Comments for Elucidations

Comment on Episode 46: Frank Veltman discusses normality by Mark Balaz

Mark Balaz — Wed, 01 May 2013 10:17:01 +0000

I think this “normal” idea just gives us the basis to live life to a degree, as with most things a certain level of assumption is needed for “normal” life. I point to the traffic light story. I stop at a red light because I really hope others will follow these basic traffic laws and traditions. Without a set of “laws” or assumptions, life would seem to get much more complex and problematic. We don’t know it all, so a certain degree of our world needs to take into account this assumption of normality. We see how people’s lives can turn out when they respond/react to the norm…

Comment on Episode 39: Nicholas Asher discusses the philosophy of language by Gonçalo Marques

Gonçalo Marques — Tue, 16 Oct 2012 08:34:32 +0000

Thanks for the reply.
Maybe it is something on my end of the download. I have the same problem with the new podcast. I’ll try using another browser or download application to see if it works.
Cheers

Comment on Episode 40: Johan van Benthem discusses logical dynamics by Matt Teichman

Matt Teichman — Sun, 07 Oct 2012 13:39:05 +0000

Great points. I think that a lot of these issues are still being worked out over in Amsterdam, NASSLLI, ESSLLI, Ludwig Maximilians Universitat, and a few other places as we speak. There are people working out the consequences of small changes in classical logic, and there are people trying to overthrow the entire logical/truth-conditional paradigm–for example, by replacing it with more statistical/corpus-based stuff. The ideal, it seems to me, is for all these approaches to be pursued by a wide variety of people a) in as much depth as possible and b) in such a way that everyone shares their results with one another.

Comment on Episode 40: Johan van Benthem discusses logical dynamics by Operator

Operator — Sun, 07 Oct 2012 00:35:00 +0000

I loved this and the last episode. They highlighted some areas of philosophy that are rapidly evolving and relevant. And showed how ideas developed originally in mathematical logic have turned out to be extremely fruitful, but also that new methods and theories are needed to tackle questions relating to computational semantics and “information flow”.

How far can we go by discovering “adjustments” to the old logic (as was done with intensional logics and Montague semantics), and is more interaction between logic, statistical methods, game theory etc. needed?

Or maybe some genius somewhere, the new Frege, is already working on a completely novel, simple, but powerful approach that will make our present tools look ad hoc and clunky.

Comment on Episode 38: Christopher Frey discusses Aristotle on living organisms and their parts by Matt Teichman

Matt Teichman — Thu, 27 Sep 2012 16:56:39 +0000

Oops indeed! This should be fixed now. Thanks a lot for pointing it out.

Comment on Episode 38: Christopher Frey discusses Aristotle on living organisms and their parts by C.J.

C.J. — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 01:55:37 +0000

Oops! This episode appears to have disappeared from your server and is missing from the list of past episodes. Can it be recovered?

Thanks

Comment on Episode 39: Nicholas Asher discusses the philosophy of language by Matt Teichman

Matt Teichman — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 18:29:01 +0000

We aren’t having trouble hearing the whole episode on our end. Is it still looping?

Comment on Episode 39: Nicholas Asher discusses the philosophy of language by Gonçalo Marques

Gonçalo Marques — Mon, 10 Sep 2012 10:19:44 +0000

Hi!
I think the mp3 is not ok. It goes back to the beginning several times.

Comment on Episode 38: Christopher Frey discusses Aristotle on living organisms and their parts by dirkusa

dirkusa — Mon, 27 Aug 2012 23:42:13 +0000

http://www.personal.psu.edu/cpl2/blogs/cplportfolio/2012/07/on-touch-and-life-in-the-de-an.html

Comment on Episode 32: Jennifer Lockhart discusses ignorant knowledge by douglas curriden

douglas curriden — Tue, 10 Jul 2012 17:33:06 +0000

totally new concept to me. providing cause for self reflection.