[ftlio]

Yes, the idea that you can't hold "the neoliberal view" of your household, and "the communist view" and the "romantic view", and the "spiritual view" all together for all their benefits and tradeoffs seems worse to me than even subscribing to one holistically without this imperative.

I've had this called out as absolutely faux pas if not totally asinine by people who are deep into philosophy, but I'm doing great, a lot better than some of them born with silver spoons.

[bckr]

> faux pas if not totally asinine

These people are embarrassed that you can think for yourself.

Life has such a high fractal dimension. It's highly unlikely that a single theory, expressed in a serial language, can be a very good description of life, at all.

But it feels good to believe one thing strongly. It feels so, so good. And it feels good to hate people who believe the other thing, and to think they're wrong.

But the right way really is to believe in all the things at once. It's weird, schizoid, scary, and completely logical.

I'd like to put something together to help people understand this. I think the quickest way to get there is:

* math doesn't work the way you think: see Wittgenstein

* space and time don't work the way you think: see Einstein

* matter doesn't work the way you think: see the double slit experiment

* rationality doesn't work the way you think: see tons of psychology

Given the above, do you think anything could possibly work the way you think it works? The best way forward is to just be incredibly weird. (And yet, somehow, be incredibly normal at the same time).

[javajosh]

I like where you're coming from, but I think you're stopping too soon. You can learn how math works (well, that's the most general one, least likely to be mastered by a single brain, and it's not clear how meaningful that accomplishment would be). Spacetime theories can be mastered. Quantum theories can be mastered. You can become acquainted with psychological theories and even psychological practice. Moreover, you can do most of this within a single lifetime. So, why not get a physics degree and at least cross two things off your list?

But yes it's hard to describe life, because of that fractal complexity you mention. So the best we can do is go over and over it again and again with different lenses, at different scales, different rates, and get a feel for the thing that way. (Then you must sample all of that, cut it together with music, and release a Terrance Malick movie).