Demon (thought experiment): Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎top: Fixed typo and added link for identification of Glenn Morton
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit
Added further reading list
Line 13: Line 13:
==Similar entities==
==Similar entities==
There are other creatures which feature in thought experiments about philosophy. One such creature is a [[utility monster]], a creature which derives much more utility (such as enjoyment) from resources than other beings, and hence under a strict utilitarian system would have more or all of the available resources directed to it. [[Newcomb's paradox]] supposes a being who is believed to be capable of predicting human behavior; [[Robert Nozick]] suggested a "being from another planet, with an advanced technology and science, whom you know to be friendly".<ref name="nozick">{{cite book |first=Robert |last=Nozick |title=Essays in Honor of Carl G. Hempel |chapter=Newcomb's Problem and Two Principles of Choice |page=114 |url=http://faculty.arts.ubc.ca/rjohns/nozick_newcomb.pdf |editor-last=Rescher |editor-first=Nicholas |year=1969 |publisher=Springer}}</ref>
There are other creatures which feature in thought experiments about philosophy. One such creature is a [[utility monster]], a creature which derives much more utility (such as enjoyment) from resources than other beings, and hence under a strict utilitarian system would have more or all of the available resources directed to it. [[Newcomb's paradox]] supposes a being who is believed to be capable of predicting human behavior; [[Robert Nozick]] suggested a "being from another planet, with an advanced technology and science, whom you know to be friendly".<ref name="nozick">{{cite book |first=Robert |last=Nozick |title=Essays in Honor of Carl G. Hempel |chapter=Newcomb's Problem and Two Principles of Choice |page=114 |url=http://faculty.arts.ubc.ca/rjohns/nozick_newcomb.pdf |editor-last=Rescher |editor-first=Nicholas |year=1969 |publisher=Springer}}</ref>

==Further reading==
* <ref>{{cite book |last1=Canales |first1=Jimena |title=Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science |date=August 9, 2022 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=9780691241685 |pages=416 |url=https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691175324/bedeviled |access-date=August 13, 2023}}</ref>
* <ref>{{cite book |last1=Weinert |first1=Friedel |title=The Demons of Science What They Can and Cannot Tell Us About Our World |date=2016 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-3-319-31707-6 |pages=251 |url=https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-319-31708-3 |access-date=August 13, 2023}}</ref>


==References==
==References==

Revision as of 06:48, 14 August 2023

In thought experiments, philosophers and scientists occasionally imagine entities with special abilities as a way to pose tough intellectual challenges or highlight apparent paradoxes. Examples include:

  • Descartes’ malicious demon – Cartesian skepticism (also called methodological skepticism) advocates the doubting of all things that cannot be justified through logic. Descartes uses three arguments to cast doubt on our ability to know objectively: the dream argument, the deceiving God argument, and the malicious demon argument.[1] Since our senses cannot put us in contact with external objects themselves, but only with our mental images of such objects, we can have no absolute certainty that anything exists in the external world. In the evil demon argument Descartes proposes an entity who is capable of deceiving us to such a degree that we have reason to doubt the totality of what our senses tell us.
  • Laplace's demon is a hypothetical all-knowing being who knows the precise location and momentum of every atom in the universe, and therefore could use Newton's laws to reveal the entire course of cosmic events, past and future. Based upon the philosophical proposition of causal determinism. Roger Joseph Boscovich developed a more physical version of the same thought experiment, known as Boscovich's demon, based on position, velocity, direction and center of mass.
  • Maxwell's demon can distinguish between fast and slow moving molecules. If this demon only let fast moving molecules through a trapdoor to a container, the temperature inside the container would increase without any work being applied. Such a scenario violates the second law of thermodynamics. Leo Szilard's refinement of Maxwell's demon in the context of information theory is sometimes refered to as Szilard's demon.[2] The biological equivalent of Maxwell's "finite being" is a Molecular demon.
  • In aphorism 341 of The Gay Science, Nietzsche puts forth his eternal recurrence concept. In it, he employs a demon with special metaphysical knowledge as an agent for forcing reevaluation of perspective on one's own life.
  • The Darwinian Demon is a hypothetical organism which can simultaneously maximize all aspects of its fitness.
  • Searle's demon is a homunculus-like being that reproduces intentional behaviour in someone's brain without neither the person nor the organism being intentional in themselves.[3] It was conceptualized by philosopher of mind John Haugeland in criticizing John Searle's theory of Biological Naturalism.[4]
  • The breakdown of Planck's law at very small distances,[5] first proven experimentally by Gang Chen and colleagues,[6][7] is sometimes referred to as Planck's demon or Planck's devil.[8]
  • Young Earth Creationist Glenn Morton's demon stands at the gateway of a person's senses and lets in facts that agree with that person's beliefs while deflecting those that do not. This demon is used to explain the phenomenon of confirmation bias.
  • The demon of Bureaucratic Chaos is the phenomenon that "blocks good things from happening" at the United States Department of Energy. This hypothesized entity makes it extremely difficult to complete complex projects — by frequently changing mission requirements, funding, and strategic direction. Examples include the Mirror Fusion Test Facility, which was constructed but never turned on; the Superconducting Super Collider, which cost $2 billion before its cancellation; and ITER, the international fusion experiment in France that the United States has alternately supported and opposed, and to which it has threatened withdrawal, cut funding, and increased funding over the decades.[9]

Similar entities

There are other creatures which feature in thought experiments about philosophy. One such creature is a utility monster, a creature which derives much more utility (such as enjoyment) from resources than other beings, and hence under a strict utilitarian system would have more or all of the available resources directed to it. Newcomb's paradox supposes a being who is believed to be capable of predicting human behavior; Robert Nozick suggested a "being from another planet, with an advanced technology and science, whom you know to be friendly".[10]

Further reading

References

  1. ^ Important Arguments from Descartes' Meditations Archived 2017-09-26 at the Wayback Machine by David Banach Archived 2017-09-13 at the Wayback Machine Department of Philosophy, St. Anselm College (retrieved 8-24-2007)
  2. ^ Berger, Jorge (1990). "Szilard's demon revisited". Int J Theor Phys. 29: 985–995. doi:10.1007/BF00673684. Retrieved August 13, 2023.
  3. ^ Savitt, Steven F. (1982). "Searle's demon and the brain simulator". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 5 (2). Department of Philosophy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada: 342-343. doi:10.1017/S0140525X00012395. Retrieved August 13, 2023.
  4. ^ Haugeland, John. (1980) "Artificial Intelligence". Behavioral and Brain Sciences. vol. 3. pp. 219–224.
  5. ^ Chandler, David L. (July 29, 2009). "Breaking the law, at the nanoscale". news.mit.edu. MIT News Office. Retrieved August 13, 2023.
  6. ^ Narayanaswamy, A., Shen, S., Hu, L. (May 2009). "Breakdown of the Planck blackbody radiation law at nanoscale gaps". Applied Physics. A (96): 357–362. doi:10.1007/s00339-009-5203-5.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  7. ^ Physics (August 20, 2009). "Close heat". Nature. 460: 934. doi:10.1038/460934c. Retrieved August 13, 2023.
  8. ^ Staff, News (July 29, 2009). "Heat Transfer: Planck's Law Demon Gets Pushed Farther Out (A Lot)". science20.com. Retrieved August 13, 2023. {{cite web}}: |first1= has generic name (help)
  9. ^ "The Demon of Bureaucratic Chaos". The New Atlantis. Retrieved 2021-07-05.
  10. ^ Nozick, Robert (1969). "Newcomb's Problem and Two Principles of Choice". In Rescher, Nicholas (ed.). Essays in Honor of Carl G. Hempel (PDF). Springer. p. 114.
  11. ^ Canales, Jimena (August 9, 2022). Bedeviled: A Shadow History of Demons in Science. Princeton University Press. p. 416. ISBN 9780691241685. Retrieved August 13, 2023.
  12. ^ Weinert, Friedel (2016). The Demons of Science What They Can and Cannot Tell Us About Our World. Springer. p. 251. ISBN 978-3-319-31707-6. Retrieved August 13, 2023.