Recent Responses
How does Godel's incompleteness theorem affect the way that mathematicians understand and see mathematics as well as the world (if at all)? I'm not even close to a mathematician, but even a slight dose of the idea and theorem were enough to affect me so I suppose that I'm curious.
Richard Heck
December 9, 2010
(changed December 9, 2010)
Permalink
This depends in part upon what you mean by "mathematicians". Ordinary mathematicians, by which I mean mathematicians who aren't particularly or specially interested in logic, have generally, as a group, been utterly uninterested in Gödel's theorems. Reactions vary from case to case, and some... Read more
Could it ever be rational to come to a belief on the basis of evidence which is only accessible to oneself? I have in mind, for instance, people who claim to have arrived at a belief in god by way of some critically personal spiritual experience.
Eric Silverman
December 11, 2010
(changed December 11, 2010)
Permalink
One very famous argument based on evidence only available to the self comes from Descartes... 'I think, therefore I am.' Sounds reasonable enough to me.
Log in to post comments
A once in a lifetime opportunity has been presented to me to participate in a reality TV show, and I meet all of the requirements to be a candidate for the show - except one. The show requires that I cannot have traveled to the country it is being filmed in, but I have been there briefly one time in my life. Granted, my odds of getting selected for the show (if I fit all the criteria) are low, but I think that several characteristics that I have are precisely what are being looked for in a candidate. What are the moral/legal implications in lying about not having been to this country, for the sake of this phenomenal opportunity? Can it be justified?
Allen Stairs
December 9, 2010
(changed December 9, 2010)
Permalink
I can't speak to the legal implications, but it seems pretty clear that you should be honest with them. If you can persuade them that in spite of your trip there, you have what they want, they may be persuaded. But it's hard to see what excuse there could be for not being truthful... Read more
Have Freud's ideas about the subconscious been tested empirically? Is there a way to test for the existence of an Oedipal Complex? If so, have the results strengthened or weakened the Freudian/Marxist critique of society made by the Frankfurt School?
Sean Greenberg
December 8, 2010
(changed December 8, 2010)
Permalink
I think that there is both considerable clinical evidence--that is, evidence from psychoanalytic sessions--and evidence from everyday life in support of the postulation of unconscious mental states in order to explain certain behavior, including slips of the tongue, forgettings, etc. Ther... Read more
It seems that the psychological and emotional difficulties experienced in life by individuals such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Artur Schopenhauer and Max Weber lead many people to be more skeptical of the theories and works of these individuals than they otherwise would, regardless of the content of these works and theories. What is the meaning relationship between a philosopher's work and his psychological issues? Surely all philosophers are influenced in their thought by the things that have happened to them in their lives, so why should some have their work dismissed or explained away, in part, via their personal issues, while others don't? Where is the line?
Douglas Burnham
December 8, 2010
(changed December 8, 2010)
Permalink
It is certainly true that all philosophers are influenced by the place and time in which they live, by their personalities, and by the interests they have as individuals. Philosophers are human beings, after all! But what happens as a result of this ‘influence’? Does it mean the adoption... Read more
What role can emotions, principles and personal (or borrowed) convictions play in a philosopher's reasoning process when approaching a specific issue? What role can they play in a philosopher's way of seeing things, or even in a given philosophical trend in which a number of philosophers share similar ideas about a certain number of issues? Is it possible to be completely or at least reasonably neutral when approaching a subject, in spite of your own personal background? If not, then, is it still a good idea for philosophers to try to be neutral? What happens, for example, if you as a philosopher are not aware of the fact that some of your arguments, or thoughts, are being "influenced" by something other than reason, like fear or rage, for example? Are the conclusions of such influenced ways of reasoning, something that you can refute (or at least recognize as "impure") in the long run through uninfluenced (if possible) or at least reasonably uninfluenced reasoning? And finally, are there any known examples in the history of philosophy where you could say emotions, principles or personal convictions played an important role in a philosopher's conclusions regarding important subects? Thanks for your time and for your great website (Juan J.).
Oliver Leaman
December 5, 2010
(changed December 5, 2010)
Permalink
Although philosophers are in the rationality business, well, many of them are, they are no more rational than anyone else about assessing their motives when it comes to themselves. Often we wish to beat someone else in an argument because we want to beat them, not establish the truth, and m... Read more
What good is it to study philosophy? I have always wondered what it is that philosophers have actually accomplished. For example science marches on without need for philosophy of science. The philosophy of mathematics is almost completely useless to a working algebraic topologist. If philosophers are really concerned about the world, why not study mathematics, natural, social science, etc?
Peter Smith
December 4, 2010
(changed December 4, 2010)
Permalink
I'm sure that you are right: most algebraic topologists don't give a moment's thought to what goes on in the philosophy of mathematics. But that's only fair: most philosophers of mathematics don't give a moment's thought to the nitty gritty of algebraic topology (well, maybe there are two or... Read more
I was wondering if you have any recommendations for works of fiction that have a clear, prevalent philosophical underpinning. For example, I enjoyed the theme of absurdism in Albert Camus' _The Plague_, but I don't have enough free time right now to commit to something like _Atlas Shrugged_. Perhaps there is a fairly accessible and thought-provoking philosophical work of fiction that consists of between 250 and 400 pages? Thanks.
Gordon Marino
April 28, 2011
(changed April 28, 2011)
Permalink
Camus' THE STRANGER and THE FALL would also be great. As well as Miguel Unamuno's, "St Manuel the Good Martyr." For another short masterwork there is Dostoyevsky's NOTES FROM UNDERGROUND and Tolstoy's DEATH OF IVAN ILYCH. Hope this helps. Happy reading.
Log in to post comm... Read more
What the role does cannabis (or any other mind-altering substances) play in the world of philosophy?
Peter Smith
December 4, 2010
(changed December 4, 2010)
Permalink
Well, there's mind-altering and mind-altering! Dope that makes you dopey might give you time out from the nagging concerns of philosophy, but isn't likely to play a role in producing serious thought. Wine or beer seems different. The glass or two in the pub after the seminar do often lubricat... Read more
How can I persuade someone who is convinced that spiritual experience is the most reliable basis for establishing truth that empirical evidence is in fact more reliable?
Charles Taliaferro
December 4, 2010
(changed December 4, 2010)
Permalink
Pray for them. Just kidding, though perhaps a prayer would not be uncalled for! I wonder if your friend is an extreme skeptic when it comes to empirical experience. Perhaps he is akin to Peter Unger in his book Ignorance, in which he seeks to undermine our confidence in our claims t... Read more