Synchronous Online Philosophy Courses: An Experiment in Progress

There are two main ways to teach a course online: synchronously or asynchronously. In an asynchronous course, students can log on at their convenience and do the course work. In a synchronous course, there is a requirement that all students be online at specific times, to allow for a shared course environment. In this article, the author discusses the strengths and weaknesses of synchronous online learning for the teaching of undergraduate philosophy courses. The author discusses specific strategies and technologies he uses in the teaching of online philosophy courses. In particular, the author discusses how he uses videoconferencing to create a classroom-like environment in an online class

A conceptual proposal on the undecidability of the distribution law of prime numbers and theoretical consequences

Within the conceptual framework of number theory, we consider prime numbers and the classic still unsolved problem to find a complete law of their distribution. We ask ourselves if such persisting difficulties could be understood as due to theoretical incompatibilities. We consider the problem in the conceptual framework of computational theory. This article is a contribution to the philosophy of mathematics proposing different possible understandings of the supposed theoretical unavailability and indemonstrability of the existence of a law of distribution of prime numbers. Tentatively, we conceptually consider demonstrability as computability, in our case the conceptual availability of an algorithm able to compute the general properties of the presumed primes’ distribution law without computing such distribution. The link between the conceptual availability of a distribution law of primes and decidability is given by considering how to decide if a number is prime without computing. The supposed distribution law should allow for any given prime knowing the next prime without factorial computing. Factorial properties of numbers, such as their property of primality, require their factorisation (or equivalent, e.g., the sieves), i.e., effective computing. However, we have factorisation techniques available, but there are no (non-quantum) known algorithms which can effectively factor arbitrary large integers. Then factorisation is undecidable. We consider the theoretical unavailability of a distribution law for factorial properties, as being prime, equivalent to its non-computability, undecidability. The availability and demonstrability of a hypothetical law of distribution of primes is inconsistent with its undecidability. The perspective is to transform this conjecture into a theorem

Why think that the brain is not a computer?

In this paper, I review the objections against the claim that brains are computers, or, to be precise, information-processing mechanisms. By showing that practically all the popular objections are either based on uncharitable interpretation of the claim, or simply wrong, I argue that the claim is likely to be true, relevant to contemporary cognitive (neuro)science, and non-trivial

Towards responsible quantum technology, safeguarding, engaging and advancing Quantum R&D

The expected societal impact of quantum technologies (QT) urges us to proceed and innovate responsibly. This article proposes a conceptual framework for Responsible QT that seeks to integrate considerations about ethical, legal, social, and policy implications (ELSPI) into quantum R&D, while responding to the Responsible Research and Innovation dimensions of anticipation, inclusion, reflection and responsiveness. After examining what makes QT unique, we argue that quantum innovation should be guided by a methodological framework for Responsible QT, aimed at jointly safeguarding against risks by proactively addressing them, engaging stakeholders in the innovation process, and continue advancing QT (SEA). We further suggest operationalizing the SEA-framework by establishing quantum-specific guiding principles. The impact of quantum computing on information security is used as a case study to illustrate (1) the need for a framework that guides Responsible QT, and (2) the usefulness of the SEA-framework for QT generally. Additionally, we examine how our proposed SEA-framework for responsible innovation can inform the emergent regulatory landscape affecting QT, and provide an outlook of how regulatory interventions for QT as base-layer technology could be designed, contextualized, and tailored to their exceptional nature in order to reduce the risk of unintended counterproductive effects of policy interventions. Laying the groundwork for a responsible quantum ecosystem, the research community and other stakeholders are called upon to further develop the recommended guiding principles, and discuss their operationalization into best practices and real-world applications. Our proposed framework should be considered a starting point for these much needed, highly interdisciplinary efforts

Counterpossibles in Science: The Case of Relative Computability

I develop a theory of counterfactuals about relative computability, i.e. counterfactuals such as 'If the validity problem were algorithmically decidable, then the halting problem would also be algorithmically decidable,' which is true, and 'If the validity problem were algorithmically decidable, then arithmetical truth would also be algorithmically decidable,' which is false. These counterfactuals are counterpossibles, i.e. they have metaphysically impossible antecedents. They thus pose a challenge to the orthodoxy about counterfactuals, which would treat them as uniformly true. What’s more, I argue that these counterpossibles don’t just appear in the periphery of relative computability theory but instead they play an ineliminable role in the development of the theory. Finally, I present and discuss a model theory for these counterfactuals that is a straightforward extension of the familiar comparative similarity models

The Busy Beaver Competition: a historical survey

Tibor Rado defined the Busy Beaver Competition in 1962. He used Turing machines to give explicit definitions for some functions that are not computable and grow faster than any computable function. He put forward the problem of computing the values of these functions on numbers 1, 2, 3, ... More and more powerful computers have made possible the computation of lower bounds for these values. In 1988, Brady extended the definitions to functions on two variables. We give a historical survey of these works. The successive record holders in the Busy Beaver Competition are displayed, with their discoverers, the date they were found, and, for some of them, an analysis of their behavior.Comment: 70 page

Humanités numériques et modélisation scientifique

Les projets dans les humanités numériques sont-ils de nature scientifique ? Une vision dite pragmatique et cognitive de la science montre que les théories scientifiques sont avant tout des modèles de différents types qui, ensemble, contribuent à l’avancement du savoir. Implicitement ou explicitement, les humanités numériques utilisent des modèles formels, matériels, conceptuels qui leur permettent de se positionner comme démarche scientifique, mais qui, aussi, limitent et contraignent leur méthode et leur champ d’application dans le domaine des humanités. En ce sens, les humanités numériques créent une passerelle originale entre les sciences et l’herméneutique.Can digital humanities build scientific theories? The pragmatic and cognitive conception of science allows us to see scientific theories as sets of various types of models. It is by working together that the models contribute to the advancement of knowledge. Implicitly or explicitly, digital humanities also use models that allow them to position themselves as a scientific inquiry. But this also limits and constrains their method and application in the field of the humanities. In this sense, digital humanities create an original bridge between science and hermeneutics

Humanités numériques et modélisation scientifique

Les projets dans les humanités numériques sont-ils de nature scientifique ? Une vision dite pragmatique et cognitive de la science montre que les théories scientifiques sont avant tout des modèles de différents types qui, ensemble, contribuent à l’avancement du savoir. Implicitement ou explicitement, les humanités numériques utilisent des modèles formels, matériels, conceptuels qui leur permettent de se positionner comme démarche scientifique, mais qui, aussi, limitent et contraignent leur méthode et leur champ d’application dans le domaine des humanités. En ce sens, les humanités numériques créent une passerelle originale entre les sciences et l’herméneutique.Can digital humanities build scientific theories? The pragmatic and cognitive conception of science allows us to see scientific theories as sets of various types of models. It is by working together that the models contribute to the advancement of knowledge. Implicitly or explicitly, digital humanities also use models that allow them to position themselves as a scientific inquiry. But this also limits and constrains their method and application in the field of the humanities. In this sense, digital humanities create an original bridge between science and hermeneutics