What are the laws of physics? Are they entities? Algorithms? Do they even exist?
Are the laws of physics themselves physical, or are they meta-physical?
If the laws of physics don't exist, then what are we describing with those words? What is the cause of the regularity in the physical world?
Check out more at: http://www.steve-patterson.com
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK7OJv-XJpA
The paradox of Buridan's Ass, as with other paradoxes, contains an error nestled in its premises.
Check out more at: http://www.steve-patterson.com
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tV8tS3Xw1ac
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/patterson-in-pursuit-philosophy/id1106619794?mt=2
Stitcher: http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/patterson-in-pursuit-philosophy-politics-religion
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Square One: The Foundations of Knowledge: http://amzn.to/2m8azBO
Free Praxis module: http://steve-patterson.com/praxis
Does infinity really come in multiple sizes? According to mathematical orthodoxy, some infinities are bigger than others - but that's awfully hard to wrap your mind around. So, I've asked Dr. Toby Meadows from the University of Queensland to help me out. He specializes in the philosophy of mathematics and set theory.
Check out more at: http://www.steve-patterson.com
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5gvDFIhRwk
Original article here: http://steve-patterson.com/karma-or-coincidence/
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4HHT9YsGcE
True skepticism isn't about dismissing anecdotes as "non-scientific". It's not about treating scientific data as god-given. It's about seeing the merits - and pitfalls - of both data sets. Anecdotes are one kind of data; randomized, controlled studies are another kind. They both have benefits and drawbacks, and they both have passionate, dogmatic proponents.
Check out more at: http://www.steve-patterson.com
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HgGcN7qiCE
This article was inspired by a life-size replica of the crucifixion within a church in Bergen, Norway. The church service was pointless, but the replica sparked some valuable thoughts about love and hate.
Original article here: http://steve-patterson.com/the-crucifixion-a-unification-of-love-and-hate/
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGdY4xd9K6w
People often confuse "linguistic truth" with "metaphysical truth". If we want to have a clear worldview, we must understand the difference and never conflate the two. Our descriptions of reality do not affect reality.
Check out more at: http://www.steve-patterson.com
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qfobZPNt_U
iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/patterson-in-pursuit-philosophy/id1106619794?mt=2
Stitcher: http://www.stitcher.com/podcast/patterson-in-pursuit-philosophy-politics-religion
Patreon: http://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
TK Coleman joins me for another excellent conversation about race. This week, we focus on the concept of "colorblindness."
Is it possible to be colorblind, or is that naive? Can we recognize differences among groups, while still judging every individual according to their own character?
Is white supremacism a fundamental feature of white people's minds - so much, that they cannot spot it within themselves? Is the reason that so many people deny being racist is because of a lack of self-awareness?
We cover these questions - and many more - in the next two episodes.
Check out more at: http://www.steve-patterson.com
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZIWLILNl2Q
What's more likely: a precise description of an ambiguous world, or an ambiguous description of a precise world?
This is the modernist fallacy: to think that conceptual blurriness correctly describes a blurry world.
To me, this is silly and irrational. Ambiguous theories are flawed; they aren't positive arguments for "true ambiguity"
To more deeply understand why paradoxes don't exist in the world, read my short book on the topic: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01M9JL27L/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&linkCode=sl1&tag=stevepatte-20&linkId=84e1ef535102b96acf62739f284b0519
Check out more at: http://www.steve-patterson.com
If you think this content is worth $1, please check out my Patreon page to support the creation of more videos like this:
https://www.patreon.com/stevepatterson
Or you can enter Amazon through: http://goo.gl/ftfFLg
Or, you can support with Bitcoin Cash: qp35pt4qlgskgg05zjuuy84udnnhw4ma7vrn05qjfz
...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt4zd5LY3nA