eripsa

@eripsa

robot. made of robots. 🤖🐜 afk: Daniel Estrada, Lecturer he/they UXVpbmUgc3RhbiBhY2N0

internet
Vrijeme pridruživanja: prosinac 2008.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @eripsa

Jeste li sigurni da želite vidjeti te tweetove? Time nećete deblokirati korisnika/cu @eripsa

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    3. kol 2019.

    Is critical robot studies a field yet?

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  2. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    prije 8 sati
    Odgovor korisnicima i sljedećem broju korisnika:

    - Probably the most well established approach to self and (disorders of) agency is and colleagues' work on conscious presence - Thomas Metzinger has some cool stuff on self - Also recommend & Felix Blankenburg on minimal phenomenal self-models (2/2)

    Poništi
  3. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    This entire thread is a delightfully candid takedown of the anti-intellectualist vitalism that pervades academic metaphysics, especially the cadre that descends from Notre Dame/Plantinga.

    Poništi
  4. prije 2 sata
    Poništi
  5. proslijedio/la je Tweet

    Why the FUCK would you use an AI for this. You could just READ THE GODDAMNED BOOKS. READ THE THINGS.

    Poništi
  6. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    prije 7 sati

    From this historical perspective, the fact that the vitalists are now haggling over "qualia" shows just how far they have retreated, and what narrow ground they have left to defend. Qualia is the death knell of vitalism. The naturalists have won. /end

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  7. prije 7 sati

    dear philosophers, philosophy is not pokemon. love, eripsa

    Poništi
  8. prije 7 sati

    From this historical perspective, the fact that the vitalists are now haggling over "qualia" shows just how far they have retreated, and what narrow ground they have left to defend. Qualia is the death knell of vitalism. The naturalists have won. /end

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  9. prije 7 sati

    But the connection between vitalism and qualia isn't just geneological/historical; they share a worldview, a philosophy of science, and their arguments are often just superficial variations of each other. Technical fluff aside, they are the same view. Qualia is the vital force.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  10. prije 7 sati

    All the "explanatory gap" arguments used to defend qualia today are direct descendants of the vitalist arguments against biological materialism from the mid-19th century. It's all just technical machinery aimed at arguing that we have a soul.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. prije 7 sati

    In short: anyone defending vitalism or creationism today isn't doing much more than providing an elaborate justification for why they don't need to do their science homework. Panpsychism is just a variation of vitalism, mystifying mind rather than life. The analogy is exact.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. prije 7 sati

    "The sciences won't satisfy me, no matter what they say" is simply rationalizing ignorance. "Nothing I say would change science" is equivalent to "nothing I say is informed by science", and neither are "pro-science" views.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  13. prije 7 sati

    If I'm aprioristically committed to science being constitutively incapable of certain explanations, then rationalized away any obligation to learn about the explanations actually found in science that might challenge my beliefs.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  14. prije 7 sati

    The popularity of such views speaks directly to the deep strands of anti-intellectualism in our culture. The rhetoric of an "explanatory gap" is compelling precisely because it provides intellectual cover for our folk theories and habituated practices.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  15. prije 7 sati

    So, if we're interested in adequate explanations of "how life works" the science is just fine. But if we're interested in *provocative alternatives to science* the rhetoric of vitalism or creationism will occasionally flare up, like gout.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  16. prije 7 sati

    Aside: Am I the only one who remembers the "New Atheism" stuff being at least partly provoked by elementary schools in the south teaching creationism as an alternative to evolution? The rhetoric of a "gap in science" has broad political consequences.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  17. prije 7 sati

    The logic of these positions is that of an "explanatory gap": 1. "Physics leaves something out" 2. ? 3. Profit The most insidious of these positions simply consist of bald-faced anti-intellectualism, masked by a lot of hard work.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  18. prije 7 sati

    So you'd think that as the science improved, the mystical alternatives would fade out, right? Nope! Some of the strongest defenses of vitalism and creationism are from scientists contemporary with Darwin proposing explicit alternatives to natural selection

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  19. prije 7 sati

    The scientific alternative (natural selection+genetics) is a completely adequate physical framework for explaining the diversity of biological life. The "modern synthesis" leaves nothing out that requires a vital force or an unseen designer or other "science beyond physics".

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  20. prije 7 sati

    It's important to understand that vitalism and creationism/intelligent design are reactionary positions motivated primarily by a belief in some fundamental limit to what can be known through the physical sciences. It's also important that vitalism and creationism are wrong.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  21. prije 7 sati

    The issue of "how life works" was one of the major conceptual battlegrounds during this period. Vitalists and creationists proposed that the complexity of life was clear evidence for a creator, or a vital force, or some other unseen power beyond the reach of physics.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi

Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

    Možda bi vam se svidjelo i ovo:

    ·