Ugh, no. The only indeterminacy here is whether the review properly represents the book, and the book is awful; or the book is OK, and the reviewer didn’t understand it. Either way, I don’t care. Philosophers should not write about QM; this is just one more data point.
-
-
-
The review accurately reflects the content of the book, and the book was written by a physicist (me). I'm curious: what didn't you like, specifically?
-
Thanks for writing the book!! I saw your Google talk the other day. I enjoyed it.
-
Glad you enjoyed it!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"I think I can safely say that nobody understands quantum mechanics." –Richard Feynman (1918-1988)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." - Niels Bohr. Anyone who spurs that kind of invitation into his theoretical framework is contender for least gullible.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How much do you know about quantum mechanics, professor?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
No one can make sense of the Kripke/Putnam direct reference revolution, it's another failed attempt at the God's Eye View approach to language, Howard Wettstein tries to make sense of it in *The Magic Prism* and point to Wittgenstein as a lens for understanding the pathology.
-
The Kripke/Putnam tribe have produced all sorts of incompatible attempts to make sense of the direct reference doctrine, which generates endless puzzles professors use to build their resume, filling the journals with epicycles upon epicycles, going no where.
-
The Kripke/Putnam folks insist that "water" is H2O, evidently because they have never heard of 2H2O, D2O ie heavy water. Language, explanation, and science simply do not work work as the direct reference dogma assumes that it must.
-
The direct reference people can spend 3 decades in seminar trying to make sense of talk of "arthritis" and never come to an agreement or make any progress -- this program is not a healthy or viable rival to anything.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Pomo relativists have no way to set a limit on their denial of truth. Thus, we can demand of them, "Now if in about a minute you acquire the idea that I have just punched you in the nose, do you promise to admit that it may not have happened?"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Fantastic overview. Thx for that!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
One might call the rebuttal of Kuhn... a paradigm shift!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@FreelanceAstro will like this. - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Highly unlikely. Seriously...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
