Clayton Littlejohn

@cmlittlejohn.bsky.social

2.6K followers 1.4K following 860 posts

Melbourne based philosopher. Dianoia RIP. Senior Research Associate, African Centre for Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, University of Johannesburg. Epistemology and ethics. #philsky #melbourne #democrats It ain't easy being blue .. more

Videos

Philosophy 48%

Psychology 20%

Posts Replies Media Videos

Reposted by Clayton Littlejohn

Jordan S. Carroll 🌹 @jordanscarroll.bsky.social · 2d

Conservatives during the English Civil War were absolutely furious that Quakers wouldn’t stop using thee/thou pronouns for everyone.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 3d

Do we think this real? Or is it true but not really real? Hegelian marries/frustrates physicist

www.reddit.com/r/badphiloso...

From the badphilosophy community on Reddit

Explore this post and more from the badphilosophy community

www.reddit.com

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 6d

Cut it out.

Greg Pak @gregpak.net · 6d

HOPE IS A DECISION

Reposted by Clayton Littlejohn

Greg Pak @gregpak.net · 6d

HOPE IS A DECISION

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 6d

Ah, it might be for the citations, but for the references, the Chicago author date 16th has too many periods, too few commas.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 6d

Is it? Amazing. I'll give it a go. I asked Claude and it said it was a unique house style. (Not that I believe it, but I was surprised it didn't identify one.)

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 6d

A little paper on whether awareness of facts differs from factual knowledge (if that interests you; if it doesn't, fair enough). Includes a little twist on the fake barn cases and should annoy all the right philosophers of perception.

philpapers.org/rec/LITCFA-2

Clayton Littlejohn, Could factual awareness be anything but knowledge? - PhilPapers

In this paper, I discuss Silva's work on factual awareness. He argues that factual awareness can help us acquire knowledge. This position is appealing to many of us who think of ...

philpapers.org

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 6d

Does anyone know what the reference format for SEP is? They give examples but not a name. If you're using something like Zotero to manage references, it would be quite easy to get the formatting right if we knew what they used. I'm manually switching periods to commas and there are thousands.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 6d

I've not been following the more technical discussions of the miners puzzle, but I'm really enjoying this discussion by Jennifer Carr on the subjective 'ought'.

philpapers.org/rec/CARSO-5

Jennifer Rose Carr, Subjective Ought - PhilPapers

The subjective deontic "ought" generates counterexamples to classical inference rules like modus ponens. It also conflicts with the orthodox view about modals and conditionals in natural language sema...

philpapers.org

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 8d

Odd request. Need a copy of the faculty lists from the 2021 Gourmet Report. Existing links broken. The draft faculty list from 19 August 2021 or 18 September 2021 would be incredible. Feel like someone has a draft in dropbox or an email to the editors somewhere.

leiterreports.com/2021/08/21/d...

Draft faculty lists for UK, Canadian, and Australasian departments for 2021 PGR

MOVING TO FRONT FROM YESTERDAY Professor Christopher Pynes, co-editor of the PGR, has now shared with me the draft faculty lists for Anglophone departments outside the U.S. for the 2021 PGR, on whi…

leiterreports.com

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 11d

Frustrated by this paper.

I think that if you're going to talk about excuses vs. justifications, you maybe don't get either for saying some 1/8th baked thing critical of someone and then saying, 'well, more to say here probably, but don't want to get drawn in'. Well, then don't.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 11d

My love for Lil Jon >> my love for reasons as facts. Quite quite annoyed I missed his show in Melbourne last week

Reposted by Clayton Littlejohn

noam chompers @noamchompers.bsky.social · 11d

how bout clayton lil john and he thinks a reason is a fact that says 'YEAH!'

Reposted by Jonathan Birch, Clayton Littlejohn

Maggie Westrum @maggiewestrum.bsky.social · 12d

epistemology is cringe

Reposted by Clayton Littlejohn

Better Things Are Possible @internethippo.bsky.social · 12d

Cat running for office: But we're going to get rid of the humans because they've been treating us very badly. And our bowls will be full in the morning- perhaps fuller than ever before

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 14d

To be fair, it might literally be true that most of the humans who have ever lived would not have earned a perfect score on this test.

darth™️ @darthbluesky.bsky.social · 14d

a tiger an elephant and a giraffe

Reposted by Clayton Littlejohn

darth™️ @darthbluesky.bsky.social · 14d

a tiger an elephant and a giraffe

Reposted by Joe R. Feagin, Efrén O. Pérez, Philip Nel , and 9 more Joe R. Feagin, Efrén O. Pérez, Philip Nel, Harry Ferguson, Sanford F. Schram, Janet Murray, Carlos Nunes Silva, Christopher Peters, Erin O’Donnell, Clayton Littlejohn, Farah Mendlesohn, Monisha Bajaj

Kelly @broadwaybabyto.bsky.social · 14d

The Walton family (who own Walmart) are worth over $400 billion, yet many of their employees are on SNAP.

Bezos is worth over $400 billion, many Amazon employees require SNAP.

The people who need help are not the problem.

It’s corporate greed. It’s an unwillingness to pay a living wage.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 16d

I guess I was surprised he hasn't left (esp because it seems so many American academics have), but then, surprised by my surprise.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 16d

Of course Robert George is on twitter.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 16d

Is PhilPapers submit a paper function not functioning?

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 16d

Well worth a read for Hugh Chandler's grumpy comment

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

I'm on the team that doesn't care that much about ballrooms when we're seeing a string of extra judicial killings take place on the high seas. And damn the media orgs that label the videos of these killings as hitting drug boats. There's been no evidence that that's what these boats are.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

This is a really nice example that illustrates how feeding an audience truth is often an artful way of spreading disinformation. (Don't ask me how standard theories of disinformation get the case right. I don't think that they do. Hoping the refs say 'yes' soon, so I can say more here.)

Cailin O’Connor @cailinmeister.bsky.social · 17d

When tech funds academics, they pick who and which projects get funded – and tech disproportionately chooses researchers using methods and aims that tend to yield positive findings for their products

Images of little men, some of them red - illustrating how just some researchers can be funded

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

Anyway, my copy of this book went missing because you can't actually mail things to Australia with any reliability and I'm sad about that. It's a pretty book and the paper I wrote with Julien was the most fun I've had writing a bit of philosophy in ages.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

And while punishing all the kids, remember that reasons alone (or known reasons) aren't very useful tools. Decision-theory was invented for a reason. But decision-theoretic tools alone don't get to tell us what matters to rightness. Reason-mongering happens for a reason.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

In general, the prospective ought should be understood in terms of probabilities of objective right/wrong makers and the gravity of these factors. So, problem solved. Knowledge and reasons matter to objective rightness. Probabilities of such factors to the prospective ought. Punish all the kids.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

So what's the solution? If it's not about the reasons you're aware of in each case and it's not about the probability of guilty, how do you justify punishing each of the kids? Well, don't be annoyed, but it's about the probability that you're aware of reasons.

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

Don't pretend that in the case of the innocent kid you're aware of facts that are good reasons to be disappointed with the kid. It's pretty fucked to say that you were aware of facts that were good reason to be disappointed with the innocent one (e.g., that they appeared guilty).

Clayton Littlejohn @cmlittlejohn.bsky.social · 17d

Ah, right, so maybe it's about reasons? Jeez. The reasons people have popped up. Yeah, sure, you can put it that way. In 99 of the cases you know some fact(s) that give you good reason to punish. But what about the 100th case? Just going to round it off and pretend that you're aware of reasons?

Light upyour news

Sign in to Lightnews

Sign up to start reading

Connect Bluesky

Connect with Bluesky

Light up
your news