Asking whether machines can really understand us is meaningless.
It's not what you think you know, but how you can justify your knowledge that is most important.
Phrases like “knowledge production” conceal the fact that knowledge answers to something beyond itself and beyond us. To produce knowledge is to find out about something.
How do we determine what is fact? An archaeologist explains how the answer has changed over time and why it matters so much now.
There's never been greater need for the study of what we don't know, and why we're not supposed to know it.
The world around you might be an illusion and you're really a brain in a vat connected to a supercomputer. Sounds preposterous? But can you prove it's not true?