Recent Responses
What is the relation between logic and good reasoning? I once thought that logic was the science or study of good reasoning, but I've read a few things (mostly online, I confess) saying that logic is only a matter of "formalizing" reasoning (making it clear and unambiguous, and perhaps making possible that computers reproduce it). But whether reasoning is good should not be a concern for logic. Is that so? And if it is so, what is the current name for the study of good reasoning?
Peter Smith
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
The business of logic is the evaluation of reasoning -- "do these premisses really support that conclusion"? But we want a systematic theory, not just piecemeal case studies. It is difficult to be systematic about reasoning presented in a ordinary language (think e.g. of the different ways we have... Read more
Who owns children? One of your philosophers wrote that Locke said a father has too much control over his children. I feel that the federal government has too much control over what a father can or cannot do to his children.
Allen Stairs
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
Perhaps we could start with a related question: who owns you? The answer, I'd think, is "No one." You aren't property. You may have obligations and responsibilities to others, but part of the way we think about persons is that they aren't property and shouldn't be treated as such. That suggests th... Read more
What is the difference between intellectually knowing something, and emotionally knowing something? What I mean is, sometimes we know things rationally, but we haven't actually come to grips with it. Say a man's father died, and he, at first, reacts with apathy. "Oh, that's terrible," he says, but doesn't feel much. Then, when he sees his dead father lying in the coffin, it suddenly hits him, and he bursts into tears. He knew his father was dead all along, so what's different? Is it really just the visual impression, or are there different levels of knowledge in the mind?
Nicholas D. Smith
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
Your question cannot be answered without some specification of what knowledge is--what counts as knowledge. This topic is extremely controversial among epistemologists. But I think one aspect of your question allows at least a part of an answer to it.
Epistemologists may not agree on the en... Read more
Is it a paradox to be at one time happy with our lives and at another time sad with our lives even if there is nothing different?
Sean Greenberg
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
Although there may at least initially appear to be something inconsistent in being happy with one's life at one time and being sad about one's life at another time even though nothing has changed with respect to one's life, provided that one is not happy and sad about one's life in the same resp... Read more
Do you have to be smart to become a philosopher? Or can you be one even if you have average intelligence?
Eddy Nahmias
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
I think you have to be pretty smart. But then again, I may be biased!
Log in to post comments
I personally believe that humans do not have free will, though I would like to hear more arguments against this. My question is, if psychological studies have shown that believing in the absence of free will makes people more aggressive, selfish and antisocial, is it ethical or moral to censure scientific 'evidence' for free will from public knowledge?
Eddy Nahmias
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
This is a great question and one that is becoming increasingly important as neuroscientists and psychologists increasingly suggest that their research is showing that free will is an illusion, a claim I call 'willusionism', and as increasing evidence comes in that shows that these willusionist cla... Read more
If something as blatant as the color green can be said to not exist isn't conceivable that nothing exists?
Saul Traiger
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
To begin with, why should we think that colors do notexist? Many philosophers have arguedthat colors are secondary properties,that is, they are properties that are perceived, and as such properly exist inthe perceiving mind rather than external objects. But many of those philosophersalso think th... Read more
Dear philosophers, I have a question about keeping secrets. Can hiding a secret from the person you love most (which is something in your mind and not in connected to your behavior) be an immoral ACT? If yes, in which ways? Thank you very much in advance.
Thomas Pogge
March 3, 2011
(changed March 3, 2011)
Permalink
You capitalize the word "act", so maybe what you are wondering about is whether hiding something can be classified as an act or whether it should always be classified as an omission. This question of classification could be important if you give weight (as most do) to the distinction between (acti... Read more
Why are certain endeavors typically considered to be more meaningful than others? Volunteers like to say that their work adds meaning and a certain form of fulfillment to their lives. Why is volunteerism, in particular, seen to be "meaningful"? Why don't we hear the same claim as frequently from say, lawyers or tax accountants?
Sean Greenberg
March 2, 2011
(changed March 2, 2011)
Permalink
I wanted to add a few thoughts prompted by Amy's very interesting response.First, if you're generally interested in the topic of the meaning of life, you might check out Albert Camus's retelling of the story of Sisyphus, which concludes: "One must imagine Sisyphus happy." This might lead one to... Read more
What makes me obligated to respect the supposed property of others? It looks to me like society apportion goods utilizing the purely selfish scheme of exchange. Some people have less ability to procure exchange than others but that doesn't make them more or less entitled to stuff than anyone else. If a person were to steal a line of credit in my name to finance a needed surgery what conceivable moral claim could I have against that person?
Thomas Pogge
February 27, 2011
(changed February 27, 2011)
Permalink
By "ability to procure exchange" you mean, I assume, money. So you are saying that the fact that some people have less money does not make them less entitled to stuff. Now this is often true, for instance in cases where those who have less have less on account of wrongs or injustices they... Read more