Sublime

Scientific models that seek to predict the consequences of human actions with some reasonable accuracy—such as game theoretical models of economic behavior—for the most part ignore human individuality in favor of aggregated outcomes.

één groepje deskundigen dat bovengemiddeld goed scoorde met hun voorspellingen. Hun overeenkomsten? Ze twijfelden veel, wilden een kwestie vanuit meerdere standpunten bekijken en herzagen hun antwoorden door de jaren regelmatig. We vinden het extreem ingewikkeld om onze eigen ideeën aan te passen, maar het werkt.

scientism is that it invites, as an almost allergic reaction, the total rejection of science. As we know to our cost, we witness this every day with climate change deniers, flat-earthers and religious fundamentalists. This is what is called obscurantism, namely that the way things are is not explained by science, but with reference to occult forces

Mais si l’on prétend s’opposer à la « rationalité scientifique » en inventant une manière plus intime, plus subjective, plus enracinée, plus globale, plus « écologique » si l’on veut, de capter nos liens avec la « nature », on va perdre sur les deux tableaux : on va conserver l’idée de « nature » empruntée à la tradition tout en se privant de

Models whose results remain a mystery are not useful; models that can be translated into intuitive insights and be broadly understood can be useful.”

reasonable creatures, and sometimes we are. Our individual reasonability is unpredictable, because it arises in unique combinations of facts that we find salient and values that we affirm. Our collective unreasonability is predictable, because (unlike values and facts) impulses and lies can be mechanized. Our collective unreasonability has general