Recent Responses
Is Homosexuality unnatural? There was much debate in our Philosophy class.
Eddy Nahmias
April 19, 2013
(changed April 19, 2013)
Permalink
I can't think of any good definition of "(un)natural" according to which it would be correct to say that homosexuality is unnatural. We should first recognize that defining "homosexuality" is itself a difficult task. I'll begin by distinguishing between being a homosexual person and homosexual... Read more
Is the claim that all scientists believe in man made global warming and thus so should you an illegitimate appeal to authority?
Miriam Solomon
April 18, 2013
(changed April 18, 2013)
Permalink
It is certainly an appeal to authority to argue that you should believe in anthropogenic global warming because all (or most) scientists do! Of course, the question is, why are scientists in (almost complete) agreement? It might be because the evidence is overwhelming, but it also could be f... Read more
Are mathematical truths such as 2+2 =4 arguable exceptions to the correspondence theory of truth? I mean is 2+2=4 a truth that corresponds to "the world"?
Stephen Maitzen
April 17, 2013
(changed April 17, 2013)
Permalink
I don't think mathematical truths pose a special problem for the correspondence theory of truth (see this link for more about the theory). The correspondence theorist can interpret "the world" broadly enough to include abstract objects, aspects of mathematical reality, and so on. In other wor... Read more
Which top philosophers, Pre-1850, have gone along with David Hume's "Theory of Causation"? Would Descartes be a good example to start with while I'm reading up on the matter?
Andrew Pessin
April 12, 2013
(changed April 12, 2013)
Permalink
Descartes would probably be a good one to read AGAINST Hume's view ... (see book by Tad Schmaltz on Descartes's causation, and some articles by Geoffrey Gorham, for a good sense of Descartes on causation ... also an article by me ...) ... Interestingly you might consider studying MALEBRANCHE on... Read more
A frequent criticism of things like life extensionism or human genetic modification is that, if successful, such technologies would cause us to be no longer human, or to lose our humanity. My question is, why is that a bad thing?
Andrew Pessin
April 12, 2013
(changed April 12, 2013)
Permalink
You got me! :-)Only a strange kind of conservatism -- that things, that we, should never change -- would seem to support that view. Unless there really is something more to the view -- it's not the 'loss of humanity' per se that is 'bad' but the specific changes in question that would be bad ..... Read more
Analogous to freedom of speech, one supposes that everyone is entitled to express their opinions concerning the character of any person. However, my personal view is that it is reprehensible for a group of people to indulge in an overt celebration of the death of a person - especially in the presence of bereaved members of her family. I have in mind the recent death of erstwhile British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, whose family would probably have seen TV news shots of revellers in Glasgow opening bottles of champagne in ribald celebration of her death. I noted that a prominent political opponent of Mrs Thatcher commented that this behaviour was despicable. I would like to know whether it is feasible/permmissible/desirable for a philosopher to provide objective guidance on the propriety or otherwise of this behaviour?
Andrew Pessin
April 12, 2013
(changed April 12, 2013)
Permalink
Interesting question! I don't know about giving 'objective' guidance, but it does seem to me that on the scale of despicable or reprehensible actions, this one would be pretty low, if on the scale at all! It also seems reasonable to me to suppose that very public figures -- in particular politi... Read more
When Plato wrote The Republic did he ever spell out that he was expressing his own ideas rather than Socrates? Did people ever attribute the ideas in The Republic to Socrates? Did Plato in any way encourage that misunderstanding by not spelling out that The Republic expresses his own ideas? Why do we think that these weren't Socrates ideas if Plato presented them as such?
Nickolas Pappas
April 12, 2013
(changed April 12, 2013)
Permalink
This is an excellent question; but that doesn't mean it can be answered in a few paragraphs. Ultimately the question of Plato's relationship to the "Socrates" he presents in his dialogues can only be thought about with reference to detailed interpretations of many of those dialogues, and car... Read more
Do polygamy bans violate the natural rights of bisexuals? In wake of the current Supreme Court debate in the US that gay marriage bans violate due process and equal protection guarantees, I want to ask a philosopher whether these two legal concepts, due process and equal protection (which go by different names in different countries), are derived from natural philosophical rights. If so and assuming that they are similar in meaning, does that mean that at least philosophically speaking, polygamy irrespective of particular examples is NOT inherently immoral? The main philosophical argument for gay marriage from what I've heard is that since sexual orientation is a fundamental and largely unchangeable part of a person's nature, it is immoral to deny gays a right that straight people have. But what about bisexuals? Isn't a bisexual woman or man who is in a serious relationship with both a man and a woman at the same time just as deserving? I don't think it matters whether or not the other two members of the triad are intimate with each other so long as they consent to the marriage as well. But if it does matter, is this the sole point of debate? I ask this as a philosophical question and not a legal question, as I realize the latter must address manipulative purposes of marriage from fundamentalist religious groups, tax dodgers, swingers, et cetera.
Allen Stairs
April 11, 2013
(changed April 11, 2013)
Permalink
I'm not sure I have your question clearly in my sights, but I think it's something like this: As it stands the only kind of marriage many countries recognize is between one man and one woman. Advocates of same-sex marriage argue that for a variety of reasons, not least the fact that sexual orien... Read more
Sometimes I read feminists who say that their mission has nothing to do with emasculating men and that they think masculinity is wonderful. I am perplexed since I don't know what this masculinity thing is or why it should matter. What is masculinity and why should it matter to anyone whether it stays or goes?
Oliver Leaman
April 11, 2013
(changed April 11, 2013)
Permalink
I don't know which feminists you have in mind, but they do not occur to me as a group who are likely to take a very positive view of masculinity. On the contrary, they tend to argue that our notions of what it is to be a man and a woman are linked, that they are based far more on culture than o... Read more
The further up the corporate ladder one climbs the more Machiavellian ones colleagues appear to be. Apportioning blame, taking undue credit and generally deceiving others can all be hugely advantageous when promotions come around. Should we accept that certain careers are merely games and if we want to play we must be prepared to do things that would not be considered outside the workplace?
Oliver Leaman
April 11, 2013
(changed April 11, 2013)
Permalink
If I say no will this be taken as my trying to impress readers with my strong commitment to ethics? If I say yes then perhaps I am only trying to persuade you of my firm realism. On the other hand, we do need to accept that political life does involve making the right sort of impression on othe... Read more