MilanoCookie

Thanks, I’m leaning towards React and Vue

Thanks, I’ll look into TypeScript more.

Thanks, I keep hearing great things about React, not to mention the added bonus of React Native. I’ll look into it further.

Related to this topic:

What are the minimum technologies needed to get a solid front-end stack, with a nice balance between modern features without framework/library/build tool/transpiling hell?

For example, I don’t want to learn TypeScript when vanilla JavaScript will suffice. I’m wary of picking up the “hot” new frameworks because they haven’t stood the test of time and may get deprecated/irrelevant.

Basically, I want to have a flexible and minimalist stack, but also with a good balance of features (i.e. not just a static HTML site).

Any ideas?

Related to this topic:

What are the minimum technologies needed to get a solid front-end stack, with a nice balance between modern features without framework/library/build tool/transpiling hell?

For example, I don’t want to learn TypeScript when vanilla JavaScript will suffice. I’m wary of picking up the “hot” new frameworks because they haven’t stood the test of time and may get deprecated/irrelevant.

Basically, I want to have a flexible and minimalist stack, but also with a good balance of features (i.e. not just a static HTML site).

Any ideas?

Yeah the approach you mentioned is very effective, it’s a deductive learning approach.

I read both of your comments, this has been an interesting discussion and I'll keep these views in mind as I explore the topic some more.

I'm trying to craft an objective reality/worldview filled with objective truths. I need an accurate model to work off of so I don't make any errors in judgement. My main goal is to further mankind in the most significant matter possible, like you said, we're standing on the shoulders of giants.

Although, fame and money is not what I seek, I only wish contribute immensely in terms of work. I'm not trying to create something small like a social media site for pets, I'm trying to aim for innovations like the discovery and harnessing of electricity.

Could you list some of the truths of being human? Also give some examples of psychological realities of the human brain?

The only ones I know of are biological in nature, as we are living, breathing, conscious, sentient organisms. I used to think us humans were all skeletons, but in reality we're just brains. And our brains, like all matter, are made out of atoms. The body parts are just the physical layer. Think about that next time you talk to someone face to face, you're two brains communicating with each other.

See, the above statements are what I mean when I talk about seeking objective reality. I analyzed us as creatures and stripped it down to the bare bones characteristics, no metaphors involved.

When you speak of fulfillment and having an aim, it's an attempt to rationalize a meaning to life. But the premise may be false, that people assume there is a meaning to be found in life in the first place. And supposedly the answer to what our aims should be are found in a book known as the Bible, which we should interpret as deep, grand metaphors.

Religion and the Bible give people an easy way out of asking the tough questions about the nature of our reality, preventing critical thinking and logical thoughts. It provides comfort for the aimless, lest they have to confront existential dread.

Laws, ethics, and morality are human/social constructs that are characteristics of our society. There are no divine, absolute, or deep truths to be found there. It just defines basic human behavior so society remains civil.

Sadness is the response to a tragic event, not how we address it. I said that we can address it by being practical and seeing what caused the event and how to prevent it in the future.

In terms of the human who experienced the tragic event, yes they are probably traumatized and will have to reflect on it.

In your second paragraph, all you’ve described is a coping mechanism, which makes total sense because humans are social creatures.

Nihilism may be too extreme, but we need to discern what parts of society are man-made (laws, ethics, morality...all principles that we generally converge and agree on to be civilized and orderly) vs. objective reality.

Calling laws, ethics, and morality absolute or divine truths only serves our own ego. It’s dangerous and misleading when religion defines human constructs as truths, since they are only characteristics of our society.

We definitely should acknowledge who we are, that’s why the study of human psychology and human nature are fascinating. We should also take a third-person view of the world and deeply analyze actual, natural phenomena.

I’m glad you watched the series.

It’s iffy, I think religion is a good bridge to morality, with the storytelling, metaphors, and whatnot. I just don’t buy this as “truth”. We have to consider that morality is not real and it’s a human/social construct to encourage desirable and cooperative behavior. I’m happy that we did create moral and ethical values though, it’s an excellent way to further the human race and ensure future survival without having to constantly worry about chaotic behavior, similar to (good) government laws.

I take the practical and actionable approach. When tragedy strikes I feel sad. That’s it. We can certainly describe the feeling in different ways using our wonderful literary methods such as metaphors, similes, etc. but at its basic core is the emotion of sadness. But what do you mean not re-evaluate the foundation? When tragedy strikes we should probably figure out how it happened and then take steps to prevent it from occurring again, a simple cause and effect analysis.

To offer an alternative viewpoint, have you watched Sam Harris talk about religion on YouTube? He even debated Jordan Peterson about topics such as morality. I like Peterson a lot, but similar to Ben Shapiro, when they talk about religion...all logic, rationality, and objective truth seeking goes out the window.

The so called spirits you talk about are merely emotions.

Religious beliefs are prevelant in Western culture for historical reasons, such that it has become a tradition. Can you imagine the anger, sadness, existential dread, and perhaps violence that would occur if all religious folks found out that their beliefs are perhaps false?

I heavily disagree with you saying that it reveals “deep truths”.

Your conclusions are entirely false. It’s obvious that any human can explain to another human how their thought process works and what their reasoning behind decisions were. You’re just wrong, and you spent a lot of time writing up conclusions that don’t make sense.

Your pre-emptive details may have been valid but your conclusions have been refuted.

We can read about mental models and then put them to use. You seem to be saying that is not possible.

1. For trying to explain riding a bike, that just shows the difficulty in describing how to coordinate and move your body parts. A software engineer can clearly explain why the code looks good, which is then clearly understood by anyone who has basic technical understanding. Implying this is some abstract phenomenon that you “just feel” sounds like witchcraft.

2. This Shane Parrish guy seems to be a practitioner hence he’s explaining the mental models to us. Or at least he’s relaying the information from folks like Charlie Munger, but the point is we are getting useful information that originated from practitioners.

3. Yes they are useful as guard rails for practice. I wouldn’t say that’s the only thing they’re good for, but even if that were true, I’d say that provides decent value.