Recent Responses
When a person says "I would like to get to know you." What exactly do they mean? In my opinion, you can't really get to "know" anyone. Because to "know" something it takes looking at it from all angles, seeing it react in different situations and examine it inside and out. So, given this definition, does "I want to get to know you" mean that a person would like to look at the other from all angles? To see him/her react in different situations? To examine him/her inside & out? Of course, this can be done physically. Through sexual relations. But how would you go about knowing someone personally & mentally? You never know what they are thinking. This, in return, makes everyone become untrustworthy. Alas, to say "I would like to get to know you" means "I want to spend the rest of my life with you" ... Or does it?
Alan Soble
October 23, 2005
(changed October 23, 2005)
Permalink
You write: "Alas, to say 'Iwould like to get to know you' means 'I want to spend the rest of mylife with you' ... Or does it?" Consider this variation: Alas, to betold "I want to get to know you" is to be told "You don't stand achance with me."
Log in to post comments... Read more
Is it that philosophy is competitive or is it just the way in which we (as humans) have come to be in general that is competitive? I'll try and spell out the distinction. My professor seems to vie for his idea. Descartes defends his position. Hobbes attacks Descartes' idea. Spinoza attacks both. There are dissertational "defenses". These are just a few examples of competitiveness in philosophy. Are humans just competitive? But if we are trying to get at truth, how does competition help? I can't understand why I feel the need to be the smartest person in my class. If I am not, I feel anguish and despair. Is it that anguish and despair come from losing and philosophy for me is just a competition and for other people it is not that way at all? But that is not true. Does philosophy harbor competition, and if it does, is it intrinsically flawed? Would art be a better way to get at truth? But art is competitive too! Is existence, then, a Schopenhauerian nightmare--endless striving to overcome, when you can't overcome yourself (as a competitor) how do you find time to even think about any other issue? Is my thinking somewhere flawed? Is there anything in life that I don't need to struggle for?
Peter Lipton
October 22, 2005
(changed October 22, 2005)
Permalink
Here is one reason why one limited form of competition in philosophy (and many other areas of inquiry) is good. Faced with a philosophical problem, our best bet is to propose a possible solution, criticise it, and on that basis to try to improve it, or improve on it. But almost all philoso... Read more
What do you think is the "right to know"? And what gives someone that "right" to know something?
Thomas Pogge
October 22, 2005
(changed October 22, 2005)
Permalink
A right to know is a moral orlegal claim, in principle enforceable, which a specific person or grouphas against another specific person or group that the latter notwithhold specific information from them. Such a claim typicallypresupposes a certain kind of relation between the two parties as... Read more
What is racism?
Thomas Pogge
October 21, 2005
(changed October 21, 2005)
Permalink
the tendency to think worse of some people (e.g., in regard to their character or abilities), or to treat them worse than others, merely on account of information about their race or ethnicity.
Log in to post comments
I've been wondering a long time about this and I can't come up with an answer. Hopefully you can help me. What is the point of government?
Alexander George
October 21, 2005
(changed October 21, 2005)
Permalink
The short answer that many political philosophers (such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, John Rawls) have offered is that we are all far better off in a civil society structured by basic institutions (legal, economic, political) that constitute the government than we would be if we were lef... Read more
In my world history class, we dedicated some time to learning about the Boxer Rebellion in China, which took place in the 19th century. My teacher had mentioned that the Boxers believed they had magical powers, and that bullets would not injure them. Bullets did indeed injure them, but my teacher said they withstood more bullets than usual, because of their belief. I'm not sure if that is true, but I was wondering if a mind over matter type of thing is possible. Perhaps it's linked to what the Redcoats did in the Revolutionary War, how they wore red so that when they were hit, they wouldn't have noticed the blood and could have lived longer. I have an illness of some sort, where I can harm myself depending on my state of mind. It really does sound like something in a sci-fi movie, it's unbelievable. There's been many times where I would feel some sort of pain somewhere, and associate it with an illness I learned about in health class, or somewhere. The more I learned about the illness, the more symptoms I would encounter. When I went to the doctor, he assured me it was nothing, and after that I no longer felt any worry, or pain. It's incredibly weird, and has happened numerous times. I was wondering if this is a mind over matter type thing, can the mind effect the body in such ways?
Alexander George
October 21, 2005
(changed October 21, 2005)
Permalink
There's nothing mysterious about "mind over matter", is there? When you had second thoughts last night and eventually decided you wanted your grilled black bean burger with cheese and therefore called after the waitress with "Could you make that with cheese, please?" -- well, that was "... Read more
How come Philosophers never mention the possibility that we may never, ever, know the meaning of justice, life and death as long as we are alive? Religious explanations are so infantile and absurd that it frightens and makes me wonder about the "intelligence" of world leaders acting and playing to what I, respectfuly, consider nonsense, as in the diferent Bibles... Eduardo Schwank Guatemala
Nicholas D. Smith
October 21, 2005
(changed October 21, 2005)
Permalink
Yours is a tough question and I doubt that you will find much to reassure you in my reply.
I think that if there is any lesson to learn from the history of philosophy, it is that fully adequate conceptions of such things as justice--and for that matter everything else that philosophers... Read more
How can one get rid of his/her memories, either bad or good ones? Is there any way to forget a happening in the past?
Alan Soble
October 21, 2005
(changed October 21, 2005)
Permalink
Fifty First Dates (Drew Barrimore, Adam Sandler) is a sour-funny treatment of loss of memory. After an automobile accident, she can remember only what happens during the course of one day. She begins again (from the point of the accident) when she wakes up the next morning. In a hospital scene... Read more
As everyone proclaims the value of education, why do we do such a sorry job in general of educating our youth? Even the best and brightest seem lacking somehow. I acknowledge that there are many individual teachers who perform the impossible of teaching the unwilling every day but they stand out because in general the uninspired are mouthing lessons to the disinterested, and it just seems such a waste for all involved. Does philosophy offer any hope? Thank you. -- L Pullin
Nicholas D. Smith
October 21, 2005
(changed October 21, 2005)
Permalink
Philosophy can offer a little hope--but only to those who manage to listen or read philosophy, and those are probably not the ones who need the help the most.
As with so many things, the only real hope for education is that people will become more willing to make the sacrifices necessar... Read more
What is Information?
Nicholas D. Smith
October 21, 2005
(changed October 21, 2005)
Permalink
Where's Fred Dretske when we need him?
Seriously, for a very well worked-out answer to this question, go find Fred Dretske's book, Knowledge and the Flow of Information (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1981).
Log in to post comments