The (re)View from nowhere
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Dr Eagleman,
I appreciate your lecture series podcast about your philosophy of mind, perception, neuroscience, and computer science. However, I really wish your podcast was either a discussion with another philosopher or neuro-scientist, or that you would make an effort to bring up more opposing views.
I studied philosophy as an undergrad at UCB, and focused on philosophy of mind, phil-of science, phil-of perception, and existentialism. I even took classes with John Searle (who you’ve mentioned) and Alva Noë (who you haven’t mentioned, but whose work I am sure you draw from or are familiar with).
Now, I can follow much of your arguments and have at least a basic enough understanding of the subject matter to appreciate your position, as well as the counter-arguments and alternative positions. So I find it kind of annoying when you are only presenting a one-sided view of your topics. Especially when you don’t even disclose to the audience that you are taking a position among a plethora of positions.
Of course, your podcast isn’t intended to be a rigorous academic pursuit—it’s more like an interesting series of musings on various inter-related branches of the philosophy of mind. But don’t you think the audience would benefit more from having many viewpoints presented? Even if you are going to prefer the arguments for your position—as right you should—don’t you think it would be more intellectually honest to clue the audience (most of whom have probably not studied philosophy or neuroscience) into the fact that your presentations are not universally accepted? Like, there is a rich history before you, and a rich environment around you full of interesting views—don’t you think your arguments would be enhanced if you at least mentioned a few? (For instance, in you monologues about AI I haven’t heard you talk about functionalism or emergence or at all!)
Anyway, these are criticisms from someone (nominally) familiar with the philosophical traditions you draw from. Perhaps the uninitiated listener wouldn’t care so much for opposing views. But I think turning your one-sided, monologue style podcast into a discussion with another philosopher or neuroscientist would bring to light more richness and subtly.
At least that’s my (re)view (from somewhere)!”
Zha0Zh0u via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
05/08/23
More reviews of Inner Cosmos with David Eagleman
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“This podcast has become my new favorite. My teenagers love to listen with me also. Highly recommend!”
shelleyspells via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
05/02/23
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Loving David Eagleman’s enthusiasm and his non judgemental approach regarding motives, motivation, free will etc. That’s the opinion this wet, 3 pound meat- jelly trapped in its skull on the Isle of Skye. More please! 😎👍”
Dunk127 via Apple Podcasts ·
Great Britain ·
02/05/24
☆
☆
☆
☆
☆
“Aka a car.
And then we would live the life of a new freakish species, another degree removed from being human.
Like a driver honking at a pedestrian.”
feeecoin via Apple Podcasts ·
United States of America ·
04/05/23
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
Listen now
Links
Genres
Artwork or description wrong?
Request an update »
Updates may take a few minutes.
Do you host a podcast?
Track your ranks and reviews from Spotify, Apple Podcasts and more.
