CHAD BOCHAN How to have conversations that lead to actual answers.
A revolution in our sense of self | Nick Chater
Psychologists have tried to plumb the depths of human motivation to make sense of our behaviour. But our inner mental world is a fiction, sustained by constant improvisation
Parmenides: Pre-Socratic Philosophy
philosophy for life on Twitter / X
“Any fool can know. The point is to understand.”- Albert Einstein— philosophy for life (@philosophy_life) October 11, 2026
Learn Your Philosophical Beliefs | ClearerThinking.org
Find your direction in life with our philosophical compass, a tool to explore your beliefs, values and purpose!
Terence Tao (@tao@mathstodon.xyz)
In basic research, such as pure mathematics, one might naively expect that the natural question to ask with regards to a given problem X in a field is "What is the answer to X?". But in many cases the more valuable question is "What can be learned from studying X?" The answer to X itself can of course be one of the things learned in this process of study; but one can learn far more useful information besides, such as * What are the main difficulties to overcome to resolve X? * What new techniques can one discover in order to solve X? * Why are existing techniques insufficient to solve the problem by itself? * How does X relate to results in prior literature? * Can one uncover new connections between X and other topics Y, Z, ...? * What are some natural related or followup questions X', X'', ... to study? Nevertheless, until recently the two questions were closely aligned, to the point where it was not really necessary to distinguish the two: the only practical route to solving a difficult problem was to first address many of the subquestions listed above. (1/3)
Development Beyond Information: Human Becoming in the Age of AI
Abstract. Discussions of artificial intelligence in education increasingly equate development with the acquisition and deployment of information. This article argues that such accounts rest on false assumptions. Development is better understood not as an informational state but as a relational, historical process of becoming through which persons emerge and continue to change. Drawing on Vygotsky, on Ilyenkov's distinction between living and petrified ideality, and on the enactive approach to cognition, we characterise development through four features: its historicity, its dependence on reciprocal sense-making, its mediation by others who orient the learner, and its cultivation within relations of care. Large language models operate over the sedimented products of these processes without participating in them. As objectifications of human purposes, such systems may mediate human development or foreclose it. We conclude by considering what this account implies for education.
(PDF) Why is dialogical solving of a logical problem more effective than individual solving?: A formal and experimental study of an abstract version of Wason’s task
PDF | We study the accomplishment of the abstract version of Wason’s selection task in a cooperative dialogue context that has been neglected in the... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate
Field Notes: The Architecture of Rationalization - Aaron Ross Powell
Marginalia on the internet turning bad, platform extraction, and existential restlessness.
Why major life decisions should be approached with ‘epistemic humility’ | Psyche Videos
At a crossroads in life? No matter how much you deliberate, one unknowable remains: the person you will be on the other side
Hegel’s Dialectics
“Dialectics” is a term used to describe a method ofphilosophical argument that involves some sort of contradictoryprocess between opposing sides. In what is perhaps the most classicversion of “dialectics”, the ancient Greek philosopher,Plato (see entry on Plato), for instance, presented his philosophical argument as aback-and-forth dialogue or debate, generally between the character ofSocrates, on one side, and some person or group of people to whomSocrates was talking (his interlocutors), on the other. In the courseof the dialogues, Socrates’ interlocutors propose definitions ofphilosophical concepts or express views that Socrates challenges oropposes. The back-and-forth debate between opposing sides produces akind of linear progression or evolution in philosophical views orpositions: as the dialogues go along, Socrates’ interlocutorschange or refine their views in response to Socrates’ challengesand come to adopt more sophisticated views. The back-and-forthdialectic between Socrates and his interlocutors thus becomesPlato’s way of arguing against the earlier, less sophisticatedviews or positions and for the more sophisticated ones later.
Philosophy Experiments — Interactive Thought Experiments
Explore 27 interactive philosophy experiments that challenge your moral intuitions, test your logical reasoning, and probe the boundaries of belief.
The Mind-Expanding Ideas of Andy Clark
The tools we use to help us think—from language to smartphones—may be part of thought itself.
David Whyte on Courage as a Measure of Our Heartfelt Participation with Life
David is a a true elder, with a gift for weaving together our inner and outer worlds in what he calls ‘the conversational nature of…
Taking Love Seriously: What Ancient Wisdom & Modern Psychology Say About Interconnectedness - The Great Simplification
In this episode, Nate welcomes Dr. John Churchill, a psychologist and former Buddhist monk, to explore a map of human development that runs from "first-person" perspective of the isolated self all the way to a felt, embodied sense of interdependence with the planet itself.
Simply Jekyll
A non-linear thread of important ideas weaved together to explore and understand the fabric of knowledge.
"There is a contrast between my biological development, confidently realizing its in-built norm, and my fumbling psychological development, realizing partially..one among many apparently possible orders .. Learning what to want is the most radical, the most painful and the most creative art of life"
