From what I recall, M-P (never read Husserl) says something along the lines of "even that is entirely occluded is not entirely unseen."
05.03.2026 19:02
👍 1
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
From what I recall, M-P (never read Husserl) says something along the lines of "even that is entirely occluded is not entirely unseen."
Husserl and Merleau-Ponty both argued there is some sense in which we perceive the parts of objects that are occluded from vision.
The website for WIRES Cognitive Science (a journal I've published in) has this notice:
This material is only for use by healthcare professionals. By continuing to view this site you are confirming that you are a healthcare professional.
Seems....odd.
I’d be very surprised if the number didn’t fall to below 5% once you remove the trolls and other insincere responders.
this is good, because it works with people too.
Today and everyday.
Brian Magee on YouTube seems to give that pronunciation too. Is this just some oddity of weird anglication (making it sound *more* foreign)? Or does the name really have an odd pronunication?
I know the question everyone is asking themselves today is "how do I pronounce Husserl" (as in Edmund Husserl)? I was taught to pronounce it as if it were spelled "Hüssel"; i.e., to rhyme with "rüssel," rather than the way one would expect.
Over that distance, the decrease in speed through the air would be very small (I think). Pitching would reduce it considerably, so I guess it's speed to pitch. The batter has to respond to where it will be pitch, so I think it makes a difference only when it hits them.
A quick google tells me that three bowlers have been recorded at over 100 mph.
Bowling action? A guess.
There's no requirement to pitch (bounce) the ball. Bowlers do it because they don't like giving away easy runs.
One might think that if they wanted to be seen as the party to vote for on the left they might try being on the left.
I had no idea until I was about 10 that my "Auntie X" was in no way related to me.
There's not nothing to that thought: I think the person latched on to a word I used and intepreted everything I said in its light. It wasn't badly chosen - I used it because others have in the same context. But it could mislead.
Philosophers: is it important to reply to a paper? A recent paper in an excellent journal is a response to me. In favor of replying: it badly mischaterizes my views. Against, the first-order is a junior scholar who doesn't deserve dunking (and I can't see a way to gently point out how wrong it is).
That is, reminding me that they belong to a group that is stereotyped as bad at a task does not reliably reduce their performance as the early work claimed.
Stereotype threat is either a tiny effect or not real, sadly.
Reform's polling means I get to experience just a faint echo of what trans people, asylum seekers and immigrants experience regularly and much more strongly: the feeling that my right to exist is on the ballot.
www.theguardian.com/politics/202...
It's not a very good paper, as it happens.
Everyone's doing it.
A nine sided and a ten sided die.
Yesterday, I found the die on the left lying on the ground. Today I found the one on the right.
Alea jacta est, I guess.
I'm too ignorant to judge, but his defenders don't deny he was fascist sympathetic in the '30s. They claim he repented of that. I don't think there's anything wrong with admiring someone for what they became, and not what they were.
You've let me down. I expected cats, but bigger than usual.
Personally I’m puzzled by what alignment even means. How is it implementable? How can it be tested? Whose values?
At least it was quality.
Aristocats.
Kevin introduced the discussion explicitly talking about non-authors. His claim - he can correct me ofc - is that LLMs are akin to those humans whose contribution falls short of authorship.
We don't hold RAs accountable for academic publications! Nor should we.
