On Tue, Jun 16, 2020, 6:11 PM Jason Cobb via agora-discussion < agora-discussion@agoranomic.org> wrote:
> On 6/16/20 9:07 PM, Aris Merchant via agora-discussion wrote: > > Thanks for this. You're describing exactly what I have in mind, and I'll > > take you advice. > > > > The problem I've identified is that we have a quadrillion different > > standards for how we understand language. There's one set of rules that > get > > applied for cases involving non-English languages, one set for new > jargon, > > one set for interpreting rules, and so on. > > > > But all of these things are communications involving language. The > problem > > isn't the standards. Most of them are pretty good standards. It's that > > there's no unifying logic behind all of them, even though they're all > > addressing the same general area. I'm going to try to come up with > unifying > > logic. > > > > Then I'm going to use my unifying logic to produce a standard algorithm > for > > interpreting language in Agora. Afterwards, most of those standards will > be > > special cases of the standard algorithm, although some of them may turn > out > > to be inconsistent with it and get overturned. If I do it correctly, I > can > > also explain why my unifying logic and standard algorithm have to be > > correct, rather than just saying "this seems reasonable, so let's go with > > it". I pretty much have to, if I want to convince everyone to switch > over. > > > > This entire business reminds me vaguely of this [1]. Hopefully, I can > avoid > > that. We'll see how things work out. > > > > [1] https://xkcd.com/927/ > > > > -Aris > > > I'll be honest; this was not the outcome I was expecting out of that > silly CFJ... > At this rate I may end up needing to split it off into a thesis or something. It's turning into a bit of a tangent. Basically, your second argument in the second CFJ is false, but once I figured out why it's false I realised that it doesn't just explain this. It also explains how to tell what an arbitrary piece of Agoran text means. And that seems like something worth writing down somewhere. I... feel like I may be overhyping this. It's all obvious stuff. When you read it it may be disappointing that it's stuff you already knew. It's just that a bunch of previous judges have said "this shall be the standard" without explaining why adequately, and I'm hoping I might be able to fix it. -Aris
