Vote now! 3 Jun 2010 I have a couple of posts nominated (one by me – it’s time to stop being humble) at the 3quarksdaily Science competition here. I won’t win, because that torrent of good science writing, Ed Yong, is nominated, not to mention Carl Zimmer and sundry others, and the Pharynguloids will of course vote for PZ, but you should either go vote reflexively for me, or actually read some of the nominations and vote sensibly… Administrative Science Administrative
Administrative Lego me too! 12 Aug 200718 Sep 2017 I had to. They made me do it. Yes, I’m smoking again, but I’ll give up soon, I promise. The grumpy expression is because I’m teaching… Read More
Evolution Ruse on Hull: a memoir 13 Aug 2010 The following memoir of David Hull is from Michael Ruse, who has graciously given permission to post it on this blog: DAVID HULL (1935–2010) I first met David Hull in the fall of 1968, at the first meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, being held in Pittsburgh. He was… Read More
Administrative The year in review 21 Dec 200718 Sep 2017 Philosophy isn’t one of those things that makes great breakthroughs that are recognised at the time. Generally something is thought of as a significant development much later, after it becomes obvious that people are engaging with it, like the Chinese Room of John Searle. So instead I will simply list… Read More
Well, I had to go back and read lots of complicated stuff with Big Words, many of which start with P. Then I chose your evolution thing. That Myzers guy will hypnotize his slavish golems, who gleefully punk anything that includes voting, so he will probably win. However, we know what he thinks of online votes: meaningless. So, even if he wins, does it matter?
Don’t forget that to “win” the voting round merely means to be in the top 25%. I actually glanced at all of the nominations, read all the promising ones, and voted sensibly. As you follow me on Twitter (GoldHoarder), you already know who I voted for. Other favourites will get blog links in due course. I left comments on a few, sometimes as Adrian Morgan, sometimes as outerhoard. Apparently I was the first person to point out (in a comment here) that two of the links were broken. This bothers me, because it implies that the vast majority of people don’t actually bother to peruse the list before voting, otherwise I never would have been first to report the error. My own view is that my vote would be illegitimate in principle if I didn’t give every candidate a fair go.