David Builes

Philosopher @Princeton. Time, Causality, Consciousness, Infinity, Ontology, and Rationality.

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

New paper! I argue for "Modal Idealism", the view that it is metaphysically necessary that: (i) every fundamental entity is conscious, and (ii) every fundamental property is a phenomenal property.
https://t.co/XjAGf4NnA6

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@eschwitz Exactly :)

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

New paper! I give 8 arguments for thinking that I'm special.
https://t.co/3hgEYnTfKi

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

Along the way, I talk about the Boltzmann Brain Problem and the simulation hypothesis :)

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

New paper in Noûs! I defend a version of the Principle of Indifference that is sensitive to one's prior metaphysical beliefs, and I use it to argue that Eternalism threatens to lead us to external world skepticism, and Modal Realism to inductive skepticism
https://t.co/3nfmSyJMjx

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@andrewyuanlee @AAPhilosophy July 2-9

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

New paper in Analysis! I develop different versions of the "grounding view of powers" under different assumptions about the metaphysics of properties. I end up arguing against a "Platonic" development of the view, which has been defended by Matthew Tugby.
https://t.co/YZvaR4pNYd

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@KennethLPearce I hope the paper increased your credence in Presentism! :)

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@KennethLPearce Imagine a world with 1 particle. It can be in either region A or B. It's a law that the particle stays in region A for 2 hours, then goes to region B for 2 hours, then A for 2 hours, etc. If the law specifies a continuous trajectory, this can be a non-Markovian and continuous law

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@KennethLPearce Lastly, insofar as you impose extra conditions on primitive laws that are not independently motivated, that reduces the prior probability of the view. Tyler Hildebrand argues against primitive laws using this point here:
https://t.co/7JqiPMhA6s

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@KennethLPearce Good question! Maudlin also talks about non-time-evolution "adjunct principles" being laws of nature, which can seem to be anything. If these are laws, not sure why they have to be Markovian.

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@KennethLPearce @estrabismoooo I hope you enjoy the paper!

I got the label from Hildebrand's excellent "Two Types of Quidditism". Other people have used the term "thick quiddities".
https://t.co/9XKXkXNBYh

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@VioletStraFish @justin_garson Unfortunately, I haven't. Maybe I'll try to do that in the future. (Also, there are four separate arguments in the paper.)

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@justin_garson No, I don't use an Occam's Razor argument. I give several other arguments (e.g. appealing to "no brute necessities", causality, our knowledge of our own conscious states, and certain close connections between idealism and other metaphysical debates)

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@andrewyuanlee @VioletStraFish @MartSchmalzried @davidchalmers42 I like the conditional “if rocks exist at all (rather than merely being particles-arranged-rock-wise, or the universe being rock-y), then rocks are conscious.” Because it is a necessary truth that to exist is to be conscious :)

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

If I like Idealism and Monism, does that make me an “Absolute Idealist”?

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@ewinsberg @KimptonNye I don’t like Humeanism or primitive governing laws. A “powers” metaphysics rejects both of them.

[David Builes @davidalanbuiles]

@Macroja1 @KimptonNye It’s controversial, that’s why I put it in scare quotes