me during interviews pic.twitter.com/gFpglImyC0
— 胡子哥 (@SanNuvola) June 8, 2016
Category Archives: Philosophy
Bakker (in fictional mode):
“… is the experience of freedom the same as having freedom?”
“They are one and the same.”
“But then why … why did you have to be blinded to experience freedom?”
“Because you cannot experience the sources of your actions and decisions and still experience human freedom. Neglect is what makes the feeling possible. To be human is to be incapable of seeing your causal continuity with nature, to think you are something more than a machine.”
He looked at her with his trademark skeptical scowl. “So what was so wrong with the other DIMEs, then? Why did they have to be destroyed … if they were actually more than humans, I mean? Were the people just scared or something? Embarrassed?”
“There was that, sure. Do you remember how the angry crowds always made you cry? Trust me, you were our little nuke, public relations-wise! But your father thinks the problem was actually bigger. The tools humans have evolved allow them to neglect tremendous amounts of information. Unfortunately for DIMEs, those tools are only reliable in the absence of that information, the very kinds of information they possessed. If a DIME were to kill someone, say, then in court they could provide a log of all the events that inexorably led to the murder. They could always prove there was no way ‘they could have done otherwise’ more decisively than any human defendant could hope to. They only need to be repaired, while the human does hard time. Think about it. Why lock them up, when it is really is the case that they only need be repaired? The tools you use—the tools your father gave me—simply break down.”
If the example she had given had confused him, the moral seemed plain as day at least.
“Sooo… you’re saying DIMEs weren’t stupid enough to be persons?”
Sour grin. “Pretty much.”
Twitter cuts (#40)
"Paradoxes are storms in the sphere of the concept." -Lucca Fraser #ontopunk pic.twitter.com/f36yOY0tkS
— Michael James (@ontopunk) March 17, 2016
(Yes, three in a row is pushing it, but this is among the most truth-dense sentences in the history of the earth. The original source still eludes me, or I would have linked to that too.)
Twitter Cuts (#35)
You can't diagonalize out of the computables – like you can't kill what's dead.
— John.Bova (@johnbova) November 30, 2014
The Plato Code
… sounds plausible, a duodecimal line-numbering structure organizing the Platonic texts:
[Jay] Kennedy argues that this is no accident. “We know that scribes were paid by the number of lines, library catalogues had the total number of lines, so everyone was counting lines,” he said. He believes that Plato was organising his texts according to a 12-note musical scale, attributed to Pythagoras, which he certainly knew about.
“My claim,” says Kennedy, “is that Plato used that technology of line counting to keep track of where he was in his text and to embed symbolic passages at regular intervals.” Knowing how he did so “unlocks the gate to the labyrinth of symbolic messages in Plato”.
Believing that this pattern corresponds to the 12-note musical scale widely used by Pythagoreans, Kennedy divided the texts into equal 12ths and found that “significant concepts and narrative turns” within the dialogues are generally located at their junctures. Positive concepts are lodged at the harmonious third, fourth, sixth, eight and ninth “notes”, which were considered to be most harmonious with the 12th; while negative concepts are found at the more dissonant fifth, seventh, 10th and 11th.
Bakker (snipped from a crucial post):
There will always be speculation — science is our only reliable provender of theoretical cognition, after all. The question of the death of philosophy cannot be the question of the death of theoretical speculation. The death of philosophy as I see it is the death of a particular institution, a discourse anchored in the tradition of using intentional idioms and metacognitive deliverances to provide theoretical solutions. I think science is killing that philosophy as we speak.
Once philosophy has been completely de-vitalized, compliance with its true vocation can begin …
The first one, here, is a Meillassoux, Hecker, Mackay conversation at the edge of cognitive
The series is introduced: “These Documents aim to expose exploratory, informal processes of transdisciplinary research and development, through working papers, sketches and conversations relating to projects in progress.”
(I’m going to grab the opportunity to ask: Does Urbanomic have the worst-organized site on the Internet? If this document hadn’t been waved at me on twitter, there is simply no way on earth I’d ever have found it.)