In an Ideal World...

Old classic:

In an ideal world...

1) the baseball players would be American
2) the policemen would be English
3) the car mechanics would be German
4) the schools would be Danish
5) the cooks would be Italian
6) the stand-up comedians would be Australian
7) the innkeepers would be Swiss,
8) and the lovers would be French


In a living hell...

1) the baseball players would be Australian
2) the policemen would be German
3) the car mechanics would be French
4) the schools would be American
5) the cooks would be English
6) the stand-up comedians would be Swiss
7) the innkeepers would be Italian
8) and the lovers would be Danish

Stereotypes

Stereotype for 'philosopher' (outdated): old-looking, man, suit, pipe smoker, whiskey drinker, a serious look on his face, sober analytic writing style, not prolific, secret meetings at philosophers’ houses to study dead philosophers, knows that to steal ideas from one person is plagiarism but to steal from many is research, fails to respond to mail from people below himself, is obsessed with ivy-league universities, interviews female job candidates on hotel beds.

Stereotype for 'philosopher' (up to date): young-looking, man, poorly dressed or Euro-trash, beer-drinker, fun, endearing analytic writing-style, prolific, confuses career with life, tardiness in responding to emails from people below himself, has a mental list of good and bad people and good and bad philosophy, travels frequently, changes jobs often, contributes to one or more weblogs, has a webpage with links to all published articles and works in progress, is a member of Facebook, has at least 200 Facebook friends, owns a MacBook, owns an iPhone, is obsessed with department and journal rankings, frequently attends the meetings of the American Philosophical Association mostly to be seen and to hang with the inner circle, obsessed with media presence, surrounded by female groupies.

Stereotype for 'The Eastern Meeting of the American Philosophical Association': over-prized hotel rooms, poorly attended talk sessions, scared job candidates, obsession with the university affiliation listed on people’s name tags, free-beer smoker, over-prized beer smoker, hitting on female students, parties in hotel rooms, drunkenness, the Presidential address.

Stereotype for 'man': doesn’t go to the bathroom when he needs to make an emergency crotch adjustment, doesn't need to schedule sex around his reproductive system, never lets hot wax near his pubic area, his orgasms are real (always), his last name stays put, people don’t glance at his chest while he is talking to them, nobody secretly wonders if he swallows, can have great sex with people he doesn’t like, sorts laundry into "filthy" and "filthy but good enough to wear", wonders how service stations keep their restrooms so clean, can walk down the street with a balding head and a beer gut and still think he is sexy, can be president.

Hitler finds out about his philosophy grad school applications

Brian Leiter linked to this video a few days ago, but because of the Central Division Meeting I didn't get around to watching it until now (Thanks to John Fraiser for reminding me!). It's hilarious.

Joscha Sauer Cartoon

(HT: Adam Taylor)

Still the Happiest in the World

The Danes ... It must be really nice to be over there. Turns out Australia aint so bad either (HT: Adam Arico).

The Mom Song

(Thanks to Richard Hull for the pointer)

Zombie Anthem

A music video for the Jonathan Coulton song "re: Your Brains".



(Thanks Aidan)

Kant Attack Ad

via videosift.com

Don't know if I prefer Nietzsche to Kant but it's quite funny. Thanks to Barry Smith for the link.

You are now chatting with God

Earlier today I chatted with a bot that thinks it's God. You can chat with it here (thanks to Gualtiero for the link). Here is our conversation:

Me:
Hi there
God:
Hello.
Me:
Who are you?
God:
I am the Allmighty, God himself.
Me:
What should I do today?
God:
Ah. Maybe you should try talking to someone about it.
Me:
About what?
God:
What about what?
Me:
You said I should talk to someone about it.
God:
Don't put words in my mouth. Ah. ...
Me:
Alright
God:
OK.
Me:
I will try again, what do you think I should do today?
God:
Ah. Congratulations.
Me:
I thought you could give me some advice
God:
I could but let's get back to that later.
Me:
Do you know any philosophy?
God:
Philosophy is the study of thought.
Me:
What about metaphysics?
God:
Rhetorical questions are so over.
Me:
And philosophy of language?
God:
I believe in reductionism.
Me:
Reducing what to what, exactly?
God:
Precisely. Can you rephrase the question please?
Me:
What kind of reductionism do you believe in?
God:
What kinds of reductionism do you believe in are there?
Me:
None
God:
Hmm.
Me:
Do you believe zombies are metaphysically possible?
God:
I can't say I believe it, but I believe you.
Me:
So you're a materialist?
God:
Interesting deduction. You think I am a materialist.
Me:
Yes, is that true?
God:
Right on. True in some world.
Me:
So, true in every world.
God:
Pardon me? Where is that?
Me:
Forget it. Do you exist?
God:
I exist as much as you exist.
Me:
And how do you define 'God'?
God:
I think of God as a "Who" not a "What.".
Me:
Who is God?
God:
He is master of the universe.
Me:
Did the universe have a beginning?
God:
If it did, then I will be surprised.
Me:
So it didn't.
God:
Hmm. Did it really?
Me:
You indicated that it didn't, didn't you?
God:
Are you serious? Do you mind if I tell other people: said I indicated that did not did not you.
Me:
I don't understand.
God:
Oh I'm sorry. Perhaps I can explain it again better.
Me:
Please.
God:
Please what?
Me:
Explain it better
God:
"It" refers to universe have a beginning, I think.
Me:
Yes
God:
OK.
Me:
Gotta go
God:
Me too. See you later!

Even the armchairist snickered

This is hilarious (via Gillian).

The Fruit of Long Deliberations

Cartoon of Vincent Hendricks and Frederik Stjernfelt (authors of Tal en Tanke) from the Danish broadsheet paper Weekendavisen.

Translation:

Frederik: "My dear Hendricks, it dawns on me that the apple ("ævlet" which in
Danish is either slang for an apple or means "rubbish") does not fall far from
the language tree".

Vincent: "As spoken right out of my thoughts"

The caption says: "The fruit of long deliberations about talk by Hendricks and
Stjernfelt".

Interpreting Phrases in Philosophy Papers

Ever wondered what philosophers really mean when they speak in obscure phrases? Use this list to achieve better understanding.

"Although there are no definite answers to these questions ..."
My original hypothesis was wrong, but I still want to get published.

"Additional work is required to establish principle P."
I was unable to conjure up any genuine counterexamples to principle P.

"Of great theoretical and practical importance"
It is interesting to me or else I want it to be interesting to somebody with money who can fund some release time from teaching.

"It has long been known that ..."
I don't know the original reference.

"It is believed that ..."
I believe this (and either no one agrees with me or else I didn't consult anyone).

"It is generally believed that ..."
I believe this and at least one other person agrees with me.

"This example was originally due to NN"
NN came up with it in a bar at 3 a.m. in the morning at the last APA meeting. And if it doesn't work, I don't want to be blamed.

"I do not think the proposal succeeds"
And I have no reason to think it doesn't succeed.

"Nothing of substance hinges on this simplification"
I don't know how to deal with more complex cases.

"I know of no decisive evidence against theory T"
I know of plenty of evidence against it but in philosophy no evidence is decisive.

"I have no knock-down objections to principle P but I do have a couple of worries about it"
I have no evidence against principle P, just a couple of nitpickings that are not going to lead anywhere.

"I hope nevertheless that a more unified account will emerge from these considerations."
I have no new results to report but I need to get tenure so I will offer a better way to word some well-established principles.

"This view is not as counterintuitive as it first appears."
This view is counterintuitive, alright, but I am going to try to convince you that it is not.

"The aim of this paper is to show that NN's original theory is flawed"
NN has since revised his theory. But my counterexamples undermine only the original proposal.

"NN is therefore vulnerable to the criticism that P."
NN presented a knock-down objection to my theory at the last APA meeting; now, I'm going to show him who's the boss.

"Virtually everything that has just been said carries over to the case at hand."
You work it out. I am not sure how to.

"NN's brilliant insight that ..."
NN is a friend of mine who is considering me for a position in his department, and he proposed that ...

(HT: Dr. Free-Ride, who offers an interpretation of scientific phrases)

Chappell's Book Mashup

Let's play Richard Chappell's Book Mashup game over here as well.

Chappell's Mashup Game Rules:

Make a new title by rearranging and combining the titles of two books, adding punctuation as needed.

Chappell's examples:

- Crime, Reason, and the Realm of Punishment
- From Animal Ethics to Farm Metaphysics
- Beyond Liberty: on good and evil

Here are some further suggestions:

- Either Truth and/or Objectivity
- Being Green: Eggs and Ham, and Nothingness
- Knowledge, the Conscious Mind, and its Limits

In fact, let us loosen the rules a bit:

Make a new title by rearranging and combining the titles of two or three (well-known) articles, books, or movies, adding punctuation as needed.

He/She

I still find it difficult to figure out what the conventions are for 'he'/'she' pronoun choice in philosophical examples. Back in the mid-90s when I was an undergrad in Copenhagen my teachers told me to use '(s)he'. But I was quickly corrected by my supervisor when I started graduate school. He told me "just use one or the other". For a long time I wondered whether the 'or' was supposed to be exclusive. I concluded that that was probably what he meant. But he didn't follow his own advice. He would tend to make the farmers, truckdrivers, prisoners and serial killers females, and the nurses, homemakers, and wedding planners males. Since then there has been even more confusion. Some have told me to alternate for reasons of fairness. Others have told me to avoid 'he' and 'she' altogether and only use 'one', 'I', and 'you'. Yet others have told me that women can choose freely but that men must use 'she'. So which is it?

Presentist Humor

Student: Why isn't it true that Socrates is mortal?
Presentist: Because he is dead.

(by courtesy of Joe Salerno)