Lightnews — Scholar-powered news

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · 7d

Huzzah!

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · 9d

I’m officially no longer just a crank who just argues about philosophy on the Internet. I’m now a crank who has had a paper accepted to Synthese! Here’s a post about it.
open.substack.com/pub/disagree...

My first publication: Quantum Immortality

Notes on a paper accepted to Synthese

open.substack.com

2 8

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · 17d

If physics really were substrate independent, and we're embedded in the physics, then we wouldn't have any evidence about the substrate. But panpsychists think we do have evidence about the substrate. So I think that the analogy to hardware/software is misleading.

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · 17d

Eh, kinda. But I think that's misleading. Core to the idea of hardware/software is the idea that software is substrate independent. You can run any software on any (Turing-complete) substrate, within time/memory constraints. I don't think that really fits well with panpsychism.

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · 28d

I would answer "meaningless" to both.

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Sep 4

I am a fan. After much deliberation I have decided it should come back.

3

Reposted by Disagreeable Me

Philip Goff @philipgoff.bsky.social · Aug 29

I've just submitted a complete book manuscript to the publisher. A liberal and mystical reimagining of the traditional religions of the West. Hardest thing I've ever done. I shouldn't complain, though, because it's going to be a bestseller.

6 2 24

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 28

pinky and the brain are in a cage and pinky says try to take over the world .

ALT: pinky and the brain are in a cage and pinky says try to take over the world .

media.tenor.com

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 26

I reckon illusionists have got to be on the list somewhere. That's why I post anonymously!

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 26

Saying that the term "consciousness" is not useful is not quite the same as saying that consciousness does not exist.

1 2

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 25

People talk about free will and experience in non-philosophical contexts, and the patterns identified by this usage are real, so for me that justifies keeping them around. Lance Bush argues also that it's not so clear that ordinary people have the metaphysical commitments you assume.

1 1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 25

It isn't either. Or it's both. It's not a question with a determinate answer. I've come around to thinking that the best way of thinking about what words mean is by looking at usage rather than metaphysics, and there is a phenomenon that is picked out by usage in both cases.

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 25

I used to feel that way about free will but I've come around to compatibilism. There is a lot more to free will and experience than a particular metaphysical story about what it is. But I respect where you're coming from too.

1 1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 25

I think it's also distracting to say that experience doesn't exist. It seems absurd and impossible to accept, so you get dismissed as crazy. Better, I think, to affirm the explanandum but to say it isn't what you think it is.

1 2

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 25

Me too. But can you not just identify whatever is happening when we think we've genuinely experienced the smell of a rose with genuinely experiencing the scent of a rose? Like, telling yourself that story just is what genuine experience is.

1 1

Reposted by Disagreeable Me

Philip Goff @philipgoff.bsky.social · Aug 19

I think this might be my clearest articulation of it IMHO

Philip Goff @philipgoff.bsky.social · Aug 19

I did a TEDx talk on panpsychism. Convinced?
www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCxh...

Is there consciousness beyond the brain? | Philip Goff | TEDxNewEngland

YouTube video by TEDx Talks

www.youtube.com

1 4 16

Reposted by Disagreeable Me

Fintan Mallory @fintanmallory.com · Nov 18

You might think from the name that panpsychism is the belief that bread is conscious. And you’d be right.

5 22 110

Reposted by Disagreeable Me

Keith Frankish @keithfrankish.com · Aug 12

Join me and @petemandik.bsky.social live at 6.15 UK time today for something indescribable
youtube.com/live/0T77EDc...

The Persuaders: Overture

YouTube video by Keith Frankish

youtube.com

3 7

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 9

It's clearly a ridiculous comparison, but I think you're going too far. His intent is to say GPT5 is as awesome as a PhD, not to say PhDs are as mechanical as GPT5. He wants to boost GPT5, not denigrate PHDs.

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Aug 1

[Me too]

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Jul 25

I think you're kind of onto something but you're drawing the wrong conclusion. We are just patterns. But patterns are real. I think the whole universe is just a pattern. Even fundamental particles are patterns.

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Jul 25

I think they exist in pretty much the same way. The charges only exist as ways to talk about electrons moving about in your computer. Yeah, that's a cheap shot, because you mean from the perspective of the simulation. But I think multiple perspectives are possible.

1

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Jul 25

The problem here, from my POV, is to say that only fundamental properties exist. Your sensations exist and can be mapped onto higher level emergent structures, which exist.

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Jul 4

Some of this hinges on what we mean by "true probability". In our chats I was mentioning some work by Peter Lewis, not endorsing it. I don't really think it's determinate if there is true probability. As long as we can account for how things seem, I think further questions are dubious.

Disagreeable Me @disagreeableme.bsky.social · Jul 4

But, as Wallace argues, that's not really adding anything you don't already need for any sort of inference or reasoning project. The axioms of rationality he relies on are pretty much givens regardless of quantum mechanics. So it's not fair to count them as additional postulates.

1 1