Ghosts Among The Philosophers

Matyáš Moravec at Aeon Magazine:

‘I assume that the reader is familiar with the idea of extra-sensory perception … telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition and psycho-kinesis. These disturbing phenomena seem to deny all our usual scientific ideas … Unfortunately the statistical evidence, at least for telepathy, is overwhelming … Once one has accepted them it does not seem a very big step to believe in ghosts and bogies.’

These words weren’t published in the pages of an obscure occult journal or declared at a secret parapsychology conference. They weren’t written by a Victorian spiritualist or a séance attendee. In fact, their author is Alan Turing, the father of computer science, and they appear in his seminal paper ‘Computing Machinery and Intelligence’ (1950), which describes the ‘imitation game’ (more commonly known as the ‘Turing test’) designed to establish whether a machine’s intelligence could be distinguished from that of a human.

The paper starts by setting up the now-famous thought experiment: a human, a machine, and an observer who asks questions.

more here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Ogres are cool

Colin Burrow in The London Review of Books:

The hyper-courtly​ Sir Thomas Wyatt wrote a verse satire in the mid-1530s that begins: ‘My mother’s maids, when they did sew and spin,/They sang sometime a song of the field mouse.’ Wyatt goes on to relate the song, which is pretty much the story of the town mouse and the country mouse as told by Horace in his Satires with some added shivers of late Henrician courtly horror. Did Wyatt’s mother’s maids read Horace? Were they reciting a folk tale they had received by oral transmission? Or (more probably) were the maids a fiction designed to mask a satire on what it was like to be a courtier in the later reign of Henry VIII – an experience which, for want of a better term, could be described as ‘grim’?

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Peto’s Paradox: How Gigantic Species Evolved to Beat Cancer

Hannah Thomasy in The Scientist:

Consider for a moment the blue whale. Weighing up to 200 tons, this majestic creature is believed to be the largest animal that has ever existed on planet Earth. It also has a remarkably long lifespan of 100 years or even more.

In theory, the blue whale should be highly susceptible to cancer: It has quadrillions of cells that could acquire the requisite oncogenic mutations, and its extended lifespan provides plenty of time for this to occur. In fact, when researchers applied an equation for estimating human colorectal cancer risk to a whale-sized organism, it predicted that virtually all blue whales would develop this form of cancer by age 80.1 Conversely, the same equation scaled down for mice predicted that they would essentially never get colorectal cancer, even if they lived for 90 years. This is, of course, not the case. Despite their brief lifespans, mice have a one to four percent chance of developing this type of cancer, similar to the human lifetime risk of about four percent.2,3 And while the exact incidence of colorectal cancer in blue whales is not known, it is certainly not 100 percent.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Friday Poem

A Rainy Morning

A young woman in a wheelchair
wearing a black nylon poncho spattered with rain
is pushing herself through the morning.
You have seen how pianists
sometimes bend forward to strike the keys,
then lift their hands, draw back to rest,
then lean again to strike just as the chord fades.
Such is the way this woman
strikes at the wheels, then lifts her long white fingers,
letting them float, then bends again to strike
just as the chair slows, as if into a silence.
So expertly she plays the chords
of this difficult music she has mastered,
her wet face beautiful in its concentration,
while the wind turns the pages of rain.

by Ted Kooser

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Thursday, March 13, 2025

It began with a rabbit: Unraveling the mystery of memory

Tim Vernimmen in Knowable Magazine:

On a rainy day in July 2024, Tim Bliss and Terje Lømo are in the best of moods, chuckling and joking over brunch, occasionally pounding the table to make a point. They’re at Lømo’s house near Oslo, Norway, where they’ve met to write about the late neuroscientist Per Andersen, in whose lab they conducted groundbreaking experiments more than 50 years ago.

The duo only ever wrote one research paper together, in 1973, but that work is now considered a turning point in the study of learning and memory. Published in the Journal of Physiology, it was the first demonstration that when a neuron — a cell that receives and sends signals throughout the nervous system — signals to another neuron frequently enough, the second neuron will later respond more strongly to new signals, not for just seconds or minutes, but for hours.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Mark Blyth talks with two inequality experts about the puzzling politics of inequality

It goes like this: inequality has profound effects on our economy, society, and lives. It has also been growing, and today is at historically high levels. Given all that, why does inequality never seem to be a topic around which we organize our politics?

Too complicated? Too boring? Too unsolvable?

The answers that Mark got made him rethink the question itself, and hopefully will make you see inequality in a new light, too.

Guests on this episode:

  • Charlotte Cavaille is an assistant professor of public policy at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, and author of “Fair Enough? Support for Redistribution in the Age of Inequality”.
  • Branko Milanovic is a senior scholar at the Stone Center on Socio-Economic Inequality at the CUNY Graduate Center.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

It’s Not Nature, It’s Not Nurture, It’s a Möbius Strip

Dalton Conley in the New York Times:

Since Sir Francis Galton coined the phrase “nature versus nurture” 150 years ago, the debate about what makes us who we are has dominated the human sciences.

Do genes determine our destiny, as the hereditarians would say? Or do we enter the world as blank slates, formed only by what we encounter in our homes and beyond? What started as an intellectual debate quickly expanded to whatever anyone wanted it to mean, invoked in arguments about everything from free will to race to inequality to whether public policy can, or should, level the playing field.

Today, however, a new realm of science is poised to upend the debate — not by declaring victory for one side or the other, nor even by calling a tie, but rather by revealing they were never in opposition in the first place. Through this new vantage, nature and nurture are not even entirely distinguishable, because genes and environment don’t operate in isolation; they influence each other and to a very real degree even create each other.

The new field is called sociogenomics, a fusion of behavioral science and genetics that I have been closely involved with for over a decade. Though the field is still in its infancy, its philosophical implications are staggering.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

If critique could kill, neoliberalism would long be dead

Blake Smith in The Hedgehog Review:

If critique could kill, neoliberalism would long be dead. So far, however, neither decades of intellectual opposition from the left and right nor the past decade of populist politics has done more than erode some measure of neoliberalism’s ideological preeminence. Talk from the right of “pro-family” policies, such as tax breaks and subsidies for having children, or moves by the Biden administration to secure domestic manufacturing of critical high-technology goods may hearten neoliberalism’s foes (even as they further blur the ideological map of American politics). Neither, however, offers anything like a consensus to replace the vision that, since the crises of the 1970s, has, with whatever degree of discontent, guided our collective thought and action.

Half a century ago, as the OPEC oil embargo and an unprecedented combination of inflation and unemployment disrupted the shared understanding of economics and politics that had oriented Western elites after World War II, neoliberalism became identified with a range of tactics for restoring economic growth. Understanding what neoliberalism is, and what its relation to liberalism might be, has been a central task for intellectuals ever since.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Man survives with titanium heart for 100 days – a world first

Smriti Mallapaty in Nature:

An Australian man in his forties has become the first person in the world to leave hospital with an artificial heart made of titanium. The device is used as a stopgap for people with heart failure who are waiting for a donor heart, and previous recipients of this type of artificial heart had remained in US hospitals while it was in place.

The man lived with the device for more than three months until he underwent surgery to receive a donated human heart. The man is recovering well, according to a statement from St Vincent’s Hospital in Sydney, Australia, where the operations were conducted. The Australian is the sixth person globally to receive the device, known as BiVACOR, but the first to live with it for more than a month. “This is certainly an important development in the field,” says Julian Smith, a cardiac surgeon at the Victorian Heart Institute at Monash University in Melbourne, Australia.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Thursday Poem

We

are out-of-focus and we are
flesh. Some call this panting
love. So much is about
breath. Small at night. Large
in our wakefulness, largest
when the body mates, when the moment
rides on its own rising. Only then
are we safe. —from
ourselves. —Our fears, our hates. Blood.
A little dust and a little water.
Sun and moist seed
shivers and climbs. Call this blind,
call this a movement toward light.

by Mark Irwin
from Quick, Now, Always
BOA Editions, Ltd. Brockport, NY, 1996

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Wednesday, March 12, 2025

Twenty Steven Pinker Quotes

Steve Stewart-Williams at The Nature-Nurture-Nietzsche Newsletter:

[SSW: The next quote is Pinker’s rebuttal of a common response to Judith Rich Harris’s claim that parents have little impact on their kids.] “‘So you’re saying it doesn’t matter how I treat my children?’ What a question! Yes, of course it matters… First, parents wield enormous power over their children, and their actions can make a big difference to their happiness… It is not OK for parents to beat, humiliate, deprive, or neglect their children, because those are awful things for a big strong person to do to a small helpless one… Second, a parent and a child have a human relationship. No one ever asks, ‘So you’re saying it doesn’t matter how I treat my husband or wife?’ even though no one but a newlywed believes that one can change the personality of one’s spouse. Husbands and wives are nice to each other (or should be) not to pound the other’s personality into a desired shape but to build a deep and satisfying relationship.”

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

‘Next-Level’ Chaos Traces the True Limit of Predictability

Charlie Wood in Quanta:

The French scholar Pierre-Simon Laplace crisply articulated his expectation that the universe was fully knowable in 1814, asserting that a sufficiently clever “demon” could predict the entire future given a complete knowledge of the present. His thought experiment marked the height of optimism about what physicists might forecast. Since then, reality has repeatedly humbled their ambitions to understand it.

One blow came in the early 1900s with the discovery of quantum mechanics. Whenever quantum particles are not being measured, they inhabit a fundamentally fuzzy realm of possibilities. They don’t have a precise position for a demon to know.

Another came later that century, when physicists realized how much “chaotic” systems amplified any uncertainties. A demon might be able to predict the weather in 50 years, but only with an infinite knowledge of the present all the way down to every beat of every butterfly’s wing.

In recent years, a third limitation has been percolating through physics — in some ways the most dramatic yet.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Canada Is Spooked

Quico Toro at Persuasion:

We can give ourselves far, far more than Donald Trump can ever take away, but it will—it will take extraordinary efforts. It won’t be business as usual. We will have to do things we haven’t imagined before, at speeds we didn’t think possible. […] I know, I know that these are dark days, dark days brought on by a country we can no longer trust. We are getting over the shock, but let us never forget the lessons: we have to look after ourselves and we have to look out for each other. We need to pull together in the tough days ahead.

These lines, spoken by Mark Carney on Sunday moments after he was chosen to lead the governing Liberal Party of Canada, paint a startling picture of a suddenly unrecognizable relationship with our giant neighbor. For a leader on the cusp of becoming Canadian prime minister to just matter-of-factly assert that Canada can no longer trust the United States is geopolitics through the looking glass. Managing the fallout from this impossibility will now be the thing a Canadian prime minister has to do.

Americans, in their endless self-regard, have always vaguely figured Canadian politics must be largely about the United States. When you live in Canada—as I did from 2009 to 2024—you soon learn how silly that is.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Wednesday Poem

Poem by Jack Kerouac —on his birthday

A Sudden Sketch Poem

Gary’s sink has a shroudy burlap
the rub brush tinwear plout
leans on right side
like a red womans hair
the faucet leaks little lovedrops

The teacup’s upsidedown with visions
of green mountains and brown lousy
Chinese mysterious up heights

The frying pan’s still wet
The spoon’s by 2 petals of flower
The washrag’s hung on edge like bloomers

I don’t know what to say
about the dishpan, the soap
The sink itself inside or what
is hidden underneath the bomb burlap
Shroudflap except two onions
And an orange old wheat germ.

Wheat meal. The hoodlatch heliograph
With the cross that makes the devil
Hiss, ah, the upper coral sensen soups
And fast condiments, curries, rices,
Roaches, reels, tin, tip, plastickets,
Toothbrushes, and armies, and armies
of insulated schiller, squozen gumbrop
Peste pans, light of Marin, pirshyar,

Magic dancing lights of gray and white
And all for verse I wrote it.

by Jack Kerouac
April 1966, McCorkle’s Shack
from— Jack Kerouac Poems All Sizes
City Lights Books, 1992

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Imposter Syndrome Isn’t a Personal Flaw. It’s a Systemic Issue

Shari Dunn in Time Magazine:

The term “imposter syndrome” has become a cultural shorthand for self-doubt. We’re told it’s something to fix within ourselves: a nagging belief that we’re unqualified or unworthy, even when all evidence points to the contrary. Yet for many women—and especially women of color—this framing misses the mark entirely.

In reality, what’s labeled as imposter syndrome in the workplace is often a misdiagnosis—a symptom of systemic inequities. It’s a response to environments steeped in bias, exclusion, and relentless scrutiny of the competence of women, Black professionals, and other people of color,  a practice known as “competency checking.” Competency checking—whether intentional or unconscious—undermines those who challenge traditional norms of leadership and success. Imposter syndrome, however, masquerades as an internal failing, leading women to pathologize themselves rather than confront the systems perpetuating their struggles.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Chinese Companies Rush to Put DeepSeek in Everything

Zeyi Yang in Wired:

What do a mobile shooting game, a nuclear power plant, and a local Chinese government office have in common? In the past two months, they have all tried incorporating DeepSeek’s R1 artificial intelligence model into their businesses in an attempt to ride the wave of the homegrown tech company’s viral rise.

Ever since the Chinese AI startup became a global sensation, DeepSeek has dominated headlines in China—but the news has almost nothing to do with DeepSeek itself. Instead, companies across nearly every industry are racing to announce that they have found a way to include DeepSeek’s open source models in their corporate strategy. Some have found genuine uses for the domestic, affordable AI model with cutting-edge capabilities, while others are merely doing it for the publicity boost or to virtue-signal their national pride.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

Tuesday, March 11, 2025

Terrence Malick, or, Philosophy by Other Means

Santiago Zabala in the blog of the American Philosophical Association:

Given the chance to become a movie director in Hollywood or a professor of philosophy at Harvard, I imagine very few of us would choose the academic life. The money and fame of being a movie director are far more tantalizing than teaching Plato, Kant, or Simone de Beauvoir. Terrence Malick chose to become a movie director instead of a philosophy professor, but not for the reasons you might think. It was not money and fame that convinced him, but the inability of philosophy courses to help “him understand himself and his place in the order of the cosmos” as Martin Woessner explained in a recent book dedicated to the great filmmaker. Although he is not the only promising scholar to ditch his dissertation and a career in academia due to philosophy’s scientific turn in the 1960s, he is probably the only one whose “entire oeuvre,” as Woessner tells us, “constitutes a philosophy by other means and is worth taking seriously as such.”

Malick’s inability to pursue a career in academia reminds us—members and friends of the APA—that we must encourage and promote students who prefer wondering, and asking questions about everything and nothing, to completing narrow tasks. Malick’s films and Woessner study demonstrate it is possible (and sometimes necessary) to philosophize outside of the university’s rigid disciplinary boundaries when these questions emerge among our students. Malick’s career arguably shows us not only what has gone wrong with the teaching of philosophy today, but also how to fix it by returning it to the project of “examining our lives,” as Socrates suggested.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.

The Quest for A.I. ‘Scientific Superintelligence’

Steve Lohr in the New York Times:

Relying on an experienced team of scientists and $200 million in initial funding, Lila has been developing an A.I. program trained on published and experimental data, as well as the scientific process and reasoning. The start-up then lets that A.I. software run experiments in automated, physical labs with a few scientists to assist.

Already, in projects demonstrating the technology, Lila’s A.I. has generated novel antibodies to fight disease and developed new materials for capturing carbon from the atmosphere. Lila turned those experiments into physical results in its lab within months, a process that most likely would take years with conventional research.

Experiments like Lila’s have convinced many scientists that A.I. will soon make the hypothesis-experiment-test cycle faster than ever before.

More here.

Enjoying the content on 3QD? Help keep us going by donating now.