I have 17 years I am really into philosophy . I would give everything to go and study it . But there is one problem. My parents doesn't know where can philosophy take me(job , career ) . I never thought about it so if you could help me PLS

Dear Friend - I have a couple of ideas about careers, but we can get to that in a minute. Since you are already a fan of philosophy, I won't bother telling you its virtues. But you might want to try telling your parents what you love about it and show your passion for it so that they have a sense that your interest is sincere and lasting. Some ideas about careers: First of all, studies show that (at least in the US) a young person starting out today will have an average of 6 different careers in her lifetime. That is not 6 different jobs -- I mean 6 entirely different careers (first a soldier, then student, then nurse, then nursing administrator, then medical salesperson...you get the idea). So a degree today should be flexible in that it will help you in the many different paths you will follow. A degree in today's accounting practices, for example, won't help you if accounting practices change tomorrow. So a philosophy degree is a good fit for someone starting out because philosophers know...

dear sir/ madam i have studied aesthetic at university, but i would like to work on aesthetics for kids at elementary school and students of high school. i would really appreciate it if you could help me with this case and introduce me some books and resources, and also i would like to know if there is a specific philosopher who had worked on this case. best regards, H.

Dear H. - Let me start by pointing you towards the American Society for Aesthetics. They have a really good teaching resource page here: http://www.aesthetics-online.org/teaching/. I also can recommend the book Puzzles about Aesthetics: A Casebook , edited by Battin, Fischer, Moore, and Silvers, widely available online. I'm not sure all of the book's commentary will be suitable for high school students, let alone younger ones, because it is a sophisticated introduction to the topic. But many of the cases there would work very well in those classroom settings. Finally, I think the best way to start a lesson on aesthetics is with the students' own aesthetics experiences, perhaps by asking them to share or write about the music, tv shows, books, outdoors experiences, etc. that move them most. Good luck!

I am often unable to decide upon an opinion, as I know that my knowledge of the subject is incomplete. For example, I am unsure of whether the (as it currently seems to me) few insights that psychology can add to our knowledge of the human mind and human behavior that cannot be found out using reason and individual observations is worth spending my and others’ time and resources on. Another example is my unwillingness to pick a side in the debate about free will, as I know that there are arguments I am not aware of. This inability to decide upon an opinion among many chooses, as I know there might be valid counter-arguments to my view that I do not know of, heavily impacts my life. The psychology example illustrates these consequences well: as I cannot decide on whether psychology is worth studying or not, I feel insecure about taking the big step to starting studying psychology, as it might be the wrong thing to do. My doubting of the very foundations of many opinions, and as in the example of free will,...

Dear Friend - I say your willingness to say 'I don't know' in the face of complex problems is to be applauded. The "patron saint" of all philosophers, Socrates, is most famous for admitting his ignorance and using it as a starting point for investigation. More recently contemporary philosopher Harry Frankfurt released two wonderful little books, called On Bullshit and On Truth . There he observes that too many of us are willing to make stuff up, demonstrating an indifference to the truth (we are B.S. ing, in other words), instead of just admitting to our ignorance. So it is worth taking a moment to compliment you on your refusal to B.S. your way through important problems. But this does lead us to the second problem, that you therefore aren't sure how to make decisions about what is worth doing or worth believing. My suggestion is to put your ideas to the test by using critical thinking methods: First, rule out options that seem totally wrong or off the mark. Then, choose between...

I intend to write an assignment (approx. 20 pages) about justice and economic doctrines (among other things, distribution of wealth) where I will attempt to explain/elucidate how different economical doctrines(capitalism, social democracy and socialism) attempt to carry out a fair and just society. All of this would, of course, also requiree to explicit how these economical doctrines perceive justice in the first place. And by this, I may also very well define justice on a ore philosophical context, as I am dealing with what pertains to moral philosophy. Overall, I would like to give a thorough, but concise account of the subject. Cutting to the chase, do you have any suggestions on possible sources of book that I make use of? By the way, I have already made plenty of considerations on possible sources, though I thought 'better safe than sorry.' Thank you in advance!

Dear Ambitious Student - What an assignment! What you propose to write could indeed be a book instead of a research paper, so my hat is off to you and your ambitions. As a piece of advice, you might want to check with your professor (before the assignment is due) to see if there is a way to meet the requirements of the assignment, but evaluate the issues in a more specific way. This might help you to narrow down your research. In am not sure, for example, you need to do a whole review of moral theory in order to write a paper about economic justice. As far as resources, I recommend beginning with the online (and free!) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Perhaps begin by searching articles in justice or economics. Besides the numerous articles, be sure to make use of the bibliographies at the end of them. You will get a sense of who the major names are, both historically and today. Good luck!

Should I expect a reward when doing a good deed? Like I pick up a wallet containing a big amount of money. Shoud I expect a reward from the owner when returning it to him.

No, I don't think you can expect it. But you can take it if it is offered. We can reasonably expect what we are owed. In this case, you literally aren't owed anything because you didn't do all that much. We can't be owed what we don't earn. (Even if the the owner of the wallet exclaims, "Oh, boy, I owe you. Gee, thanks!" and scampers off without giving you a dime.) In your example, I assume that you find the wallet on the street. Or in the seat of a taxi cab. Or anyplace. We just stumble on them. Even returning them often isn't difficult. So no, doing these minor good deeds is simply part of being a decent person. But this doesn't mean you can't graciously accept a reward if it is offered. And I think it is nice to offer, to celebrate the decency of that wallet-bearing stranger. And by the way, if you set out to a good deed on the understanding that you will be rewarded if you succeed (as in, help me find my cat and I'll give you ten bucks), then you rightly have a claim on the reward.

When a women dresses "slutty" and is raped people are usually divided between two camps. The blame can either be placed solely on the perpetrators or some would argue that the women is also to blame for getting into the situation. While admittedly I fall into the second camp, I don't quite understand why a victim can't be at least partially to blame for his/her situation. Can't people be blamed for creating a situation in which a crime is more likely or will happen? If I supply terrorists with nuclear weapons, and millions die. Yet I didn't kill anyone and the terrorists who did had a choice to disarm the weapon. Yet most people would agree that I would be sharing the blame. If I encourage racism by wearing a "hate blacks" T shirt and speaking in white supremacist rallies do I share any of the blame for the mistreatment of minorities? (Equally am I to blame if I am attacked by black gangs?) Ultimately if a women dresses "slutty" and is raped, can't she be blamed for encouraging the situation? I'm...

What I find so interesting about question is that it forces us to evaluate assumptions about why rape occurs. The second position you suggest, that a woman's style of dress contributes to her rape, assumes a good deal. It assumes that rapists are paying close attention to fashion, that they are then overwhelmed by provocative styles of dress, they subsequently lose control over otherwise normal desires, and then rape occurs. In other words, this is a story about beguilement and sexiness. It seems to me the above assumptions don't describe rape at all. Maybe they are more apt for a seduction scenario. Rape, on the other hand, is about the rapist's control, dominance, sadism, and humiliation of his victim. The fact of the matter is that all kinds of women - from nuns to sluts - are raped every day. If more modest fashion choices were all that was needed to protect women from rape I'm sure women en masse would step forward for their rape-proof makeovers. If only solving sexual...

I just wanted to weigh in again to reassert that the belief that a woman's style of dress contributes to her rape is, in my view, totally absurd. Is rape unknown in Africa or the Middle East, where more modest norms of dress prevail? Of course not. We know from interviews with convicted rapists that most rapists do not remember what their victims were wearing. In fact, a widely cited Federal Commission on Crimes of Violence study found that only 4.4% of all rapes involved any sort of particular, precipitating behavior (such as flirting) on the part of the victim. Thomas Pogge's above speculation on the psychology of acquaintance rape, wherein a man avenges himself on some perceived humiliation by raping his acquaintance, may be totally correct. According to his reasoning, the soon-to-be rapist sees himself as humiliated and rejected, and then driven is to act out by raping his victim. In that case, Thomas Pogge is saying that it is victim's rejection of her suitor (or his...

The Golden Rule, at least in its usual formulation, would seem to be problematic in cases of justice. If a judge were to "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", then they would probably never sentence anybody. A teacher couldn't fail a student who tried very hard because, presumably, that teacher (at least as a student) would have preferred a barely passing grade if they had tried very hard. The only way around this seems to be for people to enthusiastically and voluntarily be willing to punish themselves, which seems a bit of a stretch, to say the least; at most, people recognize that some system of rules requires they be punished and, perhaps, that system has a point, but nobody really *wants* to be punished. So how do proponents of the Golden Rule deal with such cases? Must they search elsewhere for their justification, or do they change the scope or meaning of the Golden Rule?

Dear Fan of the Golden Rule, We are a pair, as I am also enthusiastic about the GR. But instead of the version you cite, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you," I prefer this version: "What is hateful to you, do not do to others." This second version is found in Rabbi Hillel. It is also found in Confucius and many other sources. The difference between the two formulations is that the first asks someone to determine how one would like to be treated and then extrapolate that to a code for behavior towards others. The second formulation asks someone to determine what one hates and then simply refrain from doing that behavior towards others. I think I prefer the second version for its simplicity. Figuring out how you want others to treat you is fairly abstract, but picking out what you hate is usually pretty easy. Now, on to the case of the failing student. Everyone hates to fail. So the teacher would say to himself, "I hated failing, so I ought not to...

What does it mean to be "judgmental"? Is there a way to avoid being judgmental while also acknowledging that people sometimes engage in inexcusable evil?

Making judgments - both insignificant and momentous - is essential for everyday life. But people who use the term as an insult mean something apart from 'using one's faculty of judgment.' To call someone judgmental is to say that one is quick to condemn others, and perhaps enjoys a sense of superiority while doing it. Meant in this sense, being judgmental is an unfortunate character trait to have. Judgmental people assume a position of moral superiority and deign to pass verdict on the rest of us. The problem you raise is that sometimes we really are in a position of moral superiority to others. Perhaps being judgmental towards Nazis, for example, is justified. Certainly it is justified if one is a judge at Nuremberg. But most of us are not judges at Nuremberg. For the most part, judgmental people aren't effective in helping wrong-doers see the errors of their ways. The arrogance of judgmental people obscures the rightness of their ethical stance. At the core of all ethical systems...

If, due to unforeseen circumstances, you find love, outside of your committed relationship, what do you do? (This said, obviously you've already gone outside of your "commitment" and remember, things are always more complex than they appear.) The question is this: is your obligation to the commitment or to find your own happiness?

My Loving Friend, Man, do I wish I head that back-story that is "more complex"! It seems to me that there are several possible scenarios that have brought you to this point, and the details of those scenarios might make a difference in what I am about to say. But lacking the details...I press onward! First, let's take it as a given that your partner in the committed relationship does not know you have found extra-curricular love, and will be hurt to discover this, and you are anxious to avoid this hurt. Nonetheless, I believe it is your duty to tell this person right away what has transpired. A list of reasons why you should disclose this information: the physical: if this love with the other person has been consummated, you are introducing a third person's sexual history into your relationship. This might have health consequences for everyone. the historical: you forged a responsibility to him/her when that commitment was made. The fact that you cannot uphold it "forever" may be...

Eyery year I participate in a not-for-profit-programe that sends shoe boxes with Christmas presents to children from very poor countries in the world. A good friend of mine said this would not be worth doing it, as it is just changing nothing about the poverty in the world. When is it good to put a drop in the ocean?

My Charitable Friend, I disagree that it is not 'worth' doing, but it all depends on how you measure worth. Your good friend is correct in saying that shoebox full of trinkets and everyday supplies sent to a child or two won't solve world poverty. Ours is a world in which an estimated five thousand children under age ten die every day from preventable causes. A few shoeboxes won't change that, so it is the effort it takes you to assemble the shoebox is a wasted one because your individual actions will not change the basic dynamics of world poverty. Yet I disagree. Worth is not just measured by predicted efficacy. 'Worth it' is also about values. By preparing the shoeboxes you take an ethical stand that these children matter, that they are not forgotten, that they deserve goodies at holiday time like other children do. Values matter a good deal, so your shoebox campaign is important - but not just for your own sense of virtue. The shoeboxes, their contents and what they represent,...

Pages