Recent Responses
Selfishness is considered bad in society, and my parents tell me to be as selfless as possible, but how can it be possible to be selfless? I think selfless can be traced back to our instincts. We had to work for ourselves in order to survive and reproduce so life can continue. Eating is selfish, because it's benefiting ourselves only. That food could feed other people. If I donate to charity, is that not also selfishness? I donate so I feel like I can contribute to the world, and so I can feel better as a person. That means that the donating was purely in my own interest. If a parent throws themselves in front of a car to save a child, I think the root of their action is actually selfish - they don't think they could live knowing that they could've saved the child but didn't. What's your view on this? Do you think there's such thing as being selfless? If so, how can I live selflessly? Am I just thinking about all of this completely wrong?
Oliver Leaman
April 18, 2014
(changed April 18, 2014)
Permalink
You are right in thinking that the urge to be selfless can have selfish aspects to it, but surely not to the extent you suggest. It is possible to carry out an action entirely out of the motives to help others, and not because it makes us feel better. We may hate the action especially if we are... Read more
Is it right to call a believer rational even if she cannot prove articulately or give good arguments for her belief in God? Let's just say I ask a believer "Why do you believe in God?" and she simply answered, "Because I've experienced God's grace in my life," and she needs no arguments or other evidences for her belief, is her position justifiable? I personally thinks it is but if that is the case, then what would make belief in God irrational, if simply certain personal experiences can justify such belief?
Stephen Maitzen
April 17, 2014
(changed April 17, 2014)
Permalink
If she had reasons to believe, it would not be faith that she had but knowledge.
I respectfully reject the implicit reasoning in Prof. Marino's claim. Someone's having reasons to believe may make her belief rational or epistemically justified, but her belief is knowledge only if her belief is... Read more
Reading Wikipedia and a bit of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, I learn that, for most philosophers today, the distinction betweem analytic and synthetic truths or falsities is no longer acceptable. For them, there are no analytic truths. This rejection originates in Quine. I wonder if that is really so. Is there anything synthetic in mathematics? Is there anything synthetic in the thought that all birds are birds, or that all brown balls are brown things? How do philosophers argue that these truths are synthetic?
Stephen Maitzen
April 17, 2014
(changed April 17, 2014)
Permalink
It's a good idea to consult the SEP for discussion of these questions and for citations to various published answers. Continue to do so. I'd question, however, whether "most philosophers today" reject the analytic/synthetic distinction. According to the recent PhilPapers survey, 64.9% of "tar... Read more
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 ?
Allen Stairs
April 17, 2014
(changed April 17, 2014)
Permalink
I don't think so. Here's why
Log in to post comments
Is it possible for anything to matter? My teacher always tells me if I do bad in a drama scene, I shouldn't worry about it because no one will remember or care in a few weeks. Doesn't that apply to everything? If I cure cancer, surely that will affect almost everyone on the planet, but will anyone even appreciate it a million years after the fact? A billion? Humans can't last forever, and eventually our species will die - meaning no one will be alive to remember cancer even existed. Even Earth will die eventually. Even the Galaxy!! So how can anything I do be important in the grand scheme of things?
Gordon Marino
April 25, 2014
(changed April 25, 2014)
Permalink
Good question? I have wrestled with this one a lot. Of course, it depends what we mean by "matters" -- if it is an issue of being remembered then there is a good chance that when the earth slips into the sun or whatever, all will be forgotten and in the end nothing will have mattered.
When we... Read more
Is it right to call a believer rational even if she cannot prove articulately or give good arguments for her belief in God? Let's just say I ask a believer "Why do you believe in God?" and she simply answered, "Because I've experienced God's grace in my life," and she needs no arguments or other evidences for her belief, is her position justifiable? I personally thinks it is but if that is the case, then what would make belief in God irrational, if simply certain personal experiences can justify such belief?
Stephen Maitzen
April 17, 2014
(changed April 17, 2014)
Permalink
If she had reasons to believe, it would not be faith that she had but knowledge.
I respectfully reject the implicit reasoning in Prof. Marino's claim. Someone's having reasons to believe may make her belief rational or epistemically justified, but her belief is knowledge only if her belief is... Read more
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?
Eddy Nahmias
April 17, 2014
(changed April 17, 2014)
Permalink
See here for some relevant discussion and studies by Eric Schwitzgebel: http://schwitzsplintersethicsprofs.blogspot.com/
Log in to post comments
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?
Allen Stairs
April 13, 2014
(changed April 13, 2014)
Permalink
Suppose that 201 groups of people each set themselves a noble goal. If I were a member of a group that achieved its goal, I might well be proud of my group. If that pride is reasonable (and it might well be) I'd still have the same reason to be proud of my group if other groups—even all of them—... Read more
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
Oliver Leaman
April 12, 2014
(changed April 12, 2014)
Permalink
One difference I suppose is that someone is taken to own an animal, but only God owns human beings, according to many religions, and so only he can take the decision on life and death.
We do often decide to allow a patient to die and in some places we can actively bring about that death, with... Read more
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?
Eddy Nahmias
April 17, 2014
(changed April 17, 2014)
Permalink
See here for some relevant discussion and studies by Eric Schwitzgebel: http://schwitzsplintersethicsprofs.blogspot.com/
Log in to post comments