Author: Huenemann

We’d like to try a reading group for Philosophy Club. Each month or so, someone will propose a short essay which we’ll read, and then discuss some evening at a fun place. To start things off, you all are invited to read Isaiah Berlin’s “Two Concepts of Liberty”. Then the plan is that we’ll meet to discuss it on Thursday, September 17th, at 7 p.m., at  the Bull’s Head Grill (west of the football stadium, in the “Blue Square” complex). Philosophy alum Dan Tate will be starting off our discussion.

It’s mainly about meeting people and having fun and interesting conversation – so don’t feel you need to have especially brilliant insights about the essay. All are welcome!

A fun and insightful lecture here about the value of recognizing the tragic pointlessness of all things – (h/t Mike Howsden) –

Interesting essay here (“Fearing Artificial Intelligence”) by Ali Minai:

Whatever happens, one thing is certain:  Intelligent algorithms will certainly transform human society in major ways. And one of these will be to challenge our bedrock notions of ourselves: As more and more abilities that we had considered essentially human – thinking, planning, linguistic expression, science, art – become automated, it will become harder to avoid the question if these too are, like routine tasks and calculations, just material processes after all.

Welcome back to campus! Our college, the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, has an annual welcoming ceremony in the amphitheater a little downhill of Old Main: Tuesday eve, starting around 7 p.m. It’s a fun gathering – and it involves fire – and Philosophy Club will have a table there, giving away books. Come join in the fun! (Did I mention it involves fire?)

Brad Inwood gives a digest of his book at The Montreal Review. Excerpt:

I think the enduring appeal of Aristotelian ethics is unsurprising. Once you subtract some of the culturally specific quirks of his views (Greece in the fourth century BC was not a particularly liberal environment) he gives us a highly attractive vision of good human life, one that mere humans can aspire to achieve – it allows for our foibles, but success is by no means easy. The good life it sketches has a clear link to who we are in our real natures; our ‘lower’ selves are to be guided and regulated rather than quashed, desire and pleasure are to be managed not transcended. He claims that we are essentially human, neither beasts nor gods – failure to achieve a transcendent perfection doesn’t leave us wallowing in the muck. And he recognizes the variety of human natures – we aren’t all built for the intellectual perfections that Aristotle, like most philosophers, ranks highest. If the godlike abstract thinker is somehow highest in his view there is still a robust and fully satisfying happiness open to the rest of us.