Benjamin Davies’s avatar

Benjamin Davies

@benjamin-davies·Member since October 2025

Activity

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2945.

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for how you want to use Veritula?
I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

#2945·Dennis HackethalOP revised about 1 month ago

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for how you want to use Veritula?

This seems like a good idea.

  Benjamin Davies addressed criticism #2940.

Why is similarity a bad thing in and of itself? It can be reminiscent of discussions as long as it’s less narrow.

#2940·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

Similarity is fine if it is less narrow, but ‘thread’ doesn’t seem any less narrow than ‘discussion’ to me. A ‘thread’ usually means a reply chain.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2917.

‘Entry’

#2917·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

I can’t decide if this communicates a grouping of ideas. Seems borderline.

  Benjamin Davies commented on criticism #2928.

Too jargon-y.

#2928·Benjamin Davies, about 1 month ago

“Go check out the Karl Popper context on Veritula” would only make sense if you are already a Veritula user who is accustomed to using this terminology.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2915.

‘Subject’

#2915·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

Makes me think of “subject of discussion”.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2915.

‘Subject’

#2915·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

I have an inexplicit criticism of this relating to “school subject”.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2922.

‘Cluster’

#2922·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

This actually seems anti-discussion. Sounds like a grouping of ideas that are only related by conceptual proximity, rather than building on each other.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2913.

‘Topic’

#2913·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

This makes me think of “discussion topic”.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2914.

‘Thread’

#2914·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

Similar to ‘discussion’.

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2902.

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?
I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

#2902·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?

This is ambiguous. To be clear, are you asking if I would like to make an explicit personal methodology for using the site, as part of my effort described in #2899? Or are you inviting me to formulate an explicit methodology for users of Veritula in general? (I realise these aren’t mutually exclusive.)

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2929.

I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.

For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.

I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.

For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2902.

Would you like to try formulating an explicit methodology for using Veritula?
I noticed that you’ve started a bunch of discussions but I don’t believe you’ve reached a resolution on any of them.

#2902·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

I think this is partly to do with the fact that Veritula has no clear way of indicating when a resolution has been reached or a problem has been solved.

For example, I am currently applying #2840, and it is working well. There is no obvious thing I should be doing in Veritula to note that. I would probably only bring it up again if it didn’t solve the problem in the end.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2921.

‘Context’

#2921·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

Too jargon-y.

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2908.

This change is on purpose. The zoom feature was buggy. After zooming out far enough, the navbar and footer got cut off on the right. So I replaced it with proper scrolling.

Would you say zooming was indispensable or just nice to have?

#2908·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

It means that I have to scroll sideways to see the end of each line in a paragraph, which makes it more difficult to read ideas. It feels quite bad to use, compared to using Veritula on my computer, where the entire width of a paragraph is visible at all times.

A solution might be to adjust the mobile site dynamically to fit the user’s phone width.

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2897.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality self-reflection.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality of my self-reflection.

  Benjamin Davies commented on idea #2897.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality self-reflection.

#2897·Benjamin Davies, about 1 month ago

I already have a loose journalling habit, but it is completely free of schedule, structure or method.

  Benjamin Davies submitted idea #2897.

Reflecting on one's past thought and action seems to be a key component of living a life 100% guided by reason. Thinking about this has inspired me to make an effort to search for methods and tools that help systematise, formalise and improve the quality self-reflection.

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2829. The revision addresses ideas #2859, #2866, #2868, #2869, and #2870.

revising to account for criticisms


The Open Society

This is the political philosophy of Critical Rationalism, detailed by Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies. An open society is one in which each individual is largely enabled to make their own personal decisions, as opposed to a tribal or collectivist society. It replaces the justificationist political question, "Who should rule?", with the fallibilist question: "How can we structure our institutions so that we can remove bad rulers and bad policies without violence?". In this view, democracy is not "rule by the people" (an essentialist definition) but is valued as the only known institutional mechanism for error-correction and leadership change without bloodshed.

The Open Society

The concept of an 'Open Society' is central to the political philosophy of Critical Rationalism, detailed by Karl Popper in The Open Society and Its Enemies. An open society is characterized by individualism, where personal choice and responsibility are paramount, in contrast to a closed society (e.g., tribal or collectivist) which demands the subordination of the individual to the group. It replaces the justificationist political question, "Who should rule?", with the fallibilist question: "How can we structure our institutions so that we can remove bad rulers and bad policies without violence?". In this view, democracy is not "rule by the people" (an essentialist definition) but is valued as the only known institutional mechanism for error-correction and leadership change without bloodshed.

  Benjamin Davies commented on criticism #2892.

The purpose of the reaction would be to record a kind of agreement or acknowledgment.
That way, Veritula could show ‘pending’ criticisms to users, say – ‘pending’ in the sense that they haven’t responded to those criticisms. So in addition to revising or counter-criticizing, they get a chance to accept a criticism without it remaining in a ‘pending’ state.

Posting arbitrary emojis doesn’t achieve that purpose.

#2892·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

This is a good idea.

I often receive criticisms that I have no counter-criticisms for, and it would be nice to be able to acknowledge those, both as a way to display gratitude, and as a way to indicate that I think something is tentatively settled.

  Benjamin Davies commented on criticism #2889.

There are a few reasons people might send criticisms instead of revising an idea themselves:

  1. You get a chance to disagree.
  2. Submitting a criticism is easier.
  3. A criticism is a written record explaining why a revision is necessary.

Because of the third reason, you may see people post a criticism and then immediately revise your idea to address it.

Maybe I’m wrong but I’m sensing a bit of frustration between the lines. Please note that Veritula pursues a higher standard of error correction than other platforms. Some criticisms may be unexpected; discussions could go in a direction you did not anticipate. You may receive criticisms that would be deemed nitpicky on other platforms, but they’re not meant to be. They may go beyond what’s strictly socially acceptable. I intend criticism to be a gift to you. For ‘small’ criticisms, it’s usually best to revise accordingly and not counter-criticize.

Your idea reads more like a question than a criticism. But since I’ve (hopefully) answered it, I’m marking this response a criticism to neutralize it.

#2889·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

Thank you for clarifying this. The idea of submitting a criticism and also immediately revising makes sense.

The criticisms you shared today (that inspired me to post #2884) are valid. This question came out of confusion as to how Veritula is intended to be used, rather than frustration directed at you.

  Benjamin Davies revised idea #2823. The revision addresses idea #2858.

Political Holism

Synonymous with large-scale social engineering, this is the political program that follows from Historicism. It is the attempt to remodel an entire society from a central blueprint, based on a historicist prophecy of an "ideal" state. Popper argued this program is both violent and irrational. It is violent because it requires the suppression of all dissent to enact the central plan, and it is irrational because when an entire system is changed at once, it becomes impossible to trace the consequences of any single action, making it impossible to learn from mistakes.

Political Holism

Synonymous with large-scale social engineering, this is the political program that follows from Historicism. It is the attempt to remodel an entire society from a central blueprint, based on a historicist prophecy of an "ideal" state. Popper argued this program is both violent and irrational. It is violent because it requires the suppression of all dissent to enact the central plan, and it is irrational because when an entire system is changed at once, it becomes impossible to trace the consequences of any single action, making it impossible to learn from mistakes.

  Benjamin Davies criticized idea #2771.

Yes, see here: https://veritula.com/discussions/veritula-meta
Give it a shot.

#2771·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

This is no longer working for me.

  Benjamin Davies submitted criticism #2886.

I am currently unable to zoom out to the full width when accessing Veritula on mobile.

  Benjamin Davies commented on criticism #2860.

You forgot to count comments on older versions of ideas.

#2860·Dennis HackethalOP, about 1 month ago

Ah I see.

  Benjamin Davies submitted criticism #2884.

Since users are able to revise other users’ ideas, why is it standard practice on Veritula to submit trivial improvements to ideas (such as correction of typos, poor grammar and redundancies) as criticisms, rather than directly revising the idea itself? Example: #2865

Perhaps I have misunderstood the intention of enabling users to revise other people’s ideas.