Just in time for Halloween, a lively discussion unfolds about horror media and our primal fears. The hosts reflect on previous interviews, questioning whether they embrace the future of science-minded philosophy. They tackle the complexities of their past coverage on trans issues and respond to listener engagement. Philosophical inquiries intertwine with insights on AI, cognitive science, and the struggle to reconcile knowledge with the nuances of human psychology, creating a thought-provoking blend of topics.
The podcast critiques the audience focus of Williamson's philosophy, questioning its accessibility to general readers versus academics.
The discussion highlights the potential limitations of integrating machine learning into philosophy, emphasizing the need for a distinct methodological approach.
Deep dives
Audience and Intent of Philosophical Discourse
The podcast addresses the challenges surrounding the intended audience of philosophical works, particularly those of philosopher Williamson. It questions whether his writings are truly aimed at a general audience or if they are primarily for academics entrenched in narrow, esoteric details. The discussion highlights a skepticism toward the notion that philosophical problems can be resolved simply through a focus on heuristics, equating this idea with other traditional philosophical paradigms. The speakers suggest that without clearer applications and understandings from Williamson’s work, there remains uncertainty regarding the practical implications of his philosophy.
Philosophy in the Context of Data and Heuristics
The conversation explores the relationship between philosophy and data, particularly the potential benefits of integrating mathematical modeling and machine learning into philosophical inquiry. The speakers emphasize that the nature of philosophical data differs significantly from that of mathematical data, suggesting that merely adopting mathematical techniques may not address the unique challenges posed by philosophical problems. They raise concerns that philosophical practice may need a distinct methodology that recognizes and standardizes its own data types. The speakers also reflect on the limitations of looking to machine learning as a model for human thought, stressing the need for a deeper understanding of how philosophical approaches can effectively engage with contemporary scientific developments.
Mark, Wes, and Seth talk about horror media and what scares us in light of Halloween. We then give some follow-up discussion re. our Williamson and Chappell interviews. Do we actually want to participate in Williamson's science-minded analytic philosophy of the future? Were we too one-sided in our trans coverage? We respond to an email about our trans episode.