Hello philosophers, I'm finding it very difficult to understand the way modern society uses the word abuse . Recently I read about a case where a child was malnourished through being half starved , it was rightly described as child abuse , why then are the countless cases of childhood obesity never described this way ? If it can be shown that a child's obesity is caused by overeating is it not surely as bad as half starving a child , and therefore should be termed child abuse ?

Some people study or know a great deal about ethics as it's taught in philosophy departs, and yet those same people we may not judge to be highly ethical or to have elevated moral characters. If this assumption is correct, how do you explain this? Is there a way to solve this problem?

If there are 201 nations worldwide how can we all be proud of our nations. What is the point in having pride in your nation? Is it because it feels good?

Greeting's oh wise one's, my question ... How is it morally correct to put a very sick animal" out of it's misery" yet not accord the same privilege to a Human who has no chance of recovery ? What baffle's me most is the thoughtfulness given to the dog ,but denied the human . Kind regard's Dermot

What analytic philosophers have examined or critiqued gender and gender difference?

How important is the study of logic in philosophy, independent of any one particular philosopher or school of philosophy? Is 'logic' considered a 'neutral' subject about which 'everyone' agrees? or are there some contentious issues about what 'kind' of 'logic' applies in different kinds of situations?

On what grounds are the three classic laws of thought rendered 'true'? Is there a more fundamental law which enables us to see the law of identity, the law of excluded middle and the law of non-contradiction as true? If not, how can we claim that they are anything more than guidelines for thought?

Many philosophers say that philosophy is neither an art nor a science yet philosophy departments are usually in Arts Faculties at universities. How do you feel about this and do you think philosophy should be its own faculty? Are there any contemporary neo-logical positivists who think it should be classified as a science?

What are your main objections about the way philosophy is taught to undergraduates today and is it any different than the way it was taught during your time as an undergrad? Just how much say do professors in philosophy have over what they want to cover? I only took two philosophy courses in school, but I found that the topic material was overly broad and covered too many philosophers; even the professors seemed overwhelmed with the readings. I think it would be more worthwhile if perhaps the students decided at the beginning of courses specifically on no more than three philosophers/topics to cover intensely since specialization results in a greater degree of understanding instead of general unconcentrated knowledge.

During The Troubles the IRA would sometimes make a telephone warning beforehand prior to exploding a bomb. Even if the authorities are unable to evacuate every person in time resulting in a single digit death toll, does this make them less guilty or immoral than al-Qaeda according to virtue ethics?