Happy Holiday!

Personally, I've been thinking a lot about that last question, but still don't have a clearly expressible answer. How about you?

I have a long day of work ahead, so don't expect to be back until after the holiday. Happy Fourth of July to those of you who celebrate that. :)

Philosophical Flirting with "The Latest Dark Cabal"

Thanks for the link on your blog to Richard Bowes's story, "There's a Hole in the City," and it's nice to better understand Rick's thinking by his comment:

What I needed was time and context. In the direct aftermath when I found myself the only person out walking on a dark city block or when any sudden sound made everyone look toward Ground Zero, I felt I was in a ghost story. That stuck with me and served as the metaphor that made it possible for me to tell the story you read.

there, too. I do appreciate the appeal of a ghost metaphor as a vehicle for communicating those painful echos of "reality" in semi-fictionalized form. Myself, I've resorted to many such subterfuges from life as a dirty joke to my current role playing "real" life is pursuit of "the truth," but for today your blog together with Rick's ghost story have given rise to my latest philosophical question to the blog sphere, "Why is it so hard to 'tell it like it is'"?

Live or Die? You decide the cat's fate!

Does Stuff Exist, Or Not? Schrodinger Said: "One can even set up quite ridiculous cases. A cat is penned up in a steel chamber, along with the following diabolical device (which must be secured against direct interference by the cat): in a Geiger counter there is a tiny bit of radioactive substance, so small that perhaps in the course of one hour one of the atoms decays, but also, with equal probability, perhaps none; if it happens, the counter tube discharges and through a relay releases a hammer which shatters a small flask of hydrocyanic acid. If one has left this entire system to itself for an hour, one would say that the cat still lives if meanwhile no atom has decayed. The first atomic decay would have poisoned it. The Psi function for the entire system would express this by having in it the living and the dead cat (pardon the expression) mixed or smeared out in equal parts." It is typical of these cases that an indeterminacy originally restricted to the atomic domain becomes transformed into macroscopic indeterminacy, which can then be resolved by direct observation. That prevents us from so naively accepting as valid a ``blurred model'' for representing reality. In itself it would not embody anything unclear or contradictory. There is a difference between a shaky or out-of-focus photograph and a snapshot of clouds and fog banks."	What Does All This Mean? For the sake of adding a little interest to this old saw of a scenario, the cat in mention has been placed inside an old bowling ball bag of mine. (Science is not always a literal art.) I have a Geiger counter here, but in lieu of an actual radioactive substance I was forced to use some very old Kraft macaroni and cheese. (It was that or my Timex Indiglo.) Now, according to Schrodinger's theory as I understand it (and that's saying very little), the above cat's state is as of this very moment exactly alive and dead (though technically, 100% dead and 100% alive at the same time -- hence the paradox) ...until someone opens this here bag, that is. Let The Cat Out Of The Bag The "rather silly" part of "A Rather Silly Experiment In Quantum Physics"? You're soaking in it. Now here's the "interactive" bit. By pressing the button you "simulate" all that probability half life decay-jibberish by enacting a simple script. This will accordingly choose LIFE or DEATH for our wee quantum furball. Go ahead -- hit the button below to discover the potential fate of Schrodinger's kitty... <> Please, no wagering. Don't expect too much, kids...this is science, it sure as hell ain't "Whack-A-Mole".
	Schrodinger's Cat by Cecil Adams. He of "The Straight Dope" explains it all for us -- and manages to make it rhyme, too. Everything you ever wanted to know about lots of info on Albert Einstein. (Yeah, he's no Schrodinger, but it's all relative. Ugh...)
Errors in logic, flaws (or fleas?) in the cat theory, comments, regards to the cat? Email me. Contrary to the ideas discussed above, the cat and I will indeed exist (barring any unforseen circumstances such as e coli, spontaneous combustion, or large falling objects) until and after the fact of your anticipated response.Carpe diem nonetheless... Note to PETA: This is only a theoretical experiment... ...and it's okay, anyhow, because I ate the cat when I was done. Copyright 1999 phobe.com

A fundamental question...

Art Witherall attributes this question to Martin Heidegger
Martin Heidegger has called the fundamental question of metaphysics: "why is there something instead of nothing?".

I began considering John Wheeler's version, "How do we get 'it' from 'bit'?"
John Wheeler's questions: "The Question is what is The Question? Is it all a Magic Show? Is Reality an Illusion? What is the framework of The Machine? Darwin’s Puzzle: Natural Selection? Where does Space-Time come from? Is there any answer except that it comes from consciousness? What is Out There? T’is Ourselves? Or, is IT all just a Magic Show?"

Is there an altertative in THE PHILOSOPHY OF XAVIER ZUBIRI?
As Zuribi puts it (in Sobre la esencia translation by Robert Caponigri) "The theory of "sentient intelligence" must be distinguished from the "epistemological question" or the theory of knowledge. The theory of intelligence is logically antecedent to the epistemological question and every epistemological theory eventually reveals that it presupposes a theory of the intelligence in its account of what and how man can know."

Women Philosophers Wanted. Apply Here.

Historical Women of Philosophy: 600 BC - 17th Century AD
<- The Three Graces by Edward Burne-Jones
One wonders at the connection... (How can this not be exploitative?)

Women Philosophers <-Hypatia Leads List.

Feminism & Philosophy
How Feminism Is Re-writing the Philosophical Canon
Encyclopedic Historical Account

A few links to wax philosophical over.

Another Good Question!

Sandra LaFave on:

Thinking Critically About the "Subjective"/"Objective" Distinction

Do you agree with Sandra's conclusion that, "some people’ s moral claims are objectively more worthy of belief than others — because they are more reasonable"?

Are you satisified with your answer to this question?

Is the unexamined axiom not worth holding?

Brain in a vat? Coming soon or here already?

"If current research trends continue, however, perhaps the ethical and political problems surrounding stem cell research will succumb to a technical solution. At least three teams of researchers in the United States and Australia have recently reported encouraging results suggesting it may be possible to generate embryonic stem cells—or at least cells that are functionally equivalent to embryonic stems—without having to create or destroy embryos in the process. Several hurdles remain. But the work strongly suggests that the fantasy of someday being able to turn ordinary cells—from, say, a person's skin—into personalized stem cells capable of becoming replacement tissues for various ailing organs may not be so many years away." Including, for example, a brain in a vat?


"Fantasy writers have long been captivated by the possibility of preserving human life in a reversible state of suspended animation. In fictional tales the technique enables characters to "sleep" through centuries of interstellar travel or terrestrial cataclysms, then awaken unaffected by the passing of time. These stories are great fun, but their premise seems biologically far-fetched." Has reality caught up with and passed fantasy?

"Why are top scientists from the fields of neuroscience, biology, psychology, physics, computation, and philosophy increasingly interested in researching human consciousness?

Because the quest to solve the puzzle of human consciousness—the very essence of our being—is one of the great problems of modern science." Many philosophers remain skeptical.

How about you?