Jo Bervoets
PhD researcher - Philosophy UAntwerp
Master Philosophy - UAntwerp
Master Artificial Intelligence (Cognitive Sciences) - KULeuven
Master Applied Sciences (Electronics) - KULeuven
25 years experience in the technology sector (telecom & AI) now exploring my 1st (intellectual) love
Independent contributor to Autism Ethics Network (https://autismethics.com/)
Married, father of 3, Belgian, autistic, Madridista, sometimes - but not always -weird
Supervisors: Prof. K. Hens and Prof. J. Steyaert
Master Philosophy - UAntwerp
Master Artificial Intelligence (Cognitive Sciences) - KULeuven
Master Applied Sciences (Electronics) - KULeuven
25 years experience in the technology sector (telecom & AI) now exploring my 1st (intellectual) love
Independent contributor to Autism Ethics Network (https://autismethics.com/)
Married, father of 3, Belgian, autistic, Madridista, sometimes - but not always -weird
Supervisors: Prof. K. Hens and Prof. J. Steyaert
less
InterestsView All (9)
Uploads
Final version:
https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(21)00223-0?rss=yes
"[I]n atomic science, so far removed from ordinary experience, we have received a lesson which points far beyond the domain of physics."-Niels Bohr (1955, p.171).
Zoals blijkt uit het citaat is het idee van 'complementariteit' een idee uit de quantumfysica. Dit idee van Niels Bohr is meer bepaald het sleutelconcept van wat nog altijd de standaard interpretatie van de quantumfysica is. Waarom moet precies dit zo technisch klinkend idee dan een bredere filosofische bekendheid genieten? Niet omdat de fysica, zoals sommigen misschien denken, de ultieme wetenschap is. Wel omdat, zoals Bohr het zelf aangeeft, we zelfs in de fysica geconfronteerd worden met een basisles over hoe we kennen. In talrijke essays trachtte hij de wetenschappers in verschillende disciplines te overtuigen van deze epistemologische les: de quantum fysica herinnert ons er enigszins verrassend aan “dat we tegelijkertijd toeschouwers van en een deel van de natuur zijn” (Bohr 1960, 9). Voor hem was dit een les over de eenheid van de wetenschap in plaats van een les over het primaat van de fysica. In dit stuk tracht ik, in lijn met zijn essays, aan te geven waarom complementariteit als idee losgebroken moet worden uit het pure (filosofie van de) fysica discours.
The HIPPEA theory of autism not only created a lot of interest in academic circles but also got a lot of response in the autistic community. This contribution is specifically inspired by reactions of the (Flemish) Reading and Advice Group Adults with Autism where we had an opportunity to present HIPPEA on a 'member day'. These reactions were positive because HIPPEA was seen to put the cause of autism in a different way of dealing with (uncertainty in) information. This corresponds to the shared lived experience of autism of those present as this atypical way of information processing is directly connected to the most immediate autistic
Published version: http://wta.swptijdschriften.nl/Magazine/Article/3698.
This paper is a study of the link between the phenomenological theme of embodiment and the hermeneutical theme of making (participatory) sense of each other. Using autism as a case in point, I investigate the relation between breakdowns of the latter and neurological diversity. Is trying to explain psychopathologies like autism in this sense not just a way of understanding the human condition as such? In arguing for an emphatic 'Yes!' to this question, I elaborate a case for an empathic neurogradualism. This means that instead of emphasizing the gap between 'neurocultures' we come to an understanding of neurodiversity which informs mutual and self-understanding across such cultures. In this view the phenomenology of desynchronization and the cognitive science underlying views on neurodiversity mutually inform each other and neurodiversity becomes a source of inspiration rather than a matter of categorical separation.
Final version:
https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(21)00223-0?rss=yes
"[I]n atomic science, so far removed from ordinary experience, we have received a lesson which points far beyond the domain of physics."-Niels Bohr (1955, p.171).
Zoals blijkt uit het citaat is het idee van 'complementariteit' een idee uit de quantumfysica. Dit idee van Niels Bohr is meer bepaald het sleutelconcept van wat nog altijd de standaard interpretatie van de quantumfysica is. Waarom moet precies dit zo technisch klinkend idee dan een bredere filosofische bekendheid genieten? Niet omdat de fysica, zoals sommigen misschien denken, de ultieme wetenschap is. Wel omdat, zoals Bohr het zelf aangeeft, we zelfs in de fysica geconfronteerd worden met een basisles over hoe we kennen. In talrijke essays trachtte hij de wetenschappers in verschillende disciplines te overtuigen van deze epistemologische les: de quantum fysica herinnert ons er enigszins verrassend aan “dat we tegelijkertijd toeschouwers van en een deel van de natuur zijn” (Bohr 1960, 9). Voor hem was dit een les over de eenheid van de wetenschap in plaats van een les over het primaat van de fysica. In dit stuk tracht ik, in lijn met zijn essays, aan te geven waarom complementariteit als idee losgebroken moet worden uit het pure (filosofie van de) fysica discours.
The HIPPEA theory of autism not only created a lot of interest in academic circles but also got a lot of response in the autistic community. This contribution is specifically inspired by reactions of the (Flemish) Reading and Advice Group Adults with Autism where we had an opportunity to present HIPPEA on a 'member day'. These reactions were positive because HIPPEA was seen to put the cause of autism in a different way of dealing with (uncertainty in) information. This corresponds to the shared lived experience of autism of those present as this atypical way of information processing is directly connected to the most immediate autistic
Published version: http://wta.swptijdschriften.nl/Magazine/Article/3698.
This paper is a study of the link between the phenomenological theme of embodiment and the hermeneutical theme of making (participatory) sense of each other. Using autism as a case in point, I investigate the relation between breakdowns of the latter and neurological diversity. Is trying to explain psychopathologies like autism in this sense not just a way of understanding the human condition as such? In arguing for an emphatic 'Yes!' to this question, I elaborate a case for an empathic neurogradualism. This means that instead of emphasizing the gap between 'neurocultures' we come to an understanding of neurodiversity which informs mutual and self-understanding across such cultures. In this view the phenomenology of desynchronization and the cognitive science underlying views on neurodiversity mutually inform each other and neurodiversity becomes a source of inspiration rather than a matter of categorical separation.
"When so many excellent philosophers build on similar moral intuitions (on the relation between love, law and morality) to defend claims that appear to be mutually orthogonal, the prudent thing to do is to take a step back. In this paper I propose that the unease stems from separating the menage à trois constituted by the concepts of virtue, duty and obligation (love, morality and law). An important influence in this is the article “Modern Moral Philosophy” by G.E.M. Anscombe (5) where she famously connects duty to law to keep the psychological virtue of the good life unbound by both. The argument that I intend to develop can be seen as taking up the gauntlet of her remark on page 12 of that paper: “Just possibly, it might be argued that the use of language in the ordinary conduct of life amounts in some sense to giving the signs of entering into various contracts. If anyone had this theory, we should want to see it worked out.” I will contend that the Principle of Charity proposed by Donald Davidson (6) forms the basis of just such a theory unifying, in a law-like way, love and morality as a duty to be open to understand others."
A very short abstract follows here:
In this paper I investigate a suggestion of Kolakowski (on continental and analytic philosophy):
“A combination of the good sides of both types of analysis would make for perfect advice; a combination of the bad sides is easier.”
My analysis explores the good and bad sides of the 2 approaches in a way that, hopefully, points to a solution avoiding horrific metaphysical metaphors. If successful it will provide a desire for more research into a hermeneutical metaphysics based on a theory of language as per Davidson, one based on his Principle of Charity and evident in a quintessentially human feeling of a longing to be longed for.
The approach in this paper is to analyze the concept of imagination and see what creative component besides simulation is involved. In doing so I follow Currie in associating the recreative mind to imagery, broadly construed to cover all types of imaginings, and hence also as closely related to perception. It will emerge that imagery cannot account on its own for imagination and that a separate creative reflexive component is needed. It may then be that the “typical” functioning of the recreative mind is the “normal” developmental path to imagination but it is not correct to see “typical” imagery as the conditio sine qua non for imagination. Imagination comes apart from recreative imagery by reflexive checking of the subpersonal mechanisms of imagery and perception to see things in a new light (to create a new perspective) rather than just from another perspective. Variation in the components then explains human variation in the development and expression of imaginative capacity across the human population. These insights not only benefit autistics, they say something important about what it is to be imaginative for any human being.