Recent Responses
When a writer is giving advice on writing and they are saying what not to do and what you should do, then do you take the advice or kind of find your own groove?
The short answer is: find
Peter S. Fosl
March 18, 2016
(changed March 18, 2016)
Permalink
The short answer is: find your own groove. It's a bit of a false alternative, however. That's because finding your own groove often takes some experiment, and experimentation is often well guided by the advice of others. So, my advice (!), since you asked, is to weigh t... Read more
Premise 1: If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist. Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties do exist. Conclusion: Therefore, God exists. Can we accept the conclusion above as valid or even fact?
Stephen is right. The
Jonathan Westphal
March 17, 2016
(changed March 18, 2016)
Permalink
Stephen is right. The argument is valid, but it's not sound. It has a false premise. Even if you are a theist like me you can think that if God did not exist, there would be or could be such things as objective moral values and duties. Honesty would still be good, and w... Read more
A presidential candidate's adviser earlier today asked supporters in one state to vote for a rival in order to deny the delegate leader another win. I have always thought that voting strategically--manipulating the process to promote a particular result rather than voting for your "best candidate"--was a perversion of the franchise. I was once criticized because I voted my conscience for a candidate with little chance of winning (a Green) because it robbed the Democrat of support in a close race. I found the reasoning flawed. I guess my question is what is best for a democracy--voting based on good faith evaluation of candidates or voting for the candidate closest to one's political view who is also electable?
Others on this panel have
Allen Stairs
March 17, 2016
(changed March 17, 2016)
Permalink
Others on this panel have more insight into this sort of problem than I do, but my inclination is to say that there's no one answer. It depends on the actual situation and slate of candidates.
Suppose one candidate, if elected, would be truly bad for democracy---would su... Read more
My question is on death. I am young and have read a lot. A few people have passed in my short lived life and death is an interesting topic for me. Many people believe death is not the end, they say it is the beginning of life. How can it be the beginning if you are dead? Your body is dead I believe, but the soul lives forever even if it rotts in hell. Many claim they are not afraid of death. I think its true death is nothing to be afraid of. What we are afraid of is letting go of our bodies, of life as we know it. I am 12 and do not quite know my own theory on death, but I believe death is a great mystery and I like to study the different answers and everything. My question is - Is death real and should we be afraid?
It's wonderful to hear that
Stephen Maitzen
March 17, 2016
(changed March 17, 2016)
Permalink
It's wonderful to hear that at the age of 12 you've already read a lot, and I'm impressed by your submission. Many people twice your age wouldn't be able to submit something so thoughtful. I would recommend that you take a look at the essays in John Martin Fisc... Read more
Premise 1: If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist. Premise 2: Objective moral values and duties do exist. Conclusion: Therefore, God exists. Can we accept the conclusion above as valid or even fact?
Stephen is right. The
Jonathan Westphal
March 17, 2016
(changed March 18, 2016)
Permalink
Stephen is right. The argument is valid, but it's not sound. It has a false premise. Even if you are a theist like me you can think that if God did not exist, there would be or could be such things as objective moral values and duties. Honesty would still be good, and w... Read more
In Plato's book 'The Republic' there is no mention of Plato himself (as far as I've gotten) and it seems the main speaker and also narrator is Socrates. If this is true and Socrates is the narrator/main speaker then how is it that the book was written Plato? Thank you!
I fear I'm misunderstanding.
Allen Stairs
March 11, 2016
(changed March 11, 2016)
Permalink
I fear I'm misunderstanding. The obvious answer is that Plato wrote books in which his teacher Socrates is the main character. There are many similar examples in literature. How much of what Plato attributes to Socrates was really said by Socrates is harder to sa... Read more
My question concerns the ethics of mass influence, specifically when the intention is to help bring about positive consequences and the means of influence is manipulative. It seems to me that mass communication that is designed to manipulate public opinion is likely to be harmful to reason and rational inquiry, not to mention that it treats people as objects or pawns, it smacks of elitism (which if warranted requires justification), and in some case it can lead to social polarization and even violence. But grandpa here also wonders if he has held onto youthful idealism for far too long, and that maybe a realist would accept that anyone who wants to do good in the world on a large scale has no choice but to at least sometimes engage in some degree of manipulative mass communication, and that this is as ethically justifiable (depending on the situation) as deceiving Kant’s murderer at the door. I’ve searched in vain for philosophical commentary on this specific issue, and I would be particularly interested in hearing from or about philosophers who defend the occasional or frequent manipulation of public opinion on consequentialist grounds.
I'm surprised that you weren
Michael Cholbi
March 11, 2016
(changed March 11, 2016)
Permalink
I'm surprised that you weren't able to find some philosophical material on this issue: The topic of the morality of political communication is an old one (Plato's Allegory of the Cave can be read as a commentary on political manipulation). Noam Chomsky's Manufa... Read more
The haze in Singapore causes problems for the capitalist economic system. The forest fires in Indonesia cause the haze in Singapore. The forest fires in Indonesia are caused by the greed inherent in the capitalist economic system. So the capitalist economic system is inherently self-defeating. Is this a valid or Invalid argument?
An argument is valid if it's
Allen Stairs
March 11, 2016
(changed March 11, 2016)
Permalink
An argument is valid if it's impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion false. The argument you've given doesn't mean that standard.
For one thing, the premises neither define nor mention the term "self-defeating." That already means that your argu... Read more
Can we unknow what we already know?
I'd say yes.
Stephen Maitzen
March 10, 2016
(changed March 10, 2016)
Permalink
I'd say yes.
One way would be if (for whatever reason) you ceased to believe some proposition P that you formerly knew to be true. If belief is a precondition for knowledge, then you'd no longer know that P.
Another way might be, while retaining your belief of P, to come to b... Read more
Hi all, Don't know if anyone can answer but is it really possible to upload our consciousness onto a computer hardrive, and achieve Transcendence? I believe there was a movie with Johnny Depp, in the lead, that looked at this, but as I haven't seen it, I really don't know what treatment this topic got. Anyway I hope someone will take pity on me, and answer my question, because when it comes to Transcendence, its really the Elephant in the lounge room. Cheers Pasquale.
It's too bad that movie was
Eddy Nahmias
March 10, 2016
(changed March 10, 2016)
Permalink
It's too bad that movie was kinda lame. But the idea is not. If one is a functionalist about mental states, including consciousness, then one believes that our mental states can be instantiated in any system that has the same functional roles as the functional s... Read more