Recent Responses
Does Hegel really reject the Law of Non-Contradiction or is that just something analytic philosophers like to say because they dislike him so much?
Richard Heck
August 4, 2011
(changed August 4, 2011)
Permalink
I don't know anything about Hegel, but I have several friends who reject the Law of Non-contradiction, and they're all perfectly respectable analytic philosophers, with lots of friends who are also analytic philosophers. So I doubt that the claim that Hegel rejects the Law of Non-contradiction... Read more
Knowledge is usually said to be justified true belief (with some caveats). However, it seems that a great deal of what we "know" is actually knowledge we have received from third parties - our parents, our teachers, authors of books and websites, friends, and so on. If we define justification so broadly that it encompasses things we learn from third parties, what is to stop us from assuming that anything we learn from anyone else (or any specially qualified individual) is knowledge? Does this mean, according to the justified true belief understanding of knowledge, that most of what we think we know is not actually knowledge?
Nicholas D. Smith
August 4, 2011
(changed August 4, 2011)
Permalink
Your question engages the epistemology of testimony, which has recently gotten lots of attention among epistemologists.
But let's try to get a bit clearer on what the issue is. First, please understand that justification comes in degrees. If someone I don't know runs up to me and tells me... Read more
Should a parent report their own children to the police if they are aware that the child has commited a criminal offence. Does the age of the child or the seriousness of the crime matter. Example should you report your child if you suspect they have commited shoplifting or should you only report them for serious crimes like armed ronbbery. What about other family relations such as your brother or cousin commiting criminal acts. Do you owe any loyalty to your family or is it more important to obey the law. Michael.
Nicholas D. Smith
August 4, 2011
(changed August 4, 2011)
Permalink
I don't think there is a hard-and-fast rule to give here. Do you call the cops when you see your kid litter? Of course not! Just make them pick it up and give them a good lecture about why that is unacceptable behavior. But if you see them commit murder? Well, yes, then it seems approp... Read more
Studying philosophy is always done from a certain perspective, with certain assumptions in mind. (Every century teaches philosophy in a different way). So, if I am interested in philosophy, but do not wish to adhere to a specific set of beliefs - what do I do?
Sean Greenberg
August 5, 2011
(changed August 5, 2011)
Permalink
Just an addition to Nicholas Smith's suggestion that in order to avoid adhering to a specific philosophical viewpoint, one adopt a standpoint of 'epistemic humility', which I don't think is that easily achieved. (I, for what it's worth, don't think that one can up and decide to epistemically... Read more
Over the past few years, my wife has become a staunch antivaccinationist. (We have a son on the autism spectrum; she has bought into the discredited vaccine causation theory of autism.) She is unreachable on this topic; no facts or reason will move her from her position. Unfortunately, she has decided that our children are to have no further vaccinations. She will not compromise on this. I, of course, want our children to be protected from dangerous diseases and thus want them to be vaccinated. My question: What are my ethical obligations in this situation--to my wife, to my children, and to society? Going behind my wife's back and having the children vaccinated without her knowledge does not seem ethical. Agreeing to her demand that the children receive no further shots also seems unethical--this would put my kids at risk of disease, as well as other people. Telling my wife up front that I'm taking the children to get their shots, despite her objections, also seems problematic--they are her children also. What are my best choices here?
Eddy Nahmias
August 8, 2011
(changed August 8, 2011)
Permalink
I agree with Professor Smith. The only thing I would add may be obvious and may be something you've already tried. It sometimes helps to have third parties intervene to provide all the facts and arguments you would use to try to persuade your wife to change her mind. Here, your knowledge of w... Read more
Sexual harassment is often defined as "unwanted sexual attention." Isn't the idea that all sexual attention must be "wanted" by a women for it to be okay simply a perpetuation of the idea that women have no independent existence outside of the wants and needs of men? Don't women have the right to be indifferent to sexual attention? And don't women have the right to interpret unwanted sexual attention in other ways other than thinking of it as harassment? Basically I find it incredibly ironic that one of the the pillars of modern feminism has such a weirdly sexist underpinning.
Nicholas D. Smith
August 4, 2011
(changed August 4, 2011)
Permalink
I just answered a question very like this one. It isn't sexual harassment to express interest in a woman in a social circumstance, at least in the first instance. There are lots of ways of doing this that are rude, crude, and stupid, of course. But it is only "harassment" if it continues... Read more
If I desire to be a logician what should I do to become that?
Nicholas D. Smith
August 4, 2011
(changed August 4, 2011)
Permalink
Study logic. Then study more logic. And then...study a lot more logic.
And then hope that the world (and job market) somehow gives you the opportunity to study and do logic for a living (because if you are distracted with other things, you will never be as good a logician as you could b... Read more
Parents who are conscious and critical of rigid gender norms face a problem. If they raise their children without regard for traditional gender norms, then their children run the risk of being ostracized for not conforming to these gender norms. Yet if a parent enforces gender norms on their child, then they are closing off potential spaces for self-fulfillment. This kind of problem is most easily recognizable with regards to homosexuality - many parents say they have nothing against homosexuality, but wish their own children would be heterosexual, because of the social difficulties and ostracism faced by homosexuals. As a parent, where must one stand? Must one teach one's children to conform to rigid gender norms that one disapproves of, because it will make life easier for the children? Or should one liberate one's child from these norms, and run the risk of them suffering greatly for their disregard of these norms?
Nicholas D. Smith
August 4, 2011
(changed August 4, 2011)
Permalink
Seems to me your question poses what is known as a false alternative. I see no reason why a parent cannot help to inform a child about gender norms, so the child can understand these norms, while still making clear that such norms are really not necessary, not appropriate, and stifling. D... Read more
Is it possible to strike a balance between being content and being ambitious? Both are desirable qualities but aren't these mutually exclusive?
Nicholas D. Smith
August 4, 2011
(changed August 4, 2011)
Permalink
I don't see the incompatibility, to be honest. I think you are thinking in terms of results rather than in terms of processes, and I think that those who tend to think in terms of results rather than processes are quite likely to lose most of the value in life that is available to them. Y... Read more