Quickly: ”What are some examples where theory of philosophy on the forums is significantly better than e.g. the best book on the topic of that year?” -> I think the word “better” here is oversimplifying. I’d expect that published work in formal philosophy will represent more labor and often more skills of certain kinds than blog posts. But I’d also expect this to come with certain assumptions and focus areas that I disagree with.
I’d notice that I’m finding it awkward to be specific here, because then I feel like I’d be calling out some writers as “mid-tier”, and also calling out specific academics that I know.
I didn’t mean to make a very controversial or strong point here.
Yeah, makes a lot of sense! I think of mid-tier not as offensive since it’s also just about Gwern spending all his time on writing vs. Kat Woods running an organization as well—huge respect to both of course for what they do.
Great post, hadn’t seen that one before.
I’ll also mention that I don’t think SoTA philosophy happens in any way within any of the areas that Luke mentions. If this is classified as academic philosophy, then that’s definitely fair. But if you look at where philosophy is developed the most (outside of imaginary parallel worlds) in my eyes, it’s the summaries of academic work on consciousness (The Conscious Mind), computer science (Gödel, Escher, Bach), AI (Superintelligence), genetic foundations for morals (Blueprint for Civilization), empirical studies of human behavior in moral scenarios (Thinking, Fast and Slow), politics (Expert Political Judgment), cognitive enhancement (Tools for Thought), and neuroscience (The Brain from Inside Out), all of which have academic centres of excellence that are very inspiring.
Like, the place philosophers who truly want to understand the philosophical underpinnings of reality go today looks very very different than it did during the renaissance, in the sense that we now have instruments and mathematics that can measure ethics, morals, and the fundamental properties of reality.
My point wasn’t at all that bloggers are better than the best academics. More I was highlighting that there are situations like those in what’s known as contemporary “Philosophy”, which features people who are well-respected within certain niches, but whom most of us wouldn’t find that exciting.
Quickly:
”What are some examples where theory of philosophy on the forums is significantly better than e.g. the best book on the topic of that year?”
-> I think the word “better” here is oversimplifying. I’d expect that published work in formal philosophy will represent more labor and often more skills of certain kinds than blog posts. But I’d also expect this to come with certain assumptions and focus areas that I disagree with.
I’d point people to this previous post:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FwiPfF8Woe5JrzqEu/philosophy-a-diseased-discipline
And maybe:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/LcEzxX2FNTKbB6KXS/train-philosophers-with-pearl-and-kahneman-not-plato-and
I’d notice that I’m finding it awkward to be specific here, because then I feel like I’d be calling out some writers as “mid-tier”, and also calling out specific academics that I know.
I didn’t mean to make a very controversial or strong point here.
Yeah, makes a lot of sense! I think of mid-tier not as offensive since it’s also just about Gwern spending all his time on writing vs. Kat Woods running an organization as well—huge respect to both of course for what they do.
Great post, hadn’t seen that one before.
I’ll also mention that I don’t think SoTA philosophy happens in any way within any of the areas that Luke mentions. If this is classified as academic philosophy, then that’s definitely fair. But if you look at where philosophy is developed the most (outside of imaginary parallel worlds) in my eyes, it’s the summaries of academic work on consciousness (The Conscious Mind), computer science (Gödel, Escher, Bach), AI (Superintelligence), genetic foundations for morals (Blueprint for Civilization), empirical studies of human behavior in moral scenarios (Thinking, Fast and Slow), politics (Expert Political Judgment), cognitive enhancement (Tools for Thought), and neuroscience (The Brain from Inside Out), all of which have academic centres of excellence that are very inspiring.
Like, the place philosophers who truly want to understand the philosophical underpinnings of reality go today looks very very different than it did during the renaissance, in the sense that we now have instruments and mathematics that can measure ethics, morals, and the fundamental properties of reality.
Yep, I agree with most of that.
My point wasn’t at all that bloggers are better than the best academics. More I was highlighting that there are situations like those in what’s known as contemporary “Philosophy”, which features people who are well-respected within certain niches, but whom most of us wouldn’t find that exciting.
Yep, probably agree with this. Then it’s definitely good to lead a promising researcher away from the bad nichés and into the better ones!