Recent Responses
What is a function (of an object or an idea)? I once read that functions are conventional or "artificial". I can understand that an ashtray has its function (being a place to put cigarette ash) only if we assign it to it, but the function of our hearts (to pump blood) seems quite more natural.
Peter Lipton
December 28, 2005
(changed December 28, 2005)
Permalink
Some objects simply aquire a function in virtue of being used in a certain way, like the rock I use to prop open my office door. But traits of biological organisms do seem to have natural functions, like the white fur of the polar bear, whose function is camoflage. There is a spirited di... Read more
I recently ended a romance with a man, when he told me that several months ago he'd secured the services of a psychiatrist-friend of his, whom he'd asked to come to his home for the express purpose of listening-in on a 2-hour phone conversation with me. The listening-in occurred completely without my knowledge. My ex told me that he wanted his psychiatrist-friend's input because he didn't trust me at the time. What are the ethics of this sort of spying, if spying's what it can be called? Does it make any difference that my ex is a retired Professor of Philosophy/Ethics? Thank you for your consideration.
Thomas Pogge
December 28, 2005
(changed December 28, 2005)
Permalink
I don't think "spying" is the word. I would say that both your ex and his friend violated your privacy -- the former by inviting a stranger to witness a conversation you had reason to regard as personal and private between him and yourself, and the latter by accepting this invitation. What... Read more
I am having trouble with secondary qualities, which are manufactured in the brain after receipt of digital signals from the sense organs. For example, if I see a green leaf, I know that chlorphyll molecules in the leaf transmit electromagnetic radiation of a frequency such as to produce a sensation of green in my brain. The problem is that all the empirical objects that I perceive are structures of secondary qualities, and these are all outside my head. So where are secondary qualities, inside my head, or outside?
Peter Lipton
December 27, 2005
(changed December 27, 2005)
Permalink
I don't know how much this will help, but there seem to be three things associated with the color green: the experience of green inside your head; the disposition of certain surfaces to produce that experience, something which is not inside your head though it is defined in terms of someth... Read more
Hi, I can't stop thinking and speculating about Wittgenstein's unbelievable question: "What is left over if I subtract the fact that my arm goes up from the fact that I raise my arm?". I was wondering how you guys speculate and maybe even answer Wittgenstein's question. It appears at least to me that it's a biconditional link which is why it's so interesting. Is there even any difference between the two? What does 'raise' truly mean (which I feel might be the secret to the question)? Is an action [such as raise] only an action if there is some end or fruit to it? Is it possible for a means to have no end?
Lynne Rudder Baker
December 27, 2005
(changed December 27, 2005)
Permalink
Wittgenstein's question is a great one to ponder. It seems to me that the distinction between my raising my arm and my arm's rising is that raising my arm is intentional. That is, I raise my arm only if I want to, or decide to, or intend to raise it. But my arm would rise (without... Read more
Might it be true that certain practices of ethical philosophers are in some sense unethical? E.g., might it not be in bad taste (i.e., betray a bad character) to ask “Why shouldn’t I exploit my friends?” or “What’s so bad about pedophilia?”? This might apply more to an Aristotelian ethics, but in any case, it does seem to reflect certain attitudes in everyday modern life. E.g., we seem to place a higher ethical value on a person who is simply naturally good and doesn’t know or care about any reasons for being good (the picture of innocence).
Thomas Pogge
December 27, 2005
(changed December 27, 2005)
Permalink
Being naturally good in your sense would require knowing without further reflection how one ought to conduct oneself. But the modern societies in which we are participants are far too complex for us to have such knowledge. How can one know, without further reflection, one's responsibilitie... Read more
Is it actually ethical for medical science to try to develop cures for all diseases? Isn't disease helping to keep our population in check? If our population grows too much and depletes our resources, wouldn't wars over resources be the greater harm incurred?
Ernie Alleva
December 26, 2005
(changed December 26, 2005)
Permalink
If humans continue to reproduce at current rates, there is good reason for thinking that population growth will eventually be (if it already isn't) harmful to the well-being of humans and non-humans (though not only because of possible resource wars--there may be other harms related to unc... Read more
I often find myself in a position where I realize that taking my own life would be very easy. Suppose I am about to cross the street, or am rock climbing; how simple and quick it would be to take one step, just one step, in front of a car or off a cliff. In all likelihood I wouldn't even feel any pain. In this way there seem many scenarios wherein the effective "barrier" to suicide seems practically nonexistent. I must stress: my contemplation of suicide in such instances has nothing to do with depression or even emotion, nor do I mean to make light of those who suffer from such grief; rather, I find the extreme ease with which I may conceptually commit catastrophic acts somewhat counter-intuitive. After all, what is there, really, to dissuade me? Suppose that I am an atheist. what rationale exists that might prevent me from killing myself? For one who is certain (1) that there exists no afterlife, and, further, (2) that there is no consciousness after death (i.e., I won't "miss" anything of life or even be aware thereof) what is the conceivable "cost" of suicide? Certainly the idea of a painful death may serve as a inhibition to taking one's own life. It is easy, however, to imagine scenarios such as the aforementioned wherein suicide would be literally instantaneous and painless. A biological drive to self-preservation may also have force, but this is arguably irrelevant insofar as I have framed this discussion purely within the bounds of reason. It's finals week. I'm stressed out of my mind. Why not jump out in front of a incoming truck on route 9? At least I wouldn't have to do any more school work. Besides, what exactly would I lose? -andy c. nguyen
Ernie Alleva
December 26, 2005
(changed December 26, 2005)
Permalink
Given your assumptions that there is no afterlife or consciousness after death, I can think of two kinds of reasons not to commit suicide (though these needn't decide against suicide in all cases): (1) Moral reasons: Killing yourself may result in harm to others (e.g., to one's dependents,... Read more
In relation to the debate raging in the US about evolution and Intelligent Design, I would like to know whether positing the existence and prior activity of an intelligent designer is a scientific or a philosophical question. Is it scientifically conceivable that the existence of a designer and of things having come about purposefully as opposed to randomly could ever be deduced from available or putative evidence?
Douglas Burnham
January 29, 2006
(changed January 29, 2006)
Permalink
If I may add one additional point to the ones already given: there is an all important difference between an intelligent designer that is a human being or an advanced alien civilisation, and an intelligent designer that is divine. The former could have evidence in its favour, and could be... Read more
I am a police officer and I have a dilemma. Everyday I see people destroyed from the effects of alcohol abuse. I have seen innocent people killed by people under the influence of alcohol. In some instances it was two drunks arguing and one killed another or once a drunk husband shot and killed his wife in front of their children. Then there are the drunk drivers who indiscriminately kill I’ve seen several of those. Now I can say that I have definitely never seen someone killed by another person under the influence of marihuana. I have never seen anyone killed by a driver under the influence of marihuana. I have never seen a person die because they smoked themselves to death, but I have seen quite a few people drink themselves to death. Then I look at the potential medical value of marihuana and when I combine all these things I am beginning to feel that morally I am falling off of a cliff. One-day history may judge me to be a 21st century Nazi. If I deliberately do not make arrests for violations of Controlled Dangerous Substance Laws I feel I am violating the ethics of my profession. The other side is I feel the law itself is morally wrong.
Richard Heck
December 23, 2005
(changed December 23, 2005)
Permalink
Well, you're in a tough position. (And I agree with you: I see no reason marijuana should be outlawed when alcohol and tobacco are not.) But I don't think you're likely to be compared to the Nazis. So you should let yourself off a bit. Still, as I said, you are in a tough position. I take... Read more
What if a person could indefinitely predict the outcome of a coin flip? I understand that's not much of a question; but I want to know what that would mean in terms of either that single person, or the universe in general. If it happened tomorrow, what happens next?
Richard Heck
December 23, 2005
(changed December 23, 2005)
Permalink
I'm not sure I understand the question: Is it this? Let's say we have a fair coin, C, and that it is going to be flipped once every minute starting at noon tomorrow. Now let's imagine a person Fred. Fred is about to have an amazing streak of luck. Each minute, he is going to call "heads" o... Read more