Philosophy assoc prof at the University of Reading (UK). Californian. Experimental phil of language, ordinary language, aesthetic judgment. https://xitter.cf/t.co/RScCcDdrxC
San Francisco, D.C., London
Joined September 2008
- Tweets1.3K
- Following540
- Followers671
- Likes1.6K
Nat Hansen retweeted
My department (Philosophy at UMD) is advertising two positions. First: a junior position in Philosophy of Mind,
philjobs.org/job/show/32477
Second: an assistant, or associate position in, you guessed it, AI Ethics/AI Safety joint with AIM.
philjobs.org/job/show/32633
Spread widely!
Nat Hansen retweeted
I wrote an R package that makes it much easier to use computational models of causal judgments.
You can also explore the associated interactive app: tadegquillien.shinyapps.io/c…
cran.r-project.org/web/packa…
Nat Hansen retweeted
We're hiring for a permanent job (lecturer or associate professor) at UCL in Philosophy of Cog Sci or AI, open to different approaches, including cog sci or Phil/history of science
philjobs.org/job/show/32277
Since @DailyNousEditor posted Submission in the heap of links, the leaderboard is heating up! Note that you can pick your preferred metric for ranking (number of cites, h-index, number of publications, or prestige)
There's a new clicker-style game up at ux-phi, SUBMISSION, about submitting papers to journals and other aspects of academic life.
Start clicking here: ux-phi.com/submission
If your paper is rejected, you can submit it somewhere else. If it gets an R&R, you’ll have to click on the draft to revise it before resubmitting. If it’s accepted, you’ll start accumulating citations.
This also fits with what we found in our corpus study of [know]; basically no occurrences in COCA where people say someone doesn't know something because they lack sufficient justification (or some other feature), only occurrences where the person isn't aware of something.
Back in 2022, Jumbly Grindrod, J.D. Porter and I started writing a paper on distributional semantics and holism. How long ago that is in A.I. terms? The cutting edge model that we were talking about in our early drafts was GPT-3.
That paper is finally published and open access in an OUP volume on communicating with AI: academic.oup.com/book/63302/…
Thanks to Herman Cappelen and Rachel Sterken for editing the volume!
Here's a longer post about the paper: nathansen.substack.com/p/lma…
Nat Hansen retweeted
We've just released a new version of childes-db, my lab's interface to the CHILDES database of child language transcripts. It lets you work with CHILDES data from R through a versioned, reproducible API. A few updates 🧵 childes-db.stanford.edu/
ALT Screenshot of the childes-db website: 'A flexible and reproducible interface to CHILDES.' childes-db 2026.1 contains 56,579 transcripts from 9,151 children across 437 corpora, with panels for an R API tutorial and interactive visualizations of mean length of utterance by child age.
Nat Hansen retweeted
4/ We are looking for people with expertise in philosophy to join us.
Apply here: philosophybench.org/register
Talking to chatbots of historical philosophers is boring; it usually feels like you're querying a database. I've been trying some ways to make chatting with personas of historical philosophers more engaging—here's an experiment: playing the card game Whist w/Hume & Adam Smith:
Try it here: ux-phi.com/lab/edinburgh-177…
I got the idea for this game-based simulation from Hume’s famous remark about backgammon from the Treatise of Human Nature.
If you're signed in, you can get on the leaderboard: ux-phi.com/lab/edinburgh-177…
And here's a longer writeup of the reasons for making this:
nathansen.substack.com/p/pla…
(The game/chat was made during the summer in collaboration with Claude.)
I wrote up an account of the philosophical background for the AI-powered Socratic questionnaires now that a bunch of people have used them thanks to @xphilosopher's thread
link below
