Recent Responses
How can a person retain property rights after their death, given that they can no longer be said to actually possess property?
In denying that the dead can
Michael Cholbi
June 23, 2016
(changed June 23, 2016)
Permalink
In denying that the dead can "possess" property, you might be understanding 'possession' in a very literal way, one that doesn't conform to how we understand property. A property right is a moral claim, not a physical relation. If some property of mine is stolen and... Read more
Is the following behavior moral : 1. I was robbed when I was 14 and 15 on the streets. It was only a few dollars and they only involved verbal threats and no physical violence but it was somewhat traumatic. I didn't report to the police because for whatever reason I can't still understand. Probably there was (1) a certain mistrust of the police's ability to catch such criminals and (2) not wanting to bother with the hassle of dealing with police work -- for certainly parents would be involved in a teenager's case, and my parents were busy people -- for what was so little money, and (3) the minimization of the potential effects of such a traumatic emotional experience; I was brought up to act manly and powerful, and "telling" seemed like weakness(why I don't know). 2. 15 years has passed and I want to find them and make them pay for the emotional trauma that I had to suffer for a long time afterwards. I still lack basic trust between people and so forth. Is this moral? I.e. is the attempt at vengeance moral? Since if I don't take revenge either I am bogged down by social anxiety or become unduly aggressive against others who haven't done me wrong, but if I do it would at least be a temporary relief.
If I understand correctly,
Allen Stairs
June 17, 2016
(changed June 17, 2016)
Permalink
If I understand correctly, you're asking whether it would be acceptable to seek some sort of revenge now against someone who robbed you of a small sum 15 years ago. I don't know where you live, but in many jurisdictions the statute of limitations would have expired. (In N... Read more
How important is translation in the study of philosophy? It seems like, in certain areas of philosophy, precise definitions and subtle nuance can have significant impact in outcomes. I was curious how a difference in translation might affect it. One example: I have three different translations of the <I>Tao te Ching</I>, and for some of them, the same original comes out so differently one wonders what each translator thought they were reading at the outset! Another example: when I first read <I>Das Kapital</I> (in English), I was initially confused by the recurring term "means of production." Finally, it dawned on me, that term meant "technology" and serendipity! it all clicked. thank you for your consideration.
Translation is enormously
Jonathan Westphal
June 16, 2016
(changed June 16, 2016)
Permalink
Translation is enormously important in philosophy. It is a philosophical topic of interest in its own right. There are issues that arise in connection with the thesis of the indeterminacy of translation and "radical translation", from scratch, associated with Quine, t... Read more
Let's imagine that a Greek Philosopher, A, proposed a theory of matter that bares a striking resemblance to what contemporary experiments suggest is the case. The arguments for her theory, however, were at best dubious even by the standards of her time. Has A done enough to earn philosophical or scientific credit for the theory? To put it another way, how do we draw the line between lucky speculation and genuine insight in the history of ideas? Does such a line make a difference?
Perhaps a philosopher of
Eugene Marshall
June 16, 2016
(changed June 16, 2016)
Permalink
Perhaps a philosopher of science can address this question more cogently, but I'll make a few observations.
You seem to be assuming that the theory of the ancient greek philosopher and the modern theory confirmed by contemporary experiments are the same theory, or posit... Read more
My question relates to reclusive behavior. I wish not to be active socially because it requires so much time and I seem not to learn or be entertained by the contact with others. I am 83 years old and was a medical sales person throughout most of my life. I am a widower. Most of my time is spent on the internet learning things I have wondered about throughout life. My question is: Do very socially active people have less interest in learning things they do not know or do they already know or understand all that they ever wondered about. All information that may be provided regarding my inquiry will be appreciated.
The reclusive behavior you
Stephen Maitzen
June 16, 2016
(changed June 16, 2016)
Permalink
The reclusive behavior you describe will be familiar to many philosophers! The great Scottish philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) famously wrote that socializing with friends helped him escape from his philosophical brooding when he felt overwhelmed by it. But thank goo... Read more
In his TV series "Genius," Stephen Hawking presented an experiment in which people decided to push a button in order to stop a rotating dial. They were hooked up to EEG at the time. The experiment indicated that people decided to push the button, and then about 1 second later they became aware that they made this decision. Hawking, however, interpreted the evidence differently. He claimed that people's "unconscious" mind made the decision. It seemed to me that Hawking made significant logical error: he conflated "consciousness" with "self-awareness." It seems quite clear (at least from anecdotal reports from people who have been in a life-threatening situation) that our conscious minds are capable of processing information and reacting to it with extraordinary quickness. it also seems that we would be at a serious selective disadvantage if we were self-aware during these episodes. Is this distinction "merely" a matter of semantics? In Hawking's show, it seemed like he was interpreting data in a selective manner when more than one interpretation is possible, yet presenting his interpretation as the "only" way to view the situation.
Your question raises a number
Stephen Maitzen
June 16, 2016
(changed June 16, 2016)
Permalink
Your question raises a number of philosophical and scientific issues. You'll find them expertly discussed in this short and reasonably priced book by Alfred R. Mele, one of the world's leading authorities on the topic: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/free-97... Read more
It is said that one should put others before oneself, but isn't this impossible? Consider two people, Mr A and Miss B. If A succeeds in putting B before himself, B can't put A before herself. Hasn't B been forced into being selfcentred by A?
There can be a paradox here:
Charles Taliaferro
June 15, 2016
(changed June 15, 2016)
Permalink
There can be a paradox here: imagine Mr. A vows he will not go through a door unless Miss B goes first, and Miss B vows she will not go through the door unless Mr. B goes first. Sadly, they may be in a fix, unless the two of them fall prey to optical illusions or... Read more
I have a question regarding the notion of "objective moral truth." A friend of mine maintains that because everyone agrees that killing and eating babies is wrong, thus it is demonstrated that there are objective moral truths. I disagree. It seems to me there is no such thing as a moral truth absent a moral agent, and we (moral agents) decide what is good and what is not. So his argument seems to support the notion of some sort of consensus rather than an objective truth. What am I missing? Thanks!
I'm going to leave aside your
Michael Cholbi
June 15, 2016
(changed June 15, 2016)
Permalink
I'm going to leave aside your own suggestion that there are no moral truths absent moral agents, etc -- that raises some intricate questions in metaethics -- so as to focus on the dispute between you and your friend.
On the one hand, your friend tries to demonst... Read more
I wonder how philosophers were dealing with economical issues in ancient Greece: who took care of for instance Plato's and Aristotle's everyday needs: food, clothes etc.
Readers sometimes forget that
Nickolas Pappas
June 9, 2016
(changed June 9, 2016)
Permalink
Readers sometimes forget that Plato and Aristotle, and most other philosophers of their time, belonged to the economic and intellectual elite of their society. Even Socrates, despite his reputation for poverty, actually must have been a land-owning Athenian citizen of... Read more
Are all moral questions philosophical? Some moral questions depend on factual questions (historical or scientific), but I mean the other ones.
Not an easy question to
Charles Taliaferro
June 9, 2016
(changed June 9, 2016)
Permalink
Not an easy question to address. "Moral questions" might refer to questions about a particular act (is it morally permissible for you to buy a cup of coffee when that money might go to Oxfam and save a life) or a general practice or an institution. Moral questions migh... Read more