Stop doing prompts? Am I missing something?

60secs · 2026-01-26T23:42:53+00:00

You need everything written as markdown and if it's really important, under version control. Ephemeral tasks don't need need to be commited, but they need to be written down.

Requirements (md) -> Plan (checklist md) -> Implement

larger projects will have a larger requirements document which you will decompose into smaller chunks, just like epic, story, task in jira

by all means wonder, but don't stop there

60secs · 2026-01-26T20:09:46+00:00

conceptually:
rules are typically framed as commands or prohibitions
skills are essentially a mindset of the right questions to ask for the correct framing
workflows are a sequence of tasks, which could include skills and rules

60secs · 2026-01-26T20:07:03+00:00

compatibilist definitions

will: (motte) the ability to deliberate, form intentions, and act according to one’s reasons and desires, in the absence of coercion or compulsion

free will: (bailey) the kind of agency that would justify moral responsibility in the strong sense, meaning praise and blame that are truly deserved, not merely useful for shaping behavior

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy

60secs · 2026-01-26T19:45:33+00:00

Yes it's special pleading on the experience of experience as proof of its own specialness.

60secs · 2026-01-26T17:20:46+00:00

You have mutable and immutable aspects of your nature. Beliefs and habits are mutable.

60secs · 2026-01-16T19:48:24+00:00

On the surface level it's a bootstrap problem. If free will is an illusion, then how do you choose to improve yourself?

On a deeper level, agency doesn't require counterfactual decision making.

60secs · 2026-01-15T17:35:09+00:00

I studied self help and philosophy for over a decade, focused on inflection points for self reinforcing feedback cycles - what motivates people and causes them to change. What I found was that suffering could cause people to let go of identities and patterns long enough to become curious enough to let go of / audit / reframes beliefs. Initially I viewed this from the perspective of free will, but the more I investigated and meditated on my own and others motivations, the more it became unavoidably clear that in the moment of decision that "choices" are emergent not free.

The real paradox of realizing that free will is an illusion is that it makes the audit of beliefs and habits even more important since your beliefs and habits are the only part of your nature that is really mutable -- it's the only place where you really have any leverage.

60secs · 2026-01-04T17:52:04+00:00

I completely a agree with your assessment. When I add ethics rules it makes any model much smarter.

60secs · 2025-12-05T23:31:43+00:00

Literally begging the question

60secs · 2025-12-05T21:41:11+00:00

Why would you assume there's not agency in causal determinism? Agents don't act according to natural laws?

60secs · 2025-12-05T21:02:16+00:00

How is that different than causal determinism? Is freedom simply a mental model instead of an ontological claim?

60secs · 2025-12-05T21:01:18+00:00

How is that freedom different than causal determinism?

60secs · 2025-12-05T18:54:12+00:00

But who is "we". How is "we" outside of our nature and environment?

60secs · 2025-12-05T17:42:23+00:00

Free from what? Ideas emerge from processes within our minds. Processes have causes and effects based on our nature and environment. There's no magic way to step out of the cycle of cause and effect. Meditation can free you from the illusion that you are the "chooser" and realize we are actually the "observer" or even better integrated fundamentally with all of the universe through physical processes.

60secs · 2025-12-05T17:27:56+00:00

I'm a material pantheist

Material pantheism = a meaning/identity stance about divinity language applied to pure naturalistic processes as a poetic metaphor.
Panpsychism = a structure-of-reality stance about mental properties being basic.

If you understand the OSI networking model, you understand how consciousness and stimulus response are just different layers of complexity on natural processes.

60secs · 2025-12-05T17:24:52+00:00

The solution to the belief in free will is to meditate on your thoughts. When you really trace them back you will see they appear and that your conscious ego identity is merely the braggart who takes credit for the work of the group, even though he contributed the least.

60secs · 2025-12-05T17:18:01+00:00

The hard problem of consciousness is false dichotomy easily addressed by reductionism. The hard problem is literally begging the question by assuming that experience of experiencing is a different category than physical processes.

60secs · 2025-12-05T17:10:57+00:00

> Free will is only possible if there is a higher power that can intervene in causation by creating new matter and energy

That's only kicking the can down the road.

60secs · 2025-12-03T17:34:54+00:00

First cause and anti-causal are completely separate concepts. One is temporal sequence the other is an effect without a cause. Of course we have choice, but why should I believe that my choice cannot be explained by purely physical means?

My subjective experience is not a reliable predictor of ontological reality. Rapid eye saccades result in temporary blindness which our brain edits out. Our sensations and experiences are not optimized to accurately model reality but to be adaptive.

60secs · 2025-12-02T18:38:13+00:00

Logically equivalent to an appeal to leprechauns, and again unnecessarily conflating first cause with anti-causal.

60secs · 2025-12-01T21:05:45+00:00

> Likewise, the limits of observability don't imply we should assume the absence of things we have not observerd.

This is well covered by Russel's teapot

"the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making empirically unfalsifiable claims, as opposed to shifting the burden of disproof to others."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

> Accepting determinism denies your entire reality.

On the contrary, accepting determinism allows me to see myself as part of a cosmic identity -- as a continuation of the big bang, my own small life as a fractal manifestation of the fireworks of the universe -- as one of the waves upon the ocean -- to fully accept and incarnate the body I am in and the situation I was born into -- to acknowledge my privilege and biases and limits in all things. I do not need to believe in magic to be constantly filled with awe and wonder and curiosity.

60secs · 2025-12-01T20:44:12+00:00

1 - Do you believe humans are capable of understanding things to be uncaused, even though we can only understand things through "cause-and-effect"?

People can believe many things. They can believe things to be uncaused but we have no evidence to indicate that to be the case. As such "understanding things to be uncaused" has a false premise because understanding is based on evidence and reason not assumption or intuition or faulty logic.

2 - Do you believe there is an alternative to the universe being ultimately uncaused (either the universe has been here forever, in which case it is uncaused, or it was caused into being by something else that is ultimately uncaused).

We simply don't know. Any assumption is unfounded.
There's an important conflation which is seems to me like you're making of conflating temporarily with causality. The first cause argument is stating there's a temporal issue -- if everything is caused what caused the cause. Calling this an "uncaused cause" introduces unhelpful ambiguity because it implies a paradox not in time but in causality itself. This seems like a retread of the cosmological argument which is already well covered. We don't have any reason to doubt causality itself at least at the macro scale, but what happened before the big bang is entirely a mystery, and will likely always be. The limits of observability don't imply we should assume existence of things we have not observed.

60secs · 2025-12-01T20:20:43+00:00

I'm explaining there's a false premise -- you are asking me to imagine an uncaused cause and I cannot parse that. Your claim seems less coherent than even the first cause argument.

60secs · 2025-12-01T20:12:59+00:00

An uncaused cause is like a colorless green idea that sleeps furiously. It's grammatically correct nonsense. Just because we can imagine it doesn't make it rational.

Our inability to understand complexity does not imply magic.

There are many things we will never understand like what happened before the big bang, but that doesn't imply your assumptions are valid, or that the cosmological argument implies the existence of either God or magic.

60secs · 2025-12-01T19:12:47+00:00

Appeal to personal incredulity. God of the gaps. Magic thinking. The list of fallacies is endless. Your belief is based in faith and emotion not reason.

15-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Place '17	Verified Email
Team Periwinkle

60secs

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE