'I love that most students had no idea what the instructor thought, because she did a great job of defending every position that was discussed in class." #students
8/

Sorry for the naïve question, but is the claim contentious at all? "Provinces" hardly have an identity in Italy (many "regions" also lack it in many cases).

#UnrequestedAdvice for students working on Sanskrit philosophy:
Since you will be writing primarily for an audience who does not know your sources, I would recommend quoting them in full, instead of just evoking a page number

THE EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE RESEARCH PROGRAMME: DEGENERATIVE OR PROGRESSIVE? - Argumenta - Journal of Analytic Philosophy The notion of epistemic injustice introduced by Miranda Fricker in 2007 raised interest in the harmful effects of prejudice within analytic philosophy and beyond. It inspired various projects linking ...

CFP for a special issue of Argumenta, guest edited by @lisabortolotti.com & @lalumera.bsky.social:

THE EPISTEMIC INJUSTICE RESEARCH PROGRAMME: DEGENERATIVE OR PROGRESSIVE?

Deadline 30th of September.

"What does it say that participants were collectively most critical of cheating, the consequences of which are usually limited to an individual or a family, and least critical of eating meat?"

This goes extra intensely for academic writing, in my opinion. If you're using gAI to think (because that is what writing is) why should anyone read it? And sending AI generated writing off for peer review is just...

We have those. They are called “choose your own adventure” novels. Adults mostly don’t read them.

One of the big points of art, for me, is to enter community with the artist’s idea of the world. And maybe you’re changed or not, and maybe you write fanfic or don’t, but you’ve met another mind.

Yes, that seems to be Sucarita's approach (each cognition could in principle be falsified, but it counts as knowledge until it is falsified)

Yes. You can either reply by strengthening yr requirements for justification (& say that you thought you were justified, but in fact you weren't, since you only generically knew that someone had money in their pocket etc.) or you just give up on justification altogether and say that truth is enough

I wouldn't say that the only way to deal w Gettier-like cases is to claim that they are pramāṇābhāsa 'pseudo-knowledge'. Sucarita's way, namely to "bite the bullet" and declare them to be pramāṇic knowledge seems to me to be equally effective, especially insofar as not all Gettier cases are detected

My chapter: "In this sense, consciousness is for the self intrinsic".
English editor: "[…] consciousness is for the self-intrinsic" (completely non-sensical)
My revised version: "[…] consciousness is intrinsic to the self"
The English editor has been useful to make me rephrase the sentence

On arthāpatti, there is a book edited by M. Keating (M. C. Keating, editor, Controversial reasoning in indian philosophy: major texts and arguments on arthâpatti. Bloomsbury).

The knowledge derived from arthāpatti needs to be new, otherwise it would not be a pramāṇa. Before the arthāpatti, for instance, you did not know that overweight people who don't eat at daytime must eat at night.
7/7

Śālikanātha disagrees because arthāpatāti involves doubt and inference does not. BUT, all of them, being Mīmāṃsakas, agree that cognitions can be falsified, because of svataḥ prāmāṇya `intrinsic validity'.
6/

Nyāya authors think that arthāpatti is just a case of inference. Kumārila disagrees because it cannot be formalised in terms of pakṣa-hetu-sādhya. Prabhākara disagrees because the movement from certainty to uncertainty is the opposite than in inference.
5/

Sucarita, by contrast, (see McCrea on him), thinks that it was a real pramāṇa, and that it has been bādhita `blocked' or `defeated'.
4/4

And these also believe in svataḥ prāmāṇya, which includes the possibility of later overturning a previous cognition. What is the status of the overturned cognition? Opinions differ. Uṃveka would say that it was a pramāṇābhāsa `a pseudo-knowledge'.
3/

If you are a Naiyāyika, a Buddhist epistemologist etc., you just think that a successful arthāpatti is a case of inference. The only ones who accept arthāpatti as a distinct source of knowledge are Mīmāṃsā epistemologists.
2/

In Inference to the best explanation (aka abduction), one reasons among alternatives. arthāpatti is a pramāṇa 'source of *knowledge*', i.e., it does not give you just the likeliest outcome, but the only one.
#Philosophy #philsky

Universitat Wien is hiring:
Senior Lecturer in Ancient History and Studies in Classical Antiquity

#associateprofessor

OmG!

Just listened to Doug Wilson explaining that long-term, processions for the virgin Mary should be prohibited, because they are "public idolatry".

Dr. Manuel Vasquez Villavicencio - Arts & Science Office: Department of Philosophy, University Hall – 314A Email: vasqum3@mcmaster.ca Phone: N/A Office Hours: Monday 11:30-12:30 (appointment needed)  Dr. Manuel Vasquez Villavicencio is an assistant p...

I'm still spending most of my days w chores (grading, reviewing proofs…), but today I got to speak for hours about curiosity in Hume, omniscience in heaven and whether we will all be men in heaven with Manuel Vasquez Villavicencio, hence I'm happy:-)
#Philosophy
artsci.mcmaster.ca/dr-manuel-va...

upāyakauśalya

It seems that Toronto has put effort in becoming an uglier city…:-(

I really like Sally Haslanger's "favourite quotes" section of her website!
#Philosophy #philsky

So often I attend talks on philosophy which end up being a lot about reforming a specific historically given situation (US today or in the last 20 years). Perhaps studying history would help here?

Workshop on mantras at the University of Vienna in late May (unfortunately, at the same time as our Kumārila conference!):
www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/apk76...

#PhilosophyJobs

#PhilosophyJobs