Combining Texts

All the ideas for 'Mahaprajnaparamitashastra', 'Evidence' and 'Being You'

unexpand these ideas     |    start again     |     specify just one area for these texts


18 ideas

13. Knowledge Criteria / A. Justification Problems / 3. Internal or External / a. Pro-internalism
Internalists are much more interested in evidence than externalists are [McGrew]
     Full Idea: The notion of evidence generally plays a much more significant role in internalist epistemologies than it does in various forms of externalism.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Prop..')
     A reaction: I'm guessing that this is because evidence needs a certain amount of interpretation, whereas raw facts (which externalists seem to rely on) may never even enter a mind.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 3. Evidentialism / a. Evidence
Does spotting a new possibility count as evidence? [McGrew]
     Full Idea: Does the sudden realization of a heretofore unrecognized possibility count as evidence?
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Evid..')
     A reaction: [Nice use of 'heretofore'! Why say 'previously' when you can keep these wonderful old English words alive?] This means that we can imagine new evidence ('maybe the murderer was a snake'!). Wrong. The evidence is what suggests the possibility.
Absence of evidence proves nothing, and weird claims need special evidence [McGrew]
     Full Idea: Two well know slogans (popularised by Carl Sagan) are 'absence of evidence is not evidence of absence', ...and 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence'.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Absence')
     A reaction: [Sagan was a popular science writer and broadcaster] The second one is something like Hume's argument against miracles. The old problem of the 'missing link' for human evolution embodied the first idea.
Every event is highly unlikely (in detail), but may be perfectly plausible [McGrew]
     Full Idea: At a certain level of detail, almost any claim is unprecedented. How likely is 'Matilda won at Scrabble on Thursday with a score of 438 while drinking mint tea'? But there is nothing particularly unbelievable about the claim.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Extraordinary')
     A reaction: A striking idea, which rules out the simplistic idea that we can just assess evidence by its isolated likelihood. Context is crucial. How good is 438? What if she smoked opium? What if there is no Scrabble set on her island?
Criminal law needs two separate witnesses, but historians will accept one witness [McGrew]
     Full Idea: An ancient rule in law is that a criminal conviction needs evidence of two independent witnesses, but in history it is assumed that a document deserves the benefit of the doubt if it cannot be independently verified.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Interp..')
     A reaction: [compressed; McGrew's full account qualifies it a bit] A nice observation. One might even be suspicious of the two 'independent' witnesses, if there were lots of other reasons to doubt someon's guilt. A single weird document is also dubious.
Maybe all evidence consists of beliefs, rather than of facts [McGrew]
     Full Idea: Some philosophers have been attracted to the view that, strictly speaking, what counts as evidence is not a set of physical objects or even experiences, but rather a set of believed propositions.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Prop..')
     A reaction: This may be right. However, as always, I think animals are a key test. Do animals respond to evidence? Even if they did, they might need to 'make sense' of what they experienced, and even formulate a non-linguistic proposition.
If all evidence is propositional, what is the evidence for the proposition? Do we face a regress? [McGrew]
     Full Idea: Taking evidence as propositional may trade one problem for another. If the bloodstain isn't evidence, but 'this is a bloodstain' is evidence, then what serves as evidence for the belief about the bloodstain? Is there an infinite regress?
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Prop..')
     A reaction: [compressed] I quite like evidence being propositional, but then find this. I'll retreat to my beloved coherence. I do not endorse Sellars's 'only a belief can justify a belief', because raw experience has to be part of what is coherent.
Several unreliable witnesses can give good support, if they all say the same thing [McGrew]
     Full Idea: The testimony of a number of independent witnesses, none of them particularly reliable, who give substantially the same account of some event, may provide a strong argument in its favor.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Testimonial')
     A reaction: A striking point. It obviously works well for panicking people in a crowd during an incident. Does it also apply to independent scientists who are known to cheat? They may not collaborate, but may all want the same result.
13. Knowledge Criteria / B. Internal Justification / 3. Evidentialism / b. Evidentialism
Narrow evidentialism relies wholly on propositions; the wider form includes other items [McGrew]
     Full Idea: Evidentialism comes in both narrow and wide forms depending on whether evidence is taken to consist only of propositions or of a wider range of items.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Evid..')
     A reaction: [He cites Conee and Feldman for the wide view, which is not restricted to beliefs] You can hardly rely on occurrent beliefs as evidence, so we often have good knowledge with forgotten justification. But such knowledge has been 'weakened'.
14. Science / A. Basis of Science / 6. Falsification
Falsificationism would be naive if even a slight discrepancy in evidence killed a theory [McGrew]
     Full Idea: Data do not quite speak for themselves, which speaks against a naive form of falsificationism according to which even the slightest mismatch between theory and evidence suffices to overturn a theory.
     From: Timothy McGrew (Evidence [2011], 'Interp..')
     A reaction: [He cites Robert Boyle wisely ignoring some data to get a good fit for his graph]
15. Nature of Minds / A. Nature of Mind / 8. Brain
Single neurons can carry out complex functions [Seth]
     Full Idea: It is increasingly apparent that even single neurons are capable of carrying out highly complex functions all by themselves.
     From: Anil Seth (Being You [2021], I.1 n)
     A reaction: Bang goes the simple connectionist account of consciousness.
The cerbellum has a huge number of neurons, but little involvement in consciousness [Seth]
     Full Idea: The cerebellum [at the back] has about four times as many neurons as the rest of the brain put together, but seems barely involved in consciousness.
     From: Anil Seth (Being You [2021], I.2)
     A reaction: I wonder if it also has four times as many connections?
15. Nature of Minds / B. Features of Minds / 1. Consciousness / e. Cause of consciousness
Maybe a system is conscious if the whole generates more information than its parts [Seth]
     Full Idea: The main claim of Tononi's 'integrated information theory' is that a system is conscious to the extent that its whole generates more information than its parts.
     From: Anil Seth (Being You [2021], I.3)
     A reaction: Seth seems to present this as an 'interesting' proposal. I find it unlikely that consciousness could be explain in terms of information, or that a machine constructed on this principle would thus become conscious. (Databases pass this test).
16. Persons / C. Self-Awareness / 2. Knowing the Self
The self is embodied, perspectival, volitional, narrative and social [Seth, by PG]
     Full Idea: The elements of a self are 1) embodied - related directly to the body, 2) perspectival - having a viewpoint, 3) volitional - being an agent, 4) narrative - aware of past and future, and 5) social - as others perceive me.
     From: report of Anil Seth (Being You [2021], III.8) by PG - Db (ideas)
     A reaction: [summarised] Seth says there are distinctive emotions associated with each of these aspects of the self. This list is very helpful, as a discouragement for anyone who wants to pick one of these as the sole true nature of the self.
18. Thought / B. Mechanics of Thought / 6. Artificial Thought / a. Artificial Intelligence
Modern AI is mostly machine-based pattern recognition [Seth]
     Full Idea: Much of today's AI is best described as sophisticated machine-based pattern recognition.
     From: Anil Seth (Being You [2021], IV.13)
     A reaction: Personally I wouldn't want to underestimate the extent to which human intelligence is also pattern recognition (across time as well as in space).
20. Action / B. Preliminaries of Action / 2. Willed Action / a. Will to Act
Volition is felt as doing what you want, with possible alternatives, and a source from within [Seth]
     Full Idea: The experience of volition is defined by 1) the feeling that I am doing what I want to do, 2) that I could have done otherwise, and 3) that voluntary actions seem to come from within.
     From: Anil Seth (Being You [2021], III.11)
     A reaction: Note that these can all be cited without reference to their feeling 'free'.
22. Metaethics / A. Ethics Foundations / 2. Source of Ethics / d. Biological ethics
Human exceptionalism plagues biology, and most other human thinking [Seth]
     Full Idea: Human exceptionalism has repeatedly plagued biology, and has darkened the history of human thought everywhere.
     From: Anil Seth (Being You [2021], I.2)
     A reaction: I increasingly agree with this, as much in philosophy as in biology. We really need to get used to our place in evolution.
23. Ethics / C. Virtue Theory / 3. Virtues / a. Virtues
The six perfections are giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and wisdom [Nagarjuna]
     Full Idea: The six perfections are of giving, morality, patience, vigour, meditation, and wisdom.
     From: Nagarjuna (Mahaprajnaparamitashastra [c.120], 88)
     A reaction: What is 'morality', if giving is not part of it? I like patience and vigour being two of the virtues, which immediately implies an Aristotelian mean (which is always what is 'appropriate').