

Gray literature's high and narrow window onto specialist processes is anathema to traditional general-interest non-fiction publishing, which delivers information like a tap dispenses safely managed water—filtered, chlorinated, and piped into your very own quarters. Gray literature is a sploshing bucket of someone else's water, murky with unfamiliar vocabulary, its means of application not always entirely obvious.

We do not think in words alone. We think in images, in sensations, in the movement and flow of muscle and nerve. Yet we must clothe our thought in words to communicate it, and so our words always betray the living truth a little.
The true nature of things is in their particulars, not in generalities; we know a thing by knowing its individual characteristics, not by subsumming it under a class.
The metaphor of the library is the metaphor of the world. We search for the infinite in the finite, and we find it nowhere but in language itself.
The true nature of things is in their particulars, not in generalities; we know the world through its infinite variations, not through abstract rules that pretend to govern them.
The human understanding is no dry light, but receives an infusion from the will and affections; whence proceed sciences which may be called 'sciences as one would.' For what a man had rather were true he more readily believes.
The most terrible thing about materialism is not that it assumes the world to be made of atoms, but that it assumes this ideal notion of material atoms to be something particularly scientific, particular real, or particularly philosophic.
The true paradox of consciousness is that the more narrowly we examine it, the more it seems to elude us, as if consciousness were not an object to be grasped but a field in which the grasping occurs.
The mind does not work by starting from universal principles and deducing particular consequences; it works the other way, by gathering up particular cases until the accumulated weight of them forces upon us recognition of a universal principle.

Clearly human science is able to make progress faster than raw experimental falsification/verification would imply, and in cases where experiments are very ambiguous.
Science is organized knowledge. Wisdom is organized life. The coordination of all knowledge and all effort toward the human purpose, the welfare of life, is the purpose of wisdom.
The mind of man has perforce been made analogous to a mirror, or to a vessel, which can be filled with the images or ideas of things external. But this is a most inadequate and false representation of what takes place in the mind when it is occupied with the pursuit of truth.
The true paradox of consciousness is that it cannot be fully grasped by introspection alone; the observer is always part of the observed, creating an irreducible gap between the thinking subject and its own thought.
The world is everything that is the case. The world is the totality of facts, not of things.

He tries to hear out every faction: first the AI existential risk people, then the AI optimists and accelerationists like "Beff Jezos," then the "stochastic parrot" / "current harms" people like Emily Bender and Timnit Gebru, and finally the AI company CEOs (Altman, Amodei, and Hassabis were the three who agreed to be interviewed), with Yuval Noah Harari showing up from time to time to insert deepities.
The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible.
The mind is furnished with a set of instincts which seek out certain kinds of phenomena and are peculiarly sensitive to their presence, and which, once awakened, work and grow by exercise. Our forefathers had convictions; we have only opinions.
The mind is furnished with a set of instincts which seek out certain kinds of phenomena and are apt to feel snubbed or startled by others. The truth is that there are as many 'kinds' of things in the world as there are kinds of interest among observers of it.

We can't predict the full impact of climate change. Why did the climate movement stop pushing the world to accept this fact and start trying to deny it?
The mind is furnished with a set of instincts which seek out certain kinds of phenomena and are careless of others. It is theoretically interested in some matters, theoretically indifferent to others. And, by an easy extension of the principle, what is theoretically indifferent may be, and usually is, theoretically obnoxious.
The mind is furnished with a set of instincts which seek out certain kinds of things in the world—food, safety, beauty, knowledge—and the universe cooperates by containing those things. But there are other things in the universe that do not call to any instinct, that have no utility, that simply exist in their own right.

If there can be no physicalist explanation of subjective mental experiences, then the project of physicalism falls apart. "If we acknowledge that reality surpasses our comprehension [...] then we are back to mystery".
The true function of philosophy is not to provide final answers, but to keep alive in us the sense of wonder at the world and our place in it.

It seems to me then, that a lot of supposed ethical issues lose a lot of their heat once you get your facts straight.
The true paradox of the human condition is that we are simultaneously utterly insignificant and infinitely precious—strangers to the universe yet the only part of it that knows itself.

During this time, what we know today as the better theory can often actually make worse predictions (Copernicus's model of circular orbits around the sun was actually less accurate than Ptolemy's geocentric model). And the reasons it survives this epistemic hell is some mixture of judgment and heuristics that we don't even understand well enough to actually articulate, much less codify into an RL loop.
Man can embed himself in history only by understanding the way his ancestors embedded themselves in it; but he can understand his ancestors only by re-creating their experiments in his own mind and life.
We are not the measure of all things. There is much in the world that is indifferent to human purposes, and this indifference is a kind of freedom—for us and for reality itself.
The facts of observation stand like an iron wall against which the most ardent desire for belief dashes itself in vain.

An irrational number — a number that cannot be expressed as a fraction, the ratio between two whole numbers — π unmoors our basic intuitions about reality with its disquieting whisper of an infinity beyond the grasp of reason.
Science is a way of thinking much more than it is a body of knowledge. Its goal is not to arrive at immutable truths but to develop progressively better approximations of reality.
Underscored — save the words that stop you in your tracks.
Start saving quotes →