The Ortega hypothesis posits that science progresses through the accumulation of narrow, modest, specialized findings.
It seems a fairly unobjectionable elaboration to argue that publication bias is a major cause of friction preventing the accumulation of modest and mundane findings behind leading research programs.
I propose that publication bias is a major drag force preventing the emergence of experimental consensus.
THE VVEST VSED TO STAND FOR FINE ART
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9Fr1MlnpSk
Nice argument. However, I have already depicted myself as the interplanetary revolutionary and you as a Nazi cannibal:
https://youtu.be/BFvEnT4GbdM?si=ef1OL9TvimttkAF4
Even if every human turned off every machine and disappeared overnight tonight, we have already caused a geologically significant extinction for the only known life-source in the universe
Q4. I suffer pain and terror in my innermost feelings? Wherefrom is this?
This is a kind of rupture. This dissonance comes from your many faculties being in poor alignment either with the world or with one another. Your ability to make coffee, for example, is out-of-line with your ability to metabolize coffee.
There is no permanent solution to this, only local palliative solutions. Disrupt the configurations that are associated with dis-ease. Promote the configurations of ease.
Q3. How might we punish the wicked and redeem the upright?
We're probably going to have to renounce hellfire and eternal damnation.
Since it seems to be just us around here, and since we have no reason to expect that there's really more to this story than the sensations and relations of finite beings, then we're probably going to have to think good and hard about how much pain we can really subject anybody to for the sake of other finite beings.We finite beings must be ameliorated to one another
Humanist interested in the consequences of the machine on intellectual history.