Recent Responses
When did philosophers first start arguing about free will and determinism and who were they?
Charles Taliaferro
June 4, 2010
(changed June 4, 2010)
Permalink
I think that is quite right. I would simply highlight that the debate over freedom and determinism came to an important point in the 17th century with Ralph Cudworth when philosophers came (for the first time, perhaps) to articulate radical notions of freedom that involve a person engaging in... Read more
I read an answer here that said a description says HOW something is while an explanation entails WHY it is that way. If so then how do we determine when something has been explained (if it can be)? For example, I understand that when it rains the ground becomes wet. Why? I don't know the chemistry behind it but water is wet and covers the ground. But some could ask WHY is it wet and not something else to which many would respond "It just is". Is "It just is" the real explanation? Is the real explanation to everything "It is what it is", even though we may not know what IT is?
Charles Taliaferro
June 4, 2010
(changed June 4, 2010)
Permalink
Very interesting! It is not easy in the abstract to form a sharp distinction between an explanation and a description. Presumably, every explanation involves some description (you are describing the cause of an event, for example), and any description of a thing could probably be used as par... Read more
It's been two years now since I got a job and moved to a new city. I've grown more distant from my family and friends from home. Sometimes I wake up and my life bears absolutely no resemblance to what it once used to be. How can I be sure that I am still the same individual? What obligations do I have to the people with whom "I" once was close?
Charles Taliaferro
June 4, 2010
(changed June 4, 2010)
Permalink
It sounds as though you are already making a break with your past (putting "I" in quotes suggests that you think of yourself as a different person, for when you describe yourself as you are now, you are not using quotes). You mention family and friends. Insofar as you have made vows of life-... Read more
Eyery year I participate in a not-for-profit-programe that sends shoe boxes with Christmas presents to children from very poor countries in the world. A good friend of mine said this would not be worth doing it, as it is just changing nothing about the poverty in the world. When is it good to put a drop in the ocean?
Lisa Cassidy
June 4, 2010
(changed June 4, 2010)
Permalink
My Charitable Friend, I disagree that it is not 'worth' doing, but it all depends on how you measure worth. Your good friend is correct in saying that shoebox full of trinkets and everyday supplies sent to a child or two won't solve world poverty. Ours is a world in which an estimated five thousand... Read more
Are Native Americans the only ones who have the right to be in America?
Charles Taliaferro
June 4, 2010
(changed June 4, 2010)
Permalink
Excellent question! Uninhabited land (Iceland, prior to the Vikings) seems relatively problem-free about rights to inhabit (though some cases are controversial as they involve competing nations, e.g. who has the right to inhabit the moon? --see the Moon Treaty). Native populations seem to ha... Read more
Is it ok to kill ants for fun.
Oliver Leaman
June 4, 2010
(changed June 4, 2010)
Permalink
I think there is a difference between saying that all that matters is pleasure and pain, and thinking that pleasure and pain is a good place to start when looking at such issues. If it is an open question whether ants feel pain, then we should not kill them, if that might hurt them, it seems to me.... Read more
Doesn't the fact that prostitution is illegal imply that pleasure is not a considered a legitimate and significant moral good? Prostitutes are said to be people who provide nothing of value to society. Nothing of value? Really? Perhaps this is because our society has a deontological system of values? In a utilitarian standpoint wouldn't it not only be moral to make prostitution legal wouldn't it in fact be extremely immoral to make it illegal since sex is extremely pleasurable and in a utilitarian calculus more pleasure equals more good?
Eric Silverman
June 8, 2010
(changed June 8, 2010)
Permalink
I don't think the illegality of prostitution has direct implications for whether or not we think pleasure is a moral good. We might think that pleasure is a moral good, but might ban an activity that promotes short term pleasure because we think (rightly or wrongly) that it results in a long term... Read more
If you show all signs of loving someone, how can you figure out why you love someone? How do you know if it's just in your head, how they make you feel, their looks, how their hair is, or personality? And what justifies the right reasons of loving someone?
Nicholas D. Smith
June 3, 2010
(changed June 3, 2010)
Permalink
I'm tempted to say that when it comes to love, all is mystery, and leave it at that. But that would be a little too quick, perhaps.
You ask several questions, so I will try to reply to them one-by-one.
(1) If you show all signs of loving someone, you probably do. However, we make a distinctio... Read more
I have recently seen references to a "branch" of philosophy (or perhaps a discipline unto itself) called "metaphilosophy." Apparently, metaphilosophy is the examination of the nature of philosophy itself (e.g. what questions it addresses, how it answers questions, etc). The existence of such a branch or discipline is surprising to me, though. I had always thought philosophy was open to every possible question in some way, and so how could anyone justify such a new discipline? Isn't philosophy itself "metaphilosophy"? And, of course, what happens if someone wants to ask what question should be addressed in metaphilosophy? Do we then need a "meta-meta-philosophy"? Is "metaphilosophy" taken seriously in professional academic circles, or is it just a budding internet fad? Is such a branch of study really necessary?
William Rapaport
June 3, 2010
(changed June 3, 2010)
Permalink
Metaphilosophy is a perfectly legitimate branch of philosophy. After all, if there can be a "philosophy of X" for (almost?) any X, then surely there can be a philosophy of philosophy. As with any "philosophy of X", it studies the fundamental assumptions, methods, and goals of philosophy, inves... Read more
When did philosophers first start arguing about free will and determinism and who were they?
Charles Taliaferro
June 4, 2010
(changed June 4, 2010)
Permalink
I think that is quite right. I would simply highlight that the debate over freedom and determinism came to an important point in the 17th century with Ralph Cudworth when philosophers came (for the first time, perhaps) to articulate radical notions of freedom that involve a person engaging in... Read more