Patterson in Pursuit

What's the purpose of meditation? What is the nature of the mind? What is the nature of the self? I got to ask these questions to a Buddhist monk while in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

The most popular resolution to Zeno's paradoxes is to say, "Calculus solves it!" But, as I've written and spoken about before, the logic of calculus might be dubious. Can we really complete an infinite series? My guest this week is Dr. Michael Huemer, who has recently written a book called Approaching Infinity, where he claims that the modern theory of infinities do need to be revised - that calculus does not solve Zeno's paradoxes - and that we have to distinguish between completable and non-completable infinities. Though Dr. Huemer and I disagree on the metaphysics of mathematics, and I have an even more radical position on infinities, we agree that more work needs to be done to place modern mathematics onto sounder footing. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

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". Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Postmodernist philosophy is famous for being paradoxical. Claims like "the truth is that there is no truth" or "everything is relative" are popular - especially among academics. Many proponents are even OK with explicit contradictions in their worldview. To me, a contradiction is a demonstration of error, and not caring about intellectual consistency is a sign of dogmatism and irrationalism. But according to Dr. Stephen Hicks, that's because I have a certain psychological response to contradictions. Postmodernists have a different psychological response, and so they aren't as bothered by inconsistency. Dr. Hicks thinks it's possible to be intellectually respectable while defending internally-inconsistent views. I don't think it's possible. What do you think? Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Tai Chi master gets beat up by an MMA fighter; Chinese think it was "disrespectful" to demonstrate the truth - the Tai Chi master's "expertise" was a sham. This kind of thing happens all the time in the martial arts and in the world of ideas. "Masters" and "experts" are frequently convinced of their own knowledge and superiority - allthewhile being deluded about the basics of their own subject matter. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

This is my interview breakdown of Episode 33 - my conversation with Dr. Jody Azzouni about the metaphysics of mathematics. The first half of our conversation was about existence, the nature of language, and whether we can say true things about objects that don't exist. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

The economic principle is clear: you cannot borrow money indefinitely to pay your bills. Eventually, the bills come due. You can only delay the inevitable. This is a law of economics, and it applies to every country on earth, including the United States. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

What are the fundamentals of Zen Buddhism? What is the purpose of meditation, or zazen? Is the philosophy or the practice of Buddhism more important? I asked these questions to Keiho Nishigaki, the head monk at the Nan'yoji temple outside of Osaka, Japan. He was kind enough to work me through the basics, in addition to giving me a guided Zen meditation session. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

How fundamental is the conflict between science and religion? Is it true that the history of the church is filled with anti-intellectualism and the suppression of scientific inquiry? Is religious fundamentalism to blame for the tension between science and religion? I've got my own suspicions about these questions, but I decided to ask Dr. Peter Harrison, who teaches History at the University of Queensland. He specializes in the topic of "Science versus Religion". Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Rationalists are far too quick to dismiss anecdotes as being "non-scientific." They are also too quick to accept all official-looking "data" that comes from scientists - when, in fact, anecdotes might sometimes be more trustworthy than scientific data. On the other hand, many people are far too likely to accept the theoretical claims of anecdotal evidence - rather than accepting the data while remaining skeptical of any theoretical claims. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

For thousands of years, people have ingested psychedelic drugs in order to alter their consciousness. They report having profound experiences - many of which are life-changing. But is this just simple delusion? Can you really learn important truths while on drugs? I think it's a grave mistake to dismiss the possibility out of hand. To help me answer, I'm joined by the World Wanderers: Ryan Ferguson and Amanda Kingsmith, who have traveled to more than 45 countries together. While in Peru, they both had an ayahuasca experience that they consider to be life-changing in a positive way. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Continuing the commentary on hierarchy from last week. Seeking status, wealth, and prestige - for their own sake - is not a recipe for happiness or human flourishing. It's a recipe for pettiness and division. Playing power games within a social pecking order is an attempt to compensate for a lack of self-confidence. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

A year ago, I started Patterson in Pursuit. Ten countries later, I want to share some thoughts about what I've learned. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Regardless of where people fall on the social hierarchy, they like and reinforce the system. They seek camaraderie with other people in social classes - even if they're in the bottom class. This is a difficult part of human psychology for me to deal with. For those of us who don't like this system, it can be difficult to opt-out. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

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. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Why is the history of ideas dominated by male thinkers? Is it because women are discouraged from intellectual life - or is it because women tend to choose other careers? If we go even deeper: why do women (and men) make the choices they do? Is it because they are influenced by overwhelming societal pressures - or are they acting freely? These are the questions I've asked Dr. Michelle Boulous-Walker, who teaches at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Can we say true and false things about Harry Potter? If so, does that mean he exists? If not, then how can we talk about a non-existing thing? I've gotten different answers to these questions in my interviews so far. Here are some of my thoughts on the topic. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

If we choose to argue, have we presupposed an ethical framework? Is "self-ownership" a concept that cannot coherently be doubted? To help me answer these questions, I'm joined by Stephan Kinsella, who is one of the most prominent supporters of "argumentation ethics." He claims that ownership is inescapable. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Don't take my word for it, but the experts might not be so expert... Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Does consciousness "emerge" from physical phenomena? What does "emerge" even mean? If we grant that consciousness emerges, and that it has a distinct ontological status, doesn't that imply dualism? To help me answer these questions, I spoke with Dr. Braddon-Mitchell at the University of Sydney. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

I grew up in a Christian Evangelical household. This is my experience with religious fundamentalism. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Are the foundations of mathematics rock-solid? Are we allowed to doubt them? How central is the concept of "infinity" to modern mathematics - and has the logic of infinity been fully worked out? To help me answer these questions, I've traveled to Sydney, Australia to interview an unorthodox mathematician on the topic. Dr. Norman Wildberger is also skeptical of the modern foundations of mathematics - even though he's a teaching professor at the University of New South Wales - and he has a popular youtube channel where he's laying out new foundations for the field. You can find his youtube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/njwildberger Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

There are no infinite things - no infinite sets, magnitudes, densities, shapes, distances, or anything else. Every thing is exactly the way it is. It has boundaries and is therefore finite. If this is true, then we have a great amount of work ahead of us, re-founding modern mathematics on a more solid logical ground. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Breakdown of the interview I had with Dr. Patrick Girard about paraconsistent logic. Nothing is both true and false at the same time. Any logical theory that suggests otherwise is catastrophically flawed. There are no true logical contradictions, and if we get this wrong, we eliminate any chance of internal incoherence in our theories. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

How to replace one theory with another. You must accomplish three things: 1) Explain where the dominant theory is wrong. 2) Explain why your theory solves the problem in #1, while preserving its explanatory power. 3) Explain why the incorrect theory still had predictive power. Do those three, and you've made a compelling case for a paradigm shift. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Are all boundaries artificial? Is "the self" a real thing, or is it just an illusion? Does anything have essence? These are the questions I'm breaking down from my interview with Dr. Janet Gyatso from Harvard. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

This is the most personal article I've written. It's about love - but it's not meant to make you feel fuzzy. I believe love is the highest state of human existence, but getting to a loving state of mind is incredibly hard, and it comes coupled with a great deal of pain. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Resting at the heart of modern mathematics is the concept of infinite sets. It's a notoriously difficult concept, and in my own evaluation, it strikes me as logically contradictory. So, I accept an invitation to talk with an ex-mathematician who specializes in set theory - perhaps he can set me straight and help me understand the basic ways of thinking about these "completed infinities." Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

I can't help but notice the West's reaction to the Charlie Hebdo massacre. It's so abstract. If I were to be cynical, I'd say that people's reactions are fake. They don't really care about the tragedy; they care about social signaling to their peers. Original article here: http://steve-patterson.com/charlie-hebdo-excuse-take-selfies/ Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Great show this week covering the social justice warrior phenomenon - the origins, causes, and damage that could be created if these people gain political power. We also talk about the liberalisation of New Zealand during the 80's, "trickle-down ideologies", and the impact of relativism in higher ed. My guest is Dr. Jamie Whyte, who has a background in philosophy, studied at Cambridge, and saw first-hand the popularity of irrationalism within the academic system. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

What were the indigenous beliefs of the Māori people of New Zealand? How did they view the world? How did they react when met with the first Christian settlers? I'm joined by Dr. Hirini Kaa to help me answer these questions. We talk about the Maori worldview, history, religion, and impact of colonialism on New Zealand's indigenous people. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

What is truth? Can we know anything about it? Is truth about propositions, or is it about the world? Can a proposition be true and false at the same time? What about the infamous liar's paradox? My guest this week thinks that logical contradictions are unavoidable - but also that they aren't as big a deal as classical logicians make them out to be. I think contradictions are a very big deal, so naturally, we have a great discussion. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

This is Part II of the conversation I had with T.K. Coleman about race relations in the United States. We continue talking about the importance of intention versus action - focusing on people feelings versus focusing on their behavior. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

A timely interview on the subject of race in America. Ideas matter, and some of them matter urgently. This is one of those topics where respectful, honest, and reasonable conversation is in high demand and short supply. I hope my guest T.K. Coleman will spend a few more episodes diving into the subject with me, because we only scratched the surface here. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

The theory of physicalism does not fully explain all the phenomena that I experience. The toolbox of concepts must expand. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Omnipotent. Omniscient. Omnibenevolent. These are the descriptions that theists often give when talking about God. But are they the only conceptions of God that are possible? My guest today is Dr. John Bishop, who has written about non-standard conceptions of theism. We talk about his criticisms of the OmniGod, in addition to some fundamental concepts about faith and belief. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Do we live in a post-truth world? What does that term even mean? I'm joined by Dr. Robert Nola, who has been teaching at the University of Auckland for almost half a century. We discuss fundamental questions about truth, talk about what "post-truth" means, and also cover the methodology of "faith" in the philosophy of religion. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

What is the cause of somebody's stroke? Is it the laws of physics? The mechanics of biology? Or perhaps it's caused by the choices that they made? Is it all of the above? My guest today is Dr. Mario De Caro, who has an interesting answer to these questions. He is a metaphysical pluralist, who believes in multiple categories of existence and causation, each of which is not reducible to the other. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

The bittersweet paradox is another popular irrationalist argument, which claims that two mutually exclusive things can be experienced together - happy and sad, black and white, bitter and sweet. Once again, this type of argument falls short, and precise language clears up any confusion. It conflates the appearance of mutual exclusivity with actual mutual exclusivity. If two things are mutually exclusive, then they cannot be experienced together. If they are experienced together, it's a demonstration that they aren't mutually exclusive. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Merry Christmas and Bah Humbug! This is an analysis of my interview with a Christian theologian from Cambridge. I wasn't a big fan of his argument, which ultimately rested on a dubious distinction between "who" and "what." Also in this episode: my attempt at rationally explaining the connection between Jesus and the Christian God. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Drug prohibition causes more harm than good - that's the argument from libertarians like Dr. Jeff Miron of Harvard. He analyzes the topic from an economic and practical standpoint. In this episode, we also discuss the role of government in providing a social safety net. Can private charity do a better job than public charity? Jeff thinks so, and I agree with him. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

For the last decade, I've been searching for certain foundations, and finally, I've found them. Logic represents the foundation for all knowledge, and it's the subject of my first book on philosophy: Square One: The Foundations of Knowledge. If you are interested in objective truth, certain knowledge, and logic, then pick up a copy. Anybody can read it and understand - it's not written for academics, and it doesn't contain useless jargon. All of my work - present and future - draws from the ideas in Square One. If I've made a mistake here, you can confidently discard the rest of my worldview without hesitation. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Though it's bound to upset people, I don't think being in the military is honorable. I think it's a sign of weakness, and in most circumstances, it causes more harm than good. Submitting to orders is not noble. Killing people because you were commanded to isn't courageous. Believing propaganda is not respectable. Soldiers are how they've been used: as political pawns for ambitious men. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

What are numbers? What are concepts? Do they exist, or do we just act like they exist? I'm joined by Dr. Jody Azzouni of Tufts University. He's a philosopher who has been arguing for nominalism for years - the idea that numbers and abstract objects don't exist at all. His position is a wonderful contrast to the previous interviews I've done on this topic, where the guests have been Platonists. My own views sit in-between nominalism and Platonism. I think abstract objects exist, but they do not exist in a Platonic realm. They exist in our minds. When we stop thinking about them, they stop existing. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

If consciousness can't be explained within the conceptual toolbox of physicalism, then what's an alternative theory? Are we stuck with dualism? This is my breakdown of the interview with Professor Bram about consciousness, machine intelligence, and the implications of rejecting reductive physicalism. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Since recorded history, people have been talking about "religious" or "spiritual" experiences. It's a shame that intellectuals are no longer able to discuss them openly. It's become taboo. Fortunately, my guest doesn't care about taboos, and he shares some details about his own religious experiences, and I do as well. We're not the only intellectuals with these experiences, and it's about time we start talking about it. The ideas are too important to leave unexamined. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Cultures are not delicate flowers that must be preserved until the end of time. Cultures emerge from different individuals trying to best navigate life. Cultures have positive traits and negative traits. As humans, we should steal the positive and leave the negative behind. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

It all started with mashed potatoes... Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

Buddhist philosophy focuses on some of the most difficult questions in philosophy - what is the "self"? What is the self's relationship to consciousness? Are there meaningful boundaries in the universe, or is everything a mental construction? To help me answer these questions, I'm joined by Dr. Janet Gyatso of Harvard University, who is the Hershey Professor of Buddhist Studies. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe

What's the difference between sex and gender? Is "being a woman" different than "identifying as a woman"? I suspect that a great deal of controversy surrounding transgender people comes down to the way we use language. If we keep a sharp distinction between sex and gender, any tension resolves itself. Get full access to Steve Patterson's Substack at stevepatterson.substack.com/subscribe