Posted by: Justin | November 30, 2009

Jenann Ismael at USC

Jenann Ismael (Arizona, Center for Time – Sydney) will give a talk at USC on Friday, Dec. 4, at 4:00 pm in Mudd Hall of Philosophy 102. Her talk is entitled “Freedom, Natural Law, and the Humanization of Physics”.

Posted by: Justin | November 30, 2009

Elliot Sober at Caltech

Elliott Sober, Professor of Philosophy, University of Wisconsin – Madison will give the talk: Did Darwin write ‘The Origin of the Species’ Backwards?

Friday, 4 December 2009, 4:00pm
Caltech, Cahill Center, Hameetman Auditorium
Refreshments will follow in the lobby

Posted by: Justin | November 30, 2009

St. Louis Conference on Reasons and Rationality

Here‘s some information about the conference, which will be held at U. of Missouri-St. Louis from May 23-25, 2010. Note: deadline for submission of abstracts is Dec. 31.

Posted by: Justin | November 8, 2009

E=K: What am I missing?

I haven’t read very much of Williamson’s Knowledge and Its Limits; this is probably answered somewhere in there. But why isn’t this a good argument against E=K?

(1) I know that the sun will rise tomorrow.

(2) It’s not part of my body of evidence that the sun will rise tomorrow.

(3) Therefore, I know a proposition which is not part of my body of evidence.

I think that (1) is true. Maybe some people don’t. In fact, the little bit of the book I did read suggested that Williamson may think something like this. I don’t have a copy of the book in front of me, but somewhere (I think in chapter 9), he talks about a case where I watch someone draw n marbles from a bag, and they’re all red. Intuitively, the proposition that the n+1 marble drawn is red is not part of my evidence. One reason to think this is that it seems compatible with my evidence that the n+1 marble drawn is not red. But if it was part of my evidence that the n+1 marble drawn is red, then this would not be compatible. Williamson’s explanation for why this proposition is not part of my evidence is that I do not know it. For a small n, I can buy this. But what if n is large? Can’t I come to know, by induction, that the next draw is red? This is essentially the worry I’m pressing in (1)-(3) above. It seems that it’s compatible with my evidence that the sun doesn’t rise tomorrow (this could probably be challenged). So the proposition that it will is not part of my body of evidence. But I do know it (given that it’s true). So E=K is false.

Where am I going wrong?

Posted by: Justin | November 5, 2009

Southern California Philosophy Conference

The 12th Annual Southern California Philosophy Conference will be held this Saturday at Pitzer college. Several graduate students and professors from schools in the area will be presenting and commentating.

Posted by: Justin | October 27, 2009

CFP: USC/UCLA Conference

I feel like I should have gotten this up earlier. Here’s the link to the website, with the CFP. Note that the deadline is fast-approaching – November 1st.

Posted by: Justin | October 26, 2009

Reid conference

I don’t know about other places in the area, but Thomas Reid is pretty big here at USC. The BSHP Annual Conference is on Reid this year in Scotland. Note that the deadline for submission of abstracts is Oct. 31. So hurry!

Posted by: Justin | October 26, 2009

New home

This will be the new home of Hesperus/Phosphorus, the Southern California philosophy graduate student blog. I’ll work on getting everyone set up soon.

« Newer Posts

Categories