Podcasts about Philosophy of science

Send a textWhy do some scientific breakthroughs begin with ridicule?In this episode, we explore cancer research, serendipity, and the philosophy behind unconventional biomedical innovation.Dr. Alexander Shneider, Ph.D. is a biotech entrepreneur and scientist with more than three decades of experience spanning oncology, immunology, vaccines, and translational medicine. He is the Founder and CEO of CureLab Oncology ( https://www.curelaboncology.com/ ), where he is leading the development of a novel biological agent designed to fight cancer through a dual approach—stimulating anti-tumor immunity while also addressing the chronic inflammation that often underlies disease progression.CureLab's lead therapeutic, Elenagen, has demonstrated a strong safety profile and encouraging signals of clinical benefit in international Phase II studies, and is being explored both as an adjunct to standard cancer treatments and for its broader potential in inflammation-driven and age-associated diseases. The platform's reach may extend beyond human medicine, with ongoing interest in applications for oncology in companion animals.Over the course of his career, Dr. Shneider has advised biotechnology, pharmaceutical, and investment organizations across areas including R&D strategy, licensing, technology transfer, product development, and intellectual property. He previously founded CureLab, Inc., where he worked on tools for the rational design of DNA vaccines and the development of broad-spectrum influenza vaccine concepts.In academia, Dr. Shneider has held professor-level appointments and led the Genetic Vaccine Laboratory at Sechenov University, where he helped establish multicenter clinical research infrastructure focused on diseases involving chronic inflammation. His research has also explored evolutionarily conserved RNA structures as targets for antiviral therapies and next-generation vaccine design.In addition to his scientific and entrepreneurial work, he serves on the editorial boards of several peer-reviewed journals in immunology and aging research, reflecting his long-standing engagement at the intersection of basic science, clinical translation, and biotechnology innovation.#CancerResearch #BiomedicalScience #CancerInnovation#ScientificDiscovery #PhilosophyOfScience #Biotech #MedicalInnovation#Oncology #BreakthroughScience #StartupScience #SciencePodcast #DrugDevelopment #Serendipity #Innovation  #FutureOfMedicineSupport the show

What would trinitarian science look like? Dr Paul Axton joins David Gornoski to talk about William Desmond's reading of Hegel, the tension between body and mind, the Trinitarian principle in creation, how matter has always existed, and more. Check out Forging Ploughshares podcast here. Follow David Gornoski on X here. Visit aneighborschoice.com for more

In a continuation of the discussion of Philosophy of Science, the ideas of Rupert Sheldrake about the dogmatism of science, leads to a discussion of the work of Christopher Kaiser on the creationist tradition and the development of science.  If you enjoyed this podcast, please consider donating to support our work. Become a Patron!

This discussion of the teleological argument takes us into modern philosophy of science and the debate between Thomas Kuhn and Michael Polanyi. Paul Axton demonstrates the superiority of Polanyi's thought as reaching beyond Kuhn's stunted understanding.  If you enjoyed this podcast, please consider donating to support our work. Become a Patron!

After a long hiatus where we both saw grief counsellors over our fight about Popper's theory of content in the last C&R episode, we are back. And we're ready to play nice ... for about 30 seconds until Vaden admits that two sentences from Popper changed his mind about something Ben had arguing for literally years. But eventually putting those disagreements aside, we return to the subject at hand: The Conjectures and Refutations Series: Chapter 10: Truth, Rationality, and the Growth of Scientific Knowledge (Part II). Here all goes smoothly. Just kidding, we start fighting about content again almost immediately. Where are the guests to break us up when you need them. We discuss Why Vaden changed his mind about "all thought is problem solving" Something that rhymes with wero horship Is Popper sloppy when it comes to writing about probability and content Is all modern data science based on the wrong idea? (Hint: No) Popper's problem-focused view of scientific progress How much formalization is too much? The difference between high verisimilitude and high probability Why do we value simplicity in science? Historical examples of science progressing via theories with increasing content Quotes Consciousness, world 2, was presumably an evaluating and discerning consciousness, a problem-solving consciousness, right from the start. I have said of the animate part of the physical world 1 that all organisms are problem solvers. My basic assumption regarding world 2 is that this problem-solving activity of the animate part of world 1 resulted in the emergence of world 2, of the world of consciousness. But I do not mean by this that consciousness solves problems all the time, as I asserted of the organisms. On the contrary. The organisms are preoccupied with problem-solving day in, day out, but consciousness is not only concerned with the solving of problems, although that is its most important biological function. My hypothesis is that the original task of consciousness was to anticipate success and failure in problem-solving and to signal to the organism in the form of pleasure and pain whether it was on the right or wrong path to the solution of the problem. In Search of a Better World, p.17 (emphasis added) The criterion of potential satisfactoriness is thus testability, or improbability: only a highly testable or improbable theory is worth testing, and is actually (and not merely potentially) satisfactory if it withstands severe tests—especially those tests to which we could point as crucial for the theory before they were ever undertaken. - C&R, Chapter 10 Consequently there is little merit in formalizing and elaborating a deductive system (intended for use as an empirical science) beyond the requirements of the task of criticizing and testing it, and of comparing it critically with competitors. - C&R, Chapter 10 Admittedly, our expectations, and thus our theories, may precede, historically, even our problems. Yet science starts only with problems. Problems crop up especially when we are disappointed in our expectations, or when our theories involve us in difficulties, in contradictions; and these may arise either within a theory, or between two different theories, or as the result of a clash between our theories and our observations. - C&R, Chapter 10 Socials Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link Become a patreon subscriber here (https://www.patreon.com/Increments). Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here (https://ko-fi.com/increments). Click dem like buttons on youtube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_4wZzQyoW4s4ZuE4FY9DQQ) Is "Ben and Vaden will fight about content" high or low probability? Tell us at incrementspodcast@gmail.com

What would a four-dimensional being see if it looked at us? In this episode, Neil deGrasse Tyson and Chuck Nice answer fan questions covering higher-dimensional surgery, space elevators, alien intelligence, and colliding galaxies. Could spacetime itself be a cosmic crystal?NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here: https://startalkmedia.com/show/cosmic-queries-quantumly-stupid/Thanks to our Patrons Joei Brianne, Robert Simons, Isiah Campbell, DEVVON WILMOT, mark horgan, Jesse Carruth, John Aktiv, Kgaleberkeley, Jordan Crist, Alex Gonzalez, Guy, Jack Molyneaux, Mike, CJ Brooks, Thomas Jones, Ashley, Matt H, Pamela Carroll, Kristie Nixon, Wolter Wielenga, Richard Breytenbach, Will Mansell-Brown, Wayne Eyjolfson, Ashlanne, Jeff, PatternsComplexity, Venessa, Maya Hawthorne, Lil.Mazikeen, David Stokes, Samantha, vijay raghunathan, Jon Kerr, Micheal Charles, Alicia Reed, Petrovici Bogdan, Jordan Fofonoff, Yawaridi Southerland, Rodney Ross, Ted Doyle, Alish, Yelson Rodriguez, dahonetwo ., Janis Purens, Oscar Blanco, Roy Frank Sproule III, Tayla Szabadics, Jens Frederik Lennert Olsen, Gabe, Daniel, Nora, masterbuilderej, Brad, Will, James H English, Evolved Finch, Kioshana LaCount Burrell, Lynda Osborne, Micheal Tiberg, Damein Alexander, Jared Craig, wqf3qwf32tgf23qg, Zane Smith, Ondřej Dubina, Chimenem Wodi, George Stewart, Robbie & Annie James, John Koehler, Megan, David Bayles, robenheimer, Kiryl Medina, paul paulson, Justin Reinschmidt, Tammye, Henry C Weismann IV, and Eric Schwartz for supporting us this week. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of StarTalk Radio ad-free and a whole week early.Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

How do you know what you know? Neil deGrasse Tyson and comedian Chuck Nice explore issues with quantum mechanics and objectivity, the history of physics, and how scientists ask questions on the edge of our understanding with philosopher of physics Elise Crull.NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here: https://startalkmedia.com/show/the-limits-of-knowing-with-elise-crull/Thanks to our Patrons Erik Nunez, Jim Zehr, Paulo Santos, Ken Cho, Dean Starbuck, Dan, Spacious, Bryce Larson, Robert Neal, Dawn C. Coles, Brent Williams, Mitchell Ransom, Kyle Kwartel, Salvatore Mammana, Benjamin Hunzeker, Peter O Halloran, Kristopher, Sean Josiah, Harry Summlar, Jeffrey Walker, Matt Coda, Beth Gallagher, Sherene Levert, Gabriel Castro, Paul Elliott, Robert watry, Nathan Baker, Eric Pozzobon, Adam Weldon, George Xenakis, Troy Kemp, Manjushree Tea, Juan Villegas, John Hart Project, Trygve Peterson, driven13, Malkoon Malkoonian, Dasha, Sam Hardy, miriam walter, Adam Goodspeed, Cindy Buccellato, Brandon Christian, Robert Loper, Liam, Viper, Kroij, Kevin Casey, Waverous, TJM8991, Timothy Jeffirs, Riley Thompson, Kushal Lal, Vivak Singh, K. Stalker Art, Jerel, Sophia Bogard, Len Smith, Kenneth, Daniel Coleman, Sharjeel Sahibzada, Christopher Tillman, Chuck Bell, Mal, Zakharius, Agata Tomaszewska, Mike Strauss, Jessica Baker, Robert Palmer, Mary Loyche, Jaime R Topp, Dan Macken, yazan al hajari, Johsua Skelly, Jamie, Tammi, Elizabeth White, Martin Assirati, Christine Peterson, Sooraj Poonawala, Rachel, Bryan Gaines, Guy Gore, Kelly Bragg, Surya Bakshi, J.J., Kevin Abeln, Doug Hemphill, Thomas Hogg, Greg Brunelle, CHO, Francis, and Bryan Olay for supporting us this week. Subscribe to SiriusXM Podcasts+ to listen to new episodes of StarTalk Radio ad-free and a whole week early.Start a free trial now on Apple Podcasts or by visiting siriusxm.com/podcastsplus. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Can classical schools really prepare students for STEM careers? Many parents wonder if a humanities-rich education leaves room for science and technology. Our guest, Diane Gray, scientist, musician, contractor, tutor, and mother of seven, says yes. After 12 years in biotech R&D, Diane completed a master's in Classical Studies to explore how classical Christian education and STEM can thrive together.In this conversation with host Davies Owens, Diane shares her research comparing STEM and classical models, revealing that the two are not in competition, but complementary.

Back to basics baby. We're doing a couple introductory episodes on Popper's philosophy of science, following Chapter 10 of Conjectures and Refutations. We start with Popper's theory of content: what makes a good scientific theory? Can we judge some theories as better than others before we even run any empirical tests? Should we be looking for theories with high probability? Ben and Vaden also return to their roots in another way, and get into a nice little fight about how content relates to Bayesianism. We discuss Vaden's skin care routine If you find your friend's lost watch and proceed to lose it, are you responsible for the watch? Empirical vs logical content Whether and how content can be measured and compared How content relates to probability Quotes My aim in this lecture is to stress the significance of one particular aspect of science—its need to grow, or, if you like, its need to progress. I do not have in mind here the practical or social significance of this need. What I wish to discuss is rather its intellectual significance. I assert that continued growth is essential to the rational and empirical character of scientific knowledge; that if science ceases to grow it must lose that character. It is the way of its growth which makes science rational and empirical; the way, that is, in which scientists discriminate between available theories and choose the better one or (in the absence of a satisfactory theory) the way they give reasons for rejecting all the available theories, thereby suggesting some of the conditions with which a satisfactory theory should comply. You will have noticed from this formulation that it is not the accumulation of observations which I have in mind when I speak of the growth of scientific knowledge, but the repeated overthrow of scien- tific theories and their replacement by better or more satisfactory ones. This, incidentally, is a procedure which might be found worthy of attention even by those who see the most important aspect of the growth of scientific knowledge in new experiments and in new observations. - C&R p. 291 Thus it is my first thesis that we can know of a theory, even before it has been tested, that if it passes certain tests it will be better than some other theory. My first thesis implies that we have a criterion of relative potential satisfactoriness, or of potential progressiveness, which can be applied to a theory even before we know whether or not it will turn out, by the passing of some crucial tests, to be satisfactory in fact. This criterion of relative potential satisfactoriness (which I formu- lated some time ago,2 and which, incidentally, allows us to grade the- ories according to their degree of relative potential satisfactoriness) is extremely simple and intuitive. It characterizes as preferable the theory which tells us more; that is to say, the theory which contains the greater amount of empirical information or content; which is logically stronger; which has the greater explanatory and predictive power; and which can therefore be more severely tested by comparing predicted facts with observations. In short, we prefer an interesting, daring, and highly informative theory to a trivial one. - C&R p.294 Let a be the statement ‘It will rain on Friday'; b the statement ‘It willbe fine on Saturday'; and ab the statement ‘It will rain on Friday and itwill be fine on Saturday': it is then obvious that the informative contentof this last statement, the conjunction ab, will exceed that of its com-ponent a and also that of its component b. And it will also be obviousthat the probability of ab (or, what is the same, the probability that abwill be true) will be smaller than that of either of its components. Writing Ct(a) for ‘the content of the statement a', and Ct(ab) for ‘thecontent of the conjunction a and b', we have (1) Ct(a) = Ct(b). This contrasts with the corresponding law of the calculus of probability, (2) p(a) >= p(ab)

This is the extended "director's cut" of a talk delivered for "RatFest 2025" (next year to be "Conjecture Con"). This also serves as a supplement to my "Doom Debates" interview which can be found here: https://youtu.be/koubXR0YL4A?si=483M6SPOKwbQYmzb It is simply assumed some version of "Bayesian reasoning" is how AI will "create" knowledge. This misconception permeates the https://ai-2027.com paper, as well as Bostrom and Yudkowsky's work on this, as well as that of every other AI "Doomer" and even on the other extreme the so-called "AI-Accelerationists". All of that indicates a deep misconception about how new explanations are generated which comes from a deep misconception about how science works because almost no one in the field of AI seems to think the *philosophy of* science is even relevant. I explain what has gone wrong: 00:00 Introduction 09:14 The Big Questions and the new Priesthoods 18:40 Nick Bostrom and Superintelligence 25:10 If anyone builds it, everyone dies and Yudkowsky. 33:32 Prophecy, Inevitability, Induction and Bayesianism. 41:42 Popper, Kuhn, Feyerabend and Lakatos. 49:40 AI researchers ignore The Philosophy of Science. 58:46 A new test for AGI from Sam Altman and David Deutsch? 1:03:35 Accelerationists, Doomers and “Everyone dies”. 1:10:21 Conclusions 1:15:35 Audience Questions

For National Science Week, Ash sits down with Senior Lecturer in Philosophy of Science, Dr Sandy Boucher, to talk about how philosophical thinking underpins scientific thought, and the schism between the two. They talk everything from science's origins in early Greek philosophy, to the differentiation that we see between the two in the modern era, and whether or not philosophy can make you a better scientist.Support the show: https://buymeacoffee.com/tunefmSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, Stewart Alsop speaks with Edouard Machery, Distinguished Professor at the University of Pittsburgh and Director of the Center for Philosophy of Science, about the deep cultural roots of question-asking and curiosity. From ancient Sumerian tablets to the philosophical legacies of Socrates and Descartes, the conversation spans how different civilizations have valued inquiry, the cross-cultural psychology of AI, and what makes humans unique in our drive to ask “why.” For more, explore Edouard's work at www.edouardmachery.com.Check out this GPT we trained on the conversationTimestamps00:00 – 05:00 Origins of question-asking, Sumerian writing, norms in early civilizations, authority and written text05:00 – 10:00 Values in AI across cultures, RLHF, tech culture in the Bay Area vs. broader American values10:00 – 15:00 Cross-cultural AI study: Taiwan vs. USA, privacy and collectivism, urban vs. rural mindset divergence15:00 – 20:00 History of curiosity in the West, from vice to virtue post-15th century, link to awe and skepticism20:00 – 25:00 Magic, alchemy, and experimentation in early science, merging maker and scholarly traditions25:00 – 30:00 Rise of public dissections, philosophy as meta-curiosity, Socratic questioning as foundational30:00 – 35:00 Socrates, Plato, Aristotle—transmission of philosophical curiosity, human uniqueness in questioning35:00 – 40:00 Language, assertion, imagination, play in animals vs. humans, symbolic worlds40:00 – 45:00 Early moderns: Montaigne, Descartes, rejection of Aristotle, rise of foundational science45:00 – 50:00 Confucianism and curiosity, tradition and authority, contrast with India and Buddhist thought50:00 – 55:00 Epistemic virtues project, training curiosity, philosophical education across cultures, spiritual curiosityKey InsightsCuriosity hasn't always been a virtue. In Western history, especially through Christian thought until the 15th century, curiosity was viewed as a vice—something dangerous and prideful—until global exploration and scientific inquiry reframed it as essential to human understanding.Question-asking is culturally embedded. Different societies place varying emphasis on questioning. While Confucian cultures promote curiosity within hierarchical structures, Christian traditions historically linked it with sin—except when directed toward divine matters.Urbanization affects curiosity more than nationality. Machery found that whether someone lives in a city or countryside often shapes their mindset more than their cultural background. Cosmopolitan environments expose individuals to diverse values, prompting greater openness and inquiry.AI ethics reveals cultural alignment. In studying attitudes toward AI in the U.S. and Taiwan, expected contrasts in privacy and collectivism were smaller than anticipated. The urban, global culture in both countries seems to produce surprisingly similar ethical concerns.The scientific method emerged from curiosity. The fusion of the maker tradition (doing) and the scholarly tradition (knowing) in the 13th–14th centuries helped birth experimentation, public dissection, and eventually modern science—all grounded in a spirit of curiosity.Philosophy begins with meta-curiosity. From Socratic questioning to Plato's dialogues and Aristotle's treatises, philosophy has always been about asking questions about questions—making “meta-curiosity” the core of the discipline.Only humans ask why. Machery notes that while animals can make requests, they don't seem to ask questions. Humans alone communicate assertions and engage in symbolic, imaginative, question-driven thought, setting us apart cognitively and culturally.

In this IAI Studio interview, philosopher and science writer Peter Godfrey-Smith explores the evolution of consciousness and the enduring mystery of the mind–body problem. Drawing on his work with octopuses and other animals, he argues that consciousness emerged gradually through increasingly complex forms of sensory-motor interaction, rather than as a sudden leap. Using cephalopods as a case study, he shows how minds can evolve in radically different ways, suggesting that subjective experience is more widespread,and varied, than we often assume. The conversation touches on ethics, the limits of physicalism, and how studying animal minds can reshape our understanding of our own.Peter Godfrey-Smith is a philosopher of science and a leading thinker on the evolution of consciousness and animal minds. He is a professor at the University of Sydney and the author of several acclaimed books, including Other Minds: The Octopus, the Sea, and the Deep Origins of Consciousness and Metazoa: Animal Life and the Birth of the Mind. His work combines philosophy, biology, and firsthand experience with marine animals to explore how subjective experience arises in the natural world. Through his research and writing, Godfrey-Smith offers a compelling naturalistic account of the mind that bridges science and philosophy.To witness such topics discussed live buy tickets for our upcoming festival: https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/And visit our website for many more articles, videos, and podcasts like this one: https://iai.tv/You can find everything we referenced here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode, Alyson and Breht explore Friedrich Engels' Dialectics of Nature, a bold and underappreciated attempt to apply dialectical materialism to the natural sciences. Often dismissed or misunderstood, this unfinished work offers a sweeping view of reality - from physics and chemistry to evolution, human consciousness, and ecological breakdown - through the lens of Marxist philosophy. Together, they unpack Engels' central claim that nature itself unfolds dialectically: through contradiction, motion, transformation, and interconnection. They cover the three laws of dialectics, Engels' materialist account of human evolution, his critique of mechanistic science, vulgar materialism, and metaphysical thinking, as well as his early warnings about capitalism's ecological consequences. Along the way, they connect these insights to Marx's concept of species-being, and reflect on what this revolutionary worldview offers in the age of climate crisis, hyper-alienation, and late capitalist decay. Finally, Alyson and Breht have a fascinating open-ended discussion about the existential and spiritual implications of dialectical materialism as a worldview. Whether you're new to dialectical materialism or looking to deepen your understanding, this conversation reframes Engels' work as a profound contribution not just to Marxism, but to the philosophy of science itself. Here are the episodes recommended for further listening in the episode: Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 - Karl Marx On Contradiction - Mao Marxism 101: Intro to Historical Materialism (and the Necessity of Socialism) The Nature of All Things: Spinoza's Philosophical Odyssey All Dialectic Deep Dive Episodes ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio: https://revleftradio.com/

Send us a textEdmund Husserl is considered by many as the father of phenomenology, he is also a complex thinker. In this video, Dr. Thomas Byrne joins us to introduce Husserl's philosophy. Dr. Byrne is a research assistant professor at the University of Illinois. He is a classically trained phenomenologist, having completed his PhD at The Husserl Archives at KU Leuven.Support the show--------------------------If you would want to support the channel and what I am doing, please follow me on Patreon: www.patreon.com/christianityforall Where else to find Josh Yen: Philosophy YT: https://bit.ly/philforallEducation: https://bit.ly/joshyenBuisness: https://bit.ly/logoseduMy Website: https://joshuajwyen.com/

In this episode, Alyson and Breht explore Friedrich Engels' Dialectics of Nature, a bold and underappreciated attempt to apply dialectical materialism to the natural sciences. Often dismissed or misunderstood, this unfinished work offers a sweeping view of reality - from physics and chemistry to evolution, human consciousness, and ecological breakdown - through the lens of Marxist philosophy. Together, they unpack Engels' central claim that nature itself unfolds dialectically: through contradiction, motion, transformation, and interconnection. They cover the three laws of dialectics, Engels' materialist account of human evolution, his critique of mechanistic science, vulgar materialism, and metaphysical thinking, and his early warnings about capitalism's ecological consequences. Along the way, they connect these insights to Marx's concept of species-being, and reflect on what this revolutionary worldview offers in the age of climate crisis, hyper-alienation, and late capitalist decay. Finally, Alyson and Breht have a fascinating open-ended discussion about the existential and spiritual implications of dialectical materialism as a worldview. Whether you're new to dialectical materialism or looking to deepen your understanding, this conversation reframes Engels' work as a profound contribution not just to Marxism, but to the philosophy of science itself. ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio or here: https://www.patreon.com/TheRedMenace Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio & Red Menace HERE

On this episode of Crazy Wisdom, host Stewart Alsop speaks with Andrew Altschuler, a researcher, educator, and navigator at Tana, Inc., who also founded Tana Stack. Their conversation explores knowledge systems, complexity, and AI, touching on topics like network effects in social media, information warfare, mimetic armor, psychedelics, and the evolution of knowledge management. They also discuss the intersection of cognition, ontologies, and AI's role in redefining how we structure and retrieve information. For more on Andrew's work, check out his course and resources at altshuler.io and his YouTube channel.Check out this GPT we trained on the conversation!Timestamps00:00 Introduction and Guest Background00:33 The Demise of AirChat00:50 Network Effects and Social Media Challenges03:05 The Rise of Digital Warlords03:50 Quora's Golden Age and Information Warfare08:01 Building Limbic Armor16:49 Knowledge Management and Cognitive Armor18:43 Defining Knowledge: Secular vs. Ultimate25:46 The Illusion of Insight31:16 The Illusion of Insight32:06 Philosophers of Science: Popper and Kuhn32:35 Scientific Assumptions and Celestial Bodies34:30 Debate on Non-Scientific Knowledge36:47 Psychedelics and Cultural Context44:45 Knowledge Management: First Brain vs. Second Brain46:05 The Evolution of Knowledge Management54:22 AI and the Future of Knowledge Management58:29 Tana: The Next Step in Knowledge Management59:20 Conclusion and Course InformationKey InsightsNetwork Effects Shape Online Communities – The conversation highlighted how platforms like Twitter, AirChat, and Quora demonstrate the power of network effects, where a critical mass of users is necessary for a platform to thrive. Without enough engaged participants, even well-designed social networks struggle to sustain themselves, and individuals migrate to spaces where meaningful conversations persist. This explains why Twitter remains dominant despite competition and why smaller, curated communities can be more rewarding but difficult to scale.Information Warfare and the Need for Cognitive Armor – In today's digital landscape, engagement-driven algorithms create an arena of information warfare, where narratives are designed to hijack emotions and shape public perception. The only real defense is developing cognitive armor—critical thinking skills, pattern recognition, and the ability to deconstruct media. By analyzing how information is presented, from video editing techniques to linguistic framing, individuals can resist manipulation and maintain autonomy over their perspectives.The Role of Ontologies in AI and Knowledge Management – Traditional knowledge management has long been overlooked as dull and bureaucratic, but AI is transforming the field into something dynamic and powerful. Systems like Tana and Palantir use ontologies—structured representations of concepts and their relationships—to enhance information retrieval and reasoning. AI models perform better when given structured data, making ontologies a crucial component of next-generation AI-assisted thinking.The Danger of Illusions of Insight – Drawing from ideas by Balaji Srinivasan, the episode distinguished between genuine insight and the illusion of insight. While psychedelics, spiritual experiences, and intense emotional states can feel revelatory, they do not always produce knowledge that can be tested, shared, or used constructively. The ability to distinguish between profound realizations and self-deceptive experiences is critical for anyone navigating personal and intellectual growth.AI as an Extension of Human Cognition, Not a Second Brain – While popular frameworks like "second brain" suggest that digital tools can serve as externalized minds, the episode argued that AI and note-taking systems function more as extended cognition rather than true thinking machines. AI can assist with organizing and retrieving knowledge, but it does not replace human reasoning or creativity. Properly integrating AI into workflows requires understanding its strengths and limitations.The Relationship Between Personal and Collective Knowledge Management – Effective knowledge management is not just an individual challenge but also a collective one. While personal knowledge systems (like note-taking and research practices) help individuals retain and process information, organizations struggle with preserving and sharing institutional knowledge at scale. Companies like Tesla exemplify how knowledge isn't just stored in documents but embodied in skilled individuals who can rebuild complex systems from scratch.The Increasing Value of First Principles Thinking – Whether in AI development, philosophy, or practical decision-making, the discussion emphasized the importance of grounding ideas in first principles. Great thinkers and innovators, from AI researchers like Demis Hassabis to physicists like David Deutsch, excel because they focus on fundamental truths rather than assumptions. As AI and digital tools reshape how we interact with knowledge, the ability to think critically and question foundational concepts will become even more essential.

Creating the meaning of lifeDo life's struggles make the search for meaning a hopeless endeavour?Join renowned, continental philosopher Babette Babich as she explains the Nietzschean path to finding purpose, arguing that we must embrace all elements of life - good and bad - in our search for a meaningful existence.Babette is a trailblazing philosopher of technology and science. Known for her exploration of the philosophy, history, and sociology of science, she also works on the philosophy of digital media, poetry and art. Babette is a Professor of Philosophy at Fordham University, New York City.To witness such talks live buy tickets for our upcoming festival: https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/And visit our website for many more articles, videos, and podcasts like this one: https://iai.tv/You can find everything we referenced here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

It had to happen eventually: this week The Studies Show is all about philosophy. As we look at science in general, how do we decide what those studies are actually showing? Tom and Stuart take a look at the Big Two of philosophy of science: Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn, with their respective theories of falsificationism and paradigm shifts. Both are theories that almost everyone interested in science has heard of—but both make far more extreme claims than you might think.The Studies Show is sponsored by Works in Progress magazine, the best place to go online for fact-rich, data-dense articles on science and technology, and how they've made the world a better place—or how they might do so in the future. To find all their essays, all for free, go to worksinprogress.co.Show notes* Tom's new book, Everything is Predictable: How Bayes' Remarkable Theorem Explains the World* Wagenmakers's 2020 study asking scientists how they think about scientific claims* David Hume's 1748 Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding* Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on the problem of induction * Bertrand Russell's 1946 book History of Western Philosophy* Popper's 1959 book The Logic of Scientific Discovery* Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Popper* Kuhn's 1962 book The Structure of Scientific Revolutions* Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Kuhn* 2019 Scott Alexander review of the book* Michael Strevens's 2020 book The Knowledge Machine* Daniel Lakens's Coursera course on “improving your statistical inferences”CreditsThe Studies Show is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thestudiesshowpod.com/subscribe

Barry Loewer is Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at Rutgers. Before that he did his PhD in philosophy at Stanford. Barry works largely in the philosophy of physics, the philosophy of science, and metaphysics. This is Barry's third appearance on the show. He was last on episode 189 with David Albert, in which Robinson, David, and Barry discussed David and Barry's joint program known as “The Mentaculus”, which they use to solve many problems in the foundations of physics, from probability to the direction of time. In this episode, Barry and Robinson discuss the philosophical foundations of science, touching on the relationship between science and pseudoscience, Karl Popper, string theory, scientific realism, and many other important debates and figures. If you're interested in the foundations of physics, then please check out the the John Bell Institute for the Foundations of Physics, which is devoted to providing a home for research and education in this important area. Any donations are immensely helpful at this early stage in the institute's life. The Probability Map of the Universe: https://a.co/d/4XoYTMY The John Bell Institute: https://www.johnbellinstitute.org OUTLINE 00:00 Introduction 7:53 On Pseudoscience and Astrology 11:40 Falsification as a Criterion of Science 16:40 Is String Theory Pseudoscience? 20:14 On Marxism 24:45 What Is Scientific Realism? 34:35 On Hilary Putnam 42:16 Science Vs Metaphysics 48:32 Time in Science and Metaphysics 52:38 On Fundamentalia 56:01 On Reductionism 1:00:04 On Consciousness and Emergence 1:04:56 On Causation 1:25:52 On Time Travel 1:28:29 On Explanation and Thermodynamics 1:39:23 On Free Will 1:47:00 The Laws of Nature Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

Today we have not one, not two, but five fabulous guests who all presented at this year's conference for the Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice, or SPSP24 for short. Many philosophers of science we have featured on the podcast, including Hasok Chang, Rachel Ankeny and Sabina Leonelli, were founding members of SPSP. Also, our earlier episode on ‘The Turn to Practice' in philosophy of science has been one of our most popular. Therefore, it seemed an obvious decision to dedicate our final episode of the season to hearing from some of those doing current work in the area.Leading us further into the world of Philosophy of Science in Practice is our foreign correspondent Joshua Eistenthal, philosopher of physics at Caltech and regular contributor to the podcast. Thanks to Josh, we bring you compelling conversations with philosophers Julia Bursten, Aja Watkins, Sindhuja Bhakthavatsalam, Caleb Hazelwood, and Joseph Rouse.This is also Samara Greenwood's last episode as co-ordinator, producer and co-host of the podcast.Transcript coming soon.Relevant links:Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice | Mission statementSPSP 2024 - 10th Biennial Conference, South CarolinaSPSP 2024 - Conference Book of AbstractsThanks for listening to The HPS Podcast with current producers, Samara Greenwood and Carmelina Contarino. You can find more about us on our blog, website, bluesky, twitter, instagram and facebook feeds. Music by ComaStudio. This podcast would not be possible without the support of School of Historical and Philosophical Studies at the University of Melbourne. HPS Podcast | hpsunimelb.org

“This is Holden Thorp. I'm the Editor in Chief of Science and thanks to Sam and Carmelina for all they're doing to get the word out about the history and philosophy of science”Today's guest is Holden Thorp, professor of chemistry at George Washington University and Editor-in-Chief of the Science family of journals.In April of this year, Holden published an editorial in Science with the tantalising title ‘Teach Philosophy of Science'. Holden called for more substantial teaching of history and philosophy of science across undergraduate and graduate science curricula. He argued that learning about the historical and philosophical foundations of science is crucial for improving public trust. Encouraging deeper consideration of ongoing revision in science, as well as historical and societal contexts, will better equip future researchers and professionals with a more nuanced perspective on how robust, reliable knowledge is established.In the months since its publication the editorial provoked significant discussion across social media, so we decided to reach out to Holden to join us for a more in-depth conversation. We were keen to see exactly what role Holden saw for HPS scholars in such a shift and test his willingness to engage with the more challenging insights that research across History, Philosophy and Sociology of Science bring to the surface.A full transcript of the episode can be accessed here: https://www.hpsunimelb.org/post/s4-ep-9-holden-thorp-on-teach-history-and-philosophy-of-science Relevant links:'Teach philosophy of science' | Editorial by Holden Thorp | ScienceHolden's Seminar | 'Unreasonable Doubt' | The George Washington University'Cracking the Code of Science Denial' | On Holden's Seminar | GW Today'It matters who does science' | Holden Thorp | Science | AAASHolden Thorp | Editor-in-Chief | Science | AAASWhy Trust Science? | Naomi Oreskes | Princeton University PressThanks for listening to The HPS Podcast with current producers, Samara Greenwood and Carmelina Contarino. You can find more about us on our blog, website, bluesky, twitter, instagram and facebook feeds. Music by ComaStudio. This podcast would not be possible without the support of School of Historical and Philosophical Studies at the University of Melbourne. HPS Podcast | hpsunimelb.org

Mind, matter, and everything - PART TWOCan science ever solve the problem of consciousness? Do our methods look for answers in all the wrong places? Join Sean Carroll, Ellen Langer, and Tamar Gendler as they debate the possibility of science providing answers to the hardest problem of all - the problem of subjective experience. Jack Symes hosts.Sean Carroll is Homewood Professor of Natural Philosophy at John Hopkins University, and he also hosts the weekly podcast ‘Mindscape', which explores interesting ideas in science, philosophy, culture, and the arts. Ellen Langer is an award-winning scientist, Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, and the author of ‘The Mindful Body'. Tamar Gendler is Yale University's Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, the Vincent J. Scully Professor of Philosophy, and also a Professor of Psychology and Cognitive Science.To witness such debates live buy tickets for our upcoming festival: https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/And visit our website for many more articles, videos, and podcasts like this one: https://iai.tv/You can find everything we referenced here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Why does something exist, rather than nothing? Special guest Sean Carroll helps us explore this deep philosophical question. For ad free episodes and other exclusives, join us for just $3 a month on Patreon: https://patreon.com/whythisuniverse. Our merch is available here: https://www.shalmawegsman.com/why-this-universe

How will our scientists know if they are looking at complex phenomena from the wrong perspective? Have we taken the wrong approach to understanding the quantum world? Join Slavoj Žižek for an exclusive interview as he discusses the current state of quantum physics and questions the accuracy of our research into all things subatomic.Slavoj is a Slovenian Marxist-Lacanian philosopher and author, known for his incisive, radical, and humourous takes on society, politics, and science. He rarely holds back when giving his opinion, laying out his views and analysis in stark terms.To witness such debates live buy tickets for our upcoming festival: https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/And visit our website for many more articles, videos, and podcasts like this one: https://iai.tv/You can find everything we referenced here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

n this episode of the Modern Pain Podcast, host Mark Kargela discusses the philosophy of science as it pertains to pain research with philosophers Rani Lill Anjum and Elena Rocca. The conversation revolves around their book, which critiques traditional scientific approaches and emphasizes the importance of understanding philosophical biases in research. The trio explores how empirical methods often fail to address the complexity of individual pain experiences, the ethical dilemmas in excluding certain populations from research, and the significance of patient stories in clinical practice. This episode aims to provide clinicians with a deeper understanding of the philosophical underpinnings of the science they use in their own practices.NEW TEXTBOOK - Philosophy of ScienceCauseHealth Book - Rethinking Causality, Complexity and Evidence for the Unique PatientUnpacking the Complexity of Evidence YouTube Playlist*********************************************************************

Hoogleraar duurzaamheid Pim Martens week af van wetenschappelijk gebaande paden en sprak vertegenwoordigers van inheemse volken, stamoudsten, religieuze leiders en een sjamaan. Waarom is het ontginnen van Mars volgens hen achteruitgang? Hoe anders is hun verhouding tot dieren en de natuur? Hoe kijken zij tegen de westerse manier van leven aan? En wat kunnen we van hen leren over een duurzame toekomst, zonder te vervallen in valse romantiek?Abonneer je hier op de Future Affairs nieuwsbrief: nrc.nl/futureaffairsGast: Pim MartensPresentatie: Jessica van der Schalk & Wouter van NoortProductie: Ruben PestMontage: Gal Tsadok-HaiZie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Elektrische auto's doen uitlaatgassen verdwijnen, het internet ruikt naar niks en bij een Zoom-meeting ruik je ook alleen jezelf. De rol van geur wordt eerder kleiner dan groter in een digitalere, duurzamere wereld, toch? Niet als je het vraagt aan geurhistorica Caro Verbeek. Ze neemt ons mee langs de geur van Cleopatra, Napoleon en de geur van gevaarlijke ziektes, om ons te laten denken, nee rúíken aan de komende jaren. En hoe de toekomst ruikt kan weleens veel meer impact hebben op ons welzijn dan we ons realiseren, denkt ze.Gast: Caro VerbeekPresentatie: Jessica van der Schalk & Wouter van NoortProductie: Henk Ruigrok van der WervenMontage: Jeroen JaspersSpeciale dank aan: Ibo Bakker, componist en muzikant van het muziekstuk Audeur. Zie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Robotchirurgen, VR-spreekkamers en Apple-ziekenhuizen? De zorg verandert zeker, maar op een andere manier dan de techvoorspellers denken. Marlies Schijven nam ons mee in haar visie voor de zorg in 2031. Ze is chirurg, hoogleraar serious gaming en adviseert het ministerie van Volksgezondheid over datatoepassingen tijdens de pandemie. Zij werkt aan zorg waar technologie nog nauwelijks zichtbaar is en er meer tijd is voor menselijk contact.Zie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Vooral niet serieus nemen, die trendwatchers met hun grootse pandemievoorspellingen over het "nieuwe normaal" en de "grote reset", zegt hoogleraar Jan Rotmans. Volgens hem is dat veel te kortzichtig gedacht. Hij stelt daar een toekomstvisie tegenover waarin Nederland in 2120 is veranderd in een watergebied vol drijvende steden. Hij laat zien wat er allemaal nog moet veranderen voor een écht duurzame, inclusieve en digitale samenleving. De grondlegger van het vakgebied transitiekunde werpt een ontnuchterende blik op de veranderingen in coronajaar 2020.Gast: Jan RotmansPresentatie: Wouter van Noort & Jessica van der SchalkProductie: Henk Ruigrok van der WervenMontage: Ruben PestZie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We leven in de begraafplaats van de natuur. Onze gebouwen, voertuigen, wegen en bruggen zijn gemaakt van dode materialen. Wat als die zouden leven? Dat is het levenswerk van biodesigner Bob Hendrikx. Hij haalde het wereldnieuws met de door hem uitgevonden doodskist van levende schimmeldraden, mycelium. Als het aan hem ligt het bouwmateriaal van de toekomst. Wonen we straks in een schimmel?Gast: Bob Hendrickx Presentatie: Jessica van der Schalk & Wouter van NoortProductie: Henk Ruigrok van der WervenMontage: Yeppe van KesterenVind je deze onderwerpen interessant? Meld je dan aan voor: de Future Affairs NRC NieuwsbriefZie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

We wrote a book! You can pick up your copy here:Weightlifter's Guide to the Clean and JerkDrake Eserhaut is a PhD student at the University of Kansas, where he studies the endocrine response to exercise and sport, specifically including blood flow restriction training for strength and power athletes. In this episode, we discuss subject and objective athlete monitoring. This encompasses questionnaires to assess readiness, the roles of testosterone and cortisol in monitoring, and how science fits in.Enjoy!References mentioned:Kölling et al. on that 8-item questionnaire:https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31696778/Example Google Form for anyone interested:https://forms.gle/svEWnvTbkUZrciRy6Blood test imprecision tool:https://www.bmj.com/content/368/bmj.m149/rapid-responsesFollow Drake and get coaching:https://www.instagram.com/drake.datadrivenstrength/https://www.instagram.com/datadrivenstrength/Follow me and get coaching:https://www.instagram.com/josh_philwl/Weightlifting House:https://www.weightliftinghouse.com/ code PHILWL for 10% offOnyx:https://www.onyxstraps.com/ with code PHILWL for 10% offVirus:https://virusintl.com code PHILWL for 10% off

Key concepts of Critical Rationalism: All knowledge is conjectural Realism Conjecture and refutation Fallibilism

Should we follow our philosophical conclusions wherever they take us? Or is there a hard wall of common sense that we are beholden to?Listen to some of today's leading philosophers in science and metaphysics as they talk it out!Tim Maudlin is Professor of Philosophy at New York University as well as the Founder/Director of the John Bell Institute for the Foundations of Physics. Michael Della Rocca is Professor of Philosophy at Yale University and a famous disciple of the pre-Socratic philosopher Parmenides. Kathleen Higgins is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin, specialising in aesthetics, philosophy of music, nineteenth and twentieth-century continental philosophy, and philosophy of emotion.Looking for a link we mentioned? It's here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesThere are thousands of big ideas to discover at IAI.tv – videos, articles, and courses waiting for you to explore. Find out more: https://iai.tv/podcast-offers?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=shownotes&utm_campaign=fragments-and-reality.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Have you heard of Descartes' 'demon'? How can a mythical creature inform scientific progress? What is real? Listen in to find out!Join award-winning science historian Jimena Canales in this studio interview as she discusses the process of discovery and the nature of the unknown in science.Jimena Canales is a pioneering historian of science and an expert in 19th and 20th century history of the physical sciences. She is currently Vice-President of the Board of the American Council of Learned Societies (ACLS).Looking for a link we mentioned? It's here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesThere are thousands of big ideas to discover at IAI.tv – videos, articles, and courses waiting for you to explore. Find out more: https://iai.tv/podcast-offers?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=shownotes&utm_campaign=scientists-and-their-demons-jimena-canalesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasizes evidence, especially as discovered in experiments.  It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world, rather than resting solely on a periori reasoning, intuition or revelation

How do we conduct science when there isn't a single isolated variable? What does that mean for carbon removal not taking place in a controlled environment? How does science even work?! Today's show originated from a question of how open-system carbon removal research can be conducted given that in a less-controlled environment, isolating for a single variable with replicability is less obviously possible. Does the scientific method really demand that, or is that some sort of pop culture understanding of science that needs to be challegned? To answer that question, host and co-founder of the Nori carbon removal marketplace, Ross Kenyon, asked Dr. Holly Jean Buck of the University at Buffalo and Anu Khan of Carbon180, to read two books and come on Reversing Climate Change to discuss them. The two texts are some of the foundational works of modern philosophy of science: Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, and Paul Feyerabend's Against Method. Kuhn argued that paradigms are the collection of foundational beliefs we have about how science and knowledge production is conducted, and that they are quite hard to see outside of since most people work so deeply within them. It can often be a generational effort, as older scientists die and new ones take their places. Feyerabend goes further, arguing that we shouldn't just look for where one paradigm supersedes another, but be protective of competing systems of knowledge and the valuable ways of seeing that they unlock. The show applies their learnings to the state of the CDR industry, and attempts to ferret out carbon removal's existing paradigm, whether the world is ready for credits that are not tonne-denominated, and how much time we can afford in retooling and letting "normal science" work within an imperfect paradigm vs. trying to create an entirely new paradigm ex nihilo. Resources Anu Khan Holly Jean Buck Carbon180 Against Method on Wikipedia The Structure of Scientific Revolutions on Wikipedia The Guns of August by Barbara Tuchman Historiography Connect with Nori ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Purchase Nori Carbon Removals⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Nori's website⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Nori on Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Check out our other podcast, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Carbon Removal Newsroom⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Carbon Removal Memes on Twitter⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Carbon Removal Memes on Instagram --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/reversingclimatechange/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/reversingclimatechange/support

What is induction ? The process of going from a set of observations to a generalisation See multiple objects with a characteristic X, all such objects have characteristic X The sun rose every morning already (every observed morning had the characteristic that the sun rose) … so the sun will rise every morning, so tomorrow the sun will rise again  “The future will behave like the past”

In the philosophy of science, instrumentalism is the view that concepts and theories are merely useful instruments whose worth is measured not by whether the concepts and theories are true or false (or correctly depict reality), but by how effective they are in explaining and predicting phenomena.

Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1992). Using scientific methods to resolve questions in the history and philosophy of science: Some illustrations. Behavior Therapy, 23(2), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7894(05)80381-8

Pseudoscience can sometimes be hard to distinguish from the real thing. Today we discuss how philosophers of science have thought about this problem. For ad free episodes and other exclusives, join us for just $3 a month on Patreon: https://patreon.com/whythisuniverse Our merch is available here: https://www.shalmawegsman.com/why-this-universe

The first episode in a new mini-series on philosophical problems in cosmology - Today we start with the origins of Western science and learn what the ancient Greeks thought about the cosmos. For ad free episodes and other exclusives, join us for just $3 a month on Patreon: https://patreon.com/whythisuniverse Our merch is available here: https://www.shalmawegsman.com/why-this-universe

Links: Course: Applied Nutrition Literacy Subscribe to Premium Go to episode page (study links, bio, etc.) About This Episode: There has been much debate about the role of nutritional reductionism in research. This approach generally aims to study diet's effects by breaking down the intricate web of dietary factors into smaller, more manageable components. But critics have asked does this approach truly capture the full picture of nutrition's influence on our well-being? In an attempt to help answer research questions there has been a proposal for the use of “nutritional geometry”, a framework that delves into the multidimensional relationships between nutrients and their effects on organisms. Within this framework, the protein leverage hypothesis emerges, proposing that our bodies prioritize protein intake and adjust food consumption accordingly. But how does this theory fit into the broader spectrum of nutrition science, and what implications does it hold for understanding and managing our diets? Additionally, as aim to do better nutrition research, we are met with philosophical questions that challenge traditional reductionist views. Is it enough to simply dissect foods into their nutrient components, or do we need a more holistic understanding of dietary patterns and their impact on health? In this episode, Prof. David Raubenheimer and Dr. Jonathan Sholl discuss the need to have an approach where science meets philosophy, and where reductionism meets synthesis. And we dive into ideas they have proposed that make a defense of some aspects of reductionism.

In episode 257 of the Parker's Pensées Podcast, I'm joined by Christopher Ruoccio, author of the Sun Eater series. Christopher is an encyclopedia of science fiction, fantasy, and Roman Empire information. He is the man. A really thoughtful guy and a brilliant writer. Check out more from Christopher Ruocchio here: https://www.youtube.com/@SunEaterBooks Grab the books here to support my channel: Empire of Silence: https://amzn.to/3voU9gD Howling Dark: https://amzn.to/4ag4WbS Demon In White: https://amzn.to/4afYS38 Kingdoms of Death: https://amzn.to/4czy27L Ashes of Man: https://amzn.to/4afT1Lf Disquiet Gods: https://amzn.to/4cCqv83 Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYbTRurpFP5q4TpDD_P2JDA/join →Sponsors/Discounts Check out https://murdycreative.co/PARKERNOTES and use promo code PARKERNOTES at check out for 10% off your entire order!! Grab a Field Notes notebook or memo book wallet like the one from the video from my affiliate link here to support my work and use promo code PARKERNOTES for 10% off your entire order: https://fieldnotesbrand.com/products/daily-carry-leather-notebook-cover?aff=44 Grab a Saddleback Leather medium Moleskine/Leuchtturm1917 cover from my affiliate link here to support my channel: https://saddlebackleather.com/leather-moleskine-cover-medium/?ktk=d0pac01BLWJmZWY1MmZiYTFi Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYbTRurpFP5q4TpDD_P2JDA/join Join the Facebook group, Parker's Pensées Penseurs, here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/960471494536285/ If you like this podcast, then support it on Patreon for $3, $5 or more a month. Any amount helps, and for $5 you get a Parker's Pensées sticker and instant access to all the episode as I record them instead of waiting for their release date. Check it out here: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/parkers_pensees If you want to give a one-time gift, you can give at my Paypal: https://paypal.me/ParkersPensees?locale.x=en_US Check out my merchandise at my Teespring store: https://teespring.com/stores/parkers-penses-merch Come talk with the Pensées community on Discord: dsc.gg/parkerspensees Sub to my Substack to read my thoughts on my episodes: https://parknotes.substack.com/ 0:00 - Why people love the Sun Eater books 6:13 - CS Lewis vs Tolkien on teaching through fiction 14:52 - The Golden Age vs the New Wave of Science Fiction 24:05 - Dune 41:00 - Are Superheroes Science Fiction? 45:18 - What is Science Fantasy, Space Opera, SF vs Sci-Fi 56:52 - Favorite SF stories 1:03:40 - is it okay to borrow from other stories? 1:12:47 - Scholiasts, Mentats, and Analytic Philosophy 1:20:54 - Roman Catholicism and the Chantry 1:35:34 - How to Write Science Fiction Novels

This week, we had Kehlan Morgan on to talk about the philosophy of science. Science has lost touch with philosophy, and in turn, it has lost touch with reasoning, the metaphysical, true empiricism, and reasoning. Kehlan gives an amazing take on health as a sort of cohesion.We delve into the psyche, touching on Jung's work, which leads us into a conversation about Lamarck, evolution, and morphic resonance.This quickly turns into a discussion on the scientific method. We touch on the need for presumptions and rationalism in the seemingly empirical scientific method. We also discuss ideas of falsification, true scientific reasoning, and problems with the scientific method. Interestingly, we touch on scientific constants and why mathematical constants might not be the true constants of nature. We talk about ideas from Goethe, Whitehead, British empiricism, and many other phenomenal philosophers.We finish by talking about the structure of science as problematic (Scientistry) and the need for true science (Scientody). We also discuss the need for the reintegration of the individual in nature and of the sciences in general.This was a mind-blowing episode that will leave you thirsty for knowledge.Get your notes ready and enjoy.Transcripthttps://paragraph.xyz/@beyondterrain/kehlan-morganLearn from mehttps://www.instagram.com/beyond.terrain/https://linktr.ee/beyondterrainSupport the visionhttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/beyondterrainETH: beyondterrain.ethBTC: bc1qqwc470ktgj3l4myqxr5hq67rnlqys0qm98u6f0Learn from and Support Kehlanhttps://www.youtube.com/@Formscapeshttps://www.formscapes.org/

Professor Cailin O’Connor is philosopher of biology and behavioral sciences, philosopher of science, and evolutionary game theorist.  She is a Professor in the Department of Logic and Philosophy of Science, and recently finished co-administering the NSF grant “Consensus, Democracy, and the Public Understanding of Science” with philosopher of physics James Owen Weatherall (previous NSF grant Social Dynamics […]

Have we entered a post-knowledge era? Or was the idea that we can attain knowledge misleading in the first place? Looking for a link we mentioned? Find it here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesThe acquisition of knowledge has been a central factor driving advance. And since Descartes, Western thought has placed the question of what we know, and how we know what we know, at the centre of philosophy. But might this focus on knowledge be a mistake? Feminist and postmodernist critics argue that in seeking to validate knowledge philosophers have merely sought to justify their own interests and prejudices. Instead they argue all knowledge is limited by perspective whether by culture, class, gender, race or the many other factors that influence understanding.Should we give up the idea that our beliefs can provide us with objective knowledge? Should we reject epistemology as an attempt to elevate and make undeniable our particular perspective, interests and prejudices and focus instead on the consequences of adopting a given framework of belief? Or is knowledge essential to culture and the notion that beliefs might be definitively true vital to progress? Philosopher of race Tommy Curry, theoretical physicist Suchitra Sebastian and outspoken scientist Rupert Sheldrake debate the limits of what we can know. Hosted by Joanna Kavenna.There are thousands of big ideas to discover at IAI.tv – videos, articles, and courses waiting for you to explore. Find out more: https://iai.tv/podcast-offers?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=shownotes&utm_campaign=after-knowledgeSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This week, Michael has invited his good friend Baroness Bryony Worthington to guest-host Cleaning Up! Bryony was the lead author of the UK's ground-breaking 2008 Climate Change Act, and is now on sabbatical from her role in the House of Lords, where she has been scrutinising legislation. She's now over in California. See the shownotes below for a link to her appearance on Cleaning Up (episode 25!) Bryony is interviewing Naomi Oreskes, Henry Charles Lea Professor of the History of Science and Affiliated Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University. A world-renowned earth scientist, historian and public speaker, she is the author of the best-selling book, Merchants of Doubt (2010) and a leading voice on the role of science in society, the reality of anthropogenic climate change, and the role of disinformation in blocking climate action. Her new book, with Erik Conway, is The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free Market, published by Bloomsbury Press. Links: Read Naomi and Erik's 2010 book Merchants of Doubt How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Merchants-Doubt-Handful-Scientists-Obscured/dp/1408824833Read Naomi's 2013 book Plate Tectonics: An Insider's History Of The Modern Theory Of The Earth here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Plate-Tectonics-Insiders-History-Frontiers/dp/0813341329Read Naomi and Erik's 2014 book The Collapse of Western Civilization: A View From the Future here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Collapse-Western-Civilization-View-Future/dp/023116954X Read Naomi's 2019 book Why Trust Science? here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Trust-Science-University-Center-Values/dp/069117900X Read Naomi and Erik's brand new book The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free Market here: https://www.bloomsbury.com/us/big-myth-9781635573572/ Read Naomi's 2004 paper The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change here: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.1103618 Read the DeSmog article on heat pump disinformation here: https://www.desmog.com/2023/07/20/revealed-media-blitz-against-heat-pumps-funded-by-gas-lobby-group/  Related Episodes:Check out Bryony's appearance on Cleaning Up here: https://www.cleaningup.live/episode-25-bryony-worthington/  Guest Bio Naomi Oreskes is Henry Charles Lea Professor of the History of Science and Affiliated Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences at Harvard University. A world-renowned earth scientist, historian and public speaker, she is the author of the best-selling book, Merchants of Doubt (2010) and a leading voice on the role of science in society, the reality of anthropogenic climate change, and the role of disinformation in blocking climate action. Oreskes is author or co-author of 9 books, and over 150 articles, essays and opinion pieces, including Merchants of Doubt (Bloomsbury, 2010), The Collapse of Western Civilization (Columbia University Press, 2014), Discerning Experts (University Chicago Press, 2019), Why Trust Science? (Princeton University Press, 2019), and Science on a Mission: American Oceanography from the Cold War to Climate Change, (University of Chicago Press, 2021). Merchants of Doubt, co-authored with Erik Conway, was the subject of a documentary film of the same name produced by participant Media and distributed by SONY Pictures Classics, and has been translated into nine languages. A new edition of Merchants of Doubt, with an introduction by Al Gore, was published in 2020. Her new book, with Erik Conway, is The Big Myth: How American Business Taught Us to Loathe Government and Love the Free Market, published by Bloomsbury Press

Tim Maudlin is Professor of Philosophy at NYU and Founder and Director of the John Bell Institute for the Foundations of Physics. Tim is renowned as one of the leading philosophers of physics, and he also works in the philosophy of science and metaphysics. This is Tim's fourth appearance on the show. Tim was also a guest on episode 46 (laws of nature, space, and free will), episode 67 with David Albert (the foundations of quantum mechanics), and episode 115 with Craig Callender (the philosophy of time). In this episode, Robinson and Tim dig into some of the crucial developments in the philosophy of science that took place during the 20th century. Then they move on to John Bell and the John Bell Institute for the Foundations of Physics. If you're interested in the foundations of physics—which you absolutely should be—then please check out the JBI, which is devoted to providing a home for research and education in this important area. Any donations are immensely helpful at this early stage in the institute's life. Tim's Website: www.tim-maudlin.site The John Bell Institute: https://www.johnbellinstitute.org OUTLINE 00:00 In This Episode… 00:41 Introduction 04:56 What's the Point of Philosophy of Science? 10:38 Carnap and Logical Positivism 26:30 Thomas Kuhn and the Structure of Scientific Revolutions 42:52 What is Scientific Realism? 01:02:44 Instrumentalism and Scientific Anti-Realism 01:06:08 Who Was John Bell? 01:20:15 Einstein, Quantum Mechanics, and Bell's Inequality 01:45:34 The John Bell Institute Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

Bas van Fraassen is the McCosh Professor of Philosophy Emeritus at Princeton University and a Distinguished Professor of Philosophy at San Francisco State University. In addition to being one of the most recognized philosophers of science working today—he received the Philosophy of Science Association's inaugural Hempel Award—he has also worked in epistemology and logic. In this episode, Bas and Robinson discuss a major shift in the philosophy of science in the second half of the twentieth century from the view of the logical positivists, who had a formal, mathematical approach, to philosophers who adopted the semantic approach, which more closely aligned with how working scientists viewed and experienced the field. Some other issues touched on include scientific realism, Thomas Kuhn and The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, and interpretations of quantum mechanics. OUTLINE 00:00 In This Episode… 00:51 Introduction 03:47 An Interest in the Philosophy of Science 06:44 Logical Positivism 19:56 What is Scientific Realism? 30:56 Kuhn and The Structure of Scientific Revolutions 39:13 The Semantic Approach  54:49 The Quantum Mechanics Interpretation Wars 01:08:12 Mathematical Models 01:12:31 Epistemology Robinson's Website: ⁠http://robinsonerhardt.com⁠ Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support