Does Peter Singer really advocate/defend infanticide under certain circumstances? I recently read that he argues that parents should be able to abort mentally handicapped newborns or even to have a thirty day waiting period with which to decide whether or not they want to keep the child. Is this true and if so does this show a progression of the pro-choice stance on abortion extending beyond the womb?

What makes a philosopher a Philosopher? Isn't a philosopher just an opinion of someone who happens to get published?

Many people would agree that to use the word "gay" as a term meaning "bad" is disrespectful, or even homophobic. Only slightly fewer people hold a similar view of the word "retarded." However, there are also people who take a stronger position, according to which words like "insane" and "lame" are similarly degrading and inappropriate (I've heard these words described as "ableist"). Although the stronger position strikes me as incorrect, I can't say why. Is there any way to draw a distinction between the use of words like "gay" and words like "insane" as generally pejorative terms? Or will we one day agree that all such usage is comparable to racist or sexist language? What is it exactly that makes such usage problematic?

I read an article by a pshychologist agony aunt which said that we should be carefeul with forgiveness, that when we forgive we are at some level accepting that we deserved the wrong done to us. The lady went on to say that it is not recommended that children or people who suffered abuse (physical, sexual, psychological and or emotional )as children be encouraged to forgive the offender - especially when forgiveness involves reconcilliation with the offender (does forgiveness always involve reconcilliation with the offender?). I think that this makes sense - however, it seems that this is not the general view. I feel that there is pressure on people to forgive and we often hear the phrase "you must forgive". People who cannot forgive feel bad because they feel that they have failed or are mean spirited. Are people who claim to always forgive merely forgiving petty slights or are they refusing to deal with the offence by ignoring it /putting it out of their minds? What are our views on the...

Good morning everybody. My question is about philosophical skills, that may develop during philosopical inquiry. I ask myself if there is a kind of genuine philosophical skill, a genuine philosophical expertise. If there is one, what are the differences between this special philosophical skill and the the expertise of a theologian, a politician or a logician?

What is the difference between being mentally ill and being a bad person?

Ok,this may sound like a stupid question but I'm just worried about my marks. So,next year I'll be in High School and it will be my first year studying philosophy. All my friends say: " Oh,philosophy it's SO hard!" or "If you don't work a lot you will get negative marks.." and etc,.. I'm just starting to be worried about it. I think it's normal that someone that goes to high school worry about new subjects,difficulty levels,.. But I'm just too worried! I consider myself an inteligent person but I'm afraid of failling Philosophy and it ruins my marks! I think I may be a bit "dumb" or immature to understand all that "complicated thoughts" .Although I have no idea what I'm going to learn lots of people say I need to have a great reasoning and know how to express what I'm thinking. And I think that's the big problem because I think I've got a good reasoning and I'm good at writing (I'm good at English,Portuguese,..) but I'm just bad when I wan't to make another person understand what I'm thinking :S Do...

Is there anything right about this characterization of a philosophical problem: a person torn because she doesn't know what to do about her marriage would not be a philosophical problem in the sense that no philosopher or no moral theory could tell the person what to do, in the sense of giving her the one correct moral answer; but asking whether the personal has any reality, whether we can really speak of a person making a responsible moral decision at all, that would be something philosophers would try to prove against skeptical challenges. Is something like that what philosophy is about?

When it becomes painfully obvious that an adult child is embarrassed by her working class roots should she be confronted by the parent? Or is this a right any child has to recognise or reject their background regardless of how feeling are going to get hurt?

What are we doing when we censor expletives? Even when a person's speech has been censored (on the TV airing of an R-rated film, say), it's often perfectly clear exactly what he is saying or intends to convey. In this sense the content and meaning of the speaker's explicit speech is completely intact--so what exactly is being censored?