#Inferences&Capacities
LightNews LightNews
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
We're happy to announce that Inferences & Capacities will continue next year! Here's the incredible line-up of speakers:

#philosophy #philbluesky #inferences&capacities

Meanwhile: don't miss Eva Schmidt's talk on Monday, October 19!
October 13, 2026 at 5:16 PM
hyogweon.bsky.social
This suggests young children do have a concept of communication as a causal process, but more nuanced inferences that require counterfactual-like reasoning follow a more protracted development. Thinking about communication feels intuitive for adults, but involves a host of cognitive capacities!
October 5, 2026 at 4:48 PM
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
Inferences & Capacities continues in October with Eva Schmidt!

#philbluesky #philosophy #inferences&capacities
September 26, 2026 at 5:29 PM
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
Join us for the next talk in our series "Inferences & Capacities"!

#philbluesky #philosophy #philosophersonbluesky
September 1, 2026 at 4:37 PM
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
The next talk of our "Inferences & Capacities" will take place on Sep. 7. Our next speaker is Ulf Hlobil (Concordia University" on "Inference and Object." Find the abstract below!

#PhilosophySky #PhilSky #PhilMind #Inferences&Capacities
August 31, 2026 at 1:08 AM
danielschwarcz.bsky.social
I’m a proud signatory of this letter, joined by many UMN Law faculty, in response to recent events in Minneapolis. However, it is unfair to draw negative inferences about those who didn't sign; there are many reasons why some may have chosen not to do so. docs.google.com/document/d/1...
Open Letter to Minnesota Law CommunityJanuary 25
January 25, 2026 To the Minnesota Law Community: We, the undersigned faculty of the University of Minnesota Law School, write in our individual capacities to address the federal government's ongoin...
docs.google.com
January 27, 2026 at 6:48 PM
alancolquhoun.bsky.social
Such inferences presuppose innate conceptual capacities, not derived from the data they interpret

Moreover, mental states are multiply physically realisable (they can be instantiated in indefinitely many neural (or even non-neural)) ways
March 23, 2025 at 8:52 AM
angelicakaufmann.bsky.social
What looks like switching off may be one of the mind’s most revealing states.

Delighted to give the inaugural talk of the Inferences & Capacities series — on mind blanking, mental imagery, and intrusive imagery.
April 23, 2026 at 11:33 AM
vcarchidi.bsky.social
focuses on *that data* but also comes away with the *same inferences.* There are presumably a number of different pathways "domain-general" capacities could go given children have wildly diverse conditions that they grow up in, yet they settle on the same categories, efficiently, and without..
August 9, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Ever stop to think what voting democrat suggests about you and your political preferences? Imagine the inferences I am making of you and your ideological beliefs and capacities. But here’s an idea… ask people about policy and stop making inferences.
March 14, 2024 at 7:57 AM
epsteinweb.bsky.social
Parts 1-3/3 — EFTA01900746.jpg
#epsteinweb #efta01900746
https://epsteinweb.org
Available in the iOS app store now!
https://apps.apple.com/us/app/epstein-web/id6758880661
EFTA01900688 | EFTA01900746 defendants would stretch to suggest as much, given that none of these defendants (only Governor Jindal, who was dismissed by this Court's Order and Reasons, see Doe v. Jindal, No. 11-388, 2011 WL 39250425 (E.D. La. Sept. 7, 2011) invoked sovereign immunity in Doe I. Moreover, this Court previously observed that these defendants have the authority to enforce the registry law in Doe I: "there seems little doubt that the defendants are responsible for administering and enforcing the sex registry 15 all the relief the plaintiffs seek is prospective, and they insist that plaintiffs fail to allege an ongoing violation of federal law because Act 402 changed everything. "[I]n determining whether the doctrine of Ex parte Young avoids an Eleventh Amendment bar to suit, a court need only conduct a 'straightforward inquiry into whether [the] complaint alleges an ongoing violation characterized as of federal law prospective." and seeks Stewart, 131 relief S.Ct. properly at 1639 (quoting Verizon Md. Inc. v. Public Sew. Comm'n of Md., 535 U.S. 635, 645 (2002)). The plaintiffs' lawsuit satisfies this inquiry: they allege an ongoing violation of federal law pursuant to § 1983 (by alleging that the defendants continue to fail to remedy the Equal Protection violation conduct focused in Doe I). They do also seek relief that is indeed prospective in nature: declaratory relief that their continued subjection to sex offender registration and notification requirements violates the Equal Protection clause; that they be removed from the registry; and that the records law...[t]his places the defendants among those who contribute to the plaintiffs' harm." See Doe I, 851 F. Supp. 2d 995, 1004 (E.D. La. 2012). Defendants did not appeal this Court's ruling in Doe i. It is also noteworthy that, during oral argument, counsel for defendants conceded that the nine plaintiffs in Doe I were provided relief in accordance with this Court's Judgment (including by being removed from the sex offender registry and issued new licenses without the "SEX OFFENDER" designation) through cooperation amongst various defendants in their official capacities; the same defendants named in this lawsuit. 16 documenting that they are sex offenders be expunged.10 IiI. Standing The defendants next urge this Court to resolve another threshold issue: the Court must be satisfied that each of the three plaintiffs have standing to challenge the continued registration requirement imposed on individuals convicted of violating Louisiana's Crime Against Nature by Solicitation statute. Like they did in Doe i, the defendants vigorously attack the plaintiffs' standing. Article III of the Constitution commands that a litigant must have standing to invoke the power of a federal court. See Nat'l Fed'n of the Blind of Texas, Inc. v. Abbott, 647 F.3d 202, 208 (5th Cir. 2011). The doctrine of standing requires that the Court satisfy itself that "the plaintiff has 'alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy' invocation of federal-court jurisdiction." as See to warrant his Summers v. Earth Island institute, 555 U.S. 488, 493 (2009); see also Doe v. Beaumont Indep. Sch. Dist., 240 F.3d 462, 466 (5th Cr. 2001Xciting Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 498, 95 S.Ct. 2197, 45 L.Ed.2d 343 10 In fact, the plaintiff's in Doe I sought the same relief which the defendants did not then argue was retrospective in nature. Plaintiffs here thus characterize defendants' sovereign immunity argument as frivolous. It seems, at best, a submission of tortured reasoning, and offers an unnaturally restrictive view of the Court's decision in Doe I regarding defendants' conduct when measured by Equal Protection doctrine. 17 (1975)). "Standing to sue must be proven, not merely asserted, in order to provide a concrete case or controversy and to confine the courts' rulings within our proper judicial sphere." Doe v. Tangipahoa Parish School Bd., 494 F.3d 494, 499 (5th Cir. 2007) (noting that "[n]o amount of creative inferences from the pretrial order or 'stipulations' can overcome [the necessary proof in the record required to show standing]" and that the Board's failure to contest standing cannot create jurisdiction because standing is not subject to waiver by the parties). To establish standing, the plaintiffs must EFTA_R1_00329774 EFTA01900746 Epstein Web iOS app on the App Store.
March 14, 2026 at 10:35 AM
epsteinweb.bsky.social
Parts 1-2/2 — EFTA00015255.jpg
#epsteinweb #efta00015255
https://epsteinweb.org
EFTA00015219 | EFTA00015255 Author: CGM Reviewed: TLC 3/10/21, 3/11/21 Deliberative Process/Attorney-Client/Attorney Work Product Privileged identifying information of local law enforcement employees. These employees were acting in their official capacities and aided the FBI in the law enforcement investigative activities reflected in the records responsive to Plaintiffs' request. The rationale for protecting the identities of FBI SAs discussed in ¶¶ 81-83, supra, applies equally to the names and identifying information of these local law enforcement employees. Release of the identities of these law enforcement employees could subject them as individuals to unnecessary and unwelcome harassment that would invade their privacy and could cause them to be targeted for reprisal. In contrast, disclosure of this information would serve no public interest because it would not shed light on the operations and activities of the FBI. Accordingly, the FBI properly withheld this information pursuant to Exemptions 6 and 7(C). (b)(6)-5 and (b)(7)(C)-5: Names and Identifying Information of Third Parties Merely Mentioned (85) In Exemption category (b)(6)-5 and (bX7)(C)-5, the FBI protected the names and identifying information of third parties who were merely mentioned in the investigative records responsive to Plaintiffs' request. The FBI has information about these third parties in its files because these individuals were tangentially mentioned in conjunction with FBI investigative efforts. These individuals were not of investigative interest to the FBI. These third parties maintain substantial and legitimate privacy interests in not having this information disclosed and thus, being connected with an FBI law enforcement matters. Considering the FBI is an investigative and intelligence agency, disclosure of these third parties' names and/or identifying information in connection with an FBI record carries an extremely negative connotation. Disclosure of their identities would subject these individuals to possible harassment or criticism and focus derogatory inferences and suspicion on them. The FBI then considered whether there was any public interest that would override these privacy interests, and concluded that disclosing 37 EFTA00015255
February 12, 2026 at 1:54 PM
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
Join us for the next meeting of Inferences and Capacities!
@cameronbuckner.bsky.social

#philbluesky #philosophy
July 3, 2026 at 11:08 PM
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
Our online talk series "Inferences & Capacities" continues in June with Susanna Schellenberg's talk on "Perspectives, Schemas, and Capacities" @sschellenberg.bsky.social

Check out the poster for instructions on how to register!

#philosophy #philbluesky #inferences&capacities
June 6, 2026 at 12:13 PM
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
We are happy to announce the second talk of our series "Inferences & Capacities"!

#philbluesky #philosophy #talk #inferences
May 6, 2026 at 1:31 PM
alfredovernazzani.bsky.social
We are proud to announce our new talk series on "Inferences & Capacities" co-organized by me, Mariela Aguilera, and Matías Osta-Vélez!

Find below the 2026 lineup and info on how to register.

#philosophy #philosophySky
April 17, 2026 at 7:59 PM
danieldrucker.bsky.social
I agree we're discussing the cognitive relation, and we can doubt in any case that a human, or we, understand. That's why I'm trying to talk about capacities. Each of us knows we have the capacity for cognitive understanding, which enables phylogenetic inferences for other humans but not LLMs.
December 9, 2025 at 3:01 PM
jkd50.bsky.social
Ordinarily justices are supposed to make coherent arguments. Provide explicit linkages to direct the inferences from the data they provide. Alito is old enough for his mental capacities have suddenly plummeted.
March 23, 2026 at 5:08 PM
rss.dfaria.eu
Inferences & Capacities: Susanna Schellenberg

CAUTION: This email originated outside of the University. Do not click links unless you can verify the source of this email and know the content is safe. Check sender address,...

listserv.liv.ac.uk
Inferences & Capacities: Susanna Schellenberg
CAUTION: This email originated outside of the University. Do not click links unless you can verify the source of this email and know the content is safe. Check sender address, hover over URLs, and don't open suspicious email attachments. We are pleased to announce our monthly _online_ talk...
listserv.liv.ac.uk
June 5, 2026 at 6:01 PM
rss.dfaria.eu
Inferences & Capacities: Talk Series and First Speaker

CAUTION: This email originated outside of the University. Do not click links unless you can verify the source of this email and know the content is safe. Check sender address,...

listserv.liv.ac.uk
Inferences & Capacities: Talk Series and First Speaker
CAUTION: This email originated outside of the University. Do not click links unless you can verify the source of this email and know the content is safe. Check sender address, hover over URLs, and don't open suspicious email attachments. We are pleased to announce our monthly _online_ talk...
listserv.liv.ac.uk
April 20, 2026 at 8:01 AM
rss.dfaria.eu
Talk Series "Inferences & Capacities" - First talk: Angelica Kaufmann

CAUTION: This email originated outside of the University. Do not click links unless you can verify the source of this email and know the content is safe. Check sender address,...

listserv.liv.ac.uk
Talk Series "Inferences & Capacities" - First talk: Angelica Kaufmann
CAUTION: This email originated outside of the University. Do not click links unless you can verify the source of this email and know the content is safe. Check sender address, hover over URLs, and don't open suspicious email attachments. Dear list members, We are delighted to inaugurate the...
listserv.liv.ac.uk
April 11, 2026 at 3:31 PM