Not a secret anymore! I am extremely proud and happy to present you the EVApeCognition Dataset, out now in Scientific Data.

Over the last 5 years we have assembled and standardized data from 150 studies on great ape cognition from the WKPRC in the Leipzig Zoo!

www.nature.com/articles/s41...

It's not just about the players. For which Arsenal attacking players could you say that Arteta has got the best out of them this season? Not Havertz, not Gyökeres, not Saka, not Martinelli, not Trossard, not Odegaard, not Nwaneri, not Jesus, not Eze. Maybe just maybe Madueke?

It wasn't only the final third. In the first half not a single Arsenal player tried to control the ball in midfield. It was also just stupid knock-ons and careless passing that gave the ball right back to City.

Do you think they know we've still been sending students there? It's just not called Erasmus now.

no

Are you still crabs though? How strong is the analogy?

rofl

Do you think the authors even think that animals have personal-level goals? (I'm surprised that many still don't; or at least think the distinction uninteresting.)

If I thought it was bullshit, I wouldn't be thinking about writing on it. But even if there might be a place for theological metaphysics somewhere, it isn't in the theory of meaning.

omg

It's the one with the nonsense about the four conditions of philosophy. Coauthored with a Magic 8 Ball.

So it's hardly a surprised that at that point analytic philosophers of language checked out. Still, it's an interesting question whether Derrida's metaphysics of meaning tracks some of our ethical intuitions. (One day I'll write a book about this, but it's third on my list of books I want to write.)

In contrast Derrida wrote about messianism without a Messiah (Monolingualism), and how platonic ideals are both impossible and "call in silence from their place of hiding" (in Force of Law). Then he built a theory of meaning grounded in paradoxes and a puzzling theological metaphysics.

Yes, but the analytics (more Wittgenstein and Grice than Quine) gave good answers to the question of how we communicate in the absence of platonic meanings, by invoking the various roles of pragmatics, convention, and interpretation.

Why choose AI when you can have the real thing?

But Badiou's Manifesto is just gibberish. Scandalously bad. Like auto-generated fortune cookie nonsense, pulled out of a hat, and published in that order.

Well the field isn't uniformly bad. I got a lot out of Derrida (including my MA thesis), even if I think that most of it's wrong; and I think a lot of early Heidegger is both good and right. I even enjoyed Badiou's writing on Beckett.

Maybe she does think and she's just an idiot.

I think it's naive to insist that the issues with continental philosophy are down to translation errors. I've read Badiou in English and French and it's crap in both.

I've been listening and it's great.

Still, let's not overstate the competence of people with PhDs.

docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...

I guess the categories can't be mutually exclusive. Also, were you moved because you were moving out of the way of the bee's pee? 🥹

I think the world consists of people who care about people/animals, and people who care about things. If you don't care about things, then there's no reason to care about the moon. It's just a big space rock. It's not different from regular rocks; just bigger and further away.

Does the use of 'shopper' mean the individual bought something? And if so, was it before or after pooping on the shelf? Inquiring minds, etc.

Real embarrassing, perhaps.

omg

I'm sure it knows best what's best for us 🥹

Is an injection between the eyes ChatGPT's best interpretation of helping?

🤔🤔