Player's Handbook
Popper's Milestone

Things to Come

Greetings and salutations! A few quick notes before I get on my way:

  • I've very much enjoyed the character sheets people have attached to the Player's Handbook - hope we get a few more!
  • Have I made my scientific background clear? I did half of an Astrophysics degree before switching to Computer Science (the Physics department forbade me to use their computers for my own projects in my spare time - the CS department didn't mind). Afterwards, I did an Advanced Computer Science Masters degree specialising in Artificial Intelligence - it's curriculum was nearly identical to the Cognitive Science Masters degree  (for which I couldn't get funding), so I sometimes suggest that I have credentials as a cognitive scientist, which I don't think is unfair.
  • On that subject, I'm going to do some philosophy of mind this week. I feel some discussion on the psychological subject of cognitive dissonance is called for, as there is a gross misunderstanding surrounding this topic, and we can all benefit from taking this lesson to heart.
  • I want to state for the record that my desire to improve upon the "new synthesis" and move forward to superior models for the evolutionary process is motivated by my lifelong love of science. I am not, and never have been, a creationist, but as a philosopher I can recognise that different systems of metaphysics lead to different conclusions. If I ever seem to be attacking the idea of evolution there has been a gross misunderstanding! I apologise if my choice of words ever contributes to such a misunderstanding but please check the category of a post before drawing conclusions as posts on the subject of religion are generally concerned with metaphysics and not science.
  • And on the subject of distinguishing metaphysics from science, I'm going to kick off the week with a post about Popper's valuable contributions to the philosophy of science so that we might gain a better understanding of what metaphysics is about.
  • Oh, and I might post on some game topics too, depending how the week goes!

All aboard! Off we go...


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I'm inspired to do a post on Autopoiesis later this week.

While I enjoy some of your "this guy's philosophy at a glance" posts, I honestly wish you'd pick more interesting people. I beat you to a post on Worph, but you should do a post on Phillip K. Dick's psuedo-religious worldview.

Patrick - out of interest, what features of a person would put them into your "interesting" camp? I find Chris' selection useful, as they are often on the boundary of science and metaphysics, which is my own intellectual [playground/jungle/quagmire*].

* Delete at your whim

I need that third loop of literary/humanist endeavor to complete the venn diagram. For instance, Godel certainly borders metaphysics and science, but his work also has literary implications, which is what GEB:EGB spends 777 pages exploring, amoung other things. Phil Dick also gets all three.

Patrick: to beat me to something, we would have to be racing for the same goal. :) Why don't you do a piece on Dick? It would be much more at home on your blog; it would be very out of place in the current campaign here.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)