Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18hCritics of Effective Altruism when they realize what happens when they convince people not to donate to The Life You Can Safe. 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18hPhilosophy friends! Should we abolish morality? Here's part 2. walterveit.substack.com/p/should-we-...walterveit.substack.comTo Hell With Morality (Reading Group Part 2)Introduction, more nihilism, and more Ian Hinckfuss 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 06/10/2026Here's an interview I gave on atheism, amoralism, and animal welfare: walterveit.substack.com/p/maybe-mora...walterveit.substack.com“Maybe moral systems are harmful! Like religion they're used to divide”Atheism and Amoralism 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 05/10/2026Would we all be better off by abolishing morality? Let's find out. Join my Moral Nihilism reading group! walterveit.substack.com/p/join-the-m...walterveit.substack.comJoin The Moral Nihilism Reading Group!Moral realists welcome! No polemics. Just arguments and good vibes. 000
Reposted by Dr. Walter VeitDr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 05/10/2026Cool stuff! I've defended this kind of modelling work myself against philosophers who think its "not philosophy" but I think it's really supportive of moral nihilism: Veit, W. (2019). Modeling Morality. In Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Technology, Springer, 83-102. doi.org/10.1007/978-... 031
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 05/10/2026Cool stuff! I've defended this kind of modelling work myself against philosophers who think its "not philosophy" but I think it's really supportive of moral nihilism: Veit, W. (2019). Modeling Morality. In Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Technology, Springer, 83-102. doi.org/10.1007/978-... 031
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 04/10/2026New blog post with an excerpt from my book. I'm looking for useful feedback. The reward will be a free copy of the book when it comes out and lots of gratitude. :) walterveit.substack.com/p/when-shrim...walterveit.substack.comWhen Shrimps Ruled the WorldA draft excerpt from my book on shrimps 010
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 03/10/2026Philosophy friends. Should we abolish moral philosophy? I wrote a blog post defending the view. Please share your thoughts. walterveit.substack.com/p/to-hell-wi...walterveit.substack.comTo Hell With MoralityAnd moral philosophy with it 020
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 02/10/2026Is it still unethical for academics to monetize substack? I wrote a follow-up essay. Please share your views. walterveit.substack.com/p/is-it-unet... 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 01/10/2026As promised all newsletter income has been donated. walterveit.substack.com/p/300-dollar...walterveit.substack.com$300 Dollars For CharitiesThanks! :) 010
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 30/09/2026Friends of nature! I've written a new essay on the recent (alleged) discovery of a new penguin species. Please share! 🐧 walterveit.substack.com/p/scientists...walterveit.substack.comScientists Discover New Penguin Species - Or Did They?Hype and truth in science communication 001
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 29/09/2026I wrote a new blog post challenging Bryan Caplan's recent criticism of effective altruism. walterveit.substack.com/p/bryan-capl...walterveit.substack.comBryan Caplan vs Effective AltruismPseudo-Philosophy vs Arguments, Reasons, and Evidence (And an Invitation to Debate) 010
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 28/09/2026Philosophy friends! Is prayer self-defeating? I wrote a new essay defending the view. Please share your views. walterveit.substack.com/p/prayer-is-...walterveit.substack.comPrayer Is Self-DefeatingUnless you’re dogmatic 011
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 26/09/2026www.psychologytoday.com/nz/blog/scie...psychologytoday.comWhy Is the Department of War Against Effective Altruism?The global race for AI is driven by zero-sum thinking, probability neglect, and other cognitive biases. 010
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 25/09/2026with a reply to @lastpositivist.bsky.social :) Hopefully this makes the views of radical naturalists clearer. 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 25/09/2026Philosophy friends! Must all philosophers be radical naturalists? I wrote a new essay defending the view. Please share your views. walterveit.substack.com/p/why-all-ph... 200
Reposted by Dr. Walter VeitHugo Viciana @hugoviciana.bsky.social · 24/09/2026"Disagreement is necessary for healthy epistemic communities. And effective altruists disagree all the time. And that’s good! They literally come from all spheres of the political compass, which is why they are also perhaps targetted from all sides" 121
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 23/09/2026New essay in response to last week's events walterveit.substack.com/p/why-is-the...walterveit.substack.comWhy is the Department of War Against Effective Altruism?Zero-sum thinking, probability neglect, and other failures of reasoning 020
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 22/09/2026Friends! I'm looking for critical reader feedback for two book drafts. If you're interested comment below or on substack. walterveit.substack.com/p/two-new-bo... 770
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026It seems you're looking for a sharp cutoff here. I think any strong demarcation criterion between pseudophilosophy and philosophy is probably going to be unsuccessful, given the past track record of similar attempts. Things come in degrees. Things can be more or less "pseudophilosophical." 210
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026In my radical naturalism, intuitions should play little to no role. It seems intuitive to me, unintuitive to you, but that doesn't settle anything really. 110
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026I fear that distinction makes things far too weak for philosophy. By that logic it seems like even lifestyle philosophy should count. For they, too, make substantive arguments and theoretical claims (even if not in the style of analytic philosophy). So no longer a useful distinction? 200
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026What is your view of how we should define pseudophilosophy (and pseudoscience)? I'm happy to change my mind. 100
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026If Plato came alive today, and didn't update his methods & concepts in lights of modern science? Yes, then it would become pseudophilosophy (from a radically naturalist point of view). But you can't fault philosophers prior to the development of science. 100
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026It's not just that pseudo-philosophy doesn't deliver. We can explain why. It's not a mystery to the radical naturalist. But I'd be skeptical of those naturalistic arguments if it so happened that aprioristic approaches had a track record of solving philosophical problems. 110
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026I don't think that's a problem for my view since my claim is sensitive to history. Alchemy was once a legitimate form of investigation. Much like speculative philosophy. No longer. Plato did practise philosophy. But if he did the same today, without drawing on the sciences, that's a different story. 100
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026Except, I use it a straightforward way. Pseudophilosophy no longer qualifies as philosophy. When I say that it's a waste of time and space, I don't mean it's just less productive. That would still be progress. I explicitly stated that it's harmful to "our collective pursuit of objective truths." 200
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026There is no fact over how pseudo-philosophy ought to be defined. There is no consensus on what pseudo-philosophy is. So it's odd to insist I use the term wrong, when I define it it differently from how you would. 200
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026I'm not that interested in conceptual analysis. If your philosophical methods don't lead to progress and you refuse to switch to those that do, that's not just unproductive, that's bad. 100
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 19/09/2026I think there is a stark difference. The criticisms against radically naturalist philosophy or experimental philosophy are largely conceptual, no longer qualifying as "real philosophy." That charge is uninteresting. The scientific philosopher's criticism of unscientific philosophy is methodological. 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18/09/2026Tbf the LSE philosophy department has a great motto that pretty much matches what I call for: "The Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method was founded by Karl Popper in 1946 and is renowned for a type of philosophy that is both continuous with the sciences and socially relevant." 050
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18/09/2026Not too long ago, there was widespread skepticism about the introduction of modelling tools into philosophy. There still is, much as it is more silent now. But there's a large toolkit available within the sciences that philosophers could and should draw on. 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18/09/2026Tbf the LSE philosophy department has a great motto that pretty much matches what I call for: "The Department of Philosophy, Logic and Scientific Method was founded by Karl Popper in 1946 and is renowned for a type of philosophy that is both continuous with the sciences and socially relevant." 070
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18/09/2026Reichenbach thought we should leave unscientific philosophy behind us. His whole book criticizes it. 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18/09/2026What part about it is "MAGA level trolling" Should we not do any metaphilosophy, resulting in some methods to become considered inherently faulty, and thus call for their abolishment? By that logic quite a few philosophers would be "MAGA level trolls." See Reichenbach: 200
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18/09/2026I'm not setting a higher bar for pseudo-philosophy than wasting time and space in the pursuit of philosophical objectives. Which seems like a low bar to me. 101
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 18/09/2026Philosophy friends! Is a priori philosophy a waste of time and space? Here's a new essay. Please share your views. walterveit.substack.com/p/most-a-pri... 240
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 17/09/2026Philosophy friends! I wrote a new essay, no doubt controversial, on whether philosophy is dead. Comments welcome. walterveit.substack.com/p/is-philoso...walterveit.substack.comIs Philosophy Dead?Scientific Philosophy and Unscientific Philosophy 020
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026Do you have evidence for that role of intuitions in science? 110
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026You granted that intuitions play a role in analytic philosophy before. That intuitions are unrealiable isn't based on intuitions, but on the track record of science, where intuitions are well established to be unreliable, and the poor track record of intuitions in philosophy to resolve any disputes 000
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026I don't agree with that. Philosophers and scientists may disagree on which theoretical virtues are more condusive to progress, but the value of those virtues is ultimately settled by science, no matter how unintuitive. 100
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026My concern in that blog post was to highlight an interesting overlap between Brennan's and Schuringa's criticism of political philosophy and that of radical naturalists who are against all uses of intuitions in philosophy. That's why I gave the context behind my other blog posts. 010
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026Whether you define analytic philosophy broadly or narrowly doesn't matter for my (radically) naturalist stance. Intuitions play a role in analytic philosophy broadly conceived and I think they should play no role at all, except as a psychological phenomenon in need of explanation. 200
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026For that purpose, 'analytic philosophy' nor 'continental philosophy' are very useful categories in meta-philosophy. 100
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026You may want to use the term analytic philosophy in this very broad way describing sociological trends, but then it's not very informative anymore today, when we want to ask questions about philosophical methods. 100
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026It's counterintuitive, but I prefer Reichenbach's own term for a jornal he wanted to create with Quine and Carnap: Scientific Philosophy "Analytic philosophy" is otherwise such a broad church of methods and views that its barely connected to the scientific ambitions of the logical empiricists. 200
Dr. Walter Veit @walterveit.bsky.social · 27/08/2026Some examples: - the work of Edouard Machery (and experimental philosophy more broadly) iai.tv/articles/int... - see the reactions to Ladyman and Ross' Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized defending the use of intuitions - plenty of work in meta-philosophyiai.tvCommon sense is not a good guide to reality<p><em>Should we forcibly harvest a man’s organs to save five people? Should we plug the whole of the humanity into a machine that could ensure the maximal amount of aggregate pleasure if we could? Ar... 100