Recent Responses
Is philosophy about the world or is it just about our concepts and the way we use them? Or both?
Stephen Maitzen
February 4, 2013
(changed February 4, 2013)
Permalink
I agree: both. There seems to me to be a false dichotomy between "the world" and "our concepts and the way we use them": our concepts and the way we use them are surely part of the world.
Log in to post comments
Many disciplines have areas of study that overlap other disciplines. For example, to do physics also requires substantial math. At the same time, each discipline has something that is uniquely its own. Physics tests the mathematical predictions against actual results. What is it that is unique to philosophy that distinguishes it from other disciplines?
Gabriel Segal
February 3, 2013
(changed February 3, 2013)
Permalink
I suppose that if anything unites all philosophers it is an interest in the big questions of mind, world, existence ...analytic philosophers tend to deploy, or try to deploy, rigorous logical arguments in their work. In the latter part of the last century, a lot of analytic philosophers tho... Read more
Hi, I'm a high school student and I am interested in philosophy. I intend to study philosophy on my own (it's not taught at my school), but this subject is so vast and rich that I feel a bit lost and don't know where to begin. Could you give me some advice on how to study philosophy on my own?
Andrew Pessin
February 6, 2013
(changed February 6, 2013)
Permalink
Those are great classics, and worthwhile reads. And there are lots of introductory philosophy books out there (just google that phrase and see what comes up). But perhaps I might recommend a couple that aren't classics (but are hopefully worthwhile), and also by me (if you'll excuse the sel... Read more
I was recently at a wedding where one of the guests at my table (people from the other side of the new family) said something about the "maid of honors". Another person sitting next to him quickly leapt in to correct him into saying the "maids of honor," and I was then witness to a ten-minute, heated argument about whether or not it mattered. So that is my question to you, philosophers. How much does it matter whether a person makes minor grammatical mistakes, so long as everybody understands what is meant? How important is it to say "My friend and I" instead of "Me and my friend," or "Passers-by" instead of "Passer-bys"? What is at stake?
Gabriel Segal
February 3, 2013
(changed February 3, 2013)
Permalink
It doesn't matter to me. I would say 'my friend and me' rather than 'my friend and I' because it sounds better to me ... it is really just a question of taste. A lot of people get hung up about the 'correct' way of speaking .. with the idea that in some sense one formulation is 'right' and... Read more
Is philosophy about the world or is it just about our concepts and the way we use them? Or both?
Stephen Maitzen
February 4, 2013
(changed February 4, 2013)
Permalink
I agree: both. There seems to me to be a false dichotomy between "the world" and "our concepts and the way we use them": our concepts and the way we use them are surely part of the world.
Log in to post comments
What is the difference between revenge and justice? Example: Some guy holds you at gun point and wants your money. You manage to snatch the gun from him, would it be considered justice or revenge if you now rob him instead?
Gabriel Segal
February 3, 2013
(changed February 3, 2013)
Permalink
I don't think that justice and revenge have all that much in common. Justice is about fairness and morality: doing what is right. Revenge is about inflicting hurt or harm on someone in response to wrong suffered at their hands. But two wrongs do not make a right... acting purely out of veng... Read more
Hello everyone. Quixotic Question: has anyone written anything on a materialist versions of reincarnation? I mean, suppose you cut all the baggage, from karma to "reincarnation research" and the like, and keep strictly to a physicalist worldview (particles and field, say). If you do this necessary surgery, is there anything left to say on the subject (if so, I'd be happy to read about it, so long as the aforementioned surgery has been applied)? Gracias, just a bit curious...
Allen Stairs
February 2, 2013
(changed February 2, 2013)
Permalink
I'm not sure who has written on the topic under the specific guise that you ask about, but a good deal of work on personal identity certainly bears on it. The philosopher's question would be whether reincarnation (or something like it) is possible on a physicalist view. And on at least one i... Read more
Is there any example of something which holds value, but has no actual or potential application? Is value really just a measure of usefulness, or is it a distinct quality?
Allen Stairs
February 1, 2013
(changed February 1, 2013)
Permalink
On the one hand, most anything we can imagine has some sort of potential application. But the fact that we could use Michelangelo's Pieta to block a washed-out road doesn't have anything to do with why we think the Pieta is valuable.
Now if we're prepared to use "usefulness" loosely enough,... Read more
Recently, Nate Silver won acclaim by correctly predicting the electoral results for all fifty states. If one of Silver's predictions had failed, however, would that have shown that he was wrong? I mean, I take it that Silver's predictions amount to assignments of probability to different outcomes. Suppose that I claim that an ordinary coin has a 50% chance of landing head or tails. If a trial is then run in which the coin lands tails three times in a row, we wouldn't take this to mean that I was wrong. Along similar lines, then, would it not have been possible for literally all of Silver's predictions to have failed and yet still be correct?
Allen Stairs
February 1, 2013
(changed February 1, 2013)
Permalink
Right, as Silver himself would be the first to agree. However, we might want to put it a bit differently. The projections could all be mistaken, but not because his methods or premises were incorrect. Here's a way to see the general point.
Suppose we consider 20 possible independent events,... Read more
I know affirming the consequent is a fallacy, so that any argument with that pattern is invalid. But what what about analytically true premises, or causal premises? Are these not really instances of the fallacy? They seem to take its form, but they don't seem wrong. For example: 1. If John is a bachelor, he is an unmarried man. 2. John’s an unmarried man. 3. Therefore he’s a bachelor. How can 1 and 2 be true, and 3 be false? Yet it looks like affirming the consequent. 1. X is needed to cause Y. 2. We’ve got Y. 3. Therefore there must have been X. Again, it seems like the truth of 1 and 2 guarantee the truth of 3. What am I missing?
Stephen Maitzen
January 31, 2013
(changed January 31, 2013)
Permalink
You asked, "How can 1 and 2 be true, and 3 be false?" Suppose that John is divorced and not remarried; he'd be unmarried but not a bachelor. You can patch up the argument by changing (1) to (1*) "If John is a bachelor, he is a never-married man" and changing (2) to (2*) "John is a never-... Read more