Skip to content

The Return of the Linking Dead

Last updated on 22 Jun 2018

Return-of-the-living-dead-movie-poster-small.jpgCan philosophers use the iPad? Hell, yes. Of course, we would say that, wouldn’t we? Also, check out this TeX for Philosophy site.

Is this when journalism lost its moral compass? When it stopped calling torture “torture”? Well, not really, no. It has always been morally bankrupt, and mythopoeic.

Was Bertrand Russell a eugenicist?

Did Plato hide a message in plain sight? Thony investigates and brings it back to Galileo. Jay Kennedy’s argument that there are numerical codes in the Platonic dialogues is uncannily similar to a view presented by my old lecturer, John Bigelow, but John’s is better argued and defended, I think. He thinks, if I read him correctly, that Plato was breaking the Pythagorean exoteric circle in a guarded fashion.

Kevin Zelnio has an excellent and rewritten post on how grant reviews are retarding science. Not news to those in the field, I think, but thoughtful.

Bowdlerising Shit My Dad Says, at Language Log.

Warp speed, Captain Cook… Australia is tectonically active.

Cartoon science history… yes, even in physics.


  1. Isn’t ‘ought a philosopher use an iPad?’ a much more interesting question? ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • John S. Wilkins John S. Wilkins

      It’s a Categorical Imperative: Thou shalt use Apple Products.

      • Brian Brian

        I thought a Categorical Imperative was such that you ought do it not for gain or reward, or something. I reckon you might be getting a bit of reward or enjoyment from your Mac.

      • John S. Wilkins John S. Wilkins

        Have you used an Apple product lately? This is a matter of faith.

      • Brian Brian

        Can’t say I’ve used a mac product in the last decade.

        • John S. Wilkins John S. Wilkins

          Therefore, you cannot understand how much of a Categorical Imperative it is…

      • Brian Brian

        As a jingoistic banana bender once said: “Please explain!”

        I didn’t think Categorical Imperatives where empirical thingies. I thought that they were obvious on first blush. (Forgive my ignorance as I’ve only read about them via Mackie and I’ve drank a lot of beer since then.)

      • John S. Wilkins John S. Wilkins

        I hope you don’t think I have been using that term correctly here… I always sacrifice accuracy for a bad pun or a cheap joke.

      • Brian Brian

        Carry on then!

  2. Brian Brian

    Did anyone doubt that Australia was tectonically active? I mean, Newcastle earthquake. Lots of tremors in Victoria over recent years. Monaro uplift. The newer volcanics (which the article mentions) that stretch from north of Melbourne (where I live) down through western Victoria (where I grew up) to the border with South Australia. Just a few examples.

    • John S. Wilkins John S. Wilkins

      Nobody who has been paying attention thought that. Hence, journalists did not know this, and repeat the myth all the time.

      • Brian Brian

        Fair enough. I don’t consider myself very plugged in or whatever, but it seems like one would have to be wilfully blind to not notice such things happening.

        I meant was an is tectonically active too in the above.

  3. I would have thought that “The Return of the Living Links” would have been the more obvious option. As opposed to the dead links, of course. Badabum.

    • John S. Wilkins John S. Wilkins

      Leave the execrable puns to the experts, Konrad. We do much worse than that…

  4. Sam C Sam C

    “exoteric” – now there’s an esoteric word. Its meaning is its antonym. Mm. Fruity.

Comments are closed.