Max Severin

Essays, Articles, Videos & News

Month: February 2023

Intro to Philosophy of Time

2023-02-08 /

Philosophy of time is an area of inquiry within metaphysics. Metaphysics is one of the four main branches of philosophy — the others being ethics / aesthetics, epistemology, and logic. Metaphysics explores the nature of reality, including what sorts of entities exist, and the nature of cause and effect.

Photo by Aron Visuals on Unsplash

The metaphysician JME McTaggart (1908) divided philosophy of time into two general camps:

  1. A-theory (or A-series), where time is seen as flowing and dynamic.
  2. B-theory (or B-series), where time is seen as static.

A-theorists tend to argue for their position by appealing to the scientific observations of cause and effect, and change — in which the arrow of time seems to be a necessary feature (for example, the motion of objects and entropy in thermodynamics). They may also appeal to general observation and our intuitive understanding of how time works.

B-theorists often appeal to the theory of relativity, which holds that there is no objective present moment that is the same for all observers. Rather, observers travelling at different speeds will experience time differently. They may also appeal to evidence from quantum mechanics, which seems to show that time emerges from the relationships between physical entities, rather than as a stable feature of the universe that can be labeled as past, present, or future.

Leading A-theories of time:

  • Presentism — only the present moment exists; the past and future are non-existent.
  • Growing Block Theory — only the past and present exist; the future does not exist. The passage of time creates new events that are added to the “growing block” of existing moments.

Leading B-theories of time:

  • Eternalism — the past, present, and future all exist equally. Eternalism can be traced back to the pre-Socratic philosophers, such as Parmenides in the 5th century BCE. In Plato’s Timaeus — written around 360 BCE — he states that time is a “moving image of eternity”.
  • Block universe / block time — the past, present, and future all exist equally in a four-dimensional block of space time. All events have a different temporo-spatial location with the block.

Implications

These theories have some interesting implications. I list some of the most striking ones below.

Some of the implications of presentism:

a) Change and the flow of time are real phenomena.

b) It would seem that there can be no objective truth about the past, since the past does not exist.

c) Time travel would not seem to be possible if presentism is true.

Some of the implications of the growing block theory:

a) Change and the flow of time are real phenomena.

b) The past exists just as the present moment exists.

c) If the growing block theory is true, then it could be possible, in theory, to travel into the past — but not the future.

Some of the implications of eternalism / block universe / block time:

a) Temporal determinism — the future already exists and is fixed.

b) The flow of time is a subjective phenomenon — in reality there is no flow of time; different times have different temporo-spatial locations within spacetime.

c) If these theories are true, then time travel to the future and the past might be possible.

d) Cause and effect would seem to no longer make sense.

e) Free will (metaphysical libertarianism) would not seem to be possible if eternalism is true; however, compatiblism might still be possible in an eternalist / block universe (that is, if one holds compatiblism to be a coherent theory).

Conclusion

As is always the case with philosophy, not all philosophers agree on some of these finer points, and there is much debate over these. To learn more about philosophy of time I recommend:

References

McTaggart, J. M. E. (1908). The Unreality of Time. Mind, 17(4), 456–473. doi:10.1093/mind/XVII.68.456

Debunking the Meme: Theism and IQ

2023-02-06 /

The “midwit” mocking meme below has become stock propaganda used by alt-righters and other counter-enlightenment types (there are many variations, this just happens to be the one I came across today).

It seems to imply that the greater levels of religiosity or theism professed by below average IQ individuals are vindicated by the fact that above average IQ individuals also have higher rates of religiosity or theism.

There are a number of problems with this meme, but the biggest one is that it is simply not true.

I surveyed psychological and sociological research in several databases to explore this issue. Of all of the rigorous studies I found on IQ and its relationship to religiosity / theism the opposite findings were reported: individuals with above average IQ scores report lower levels of intrinsic religiosity (religious belief, as opposed to religious behavior [e.g., church-going, church involvement] ), theism, and other supernatural beliefs than average or below average cohorts (see Alsan et al., 2020; Kanazawa, 2010; Saroglou et al., 2002; Woellert & Luttig, 2018; Zuckerman et al., 2013).

In other words, religious or theistic belief was negatively correlated with IQ scores — that is, as IQ score rises, religiosity / theism goes down (see the graph below).

Meisenberg et al., 2012

However, let’s make sure we are not strawmanning the implicit argument presented by this meme. In order to avoid this we will steelman it:

Premise 1: Below average IQ individuals report the highest levels of religiosity / theism.

Premise 2: Average IQ individuals report lower levels of religiosity / theism than below average IQ individuals.

Premise 3: Some above average IQ individuals report religious / theistic beliefs.

Conclusion: Therefore, religiosity or theism is not irrational.

This steelmanned version is valid, however, its soundness is questionable due to the complexity of the issue.

For instance, it is important to note that the religious, spiritual, or theistic beliefs of above average IQ individuals tends to be much different than those in the below average IQ cohort.

As discussed in Kanazawa (2010), above average individuals are more likely to have non-conforming or eccentric beliefs. That is to say, the theism or spiritual / religious beliefs professed by above average IQ individuals is much more likely to resemble the nuanced and freethinking views of Epicurus, Spinoza, Einstein, or Thomas Paine, than the dogmatic and supernatural views of the average Bible-believing religious person.

Other Problems:

The question of whether IQ tests fully capture intelligence (considering we don’t have a robust philosophical definition) is unresolved. Also, it is not clear that we have good reasons to consistently expect more epistemic rigor / rationality from high IQ persons, than from, say, high-average IQ persons. In fact, there is some evidence to suggest that a segment of the high IQ population may be predisposed to neuro-psychological epistemic dysfunction. I discuss both of these issues in my article The Fallacy of IQ Obsessiveness.

References:

Alsan, M., Phillips, M. R., & Wang, Q. (2020). Cognitive ability and religious beliefs: Evidence from the United States. Social Science Research, 95, 102336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2020.102336

Kanazawa, S. (2010). Intelligence and religious fundamentalism. Intelligence, 38(6), 669–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2010.06.007

Meisenberg, G., Patel, H., Woodley, M. A., & Rindermann, H. (2012). Is it smart to believe in God? The relationship of religiosity with education and intelligence. Temas em Psicologia, 20(1), 101–120.

Saroglou, V., Delpierre, V., Dernelle, R., & Dapy, X. (2002). Values and religiosity: A meta-analytic review of the nomological network of beliefs. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(5), 757–780. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(01)00195-8

Woellert, A., & Luttig, M. (2018). Cognitive ability and religious fundamentalism: Evidence from the UK. Intelligence, 66, 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2017.11.009

Zuckerman, M., Silberman, J., & Hall, J. A. (2013). The relationship between intelligence and religiosity: A meta-analysis and some proposed explanations. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17(4), 325–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313491624

China’s Balloons Could Signal a Greater Threat Than Espionage

2023-02-04 /

High altitude balloons (HABS) or airships (HAA) can be used for more than just surveillance. In fact, they could be (and have been) used as offensive weapons.

Credit: Chase Doak, 2/1/2023. Over Billings, Montana.

China’s explanation for the HAA currently (2/3/2023) loitering over the US is that it is a stray airship for meteorological study that has been blown off course. This may very well be true, but the timing of the event, and its size (around 120 feet in diameter) makes this claim dubious — the largest weather balloons are usually no more than 20 feet in diameter.

If this is not a “spy balloon,” what could it be? Some of the most concerning possibilities for HAA use:

  1. An airship carrying one or more thermonuclear weapons. An HAB or an HAA could be an ideal platform to sneak attack with a nuclear weapon — especially those that are optimized to produce an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP). A nuclear explosion high in the atmosphere would produce an EMP that could destroy a large swathe of the US electrical grid. The Congressional EMP Commission’s report states:

“EMP is one of a small number of threats that can hold our society at risk of catastrophic consequences. EMP will cover the wide geographic region within line of sight to the nuclear weapon. It has the capability to produce significant damage to critical infrastructures and thus to the very fabric of US society, as well as to the ability of the United States and Western nations to project influence and military power.”

2. A biological warfare dispersal system.

3. A drone swarm mothership (imagine a swarm like those seen in professional drone shows, except they are all kamikaze drones; see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ma3ya_lqCLM). Another possibility: an HAA could be used to release very small surveillance drones that self-destruct or surreptitiously implant into electronic infrastructure.

4. An electronic warfare platform to disrupt communications, radar, etc.

5. A psychological operation to create general disruption or distraction from some other maneuver. Or perhaps to distribute propaganda (though this seems unlikely). A further psychological consideration is that doing this kind of incursion from time to time creates a “boy who cried wolf” effect, which may lower an adversary’s guard for a possible offensive use at a later date.

I do not consider the above possibilities to be highly probable, but they are concerning nonetheless.

Most likely this is an electronic espionage HAA.

Many have asked why China would need “spy balloons” if they have satellites. Some reasons:

  1. Satellites cannot intercept all terrestrial radio signals, and the Chinese government is very curious about US radio chatter right now — considering the current geopolitical situation and the increasing tensions over the Taiwan issue.
  2. A surveillance HAA of this sort would provide greater resolution intelligence imagery of airfields, missile silos, etc.
  3. Spy satellites only have a short window of opportunity in their orbit to view, adversaries can “time” spy satellites and predict when it is concealable to do things like move materiel.
  4. HAA / HAB may evade some radar system capabilities by flying above the detection ceiling.

Time will tell what type of HAA or HAB this is (the US is likely going to shoot it down over the ocean — though any sensitive hardware will have self-destructed before this), however, its use sends a clear signal and reveals a potential weakness in the armor of US defensive capabilities.

© 2026 Max Severin

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑