Meta-philosophy
I’ve been reading up on information, again (John Collier’s Intrinsic Information), which has nothing to do with what I’m supposed to be studying, and, probably as a consequence, thinking deep thoughts about my future in philosophy, and whether I really want to do a PhD (and if not, whether I still have reason to complete the current course). It can’t be instrumental: I’d be over 60 by the time I finished it, and not likely to be more willing to relocate then than I am now, which is very reluctant, so a philosophical job is very unlikely.
So what it comes to is: do I want to do a PhD for its own sake, regardless of what I might or might not do with it? An important consideration is that my philosophical interests tend to be in the big picture, the broad sweep, and philosophers these days seem to be like scientists, focusing on smaller and smaller issues. I want to develop a sort of philosophical (as opposed to scientific) theory of everything: matter, meaning and mind from the bottom up. What are my chances of getting to do a PhD on that? Not good, I’d guess—but that’s all it is, a guess, I really don’t know.
So leaving aside the question of what I’d do it on, for now, ask this: would I be likely to enjoy the process of doing it, the life, as it were? Umm, don’t know that either, so how could I find out? If only I could do the next best thing, the nearest to a PhD that’s currently open to me, an MSc by research, and see what that’s like. Wait a minute, that’s what I’m already doing! Except, as long as I’m thinking about my future in philosophy, or studying other things like information (or blogging), I’m not. I suppose I better get on with it then… 
[In a "senior moment", I forgot I supposedly committed myself to completing the MSc and going on to do (or try to) a PhD on information last week. That's fairly typical these days. Would having a memory like that compromise my ability to do a PhD? Let's see what effect it has on an MSc...]
February 26, 2010
Posted in: announcements
2 Responses
Your post was interesting
I am just about to complete a PhD in the philosophy of information at Reading U.
Essentially I defend the thesis that information is form conveyed by data. Form is what we can sense of our environment and is what is conveyed by Shannon’s data (the form conveyed by the data is all important). This form must be supported by something that has form – solid material or the data arranged to be in a particular form – or an energy field that is of a particular form. This leads to the idea that mind could be an energy field created by neural activity.
Don’t let your age dissuade you from the PhD – I was over 60 when I started the PhD and did it to get to know something about a subject I have been interested in for a long time.
All the best
Dick
Hi Dick, sorry for the delay in approving your comment and replying to it, which was due to technical factors.
As you might expect, having my own views on information/form and mind, I’m not particularly open to alternatives. There is all the difference in the world between someone who is looking for answers and someone who is trying to get their own theories accepted — or to sell them, to put it bluntly. I’m certainly in the latter category, and it looks rather like you are too, so we are natural competitors, not collaborators.
Having said that, your encouragement re the PhD is very welcome, thanks a lot, and I wish you the best of luck with your’s.
Leave a Reply