| History and Philosophy of Science
Eötvös University, Budapest |
Philosophy of Science Colloquium
Room 6.54 (6th floor) Monday 4:00 PM |
| Pázmány P. sétány 1/A Budapest |
Phone/Fax: (36-1) 372 2924 |
Location? |
1 March 4:00 PM 6th floor 6.54 
|
György Geréby
|
Instiute for Philosophy, Eötvös University, Budapest
Department of Philosophy, CEU, Budapest
|
| |
Mentális nyelv problémák a 14. sz. elején
(The problem of mental language in the early 14th century)
|
|
|
8 March 4:00 PM 6th floor 6.54
|
Soós
Sándor
|
|
History and Philosophy of Science, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest
|
| |
A
fajok problematikájának “interdiszciplináris
mátrixa”: tudományelmélet, szemantika,
pszichológia vagy ontológia?
(The
“interdisciplinary matrix” of the species problem)
|
A
species problem
a XX. század második felében rendkívül
szerteágazó problémarendszerré nőtte ki
magát. A modern szintézis utáni biológia
fogalmi–módszertani kérdései kölcsönhatni
látszottak a rájuk épülő
tudományfilozófiai–ismeretelméleti–ontológiai
megfontolásokkal (amit többek között a
“fajok–mint–individuumok” tézis megszületése,
ill. a kládisztikának nevezett rendszertani iskolába
való beépülése
fémjelez). Mindennek dacára a problematika szívósan
tartja magát. Az utóbbi évek vonatkozó
irodalmának reprezentatív mintája (biológusok,
filozófusok és pszichológusok/antropológusokok
munkája) pedig már az “interdiszciplinaritás”
védjegyével látja el a kérdéskört
(Wilson, 1999)*.
A
témával szemben ugyanakkor évtizedek óta
fokozódik a szkepszis, és egyre erősödik
az az álláspont,
hogy a bajok forrása
a különböző területekről származó
érvek sajátos kapcsolatrendszerében (és
nem pl. a fajfogalmak tökéletlenségében)
keresendő:
a diszciplináris kölcsönhatás torzításai
okozzák. Az előadás egyrészt megkísérli
szisztematikusan felvázolni azt a mátrixot
(vagy annak erősen árulkodó részleteit), amely
az egyes kanonikus megközelítések
kapcsolatrendszerét ábrázolja, hogy azt elemezve
láthatóvá váljanak a species
problem
felszámolásához vezető utak.
* Wilson,
R.A., ed. 1999.
Species: New Interdisciplinary Essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
|
|
22 March 4:00 PM 6th floor 6.54 
|
|
|
Ph.D. candidate,
Philosophy, CEU, Budapest
|
|
The Doomsday Simulation Argument.
Or why isn’t the end nigh and you are not living in a simulation.
|
According to the Carter-Leslie Doomsday Argument, we should assign a
high probability to the hypothesis that the human species will go
extinct very soon. The argument is based on the application of Bayes’s
theorem and a certain indifference principle with respect to the
temporal location of our observed birth rank within the totality of
birth ranks of all humans who will ever have lived.
According to Bostrom’s Simulation Argument, which appeals to a weaker
indifference principle than the Doomsday Argument, at least one of the
following three propositions must be true: (1) the human species is
very likely to go extinct before reaching a posthuman stage, (2) it is
very unlikely that some posthuman civilization will run a significant
number of ancestor simulations, (3) it is almost sure that we are
living in a computer simulation.
According to my Doomsday Simulation Argument, both of the following
propositions must be true: (1) it is almost sure that the human species
will not go extinct before reaching a posthuman stage, (2) it is almost
sure that we are not living in a computer simulation.
PDF file
|
|
29 March 4:00 PM 6th floor 6.54
|
|
|
Astronomical Observatory Belgrade
|
|
Five roads to the arrow of time
|
We
are witnessing a great resurgence of interest—in both the domains of
physics and philosophy—in the problem of the origin of the
thermodynamical arrow of time (also known as the origin of the Second
Law of thermodynamics or the entropy gradient or the thermodynamical
temporal asymmetry, etc.). Although variations on the same theme
existed since antiquity, the problem in its modern form was probably
first formulated by Irish physicist Edward P. Culverwell in 1890, who
concluded that the kinetic theory alone could never succeed in
explaining the Second Law of thermodynamics. This has provoked
Boltzmann (and his assisstant Schuetz) to formulate one of the most
interesting answers to the puzzle, an answer which, we hereby attempt
to show, has remained interesting, in a particular reformulation, to
this day. Before engaging in such reformulation, we present a modern
taxonomy of the approaches to the explanation of the thermodynamical
arrow of time puzzle. There are five possible roads to be taken,
depending on the exact location of the origin of the asymmetry and the
nature of physical mechanisms involved: two inherent
solutions (statistical and dynamical), interventionism,
Acausal-Particular approach of Price, and the reformulated
Boltzmann-Schuetz (also dubbed the Acausal-Anthropic). Surprisingly
enough, it seems that most solutions include at least some new physics,
on either micro- or macro level. The preferred alternative (which we
dub the Acausal-Anthropic approach) is based on accepting Boltzmann's
statistical measure at its face value, and accomodating it within the
quantum-cosmological concept of the multiverse (world-ensemble).
Notably, the special low-entropy initial conditions of our cosmological
domain (“universe”) are best explained by embedding them in a wide
spectrum of many possible initial conditions appearing among the
domains of the quantum-cosmological multiverse.
Keywords: entropy, cosmology, history and philosophy of physics
|
|
The 60-minute lecture is followed by a 10-minute break. Then
we hold a 30-60-minute discussion. The language of the presentation is indicated
in the following way:
English
English, except if all participants speak Hungarian
Hungarian
The participants
may comment on the talks and are encouraged to initiate discussion through the
Internet. The comments should be written in the language of the presentation.
The organizer
of the colloquium for the academic year 2003/2004:
Miklós Rédei
(email: redei@hps.elte.hu)
|
|
|
|
