PantagruelFebruary 10, 2023 at 20:132150 views11 comments
I'm interested in his newer book, The Structure and Metaphysics of Mind. I can't find it to borrow and it's $120 to purchase. Maybe start with his earlier book instead? Anyone read both?
Mike
Comments (11)
PantagruelFebruary 19, 2023 at 13:33#7823580 likes
Reply to Pantagruel For both far less expensive and less Aristotlean approaches to the 'mind-body pseudo-problem', I recommend any or all of the following books:
The Ego Tunnel, Thomas Metzinger
Being You, Anil Seth
Looking for Spinoza, Antonio Damasio
Reply to Paine Reply to 180 Proof
Thanks, noted. I read Descartes' Error, I preferred Damasio's Error though.... :naughty:
I am still keen to read Jaworski on hylomorphism. I'll just have to bite the bullet.
edit: Jaworski's 2011 book Philosophy of Mind is available on Archive.org. Noice.
Accessibility is a big issue for philosophy, I think. And not because of those who practice philosophy -- if anything, anyone who is a professional philosopher is usually pretty open to talking philosophy, even though it is their day job. (and willing to use their privileges of access to help)
That is way too high a price. IMO. I've bitten the bullet before, but jeeminy.
Reply to Moliere Right now I'm having fun with ChatGPT for free. I realized that, as a neural net, its primary operation consists of processing data through a layer of "hidden neurons" that basically function to tease out abstract similarities between inputs, which can be equated with concepts since the architecture is software implemented. It seems pretty responsive to novel input - I got it to revise its use of certain concepts - uncommon versus unusual - and the revisions stuck between chat sessions, even though it doesn't retain data from session to session by its own account. It was also willing to define new functional terms. It offered me the operation of "dual response" when I asked it to provide me the option to compare its first runner-up response the to one it actually selected, and to give me an easy way to ask it to do that.
So I'm going to start chatting around some philosophical concepts, hylomorphism, dualism, the mind-body problem, and see what this "abstraction engine" can dredge up. A platonic dialog of anamnesis with an AI I guess you could say....
Reply to Moliere
I am torn in this regard. People work and they should get paid.
There are particular points of entry that get charged a certain amount. I have not seen a rent version where one could access all the sites carte blanche.
Reply to Paine Oh I definitely think people should be paid, and I respect the work of academics.
Something I've often felt about academic publishing, given that it's widely funded by taxes, is that it ought to be available to everyone. So this criticism would actually apply not just to philosophy, but the sciences, and all the academic disciplines.
But even more, I've noticed that people who do the work aren't the ones who are opposed to this idea, for the most part, of making academic research widely accessible. It's the monster that is the academic world that prevents it.
Reply to Moliere
I am glad that Pantagruel brought this up because it has been bugging me for decades.
One response I have gotten when I complained about academic publications is surprise that I cared. "Why do you want to know about what is happening in the context of our dialogue?"
There are many who do know why but I figure the surprise is part of the status quo..
That makes it similar but different than issues of copyright in music and literature.
One response I have gotten when I complained about academic publications is surprise that I cared. "Why do you want to know about what is happening in the context of our dialogue?"
Hrm! Well, goes against the kindness I've been treated to. Though, upon reflection, that gets along with the elitist sentiments often expressed in philosophical writing. I probably was lucky in my encounters.
That makes it similar but different than issues of copyright in music and literature.
Yup. Academia sits in a very weird position, economically. It seems like a guild system, primarily. Even in the sciences (or maybe even especially so, given that the sciences care what you trained in and who trained you)
Looks like Nicolai Hartmann is another punitively priced author. I bought a couple on ontology for $110, but volume 1 and 2 of his Ethics are nearly $80 apiece. So they'll have to wait. Great perspective on the mind-body psuedo-problem it seems.
Comments (11)
Oftentimes I have stood on the wrong side of the glass watching academics cavort freely with what I cannot afford.
The Ego Tunnel, Thomas Metzinger
Being You, Anil Seth
Looking for Spinoza, Antonio Damasio
Thanks, noted. I read Descartes' Error, I preferred Damasio's Error though.... :naughty:
I am still keen to read Jaworski on hylomorphism. I'll just have to bite the bullet.
edit: Jaworski's 2011 book Philosophy of Mind is available on Archive.org. Noice.
:(
Accessibility is a big issue for philosophy, I think. And not because of those who practice philosophy -- if anything, anyone who is a professional philosopher is usually pretty open to talking philosophy, even though it is their day job. (and willing to use their privileges of access to help)
That is way too high a price. IMO. I've bitten the bullet before, but jeeminy.
So I'm going to start chatting around some philosophical concepts, hylomorphism, dualism, the mind-body problem, and see what this "abstraction engine" can dredge up. A platonic dialog of anamnesis with an AI I guess you could say....
I am torn in this regard. People work and they should get paid.
There are particular points of entry that get charged a certain amount. I have not seen a rent version where one could access all the sites carte blanche.
Something I've often felt about academic publishing, given that it's widely funded by taxes, is that it ought to be available to everyone. So this criticism would actually apply not just to philosophy, but the sciences, and all the academic disciplines.
But even more, I've noticed that people who do the work aren't the ones who are opposed to this idea, for the most part, of making academic research widely accessible. It's the monster that is the academic world that prevents it.
I am glad that Pantagruel brought this up because it has been bugging me for decades.
One response I have gotten when I complained about academic publications is surprise that I cared. "Why do you want to know about what is happening in the context of our dialogue?"
There are many who do know why but I figure the surprise is part of the status quo..
That makes it similar but different than issues of copyright in music and literature.
Hrm! Well, goes against the kindness I've been treated to. Though, upon reflection, that gets along with the elitist sentiments often expressed in philosophical writing. I probably was lucky in my encounters.
Quoting Paine
Yup. Academia sits in a very weird position, economically. It seems like a guild system, primarily. Even in the sciences (or maybe even especially so, given that the sciences care what you trained in and who trained you)