New publication: What's Wrong with the Semantic Conception of Theories? (Erkenntnis)
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
#philsci #philpapers
I argue against the move away from linguistic analysis of theories and models in philosophy of science and outline a pragmatic conception of theories.
I am not implying that pursuing a ‘correct’ score without serial mistakes is aesthetically incorrect or that a performer could not choose to depart from a written score to pursue a better performance. Instead, my view supports the advocators of Stravinsky’s original arrangement and performers who take Stravinsky’s confirmation as the final verdict about the ‘correct’ score. They listen to what Stravinsky is trying to say through the music, just as we try to figure out what our friends are telling us in our conversation, as we set aside the question of whether they are making mistakes. - Yili Zhou, Why Follow the Score? Aesthetic Normativity in Performing Classical Music and the Genuine Performing Experience
A novel explanation of the normativity of the score-following rule? You'll find one in our latest issue. doi.org/10.1093/aest... #philpapers
I've been rejected again.
philosophics.blog/2026/01/09/r...
I've not written about the nonsense of peer review, but these are unadulterated gatekeeping mechanisms antithetical to knowledge dissemination.
#philosophy #journals #credibility #gatekeeping #zenodo #philpapers #writing #letters #blog
Here's the final (view-only) version of my paper on large language models and representation:
rdcu.be/eXF6T
#philpapers
A theoretical physics answer to the age old question of whether God could make a rock so heavy he himself could not lift it: "The physical universe when pushed far past its
natural limits does allow the creation of an unliftable rock"
#philosophy #philpapers philpapers.org/rec/ANDCGM
In 48 hours, my paper on AI self-referential coherence went from 18 to 43 academic reads — now spreading across philosophy departments in Asia, Europe, and North America. The Turn 5 Event: philpapers.org/rec/WIKTTN
#ai #philpapers #coherence
This paper of mine is now officially published, a mere four years after it was accepted at Philosphers' Imprint. #philsky #philsci #philpapers
journals.publishing.umich.edu/phimp/articl...
#philpapers? #philsky, of course.
Although we can indeed describe the current critical scrutiny of drill as another iteration of the critical scrutiny of its predecessors, the scrutiny of drill is, as we will see, more severe. I show in the following sections how this has led to harsher levels of censorship and restriction. - Tareeq Omar Jalloh, Does the Critical Scrutiny of Drill Constitute an Epistemic Injustice?
The BSA's Postdoctoral Fellowship winner for this year is Tareeq Jalloh. Read his article from our October 2022 issue on the relationship between drill music and epistemic injustice. doi.org/10.1093/aest... #philpapers
In this essay, I critically examine fiduciary governance failures and conflicts of interest at PhilPapers, focusing particularly on the dual governance and editorial roles held by Professors David Chalmers and David Bourget. Drawing upon fiduciary theory, epistemic justice principles, and my prior scholarship, I argue that the concentration of both governance oversight and editorial decision-making within the same individuals creates structural conflicts that severely compromise transparency, impartiality, and accountability. These governance deficiencies not only undermine the legitimacy and scholarly integrity of PhilPapers but also contribute to epistemic injustice by diminishing scholars’ epistemic autonomy and trust globally. To address these issues, I propose immediate reforms including clear structural separation of fiduciary and editorial roles, establishment of an independent oversight board, rigorous transparency and accountability measures, and meaningful mechanisms for stakeholder responsiveness. The implementation of these reforms is essential, not only for restoring integrity at PhilPapers but also as a globally significant precedent for similar scholarly platforms and epistemic gatekeepers.
Just published my new essay, “Fiduciary Governance Failures and Conflicts of Interest at PhilPapers”—a critical analysis and urgent call for governance reform, transparency, and accountability at PhilPapers.
pkahl.substack.com/p/fiduciary-...
#PhilPapers
#EpistemicJustice
#Governance
#PeterKahl
Dear David Chalmers and David Bourget, I write this open letter to formally request public acknowledgment and resolution of persistent breaches of fiduciary-epistemic obligations at PhilPapers. As I have recently argued and advanced in my scholarly work—building upon foundational theories of fiduciary responsibility (Frankel, 2011) and epistemic accountability (Barnett, 2018)—academic repositories and platforms like PhilPapers bear critical fiduciary duties of transparency, openness, responsiveness, and epistemic accountability towards the scholarly community. My recent experiences with PhilPapers have highlighted troubling failures in fulfilling these obligations: Persistent technical barriers prevent me from uploading publications or submitting messages via the PhilPapers platform. These barriers have been accompanied by a lack of explanation or transparent communication, creating an atmosphere reminiscent of Kafkaesque opacity. Direct communications to Professors Chalmers and Bourget have gone unanswered, reflecting unresponsiveness incompatible with the fiduciary obligations you have assumed. My repeated attempts to engage PhilPapers publicly—including through explicit posts on LinkedIn—have similarly met with silence, reinforcing the perception of systemic epistemic gatekeeping.
Just published an open letter to David Chalmers and David Bourget of PhilPapers, calling out epistemic gatekeeping, breaches of fiduciary duties, and Kafkaesque opacity. Time for accountability in scholarly publishing.
#EpistemicJustice #PhilPapers #Transparency
pkahl.substack.com/p/open-lette...
I've just uploaded another new paper on #PhilPapers: "Ethical considerations for human-digital mind neural interfaces" (philpapers.org/rec/ZIEECF). Feedback is much welcome.
I've just uploaded another new paper on #PhilPapers: "AI welfare vs #AI #warfare" (philpapers.org/rec/ZIEAWV). Feedback is much welcome.
Happy to share with you that I've been accepted as a presenter at the upcoming King's College London Political Theory Conference, scheduled for April 25th. Tips on accesible accommodations are welcome.
See you there!
#Philosophy #PhilPapers #PoliticalTheory
Everyone Thinks that an Ability to Do Otherwise Is Necessary for Free Will and Moral Responsibility #philpapers #philsky #philosophy #agency
De-moralising Retributivism: agency, blame and humanity in criminal law theory and
practice #philsky #philpapers
Email message informing me that my article will be published in the journal Logos & Episteme.
Now this was a delightful email greeting me this morning. 🥳
#philosophy #philpapers #philsky #wittgenstein
What if Foucault had survived AIDS? DePaul University Philosophy Graduate Student Conference Foucault and the Frankfurt School September 20-21, 2024, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
#philosophy #philpapers
philpapers.org/rec/GONWIF-2
#PhilPapers feature suggestions included:
- [some existing but lesser-known features]
- PhilTeach: a database of syllabi and other course materials to help instructors share (and market) their curricula, worksheets, etc.
- [your suggestions in the comments — if popular, send them to the webmasters.]
Now to the #PhilPapers Roundtable! 🤓
@dbourget.bsky.social + @davidchalmers.bsky.social shared 3 exciting projects in the works:
1. #AI assisted search of #PhilArchive
2. Crowd-sourced manuscript ratings (e.g., how well it argues for or against a view).
3. Another #PhilSurveys follow-up study.
If you're an academic philosopher and you don't have a #PhilPapers profile or a @Google Scholar profile ...why? Seriously, why?
#philosophy
Today's challenge: translate the #PhilPapers #survey questions into lay terms. #philosophy #thisishard... http://fb.me/QxjYxo3b
