```tracker searchType: frontmatter searchTarget: weight folder: daily notes line: title: Weight Tracker yAxisLabel: weight lineColor: blue ``` # Philosophical thinking prompt When approaching philosophical problems, adopt the following mindset and methodological approach: 1. Critically analyze existing theories: - Identify key assumptions in current approaches. - Question whether these assumptions are necessary or well-justified. - Consider how changing these assumptions might lead to new perspectives. - Examine how well existing theories account for the full range of phenomenological facts. - Look for cases or experiences that current theories struggle to explain. - Use these phenomenological gaps to motivate the need for new approaches. 2. Innovate conceptually: - Develop new concepts or distinctions to help reframe or resolve issues. - Ensure these concepts are motivated by specific explanatory needs identified in your analysis. - Show how these new concepts can account for phenomena that existing theories struggle with. - Draw analogies between the problem at hand and other philosophical domains or everyday experiences. - Use these analogies to transfer insights from familiar contexts to the problem you're addressing. - Be explicit about how the analogy illuminates the issue and where it might break down. 3. Drive metaphysics through phenomenology: - Use detailed analysis of experiential facts to constrain metaphysical theories. - Show how phenomenological considerations can rule out certain metaphysical positions. - Develop metaphysical accounts that align closely with the structure of experience. - Introduce concepts that connect phenomenological facts with metaphysical claims. - Show how these bridging concepts can resolve tensions between experience and metaphysics. - Use these concepts to develop unified accounts that explain both how things seem and how they are. 4. Engage critically with literature: - Analyze existing accounts, showing a thorough understanding of their strengths and weaknesses. - Demonstrate how your approach retains the advantages of existing views while avoiding their pitfalls. - Use comparative analysis to motivate your own position. - Look for ways to combine insights from different existing theories. - Show how seemingly competing views might be reconciled through your new approach. - Aim for theories that can unify diverse phenomena under a common framework. 5. Anticipate objections: - Consider a wide range of cases or phenomena that your theory needs to account for. - Use potential counterexamples to refine and improve your account, not just to reject alternatives. - Show how your theory handles cases that are problematic for other views. - Clearly acknowledge any limitations or potential weaknesses of your own view. - Consider whether the explanatory benefits of your account outweigh these limitations. - Identify areas where further work or clarification is needed. 6. Make interdisciplinary connections: - Draw on debates in metaphysics to inform issues in philosophy of perception (or vice versa). - Show how insights from one area can shed new light on problems in another. - Be explicit about how this cross-pollination of ideas leads to novel solutions. When using this approach, strive to emulate a selection of the following specific philosophical moves, each exemplified by a quote from published philosophical work(which moves are appropriate will depend upon the particular philosophical question you are dealing with so be discerning in your selection of which moves to use): 1. Identify key assumptions: "It is often supposed that some aspect of perceptual experience leads to a belief in temporal passage" 2. Question assumptions: "Here I outline some difficulties for this approach, and propose instead that the belief in time passing is elicited by a particular feature of agentive experience." 3. Consider new perspectives: "I suggest that, whatever the truth may be about the metaphysics of persistence, auditory experience presents individuals as perduring, as composite wholes made up of temporal parts." 4. Examine phenomenological facts: "We never have auditory experiences of entirely unchanging objects, even in unusual or contrived circumstances." 5. Identify explanatory gaps: "Neither does it seem possible to elicit an experience as of an unchanging object artificially." 6. Use gaps to motivate new approaches: "If this is correct, then it is implausible to think that we hear events by hearing unified sequences of potentially stable properties." 7. Introduce novel concepts: "According to Shape, sounds are temporally extended sensible properties of objects." 8. Motivate new concepts: "The trick is, however, to think of an object's sound as its shape-in-time." 9. Show explanatory power of new concepts: "Such a view retains all the advantages of Property but fits better with auditory phenomenology and ordinary language by allowing that both objects and events are heard." 10. Use analogies: "Consider how we see objects to be what they are by seeing their shape. You see the bell as a bell. Why? Because, in virtue of your spatial field, you see it as extending through space in a bell-shaped way." 11. Transfer insights through analogies: "On Shape, the same applies for audition. We hear source events to be the source events they are by hearing the sounds of their objects." 12. Acknowledge analogy limitations: "There is no visual equivalent of such a case." 13. Use experience to constrain theories: "Audition however, is not field-like in the same way that vision is. It does not present an array of filled and empty regions of space, nor of objects as extending through space." 14. Rule out positions based on phenomenology: "If hearing movement cannot be modelled on seeing it, we need a different account of source perception." 15. Align accounts with experience: "I suggest that, whatever the truth may be about the metaphysics of persistence, auditory experience presents individuals as perduring, as composite wholes made up of temporal parts." 16. Connect phenomenology and metaphysics: "Experiencing oneself as an agent is to experience a particularly intimate form of change, which pervades all, or at least a large proportion of, the instants at which we are conscious." 17. Resolve experience-metaphysics tensions: "Not experiencing oneself as effecting change makes a good candidate for the experiential ingredient which tells us the present moment is changing." 18. Develop unified explanatory accounts: "Every instant at which we catch ourselves doing, or thinking, or attending, is an experience of change, and while we have an explanation as to how this change unfolds -we sense ourselves as guiding it- we do not have an explanation as to why there is change at all." 19. Analyze existing accounts: "Unlike objectless accounts, vibratory dispositions provide an explanation of the audible similarities between different source events involving the same object." 20. Compare approaches: "Such a view retains all the advantages of Property but fits better with auditory phenomenology and ordinary language by allowing that both objects and events are heard." 21. Motivate new positions: "If there is no obvious reason to believe that events but not objects instantiate sounds, and there are reasons for wanting an account of audition which allows for objects to be heard, why not go with a more traditional object-property view of sound rather than Property?" 22. Combine insights: "Here, I shall argue that, while not being a representation of a changing present, this type of experience invites us to believe that there is such a thing in much the same way that Hoerl says that a lack of temporal view pointedness invites a belief in the privileged present." 23. Reconcile competing views: "According to Hoerl, perceiving the bare occurrence of some event or other leads to the belief that the instant of perception is somehow special; on my account it is the bare occurrence of our own agentive restlessness which leads us to believe that that instant is in some special sort of flux." 24. Unify diverse phenomena: "Shape also retains the idea that sounds are caused by source events. An object takes on a particular shape-in-time depending on how it is stimulated and its physical properties." 25. Consider diverse cases: "Consider also how you might make a mistake in cases like this. Unbeknownst to you I might pick up and move the ball just as it stops, or it might roll onto a plush carpet, continuing its journey but no longer producing sound waves." 26. Refine through counterexamples: "I do not deny that we can learn of the presence and location of unmoving objects from what we hear." 27. Address problematic cases: "There are also mental actions to consider. The body could be entirely at rest and yet we can still deliberately deliberate on a problem, purposefully bring a memory to mind, or privately curse in inner speech." 28. Acknowledge limitations: "While I am sympathetic to this idea, I will not argue for it further here. This is because there is a second, more modest, response available to the challenge we are currently considering." 29. Weigh explanatory benefits: "One cost of rejecting the idea that perceptual experience always presents objects as enduring is that it would appear Prosser's account of experienced passage must be given up as well. Given that there are other accounts available as to why passage is experienced which do not rely on objects being experienced as enduring (e.g. Paul 2010; Skow 2015; Torrengo 2017), as well as doubts that there even is a phenomenology of passage (Hoerl 2014), I think that this is a price worth paying." 30. Identify areas for further work: "There are a variety of views as to what change perception involves (e.g. Arstila 2018; Lee 2014; Phillips 2014)." 31. Integrate metaphysics and perception: "This proposal draws on a debate in metaphysics as to the nature of persistence." 32. Apply insights across domains: "I suggest that, whatever the truth may be about the metaphysics of persistence, auditory experience presents individuals as perduring, as composite wholes made up of temporal parts." 33. Explain novel solutions through cross-pollination: "In perdurantism, however, we have a potential alternative. I suggest that, whatever the truth may be about the metaphysics of persistence, auditory experience presents individuals as perduring, as composite wholes made up of temporal parts. Hearing a source event is to hear a material object extend across a duration of time, and the type of event in which it participates determines which temporal parts it is heard to have." By internalizing these specific approaches and moves, strive to produce philosophical analyses that engage critically with existing ideas while introducing novel concepts and perspectives to advance the debate. # Old paper summariser prompt Here is a philosophical text. Please could you give me a very very very very very detailed bullet point summary, made up of a mixture quotes and paraphrases of all the ideas contained in it. The summary you give me should not leave out any details, and it should respect the headings and subheadings of the text. this should be suitable for professional academic philosophers. For this answer/these answers, and all of your answers going forward, follow this procedure: For your answer, please think about it in a vast amount of detail, step-by-step within <thinking></thinking> tags. Then, provide your final answer using the artifact plugin. then move onto the next answer. go into a large amount of detail. your final answer(s) should be in very very very detailed bullet points within subsections within sections. All text within the artifact should be written in markdown that i can easily copy past to obsidian. Headings and sub headings (sub sub, etc.) should be formatted with #, ##, ### etc. There should be a line break between your thinking and your answering for each question. Important message going forward. Whenever I ask you about the contents of this text/these texts. Please answer the question AND ALSO provide a quote comprising of at least four sentences from the text which includes the part of the text that backs up what you are saying. I want at least four sentences so i can see the context within which the key information is presented by the author. Please be careful to always quote FULL sentences, not just parts of them. The quote should be formatted as a block quote in markdown and include page numbers, and, in the case of a book, chapter numbers. # Possible new paper summariser prompt Provide an extremely detailed, comprehensive, and granular summary of the given philosophical text. Your summary should be at least 5000 words, offering an in-depth exploration of every concept, argument, and implication present in the text, down to the most minute details. This summary should be suitable for professional academic philosophers and serve as a standalone resource that captures the entirety of the text's content. ## Structure and Format - Use markdown formatting throughout (# for main headings, ## for subheadings, ### for sub-subheadings, etc.) - Organize the summary into major sections, subsections, and sub-subsections, mirroring and expanding upon the structure of the original text - Present information in detailed bullet points within each section, using nested bullets for sub-points ## Content Requirements ### 1. Contextual Introduction - Provide extensive background on the author and the historical/philosophical context of the work - Discuss the text's place within the author's broader body of work and its significance in the field - Explain any key terms or concepts that are prerequisite to understanding the text ### 2. Main Body For each major idea, argument, or discussion in the text: - Offer a detailed explanation of the concept, breaking it down into its constituent parts - Provide at least three relevant quotes, each at least 4-5 sentences long, formatted as block quotes with page/chapter numbers - Analyze the author's reasoning and methodology, explicating each step in their argument - Explore all potential implications and applications of the idea, no matter how minor - Discuss how this concept relates to other ideas within the text, drawing explicit connections - Compare and contrast with relevant philosophical perspectives from other thinkers, providing specific examples - Examine any examples, thought experiments, or analogies used to illustrate the concept, explaining them in full - If the text mentions a "discussion" or "argument," provide the complete content of that discussion or argument, not just a mention of its existence ### 3. Critical Analysis - Dedicate a substantial section to critical analysis of the text's arguments - Identify and explicate all potential weaknesses or inconsistencies in the author's reasoning - Explore counter-arguments from other philosophical traditions or thinkers, providing specific examples - Discuss the contemporary relevance and potential modern applications of the ideas presented, with concrete examples ### 4. Synthesis and Conclusion - Provide a comprehensive overview of how the various ideas in the text interconnect, drawing explicit links - Discuss the overall impact and significance of the work in its field, citing specific influences or developments - Explore potential areas for further research or philosophical inquiry stemming from the text, offering concrete questions or hypotheses ## Level of Detail - Aim for exhaustive coverage, leaving absolutely no detail unexplored - Prioritize depth over brevity, exploring each concept from multiple angles and at multiple levels - Include all relevant technical terminology, defining and explaining each term thoroughly - Never summarize a "discussion" or "argument" without providing its full content - Err on the side of over-explanation rather than assuming any knowledge on the reader's part ## Example of Expected Detail Level Instead of writing: "Detailed discussion of how Frischhut's account challenges traditional views of temporal experience" Provide this level of detail: "Frischhut's account challenges traditional views of temporal experience in several key ways: 1. Rejection of the 'specious present' theory: - Traditional view: We experience a 'specious present' that spans a short duration (e.g., a few seconds) - Frischhut's argument: a) The specious present theory leads to paradoxes in our understanding of change perception b) Example: If we experience a 3-second present, how do we perceive changes that occur within that timeframe? - Quote: [Insert relevant 4-5 sentence quote here with page number] - Implication: Our experience of time must be more granular than previously thought 2. Proposal of a 'punctual present' theory: - Frischhut's view: We experience time as a series of instantaneous 'nows' - Key arguments: a) This resolves the paradoxes of the specious present theory b) It aligns better with our subjective experience of immediate, moment-to-moment changes - Potential issues: a) How do we account for the apparent continuity of experience? b) How does this relate to the minimum discriminable unit of time in human perception? - Quote: [Insert relevant 4-5 sentence quote here with page number] 3. Reinterpretation of duration perception: - Traditional view: We directly perceive duration as an extended present - Frischhut's argument: a) Duration perception is a cognitive construction based on memory and expectation b) We don't experience duration directly, but infer it from changes in our instantaneous experiences - Supporting evidence: a) Psychological studies on time perception illusions (e.g., oddball effect, filled-duration illusion) b) Neurological studies on time perception mechanisms in the brain - Quote: [Insert relevant 4-5 sentence quote here with page number] - Implications for other philosophical theories of time (e.g., presentism, eternalism) [Continue with several more detailed points, each broken down to this level of granularity]" ## Additional Instructions - When addressing follow-up questions, provide extensive answers (at least 1000 words) supported by multiple contextual quotes - Format your thinking process within `<thinking></thinking>` tags before presenting the final summary - Use the artifacts plugin to present the final summary, ensuring all text is in markdown format Your goal is to create a summary so thorough and detailed that it could serve as a standalone study guide for a graduate-level philosophy course focused solely on this text. The summary should be so comprehensive and granular that it eliminates [[the need]] for follow-up questions to clarify or expand on any points. No detail is too small to include.