I'm not sure, but I'm very disturbed by the standard result that if you give people a choice between option A: "You get 1 dollar and some other person gets 1 dollar" and option B: "You get 2 dollars and some other person gets 10 dollars", they tend to choose option A...... *sigh*
Fortunately, it turns out that if you let them meet and chat with that other person before hand, then they'll pick option B.....
LJ's creator, in his awesomeness, also invented an open interoperability standard called OpenID, which you can use here. But unlike a LJ account, I don't think OpenID will allow you to see friends-only entries.
If OpenID is configured right, it should be technically possible for an LJ user to friend an OpenID user... but AFAIK there aren't currently any non-LJ implementations of OpenID that are fully functional.
Ahhh, heh. I had forgotten to account for other sites using the LJ codebase. What I really meant was "other implementations not written by the LJ folks", but I forgot about places like deadjournal.
The problem of believing life is fair? I don't, typically, have that problem.
As for the name of this...seems more like something you'd find in the metaphysical than psychological realm. There's probably a less-loaded term for it, but Panglossianism is what came to my mind.
Not all hypotheses need be scientific; they're just suppositions.
What you think of as hypothesis (falsifiable claim), <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis>Wikipedia categorizes</a> as (helpfully) a <i>falsifiable hypothesis</i> or a <i>scientific hypothesis</i>.
I don't like the term hypothesis either, but for a different reason: the statement doesn't even seem to be a closed one (what is "fair"? what is "deserved"?), regardless of its falsifiability.
Not all hypotheses need be scientific; they're just suppositions.
What you think of as hypothesis (falsifiable claim), Wikipedia categorizes as (helpfully) a falsifiable hypothesis or a scientific hypothesis.
I don't like the term hypothesis either, but for a different reason: the statement doesn't even seem to be a closed one (what is "fair"? what is "deserved"?), regardless of its falsifiability.
You have the right idea, but I am not exactly a naïve falsificationist. Falsification is just the dual of verification.
Kevin Kelly can articulate this better than me. He and I agree that even Sigma_2 statements can be scientific:
KK: > In other words, one feels secure while a > particular instance of the sigma-2 statement continues to be "confirmed" >and then one loses confidence for a while when the favored instance is > refuted. That's the best you can do.
I agree. I further claim that, since it only makes sense to talk about things within our horizon, any meaning we can correctly give to Sigma_2 sentences is by projecting them as empirically-verifiable-or-refutable predictions... as you suggest when talking about "confidence", a Sigma_2 statement would have probabilistic consequences that are, in a weaker sense, empirically-verifiable-or-refutable.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
krja![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Not sure...
Date: 2006-08-13 06:18 am (UTC)Fortunately, it turns out that if you let them meet and chat with that other person before hand, then they'll pick option B.....
Re: Not sure...
Date: 2006-08-13 06:19 am (UTC):)
Terry
(who really should sign up to get a livejournal account....)
getting a livejournal account
Date: 2006-08-13 06:31 am (UTC)LJ's creator, in his awesomeness, also invented an open interoperability standard called OpenID, which you can use here. But unlike a LJ account, I don't think OpenID will allow you to see friends-only entries.
Re: getting a livejournal account
Date: 2006-08-13 06:53 am (UTC)Re: getting a livejournal account
Date: 2006-08-13 09:05 am (UTC)http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?userid=7563501&t=I
Re: getting a livejournal account
Date: 2006-08-13 05:37 pm (UTC)Re: getting a livejournal account
Date: 2006-08-13 09:53 pm (UTC)I am probably going to put it up soon myself, just for shits and giggles, we'll see what happens.
Re: getting a livejournal account
Date: 2006-08-13 05:55 pm (UTC)Re: getting a livejournal account
Date: 2006-08-14 12:36 am (UTC)Re: getting a livejournal account
Date: 2010-07-29 10:37 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 07:04 am (UTC)divine justice
Date: 2006-08-13 07:54 am (UTC)The problem of believing life is fair? I don't, typically, have that problem.
As for the name of this...seems more like something you'd find in the metaphysical than psychological realm. There's probably a less-loaded term for it, but Panglossianism is what came to my mind.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 07:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 05:57 pm (UTC)I wonder why it's called a "hypothesis". It's obviously not a scientific claim.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 06:23 pm (UTC)What you think of as hypothesis (falsifiable claim), <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis>Wikipedia categorizes</a> as (helpfully) a <i>falsifiable hypothesis</i> or a <i>scientific hypothesis</i>. I don't like the term hypothesis either, but for a different reason: the statement doesn't even seem to be a closed one (what is "fair"? what is "deserved"?), regardless of its falsifiability.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 06:26 pm (UTC)Not all hypotheses need be scientific; they're just suppositions.
What you think of as hypothesis (falsifiable claim), Wikipedia categorizes as (helpfully) a falsifiable hypothesis or a scientific hypothesis.
I don't like the term hypothesis either, but for a different reason: the statement doesn't even seem to be a closed one (what is "fair"? what is "deserved"?), regardless of its falsifiability.
falsificationism
Date: 2006-08-13 06:59 pm (UTC)Kevin Kelly can articulate this better than me.
He and I agree that even Sigma_2 statements can be scientific:
(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 07:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 07:51 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 08:00 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-08-13 09:08 am (UTC)Wishful thinking?
(Here via friendsfriends, I'm bored.)