Philosophy of Science, Misc
- All discussions (667)
- Paper discussions (135)
- In the profession (28)
- PhilJobs (6)
- About PhilPapers (180)
- Philosophy discussions (459)
- Epistemology (64)Metaphilosophy (29)Metaphysics (44)Philosophy of Action (23)Philosophy of Language (44)Philosophy of Mind (141)Philosophy of Religion (17)M&E, Misc (6)Value Theory (110)
- Aesthetics (12)Applied Ethics (25)Meta-Ethics (24)Normative Ethics (26)Philosophy of Gender, Race, and Sexuality (14)Philosophy of Law (4)Social and Political Philosophy (58)Value Theory, Miscellaneous (64)
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic (39)Philosophy of Biology (18)Philosophy of Cognitive Science (43)Philosophy of Computing and Information (8)Philosophy of Mathematics (39)Philosophy of Physical Science (14)Philosophy of Social Science (11)Philosophy of Probability (6)General Philosophy of Science (39)Philosophy of Science, Misc (7)
- Ancient Greek and Roman Philosophy (11)Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy (1)17th/18th Century Philosophy (11)19th Century Philosophy (6)20th Century Philosophy (20)History of Western Philosophy, Misc (4)
- African/Africana Philosophy (2)Asian Philosophy (9)Continental Philosophy (12)European Philosophy (24)Philosophy of the Americas (4)Philosophical Traditions, Miscellaneous (3)Philosophy, Misc (14)
- Philosophy, Introductions and Anthologies (2)Philosophy, General Works (4)Teaching Philosophy (1)Philosophy, Miscellaneous (8)Other Academic Areas (20)
- Natural Sciences (2)Social Sciences (1)Cognitive Sciences (9)Formal Sciences (1)
1 - 7 / 7 2016-02-22Would like some responses on these thoughts:
Space is the negation of substance, of reality, of being; thus, space is nothing, unreality, non-being.
Can anyone see nothing or imagine nothing? Yes, for space is nothing. To see nothing means to see no thing.
Consequently, we do not see things in space; we see things alone and their negation, viz.,space.
Things do not occupy space. For then, what does space occupy?
Things negate space, i.e. nothing.
Take a plastic bottle of 1 ltr. How much water can it contain? 1 ltr. Squeeze it, can it contain 1 ltr of water? No, why? Because the bottle being squeezed increasingly negates space allowing less negatability for another (meaning that negatibility for it increases at the same time). For perfect density = perfect negation of space; less density = less negation of space. That which is negated cannot be again negated without the destruction of that which negates it.
Zero = infinite; therefore, space = infinite; it can be infinitely negated by things wi ... (read more)Latest replies:
- Derek Allan, 2016-10-01 : _H_i DCD_ _ RE: “I don't disagree that the syntax of “Being conscious is like something.” is troubling and pecu... (read more)
- Derek Allan, 2016-10-01 : RE: “he has accomplished his usual feat, which is to kill off any meaningful dialogue that was trying to occur prior to... (read more)
- Daniel Davis, 2016-10-02 : The guy who started this conversation, Domenic?, has not been heard from since. Space is one of my main topics of intere... (read more)
- Tami Williams, 2016-10-02 : You are so interesting to me, like an old friend of mine (I'll drop a name, sorry)- John Lennon. Brilliant cha... (read more)
- Daniel Davis, 2016-10-11 : Sorry I haven't written again. The new term started here and work is consuming my time. Talk about God, politics, or... (read more)
- 81 more ..
University of TokyoAs I got the permission from the Society, now I upload the material.
University of TokyoBecause of Copyright, I am not yet in a position to upload this article. If you have any interest, feel free to contact me anytime. (Author)
University of California, BerkeleyJames Fetzer’s recent article, “Evolution and atheism: Has Griffin reconciled science and religion?” (Synthese  178: 381-396) purports to offer a well-founded critique of David Ray Griffin’s philosophical arguments for “a version of theistic evolutionism that can do justice both to the facts that count in favor of evolution and those that count against the neo-Darwinian theory of it” (Griffin, 2000, p 243). Fetzer claims that Griffin’s detailed characterization of neo-Darwinism is inaccurate, “exemplifying the straw man fallacy, where an exaggerated version of a position is presented in order to knock it down” (p. 382). Fetzer not only makes strong claims for the inadequacy of Griffin’s work on evolutionary theory, but also asserts that Griffin has made fundamental errors of logic and argument and is not “morally justified” in holding the views he propounds. Fetzer’s article, however, fails to back up these claims.
Amazingly, Fetzer does not provide any evidence that he has actua ... (read more)Latest replies:
- Mohan Matthen, 2011-02-02 : I am sure that this is very useful to those who want to assess the quality of Fetzer's response to Griffin. But I ca... (read more)
- Tod Fletcher, 2011-02-03 : Thanks for your interest, and for an excellent suggestion. I will write and post a succinct precis of Griffin's natu... (read more)
- Tod Fletcher, 2011-08-19 : _Philosophical Problems of Neo-Darwinism_ In Chapter 8 of his book Religion and Scientific Naturalism: Overcoming... (read more)
University of EssexSpringer has commissioned an edited volume in The Frontiers Collection (which deals with forefront topics in science and philosophy) about the singularity hypothesis and related questions, such as the intelligence explosion, acceleration, transhumanism, and whole brain emulation. The book shall examine answers to central questions which reformulate the singularity hypothesis as a coherent and falsifiable conjecture, examine its empirical value, and investigate its the most likely consequences, in particular those associated with existential risks.
Seeking to promote this debate, this edited, peer-reviewed volume shall be concerned with scientific and philosophical analysis of the conjectures related to a technological singularity. We solicit scholarly essays offering a scientific and philosophical analysis of this hypothesis, assess its empirical content, examine relevant evidence, or explore its implications. Commentary to selected essays will be solicited to develop the discussion.
Imp ... (read more)
North Carolina State UniversityI have somewhat arbitrarily chosen this thread for this particular posting. It would be better off perhaps in some thread devoted to teaching, curricula, or related areas; but there don't seem to be any fora appropriate to that at the moment (well, the subtitle of this site does say "research"). In any event ...
I have recently developed a course in "practical ontology" that I will begin to give at North Carolina State University in the fall of 2010. Initially, this course will have both a traditional classroom variant and a "distance learning" variant. My intention is not to draw any distinction between these two manifestations of the course, making all material in each available in the other. Accordingly, for example, the classroom sessions will be video recorded and put on the web for use by the DL students. The DL part of the course will be taught through the use of pretty sophisticated "virtual classroom" technology, but will al ... (read more)Latest replies:
- Kyle Brady, 2011-01-28 : This sounds really promising. I have an MA in philosophy and an MSc in Information and Library Studies. My masters disse... (read more)
- Gary Merrill, 2011-01-29 : Well, yes there is. I would go into more detail at this point, but a paper of mine specifically addressing this is... (read more)
- Kyle Brady, 2011-02-02 : That sounds like a really interesting article, addressing the exact question I’ve been asking myself recently. I’m inter... (read more)
- Gary Merrill, 2011-02-02 : Information management and information and library fields? Yikes!! Run away quick! Those are the areas... (read more)
- Kyle Brady, 2011-02-05 : That would be great thanks, I look forward to reading it! I know what you mean about the IM and Library fields, I really... (read more)
Many medical research protocols pay for medical care for subjects who do not have insurance but bill insurance companies if they do. Is this ethical?
e.g. 2 subjects in a cancer chemo protocol, each has an annual income of $100,000:
A Has chosen to pay for insurance. His insurance is billed for care.
B Has no insurance. He pays nothing.
Is this ethical?
1 - 7 / 7loading ..Home | New books and articles | Bibliographies | Philosophy journals | Discussions | Article Index | About PhilPapers | API | Contact us
terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications).
Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Page generated Fri Jul 20 20:22:18 2018 on pp1