timelets

Tue, 28 Apr 2026 03:24:32 GMT

...by “freedom” Hegel now means nothing transcendent but, in a more transcendental vein, the power that reason demonstrates over nature by transforming what would otherwise be just something physical into an object, by humanizing it through labor, and ultimately by making it re-exist, as Hegel says in the 1805/06 System, as the object of art, religion, and science. ”

-- Di Giovanni in “Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel: The Science of Logic.”

Imagine, we outsource this labor to learning/reasoning/inferring machines. What happens to the process of humanization?

comments

How America recovers

Wed, 15 Apr 2026 21:13:29 GMT

comments

Mon, 23 Mar 2026 22:28:06 GMT

"We are prone to think that we have here are degrees of certainty, with 2+2=4 enjoying the highest certainty. We don't realize that what we have here are not degrees of certainty, but kinds of certainty. And the kinds of certainty are as various as the kinds of proposition in question. *"

This crucial point is often lost in probability calculations. Nassim Taleb gets it though.

* “Different kinds of certainty have different kinds of grounds. And what it is that is certain is, in each such case, a categorially different kind of proposition. The grounds for mathematical certainty are deductive proofs, and mathematical propositions are rules, not descriptions. The certainty of a perceptual statement such as ‘The curtains are red’ lies in its being evident to the senses – look and see! The certainty of an empirical prediction is determined by its conclusive empirical evidence. And the certainty of a highly theoretical proposition of science, such as e = mc2, is determined by the holistic confirmation of the theory of which it is a part.
...
What applies to certainty applies also to truth.
..
Empirical propositions, mathematical propositions, logical propositions and ethical propositions are categorially different. And that’s why what it is for propositions of categorially different kinds to be true is also so different, even though the term ‘true’ is unequivocal.”

Peter Hacker;. “A Beginner's Guide to the Later Philosophy of Wittgenstein.”

comments

Sat, 07 Feb 2026 22:31:01 GMT

https://youtu.be/CBmz3pFdK-4?si=oQv5Nbi3g4aoh-PB

( Read more... )

comments

Mon, 02 Feb 2026 03:34:50 GMT

comments

Sun, 01 Feb 2026 04:28:16 GMT

comments

Thu, 22 Jan 2026 04:16:46 GMT

at around 3:30, he says, I'm suspicious of philosophy.

comments

Thu, 04 Sep 2025 21:55:52 GMT

comments

Sun, 13 Jul 2025 17:37:12 GMT

"Every new theory of physics has invented a new concept of time"

comments

Thu, 10 Jul 2025 16:21:50 GMT

How is it that half of America looks at Donald Trump and doesn’t find him morally repellent? He lies, cheats, steals, betrays, and behaves cruelly and corruptly, and more than 70 million Americans find him, at the very least, morally acceptable. Some even see him as heroic, admirable, and wonderful. What has brought us to this state of moral numbness?
...
the thinking of Alasdair MacIntyre, the great moral philosopher
...
As MacIntyre put it, “The choice between the ethical and the aesthetic is not the choice between good and evil, it is the choice whether or not to choose in terms of good and evil.”
...
How do people make decisions about the right thing to do if they are not embedded in a permanent moral order? They do whatever feels right to them at the moment. MacIntyre called this “emotivism,” the idea that “all moral judgments are nothing but expressions of preference, expressions of attitude or feeling.” Emotivism feels natural within capitalist societies, because capitalism is an economic system built around individual consumer preferences.

One of the problems with living in a society with no shared moral order is that we have no way to settle arguments. We have no objective standard by which to determine that one view is right and another view is wrong. So public arguments just go on indefinitely, at greater levels of indignation and polarization. People use self-righteous words to try to get their way, but instead of engaging in moral argument, what they’re really doing is using the language of morality to enforce their own preferences.

If no one can persuade anybody about right and wrong, then there are only two ways to settle our differences: coercion or manipulation.
...
Trump speaks the languages we moderns can understand. The language of preference: I want. The language of power: I have the leverage. The languages of self, of gain, of acquisition. He treats even the presidency itself as a piece of personal property he can use to get what he wants. As the political theorist Yuval Levin has observed, there are a lot of people, and Trump is one of them, who don’t seek to be formed by the institutions they enter. They seek instead to use those institutions as a stage to perform on, to display their wonderful selves.

-- David Brooks, 7/8/2025, the Atlantic.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/07/trump-administration-supporters-good/683441/

Works well with Turchin's metaphor of musical chairs in politics/power.

comments

Sat, 14 Jun 2025 18:18:26 GMT

The transition from the ‘red’ of awareness to the ‘red’ of thought is accompanied by a definite loss of content, namely by the transition from the factor ‘red’ to the entity ‘red.’ This loss in the transition to thought is compensated by the fact that thought is communicable whereas sense-awareness is incommunicable.

-- Whitehead, The Concept of Nature.
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/18835/18835-h/18835-h.htm

This is different for AI. Even more specifically, Jeff Dean introduced a mode of "teacher-student" transmission where both weights and elements of the model transferred between entities.

comments

Wed, 11 Jun 2025 00:46:18 GMT

I find it really productive to think about different types of AI/ML using one of Whitehead's approaches. For example, he describes three elements of any event: physical prehension (objective data), cognitive prehension (eternal possibilities), decision. Implicitly, when we talk about an agent, the fourth element is realization, i.e. action on the decision. (upd. he also has _subjective aim_, which is the target of the decision).

Each of these elements carries modes of interaction that are fundamentally different for humans and ML. First of all, physical prehension, i.e. awareness of the world, involves radically different sensory methods. Furthermore, while human awareness relies on analog biological, evolutionary fixed senses, ML can access digital non-biological signals. Further, its awareness can be retrained on new data gathering methods. Moreover, various types of ML can be trained and retrained on new senses just like we train dogs for tracking. The possibilities for creating new types of world awareness are mind boggling.

Etc, etc, etc.

Also, Whitehead's theology is highly applicable to this subject, but I'd need more time to study and think about it.

upd: transparency of prehension would be a good topic on which to "compare and contrast"

comments

Sat, 07 Jun 2025 22:04:12 GMT

There once was an old Bedouin, who, sensing that his death was imminent,
gathered together his three sons and signified his last wishes to
them. To the eldest, he bequeathed half his inheritance, to the second one
quarter, and to the third one sixth. As he said this, he died, leaving his sons
in perplexity, for the inheritance in question consisted of eleven camels.
How were they to respect the old man's will ? Should they kill those of
the camels whose division seemed prescribed, and share the meat among
them ? Was this the required filial piety? Did their father really want them to
prove their love by accepting this loss? Or had he made a mistake, distracted
or weakened by his imminent death ? In fact, at least one error was
obvious, because one-half plus a quarter plus a sixth do not make one.

Yetto inherit on the basis of an interpretation that disqualifies a last wish, is
this not to insult to the dead? And in this case, moreover, how could one
divide ? Who would take away the remainder of the division ? All the ingredients
were there for a fratricidal war. The three brothers nevertheless
decided to try to avoid the war, that is, to wager that a solution could
exist. This means that they went to see the old sage who so often plays a
role in such stories. This old sage, on this occasion, told them that he
could not do anything for them except to offer them what might perhaps
help them: his old camel, skinny and half-blind. The inheritance now
counted twelve camels: the eldest took six of them, the second three, the
youngest two, and the old camel was returned to the old sage.

What did the twelfth camel accomplish ? By its presence, it made possible
what seemed contradictory, simultaneously obeying the father's wishes,
discovering the possi bility of respecting their terms, and not destroying
the value of the inheritance.

--- I.Stengers, Thinking with Whitehead

I'm going to steal this parable from her.

comments

Sat, 07 Jun 2025 18:03:55 GMT

А. Воробей недавно написал, что разрешает себе писать о политике только если, как минимум, час позанимался физикой или математикой. https://avva.dreamwidth.org/3576932.html

Это хорошее правило. Для меня этот час будет включать философию — начал читать книгу Isabelle Stengers "Thinking with Whitehead: free and wild creation of concepts."

comments

Misplaced concretenes

Sat, 31 May 2025 00:56:45 GMT

Most discussions about AI, especially AGI, suffer from what Whitehead would call the Fallacy of Misplaced Concreteness. That is, people assume that Intelligence is something concrete existing in Nature that can be easily pointed to and described. Instead, we have a broad range of definitions covering various bundles of human and/or computer capabilities.
By contrast, discussions about industrial robots, including drones and autonomous cars, are usually much more productive because their roles are well specified in terms of tasks and accomplishments.

comments

Charles Peirce, Inference and Category theory

Fri, 07 Mar 2025 07:39:08 GMT

Here's an interesting way to make a connection between Peirce's pragmatism/logic and the category theory

Link to the paper https://ncatlab.org/davidcorfield/files/Peirce200225.pdf

comments

Wed, 19 Feb 2025 06:30:44 GMT

What Nagel has discovered is a fascinating architectural feature of the human mind: We are beings who can representationally distance ourselves from ourselves and make this fact globally avail- able through conscious experience.

-- Thomas Metzinger, Being No One. 2004

Nagel's book View From Nowhere is going to be next on my reading list

comments

Quote of the Day

Wed, 05 Feb 2025 04:41:42 GMT

Philosophical problems can frequently be solved by conceptual analysis or by transforming them into more differentiated versions. However, an additional and interesting strategy consists in attempting to also uncover their introspective roots. A careful inspection of these roots may help us to understand the intuitive force behind many bad arguments, a force that typically survives their rebuttal.

--- Thomas Metzinger, Being No One, 2004.

comments

Tue, 04 Feb 2025 07:45:08 GMT

( Read more... )
However, this would require shifting incentives away from maximizing engagement and toward epistemic responsibility, which is difficult given current business models.

====
It would be an interesting challenge to come with up a technology and a business model that solves the problem.

Also related https://youtu.be/qlPHGnChhI4?si=03mDoaAYAFJnEfCE&t=4004

truth conditions (theoretical intentionality) vs satisfaction conditions (practical intentionality)

comments

Quote of the day

Tue, 04 Feb 2025 01:43:24 GMT

The American composer, artist, and music theorist John Cage (1912–1992) wrote
about a sudden philosophical insight that he had in the late 1940s during an experi-
ment in the anechoic chamber at Harvard University. He described it like this: “[S]ilence
is not acoustic. It is a change of mind, a turning around.”

--- Thomas Metzinger, The Elephant and the Blind. 2024.

=====
His comparison of meditation experience to silence feels right. It's not like any other exprience, even if we say it's like flying or swimming or resting. On my smartwatch it registers as deep sleep, but I know I'm not sleeping; rather, I feel that the world around me goes into quetude of almost non-existence.

comments

Thu, 30 Jan 2025 04:08:05 GMT

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPuWHN0BTio

comments

Sun, 24 Nov 2024 04:44:56 GMT

“Fairy tales operate according to several other fundamental principles of magical thinking besides natural magic and animist vitality: animal metamorphosis and changeable bodies on the one hand, and the binding power of promises and curses on the other, govern the logic of the plots—although logic is hardly the mot juste, since magic springs continual surprises that break all the rules of probability. The implied, ever-present possibility of transmogrification means that fairytale protagonists...may be changed, sometimes literally, sometimes figuratively. A stroke of fate will raise them high or lay them low.

Although magic operates according to fundamental principles, its manifestations differ from culture to culture, and era to era, which adds spice and variety to fairy tales.”

...
The stress falls on the binding power of words: the father must keep his promise to the Beast, the beauty will sleep for a hundred years, according to the letter of the spell.
...

“Prophecies—and curses—march on unstoppably. One message of fairy tales is ‘Beware what you wish for.’ Another would be ‘Beware what you promise.’ Yet another would be ‘Beware what you utter.’ You can’t take back what you say. There’s a profound respect in the genre for what words do in the world, as well as in the stories.”

--Warner, Marina;. “Once upon a Time.”

=====
Promises create a stable structure, while everything else is changeable. This way "what is" and "what ought to be" ultimately are the same.

comments

Mon, 18 Nov 2024 07:33:50 GMT

when people thought the earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the earth was spherical, they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together.

The basic trouble, you see, is that people think that "right" and "wrong" are absolute; that
everything that isn't perfectly and completely right is totally and equally wrong.

--- Asimov, The Relativity of Wrong. Source: The Skeptical Inquirer, Vol. 14 No. 1, Fall 1989, pp. 35-44.

comments

Thu, 19 Sep 2024 03:37:49 GMT

Philosophy can exclude nothing.

...before the work of systematization commences, there is a previous task—a very necessary task if we are to avoid the narrownesses inherent in all finite systems... [this] primary stage can be termed 'assemblage'.

...the philosophic process of assemblage should have received some attention from every educated mind, in its escape from its own specialism.

In Western Literature there are four great thinkers, whose services to civilized thought rest largely upon their achievements in philosophical assemblage; though each of them made important contributions to the structure of philosophic system. These men are Plato, Aristotle, Leibniz, and William James.
...
William James, essentially a modern man. His mind was adequately based upon the learning of the past. But the essence of his greatness was his marvellous sensitivity to the ideas of the present. He knew the world in which he lived, by travel, by personal relations with its leading men, by the variety of his own studies. He systematized; but above all he assembled. His intellectual life was one protest against the dismissal of experience in the interest of system. He had discovered intuitively the great truth with which modern logic is now wrestling.
...
One characteristic of the primary mode of conscious experience is its fusion of a large generality with an insistent particularity.
...
In order to acquire learning, we must first shake ourselves free of it. We must grasp the topic in the rough, before we smooth it out and shape it. For example, the mentality of John Stuart Mill was limited by his peculiar education which gave him system before any enjoyment of the relevant experience. Thus his systems were closed. We must be systematic; but we should keep our systems open. In other words, we should be sensitive to their limitations. There is always a vague 'beyond', waiting for penetration in respect to its detail.

--- Whitehead.
https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Whitehead/Whitehead_1938/1938_01.html

comments

Sun, 15 Sep 2024 02:57:16 GMT

There is an insistent presupposition continually sterilizing philosophic thought. It is the belief, the very natural belief, that mankind has consciously entertained all the fundamental ideas which are applicable to its experience. Further it is held that human language, in single words or in phrases, explicitly expresses these ideas. I will term this presupposition, The Fallacy of the Perfect Dictionary.

--- Whitehead.
https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/Whitehead/Whitehead_1938/1938_09.html

We might be committing this fallacy wrt ML.~~, although most people live with the fallacy b/c their world is quite stable.~~ The world is full of inexpressible moments.

comments