Editing Talk:903: Extended Mind
Please sign your posts with ~~~~ |
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
Saying that everything ends up in "philosophy" is simply choosing from a long list of possible entries to suit an argument. I found it much more interesting, having gotten to philosophy, to keep going through the loop, then to see where certain pages drop you into said loop. The loop currenty is reality, existence, world, human, hominini, tribe, biology, natural science, sciences, knowledge, fact, proof, necessity and sufficiency, logic, reason, consciousness, quality (philosophy), property (philosophy), modern philosophy, then finally philosophy. It's as if we've stumbled upon a new classification of knowledge. If only we could look recursively at ALL the things that lead into a certain topic in the loop. For example, goat drops you into the loop at biology, which makes perfect sense, but Volvo drops you in at natural sciences from a very convoluted path which includes physics, time, dimension, list of time periods, and scandinavia. In other words, it's the journey not the destination that I find interesting. - naginalf [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.40|108.162.216.40]] 15:39, 12 March 2014 (UTC) | Saying that everything ends up in "philosophy" is simply choosing from a long list of possible entries to suit an argument. I found it much more interesting, having gotten to philosophy, to keep going through the loop, then to see where certain pages drop you into said loop. The loop currenty is reality, existence, world, human, hominini, tribe, biology, natural science, sciences, knowledge, fact, proof, necessity and sufficiency, logic, reason, consciousness, quality (philosophy), property (philosophy), modern philosophy, then finally philosophy. It's as if we've stumbled upon a new classification of knowledge. If only we could look recursively at ALL the things that lead into a certain topic in the loop. For example, goat drops you into the loop at biology, which makes perfect sense, but Volvo drops you in at natural sciences from a very convoluted path which includes physics, time, dimension, list of time periods, and scandinavia. In other words, it's the journey not the destination that I find interesting. - naginalf [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.40|108.162.216.40]] 15:39, 12 March 2014 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
Randall is either mistaken or intentionally misinformative (or rather, politically correct) in his IQ estimates. What's a car hyperbole aside, the cluelessness, sentence length, and spelling of the outage-messages remind of a person in their low 90s-high 80s, if not lower, and Randall is clearly more than 120, (conservative) average for physics majors as it might be. [[Special:Contributions/178.42.101.38|178.42.101.38]] 20:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC) | Randall is either mistaken or intentionally misinformative (or rather, politically correct) in his IQ estimates. What's a car hyperbole aside, the cluelessness, sentence length, and spelling of the outage-messages remind of a person in their low 90s-high 80s, if not lower, and Randall is clearly more than 120, (conservative) average for physics majors as it might be. [[Special:Contributions/178.42.101.38|178.42.101.38]] 20:08, 13 July 2013 (UTC) | ||
Line 134: | Line 132: | ||
Update on the looping situation: As of now, every link I tried leads to "Philosophy" except those that wind up at "Fact" or "Truth", both those pages now refer to each other in their first link. For those curious as to *why* the title text is (usually) true but can't be bothered to check: Most articles start by stating the more generic form of the topic, like "Car is a kind of <vehicle>". It tends to get more and more generic until you hit a field of science, at which point you inevitably get led to the page on "Science", which eventually leads to "Philosophy" --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.32|141.101.99.32]] 10:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC) | Update on the looping situation: As of now, every link I tried leads to "Philosophy" except those that wind up at "Fact" or "Truth", both those pages now refer to each other in their first link. For those curious as to *why* the title text is (usually) true but can't be bothered to check: Most articles start by stating the more generic form of the topic, like "Car is a kind of <vehicle>". It tends to get more and more generic until you hit a field of science, at which point you inevitably get led to the page on "Science", which eventually leads to "Philosophy" --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.32|141.101.99.32]] 10:30, 28 January 2022 (UTC) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |