Tell me what you think about the following project. I would like to examine all philosophy books and journal articles and axiomatize them. Then select the first place where a sound argument occurs and where it is repeated. Also compare all the arguments and select the most reasonable ones. Is this project feasable?
ChatGPT said:
Your project is ambitious and intellectually stimulating, but it also faces significant challenges due to the scope and complexity of what you’re proposing. Here’s a breakdown of its feasibility and potential issues:
1. Scope of Axiomatization
- Feasibility: Philosophy texts are often written in natural language, not formal logic. Axiomatizing these texts would require translating dense, nuanced arguments into formal systems, which is highly time-consuming and requires a deep understanding of both philosophy and formal logic.
- Challenges:
- Many philosophical arguments rely on implicit premises or context-specific interpretations that resist formalization.
- Ambiguities and terminological differences across eras and traditions could complicate the process.
2. Identifying “Sound” Arguments
- Feasibility: Determining soundness requires establishing both the validity of the argument and the truth of its premises. For many philosophical arguments, the premises are themselves contentious and subject to ongoing debate.
- Challenges:
- Epistemic disputes: Philosophers often disagree on what counts as “true” or “reasonable.”
- Subjectivity: Your evaluation criteria for soundness may unintentionally reflect personal or cultural biases.
3. Tracking Repetition and Comparing Arguments
- Feasibility: It is possible to track thematic and argumentative repetitions using textual analysis and citation tracking, especially with the help of AI and natural language processing (NLP).
- Challenges:
- Philosophers often rephrase or reframe arguments rather than repeating them verbatim.
- Differences in context and purpose may make it hard to compare arguments directly.
4. Selecting the Most “Reasonable” Arguments
- Feasibility: This step is subjective, as “reasonableness” can depend on criteria such as logical coherence, simplicity, or practical applicability.
- Challenges:
- Philosophical disagreement: Different traditions (e.g., analytic vs. continental) prioritize different criteria for evaluating arguments.
- The project risks privileging certain philosophical methodologies over others.
5. Practical and Technical Considerations
- Scale: The sheer number of books, articles, and philosophical traditions makes the project enormous. Even with advanced AI, it could take years to process all the material.
- Resources: You would need access to vast academic databases and likely a team of researchers and developers to assist with formalization, coding, and analysis.
- AI Assistance: Recent developments in AI could help automate parts of the process, such as identifying arguments and categorizing themes. However, AI systems still struggle with nuanced reasoning and context-dependent interpretation.
Recommendations
- Narrow the Scope: Start with a subset of philosophy, such as a specific period, tradition, or set of texts, to create a manageable pilot project.
- Leverage Technology: Use existing tools like NLP for argument extraction and logical formalization.
- Iterative Approach: Focus on one part of the project (e.g., axiomatization or soundness evaluation) before expanding to others.
- Collaborate: Engage with experts in philosophy, logic, and AI to refine your methodology.
If successful, your project could be a groundbreaking contribution to philosophy, helping clarify and systematize centuries of thought. However, it will require careful planning, robust methodologies, and likely a lifetime (or more!) of dedicated effort.
4o
O