Recent Responses
More people are familiar with the ideas of Camus and Sartre, two examples of continental philosophers who wrote of the need of philosophy to be applied to the human condition, than are aware who Quine and Wittgenstein were. Does it bother analytic philosophers that most people consider analytic philosophy to have zero relevance in their lives yet regard many continental philosophers as public intellectuals?
Douglas Burnham
July 19, 2013
(changed July 19, 2013)
Permalink
I suppose I count as a'continental' philosopher. It is worth pointing out that thisanalytic/ continental distinction, however you want to draw it, andfor whatever it is worth, is mainly internal to philosophy. 'Mostpeople' would not be aware of the distinction. Heck, there are signsin businesse... Read more
Most currencies in the world today are issued by governments. Does this mean that money only has value because governments assign it value? By this definition, are commodities more valuable than money since value is assigned by individuals instead of governments?
Oliver Leaman
July 19, 2013
(changed July 19, 2013)
Permalink
Not at all, things have value not because governments or individuals assign them value but because a significant group of people do. Whatever we are prepared to accept as valuable makes something valuable. Governments certainly cannot do it as we can see at times of hyperinflation when government... Read more
Is it immoral to play poker (a game that inherently involves bluffing) full time to make a living even if it is more profitable for someone than a traditional job? Even if we consider it a sport akin to tennis or golf, it does not create economic value in the sense that's it's usually not being broadcast and there are no spectators or advertising. Players do not contribute to the tax base and social insurance; money is just being passed around from person to person.
Oliver Leaman
July 18, 2013
(changed July 18, 2013)
Permalink
If gambling is your job I think you would end up paying taxes on your winnings, and gambling is certainly taxable in the United States, for instance. What is wrong with bluffing? When everyone knows that bluffing may be involved, it makes it part of a systematic attempt of winning a competition w... Read more
More people are familiar with the ideas of Camus and Sartre, two examples of continental philosophers who wrote of the need of philosophy to be applied to the human condition, than are aware who Quine and Wittgenstein were. Does it bother analytic philosophers that most people consider analytic philosophy to have zero relevance in their lives yet regard many continental philosophers as public intellectuals?
Douglas Burnham
July 19, 2013
(changed July 19, 2013)
Permalink
I suppose I count as a'continental' philosopher. It is worth pointing out that thisanalytic/ continental distinction, however you want to draw it, andfor whatever it is worth, is mainly internal to philosophy. 'Mostpeople' would not be aware of the distinction. Heck, there are signsin businesse... Read more
Are sex selective abortions immoral? In countries where abortion is legal on demand, does it make any sense to try and prevent sex selective abortion if the legal system allows abortion for any reason?
Stephen Maitzen
July 18, 2013
(changed July 18, 2013)
Permalink
You've asked two independent questions: (1) Are sex-selective abortions immoral? (2) Does it make sense to try preventing sex-selective abortions where abortion is generally legal? Now, 'make sense' in (2) can be construed at least two ways: (2a) Is it a practical policy to try preventing sex-s... Read more
If God exists, is there any proof that he involves himself in human affairs? It seems most if not all debate in contemporary philosophy centers around whether a deist God exists.
Andrew Pessin
July 16, 2013
(changed July 16, 2013)
Permalink
Great question, but just a short answer to start. By "involvement" you probably have in mind something like "miracles" (say, violations of the law of nature). But questions of "miraculousness" are VERY hard to prove, and so (I'm guessing) discussion of their occurrence is probably mostly limited... Read more
Ethically, what is the difference between a sex object and a sex symbol when talking about a person? Why is the latter term considered less degrading and even beneficial? Is a symbol merely a representation of an object or actually an extension of one?
Andrew Pessin
July 16, 2013
(changed July 16, 2013)
Permalink
This is a great question I hadn't thought of. One response perhaps is to acknowledge how it reflects the fundamental ambiguity our society has toward ALL matters sexual. Sexuality is both good and bad, in various ways/senses, at least for many. Profoundly religious people of a certain sort might... Read more
Ethically speaking, should private businesses be allowed to refuse service to individuals on account of any characteristic that is related to their behavioral choices? For example, in the US, restaurants are allowed to refuse service to patrons who spit on the floor or don't wear shoes but are not allowed to refuse service to a black man (since he did not "choose" to be black). In that case, supposing a restaurant owner does not like obese people, why should he be forced to serve obese patrons (some of whom might be black) since many of them chose to eat their way to obesity?
Thomas Pogge
July 13, 2013
(changed July 13, 2013)
Permalink
While I think you are right to observe that business owners are generally not allowed to discriminate against persons on the basis of their unchosen characteristics, it does not follow that they are allowed to discriminate on the basis of chosen characteristics. Religion, sexual orientation and po... Read more
Is it moral to behave only in terms of fearing punishment? For example, suppose the only reason a person has for not behaving immorally is the fear of divine punishment. Since his actions yield the same results as another non-immoral person who has no fear of divine punishment, why does it matter what reasons give the same results?
Thomas Pogge
July 13, 2013
(changed July 13, 2013)
Permalink
Your question: "Is it moral?", can be asked about the conduct and the person. As you describe the case, the conduct is moral (i.e., morally above reproach), but the person arguably is not because he has no concern for the rights, needs and interests of other people. What does it matter, you ask, i... Read more
I am an economist who wants to extend his philosophical horizon over the summer. I am looking for a constructive philosophical approach to counter utilitarianism. I feel that utilitarianism is often not satisfactory but I can't say exaxtly why. So far, my reading list consists of Kant's Groundwork and Rawls's Theory of Justice. What else would you recommend?
Thomas Pogge
July 13, 2013
(changed July 13, 2013)
Permalink
Here a few classics that shaped the debate when it was at its peak...
J.J.C. Smart and Bernard Williams: Utilitarianism: For and Against (Cambridge UP 1973).
Amartya Sen and Bernard Williams (eds.): Utilitarianism and Beyond (Cambridge 1982), esp. Rawls's essay.
Ronald Dworkin: “What is Equality?... Read more