My suggestion, aside from the link I gave you about prepping manatee meat, is to leave off Feser and Murphy. But no-one takes good advice!
Seriously, I think you would enjoy, in a weird way, Jerry Coyne's blog WhyEvolutionIsTrue. It's a mix of good science, dreadful philosophy, grotesquely partisan politics, and cats. I think you'd be .... piqued.
I recommend Scott Alexander's blog Slate Star Codex. He has lots of insightful posts about politics, philosophy, and other topics. And I think you'd agree with him on a lot. (I agree with him on fewer things than you probably do, but I find still his posts useful to think about at the very least.)
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas -- unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
My suggestion, aside from the link I gave you about prepping manatee meat, is to leave off Feser and Murphy. But no-one takes good advice!
ReplyDeleteSeriously, I think you would enjoy, in a weird way, Jerry Coyne's blog WhyEvolutionIsTrue. It's a mix of good science, dreadful philosophy, grotesquely partisan politics, and cats. I think you'd be .... piqued.
You should link LK and Landsburg too of course.
Well, the blogroll is first and foremost those whom *I* enjoy reading, so Murphy and Feser are in. I'll check out Coyne.
DeleteTake your blood pressure pills. Some of the stuff on philosophical topics, like free will, is...
ReplyDeleteI recommend Scott Alexander's blog Slate Star Codex. He has lots of insightful posts about politics, philosophy, and other topics. And I think you'd agree with him on a lot. (I agree with him on fewer things than you probably do, but I find still his posts useful to think about at the very least.)
ReplyDeleteSeconded.
DeleteHere's a good programming project too: a Scott Alexander compressor. Badly needed.