<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/css/feed.css"?>
<rss xmlns:googleplay="http://www.google.com/schemas/play-podcasts/1.0" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>AutoMata</title>
<link>//podcastplus.net/feed/podcast~d0ecde98386879421d6908895756fb8ba58b2bb833d8589d7760168a2513cff9</link>
<description>Books, science, politics, philosophy. automata.substack.com</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 18 Aug 2026 07:55:07 +0000</pubDate>
<item>
<title>What I Believe</title>
<link>https://api.substack.com/feed/podcast/38416514/9269e9f43609a9e74b9fee40f2e62138.mp3</link>
<description>  I took this classic 1925 essay by Bertrand Russell as a blueprint for a not-so-short manifesto and introduction to  AutóMata  . The order of some sections has been switched around a bit, and I made no effort to emulate any of Russell’s original points or arguments; I just used the section headlines as writing prompts. I do not intend to flesh out all the arguments in this piece, so some of it may come out as somewhat aphoristic or glib. I’ll do deep dives on the reasoning for my positions eventually—that’s what this space will be for.   Nature and Man   I should begin by specifying that I’m not only a physicist but a  physicalist  and, as far as I can remember, always have been. For now I will leave the arguments for physicalism for another time and skip directly to state its conclusion: there is no such thing as a non-physical entity, and indeed there  can’t be  , because the notion of a non-physical entity is gibberish. Sometimes this view is also known as  naturalism  or  materialism  . I fi...</description>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2021 23:22:52 +0000</pubDate>
<guid>https://api.substack.com/feed/podcast/38416514/9269e9f43609a9e74b9fee40f2e62138.mp3</guid>
<enclosure url="https://api.substack.com/feed/podcast/38416514/9269e9f43609a9e74b9fee40f2e62138.mp3" type="audio/mpeg" length="1"/>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
