Recent Responses
Is there too much ideology in philosophy? I consider such areas as "feminist philosophy" to be a contradiction; how can one discover truths while constantly bound by an ideological method? Why not just restrict it to a "philosophy of women" or a "philosophy of sex" instead?
Charles Taliaferro
March 22, 2014
(changed March 22, 2014)
Permalink
Excellent question. "Feminist Philosophy" as a title covers a range of types of philosophy that are united in the goal of offering a critique of patriarchy and exploring the positive contributions philosophically that are made in light of being female (in terms of both gender and sex, and... Read more
Is there any difference between the images released by the fashion industry and softcore pornography?
Oliver Leaman
March 20, 2014
(changed March 20, 2014)
Permalink
There is generally a big difference. Soft core can involve nudity, fashion does not. After all, the point of the latter is to sell clothes and although models may not wear many clothes, they will wear something.
It is a mistake to think that images which are capable of being sexually provocati... Read more
Did Plato and Aristotle have economic philosophies? Or were they smart enough to avoid the dismal science?
Sometimes when you discuss
Nickolas Pappas
March 20, 2014
(changed July 6, 2015)
Permalink
Sometimes when you discuss ancient philosophers it’s allright to be a little anachronistic. Sowe can discuss Aristotle and technology, even though what he would have known as technology was close to nothing compared to what we find in the modern world. Or we talk about... Read more
Just what is the difference between a lawyer and a legal philosopher? Does the legal philosopher care more for metaethics and less for social norms?
Jonathan Westphal
March 20, 2014
(changed March 20, 2014)
Permalink
A lawyer is someone who practises law, or perhaps studies it, an attorney (in the US) or a barrister or solicitor (in the UK), someone who might have little or no interest in the philosophy of law, or in the the concept of law in the abstract. A legal philosopher, on the other hand, is a ph... Read more
Can you give me a clear example of a problem that philosphers are generally acknowledged to have solved? Thanks.
Daniel Koltonski
March 20, 2014
(changed March 20, 2014)
Permalink
I'm not sure whether this is "generally acknowledged" (or whether it counts as "solving a problem") but I think the following might be an example: In explaining human action, many people are quite tempted by what has come to be called 'psychological egoism': the view that each person has but... Read more
I am a recently married thirty year old living in Oregon. My wife and I don't want to have any kids and we don't subscribe to religion or any ideology. Because of this why should I be concerned about global warming which won't affect me in any major way in my lifetime? I do not have any responsibility to future generations because all my friends and family are either older or around my same age as well.
Eddy Nahmias
March 20, 2014
(changed March 20, 2014)
Permalink
Your view, dear reader, seems to presuppose that the only reason anyone should care about global warming (or any other problem that will affect future generations) is that one may have (biological?) descendents that might be affected. That presupposition seems false. On the one hand, it's not... Read more
Hi. My question regards Martin Heidegger and his work and philosophical project. To whom would you recommend reading Heidegger's texts? To whom would you recommend his philosophy? I was once told by a philosophy professor of mine that he was "The greatest thinker of the last century" and, consequently, when faced with one of his texts, I expected something grand. Yet, 'grand' is not exactly the word I'd use to describe my experience with it. Since then, I have read some other stuff by him and I can say that my opinion about his work has not really changed from that of the first time I encountered: a rather obfuscated writer with many pretensions; not a true thinker. On the other hand, the fact of seeing some personalities praising his work, without actually elaborating on their claims, makes the case rather shady. Is Heidegger being praised for his actual efforts as a thinker? Or is it all the buzz a mere tool to promote a certain view of things which, otherwise, would not find itself a place among more serious people? I'd like to hear your opinion on this particular subject. Thanks for your time (J.J.).
Stephen Maitzen
March 17, 2014
(changed March 17, 2014)
Permalink
I share your skepticism about Heidegger and his work. But, to give him a fair shake, I'd recommend reading the long and detailed SEP entry on him, available at this link. It appeared in the SEP in 2011, which is surprisingly late given Heidegger's fame and influence. (By comparison, Derrida's... Read more
Hello All, My question is if someone makes an argument using conditional statements is the argument necessarily deductive? Basically the person claims because I am using If . . . .then clauses then that makes my argument deductive by default. I was under the impression that some conditional arguments can still be inductive based on the context of the argument. So if I claim not all conditional arguments are deductive am I correct or incorrect?
Miriam Solomon
March 13, 2014
(changed March 13, 2014)
Permalink
An argument using conditional statements can be an argument of any kind (it depends on what other statements are used). There is one kind of well known argument--modus ponens--that uses a conditional statement and a premise stating the antecedent of the conditional. That argument is deductiv... Read more
In some fields, people make a distinction between "theory" and "philosophy" (e.g., political theory and political philosophy). On what basis is the distinction made and is there any value in it?
Miriam Solomon
March 13, 2014
(changed March 13, 2014)
Permalink
The more theoretical and the more general a subject is, the closer it is to being considered "philosophy." I don't think that there is a definite point where theory leaves off and philosophy starts. So political theory and political philosophy blur together, as do theoretical biology and phi... Read more
I guess some people call almost everything "a language". Is music a language? Is mathematics a language? I really think they aren't, but have no idea on how to explain it. Thank you.
Oliver Leaman
March 9, 2014
(changed March 9, 2014)
Permalink
I wonder why you disapprove of the description, since they are clearly languages, it seems to me. They have a syntax and a semantics, a structure of meaning and rules that are meant to be followed but can be varied in particular instances. Just like a language.
Log in to post... Read more