What is philosophy? 16 Dec 2008 Below the fold is a video produced by the Australasian Association of Philosophy back in the 1990s. The talking head is, I think, Graeme Graham Priest. [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IG1IAzSC0U&hl=en&fs=1] Uncategorized
Uncategorized On epigenetics 6 Apr 2009 Here is an interesting discussion of a recent paper on the operational and theoretical definitions of “epigenetics”. This term – which has a deep history, well before genetics – is interpreted in every manner from inherited histone patterns on chromosomes to parental investment and extrasomatic inheritance. The authors of the… Read More
Uncategorized Marjorie Grene dies 17 Mar 200918 Sep 2017 Marjorie Grene was a doyen of philosophy and history of biology, and I reviewed one of her last texts a while back and linked to an interview. She died yesterday, according to Leiter, aged 99. Read More
Uncategorized Amazing new philosophy resource 30 Jan 2009 David Chalmers and his student David Bourget at the Australian National University have developed a new resource: PhilPapers. This is a hot list to online versions of (so far) over 188,000 items in current philosophy. I checked my own papers and they were all there (something Thompson International seems unable… Read More
But that would lead to a para-consistency! Oh, wait… Have you tried this on him? I’d love to see how he gets around it.
At least Graham Priest will have a hard time arguing why “Graeme Priest” is not the correct spelling … oh, it is surely wrong, but according to Priest that doesn’t exclude the possibility that it’s right as well. Trouble like this is, in fact, the main problem for dialetheism (at least Priest’s system) – even if there were dialetheia, you want to be able to at least formulate the claim that some sentence ‘s’ isn’t among them, yet there are no resources for doing exactly that (and what does that expressive limitation do to his argument against a Tarski-style solution to the semantic paradoxes? Just asking).
At least Graham Priest will have a hard time arguing why “Graeme Priest” is not the correct spelling … oh, it is surely wrong, but according to Priest that doesn’t exclude the possibility that it’s right as well. Trouble like this is, in fact, the main problem for dialetheism (at least Priest’s system) – even if there were dialetheia, you want to be able to at least formulate the claim that some sentence ‘s’ isn’t among them, yet there are no resources for doing exactly that (and what does that expressive limitation do to his argument against a Tarski-style solution to the semantic paradoxes? Just asking).