[extropy-chat] Fw: Deconstruction deconstructed....

[Eliezer S. Yudkowsky]

Harvey Newstrom wrote:
> Rafal Smigrodzki wrote,
> 
>> I'd never before had the experience of being quite this baffled by
>> things other people were saying. I've attended lectures on quantum
>> physics, group theory, cardiology, and contract law, all fields about
>> which I know nothing and all of which have their own specialized
>> jargon and notational conventions. None of those lectures were as
>> opaque as anything these academics said. ", again intimating that he
>> does not have a reason to see himself as an all-around ignoramus.
> 
> This doesn't make sense.  You think all the speakers were bogus and 
> off-topic, and the only person on-topic was the author?

This sounds entirely plausible to me.  Nothing in the article contradicts 
what I have heard of postmodernism from other writers I respect.

> This doesn't make sense.  You think that the entire conference was
> filled with bogus guests and no real engineers showed up except for the
> author?

Again, this is not out of character for what I know of postmodernism.

>>> And in conclusion, after a very lengthy attempt at persuasion, the
>>>  author finishes with a not-too-clear conclusion.  He says, "So,
>>> what are we to make of all this? I earlier stated that my quest was
>>> to learn if there was any content to this stuff and if it was or
>>> was not bogus. Well, my assessment is that there is indeed some
>>> content, much of it interesting. The question of bogosity, however,
>>> is a little more difficult."
>> 
>> ### His conclusions are clear, and entirely in agreement with my own
>> amateur opinions of the field.
> 
> This is clear conclusion?  The question of bogosity is difficult?
> OK....

He said it was difficult and then provided his answer:  Bogosity so far 
off the scale it pegs the bogosity meter and breaks it.

-- 
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky                          http://singinst.org/
Research Fellow, Singularity Institute for Artificial Intelligence