Oracle: Possibly, didn’t get around to reading it all so far. As far as I understand from just skimming, I guess a difference may be that the term deconfusion is used with regards to a domain where people are at risk of thinking they understand and aren’t aware of any remaining confusion. I was more referring to situations where the presence of confusion is clear, but one struggles to identify a strategy to reduce it. In that case it may be helpful to focus on the origin of one’s own confusion first as opposed to the thing one is trying to understand.
Sunk Meaning: Yes, plus there may be times when we are talking about meaning / interpretation without realizing so, falsely assuming we’re referring to actual properties of the real world. In the above example, people may feel like “we should use the cow’s skin as otherwise it is wasted” is a real argument, that reality would in some way be better when acting that way, because “wasting things = bad”. That’s a (usually useful but still at times) flawed heuristic though. I wonder if there are more ways where we intuitively think we’re talking about properties of the real world, when in actuality we’re only referring to states of our own mind.
Trying to understand your points… Possibly incorrectly.
Technique: Quantum Walk: set a stretch goals and Work backwards from your goal.
Ask the Oracle: seems like you suggest working on deconfusion.
Bias: Sunk Meaning: Meaning is in the map.
Quantum Walk: That’s pretty much it.
Oracle: Possibly, didn’t get around to reading it all so far. As far as I understand from just skimming, I guess a difference may be that the term deconfusion is used with regards to a domain where people are at risk of thinking they understand and aren’t aware of any remaining confusion. I was more referring to situations where the presence of confusion is clear, but one struggles to identify a strategy to reduce it. In that case it may be helpful to focus on the origin of one’s own confusion first as opposed to the thing one is trying to understand.
Sunk Meaning: Yes, plus there may be times when we are talking about meaning / interpretation without realizing so, falsely assuming we’re referring to actual properties of the real world. In the above example, people may feel like “we should use the cow’s skin as otherwise it is wasted” is a real argument, that reality would in some way be better when acting that way, because “wasting things = bad”. That’s a (usually useful but still at times) flawed heuristic though. I wonder if there are more ways where we intuitively think we’re talking about properties of the real world, when in actuality we’re only referring to states of our own mind.