Recent Responses
Socrates said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." Would my life be less valuable if I chose not to examine it? If I simply did everything according to the conventions and mores of my society, would my life be less valuable than someone who questioned these things deeply?
Allen Stairs
December 28, 2007
(changed December 28, 2007)
Permalink
A good question! In the most important sense, the answer is no. But theterritory is a bit complicated.
Start with the famous quote from Socrates. If we think about it, we'rebound to say that many unexamined lives are unquestionably worth living.Socrates' comment is hyperbole at best and p... Read more
I am a different person to the person I was 10 years ago. This change has been brought about by various dramas and experiences that have unfolded over short and long time-scales. I didn't realise that the events were changing me until after they had affected me, so I could say that all the experiences I am having now are making a new me that I don't know and will not recognise until I have changed so much that I can clearly see a difference. So is there such a person or an individual as 'me' or am I a different 'me' at any time of my existence? Does the concept of self exist? (I really hope this makes sense!)
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
This is one of the more contentious and continuing questions that I've encountered in philosophy...and the way you put it makes perfect sense. So you are likely to get a great variety of answers.
I like J. David Velleman's account of triadic, reflexive selfhood: he argues that the "self... Read more
Re: Mitt Romney. Is it ever appropriate for a politician to justify policy on the basis of religious belief? Presumably, most people would answer this question with a vociferous "NO!". There's something strange about the way we ask politicians to compartmentalize their beliefs and motives, however. If a politician tells me that he has religious belief X but that he's able to separate this from his work in office, it seems to me that he doesn't really believe in X at all.
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
I'm inclined to agree that there's something strange in asking politicians to recuse themselves from personal integrity (which is how such compartmentalization might be characterized).
One interpetation of the politician's statement that he's able to separate his religious belief from... Read more
How do you think technology will affect the teaching and practice of philosophy? During my undergraduate degree (in philosophy), I took notes in numerous classes on a laptop and could download papers from a variety of journals as PDF. I have seen numerous academic perspectives regarding technology and learning - from Bert Dreyfus' idea that the podcast of his lectures at Berkeley on philosophy and literature reduced class attendance, to law schools having "laptops off" sessions to science professors encouraging (or even requiring) graduate students to blog about their lab work. I even saw a theory that ethical theories are implicitly tied to the technology of their time - the printing press linking with Kant, utilitarianism, Mill-style liberalism, the mass media of television, radio and newspapers doing the same for Rawls and Nozick. And, of course, many philosophy professors like Brian Leiter now have blogs and some have podcasts too. At technical conferences, we use technology to provide things like "backchannels" during discussions where the topic is discussed during the talk - people post links, argue, throw insults around and involve outside experts. It is a sort of live peer review. A speaker recently came onto chat during a conference for some informal pre-talk peer review. Would you consider having a backchannel chat running in the background (or perhaps broadcast up on a screen) during, oh, Introduction to Metaphysics? As someone who is an avid user (and amateur programmer) of technology and a prospective philosophy graduate student, I would be interested in specific anecdotes or perspectives that you have on how the philosophy classroom and the daily practice of philosophy professors is going to adapt or cope with the shift to the Internet. In short, could the Internet spark a significant shift in philosophy as it is currently studied and practiced?
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
Oh, and one more brief comment, an anecdote: Saul noted that "[m]ost philosophersstill read prepared talks, and few use multi-media aids." This is quite true, at philosophy meetings, but can be a source of considerable anxiety for the philosopher invited to present at interdisciplinary... Read more
What should someone interested in philosophy read? Although I primarily mean philosophical texts, I also mean philosophical fiction, poetry, non-fiction, plays, et cetera. Of course, movies would also be nice. Also, are there any philosophers, modern or otherwise, that are readable. I love Kant and the rest, but it oftentimes seems as if their language is purposefully obtuse. Thank you!
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
My favorite recommendation is the novel Sophie's World by Jostein Gaarder, which provides a comprehensive -- and comprehendible! -- overview of the history of western philosophy in the form of a highly entertaining (in my view, anyway) bloodless mystery. From there, you can easily choos... Read more
How do you think technology will affect the teaching and practice of philosophy? During my undergraduate degree (in philosophy), I took notes in numerous classes on a laptop and could download papers from a variety of journals as PDF. I have seen numerous academic perspectives regarding technology and learning - from Bert Dreyfus' idea that the podcast of his lectures at Berkeley on philosophy and literature reduced class attendance, to law schools having "laptops off" sessions to science professors encouraging (or even requiring) graduate students to blog about their lab work. I even saw a theory that ethical theories are implicitly tied to the technology of their time - the printing press linking with Kant, utilitarianism, Mill-style liberalism, the mass media of television, radio and newspapers doing the same for Rawls and Nozick. And, of course, many philosophy professors like Brian Leiter now have blogs and some have podcasts too. At technical conferences, we use technology to provide things like "backchannels" during discussions where the topic is discussed during the talk - people post links, argue, throw insults around and involve outside experts. It is a sort of live peer review. A speaker recently came onto chat during a conference for some informal pre-talk peer review. Would you consider having a backchannel chat running in the background (or perhaps broadcast up on a screen) during, oh, Introduction to Metaphysics? As someone who is an avid user (and amateur programmer) of technology and a prospective philosophy graduate student, I would be interested in specific anecdotes or perspectives that you have on how the philosophy classroom and the daily practice of philosophy professors is going to adapt or cope with the shift to the Internet. In short, could the Internet spark a significant shift in philosophy as it is currently studied and practiced?
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
Oh, and one more brief comment, an anecdote: Saul noted that "[m]ost philosophersstill read prepared talks, and few use multi-media aids." This is quite true, at philosophy meetings, but can be a source of considerable anxiety for the philosopher invited to present at interdisciplinary... Read more
The early philosophers were much involved with sport, in particular Aristotle who used the Olympic games as metaphor for society. Why does sport feature little, if at all, in modern philosophy? From John L.
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
That's a very good question, John, and one without a better answer, I suspect, than the limits of practicality. So many topics for philosophical reflection, so little time! As a matter of practicality, many philosophers feel the pressure of researching and publishing in the more tradit... Read more
I read a question on this site: What are the questions philosophers usually ask? My question is: What are the questions we (non-academic people/people not trained in philosophy) should put to philosophers? Elaboration: Are there areas in philosophy from the exploring of which laypeople would benefit? If yes, any list of priorities? With a list of questions (from various philosophers), I'll start my next innings on this site. :) But, seriously, I would really like to know what questions philosophers would "advise" people to ask, and not necessarily the ones they'd love to answer.
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
The questions that should be asked are those for which you'd like answers, I'd say. (How's that for a " right back atcha" response?)
You might ask what makes an answer to a given question a good one. You might ask what it is about philosophy that makes questioning philosophers worth... Read more
Some friends and I were having one of those classic hypothetical discussions: Suppose a scenario existed in which, by killing 10 million innocent people, you could save the lives of everyone else on earth. I said no. You don't kill the 10 million innocents. To my surprise, everyone else in the group was incredulous. They didn't think the point was even debatable. Of course you kill the 10 million to save billions. Greater good and all that. I argued that when you intentionally do unjust harm to innocents in order to be able to offer that good, then absolutely, yes, that is a horrendous thing. "By your standard," I said, "you could wipe out 49.99999% of the world's population, raising the standard of living for the other 50.00001%, and call yourself a goddamn hero." They still weren't convinced. I feel sure I'm right, but don't have the skills to explain to my friends why. Can you help? Or . . . explain to me why I'm wrong?
Kalynne Pudner
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
You seem to have encountered a problem my friend and mentor, John Marshall, once described as follows: "There is a sense in which utilitarians and Kantians pass in the dark in the way in which representatives of different cultures are said by moral relativists to do.What is more, utilita... Read more
What, precisely, is requested when the question "What is X" is asked?
Allen Stairs
December 27, 2007
(changed December 27, 2007)
Permalink
It depends, doesn't it? If the question is "What is that funny-looking gizmo?" it's likely that the person simply doesn't recognize the sort of thing s/he's seeing. The answer might be "It's a pressure cooker weight" or "it's a memory chip."
Sometimes "What is X?" is a way of asking for a... Read more