After failing to build our inductive bridge in part 1, we take the leap anyway to explore what our inductive inferences are even worth when put against the alien form of life that is GenAI.
Philosopher
Nelson Goodman
1 article with this philosopher.
Extreme TL;DR summary
Driven by ontological and epistemic considerations, one of his main goals was eliminating anything non-actual from philosophy of science and mathematics. This led him into formulating his best known encapsulated piece of work, the new riddle of induction, with its controversial grue-some terms.
If he were in the modern software business
He’ll show up to a high-profile leadership workshop that’s been scheduled and planned for 6 months ago, argue with everyone over some side bullet in the intro slide citing an assumption he finds to be unsupported, then abruptly leave for a family emergency.
The emergency was that chicks hatched in the nest outside his window, and the neighborhood cat was sighted nearby1 Goodman did actually cancel a scheduled appointment due to this emergency 🤷♂️. .
And BTW, that assumption did turn out to be unsupported, retroactively voiding all the workshop decisions.