# Some relevant tweets ![[attachments/Screenshot [[[[2025-02-11]]]] at 10.39.52.png]] ![[attachments/Screenshot [[[[2025-02-11]]]] at 10.41.07.png]] ![[attachments/Screenshot [[[[2025-02-11]]]] at 10.41.40.png]] ![[attachments/Screenshot [[[[2025-02-11]]]] at 10.42.07.png]] ## Really good chat 4 Feb 2025 at 17:51 (or at least the beginnings of one) https://chatgpt.com/c/67a242a8-fb70-800d-9059-6a163d20520c ## [[Current Draft]] [https://docs.google.com/document/d/19HsUVYs4yQFOC7n0XJ04VY-ISBnhoR9c_01jpHD-AeE/edit?tab=t.0] ## Most Recent Presentation https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1RdIFFk59umW6jw3ZHb6f2K0hbSAcOBnL4EPs4-HharY/edit#slide=id.p --- ## Readwise highlights https://readwise.io/tags/generating%20philosophy%20paper ## Readwise Texts https://read.readwise.io/filter/tag%3A%22generating%20philosophy%20paper%22 # LLM Text ### paraphrase of Progress paper:** [[Philosophical progress]] is enabled by putting people in a position to increase their understanding of a phenomenon, where understanding is achieved by accurately and comprehensively representing the network of [[dependence relations]] surrounding that phenomenon ### Clarification about “[[philosophical progress]]” and [[representation You]] asked: > Could you elaborate on [[what you]] mean by "Crucially, the text emphasises that [[philosophical progress]] does not require that all philosophers themselves actually hold the correct representation. Instead, progress occurs when people in general are placed in a position to achieve an improved understanding." In broad terms, [[the idea]] here is that [[the state]] of [[philosophical inquiry]] advances when the conceptual frameworks, arguments, and ideas made available in the culture (e.g., through published writings, scholarly debates, or broadly disseminated teaching materials) become collectively more refined or accurate. We often think about [[philosophical progress]] as if it must be reflected in every philosopher’s mind (i.e., that each person’s actual beliefs must somehow all “converge on the correct view”), but that is not strictly necessary. [[Philosophical progress]] also arises from the availability of new conceptual resources—new ways of formulating problems, sharper distinctions, improved taxonomies, better or subtler arguments—such that the broader intellectual community is now better able to achieve correct or more sophisticated understandings. To put it differently: imagine that only a few philosophers (or even just one, initially) manage to articulate a new, insightful argument that clarifies a persistent philosophical problem. If this argument is published, discussed, perhaps taught widely, then “people in general” (both present and future students, scholars, and so on) are placed in a better position to grasp the issue at a higher level of sophistication, and to share in that improved understanding—if they so choose. Even if only a fraction of contemporary philosophers personally hold the new perspective or are fully persuaded by it, the fact that it is “on the table” in the public sphere is itself a significant mark of progress. Hence, the focus is on the presence and accessibility of better conceptual or argumentative tools in society, rather than on a unanimous agreement. Consensus can lag behind conceptual refinement, yet progress can still occur once a new “best account” or “best representation” is introduced in publicly accessible ways. ### Micro vs. Macro Level The same idea which applies at the macro level—of an entire field gaining better conceptual tools—can analogously apply at the micro level of an individual. For a single philosopher (or student or interested reader), “progress” means that they now have available new theories or arguments that were not accessible before, or that were less well formulated, and thus can update or refine their own “mental models” of a philosophical problem. Your question is pointing out that this might be best seen as the personal, individual version of the broader cultural phenomenon: - **Micro level**: An individual’s own trajectory of acquiring refined concepts, sharper arguments, or new frameworks constitutes [[philosophical progress]] for that person. - **Macro level**: In a larger society or scholarly domain, those refinements become available publicly (through journals, books, debates, syllabi, etc.), so “people in general” are better positioned to improve their own understanding. Hence, we can say you have not misunderstood the fundamental notion. You are correct that this is a matter of individuals being able to make progress because the arguments and representations are out there in an improved form. ### Chain-of-Thought based on the capacities paper - _CoT prompting_ harnesses the model’s capacity to generate intermediate reasoning steps. - Approaches: - **Few-shot CoT**: demonstration includes [[the question]] + stepwise reasoning + [[final answer]]. - **Zero-shot CoT**: prompt with instructions such as “Let’s think step by step” to coax reasoning. - CoT is particularly advantageous for tasks requiring multi-step reasoning, e.g., mathematics, logic, or symbolic tasks. Large models appear more adept at CoT, but code training also helps. - _Self-consistency_ can be used: sampling multiple chains of thought, then choosing the majority answer. ## General Notes - #### Relevant Quotes > Differences between philosophical practice and scientific practice surely do invite the question of whether philosophical progress and scientific progress might be entirely different things. For example, scientists tend to focus on empirical observation and real-world experimentation whereas philosophers tend to focus on clarifying concepts and conducting thought experiments, along with all the other achievements discussed in §2.1. By supposing that philosophy doesn't aim at the same kind of progress as science, exceptionalist accounts avoid the burden of accounting for these methodological differences between philosophy and the empirical sciences. #### Ideas ## Section Notes ### 1. Introduction #### Key Points - #### Relevant Quotes > #### Development Notes - ### 2. [Section Name] #### Key Points - #### Relevant Quotes > #### Development Notes - ### 3. [Section Name] #### Key Points - #### Relevant Quotes > #### Development Notes - ## Resources ### Reading Notes - Author (Year) - Title - Key ideas: - Useful for section: - Page numbers to cite: ### Conversations & Feedback - Discussion with [Name] (Date) - Main points: - Changes to make: - LLM Conversations - [Link to conversation] - Key insights: ## Version History - Version 1.0 (Date) - Link to old version - Main changes: - Version 2.0 (Date) - Link to old version - Main changes: ## Todo List - [x] Task 1 🆔 vYuhxz ✅ 2025-01-16 - [x] Task 2 🆔 jLMafe ✅ 2025-01-16 ## Working Bibliography - Author, A. (Year). *Title*. Publisher. - Author, B. (Year). *Title*. Publisher. --- Tags: #paper/draft #philosophy #[specific-topic]