Electrical Performance of Electrical Packaging (IEEE Cat. No. 03TH8710), 2003
A new method for validating interconnect performance has been demonstrated. The use of DOE permit... more A new method for validating interconnect performance has been demonstrated. The use of DOE permitted timely acquisition of data by optimizing the number of experiments (measurements) needed. The model fitting (RSM) of the data allowed for confident prediction across all high volume conditions, even though every case could not be tested. There were a number of new learnings and huge
Existing solutions to the epistemic regress problem, and the theories of justification built upon... more Existing solutions to the epistemic regress problem, and the theories of justification built upon them, are inadequate, for they fail to diagnose the root source of the problem. The problem is rooted in our attachment to a pernicious dogma of modern epistemology: the idea that a judgement must be supported by some kind of reason or evidence to be justified. The epistemic analogue of the doctrine of original sin, this idea renders every judgement in need of redemption – guilty until shown to be innocent – distorting our understanding of reason at a very deep level, and preventing us from conceptualizing a satisfactory solution to the problem. If we opt for a more context–sensitive mechanism for assigning default epistemic status, however, we get a more plausible picture of justification, an epistemology more in tune with epistemic practice, and an elegant solution to the regress problem.
My review of Rutger Bregman's fascinating Humankind: A Hopeful History makes a case that Bregman ... more My review of Rutger Bregman's fascinating Humankind: A Hopeful History makes a case that Bregman by and large succeeds in upending an influential orthodoxy about human nature--one that misleadingly paints our species as primarily selfish and callous.
In this addendum to my and Rebecca Goldstein's Free Inquiry symposium on mattering, I offer a dif... more In this addendum to my and Rebecca Goldstein's Free Inquiry symposium on mattering, I offer a different, mattering-theoretic take on the Is-Ought problem. Basically, the idea the 'Creaturely wellbeing matters' is close to definitionally true, yet capable of transforming facts into values. In fact, if you add this simple axiom of mattering theory to a solution of facts, you get a rich and admirable moral system.
The felt need to matter—to have our lives amount to something—is an important and largely overloo... more The felt need to matter—to have our lives amount to something—is an important and largely overlooked determinant of human behavior. This essay lays out the basic tenets of mattering theory and shows that they shed considerable light on some otherwise baffling phenomena. Religiosity, it turns out, is a direct manifestation of the mattering instinct. Mattering theory also illuminates how our identities form, how ideologies work, why we sacrifice for the causes we believe in, and how ideologies produce violent extremists. Faith and other intellectually dishonest approaches to satisfying the mattering instinct, it turns out, sow the seeds of radicalism. Mattering theory also affords a new perspective on the philosophy of humanism. At bottom, humanism is a commitment to developing a shared, evidence-based understanding of what matters. This commitment, it turns out, can and does inoculate human minds against the worst forms of ideological infection.
In 2015, Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari published Sapiens, a sweeping and widely acclaimed h... more In 2015, Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari published Sapiens, a sweeping and widely acclaimed history of humankind. In it, he discusses a phenomenon he calls humanism. Humanism, as he defines it, is a family of “religions (that) worship humanity, or more correctly, homo sapiens.” This worship of humanity, he argues, has made modernity “an age of intense religious fervor, unparalleled missionary efforts, and the bloodiest wars of religion in history.” The crimes of genocidal Nazism, Stalinist communism, and environmental destruction, he argues, can all be traced to the central tenets of humanism. In this published exchange of letters, philosopher Andy Norman and historian Yuval Noah Harari debate the meaning and legacy of humanism.
[This retitled version of "No, Virginia..." draws attention to the paper's capacity to illuminate... more [This retitled version of "No, Virginia..." draws attention to the paper's capacity to illuminate the concept of basic belief, and with it the foundations of knowledge.] Alvin Plantinga dealt a significant blow to the “sufficient evidence” standard of rational accountability when he showed that many beliefs are, as he puts it, “properly basic”—rationally permissible despite appearing to lack an evidential basis. Why, Plantinga asks, can’t belief in God be considered properly basic? In this paper, I provide a workable account of proper basicality, thereby repairing a longstanding problem with evidentialism. This deepens our understanding of what it means to be rationally responsible, and allows a definitive answer to the theological question: God-belief, it turns out, cannot be considered properly basic.
Why do humans reason? Many animals draw inferences, but reasoning—the tendency to produce and res... more Why do humans reason? Many animals draw inferences, but reasoning—the tendency to produce and respond to reason-giving performances —is biologically unusual, and demands evolutionary explanation. Mercier and Sperber (2011) advance our understanding of reason’s adaptive function with their Argumentative Theory of Reason (ATR). On this account, the “function of reason is argumentative… to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade.” ATR, they argue, helps to explain several well-known cognitive biases. In this paper, I develop a neighboring hypothesis called the Intention Alignment Model (IAM) and contrast it with ATR. I conjecture that reasoning evolved primarily because it helped social hominins more readily and fully align their intentions. We use reasons to advance various proximal ends, but in the main, we do it to overwrite the beliefs and desires of others: to get others to think like us. Reason afforded our ancestors a powerful way to build and maintain the shared outlooks necessary for a highly collaborative existence. Yes, we sometimes argue so as to gain argumentative advantage over others, or otherwise advantage ourselves at the expense of those we argue with, but more often, we reason in ways that are mutually advantageous. In fact, there are excellent reasons for thinking this must be so. IAM, I suggest, neatly explains the available evidence, while also providing a more coherent account of reason’s origins.
What is the root cause of extremist violence? Does religious faith make us more vulnerable to id... more What is the root cause of extremist violence? Does religious faith make us more vulnerable to ideological extremism? Do moderate religionists bear any responsibility for rendering their adherents susceptible to radical ideologies?
Electrical Performance of Electrical Packaging (IEEE Cat. No. 03TH8710), 2003
A new method for validating interconnect performance has been demonstrated. The use of DOE permit... more A new method for validating interconnect performance has been demonstrated. The use of DOE permitted timely acquisition of data by optimizing the number of experiments (measurements) needed. The model fitting (RSM) of the data allowed for confident prediction across all high volume conditions, even though every case could not be tested. There were a number of new learnings and huge
Existing solutions to the epistemic regress problem, and the theories of justification built upon... more Existing solutions to the epistemic regress problem, and the theories of justification built upon them, are inadequate, for they fail to diagnose the root source of the problem. The problem is rooted in our attachment to a pernicious dogma of modern epistemology: the idea that a judgement must be supported by some kind of reason or evidence to be justified. The epistemic analogue of the doctrine of original sin, this idea renders every judgement in need of redemption – guilty until shown to be innocent – distorting our understanding of reason at a very deep level, and preventing us from conceptualizing a satisfactory solution to the problem. If we opt for a more context–sensitive mechanism for assigning default epistemic status, however, we get a more plausible picture of justification, an epistemology more in tune with epistemic practice, and an elegant solution to the regress problem.
My review of Rutger Bregman's fascinating Humankind: A Hopeful History makes a case that Bregman ... more My review of Rutger Bregman's fascinating Humankind: A Hopeful History makes a case that Bregman by and large succeeds in upending an influential orthodoxy about human nature--one that misleadingly paints our species as primarily selfish and callous.
In this addendum to my and Rebecca Goldstein's Free Inquiry symposium on mattering, I offer a dif... more In this addendum to my and Rebecca Goldstein's Free Inquiry symposium on mattering, I offer a different, mattering-theoretic take on the Is-Ought problem. Basically, the idea the 'Creaturely wellbeing matters' is close to definitionally true, yet capable of transforming facts into values. In fact, if you add this simple axiom of mattering theory to a solution of facts, you get a rich and admirable moral system.
The felt need to matter—to have our lives amount to something—is an important and largely overloo... more The felt need to matter—to have our lives amount to something—is an important and largely overlooked determinant of human behavior. This essay lays out the basic tenets of mattering theory and shows that they shed considerable light on some otherwise baffling phenomena. Religiosity, it turns out, is a direct manifestation of the mattering instinct. Mattering theory also illuminates how our identities form, how ideologies work, why we sacrifice for the causes we believe in, and how ideologies produce violent extremists. Faith and other intellectually dishonest approaches to satisfying the mattering instinct, it turns out, sow the seeds of radicalism. Mattering theory also affords a new perspective on the philosophy of humanism. At bottom, humanism is a commitment to developing a shared, evidence-based understanding of what matters. This commitment, it turns out, can and does inoculate human minds against the worst forms of ideological infection.
In 2015, Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari published Sapiens, a sweeping and widely acclaimed h... more In 2015, Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari published Sapiens, a sweeping and widely acclaimed history of humankind. In it, he discusses a phenomenon he calls humanism. Humanism, as he defines it, is a family of “religions (that) worship humanity, or more correctly, homo sapiens.” This worship of humanity, he argues, has made modernity “an age of intense religious fervor, unparalleled missionary efforts, and the bloodiest wars of religion in history.” The crimes of genocidal Nazism, Stalinist communism, and environmental destruction, he argues, can all be traced to the central tenets of humanism. In this published exchange of letters, philosopher Andy Norman and historian Yuval Noah Harari debate the meaning and legacy of humanism.
[This retitled version of "No, Virginia..." draws attention to the paper's capacity to illuminate... more [This retitled version of "No, Virginia..." draws attention to the paper's capacity to illuminate the concept of basic belief, and with it the foundations of knowledge.] Alvin Plantinga dealt a significant blow to the “sufficient evidence” standard of rational accountability when he showed that many beliefs are, as he puts it, “properly basic”—rationally permissible despite appearing to lack an evidential basis. Why, Plantinga asks, can’t belief in God be considered properly basic? In this paper, I provide a workable account of proper basicality, thereby repairing a longstanding problem with evidentialism. This deepens our understanding of what it means to be rationally responsible, and allows a definitive answer to the theological question: God-belief, it turns out, cannot be considered properly basic.
Why do humans reason? Many animals draw inferences, but reasoning—the tendency to produce and res... more Why do humans reason? Many animals draw inferences, but reasoning—the tendency to produce and respond to reason-giving performances —is biologically unusual, and demands evolutionary explanation. Mercier and Sperber (2011) advance our understanding of reason’s adaptive function with their Argumentative Theory of Reason (ATR). On this account, the “function of reason is argumentative… to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade.” ATR, they argue, helps to explain several well-known cognitive biases. In this paper, I develop a neighboring hypothesis called the Intention Alignment Model (IAM) and contrast it with ATR. I conjecture that reasoning evolved primarily because it helped social hominins more readily and fully align their intentions. We use reasons to advance various proximal ends, but in the main, we do it to overwrite the beliefs and desires of others: to get others to think like us. Reason afforded our ancestors a powerful way to build and maintain the shared outlooks necessary for a highly collaborative existence. Yes, we sometimes argue so as to gain argumentative advantage over others, or otherwise advantage ourselves at the expense of those we argue with, but more often, we reason in ways that are mutually advantageous. In fact, there are excellent reasons for thinking this must be so. IAM, I suggest, neatly explains the available evidence, while also providing a more coherent account of reason’s origins.
What is the root cause of extremist violence? Does religious faith make us more vulnerable to id... more What is the root cause of extremist violence? Does religious faith make us more vulnerable to ideological extremism? Do moderate religionists bear any responsibility for rendering their adherents susceptible to radical ideologies?
This whimsical but scientifically and philosophically informed poem has modest pretensions: it re... more This whimsical but scientifically and philosophically informed poem has modest pretensions: it recounts the story of life on earth, traces the evolution of homo sapiens, illuminates the role that faith has come to occupy, and advocates for humanistic inquiry and secular ethics as sources of moral progress. Published in both Free Inquiry and The Humanist.
This infographic conveys the fundamental insights of a naturalized, secular ethics. Makes the cas... more This infographic conveys the fundamental insights of a naturalized, secular ethics. Makes the case that the emerging moral sciences promise a kind of Copernican revolution in our collective understanding of right and wrong.
Decisions That Matter is an interactive graphic novel that my students built in my and Ralph Vitu... more Decisions That Matter is an interactive graphic novel that my students built in my and Ralph Vituccio's Morality Play class at Carnegie Mellon University. It's meant to provoke reflection on the role bystanders can play in deterring sexual assault, and our data indicates that it does just that.
This infographic dramatizes a curious and intellectually significant fact, namely: that humanism'... more This infographic dramatizes a curious and intellectually significant fact, namely: that humanism's core principles *all* function to illuminate what really matters. I now like to think of humanism as a commitment to honest mattering, and this visually engaging diagram illustrates the promise of this interpretation. Thanks to Rebecca Goldstein for the concept of mattering maps, and James Laslavic for his design wizardry.
A critical thinking curriculum for young adults that uses argument visualization ("mapping") tech... more A critical thinking curriculum for young adults that uses argument visualization ("mapping") techniques to build logical acumen. Twelve lessons complete with exercises and solutions.
Educated people are frequently astonished by the power of ideology. We are baffled by the extent ... more Educated people are frequently astonished by the power of ideology. We are baffled by the extent of religious credulity, and bewildered by its capacity for moral derangement. How, we wonder, do people convince themselves to become human bombs? 1 How can mere ideas motivate creatures like us to massacre blaspheming cartoonists, butcher apostate bloggers, or run an Auschwitz? 2 How is it possible that people's thinking can become so unhinged? Despite daily reminders of ideology's breathtakingly destructive power, the phenomenon stubbornly resists comprehension. It is high time we developed a working model of what I will call ideological derangement, whereon seductive ideas thoroughly scramble the moral sensibilities of an individual or sub-‐culture. We humans have built cultures that are tragically prone to the ravages of ideology. The Middle East, for example, has long been riven by religious and political violence. We've also built cultures that are relatively immune to such ravages. Enlightenment humanism, for instance, ushered in an era of European history in which religious enthusiasm declined, slavery was abolished, basic rights were secured for many, and incidents of several types of violence declined markedly. 3
Uploads