Reason, truth, and history

What Hacker News says

1. morelispNov 2019
   > what is the purpose of philosophical work such as Bostrom’s?

   This is a good question. This paper is popular well in disproportion to its impact, because it's a sexy scifi topic. I don't know Bostrom but I suspect it's popular far in disproportion to his desires also - it's just one small piece of his work on superintelligence, which is in turn only one part of his work on measuring existential risk.

   The paper, it should be noted, is not an argument we are living in a simulation (it's often taken as one, but the simulation hypothesis predates Bostrom, the 20th century, etc.). Rather, it's an argument that there is a trilemma of which two options are material, and potentially even testable - so in a sense, it does allow the simulation hypothesis to be tested, if you buy his trilemma and reject the other options. (Based again on his other work, I suspect Bostrom may personally believe #1 - I personally am suspicious of both the validity of the trilemma and independently suspect #2.)

   So this plays the kind of role in philosophy that a discovery of some unique way to synthesize a chemical we already have plenty of ways to synthesize in chemistry. It's a workaday paper - interesting if you are interested in the field, but of no great impact to most people's lives.

   The result is that there's also not a lot of great ways to engage with the paper, in the same way it's difficult to engage with a refinement of the equivalence between inertial and gravitation mass.

   If you want to engage with the simulation hypothesis and metaphysical realism more broadly, I would begin with Putnam's Reason, Truth and History. The philosophical work around the simulation hypothesis is maybe best thought of not as an attempt to actually answer it conclusively, but as particular lens on the relationship between reality, self-perception, and sense-perception. Clarifying those relationships is of immense use to the average person.

   Show morethread
2. rayvalMar 2016
   Hilary Putnam had many achievements in the field of philosophy. Here's some context about his concept of "brain in a vat"[1], in his 1981 book, "Reason, Truth and History".

   The brain-in-a-vat concept was famously used in the The Matrix films.[2]

   A summary from Philosophy Index: "The example supposes that a mad scientist has removed your brain, and placed it into a vat of liquid to keep it alive and active. The scientist has also connected your brain to a powerful computer, which sends neurological signals to the brain in the way the brain normally receives them. Thus, the computer is able to send your brain data to fool you into believing that you are still walking around in your body."

   "The brain-in-a-vat thought experiment is generally used to ask the question: how do you know that you are not a brain in a vat? The question mirrors an early one from Descartes, which asks how you are to know that there is not an evil demon feeding false information to your senses. The essential conclusion is that, from the perspective of the brain itself, it is impossible to tell whether it is a brain in a vat or a brain in a skull." [1][3]

   ___________

   Links: [1] http://www.philosophy-index.com/putnam/brain-vat/ [2] http://consc.net/papers/matrix.html [3] https://philosophy.as.uky.edu/sites/default/files/Brains%20i...

   Show morethread
3. brudgersApr 2015
   One of the things I learned quickly when I became a philosophy major is reading philosophy is a skill. I remember the sensation of realizing I had read six pages of Descartes Meditations and had been at it for an hour. Philosophy requires unpacking in some of the same ways a book about a programming language written without mercy for beginners will.

   To a first approximation, if I am reading philosophy these days it's Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations unless I am looking for a reference [e.g. last week I looked at Putnam's Reason Truth and History because I was thinking about the ant's portrait of Churchill in relation to the role of interpretation of data. I'll also find myself in Plato occasionally...though that's often via the internet rather than the bound Jowett volumes.

   Stretching philosophy a bit, I am these days often looking at logic and mathematics, and regretting a bit roads not taken. These have the same interest in accurate language I enjoy.

   Anyway, reading philosophy as an investment sounds horrid. Read something you enjoy.

   [edit] You might enjoy the philosophy bites podcast: http://www.philosophybites.com/

   Show morethread