News and views about philosophy, the academic profession, academic freedom, intellectual culture, and other topics. The world’s most popular philosophy blog, since 2003.
I respond to this report here https://jasonstanleyantifascist.substack.com/p/on-the-philosophical-muddle-that
For what it’s worth, I agree. I have, with some trepidation, given it a bunch of my papers and asked…
Looking at some of the AI-amplified cranks on philpeople, it is hard to agree with the assessment of this article.…
Perhaps a useful distinction here is between replacing philosophers and changing the conditions under which philosophical work gets done. LLMs…
Conditional on the hypothesis that journal editors sometimes desk reject high-quality papers written and commended by world experts on a…
Some users seem to have conflicting impressions about the (absolute level of) abilities of current iterations of the LLMs. But…
One thing I appreciate about Greco’s piece is the very helpful distinction between instrumental and intrinsic value, which he lays…
What a great review. I am biased, of course, since Alex, who has held the Chair at the University of Otago for many years now, was one of my closest friends in graduate school–when both Boghossian and Crispin Wright were at Michigan. Alex is, indeed, the world’s preeminent authority on Wittgenstein’s rule-following considerations.
I enjoyed the review. Wittgenstein on rule following was my single favourite topic in my Philosophy undergrad degree. In some ways, all the arguments are variations of the theme/assertion that you cannot get an “ought” from an “is” (or you cannot get a normative fact from a descriptive fact). But it is a pleasure to play through the variations all the same. The leading text before this was I think Martin Kusch’s “A sceptical guide to meaning and rules: defending Kripke’s Wittgenstein” (2006).
Leave a Reply