Theo Todman's Web Page

For Text Colour-conventions (at end of page): Click Here

Status Reports - Status: Summary (2018 - December)

Rationale for this Report


Projects in Progress
Planning and Actuals
Detailed Interim Activities

Plans for the Near Future24
  1. Thesis25
    1. Continue with my Thesis26; in particular
      1. Fill out those sections that I can write something on without further research.
      2. Rework the structure so that Level-1 or -2 print produces the thesis with the correct reading-list.
    2. Continually review the Note describing my Current Beliefs27 on the topic of Personal Identity.
    3. Complete a full review and update of the Notes I’ve created on Personal Identity, focusing on those directly referenced by my Current Beliefs28.
    4. Make progress on specific Chapters of my Thesis, using the materials below →
    5. Chapter 229 (What Are We?). Focussing on:-
      1. Human Beings: "Johnston (Mark) - 'Human Beings' Revisited: My Body is Not an Animal".
      2. Persons: "Cottingham (John) - Why we are not 'persons'".
      3. Selves:-
        1. "Dainton (Barry) - Self: Philosophy In Transit",
        2. "O'Hear (Anthony), Ed. - Mind, Self and Person".
    6. Chapter 530 (Persistence and Time). Focussing on:-
      1. "Botros (Sophie) - Truth, Time and History: A Philosophical Enquiry",
      2. "Haslanger (Sally) & Kurtz (Roxanne), Eds. - Persistence : Contemporary Readings",
      3. "Miller (Kristie) - Issues in Theoretical Diversity: Persistence, Composition, and Time",
      4. "Orwell (George), Davison (Peter), Taylor (D.J.), Ed. - Nineteen Eighty-Four: The Annotated Edition",
      5. "Rovelli (Carlo) - The Order of Time",
      6. "Sider (Ted), Hawthorne (John) & Zimmerman (Dean), Eds. - Contemporary Debates in Metaphysics",
      7. "Skow (Bradford) - Objective Becoming",
      8. "Wiggins (David) - Continuants: Their Activity, Their Being, and Their Identity",
      9. Complete "Lebens (Samuel) & Goldschmidt (Tyron) - The Promise of a New Past", and send to Sophie Botros & Michael J. Alter,
      10. Complete running through relevant pages from Robert O. Doyle.
    7. Chapter 631 (Animalism). Focussing on:-
      1. "Olson (Eric) - The Human Animal - Personal Identity Without Psychology", my core text,
      2. "Merricks (Trenton) - Objects and Persons",
      3. "Bailey (Andrew M.) - The Elimination Argument",
      4. "Olson (Eric) - On Parfit's View That We Are Not Human Beings",
      5. "Olson (Eric) - The Metaphysical Implications of Conjoined Twining",
      6. "Olson (Eric) - The Role of the Brainstem in Personal Identity",
      7. "Shoemaker (Sydney) - Persons, Animals, and Identity",
      8. "Snowdon (Paul) - Persons, Animals, Ourselves",
      9. Review "Hershenov (David) - Review of David DeGrazia’s Human Identity and Bioethics".
      10. Review the work of Elselijn Kingma.
    8. Chapter 732 (The Constitution View):-
      1. Start a serious review of "Baker (Lynne Rudder) - Persons and Bodies: A Constitution View", my other core text.
      2. Write up reviews of papers in "Baker (Lynne Rudder), Etc. - E-Symposium on 'Persons & Bodies: A Constitution View'".
      3. Read and review "Corcoran (Kevin) - Rethinking Human Nature: A Christian Materialist Alternative to the Soul".
      4. Write a Note on "Loose (Jonathan) - Constitution and the Falling Elevator".
    9. Chapter 1033 (Thought Experiments):-
      1. Investigate Transhumanism34. In particular,
        1. Read "Bridle (James) - New Dark Age: Technology and the End of the Future",
        2. Briefly review "O'Connell (Mark) - To be a Machine",
        3. Read "Bostrom (Nick) - Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies",
        4. Detailed review of "Graziano (Michael) - Endless fun",
        5. Complete "Midgley (Mary) - Biotechnology and Monstrosity: Why We Should Pay Attention to the 'Yuk Factor'",
        6. Complete review of "Shipley (G.J.) - Review of Andy Clark's 'Natural-Born Cyborgs'",
        7. Review "Harari (Yuval Noah) - Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow", especially Chapter 8.
        8. Read & review "Fry (Hannah) - Hello World: How to be Human in the Age of the Machine".
    10. Chapter 1135 (Resurrection):-
      1. Start a thorough review of "Martin (L. Michael) & Augustine (Keith) - The Myth of an Afterlife: The Case against Life After Death",
      2. Start a review of "Luper (Steven), Ed. - The Cambridge Companion to Life and Death", especially
        → "Olson (Eric) - The Nature of People",
      3. Start a review of "Bradley (Ben), Feldman (Fred) & Johansson (Jens) - The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Death", especially
        → "Zimmerman (Dean) - Personal Identity and the Survival of Death",
      4. Read and review
        → "Baker (Lynne Rudder) - Death and the Afterlife",
        → "Corcoran (Kevin) - Dualism, Materialism and the Problem of Post Mortem Survival", and
        → "Badham (Paul) - Christian Beliefs About Life After Death".
      5. Write a file-note on "Barua (Ankur) - Revisiting the Rationality of Reincarnation-Talk".
    11. As background tasks:-
      1. Ensure all items in:-
        → "Various - Papers on Desktop", and
        → "Various - Papers in Desk Drawer"
        are either addressed or re-filed.
      2. Convert old PDF-précis, Etc36 to Notes,
      3. Complete cataloguing the books downloaded from Springer,
      4. Continue with "Marshall (Richard) - Philosophy at 3:AM: Questions and Answers with 25 Top Philosophers",
      5. Complete reading:-
        1. "Gazzaniga (Michael S.) - Who's in Charge? Free Will and the Science of the Brain"
        2. "Rosling (Hans) - Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think" (Note37)
        3. "Updike (John) - Self-Consciousness"
      6. Complete my Note on "Smith (Martin) - Why Throwing 92 Heads in a Row Is Not Surprising" and discuss with Pete & Mike.
      7. Continue reading and reviewing38 papers issued by Aeon,
      8. Attend Oliver Black’s Salon39(s),
      9. Keep up with the Journals via JSTOR & Cambridge Core40.
      10. Keep up with the philosophical world by periodic reviews of "Interaction - Philos-List".
  2. Religion41
    1. Philosophy of Religion:
      1. Continue reading "Antony (Louise M.) - Philosophers without Gods: Meditations on Atheism and the Secular Life",
      2. Continue reading the Blog "Ferguson (Matthew) - Κέλσος".
    2. Resurrection: Continue reviewing42
      1. "Alter (Michael J.) - The Resurrection: A Critical Inquiry", and
      2. "Alter (Michael J.) - The Resurrection & Christian Apologetics: A Critical Inquiry Volume 2".
    3. Background:
      1. Read appropriate items from Aeon43.
      2. Continue reading "Finkelstein (Israel) & Silberman (Neil Asher) - The Bible Unearthed".
  3. Website44
    1. Own Website: Priority 1 Items By Category:-
      • Architecture
        1. Complete XRef-re-engineering project:-
          1. Ensure all links and link-pages use the new XRef table, and pension off the old tables.
          2. Check all link-types still work and fix any errors.
          3. Complete the auto-triggering of regeneration of “associated” link pages.
          4. Fix update bug in Convert_Webrefs.
          5. Fix Bug whereby PaperSummary pages seem to have “Works-” and “Books/Papers-” Citings that refer to the same link-pages.
        2. Review effectiveness of hyperlinking method in the light of PhD and Philosophy of Religion experience.
        3. Where possible, use ID rather than NAME for in-page hyperlinks
      • Authors
        1. As revealed by Spider: Author pages not regenerated when name corrected, leading to Sundry broken Links from other pages. 72 items.
        2. As revealed by Spider: Philosophers_Index_List_OA.htm. Author Names Scrambled. 133 items.
      • Backups
        1. Review architecture to improve performance; Need to document first
      • Books/Papers
        1. Investigate whether multiple Subject/Topic/Subtopic usage leads anywhere (ie. are just the first (of 3) actually used). Fix anything amiss.
      • Documenter
        1. Provide Functional Documentation for Website Generator (using Notes)
      • Education
        1. Continue with Harvard CS50's Web Programming with Python and JavaScript (https://www.edx.org/course/cs50s-web-programming-with-python-and-javascript-0): either complete it, or check it'll still run in 2019.
        2. Investigate Bootstrap.
        3. Plan what to do with "Sitepoint (Learnable) - Sitepoint Learnable Web Development Courses" and the eBooks in my possession.
        4. Read "PC Pro - Computing in the Real World".
        5. Read "Barnes (Russell), Ed. - Web Designer".
        6. Re-start "Harvard University - CS50 Introduction to Computer Science". Maybe just "audit".
        7. Understand Bitcoin & Blockchain better
      • Infrastructure
        1. Re-install iCloud: solve 'The upload folder for iCloud Photos is missing' problem
      • Notes
        1. Add "Note Alternates" to Note pages.
        2. Allow the option to concatenate Notes in the Printed version (ie. linearly embed them essay-style), rather than treating the hyperlinks as footnotes – but still keep the hyperlink & cross-referencing in place.
          1. For use as "disclaimers" - eg. for "Plug Notes".
          2. For Thesis / essays: the difficulty here is the need for linking passages to make the text run smoothly.
        3. As revealed by Spider: #Reference links: fail for Printable Notes. 24 items.
        4. As revealed by Spider: Blog45 Achived Notes - sundry links to Printable Notes. Live Note OK. 110 items. 100 items outstanding.
        5. As revealed by Spider: Old links from Archive Notes to (non-existent) Archived Printable Notes. 42 items.
        6. Investigate Note_Links: Section references seem to be incorrect
        7. Printable Notes: fix the bug whereby the “private” flag is round the wrong way.
        8. Suppress the publication of the Printable versions of Temp Notes
      • Photos
        1. Create Timeline software: Add photos of Tom & Coxes Farm
        2. Develop software & procedure to make adding more content to the photos pages easier to undertake.
      • Process
        1. As revealed by Spider: Sundry uncategorised. Refs failing. 17 items.
        2. Determine why Recalculation & Changed Book/Papers produce unneeded regeneration.
        3. Full Website Regeneration is now taking 27 hours. Investigate why so, and improve performance!
      • Spider
        1. Analyse the results of the data collection exercise and design a plan of campaign to fix broken Internal links and prevent recurrence.
          1. Correct the code so the problems discovered by the Spider don’t recur.
          2. Delete 'orphan pages' that are never linked to, ie. Use the Spider to prune redundant pages46 automatically where possible.
          3. Fix the historical data where errors are uncovered by the Spider. An easier task now the site has a full-regen function.
        2. The Spider was generating WebRefs. Procedurally, this ought not to have been possible.
          1. The major problem turned out to be because unprocessed47 URLs got added to the end of the last WebLinks_Tester_Brief page, which then got Spidered. I've stopped this happening, so hopefully the problem will not recur. The fix was made in 18Q2.
          2. However, 4 other creations appeared - dated 18/05/18 - from the run of 10/07/18. The creation date was from the previous spider run, but the IDs show that they were produced in the latest run.
          I've re-opened the case!
      • Technology
        1. Look into Sistrix Smart48. Errors and warnings itemised are:-
          1. Duplicate content: seems to be theotodman.com and Link - Defunct
          2. Title Tags: Empty, too long, identical
          3. Page Not Found
          4. Filesize in excess of 1Mb
          5. Meta-Description: Empty
          6. Few words on Page
          7. H1: Not used, used multiple times per page, identical across pages
          8. Pictures: Alt attribute missing
      • WebRefs
        1. As revealed by Spider: WebLinks_Tester_Full_Map.htm (etc). Refs failing. 116 items.
        2. As revealed by Spider: WebLinks_Tester_Map_3.htm (etc). Refs failing. 16 items.
        3. Documentation & Bug-fixes: Phase 2
          1. Re-document the procedures in the light of recent changes.
          2. Resolve issues generated / revealed by the spider.
          3. Investigate - and fix where possible - broken links.
        4. Reformat WebLinks_Tester.htm, WebLinks_Tester_Map.htm, WebLinks_Tester_Full.htm & WebLinks_Tester_Full_Map.htm
          1. Clarify 'truncated': Display, not link
          2. Allow more space for 'link returned', 'issue' and 'display text'
          3. The 'As Above" lines waste space. Only for Notes Archive? Consolidate onto single second line.
        5. Reformat WebLinks_Tester_Brief: Allow more space for 'link returned', 'issue' and 'display text'
    2. Other Websites: Priority 1 Items By Category:-
      • Bridge
        1. Create "Small Sites" database for Alaric (if chased)
      • Enigma
        1. Termly updates to the Enigma Ensemble (http://www.enigmaensemble.co.uk/) Website.
      • Sophie
        1. Periodic updates to Sophie Botros: Live Site (http://www.sophiebotros.com/)
  4. Music49
    1. Oboe:-
      1. Practice the oboe for two 30-minute sessions each and every day50 – focussing on the items below and …
      2. Occasionally combine into an hour-long session to build up stamina further.
      3. Attend the six sessions of The Enigma Ensemble in the coming quarter.
      4. Run through the Enigma Ensemble portfolio, practicing the active pieces.
      5. Work through, and perfect, scales & arpeggios51 for Grades I-VI, using
        → "Trinity Guildhall - Trinity Guildhall Scales & Arpeggios for Oboe (Grades 1–8)", and
        → "ABRSM - Scales and Arpeggios for Oboe, Grades 1-8 (ABRSM Scales & Arpeggios)".
      6. Improve sight-reading by playing through "Trinity Guildhall - Sound at Sight Oboe Grades 1-8".
      7. Prepare Grade VI pieces, in particular
        → "Boni (Giovanni) - Sonata in G" (Prelude only),
        → "Miller (Vojislav) & Liebermann (Winfried), Eds. - Test Pieces for Orchestral Auditions (Orchester Probespiel) - Oboe" (Eroica, Aida, Der Freischutz),
        → "Nielsen (Carl) - Two Fantasy Pieces, Op. 2" (Romanze only),
        → "Davies (John) & Harris (Paul) - 80 Graded Studies for Oboe: Book 2" (Blatt - Study No. 52)
      8. Read and apply oboe practice techniques recommended by Martin Schuring.
      9. Read "Caplan (Stephen) - Oboe: The Breathing Book".
    2. Piano: Try to develop some competence as an aid to theory, so:-
      1. Complete working through "Rhodes (James) - How to Play the Piano",
      2. Work through "ABRSM - Selected Piano Exam Pieces 2009-2010: Grade 1", and
      3. Try to play by ear, using for inspiration:-
        → "Cannel (Ward) & Marx (Fred) - How to Play the Piano Despite Years of Lessons: What Music Is and How to Make It at Home".
    3. Theory: Prepare for Grade 5 Theory, so:-
      1. Study
        → "Taylor (Eric) - The AB Guide to Music Theory - Part 1", and
        → "Taylor (Eric) - The AB Guide to Music Theory - Part 2",
      2. Do the exercises in
        → "Taylor (Eric) - Music Theory in Practice: Grade 1",
        → "Taylor (Eric) - Music Theory in Practice: Grade 2",
        → "Taylor (Eric) - Music Theory in Practice: Grade 3",
        → "Taylor (Eric) - Music Theory in Practice: Grade 4", and
        → "Taylor (Eric) - Music Theory in Practice: Grade 5",
    4. Aural:
      1. Run through "ABRSM - Aural Training In Practice: Book 1 - Grades 1-3"
      2. Get a grip on the process of ear-training by reading "Deutsch (Diana) - Absolute Pitch", and related material52.
  5. Chess53
    1. Training using Chess.com (https://www.chess.com/).
    2. Read "van der Sterren (Paul) - FCO - Fundamental Chess Openings", with assistance from the above.
    3. Study "Willemze (Thomas) - The Chess Toolbox: Practical Techniques Everyone Should Know".
    4. Full participation in Billericay Chess Club:-
      → Club Nights
      → Club Championship
      → NECL matches
      → Southend League matches
    5. Training versus Mephisto Monte Carlo.
    6. Read "Chess - Chess Magazine"; work through the “How Good Is Your Chess” articles.
  6. Consciousness54
    1. Re-read and write notes on "Papineau (David) - Introducing Consciousness",
    2. Re-read and review notes on "Crane (Tim) - Elements of Mind - An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind",
    3. Read "Dehaene (Stanislas) - Consciousness and the Brain: Deciphering How the Brain Codes Our Thoughts",
    4. Read appropriate papers from Aeon55.
  7. Bridge56
    1. Meet up with former partners from time to time.
    2. Return to playing bridge at most once a week if encouraged to do so.
    3. Read "Reading - Bridge - Magazines".
  8. Languages57
    1. Thai: Following Nat's emigration to Thailand:-
      → "Lonely Planet - Lonely Planet Thai Phrasebook & Dictionary",
      → "Becker (Benjawan Poomsan) - Thai for Beginners",
      → "ThaiNotes - Thai Notes",
      → "Wikipedia - Thai Alphabet", and
      → "Wikipedia - Thai Language".
    2. Egyptian (Ancient):
    3. Maltese:
      Wikipedia: Maltese language (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maltese_language)
  9. Mathematics58
    1. Read papers from Aeon as they arise.
    2. Browse "Gowers (Timothy), Barrow-Green (June) & Leader (Imre), Eds. - The Princeton Companion to Mathematics".
    3. Complete reading "Shapiro (Stewart) - Thinking about Mathematics - The Philosophy of Mathematics".
    4. Read "Polya (George), Stewart (Ian) - How to Solve IT: A New Aspect of Mathematical Method".
    5. Try the puzzles in "Polya (George) & Kilpatrick (Jeremy) - The Stanford Mathematics Problem Book: With Hints and Solutions".
    6. Analyze "Smith (Martin) - Why Throwing 92 Heads in a Row Is Not Surprising".
  10. HiQ59
    1. ISPE
    2. Mensa
      • Nothing planned.



In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1:
  • Since the contents of the groups changes over time, this justification for their segregation isn’t entirely accurate.
Footnote 12:
  • Mind you, the mathematical bits didn’t function very well in my youth, so what hope is there now?
Footnote 14:
  • Due to administrative confusion, I needlessly took their latest entrance test. After chasing them up I was told I “passed with flying colours”, but could get no more information.
Footnote 15:
  • Coxes Farm hails from the 16th century, or possibly earlier, and is very “wonky”, requiring continual maintenance.
  • In December 2017, a base to roof crack appeared in the render at the front.
  • Subsequent investigations revealed that the frame at the front – which had been added in the 17th century – has rotted away, so the front façade was held up by the brick infill and an impervious cement render, the cause of the rot.
  • The front of the house has now been rebuilt, as has ¾ of the rear. A third project – for spring 2019 – is to rebuild the lower part of a side wall.
  • I’m writing a Blog Item on this saga, with some theoretical thoughts, which I hope to have published in due course.
Footnote 19:
  • 25 hours / week represents the amount of time that I’d need to spend if I were pursuing my research part-time at Birkbeck – which would be something like 5 hours / day, 5 days a week.
Footnote 20:
  • As my purchasing has now dropped to a relative trickle, I’ve extended the selection range to cover the last 6 months.
  • Some of these are random purchases from charity shops, or presents. Others are selectively purchased in support of my various projects.
  • Poverty and lack of space is severely curtailing my purchasing power.
Footnote 21:
  • Or at least those recently added to my database, in the case of electronic items that sometimes arrive too fast to be catalogued immediately.
Footnote 24:
  • In the light of the segregation of my projects into three tiers, items for tertiary projects are only to be addressed if everything of higher priority is in shape.
  • If there are any changes to this list between quarters, they will appear in the Priority Task List.
Footnote 37:
  • Read the Appendices, and extract the Chapter Summaries as learning-points.
Footnote 38:
  • Try to keep up to date, but only read those that are strictly relevant – ignore the rest!
  • At present I have a relatively small reading-backlog, and a much larger reviewing-backlog.
  • Try to add a brief comment for each paper – maybe at the expense of reading the full text!
Footnote 39: Footnote 42:
  • While I couldn't submit to Michael Alter's deadlines and the amount of work required, I ought to at least read these books.
Footnote 46:
  • Note that Backup_Prune_Ctrl deletes (relevant) pages that weren't regenerated in the last full site-regen, but this isn't the same thing.
Footnote 47:
  • These are URLs that were used in web pages but hadn't yet been converted to the +WnnnW+ format, so appeared at the end with no WebRef ID.
Footnote 48:
  • See Sistrix (https://www.sistrix.com/smart/)
  • This used to be called Optimizr, see Optimizr (http://www.optimizr.com/) (which now auto-forwards to Sistrix).
  • A quick look doesn’t show it to be an obvious scam, but I need to double-check.
  • An unsolicited analysis of my site turned up monthly from Optimizr from January 2015 to October 2017, listing a large number of “problems” that I think I know about, but which are in the queue to address.
  • It restarted in February 2018, under the Sistrix name (this seems to have been associated with Optimizr since November 2015).
  • The free version of this software is restricted to 1,000 pages, which is a very small proportion of my Site, though I may be able to point it to difference base-URLs.
  • But I do need to address the problems validly itemised, and a sub-set is still useful.
Footnote 50:
  • Well, maybe with the occasional holiday, and excluding days on which I have a lesson or the Enigma Ensemble.
Footnote 51:
  • I don't intend to present these for the Trinity exams, as I can present Orchestral Audition pieces instead; but they are essential for technique.
Footnote 52: Ie. The following:-

Note last updated: 06/01/2019 23:36:58


Footnote 2: (Status: Personal Identity (2018 - December))

Rationale for this Project

  • I am researching the subject of Personal Identity primarily because of its intrinsic interest and importance. It is really a sub-topic in my Philosophy of Religion project, with its penultimate chapter considering the metaphysical possibility of resurrection.
  • While I’m interested in the topic of my research in its own right, I think when I’ve sorted it out a bit, and have something to say, I’ll want to engage with other philosophers active in this field – and re-starting a PhD at Birkbeck or elsewhere might be the only effective way to do this.
  • While a PhD is not an end in itself, and certainly not the ultimate aim of my doing philosophy, it’s still true that a PhD would teach me research techniques, provide focus and direction, and furnish a professional qualification should I want to publish any results in this or any other area of philosophy.
  • The best place to find my current views is here.
  • The jumping-off point for my thesis is here, and a progress dashboard is here, though neither of these has changed for some considerable time.

Summary of Progress during October - December 2018
  1. I spent 277.25 hours in 4Q18 on this Project, or related work (277.25 hours YTD, where for "YTD" - Year to Date - I mean the (academic) year that commenced in October 2018). That's 106.6% of the planned effort (106.6% YTD). Overall, 46.5% of my Project effort in the Quarter was directed towards this project (making 46.5% YTD) - as against 37% planned (36.9% YTD).
  2. My planned effort was 20 hours / week5. This quarter – after a late surge – I more than achieved this. Moreover, most of the effort expended was on relevant items!
  3. My main focus this time round was on "Botros (Sophie) - Truth, Time and History: A Philosophical Enquiry": firstly, to complete reading the book, then to complete going through the bibliography and adding text within my database for all the entries I think are relevant, acquiring those items I didn’t have.
  4. I also watched and transcribed the associated video "Botros (Sophie) - Truth, Time and History - A Philosophical Inquiry with Dr Sophie Botros", and have spent time adding footnotes.
  5. In connection with the above, where O’Brien’s views on the unreality of the past receive support, I purchased and started reading "Orwell (George), Davison (Peter), Taylor (D.J.), Ed. - Nineteen Eighty-Four: The Annotated Edition".
  6. Updated a number of my Notes, though with less zeal than last quarter.
  7. Made another attempt to read and understand "Lebens (Samuel) & Goldschmidt (Tyron) - The Promise of a New Past". On-going!
  8. In addition, completed reading
    → "Heyes (Cecilia M.) - Cognitive Gadgets: The Cultural Evolution of Thinking"
    → "Rosling (Hans) - Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think"
    → "Rovelli (Carlo) - The Order of Time"
    → "Hale (Sheila) - The Man Who Lost His Language"
  9. Progress between reports can be obtained from the relevant section of my Summary Task List. More detail follows:-
Thesis (Total Hours = 250.5)
  1. Thesis - Reading / Writing (Total Hours = 235.75)
  2. Thesis - Discussions (Total Hours = 1.25)
  3. Thesis - Lectures
  4. Thesis - Research Repositioning
  5. Thesis - Seminars (Total Hours = 4.75)
  6. Thesis - Seminars (Writing)
Thesis Background (Total Hours = 25.75)
  1. Thesis Background - Reading / Writing (Total Hours = 19.25)
  2. Thesis Background - Status (Total Hours = 6.5)
Thesis (Aeon)
Plans for the Near Future – Top Priority Tasks
Summary of Progress to Date

This was hived off to a separate Note back in 2010, and hasn’t changed much since.




In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 5:
  • 25 hours / week is approximately what I’d expect to put in to a part-time PhD. I intend to attempt this in the coming quarter.
Footnote 7:
  • Hopefully, I may complete, or get stuck, earlier.
  • I had hoped to complete this phase of my research by my 65th birthday – ie. by 13/11/2018. Previously, I’ve remarked “This is not to slip!” Unfortunately, the distraction of the problems with Coxes Farm – as well as a general lack of focus – have meant that it has!
  • On the plus side, I’m already much further advanced than would be expected of someone commencing a PhD.
  • On the minus side, I want to go into much greater depth, and have other projects on the go – most notably Music, Philosophy of Religion, Chess and – particularly – my Web-tools project.
  • The original reason for deferring to my 65th birthday was that this is when I am eligible for my State Pension. This may not be much to live on – but it is a quite generous supplement which would make a significant contribution towards the fees and expenses, which prior thereto I couldn’t afford.
  • Unfortunately, my state pension (and Julie’s, for that matter) has been more than gobbled up by payments on the mortgage I’ve managed to obtain for Coxes Farm. We’ll be repaying that until 2031, by which time I’ll be 77. Maybe litigation against a negligent surveyor will liberate some cash.
Footnote 8:
  • This used to say “complete a thesis …”, which is obviously impossible, given that my idea of a thesis is way in excess of what is required.
Footnote 10:
  • This is still ludicrously inadequate for what I want to achieve, but is what would be expected of a part-time research student.
Footnote 12:
  • This is obviously far too long, and keeps getting items “carried forward” tacked on to it.
  • Maybe I’ll prune it next time.
Footnote 24:
  • Read the Appendices, and extract the Chapter Summaries as learning-points.
Footnote 25:
  • Try to keep up to date, but only read those that are strictly relevant – ignore the rest!
  • At present I have a relatively small reading-backlog, and a much larger reviewing-backlog.
  • Try to add a brief comment for each paper – maybe at the expense of reading the full text!
Footnote 26:

Note last updated: 06/01/2019 23:36:58


Footnote 4: (Status: Web-Tools (2018 - December))

Rationale for this Project

  • This Project was alluded to briefly in a footnote on research methodology in my original Research Proposal under the head Research - Internet Technology. When last at Birkbeck, I wrote a more extensive paper defending the Project and describing its rationale. Now that my PhD is in suspense, I have decided to take this Project further. There’s a lot to do: still quite a few items on the “wish list”. It is fairly critical as an enabler for my research, so I need to get a move on as I want it all out of the way before I re-start4 formal research.
  • For documentation on my website (currently password protected) follow the links below:-
    1. Functional5 Documentation.
    2. Technical7 Documentation.
  • Other Websites
    1. Sometime around 2005, I created a website for Dr. Sophie Botros (Sophie Botros: Live Site (http://www.sophiebotros.com/)), one of my supervisors at Birkbeck, but we then lost touch and it got maintained (very badly) by some desktop support outfit. In 2Q15 I took it back on again and spruced it up a bit, and maintain it periodically, though it still requires more work.
    2. I created and / or ran a multitude of bridge websites, but as of January 2018 I have either handed them over or mothballed them9:-
      1. I established the Hutton Bridge Club (http://www.bridgewebs.com/hutton.html) Website in 4Q11 using the standard Bridgewebs service, but with a couple of competitions using my own routines. This was handed over in 3Q15.
      2. In 1Q15, I took over the support and development of the Essex Contract Bridge Association (http://www.bridgewebs.com/essex/) (ECBA) website, which also uses Bridgewebs, but is very much larger. I wrote a lot of code10 to make this job less tedious. The site was handed over in 4Q17.
      3. For several years, I collected data11 on bridge activity in the Billericay / Brentwood area (initially needed for a project to set up a new consolidated club) – by “scraping” data off web pages, consolidating it into a database and modelling it in various ways.
      4. I used this data to generate websites with a multitude of ladders for small clubs (Essex Bridge Results (http://www.theotodman.com/Bridge/index.htm)). These are now mothballed.
      5. I created and maintained a new website for the First Class Bridge (http://www.bridgewebs.com/firstclassbridge/) Academy, giving it “small clubs” ladders as these were easy to maintain with little intervention.
      6. In 3Q16 I revived the Mountnessing Bridge Club Archive (http://mountnessing.theotodman.com/index.shtml) website.
    3. I’ve created and continue to maintain a small website for a music group Julie and I attend – the Enigma Ensemble (http://www.enigmaensemble.co.uk/).
    4. I created a website for displaying the textual and grammatical analyses and appendices of Pete’s PhD on the Acts of the Apostles. It exists in two versions: Acts: Live Site (http://www.acts-research.website/) and Acts: Test Site (http://www.theotodman.com/Petes_PhD/index.htm).
  • I did consider returning to work part-time as an MS Access/Excel developer, with a spin-off into website generation, but have done nothing about it so far.

Summary of Progress during October - December 2018
  1. I spent 79.5 hours in 4Q18 on this Project, or related work (79.5 hours YTD, where for "YTD" - Year to Date - I mean the (academic) year that commenced in October 2018). That's 51% of the planned effort (51% YTD). Overall, 13.3% of my Project effort in the Quarter was directed towards this project (making 13.3% YTD) - as against 22.2% planned (22.2% YTD).
  2. Again, I made no progress at all on the courses put out by Harvard
    → "Harvard University - CS50 Introduction to Computer Science", and
    → "Harvard University - CS50W Web Programming with Python and JavaScript".
    I still intend to make a serious attempt to complete the former sometime (I will need to re-start). However, I decided to precede it with the latter which is more immediately relevant.
  3. Early in the quarter I’d been on course to approximate budget, but decisions to meet or exceed budget on other projects – in particular my Thesis, Music and Chess – and two weeks’ illness – got in the way in the latter half of the quarter, when I did virtually nothing on this project, so I only achieved about 50% of plan in the end.
  4. However, I did manage to spend 55 hours developing my own site and did a lot of useful work.
  5. Completed items included:-
    1. Own Website:
      • Architecture
        1. As revealed by Spider: Old links in unregenerated pages. 8 Items.
      • Documenter
        1. Outstanding Developments by Category appearing all in Bold, and links to lists failing.
      • Notes
        1. Create Priority Task List Report.
        2. As revealed by Spider: Links from Blog in Level 1 or 2 Printed Notes 512 and 981 failing. 141 items.
        3. As revealed by Spider: Links to sundry 'static' pages failing.
          1. 13 items fixed.
          2. 7 items outstanding: to do with Pete's PhD Test site. Links seem to be OK, so may be a problem with the Spider. Directory "Petes_PhD" was the only one set to "do not parse". The file wasn't in the site map. Reset; hopefully it'll work!
        4. As revealed by Spider: Status Reports - Achived Notes - sundry links failing. 50 items in total. Live Notes fixed.
          1. Website: Maintenance Dashboard. 14 items.
          2. Personal Identity Status Report. 11 items.
          3. Summary Status Report. 4 items.
          4. Actual Detail Summary Report. 6 items.
          5. Chess Status Report. 12 items.
          6. Etc. 3 items.
        5. As revealed by Spider: Consciousness Status Report Achived Notes - links to BookCatalogCategorised_16_115_471.htm failing. Live Note OK. 46 items. 24 items outstanding.
        6. As revealed by Spider: Sundry links failed for Supervisions. 30 items.
      • Process
        1. Added 'time to regenerate' sub-totals & grand-totals to Website Maintenance Dashboard.
      • Spider
        1. Determined why Full_Link_Up_Levels_Gen takes so long - approximately 4 hours. Re-architected to reduce database reads.
      • Status
        1. Links occasionally missing from Summary Task List and Summary Task List (YTD).
      • WebRefs
        1. Added Display text to WebRefs for Links to Stanford, Wikipedia & Aeon
    2. Other Websites:
      • Enigma
        1. Added 'EE' shortcut icon on all Webpage browser tabs
      • Sophie
        1. Added 'SB' shortcut icon on all Webpage browser tabs
  6. Full details for 18Q4 are given below:-
Website (Total Hours = 75)
  1. Website - Development (Total Hours = 55)
    • Create Timeline software: Add photos of Tom & Coxes Farm (10.5 hours)
    • Investigate Spider_Copy: Full_Link_Up_Levels_Gen. (2 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Add timestamps to MsgBox completion messages (0.25 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Add totals to Maintenance Dashboard (5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Development Log - Bug Fixes (0.5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Fixes re Broken Links revealed by Spider (15.5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Investigating pgn4web Chess-game viewer (1.5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Links from Blog in Level 1 or 2 Printed Notes 512 and 981 failing (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - Links occasionally missing from Summary Task Lists (1.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Maintain consolidated Development Log (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - Priority Task List Report (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - Various fixes re Supervisions Notes Directory errors (4.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Web Spider - Check out & correct missing links (2 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Web Spider - Delete Raw_Links associated with Pruned Files (0.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - WebRefs - Added Display text to WebRefs (2.25 hours)
    • Website - Generator - WebRefs - Added Display text to WebRefs for Links to Stanford, Wikipedia & Aeon (5.25 hours)
      → See "Software Development - Website - Development" (55 hours)
  2. Website - Education (Total Hours = 2)
  3. Website - Infrastructure (Total Hours = 5.5)
    • iCloud for Windows Installation (0.75 hours)
    • Julie's Laptop Support - Including Windows 10 Bugs & Upgrades (0.25 hours)
    • Microsoft Windows 10 / MS Office - Releases, Bugs & Periodic Re-boots (2.5 hours)
    • PC Backups / OneDrive (1.5 hours)
    • XMas Newsletter - photos & formatting (0.5 hours)
      → See "Software Development - Website - Development" (5.5 hours)
  4. Website - Maintenance (Total Hours = 12.5)
    • 18Q3 Status Reports (1 hour)
    • Renew Kaspersky License (0.75 hours)
    • Website - Correct WHOIS Data for theotodman.com Domain Name (0.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - General: Tidy up Site - delete un-updated pages (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - WebRefs - Manual URL Checks (0.5 hours)
    • Website - Periodic Full Regeneration (6.25 hours)
    • Website - Run Web Spider (1.25 hours)
    • Website - ZoomSearch database refresh (1 hour)
      → See "Software Development - Website - Development" (11.5 hours)
Website Others (Total Hours = 4.5)
  1. Website Others - Enigma Ensemble (Total Hours = 1.5)
    • Added 'EE' shortcut icon (used Logomakr (https://logomakr.com/)) (1 hour)
    • Enigma Ensemble Website - Creation, Admin & Maintenance (0.5 hours)
      → See "Admin - Music - Administration" (1.5 hours)
  2. Website Others - Sophie Botros (Total Hours = 3)

Plans for the Near Future

I’ve had to halve the planned weekly effort on this project to 6 hours in order to allow for other commitments. While there’s still a lot on my development “priority list”, my hope for the current academic year was to focus on updating my technical competence. However, I can’t see how to fit it in. The Plan below is taken automatically from the Priority 1 items on my Development Log, as published in my Outstanding Developments Report.
  1. Own Website: Priority 1 Items By Category:-
    • Architecture
      1. Complete XRef-re-engineering project:-
        1. Ensure all links and link-pages use the new XRef table, and pension off the old tables.
        2. Check all link-types still work and fix any errors.
        3. Complete the auto-triggering of regeneration of “associated” link pages.
        4. Fix update bug in Convert_Webrefs.
        5. Fix Bug whereby PaperSummary pages seem to have “Works-” and “Books/Papers-” Citings that refer to the same link-pages.
      2. Review effectiveness of hyperlinking method in the light of PhD and Philosophy of Religion experience.
      3. Where possible, use ID rather than NAME for in-page hyperlinks
    • Authors
      1. As revealed by Spider: Author pages not regenerated when name corrected, leading to Sundry broken Links from other pages. 72 items.
      2. As revealed by Spider: Philosophers_Index_List_OA.htm. Author Names Scrambled. 133 items.
    • Backups
      1. Review architecture to improve performance; Need to document first
    • Books/Papers
      1. Investigate whether multiple Subject/Topic/Subtopic usage leads anywhere (ie. are just the first (of 3) actually used). Fix anything amiss.
    • Documenter
      1. Provide Functional Documentation for Website Generator (using Notes)
    • Education
      1. Continue with Harvard CS50's Web Programming with Python and JavaScript (https://www.edx.org/course/cs50s-web-programming-with-python-and-javascript-0): either complete it, or check it'll still run in 2019.
      2. Investigate Bootstrap.
      3. Plan what to do with "Sitepoint (Learnable) - Sitepoint Learnable Web Development Courses" and the eBooks in my possession.
      4. Read "PC Pro - Computing in the Real World".
      5. Read "Barnes (Russell), Ed. - Web Designer".
      6. Re-start "Harvard University - CS50 Introduction to Computer Science". Maybe just "audit".
      7. Understand Bitcoin & Blockchain better
    • Infrastructure
      1. Re-install iCloud: solve 'The upload folder for iCloud Photos is missing' problem
    • Notes
      1. Add "Note Alternates" to Note pages.
      2. Allow the option to concatenate Notes in the Printed version (ie. linearly embed them essay-style), rather than treating the hyperlinks as footnotes – but still keep the hyperlink & cross-referencing in place.
        1. For use as "disclaimers" - eg. for "Plug Notes".
        2. For Thesis / essays: the difficulty here is the need for linking passages to make the text run smoothly.
      3. As revealed by Spider: #Reference links: fail for Printable Notes. 24 items.
      4. As revealed by Spider: Blog Achived Notes - sundry links to Printable Notes. Live Note OK. 110 items. 100 items outstanding.
      5. As revealed by Spider: Old links from Archive Notes to (non-existent) Archived Printable Notes. 42 items.
      6. Investigate Note_Links: Section references seem to be incorrect
      7. Printable Notes: fix the bug whereby the “private” flag is round the wrong way.
      8. Suppress the publication of the Printable versions of Temp Notes
    • Photos
      1. Create Timeline software: Add photos of Tom & Coxes Farm
      2. Develop software & procedure to make adding more content to the photos pages easier to undertake.
    • Process
      1. As revealed by Spider: Sundry uncategorised. Refs failing. 17 items.
      2. Determine why Recalculation & Changed Book/Papers produce unneeded regeneration.
      3. Full Website Regeneration is now taking 27 hours. Investigate why so, and improve performance!
    • Spider
      1. Analyse the results of the data collection exercise and design a plan of campaign to fix broken Internal links and prevent recurrence.
        1. Correct the code so the problems discovered by the Spider don’t recur.
        2. Delete 'orphan pages' that are never linked to, ie. Use the Spider to prune redundant pages26 automatically where possible.
        3. Fix the historical data where errors are uncovered by the Spider. An easier task now the site has a full-regen function.
      2. The Spider was generating WebRefs. Procedurally, this ought not to have been possible.
        1. The major problem turned out to be because unprocessed27 URLs got added to the end of the last WebLinks_Tester_Brief page, which then got Spidered. I've stopped this happening, so hopefully the problem will not recur. The fix was made in 18Q2.
        2. However, 4 other creations appeared - dated 18/05/18 - from the run of 10/07/18. The creation date was from the previous spider run, but the IDs show that they were produced in the latest run.
        I've re-opened the case!
    • Technology
      1. Look into Sistrix Smart28. Errors and warnings itemised are:-
        1. Duplicate content: seems to be theotodman.com and Link - Defunct
        2. Title Tags: Empty, too long, identical
        3. Page Not Found
        4. Filesize in excess of 1Mb
        5. Meta-Description: Empty
        6. Few words on Page
        7. H1: Not used, used multiple times per page, identical across pages
        8. Pictures: Alt attribute missing
    • WebRefs
      1. As revealed by Spider: WebLinks_Tester_Full_Map.htm (etc). Refs failing. 116 items.
      2. As revealed by Spider: WebLinks_Tester_Map_3.htm (etc). Refs failing. 16 items.
      3. Documentation & Bug-fixes: Phase 2
        1. Re-document the procedures in the light of recent changes.
        2. Resolve issues generated / revealed by the spider.
        3. Investigate - and fix where possible - broken links.
      4. Reformat WebLinks_Tester.htm, WebLinks_Tester_Map.htm, WebLinks_Tester_Full.htm & WebLinks_Tester_Full_Map.htm
        1. Clarify 'truncated': Display, not link
        2. Allow more space for 'link returned', 'issue' and 'display text'
        3. The 'As Above" lines waste space. Only for Notes Archive? Consolidate onto single second line.
      5. Reformat WebLinks_Tester_Brief: Allow more space for 'link returned', 'issue' and 'display text'
  2. Other Websites: Priority 1 Items By Category:-
    • Bridge
      1. Create "Small Sites" database for Alaric (if chased)
    • Enigma
      1. Termly updates to the Enigma Ensemble (http://www.enigmaensemble.co.uk/) Website.
    • Sophie
      1. Periodic updates to Sophie Botros: Live Site (http://www.sophiebotros.com/)

Summary of Progress to Date

This is hived off to various separate documents, which have now been harmonising and / or consolidated:-
  1. Summary of Progress to Date.
  2. Outstanding Developments,
  3. Functional Documentation,
  4. A summary of time expended across the years developing my website32 is at "Software Development - Website - Development".





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 4:
  • Well, I’ve missed the boat, so will need to continue with both projects in parallel.
  • This was always likely to be necessary, as new features will always arise in use. It’s a prototype methodology, after all.
Footnote 5:
  • This is very tedious to produce and consequently is both incomplete and out of date.
Footnote 7:
  • This is much more fun, as it’s a purely technical task.
  • I’ve written a vastly-improved general-purpose technical documenter for MS Access.
Footnote 9:
  • It’s a shame to abandon the “mini websites” with all their ladders, as it’s rather well done.
  • However, I can’t waste time on these after I’ve abandoned bridge.
Footnote 10:
  • In particular, for the ECBA “Victor Ludorum” competition.
  • I cannot hand any of this code over, so the tedium will return, though not to me!
Footnote 11:
  • I had agreed to share this data sometime early in 2018
  • But will wait until asked again, as I doubt it’ll be of any real use to anyone.
Footnote 26:
  • Note that Backup_Prune_Ctrl deletes (relevant) pages that weren't regenerated in the last full site-regen, but this isn't the same thing.
Footnote 27:
  • These are URLs that were used in web pages but hadn't yet been converted to the +WnnnW+ format, so appeared at the end with no WebRef ID.
Footnote 28:
  • See Sistrix (https://www.sistrix.com/smart/)
  • This used to be called Optimizr, see Optimizr (http://www.optimizr.com/) (which now auto-forwards to Sistrix).
  • A quick look doesn’t show it to be an obvious scam, but I need to double-check.
  • An unsolicited analysis of my site turned up monthly from Optimizr from January 2015 to October 2017, listing a large number of “problems” that I think I know about, but which are in the queue to address.
  • It restarted in February 2018, under the Sistrix name (this seems to have been associated with Optimizr since November 2015).
  • The free version of this software is restricted to 1,000 pages, which is a very small proportion of my Site, though I may be able to point it to difference base-URLs.
  • But I do need to address the problems validly itemised, and a sub-set is still useful.
Footnote 32:
  • As distinct from developing other peoples’ websites – time which is also recorded against this project, but not against this task.

Note last updated: 06/01/2019 23:36:58


Footnote 10: (Status: Bridge (2018 - December + Ongoing))

The text of this report – apart from some statistics – hasn’t been much changed since end September 2018 as this project is mostly in abeyance. This report is generated automatically.

Rationale for this Project
  • I showed some natural talent for bridge in my youth, and wanted to see how far I could get with a bit of application (but – given the breadth my other interests – without fanaticism).
  • However, this project has always needed to be kept rigorously in hand, something that has rarely been the case since I returned to the game.
  • Basically, Bridge is fun – and I do reasonably well, but not well enough.
  • I withdrew from the game2 for most of 2015, but returned in the final quarter. This absence allowed me to get things in perspective for a while - playing twice or three times a week, with the occasional tournament.
  • However, as from July 2017 I have now retired from the game again, though I still keep in touch with what’s going on via my bridge website activities.
  • I’m now committed to Billericay Chess Club3 for the coming season, so there’s definitely no time for serious Bridge. However, I’ve agreed with David, Colin and Albert that I may on rare occasions substitute for an absent partner.

General Status
  1. The items below relate to mid-2017 and before, when I used to play! They may become more relevant if I return to the game in any capacity.
  2. Statistics: by partner and club-category can be obtained by following these links – for the last quarter of regular play and to date.
  3. Results: Follow this link. Further information can be found from my Bridge Page.
  4. Local Points:
    • 33,7685, bagged to date, including 1,175 Blue Points and 98.65 Green Points.
    • That makes me a National Master. My next aim – if I play again – will be to achieve Premier National Master status (40,000 LPs, including 100 GPs) – so just there as far as GPs are concerned6, but still a long way to go for local points.
    • I think I had about 5,000 LPs from my student days, but never registered any, more’s the pity.
  5. EBU Grading:
    • My rating continued to decline in 3Q17, and was down to a mid Q by the time I stopped playing.
    • See Link (https://www.ebu.co.uk/ngs/) for full details of the scheme, and the summary and previous reports for my detailed meanderings over time.
  6. Summary of Progress to Date: I’ve hived off the history to a separate document.
  7. Further Details: of time expenditure against task are given below, extracted from the relevant version of my Summary Task List (which is regularly updated between Quarterly Status Reports).

Summary of Progress during October - December 2018
  1. I spent 20.5 hours in 4Q18 on this Project, or related work (20.5 hours YTD, where for "YTD" - Year to Date - I mean the (academic) year that commenced in October 2018). That's 78.8% of the planned effort (78.8% YTD). Overall, 3.4% of my Project effort in the Quarter was directed towards this project (making 3.4% YTD) - as against 3.7% planned (3.7% YTD).
  2. The main item to note for the last quarter was that I did have a couple of games with David. Rather middling, so my grade dropped marginally10, but encouraging in that I managed to re-internalise the Strong Diamond system without too much trouble and managed to play reasonably competently. Also, it was good to reacquaint myself with some on my old cronies.
  3. YTD Activity11
    Bridge (Total Hours = 21.25)
    1. Bridge - Reading / Writing
    2. Bridge - Admin (Total Hours = 5)
      • 18Q3 Status Reports (1 hour)
      • 18Q4 Status Reports (0.75 hours)
      • Bridge - Discussion with Jon & Coral (0.25 hours)
      • Bridge - Emails to David (0.5 hours)
      • Bridge - Socialising with Tony (2.5 hours)
        → See "Admin - Bridge - Admin" (5 hours)
    3. Bridge - Play (Total Hours = 6.5)
      • Bridge - Hutton (David Tennet) (3.25 hours)
      • Bridge - Mayflower (David Tennet) (3.25 hours)
        → See "Admin - Bridge - Playing" (6.5 hours)
    4. Bridge - Study (Total Hours = 5.75)
      • Bridge - Session Reviews (David Tennet) (1.5 hours)
      • Bridge - Systems Review (Strong Diamond) (4.25 hours)
        → See "Admin - Bridge - Study" (5.75 hours)
  4. Progress (if any) in the current quarter can be obtained from the relevant section of my Summary Task List, and YTD in the current & future “automatic” editions of this report.

Plans for the Near Future:
  • I’ve again planned 2 hours a week on this project for 19Q1, in case the plan to act as an occasional substitute for absent partners comes to anything.
  • So,
    1. Meet up with former partners from time to time.
    2. Return to playing bridge at most once a week if encouraged to do so.
    3. Read "Reading - Bridge - Magazines".





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 2:
  • When not playing, I didn’t miss the game at all, but maybe this was mainly because acting as the Essex County Bridge Association (ECBA) Webmaster performed as a psychological substitute.
  • However, I’ve not missed it over the last year or so either, and I no longer do any Webmastering.
Footnote 3: Footnote 5:
  • These are the EBU stats.
  • My calculations had 33,629, made up of 22,737 LPs, 1,175 BPs and 98.56 GPs.
  • I’ve not been bothered to determine the reason for the discrepancy.
  • My Gold Points have now “aged off”.
Footnote 6:
  • Taking into account the BPs, which are converted at the rate 300 BPs = 1 GP.
Footnote 10:
  • From 58.07 to 57.83. Still a Q.
Footnote 11:
  • As this project is substantially inactive, I don’t update the text between quarters other than at the end of the academic year.
  • Hence, the YTD Activity is to make this task easier, and to give a clearer idea of what – if anything – has been going on in the interim.

Note last updated: 06/01/2019 23:36:58


Footnote 11: (Status: Mathematics (2018 - December + Ongoing))

The text of this report – apart from some statistics – hasn’t been changed since end September 2018 as this project is in abeyance. This report is generated automatically.

Rationale for this Project
  • This is rather an eccentric activity, partly an attempt to exorcise some ancient demon – the rather bruising experience of reading mathematics at King’s College Cambridge back in the mid 1970’s.
  • However, any modern educated person should be reasonably up to date with the mathematical sciences, and statistical and probability theory are essential tools for evaluating evidence, and are useful in Bridge! If only advanced mathematics wasn’t such a difficult subject.
  • This project is diverging from Mathematics per se to the Philosophy of Mathematics and other related subjects. For instance, Philosophy of Mathematics features in Philosophy of Religion by providing an analogy or model of the sort of necessary existence that God is supposed to have.

Summary of Progress during October - December 2018
  1. I spent 5 hours in 4Q18 on this Project, or related work (5 hours YTD, where for "YTD" - Year to Date - I mean the (academic) year that commenced in October 2018). That's 38.5% of the planned effort (38.5% YTD). Overall, 0.8% of my Project effort in the Quarter was directed towards this project (making 0.8% YTD) - as against 1.9% planned (1.8% YTD).
  2. Very little time has been spent on this project this year and – as noted above – none of it is real mathematics.
  3. YTD Activity1
    Mathematics (Total Hours = 5.5)
    1. Mathematics - Reading / Writing (Total Hours = 4.25)
    2. Mathematics - Admin (Total Hours = 1.25)
  4. Progress (if any) in the current quarter can be obtained from the relevant section of my Summary Task List, and YTD in the current & future “automatic” editions of this report.

Plans for the Near Future:
Mathematical Resources




In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1:
  • As this project is substantially inactive, I don’t update the text between quarters other than at the end of the academic year.
  • Hence, the YTD Activity is to make this task easier, and to give a clearer idea of what – if anything – has been going on in the interim.
Footnote 3:
  • These are not left over from my Cambridge days as these few books were given away to my sister’s high-school in Gloucester by my mother during my brief sojourn with the Carthusians.
  • Rather, I found them going cheap in bulk at a local second-hand bookshop.
  • They are accessible via …this link.

Note last updated: 06/01/2019 23:36:58


Footnote 13: (Status: HiQ (2018 - December + Ongoing))

The text of this report – apart from some statistics – hasn’t been changed since end September 2018 as this project is in abeyance. This report is generated automatically.

Rationale for this Project
  1. I was very active in Mensa and ISPE in the years prior to taking up formal study of philosophy at Birkbeck in 2000. Thereafter I was too busy, and no longer felt the need to contribute, so I let my memberships lapse.
  2. When I retired from HSBC at the end of 2010, and given that I was no longer involved in formal academic study, I re-joined both societies for a year to see how things were going, but then let my memberships lapse again.
  3. ISPE seemed no better than when I was involved last time. The Mensa SIGs seem active enough, but I didn’t have the time to contribute.
  4. I re-joined ISPE1 yet again for the calendar year 2017, to see what was going on, and renewed for 2018. Membership is cheaper now Telicom is electronic, so I intend to let my membership continue – and have paid my $40 for 2019.
  5. Society Details:-
    • For Mensa – see Mensa (https://www.mensa.org.uk/). In 2010 I joined, or re-joined, a bundle of societies, but did nothing.
    • For ISPE – see ISPE (https://www.thethousand.com/). Since re-joining I have done nothing other than pay my dues and exchange friendly emails with a couple of old contacts.
    • For a site2 giving details of the various tests, and other Hi-Q information, see Uncommonly Difficult IQ Tests (http://tthqi.free.fr/Uncommonly%20Difficult%20IQ%20Tests.php). The site doesn’t seem to have been updated since 2006.
    • See High-IQ Societies and their Tests (http://www.polymath-systems.com/intel/hiqsocs/hiqsocs1.html) for a site that gives the admission tests used for entry to ISPE and peer and “higher” societies (and which refers to the defunct site mentioned in the footnote above-mentioned).
  6. Between 1997 and 2001 I edited a newsletter (Commensal - Past Issues) in my capacity as secretary of the Philosophical Discussion Group of British Mensa.
  7. I also edited "ISPE, Todman (Theo) - Under the Sycamore Tree: Correspondence Folder for the UK Members and Associates of ISPE" for a year.
  8. My intention has been to participate in these societies just so far as doing so would support my other projects by way of stimulation and the opportunity for interaction. As such, most of the time recorded against this project could equally be recorded against others.

Summary of Progress during October - December 2018
  1. I spent 1.75 hours in 4Q18 on this Project, or related work (1.75 hours YTD, where for "YTD" - Year to Date - I mean the (academic) year that commenced in October 2018). That's 13.5% of the planned effort (13.5% YTD). Overall, 0.3% of my Project effort in the Quarter was directed towards this project (making 0.3% YTD) - as against 1.9% planned (1.8% YTD).
  2. YTD Activity3
    HiQ (Total Hours = 2.25)
    • 18Q3 Status Reports (1.25 hours)
    • 18Q4 Status Reports (0.5 hours)
    • Admin - HiQ Societies - ISPE - Membership Dues (0.5 hours)
      → See "Admin - HiQ Societies - ISPE" (2.25 hours)
  3. As can be seen from the list above, this project has been inactive so far this year. It will remain so for the foreseeable future.
  4. Progress (if any) in the current quarter can be obtained from the relevant section of my Summary Task List, and YTD in the current & future “automatic” editions of this report.

Plans for the Near Future:
  • Because of the need to focus on higher-priority projects, it is not possible to schedule much time on this project.
  • Consequently, I’ve scheduled one hour a week, and don’t really expect to achieve that.
  • If I do find the time, I’ll be looking into:-
    1. ISPE
    2. Mensa
      • Nothing planned.





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1:
  • All that ought to have been required was that I pay my dues, but because of a mix-up I was asked to sit the latest version of their test, which I did.
  • I didn’t initially hear back – though I was re-instated OK. On chasing them up for the results I eventually got the response that “I’d passed with flying colours”, but no further details could be elicited.
  • My rationale for the enquiry was set out in an email: “On the test itself – it’s similar to, though not the same as – the first one I took, and leaves me feeling similarly uncomfortable. Theory is massively underdetermined by data, so – in a sense – “it depends what you want”. It’d be possible – no doubt – to think more and more deeply and come up with more and more Byzantine reasons for excluding particular items. But how would I know this is what is wanted? It wasn’t until I got the same percentile on the (much more satisfying but now sadly compromised) Mega Test that I trusted the ISPE test at all (actually, I was surprised that I didn’t do better on the Mega Test, and an inquest revealed I’d made at least 3 howlers that more care would have avoided).”
Footnote 2:
  • The reference given in previous reports is defunct.
  • I think this is the same basic site.
Footnote 3:
  • As this project is substantially inactive, I don’t update the text between quarters other than at the end of the academic year.
  • Hence, the YTD Activity is to make this task easier, and to give a clearer idea of what – if anything – has been going on in the interim.

Note last updated: 06/01/2019 23:36:58


Footnote 18: (Status: Summary - Actual versus Plan (2019 - February))

This page shows the following tables (which are unlikely to be of any interest to anyone other than myself):-

  1. Plan versus Actual Effort Summary - Split (Current Quarter & YTD)
  2. Plan versus Actual Effort Summary - Actual (Current Quarter & YTD)
  3. Plan Summary (Next Quarter & Full Year)
  4. Actual & Plan Summary (2007 - Current Year)

Plan versus Actual Effort Summary - Split (Current Quarter & YTD)


Summary figures against the QTD (January - March 2019) Plan, and for the YTD (2018/19) Academic Year, are as below. This table shows the actual %age split of work (YTD & QTD) as against the planned %age split of work. The second table below compares the amount of work done, as against plan:-

ProjectPlanned Weekly HoursPlanned QTD %ageQTD Actual %Planned YTD %ageYTD Actual %QTD Actual HoursYTD Actual Hours
Bridge246441434
Chess71316121536123
Consciousness1212 23
HiQ12 2  2
Languages12 31 6
Mathematics12 21 6
Music91715151733140
Religion12122314
Thesis2546463946104381
Website61115191434114
Total54100100100100226822
Comparisons32 days124 days95% 87%239949


All figures above are rounded to the nearest unit. The bottom row in the above table is non-standard. The first two columns show the number of days in the current reporting Quarter and YTD, and the last two columns show the hours planned (according to the latest quarterly plan) for the current reporting Quarter and pro-rata YTD. The middle non-empty columns show %age actual vs plan (actuals taken from the Total row) for the Quarter and YTD. In principle this allows monitoring of total effort vs plan, as well as the distribution of effort across projects.


Plan versus Actual Effort Summary - Effort (Current Quarter & YTD)


Summary figures against the QTD (January - March 2019) Plan, and for the YTD (2018/19) Academic Year, are as below. This table shows the actual percentage against plan:-

ProjectQTD Planned HoursYTD Planned HoursQTD Actual HoursYTD Actual HoursQTD Actual % v PlanYTD Actual % v Plan
Bridge935143415397
Chess3111036123116112
Consciousness418233419
HiQ418 21113
Languages431 61119
Mathematics418 61131
Music40145331408397
Religion4183146277
Thesis11137410438194102
Website271833411412962
Total23994822682295%87%


All figures above are rounded to the nearest unit.


Plan Summary (Next Quarter & Full Year)


The plan for the distribution of effort, in hours / week, for the coming Quarter & Academic Year is as below. As the year goes by, estimates are replaced by actuals, and re-estimates are made. In the final quarter of the academic year (July - September) this table just shows the plan for the next academic year. In the light of the above "re-focusing" decisions, Secondary Projects have no time estimated for them:-

ProjectPlanned Hours / Week Next QtrPlanned %age Next QtrFull Year Planned %agePlanned Hours Next QtrFull Year Planned HoursFull Year Actual + Planned HoursComparison (%ages)
Bridge2442610410399
Chess7131291352364103
Consciousness12213523872
HiQ12213523770
Languages12213654062
Mathematics12213524077
Music9171611745645099
Religion12213524892
Thesis25464432512381242100
Website611147839132082
Total541001007022816268295


All figures above are rounded to the nearest unit.


Actual & Plan Summary (2007 - 2019)


Below is a table showing the split amongst my various projects of time expended or planned over a 12-year period. :-

Project2007/08 (Actuals)2008/09 (Actuals)2009/10 (Actuals)2010/11 (Actuals)2011/12 (Actuals)2012/13 (Actuals)2013/14 (Actuals)2014/15 (Actuals)2015/16 (Actuals)2016/17 (Actuals)2017/18 (Actuals)2018/19 (Actual + Plan)Total%age
Bridge776632757796106293494138066287061103797327.89
Chess 291614661149611593645722
Consciousness 4176301521916144217383451.21
HiQ   171481115637900.31
Languages234331232268952564292912464014064.92
Mathematics2328845518628418402770.97
Music63132144618323716817927845014365.02
Religion91198412849203305248116108601484827869.74
Thesis60845334947718040273589656182811421242787327.54
Website671981812043486514949471117664643320583420.4
Total18622042225027181928239425422507257426752420268228592100

Note last updated: 01/02/2019 00:33:07


Footnote 23: (Status: Summary Task List (YTD: 18Q4 - 19Q1))

This is a list of the tasks performed on my various projects since the beginning of the 2018-19 academic year. It is automatically generated from my time-recording system, so is fairly crude. See also the Quarterly Report. This Annual Report is mostly for use for the "inactive" projects for which commented Quarterly Status reports are not produced. Projects are in priority sequence, broken down by sub-project where appropriate. If the project name has a superscript, clicking on the name will take you to the last published report for this project. To jump to the Project task-lists, click on the links in the list below:-

  1. Thesis (For the latest Status Dashboard, Click Here)
  2. Thesis Background
  3. Thesis (Aeon)
  4. Religion
  5. Religion Background
  6. Website
  7. Website Others
  8. Music
  9. Chess
  10. Consciousness
  11. Bridge
  12. Languages
  13. Mathematics
  14. HiQ
Links to the latest time-analyses are given first.
  1. Total Time outstanding this period = 454 hours
  2. Click Here for Actual Detail Summary (2007 - 2019) by Sub-Project
  3. Click Here for (by Project)
    • Summary of Effort YTD & QTD
    • Time Analysis (YTD by Study-location)
  4. Click Here for (by Project)
    • Plan versus Actual Effort Summary - Split (Previous Quarter & YTD)
    • Plan versus Actual Effort Summary - Actual (Previous Quarter & YTD)
    • Plan Summary (Next Quarter & Full Year)
    • Actual & Plan Summary (2007 - 2019)
Project 1: Thesis (Total Hours = 318.75)
  1. Thesis - Reading / Writing (Total Hours = 272.75)
  2. Thesis - Discussions (Total Hours = 2.5)
    • Interaction - Correspondence with Zenen Kristensen (0.5 hours)
    • Interaction - Discussions at Anne & Ken's (1 hour)
    • Interaction - Discussions at King's (0.25 hours)
    • Interaction - Discussions with Mike & Sylvia (0.5 hours)
    • Interaction - Discussions with Pete (0.25 hours)
      → See "Todman (Theo) - Thesis - Current Position" (2.5 hours)
  3. Thesis - Lectures
  4. Thesis - Research Repositioning (Total Hours = 34.5)
  5. Thesis - Seminars (Total Hours = 4.75)
  6. Thesis - Seminars (Reading)
  7. Thesis - Seminars (Writing)
Project 2: Thesis Background (Total Hours = 60.75)
  1. Thesis Background - Reading / Writing (Total Hours = 35.75)
  2. Thesis Background - Books Admin (Total Hours = 13.75)
  3. Thesis Background - Status (Total Hours = 11.25)
Project 3: Thesis (Aeon) (Total Hours = 1.75) Project 4: Religion Project 5: Religion Background (Total Hours = 12.75)
  1. Religion Background - Reading / Writing
  2. Religion Background - Admin (Total Hours = 2.75)
  3. Religion Background - Discussions (Total Hours = 7.75)
    • Interaction - Discussions at Anne & Ken's (1 hour)
    • Interaction - Discussions at King's (0.5 hours)
    • Interaction - Discussions with Mike & Sylvia (1 hour)
    • "Interaction - Discussions with Pete" (2.25 hours)
    • Interaction - Discussions with Pete & Caro (0.25 hours)
    • Interaction - Discussions with Willie (1 hour)
    • Interaction - Discussions with Willie, Mike, Sylvia, Pete, Caro, … (1.75 hours)
Project 6: Website (Total Hours = 109.25)
  1. Website - Bridge Development
  2. Website - Development (Total Hours = 80.75)
    • Reference_Author: Re-format 'Not found' Author Links (0.25 hours)
    • Create Timeline software (29.25 hours)
    • Investigate Spider_Copy: Full_Link_Up_Levels_Gen. (2 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Add timestamps to MsgBox completion messages (0.25 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Add totals to Maintenance Dashboard (5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Development Log - Bug Fixes (0.5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Document Referencing functions (plus sundry referencing fixes) (4 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Fixes re Broken Links revealed by Spider (15.5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Investigating pgn4web Chess-game viewer (1.5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Links from Blog in Level 1 or 2 Printed Notes 512 and 981 failing (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - Links occasionally missing from Summary Task Lists (1.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Maintain consolidated Development Log (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - Password Protection - Review (0.25 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Priority Task List Report (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - Refine totals in Functor_08 (2 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Run and Refine File Pruning process (0.5 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Various fixes re Supervisions Notes Directory errors (4.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Web Spider - Check out & correct missing links (2 hours)
    • Website - Generator - Web Spider - Delete Raw_Links associated with Pruned Files (0.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - WebRefs - Added Display text to WebRefs (2.25 hours)
    • Website - Generator - WebRefs - Added Display text to WebRefs for Links to Stanford, Wikipedia & Aeon (5.25 hours)
      → See "Software Development - Website - Development" (80.75 hours)
  3. Website - Education (Total Hours = 2.25)
  4. Website - Infrastructure (Total Hours = 8.5)
    • iCloud for Windows Installation (0.75 hours)
    • Install Kaspersky on own & Julie's laptops (1 hour)
    • Julie's Laptop Support - Including Windows 10 Bugs & Upgrades (0.25 hours)
    • Microsoft Windows 10 / MS Office - Releases, Bugs & Periodic Re-boots (3.75 hours)
    • Nat's monitor - order, chase, complain! (0.5 hours)
    • PC Backups / OneDrive (1.75 hours)
    • XMas Newsletter - photos & formatting (0.5 hours)
      → See "Software Development - Website - Development" (8.5 hours)
  5. Website - Maintenance (Total Hours = 16.75)
    • 18Q3 Status Reports (1 hour)
    • 18Q4 Status Reports (1.25 hours)
      → See "Admin - Website - Admin & Maintenance" (2.25 hours)
    • Renew Kaspersky License (0.75 hours)
    • Website - Correct WHOIS Data for theotodman.com Domain Name (0.75 hours)
    • Website - Generator - General: Tidy up Site - delete un-updated pages (1 hour)
    • Website - Generator - WebRefs - Manual URL Checks (0.5 hours)
    • Website - Periodic Full Regeneration (8 hours)
    • Website - Run Web Spider (2 hours)
    • Website - ZoomSearch database refresh (1.5 hours)
      → See "Software Development - Website - Development" (14.5 hours)
Project 7: Website Others (Total Hours = 4.5)
  1. Website Others - Enigma Ensemble (Total Hours = 1.5)
    • Added 'EE' shortcut icon (used Logomakr (https://logomakr.com/)) (1 hour)
    • Enigma Ensemble Website - Creation, Admin & Maintenance (0.5 hours)
      → See "Admin - Music - Administration" (1.5 hours)
  2. Website Others - Sophie Botros (Total Hours = 3)
Project 8: Music (Total Hours = 140.25)
  1. Music - Administration (Total Hours = 14)
    • 18Q3 Status Reports (5.75 hours)
    • 18Q4 Status Reports (1 hour)
    • 19Q1 Status Reports (0.25 hours)
    • Julie's Singing Group - Christmas Meal discussions (3 hours)
    • Julie's Singing Group Concert (0.5 hours)
    • Music Copying / Filing (0.75 hours)
      → See "Admin - Music - Administration" (11.25 hours)
    • Oboe - Enigma Ensemble - Admin (1.5 hours)
      → See "Practice - Oboe - Enigma Ensemble - Playing & Practice" (1.5 hours)
    • Oboe Reeds - Research, Purchase & Commission (0.75 hours)
    • Re-investigating Oboe Grade VI requirements (0.25 hours)
    • Reschedule Oboe Lessons (0.25 hours)
      → See "Admin - Music - Administration" (1.25 hours)
  2. Music - Aural (Total Hours = 4.5)
  3. Music - Oboe (Total Hours = 117.75)
  4. Music - Piano (Total Hours = 0.75)
  5. Music - Theory (Total Hours = 3.25)
Project 9: Chess (Total Hours = 123)
  1. Chess - Reading / Writing (Total Hours = 5)
  2. Chess - Admin (Total Hours = 33.25)
    • "Chess" Chess Clock: Fixed rocker mechanism (0.25 hours)
    • 18Q3 Status Reports (2.75 hours)
    • 18Q4 Status Reports (1.75 hours)
    • Billericay Chess Club: Communications, Admin, Grading, etc. (25 hours)
    • Chess - Discussions with Chris (1.25 hours)
    • DGT 2010 Chess Clock: Reading Essex Guide (0.5 hours)
    • DGT XL Chess Clock: Reading User Manual (0.75 hours)
    • PQ99075 Chess Clock: Reading User Manual (0.25 hours)
    • Purchase chess set for home matches (0.75 hours)
      → See "Chess - Chess - Admin" (33.25 hours)
  3. Chess - Play (Total Hours = 47.5)
    • Chess - Billericay Chess Club - Christmas Teams & Blitz games (4.25 hours)
    • Chess - Billericay Chess Club - Club Championship (12 hours)
    • Chess - Billericay Chess Club - Club Nights (2.75 hours)
    • Chess - Billericay Chess Club - NECL Match (14.5 hours)
    • Chess - Billericay Chess Club - Southend League Match (14 hours)
      → See "Chess - Chess - Playing" (47.5 hours)
  4. Chess - Study (Total Hours = 19.75)
  5. Chess - Training (Total Hours = 17.5)
    • Chess - Training - Mephisto Monte Carlo (1 hour)
    • Chess - Training - Mephisto Monte Carlo - Review Games (0.25 hours)
    • Chess - Training - Review Club games (16.25 hours)
      → See "Chess - Chess - Training" (17.5 hours)
Project 10: Consciousness (Total Hours = 3.25) Project 11: Bridge (Total Hours = 34)
  1. Bridge - Reading / Writing
  2. Bridge - Admin (Total Hours = 6.25)
    • 18Q3 Status Reports (1 hour)
    • 18Q4 Status Reports (1 hour)
    • Bridge - Discussion with Jon & Coral (0.25 hours)
    • Bridge - Emails to David (1.5 hours)
    • Bridge - Socialising with Tony (2.5 hours)
      → See "Admin - Bridge - Admin" (6.25 hours)
  3. Bridge - Play (Total Hours = 13)
    • Bridge - Hutton (David Tennet) (3.25 hours)
    • Bridge - Mayflower (David Tennet) (9.75 hours)
      → See "Admin - Bridge - Playing" (13 hours)
  4. Bridge - Study (Total Hours = 10)
    • Bridge - Session Reviews (David Tennet) (3.5 hours)
    • Bridge - Systems Review (Strong Diamond) (6.5 hours)
      → See "Admin - Bridge - Study" (10 hours)
Project 12: Languages (Total Hours = 5.75)
  1. Languages - Admin (Total Hours = 2)
  2. Languages - Thai (Total Hours = 3.75)
Project 13: Mathematics (Total Hours = 5.5)
  1. Mathematics - Reading / Writing (Total Hours = 4.25)
  2. Mathematics - Admin (Total Hours = 1.25)
Project 14: HiQ (Total Hours = 2.25)
  • 18Q3 Status Reports (1.25 hours)
  • 18Q4 Status Reports (0.5 hours)
  • Admin - HiQ Societies - ISPE - Membership Dues (0.5 hours)
    → See "Admin - HiQ Societies - ISPE" (2.25 hours)

Note last updated: 01/02/2019 00:25:55


Footnote 26: (Thesis - Outline)

The Thesis seems to fall naturally into three sections (other than the Introduction and Conclusion); namely, Chapters 2-5 (setting up the problem), chapters 6-9 (Olson and Baker’s views contrasted); and Chapters 10-11 (testing the preferred solution). Consequently, I anticipate my Thesis having the following chapters:-

  1. Chapter 01: Introduction
  2. Chapter 02: What are We?
  3. Chapter 03: What is a Person?
  4. Chapter 04: Basic Metaphysical Issues
  5. Chapter 05: Persistence and Time
  6. Chapter 06: Animalism and Arguments for It
  7. Chapter 07: The Constitution View and Arguments for It
  8. Chapter 08: Arguments against Animalism
  9. Chapter 09: Arguments against the Constitution View
  10. Chapter 10: Thought Experiments
  11. Chapter 11: Resurrection
  12. Chapter 12: Conclusion
I’ve started a Note listing “parked” future reading.

For convenience, brief abstracts (as currently intended) of the above chapters are given below. I have included hyperlinks in the above list to my initial thoughts on these topics (and to reading lists and plans for further research) by way of further clarification. I’ve also included links from the “Thought Experiment” abstract below, for the same reason. The reading lists are rather full, and I’ll need to whittle them down to those I actually intend to read (and, better, address).

Chapter abstracts
  1. Introduction: Something like this document, but in narrative form, maybe including a brief historical general survey of Personal Identity.
  2. What are We? : The topic “personal identity” has historically presupposed that we are (in the sense of “identical to”, or “most fundamentally”) persons, whereas I (along with other animalists) claim that we are identical to human animals. “We” requires explanation. This chapter will sort out the topic of discussion for the Thesis as a whole.
  3. What is a Person?: This Chapter will canvass the various views and consider how important issues in this area are to my main concern of our identity.
  4. Basic Metaphysical Issues: Substances and sortals are central to the persistence of anything, and in particular to my claim that persons are phase sortals of human animals (the substances). I need to address the concept of a SOUL as souls are the major counter-claim to the persisting entity being an animal; or at least popularly so. The question of Natural Kinds arises in considering whether PERSON is a natural kind concept.
  5. Persistence and Time: A number of thought experiments that feature in the following chapter seem to fail if perdurantism is true (because the reduplication objections fail). Depending on whether any of these are critical to my arguments, I may need to consider the impact of perdurantism. But this complex area may be a step too far within a fairly limited word-count. I’m also unsure whether it should feature before or after the account of Thought Experiments.
  6. Animalism and Arguments for it: This Chapter describes what Animalism is, with an excursus on animals and organisms and their persistence. It puts forward the arguments in favour of animalism, those against being reserved for a later Chapter. It focuses on the account of Eric Olson, the primary contemporary exponent of Animalism.
  7. The Constitution View and Arguments for it: This Chapter gives an account of Lynne Rudder Baker’s thesis that human persons are not identical to human animals, but are – temporarily at least – constituted by them.
  8. Arguments against Animalism: A discussion of the arguments against animalism, as given by those of anti-animalist persuasion and defended by the principal animalists (with a focus on Olson), with a critique.
  9. Arguments against the Constitution View: A discussion of the arguments against the Constitution View, focusing on the principal animalists, with a critique. In particular, I intend to critique Olson’s “thinking animal” argument against the Constitution View (though I think this argument is unnecessary for Olson to establish the case for Animalism).
  10. Thought Experiments: Any account of personal identity needs to give an account of what is going on in the various thought experiments that have been thought relevant to the topic. It’s also the area that’s most fun. Indeed, I think that the entire Thesis will be an exercise in inference to the best explanation. It needs to account for our intuitions (if there is a universal response) or explain them away as confused. I will firstly briefly consider the propriety of using thought experiments in this domain of enquiry, and then consider the usual suspects, such as:
    • Fission, fusion and replication in general
    • Commissurotomy
    • Multiple Personality Disorder
    • Brain-state Transfer
    • Brain Transplants
    • Teletransportation
    • Siliconisation
    • Etc?
  11. Resurrection: If mind-body substance dualism is false, and we are identical to human animals, then the only possibility for post-mortem existence is some form of bodily resurrection. Since the body is destroyed at death, it would seem that any resurrected individual could only be a copy of the original. It might think of itself as the resurrected pre-mortem individual, but it would be wrong. Consideration of arguments by Peter Van Inwagen in this respect. This chapter is likely to be controversial, so needs to be very carefully argued, and factually correct concerning what is actually believed by intellectually Christians and Muslims (unlike what seems to be the case with most swipes against religion). Maybe I should also cover reincarnation.
  12. Conclusion: Brief summary of the above;
    • We are human animals,
    • Human persons fall under phase sortals of the concept HUMAN ANIMAL,
    • The person is inseparable from the animal,
    • The animal is utterly destroyed at death,
    • Substance dualism is false, and
    • Consequently (given the sort of thing we are) resurrection or any other post-mortem survival is impossible for us.

Note last updated: 24/04/2018 00:12:58


Footnote 27: (Thesis - Current Stance)

The purpose of this Note is to provide a periodic refocusing of what my thoughts and beliefs about the topic of Personal Identity currently are. Previous versions can be found from the list below. This version has links to the various other Notes that expand further on the issues raised, and supply extensive reading lists. While very often these Notes are of the “promissory” variety, the links will remind me to improve them as needed.

  1. What are we? This is one of the most important questions we need to ask ourselves. Just what kind of things are we? The question is closely related to a similar one: just what sort of adventures can individuals such as ourselves survive? This second question sheds light on the first for if there are certain contingencies that we think we would – or would not – survive, when a typical member of that kind would not – or would – survive, then that kind may not represent what we really think we are. Of course, we might be wrong in our estimations, but at least this will raise the question.
  2. Why is this not a trivial question? If we look at a dog, say, and ask what it is, the answer to such a question is obvious – it’s a dog! It may be our pet – with a name – a particular individual, but when we ask what kind of thing it is, it’s a member of the species canis lupus. So, when we look at ourselves, the obvious answer is that we are human beings – specifically human animals, members of the species homo sapiens. That is the answer posited by the Animalists, amongst whose number – broadly speaking – I place myself, who accept the biological view of personal identity.
  3. If this is true, then our persistence conditions – the necessary and sufficient conditions for us to continue in existence – are the same as those of other animals – the great apes, say, under which category we fall, biologically speaking. Why is this not the end of the story? Well, this is because – despite being a species of great ape – human beings are special in that we have enhanced cognitive capacities. We are morally accountable. In sum, we are persons, and have a “first person perspective” (FPP) on the world – something most philosophers deny to other animals – and care about our futures and – wantons apart – agonise over our past mistakes. Lynne Rudder Baker claims this perspective makes an ontological difference, rather than being – as I think – a special property of human beings that may or may not be had in particular cases. Baker accuses the animalists of not taking persons seriously. I might just note that there’s a facile and confusing answer to what we are, that is “people”. You may have noticed that I used the technical term “persons” as the plural of “person”. Some philosophers annoyingly use the term “people”, but this confuses the issue. When we say there are ten people in the room, while it is clear in normal circumstances what we mean – dogs don’t count, for instance – but if there happened to be a Klingon and a visiting angel, would they count as people or not? They are – we may suppose – persons, but they are not human persons
  4. Since at least John Locke, this fact of our mental exceptionalism has tempted philosophers to say that it’s our psychological continuity that is more important for our identity-preservation than our physical continuity. This view still has its supporters – not only for those such as Dean Zimmerman and Richard Swinburne who believe in immaterial souls – but for the many who think that psychological continuity and connectedness is constitutive of the identity of persons. It is also implicit in the ideas of the Transhumanists who think that – come the Singularity – we might be capable of being uploaded to computers and thereby live almost forever.
  5. Before proceeding further we have to say something brief and sketchy about identity and persistence. “Identity” – in the sense of “numerical identity” – is a relation a thing holds to itself and to nothing else. A is identical to B if A and B are the very same thing. It is an equivalence relation, being transitive, reflexive and idempotent; and, many of the sticking points in the philosophy of personal identity arise from this fact.
    1. It has nothing to do with “identity” as a sociological concept such as national identity, sexual identity or identification with a particular group.
    2. Also, John may be said “not to be the same person” since he took heroin, but he is still John and still the same individual; it’s just that his personality has changed.
    3. It also has nothing to do with “narrative identity” which is the story we tell about ourselves in an attempt to make sense of our lives.
    4. Finally, it has nothing to do with “exact similarity”: my television may be “identical” to yours, but that doesn’t mean I can have yours if mine breaks. They are – or were, when manufactured – exactly similar, but are distinct.
  6. “Persisting” is what a thing does in continuing in existence. As we noted above, there are what are called “persistence conditions” – specific to a kind of thing – that set out what vicissitudes a thing can survive if it is to remain that very same thing. There are sometimes hard cases, and there can seem sometimes that there is an element of convention: is a particular club still the same clubs after it has lost all its original members, changed its name, and so on? But we can’t accept that our own existence is a matter of convention, though this could seem the case with the once-dominant psychological view of personal identity: just how much psychological connection could I lose with my former self – philosophers wondered – and still be me? However, things seem simpler and more objective for organisms, which persist despite exchanging material with the environment and changing many of their properties, provided they are caught up in a complex and hopefully long drawn-out event (or process) known as a “life”.
  7. In the above I have assumed at least three things.
    1. Firstly, that “things” – or at least some things – exist. There’s a philosophical position known as “Process Metaphysics” (or “Naturalised Metaphysics”) that gives the focus to process rather than ontology, particularly in the case of organisms. I’m not sure how fatal this is to my approach, since I admit that animals are individuated by their lives, which are processes.
    2. Secondly, that we exist. This would seem hardly worth mentioning, other than that certain philosophers – nihilists – have argued that we (whatever we are) or – for similar reasons – various common things like hands – don’t exist.
    3. Finally, I assume that things do indeed persist, at least some of the time.
    I can’t really address these foundational issues here, but will just say a few words on the second issue. There are a lot of interconnected issues to do with the philosophy of time and change, in particular the problem of temporary intrinsics. How can the leaf that was green yesterday be the same leaf if it is brown today? How can the old bald bloke I am today be the same individual as the hirsute teenager all those years ago?
    1. Some philosophers – the exdurantists – say that there’s no relation of identity across time, but merely a weaker counterpart relation analogous to that between an individual and its counterpart in another possible world.
    2. Others – in particular Derek Parfit – have said that even if there is identity across time, it’s not what matters.
    In what follows, I assume that we exist and that we continue to exist self-identically across time and that this identity relation is important. We could not carry on our lives without these assumptions even if – philosophically-speaking – they were false; but I think they are true: I don’t want to distinguish the “strict and philosophical” from the “loose and popular” senses of identity first raised by Joseph Butler. I also assume the standard logic of identity and reject all heretical accounts that are invented from time to time as radical solutions to the difficult questions of persistence. In particular, I reject the view – known as occasional identity that – while (say) I am not identical to my younger self – yet I was that person, just not any more.
  8. Now back to the main thread. Most Anglophone philosophers these days are physicalists (though maybe most non-philosophers are unreflective dualists). This gives physicalist philosophers a problem if they have hopes of post-mortem survival. If the human organism is totally destroyed – eg. by cremation, explosion, or eating of worms – just how does the very same individual get from this life to the next? Christian Materialists have had a go at thinking this through, and acknowledge the difficulties. Peter Van Inwagen attempted to show that it is at least logically possible by having God snatch away the dying body immediately pre-mortem, replacing it with a simulacrum. Dean Zimmerman – while himself a dualist – has suggested a “falling elevator” model to help out his materialist friends, whereby there is immanent causation (by some unknown natural or supernatural process) between the dying body and the resurrection one so that the dying individual escapes in the nick of time to the next world without loss of numerical identity. Others claim that God’s omnipotence is sufficient and is sovereign even over the laws of logic, so that problems raised by identity being an equivalence relation can be overcome by brute force. Maybe so, but without the constraints of logical possibility, we have no way of arguing the matter, so let’s not bother.
  9. However, most Christian materialists prefer an alternative. They recognise that getting from here to the next world with temporal or spatial gaps raises difficult questions as to whether the numerical identity of the individual is preserved but adopt an alternative solution – the Constitution View. On this thesis, the person is distinct from the human animal – “just as” the statue is distinct from its constituting marble – so that the very same person – tagged by the unique “first person perspective” noted above – can be constituted first by its earthly body, and subsequently by its heavenly one.
  10. Some Animalists have what they think of as a knock-down argument against the Constitution View. Eric Olson calls it the “Thinking Animal” argument. If the person and the animal are distinct things, albeit co-located, there are too many thinkers – because the animal can certainly think, as can the person, so we have two thinkers where we thought we had one – which is one problem; and there’s another – how do we know which we are, the person or the animal? I’m not impressed by this argument. There are several “multiple occupancy” conundrums that have been claimed at one time or another to deny the existence of things we are sure do exist. Dion and Theon, Tib and Tibbles, the “problem of the many” and so on. We just need to sort out our rules for counting. Also, the whole question of three- versus four-dimensionalism (4D) – whether a persisting thing is wholly present at a time – or whether only a temporal part is present, the thing as a whole being a “space-time worm” – bears on the question of counting. If different things can share stages – say the person and the human animal, or the statue and the clay – then we have to be careful how we count. In the case of a future fission – whereby two space-time worms share their past stages, but will ultimately diverge – we might not know how many to count at a time, but this will often not matter for practical purposes.
  11. I think the idea of a first-person perspective is important. It is this that provides the pull against animalism when linked to various thought experiments (TEs) that we’ll come on to presently. However, I still don’t like the Constitution View. My objection is that the FPP is a property of something else – like a smile – in this case of a human animal, though the smile might belong to a cat. You can’t take the very same smile from one cat and place on another (it would be at best an exactly similar smile) – let alone have a disembodied smile like that of the Cheshire Cat. Similarly, you can’t take the very same FPP from one body and plop it onto another. True, it might be a qualitatively exactly similar FPP, but not the same one. What’s to stop that FPP being plopped on several resurrection bodies? Which would be numerically identical to me, given that they can’t all be, in the absence of 4D?
  12. What are the temptations for not sticking with the animalist approach – which ought these days to be the default position in the absence of anything more compelling? As noted, the apparent lack of rational expectation of an afterlife is one incentive to look elsewhere, so “elsewhere” is a favourite for those who can’t bear the thought of their selves expiring with their bodies. We’ve noted the Christian dualists and materialists, but what about the Transhumanists? There’s the relatively metaphysically uninteresting case of cryoscopy followed by repair and resuscitation; there we have material continuity, and no possibility of reduplication, though some might claim there is too much outside interference for identity to be preserved. But, what about the “hope” of “you” being uploaded to a computer? There seems to be an idea about that “we” are really software (or data), when we are clearly material beings. If we are software, it is said, then we might “run” on different hardware. I have two issues with this, apart from the immense technical obstacles to be overcome both in “scanning” the “real you” and providing a computer of sufficient power to run your program and the virtual world for you to experience, Matrix-like.
    1. Firstly, what sort of thing is a program? It’s an interesting question whether a program has persistence conditions. Is Windows 10 the same program as Windows 0? Whatever the answer to this question is, a program would seem to be a kind of universal rather than a particular, and “we” are particulars.
    2. This leads to the second issue – a reduplication objection. Say we developed a sophisticated program that could run on an open-ended number of exactly similar robots. No two of these would be numerically identical to one another – they would be distinct, though exactly similar. So, were the program to be a simulation of your brain, it could run – presumably – on an open-ended number of computers – and these computers (or computer partitions) would not be identical to one another, so none of them could be you, as you could only be one of them, and there’s no principled way of saying which. The same objection prevents Star Trek-like teletransportation – were it possible – being identity-preserving. I might also add that no “program” is – in itself – conscious, though a machine that runs it might conceivably be. Mind you, there are arguments here as well – originated by John Searle – at least for digital computers.
    Incidentally, the transhumanists seem to imagine unending computer life as a secular heaven, but it could just as easily be a secular hell.
  13. So, I remain wedded to my view that we are human animals with the persistence conditions of such. “Person” is not a substance term, but an honorific that refers to some substance during some periods of its existence when it has the requisite mental and moral properties to qualify. “Person” is a Phase Sortal (like “teacher”) that – in the case of “person” – applies to most humans most of the time, but need not apply to all humans all the time. There are ethical consequences for this view, but they are not as dramatic as is sometimes urged. Non-persons don’t have moral responsibilities, as is already recognised for demented or infant humans, and all non-human animals. The obverse – that persons allegedly have no moral obligations towards non-persons – or that non-persons have no rights – is the sticking point, and ought to be reflected in a more humane treatment of all non-persons rather than that we might contemplate sending human non-persons as well as non-human non-persons to the slaughter-house.
  14. So, what are the problems for animalists? There are several. Some – like the so-called “corpse problem” (is my corpse me – only dead – if not, where does it come from? It doesn’t have the persistence conditions of an organism) are probably relatively easy to overcome. Recently, I’ve discovered that animalists – like (but for different reasons) those who think we are essentially persons – allegedly have a “fetus problem”. Animalists – saying that we are essentially animals – have (it seems) to say that we were once foetuses – which appears to be what our animal once was. But was this fetus once a proper part of its mother? There’s work currently going on to suggest that this is so – and if so, just when did the new human animal come into existence? However, I don’t think any of this seriously threatens animalism. Maybe animalists should have considered the problem more than they have, but animals do come into existence sometime – presumably by the time of birth at the latest – and that’s enough for an animalist.
  15. The real problems for animalism stem from the force of thought experiments such as the “brain transplant intuition”. An animalist seems forced to say that I would not “go with my brain” in the circumstance where my brain is transplanted into another body, when it seems to most people that I would. The alleged reason for this is that at least some animalists consider the brain to be “just another organ” that we might lose like we might lose a kidney, provided the animal is kept alive. Doubts about this have led some to think that we are not “really” whole human animals but proper parts thereof, maybe not brains as such, but brains and a few other bits. This does seem comical. Just how large am I – would I fit into a hat-box, as Olson asks?
  16. My view is as follows. I am currently (thankfully) a whole human animal. My wife worked in the NHS with amputees, and I think it is right to say that they also are whole human animals, though they lack parts that most of us have. No doubt they could lose more parts – and some diabetics sadly do. So, we might view a “brain in a vat” – one ready for transplant – as a “maximally mutilated” human animal. Maybe – in the case of a brain transplant – a prior animal has fissioned (divided into two) when the brain is extracted and we now have a case of the fusion of two animals (the brain from one fusing with the body of the other). It might be argued that our identity-logic isn’t quite up to deciding who is who in such circumstances, but the stakes seem high enough to demand an answer, for which read on.
  17. I doubt whether the transhumanist hopes of augmenting our physical or mental attributes by effectively converting us into cyborgs is much of a threat to animalism. We don’t worry about our spectacles or our mobiles phones making us any less mammalian. Closer integration with AI applications is only the next step for the extended mind.
  18. So, is there any purchase in thought experiments that putatively have my first person perspective persisting in cases where there is no identity preservation. Could it be the case that “it seems to me” that I have survived some vicissitude – a cerebrum transplant, say – but I am mistaken? Some philosophers argue that this happens every night – I go to sleep, and when I wake up I just assume that I am identical to the individual who got into bed, but how do I know? I might be intellectually convinced by third parties – those other than the sleeper and the waker – one way or another, but how would this affect how it seems to me? Take the teletranportation case. Because of the reduplication objection (unless we are 4-dimensionalists), we should say that numerical identity is not preserved. But – if the technology works, and I am the teletransportee – the individual (or 77 duplicates) would (all) wake up convinced they were me, yet they must be deceived. Thankfully, reduplication is not a problem for whole-brain transplants, but it is for idempotent half-brain transplants, though I think the identity problem there occurs during the fissioning process rather than when the half-brains are implanted.
  19. I continue to think that there is a distinction to be made between forward and backward psychological continuity, though I don’t see how third parties – or even first or second parties – could tell the difference. It makes all the difference to me if I go to sleep and someone else wakes up thinking they are me – as against the normal case where I go to sleep and I wake up. In the former case – for me – there’s just an endless nothingness, of which I know nothing, while in the latter case my experiential life carries on. However, backward psychological continuity – what it feels like looking back – is the same for a survivor and one who only thinks he’s survived.
  20. In the case of the split brain transplant, however, how is it all supposed to work, experientially? Neurosurgery is – even today – carried out on substantially conscious patients, as that way there’s a quick feedback loop to tell the surgeon whether he’s destroying any important areas of cognitive function. What would it be like to “fission”? Maybe I lack the imagination, but it seems to me that my First Person Perspective would go along with whatever was the dominant hemisphere, assuming this “seat of consciousness” is initially located in one hemisphere or the other. If it is not, then it would presumably be destroyed and two new ones would be created in this miracle operation. Either way, this would sit comfortably with the logic of identity which would not be violated, as at most one of the recipients would be me. I can imagine being ripped apart psychologically, but I can’t imagine going two ways.
  21. Of course, there are physical and metaphysical issues with the whole idea of brain transplants – the physical structure of the brain reflects “its” body, and mental faculties are not fully localised, so it’s not just the immensely complex task of “wiring up” the brain to its new body that presents a challenge. Half-brain transplants are even more problematical as in the TEs the brain stem is not split, but only the cerebra are supposed to be transplanted. It’s not clear to me whether there is pervasive confusion here and that these thought experiments are underspecified to the degree of incoherence. Some philosophers – eg. Kathleen Wilkes – think TEs are unhelpful in the philosophy of personal identity, and that our concepts are not up to being probed in this way. I’m not so sure – the TEs are about us, not our concepts.
  22. There is finally the question whether there is any such thing as “the Self”, which is what is supposed to have this FPP. Some contemporary philosophers argue that the Self is an illusion that the brain generates. Others – such as David Hume – have argued; and others – such as Galen Strawson – do argue that when they introspect they find no evidence of a persisting Self. I don’t know where they are coming from, as I can’t think of anything more certain. But a Buddhist-inspired “no-self” view makes the animalist’s task easier, if maybe less interesting.

Note last updated: 06/07/2018 18:56:10


Footnote 29: (Thesis - Chapter 02 (What are We?))

Abstract

  1. The topic “personal identity” has historically presupposed that we are (in the sense of “identical to”, or “most fundamentally”) persons, whereas I (along with other animalists) claim that we are identical to human animals.
  2. “We” requires explanation. This chapter attempts to sort out the topic of discussion for the Thesis as a whole.
  3. I need to address the concept of a SOUL as souls are the major counter-claim to the persisting entity being an animal; or at least popularly so. The same goes for SELVES, and also for HUMAN BEINGS, insofar as these are supposed to be distinct from HUMAN ANIMALs.
  4. I also need to have some discussion of what is meant by the various other possibilities of what we are, but leave explications of PERSONs, BODIES and ANIMALs / ORGANISMs until later Chapters.
  5. I’m not quite sure where the possibility that we are BRAINs ought to go, but for the time being it’s here; and this leads on to the possibility (tacitly assumed in some TEs) that we might be individual CEREBRA.



Research Methodology
  • Follow this Link for a generic statement of how I intend to pursue each Chapter.
  • The method is broken down into 12, possibly iterative, stages.
  • Follow this Link for my progress dashboard on these tasks.
  • Progress on this Chapter is unusual in that it was the sample Chapter on which I was working with my Supervisor when registered for the PhD at Birkbeck.



Chapter Introduction
  1. This Chapter has the title “What Are We?”. The “We” is of some significance, as we will see in the course of this Thesis when we consider the social and reciprocal aspects of what it is to be a person. Nonetheless, should we not start with the singular, maybe even solipsist, question “What Am I?”, and expand out from there into the collective question? How we phrase our initial question has an impact on the course of our investigations, and may reflect our deepest presuppositions. The first-person question adopts the Cartesian stance of looking from the inside out, whereas the third-person question considers “us” collectively. The first-person question may presuppose that the answer to the question is that I am primarily a psychological being, whereas the third-person question may assume or expect the answer that I am fundamentally physical.
  2. Some of the potential answers to the question will be the same whether we phrase the question in the singular or the plural.
  3. Taking it in the plural for now, we need to distinguish, as candidates for what we might be on the physical side, (prefixing “human-” passim):-
    • Animals,
    • Organisms,
    • Bodies,
    • Beings, and
    • Brains.
  4. On the psychological side, I might be a self or, more popularly, a person. I might even be a non-essentially-embodied entity like a soul.
  5. I will consider all these options in due course; with the exception of a detailed discussion of the concept PERSON (which is reserved for the next Chapter), I will do so later in this chapter.
  6. Olson7 also considers whether we might be Humean bundles of mental states and events, and even the nihilist view that we don’t exist at all. I’m not sure I’ll have space for these, but need to remain aware of the possibilities and motivations for these positions.
  7. However, for the moment I want to consider some themes connecting the possible answers to our question. Firstly, does there have to be a single answer? I know that I, and presume that my readers also, fall happily under the concepts HUMAN ANIMAL, HUMAN ORGANISM and HUMAN BEING. I at least have a human body and a human brain, though I would initially feel reluctant to say that I am one of either of these things. I would certainly claim to be a SELF, and also a PERSON, as no doubt would my reader. So, cannot all these answers be correct?
  8. This raises the question of what I mean by saying what I am (or we are) something. In saying that I am any of these things, what sort of relation is the “am”? Am I using am in the sense of an identity relation, a constitution relation, ascribing a predicate, or have some other sense in mind?
  9. There are two kinds of questions I want to ask. Firstly, what sort of being am I identical to? Secondly, what sort of properties do I have; both metaphysically essential properties (those without which I would cease to exist), and those I merely consider essential (that is, “very important”, though I would continue to exist without them)?
  10. Any “is” that does duty for the identity relation inherits the formal properties of an equivalence relation; in particular, it is a transitive relation. Additionally, the “two” identical entities either side of the copula must satisfy Leibniz’s law; “they” share (at a time) all their properties; actual and modal, intrinsic and relational. So, if I am identical to a human animal, and also identical to a human person, then that human animal must be identical to that human person. This would mean that these “two” entities are really one. They co-exist at all times in all possible worlds where either of “them” exists, and share all their properties and relations, at any time and world. Everything that happens to “one” at a world and time happens to the “other” at those coordinates. This places strong logical constraints on how much cake I can have and eat. I may want to say that I am identical both to a human animal, and to a human person, yet claim that a human person has certain mental properties essentially, but deny that a human animal does. However, I am then claiming what is logically impossible, at least for the classical logic of identity that denies that such notions as relative identity are coherent. As we will see, this point is essential to the animalist case that we are not identical to human persons (given the claim that we are identical to human animals).
  11. My thesis addresses the topic of personal identity, but we might claim that what we’re really interested in is in our identity. Not that we have doubts as individuals as to which particular individual we are (as though I, as Bill Clinton, don’t know whether I am Bill Clinton or George W. Bush), but what sort of individual we are, together with worries about our persistence (how long we are going to last, and in what form). Historically, it has been a standard presupposition that what we are most fundamentally is persons, or at least that’s all we care about. So, concern about our identity has been elided with concern for personal identity, almost as though we thought that the two questions are the same. Animalists argue that the two questions are indeed different, but for convenience, and the historical continuity of the general topic under discussion, still say they are talking about personal identity.



Main Text
  1. To be supplied.



Links to Books / Papers to be Addressed9
  1. For this Chapter I have already worked on the various papers or book chapters under supervisory control. Where this is the case, for ease of reference, the analytical Note for each reference is hyperlinked directly.
  2. Additionally, I may need to consider other papers or book chapters in the following lists (together with some others referenced by these). There are doubtless many more that are relevant and which will be addressed in the course of the thesis, but these are probably sufficient to get us going. Some that I have considered have been culled or reserved for later.
  3. The General Question:-
  4. Brains / Cerebra
  5. Neurological Background
  6. Human Beings
  7. Selves36
  8. Souls38
  9. Nihilism
  10. Many aspects of these papers will need to be left for later chapters.



The Cut
  1. There had already been a lot of cutting in the various selections of the original reading list – the reading lists attached to the Notes run on and on – and these items just represent the works in my possession (though I have sought out all that I’ve heard of that look relevant).
  2. However, the items in the lists following were given some attention, and have been culled – at least temporarily – from the lists above, where they originally appeared. I’ve not always given a reason as I’ve not studied them sufficiently closely. But, you have to draw a line somewhere.
  3. The General Question
  4. Brains / Cerebra
  5. Human Beings
  6. Selves
  7. Souls



Links to Notes
  1. For an out-of-date skeleton giving a fuller reading list, follow this link.
  2. Candidates for what we are, considered in this Chapter:-
    • Human Beings,
    • Brains,
    • Cerebra,
    • Selves,
    • Souls,
    • Others to be Supplied?
  3. Candidates for what we are, considered in later Chapters:-
    • Animals,
    • Bodies,
    • Organisms,
    • Persons,
    • Nihilism.



Final Remarks
  1. This is work in progress.





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 7: In "Olson (Eric) - What are We? A Study of Personal Ontology"

Footnote 9:
  • See the section on Research Methodology for what is to be done with these.
  • The author’s surname is repeated in the text to make it easier for me to see what’s going on in the encoded text I work on.
Footnote 16: The excerpt from Brandom raises some questions about the community we call “we”.

Footnote 19: Baker often expresses indebtedness to Roderick Chisholm, who is reviewed on that account.

Footnote 21: An annoying book, but one I ought to study.

Footnote 25: The book. From my perspective, probably the most important source for this Chapter.

Footnote 26: See also the Chapters on Brains and Souls in the subsequent reading-lists.

Footnote 30: Useful historical background, maybe!

Footnote 32: Lockwood might deny that this is his view, but he seems committed to it, as far as I can see.

Footnote 33: This maybe ought to be categorised as an “anti-soul” view.

Footnote 34: Some of the papers by Puccetti will be reconsidered in (or maybe reserved for – a couple already have been) Chapter 10.

Footnote 36:
  • This list is rather long, and contains many whole books. I may have to cull several of these further down the line.
  • However, the Self is important, as it’s the root of Baker’s FPP, and the motivator for all psychological theories of PI, so understanding just what it is supposed to be is central to my concerns.
Footnote 37: Alexander thinks that we are Selves, and that Selves are tropes – abstract particulars – which by my lights is about as far from the truth as you can get, so I need to consider his arguments carefully.

Footnote 38:
  • The comment about the prolixity of the reading list applies even more to Souls than Selves, without the positive connection my primary thesis.
  • However, if we were to be souls, this would solve the resurrection problem; so I need to thoroughly understand the reasons why we might be – but most likely are not – souls.
Footnote 39: This looks interesting, but is somewhat off-topic for a priority reading-list.

Footnote 40: This is rather elementary, and ought to have been reviewed in Chapter 01.

Note last updated: 01/02/2019 12:23:02


Footnote 30: (Thesis - Chapter 04 (Basic Metaphysical Issues))

Abstract

  • I need to discuss the logic of identity, survival and persistence, and even whether identity matters in survival.
  • Substances and sortals are central to the persistence of anything, and in particular to my claim that persons are phase sortals of human animals (the substances).
  • The question of Natural Kinds arises in considering whether PERSON is a natural kind concept.
  • Certain four-dimensional approaches to persistence do away with the substance concept, but I discuss this issue in the next Chapter.



Research Methodology
  • Follow this Link for a generic statement of how I intend to pursue each Chapter.
  • The method is broken down into 12, possibly iterative, stages.
  • Follow this Link for my progress dashboard on these tasks.



Chapter Introduction
  1. The purpose of this chapter is to clarify my views on a number of logical and metaphysical issues that are central to the core of this Thesis.
  2. I will also consider Derek Parfit’s claim that “Identity is not what matters in survival” in this Chapter.
  3. The coverage in the Chapter itself will have to be very brief lest it consume the word-count for the entire thesis. Most information – and in particular the bulk of the justification for my views – will remain in the Notes.
  4. Three background issues, namely my views on:-
    • Persistence and Time,
    • Thought Experiments, and
    • Constitution
    are covered elsewhere (follow the links above).
  5. Other topics may be added as they arise.



Main Text
  1. To be supplied.



Links to Books / Papers to be Addressed6
  1. In this Chapter I will consider the following papers or book chapters (together with some others referenced by these). There are doubtless many more that are relevant and which will be addressed in the course of the thesis, but these are probably sufficient to get us going:-
  2. Basic Metaphysics7
  3. Logic of Identity (General)
  4. Relative Identity
  5. Vague Identity
  6. Indeterminate Identity
  7. Contingent Identity
  8. Occasional Identity
  9. Criteria of Identity
  10. Substances
  11. Sortals & Phase Sortals
  12. Kinds and Natural Kinds
  13. Metamorphosis
  14. Does Identity Matter?
  15. Many aspects of these papers will need to be either ignored or reserved for other chapters.
  16. The motivation for these works is as follows:-
    • To be supplied.



The Cut
  1. There had already been a lot of cutting in the various selections of the original reading list – the reading lists attached to the Notes run on and on – and these items just represent the works in my possession (though I have sought out all that I’ve heard of that look relevant).
  2. However, the items in the lists following were given some attention, and have been culled – at least temporarily – from the lists above, where they originally appeared. I’ve not always given a reason as I’ve not studied them sufficiently closely. But, you have to draw a line somewhere.
  3. I’m well aware that the cut has not been sufficiently rigorous. Further items beyond the items below are likely to be culled when I come to process them.
    • To be Supplied.



Links to Notes
  1. Logic of Identity, including:-
    • Relative Identity,
    • Vague Identity.
    • Indeterminate Identity,
    • Contingent Identity, and
    • Occasional Identity.
  2. Criteria of Identity,
  3. Substance,
  4. Sortals,
  5. Metamorphosis,
  6. Phase Sortals,
  7. Kinds,
  8. Natural Kinds,
  9. Does Identity Matter,
  10. Others to be supplied as they come up.



Final Remarks
  1. This is work in progress.





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 6:
  • See the section on Research Methodology for what is to be done with these.
  • The author’s surname is repeated in the text to make it easier for me to see what’s going on in the encoded text I work on.
Footnote 7: There’s an endless amount of stuff in this area, so I’ve (for now) chosen a couple of contrasting approaches.

Footnote 8: Footnote 9:
  • Modality is important in my thesis, because modal questions come into persistence criteria.
  • That said, the last two essays in the book – by Hossack and Olson – are the most important, though of these two only that by Hossack really belongs to this Chapter.
Footnote 10: I’m not sure where this book should be parked, and not all of it is relevant.

Footnote 11: I doubt this paper is really about Relative Identity, but more about Brain Transplants).

Footnote 12: Read the Synopsis below first.

Note last updated: 10/01/2019 10:32:10


Footnote 31: (Thesis - Chapter 06 (Animalism and Arguments for It))

Abstract

    This Chapter describes what Animalism is, with an excursus on animals and organisms and their persistence.
  • It puts forward the arguments in favour of animalism, those against being reserved for a later Chapter.
  • It focuses on the account of Eric Olson, the primary contemporary exponent of Animalism.



Research Methodology
  • Follow this Link for a generic statement of how I intend to pursue each Chapter.
  • The method is broken down into 12, possibly iterative, stages.
  • Follow this Link for my progress dashboard on these tasks.



Chapter Introduction
  1. As we saw in Chapter 02, nothing is more obvious than that we are human animals.
  2. The disadvantages of whole-hearted acceptance of this seemingly obvious fact are firstly that it seems to demote human beings from their status of being made in the image of the God most people no longer believe in. There are two responses to this; either to deny that it does, or to accept that the differences between human beings and other animals are those of degree rather than kind.
  3. A second disadvantage is that accepting that we are human animals makes the prospects for post-mortem survival look bleak. This is addressed in Chapter 11.
  4. So, while saying that we are human animals might seem to be the default position – and so the burden is on others to demonstrate that we are not – the historical situation places a burden on the animalist to present the case for animalism with as much rigour as possible.
  5. Further text to be supplied.



Main Text
  1. To be supplied.



Links to Books / Papers to be Addressed5
  1. In this Chapter I will consider the following papers or book chapters (together with some others referenced by these). There are doubtless many more that are relevant and which will be addressed in the course of the thesis, but these are probably sufficient to get us going.
  2. As this is a “core” chapter, the coverage of the literature will be very complete, if not exhaustive, when it comes to Animalism itself.
  3. For background topics, it will be more selective6. Hence, I have divided the reading list into two.
  4. I’ve not been overly careful to segregate the reading-list of this Chapter from that of Chapter 8. I will address the segregation in due course. There will, in any case, be some overlap.
  5. Core Topics
  6. Background Material
  7. Many aspects of these papers will need to be either ignored or reserved for other chapters.
  8. The motivation for these works is as follows:-
    • To be supplied.



The Cut
  1. There had already been a lot of cutting in the various selections of the original reading list – the reading lists attached to the Notes run on and on – and these items just represent the works in my possession (though I have sought out all that I’ve heard of that look relevant).
  2. However, the items in the lists following were given some attention, and have been culled – at least temporarily – from the lists above, where they originally appeared. I’ve not always given a reason as I’ve not studied them sufficiently closely. But, you have to draw a line somewhere.
  3. I’m well aware that the cut has not been sufficiently rigorous. Further items beyond the items below are likely to be culled when I come to process them.
    • To be supplied.



Links to Notes
  1. Animalism,
  2. Animalists,
  3. Bodies,
  4. Olson,
  5. Animals,
  6. Organisms,
  7. Life,
  8. Thinking Animal Argument,
  9. Other Arguments for Animalism18,
  10. Others to be supplied?



Final Remarks
  1. This is work in progress.





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 5:
  • See the section on Research Methodology for what is to be done with these.
  • The author’s surname is repeated in the text to make it easier for me to see what’s going on in the encoded text I work on.
Footnote 6:
  • There are a few papers listed on the cognitive capacities of animals.
  • I got bored with listing these, so the sample may not be representative.
  • These are, in any case, probably more relevant to Chapter 9 – as an antidote to Baker’s attempted ontological separation of human persons from human animals – so I will move them there – and expand the list if necessary – in due course.
Footnote 8: A knowledge of genetics is important in arguments about the comings into being and identities of animals.

Footnote 9: What is this important book doing here?

Footnote 18: This needs a Note!

Note last updated: 07/01/2019 20:16:48


Footnote 32: (Thesis - Chapter 07 (The Constitution View and Arguments for It))

Abstract

  • This Chapter gives an account of Lynne Rudder Baker’s thesis that human persons are not identical to human animals, but are – temporarily at least – constituted by them.



Research Methodology
  • Follow this Link for a generic statement of how I intend to pursue each Chapter.
  • The method is broken down into 12, possibly iterative, stages.
  • Follow this Link for my progress dashboard on these tasks.



Chapter Introduction
  1. Baker’s account of constitution is not the standard mereological account, of some larger body being constituted by its parts, but is her own idea that requires explication.
  2. Baker also has a commitment to PERSONs being substances in their own right, rather than being an honorific title applied to substances that at other times might not deserve the honorific.
  3. She also reifies a useful idea – that of a First-person Perspective. It is the FPP that individuates persons, according to Baker, so the FPP requires explanation as well.
  4. Further detail to be supplied.



Main Text
  1. To be supplied.



Links to Books / Papers to be Addressed4
  1. In this Chapter I will consider the following papers or book chapters (together with some others referenced by these). There are doubtless many more that are relevant and which will be addressed in the course of the thesis, but these are probably sufficient to get us going.
  2. I’ve not been overly careful to segregate the reading-list of this Chapter from that of Chapter 9. I will address the segregation in due course. There will, in any case, be some overlap.
  3. Baker
  4. Constitution
  5. Mereology6
  6. Co-Location7
  7. First-Person Perspectives
  8. Constitution View
  9. Many aspects of these papers will need to be either ignored or reserved for other chapters.
  10. The motivation for these works is as follows:-
    • To be supplied.



The Cut
  1. There had already been a lot of cutting in the various selections of the original reading list – the reading lists attached to the Notes run on and on – and these items just represent the works in my possession (though I have sought out all that I’ve heard of that look relevant).
  2. However, the items in the lists following were given some attention, and have been culled – at least temporarily – from the lists above, where they originally appeared. I’ve not always given a reason as I’ve not studied them sufficiently closely. But, you have to draw a line somewhere.
  3. I’m well aware that the cut has not been sufficiently rigorous. Further items beyond the items below are likely to be culled when I come to process them.



Links to Notes
  1. Baker,
  2. Constitution,
  3. Constitution View,
  4. First-Person Perspective,
  5. Mereology,
  6. Dion and Theon,
  7. Others to be supplied?



Final Remarks
  1. This is work in progress.





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 4:
  • See the section on Research Methodology for what is to be done with these.
  • The author’s surname is repeated in the text to make it easier for me to see what’s going on in the encoded text I work on.
Footnote 6: While Baker’s understanding of constitution is distinct from a mereological one, it is necessary to understand mereology.

Footnote 7: I’m not sure whether this section belongs here, but it must go somewhere!

Footnote 8: This may properly belong to one of the Chapters on Animalism.

Footnote 9: This Chapter has rather more to do with distributive ethics than personal identity or the FPP.

Note last updated: 07/01/2019 20:16:48


Footnote 33: (Thesis - Chapter 10 (Thought Experiments))

Abstract

  • Any account of personal identity needs to give an account of what is going on in the various thought experiments that have been thought relevant to the topic. It’s also the area that’s most fun. Indeed, I think that the entire Thesis will be an exercise in inference to the best explanation. It needs to account for our intuitions (if there is a universal response) or explain them away as confused. I will firstly briefly consider the propriety of using thought experiments in this domain of enquiry, and then consider the usual suspects, including the following:-
    1. Fission
    2. Fusion
    3. Replication
    4. Commissurotomy1
    5. Multiple Personality Disorder2
    6. Brain-state Transfer
    7. Brain Transplants3
    8. Teletransportation
    9. Siliconisation
    10. Transhumanism



Research Methodology
  • Follow this Link for a generic statement of how I intend to pursue each Chapter.
  • The method is broken down into 12, possibly iterative, stages.
  • Follow this Link for my progress dashboard on these tasks.



Chapter Introduction
  1. To be supplied.



Main Text
  1. To be supplied.



Links to Books / Papers to be Addressed6
  1. In this Chapter I will consider the following papers or book chapters (together with some others referenced by these). There are doubtless many more that are relevant and which will be addressed in the course of the thesis, but these are probably sufficient to get us going.
  2. I have segregated the papers by sub-topic, but some would fit into more than one category.
  3. Theory
  4. Brain State Transfers7
  5. Brain Transplants
  6. Commissurotomy
  7. Fission
  8. Fusion
  9. Multiple Personality Disorder
  10. Replication
  11. Siliconisation8
  12. Teletransportation
  13. Transhumanism10
  14. Many aspects of these papers will need to be either ignored or reserved for other chapters.
  15. The motivation for these works is as follows:-
    • To be supplied.



The Cut
  1. There had already been a lot of cutting in the various selections of the original reading list – the reading lists attached to the Notes run on and on – and these items just represent the works in my possession (though I have sought out all that I’ve heard of that look relevant).
  2. However, the items in the lists following were given some attention, and have been culled – at least temporarily – from the lists above, where they originally appeared. I’ve not always given a reason as I’ve not studied them sufficiently closely. But, you have to draw a line somewhere.
  3. I’m well aware that the cut has not been sufficiently rigorous. Further items beyond the items below are likely to be culled when I come to process them.



Links to Notes
  1. Propriety of Thought Experiments
  2. Principal Examples:-
    • Fission
    • Fusion
    • Replication
    • Commissurotomy
    • Multiple Personality Disorder
    • Brain-state Transfers
    • Brain Transplants
    • Teletransportation
    • Siliconisation
    • Transhumanism.



Final Remarks
  1. This is work in progress.





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1: This is more an experiment than a thought-experiment, as commissurotomies are actual.

Footnote 2:
  • Again, this is – allegedly – an existent pathology rather than a TE.
  • Moreover, it might be better situated in Chapter 9 (Click here for Note) as a critique of the idea of an individuating FPP.
Footnote 3: We need to distinguish Whole-Brain Transplants (WBTs) from single or double Cerebrum transplants, and these from brain-tissue transplants, which shade off into Brain State Transfers.

Footnote 6:
  • See the section on Research Methodology for what is to be done with these.
  • The author’s surname is repeated in the text to make it easier for me to see what’s going on in the encoded text I work on.
Footnote 7:
  • There must be many more papers than the classic one by Williams (and commentaries thereon) – I just haven’t got them correctly categorised.
  • Under this head should be included references to “Brain Zaps” and the like.
Footnote 8: Footnote 9:
  • Tye seems to be discussing brain-partition, with silicon transceivers. But he uses Unger’s term “zippering”.
  • He is indebted to Arnold Zuboff, who may be worth following up.
Footnote 10: Footnote 11: I’ve read this book, but it’s insufficiently philosophical for its arguments – such as they are – to be worth considering as a priority.

Footnote 12: Cover in the next Chapter.

Note last updated: 10/01/2019 10:32:10


Footnote 34: (Transhumanism)

Plug Note1






In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1:
  • A number of my philosophical Notes are “promissory notes” currently only listing the books and papers (if any) I possess on the topic concerned.
  • I’ve decided to add some text – whether by way of motivation, or something more substantive – for all these identified topics related to my Thesis.
  • As I want to do this fairly quickly, the text may be confused or show surprising ignorance.
  • The reader (if such exists) will have to bear with me, and display the principle of charity while this footnote exists.
Footnote 10:
  • If only a “non-updating” run has been made, the links are only one-way – ie. from the page of links to the objects that reference this Note by mentioning the appropriate key-word(s). The links are also only indicative, as they haven’t yet been confirmed as relevant.
  • Once an updating run has been made, links are both ways, and links from this Notes page (from the “Authors, Books & Papers Citing this Note” and “Summary of Note Links to this Page” sections) are to the “point of link” within the page rather than to the page generically. Links from the “links page” remain generic.
  • There are two sorts of updating runs – for Notes and other Objects. The reason for this is that Notes are archived, and too many archived versions would be created if this process were repeatedly run.
Footnote 11:
  • Frequently I’ll have made copious marginal annotations, and sometimes have written up a review-note.
  • In the former case, I intend to transfer the annotations into electronic form as soon as I can find the time.
  • In the latter case, I will have remarked on the fact against the citation, and will integrate the comments into this Note in due course.
  • My intention is to incorporate into these Notes comments on material I’ve already read rather than engage with unread material at this stage.
Footnote 12:
  • I may have read others in between updates of this Note – in which case they will be marked as such in the “References and Reading List” below.
  • Papers or Books partially read have a rough %age based on the time spent versus the time expected.

Note last updated: 18/08/2018 20:55:41


Footnote 35: (Thesis - Chapter 11 (Resurrection))

Abstract

  • If mind-body substance dualism is false, and we are identical to human animals, then the only possibility for post-mortem existence is some form of bodily resurrection.
  • Since the body is destroyed at death, it would seem that any resurrected individual could only be a copy of the original. It might think of itself as the resurrected pre-mortem individual, but it would be wrong.
  • Consideration of arguments by Peter Van Inwagen in this respect.
  • This chapter is likely to be controversial, so needs to be very carefully argued, and factually correct concerning what is actually believed by intellectually-aware Christians and Muslims (unlike what seems to be the case with most swipes against religion).
  • Maybe I should also cover reincarnation.



Research Methodology
  • Follow this Link for a generic statement of how I intend to pursue each Chapter.
  • The method is broken down into 12, possibly iterative, stages.
  • Follow this Link for my progress dashboard on these tasks.



Chapter Introduction
  1. While I wish in this chapter to consider seriously the religious hope of resurrection, I do not want to get side-tracked onto matters of Scriptural exegesis, or into evidential matters of whether particular resurrections – specifically of Jesus – happened or not. In this regard, I’m interested only in what they take resurrection to be, and whether they provide any detailed metaphysical account of how it is supposed to work.
  2. As in the chapter on Thought Experiments, this chapter is partly aimed at checking how (my version of) animalism copes with projected situations. As such, I may extend this to other posited versions of post-mortem survival, though most are ruled out by the essentially physical nature of the human person as proposed by animalism.
  3. While not wanting to get too far off topic, especially at the end of the thesis, I want to consider some of the ethical consequences of adopting Animalism with – I presume – the lack of hope of post-mortem existence. Hence the reading material on death itself and on “matters of life and death”.
  4. Further text to be supplied.



Main Text
  1. To be supplied.



Links to Books / Papers to be Addressed4
  1. In this Chapter I will consider the following papers or book chapters (together with some others referenced by these). There are doubtless many more that are relevant and which will be addressed in the course of the thesis, but these are probably sufficient to get us going.
  2. I have divided those on the core topic of resurrection into those that are from a religio-philosophical perspective, rather than pure philosophy. In general, those written by professional philosophers are in the latter section, even if addressed to a religious audience.
  3. As the topic of death in itself – and the ethical consequences of death without post-mortem survival - are important issues, I have reading lists for these as well.
  4. Finally, in order to diagnose death, we need to know what life is! I’ve not really investigated a reading-list for this.
  5. Life:
  6. Death:
  7. Death and Ethics6:
  8. Resurrection - Purely Philosophical:
  9. Resurrection - Religio-Philosophical:
  10. Many aspects of these papers will need to be either ignored or reserved for other chapters.
  11. The motivation for these works is as follows:-
    • Gasser is the most important work I need to address.
    • Wright’s big book (hopefully) supplies all there is from the Christian side – even though the focus is on a specific – and theologically and metaphysically special – resurrection.
    • Bynum and Gillman provide background information from the Christian and Jewish perspectives, respectively.
    • Badham is a rather elementary Christian discussion, and may be rejected.
    • Corcoran is an important survey, already included in the reading for a couple of other Chapters.
    • Edwards, Flew and Penelhum are useful surveys of older material, which is useful just to read for the appropriate background. There is some considerable overlap in the selections.
    • I suppose I need to discuss death itself, hence Kagan, McMahan, Regan & Wyatt – though skipping the ethical bits.
    • Perrett and Tippler may be a little off-centre, and I may reject them on closer inspection.
    • The other individual papers – especially those by van Inwagen and Shoemaker – are probably important, but justification is to be supplied.
  12. Books / Papers Rejected: There are a number of works that I have in my possession that I considered investigating, but in the end decided not to. They are listed here, with reasons for rejection. Of course, there are very many others less tempting that appear in the topical reading lists but are not specifically mentioned here.
    • To be supplied.



The Cut
  1. There had already been a lot of cutting in the various selections of the original reading list – the reading lists attached to the Notes run on and on – and these items just represent the works in my possession (though I have sought out all that I’ve heard of that look relevant).
  2. However, the items in the lists following were given some attention, and have been culled – at least temporarily – from the lists above, where they originally appeared. I’ve not always given a reason as I’ve not studied them sufficiently closely. But, you have to draw a line somewhere.
  3. I’m well aware that the cut has not been sufficiently rigorous9. Further items beyond the items below are likely to be culled when I come to process them.
    • To be supplied …



Links to Notes
  • A lot of my notes seem to mention resurrection and the Notes fall into at least two categories10:-
    1. Thesis:-
      1. Resurrection,
      2. Life,
      3. Death,
      4. Corpses,
      5. Immortality,
      6. Reincarnation,
      7. NDEs,
      8. Makropulos Case,
      9. Life after Death.
    2. Philosophy of religion:-
      1. Resurrection,
      2. Resurrection (Metaphysics),
      3. 1 Corinthians 15,
      4. Heythrop.



Final Remarks
  1. This is work in progress.





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 4:
  • See the section on Research Methodology for what is to be done with these.
  • The author’s surname is repeated in the text to make it easier for me to see what’s going on in the encoded text I work on.
Footnote 6:
  1. The topic of “Death and Ethics” is already a bit tangential to my thesis, but there’s a set of questions – of which two are the most important, namely:-
    • Why is death bad (for the deceased)?, and
    • Can the dead be harmed (assuming they no longer exist)?
    – in which I have an interest, and on which I wonder whether my views on Personal Identity have anything to say.
  2. Therefore, I park here a bunch of papers on these topics (more on the second than the first) that may or may not get “processed”:-
Footnote 7:
  • Unlikely to have anything to do with resurrection, but I want an excuse for reading the book!
  • Maybe belongs to Chapter 8.
Footnote 8: Hardly philosophy, but important to have read!

Footnote 9: Especially as the list is currently empty!

Footnote 10: Write-up notes are accessible via the papers or books they are write-ups of.

Note last updated: 10/01/2019 10:32:10


Footnote 36: (Theo Todman's BA Papers)

Here are my BA writings. Currently these are mostly .pdf files only. I have started to convert them to my Notes format1 and (maybe) intend to update them in the light of greater understanding (if any). However, this is not a priority task. There are four groupings, the fourth of which links to another page on my site2:-

Final Year Essays Earlier Essays Book AnalysesPaper Analyses

Here are some final-year BA papers ...

1.This is my BA Dissertation on the topic of Poverty of Stimulus arguments for the Innateness of Grammar. I enjoyed this investigation, and intend to use the kind of abductive arguments on which it is based as a model for my PhD thesis.Poverty of Stimulus
2.This is the first of three essays on Greek Philosophy. Despite my arguing that Greek Philosophy shouldn't be included in the BA, or at least not so early in the course, or not without a lot of motivation, this turned out to be my best paper. This essay is on the topic of fatalism. The Sea Battle
3.The second essay on Greek Philosophy asks whether the Third Man Argument refutes Plato's Theory of Forms. I have to admit that, but for the course, I wouldn't have looked into this subject, and those reading the essay should have a bottle of paracetamol to hand.The Third Man
4.The third essay on Greek Philosophy, asking whether Democritus was a sceptic. I have to ask who cares, but I did enjoy researching and writing the essay. Democritus a Sceptic?
5.This is the first of three essays on Modern Philosophy, and is an attempt to make the most of Locke's psychological view of personal identity. Locke on Personal Identity
6.A second essay on Modern Philosophy. It looks into Hume's Correspondence Theory between our 'ideas' (concepts) and 'impressions' (sense perception). Correspondence Theory
7.A third essay on Modern Philosophy, looking at two of Descartes's arguments that mind and body are distinct substances. Real Distinction
8.This is the first of three essays on Ethics. Caveat lector! I never got the hang of ethics. This essay discusses Mackie's Error Theory. Error Theory
9.This second ethical essay discusses whether moral relativism is absurd. Relativism Absurd?
10.This final ethical essay addresses utilitarianism. Can Mill successfully explain why it is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied?Higher Pleasures

Here are some earlier BA essays

They are of varying quality, but useful for me to have on-line ...

1.This is a rather feable and incomplete effort addressing Jackson's Knowledge Argument against physicalism in the philosophy of mind. The topic is sufficiently important to make the essay worth completing someday ...Knowledge Argument
2.This is an essay in the philosophy of psychology asking whether "The mind is in effect a Swiss-Army knife, full of specialised modules designed for special purposes."Mind Modular?
3.Another essay in the philosophy of psychology, asking whether the concept of innateness is incoherent or unnecessary. Innateness Incoherent?
4.An essay on the topic of free will. If it is said that I did something freely, is it implied that I could have done something different?Free Will
5.An essay on the border between modern philosophy and methodology, examining Hume's argument that we have no reason to expect the future to resemble the past.Future & Past
6.Another essay on the problem of induction, investigating Hempel's paradox of the ravens.Induction
7.An essay on the philosophy of language, looking at the different uses of definite descriptions.Definite Descriptions
8.First of three essays on bodily sensations in the philosophy of mind, asking whether pains are mental objects. Rather slavishly adherent to Tim Crane's ideas (garbled, no doubt).Pains as Mental Objects
9.Essay asking whether bodily sensations are perceptions of one's body.Sensations as Perceptions
10.Final essay on this topic, asking whether I could feel a sensation to be located in someone else's body.Extraneous Bodily Sensations

Finally, here are some notes taken during the BA course

For a while, I pursued the eccentric line of trying to precis whole books, as a way of attempting to take the subject seriously. This proved to be somewhat time-consuming, so I stopped early in the third year. However, having made the effort, here are the results...
1."Dancy (Jonathan) - An Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology". This is rather a full set. At 110 pages it's not much shorter than the book. Dancy – Epistemology
2."Crane (Tim) - Elements of Mind - An Introduction to the Philosophy of Mind". A bit briefer this time at a mere 71 pages. It is graced by 153 footnotes showing where I disagreed with the esteemed author (or where I was confused, most likely). Crane – Elements of Mind
3."Fodor (Jerry) - The Modularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology". Much shorter - only 23 pages; but then, it's only a little book. Fodor - Modularity of Mind
4."Kripke (Saul) - Naming and Necessity". Back to form. 73 pages and 156 footnotes. At least I have the justification that this is one of the "must read" philosophy books. Kripke - Naming & Necessity





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1: As an interim step, I now have “stub” Notes for them all, but these mostly still link to the pdfs.

Footnote 2:
  • This page seems to include almost everything I’ve written, categorised by sub-topic.
  • Many of these writings are still only in pdf form and require conversion to Notes.

Note last updated: 01/08/2017 00:11:31


Footnote 40: (Thesis - Journals)

Introduction1

  1. The reading-list for my Thesis is already too long to manage, but – I have no doubt – new material will always be coming up that I ought to be aware of.
  2. So, I ought also to keep up to date with what’s going on in other areas of Analytic Philosophy, not to mention recent work relevant to my thesis.
  3. This Note lists all the journals to which I have access. It’s not practical to review them all, but if I come across a reference in another paper that I want to follow up, this will provide a quick check as to whether I can get it.
  4. As a Cambridge Alumnus, I have access to JSTOR (https://www.jstor.org/) and thereby to most of the philosophical journals. The access to the text is not up-to-date, but I ought – at least for the most important journals – to inculcate a discipline to:-
    • Check the TOCs of the most recent issues, and mark them for future interrogation, and
    • Check the most recent issues with content, and briefly review what’s there, downloading where it looks useful.
  5. Cambridge has recently opened up Cambridge Core (https://www.cambridge.org/core/) to alumni:-
    • This allows up-to-date access to 18 philosophy journals2 (Cambridge Core: Philosophy (https://www.cambridge.org/core/browse-subjects/philosophy)), including those listed below.
    • There are also a great number of books available for download. I need to avoid distraction, but if there’s a book by CUP I need, and it’s here, then it’s a good place to go! Unfortunately, not all philosophy books published by CUP are available for free.
    • I need to adopt the same discipline as for JSTOR.
  6. Cambridge also allows access to SAGE Journals (https://journals.sagepub.com/). Checking out the Philosophy journals (SAGE: Philosophy (https://journals.sagepub.com/action/showPublications?category=10.1177/social-sciences-and-humanities-philosophy)) reveals slim pickings.
  7. Finally3, there’s Project Muse (https://muse.jhu.edu/). Not very much of interest.
  8. I also note Sci-Hub (Wikipedia: Sci-Hub (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci-Hub), Sci-Hub (https://sci-hub.tw/)). It’s illegal, and also asks you to install an App. Not sure I like the Russian connection. It’d be interesting to know what the coverage is ... presumably it’ll (try to) get any academic paper on any subject. I’ll only take a look if desperate (not very likely).

Relevant Cambridge Core, Sage & Project Muse Journals4
  1. Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/dialogue-canadian-philosophical-review-revue-canadienne-de-philosophie) (1963 to date)
  2. Diogenes (https://journals.sagepub.com/home/dioa) (1953-2015)
  3. Episteme (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/episteme) (2004 to date)
  4. Hastings Center Report (https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/287) (2005-11)
  5. Hume Studies (https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/432) (Complete)
  6. Journal of the American Philosophical Association (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-the-american-philosophical-association) (2015 to date)
  7. Journal of the History of Philosophy (https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/76) (Complete)
  8. Philosophy (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/philosophy) (1926 to date)
  9. Philosophy and Literature (https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/158) (Complete)
  10. Philosophy East and West (https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/156) (2000 to date)
  11. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology (https://muse.jhu.edu/journal/164) (Complete)
  12. Religious Studies (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/religious-studies) (1966 to date)
  13. Review of Symbolic Logic (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/review-of-symbolic-logic) (2008 to date)
  14. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/royal-institute-of-philosophy-supplements) (1968 to date)
  15. Think (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/think) (2003 to date)
  16. Utilitas (https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/utilitas) (1989 to date)

Relevant JSTOR Journals5
  1. JSTOR: American Journal of Theology & Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/amerjtheophil) (1980–2018)
  2. JSTOR: American Philosophical Quarterly (https://www.jstor.org/journal/amerphilquar) (1964-2015)
  3. JSTOR: Analysis (https://www.jstor.org/journal/analysis) (1933-2013)
  4. JSTOR: Behavior and Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/behaphil) (1972-2014)
  5. JSTOR: British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (https://www.jstor.org/journal/britjphilscie) (1950-2013)
  6. JSTOR: Bulletin of Symbolic Logic (https://www.jstor.org/journal/bullsymblogi) (1995–2018)
  7. JSTOR: Canadian Journal of Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/canadianjph) (1971-2013)
  8. JSTOR: Dialectica (https://www.jstor.org/journal/dialectica) (1947–2013)
  9. JSTOR: Erkenntnis (https://www.jstor.org/journal/erkenntnis2) (1930-2015)
  10. JSTOR: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice (https://www.jstor.org/journal/ethitheomoraprac) (1998-2015)
  11. JSTOR: Ethics (https://www.jstor.org/journal/ethics) (1890–2015)
  12. JSTOR: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences (https://www.jstor.org/journal/histphillifescie) (1979-2015)
  13. JSTOR: History of Philosophy Quarterly (https://www.jstor.org/journal/histphilquar) (1984-2015)
  14. JSTOR: HOPOS: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science (https://www.jstor.org/journal/hopos) (2011-2015)
  15. JSTOR: Human Studies (https://www.jstor.org/journal/humastud) (1978-2015)
  16. JSTOR: Hypatia (https://www.jstor.org/journal/hypatia) (1986-2013)
  17. JSTOR: International Journal for Philosophy of Religion (https://www.jstor.org/journal/intejphilreli) (1970-2015)
  18. JSTOR: Journal for General Philosophy of Science (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jgenphilscience) (1990-2015)
  19. JSTOR: Journal of Animal Ethics (https://www.jstor.org/journal/janimalethics) (2011-2018)
  20. JSTOR: Journal of Applied Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/japplphil) (1984-2013)
  21. JSTOR: Journal of Ethics (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jethics) (1997-2015)
  22. JSTOR: Journal of Philosophical Logic (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jphillogic) (1972-2015)
  23. JSTOR: Journal of Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jphilosophy) (1921-2013)
  24. JSTOR: Journal of Religious Ethics (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jreliethi) (1973-2013)
  25. JSTOR: Journal of Speculative Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jspecphil) (1867-2018)
  26. JSTOR: Journal of Symbolic Logic (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jsymboliclogic) (1936-2014)
  27. JSTOR: Journal of the Society of Christian Ethics (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jsocichriethi) (1975-2016)
  28. JSTOR: Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jwarbcourinst) (1939-2015)
  29. JSTOR: Journal of Thought (https://www.jstor.org/journal/jthought) (1966-2017)
  30. JSTOR: Law and Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/lawphilosophy) (1982-2015)
  31. JSTOR: Linguistics and Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/lingphil) (1977-2015)
  32. JSTOR: Metaphilosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/metaphilosophy) (1970 - 2013)
  33. JSTOR: Mind (https://www.jstor.org/journal/mind) (1876-2013)
  34. JSTOR: Monist (https://www.jstor.org/journal/themonist) (1890-2015)
  35. JSTOR: New Atlantis (https://www.jstor.org/journal/newatlantis) (2003-2018)
  36. JSTOR: Noûs (https://www.jstor.org/journal/nous) (1967-2013)
  37. JSTOR: Philosophia Reformata (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philrefo) (1936-2015)
  38. JSTOR: Philosophical Issues (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philissu) (1991-2013)
  39. JSTOR: Philosophical Perspectives (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philpers) (1987-2013)
  40. JSTOR: Philosophical Quarterly (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philquar) (1950-2013)
  41. JSTOR: Philosophical Review (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philrevi) (1892-2015)
  42. JSTOR: Philosophical Studies (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philstudies) (1950-2015)
  43. JSTOR: Philosophical Topics (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philtopics) (1981-2018)
  44. JSTOR: Philosophy (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philosophy) (1931-2013)
  45. JSTOR: Philosophy and Phenomenal Research (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philphenrese) (1940-2013)
  46. JSTOR: Philosophy & Public Affairs (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philpublaffa) (1971-2013)
  47. JSTOR: Philosophy & Rhetoric (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philrhet) (1968-2018)
  48. JSTOR: Philosophy East and West (https://www.jstor.org/journal/phileastwest) (1951-2015)
  49. JSTOR: Philosophy of Science (https://www.jstor.org/journal/philscie) (1934-2015)
  50. JSTOR: Phronesis (https://www.jstor.org/journal/phronesis) (1955-2015)
  51. JSTOR: Pluralist (https://www.jstor.org/journal/pluralist) (2006-2018)
  52. JSTOR: Personalist Forum (https://www.jstor.org/journal/personalistforum) (1985-1999)
  53. JSTOR: Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association (https://www.jstor.org/journal/procaddramerphil) (1927-2015)
  54. JSTOR: Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (https://www.jstor.org/journal/procarissoci) (1887-2013)
  55. JSTOR: Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society: Supplementary Volumes (https://www.jstor.org/journal/procarissocisupp) (1918-2013)
  56. JSTOR: Process Studies (https://www.jstor.org/journal/processstudies) (1971-2018)
  57. JSTOR: Religious Studies (https://www.jstor.org/journal/relistu) (1965-2013)
  58. JSTOR: Review of Metaphysics (https://www.jstor.org/journal/revmetaphysics) (1947-2015)
  59. JSTOR: Synthese (https://www.jstor.org/journal/synthese) (1936-2015)
  60. JSTOR: Studia Logica: An International Journal for Symbolic Logic (https://www.jstor.org/journal/studlogi) (1953-2015)
  61. JSTOR: Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society (https://www.jstor.org/journal/trancharpeirsoc) (1965-2018)
  62. JSTOR: Vivarium (https://www.jstor.org/journal/vivarium) (1963-2015)





In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1:
  • This Note used to include a (rather short) list of “interesting” papers that I’d discovered from the journals below, but missed the cut as far as reading was concerned.
  • I’ve abandoned this idea as it’s too much work for little benefit.
Footnote 2: And journals in many other areas of interest!

Footnote 3: More resources are being added all the time; I’ve ignored what seems irrelevant.

Footnote 4: The available issues are usually more recent than those on JSTOR.

Footnote 5:
  • The dates for which I have access to free Text appear in brackets.
  • This list was last updated in January 2019, so there may be new journals of interest, and the dates will eventually have moved on.

Note last updated: 22/01/2019 01:03:22


Footnote 41: (Status: Philosophy of Religion (2018 - December + Ongoing))

The text of this report – apart from some statistics – hasn’t been much changed since end September 2018 as this project is mostly in abeyance. This report is generated automatically.

Rationale for this Project
  • See my Christian page and onward links from there for an explanation of how I got in to and out of evangelical Christianity. This is still a live issue for me, and the reason I originally undertook formal philosophical training.
  • The connection to my current philosophical researches arises from the standard religious hope that resurrection – or some other form of post-mortem survival – is possible. This is a cornerstone of religious claims and expectations, at least in the Abrahamic religions, from those of suicide bombers to those of more pacific persons. I wish to go back to the considerations that originally motivated Locke and research the metaphysical possibility of resurrection for beings such as us. My current opinion is that resurrection for human beings is metaphysically impossible2, given that substance dualism is false.
  • In late September 2010 I took the Philosophy of Religion Module of a 2-year part time MA in Philosophy and Religion at Heythrop College (http://www.heythrop.ac.uk/), University of London. Follow the links for my Personal Statement, Interview Write-up, and Course Outline. I decided not to proceed with the MA but do intend to follow up on7 the many issues raised.
  • During 2016 I assisted with the Appendices of my friend’s PhD Thesis on the Narrative Structure of the Acts of the Apostles, building a website. See "Mansell (Peter) - Bottom Up Reading of Acts".
  • In August 2017 I was asked by Michael J. Alter to review pre-publication his book on the theology of the Resurrection. Unfortunately it turned out to be too much work, and I only commented on the first section.

Summary of Progress during October - December 2018
  1. I spent 10.75 hours in 4Q18 on this Project, or related work (10.75 hours YTD, where for "YTD" - Year to Date - I mean the (academic) year that commenced in October 2018). That's 82.7% of the planned effort (82.7% YTD). Overall, 1.8% of my Project effort in the Quarter was directed towards this project (making 1.8% YTD) - as against 1.9% planned (1.8% YTD).
  2. Nothing much happened in 18Q4, though I did review 6 Articles on Acts that Pete had written for Search.
  3. YTD Activity8
    ReligionReligion Background (Total Hours = 11.25)
    1. Religion Background - Reading / Writing
    2. Religion Background - Admin (Total Hours = 2.25)
    3. Religion Background - Discussions (Total Hours = 6.75)
      • Interaction - Discussions at Anne & Ken's (1 hour)
      • Interaction - Discussions at King's (0.5 hours)
      • "Interaction - Discussions with Pete" (2.25 hours)
      • Interaction - Discussions with Pete & Caro (0.25 hours)
      • Interaction - Discussions with Willie (1 hour)
      • Interaction - Discussions with Willie, Mike, Sylvia, Pete, Caro, … (1.75 hours)
  4. Progress (if any) in the current quarter can be obtained from the relevant section of my Summary Task List, and YTD in the current & future “automatic” editions of this report.

Plans for the Near Future
Summary of Progress to Date

I’ve hived off the history to a separate document, which still requires a major update.




In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 2:
  • Or if not strictly impossible – rather unlikely, as the candidates for enabling some sort of physical continuity – from luz bones to “corpse swapping” – have multiple problems.
  • However, there are some interesting ideas by Dean Zimmerman, most recently in "Zimmerman (Dean) - Bodily Resurrection: The Falling Elevator Model Revisited", that argue the contrary.
  • Also, transhumanists – who are almost following a religion – are often hopeful of post-mortem survival. I have no metaphysical worries about “cryonic suspension”, and subsequent resuscitation, but think that uploading is incoherent.
Footnote 7:
  • This pious hope has been sitting unactioned for nearly 8 years now!
  • The proximate cause of my failure was missing a deadline for my essay on the Ontological Argument, but a more serious reason was that it was all a waste of time (for me, given my research interests). Peter Vardy had warned me about anno domini, with the claim that original work after the age of 65 is unlikely. I hope this is false, as I’ve ignored the warning, and am about to reach that milestone.
Footnote 8:
  • As this project is substantially inactive, I don’t update the text between quarters other than at the end of the academic year.
  • Hence, the YTD Activity is to make this task easier, and to give a clearer idea of what – if anything – has been going on in the interim.
Footnote 10:
  • While I couldn't submit to Michael Alter's deadlines and the amount of work required, I ought to at least read these books.

Note last updated: 06/01/2019 23:36:58


Footnote 43: (Aeon Papers - Summary Document)

Links to Topics on this Page

AestheticsAnimalsAstronomyComputingConsciousness
EducationEthicsEvolutionGeographyHistory
IslamLanguageLawLiteratureMathematics
MedicineMetaphilosophyMusicPersonal IdentityPolitics
PsychologyReligionScienceTranshumanism*** Pending ***
Introduction
  1. The Aeon1 eZine:-
    1. Covers a number of topics that I’m particularly interested in, from a semi-professional point of view.
    2. It also covers others that are of more general interest, for which I’ve read papers as they crop up but don’t really have much time to comment on.
    3. Finally, there are others – and particularly videos – which are not as relevant, and which I’ve ignored. In 2017 these were relatively few and far between (though in general I’ve ignored all the videos). Occasionally I’ve read or viewed them, but not incurred the overhead of logging them in my database.
  2. As with all papers, I categorise them by subject, topic and sub-topic: up to three of each. As such, it is possible to cross-refer the subjects under discussion. But as I have about 22,000 papers of one sort or another, this cross-categorisation leads to something of a morass.
  3. Consequently, I’ve decided to list the main topics that I’m interested in that have come up (this will be an on-going job, requiring occasional refinement), and to list the papers that fall under them. That way, it’ll be easier to see how the various authors address the same topics, and in particular how they disagree.
  4. The topics appear in the table above, with links to the lists. The topic of Personal Identity is further broken down in the list.
  5. Unfortunately, there is some need for cross-categorisation, but I’ll have to resist this and live with the deficiency. Multiple-listings will make the lists too long and confusing. Connections will need to be made between the papers themselves in such cases.
  6. I have now logged by category all the papers I’ve accessed since joining the list at the beginning of 2017 – hence developing the categories. I now need to add – usually brief – comments, making use of a disclaimer as necessary.
  7. Stimulating though this exercise is – I’ve found it’s taking too much time away from my research, so I’ve had to put it mostly on hold. What I decided to do in 4Q17 was just to categorise and read those items that really relate to my research. The others cannot for now be categorised or added to my database, but – as a weekly exercise – I added the authors, titles, dates and links in an uncategorised list.
  8. For 2018, I’ve decided that a further refocussing of effort will be required. From now on I’ll only add those papers that are strictly associated with my research, or are particularly interesting. I hope to comment on those papers already logged.
  9. I must also note here that I treat a few other articles I come across that are of similar standard to Aeon, and treat them as though they were Aeon, listing them in the cross-reference and filing them with the Aeon articles proper, for want of a better home. I note this against the individual papers.


Papers
  1. Aesthetics

  2. Animals / Animal Rights

  3. Astronomy / Cosmology

  4. Computing

  5. Consciousness

  6. Education

  7. Ethics7

  8. Evolution

  9. Geography

  10. History

  11. Islam & Philosophy

  12. Language / Linguistics

  13. Law

  14. Literature

  15. Mathematics

  16. Medicine / Health

  17. Metaphilosophy11

  18. Music

  19. Personal Identity13

  20. Politics / Economics / Sociology