Recent Responses
How does one go about becoming a philosopher?
Peter Smith
July 29, 2008
(changed July 29, 2008)
Permalink
And let me add a link to some reflections on a related question, on getting started in philosophy.
Log in to post comments
I have a question about Whitehead and Russell "Principia Mathematica". Can mathematics be reduced to formal logic?
Peter Smith
July 28, 2008
(changed July 28, 2008)
Permalink
Let's narrow the question a bit: can arithmetic be reduced to logic? If arithmetic can't be so reduced, then certainly mathematics more generally can't be.
What would count as giving a reduction of arithmetic to logic? Well,
We would need to give explicit definitions (or perhaps some other kind of... Read more
I'm religious, but I'm also gay. My church teaches that homosexual relationships are immoral. They say that this is what God has told us and they back it up with scriptures and revelation from God given to my current church leaders. I have a hard time accepting that homosexuality is immoral. I don't see why people should be denied consenting, intimate, long-term relationships. So, here's the question that I need to find a solution to: Should I deny believing what I think is right to comply with what my church leaders say God thinks is moral?
Charles Taliaferro
June 21, 2010
(changed June 21, 2010)
Permalink
Following up on Heck: The church I attend (Episcopal) is quite welcoming to gays. The associate pastor (and for many years my confessor) is a Lesbian priest. There are substantial support groups for homosexual Christians in different denominations. While Richard Swinburne is a Christian... Read more
Is the following situation a logical and rational reason to believe in G-d?: Judaism, unlike any other known religion, claims that G-d gave the torah not to just one person but to an entire nation. The whole nation of Israel, which numbered over a million people witnessed Moses receiving the ten commandments and heard G-d tell them what the torah was. Unless the above really happened, there is no logical way to explain the tradition that over a million people heard G-d speak. The generation it was supposed to happen to would not be able to be convinced that they saw something they really didn't. And if the "lie" tried to be started a few generations later, the people would ask why they had never heard this claim before. Therefore, it must have really happened and the torah and all it contains is divine.
Alexander George
July 28, 2008
(changed July 28, 2008)
Permalink
Are you looking for independent evidence for God's existence, as described in Judaism? If so, I don't think the argument you offered does the trick. I suppose if we really had over a million people testifying to Moses' receiving instruction from God, then perhaps that should make us pause.... Read more
I have a daughter that is 14 years young. As a mother I understand that teenagers in her age grow up and they want to have fun, most of them with the guys. But still I can't let her go out. I think it's wrong. But my question is, Is that really wrong? Because I remember myself in her age... I also see the friends around her, they don't go out... well she's the only one. But she suffers because of me not letting her to have a boy-friend. Do you think I should let her? Because I'm really confused...
Peter Smith
August 5, 2008
(changed August 5, 2008)
Permalink
Just three quick afterthoughts, to add to Nicholas Smith's and Jyl Gentzler's wise but perhaps slightly daunting words.
First, remember most teenagers do survive just fine (with a bit of a close shave here, and an emotional storm or two there): it is our burden as parents to worry far too much. S... Read more
In a conversation with a teacher today I expressed that I thought that teachings from the Bible and any other “facts” or “information” gained through reading it are false. My teacher responded to this by saying, “you do realise I am a Christian, don’t you?” I did, in fact, know that she is a Christian but I do not see why, just because she is a Christian, I have to pay such high respect to what she believes to be “truth”. I believe that the Bible is neither truth nor fact, yet she would not have to pay respect to my opinion. This has lead me to ask why we should have to give so much respect to someone’s views when they are based on religion. Why does religion demand such high respect when it is simply an opinion?
Peter Smith
July 25, 2008
(changed July 25, 2008)
Permalink
Opinions are only worth as much as the reasons they are based on. If the reasons are no good, the opinions don't deserve respect -- indeed, they deserve to be vigorously criticized. And that applies as much to religious opinions as any other kind of opinion.
Some Christians have a thought out posi... Read more
Would Immanuel Kant oppose alternative rock? If we were to universalize the maxim "It is permissible to listen to alternative rock" then "alternative" rock would become mainstream, since everyone would listen to it. This of course creates a contradiction, implying we have a perfect duty not to listen to alternative rock. (I'm not trying to be silly. I think I've wildly misinterpreted Kant, and I was wondering if you could clear it up.) You might say that just because alt. rock was permitted, that doesn't mean everyone would listen to it. But if stealing was permitted, it doesn't logically follow that everyone would steal. (Same goes for lying.)
Douglas Burnham
August 11, 2008
(changed August 11, 2008)
Permalink
Very clever question. Maxims can fail to live up to the moral law in (at least) two ways. Either they are themselves impossible as universal laws; or they are impossible for us to consistently will to be moral laws. An example of the first type would be a rule such as ‘lie when it is in you... Read more
Do you think it's possible, even theoretically, for there to exist a substantive belief (any kind, about anything) that is impervious to any argument, cannot be debunked, etc., and yet is false?
Nicholas D. Smith
July 24, 2008
(changed July 24, 2008)
Permalink
Yes, at least theoretically. An example of how this might be is given in the first of Descartes' Meditations on First Philosophy. Descartes asks us to consider a world that is governed by a kind of evil god who delights in nothing more than making us believe what is false. In such a world,... Read more
How does one go about becoming a philosopher?
Peter Smith
July 29, 2008
(changed July 29, 2008)
Permalink
And let me add a link to some reflections on a related question, on getting started in philosophy.
Log in to post comments
I was recently having a conversation with a friend about what should be the ultimate goal of life. I suggested that happiness (although this was not strictly defined) may be one of the most worthy goals to aim for in life since it is not a means to anything else but an end in itself. In response my friend argued that if happiness were to be the ultimate goal of someone's life then it would be best achieved by taking a 'happiness' drug or otherwise stimulating the brain in such a way as to induce a state of perpetual happiness. Although this seemed inherently wrong to me it nevertheless seemed to fulfill my criteria of the purpose of a life. It is an important point to bear in mind when answering this question that my friend tends to offer explanations in terms of reductionist science. He is an undergraduate biologist and for him even emotions, such as happiness, can be simply reduced down to chemical reactions and electrical impulses. As a result it seems to me that if happiness is seen in these scientific reductionist terms, and the goal of the life as being happiness is accepted, then there is no way round the conclusion that happiness obtained through drugs or other 'artificial' means is just as worthy or good as any other kind of more 'genuine' happiness. Indeed to my friend this kind of so called 'artificial' or induced happiness is the same as 'genuine' happiness because they all have their origins in chemical reactions in the brain. Is it appropriate to reduce happiness to nothing more that chemical reactions and are such 'artificial' or induced states of happiness as good or worthy a goal for someone's life as more 'genuine' happiness?
Nicholas D. Smith
July 24, 2008
(changed July 24, 2008)
Permalink
Most philosophers (including several you have no doubt heard of, such as Plato and Aristotle) who have thought that happiness was the appropriate goal of a good life have not understood the goal they had in mind as a purely subjective state, so I would encourage you and your friend to conside... Read more