Beautiful! Sounds like a relaxing warm weather sea, though, and I prefer the cold ones ☁️

If you send me an email I can share the handout I used at least. You would have to contact Susanna for her notes, if interested.

This particular set of talks was about collective attention, and didn’t connect cleanly with our respective work on individual perception. But, yes, nice when recordings are available. Not in this case, but that allowed us all to be comfortable presenting work in progress.

Well, I am more interested in the “subject,” and Susanna more in the content, but I am not sure it makes sense to categorize in this way (intentionality vs magical residue). Your original post is interesting, and I am sympathetic to it, but I’m not sure if Susanna would be.

Our spontaneous collective responses, if possible

I argued in that talk that collective attention on social media is currently spontaneous, and rarely if ever controlled. How can we move the needle? I’m working on trying to answer that! One provocative idea: we should intentionally limit our exposure to other perspectives. #philsky

Incredible. philsci-archive.pitt.edu/11195/1/Mind...

People really brought positive energy and a creative spirit to this protest in a small town in a purple part of the state

(From this www.reddit.com/r/funnygifs/...)

“Is this a piece of your brain??”https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=2896037940683886&vanity=thejohncleese

I argue that postdiction is quite consistent with fast but initially partial and unsettled perception. Must such rapid and revisable perception overflow cognitive access? That's not obvious -- there's evidence access can be fleeting too! Nor is it clearly empirically objectionable if it does. 2/3