This, the 51st Philosophers' Carnival, is a round-up of recent stuff from philosophically inclined blogs, with a bias towards maths, science, logic etc. In the interests of making life easy for myself (an essential part of any rational philosophy) I first chose the total number of posts to be 37 (as I was listening to Femme Fatale) and then, as posts arrived, I simply added them below in descending order of my credence (a real measure of subjective probability) that they would eventually be included.
......To begin with the basics, why does 1 + 1 = 2? asks Philosophy Sucks! Although that equation is so obviously true, it is obscure what is the right proof that it is true; and regarding different types of proofs the question what is involved in arguments for the existence of God? was raised at Prosblogion; and for another view of proofs of God's existence see A brood comb. At another extreme, for a clear and stimulating account of infinity hear A W Moore on Infinity at philosophy bites. And for some more maths that philosophers may find interesting, why not take a look at Peano's Space-filling Curve at Good Math, Bad Math? And for a nice example of how maths enters into the basics, even of the philosophy of mind, read this post on formal logic and free will, at Elliptica. Not to mention how useful maths is if we want to get to the truth behind the headlines, as in this about Cannabis at Bad Science.
......Less mathematically this report on a Meta-ethics conference at Philosophy Blog was enjoyable to read; and on the topics of meta-stuff and conferences, this call for papers at bLOGOS began: "Do numbers, sets, and other abstract entities, exist?" (which seems apposite. Meta-metaphysics appears to me to be about the status of the metaphysical debates about such things, but for better views on what it is see this post about that call at Theories 'n Things, and also this post about the same thing at Metaphysical Values). The relation between virtues and flourishing is treated logically at Philosophy Journal. And there is a formal model in support of the possibility of parity at Philosophy, et cetera. And if you want to know more about the relation between religion and science, take a look at Galactic Interactions.
......More entertaining may be the claim that modal logic can solve all problems, at Thad Guy. There's a nice introduction to possible worlds at Big Ideas. Classically progressing from possible to probable goes via the principle of indifference, reconsidered at Bloggin The Question, while an important principle relating credence and chance was mentioned at Antimeta. For those who prefer examples to principles, the ever-interesting image of tossing a coin forever was pondered upon at Probably Possible. A less tidy but more important application of probabilities, Dawkins' improbability argument against ID has been examined by Stephen Law. Probabilities also crop up in the Klein problem, at Think Tonk. And speaking of measures, the best way to measure happiness is considered at Splintered Mind.
......Experimental philosophy (applied maths if you like) yields fascinating results, e.g. those well described in this brief introduction to the Knobe effect and similar phenomena, at Natural Rationality. Poles apart, and the origin of the neologism "Pancomputationalism" was examined by Gualtiero, at Brains, while there was an example of a difficult definition in Poker at Nothing but the Truth-in-L. And very different again is this rethinking of Shell on Kant on Properties, at Rethink. More mathematically, What is the role of intuition? is the question inspired by an example from the history of geometry, at Words and Other Things. For something deeper, how about Duhem on Mathematical Generalization, at Siris? And if you don't know who the founder of modern structural proof theory is, you might want to read about Gentzen at Logic Matters.
......Inevitably some dubious oddities, e.g. this defense of Deleuze at Sportive Thoughts seems to be about maths, but as it's Continental I'm not sure. And this post about quantity at Tetrast2 seems to be more analytic, but again, who's to say? By contrast with those two, this treating of paradoxes as Mobius strips at Heart, Mind, Soul and Strength is relatively neat, and so I leave it as an exercise for the reader to say why it's not proper philosophy (after all, picture proofs are arguably good mathematics, and philosophers do take even dialethicism seriously, as a unifying principle). But for a reminder of why it's not even worth arguing with one half of the American culture war, see some Fundamentalist Math at Ooblog. And to show we're not prejudiced, let's also laugh at academia, with Jean Kazez. For more mathematical humour read about Nowak on the Loom.
......All good things must end, and why not with the contradictions inherent in our social structures? E.g. with when business is incontinent, at Trust Matters: "The paradox of trust is that the greatest economic success is a byproduct of putting customers' success first." Or with Hegelian families, at The Brooks Blog, which was #37... half the submissions were excluded, but posts can now be submitted to the next Philosophers' Carnival via the submission form.