This is the third in a series of posts on philosophy.
It must irk philosophers that any idiot thinks he can do what they do.
Posts published in “Scientific Curmudgeon”
This is the second in a series of posts on philosophy.
Dining last year with members of a philosophy salon in Manhattan, I met an eminent philosopher, whom I’ll call Harry.
I’ve been hobnobbing with philosophers more than usual lately. Over the last 18 months, I’ve attended several conferences with philosophical themes, eavesdropped on graduate seminars, interviewed prominent philosophers and joined a philosophy salon in New York City.
Two recent stories in Scientific American have me contemplating, once again, the terrible possibility that psychopharmacology hurts more people than it helps.
I was in Washington, D.C., on Inauguration Day, January 20, and have some things to get off my chest about violence I witnessed.
Dear Mr. President:
Congratulations on your inauguration! Let me be honest: I supported Hillary Clinton, because the liberal media convinced me that you were too disrespectful of convention to be President.
Ever since I read that New York Times headline, “Trump Triumphs,” things have seemed surreal. The psychedelic visionary Terence McKenna keeps coming to mind.
Would you rather be plausible but dull, or implausible but fascinating? Economist Robin Hanson has made his choice. His new book The Age of Em: Work, Love and Life when Robots Rule the Earth, envisions consequences of advances in artificial intelligence.
At a recent artificial intelligence conference, listening to smart people ponder what super-smart machines will be like, I kept thinking of things I’d heard, watched and read before.
You are a born narcissist. You know you are conscious, and you don’t worry about whether others are too, because only your experiences matter.