Watched Primal Fear for the first time in 20 years. Weirdly conservative-coded movie:
A jaded defender finds a case that makes him believe that maybe his job should be to defend the innocent. Fortunately, he learns the valuable lesson that you should never trust any criminals.
Shameful
I just spoke with President @EmmanuelMacron about the situation in the Middle East.
We condemned Iran’s strikes against civilians and civilian infrastructure, and underscored the importance of opening secure access through the Strait of Hormuz. Canada supports efforts to safeguard international shipping and ensure freedom of navigation.
DMV retweeted
Analytic philosopher here, wife claims I don’t love her enough so I stayed late at the office and wrote up a devastating and humiliating refutation of her view
DMV retweeted
this stuff really depresses me because at no point did "continental philosophers" do anything to hurt anyone doing analytic philosophy. the converse is not true: self-professed analytic philosophers went out of their way to destroy the careers of continental philosophers.
As you get older, you realize that the value of philosophy is not in expanding your knowledge but in deepening it.
Iit is precisely the inefficiency of gift giving that makes it a sign of friendship: instead of giving you this fully fungible thing which is of equal value to everyone, I am giving you something that only someone who stands in this relationship with you would give.
One founding myth of analytic philosophy is that each sentence has a unique logical form, that this form is representable symbolically, and that a precondition for good philosophy is presenting one’s sentences in such a way that it is clear exactly what their logical form is.
DMV retweeted
I remember attending a conference when I was unemployed right after I first graduated and my name tag said “Independent Scholar” and it low-key felt like a scarlet letter, the way I was treated
DMV retweeted
grad school sets you up to think that the only spiritual completion of the intellectual life is a certain sort of job, and the painfulness of thinking your virtue has failed to live up to this is a horrible thing to do to a psyche
DMV retweeted
That a statement can be meaningful even if it’s not analytic or empirically verifiable
This quoted post is unavailable.
Cool paper forthcoming in Nous. Authors show that the reverse ontological argument (possibly God does not exist, therefore God does not exist) is much "easier" to prove than the regular ontological argument (possibly God exists, therefore God exists).
philpapers.org/rec/FRISLA-2
Given the premise "If God exists, then God necessarily exists", the reverse ontological argument can be proven in a logic as weak as KT, while not even S4 is sufficient for the validity of the regular ontological argument.
