Recent Responses
Do implicit cultural biases, stereotypes, and even outright errors in Hegel's concrete historical claims about the past effect, in any serious way, the validity of his philophical views in general?
If Hegel relies on false
Eugene Marshall
December 10, 2015
(changed December 10, 2015)
Permalink
If Hegel relies on false observations about other cultures or false historical claims to make his arguments in the philosophy of history, then I would think that it would undermine those arguments. I suspect that those false claims do in fact serve as evidence f... Read more
If I believe that an action, e.g. killing-someone-from-a-distance-for-personal-pleasure-in-the-act-of-killing, with no extenuating circumstances, is always wrong, must I also believe that not-having-that-action-done-to-me is my "right"? Or can "rights" only exist in the presence of an enforcing authority, while wrongs can exist with or without an authority? Under what circumstances could an act committed by a person be judged morally as a "bad" rather than a "wrong"? I apologise if this reads like an academic question, but it comes from a conversation I had tonight with my wife. Thank you.
Perhaps the easiest way to
Michael Lacewing
December 10, 2015
(changed December 10, 2015)
Permalink
Perhaps the easiest way to answer your question is to start from a slightly different place. We need to distinguish the idea of rights from the idea of what is morally right (and wrong). Once we’ve made that distinction, we can then look at the further distinc... Read more
Is it irrational or illogical to say that dead people can have their possessions "stolen"?
I gather that the worry
Michael Cholbi
December 7, 2015
(changed December 7, 2015)
Permalink
I gather that the worry behind your question is whether the dead really have "possessions" to be stolen: How can a dead person "possess" something? After all, they can't hold it, see it, use it, etc. But it's worth keeping in mind that stealing amounts to taking some... Read more
How can a blind person tell if someone else is blind or not?
Ask them.
Allen Stairs
December 4, 2015
(changed December 4, 2015)
Permalink
Ask them.
Log in to post comments
It is often stated that science is not 'value-free'. However, there are certain established facts about the physical world, for example, that a water molecule contains one oxygen and two hydrogen atoms, which irrespecitve of the values of observer or the social context in which this is observed, is just that, ie. an observable, indisptuable fact. How then can political or social environments alter or intrude upon such scientific facts whether they be about this planet, biology or whatever scientific enterprise one is studying. Surely, science in this regard is 'value-free'?
Great question; thank you for
Charles Taliaferro
December 3, 2015
(changed December 3, 2015)
Permalink
Great question; thank you for raising your point. I believe that the when the claim is made that science is not value-free various things may be involved. There might be at least four points to consider.
First, there is the thesis that the very practice o... Read more
Do you need to be religious in order to be Moral?
I will try to resist this
Charles Taliaferro
November 27, 2015
(changed November 27, 2015)
Permalink
I will try to resist this reply: that depends on what you mean by "religious" and "moral." But definitions do matter, and I will not be able to avoid appealing to definitions.
If you have a very broad definition of "religious" according to which being reli... Read more
Who would you say is the most influential philosopher of all time? I am taking about a philosopher who has not just made a fundamental impact on Western philosophy, but also on Eastern philosophy, and all the other ones of which I am not aware. I am also not taking about the best, greatest, or most known, loved, cited, quoted, or recognized. My question is solely based on influence, whether it was good, bad, both, or neither.
I will take a shot at this
Charles Taliaferro
November 27, 2015
(changed November 27, 2015)
Permalink
I will take a shot at this question, though with great hesitancy. The three philosophers that pop to mind are Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. And because you are requesting a single philosopher, I would place a small wager on Plato for it is through Plato... Read more
What is the definition of happiness and how is it possible for human beings to achieve happiness? What are the limits toward an individuals happiness and how can I know when I have surpassed or come close to such limits?
Not easy questions.
Charles Taliaferro
November 27, 2015
(changed November 27, 2015)
Permalink
Not easy questions. Philosophical accounts of happiness have tended either to stress happiness as a subjective matter involving (for example) the satisfaction of preferences and desires or in a more objective or less subjective matters, for example, a person is h... Read more
Could someone explain in layman's terms the difference between truth conditions and assertability conditions, and what is at stake between them? Thanks for your time.
Truth conditions are often
Charles Taliaferro
November 27, 2015
(changed November 27, 2015)
Permalink
Truth conditions are often held to be independent of assertability. Thus, the claim that 'snow is white' or '6 is the smallest perfect number' are true, regardless of whether anyone is warranted in asserting these claims. The reason why some philosophers m... Read more
Do philosophers raise their children differently? Is talking back to a teacher always a good thing so long as the child has good arguments?
Second question first: Of
Michael Cholbi
November 19, 2015
(changed November 19, 2015)
Permalink
Second question first: Of course not! If 'talking back' means picking arguments with a teacher, that's not very productive -- or very philosophically minded. That said, I think many philosophers would agree that too much of formal education emphasizes the memoriz... Read more