532 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2024
    1. Despite growing interest, the effects of AI on the news industry and our information environment — the public arena — remain poorly understood. Insufficient attention has also been paid to the implications of the news industry’s dependence on technology companies for AI. Drawing on 134 interviews with news workers at 35 news organizations in the United States, the United Kingdom, and Germany —

      Ini bagus

    1. I sometimes see this in YouTube comments. When I recommend Plato to beginners in philosophy, I am told that I am being irresponsible, because Plato is too difficult for a beginner. It would be better to recommend a comprehensive survey of philosophy explicitly written for beginners, the critics say, so that people don’t get overwhelmed. But then I see other comments, sometimes on YouTube but often elsewhere, from people who had never read any philosophy, stumbled on one of my videos, and read Plato. Sometimes these are high school students, sometimes college graduates who did not study philosophy, sometimes mid-career adults who didn’t bother with college. The message is remarkably similar. They were previously convinced that philosophy would be too difficult to them, and reading Plato helped them see that they were wrong.

      Self-fulfilling prophecy?

  2. May 2024
    1. “Both the optimist and the pessimist contribute to society: the optimist invents the airplane, and the pessimist invents the parachute.”
    2. Humane Values: “What are humane values, anyway?” (a problem for philosophy & ethics) The Technical Alignment Problem: “How can we make AI robustly serve any intended goal at all?” (a problem for computer scientists - surprisingly, still unsolved!)

      Interesting. For me, humane values would be doing the right thing and helping people. I think Stoic philosophy resembles "humane values" in my regard.

    3. A human may or may not be humane

      Strongly Agree

    1. for - Alfred North Whitehead - philosophy - process

      Summary - This is a very insightful presentation of Whitehead's process philosophy. It's the first time I was introduced to it via Gyuri but I can see why he wanted to. I could identify many parallels with SRG and Deep Humanity ideas.

  3. Apr 2024
    1. After 1836 Chaadayev continued to write articles on cultural and political issues "for the desk drawer." Chaadayev defies categorization; he was not a typical Russian Westernizer due to his idiosyncratic interest in religion; nor was he a Slavophile, even though he offered a possible messianic role for Russia in the future. He had no direct followers, aside from his "nephew" and amanuensis, Mikhail Zhikharev, who scrupulously preserved Chaadayev's manuscripts and tried to get some of them published after Chaadayev's death. Chaadayev's lasting heritage was to remind Russian intellectuals to evaluate any of Russia's supposed cultural achievements in comparison with those of the West.
  4. Mar 2024
    1. Cahoone, Lawrence. The Modern Intellectual Tradition: From Descartes to Derrida - Course Guidebook. The Great Courses 4790. Chantilly, VA: The Teaching Company, 2010. https://www.thegreatcourses.com/courses/modern-intellectual-tradition-from-descartes-to-derrida.

      Cahoone, Lawrence. The Modern Intellectual Tradition: From Descartes to Derrida. Audible Audio Edition. The Great Courses 4790. Chantilly, VA: The Teaching Company, 2013. https://www.amazon.com/Modern-Intellectual-Tradition-Descartes-Derrida/dp/B00DTO5BTO.

      Annotation URL: urn:x-pdf:92bff7dc89e6440afc484388b7b72d79

      alternate version: https://jonudell.info/h/facet/?user=chrisaldrich&max=100&exactTagSearch=true&expanded=true&url=urn%3Ax-pdf%3A92bff7dc89e6440afc484388b7b72d79



    1. . Positivism asserted that allcultures move through progressive stages of development: first the-ological, then metaphysical, and finally “positive.”
  5. Feb 2024
    1. Some people never realise what their purpose in life is before leaving . For some, it takes half of their life to find their purpose in life, And then they're the lucky ones that find it at an early part of their life.

      How does one find their purpose in life?

      • Who: The author, Meya Teingi, and Billie Eilish.
      • What: Reflecting on the song "What was I made for" by Billie Eilish and discussing the search for purpose in life.
      • Why: To explore the idea of finding one's purpose in life and the struggle to maintain happiness.
      • When: The author listened to the song in the morning.
      • How: The author relates to the song's themes of searching for purpose and feeling lost in life. They discuss the idea of societal expectations. And question what people are truly made for in life.
    1. Shall find it–being grown perfect–in himself. Believing, he receives it when the soul Masters itself, and cleaves to Truth, and comes– Possessing knowledge–to the higher peace,

      Arjuna struggles with moral decisions while serving his country. Jnana Yoga, often known as the "Yoga of Knowledge," is a highly profound kind of yoga that emphasizes realizing one's own transience and pursuing self-realization. Arjuna's journey through this Yoga illustrates the transformational potential of knowledge by serving as a metaphor for the seeker's journey towards enlightenment. In the face of adversity facing the challenges of line ones Dharma must still be fulfilled. This understanding reveals the moral and ethical beliefs Hindu philosophies operated by. Nonetheless philosophy like this can be applied to our own lives. Regardless of the mountain present in front of us, it is important that we seek and fulfill our life's purpose. .

    1. I believe that we all wish our course could be determined by ourcollective values, ethics, and morals.

      the collective "we" here must broadly be the West, but even there our values, ethics, and morals aren't all the same. Things devolve further and more quickly beyond the cis-gendered white male perspective which Joy represents here.



    1. Hellinger told how one of the trainers asked the group, "What is more important to you, your ideals or people? Which would you sacrifice for the other?"

      direct attribution?<br /> likely in <br /> Hellinger, B., Weber, G., & Beaumont, H. (1998). Love's hidden symmetry: What makes love work in relationships. Phoenix, AZ: Zeig, Tucker & Theisen. p. 328

  6. Jan 2024
    1. if we had a choice what would we want to eat what brings us joy and my my strong belief

      for - William Li - personal philosophy - healthy food strategy - begin by asking about favorite foods

      personal philosophy - William Li - what food do you eat that already brings you joy? - find out which ones are healthy - show them it's not heavy lifting

    1. It seems to me farmore likely that a robotic existence would not be like a human one inany sense that we understand, that the robots would in no sense be ourchildren, that on this path our humanity may well be lost.

      Here would be a good place to give a solid definition of humanity? What makes it special beyond the "self"?

      We are genetically very closely related to great apes and chimpanzees and less closely to dogs, cats, and even rats. Do we miss our dogicity? Or ratanity?

      What if the robot/human mix is somehow even more interesting and transcendent than humanity? His negativity doesn't leave any space for this possible eventuality.

    1. read [[Dan Allosso]] in Actual Books

      Sometimes a physical copy of a book gives one information not contained in digital scans. Allosso provides the example of Charles Knowlton's book The Fruits of Philosophy which touched on abortion and was published as a tiny hand-held book which would have made it easy to pass from person to person more discretely for its time period.

    1. there's always a little bit of novelty with each new drop of experience and so 00:17:17 there's a kind of uh reality at its fundamental basis is a kind of evolving relationship among all of these white heads technical term again 00:17:30 actual occasions of experience

      for - definition - actual occasion of experience - Whitehead - definition - society - Whitehead - Whitehead - process relational ontology - adjacency - Whitehead's philosophy - morphic resonance

      definition - actual occasion of experience - Whitehead question - does Whitehead mean that reality itself is intrinsically evolutionary in nature and that it is constantly metamorphosizing? Is he making a claim similiar to Rupert Sheldrake's morphic resonance? Or we might say Sheldrake follows Whitehead

      Explanation - Whitehead's Process Relational Ontology - Passage below is explanation of Whitehead's Process Relational Ontology

      • There's always a little bit of novelty with each new drop of experience and so
      • There's a kind of reality
      • At its fundamental basis is a kind of evolving relationship among all of these
      • Whitehead's technical term again actual occasions of experience and
        • as they co-evolve new habits emerge and these habits allow nature at various scales to form what Whitehead calls societies
      • An example of a society of occasions or experiential events would be hydrogen atoms
      • The first hydrogen atoms which emerge i think a few hundred thousand years after the big bang represent the growing together of what had been distinct processes
        • protons and electrons
      • to form this relationship that would be enduring which we call the hydrogen atom
      • That's a society of actual occasions of experience that has formed
      • and then hydrogen atoms continue this evolutionary process and collect together into the first stars
      • and a star would be another example of a society of actual occasions of experience
      • and as these new forms of social organization are emerging over the course of cosmic evolution
        • what physics describes in terms of laws begin to take shape
      • but again for Whitehead these are not eternally fixed laws imposed on the process of evolution that's unfolding
      • Rather what we call laws
        • emerge from out of that process itself
        • as a result of the creative relationships being formed by these actual occasions of experience
      • So rather than speaking of laws imposed from outside,
        • Whitehead understands uh physical law
        • in terms of the habits which emerge over the course of time
          • as a result of relationships
      • So for Whitehead, the task of philosophy is really
        • to situate us in our experience
      • His is a is an experiential metaphysics and
        • as we've seen in our study of Goethe
        • the idea here is not to look behind or beyond experience for something which might be the cause of experience
        • The participatory approach to science that Goethe and Whitehead were both attempting to articulate
          • requires that we stay with experience
            • so metaphysics then
              • is not an effort to explain away our common sense experience
              • it's really the effort to bring logical coherence and consistency to experience
                • to find the all-pervasive relationships among various aspects of experience
      • And so science becomes the search for those relationships within experience
        • rather than the search for some mechanical explanation which would be
          • before,
          • behind or
          • beneath experience
    2. whitehead says that philosophy is an attempt to express the infinity of the universe in terms of the limitations of language

      for - Whitehead's philosophy - Whitehead - limitations of language - Indra's Net - Whitehead - process relational ontology

      • Whitehead says that

        • philosophy is an attempt to express the infinity of the universe
          • in terms of the LIMITATIONS OF LANGUAGE
      • And i think this image of the spiderweb with the dewdrops each reflecting the others is the perfect analogy for whitehead's ontology

      • You may have heard of indra's net from madhyamaka buddhism
        • the idea of dependent co-origination of all things
          • that nothing has independent abiding existence
            • but is rather caught up in a network of
              • relations or
            • causes and conditions
          • and so you can't remove any of the nodes in the network without destroying the node and totally changing the rest of the network that it was embedded within
      • This is the key to what a process RELATIONAL ONTOLOGY is trying to reveal to us about the nature of reality
      • Dependent co-origination or you could say
        • the inter-penetration of all things
      • though in Whitehead's cosmology there really are no things
        • if by thing you mean an inert isolated entity
      • Whiteheads ontology is really composed of events or processes
      • You could say and these processes for whitehead are
        • drops of experience
      • So for whitehead, there's no node in the network of reality that is not there for itself
      • It is not enjoying some degree of experience or subjectivity or has some degree or capacity for feeling
    3. this is similar to the kind of buddhist understanding of emptiness 00:15:22 right there is no abiding self

      for - adjacency - Whitehead - emptiness

      adjacency - between - Whitehead's philosophy - emptiness - adjacency statement - Whitehead's philosophy is similiar to the Buddhist concept of emptiness

    4. someone from outside 00:11:06 the discipline within which they um provide some new paradigmatic understanding uh is looking at the old problems with fresh eyes

      for - outsider advantage - fresh eyes - outsider advantage - autodidactic - Whitehead - philosophy - paradigm shift

      • He would teach at harvard from 1924 until 1937
      • This is when most of his major philosophical books were written
      • He reports in 1924 in the fall when he began teaching his first philosophy course to these students at harvard that
        • it was also his first philosophy course
      • Of course he'd been studying philosophy but he'd never had formal education in it
      • So as is often the case with major paradigm changes
        • someone from outside the discipline within which they provide some new paradigmatic understanding
        • is looking at the old problems with fresh eyes
        • They don't have the disciplinary training that would tend to leave one stuck in the existing concepts and categories
      • Whitehead is coming into philosophy with fresh eyes
  7. Dec 2023
  8. Nov 2023
    1. Ran across David Auerbach's blog while looking up a note on Keith Thomas.


      He's got some interesting looking stuff on Hans Blumenberg in translation.

    1. Entering his thinking through a side door, starting with the epoche, I was less bothered than many others seem to be by Husserl's dry and long-winded writing, and his attempts to continue fighting late nineteenth century battles that most people consider to be totally outdated. Rather, I was struck by the fact that I found, smack in the middle of Western twentieth century philosophy something that I had first encountered in various ancient Asian writings, and that had transformed my life and my way of looking at the world.
      • for: insightful - Husserl, adjacency - Husserl - Eastern philosophy
    1. he also demonstrated unfailing empathy andgenuine commitment to their progress.

      this is a good start at a definition of teaching

    1. Ancient Romans had (a lot of) slaves. Ancient Romans only allowed a tiny number of men, specifically, to vote. Ancient Romans imposed a violently enforced extractive empire around the Mediterranean and beyond. A philosophy that arose from those conditions might give me pause to emulate in a modern setting — at least, as someone who believes imperialism to be evil, slavery in all forms to be unacceptable, sexism to be harmful to all, and actual one-person-one-vote democracy to be the most reliable way of allowing some measure of self-governance by the people.

      While true, I don't think the underlying evil as such played a role in whether a philosophy arose from ancient Rome, but having a large enough layer of society that can afford spending time musing and thinking or be an audience for that thinking. The source of that wealth isn't a cause even though the wealth is a prerequisite to free up time and energy. The extraction made that possible of course, and it is not much different now. BigTech probably feels resonance because it's a global extractive industry too. I remember from my Latin at school how we would read texts by certain authors where they made some nuanced ethical point, while in the same text never bothering to question slavery. Or even in the same paragraph along the lines of "you need to treat slaves as human beings", except for the keeping them enslaved part ofcourse.

      There's something here about cultural appropriation across eras. The Renaissance did, claiming the mantle of the Roman civiliisation as its predecessor, and thus we in the West tend to see that as our cultural lineage. Cherry picked of course, not wholesale, as we tend to with more immediate own history too (Dutch Golden Age and the role of slave trade and colonial extraction e.g. unacknowledged but being a safe haven for religious refugees from elsewhere in Europe such as the Sefardim or Hugenots clearly embraced)

  9. Oct 2023
    1. And with that puerile quarrel between stubborn warlords over the right to own and to rape a girl, Western literature begins.

      A stark statement that lays bare the original sin of Western thought.

    1. the philosopher by pointing to experiences that are common to all.

      This definition common "to all" presupposes an audience here, thus different cultures with different viewpoints are very likely to have radically different philosophies.

    1. Do public intellectuals even exist anymore? Do publics exist? Everywhere you go, the forces of power seek to atomize us away into marketable metrics, Facebook groups, random and randomized individuals, software-recognizable faces. Who are we, but clicks, trends, and lifestyles. We are everything but a public.

      yes I think they exist but they are hard to find. Public intellectuals do not seek to build audiences - either for the sake of social media presence or for mass appeal. They attract modest audiences of likeminded people.

    1. even as you set out to ignore metaphysics you're probably engaged in some form of manifest physical speculation
      • for: quote, quote - metaphysics

      • quote

        • even as you set out to ignore metaphysics, you're probably engaged in some form of metaphysical speculation.
      • author: Dan Robinson
      • date: 2011
  10. Sep 2023
    1. All Western philosophy, Whitehead once remarked, is but "a footnote to Plato";and the later Greeks themselves had a saying: "Everywhere Igo in my head, I meet Plato coming back."
    2. "Poetry is more philosophical than history," wrote Aristotle.By this he meant that poetry is more general, more universal.
    1. The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato . I do not mean thesystematic scheme of thought which scholars have doubtfully extractedfrom his writings . I allude to the wealth of general ideas scattered throughthem . His personal endowments, his wide opportunities for experience ata great period of civilization, h is inheritance of an intellectual traditionnot yet stiffened by excessive systematization, have made h is writings t aninexhaustible mine of suggestion
    2. Whitehead, Alfred North. Process and Reality: An Essay in Cosmology (Gifford Lectures, Delivered in The University of Edinburgh during the Session 1927-1928). Edited by David Ray Griffin and Donald W. Sherburne. 2nd edition, Corrected. 1929. Reprint, New York: Free Press, 1978.

    1. A rhizome is a concept in post-structuralism describing a nonlinear network that "connects any point to any other point".[1] It appears in the work of French theorists Deleuze and Guattari, who used the term in their book A Thousand Plateaus to refer to networks that establish "connections between semiotic chains, organizations of power, and circumstances relative to the arts, sciences and social struggles" with no apparent order or coherency.
    1. Lichtenberg, Georg Christoph. Georg Christoph Lichtenberg: Philosophical Writings. Edited and translated by Steven Tester. SUNY Series in Contemporary Continental Philosophy, 1.0. State University of New York Press, 2012.

    1. what this is supposed to be what this is supposed to be is um a framework that moves these kind of 00:15:43 questions questions of uh cognition of sentience of uh of of um intelligence and so on from the area of philosophy where people have a lot of philosophical feelings and preconceptions about what things can do 00:15:56 and what things can't do and it really uh really stresses the idea that you you can't just have feelings about this stuff you have to make testable claims
      • in other words
        • a meta transformation from philosophy to science
    1. 子为鲁司寇。子路问曰:「有岛焉,其车驱以电,行于轨,离则覆。今有五民缚于干,一民支,车过则民卒。若御者为夫子,将从干也欤?将从支也欤?」曰:「典守者不得辞其责。」对曰:「事急,民将罔矣。」曰:「有君乎?有亲乎?有师友乎?有则改行与支焉。」子路异之:「使支者死,可乎?」子曰:「殆哉求也。根而后干,干而后枝,枝而后叶。根干不存,枝叶焉附?此远近主次之序也。君子近亲而近人之亲,故能老老,幼幼也。岂有远于亲者能近于人也?」子路问曰:「为吾之亲而杀人之亲,非私也?」子曰:「非杀人也,为救亲也,救亲可罪乎?缚民者有罪,车无羁有罪,救亲者何罪?罪在典守!」时赐、回过庭,赐资回肉回,皆不受。子曰:「赐尝负重债。列其父兄妻子于左右,欲死之,令赐择一而释。然非赐,回邻也。回救之,何以对?」回曰:「邻者不仁,债害其家;贷者无识,资诸无赖。吾师为司寇,诛少正卯,请诉之。」曰:「奈电车之辩何?」乃言于回。回曰:「知矣,救人也,当赏。」子贡笑曰:「无杀人之过,反有救人之功乎?」回曰:「救人,性也,不为赏,不辞赏。使有司赏善,则为善者愈多,罚恶,则为恶者愈寡。」子击节而叹。后遂有子路受牛事。
    1. followers of Spinoza adopted his definition of ultimate substance as that which can exist and can be conceived only by itself. According to the first principle of his system of pantheistic idealism, God (or Nature or Substance) is the ultimate reality given in human experience.
    2. Historically, answers to this question have fallen between two extremes. On the one hand is the skepticism of the 18th-century empiricist David Hume, who held that the ultimate reality given in experience is the moment-by-moment flow of events in the consciousness of each individual. That concept compresses all of reality into a solipsistic specious present—the momentary sense experience of one isolated percipient.
    3. two basic forms of idealism are metaphysical idealism, which asserts the ideality of reality, and epistemological idealism, which holds that in the knowledge process the mind can grasp only the psychic or that its objects are conditioned by their perceptibility.
    4. idealism, in philosophy, any view that stresses the central role of the ideal or the spiritual in the interpretation of experience. It may hold that the world or reality exists essentially as spirit or consciousness, that abstractions and laws are more fundamental in reality than sensory things, or, at least, that whatever exists is known in dimensions that are chiefly mental—through and as ideas.
  11. Aug 2023
    1. the number one and most important reason why research is meaningful and makes a useful and valuable contribution is theory.
    2. (1) Why is theory so critical and for whom? (2) What does a good theory look like? (3) What does it mean to have too much or too many theories? (4) When don’t we need a theory? (5) How does falsification work with theory? and (6) Is good theory compatible with current publication pressures?

      This is six question to understand the state of art of a theory

    1. published article can be cited as below:

      Sacha Golob (2019) A New Theory of Stupidity, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 27:4, 562-580, DOI: 10.1080/09672559.2019.1632372

    1. One of the core principles of Hermetic philosophy is the principle of Mentalism, which states that all things are created from and expand from the mind.
      • for: definition, definition - mentalism, hermetic philosophy
      • definition: Mentalism
        • things are created from and expand from the mind
      • paraphrase
      • quote
        • There are different ways that you can interpret this,
          • but in its simplest form it means that
          • everything that we do in life begins with a thought or a feeling.
        • The thought or feeling always precedes the action. / Comment: This is part of the philosophy of Deep Humanity that entangles inner transformation with outer transformation /
        • Therefore the inner world, the spiritual world, drives the physical world. It is a mirror. / Comment: A Deep Humanity way to express this is to say that the outer world is a reflection of the cumulative inner world's of humanity/
        • Everything that humans have ever done throughout our entire history
          • has begun as thoughts and feelings,
          • which then manifested as actions in the physical world.
        • Our society is therefore shaped by the interaction between
          • our inner worlds and
          • the laws of nature.
        • We cannot change the laws of nature
          • and so if we want to change the world,
          • we must focus our attention inwards. / Comment: Again, this is reflected in the Deep Humanity phrase: A stimuli occurs, the heart feels, the mind thinks, the body acts and an impact appears in our public, shared reality/
    1. Possibilianism is a philosophy which rejects both the idiosyncratic claims of traditional theism and the positions of certainty in atheism in favor of a middle, exploratory ground. The term was first defined by neuroscientist David Eagleman in relation to his book of fiction Sum. Asked whether he was an atheist or a religious person on a National Public Radio interview in 2009, he replied "I call myself a Possibilian: I'm open to ideas that we don't have any way of testing right now.
      • for: spirituality, defintion, definition - possibilian, defintion - possibilanism, possibliian, possibilianism, David Eagleman, philosophy, quote, quote - David Eagleman, quote - possibilian, quote - possibilianism
      • definition
      • paraphrase Possibilianism is a philosophy which rejects
        • both
          • the idiosyncratic claims of traditional theism and
          • the positions of certainty in atheism
        • in favor of a middle, exploratory ground.
        • The term was first defined by neuroscientist David Eagleman in relation to his book of fiction Sum.
        • Asked whether he was an atheist or a religious person on a National Public Radio interview in 2009, he replied
        • quote
          • I call myself a Possibilian: I'm open to ideas that we don't have any way of testing right now.
        • end quote
        • In an interview with the New York Times, he expanded upon this:
        • quote
          • Our ignorance of the cosmos is too vast to commit to atheism, and yet
          • we know too much to commit to a particular religion.
          • A third position, agnosticism, is often an uninteresting stance in which a person simply questions whether his traditional religious story
            • (say, a man with a beard on a cloud) is true or not true.
          • But with Possibilianism I'm hoping to define a new position
            • one that emphasizes the exploration of new, unconsidered possibilities.
          • Possibilianism is comfortable holding multiple ideas in mind;
          • it is not interested in committing to any particular story.
        • end quote
    1. I mentioned that I knew I liked Zettelkasten within the first 30 minutes. I think it might be important that when I sat down to try it, I had an idea I was excited to work on. It wasn’t a nice solid mathematical idea -- it was a fuzzy idea, one which had been burning in the back of my brain for a week or so, waiting to be born. It filled the fractal branches of a zettelkasten nicely, expanding in every direction.

      abramdemski suggests starting with an idea you're interested in working on and fleshing out when you start your zettelkasten. This harkens back to Montessori teaching philosophies.

    1. Are there better reasons for pursuing your education than getting a job? What are they?

      Education is so much more than preparing for a future job. The purpose of education is to understand the world around us. We are always in an endless pursuit of knowledge. We cannot know everything, but we will surely try. Education helps us expand our minds and understand complex ideas. This passage challenges the reason why we seek further knowledge. To see education as not just an end goal for a job but to see education as a means to understand the mystery of the world around us.

    1. mythological legitimization of transness. positions being trans as inherently revolutionary, i think. we are children of Lilith and must embrace The Slime™.

    1. The chief exponent of the view that times have changedand that our conception of the best education must changewith them is that most misunderstood of all philosophers ofeducation, John Dewey.

      Hutchins indicates that John Dewey was misunderstood as a philosopher of education.

    1. Science must find for every effect a single cause. The historian is rarely faced with the same requirement.Historians have the advantage of being able to live with explanatory ambiguity that would be unacceptable in science.
    1. The sixth step, most essential as well, is to Accept the Wins

      Owning the losses means also owning the wins.

    2. The fifth step is to have Selective Memory only choose to remember the events that serve the future. Things that help to improve in the future.

      It's like Marcus Aurelius wrote (in a slightly different way): "Ask yourself at any moment, is this essential?" In this way it would become: "Ask yourself at any moment, does this help me?"

    3. The fourth step is to Apply the Reflection. Adjust behavior based on reflection. We improve not for validation, we improve for ourselves (stoic philosophy)

      Document the journey in for example a journal. Make a comparison between what would be done in the past and what will be done in the future.

      Data collection. Measurement.

      Marginal Gains. It's sort of a daily continous Kolb's cycle but in a more lightweight form. I can already see the power in this. Absolute gem.

      Could also be overwhelming if applied to a lot. therefore, use the power law and focus on what is essential to life change. (thanks Dr. Benjamin Hardy.)

    4. The third step is to Reflect and think into the future. Extract meaning and lessons from the failure. Think about opportunities.

      Reflection increases confidence. Kolb's can help with this a lot.

    5. The second step is Sit with the loss in order to find the (root) cause of the loss or pain. Do not avoid the pain, don't distract oneself, instead embrace it and feel it.

      Endurance can be trained. Comfort with uncomfortability can be trained in the same way.

      Accept and sit in the fire. Embrace the turmoil.

    6. The first step to deal with loss of any kind, be it a girlfriend, love, job, purpose, etc. Is to ACCEPT YOU LOST

      Failure = Failure.

      Failure is inevitable, and will be part of any learning process. Therefore it should not be avoided at all costs. It should be used to learn from. However; there is also no point in seeking failure, for if failure is not something negative, there is no point to improve (says the author at least)

    1. The original accident is een concept van de Franse filosoof Paul Virilio, waarmee hij waarschuwt voor de onbedoelde gevolgen van technologische ontwikkeling. Uiteindelijk stuit elke technologie op een grens waardoor er een ongeval zal ontstaan, zo stelt hij. Daarmee leren we wat er verbeterd moet worden. Tegelijkertijd maakte hij zich steeds meer zorgen over de onbeheersbaarheid van technologische vooruitgang. Stevenen we af op een doomsday?

      Original accident: elke tech heeft een onbedoeld gevolg, en dat leidt uiteindelijk tot een 'ongeval'. zo leer je meer over het wezen van die tech, en wat er verbeterd moet worden. Virilio vreest kennelijk dat huidige tech dev tempo te hard is om dat proces beheersbaar te laten verlopen.



      "Accidents reveal the substance"

    1. není během rozhovoru možné pracovat s hypotetickými situa-cemi nebo se snažit dohadovat „co kdyby“.

      Uvažováním nad hypotetickými situacemi se zabývají kontrafaktuály.

  12. Jul 2023
    1. Much of Buddhist philosophy centers around this same idea, this balance between what’s being phrased as “intention” and “attention” – our intentional curiosity about knowledge and growth, and our choice of where to focus our awareness, what to pay attention to. So that, I think, is the role of information curators: They are our curiosity sherpas, who lead us to things we didn’t know we were interested in until we, well, until we are. Until we pay attention to them — because someone whose taste and opinion we trust points us to them, and we integrate them with our existing pool of resources, and they become a part of our networked knowledge and another LEGO piece in our combinatorial creativity.

      My view: intention as what to gather/learn, attention as what to do in the moment, looking at a note, which makes us aware of that thing, which results into curiosity (also good entry to flow)

    1. Science is not described by thefalsification standard, as Popper recognized and argued.4 In fact, deductive falsification isimpossible in nearly every scientific context. In this section, I review two reasons for thisimpossibility.(1) Hypotheses are not models. The relations among hypotheses and different kinds ofmodels are complex. Many models correspond to the same hypothesis, and manyhypotheses correspond to a single model. This makes strict falsification impossible.(2) Measurement matters. Even when we think the data falsify a model, another ob-server will debate our methods and measures. They don’t trust the data. Sometimesthey are right.For both of these reasons, deductive falsification never works. The scientific method cannotbe reduced to a statistical procedure, and so our statistical methods should not pretend.

      Seems consistent with how Popper used the terms [[falsification]] and [[falsifiability]] noted here

    1. Popper 1983, Introduction 1982: "We must distinguish two meanings of the expressions falsifiable and falsifiability:"1) Falsifiable as a logical-technical term, in the sense of the demarcation criterion of falsifiability. This purely logical concept — falsifiable in principle, one might say — rests on a logical relation between the theory in question and the class of basic statements (or the potential falsifiers described by them)."2) Falsifiable in the sense that the theory in question can definitively or conclusively or demonstrably be falsified ("demonstrably falsifiable")."I have always stressed that even a theory which is obviously falsifiable in the first sense is never falsifiable in this second sense. (For this reason I have used the expression falsifiable as a rule only in the first, technical sense. In the second sense, I have as a rule spoken not of falsifiability but rather of falsification and of its problems)."

      A passage from [[Karl Popper]] about how he distinguishes between [[falsifiability]] and [[falsification]].

      Popper's "falsification" seems related to [[Imre Lakatos]]'s notion that a [[research programme]] has a [[hard core]]

      of central theses that are deemed irrefutable—or, at least, refutation-resistant—by methodological fiat. (Musgrave & Pigden 2021, SEP article linked below)

      Also, what Popper calls "falsifiable"/"falsifiability" is similar to Lakatos's

      [[protective belt]] of [[auxiliary hypotheses]] which has to bear the brunt of tests and gets adjusted and re-adjusted, or even completely replaced, to defend the thus-hardened core. (FMSRP: 48)

      [[Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes]]

      There's seems to be a curious reversal between Popper & Lakatos. The theoretical component for Lakatos (ie, the "hard core") can't be falsified, whereas the theoretical component for Popper (ie, something being "falsifiable in principle") is a

      purely logical concept … [that] rests on a logical relation between the theory in question and the class of basic statements (or the potential falsifiers described by them). (Popper 1982, from passage above)

      A crucial difference between Lakatos & Popper is that for Lakatos

      A research programme can be falsifiable (in some senses) but unscientific and scientific but unfalsifiable. (Musgrave & Pigden 2021, SEP article linked below)

      This seems in direct conflict with one of Popper's views that falsifiability can serve as a [[demarcation criterion]] for what is scientific and non-scientific.

      Cf. 2.2 of "Imre Lakatos" on SEP

    1. Robert Maynard Hutchins (January 17, 1899 – May 14, 1977) was an American educational philosopher. He was president (1929–1945) and chancellor (1945–1951) of the University of Chicago, and earlier dean of Yale Law School (1927–1929).
    1. Sometimes it means telling them something they knew unconsciously but had never put into words. In fact those may be the more valuable insights, because they tend to be more fundamental.

      The art of the "aha" moment.

  13. Jun 2023
    1. The author, Rediscovering Analog, reads a book at least twice, usually. He first reads it mainly for pleasure, just to enjoy it and to see what's in it. During the second time, if applicable, he goes through the book using intellectual (or learning) systems and methodologies to extract value from the book.

      The first pass, which the author terms Scouting, is thus namely for enjoyment, but keeping in mind what might be valuable or interesting that will be valuable in the future, basically an unguided open ear. He has a list of scouted books in each section of the Zettelkasten that might be relevant to the section. What he does is have a stack of physical cards there with just the name of the book and the author, without anything else. Then when author proceeds to extract value from the book, he takes the card out and puts it in the respective book. Afterwards throwing this particular card into the trash. It's a form of the Anti-Library.

      ( Personally, I would include an appropriate reading cost and a level on Adler's hierarchy of books. In addition, I would make sure that my process of orientation, in the Inquiry-Based Learning framework, has been completed before I put it as a book within the Anti-Library. )

      This may not be the most efficient for the purpose of acquiring value, but efficiency is not all there is. Enjoyment is a big part of intellectual work as well, as Antonin Sertillanges argues in his book The Intellectual Life: Its spirit, methods, conditions, as well as Mihaly Csikszentmihaliy in his book Flow.

  14. May 2023
  15. Apr 2023
    1. The Incoherence also marked a turning point in Islamic philosophy in its vehement rejections of Aristotle and Plato.

      The Incoherence of the Philosophers by al-Ghazali marks a dramatic turn in Islamic philosophy away from Aristotle and Plato which had been followed by previous Arab philosophers like Avicenna and al-Farabi.

    2. al-Ghazali to investigate a form of theological occasionalism, or the belief that all causal events and interactions are not the product of material conjunctions but rather the immediate and present will of God.

      al-Ghazali practiced a theological form of occasionalism, which suggested that God was the cause of events. This was rebutted by Averroes a century later, but al-Ghazali's influence on Islamic thought broadly won out.

    3. the Tahāfut al-Falāsifa ("Incoherence of the Philosophers") is a landmark in the history of philosophy, as it advances the critique of Aristotelian science developed later in 14th-century Europe.[35]
    1. Real explanations will sometimes sound weird, crazy, or too complicated because reality itself is often weird, crazy, or too complicated.

      Great point

    2. Reality is very weird, and you need to be prepared for that. Like the hypothetical Holst, most of us would be tempted to discard this argument entirely out of hand. But this weird argument is correct, because reality is itself very weird. Looking at this “contradictory” evidence and responding with these weird bespoke splitting arguments turns out to be the right move, at least in this case.

      Such a great point. Often we discard what we presume to be fringe case ideas when they might true because "reality is very weird".

    1. Recommended Source

      Under the "More on Philosophies of Copyright" section, I recommended adding the scholarly article by Chinese scholar Peter K. Yu that explains how Chinese philosophy of Yin-Yang can address the contradictions in effecting or eliminating intellectual property laws. One of the contradictions is in intellectual property laws protecting individual rights while challenging sustainability efforts for future generations (as climate change destroys more natural resources.

      Yu, Peter K., Intellectual Property, Asian Philosophy and the Yin-Yang School (November 19, 2015). WIPO Journal, Vol. 7, pp. 1-15, 2015, Texas A&M University School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 16-70, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2693420

      Below is a short excerpt from the article that details Chinese philosophical thought on IP and sustainability:

      "Another area of intellectual property law and policy that has made intergenerational equity questions salient concerns the debates involving intellectual property and sustainable development. Although this mode of development did not garner major international attention until after the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, the Yin-Yang school of philosophy—which “offers a normative model with balance, harmony, and sustainability as ideals”—provides important insight into sustainable development."

    1. How Gertrude Teaches herChildren

      Swiss educator Johann Pestalozzi (1746-1827) developed a holistic teaching philosophy in How Gertrude Teaches Her Children based on John Locke's ideas and used it to open his own schools.

      See copies at https://archive.org/details/texts?query=How+Gertrude+Teaches+Her+


  16. Mar 2023
    1. Or, did you ever see a dog with a marrowbone in his mouth,—the beast of all other, says Plato, lib. 2, de Republica, the most philosophical? If you have seen him, you might have remarked with what devotion and circumspectness he wards and watcheth it: with what care he keeps it: how fervently he holds it: how prudently he gobbets it: with what affection he breaks it: and with what diligence he sucks it. To what end all this? What moveth him to take all these pains? What are the hopes of his labour? What doth he expect to reap thereby? Nothing but a little marrow

      The description of this scene is insinuating on the importance of the little things which I believe is what the author was trying to convey when asking such questions to seeing a dog with a bone. He even refers to Plato at one point who was known as a philosophical speaker who was wise in such ideas. "Plato says that true and reliable knowledge rests only with those who can comprehend the true reality behind the world of everyday experience." (Macintosh) Platos theory of forms suggested that there is a different reality to everything for each person. That would insinuate that for a dog, that bone is big thing worth his time, while as humans, we see the dog with his bone and think "why bother?".

    1. All good principles should have sexy names, so I shall call this one Newton‘s Laser Sword on the grounds that it is much sharper and more dangerous than Occam’s Razor. In its weakest form it says that we should not dispute propositions unless they can be shown by precise logic and/or mathematics to have observable consequences. In its strongest form it demands a list of observable consequences and a formal demonstration that they are indeed consequences of the proposition claimed. Those philosophers who followed Newton became known as ‘scientists’ and eventually Karl Popper came along and codified the practice of these heretics in his famous falsifiability demarcation criterion.


    2. Until the mathematicians Bolyai, Lobachevsky, and Riemann came along. Bolyai tried to deduce a contradiction, assuming that through a point, parallel to a given line, many lines could be drawn. He deduced away like crazy but failed to get a contradiction, and eventually realised that he had invented a new geometry, different from Euclid‘s but just as respectable. Riemann went the other way. He assumed that through a point, parallel to a given line, no line could be drawn. He realised that he too had invented another geometry, in fact the geometry of great circles on a sphere.

      直到数学家 Bolyai、Lobachevsky 和 ​​Riemann 的出现。 Bolyai 试图推导出一个矛盾,假设通过一个点,平行于给定的线,可以画出许多线。他疯狂地推导却没有得到矛盾,最终意识到他发明了一种新的几何学,它不同于欧几里德的几何学,但同样值得尊敬。Riemann 走了另一条路。他假设通过一个点,平行于给定的线,不能画出任何线。他意识到他也发明了另一种几何学,实际上是球体上大圆的几何学。

    3. Eventually I concluded that language was bigger than the universe, that it was possible to talk about things in the same sentence which could not both be found in the real world. The real world might conceivably contain some object which had never so far been moved, and it might contain a force that had never successfully been resisted, but the question of whether the object was really immovable could only be known if all possible forces had been tried on it and left it unmoved. So the matter could be resolved by trying out the hitherto irresistible force on the hitherto immovable object to see what happened. Either the object would move or it wouldn‘t, which would tell us only that either the hitherto immovable object was not in fact immovable, or that the hitherto irresistible force was in fact resistible.


      There is a similar story of spear and shield in China. but I have only passively accepted it, never thinking deeply about it. I was amazed that the author could engage in such thinking even in the later grades of elementary school.


    1. We must be epistemically vigilant. And we should look after the epistemic wellbeing of others

      Article's Claim.

    2. This means that entertaining beliefs that are true and justified isn’t just a noble aim, it’s a goal we ought to actively pursue: an epistemic duty.

      This is the core argument for claiming moral duty in avoiding epistemic harm, that is, not fighting wrong beliefs.

    1. If nothing matters long-term, as Syfret puts it, then her attention shifts to the here and now. But why? According to nihilism nothing at all matters, either long or short term. So focusing on now is just as meaningless as focusing on the big picture.

      This is probably the strongest and definitive argument, and one of (in my opinion) cardinal flaws of nihilism as a whole. Nihilism makes impossible to argue about anything without entering in the above contradiction.

    1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RJVHhwyx-Cg

      An overly complex method of commonplacing, though oddly with absolutely no mention of indexing of any sort.

      reply: <br /> If academia doesn't work out, then perhaps you could shill for "Big Notebook"? Seriously though, this is a pretty heavy/complex method of commonplacing. Do you index any/all of it somehow so you can find the pieces you know you've worked through in the past? A card index perhaps? John Locke's commonplacing method? I do something similar, but use slips or index cards the way Wittgenstein or Walter Benjamin did.... Perhaps one day I'll go more visual like https://www.denizcemonduygu.com/philo/browse/ ?

  17. Feb 2023
    1. one finds in Deutsch’s catalogue one implementation of what LorraineDaston would later term ‘mechanical objectivity’, an ideal of removing the scholar’s selffrom the process of research and especially historical and scientific representation (Das-ton and Galison, 2007: 115-90).

      In contrast to the sort of mixing of personal life and professional life suggested by C. Wright Mills' On Intellectual Craftsmanship (1952), a half century earlier Gotthard Deutsch's zettelkasten method showed what Lorraine Datson would term 'mechanical objectivity'. This is an interesting shift in philosophical perspective of note taking practice. It can also be compared and contrasted with a 21st century perspective of "personal" knowledge management.

    1. the manner in which knowledge is acquired, communicated and shared is internal to the nature of knowledge itself, and that the metaphysics of personhood needs to countenance the formation of reason if we are to understand how rationality and animality are united in the human person.
      • = quotable
      • the manner in which knowledge is acquired, communicated and shared is internal to the nature of knowledge itself
    2. education is not a merely contingent addition to the human life-form. Education is reason’s vehicle.
      • education is not just a contingent addition
      • it is the = vehicle for reason
      • the = feral child has no (cultural) education
      • so cannot reason in the way we do
    3. why exactly education should matter to philosophy. The reason is that education makes us what we are. Human beings do not enter the world with their rational powers ‘up and running’. Those powers are actualised in the child in a process of formation, or education in the broadest sense
      • why = education should matter in = philosophy
        • Education makes us what we are.
        • Human beings do not enter the world with rational powers
        • Those powers are actualised in the child in a process of formation otherwise called education
  18. Jan 2023
    1. As British philosopher Galen Strawson recently put it, to imagine that one can travel from insensate matter to a being capable of discussing the existence of insensate matter in a mere two jumps is simply to make emergence do too much work.
    2. Lobsters have a very bad reputation among philosophers, who frequently hold them out as examples of purely unthinking, unfeeling creatures. Presumably, this is because lobsters are the only animal most philosophers have killed with their own two hands before eating. It’s unpleasant to throw a struggling creature in a pot of boiling water; one needs to be able to tell oneself that the lobster isn’t really feeling it. (The only exception to this pattern appears to be, for some reason, France, where Gérard de Nerval used to walk a pet lobster on a leash and where Jean-Paul Sartre at one point became erotically obsessed with lobsters after taking too much mescaline.)
    3. But in the new full-blown capitalist version of evolution, where the drive for accumulation had no limits, life was no longer an end in itself, but a mere instrument for the propagation of DNA sequences—and so the very existence of play was something of a scandal.

      Could refuting the idea of accumulation without limits (and thus capitalism for capitalism's sake) help give humans more focus on what is useful/valuable?

  19. Dec 2022
    1. Through her writing Easterling often forces architects to re-envision their role in the making of space around the world, extolling the virtues of knowing how versus knowing what. She also encourages them to consider creating “active forms” — time-released protocols that manage spatial levers, exchanges, and switches — in addition to “object forms,” or what we commonly think of as buildings.

      [[Active form]] consist of dispositions that materialize as new forms.

    1. I came to this page after reading the "About the Author (The Second Right Answer)" page of Roger von Oech's "A Whack on the Side of the Head: How You Can Be More Creative" which was mentioned by Kevin Bowers in his discussion with John Vervaeke titled "Principles & Methods for Achieving a Flow State | Voices w/ Vervaeke | John Vervaeke & Kevin Bowers".

      von Oech stated that

      I wrote my doctoral dissertation on the twentieth century German philosopher Ernst Cassirer, the last man to know everything. From him, I learned that it's good to be a generalist, and that looking at the Big Picture helps to keep you flexible.

      This was a surprising reference since Bowers stated that the book was written for helping entrepreneurs become more creative; the book seems more widely applicable based on the examples and exercises given in the first 20 pages.

      Cassirer appears to bridge between the continental and analytic traditions in philosophy. Cassirer's touching on mathematics, aesthetics, and ethics reminds me of - John Vervaeke's work - ie, the process of relevance realization and his neo platonic, transformational reading of ancient texts - Forrest Landry work - ie, his magnum opus "An Immanent Metaphysics" which he purports to be pointing to a foundation between ontology, epistemology, and ethics. Recently, IDM (Immanent Domain Metaphysics) made more sense to me when I attempted to translat the 3 axioms and 3 modalities into language from category theory

      The following seem important and related somehow: 1. the symbolic process 2. the process of abstraction 3. the process of representation

      Maybe these are related to the means by which one can can transcend their current self? ie, is it through particular symbolic practices that one can more easily shed one identity and acquire another?

      Also, are 1., 2., and 3. different aspects of the same thing/event?

    1. “The invention of the ship,” as Paul Virilio wrote, “was also the invention of the shipwreck.”

      Every innovation drags a host of new concepts into existence with it. Ways it can succeed, fail. All clouding around its reputation and providing handles for people to wield it.

    1. You’re walking to work and you see a burning mansion. You’ve been in that mansion and know that there’s a Picasso worth $100 million. (Quick math: 100,000 lives saved.) You’re about to run into the mansion to save the Picasso…But right next to you, there’s a lake. And in that lake, there’s a drowning child.

      not all good actions can necessarily be quantified.

  20. Nov 2022
    1. i think so like in social terms the conservatives would say well i like that it benefits from the wisdom of math already invented you're not 00:36:39 throwing anything away you're not you're not throwing it all away and starting over you're taking what we already have and you're you're using it that's great and a libertarian might say i really like that you're free to create as you see fit you can make anything you 00:36:52 want and you're working within this background framework that's minimally invasive it doesn't make a lot of rules for you but it is highly functional i like that it kind of keeps everyone in line while 00:37:03 like satisfying some formal contracts or something while still being uh i'm still free to create and a progressive might say i like about category that theory that everyone can contribute to 00:37:15 making their own world making it more rich adding new ideas uh making it more meaningful understanding connections between things a modern viewpoint would say i like that 00:37:26 it's completely rigorous that it's been used in proving well-known conjectures that people thought were important to prove but also that it's interesting it's useful in science and technology and a postmodern person might say i like 00:37:40 that um that no perspective is right that that there's just all sorts of different categories but that navigating between these perspectives lets you look at problems from all sides or a hippie might say i like that it's 00:37:53 all about relationship and connection or irrelevant i don't know what that means maybe a practical person might say that i like that it's that we can actually use it to organize and learn from big data in 00:38:06 today's world or to manage complexity of software projects that are that are very large and changing all the time i like that you can think about ai and other complex systems with this stuff i think it's relevant and 00:38:19 practical for right now so that's that's my uh tutorial or that's the the part i'm going to record and now i'm going to open it up for questions

      David Spivak discusses how category theory may appeal to different political ideologies for a variety of reasons.