Recent Responses
In case I would like to know more about philosophy of education, but my background is Political Science...which authors you recomend me to start with?
Thomas Pogge
August 23, 2007
(changed August 23, 2007)
Permalink
There are the classic authors: Plato, Rousseau, and John Dewey.
Among contemporaries, I would name Nicholas Burbules (pragmatist), Harvey Siegel (analytic philosopher), and Joseph Dunne (Gadamerian).
Given your background in political science, you might also want to look at Paulo Freire for cr... Read more
Assume there is a God, who is the always-was, always-will-be Catholic version of a Supreme Being. If this is the first universe and the first earth (and, therefore, we are the first people) what in tarnation was He doing all that time before He decided to actuate the so-=called Big Bang?
Alexander George
August 22, 2007
(changed August 22, 2007)
Permalink
In his Confessions (Book XI), St. Augustine turned his attention to those who kept asking "What was God doing before he created heaven and the earth?" and he answered them that "He was preparing Hell for people who pry into mysteries"!!!
But he realized himself that "it is one thing to m... Read more
Assume there is a God, who is the always-was, always-will-be Catholic version of a Supreme Being. If this is the first universe and the first earth (and, therefore, we are the first people) what in tarnation was He doing all that time before He decided to actuate the so-=called Big Bang?
Alexander George
August 22, 2007
(changed August 22, 2007)
Permalink
In his Confessions (Book XI), St. Augustine turned his attention to those who kept asking "What was God doing before he created heaven and the earth?" and he answered them that "He was preparing Hell for people who pry into mysteries"!!!
But he realized himself that "it is one thing to m... Read more
Does anyone know the national average number of Americans that will study philosophy in their lifetimes?
Allen Stairs
August 21, 2007
(changed August 21, 2007)
Permalink
I'd like to know if my colleagues have any better information than I do. The best I have to offer is a not very reliable guess based on limited information. There is a graph at http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/97trends/ea1-6.htm which, when extrapolated, leads to the estimate that perhaps as many as 70... Read more
Am I morally wrong if I can understand why my son took his own life? Am I wrong to see that his decision was a positive one, given the circumstances? Of course I am distraught, heartbroken and miss him terribly but the guilt I feel for understanding his reasons for ending his life seem to come from expectations of society. The acceptable moral viewpoints that society seems to have over suicide leave caring family members looking like we don't give a damn, when in fact the absolute opposite is true....the question in my head remains though...am I really morally wrong in understanding his reasons and believing he did the right thing for himself? To give some background:- My son was an extremely intelligent, gentle and kind young man, who had battled with schizophrenia for 7 years from the age of only 18. His hopes and dreams in life had to be abandoned through the terrible experiences of hallucinations and panic attacks. Despite the daily routine of taking drugs that left him with slurred speech and apathy, he tried his best to make something of his life and gave up his masters in pure mathematics to work as a volunteer in a charity shop. Even doing that part time job, for him was a struggle. In the end he rarely could face leaving his flat. He was fully aware of the toxity of the drugs used to control schizophrenia and knew that his life would probably end in his early 50's with cancer of the liver. I think he had weighed up the life he had in a rational way and decided that he did not want to pretend to himself any longer that living was going to improve for him. His decision was terribly brave and probably the hardest thing anyone could possibly have to try and do. I would be interested in your arguments for and against society and its belief's on this subject and how this equates to my own personal view of understanding and acceptance of suicide under these circumstances.
Oliver Leaman
August 20, 2007
(changed August 20, 2007)
Permalink
I don't think you are wrong to have such a belief, and we can all think of situations in which people might come to the reasonable conclusion that death was preferable to life. There are of course religious, and not only religious, principles on which suicide is morally ruled out, but social... Read more
Am I morally wrong if I can understand why my son took his own life? Am I wrong to see that his decision was a positive one, given the circumstances? Of course I am distraught, heartbroken and miss him terribly but the guilt I feel for understanding his reasons for ending his life seem to come from expectations of society. The acceptable moral viewpoints that society seems to have over suicide leave caring family members looking like we don't give a damn, when in fact the absolute opposite is true....the question in my head remains though...am I really morally wrong in understanding his reasons and believing he did the right thing for himself? To give some background:- My son was an extremely intelligent, gentle and kind young man, who had battled with schizophrenia for 7 years from the age of only 18. His hopes and dreams in life had to be abandoned through the terrible experiences of hallucinations and panic attacks. Despite the daily routine of taking drugs that left him with slurred speech and apathy, he tried his best to make something of his life and gave up his masters in pure mathematics to work as a volunteer in a charity shop. Even doing that part time job, for him was a struggle. In the end he rarely could face leaving his flat. He was fully aware of the toxity of the drugs used to control schizophrenia and knew that his life would probably end in his early 50's with cancer of the liver. I think he had weighed up the life he had in a rational way and decided that he did not want to pretend to himself any longer that living was going to improve for him. His decision was terribly brave and probably the hardest thing anyone could possibly have to try and do. I would be interested in your arguments for and against society and its belief's on this subject and how this equates to my own personal view of understanding and acceptance of suicide under these circumstances.
Oliver Leaman
August 20, 2007
(changed August 20, 2007)
Permalink
I don't think you are wrong to have such a belief, and we can all think of situations in which people might come to the reasonable conclusion that death was preferable to life. There are of course religious, and not only religious, principles on which suicide is morally ruled out, but social... Read more
Most Christians would agree that God is perfect. She is the ultimate: Omnipotent, Omniscient and Omnipresent. Most Christians (and most people) would agree that humans are imperfect. Surely the mere act of a perfect being (God) creating an imperfect being (humans) is an act of imperfection in itself. In other words; how is it possible for a perfect entity to create something less than perfect? I’m sure my logic has flaws in it (that’s what happens when you’re imperfect), but I just can’t seem to see it; whether that’s because I’m not able to or just because I don’t want to, I’m not sure. Any comments would be appreciated.
Allen Stairs
August 17, 2007
(changed August 17, 2007)
Permalink
It's a nice question. But let me ask another. Are you saying that it would have been better if God had not created creatures like us -- less than perfect beings?
Suppose you think, as many theologians do, that there can be at most one perfect being. Then if God is going to create anything at a... Read more
What is the epistemic significance of our being unable to convince other people of our beliefs? Or: Does being unable to convince someone that P give me reason to doubt that P? Let's say that a philosopher deploys all the effort and rhetorical skill he can muster, but is unable to persuade his opponent. Why has he failed to convince? There are two principle reasons I can think of: (1) the philosopher and his opponent do not share the same premises, or (2) the philosopher's opponent is irrational (biased, stupid, crazy, etc.). The problem as I see it is that there seems no way to tell who is in the right. Presumably, neither the philosopher nor his opponent can justify their premises, nor can either one show that he is the rational one and the other irrational (the philosopher could just say that his opponent is crazy, but the opponent could say the same thing of him!). It's problems like this which move me closer to the uncomfortable possibility that to be in the right is often simply to be in the majority.
Peter Lipton
August 17, 2007
(changed August 17, 2007)
Permalink
I don’t think that the moral of your story would be that being right is just being in the majority, but it might be that we can’t know whether or not we are right. But even this fortunately won’t always be the case. Even if I can’t convince you, I may have good reason to believe that I am in a... Read more
If a person hasn't been taught right from wrong, good from bad, acceptable from unacceptable behavior, how responsible are they for their actions when they realize their "mistake"?
David Brink
August 16, 2007
(changed August 16, 2007)
Permalink
It's a common claim in morality and in the law that one can't be held responsible for wrongdoing unless one was able to know that the conduct in question was wrong and was able to regulate one's actions in accordance with this knowledge. This makes a certain kind of normative competence a cond... Read more
All throughout our educational careers, we are taught not to divide by zero. Death upon he who divides by zero. If you punch it into a calculator you get an error or undefined. But, what I want to ask is if we can display this error. In reality we can divide by certain amounts. If I have four apples, and I want two 'divide by two,' I must split the apples into even groups. I can do this for any real number. But is there a realistic model that we can divide by zero? If I get the error on a calculator, can I get that error in real life? So that this apple will simple vanish, or, God forbid, time and space unravel? I think there has to be some realistic model to divide my four apples into zero baskets.
Allen Stairs
August 16, 2007
(changed August 16, 2007)
Permalink
A couple of thoughts. The first is that even though arithmetic may have been inspired by things that we do when we arrange objects like apples and baskets, arithmetic isn't "about" those concrete operations. On the contrary: suppose we "add" one rabbit to another and get 10 rabbits. Then we si... Read more