wasn't he entirely homeschooled

People are always praising that fanfic for some reason so I tried reading it a while back. If it's the one I'm thinking of then hard disagree, the protagonist is a self-insert Mary Sue clearly written by a kid who thinks they're the smartest person alive. One part that still sticks in my mind years later is their fundamental misunderstanding of how fiat currency works, it was some ridiculous get-rich-quick scheme like melting down wizard currency into pure gold to sell to non-wizard community then using that money to buy silver which they'd trade up to magic society gold coins. It was some years ago so I may be misremembering the details, but there should be a ton of issues that immediately jump out to you there.

I trudged through and got as far as the first meeting with Malfoy where the author realized they were being too friendly with each other, but since Malfoy is supposed to be a bad guy they decided he should randomly blurt out something about how he wants to rape some girl.

Maybe it's just because I don't have the context of other bad fanfics, but that's a solid 0/10 from me.

Counterpoint: https://danluu.com/su3su2u1/hpmor/

Possibly the only thing more annoying than Yudkowsky are the anonymous online people who think they figured him out. Many of them are in these threads.

https://hpmor.com/ for anyone else with delusions of literary grandeur.

By who?

Everything I've heard about big yud is that he's a bit of a douchebag with a cult of personality. Never heard he's anti science, or that he's done anything wrong.

i assure you, there is much weirder harry potter fanfiction out there. i once read a Hogwarts Castle/Giant Squid smut fic.

Also, pretty sure a fellow named Roko came up with the basilisk, not Yudkowsky.

I think it's a shit post about how he's been reading into the science and it is just way more complicated than what most people talk about.

That's fair. Language changed for accuracy.

Well did I miss hearing that someone has proven Einstein?

Not so. There are those that believe objectivism is the true way of viewing the world. They view that we are on the way to understanding the universe as it truly is, that human perception will not pose an obstacle to that pursuit, and that there will eventually be one true method of viewing the universe in its entirety that is yet to be discovered. Constructivist beliefs directly oppose that idea, since all science is a man-made construct that can only approximate reality in their view. Constructivism also, then, leaves room for multiple theories coexisting because they provide better utility and insights in different circumstances. In the example of Einstein's Relativity vs Newton's Physics, we are talking about an older theory and the theory which usurped it because it was more accurate, and the general expectation is that another theory will be accepted down the line which will be better than both. That expectation is fairly objectivist, since it assumes there is a true model which we just haven't discovered yet. Constructivism does not make that assumption, since the universe likely does not fit neatly into our constructions in its image.

The other thing, is that constructivism challenges scientific realism to some extent, in that it challenges the existence of many things which we cannot directly observe, such as quarks, proteins, particles, etc... because "how can we actually confirm these things exist, when we physically can't observe them, and the things we're using to show their existence are constructs made up by us?"

This topic is still very much in a state of debate that has very strong implications around the philosophy of how science works and how it should be conducted. That's also just talking about constructivism's implications in the physical sciences. Things get much hairier when you start looking at the social sciences, where biases and perception are extremely influential on what we discover. Constructivism directly challenges the attainability of scientific objectivity, which has serious implications across all fields of science.

The amount of people who think that scientists don't understand how bees fly is evidence that most people don't have this world view. As if someone would see a bee flying, not only having been around for eons, but a very common creature most people are familiar with, would just throw their hands up and say "WHOA! THIS VIOLATES ALL THE LAWS OF PHYSICS! THIS SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE!"

Yeah that’s a good rule too. Calories in vs calories out.

Say whatever you want but you can’t argue with results my man.