btrmt.

Analects

Here you'll find all the btrmt. content from across the projects.

See everything I have on:
on-thinking-and-reasoning

Other Projects  |  About btrmt.
btrmt.

Analects

filter by:

On Thinking and Reasoning

stuff On knowing things, and how we get there

show:

article

Human reasoning isn’t flawed, it’s a social tool we use in the wrong places. It’s about sharing and evaluating intuitive claims, not generating rational ones. AI is fundamentally this but crippled: without the grounded intuitions and social friction that makes it work.

AI Hallucination is just Man-Guessing

article

One time I was out drinking with some Swedish folks and they told me about the word killgissa. It means something like ‘man-guessing’, referring to when you sound like you know what you’re talking about but you’re actually just guessing. I reckon AI hallucination is just man-guessing, but on your behalf. To explain, I first have to convince you that human reason isn’t actually that reasonable. With any luck it’ll make you better at managing your own processes of reason and your AIs. Let’s see.
Human reasoning isn’t flawed, it’s a social tool we use in the wrong places. It’s about sharing and evaluating intuitive claims, not generating rational ones. AI is fundamentally this but crippled: without the grounded intuitions and social friction that makes it work.
Check it out

filed under:

betterment digital-architecture on-being-fruitful on-thinking-and-reasoning somatic-architecture thought-architecture wealth-architecture

article

System 1 vs System 2 is a useful shorthand, but our minds aren’t two-speed engines—they’re multi-process coalitions of specialised agents working in parallel and in series.

Beyond System 1 and System 2

article

Kahneman’s System 1 and System 2—our fast, intuitive autopilot versus slow, deliberative override—have become a shorthand for human thought. But thinkers from Evans and Sloman to Stanovich and Minsky remind us that cognition isn’t just a two-lane road. It’s a bustling coalition of specialised processes—heuristics, conflict-detectors, symbolic reasoners—all running in parallel or in nested hierarchies. Fast versus slow will do as a starting point, but the real story lies in the many flavours and layers of mind at work behind the scenes.
System 1 vs System 2 is a useful shorthand, but our minds aren’t two-speed engines—they’re multi-process coalitions of specialised agents working in parallel and in series.
Check it out

filed under:

betterment gratification on-(un)happiness on-being-fruitful on-thinking-and-reasoning somatic-architecture spiritual-architecture

article

The neuroscience confidence game trades content for cosmetic filler, making vacuous advice look smart.

The Neuroscience Con

article

I talk about something I call the “neuroscience confidence game” a lot, but I realised I hadn’t ever written an article I could easily link to to explain it. Some unfortunate soul on instagram, using this technique as their primary strategy, had me fall into their ad-targeting and I’m going to use them to illustrate, so that you can tease this kind of thing apart yourself.
The neuroscience confidence game trades content for cosmetic filler, making vacuous advice look smart.
Check it out

filed under:

betterment gratification on-being-fruitful on-thinking-and-reasoning somatic-architecture

article

Cogntive dissonance often describes a bias towards seeing ourselves as coherent. Sure, it’s sneaky and prevalent, but entirely necessary. And, other times we tolerate how noisy we are, keeping us open to new insights and better equipped for a complex world.

Preferring Coherence

article

The concept of cognitive dissonance gets flogged online. It’s always this malevolent feature of our minds lurking back there making us do outrageous stuff. But cognitive dissonance isn’t really this. It’s just another example of bias—optimising us for certain features of a messy world so we can get on with things. Of course this doesn’t always help. But actually most of the time it does. And people don’t often talk about the fact that we don’t always worry about conflicting cognitions. But we don’t—sometimes we’re open to the noise too.
Cogntive dissonance often describes a bias towards seeing ourselves as coherent. Sure, it’s sneaky and prevalent, but entirely necessary. And, other times we tolerate how noisy we are, keeping us open to new insights and better equipped for a complex world.
Check it out

filed under:

betterment gratification on-(un)happiness on-aesthetics on-being-fruitful on-thinking-and-reasoning somatic-architecture thought-architecture wealth-architecture

article

Cognitive dissonance is often thought of as the <em>discomfort</em> we have with conflicting cognitions. But it’s really about how the brain will smooth over <em>dissonant</em> cognitions, whether they’re uncomfortable or not. It happens a lot.

Cognitive dissonance isn't discomfort

article

I’ve never written an article about the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance, even though I’ve referenced it a lot. It’s so mainstream that I assume everyone knows what it is. But, actually, people don’t. And even the guy who came up with it was a little disappointed by where the literature around it went. So I thought we’d revisit it, and keep it short and fun.
Cognitive dissonance is often thought of as the discomfort we have with conflicting cognitions. But it’s really about how the brain will smooth over dissonant cognitions, whether they’re uncomfortable or not. It happens a lot.
Check it out

filed under:

betterment gratification on-(un)happiness on-aesthetics on-being-fruitful on-thinking-and-reasoning somatic-architecture thought-architecture wealth-architecture
Newsletter
Join over 2000 of us. Get the newsletter.
Read it first | Privacy | Not working?