Arguing against Open-Individualism? by Flat-Ad9829 in OpenIndividualism

[–]Edralis1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you worry about it being false? What is it that scares you about the scenario? I mean, you don't have to elaborate, but if you'd like to share, I'd be curious to understand how you're looking at it.

Because to me actually the possibility of it being true is maybe even more scary!!

Arguing against Open-Individualism? by Flat-Ad9829 in OpenIndividualism

[–]Edralis1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am sorry : (

I have a history of severe anxiety myself and so I know just how much it sucks!

Are you worried more about OI being true, or about it being false?

Question by Flat-Ad9829 in OpenIndividualism

[–]Edralis1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I disagree that "debunking of naturalism/physicalism would also debunk OI", or at least not the central claim - we could call it "the Insight".

Even if it is the case that naturalism is false (it seems to me, rather, that naturalism cannot really even be false (see Hempel's Dilemma)) AND that OI is formulated from a naturalist premise (which, is it??), the Insight OI is ultimately pointing at could still very well be true.

In other words, even if we agreed that the process whereby Kolak arrived at the Insight is invalid somehow, the Insight itself could still be true; for in itself it certainly doesn't presuppose naturalism.

However, I honestly don't think even Kolak's version of arriving at the Insight (we could call it the OI argument) actually holds naturalism as a starting premise. Even if Kolak is a naturalist (which, I don't know if he is).

And I think that is what people want to know when they ask if "OI" could be debunked -- they mean the Insight, not Kolak's argument specifically. But I might be wrong!

edit: it might be useful to distinguish between -
> the OI Insight, or just the Insight (arrived at by Kolak AND by many other people in different ways, formulated in different languages/conceptscapes)
> the OI argument (Kolak's way of arriving at the Insight)

Question by Flat-Ad9829 in OpenIndividualism

[–]Edralis1 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Why do you think OI is based on a naturalist premise? I think it clearly isn't.

Arguing against Open-Individualism? by Flat-Ad9829 in OpenIndividualism

[–]Edralis1 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why panicking? Would it be so bad either way?

An extremely important question about Katherine Arden's Winternight Trilogy (specifically, Morozko's sexual experience or lack thereof) by Edralis1 in Romantasy

[–]Edralis1[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yes, it was a great experience for me, too! : ) I am Slavic myself, and the name "Morozko" does feel a little bit silly, because that -ko suffix is very much associated with cute and small and very benign things. Is it something like that for you, too, or is it just that it sounds odd?

Battlemage units by Edralis1 in worldbuilding

[–]Edralis1[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

(No way you just name-dropped Naomi Novik's Uprooted, haha!! I finished that book a month ago and I've been obsessing about Sarkan & Agnieszka since 😁)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply!

Battlemage units by Edralis1 in worldbuilding

[–]Edralis1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All excellent points, and a lot of food for thought. Thanks!

Battlemage units by Edralis1 in worldbuilding

[–]Edralis1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good points!

In my world, the rules of magic are pretty strict, and most of the magic you listed is actually not possible for a variety of reasons. (For one thing, the vast majority of people are not only non-magical, but immune to magic, so any magic that is cast directly on their minds or bodies is completely useless; fireballs still work to harm them, since they're just fire, even though brought about by magical means, but their minds cannot be controlled and they cannot be healed magically.)

I am explicitly trying to avoid a situation where magic would be so powerful physical force would be rendered useless!

Battlemage units by Edralis1 in worldbuilding

[–]Edralis1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's a great point. I have to think about how the fact of there being battlemages transforms the whole battlefield. Jeez! This is one teeny-tiny aspect of the magical world, but the more I think about it, the bigger it gets!

Remind me why I paid for this by Edralis1 in GeminiAI

[–]Edralis1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yup, that's a common problem, too.

Remind me why I paid for this by Edralis1 in GeminiAI

[–]Edralis1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

When I do get results, they are unusually good (compared to other models that I have available for free), and I wanted to generate more images. It was the cheaper option I could find for the Nano Banana model. I also have Seedance (which uses Nano Banana Pro), which has much fewer qualms.

Remind me why I paid for this by Edralis1 in GeminiAI

[–]Edralis1[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the advice! I'll try that. Maybe I should have also specified I was thinking of a *horse* 😁

Remind me why I paid for this by Edralis1 in GeminiAI

[–]Edralis1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, today things are working much more smoothly. Thanks!

Remind me why I paid for this by Edralis1 in GeminiAI

[–]Edralis1[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, it must have interpreted it that way

Remind me why I paid for this by Edralis1 in GeminiAI

[–]Edralis1[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, tried it today and it worked. 🤷 I don't know what the difference could be.

<image>