I take a poke at his main claim to fame over at Substack.
(What work does 'over' do in the preceding sentence? None at all. But I like the sound of it. So stet.)
I take a poke at his main claim to fame over at Substack.
(What work does 'over' do in the preceding sentence? None at all. But I like the sound of it. So stet.)
A tilt at transhumanism.
Substack latest.
Top o' the Stack.
The Austrian philosopher and Vienna Circle member Herbert Feigl wrote about nomological danglers. Mental states as the epiphenomenalist conceives them have causes, but no effects. They are caused by physical states of the body and brain, but dangle nomologically in that there are no laws that relate mental states to physical states.
The childless are anthropological danglers. They are life's epiphenomena. They have ancestors (causes) but no descendants (effects). Parents are essential: without them we could not have come into fleshly existence. But offspring are wholly inessential: the individual, though not the species, can exist quite well without them.
I mention pros and cons of dangling anthropologically.
Top o' the Stack.
Substack latest.
One day, well over 40 years ago, I was deeply tormented by a swarm of negative thoughts and feelings that had arisen because of a dispute with a certain person. Pacing around my apartment, I suddenly, without any forethought, raised my hands toward the ceiling and said, "Release me!" It was a wholly spontaneous cri de coeur, a prayer if you will, but not intended as such. I emphasize that it was wholly unpremeditated. As soon as I had said the words and made the gesture, a wonderful peace descended upon my mind, and the flood of negativity vanished. I became as calm as a Stoic sage.
Top o' the Stack.
Substack latest.
On believing beyond the evidence. Immoral? Irrational?
Top o' the Stack.
Substack latest.
Is Trump an example?
Substack latest.
A hot (sauce rant) or a (hot sauce) rant? Both. Parentheses matter! Scope matters. All scope distinctions matter. Mind your p's and q's. Discriminate operators and operands. (Am I sending a coded message?)
Substack latest.
Don't complain about 'old news.' What are you, a Twitterized 'woke' presentist?
There is presentism in the philosophy of time and there is what I will call, for want of a better term, historical presentism. This, roughly, is the conceit that the present alone matters and that we have little or nothing to learn from the past. It is not so much a view as an attitude, a 'bad 'tude' if you will, one shared by adolescents of all ages. There is the punk who, ignorant of great literature, installs Bukowski in the literary pantheon. Self-insulation from the past and its achievements is one of the ways wokesters self-enstupidate.
And there are those who ought to know better, spineless university administrators in the grip of fashionable obsessions, who are thereby rendered incapable of just judgments of past times and individuals. Case in point: the Flannery O'Connor unnaming.
. . . but don't pay to publish. Leader of the Stack.
. . . but truth is not? An inconsistency in Dennett.
Over at the Stack.
Top o' the Stack. Dennett debunked!
At Substack and elsewhere.
If you make it to the end of the day, you may want to quaff in celebration the libation, The Ides of March.