Juan Comesaña

The speakers and commentators are set for the 2026 Rutgers Epistemology Conference. Consider applying for the Young Epistemologist Prize if you are eligible! juancomesana.org/rec

Hey Philosophers, here is some information about the next Rutgers Epistemology conference, including information on the Young Epistemologist Prize: juancomesana.org/rec24

@jweisber Got another one?

Anybody got an invitation for bluesky?

@LaraBuchak Got it, cool experiment! But what if it turns out that as the years go by classes are split roughly 50/50 between cooperation and defection?

@Juan I don’t tell them so. They are thinking about it along the lines of reasoning in the PD, rather than Newcomb’s problem. (It simulates what people think they should do in a PD, even though it’s technically a Newcomb problem.)

Favorite experiment in my game theory class: the class decides whether to get 1 bonus point or give next year’s class 3 bonus points. They know last year’s class got the same choice, but don’t know what that class decided until after making their own decision.

@LaraBuchak This is the part I’m not totally sold on. Are they in fact probabilistically correlated? Do you explicitly tell them so?

@Juan And the past class is the “predictor” insofar as they are probabilistically correlated with what the current class will do.

@LaraBuchak I don’t get this part: “if it’s predicted you won’t be greedy”. How is giving 3 points predicting non-greediness for the next class?

(4) Technically, this is repeated applications of a decision called “Newcomb’s Problem,” in which you get more if it’s predicted you won’t be “greedy.” In this case, the prediction is made by the actions of past students, people just like you, so we can assume they are accurate.

Apropos of nothing.

Paperback edition is out: amazon.com/Being-Rational…

@eganaegana Matt Kotzen on defeat: static1.squarespace.com/static/6112a75… And Matt Kotzen on transmission-adjacent issues: static1.squarespace.com/static/6112a75…

Hey philosophers - any suggestions for stuff to read about translating traditional-epistemology concerns about justification, transmission, (anti-)reductionism, etc. into bayesian terms and/or arguments about which bits of that stuff can't get translated? (Asking for a seminar.)

@non_philosophy Nomic

has anyone tried to create a philosophy game? what would that look like?

🥳 What a great year it’s been, with some terrific titles! To celebrate, we have compiled our best ANZ Philosophy titles for 2022, including books by @Juan and #BertrandRussell 👉 If you buy now, you also get a 20% discount! routledge.com #BookTwitter

@bweatherson @fabcariani Isn't it too optimistic to think we have seen the last of them?

Oh no, it lost its nerve.

Intelligent indeed.

Where could one watch the World Cup from a place that fell off a truck?

Tomorrow Timothy Kearl from Glasgow will be giving an extra Logos talk on the obstacles to knowledge, and how talk about preventers of knowledge allows us to account for epistemic excuses in a way that can be accommodated in extant paradigms of epistemic responsibility

@davidchalmers42 @davidchalmers @david_chalmers You should have gotten David.

i tweet from @davidchalmers42 because both @davidchalmers and @david_chalmers were already taken. as it happens, both are associated with accounts that have never tweeted. any ideas on how to reach them? davids, if you're out there, let's talk!

This Wednesday, Juan Comesaña (@Juan) from Rutgers, will give a Logos colloquium on how the old argument from illusion in epistemology is compatible with the anti-luminosity argument and the distinction between justification and excuses that knowledge-first accounts usually wield

@bweatherson @jweisber Yup.