Joe Dewhurst

@joe_dewhurst

Postdoctoral Fellow at the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy. Cognitive Science/Computation/Cybernetics. Brezel-Zauberer. Not afraid of ruins. He/Him.

Vrijeme pridruživanja: srpanj 2016.

Tweetovi

Blokirali ste korisnika/cu @joe_dewhurst

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

  1. Prikvačeni tweet
    29. tra 2019.

    Doing a lecture (partly) on cybernetics gives me the perfect opportunity to once again share my favourite ever video! I got into cybernetics just to be able to show this to as many people as possible, so enjoy.

    Poništi
  2. prije 9 sati

    The reason I say "(precarious)" is because I feel like if I had a forever job I could at least justify not always feeling enthusiastic about the work with the stability and (relatively) good income, but perhaps I'm wrong about that.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  3. prije 9 sati

    This is very good, and hard to read because much of it is all too familiar. I think it probably is for a lot (most?) of us in (precarious) academic work, but it's tough to admit it, because it means thinking seriously about doing something different.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  4. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    2. velj

    The app is called “You’re Cancelled.” When you’ve made plans that you wish you could cancel, you go into the app and press a little button. If the other person presses theirs too, congratulations! Confetti exploded and your plans are cancelled.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  5. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    prije 22 sata

    Ruth Millikan will livestream "Mental Representation made simple" this Friday (7th) as part of the NeuralMechanismsOnline 2020 webinar series. Mark your calendars! Details in this post. 👇

    Poništi
  6. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    30. sij

    Our Dr Ana Maria Cretu explains why we should think of natural kinds as real patterns rather than defined by essential properties.

    Poništi
  7. 30. sij

    I can confirm that Bielefeld "exists".

    Poništi
  8. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    30. sij

    philosophy twitter is captain planet, only what we do "by our powers combined" is take any normal view,, and make it cursed

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  9. 30. sij

    ...but this is precisely what language and meaning *is* like! (Plus maybe little a ostensive definition, as a treat.) Okay, okay, that's enough for now, I will go and work on the talk I am meant to be writing.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  10. 30. sij

    Perhaps I have just become too much a creature of the MCMP, which is after all a hive of scum and...I mean a hive of anti-realism and metaphysical quietism.

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  11. 30. sij

    Addendum: here's another, even simpler analogy. Again I just draw the opposite conclusion to Goff! This just seems like a very austere 'game-world', not irritating or unintelligble in the slightly (it is basically just a cyclic directed graph with three nodes and three edges).

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  12. 30. sij

    German trains are so nice to work in, I would almost be happy to have my office in one. (Or at least mid-week, midday ICEs, when you can get an empty table in the quiet coach).

    Poništi
  13. 30. sij
    Poništi
  14. 30. sij

    So it seems to me like the correct conclusion to draw from this analogy is that we *should* adopt a structuralist ontology in this world, just as we should in the 'world' of the game of chess (or any game-world, which brings me dangerously close to doing *philosophy of games*).

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  15. 30. sij

    ...at least *qua chess*. Similarly, within the 'game' of *our world*, structural properties (causal or otherwise) can be the only ones that matter, and any potential intrinsic natures may as well not exist (if they did, they would be in principle inaccessible to us).

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  16. 30. sij

    In particular, I draw precisely the opposite conclusion from the chess analogy than Goff does. It seems obvious to me that *within the game of chess* the only properties that a piece has are structural, e.g. how it moves and interacts, and what it is made of doesn't matter...

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  17. 30. sij

    Just hearing about 's view of intrinsic properties (or natures) from has pushed me more than ever towards a structuralist ontology! Trying to write up my thoughts on this now, although I need to read a bit of his book first...

    Prikaži ovu nit
    Poništi
  18. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    29. sij

    man its crazy how if u sit down and do a bit of work, time goes by just the same as if you weren’t doing work, except after the time goes by, some of your work is done and you actually have *less* dread rather than the increased dread that normally accompanies the passage of time

    Poništi
  19. proslijedio/la je Tweet
    30. sij

    To paraphrase Bowie: "Fame makes a hypothesis take things over" - my latest paper with is now online and in open access:

    Poništi
  20. 29. sij

    Should I use the coronavirus as an illustrative example in my talk about functions and diseases on Saturday? 😬

    Poništi
  21. 29. sij
    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:

    ·