What does philosophy say about the repetitive nature of experience? For instance, say I have five grapes that I could eat but they are not necessary for my nutrition. I would be eating them purely for pleasure. I have three choices: 1) do not eat them, 2) eat some of them, or 3) eat all of them. I have memories of eating grapes, so I could just rely on the memories to experience the pleasure of eating a grape (a pale substitute for the real thing). Or, I could eat one of them, which would allow me to experience the taste and texture of a grape in the present. Or, I could eat more than one grape which would prolong the experience but not really add more taste or texture to the experience of eating just one. However, after eating one or more grapes, I would only have another (fading) memory of eating grapes which would not really add to my previous stock of memories of eating grapes. If much of life has this repetitive nature to it, is there any value to doing anything more than once (assuming that...

The reason we do things more than once is that we value doing them more than once, either because we find the things pleasurable or otherwise valuable in and of themselves or because doing them advances other values of ours. (Here, I am using "value" pretty loosely; I simply mean that we perceive ourselves to be gaining something from the relevant things.) So take your grape example. If I like grapes, and if I have an opportunity to eat them on numerous occasions, then, when I'm hungry and feel like eating grapes and grapes are available, I'll want to eat them. The memory of eating a grape is not going to satisfy my hunger, either for filling my stomach or for experiencing the eating of a grape. Of course, we sometimes have vivid memories of eating things -- Proust's madeleines are perhaps the quintessential example -- but a memory of something is very different (in numerous ways) from experiencing the thing itself. When you think about it, it's not surprising that we do the same things over and...

As a business major who has a strong interest in philosophy I'm strongly considering adding a philosophy minor. My question is this: how can studying philosophy help me in not just business but in life in general? What are some benefits to adding a philosophy minor?

Good philosophers don't take anything for granted. They are committed -- sometimes painfully so! -- to the idea that no beliefs, values, or points of view ought in principle to be exempt from scrutiny and criticism. They understand how easy it is to run a life on autopilot; to get into habits (of behavior or mind) that, on reflection, they can't justify or endorse; and to succumb to the temptations of complacency, or even smugness and arrogance. And they seek to teach and to model how to avoid these easy pitfalls. Studying, or studying with, such philosophers can give you the resources, and the inclination, to live a more deliberate life. Of course, too much self-scrutiny will prevent you from living your life at all. But taking courses that prime you to be reflective, especially about your own life, might help you establish habits of thought that will serve you well no matter what you end up doing with your life.

How much of my time should I spend helping others? Let me first say that I am a pretty happy person in general and I enjoy my life. However, although I volunteer a considerable amount (15-20 hrs. a week), I always feel like I should and/or could be doing more. I am a college student (majoring in philosophy) who lives a considerably comfortable lifestyle (I have a home, food, etc.), and I can't help but feel guilty for taking any pleasure in frivolous activities (video games, socializing, etc.) while I know how many people on earth live extremely hard lives. At the same time, it seems necessary to spend time not helping others and merely enjoying myself. What percentage of our time/effort/money should we spend making others' lives better? Would it be morally mertitorious to devote one's self entirely to others at the expense of ourselves or conversely, would it be alright to not volunteer at all and focus soley one's self? I can't seem to find a happy medium. p.s. This is a great service...keep it up.

How best to spend one's time is a question that every adult grapples with. It has many dimensions, including an ethical one. Though the three most popular approaches in philosophical ethics -- utilitarianism, Kantianism, and virtue ethics -- have something to say about the question, none provides a decisive answer. And that's as it should be: we should be suspicious of any philosophical position that fails to acknowledge the complexity of an issue as central to human existence as the one you raise. Utilitarians argue that we should try to maximize happiness for the greatest number of people. When you think about it, this is in general a pretty tall order. There's no theoretical built-in limit on how much time we should spend trying to make the most people the happiest. Some utilitarians -- the contemporary philosopher Peter Singer comes to mind -- argue that this is the way it should be, that living the best sort of life may well involve forgoing a lot of personal pleasure. Others -- I...