Jonathan Birch
banner
birchlse.bsky.social
Jonathan Birch
@birchlse.bsky.social

Professor, LSE. Philosophy of science, animal consciousness, animal ethics. Director of The Jeremy Coller Centre for Animal Sentience.

Jonathan Birch is a British philosopher and professor of philosophy at the London School of Economics and Political Science. His work addresses the philosophy of biology and behavioural sciences, especially questions concerning sentience, bioethics, animal welfare, and the evolution of social behaviour and social norms. .. more

Neuroscience 26%
Psychology 15%
Pinned
An emotional day - I can announce I'll be the first director of The Jeremy Coller Centre for Animal Sentience at the LSE, supported by a £4m grant from the Jeremy Coller Foundation. Our mission: to develop better policies, laws and ways of caring for animals. (1/2)
www.lse.ac.uk/News/Latest-...
LSE announces new centre to study animal sentience
The Jeremy Coller Centre for Animal Sentience at LSE will develop new approaches to studying the feelings of other animals scientifically.
www.lse.ac.uk

I think it's part of the doctrine (on this reading) that personal identity follows the exact repeats. You are a string of actual choices, actual willings. So in those parts of the cosmos where other strings of choices get made, it's not you.

Reposted by Jonathan Birch

But if that's the argument for it, then not only this life but all others in which I did something else will *also* take place infinitely, in all possible variations. That hardly seems like the heaviest weight—more like the lightest.

You may be right that the thought "no one could literally believe this, and so, charitably...." has been steadily diminishing in plausibility.

I haven't studied the foreshadowing of Poincaré in detail, but @neilsinhababu.bsky.social has. As I understand it, Nietzsche wasn't thinking formally at all, so would not have asked "is it *exactly* the same point or a point in an arbitrarily small neighbourhood."

Reposted by Jonathan Birch

In an odd coincidence, the new literalist reading came into being at the same time that we started regularly hearing Trump talk about himself.

And here is the quoted passage with alt-text.

I have the same feeling as a non-specialist. I was surprised to learn that a majority of Anglophone Nietzsche scholars (who may not be representative of other traditions) dismiss the importance of ER and Thus Spake Zarathustra, focusing primarily on other works.

Reposted by Jonathan Birch

(Having only read N. without any scholarly apparatus, it is very surprising to hear this is not mainstream -- so much in his work, especially Z., seems centered on being sincere with oneself and one's own intentions?)

This is dreadful advice if ER is false. If ER is false - and we in fact have one life, containing finite suffering - then Nietzche should instead have accepted Schopenhauer's position regarding the overriding importance of compassion for others.

What it does (for Nietzsche) is justify his clear, consistent disdain for helping to alleviate suffering - because, regardless of what you do, suffering remains infinite. It transforms the important question into: how can you (by being a higher man of a certain kind) create infinite positive value?

Nietzsche always wrote as though he had a shocking, Buddha- or Christ-sized revelation to deliver to humanity. On the mainstream reading this is bluster or parody (either way, annoying), whereas on the new literalist reading it's an eccentric but sincerely held belief. (4/4) bsky.app/profile/birc...
Nietzsche knew that a true philosopher must write his own jacket blurbs.

For me, a literalist reading makes Nietzsche easier to like. If ER is a fiction, the advice to live as though it were true is bad advice. But if it's a literal truth we must all come to terms with, the idea of living such that you could affirm it does indeed become as important as Nietzsche claims.

How could he have believed this? Because he anticipated (qualitatively, loosely) ideas that would soon be formalized rigorously by Poincaré and Boltzmann. If time is infinite, and the world is a dynamical system drifting around a bounded phase space, it revisits the same point infinite times. (2/4)

I really enjoyed @neilsinhababu.bsky.social's "Nietzsche on the eternal recurrence". Together with Paul Loeb's work it's persuaded me that Nietzsche believed his eternal recurrence doctrine to be literally true, or at least probably true. (1/4)
philpapers.org/rec/SINNOT-9
Neil Sinhababu, Nietzsche on the Eternal Recurrence - PhilPapers
The idea of the eternal recurrence is that everyone will live the exact same lives again an infinite number of times. Nietzsche appreciates that this would multiply the value of a ...
philpapers.org

When they said "soon you will be using AI to search" I never imagined the plan was to degrade the internet to an unusable level rather than to improve the AI.
For those cephalopod lovers among you, our new updated review of the evidence for cephalpod sentience has now been published in Biological Reviews. (Sadly the picture is of birds rather than cephalopods, as this is the journal cover!)
doi.org/10.1002/brv....
Sentience in cephalopod molluscs: an updated assessment
This article evaluates the evidence for sentience – the capacity to have feelings – in cephalopod molluscs: octopus, cuttlefish, squid, and nautilus. Our framework includes eight criteria, covering b...
doi.org

I think The Simpsons may be a counterexample to the theory that it always strengthens a brand to have new content coming out.

I sometimes think about the counterfactual universe where Gordon Brown just loses it and says "yeah, well maybe if you were bit less fucking bigoted" - and turns into a kind of Zack Polanski figure of the 2010s.

Reposted by Jonathan Birch

I doubt Starmer even realises the damage he's inflicted on his own standing through Trump sycophancy. He must think it's a minor issue for most voters but the general perception of him as weak and servile spills over to every other issue.

Starmer spent a whole year debasing himself to keep Trump onside - and still gets a 10% tariff for opposing the conquest of Greenland. Nothing is ever enough. It is not worth it.

In London you do overhear these sort of alternate-reality conversations about how it's tough to buy a house these days on a normal professional salary of £150K or so. People who are in the 99% centile nationally think they are the middle.

Reposted by Jonathan Birch

Reposted by Jonathan Birch

You're not denying there is a housing crisis in London, surely? I'm aware of the population. The size of the population says little about how easy or difficult it is for new people to move and settle for the long term. www.bbc.co.uk/news/article...
London's 'spiralling housing crisis' in numbers
Research sets out the challenges and solutions to tackle the growing housing need in the capital.
www.bbc.co.uk

With both London and New York there's the problem that very few people can afford to live in them, and even travelling in is expensive. They've become exciting cultural hubs to which the majority are denied access.
This photo was taken in 1911 using glass plate technology by Herbert Ponting who was part of Scott's Antarctic expedition,

The composition and detail are exquisite with the band of white snow/ice creating a perfect frame around the two people and the ship in the distance

Iconic imo

When they become very burdensome you do get debates around "is this in effect licensing the unwanted behaviour?" - because it can shift labour on to those affected by the behaviour when really it's those who do it who need the intensive training.

Yes, I see the intention is not to protect them - but still, if you have institutional design based on the principle that "senior profs will always be like this, so..." it does implicitly licence the bad behaviour by calling it an irremediable part of human nature.