Ramón Alvarado
banner
ramonalvarado.bsky.social
Ramón Alvarado
@ramonalvarado.bsky.social
Associate Professor of Philosophy. Editor-in-Chief of Global Philosophy. President of the Association for Philosophy and Computing. Philosopher of computational methods and technologies in science and society.
That last sentence hit hard. What a piece of 21st century art!
November 7, 2025 at 8:19 PM
Reposted by Ramón Alvarado
A truly fantastic piece Ramon, I enjoyed the exchange enormously and argued back for the need to rescue intelligence from anti-human AI, it’s too important a notion to both human and non-human interactions with the world - see this rejoinder hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu/pub/c5hq3by1.... #philsci
Rejoinder: Let Us Rescue Intelligence from Anti-Human AI
hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu
November 7, 2025 at 9:39 AM
I really enjoyed the rejoinder, Sabina, it signals a longer and important conversation. The interrogation and/or the rescuing of intelligence will be one of the most important (and fundamental) debates in our fields ( #philtech #philsci and #AIethics). Long overdue.
November 7, 2025 at 3:04 PM
I’m not sure that we did. Maybe in public discourse, but in scientific practice all are at play and pretty much on equal footing. This is even more evident in software-intensive sciences.
October 19, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Only 2 tired alternatives were given. I suggested an example of a 3rd: a bunch of philosophers and artist of computational methods that understand the tech so well they can “take it apart” and “mod” it to appropriate it beyond intended design. Critical thinking IS what enables this alternative.
third.to
October 8, 2025 at 12:49 AM
I found that hanging out with artists and creatives helps transcend the whole “use or refuse” dichotomy and discourse. There are so many interesting and cool ways to appropriate this technology and push its limits and capabilities to take it into fascinating directions. Very similar to street art.
October 7, 2025 at 7:27 PM
It’s pretty straightforwardly stated multiple times in the Novum Organon.
September 3, 2025 at 8:15 PM
I would strongly resist this reading. Although American pragmatism got a lot from Bacon and Bacon emphasized ‘useful’ outcomes from inquiry, he nevertheless was really critical of the naive empiricism and useful haste of the alchemist. His view of Truth in inquiry was not compatible with pragmatism.
September 3, 2025 at 8:13 PM
That phrase is so much more complex than most people give it credit for. The word power, in context, had a complex meaning which included the ability to create/invent/do. His natural philosophy was an “active” (not contemplative) one that put emphasis on inventions that could help humanity prosper.
September 3, 2025 at 4:56 PM
As I traced back the origins of our contemporary data world all the way back to Francis Bacon, I found this beautiful piece by Czech philosopher Petr Šourek in a Media Studies book from 2011. I’m hoping to help him write a more internet-friendly version for Global Philosophy soon. #AIethics
September 3, 2025 at 2:07 AM