Pinned Tweet
Today's the day! Inquiry under bounds is out (open access) from OUP: academic.oup.com/book/57345
David Thorstad retweeted
Solid piece on forecasting AI risk. I am more bullish, but I think it covers most of the key considerations.
Featuring @eli_lifland @marcusabramovi1 @liron @DrTechlash @DavidThorstad and others.
open.substack.com/pub/sharon…
David Thorstad retweeted
Announcing the Call for Papers for Oxford Studies in Philosophy of AI and Computing!
Rapid AI progress is raising *so many* philosophical questions; but philosophers aren't as involved in the conversation as they should be, for many different reasons.
One is that, aside from some work in logic and philosophy of mind, philosophy of AI and computing has often sat on the margins of the discipline. One reason for *that* is that so many philosophers working on AI have had to do so basically on their own, figuring things out for themselves as they go along, without a real community around them.
OSPAIC is going to help fix this! We're going to have an annual conference and volume. The conference (in DC! where much of the future of AI will be decided) is especially important as we think about the nature of intellectual life in a world where AI systems can one-shot a superficially-plausible philosophy paper. OSPAIC sees philosophical progress as being about more than just the accumulation of true claims. The conference is a big part of our vision for how we contribute to philosophical progress.
And our aim is also to help philosophers be part of the broader public conversation! To that end we're also going to be launching, soon, a subcode on arXiv for philosophical foundations of AI (cs.pfai), and encouraging everyone who submits to OSPAIC to also upload their draft to arXiv (at present, use keyword PFAI).
We're also partnering with @cosmos_inst, who will be sponsoring an annual prize for the best paper on philosophy and AI, as well as helping fund the first round of the conference and Open Access publication for the volume. And with Cosmos we'll be highlighting some of the most interesting submissions to cs.pfai as they come in.
I'm the executive editor; Jeff Howard (UCL) and Rachael Sterken (University of Hong Kong) are associate editors; Ned Howells-Whitaker (JHU and Pittsburgh) is the assistant editor. We're grateful for the support of a wonderful advisory editorial board, including brilliant philosophers and computer scientists from academia, industry, and civil society.
The deadline for submissions is 11.59pm Feb 14, 2027, anywhere on earth. All details are at ospaic.org.
David Thorstad retweeted
I've teased this before, but it's coming soon: Oxford Studies in Philosophy of AI and Computing. Call for papers out in a couple of weeks. It's going to be awesome. Tell your (philosophy) friends.
There's been a lot of recent concern about existential risk from power-seeking AI. I push back against that concern in a new paper: philpapers.org/rec/THOICA-10
You can read a blog series about the paper here reflectivealtruism.com/2025/…
Ecological rationality can help us to improve cognitive bias benchmarks in LLMs. Now forthcoming in Proceedings of NeurIPS. philpapers.org/rec/THOCBB-2
Maximizing? Satisficing? Why not both? Now forthcoming in Philosophical Quarterly. philpapers.org/rec/THOSMA-15
Attentionally-limited agents may rationally neglect cost-free evidence. Now forthcoming in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research.
philpapers.org/rec/THOAAE-12
New symposium on my book Inquiry under Bounds at Syndicate Philosophy: syndicate.network/symposia/p…
Pangram scores of submitted NeurIPS position papers this year: 70.5% of papers above 50%, 28.2% at 100%. Please do better people. blog.neurips.cc/2026/06/02/a…
Framing effects are often taken as paradigmatic examples of human irrationality. In this new paper (forthcoming in Phil Imprint) I show how framing effects can be in an important sense fully rational. philpapers.org/rec/THOPRF
Drawing on Herbert Simon's notion of procedural rationality, I show how rational processes of category-based choice, salience-driven decisionmaking, and decisionmaking in finite automaton models can produce framing effects.
I spoke with Edouard Machery about bounded rationality on the Conversations at the Center Podcast from UPitt Center for Philosophy of Science youtube.com/watch?v=BOKqpUzv…
Great talk by one of my co-fellows at Pitt HPS m.youtube.com/watch?v=bKX-86…
David Thorstad retweeted
Curious about the ideal and non-ideal theory debate? My book, Ideal and Non-Ideal Theory, is now out open access with Cambridge Elements in Political Philosophy! Read the book that David Estlund has called "easily the best full treatment of the topic that we have."
(link below)










