This post is Part 1f with the topics being Science, Gender and Race. I recently came across the 2020 Philosopher Papers Survey of 7,685 academic philosophers around the world. (I think < 1,800 actually responded). I then ran into my first problem - uhh, what do those answers mean? It reminded me of tax lawyers writing for other tax lawyers. One piece of advice I used to give younger tax lawyers when they were writing for a business audience - drop the nuance.

This post is Part 1e with the topics being Metaethics, Analytic-Synthetic Distinction and Aesthetic Value. I recently came across the 2020 Philosopher Papers Survey of 7,685 academic philosophers around the world. (I think < 1,800 actually responded). I then ran into my first problem - uhh, what do those answers mean? It reminded me of tax lawyers writing for other tax lawyers. One piece of advice I used to give younger tax lawyers when they were writing for a business audience - drop the nuance.

This post is Part 1d with the topics being Mind, Meaning of Life and Knowledge. I recently came across the 2020 Philosopher Papers Survey of 7,685 academic philosophers around the world. (I think < 1,800 actually responded). I then ran into my first problem - uhh, what do those answers mean? It reminded me of tax lawyers writing for other tax lawyers. One piece of advice I used to give younger tax lawyers when they were writing for a business audience - drop the nuance.

This post is Part 1c with the topics being Normative Ethics, Footbridge Experiment and the Trolley Problem. I recently came across the 2020 Philosopher Papers Survey of 7,685 academic philosophers around the world. (I think < 1,800 actually responded). I then ran into my first problem - uhh, what do those answers mean? It reminded me of tax lawyers writing for other tax lawyers. One piece of advice I used to give younger tax lawyers when they were writing for a business audience - drop the nuance.

This post is Part 1b with the topics being External World, Free Will and A priori knowledge. I recently came across the 2020 Philosopher Papers Survey of 7,685 academic philosophers around the world. (I think < 1,800 actually responded). I then ran into my first problem - uhh, what do those answers mean? It reminded me of tax lawyers writing for other tax lawyers. One piece of advice I used to give younger tax lawyers when they were writing for a business audience - drop the nuance.

This post is Part 1a with the topics being Aim of Philosophy, God and Eating Animals. I recently came across the 2020 Philosopher Papers Survey of 7,685 academic philosophers around the world. (I think < 1,800 actually responded). I then ran into my first problem - uhh, what do those answers mean? It reminded me of tax lawyers writing for other tax lawyers. One piece of advice I used to give younger tax lawyers when they were writing for a business audience - drop the nuance.

Warning: Very Long Post and Very Deep Rabbit Hole about something that doesn’t really matter. Elon Musk has publicly said that we’re most likely in a simulation. Before we get into anything, please note that this is a hypothesis, not a theory. What is the Simulation Hypothesis? The super simple description of the idea that the universe could be a simulation is you assume unlimited computing power and God/aliens create a sufficiently complex version of the Matrix, Inception, Minecraft or the Sims and we are just the characters running around inside a computer program.

I will posit this as my opinion - it is easier to change opinions than it is to change beliefs. The line drawing between opinions and beliefs is probably fuzzy, however. I would also suggest that your own personality will affect whether seeing facts contrary to your own opinion will cause you to change that opinion. I think this opinion of mine gets some support in a recent paper (abstract published at Close Minded Cognition).

That paper determined that people scoring high in the desire for order, structure and preservation of social norms tend to be less successful at correcting erroneous beliefs when confronted by new information. For those people, a close-minded cognitive style negatively influences belief updating. (click on the title to see more)