• "Surviving a Police Encounter: A Guide for African Americans," by Christopher Keelty

    Surviving a Police Encounter: A Guide for Non-whites in America

    Non-white? Waiting for justice? While you wait, here are some “Dos and Don’ts” should you encounter police:“Surviving a Police Encounter: A Guide for African Americans,” by Christopher Keelty

    Google Doc Templates – Not in Apps for the Organization!?

    If you use the free, Standard Edition of Google Apps, your admin control panel will give you the illusion that you can enable the use of document templates on your domain.… Continue Reading

    Rebekah Frumkin

    Socrates and Glaucon on the Home Shopping Network

    by REBEKAH FRUMKIN, McSweeneys (19 May 2010) SOCRATES: Good evening, Glaucon. You look troubled. GLAUCON: I am, Socrates. SOCRATES: What worries you so? GLAUCON: Look at my kitchen floor. That… Continue Reading


    Stuffed Poblano Pepper Delight

    Ingredients 4 good sized peppers One tube of 3.5 oz chèvre 8 oz block of cream cheese the other things mentioned below Instructions Soften the cheeses (e.g., let them sit… Continue Reading

  • Latest

    • The Perfect Moral Storm: Philosophers Respond to the Impending Anthropogenic Apocalypse

      by Ava Kofman (Vice, May 31, 2015)

      For at least the next 200 years, weather forecasts predict shitstorms, with global temperatures now set to remain elevated for hundreds of years to come. The latest IPCC report explains that our emissions are nearing the point of no return. Even if industrialized nations switched to solar power overnight, it is now too late to fully reverse the planet’s course.

      Geologists have officially termed this new epoch, where the human species has irreparably shaped earth’s geological history, the Anthropocene. Policymakers no longer have the luxury to decide how we might “stop” global warming. Instead, we have to figure out how we’ll manage amidst climate instability.

      With a dark future ahead comes a new set of existential questions. What do present generations owe those in the future? Should we value only what affects us as humans? Is there value to nature, or a culture, in its own right? Since Western economies were responsible for the rise in temperature to date, should they bear more of the burden for stopping it in the future?

      Underlying the technical answers of scientists, economists, and politicians are some of the deepest moral dilemmas—problems that philosophers have been grappling with for centuries. “These issues of justice are brought into bold relief by climate change, but they are still traditional ethical questions,” Lawerence Torcello, a philosopher who researches the moral implications of climate denial at the Rochester Institute of Technology, explained in an interview with VICE. “How should we live? That’s as pressing now as ever. How are we going to live in the Anthropocene?”

      Unlike other paradigmatic moral problems, there is no single individual intentionally harming another in the case of climate change. As the philosopher Dale Jamieson and othershavewritten, our moral judgments are more likely to fail in precisely these situations: where the connections between our bad behavior and the harm it causes are indirectly linked. In the case of invisibly emitting greenhouse gas, there is no single moment of pulling a trigger, nor is there a single smoking gun. The problem’s global scale, complicated causality over space and time, and long-term effects is what the philosopher Stephen Gardiner has in mind when he refers to climate change as “a perfect moral storm.”

      What is it going to mean to love a place when it is no longer there?

      Such a storm has led philosophers to call for new ethical framework around the issue—one that will ideally have political influence. “We need to start thinking in terms that we’re just not used to thinking of as a human species,” Torcello said. “We need to start thinking that things like driving cars and turning up our thermostats are harming people that haven’t even been born yet.”

      Dale Jamieson, a founding expert in the field of climate ethics and a professor of environmental studies and philosophy at NYU, was one of the first people to argue that to live well in the Anthropocene requires the adoption of new values, or what he calls ” green virtues.” He sees temperance—which he defines as living moderately with relatively low consumption—as key. Another necessary virtue, Jamieson says, is mindfulness, which is the understanding that “when you bring something into your life, you see yourself as taking cradle-to-grave responsibility for its whole lifecycle.” As in, every product you purchase will eventually have to go somewhere, if you discard it. And then, of course, there’s the desperate need for more cooperation. Jamieson recommends that cooperative political measures be taken quickly to eliminate coal and put a price on carbon.

      Photo via NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center

      Virtually all philosophers agree that developed countries should take the lead role in bearing these costs, while less developed countries should be allowed to increase or maintain emissions for the future. Yet, as Jamieson and others well know, no international mitigation and abatement efforts have been taking place on a large enough scale to freeze emissions. The source that provided the most new energy to the world economy in 2013 was, perversely, coal. Our increasing understanding of the damage caused by fossil fuels runs parallel to an increase in carbon emissions worldwide.

      Economist turned Oxford philosopher John Broome sees this failure of intense geopolitical cooperation as a classic “tragedy of the commons”: Each country will act within its own interest, which is always to emit. Broome explained to VICE that George Bush’s refusal to sign the Kyoto Protocol expressed “the bald truth”: Countries are not going to do anything on behalf of others that requires them to sacrifice their own interests.

      One the largest questions about climate change concerns our responsibilities to future generations. Some economists have argued that future generations will be better off, and therefore better equipped to pay environmental costs themselves, while others, most notably Nordhaus, have argued that waiting costs not only the present generation, but also the future. Broome has worked to demonstrate that in asking humans to weigh what they value the most, these economic arguments are, at heart, ethical decisions.

      “It’s the nature of climate change to inflict damages on a large part of our society and on humans who don’t exist yet.” —Dale Jamieson

      This need to account for an unknown future population is part of what makes climate change difficult to square with traditional understandings of individual morality and global justice. One study shows that more than 60 percent of Americans believe that climate change will harm future generations, but only 38 percent believe it will harm them personally “a moderate amount.” Jamieson explains that democracy, as it now stands, is not adequately equipped to represent the interests of future generations. “Everyone likes to talk about the future but there’s a present generation narcissism that always goes on,” he added, noting that conversations around intergenerational justice point to how “badly equipped the present system is to protect interests that go beyond an electoral cycle. A well-functioning democracy ideally represents everyone who shows up. But it’s the nature of climate change to inflict damages on a large part of our society and on humans who don’t exist yet.”

      Jamieson, who started working on environmental ethics in the early 1990s, notes that as climate change transitioned from a theoretical problem to be avoided to a full-blown disaster, the questions posed by philosophers began to change. “Once that happened, you found yourself in a world where you needed to think about the fact that different places in the world have different levels of emissions. How do we adapt? Who pays for this adaptation? What does it mean to live a human life? What about animals? What about endangered species?”

      Broome says the recognition of the inevitability of crisis has led philosophers to take a more “pessimistic turn.” The titles of their books have likewise registered the dark mood, like Tim Mulgan’s Radical Hope and Ethics for A Broken World: Imagining Philosophy After Catastrophe and Jamison’s Reason in a Dark Time.

      Broome noted that his own approach to publicly discussing climate change has evolved. He’s realized that any statements he makes about “how we should live as individuals,” ended up distracting people from their governments using powers to prevent people from emitting. “I used to say you should have a zero carbon footprint that you can achieve by offsetting,” he said, “but that’s not how you’re going to solve climate change if the government doesn’t make judgments on that behavior.” The aim is not to discount what he calls private morality––refusing to fly on planes, for instance, could show the government that people care—but to ensure that public morality is mandated. But he notes that even government coercion can fail.

      So if all else fails, it’s possible that we’ll be turning to philosophy for one of its oldest promises: to teach us how to die. “We’re facing the most difficult problem that humanity has ever faced, and we’re in this post-Enlightenment period where we’ve never been less confident of our ability to make decisions for the better.” This crisis of meaning tends to get neglected: “What does it mean to live a meaningful life in a world where you and your kind have eliminated all wildness and forms of life from the planet?” Jamieson asked. “It’s a philosophy for trying to keep the world from going to hell.”

  • Widgets In Tabs

  • Think

    Bhante Henepola Gunaratana, Mindfulness in Plain English
    When you see a truck bearing down on you, by all means jump out of the way. But spend some time in meditation, too. Learning to deal with discomfort is the only way you'll be ready to handle the truck you didn't see.
    Bhante Henepola Gunaratana, Mindfulness in Plain English
  • Philosophy Feeds

    • PBites
    • Leiter
    • PN
    • PN podcasts
    • Ethics

    To what degree is reality something created by us? Jesse Prinz explores this fascinating question in conversation with Nigel Warburton

    How can you tell science from non-science? Karl Popper argued that the falsifiability of a hypothesis is the mark of science. Massimo Pigliucci is not so sure about that. 



    What is a duty and what sort of obligation does it put us on? David Owens explores the nature of duty in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. If you enjoy Philosophy Bites, please consider supporting us via Patreon.

    We are a highly social species: we need human contact. But do we have a right to it? In this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast Kimberley Brownlee suggests that this is an ingredient in a minimally decent human life...

    The philosopher Peter Singer is famous for his attack on speciesism, the alleged prejudice that many exhibit in favour of human interests when compared with the interests of other animals. Here Shelly Kagan outlines Singer's position and takes issue with it. In the process he makes some interesting points about prejudices in general.

    Michel Foucault's work explores a wide range of topics; it includes histories of both punishment and sex. He also wrote more abstractly about philosophical topics. One theme to which he kept returning, whatever the topic, was the nature of our knowledge. Susan James discusses this thread in his work in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast.

    How do you choose which course of action is best? It seems reasonable that if A is better than B, and B is better than C, A must be better than C. But is it? Larry Temkin challenges this idea, known as the axiom of transitivity.

    How should we live? is a basic philosophical question. The Stoics had some answers. But are they relevant today? William B. Irvine thinks so. Listen to his conversation with Nigel Warburton on this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast.

    ...has a "safe space policy" which, in non-Orwellian language, is actually a "policy to suppress speech in the name of equality", as its application to the lesbian feminist writer Julie Bindel plainly demonstrates. (Thanks to Phil in an earlier thread...

    In brief: Letters are unreliable (they vary too much in their measurements). They draw attention to the wrong things (people judge the status of the letter writer). They rarely focus on the few items that do predict performance (like explicit...

    ...so obviously the most important thing to do is prevent a handful of college executives from getting windfall payments.

    ...at The Point. A taste: At some point, on one of our regular treks through the forest-bog of the slightly left-leaning internet, we read about Effective Altruism. The idea, posed and propounded by Princeton philosopher Peter Singer, is not complicated....

    ...of all the sociopaths and fraudsters seeking the Republican nomination.

    MOVING TO FRONT FROM OCTOBER 1, SEE BELOW Philosopher Ken Gemes (Birkbeck) writes: Some users of academia.edu are presently having severe problems editing their academia.edu webpages. These problems are ongoing and academia.edu are not providing timely or helpful responses. For...

    by Rick Lewis

    Tots gain moral sense by 2 years • French children to be taught more civics • Heythrop College to close — News reports by Anja Steinbauer

    James P. Sterba thinks libertarianism implies a right to welfare.

    Philip Badger tries to convince us to be optimistic about human equality.

    Simon Clarke argues that deciding when to die is a matter of individuality.

    by M. A. Istvan Jr.

    Seán Moran is watching the watchers.

    Francisco Mejia Uribe explains why the rise of fundamentalism poses a problem for liberals, and suggests what they can do about it.

    Grant Bartley from Philosophy Now (and author of The Metarevolution) is joined by members of London philosophy groups Philosophy For All and the Philosophical Society of England to debate an argument advanced by PFA member Kieran Quill that according to quantum mechanics the universe is mental in nature. Join us to hear the fallout. First broadcast on 29 June 2014 on Resonance FM.

    Ludwig Wittgenstein worked out how language has meaning, twice. He also thought that some of the most important things we can know we can’t express at all. Grant Bartley from Philosophy Now finds out the meaning and limits of language from guest Daniel Hutto from the University of Wollongong, NSW. First broadcast on 22 June 2014 on Resonance FM.

    Might Nietzsche be right, claiming that lying is “a condition of life?” – Or Kant, arguing that lying means annihilating human dignity? Is it ever acceptable for governments to lie to the public or for individuals to lie to the government? Anja Steinbauer is joined by politician and philosopher Shahrar Ali and moral philosopher Piers Benn to discuss whether lying can be a good thing. First broadcast on 15 June 2014 on Resonance FM.

    What is meta-ethics? How does meta-ethics differ from ethics, and what does it tell us about ethics? Why is it important for how we should live our lives? Join Grant Bartley from Philosophy Now and his guests Edward Harcourt from Keble College, Oxford, and Richard Rowland from the University of Warwick, to find the answers to these questions and more. First broadcast on 8 June 2014 on Resonance FM.

    Join Grant Bartley from Philosophy Now and guests John Callanan from King’s College, London, and Andrew Ward from the University of York to talk about the most important idea you’ve never heard of, and some other persuasive arguments from revolutionary but unfortunately unknown-to-the-world philosopher Immanuel Kant. First broadcast on 1 June 2014 on Resonance FM.

    Join Grant Bartley from Philosophy Now and guests Philip Goff from the University of Liverpool and Tom McClelland from the University of Manchester as they try to work out how all that electricity between your nerve cells relates to and produces all your experiences and thoughts. First broadcast on 25 May 2014 on Resonance FM.

    What has Buddhism to offer the 21st Century? Join Anja Steinbauer and her guests, Martin Muchall and Rick Lewis, for a critical discussion of ideas in and about Buddhism. First broadcast on 18 May 2014 on Resonance FM.

    Isaiah Berlin said of David Hume, “No man has influenced the history of philosophy to a deeper or more disturbing degree.” Join Grant Bartley from Philosophy Now plus guests Jane O’Grady, Peter Kail and James Arnold to find out why. First broadcast on 11 May 2014 on Resonance FM.

    Google is said to have dropped the famous “Don’t be evil” slogan. Actually, it is the holding company Alphabet that merely wants employees to “do the right thing”. Regardless of what one thinks about the actual behaviour and ethics of Google, it seems that it got one thing right early on: a recognition that it […]

    Catia Faria, Pompeu Fabra University Follow Catia on Twitter here  Throughout history, countless species have come into existence only to later become extinct. Whether extinction is caused by natural processes or human agency, environmental scientists and the general public seem to agree that extinction is a bad thing and that, therefore, conservation efforts should be […]

    Brenda Kelly and Charles Foster Female Genital Mutilation (‘FGM’) is a term covering various procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons (WHO, 2012). It can be associated with immediate and long-term physical and psychological health problems. FGM is prent in […]

    Consider the following case. Imagine you inherit a fortune from your parents. With that money, you buy a luxurious house and you pay to get a good education, which later allows you to find a job where you earn a decent salary. Many years later, you find out that your parents made their fortune through […]

    The Rugby World Cup is now well underway in England and Wales, and rugby fans have possibly already seen one of its most surprising results and entertaining games. On the second day of the tournament, Japan defied the odds to earn a narrow 34-32 victory over South Africa. The result stunned the rugby world – […]

    By Rebecca Roache and Hannah Maslen     Yes they’re sharing a drink they call loneliness But it’s better than drinking alone – Billy Joel, Piano Man   Drinking alone is often frowned upon. Those who do it can be quite defensive about it—as illustrated by a Reddit thread entitled ‘Why do people think drinking […]

    Written by Toni Gibea Research Center in Applied Ethics, University of Bucharest My aim is to show that the decision made by ESL (Electronic Sports League) to ban Adderall in e-sport competitions is not the outcome of a well-reasoned ethical debate. There are some important ethical arguments that could be raised against the ESL decision […]

    by Brian D. Earp / (@briandavidearp) * Note: this article was originally published at the Huffington Post. Introduction As someone who has worked on college campuses to educate men and women about sexual assault and consent, I have seen the barriers to raising awareness and changing attitudes. Chief among them, in my experience, is a sense of skepticism–especially […]

  • Poem

    • Telephone cords and daffodils

      Telephone cords and daffodils

      Telephone cords and daffodils, Pelican beaks and ink spills, Wet kisses and electric bills, Laughing, gasping, sweating, chills. Fri, 05/16/2008

Leave a Reply