Recent Responses
I am not a mind-independent moral realist. When I have a child, I am concerned that teaching them that certain actions are "good" or "bad" will instill an erroneous concept of objective moral realism that might have harmful consequences to their happiness in later life (for example not taking actions that will make them happy because they think they are somehow "wrong"). On the other hand, I am also concerned that explaining why not to take certain actions solely because of the possible social consequences (e.g. "if you are caught stealing then you may go to prison") will not instill a strong enough framework in their mind to prevent them from committing crimes or otherwise taking actions that could harm them. It can be difficult, for example, to predict the possible risks associated with certain actions when you are a child. So it is easier to teach that the action is "wrong" rather than explain the possible consequences, their liklihood and their impact. What do you recommend? Should I teach my child mind-independent realism even though I personally consider it incorrect. Or should I attempt the (probably more difficult) task of teaching a non-realist framework for conduct within society?
I recommend that you don't
Allen Stairs
June 25, 2020
(changed June 25, 2020)
Permalink
I recommend that you don't think about it this way.
Is mind-independent moral realism true? Geez. I don't know. (And, by the way, neither do you.) But here's some stuff I feel quite comfortable saying.
I want my kids to be empathetic. I want them to give a damn abo... Read more
Any two sets have different conditions for membership, so if object O is in set S because it's blue or green, then being blue or green cannot be the reason why any other object is in any other set. If so, how can there exist a set of green objects?
Suppose S is the set of all
Allen Stairs
June 18, 2020
(changed June 18, 2020)
Permalink
Suppose S is the set of all things that are blue or green. Then my mug is in S because it's green and therefore satisfies "x is blue or x is green," and my pen is in the set S because it's blue and therefore satisfies "x is blue or x is green." Now it's true: satisfyin... Read more
I have somewhat of a general question. What exactly is Compatibalism? As far as I understand, a way of reconciling the contradiction between free will and determinism. One way of describing it, as far as I understand, is this: "Free will is to be understood only as freedom from coercion, and anything further is an illusion." But I don't really understand what "freedom from coercion" means here. This quote is taken from wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_free_will
This is a good question, and
Jonathan Westphal
May 3, 2020
(changed May 7, 2020)
Permalink
This is a good question, and it is easy to answer. "Coercion" here is something like arm-twisting. It is a use of force or the threat of force to cause someone to do something. It takes this kind of force to prevent freewill doing its stuff. Ordinary causation won't d... Read more
Does low self esteem really exist as mental chemical dysfunction or is it just that i'm smart enough to know how stupid i am, stay my real place and not engage in something beyond my reach no matter how others may react or judge ?
If I really believed that you
Allen Stairs
April 27, 2020
(changed April 27, 2020)
Permalink
If I really believed that you really believed that these are the only two alternatives, then I'd probably believe that you're stupid. But I don't believe any such thing. I'd be willing to bet a tidy sum that if someone else asked you the very same question, you would... Read more
Chelsea are due to play Arsenal in a soccer match. Mr A prays for Chelsea to win, while Mr B prays for Arsenal to win. Chelsea won the match. Why were Mr A's prayers answered but not Mr B's?
Hi,
Yuval Avnur
April 16, 2020
(changed April 16, 2020)
Permalink
Hi,
I'm going to answer this question as a non-theologian, but I should note that there are many, many different theological approaches to the theory of prayer, and I'm sure some would disagree with, or offer a different answer than, mine. For the purposes of your question, it seems important... Read more
My question is whether or not beliefs require objects. Put another way, is it possible to have a belief about “nothing” or about a negative, as opposed to affirmative, proposition? This question came up in a discussion about the definition of Atheism. Essentially, is Atheism either A) a belief that there are no Gods; or B) a lack of belief (or denial) in the existence of at least one God? Thank you.
There are several questions
Allen Stairs
April 9, 2020
(changed April 9, 2020)
Permalink
There are several questions here, and we need to distinguish them.
1) Does belief require objects? Beliefs are "about" in a very broad sense, but I believe (as should you) that there is no ratio of two integers that equals 2 when squared. There is no object that answers... Read more
Chelsea are due to play Arsenal in a soccer match. Mr A prays for Chelsea to win, while Mr B prays for Arsenal to win. Chelsea won the match. Why were Mr A's prayers answered but not Mr B's?
Hi,
Yuval Avnur
April 16, 2020
(changed April 16, 2020)
Permalink
Hi,
I'm going to answer this question as a non-theologian, but I should note that there are many, many different theological approaches to the theory of prayer, and I'm sure some would disagree with, or offer a different answer than, mine. For the purposes of your question, it seems important... Read more
Two different sets cannot have the same reason for membership, so if beauty is the reason why a painting is in the set of beautiful paintings, then beauty cannot be the reason why the painting is in any other set, such as the set of good paintings. Is that fair?
No.
Allen Stairs
April 2, 2020
(changed April 2, 2020)
Permalink
No.
There is a set of even numbers. There is also a set of numbers that are even or prime. (Note, by the way: something can be even and prime: the number 2.) The number 8 is in the first set because it's even. It's also in the second set because it's even, hence even or prime.
Not all good pa... Read more
Perhaps a semantic quibble, perhaps a more deeply-rooted consideration.... Why is the Deity so frequently portrayed as "all-"powerful, "all-"knowing, etc. Is there some really fundamental reason why the Deity cannot be "very" powerful" and know "quite a bit indeed"?
Some theologians and
Allen Stairs
April 2, 2020
(changed April 2, 2020)
Permalink
Some theologians and philosophers would say that religious devotion to anything less than a perfect being amounts to idolatry, and a less-than-omniscient or less than omnibenevolent or less-than-omnipotent being would be less than a perfect being.
My own view is that this is a... Read more
Perhaps a semantic quibble, perhaps a more deeply-rooted consideration.... Why is the Deity so frequently portrayed as "all-"powerful, "all-"knowing, etc. Is there some really fundamental reason why the Deity cannot be "very" powerful" and know "quite a bit indeed"?
Some theologians and
Allen Stairs
April 2, 2020
(changed April 2, 2020)
Permalink
Some theologians and philosophers would say that religious devotion to anything less than a perfect being amounts to idolatry, and a less-than-omniscient or less than omnibenevolent or less-than-omnipotent being would be less than a perfect being.
My own view is that this is a... Read more