“AN ARGUMENT THAT PHILOSOPHERS MAY BE USEFUL” NATHAN LARKIN COPPEDGE 2020/11/19 EDITION FROM “An Argument that Philosophers may be Useful 2020-11-19”, LOCATED ON QUORA.COM https://www.quora.com/q/bgtzphedcvfqsorv/An-Argument-that-Philosophers-May-be-Useful-2020-11-19 BY NATHAN LARKIN COPPEDGE REPRODUCIBLE IF MY NAME STAYS WITH THE WORK FOR EDUCATIONAL AND OTHER PURPOSES THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT INTENTIONALLY MADE AVAILABLE ON USB TO BE DISTRIBUTED IN A PUBLIC AREA PERMISSION IS GRANTED TO KEEP ALL ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS ON RECORD FOR ANY APPLICATION. PROPRIETARY OWNERSHIP IS NOT GRANTED. THESE MATERIALS MUST REMAIN FREE UNDER MY NAME DERIVATIVE WORKS MAY BE PROPRIETARY IF APPLICABLE LAW PERMITS UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS NATHAN COPPEDGE IN NO WAY GRANTS OTHERS TO USE HIS CONTENT AS AN EXCLUSIVE BRAND FURTHER MARKETING IS PERMITTED BUT CONDITIONS MUST GRANT SUFFICIENT DIGNITY TO THE AUTHOR AN ARGUMENT THAT PHILOSOPHERS MAY BE USEFUL (Nov 19, 2020) First of all, here are some results. On Google Scholar, these people are known for what might be philosophical coherence: https://scholar.google.com/citations?view_op=search_authors&hl=en&mauthors=label%3Acoherence_theory These scientists are also known for the scientific end of coherence: https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&view_op=search_authors&mauthors=label%3Acoherence&btnG= On Quora, these people are known for being Top 10 Writers in coherence: https://www.quora.com/topic/Coherence/writers Of these writers, few if any are writers with academic citations. Currently the number one writer on Quora in Coherence Theory is ME. I am also someone who has citations on coherence, but I am not #1 on Google Scholar. This leads me to believe that I am the ONLY writer on real academic coherence who is not writing about science. Now, I have done an extensive search. If I list all of these scholars names, each individually with perfect spelling, after the term ‘theory of everything’. What comes up? What is the net result? HERE IS AN EXTENSIVE EVALUATION OF THE RESULTS FOUND: Greg Gbur — Physicist with research on ‘Falling Felines’. Xi Chen — possibly mathematics Nathan Coppedge —”The Theory of Everything” philosophical theory, extensive materials. Emil Wolf —- Pioneer in optics, now deceased, widely cited. Garth Williams —Illustrated Charlotte’s Web. David ATTWOOD— Seems to be an expert on ultraviolet radiation. Maxim S. Pshenichnikov — Coulomb effect, nanodefraction, spectroscopy. Few results. Domenico Pacifici — “fundamental property of light”. Pierre Thibault — conceptual artist / architect known for quaint minimalism. David R. Mandel —Canadian defense agency, counterfactualism. Jeremy Dahl — “creative mind” with his wife, hiearchical address book… Yanwei Liu — X-ray microscopy “I hope everything is going well”. Jesse N. Clark — Elliptically bent X-ray nanomaterials… Few results. Aeron Tynes Hammack— Locus biosciences. Dual-beam laser traps. Sid JA Hubbard—Operators in strongly correlated electrons. Lauren J. Human —Utilizing trait observability to disentangle judgeability Dina Carbone — Nanofibers. Few results. Yin Song — Neuroimaging, data science lab. Not many results. Rakesh kumar Singh—Air Marshal. Sebastian Roling—Photonics or something. Not many results. Naresh Satyan—Semiconductor optics, comets. Oscar G. Rodríguez-Herrera—Catodioptric parallel processors. Mikhaël Myara — acronyms about photonics. Bo Chen — physical dynamics, estimation theory, query processing. Zhengyun Zhang — mathematics, light field. Dr Bartlomiej Siwicki — phase coherence, biocompatible. Yobani Mejia — BA in biochemistry, at Arizona State otherwise little information. Oleg Gorobtsov— coherent synchrotron. Tiberiu Tudor—Mueller matrix algrebra, polarimetry. Doug Renshaw—Biomechanics, Tasmanian fire service. Dominique Derauw —Advisory committee for stability of Antarctic ice shelves. Arpit Joshi—multiprocessor software design, parallel algorithms, intel. Vinu RV—optical imaging through complex scattering. Youyou Hu — nutrition book. Lara McManus —catholic school, sorority. Simon Brezan— Biological coherence. Francisco García-Rosales—conference of neuroethology. Madara Lakshika Marasinghe—vortex networks. Matthew R. Morgan—Wittgenstein, Wittgenstein, arguments for God’s existence. JunWoo Kim—inventor of a coin-collecting cryptocurrency. Heath Gemar—graduate student at NASA? Not many results. Magnus Norgren— “chelating agents” in metal, bubble formation. Abhinandan Bhattacharjee—quantum physics, go barefoot. Suchita—finance or dark matter formation. izuchukwu udochi nwachukwu—”Direct Mapped Caches” maybe African? Darshika Singh—free trade, Soho. George Papademetriou—exorcism, possibly ordained priest. Jungeun Choi—shamanism, book design. Arvind Yelashetty—No real results, name partly matches an actor from a movie about TOEs. CB Singh—Handbook of seed testing. “Seed testing is performed in dedicated laboratories by trained and usually certified analysts… The various classes of improved seeds are recognized to facilitate the maintenance of genetic purity of the variety and to ensure a continuous supply of good quality seed at a reasonable cost.” Jesse Raffield— masters degree in physics, perhaps wrongly associated with Hawking’s TOE book. Christy Moseley—knows about coherence in English papers. Marvin Glover—Yin-yang, Max Tegmark, not many results. Mark John Fernee—Australian physicist. Tipper Rumpf—EMLab mold sampling mentor. Bill Otto—nuclear missile engineer. Keith Ramsay—Homeland security, “makes everything easier”, critiqued by a mathematician. Mahesh Prakash— “combining digital terrain and surface textures”. Quinn Rusnell—advocate for constructive experimental philosophy​ He believes “it’s far fetched to expect a theory of everything if ‘everything’ is understood [to mean absolutely everything in knowledge]” Bob Guenther—encyclopedia of modern optics. John Rodrigues—possibly a bishop, speaker on dyslexia. … Now here is why you might value a philosopher on the topic of something obscure which relates to logic! Notice I am really the only useful name here for real coherence in philosophy, or whoever it is either doesn’t list coherence in their Academia credentials or is not a top writer in Coherence on Quora. From this we can discern: Scientific experts do not yet use ‘coherence’ to refer to a Theory of Everything, over seven years after Nathan’s book on coherent philosophy was published. There are no major experts in ‘traditional coherence’ because it was not known terminology. (NEW) HOW DO WE KNOW WHEN WE KNOW SOMETHING? Why metaphysics may be helpful in avoiding blue blow pops. 1. Similarity, like 1 + 1. 2. Grasping, like I can estimate that if I offer $1 million the bully will not destroy my Dad’s car. 3. Familiarity, like I just would not believe my mother would ever do that. 4. Habit, like I have done these problems before, they’re not that difficult. 5. Experience, like I can guess the gas station is still there because I’ve always used it to navigate on my way home. At least if it’s gone I’ll know it’s gone. 6. Wisdom, like although blue blow-pops may look delicious, I know the blue dye does nothing good for my circulatory system. 7. Understanding, like I could taste a blue blow-pop in my mind if I want to, but I don’t think that’s the same thing. It probably would not impact my body very directly. 8. Metaphysics, like we could have more than one thing like a blue blow pop but let’s say they’re not really the same thing, they could be completely different. If we have the collection of all such things, or a way of representing that we have included everything, then if we have the right system it could help us gain understanding. What does this have to do with blue blow pops anyway? oppedge, Nathan / Southern Connecticut State University 2020-11-19