Jan
2nd
2017

Two months ago.

I'm realizing that this might be too abstract a tool to expect anyone to get it after a blog series, or even after several months of study.

It's a language for describing things more conducive to intuitive reasoning. The problem is that if I apply it to anything, everyone's first reaction is going to be that I just retrofitted the solution (the language) to the example, regardless of whether or not such a belief even makes sense in this context.

For any other kind of tool, that might be a legitimate counter. Except people think in terms of the languages they know, and this particular language is the one letting me come up with the examples I put down here. You can't read my mind though, so to you it just looks like a bunch of random examples that I happen to describe with this funny language.

I'm rambling. I suspect my approach is not the right one.

One month ago.

Category theory is a language. This particular one is good for defining things. How do I demonstrate that? By defining things badly in one language, then correctly in this new one? How would you even make sense of the new definition? How would you recognize what’s wrong with the original definition? I’d have to translate the new definition into the old language, at which point you would (almost certainly) conclude that the old language was good enough because the translation was possible.

I’m rambling again. I don’t know if I can do this.

Zero months ago.


Here’s an easy problem. I offer you a bet where I flip a fair coin. If it lands tails, you owe me one dollar. If it lands heads, I owe you two dollars. Do you take the bet?

Read More
Report equestrian.sen · 135 views ·
  • Viewing 10 - 14 of 14
#14 · 43w, 4d ago · · ·

You're a relic

#13 · 54w, 6d ago · · ·

Thanks for favoriting Kaleidoscope! :twilightsmile:

Comment posted by equestrian.sen deleted at 9:40am on the 22nd of October, 2016
#11 · 132w, 4d ago · · ·

>>1396662

Just enough to stalk them and avoid retaliation.

#10 · 132w, 4d ago · · ·

Clearly you know all the cool kids.

  • Viewing 10 - 14 of 14
Login or register to comment

Jan
2nd
2017

Two months ago.

I'm realizing that this might be too abstract a tool to expect anyone to get it after a blog series, or even after several months of study.

It's a language for describing things more conducive to intuitive reasoning. The problem is that if I apply it to anything, everyone's first reaction is going to be that I just retrofitted the solution (the language) to the example, regardless of whether or not such a belief even makes sense in this context.

For any other kind of tool, that might be a legitimate counter. Except people think in terms of the languages they know, and this particular language is the one letting me come up with the examples I put down here. You can't read my mind though, so to you it just looks like a bunch of random examples that I happen to describe with this funny language.

I'm rambling. I suspect my approach is not the right one.

One month ago.

Category theory is a language. This particular one is good for defining things. How do I demonstrate that? By defining things badly in one language, then correctly in this new one? How would you even make sense of the new definition? How would you recognize what’s wrong with the original definition? I’d have to translate the new definition into the old language, at which point you would (almost certainly) conclude that the old language was good enough because the translation was possible.

I’m rambling again. I don’t know if I can do this.

Zero months ago.


Here’s an easy problem. I offer you a bet where I flip a fair coin. If it lands tails, you owe me one dollar. If it lands heads, I owe you two dollars. Do you take the bet?

Read More
Report equestrian.sen · 135 views ·