Recent Responses
If we consider the norm to be defined as what the majority of people do, can homosexuality be considered normal since it defines behavior that is clearly not what most people indulge in? And would that make homosexuality abnormal? And if it were abnormal, would it be wrong to validate gay marriage?
Eddy Nahmias
July 1, 2010
(changed July 1, 2010)
Permalink
The statistical norm might be defined by what is true of the majority. But why on earth would we want to define the moral norm solely in terms of what the majority of people do? That would mean that, by definition, vegetarianism, atheism, and marriage between different races was wrong. It would m... Read more
Do (or should) public figures--professional athletes, politicians, film stars--have a moral obligation to serve as role models for society? Another way to ask this: do public figures have a moral obligation **above and beyond that of a non-public figure** to act in a morally permissible or morally good way? Take, for instance, the professional athlete who abuses his child or the politician who cheats on his or her spouse. Assuming that such actions are prima facie wrong (leaving aside scenarios in which, say, utilitarianism would morally allow or demand such actions), are there any extra moral obligations that a public figure has--or is there any extra moral weight to their actions--just in virtue of being a public figure?
David Brink
July 1, 2010
(changed July 1, 2010)
Permalink
I am inclined to think that public figures typically do have obligations to the public that go beyond the obligations of non-public figures. Often, there are forward-looking consequential reasons for this additional responsibility. As public figures, their behavior is likely to be more influential,... Read more
Is listening to a classic book on tape, unabridged, sufficient to be able to claim to have read it?
Peter Smith
July 3, 2010
(changed July 3, 2010)
Permalink
Here's a somewhat differently slanted view -- in favour, perhaps, of being a bit "daft"! :-)
No matter how many times I read three-year old Daisy her favourite book, no matter how well she knows it by heart, she hasn't read it herself. She can't read.
No matter how many times the adult illiterate l... Read more
How can we really know that time travel doesn't happen?
Amy Kind
July 1, 2010
(changed July 1, 2010)
Permalink
Well, for one piece of evidence, no confirmed time travelers attended the Time Traveler's Convention held at MIT in 2005 (http://web.mit.edu/adorai/timetraveler/). The organizers do note that some might have attended in disguise, to avoid questions about the future.
More seriously, some philosophers ha... Read more
Recent advances in scientific research claim to create "artificial life". They are only replacing DNA in living cells. I cannot find research that describes what life is, where it comes from, how it permeates inanimate molecules and makes them "live". Putting aside the impossible complexity of living cells required to capture and retain life, where does life come from in the first place? We've discovered dark energy and dark matter as being necessary to maintain the state of the universe, yet we can't detect them. We have no idea what gravity is, but it may originate in alternate dimensions. Is it plausible to consider life to be an energy that exists as dark energy exists? Is it all around us and only manifests itself within the proper matrix? Would it exist even if nothing was "alive" in the universe? What is it?
Marc Lange
July 1, 2010
(changed July 1, 2010)
Permalink
What is the difference between a living thing and a non-living thing? What is "vitality"? This is a difficult question. Once upon a time, it was widely believed that living things are distinguished by possessing a certain substance (an "elan vital") or perhaps by a certain force being present in them... Read more
Do (or should) public figures--professional athletes, politicians, film stars--have a moral obligation to serve as role models for society? Another way to ask this: do public figures have a moral obligation **above and beyond that of a non-public figure** to act in a morally permissible or morally good way? Take, for instance, the professional athlete who abuses his child or the politician who cheats on his or her spouse. Assuming that such actions are prima facie wrong (leaving aside scenarios in which, say, utilitarianism would morally allow or demand such actions), are there any extra moral obligations that a public figure has--or is there any extra moral weight to their actions--just in virtue of being a public figure?
David Brink
July 1, 2010
(changed July 1, 2010)
Permalink
I am inclined to think that public figures typically do have obligations to the public that go beyond the obligations of non-public figures. Often, there are forward-looking consequential reasons for this additional responsibility. As public figures, their behavior is likely to be more influential,... Read more
I am sixty and I find myself becoming removed from my life (my very nice life, I might add). I watch, rather than participate. Everything I read about, see, or experience is similar to that which I have read about, seen or experienced before. I've been down that road before, I know where it goes, it's hard to stay engaged. It's hard to care. I know that in the broadest view everything turns out fine- all good things end and all bad things end. I am not unhappy at all. Am I just old?
Gordon Marino
July 3, 2010
(changed July 3, 2010)
Permalink
Thanks for your very well put and honest sigh of a reflection. It does sound as though you are bored and detached. You say that it is hard to care - which is right to suggest that caring is an activity-- not a feeling that washes over. Could you make stronger efforts to care, to get involved? I've... Read more
If everybody in the world thought blue was the best color, would it be a fact that blue is the best color? --Josh, age 11
Jonathan Westphal
July 1, 2010
(changed July 1, 2010)
Permalink
In general, the fact that everyone agrees on something is not really enough to make it true. The fact that everyone believes that Brazil is the best team in the World Cup doesn't mean they will win the Cup, or be the best team.
On the other hand, if I believe that Jennifer is my best girl, the... Read more
I am firm believer that life human or animal should be preserved whenever possible. I would also like to believe that had I lived in Nazi Germany I would have stood up for the persecuted. So how can I reconcile my strong moral convictions with my inaction regarding the mass murder of animals everyday. Ironically enough I feel guilty for letting the law and the disappointment of my family stand in the way of stopping the massacre. This guilt is causing me great pain. Please enlighten me on what I should do.
Gordon Marino
July 24, 2010
(changed July 24, 2010)
Permalink
I suspect that at some level you do not really believe that the slaughter of animals is at quite the same level as the halocaust, though you seem to think you think that they are equivalent. There are pletny of evils in the world that we should be protesting but I 'm not sure that torturing yours... Read more
Is it morally wrong for a person with a serious illness and reduced lifespan to reproduce, knowing that in all likelihood the child will have to experience the loss of a parent in adolescence? Assume that the other parent is healthy and prepared for life as a single parent. Can the reproduction be morally justified on the basis of it being less of a wrong to bring into existence a child who will likely lose a parent early on than for one person to deny the other the opportunity of experiencing parenthood? Obviously we are talking about two different recipients of potential harm here but I am focusing on the idea of a general moral wrong. i.e. which is the greater wrong?
Jean Kazez
July 1, 2010
(changed July 1, 2010)
Permalink
You ask whether it's "less wrong" to create the child than for one adult to deny the other the chance of parenthood. That makes it sound as if the only possible wrong on the adults' side is the willing adult being denied parenthood. Wouldn't it also be wrong for the unwilling adult to be forced into... Read more