Recent Responses
A spoon half-immersed in a glass of water appears bent at the surface of the water. We know that this is due to refraction of light, which bends the rays of light at the surface, so that the retinal image of the spoon is illusorily bent. So we can speak of the real spoon, which is not bent, and the image spoon, which is bent. They have to be two, because one thing cannot be bent and not bent at once. Since the spoon that I see is bent, it must be the image spoon, not the real spoon. So where is the real spoon?
Richard Heck
March 5, 2006
(changed March 5, 2006)
Permalink
To my mind, the mistake occurs here the moment you start speaking of "the image spoon". There is no "image spoon". There is just a spoon, and it is in a glass, and you see it. (So the real spoon is in the glass, right where you thought it was.) The spoon looks to be bent, certainly, so perhaps it... Read more
Is there philosophy of humor? I want to know if any professional philosophers have written on the necessary and sufficient conditions for quality comedic material.
Catherine Wearing
March 5, 2006
(changed March 5, 2006)
Permalink
Another great resource is Ted Cohen's recent book, Jokes: Philosophical Thoughts on Joking Matters. He explores how jokes work -- what makes them funny, what makes them offensive (when they are) -- as well as what jokes can do beyond simply making us laugh. Full of good examples.... Read more
Is it possible to comprehend happiness if one never experiences unhappiness? In a life in which a person has no negative experiences, is it possible for a person to distinguish especially positive experiences? In other words, can happiness exist without something negative to compare it to?
Roger Crisp
May 24, 2006
(changed May 24, 2006)
Permalink
You ask whether a being that had never experienced unhappiness could experience happiness. Alex appears to be suggesting that happiness requires the possibility of unhappiness. Now that possibility could exist even if it were never actualized. I find no difficulty in imagining a human being who has n... Read more
World peace is mentioned in popular culture many times and appears to be an ideal state for the world to be in. However, is world peace really capable of being achieved; or is it rather an illusion in all of our minds? It seems to me that there will never be world peace due to disagreements and conflicts that happen between people. Please fill me in on your views pertaining to this topic.
Oliver Leaman
March 16, 2006
(changed March 16, 2006)
Permalink
We might wonder whether world peace would be so desirable. Isn't some conflict rather stimulating and exciting, and would it not be boring if everyone was in perfect harmony with everyone else? Of course, peace would be preferable to immense murder and destruction, however lacklustre it might t... Read more
World peace is mentioned in popular culture many times and appears to be an ideal state for the world to be in. However, is world peace really capable of being achieved; or is it rather an illusion in all of our minds? It seems to me that there will never be world peace due to disagreements and conflicts that happen between people. Please fill me in on your views pertaining to this topic.
Oliver Leaman
March 16, 2006
(changed March 16, 2006)
Permalink
We might wonder whether world peace would be so desirable. Isn't some conflict rather stimulating and exciting, and would it not be boring if everyone was in perfect harmony with everyone else? Of course, peace would be preferable to immense murder and destruction, however lacklustre it might t... Read more
Does the relation of self-similarity exist? It seems obvious that it does, since nothing is self-dissimilar. But if it does then it, as a relation, must be self-similar, and this second relation of self-similarity must be self-similar, and so on ad infinitum. And surely the Universe is not crammed with an infinity of relations of self-similarity. But does that mean that nothing is self-similar?
Richard Heck
March 4, 2006
(changed March 4, 2006)
Permalink
I lost you right here: "this second relation of self-similarity must be self-similar". What is the "second" relation? I thought it was just the relation of self-similarity, which, as you say, the relation of self-similarity presumably has to itself, since everything is self-similar.
It's perhaps w... Read more
I am a a high school teacher working for the Los Angeles Unified School District. I have been given approval to begin teaching a Philosophy survey course for the next school year. Although I am well read and schooled in Philosophy (I think?), I am unaware of possible textbooks for the study of Philosophy. I am looking for something that might be high school student friendly. Thus the Adorno Reader might be out of sorts for my pubescent high school students. In addition, I am fielding advice on the best approach to teaching Philosophy to high schoolers. I am interested in possible methods, assignments and projects. Any advice would be welcomed. Thank you, Ramon
Oliver Leaman
March 9, 2006
(changed March 9, 2006)
Permalink
I would add to the helpful suggestions that there is nothing like working with the students on an actual extended text, like one of the shorter Plato dialogues, perhaps, or some of Russell's essays, to bring them into direct contact with a philosopher. I have often found that this is effective i... Read more
Can we perceive relations? For example, if I have a cup of coffee I can perceive the cup as white, round, hard, and shiny; and the coffee as liquid, brown, hot, and delicious; but the relation in has no color or visual size or shape, and I cannot touch it, hear it, smell or taste it --- so how can I perceive it? It's tempting to say that I cannot perceive it because it isn't real --- but if it isn't real then how could I drink the coffee? The similarity between two oranges, the direction of a train whistle, the relative brightness of the sun and the full moon ... There are countless empirical relations that can/cannot be perceived. How come?
Richard Heck
March 3, 2006
(changed March 3, 2006)
Permalink
I'd suggest that this puzzle is largely a linguistic one. Consider the relation being larger than. Can one perceive that relation? There's a temptation to say that one cannot perceive the relation itself, because the relation itself "has no color or visual size or shape", and so on and so forth. A... Read more
Why don't humans think of all lives as equal, and instead that other creatures' lives hold more importance than others? For example a human kills an animal such as cows or pigs and no one (except animal rights activists and the like) has a problem with that, but if that same person killed another human they would be charged and sent to prison. In both cases a life is taken but (one human) and that person's life for some reason holds more importance than the animal's.
Richard Heck
March 3, 2006
(changed March 3, 2006)
Permalink
It is crucial, I think, to recognize that the relevant question here is not: Are the lives of humans more valuable than the lives of (other) animals? The objection to killing animals need not presuppose that animals' lives and humans' lives are of equal value. Most defenders of animal rights would... Read more
How can a person love another without knowing him/her personally?
Oliver Leaman
March 3, 2006
(changed March 3, 2006)
Permalink
On the other hand, when it comes to romantic love there is a sense in which too much knowledge might be thought to be a distraction. For example, we often compartmentalize our relationships with people, keeping separate different aspects of their personality in our minds because we suspect that w... Read more