Unweaving the Rainbow: Science, Delusion and the Appetite for Wonder by Richard Dawkins, 2020
With the wit, insight, and spellbinding prose that have made him a bestselling author, Dawkins takes up the most important and compelling topics in modern science, from astronomy and genetics to language and virtual reality, combining them in a landmark statement of the human appetite for wonder.
On the blog today, Victor Lange and Thor Grünbaum discuss their recent paper about transparency of experience and mindfulness meditation. #philosophy@philosophy
@indubitablyodin well said. Belief in inevitable change to a future perfected state is just religious thinking under a different name. It's irrational and enervating.
In order to understand the transformation of societies from one stable state to another through a chaotic transition I would look to complexity theory and in particular the idea of fitness landscapes and the "phase change" transitions between local minima.
The implications of neofeudalist thought are very dark -
@indubitablyodin - feudalism itself turns out to be a flawed, kind of bullshit folk history concept anyway, but in its own terms, feudalism requires an external threat for the lords and their armies to protect the peasants from in exchange for fealty and work. In the neofeudalist model that threat is climate refugees. Without climate refugee "barbarian hordes" their model makes no sense. So they're actually incentivized towards climate driven social collapse. What a bunch of dicks.
I've never been able to get into Stoicism, but I still like reading about different philosophies. However, I also know that that is one where a lot of popular works deviate badly from the original.
So, a question: are Ryan Holiday's books solid/accurate? Are they in line with ancient Stoic philosophy? Are they a purely modern interpretation? Are they worth reading for growing my non-expert knowledge (in a positive, not just critiquing, way)?
Holiday as a couple different types of books. Daily Stoic and Lives of the Stoics I find to be rather interesting. From the latter I got a list of names to research for some later date.
Which is more important? Learning from your own mistakes or learning from other people's mistakes?
Or is the real problem the idea that any mistakes can be prevented? Maybe we just have to make the same mistakes over and over again, and the entire project of worrying about the unknowable future is the real mistake?
Too many examples in the current news, but it really feels like "There's nothing new under the sun", just new fools making the same old mistakes.
Disobey The Philosophy of Resistance by Frédéric Gros
In this provocative essay, Frédéric Gros explores the roots of political obedience. Social conformity, economic subjection, respect for authorities, constitutional consensus? Examining the various styles of obedience provides tools to study, invent and induce new forms of civic disobedience and protest.
Mind Design III: Philosophy, Psychology, and Artificial Intelligence by John Haugeland, 2023
The essential reader on the philosophical foundations and implications of artificial intelligence, now comprehensively updated for the twenty-first century.
Did you know that "eat the #rich" was first a #philosophy concept?
Limitarianism is fundamentally the study of when it might be #ethical to put limitations on citizens in a governed society. It's a case-based theory, not a political system.
It asks questions like: is #wealth ever individual? What is the wealth limit?
& questions it isn't positing, like: If no one is ultra-rich, should no one be #poor? Is limitarianism virtue #ethics or justifiable without perfectionist views?