Although I don't doubt the pain of transsexual people who feel that their bodies do not match their gender, I find myself skeptical of their claims. I am female, I don't doubt that I am female, yet I do not have any idea what it means to "feel like a woman." It also happens that I have no interest in hairdos, high heels, or the notion of "femininity." Although I am undoubtedly a woman, I would guess that a person who feels like a man trapped in a woman's body does not feel like I do, or aspire to being a woman such as me. When a MTF transsexual person insists that they are genuinely women and must change their male bodies to match their internal state, how can their conviction be based on anything but imagination, speculation and stereotypes? How can they possibly know what it feels like to be a woman if I, a woman, do not know that feeling? (Please note that I do not mean any disrespect to transsexuals; I'm genuinely trying to understand.)

Is it possible for an action or an event to be beautiful? If so, what does this descriptor mean? Are we appealing to the same aesthetics we are when judging works of art, or objects?

Are there any modern philosophers that still defend astrology as either a legitimate practice or as a science?

The Kantian ethical formulation, "Always act according to that maxim whose universality as a law you can at the same time will," seems rather vague. Where, exactly, do we decide how to formulate one's actions? Suppose a poor man steals medicine he otherwise can't afford, in order to save his child. Which maxim's universality as a law, exactly, should he be willing? If we examine the maxim as being "It is permissible to steal", then we clearly have a universal law that shouldn't be willed, but if we examine the maxim as being "It is permissible to steal in order to save lives, when there are no other options", then we have a maxim that might hold up under more scrutiny. For any given action, there are multiple possible maxims that are more or less reprehensible, each of which can justify the action in question. So how does Kantian ethics treat situations like this? Do we boil it down to the most semantically/logically simple maxims? Do we go instead for the most nuanced maxims?

Could you suggest an introductory book on metaphysics. thank you

Would it be considered unethical to anonymously report my suspicion that several co-workers are stealing from customers and the company I work for by suggesting the company conduct an investigation into the practices of their employees to determine whether or not this is actually occurring? I ask this because I highly suspect this is the case where I work. Should I simply turn a blind eye? My internal conflict regarding this situation is that almost no one likes the company and the clientele they work for, which is in part, why I believe some employees feel they are justified in indulging their greed by stealing from both company & client. I mention 'greed' because I suppose this is why I feel compelled to report my suspicions. So many of my co-workers behave abusively to one another because of their greed and I suppose I feel that these nasty, greedy individuals deserve to be called on their unethical behaviour, but once again, I wonder if it is up to me to be the one to see to it that they receive...

What are the three characteristics of a philosophical question?

If philosophers are asked, "What makes people happy (eudaimonic)?", why do they sit around and speculate on what should make people happy, instead of walking out into the street and checking people out? "Hey, are you happy? If so, tell us why!"

In this question, I'm going to assume there are strictly two human biological sexes, male and female. That assumption isn't exactly true (chromosomal variations), but it's a close enough approximation to ask the question. At restaurants such as "Hooters," provocatively-clad females serve food to patrons. There are no male waiters. No one seems to think too much about it. I think, however, that many people would be appalled if we had restaurants whose theme was to have provocatively-clad Jewish people serve food, or provocatively-clad African Americans serve food, or provocatively clad [insert religious or ethnic or national group] serve food. There are, of course, ethnic restaurants. So we might think of Hooters as nothing more and nothing less than another type of ethnic restaurant, this one peculiar to sex instead of ethnicity. Is this good reasoning? Maybe that reasoning is not valid. Women have a sex (female) and men have a sex (male). There can't be anything intrinsically more sexual about...

I've been in a long distance relationship for about a year now and my girlfriend has just moved to London for work. She recently told me a stranger on a train asked her for her number after they've chatted for 5 minutes. Without hesitation or telling him that she's in a relationship, she gave it to him. Her explanation was she needed friends in a new and unfamiliar place. While I am very understanding about her feelings of been lonely I still felt very angry about her giving her number away to a complete stranger who's intention was to ask her out on a date. I feel it is wrong for her to be going out on dates with random people while she's in a committed relationship as I would never do the something thing to her. She says I'm just jealous. Am I wrong to feel like this?