Browse by:

Stigmergic Epistemology, Stigmergic Cognition

A co-authored paper with Chris Onof, Faculty of Engineering, Imperial College London and School of Philosophy, Birkbeck College London. A pre-press version is available for download here. Final to appear in Cognitive Systems Research Special Issue. Abstract: To know is to cognize, to cognize is to be a culturally bounded, rationality-bounded and environmentally located agent. Knowledge and cognition…

Ryle and Oakeshott on the knowing-how/knowing-that distinction

Ryle   Oakeshott I presented this paper at the third international Michael Oakeshott Association conference. ——————————————- Abstract: Politics make a call upon knowledge. Consequently, it is not irrelevant to inquire into the kind of knowledge which is involved . . . (Rationalism in politics, p. 45) Gilbert Ryle’s ‘Knowing How/Knowing That’ distinction gave crisp articulation to a…

Taking the Super out of the Supernatural

I recently took part in a symposium to discuss Loyal Rue’s Religion is not About God.  This syposium has been published in the June issue of Zygon. ————————————————- TAKING THE SUPER OUT OF THE SUPERNATURAL (OR A MANIFESTO FOR A LATTER-DAY PANTHEISM) Abstract Metaphysical dualities divorce humankind from its natural environment, dualities that can precipitate environmental…

Review Essay: Dennett’s Breaking the Spell

My review essay of Dennett’s Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon has just been published in The Journal of Mind and Behavior, Summer and Autumn 2006, Vol. 27, Nos. 3 and 4: 357-366. If you’d like to receive a reprint please drop me a line. Update – now available online. ========================================== The thesis that…

Constructivism and Relativism in Oakeshott

Constructivism and Relativism in Oakeshott. In The Intellectual Legacy of Michael Oakeshott —————————————————– This paper highlights a troubling tension within the philosophy of Michael Oakeshott. The relativistic stance that informs his radical constructivism gives license to socio-political conclusions we know Oakeshott couldn’t possibly accept. Politically, Oakeshott cannot accept constructionist social ontologies that are forged in…