ask a question

recent responses

all topics

info

⚲

Education

I was watching the movie 'Mona Lisa' and was wondering, what is the purpose of a college education for women who were all to become housewives and never use this knowledge to accomplish anything? Coco, 16.

I'm really confused by your tenses. "What IS the purpose of a college education for women who WERE all to become housewives..."? So, let me begin by saying that I'm not really sure what exactly you are asking, so let me try to answer what MIGHT be your question, and let's see if that works for you. First, you might be asking what WAS, or what COULD HAVE BEEN, the point of getting a college education, at a time when all women would (only) become housewives, and so on. Even in such societies, I think, there would be good reasons to become educated. These might include being better able to interact in an interesting variety of ways with your husband and your friends--after all, educated people are more interesting to talk to than uneducated people, as a general rule. Moreover, even housewives do many things that are profoundly valuable (to themselves, to others they care for, and to society)--for one thing, they raise children. Isn't it better to raise children from a standpoint of greater,...
Education
Philosophy

A few years ago I completed a masters degree; however, since that time I have been employed at a job that tends not to incorporate masters (and indeed undergrad) level philosophy. As a result, perhaps, of this I have found myself reading less and less intellectual work (and spending less and less time with literature in general). I long to get back into an intellectual mindset, but am having difficulty 'reading'. I have tried various different approaches - from attempting to get through Russell's History of Western Philosophy , to simply trying to read at least one text by each of the 'greats', but each time I find myself glancing at the texts for about half an hour and then losing concentration. Ideas that I would once understand quite quickly have become hieroglyphs that I cannot translate. Put simply, I am having trouble reading philosophy philosophically. I am not looking for a 'quick fix' solution to this problem (as I do not think that there exist such things) - however, do you have any...

Reading philosophy can be difficult even for those of us deeply engaged in the profession, so don't feel bad that you are finding it difficult. In fact, most of us who do lots of reading of these materials actually don't "go it alone" in the way you are trying to do--we read, then discuss with others, which often helps us to avoid misunderstanding (as well as motivates us to continue, when the going gets slow). So here are a couple of suggestions: (1) Find others who are interested in reading these kinds of materials. Then figure out what you want to "assign" to yourselves as readings, and meet once a week (or once a month, or...the main thing is to have a regular schedule that works for the people involved, and to which they can commit themselves) to discuss what you have read, and to consider what you want to read and discuss next. (2) Take an evening class at your local community college. This will get you back into practice, and will give you (in the classroom and in the person...
Education
Philosophy

What makes philosophers such as Kant, Aristotle, and Plato (and the many others) able to gain and retain such vast amounts of knowledge? Are they somehow able to use more of their brain than others, or are they merely the same as everyone else yet they have chosen to read and learn more? At the same time... I wish to become as great as these philosophers. Here is the scenario I have in mind: I graduate school in June. Once I graduate, I have a stack of grammar books and philosophy books I have yet to read. Granted they are "beginner" philosophy/grammar books (such as "The Art of Making Sense 2/e", "The Elements of Moral Philosophy 3/e", The Rhetoric and the Poetics of Aristotle", "What Does It All Mean?", "The Elements of Style- Strunk and White 3/e" and "An Introduction to Language 3/e"), I aim to move upward and get into the heavy stuff soon. If I keep this steady flow of progression, in due time, will I become a great thinker? I feel as though I have wonderful thoughts circulating inside of my mind...

It sounds to me as if you are off to a great start, Steve. No one can really predict how one would become a Plato, Aristotle, or Kant. Greatness such as theirs, plainly, only comes very rarely and may skip many generations before appearing yet again. My advice, for what it is worth (not myself being anything even close to a Plato, Aristotle, or Kant!), is merely to aim to keep growing, intellectually, all of your life. Whether one's work ends up being regarded as great, or merely good, or mediocre, or simply foolish is not up to the one who does the work--it is up to those others who judge it. Because you have no control over what others will think of you and your ideas, I would urge you not to give too much attention to trying to achieve whatever they would require, in order to consider you great. Instead, find what it is that makes you passionate, that calls out for your attention to such a degree that you find your mind drifting back to it even when it is socially inappropriate to do...
Education
Philosophy

Which philosophical texts are considered, generally, to be canonical (in the sense that any and everyone who either has an interest in philosophy or is studying it should have read them)?

The list of such texts will either be very long (if you allow that not absolutely all philosophers need to read each one), or else there will be no such list (if you insist that absolutely all philosophers should have read each one). Philosophy has come to have so many sub-disciplines that it is quite possible for someone to be very good in field X and yet never have read any of the basic texts in some other field(s). Also, the closer we get to the present day, historically, the more difficult it becomes to name the texts that are going to be the "classics" of philosophy. The safest answer to questions such as yours would be to look at the lists of texts taught in most history of philosophy classes (those covering ancient Greek through 19th Century European philosophy). What professors assign to their students in these classes are generally regarded as very important works of philosophy that good philosophers would do well to have read and understood.
Education
Profession

Is there any way to get published if you're not a professor in a university? For example, let's say I just pick up a philosophy magazine out of interest and want to respond to the article. Will I even be read or do I have to have a degree? Since people seem to agree that on the basic philosophy questions everybody asks them and has their own answers, it's theoretically possible that some non-professional has got a good answer right? And perhaps s/he wants to publish it. How might someone like this proceed? Separately, is it possible to know where philosophy presently is without being educated formally? I feel like the books in bookstores are mostly classics from at least 50 or so years ago. But can you get aboard of what's going on now without entering a university? For example, how would I proceed if I want to know the present state of deliberation on the...philosophy of mind, say? Thanks!!

Nearly all of the philosophy journals practice "blind review" of submitted articles. What this means is that those making the decision to publish or not to publish the contributed piece have no idea who the author is, or what his professional status (or lack of it) might be. So yes, it is certainly possible for someone who is not a professional academic to publish philosophical work where professionals will read it. Even so, I think it will be difficult for someone without specialized training to get published in this way--the rejection rate at most philosophy journals is very high even for those with graduate training and years of experience, so getting one's work published can be quite challenging, and usually requires that the piece to be published demonstrates mastery of the field and the most recent work in thsi field. As for how someone might keep up with what is going on now, many publishers (I would recommend Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and Blackwells, who...
Education

Dear philosophers, this is a question from a fresh mother who has a teenage kid. Every time she asks some questions about the truth of life and world, I feel cornered. I hope she could grow up into a person who has her own judgements and ability to reflect independently. I don't want her to be influenced by her mother's words as I was. What should I do?

I wholly agree with Joseph Moore's reply and wish merely to add to it. As much as I understand not wanting to be too heavy an influence, your role as mother does not give you the moral option of not being an influence--that is just the way it works, and I'm sure you do know that. So, the only question is: What sort of influence do you wish to be? You can influence your daughter in ways that will strengthen her ability to make sound independent judgments, and the best way to do this is to model the process for and with her. She needs the raw materials, to do the job--just as we all do. One does not become independent through ignorance--ignorance takes us in the very opposite direction. So for Heaven's sake do not refuse to answer her questions and thus leave her in ignorance! By showing her how you reason, and how you are willing to attend to her reasoning (and to show the respect of challenging and correcting her reasoning, when it seems flawed to you), you will promote far better the...
Education
Philosophers

Aristotle began studies at Plato's Academy at the age of 17. I have a few questions. 1) How smart was Plato compared to Aristotle? 2) Who would you say is as intelligent as Plato or Aristotle (preferably someone who is still alive)? 3) I am 17. Who can I go to in order to gain the same education that Aristotle did from Plato? 4) How did Aristotle go about becoming Plato's student? Did he have to pay to be his student in the same way people pay to become a student at a college? I pretty much got myself into philosophy, and upon finding out about the greater of ancient philosophers, I have been wondering how I might be able to gain knowledge compared to that of the aforementioned. Is this possible in today's society? Thank you, Steve

Your questions seem to focus on how smart people were (or are), and thus on how you can become that smart. Maybe you mean something different than I do, when you use the word "smart," but I think the only honest answer one can give to many of your questions is "no one knows, and no one can know." But I can say that Socrates (and Plato, and Aristotle) would all agree on the best thing you can do to get the best education you can have: Find others who have that same interest, and those credibly reputed to be able to serve that interest, and follow the inquiries that follow where they may. This does happen at universities (and at colleges, in the US--a "college" is not post-secondary education most other places), and I would also pick your college or university in the same way that Aristotle probably did. He found out that the most famous thinkers and educators were at Plato's Academy, and so he wanted to work with--and to think alongside--the best minds. So my advice is: Find out...
Education

I am a a high school teacher working for the Los Angeles Unified School District. I have been given approval to begin teaching a Philosophy survey course for the next school year. Although I am well read and schooled in Philosophy (I think?), I am unaware of possible textbooks for the study of Philosophy. I am looking for something that might be high school student friendly. Thus the Adorno Reader might be out of sorts for my pubescent high school students. In addition, I am fielding advice on the best approach to teaching Philosophy to high schoolers. I am interested in possible methods, assignments and projects. Any advice would be welcomed. Thank you, Ramon

I would recommend Theodore Schick's and Lewis Vaugn's Doing Philosophy : An Introduction through Thought Experiments (New York: McGraw Hill, 2005--3rd edn.) Its use of thought experiments makes the theories more readily accessible than most anthologies. By the way, I have actually worked with another teach in LAUSD (at Palisaides High and at Hollywood High) on some philosophical topics. If you think it would help to have a guest come to your classes for some discussion, I would be glad to do so (for no pay), as I am in the Los Angeles area often for various reasons. Feel free to contact me directly if your are interested: ndsmith@lclark.edu .
Education
Philosophy

Is it always important to have a good grounding in 'analytic' philosophy, no matter what area of the subject we are studying? For example, must I familiarize myself with logic and linguistic thought despite studying thinkers such as Nietzsche, Heidegger or Hegel?

I really think it is a good idea to be as well-rounded in your training as you can be. I often find myself using skills not normally associated with ancient Greek scholarship, my own specialization. The best thing about "analytic philosophy" is that it provides useful ways of looking at philosophical questions--no matter who framed them, and no matter whose answers you might find the most interesting.
Education

Philosophers / Journalism / Truth If we can agree upon the premiss that Man is not a solitary creature and that Man wants to belong to a group, why isn't there more movement towards getting the mass-media to use this longing to propel mankind to a higher level by 'punishing' (exposing) the Bad and 'rewarding' (admiring) the Good? Is this at all possible, you think? And if not, why not? As far as I am aware there is not a single major/popular newspaper or news program or internet site that reports a selection of objectively gathered news in a framework of comparison to the eternal value of 'Good vs Bad' on which the great philosophers agree. For example: Only reports (aknowledge and admire) of true 'good' deeds - esp. from role models - and ignore all the other trivial actions (non-news) as much as possible. Sorry for my poor English. Please translate into proper English ... Compliments for the site!!!

I suppose that at least part of an answer to your question would come from a clearer picture of what we take to be the proper role of journalism (or the mass media). Your question seems to suppose that it is the proper role of the media to "propel mankind to a higher level." But why shouldn't those involved in the mass media simply reject this, claiming instead that it is their role, at most, to keep us informed about what we are most interested in? In this view, the media serve--rather than fundmentally shape--public opinion and our actual interests (as opposed to what, perhaps, we should be interested in). In fact, of course, it is not quite as simple as this--for surely the media also help to shape our interests, which is why, for example, businesses and industries use the media to advertise their products, thus shaping our interests to suit their commercial goals. But I do think there is a very delicate and ethically precarious balance between provisions to allow freedom of the press,...

Pages