This is the exact opposite of my experience- I think wordlessly with both abstract and concrete things, and hunting for words might work for the concrete things occasionally, since they are mostly the same, but for almost all abstract things there simply does not exist any word even close to what I want to say, so surrender—the hard kind, accepting defeat and humiliation, like that class scene in MoR—and making do with unbearably clumsy, confusing and muddled metaphor is exactly what I have to learn in every case I don’t know the exact mathematical notation to formalize my thoughts.
You could try using “kind of shit” or similar as the only noun in you consciousness used to describe abstract things. E.g. “Those kinds of shit, or those kinds of shit? Hmm...the first kind of shit seems much less bad when I think about it. Pile of shit—I mean, virtue ethics—it is, then!”
Huh? How would that help me communicate wordless ideas? Just because I know what “shit” means doesn’t help the other person understand what I mean by it. If anything this’d make the problem much worse.
From the original quote I thought the problem being addressed wasn’t communication, but using a cached carving of reality despite new evidence. Something analogous to how seeing a movie sets images of a book’s characters and settings in one’s mind.
As for how I now think you intended it, “making do with unbearably clumsy, confusing and muddled metaphor is exactly what I have to learn in every case I don’t know the exact mathematical notation to formalize my thoughts,” I disagree to some extent, as conveying ideas has much to do with the flawed interpreters, and not just perfectly formalizing thoughts. See e.g. my misinterpretation above. ;-)
That’s a different problem, and a much harder one, although the specific apple tree case I’m surprised they didn’t figure out: “I don’t know, but I have a hunch it might be between 10 and 1000. ”
If I have the notation I can explain it to other somewhat rational people who also know that notation, and might be better at explaining things than me so that others can get the idea indirectly as well. If I don’t know the notation the idea is stuck in my head forever.
I find that some of the charts used to plan software and to turn English into logical constructs match my thoughts more closely than the English itself.
Yea. Lot’s of problems thou. They tend to be domain specific, making anything in them tends to take ages due to the low brain-computer bandwidth and/or flawed interfaces, others are unlikely to understand them, etc.
This is the exact opposite of my experience- I think wordlessly with both abstract and concrete things, and hunting for words might work for the concrete things occasionally, since they are mostly the same, but for almost all abstract things there simply does not exist any word even close to what I want to say, so surrender—the hard kind, accepting defeat and humiliation, like that class scene in MoR—and making do with unbearably clumsy, confusing and muddled metaphor is exactly what I have to learn in every case I don’t know the exact mathematical notation to formalize my thoughts.
You could try using “kind of shit” or similar as the only noun in you consciousness used to describe abstract things. E.g. “Those kinds of shit, or those kinds of shit? Hmm...the first kind of shit seems much less bad when I think about it. Pile of shit—I mean, virtue ethics—it is, then!”
Huh? How would that help me communicate wordless ideas? Just because I know what “shit” means doesn’t help the other person understand what I mean by it. If anything this’d make the problem much worse.
From the original quote I thought the problem being addressed wasn’t communication, but using a cached carving of reality despite new evidence. Something analogous to how seeing a movie sets images of a book’s characters and settings in one’s mind.
Yes, that’s the problem talking about in the OP. Then I said “I’m having exactly the opposite problem” in response to that OP.
Sorry, I misinterpreted your statement.
As for how I now think you intended it, “making do with unbearably clumsy, confusing and muddled metaphor is exactly what I have to learn in every case I don’t know the exact mathematical notation to formalize my thoughts,” I disagree to some extent, as conveying ideas has much to do with the flawed interpreters, and not just perfectly formalizing thoughts. See e.g. my misinterpretation above. ;-)
The sequence post on that is here.
That’s a different problem, and a much harder one, although the specific apple tree case I’m surprised they didn’t figure out: “I don’t know, but I have a hunch it might be between 10 and 1000. ”
If I have the notation I can explain it to other somewhat rational people who also know that notation, and might be better at explaining things than me so that others can get the idea indirectly as well. If I don’t know the notation the idea is stuck in my head forever.
I find that some of the charts used to plan software and to turn English into logical constructs match my thoughts more closely than the English itself.
Yea. Lot’s of problems thou. They tend to be domain specific, making anything in them tends to take ages due to the low brain-computer bandwidth and/or flawed interfaces, others are unlikely to understand them, etc.