Recent Responses
Hello, I am really interested in justice in ancienne greek. what is the main difference between these greek words: dike and dikaiosune? (dike is justice but dikaiosune?) Thanks.
Nicholas D. Smith
January 12, 2006
(changed January 12, 2006)
Permalink
DikaiosunE (with an eta, which is why I used the upper case for the "E") is closer to our word "justice." DikE is really a broader term, which could mean simply "custom," or "the normal way of things," "or what is fitting (or suitable)." The word also applies to legal judgments and en... Read more
i've always thought it a fantastic absurdity that the basic intelligence or moral fiber of our president might be so easily scrutinized. when dubba bush is lambasted for a lack of basic grammar i wince, not simply because he is our president but because our democratic system allows for the endowment of such power on such outrageously questionable individuals. i think ultimately i find this so strange because our president should presumably represent the best our civil society has to offer - his or her acumen should not even be in question on this level, one would think. that i can think of literally dozens individuals in my personal life who seem more intelligent that our current president seems ludicrous. likewise, in our most recent election, when voters complained that neither kerry nor bush represented a desireable candidate, i thought it absurd that of all our nation's people the two chosen to compete for the presidency could be so lackluster. ideally shouldn't voters be choosing between two or more amazingly brilliant candidates? the better of two goods and not the lesser of two evils? i suppose that the fact of politicians' various ineptitudes is made possible by the fact that the political process does not represent an egalitarian competitive system (ie, politicians likely owe their success as much to their wealth and inherited stature as to their ability). is there any conceivable solution to this dilemma, or is the democratic process necessarily inhibited by socio-economic barriers? - ace connors
Nicholas D. Smith
January 12, 2006
(changed January 12, 2006)
Permalink
I think you are right to say that the political system of the United States considerably privileges certain kinds of people (wealthy religious white men especially). But it seems to me that a basic feature of representative democracy will always be that candidates will represent the pr... Read more
To what extent do our words influence our perceptions? Is the whorfian hypothesis completely wrong? Does referring to "mail carriers" or "mailperson" (as opposed to "mailman") contribute to the increase of woman mail carriers? Or, does a change in our thought result in a change our words?
Nicholas D. Smith
January 12, 2006
(changed January 12, 2006)
Permalink
I hope others will add to what I have to say here. But it seems to me that the actual question you ask here is really more one for social science than for philosophy--in other words, the answer to your questions, as framed, strike me as likely to come from empirical study (which is not... Read more
What, traditionally, have philosophers said about the widespread practice of 'anthropomorphizing' or 'personalizing' the powers of nature? Consider, for example: 'it was a "killer" hurricane,' or 'this year we saw evidence of the wrath of Mother Nature,' and so forth and so on. I can't quite explain why, but this way of speaking about weather-related natural phenomena has always irked me. Thank you.
Nicholas D. Smith
January 12, 2006
(changed January 12, 2006)
Permalink
I'm not sure "killer hurricane" is anthropomorphizing--"murderous hurricane" would be. "Killer" does not imply motives, just deadly effects. But to answer the rest of your question, I'm not sure I see why metaphorical language of this sort is a problem, as long as there is no reason t... Read more
What is a reason (to do or believe something)? Suppose that someone who kills another person should be punished and that Ann killed somebody. Are there two reasons or just one reason to punish Ann?
Nicholas D. Smith
January 12, 2006
(changed January 12, 2006)
Permalink
Seems like one reason to me. Reasons (and reasoning) can be complex, of course, but there would be no reason to punish Ann if she did not do a punishable act, and there would be no reason to punish her if acts such as the one she did were not punishable. So the way to count the (singl... Read more
I am an agnostic but, at 61-years old, I can easily understand the concern about immortality. I think that the desire of some live after physical death is more motivating to religious belief than the need for understanding creation or the origins. What can be the sense of "immortality" for an agnostic? For me, it is just the memory we leave. This imposes a strong ethical view on life. I understand that this is not a question, but anyway I would like to know your comment.
Oliver Leaman
January 9, 2006
(changed January 9, 2006)
Permalink
I suppose for an agnostic immortality just has no connection with a deity. If immortality is just the memory we leave, or the impact we have on others, then there is no need for any religious context for these ideas to make sense. I wonder though whether immortality does have any connection... Read more
Is there the right to breathe and occupy space, the right to occupancy as a living being? Does having to pay rent and pay mortgages infringe on the right to life by having to pay to be in a space and to have your personal space? From Collis Huntington USA Fast Food Worker
Thomas Pogge
January 8, 2006
(changed January 8, 2006)
Permalink
Think of a world in which everyone -- at least initially, when they come of age -- is entitled to a space of their own with enough space left over for roads, markets, and the like. In that world, it might be fair to ask anyone who wants to occupy more than a fair share of privately occupied la... Read more
Why do philosophers become Philosophers, is it purely intellectual or is it because all they are good at is thinking, and why for that matter aren't they out, thinking up the answers to the world's problems?
Lynne Rudder Baker
January 7, 2006
(changed January 7, 2006)
Permalink
Although I agree with Alex about there being no general answers to your questions, I want to emphasize one point. Many people think that philosophical problems have no practical import or that it simply doesn't matter whether there are philosophers or not. Now it does seem that a socie... Read more
It would be unbearable to live a life believing that things like beauty, love, knowledge and life don't matter, and any philosophy that claimed it would be completely alien to me. At the same time, looking at altruism in animals and evolution of social behaviour makes it pretty obvious that our instincts and culture for good evolved for practical survival reasons. Surely it is a bit of a stretch to suppose that by fluke we evolved the beliefs and values that precisely match what is really good and really matters? I'm sure this is a pretty standard question that lots of philosophers have asked, so what kind of answers are there, and how can we decide what is really good or ethical?
Matthew Silverstein
January 6, 2006
(changed January 6, 2006)
Permalink
Does it have to be a fluke that we have evolved in the way you describe? Our perceptual and conceptual apparatuses have evolved such that our perceptual beliefs largely match what is "really out there," and so why should it be a surprise (or a fluke) that our ethical beliefs match what... Read more
Why is it considered morally wrong for a man or a woman to have a romantic or sexual relationship with someone significantly younger than themselves?
Alan Soble
January 5, 2006
(changed January 5, 2006)
Permalink
The idea -- "I would hazard a guess that most such relationships pair much older men with much younger women--while again acknowledging that there are exceptions to this generality. Given the prevalence of sexism, such relationships seem to raise reasonable suspicions that they are embodiments o... Read more