Massimo on consciousness: no illusion, but also no spookiness

Massimo Pigliucci has a good article on consciousness at Aeon.  In it, he takes aim both at illusionists as well as those who claim consciousness is outside the purview of science.  Although I'd say he's more worked up about the illusionists. However, rather than taking the typical path of strawmanning the claim, he deals with … Continue reading Massimo on consciousness: no illusion, but also no spookiness

Stephen West and Massimo Pigliucci discuss David Hume

Stephen West, on his Philosophize This! podcast, interviews Massimo Pigliucci on David Hume.  This was a big win for me.  Two of my favorite podcasters discussing one of my favorite historical philosophers!  It provides some good insights into Hume's skeptical and empirical philosophy. One of the questions Stephen asks Massimo is what he thinks Hume's … Continue reading Stephen West and Massimo Pigliucci discuss David Hume

Massimo Pigliucci’s pessimistic view of mind uploading

Massimo Pigliucci wrote a paper on his skepticism of the possibility of mind uploading, the idea that our minds are information which it might be possible someday to copy into a computer virtual reality system or some other type of technology.  His paper appears to be one chapter in a broader book, 'Intelligence Unbound: The Future … Continue reading Massimo Pigliucci’s pessimistic view of mind uploading

Massimo Pigliucci on the boundary between science and pseudoscience

In this video, Massimo Pigliucci, the philosopher and biologist who runs the Scientia Salon site, discusses the demarcation problem, the dividing line between what is and is not science.  The distinction is easy for things like astrology and astronomy, but gets more difficult for many other areas. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBUKQWM5Jf0 I'd forgotten about Massimo's latest book on pseudoscience. … Continue reading Massimo Pigliucci on the boundary between science and pseudoscience

Is logic and mathematics part of science?

Last week was scientism week at Scientia Salon, and I reblogged a post by Coel Hellier on a defense of scientism, mostly by arguing that mathematics was actually part of science.  As I indicated in my comment on that reblog, while I agree with Coel that both logic and mathematics have foundations that are empirically … Continue reading Is logic and mathematics part of science?

My philosophy, so far — part II | Scientia Salon

Massimo Pigliucci is doing an interesting series of posts on his philosophical positions. In the first part [19] of this ambitious (and inevitably, insufficient) essay I sought to write down and briefly defend a number of fundamental positions that characterize my “philosophy,” i.e., my take on important questions concerning philosophy, science and the nature of … Continue reading My philosophy, so far — part II | Scientia Salon

What Scientific Arrogance Really Looks Like — Starts With A Bang! — Medium

Ethan Siegel weighs in on the Tyson / philosophy controversy.  Siegel is a theoretical physicist, notably a cosmologist which I believe is Tyson's own specialty.  But Siegel's views on philosophy appear to be much more informed. Now, philosophy doesn’t have the answers, but it does teach ways to consider the limits of our knowledge. And … Continue reading What Scientific Arrogance Really Looks Like — Starts With A Bang! — Medium

Neil deGrasse Tyson is wrong to dismiss all of philosophy, but he may have a point on some of it

So, I reblogged Massimo Pigliucci's post responding to Tyson's remarks about philosophy, which appears to have generated some heated discussion.  After reading some of it, I realized that I have a few thoughts on this. First, I suspect Tyson's blanket dismissal of philosophy is simply the result of insularity.  I've noticed that philosophy's critics tend to be those … Continue reading Neil deGrasse Tyson is wrong to dismiss all of philosophy, but he may have a point on some of it

Philosophy that ignores science risks impotence

Peter Hankins has a post up reviewing Harold Langsam's new book, 'The Wonder of Consciousness'.  While the book sounds interesting (Hankins describes it as philosophically dense, so I probably won't read it), something bothered me while reading Hankins's review. It was the idea that we can determine things about the world without looking at it, … Continue reading Philosophy that ignores science risks impotence