SodaHead Celebrates Green Week

RealityApologist

is wrapped up in final papers. Back in a month or so.

Profile

About Me

I did my BA at UC Berkeley, and am currently working on my PhD at Columbia University. I work broadly in the philosophical foundations of the natural sciences (primarily cognitive science and physics) and on the subject of naturalism generally. I'm particularly interested in the mind/body problem, the nature of consciousness, the metaphysics of tools and technology, the direction of time, the foundations of statistical mechanics, and the prospects for an evolutionary account of ethics. My overall philosophical project is concerned with articulating a "level of description" ontology based in the foundations of physics, and extending through the level of macro-sized objects, biology, consciousness, and social ontology.

Not failing graduate school, philosophizing, eschewing sesquipedalian obfuscation, destroying the belief in God wherever I can find it, holding unpopular or apparently untenable opinions, making puns, contact juggling (particularly isolations), devil stick juggling, coin manipulation, scheming, self-improvement, conjoining things with slashes/saying 'slash' in everyday conversation, teaching all the time, making "that's what she said" jokes, being generally awesome

The mind, the brain, neuroscience, intentionality, representation, physics, foundations of statistical mechanics, time, science, language, ethics, religion, free will and action theory, perception (especially color vision), color theory, intuition, reason, naturalism, technology, psychopharmacology (theory and practice), teaching, politics, music, drugs, computer security, evangelical atheism, general punditry, D&D (yes, I'm a geek), intellectual/academic elitism, self-improvement/perfection, software piracy, wordplay, 'amateur locksmithing' (heh), neologisms, urban absurdism

House, Jeopardy, anything on the Discovery Channel

Ishmael, My Ishmael, The Story of B, Beyond Civilization, Why I'm Not a Christian, The Slightest Philosophy, Dharma Bums, On The Road, The Way of the Peaceful Warrior, In Watermelon Sugar, Trout Fishing in America, Pharmakopoeia, Pharmakodynamis, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, The God Delusion, The Dungeon Master's Guide, the Dark Tower series, anything written by John Searle

"Just so you know, he's a philosopher. So if he says anything weird, that's why."

-The first thing my roommate tells pretty much every guest about me

"Sometimes the first task of an intelligent man is to state the obvious."

-George Orwell

"The terrible truth is that postmodernism is what happens when someone who believes everything he reads reads the philosophy canon."

-Quee Nelson

"Philosophy proper deals with matters of interest to the general educated public, and loses much of its value if only a few professionals can understand what is said."

-Bertrand Russell

"The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments."

-Nietzsche

"Was somebody asking to see the soul?
See, your own shape and countenance...
Behold the body includes and is the meaning, the main
Concern, and includes and is the soul
Whoever you are! how superb and how divine is your
body, or any part of it. "

-Walt Whitman

"Those who know they are profound strive for clarity. Those who would like to seem profound strive for obscurity."

-Nietzsche

"The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking."

- AA Milne

"And it's no use crying over every mistake /
You just keep on trying till you run out of cake."

-GLaDOS

“My mind,” he said, “rebels at stagnation. Give me problems, give me work, give me the most abstruse cryptogram, or the most intricate analysis, and I am in my own proper atmosphere. I can dispense then with artificial stimulants. But I abhor the dull routine of existence. I crave for mental exaltation."

-Sherlock Holmes

"Like the entomologist in search of colorful butterflies, my attention has chased in the gardens of the grey matter cells with delicate and elegant shapes, the mysterious butterflies of the soul, whose beating of wings may one day reveal to us the secrets of the mind."

- Santiago Ramon y Cajal

John Searle
Bertrand Russell
Dan Dennett
Mohandas Gandhi
David Hume
W.V. Quine

Comments

  • thanks for friend add

    April 13, 2009 09:23:01 | See Conversation
  • My popcorn has grown stale! Wah! :( T_T

    January 10, 2009 05:46:33 | See Conversation
  • Oh, to be a fly on the wall for that illogical conversation...

    You think you two could record it for me and send it over while I make some popcorn?

    January 07, 2009 18:12:39 | See Conversation
  • We need to have a chat about love, bitch.

    January 04, 2009 00:06:33 | See Conversation
  • ooh. awesome.

    January 02, 2009 18:09:18 | See Conversation
  • my christmas was good. . .what kind of writing do you do?

    January 02, 2009 03:29:31 | See Conversation
  • hey have you read this? it's pretty freakin awesome. hey read pretty freakin awesome
    i got a copy for christmas and it made my brain hurt to read the whole thing in one morning.

    you have a good christmas?

    December 28, 2008 20:44:01 | See Conversation
  • Have you ever studied any game theory? After reading your profile, I think it would be right up your alley. Here's a reference for you: "The Prisoner's Dilemma" by William (I think?) Poundstone.

    December 18, 2008 22:43:04 | See Conversation
  • Psh.

    I'm a sexy bitch, and you know it.

    October 25, 2008 06:40:46 | See Conversation
  • d00d! My face is regal like the plumage of an exotic bird!

    October 25, 2008 01:05:45 | See Conversation
  • Why thank you.
    I enjoy your questions and comments...you're clearly very intelligent.
    And thanks for the friend add.

    { Citizen Erased }

    October 16, 2008 19:19:33 | See Conversation
  • What's the fun in Mundane thoughts?

    October 10, 2008 08:32:52 | See Conversation
  • "RealityApologist is thinking about William James' Will to Believe and the pragmatic conception of truth."


    Do you ever enjoy any mundane thoughts? :p

    October 08, 2008 05:12:21 | See Conversation
  • I just looked it up for a sec at the IEP but I'm still lost on what you're writing about. Between you and T1g I have too many tabs open waiting for me to get my replacement brain!

    September 22, 2008 21:03:23 | See Conversation
  • Status RealityApologist is reading and writing.

    Just how many books do you write in a day, RA? ;p I always enjoy the ones you write at my request. :)

    September 22, 2008 20:54:25 | See Conversation
>> View all 15 comments

SodaFeed

Latest Question

Embed:

Embed this Question anywhere and follow RealityApologist's latest Question.

Top SodaHeads

Top Comments

  • +4 raves We need to be careful here to be clear about what we mean--'free will' is a very slippery... We need to be careful here to be clear about what we mean--'free will' is a very slippery concept, and many people, it seems, mean many different things by it. Instead of attacking things head on, let's try to sneak up on the problem.

    There's a common argument against free will that goes like this: "we can't possibly be free (whatever that means), because we're just physical systems. All our behavior is governed by the behavior of the particles that compose us, and that behavior is purely deterministic. Therefore, our behavior is purely deterministic, and we are not free." What's going on here, I think, is something akin to the following mistake: "water can't possibly be wet, because water is composed entirely of oxygen and hydrogen atoms, and none of those atoms is wet. If water is made up entirely of things that aren't wet, then it can't possibly be wet either." The mistake here, of course, lies in thinking that predicates like 'wet' or 'dry' can be applied to things at the level of constituent atoms--they can't be. Atoms just aren't the right kind of things to be either wet or dry: they're not terms that work at that level of description. Rather, predicates like 'is wet' only apply to collections of atoms--they only apply to (as it were) objects seen from one level of description higher.

    A similar mistake is being made in the argument against free will above, I think. 'Free' or 'not free' are predicates that just don't make sense when applied to particles, so it's just incoherent to say 'we can't be free because our particles aren't free.' Just as in the wet/dry case, the mistake lies in trying to apply a predicate to the wrong level of description, and then trying to base our reasoning on that application. When we're considering whether or not some person acted freely, we need to look at constraints operating at the level of description where ascriptions of freedom actually make sense: that is, constraints operating at the level of description that roughly corresponds to people, cars, basketballs, and other macro-level objects. If I hold a gun to your head and force you to rob a bank, that's a macro-level constraint that prevents you from acting freely; your decision to rob the bank (in that case) wasn't a free one, but the reasons for that have nothing to do with the freedom (or lack thereof) of your particles--indeed, that doesn't even make any sense.

    If by 'acted freely' we mean 'performed actions that were uncaused,' then we're certainly not free: our brains are physical systems like any other (albeit more complex than most), and obey the same physical laws that all other such systems obey. If we take the kind of deflationary view I offered above, though, then determinism at the level of microphysics doesn't play any interesting role in our freedom at all: discounting freedom because of particle behavior is, on this view, as bizarre as discounting Obama's election because everyone is made out of quarks, and no quarks voted for Obama. This isn't the kind of robust metaphysical freedom that philosophers have classically sought, but I think the fact that we've gotten _no where_ with that concept is sufficient to show that such metaphysical projects should be abandoned; a level-based ontology like the one I've alluded to here deflates many of the traditional metaphysical questions in favor of a more pragmatic (and tractable) solution.
    (more)
  • +4 raves This is deliberate--as opposed to accidental--stupidity.
  • +6 raves Being alone is a reversible condition; death (so far) is not.
  • +2 raves Actually, the cows consume far more vegetation than do the vegetarians. Since nothing (organism ... Actually, the cows consume far more vegetation than do the vegetarians. Since nothing (organism or otherwise) is 100% energy efficient--or even close to that--a significant amount of energy is lost in each link of the food chain. Plants take advantage of a small amount of the sunlight that reaches them, cows take advantage of a small amount of the energy that the plants got from sunlight, and we take advantage of a small amount of the energy that cows got from eating grass; vegetarianism removes a link from this chain, and thus is far more sustainable. (more)
  • +3 raves I definitely suggest talking to your friend about it if you're at all uncertain about how he&... I definitely suggest talking to your friend about it if you're at all uncertain about how he'll take it (or what his intentions are with her). (more)
  • +16 raves Somehow I suspect that if this were true, it would be reported somewhere other than on an extreme... Somehow I suspect that if this were true, it would be reported somewhere other than on an extreme right wing website--for instance, on the AP website, since that's where it purports to be from. It isn't. (more)
  • +6 raves I'm a daily smoker, and walking proof that pot neither makes you stupid nor lowers your ambit... I'm a daily smoker, and walking proof that pot neither makes you stupid nor lowers your ambition. (more)
  • +5 raves Zombie preparedness is just a basic part of good parenting.
  • +2 raves There are plenty of intelligent people here, though the signal to noise ratio isn't terribly ... There are plenty of intelligent people here, though the signal to noise ratio isn't terribly high overall. Just hang around and post where you're interested--you'll get a sense of who's a moron and who's not. (more)
  • +3 raves That's great! Congratulations! Grad school is a lot of fun.
>> View all Top Comments
or
Cancel