Recent Responses
What are the most notable and the best books with the subject : "history of philosophy", that can be used as a reliable reference?
Andrew N. Carpenter
January 1, 2010
(changed January 1, 2010)
Permalink
One more thought: if you are interested in twentieth century analytic philosophy, Scott Soames' two-volume history provides clear and reasonably reliable interpretations of the history of some of the movements within that tradition.
Even though Soames does not provide a full or complet... Read more
Are certain statements offensive simply because people are often offended by them? Or are they inherently offensive no matter what the target thinks of them?
Andrew N. Carpenter
November 23, 2009
(changed November 23, 2009)
Permalink
I'm not sure how to answer your main question: It seems to me that to say that a statement is offensive is to say that people tend to be offended by it, and so I don't have a clear sense of how a statement could be "inherently offensive" if by that you mean assessed with no referenc... Read more
I'm a first year student of philosophy at UCLA, and I am interested primarily in philosophy of religion. I've just taken an introductory logic course which covered symbolization, sentential logic, and quantification. There are numerous other logic courses offered through the department, including metalogic, modal logic, etc, and I was wondering if AskPhilosophers could recommend a logic course to take? More specifically, I want to take a logic course that is related or will aid me in my studies in philosophy of religion. Maybe modal logic, since it deals with necessity and possibility? Thanks.
Charles Taliaferro
June 19, 2010
(changed June 19, 2010)
Permalink
Contra Smith, I congratulate you on having an interest in philosophy of religion, one of the most exciting areas of philosophical inquiry. Actually, many who have been drawn to philosophy have often begun with a fascination with philosophical reflection on religion (Colin McGinn's autobiogr... Read more
When we deliberate, we often make note of pertinent constraints as we form our opinion. For instance, a jury member might arrive at a different recommendation than she would have otherwise if she observes a judge's instructions to ignore a particular piece of testimony. Does the ability to determine our beliefs by considering some factors and not others show we can in some sense control what we believe?
Jennifer Church
November 28, 2009
(changed November 28, 2009)
Permalink
I agree with Mitch Green's response with regard to the possibility of controlling our beliefs indirectly. But in the case of a jury member instructed to ignore certain evidence, it is not really belief that is at issue. The jury member is asked to reach a conclusion following certain... Read more
As someone who is clinically depressed, I have often wondered: philosophically speaking, is trying to treat depression wrong? People are depressed for a reason, possibly because life's pretty damned depressing once you get down to it. It seems to me that in plenty of cases, depression is a logical reaction to this planet, a rather depressing thought in and of itself. Despite the wars and the plagues and the genocides and the poverty and the seemingly countless other reasons for one to be depressed, people treat depression like a disease when it seems more like a perfectly acceptable reaction to the human condition. Treating depression like this appears to me as a rather unsubtle way of trying to trick people into believing everything is going to be okay when reality seems to contradict this. Any thoughts?
Jonathan Westphal
November 20, 2009
(changed November 20, 2009)
Permalink
Depression used to be classified in two forms: endogenous ("originating from within") and reactive. There was an obvious point to this way of classifying things, but a different way has been suggested recently. The newer way is to distinguish between cases in which depression, the med... Read more
Is this for philosophers, mathematicians, or logicians? But here goes: Given that the decimal places of pi continue to infinity, does this imply that somewhere in the sequence of numbers of pi there must be, for instance, a huge (and possibly infinite) number of the same number repeated? 77777777777777777777777777... , say? If Pi goes on forever, you might think it must be. After all, if you checked pi to the first googol decimal places you obviously would't find an infinite number of anything. Try a googlplex! Still nothing. But we haven't scratched the surface, even though the universe would have fizzled out by now. If pi's decimal places go on forever, there may be, (not just 77777777777777... or 1515151515151) but all of them, in all combinations, forever. After all, you only have to say "You've only checked a googolplex. There's still an infinite number to to check. The universe is long gone, but pi goes on and on." Philosophers, mathematicians, logicians, any ideas? Mark G.
Daniel J. Velleman
November 19, 2009
(changed November 19, 2009)
Permalink
There are two questions here that need to be distinguished: (1) Does the decimal expansion of pi contain a large but finite string of consecutive 7's--say, 1000 consecutive 7's? (2) Does it contain an infinite string of consecutive 7's?The second question is the easier one. The o... Read more
Eugenics has a bit of a history for being unethical; between disputes over what makes people 'better' and outright genocide of those that don't make the cut, this is quite understandable. However, what about other methods of eugenics? I've recently come across a movement, I can't vouch for size but I imagine rather small, called Transhumanism. It calls for the improvement of human physical and mental aptitudes and abilities with modern science and technology. Surely THIS isn't immoral, right? Unless patients were unwilling, procedures unduly risky, or improvements distributed unequally or based on race or income, surely the desire to improve the human race can't be construed as immoral, can it?
Miriam Solomon
November 19, 2009
(changed November 19, 2009)
Permalink
Your last sentence is correct, I think, with the exception of the word "improve," which I would replace with "modify" or "enhance." "Improvement" raises all the questions that critics of eugenics have raised about classifying human beings into better or worse.
By the way, we are already... Read more
I'm just a Portuguese 15 year old boy looking for some answers (sorry for my bad english) Imagine that there is a suicide bomber terrorist with some people in a room, and there are lots of cops outside that room...The terrorist let all the people leave the room and he stay there alone unarmed but the cops are still outside and they obviously wnat to kill him.Would it be politicaly and would society think it was the correct way of doing things?I think they shouldn't kill him, after all he is a human... but why yes/not?
Miriam Solomon
November 19, 2009
(changed November 19, 2009)
Permalink
If the terrorist is alone in the room, then the cops should try to capture him, preferably without injuring him or killing him. Killing would only be justified in self-defense or in defense of other humans. It is up to judge and jury to decide guilt and consequences (e.g. punishment).... Read more
What are the most notable and the best books with the subject : "history of philosophy", that can be used as a reliable reference?
Andrew N. Carpenter
January 1, 2010
(changed January 1, 2010)
Permalink
One more thought: if you are interested in twentieth century analytic philosophy, Scott Soames' two-volume history provides clear and reasonably reliable interpretations of the history of some of the movements within that tradition.
Even though Soames does not provide a full or complet... Read more
Is this for philosophers, mathematicians, or logicians? But here goes: Given that the decimal places of pi continue to infinity, does this imply that somewhere in the sequence of numbers of pi there must be, for instance, a huge (and possibly infinite) number of the same number repeated? 77777777777777777777777777... , say? If Pi goes on forever, you might think it must be. After all, if you checked pi to the first googol decimal places you obviously would't find an infinite number of anything. Try a googlplex! Still nothing. But we haven't scratched the surface, even though the universe would have fizzled out by now. If pi's decimal places go on forever, there may be, (not just 77777777777777... or 1515151515151) but all of them, in all combinations, forever. After all, you only have to say "You've only checked a googolplex. There's still an infinite number to to check. The universe is long gone, but pi goes on and on." Philosophers, mathematicians, logicians, any ideas? Mark G.
Daniel J. Velleman
November 19, 2009
(changed November 19, 2009)
Permalink
There are two questions here that need to be distinguished: (1) Does the decimal expansion of pi contain a large but finite string of consecutive 7's--say, 1000 consecutive 7's? (2) Does it contain an infinite string of consecutive 7's?The second question is the easier one. The o... Read more