Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Leo Gura]

31 minutes ago, Ero said:

mathematics exceeds bare formal logic insofar as proofs are not merely external rule-following

Of course that is not what I mean when I say logic. My notion of logic is not about mechanical rule-following but the logic of how your mind flows and comprehends things. My notion of logic is rich, qualitative, and subjective, not just a machine crunching numbers.

Edited 13 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Leo Gura]

29 minutes ago, Ero said:

 

@Leo Gura Side note, THE most spiritual people I have met (visions, psychedelics, meditation, maturity, etc), by far, are all vocationally scientific (Math PhD, MD/PhD and History PhD). 

Then they should love my book.

[NewKidOnTheBlock]

Leo's bitter rants about science are getting out of hand these days lmfao

Edited 9 hours ago by NewKidOnTheBlock

[Ero]

@zurew Thank you for the words. I didn't read it as dismissive, my phrasing was just the mathematician's equivalent "this is trivial" so all I meant is you wouldn't have to worry about me defending nominalism.  

[Ero]

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

My notion of logic is not about mechanical rule-following but the logic of how your mind flows and comprehends things. My notion of logic is rich, qualitative, and subjective, not just a machine crunching numbers.

Then you are much closer to the idea of "proofs being paths through cognitive space" than to "mathematical logic". That idea, however, is mathematically, epistemologically and philosophically different enough to have its own term. 

I am pushing back not because I am being pedantic, but because I am trying to highlight one frequent failure mode you have when you talk specifically on scientific topics (e.g. previous forum discussion on Gödel's theorems and the distinction between "incompleteness" and "inconsistency"). In mathematics, technical words come pre-loaded with a lot of definitional "weight". It is what helps mathematicians know that they are talking about the same thing, because the "notion" is air-tight (i.e. "math-speak"). 

The biggest failure mode (not yours, highlighting the risk) of people outside of math/science is that they haven't done their homework to understand the precise meaning which makes them conflate words/color them with their own notions. That makes all serious thinkers scoff (case in point are hippies with their "quantum lingo" ) and simply tune out because we immediately know the people have fitted the words to their meaning which makes what are already incredibly difficult conceptual questions impossible to be discussed - the "that's not what I meant" script. 

I know for a fact that is not you. You know the concepts and definitions and are well-read on the history/genealogy of these words and ideas. That is why when you are being loose with your wording, you risk being conflated yourself with the "hippie quantum" guys than be recognized as a generational thinker, which is what you are. 

8 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Then they should love my book.

Your book truly has the potential to be generational, which is why I have been posting over the last few days. I don't want you to miss that opportunity.

As someone who reads and produces technical papers, reads a book or two a week and a textbook a month, I can tell you that "writing" is the hard part. Because reading it yourself will always seem understandable -  you already have all the context for what you mean. But for someone who has not spent the thousands of hours like you contemplating, it takes a lot more to "catch them up to speed". This is the art of "condensing thought" into building blocks that you can craft an edifice from. 

Too many great thinkers get lost from humanity's Intellectual stream (Intelligence with capital "I") because their ideas were hard to penetrate. I really hope you are not one of them. Ask for feedback from the precise demographic you want to reach - the deep and contemplative thinkers. I am giving you feedback as one such sample point. 

I know you care for understanding Truth for its own sake (Arhat). If that was your only stated goal, then all I've said wouldn't matter. But you also want to write a book and to "be understood" in order to move the needle of Consciousness (Bodhisattva). And that happens on the plane of Maya.

Edited 5 hours ago by Ero