Machine Math?
Posted by fullyfleshed in Viewpoint on February 16, 2012
Calculators are an often used example in the philosophy of mind. Sometimes they’re used analogously, to show how computational algorithms can be implemented in a variety of mediums (say, the very different circuitries of the calculator and the human brain). Other times, they’re used metaphorically, as objects that we can attribute intentional states: the calculator ‘knows’ how to add and ‘believes’ that 2+2=4. But how appropriate are comparisons between calculators and humans? Is it a matter of implementing the same (or nearly the same) algorithm? Or is the comparison a mere metaphor? Stanislas Dehaene is the champion of the surprising view that neither of these (caricatured) approaches can be right: calculation is neither a matter of merely attributing intentional states, nor do humans and calculators implement algorithms in the same way.
(Apologies if this topic seems old hat to any – if you are a person already familiar with Dehaene, ‘cultural re-mapping’, number sensing, and the like, the payoff to re-reading this extremely cool and interesting stuff about human mathematical capabilities, is some very exciting and interesting new advances in brain localization and machine-learning)
Dehaene’s view is that our mathematical abilities result from the mixture of two evolved mechanisms, and, importantly, a sprinkling of language. The first of these evolved mechanisms is a capacity to distinguish a certain amount of discrete quantities, or numerosity: the ability to tell apart one, two, three, and maybe four and five. Then, there is the capacity to distinguish differences in quantity: that six is bigger than one, or that twenty is less than sixty. Both of these abilities can be found in animals, and, yes, human children. And it’s easy to understand why such mechanisms might persist over time*: as an organism, it is very handy to have a capacity to determine between alternatives; whether option (a) was better than (b) because more nutrients, or less competition, or what have you. Read the rest of this entry »
Tradition and Politics
Detail from James Gillray's 'New Morality'. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)
‘Without a tradition, everything is impermanence and flux.’ Thus writes David Brooks in a New York Times piece giving advice to the rebellious and dissatisfied youth of today. If you are one of these youth, Brooks’ advice is that your rebellion should be grounded in a past tradition:
‘If I could offer advice to a young rebel, it would be to rummage the past for a body of thought that helps you understand and address the shortcomings you see. Give yourself a label. If your college hasn’t provided you with a good knowledge of countercultural viewpoints — ranging from Thoreau to Maritain — then your college has failed you and you should try to remedy that ignorance.’
The Philosophy of Safety Nets
Source: Wikimedia Commons
Achieving happiness is easy. I don’t mean eudaimonia – that oversophisticated happiness for Pinot-snuffling yuppies. I mean ordinary, practical happiness for ordinary, practical folk: utility. Achieving eudaimonia is definitely not easy; at your very approach it dances away like a will-o’-the-wisp on gossamer winds of pretentiousness. But utility? Utility is solid and graspable. In fact, Australians say ‘utility’ to refer to what Americans call a ‘pick-up truck’. A ute, we normally say. What’s more blunt and practical than that? Eudaimonia is a concept for sprinkling on your puy lentils to add that certain je ne sais quoi. Utility, on the other hand, is a concept you could change your sparkplugs with.
So, achieving ute is easy. Here’s how you do it. Start with the things you have. Now exchange them with people for other things you would prefer to have. People will participate in these exchanges whenever their preferences are different to yours. This will be often, since humans are psychologically diverse. Keep exchanging for as long as your preferences fail to be maximised, and you’ll always be getting closer to full happiness.
Interview: The Art of Comics: A Philosophical Approach
Posted by Liam Cooper (Managing Editor) in Interview on January 24, 2012
Aaron Meskin is Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Leeds. He is the author of numerous journal articles and book chapters on aesthetics and other philosophical subjects. He was the first aesthetics editor for the online journal Philosophy Compass, and he co-edited Aesthetics: A Comprehensive Anthology (Wiley-Blackwell, 2007). He is a former Trustee of the American Society for Aesthetics and is Treasurer of the British Society of Aesthetics.
Roy T Cook is an Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Minnesota, a Resident Fellow of the Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science, and an Associate Fellow of the Northern Institute of Philosophy (Aberdeen). He works in the philosophy of logic, the philosophy of mathematics, and the aesthetics of popular art. He blogs about comics at: www.pencilpanelpage.wordpress.com
Philosopher’s Eye: Why did you two decide to edit The Art of Comics: A Philosophical Approach?
AM: I thought there was enough good 
work out there being done on comics that someone could produce a good book on the subject matter. I like to work collaboratively, so when I met Roy it seemed like a good idea to work together. I suppose there’s also a sort of selfish reason–philosophy is about conversation and I wanted more conversation (and more interlocutors) on a topic I care about.
RTC: Aaron was nice enough to ask me – someone with no prior professional experience in aesthetics – to comment on a three-paper session on comics at an aesthetics conference. The volume was conceived over coffee at the same conference, based on the positive response to the papers and resulting discussion.
PE: What’s the central concern of the book, and why is it important?
AM & RTC: The book focuses on the aesthetic issues that are raised by the art form of comics. It is not philosophy ‘in’ or ‘through’ comics–the basic idea is Read the rest of this entry »
Like this:
Irritating ‘Philosophy’
Posted by fullyfleshed in Viewpoint on January 21, 2012
I have a little bugbear.
A little pet peeve.
So there are a ton of different usages of the word ‘philosophy’. Leaving aside its double-life as a verb, the OED lists nine noun entries for ‘philosophy’ – and one of them really grinds my gears. I might be the only philosopher that gets the irritated, nails-on-chalkboard sensation when someone uses the term in this way, but I suspect not. Not only are philosophers incredibly sensitive to their own use of language, splitting already split hairs, I find that they’re almost preternaturally attuned to the misuse of words in others. Maybe we’re just all jerks. Number six in the OED list is the spine-shivering offender, particularly, entry (b): “In extended use: a set of opinions or ideas held by an individual or group; a theory or attitude which acts as a guiding principle for behaviour; an outlook or world view.”
Maybe now you’re starting to sympathize with me. Read the rest of this entry »
Alien Intelligence and Plant Intelligence
Posted by fullyfleshed in Viewpoint on January 14, 2012
As NPR reports, planets are being discovered that might support life. These new and exciting celestial spheres are more-or-less suitable for the emergence of life: the temperature, gravity, and elemental make-up of such planets can create selection pressures that range the gamut from mild to pretty-much-inhospitable. One such discovery is especially noteworthy: Kepler 22-B (named after the telescope) is in the ‘goldilocks’ zone. In this zone, the size of the planet and its proximity to its star create the right sort of conditions to support flowing water.
The BBC (picked up by Slate) go on to make the link between the discovery of such planets and astral systems, and SETI, the Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence. With the discovery of more and more of these potentially-hospitable earth-twins, SETI gains a more plausible target to turn its arrays. With the discovery of more and more of such planets, it is more likely (though I am hesitant to use this term here) that we may discover intelligent life. Another variable in the Drake Equation starts its climb up in the cardinal numbers.
But wait! What is intelligent life? The ability to broadcast galactic radio-waves? Drake, at least, keeps that a separate variable, a tier that only a select group of intelligent critters will ever reach. But that really seems to operationalize our search for intelligent life. What if, being impatient, we send a probe (‘Make it so Number One’, etc.) to Kepler 22-B and discover strange, barely congealed bioluminescent areas – would we be right in attributing it with intelligence? Might our current conceptions of it be too broad? – too exclusive?
New Insights and Directions for Religious Epistemology
Posted by Liam Cooper (Managing Editor) in Viewpoint on January 12, 2012
Congratulations to John Hawthorne, editor of Philosophical Perspectives, for his recent grant award from the John Templeton Foundation! Prof. Hawthorne will lead a project titled “New Insights and Directions for Religious Epistemology” that seeks to revitalize the field by drawing on recent developments in mainstream epistemology. Valued at £1.3 million, the award will support three postdoctoral researchers, three PhD students, 22 visiting research fellowships, nine public lectures, four roundtable discussions, six workshops, and a major international conference.
Time is Money!
Posted by fullyfleshed in Viewpoint on January 3, 2012
Einstein's Clock
To me, the first of January is always a write-off. Nothing productive ever happens. It exists among the days of hangovers and jetlag. But now it is the day after the first, and it is now (as it was yesterday) 2012, and that means it is the perfect time to discuss, well, time. And there have been quite a few timely stories lately, from Samoa and Tokelau going back to the future, to the growing schism between international time and astronomical time. Even the Royal Society has some choice words on tricky temporal travails. And, resolutions aside, I’m going to attempt to be timely myself, and make this a rather short post. I want to share a few thoughts and links about the commercialization of time.
Of course, time is involved in many non-trivial ways in our daily life: the flow and change of seasons that signalled times of growth and harvest; the rotations of the sun that marked out the day’s working hours; the shivers of tide that allow for the gathering of molluscs, and so on. There is a strain of philosophy, particular the early Phenomenologists, that assert that such relationships to time are primordial, originary. These initial demarcations of time and change are what allow our mind to grasp a hold on the concept, to bring it to the rarefied reaches of reason, and to gain a measure of control over it. This is a rich field of thought, but I want to make just a few remarks about one aspect of this control: when time becomes part of – a tool, even – of our commercial and economic spheres.
Philosophy at Christmas – gawd bless us, *every one*.
Posted by Liam Cooper (Managing Editor) in Viewpoint on December 23, 2011
Christmas – Philosophy for Everyone
Better Than a Lump of Coal
From the blurb:
From Santa, elves and Ebenezer Scrooge, to the culture wars and virgin birth, Christmas – Philosophy for Everyone explores a host of philosophical issues raised by the practices and beliefs surrounding Christmas. Offers thoughtful and humorous philosophical insights into the most widely celebrated holiday in the Western world Contributions come from a wide range of disciplines, including philosophy, theology, religious studies, English literature, cognitive science and moral psychology The essays cover a wide range of Christmas themes, from a defence of the miracle of the virgin birth to the relevance of Christmas to atheists and pagans
Like this:
The Moral Status of a War
Posted by tobybetenson in Viewpoint on December 19, 2011
As the last of the United States’ armed forces withdraw from their prolonged engagement in Iraq, an observer can pause to reflect and consider the moral status of this conflict. Two recent experiences – incredibly trivial though they may be – inform my analysis. Firstly, I happened to chance upon In the Valley of Elah (a 2007 film whose story aims to highlight some of the terrible psychological effects that can result from throwing young individuals into such a conflict) the other day, and I found it quite compelling. Secondly, in a recent philosophy seminar that I was overseeing, a student attempted to raise the war in Iraq as an example that might offer support for a more general point about the validity of a consequentialist justification in moral reasoning; at the time I didn’t have any knowledge of the numbers involved, so I couldn’t say much about the nature of the example as regards a strictly consequentialist calculation. Due to my role, I felt compelled to stay silent at the time, and it left me frustrated.
I shall elaborate upon this second instance first. The war in Iraq was mentioned because – so the student asserted – America’s action was a reaction to 9/11, Read the rest of this entry »
New from Philosophy Compass:- The Concept of Sovereignty in Contemporary Continental Political Philosophy Verena Erlenbusch
- Agamben’s Fictions Colin McQuillan
- Berkeley and God in the Quad Melissa Frankel
- Foundational Semantics I: Descriptive Accounts Manuel García-Carpintero
- Foundational Semantics II: Normative Accounts Manuel García-Carpintero
- Is There a Distinctively Feminist Philosophy of Religion? Elizabeth D. Burns
Follow us:
