3QD Philosophy prize 4 Sep 2010 The 3QuarksDaily website is running its second Prize in Philosophy which has a convenient wrap up of some good philosophy posts. Most of them, though, are your usual deep ethics, metaphysics and epistemology, which is too deep for the likes of me. Still, you may find them worth reading and voting for. One of our frequent flyers here, Siris, has a piece for consideration, the one discussing PZ Myers, whoever he is, and Pascal’s Wager. If you read it and liked it, go vote for it. Another is by another frequent flyer, u n d e r v e r s e, which discusses free will. Now I note that none of you thought to nominate one of mine, and I want you all to be assured that I only hate you a little bit. But vote for one of these, if not both (Chicago voting rules), or someone else. Epistemology Ethics and Moral Philosophy Metaphysics Philosophy Philosophy
Epistemology Dynamics and classification redux 7 Aug 2010 In my last two posts in this series, I suggested that science is a field of possible moments, with no set trajectory over what I called the “dance floor of science”. Some commentators have objected to this, arguing that there is no real difference between classification and theory building. I… Read More
Epistemology Can one do philosophy of religion? 6 Jan 20114 Oct 2017 A while back, philosopher of religion Keith Parsons (Houston, Clear Lake) announced that he could no longer do philosophy of religion because I have to confess that I now regard “the case for theism” as a fraud and I can no longer take it seriously enough to present it to… Read More
Epistemology 50 words for snow 6: constructing phenomena 11 Dec 20171 Mar 2019 Series Conceptual confusion The economics of cultural categories What are phenomena? What counts as sociocultural? Species Constructing phenomena Explanations and phenomena There is a naive empiricist view held by nobody on close inspection, that phenomena merely present themselves to the observer, and call for explanation. At least since Kant, such… Read More
John’s comment seems to indicate that I did not pay close enough attention to the election campaign. I did not get my message across. Vote for me and turn back the boats! An elephant in every pot and vice-versa! Vote for me because consciousness matters! Plus the costings of the others are all dodgy.
Actually, I myself wouldn’t recommend voting for mine; it’s a slapped-together post rather than a properly developed argument. If it’s any consolation, I didn’t nominate anyone at all. But you’re at the top of the list of people I didn’t nominate!
I do think preferences are my best hope. I am the second ‘Flickers of Freedom’ post. Why do people who vote for my opponents hate freedom?
Depends on whether you measure me by nerve impulses or self-reporting. But as I said in my post that Chris referenced, I don’t believe in uncaused freedom, just the normal moral variety. Damian Cox was explaining to me that the best view is a virtue ethics account of character, not actions, or something…
I’m not convinced number 9 counts as philosophy. Or as remotely intelligible. But it’s a great pitch for a science fiction series.
There’s an old joke about mystery novels requiring royalty, sex, religion, and detective problems. In a short story exercise one person offered: “MyGod!” said the duchess. “I’m pregnant! Who did it?” Quantum mechanics is one of those elements that you just have to bring into play if you want to get people interested. Like Gödel’s Theorem in earlier days, it doesn’t matter if you understand it, so long as you mention it. “Entanglement!” said the duchess…
OK, I’ve finished Round One, wherein I take a cursory look at everything on offer and decide which are worth having a closer look at later. Three articles have survived my first round of eliminations. These are: #12 (non-western philosophy), #14 (Leibniz’s theories of matter), and #22 (rules and creativity). I have not read any of these from beginning to end yet, so none of this implies endorsement, but given that if I vote at all I will vote for one of these three, would you like to add anything before I do?
I found the Leibniz one superficial on the aspects I knew. But hell, it’s a blog post, not a doctoral dissertation.
I’m not sure I want to vote for anything. I couldn’t find a single article that gave me any significant sense of being enriched through exposure to new ideas. Judged by the discussion it has the potential to initiate, #12 (non-western philosophy) is probably my favourite, but judged as a self-contained entity, it too proved disappointing in the end. It leaves its most crucial claims unsubstantiated and its most crucial conclusions undefined.
Yes, I want to add something. I know a spell to banish dragons whence they came. Don’t make me use it.
I have tried it. I am relieved to say it works. At least, I can’t find a single dragon anywhere in my office.
Now I note that none of you thought to nominate one of mine… I didn’t wish to demean you by nominating one of your first class posts for a third rate bun fight.