How Putnam Defeats Descartes' Demon
A little while back, I wrote a post describing Cartesian demon skepticism as a form of 'adversarial epistemology'
. The idea is that Descartes' thought experiment can be conceived of as a game with two players: the meditator and the demon. The meditator selects a process for forming beliefs from perceptual experiences, and the demon knows what process the meditator has selected, and controls all of the perceptual experiences. If the meditator ends up with mostly true beliefs, she wins. Otherwise, the demon wins.
Now, I mentioned at the bottom of that post that this way of framing the problem is helpful...
Continue reading "How Putnam Defeats Descartes' Demon"
Cartesian Demon Skepticism as 'Adversarial Epistemology'
In one of my computer science classes in undergrad, we discussed a particular way of thinking about the efficiency of an algorithm, which the professor called 'adversarial upper bounds'. The idea was to suppose that someone knows the 'guts' of your algorithm - exactly how it works - and that person is trying to make your algorithm take as many steps to complete as possible. The upshot was that sometimes with this kind of system inserting some randomness will give you a better expectation value. For instance, suppose I am trying to find a route (just any route) from A...
Continue reading "Cartesian Demon Skepticism as 'Adversarial Epistemology'"