I need to converse with you guys. You talk about the stuff Noone I know can handle talking about but it's all I think about. 

isn't "metaphysical realism" an oxymoron? if so, shouldn't that lend credence to Heisenberg's position?

i'm confused about the use of the term acceleration.  is it the electron that's actually "accelerating" (as an individual particle) or is it the wave's pulsation (or vibration) that make an electron's negative charge react (or illuminate?), causing us to perceive that reaction as acceleration?

so is the quantum zeno effect theoretical or actual?

there is no empty space--can't emphasize this enough

podcasts (science, philosophy)

Reporting in Science, researchers write of discovering four radio bursts from outer space. Physicist Duncan Lorimer, who detected the first such explosion in 2007, discusses what could be causing these radio signals.

Mysterious Radio Bursts, Sent From Deep Space

"On Werner Heisenberg’s “Physics and Philosophy” (1958), and talking about it with an actual former particle physicist, Dylan Casey.

What weird stuff about reality does quantum physics imply? Is Heisenberg (of the Uncertainty Principle fame) right that we need to reject “metaphysical realism” based on this very well established scientific framework? The discussion ranges over the uncertainty principle, relativity, wave/particle duality, Pre-Socratic metaphysics, why Kant is wrong about space, and lots of very weird things."

Go to blog

Metaphysical Implications of Quantum Mechanics - Partially Examined Life

On Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s What Is Philosophy? (1991).

How is philosophy different from science and art? What’s the relationship between different philosophies? Is better pursued solo, or in a group? Deleuze described philosophy as the creation of new concepts, whereas science is about functions that map observed regularities and art is about creating percepts and affects. Just reading or writing about past philosophers is not enough; you have to actually create concepts, and to create or understand a concept requires a “plane of immanence,” which is something like a set of background intuitions that is not private to a particular mind. Such a plane constitutes an image of what thought is and determines what questions will be considered legitimate, so trying to evaluate a past philosophy without grappling with the plane means you’ll inevitably misunderstand the philosopher and your critiques will just talk past him or her. Likewise, if you yank a philosophical concept out of its plane and try to turn it into a proposition that you can evaluate, it’s inevitably going to seem weak, like “just an opinion,” because propositions are not what philosophy creates. As for a pragmatist, “truth” for Deleuze is something defined within a plane, not some transcendental standard used to judge planes or concepts.

Mark, Seth, and Dylan are joined by “sophist” (PhD in rhetoric) Daniel Coffeen to try to figure this out.

Deleuze on What Philosophy Is - Partially Examined Life

Performance artist Marina Abramovic wants to build a laboratory devoted to arts and science. [Photo by Maxim Lubimov, Garage Center for Contemporary Culture]

Marina Abramovic: Experimenting on Consciousness, Through Art

&x202b;يارب صلي على النبي ياربي صلي - من اجمل المدائح النبوية - I

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don't have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we're talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion.

Metaphysical Implications of Quantum Mechanics - Partially Examined Life

Partially Examined Life

Recent comments

dialectical integrities

dialectical integrities

dialectical integrities

dialectical integrities

Related tracks