12 found
Sort by:
See also:
Profile: Michael Raven (University of Victoria)
  1. Michael J. Raven (2013). Is Ground a Strict Partial Order? American Philosophical Quarterly 50 (2):191-199.
    Interest surges in a distinctively metaphysical notion of ground. But a Schism has emerged between Orthodoxy’s view of ground as inducing a strict partial order structure on reality and Heresy’s rejection of this view. What’s at stake is the structure of reality (for proponents of ground), or even ground itself (for those who think this Schism casts doubt upon its coherence). I defend Orthodoxy against Heresy.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Michael J. Raven (2013). Is Lewis's Mixed Theory Mixed Up? Theoria 79 (1):57-75.
    My aim is to rekindle interest in David Lewis's (1983) infamous but neglected Mixed Theory of mental states. The Mixed Theory is a mix of physicalism and functionalism designed to capture the intuitions that both Martians and abnormal human Madmen can be in pain. The Mixed Theory is widely derided. But I offer a new development of the Mixed Theory immune to its most prominent objections. In doing so, I uncover a new motivation for the Mixed Theory: its unique ability (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Michael J. Raven (2013). Review of Metaphysical Grounding. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Michael J. Raven (2013). Subjectivism is Pointless. Logos and Episteme 4 (1):733-748.
    Epistemic objectivists and epistemic subjectivists might agree that inquiry pursues epistemic virtues (truth, knowledge, reason, or rationality) while disagreeing over their objectivity. Objectivists will evaluate this disagreement in terms of the epistemic virtues objectively construed, while subjectivists will not. This raises a rhetorical problem: objectivists will fault subjectivism for lacking some objective epistemic virtue, whereas subjectivists, by rejecting objectivity, won’t see this as a fault. My goal is to end this impasse by offering a new solution to the rhetorical problem. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Michael J. Raven (2012). In Defence of Ground. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 90 (4):687 - 701.
    I defend (metaphysical) ground against recent, unanswered objections aiming to dismiss it from serious philosophical inquiry. Interest in ground stems from its role in the venerable metaphysical project of identifying which facts hold in virtue of others. Recent work on ground focuses on regimenting it. But many reject ground itself, seeing regimentation as yet another misguided attempt to regiment a bad idea (like phlogiston or astrology). I defend ground directly against objections that it is confused, incoherent, or fruitless. This vindicates (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Michael J. Raven (2011). Can Time Pass at the Rate of 1 Second Per Second? Australasian Journal of Philosophy 89 (3):459 - 465.
    Some believe reality is dynamic: time passes, not just in our experience of reality, but objectively, in reality itself. There are many objections to this view. I focus on the rate objection: that time passes only if it passes at the rate of 1 second per second, but that it cannot coherently pass at that rate. Existing replies to this objection do not fully engage with its motivation. My aim is to refute the rate objection. Time can coherently pass at (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Michael J. Raven (2011). Attesting the Aristotelian Future. Philosophia 39 (4):751-757.
    Aristotelian relativism about the future (as recently defended by MacFarlane ( 2003 )) claims that a prediction made on Monday, such as ‘It will rain’, can be indeterminate on Monday but determinate on Tuesday. A serious objection to this intuitively appealing view is that it cannot coherently be attested: for if it is attested on Monday, then our blindness to what the future holds precludes attesting that the prediction is determinate on Tuesday, and if it is attested on Tuesday (when, (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Michael J. Raven (2011). There is a Problem of Change. Philosophical Studies 155 (1):23-35.
    Impostors are pseudo-problems masquerading as genuine problems. Impostors should be exposed. The problem of change appears genuine. But some, such as Hofweber ( 2009 ) and Rychter ( 2009 ), have recently denounced it as an impostor. They allege that it is mysterious how to answer the meta - problem of saying what problem it is: for even if any problem is genuinely about change per se, they argue, it is either empirical or trivially dissolved by conceptual analysis. There is (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Michael J. Raven (2010). David Chalmers, David Manley, and Ryan Wasserman, Eds. Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology Reviewed By. Philosophy in Review 30 (3):173-175.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Mark A. Bedau, Richard Crandall & Michael J. Raven, Cryptographic Hash Functions Based on ALife. PSIpress.
    There is a long history of cryptographic hash functions, i.e. functions mapping variable-length strings to fixed-length strings, and such functions are also expected to enjoy certain security properties. Hash functions can be effected via modular arithmetic, permutation-based schemes, chaotic mixing, and so on. Herein we introduce the notion of an artificial-life (ALife) hash function (ALHF), whereby the requisite mixing action of a good hash function is accomplished via ALife rules that give rise to complex evolution of a given system. Various (...)
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Michael J. Raven (2008). Problems for Testimonial Acquaintance. Noûs 42 (4):727-745.
    We think about and refer to things that we’ve never perceived or experienced. This paper bears on how this could be. Someone is testimonially acquainted with something just in case the explanation of one’s ability to think de re thoughts about it essentially appeals to communication with others who already have that ability. The main motivation for the claim that testimonial acquaintance is possible is that it best explains how we can think de re about and refer to things we’ve (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Steen Rasmussen, Michael J. Raven, Gordon N. Keating & Mark A. Bedau (2003). Collective Intelligence of the Artificial Life Community on Its Own Successes, Failures, and Future. Artificial Life 9:207-235.
    We describe a novel Internet-based method for building consensus and clarifying con icts in large stakeholder groups facing complex issues, and we use the method to survey and map the scienti c and organizational perspectives of the arti cial life community during the Seventh International Conference on Arti cial Life (summer 2000). The issues addressed in this survey included arti cial life’s main successes, main failures, main open scienti c questions, and main strategies for the future, as well as the (...)
    No categories
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation