This inward journey reveals how consciousness is not only about understanding ourselves but about understanding reality itself.
Read More ›
An absolute monopoly for science on truth conceals a fatal flaw. If scientific inquiry becomes corrupt or useless, we can find help from no other quarter.
Read More ›
In most public emergencies, authorities attempt to stem the panic. But with COVID, it so often seemed that the panic was coming from the top. Why was that?
Read More ›
Musk’s philosophy of the future: I believe it should be curiosity about the Universe – expand humanity to become a multiplanet, then interstellar, species.
Read More ›
Shermer writes, “the people promulgating these woke ideas are mostly true believers” and their fervor makes it easier to convince themselves, not others.
Read More ›
Nature, a British publication, should stay out of American politics; otherwise, it breeds the very mistrust of the science sector that it decries.
Read More ›
One element of getting to choose our private truths is that we need only notice or understand the significance of the things we want to notice or understand.
Read More ›
Earlier this year, University of Toronto psychiatrist Ralph Lewis wrote a two-part series at Psychology Today titled “The Strongest Neuroscience Arguments in the Free Will Debate” (here and here). He looked at Mitchell (yes) and Sapolsky (no), both of whom published serious books on the topic in 2023. And he concluded, For now, for practical purposes, given our current level of incomplete understanding of the complexities of the brain’s decision-making processes, and our inability to predict human behaviors in most situations, we might as well regard ourselves as having free will—or rather, degrees of freedom. We do know that our brain has highly evolved systems for self-control—even for those of us who struggle with this relatively more than others, and Read More ›
Stark, reappraising the role of religion, found that seeing history through a positivist, materialist lens reduces its complexities to caricatures.
Read More ›
Leading atheist philosophers have found Dawkins’s arguments superficial, many find his “warfare” thesis against religion shallow and his certitude unjustified.
Read More ›
The editors of Nature are destroying a once venerable and important science journal. That’s bad for science, which is bad for the world. Shame.
Read More ›
Some prediction models were developed by well-intentioned researchers before the perils of p-hacking were clearly understood, hence the failures.
Read More ›
For many today, truth is whatever benefits Woke causes. Claims for truth that offer them no political benefit are seen as a threat, meriting a hostile response.
Read More ›
Experiments like ARC–AGI have finally made true computer intelligence into a scientifically respectable theory, because AI can now be falsified.
Read More ›
When scientists engage in political partisanship, they abandon accuracy, regarding their choice a form of righteousness as long as the Good party wins.
Read More ›
Increasingly, those who claim to be science’s greatest defenders do the sector wrong by becoming highly ideological and progressively partisan.
Read More ›
If AI systems such as ChatGPT cannot engage in conceptual thought, then they can only promote consensus, which is what we see.
Read More ›
The science world has come to depend on China a great deal — for money, among other things — and dare not risk giving offense by unwanted discussion.
Read More ›
On the whole, Milligan’s worries are not so much unreasonable as they are perennial. People will NOT easily accept that we might be alone in the universe.
Read More ›
Their strategy worked quite well because, by gentleman’s agreement, everyone closed ranks and no one asked hard questions — until quite recently…
Read More ›