My model of the target audience was very indignant at the “moving on” suggestion that doesn’t rest on an object level argument (especially in context of discussing hypothetical friends who are not taking the concern seriously). Which is neither here nor there, since there is no object level argument available for this open question/topic. At least there is a meta argument about what’s actually productive to do. But interventions on the level of feelings is not an argument at all, it’s a separate thing that would be motivated by that argument.
the boundary of “okay, I’ve thought about this enough to be roughly oriented”
Curiosity/value demands what’s beyond currently available theory, so the cutoff is not about knowing enough, it’s pragmatics of coping with not being able to find out more with feasible effort.
“look, man, acausal extortion isn’t that big a deal, chill out”
I think a relevant argument is something like anti-prediction, there is a large space of important questions that are all objectively a big deal if there is something to be done about them, but nonetheless they are pragmatically unimportant, because we do not have an attack. Perhaps it’s unusually neglected, that’s some sort of distinction.
I updated the opening section of the post to be a bit less opinionated and more explain-rather-than-persuade-y. Probably should also update the end to match, but that’s what I had time to do in this sitting.
My model of the target audience was very indignant at the “moving on” suggestion that doesn’t rest on an object level argument (especially in context of discussing hypothetical friends who are not taking the concern seriously). Which is neither here nor there, since there is no object level argument available for this open question/topic. At least there is a meta argument about what’s actually productive to do. But interventions on the level of feelings is not an argument at all, it’s a separate thing that would be motivated by that argument.
Curiosity/value demands what’s beyond currently available theory, so the cutoff is not about knowing enough, it’s pragmatics of coping with not being able to find out more with feasible effort.
I think a relevant argument is something like anti-prediction, there is a large space of important questions that are all objectively a big deal if there is something to be done about them, but nonetheless they are pragmatically unimportant, because we do not have an attack. Perhaps it’s unusually neglected, that’s some sort of distinction.
I updated the opening section of the post to be a bit less opinionated and more explain-rather-than-persuade-y. Probably should also update the end to match, but that’s what I had time to do in this sitting.