A talk on understanding 27 Jun 2019 I will be presenting this one at ISHPSSSB in Oslo in a couple of weeks. Comments and objections received with the usual ill grace… [embeddoc url=”https://evolvingthoughts.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Comprehension.pdf” width=”100%” download=”all” viewer=”google”] Epistemology Philosophy Theories
Administrative A philosophy blog 24 Jul 2010 I have only just found the blog Journeyman Philosopher by Paul Mealing, a fellow Australian. It is a thoughtful and infrequent blog in which he deals with everything from quantum mechanics and time through to popular culture and speciation. I strongly recommend subscribing to this one. Mealing is a writer,… Read More
Biology Natural classification 23 Jan 201423 Jan 2014 It occurs to me that I haven’t plugged my own book here. What a failure on my part! It was published in December, so it is really time I did so. In this book, Malte Ebach and I discuss a topic not often discussed in the philosophy of science: the… Read More
Biology Fame in Brazil 23 May 2009 A paper of mine on microbial species concepts, which started life on ET1 and hence you’ll be able to find on this edition of the blog, has been quoted in Portuguese in a Brazilian magazine, Pesquisa FAPESP. Can fame and fortune in that worthy nation be far behind? Read More
Schmidhuber (LSTM etc) https://arxiv.org/abs/0812.4360; Friston etc Where this might have a difficulty is when one discusses mathematical understanding. This comes up with computer generated proofs, and in mathematical education. It is objective, but a property of a learner (one can explain a proof, one can generate a new theorem, one can apply a particular method to a new area or recognise a dual). This obviously overlaps a lot of modern physics, and partly addresses de Regt’s problem about simplified “false” models that are actually deeper mathematically, though it does ring with his description of understanding as a skill. But no equivalent to causality, ISTM, especially if one is a constructivist in these matters. In the example of population genetics, I think it is the “higher” level where selection etc is happening – the molecular genetics is too “low”. It is the coarsening of the description that allows one to see what is really going on (sim thermodynamics, QM) in a complex system.
I don’t know Hempel, no idea who he is or the context. I don’t think i want to know any more about him. It conjures the image of a man sitting on a spike or a Dalek.