Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
dmv.community is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
A small regional Mastodon instance for those in the DC, Maryland, and Virginia areas. Local news, commentary, and conversation.

Administered by:

Server stats:

170
active users

dmv.community: AboutStatusProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.3.4

#philosophyofscience

2 posts2 participants0 posts today
Replied in thread
Public
Chris Brooking

@sarahdalgulls I know that generative AI applies a set of rules , and is just a "text rearranger". However, I don't see that as necessary precluding intelligent results, as there are many examples of emergent complexity in mathematics. One example the Mandelbrot set has infinite complexity, yet arises from applying a simple rule to each point. A classic example is the [game of life en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conway], where different starting states can give different complex outcomes.

So, I would not be surprised if a complex system produced more than you'd expect by just rearranging words. When and if we do create real artificial intelligence it won't be something planned and programmed but an emergence from a complex system, just as our intelligence is an emergence from neurons that fire depending on complex rules. It is likely to be quite different from anything we predicted the system would do, and possibly not obvious as intelligence at first.

The Mandelbrot set, a symmetrical pattern of curved shapes and radiating lines.
#ai#emergentbehaviors#philosophyofscience
Public
Lupposofi

Dominic Murphy has revised his SEP-entry on Philosophy of Psychiatry, plato.stanford.edu/entries/psy

The Angius, Primiero & Turner entry on The Philosophy of Compurer Science has also been revised, plato.stanford.edu/entries/com

Other SEP-news here, as usual, plato.stanford.edu/new.html

plato.stanford.eduPhilosophy of Psychiatry (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
#sep#philosophy#filosofia
Replied in thread
Public *
ParabenAparaten 🇪🇺🇺🇦🇨🇦

@fringemagnet @jifi @benroyce

Even if you were familiar with Karl Popper, that could still be a good advice to read it again

Look at what #US #Americans do when they say/pretend they are familiar with Jesus Christ: they do all the contrary of what he is meant to have preached #whitenationalism #ultraright #farright (In deed they never read anything, except when they are already agreeing on the idea, so as they can be sure not to read something else)

So I don't think that being "familiar" with anything is the way to go: Maybe "being able to discuss" is a much stronger stance?

Personally, I am not able to "discuss" Karl Popper. I simply study #epistemology and #philosophyofscience at my rhythm.

Public
Oliver Brendel

Hello, thanks to everybody who has welcomed me so warmly. Many of you were curious about my research. Perhaps look at this paper (OA) :
link.springer.com/article/10.1
and which follows the understanding of the relationship between plant growth and water consumption from the old Greek philosophers, through the middle ages, the age of enlightenment to the use of modern measurement techniques.
So it’s about #HistoryOfScience #ScienceHistory #PhilosophyOfScience #PlantEcoPhysiology

SpringerLinkThe relationship between plant growth and water consumption: a history from the classical four elements to modern stable isotopes - Annals of Forest ScienceKey message The history of the relationship between plant growth and water consumption is retraced by following the progression of scientific thought through the centuries: from a purely philosophical question, to conceptual and methodological developments, towards a research interest in plant functioning and the interaction with the environment. Context The relationship between plant growth and water consumption has for a long time occupied the minds of philosophers and natural scientists. The ratio between biomass accumulation and water consumption is known as water use efficiency and is widely relevant today in fields as diverse as plant improvement, forest ecology and climate change. Defined at scales varying from single leaf physiology to whole plants, it shows how botanical investigations changed through time, generally in tandem with developing disciplines and improving methods. The history started as a purely philosophical question by Greek philosophers of how plants grow, progressed through thought and actual experiments, towards an interest in the functioning of plants and the relationship to the environment. Aims This article retraces this history by following the progression of scientific questions posed through the centuries, and presents not only the main methodological and conceptual developments on biomass growth and transpiration but also the development of the carbon isotopic method of estimation. The history of research on photosynthesis is only touched briefly, but the development of research on transpiration and stomatal conductance is presented with more detail. Conclusion Research on water use efficiency, following a path from the whole plant to leaf-level functioning, was strongly involved in the historical development of the discipline of plant ecophysiology and is still a very active research field across nearly all levels of botanical research.
Continued thread
Public *
The Krononaut Moon Project 🌑

#astrophysicist #MattODowd expresses concerns that "physics is stalled" — see our toot from 28 Aug 2024. Is our best out-of-the-box thinking and experimentation being impeded by #cognitive #biases? The animated video targets safety issues in the workplace, but, is scientific creativity also suffering from a reluctance to deviate from, or institutional pressure to continue in, one's familiar lane, when the future resides in other lanes of inquiry? How can one know? #PhilosophyOfScience

Public
T. T. Perry

Moral Realism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Section 4 Epistemology

"there is no valid inference from nonmoral premises to moral conclusions unless one relies, at least surreptitiously, on a moral premise. If, then, all that science can establish is what “is” and not what ought to be, science cannot alone establish moral conclusions."

plato.stanford.edu/entries/mor

Suppose, for the sake of the argument, that there are moral facts. Suppose even that the moral facts are properly thought of as at least compatible with science. One thing Moore’s Open Question Argument still seems to show is that no appeal to natural facts discovered by scientific method would establish that the moral facts are one way rather than another. That something is pleasant, or useful, or satisfies someone’s preference, is perfectly compatible with thinking that it is neither good nor right nor worth doing. The mere fact that moral facts might be compatible with natural facts does nothing to support the idea that we could learn about the moral facts. David Hume seems to have been, in effect, pressing this point long before Moore, when he argued that no moral conclusion follows non-problematically from nonmoral premises (Hume 1739). No “ought,” he pointed out, followed from an “is”—without the help of another (presupposed) “ought.” More generally, there is no valid inference from nonmoral premises to moral conclusions unless one relies, at least surreptitiously, on a moral premise. If, then, all that science can establish is what “is” and not what ought to be, science cannot alone establish moral conclusions.
#Science#Philosophy#PhilosophyOfScience
Public
Jez 🍞🌹

As a young, naïve computer scientist I used to think that philosophy was... not quite a waste of time but not really of interest or relevance. Now so many things I'm involved with seem to orbit around questions like "what does it mean to know?" and "by what processes is knowledge preserved and transferred?".

On which note, who can recommend me good introductory books on things like #epistemology, #semiotics, #philosophyOfScience and sci/tech studies #STS...? 😅

ExploreLive feeds
About