Recent Responses
I intend to write an assignment (approx. 20 pages) about justice and economic doctrines (among other things, distribution of wealth) where I will attempt to explain/elucidate how different economical doctrines(capitalism, social democracy and socialism) attempt to carry out a fair and just society. All of this would, of course, also requiree to explicit how these economical doctrines perceive justice in the first place. And by this, I may also very well define justice on a ore philosophical context, as I am dealing with what pertains to moral philosophy. Overall, I would like to give a thorough, but concise account of the subject. Cutting to the chase, do you have any suggestions on possible sources of book that I make use of? By the way, I have already made plenty of considerations on possible sources, though I thought 'better safe than sorry.' Thank you in advance!
Lisa Cassidy
November 13, 2012
(changed November 13, 2012)
Permalink
Dear Ambitious Student - What an assignment! What you propose to write could indeed be a book instead of a research paper, so my hat is off to you and your ambitions. As a piece of advice, you might want to check with your professor (before the assignment is due) to see if there is a way... Read more
Hello, I am reading Tolstoy's My Confession for my philosophy class and had a question about it. What does he mean when he says "What meaning has my finite existence in this infinite world"? I understand what he means by the 'finite', but what is the meaning behind the 'infinite'? Does he just mean the unknown? Thanks David
Charles Taliaferro
November 10, 2012
(changed November 10, 2012)
Permalink
Good question. While it has been many years since I read Tolstoy's confessions, I suggest that in the passage you cite he is struggling with the apparent void or endless, apparent meaningless of life (and a universe) without God. I recall him claiming that if one really took seriou... Read more
I was recently speaking with someone who had an argument about whether time exists or not. Time Dilation is often put forward as proof that time exists and that it is not merely a figment of imagination of mankind. But this person argued that by believing this, we are making a self-contained assumption about time. He argued that time is actually just the measurement of change that occurs in an object relative to constant natural phenomena. For instance, atomic clocks measure the microwave emissions of changing electrons, and older clocks measure the degree of the earth's rotation. He suggests that it is a huge and erroneous jump to say that these things measure anything other than what is stated i.e. emissions of changing electrons or the degree of the earth's rotation, and that to say that they measure a force or external entity that is time is simply illogical. And I would be inclined to agree. I watched a Stephen Hawking program where he discussed the possibility of time travel. He spoke about the effect of mass/matter on time, as if time itself is a force. And he spoke about how the earth's mass affects the atomic clocks in global-positioning satellites, and thus how G.P.S. systems have to be adjusted due to the loss of a third of a billionth of a second because of the effect of mass on "time". But really, it seems that mass has an effect on the emissions from the electrons, and not on time itself. (You can see the video, here: youtu.be/02tchltLm3c) He concluded in the program that a twin who travelled on a spaceship and circled around an extremely large mass for an extended period, e.g. a black hole, would come home having aged less than his twin who remained on earth. This is where I get confused. I really did not want this question to focus on time travel, but it looks like I have a few additional questions that pertain to the existence of time itself. If, say, this effect on the atomic clocks is because the matter and the emissions from the electrons have slowed, will the twin actually age slower because, oh I don't know, the changing of the particles in his body are going slower because of the effect of mass, or am I making an illogical jump relating to particle physics? Or, say it is not "time" itself that is being slowed, but merely the emissions from the electrons, is it illogical to suggest that the twin would age slower? From what I read on the internet, it is considered unscientific and almost crackpottery to suggest that time does not itself exist. So when time is given as a measurement, what is actually being measured is the change that occurs in an object relative to some natural phenomena. How is this not correct? The practical implication of this is that instead of viewing time as a force of nature, it is merely viewed as a measurement system, akin to the metric system, and is afforded no special properties with regard to the "space-time continuum". I don't understand why this is not what is accepted.
Allen Stairs
November 9, 2012
(changed November 9, 2012)
Permalink
As you may sense yourself, part of the problem is to decide just what question we're asking and what would count as an answer.
Start with space. One way of claiming that space is real is to say that it's a thing -- a "substance", as the jargon of philosophy would have it. (In this sense, a s... Read more
Can rationality be explained? Sometimes I think that it can, it is just something like non-contradiction. But sometimes I think it can't, since any explanation of rationality will have to assume it. ?
Charles Taliaferro
November 9, 2012
(changed November 9, 2012)
Permalink
Great question! Your point about any explanation of rationality will have to presuppose (or assume) it seems right. After all, if our choice is between a rational explanation of rationality or an irrational one, the former seems to have the advantage! Moreover, I am inclined to thin... Read more
Is there a way to prove that logic works? It seems that the only two methods for doing this would be to use a logical proof –which would be incorporating an assumed answer into the question– or to use some system other than logic –thus proving that sometimes logic does not work.
Jonathan Westphal
November 16, 2012
(changed November 16, 2012)
Permalink
Aristotle gives a nice account of why we must have something "definite in our thinking" and not contradictions in Metaphysics IV. In order to say of something that it is or can be both F and not-F, he writes, we must have successfully identified that thing as the thing that is or can... Read more
Is there a way to prove that logic works? It seems that the only two methods for doing this would be to use a logical proof –which would be incorporating an assumed answer into the question– or to use some system other than logic –thus proving that sometimes logic does not work.
Jonathan Westphal
November 16, 2012
(changed November 16, 2012)
Permalink
Aristotle gives a nice account of why we must have something "definite in our thinking" and not contradictions in Metaphysics IV. In order to say of something that it is or can be both F and not-F, he writes, we must have successfully identified that thing as the thing that is or can... Read more
What is the philosopher's response to the anthropic principle? (which, if I recall correctly, states that the universe "had to" evolve in a certain manner, otherwise we would not be here to ask these questions about it!) Is it dismissed as basically a tautology? or is there something more substantive behind it?
Nicholas D. Smith
November 8, 2012
(changed November 8, 2012)
Permalink
It strikes me as neither a tautology nor as something that has anything "more substantive behind it." The tautological version is that the universe did come to be in such a way as we came to be a part of it. But given the number of other animals that have managed to go extinct, I see... Read more
Is it wrong to continue to pursuit someone romantically (like ask them out regularly) if they never agree to go out (i.e. make different excuses why they cant), but they never out right say they are not interested and they always return (but never initiate) text messages in a very friendly way.
Nicholas D. Smith
November 8, 2012
(changed November 8, 2012)
Permalink
Not sure that it is wrong, but it does begin to sound like it is a case of not getting the message. "Very friendly" should generally be assumed to mean just that. If you have repeatedly asked someone out and they have repeatedly declined, then it seems that the message has been provid... Read more
Is it racist to assert that violence within African-American communities is driven more by cultural factors than economic factors?
Nicholas D. Smith
November 8, 2012
(changed November 8, 2012)
Permalink
I think the natural question to ask here is: why do you think that? I am not aware of any evidence that would license such a claim, and in the absence of any such evidence, I would have to conclude that such a judgment could only be based on racism.
Log in to post... Read more
What did Descartes mean by saying "I think, therefore I am?"
William Rapaport
November 8, 2012
(changed November 8, 2012)
Permalink
Here's a simple (maybe even simplistic!) answer:"I think" is Descartes's first axiom."I am" is his first theorem.Descartes was seeking propositions that could not be doubted. He determined that the most indubitable one was "I think", on the grounds that, even if he were being deceived a... Read more