News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.
Sorry, in the *20* years since it was published.
Where in the remarks I sent to Brian is the “highfalutin rhetoric” about the social value of philosophy? As for…
With regard to the paper, it should not be much of a surprise that my views have substantially evolved over…
Gabriele Taylor was my undergraduate philosophy tutor at St Anne’s College, Oxford from 1989-1992. I remember her as an incisive…
> If you take a broadly Dennettian view on what it is to be a mind, then something has a…
In addition to many interesting points above, I wonder if welcoming AI into the research process turns off many academics…
Just as a further response to Daniel Kaufman’s comment that ‘Philosophy is much more like literature than the “hard science…
Here. From Professor Sarkar’s generous conclusion:
[T]he lack of depth or insight in this book is more than compensated by the entertainment it provides, at least to a philosopher or historian of science. No one should begrudge us our simple pleasures. I’m happy to have read this book, and even more so not to have paid for it.
Copies of this review should be circulated whereever Professor Fuller peddles his nonsense.
Leave a Reply