Previously - Applied Epistemology on Russia - Dialectic with Darren | TranscendentPhilosop
Darren:
And brother... furthermore to your point about type 1 and 2 errors...Can we "act from" a mentality where we are thinking about type 1 errors yet, we actually are. How can we mix those up?
Seth:
That's a great question that I haven't thought about much.
Darren:
Right! We aren't often conscious of what we are thinking. This mix up....may be a way to tend to it consciously. My observation it seems like people are more consistent on which error they are focused on, but often people's problem is that they don't realize that their goal actually increases a different type of error.
Seth:
I think when people can understand different trade-offs they can appreciate different perspectives more.
Darren:
Sure. Not being aware of what results we achieve....seems dangerous yet common.
We want something, yet we do the opposite to achieve the opposite result.
Seth:
It's easy for conservatives and progressives to view each other as evil until they realize that too much conservatism produces an error and too much progressivism produces an error and actually bringing both perspectives together helps reduce errors.
Darren:
I like "tradeoffs." Something very humble and altruistic about that. It's easy for conservatives and progressives to view each other as evil… Ok, so that is to the point. Are conservatives somehow more sensitive to resist the error of a "progressive" and vice versa? I don't know if that is the case though.
It's like asking if Putin is just mixed up on his assessment and a simple correct would change everything. It isn't so simple. Hitler wasn't just making a type 1 or 2 error. I wonder how to "correct" errors most of all? 🤔🤔🤔🤔
Seth:
Extremism could be considered a bias in favor of optimizing one variable at the sacrifice of another. Instead of balancing two variables, they sacrifice one. Hitler and Putin are both extreme for optimizing selfish wellbeing at the cost of their neighbor's wellbeing.
Darren:
Definitely. What I like about your type 1 error and 2 is it suggests there is a paradoxical nature. When we focus on Yang, we miss Yin. Vice versa. That is really profound and necessary to self-reflect on for the goal of reconciliation. Viewing Yin as Yang and Yang as Yin? 🤔 Seems to be a precursor to error. What are these dualistic aspects to every binary relationship? That is profound.
"all mixed up, don't know what to do, next thing you turn around and find that person is you." Woh.
Where one error is being committed, another person may see it. Yet it's our own errors we are less likely to acknowledge.
Seth:
I don't think people intentionally make errors. Error is the gap between their brain and reality.
Darren:
Agreed! I mean, sometimes we naturally are trying to recruit others and we care little how few errors we are making as long as we are "persuasive." That leads to error too. We have to believe our error to sell it well. Which scares me. But do we want to admit we make errors? If we don't, what do we do... continue making worse errors? The more bias we have the less we want to admit our errors. A flat earther who has lots of error, believes others have more error to continue with the mistaken believe.
Seth:
Yep
Darren:
So....that is just piled high error? How do we help?
Seth:
I just debated a very eloquent flat Earth there yesterday who matches this description perfectly
Darren:
Arrogance about ignorance is the name of the game it seems still to me. I humorously don't meet or talk to flat earthers ha. I bet, it would be hard for me ha.
Seth:
My friend was listening to Fox News recently and was getting riled up about gas prices and how Trump allowed gas production in North America, but Biden is shutting it down and purchasing gas from Russia and elsewhere. He was getting frustrated about the coming recession because of Biden, and he asked me if I think that we should be energy independent as a nation. I simply said, "I don't have enough information to have an opinion on that" and he was quite confounded with that response.
Darren:
This is the point of Fox propaganda. To get people riled up and confused. It's propaganda. They know their errors my friend. They mean them.
Seth:
Basically, I matched my opinion to my understanding, instead of arrogantly thinking I understand a complicated issue and getting mad and passionate and self-righteous about it.
Darren:
The recent lawsuit about the voting machines show it.
Seth:
I think my friend understands how rigorous I can be about researching things, so when I say I don't have enough information what it also means is that in my opinion he doesn't have enough information to have an opinion either.
Darren:
Every self-righteous person will see others as self-righteous the moment they start making sense to the contrary. How know it alls (know little) call others who showed they were wrong "know it alls." No intelligent person says, "know it all " Unless they are wrong often. And hate it. Because no one is such a thing. We know so little!
Seth:
I think it was a good moment of self-reflection for my friend to ask himself, "do I know enough to be passionate about this?"
Darren:
Sure...he is working for "convincing" of answers perhaps more so than exploration of the topic. If you agree with him after his hour watching Fox, he likely would be more pleased then anything.
Seth:
I think religious epistemology is a huge corrupting factor.
Darren:
Ok, I'm thinking...it's rare to find someone to say "oh I made an error!? Thanks man!"
Seth:
I want to tie this into the construction of mental models of the world.
Darren:
We defend when we think others will see us in negative light. Which means, we hide our errors from ourselves to hide then from others. Self-deception is a self-defense mechanism. Because it is overwhelming to understand we make errors. When we train ourselves to memorize.
Seth:
I think errors are often deeper than the level of conversation. We can't fix the error if we don't get to it's source. Fixing a superficial error won't be effective.
Darren:
Ahh, so the bottom of the "iceberg" influences the top which makes the decision? This is DADA - Data, Analysis, Decision, Action. That is intelligence. How well we precess it.
If we begin with terrible data ..we are kind of fucked.
Seth:
Exactly! You have to fix the bottom first.
Darren:
Definitely bro.
Seth:
Then corrections will migrate upwards.
Darren:
I really love that concept. It intuitively feels very wise to me. It tends to what is "underneath" before we deal with how it influences us. That is the definition of "deep."
Seth:
I think you are one of the few people who has always intuited this aspect of wisdom. You are always probing deeper. Trying to find that root.
Darren:
Haha. You too!
Seth:
Quite excellent of you.