Recent Responses
Is philosophy of language and empirical study, since it discusses how humans actually communicate, as opposed to all the ways we hypothetically could communicate?
Mitch Green
April 4, 2010
(changed April 4, 2010)
Permalink
Thanks for your message. The philosophy of language is not exclusively interested in how humans actually communicate; it is also interested in the various ways in which we could communicate, where 'we' is not limited to members of our species. Nonetheless, the field is not entirely divorced from... Read more
Suppose I was born on March 17, 2010, which was a Wednesday. I was born on a Wednesday. My question is whether the fact that I was born on a Wednesday is a "conventional", "artificial" or "socially constructed" fact (I'm not sure about the right words to use, but I'm sure you got the idea). But I want you to make a distinction. It is obvious that we could have another word for Wednesdays. We could have called them "Sonntags", or "Fourthdays", or "Potatoes", or whatever. But the days would still be the same. As we could have called dogs "cats", and cats "dogs", but the animals would still be the same. In my view, the fact that I was born on a Wednesday is NOT a conventional or socially constructed fact, but rather a strictly objective, perhaps even "natural" or "logical" fact. Unfortunately I haven't found anybody who agrees with me until now.
Mitch Green
April 4, 2010
(changed April 4, 2010)
Permalink
Thank you for your message. Your instincts about this issue are correct. We could have called Wednesdays something else, and that would not have changed when it was you were born. Abe Lincoln saw this long ago when he remarked, “How many legs does a dog have, if you call his tail a leg? The answ... Read more
What is the difference between philology and linguistics?
Mitch Green
April 4, 2010
(changed April 4, 2010)
Permalink
Thanks for your question. Very roughly, philology is the study of words and their meanings, and the development of these two over time. This includes work deciphering "dead" languages such as Aramaic or Sumerian. By contrast, linguistics is a good deal more theoretical, aiming not just to descri... Read more
What happens to a memory when I forget it, or realize I've forgotten it?
Jennifer Church
April 4, 2010
(changed April 4, 2010)
Permalink
There is a wealth of psychological theorizing that can help to clarify the many ways in which memory works, or fails to work. Philosophers can sometimes help to clarify the possibilities, though. On the assumption that a memory involves the retrieval of information about an event that has occ... Read more
If, as Dawkins reminds us in "The God Delusion", our cellular self is completely renewed over time, should we absolve the criminal of his crimes after time has passed on the grounds that he is no longer the person that committed the crime - for example, the rapist who is not caught until decades after his crime, or the aging general who committed war crimes. If not, does this prove that there is more to the self-hood of a person than just a collection of cells?
Richard Heck
April 2, 2010
(changed April 2, 2010)
Permalink
And one might add that the cells themselves are hardly immune from "renewal" at the molecular level. So the short version is: If identity requires complete coincidence of matter, then essentially nothing but sub-atomic particles survive over any reasonable stretch of time. That does rather suggest... Read more
If, as Dawkins reminds us in "The God Delusion", our cellular self is completely renewed over time, should we absolve the criminal of his crimes after time has passed on the grounds that he is no longer the person that committed the crime - for example, the rapist who is not caught until decades after his crime, or the aging general who committed war crimes. If not, does this prove that there is more to the self-hood of a person than just a collection of cells?
Richard Heck
April 2, 2010
(changed April 2, 2010)
Permalink
And one might add that the cells themselves are hardly immune from "renewal" at the molecular level. So the short version is: If identity requires complete coincidence of matter, then essentially nothing but sub-atomic particles survive over any reasonable stretch of time. That does rather suggest... Read more
Is it wrong to practice a belief which one does not believe or finds to be irrational? For instance, are cultural Christians like Richard Dawkins intellectually irresponsible for adhering to practices connected with the belief which they find unconvincing? This is a very bugging question for me since I am a Christian who is becoming more and more disillusioned with my religious beliefs, so a philosophical answer would be very much appreciated. Thank you.
Richard Heck
April 2, 2010
(changed April 2, 2010)
Permalink
Another question worth considering here is whether the "practice" of Chistianity, as you understand it, is really as connected to the beliefs with which you are becoming disillusioned as you suggest. I'll speak at some length about this. What I have to say may not seem very philosophical, and in s... Read more
Does it makes sense to pray if God's existence hasn't been rationally proven independently of faith? Does the meaning of the practice of praying depend on philosophical proofs of God's existence?
Charles Taliaferro
June 19, 2010
(changed June 19, 2010)
Permalink
I agree with Professor Leaman. I might only add that today most theists do not traffic in "proofs" for God's existence. There are very few, if any, universally acknowledged proofs in philosophy. These days, we more often simply refer to good or bad arguments. It also might be added that... Read more
Is it wrong to practice a belief which one does not believe or finds to be irrational? For instance, are cultural Christians like Richard Dawkins intellectually irresponsible for adhering to practices connected with the belief which they find unconvincing? This is a very bugging question for me since I am a Christian who is becoming more and more disillusioned with my religious beliefs, so a philosophical answer would be very much appreciated. Thank you.
Richard Heck
April 2, 2010
(changed April 2, 2010)
Permalink
Another question worth considering here is whether the "practice" of Chistianity, as you understand it, is really as connected to the beliefs with which you are becoming disillusioned as you suggest. I'll speak at some length about this. What I have to say may not seem very philosophical, and in s... Read more
I was wondering why philosophers, as far as I know, insist that one must be consistent in one's ethical behavior and philosophy. Why would it be bad if I do X one day and don't do X the next day? I change from day to day, the world around me changes, and no two situations are ever exactly identical.
Jasper Reid
March 27, 2010
(changed March 27, 2010)
Permalink
I'm reminded of a famous remark from the economist, John Maynard Keynes. On once being accused of inconsistency -- what I believe the Americans like to call 'flip-flopping' -- he replied: "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" I don't think any philosophers would wish to... Read more