Just a concept at this stage, but he's a tech-head and his notion is to produce (for example) a natural stone pendant that glows when you warm it with your hands, or a wand that activates a light when you wave it over your altar, or a small stack of river stones that charges your cell-phone. Would those sorts of things be of interest?
So conventionally naturalism is taken to be a position contra, say, mathematical platonism, because platonists are committed to mathematical objects 'existing', and clearly mathematical objects don't follow the laws of physics. But the platonist isn't claiming that mathematical objects are spatio-temporal, and as far as I'm aware isn't claiming that mathematical objects have spatio-temporal effects. On this account it seems like you could have something which could reasonably be called naturalism, as in its committed to everything that is spatio-temporal and everything that has spatio-temporal effects following the same set of laws, but doesn't demand that everything that is 'real' follows the same set of laws. So no ghosts, no god, but mathematical objects, or The Good, or whatever else. I can see how people might be unimpressed with this as a metaphysical stance, as it seems to be just be talking the objects of investigation of the natural sciences, and so is perhaps just a physical claim, but yeah.
Like i got myself a new snowboard recently and i nammed it Griff, my fav caracter from SSX 3 :)
The different categories of 'what we talk about' could be things like:
Clearly some of these categories overlap, so it would be more that conversational content would be tagged with appropriate labels, so it could be tagged with several different labels, like 'factual,self-promoting' - "Hey, I passed my driving test!" etc
Would be fascinating to know how the proportions change for different environments/circumstances/situations. For example, how do things change between first meeting someone and getting to know them over time, differences between family members and friends, differences between work colleagues and talking casually with the boss etc
Ideally I'd like to know this in environments where we're speaking naturally (ie unaware that we're being recorded, since people will shy away from gossiping, for example, if they know they're being recorded). Obviously there's ethical problems with this, but perhaps some studies were done longer ago when people were less aware of ethics?
Alternatively, are there any such conversations available as raw materials?
EDIT: I've found a very interesting paper by Dunbar - Gossip in Evolutionary Perspective https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1037/1089-26220.127.116.11 He analyzes publicly overheard conversations for content, exactly what I was after.
Having my coffee this morning I had a thought. Consider you had a cup of hot coffee and a cup of cold creamer sitting on a table in identical volumes in identical cups with the same delta temperature with the ambient with the same thermal fluid properties as they’re both mostly water. Which is faster the milk heating up or the coffee cooling down?
Now I know in extreme scenarios where the air is extremely hot or extremely cold the kinematic viscosity and density would vary a bit which would affect the buoyancy and viscous forces changing your grashoff number and your rate of convection. But say the delta is only 40F for the milk and the coffee and we neglect these differences.
In my mind nearly everything will be the same except for some geometry effects. Assume there is a gap between the surface level of the milk and the top of the cup, you’d have a small amount of volume where warmer air once cooled by the milk will fall and fill and stagnate this volume essentially acting as an insulation to further currents.
But in grand scheme of things I’d assume this would be a small factor in the heat leak out/into the cups as most of the flux will occur on the outer cup surface since there’s a larger surface area there and vertical plate or cylinder natural conv is typically stronger than horizontal (if I’m remembering correctly).
Thanks for your time!
I tend to feel a different experience when I'm perceiving nature (e.g. hiking/camping in Yosemite) vs perceiving a human object (e.g. listening to music, watching a film). They feel like similar experiences, yet different. But, I don't know how to describe how they're similar or how they're different.
I was wondering if philosophy can help me with that description. Has philosophy (or psychology) defined how these two experiences are similar, yet different?
I believe this same thought can be applied to looking at paintings vs. listening to music.
I'm going to sound a bit uneducated since I don't know a lot of linguistic terms, it's just a hobby so far and I've never studied linguistics formally.
I just watched a video covering some basics from old Japanese, and I noticed that natural numbers were awfully similar to object counters in modern Japanese.
|Old Japanese numerals (transliterated)||Arabic numerals||Modern Japanese obj. counters (translit.)||Mod. Japanese natural numbers (translit.)|
I'd be grateful if anybody here who knows more about Japanese could explain this to me, how natural numbers in today's Japanese arose, and how the natural numbers in old Japanese evolved into the object counters.
I wish I could be more specific about the kind of answer I really search for, but I hope I made myself clear.
Thanks in advance