-
6 votes
-
No meaning without justification
6 votes -
The illogic of logical positivism
4 votes -
Twitter, the intimacy machine
7 votes -
Violence and protest
6 votes -
Machine learning for moral judgments
3 votes -
Against the stoics, skeptics, epicureans, and buddhists
6 votes -
Critical race theory and moral panic
13 votes -
Repeatedly clicking the first link on Wikipedia ends up at "Philosophy" 97% of the time
27 votes -
The American Aristotle
2 votes -
In Nyaya philosophy only some debates are worth having
8 votes -
Introduction to the Upanishads - The Essence of Vedic Philosophy
5 votes -
Do chairs exist?
2 votes -
Food, beauty, mind
6 votes -
The Fruitful Death of (Some) Modal Collapse Arguments | with Joe Schmid
2 votes -
He taught a Ta-Nehisi Coates essay. Then he was fired.
12 votes -
About meanings that make absolutely no sense
7 votes -
Developing ethical, social, and cognitive competence
3 votes -
Physicists face stagnation if they continue to treat the philosophy of science as a joke
10 votes -
It’s a good thing I don’t care what you think -- How reception shapes philosophy articles
3 votes -
Don’t farm bugs
11 votes -
How Michel Foucault was shielded from scandal by French reverence for intellectuals
6 votes -
Blade Runner and personal identity
7 votes -
Why relativism is the worst idea ever
6 votes -
One Tenth of a Second
5 votes -
The problem with consequentialism
5 votes -
Anger management
8 votes -
Ethical behaviourism and the moral risks of human-robot relationships
4 votes -
Our need to get drunk in company may be innate
4 votes -
The power of concepts under authoritarianism: The life of Arendt’s banality of evil in Turkey
6 votes -
Jean-Paul Sartre: Exalting Black thought and living existentialism
2 votes -
Philosophy has made plenty of progress
5 votes -
Social constructs: An introduction
13 votes -
Shaping the artificial intelligence revolution in philosophy
2 votes -
Are plants animals like any other?
5 votes -
How much should we trust technology?
7 votes -
The ‘great danger’ of technology according to Martin Heidegger
3 votes -
An essay on nothing
4 votes -
The Selfish Fallacy
11 votes -
Scientists and economists sold Karl Popper’s ‘falsification’ idea to the world. They have much to answer for
7 votes -
The private language argument
3 votes -
Can you be a good billionaire?
15 votes -
Arguing: Good and bad faith
4 votes -
What pro wrestling can teach us about the quest for truth
3 votes -
This is the only possible world
4 votes -
A first lesson in meta-rationality
7 votes -
The principle of explosion
6 votes -
How can I better engage Tilderinos on my philosophy posts?
I wouldn't say Tildes is wholly uninterested in philosophy, that is certainly not the case. You're a smart bunch full of intellectual curiosity! I have been making an effort to share more...
I wouldn't say Tildes is wholly uninterested in philosophy, that is certainly not the case. You're a smart bunch full of intellectual curiosity!
I have been making an effort to share more philosophy articles on ~humanities for some time now. They always get a few votes, but discussion is not as common. This is in no way a complaint about our users, philosophy is often highly specific and long-form, and it is hard to predict if a long article will eventually pay off for you.
Generally, philosophy posts that are related to technology, computer science, consciousness/AI, and, to a lesser degree, social change, attract more attention. But there are not as many of those (and I'm personally interested in other stuff too...).
As I said, the purpose of this post is not to complain. I believe the lack of participation in certain topics reflects the size of our community, our most common interests, and our repertoire.
With that in my mind, I would like to know how could I better engage our community in discussions about philosophy. Apart from the themes I mentioned, what are you interested in or curious about?
I could make an effort to include a short introduction or conversation starter on every post, but I'm not sure what is the sentiment regarding that (would that be considered/labeled as noise?). Besides, I'm not a philosopher or anything of the sort, just a layman with a lot of philosophy websites on my feed. So my guess is as good as everyone else's.
It would be awesome if we had a ~humanities.philosophy someday, but I wonder if that is realistic at all...
12 votes -
The appeal to emotion fallacy
6 votes -
You don’t need an identity
5 votes