# ? ## Retrieval Notes - Session id: `a7bb0332-3e60-4277-b9ba-30a0481b5357` - Last activity: `2026-02-17T09:11:10.997Z` ## My Notes <!-- Add your notes here. This section is preserved across syncs. --> ## Conversation ### User ? ### Assistant It looks like you're asking a question but it came through as just "?". Could you clarify what you need help with? I can see you're currently viewing your daily note for today ([[Daily Notes/2026-02-17.md]]). Would you like me to: - **Read** the note and help with its contents? - **Add** something to it? - **Help with something else** entirely? Just let me know what you're looking for! ### User i want to talk to you about my generating philosophy project ### Assistant Sure! Let me start by reading your current daily note and then search for any notes related to your "generating philosophy" project. ### Assistant I found several notes related to your generating philosophy project. Let me pull up the key files to get a full picture. ### Assistant I've got a good picture of your project now. Here's what I see: --- Your **"Generating Philosophy with Artificial Intelligence"** is a substantial piece living in [[Writing/substack/Generating Philosophy with Artificial Intelligence.md]]. It's structured as a two-part (possibly three-part) essay arguing that: 1. **Part One** — LLMs can help philosophers generate understanding. You clear the air with three moves: - **The Butter Chicken Defense** — decouple intent from reliability; evaluate the output, not the process - **Philosophy as self-verifying** — unlike empirical fields, understanding an argument *is* verifying it, making hallucination worries less pressing - **Recombination Realism** — genuine novelty vs. recombination is a false distinction (Boden, Gaut) 2. **Part Two** — The mechanism, grounded in **Keith Frankish's activity view** of inner speech: - **Reciprocal Prompting** — the LLM participates in your cognitive loop (produce → perceive → interpret → respond) - **The Articulation Demand** — prompting well *is* intellectual labor - **Cognitive Eversion** — triangulating across models to externalize and inspect your own thinking (Ted Chiang's "everted self") 3. **A speculative provocation** — could philosophers be taken out of the loop entirely? The note also contains two layers: a **polished draft** at the top and a **working notes section** (from 18 Jan 2026) with structural plans, inline `%%comments%%` flagging things to rewrite, and open questions about tone, ordering, and labelling. --- What would you like to dig into? For example: - **Structure/ordering** — working through your `%%comments%%` about rearranging sections? - **Drafting** — rewriting sections in a better tone/register? - **Content** — thinking through a particular argument (the auto-evaluation idea, the novelty objection, the Frankish connection)? - **The speculative Part 3** — developing the "philosophers out of the loop" provocation? - **Something else entirely?** ### User Unknown skill: contemplate ### User you got cut off, please continue from where you left off. ### Assistant No worries — I don't think I actually got cut off! My message ended with a list of options for where you'd like to take the conversation. Let me restate them: What aspect of the generating philosophy project would you like to talk about? - **Structure/ordering** — e.g. working through your `%%comments%%` about whether the Articulation Demand should come earlier, or how to reframe the Butter Chicken section - **Drafting** — rewriting sections to fix the tone/register issues you flagged ("contentwise and structurally, is great... tone/style, vocabulary, register and jargon, it's appalling") - **Content/arguments** — thinking through a specific idea (the auto-evaluation concept, the Frankish connection, the novelty objection, etc.) - **The speculative Part 3** — developing the "philosophers out of the loop" provocation - **Big picture** — where the project stands, what's left to do, next steps - **Something else entirely?** What's on your mind? ### User Unknown skill: contemplate ### User Unknown skill: contemplate ### User Unknown skill: contemplate ### User what is going on? ### Assistant Sorry about the confusion! It looks like there were some repeated attempts to run a command (`/contemplate`) that doesn't exist as a skill, which generated those system messages. You can ignore all of those. We're just having a conversation about your **Generating Philosophy with AI** project. I've read through your main draft in [[Writing/substack/Generating Philosophy with Artificial Intelligence.md]] and I'm ready to discuss whatever aspect of it you'd like. So — what did you want to talk about? ### User you don't have a contemplate skill? ### Assistant No, I don't have a `/contemplate` skill available. The only skill I currently have is: - **`/keybindings-help`** — for customizing keyboard shortcuts That said, I'm perfectly happy to do the *activity* of contemplating with you — thinking deeply about your generating philosophy project, working through arguments, playing devil's advocate, exploring ideas — just through regular conversation rather than a special command. What's on your mind with the project?