How does a philosopher become popular? Why do we teach the writings of some philosophers, but not others if all philosophers work from a common history, or work within a common tradition or set of ideas that include logic? Is there a social construction to philosophical ideas?

At 57, I have spent much of my life feeling a little superior to others. I have never stolen anything. I am pained whenever I say something that is even close to a lie. I am dedicated to fairness. And so on. I have long considered myself to be a highly ethical person. In recent years, though, not so much. I no longer feel compelled to tell the truth on my tax return if I think I won't get caught. I am less likely to stop for a stop sign in the middle of the night. I am willing to turn a deaf ear to a bill collector when I can't pay or even when competing priorities make me feel overburdened by the prospect. What's happened is that I have come to realize that I am embedded in a culture that is so pervasively unfair, among powerful entities devoted to ripping me off, subject to laws that I not only disagree with but find counterproductive and stupid, often evil. Despite a cheerful attitude, reasonable skill and good work ethic, this society has not allowed me even minimal prosperity. And so, I find...

Are double standards always wrong? Even though I am a female, I have always had more (and closer) male friends than female. For example, one of my best friends is male, and we talk on the phone/computer about once a week, not counting intermittent texts throughout the week. However, I would be extremely uncomfortable if my boyfriend (of six years, perhaps irrelevant) had the same type of relationship with a female. He does not have any close friendships with women, both prior to and during our relationship, whereas prior to our relationship I have had many close friendships with men. Is it morally wrong for me to expect something from him that I do not apply to myself? For example, I would not like it if he called another woman on the phone, "just to talk." In response to the question of whether he is comfortable with my friendships with men, most of them are his friends as well, and he does not indicate any problem with my friendship with them. But as already said, I don't have many close...

Why philosophy? Mindful of truly urgent issues like climate change and the gulf oil gusher, if the question is existence or extinction, doesn't merely thinking about either seem a dubious luxury?

Is listening to a classic book on tape, unabridged, sufficient to be able to claim to have read it?

Is it better to adopt children or to create them?

I would like to take liberty on discussing an issue which is taxing my mind for the last many decades, which is "Vulgarism and Other Errors of Speech." I am proud to say that I have been brought up by my moralist father on universal ethics and moral grounds without any streak of religious thought or teaching. His education and moral guidance inculcated in me not to speak a single vulgar word ever in my life. I have never spoken a vulgar or indecent word from the day I learned to speak up till today. But it has been bothering me, why people use vulgar and indecent words in their speech when it has no pragmatic role. It is all over the world in every culture and in every society. Highly educated people have a vulgar explitive or a 'F' and 'S' word needlessly and habitually used in speech which they will spit out whether sitting in the drawing rooms or in the company of family members. I was almost stunned when the Vice President excitedly said to President Obama that this 'Fucking Bill of Health is finally...

When choosing between two paths, isn't it rational to choose the path where you are most wanted? If I am choosing between two partners, would it make sense to choose the path where I am more needed rather than where I would rather be? The argument goes like this: 1. More needed = more wanted 2. More wanted = more useful 3. Life = using your time to be the most useful you can be 4. Life should be made with choices that allow you to be where you are most needed If someone hears this argument and argues that I should choose where I WANT to be, wouldn't it suffice to say that I will want to make the choice that is most rational?

How might a person who does not subscribe to any organized religion and does not believe in an afterlife find meaning in his or her death—that is, the cessation of his or her personal existence? Or, perhaps another way to ask the same question: if there is no afterlife—no continuation as a soul, consciousness or personal identity upon the cessation of physical life—how might one’s life continue to have meaning after death? And if we only live on in the memories of friends and loved ones, or perhaps in some other concrete contribution to culture or society, are not these too ultimately ephemeral?

On the subject of art - I have done only little research regarding different philosopher's opinions on the validity and place of art in society. It seemed some pre-Socratic philosophers believed art and tragedy were the only worthwhile endeavors in life, and contrariwise, that philosophers have since decided reason is the only valid way to approach life. Can you provide a more recent overview of the philosophical place of art in society, and/or classic/recent texts where I could read more?