I don’t agree with this stark duality. Reality is reality, and it’s all casual. Some of it is simple enough to model explicitly and to make fairly good plans and predictions based on calculations. Some is so complicated that we don’t know what the useful models are, and while our brains have built some usable models, those models are even too complicated for us to introspect and understand mathematically.
This is a continuum rather than a classification, and behavior of other humans is toward the complex and illegible side.
For your examples, the heuristic “don’t be weird” is a FAR better model than the one which outputs “stand in the street yelling to yourself about how unpleasant mortality is”. It may or may not be better than “dedicate all your attention to some subset of the problem of death”, which may or may not be better than working on your philosophy to understand that individuals don’t matter and it’s the hive, not the ants that should be immortal.
I don’t agree with this stark duality. Reality is reality, and it’s all casual. Some of it is simple enough to model explicitly and to make fairly good plans and predictions based on calculations. Some is so complicated that we don’t know what the useful models are, and while our brains have built some usable models, those models are even too complicated for us to introspect and understand mathematically.
This is a continuum rather than a classification, and behavior of other humans is toward the complex and illegible side.
For your examples, the heuristic “don’t be weird” is a FAR better model than the one which outputs “stand in the street yelling to yourself about how unpleasant mortality is”. It may or may not be better than “dedicate all your attention to some subset of the problem of death”, which may or may not be better than working on your philosophy to understand that individuals don’t matter and it’s the hive, not the ants that should be immortal.