Recent Responses
We often deride others by referring to them as childish. Why is this an insult? What's so bad about being a child? The only major disadvantages of being a child I can think of are physiological and intellectual, and yet when we say someone is acting childish, we usually don't mean they can't perform complex reasoning or that they haven't reached the peak of their physical prowess. So how are we to understand accusations of childishness as insults?
Miriam Solomon
April 7, 2011
(changed April 7, 2011)
Permalink
Children have poor impulse control. They often think the world revolves around them. In general they have difficulty managing their feelings and often end up in meltdown or, worse, in violence. These emotional aspects of childishness are much of what we have in mind when we say that adults ar... Read more
How reasonable is the way we speak about causality? Say a person catches a cold. The cause of that cold might be said to be the effect of the cold virus; or it might be said to be the contraction of the cold; or the failure to prevent the contraction of the cold; or the presence of the virus or of the victim wherever it was contracter; or whatever brought either of them to that place; etc. For most things (leaving aside the thorny issue of free will), things that happen are caused by other things. So when we speak of causality, does it make any sense to say that some causes caused whatever we're talking about, and to ignore other, more proximal or more distal causes?
Miriam Solomon
April 7, 2011
(changed April 7, 2011)
Permalink
Usually when we ask a question about what caused something, we are engaged in trying to repeat or avoid the same situation, or trying to assign blame and responsibility. So although events have many causes, only a few or one of them may be relevant in a particular context. If I disregard instr... Read more
Imagine a novel or film that satirizes sexism by pushing it to extremes in order to make it seem ridiculous. Assuming there aren't any explicit criticisms of sexism within the work (i.e. the only criticism is the satirical extremes to which the sexism goes), is the work actually a sexist work, despite its satire? If we ignore what the author(s) might say about their work, how can we distinguish satirical sexism (or sexism, or xenophobia, or anything else) from the real thing?
Sean Greenberg
April 6, 2011
(changed April 6, 2011)
Permalink
Provided that there is some cue to the fact that the work in question is a satire of sexism--even if the cue is only a matter of conversational implicature (a notion introduced by the philosopher Paul Grice to capture aspects of meaning that may be communicated without being made explicit in the... Read more
Beauty seems to be the main quality of concern in philosophy, when it comes to aesthetic judgements. But do philosophers also busy themselves with questions of the appreciation of the cute, the cool, or the funny? What about other qualities, ones that are also, in a sense, aesthetic?
Sean Greenberg
April 6, 2011
(changed April 6, 2011)
Permalink
Philosophers interested in judgments about works of art certainly do tend to focus on beauty, but other aesthetic categories have received philosophical attention.
Ted Cohen has written a book on jokes and other work has been done on the philosophy of humor. The concept of ugliness has recent... Read more
Are reasons causes, as relates to free will? I.e. does having reasons for acting not, in a sense, constrain me? Why would I act in one way when I know I have better reasons for acting in another? The only way I can see that this might happen is if I am weak of will - I know it's best I go jogging, but I'm too lazy. But that doesn't exactly sound like freedom, certainly not an admirable kind. So in what sense can our actions be governed by reasons and still be free?
Sean Greenberg
April 5, 2011
(changed April 5, 2011)
Permalink
You raise multiple questions, all very important and interesting, which intersect in various ways, but which, I think, can be distinguished. (1) Are reasons causes? (2) Is an agent constrained if s/he acts for reasons? (3) Can one freely act against one's own better judgment? (4) Even if one... Read more
Was Shakespeare REALLY a philosophical genius? I've read many impressive interpretations of his work from the various literary schools of theory but none of them seem to sort out Shakespeare's philosophical views in a straightforward and clear way. Have analytic philosophers deduced a coherent Shakesperean belief system from his works?
Sean Greenberg
April 5, 2011
(changed April 5, 2011)
Permalink
Although I agree with most, if not all, of Professor Taliaferro's response to your fascinating question, I want to add a few remarks that may take the discussion in a slightly different direction.
You asked whether Shakespeare was a philosophical genius, and whether philosophers have "deduced a... Read more
Was Shakespeare REALLY a philosophical genius? I've read many impressive interpretations of his work from the various literary schools of theory but none of them seem to sort out Shakespeare's philosophical views in a straightforward and clear way. Have analytic philosophers deduced a coherent Shakesperean belief system from his works?
Sean Greenberg
April 5, 2011
(changed April 5, 2011)
Permalink
Although I agree with most, if not all, of Professor Taliaferro's response to your fascinating question, I want to add a few remarks that may take the discussion in a slightly different direction.
You asked whether Shakespeare was a philosophical genius, and whether philosophers have "deduced a... Read more
Is the role where men financially support a woman in a marriage compatible with the feminist belief in the equality of the sexes?
Thomas Pogge
April 3, 2011
(changed April 3, 2011)
Permalink
A society where this is the norm is not one in which the two sexes are equal. So, as a social norm, this division of gender roles is not compatible with the feminist belief in the equality of the sexes. But at the individual level the two are compatible. In a society in which the sexes are equal,... Read more
I am now taking a medication once a month to manage a symptom of a slow-growing cancer that I have. I just started Medicare last year and see by my statements that the cancer center charges my Medicare an enormous sum of money for this treatment and my oncologist says that there is not a generic equivalent that can be administered this way. Is it ethical for them to charge this sum (over $10,000) for an injection and is it morally "acceptable" for me to take this, at great cost to my fellow taxpayers?
Thomas Pogge
April 3, 2011
(changed April 3, 2011)
Permalink
It is very good of you to pay attention to these costs borne by others -- most people don't. Given the amount involved ($120,000 per annum), I think you should make an effort to find out more. Your oncologist says that no generic drug "can be administered this way" -- well, is there a compelling r... Read more
It may be unethical to, through inaction, allow bad things to come to pass. But is it unethical to fail to make good things happen, in the absence of any actual ill?
Thomas Pogge
April 3, 2011
(changed April 3, 2011)
Permalink
It sounds like you are drawing a distinction here, but I am not sure that you are. Suppose you have the ability to intervene in a certain situation in a way that makes the outcome better. If you do not intervene, then the outcome will be X; if you do intervene, then the outcome will be X+. Suppose... Read more