DOCSLIB.ORG

The Big Questions: a Short Introduction to Philosophy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Big Questions This page intentionally left blank The Big Questions A Short Introduction to Philosophy Eighthሀ Edition ROBERT C. SOLOMON University of Texas at Austin KATHLEEN M. HIGGINS University of Texas at Austin Australia • Brazil • Japan • Korea • Mexico • Singapore • Spain • United Kingdom • United States The Big Questions: A Short © 2010, 2006 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Introduction to Philosophy, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. No part of this work covered by the Eighth Edition copyright herein may be reproduced, transmitted, stored or used Robert C. Solomon and in any form or by any means graphic, electronic, or mechanical, Kathleen M. Higgins including but not limited to photocopying, recording, scanning, Publisher/Executive Editor: digitizing, taping, Web distribution, information networks, or Clark Baxter information storage and retrieval systems, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, Senior Sponsoring Editor: without the prior written permission of the publisher. Joann Kozyrev Associate Media Editor: Diane For product information and Akerman technology assistance, contact us at Cengage Learning Assistant Editor: Nathan Academic Resource Center, 1-800-423-0563 Gamache For permission to use material from this text or product, Editorial Assistant: Michaela submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions. Further permissions questions can be emailed to Henry [email protected] Marketing Manager: Mark Haynes Library of Congress Control Number: 2008941295 Marketing Coordinator: Josh Hendrick ISBN-13: 978-0-495-59515-1 Marketing Communications ISBN-10: 0-495-59515-2 Manager: Kim Soltero Project Manager, Editorial Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Production: Abigail Greshik 10 Davis Drive Creative Director: Rob Hugel Belmont, CA 94002-3098 Art Director: Faith Brosnan USA Print Buyer: Marcia Locke Cengage Learning products are represented in Canada by Permissions Editor: Nelson Education, Ltd. Timothy Sisler Production Service: Pre-PressPMG For your course and learning solutions, visit academic.cengage.com Text Designer: Rebecca Evans Photo Researcher: Rachel Purchase any of our products at your local college store or at our Trousdale preferred online store www.ichapters.com Copy Editor: Pre-PressPMG Cover Designer: RHDG/ Christopher Harris Cover Image: © age footstock/ SuperStock Compositor: Pre-PressPMG Printed in Canada 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 12 11 10 09 For our nieces and nephews, Jem, Jesi, Danyal, Rachel, and Carrie Solomon, Caitlin Higgins, Jeffrey and Matthew Cook, Allison, Rachel, Daniel, Brett, and Marcus Felten, Kevin and Emily Daily This page intentionally left blank Contents Preface xv Introduction Doing Philosophy 3 Beyond Buzzwords 4 Articulation and Argument: Two Crucial Features of Philosophy 5 Concepts and Conceptual Frameworks 8 Doing Philosophy with Style 13 A Little Logic 15 Deduction 16 Induction 17 Criticizing Arguments 20 Closing Questions 24 Suggested Readings 25 Chapter 1 Philosophical Questions 27 Philosophical Questions 28 Opening Questions 29 Suggested Readings 41 Chapter 2 The Meaning of Life 43 Opening Questions 43 The Meaning of Meaning 44 Children as Meaning 46 God as Meaning 46 Afterlife as Meaning 47 No Meaning at All 47 The Meanings of Life 50 Life as a Game 51 Life as a Story 52 Life as Tragedy 52 Life as Comedy 53 Life as a Mission 54 vii viii Contents Life as Art 55 Life as an Adventure 55 Life as Disease 56 Life as Desire 57 Life as Nirvana 58 Life as Altruism 58 Life as Honor 58 Life as Learning 59 Life as Suffering 60 Life as an Investment 61 Life as Relationships 61 Closing Questions 62 Suggested Readings 63 Chapter 3 God 65 Opening Questions 65 Believing in God 66 Gods and Goddesses 69 The Traditional Western Conceptions of God 70 God as Transcendent 73 God as Immanent 73 God as Totally Immanent: Pantheism 75 God as Universal Spirit 77 God as Process 78 God as Transcendent Creator: Deism 79 God as the Unknown Object of Faith 79 God as a Moral Being 81 The Problem of Evil 81 Denial of God 82 Two Kinds of Evil 82 Denial of Evil 83 The Least of the Evils 84 The Aesthetic Totality Solution 85 The Free-Will Solution 85 Justice in the Afterlife 86 God’s “Mysterious Ways” 86 Working Out an Answer 87 Faith and Reason: Ways of Believing 87 The Cosmological Argument 89 The Argument from Design 90 The Ontological Argument 91 Rational Faith 93 Pascal’s Wager 94 Irrational Faith 95 Contents ix Religious Tolerance: Ritual, Tradition, and Spirituality 97 Doubts 100 Closing Questions 103 Suggested Readings 104 Chapter 4 The Nature of Reality 107 Opening Questions 107 The Real World 108 What Is Most Real? 110 The Reality Behind the Appearances 111 Dreams, Sensations, and Reason: What Is Real? 112 The Basis of Metaphysics 113 The First Metaphysicians 113 Thales 113 The Pre-Socratic Materialists 114 Early Nonphysical Views of Reality 117 Plato’s Forms 120 Aristotle’s Metaphysics 122 Mind and Metaphysics 123 René Descartes 124 Baruch Spinoza 127 Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz 128 Idealism 130 Teleology 136 Metaphysics and the Everyday World 139 Closing Questions 141 Suggested Readings 142 Chapter 5 The Search for Truth 145 Opening Questions 145 What Is True? 145 Two Kinds of Truth 147 Empirical Truth 147 Necessary Truth 148 Rationalism and Empiricism 151 The Presuppositions of Knowledge 153 Skepticism 155 René Descartes and the Method of Doubt 157 David Hume’s Skepticism 159 The Resolution of Skepticism: Immanuel Kant 162 Knowledge, Truth, and Science 164 x Contents The Nature of Truth 168 The Coherence Theory of Truth 170 The Pragmatic Theory of Truth 171 Rationality 172 Why Be Rational? 174 Subjective Truth and the Problem of Relativism 176 Closing Questions 181 Suggested Readings 181 Chapter 6 Self 183 Opening Questions 183 The Essential Self 184 Self as Body, Self as Consciousness 186 The Self and Its Emotions 190 The Egocentric Predicament 194 The Mind-Body Problem 196 Behaviorism 198 Identity Theory 199 Functionalism 200 The Self as a Choice 202 No Self, Many Selves 206 The Self as Social 208 Self and Relationships 211 Closing Questions 214 Suggested Readings 215 Chapter 7 Freedom 217 Opening Questions 217 Freedom and the Good Life 218 Why Is Freedom So Important to Us? 219 What Is Freedom? 222 Free Will and Determinism 228 Determinism Versus Indeterminism 230 The Role of Consciousness 234 Soft Determinism 235 In Defense of Freedom 236 Closing Questions 240 Suggested Readings 240 Chapter 8 Morality and the Good Life 243 Opening Questions 243 The Good Life 245 Hedonism 245 Contents xi Success 247 Asceticism 248 Freedom 249 Power and Creativity 250 Religion 250 Happiness 251 Egoism Versus Altruism 253 Morality and Theories of Morality 257 Duty-Defined Morality 260 Immanuel Kant and the Authority of Reason 261 Consequentialist Theories 263 Utilitarianism: Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill 263 Aristotle and the Ethics of Virtue 266 Morality—Relative or Absolute? 267 Friedrich Nietzsche and the Attack on Morality 270 Closing Questions 272 Suggested Readings 273 Chapter 9 Justice and the Good Society 275 Opening Questions 275 Morals and Society 276 The Nature of Society 277 Who Should Rule? The Question of Legitimacy 278 Anarchism, the Free Market, and the Need for Government 281 What Is Justice? 283 The Meaning of Equality 286 The Origins of Justice and the Social Contract 289 Rights and the Self 292 Libertarianism 293 Liberalism 293 Communitarianism 293 Closing Questions 294 Suggested Readings 295 Chapter 10 Philosophy, Sex, Race, and Culture 297 Opening Questions 297 Expanding the Philosophical Canon 298 Beyond the Western Tradition 301 xii Contents Other Cultures, Other Philosophies 302 South Asian Philosophy 304 East Asian Philosophy 311 The Middle East 318 Latin American Philosophy 320 Native American and African Philosophy 324 Sexual Politics: The Rise of Feminist Philosophy 328 Women and the Body 332 Plato: Patriarch or Early Feminist? 334 Reason Versus Passion in Ethics: The Ethics of Care 335 Feminist Epistemology and Feminist Science 336 Feminist Philosophy of Language 337 The Revival of African American Philosophy 338 Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X 338 Closing Questions 341 Suggested Readings 341 Chapter 11 Beauty 345 Opening Questions 345 Beauty and Truth 346 Enjoying Tragedy 349 Arguing About Taste 351 Art, Ethics, and Religion 354 The Aesthetics of Popular Culture and Everyday Life 356 Closing Questions 360 Suggested Readings 361 Appendix A Writing Philosophy 363 Opening Questions 363 The Rules of Good Writing in Philosophy 364 Organize 364 Write Simply 366 Be Clear 366 Be Human 367 Use Examples 368 Argue Your Point 371 Consider the Objections and Alternatives 373 Define Your Specialized Terms 373 Use the History of Philosophy 374 Contents xiii Indirect Styles 375 Dialogue Style 376 Ironic Style 379 Aphoristic Style 380 Appendix B Deductive Logic Valid Argument Forms 385 Appendix C Common Informal Fallacies 391 Informal Fallacies 391 Glossary 397 Index 413 This page intentionally left blank Preface t was the fall of 1806, in the college town of Jena, in what we now call Germany. IIt was about the time when most students and professors would have been get- ting ready for their classes, with mixed annoyance and anticipation. The profes- sors would have been finishing up their summer research; the students would have been doing what students usually do at the end of the summer. But this year school would not begin as usual. Napoleon’s troops were already approaching the city, and you could hear the cannon from the steps of the university library. French scouts were already in the town, walking around the university, stopping for a glass of wine in the student bars, and chatting casually with the local residents, many of whom were in sympathy with the new French ideals of “liberty, equality, and fraternity.” As the battle was about to begin, a young philosophy instructor named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel was hastily finishing the book he was writing—a very dif- ficult philosophy book with the forbidding title The Phenomenology of Spirit.
Recommended publications
  • Is Plantinga's Argument for God Incompatible with Human Free Will?

    Is Plantinga's Argument for God Incompatible with Human Free Will?

    123 IS PLANTINGA'S ARGUMENT FOR GOD INCOMPATIBLE WITH HUMAN FREE WILL? MARINA GARNER1 Abstract / Resumo es Morriston has written a few articles claiming the incompatibility of Alvin WPlantinga’s Modal Ontological Argument and the Free Will Argument against the problem of evil. According to him, the Modal Ontological Argument defends an essentially good and free God in opposition to the Free Will Argument, which defends that the best kind of freedom is the significant freedom (SF), justifying God creating us with such freedom. In this paper, we attempt to summarize the arguments and Morriston’s position. In conclusion, we will see that there are reasons to agree with both of Plantinga’s arguments without falling in to a contradiction. Key words: Alvin Plantinga; Modal ontological argument; Free will argument; Wes Morriston. es Morriston escreveu alguns artigos afirmando a incompatibilidade do WArgumento Ontológico Modal de Alvin Plantinga e o Argumento do Livre Arbítrio contra o problema do mal. De acordo com ele, o Argumento Ontológico Modal defende um Deus essencialmente bom e livre em oposição ao Argumento do Livre Arbítrio, que defende que o melhor tipo de liberdade é a liberdade significativa, justificando a pessoa de Deus ao nos criar com tal liberdade. Nesse trabalho tentaremos resumir os argumentos e a posição de Morriston. Concluindo, veremos que há razões para concordar com ambos os argumentos de Plantinga sem entrar em contradição. Palavras-chaves: Alvin Plantinga; Argumento ontológico modal; Argumento do livre- arbítrio; Wes Morrison. In the realm of Christian apologetics and the doctrine of God, all arguments would ideally be in perfect accord.
  • Giving up the Enkratic Principle

    Giving up the Enkratic Principle

    Giving Up the Enkratic Principle (forthcoming in Logos and Episteme) The Enkratic Principle enjoys something of a protected status as a requirement of rationality. I argue that this status is undeserved, at least in the epistemic domain. Compliance with the principle should not be thought of as a requirement of epistemic rationality, but rather as defeasible indication of epistemic blamelessness. To show this, I present the Puzzle of Inconsistent Requirements, and argue that the best way to solve this puzzle is to distinguish two kinds of epistemic evaluation – requirement and appraisal. This allows us to solve the puzzle while accommodating traditional motivations for thinking of the Enkratic Principle as a requirement of rationality. Keywords: Enkratic Principle; coherence; evidence; rationality 1. The Enkratic Principle The Enkratic Principle demands coherence. In the epistemic domain, it demands coherence between the agent’s beliefs about which epistemic attitudes she ought to have, and her first- order1 epistemic attitudes2. According to the orthodox view, the Enkratic Principle is a 1 ‘First-order’ is not the ideal term. By ‘first-order’ I mean epistemic attitudes whose content does not concern what we ought, rationally, to believe. 2 These could include believing, disbelieving, refraining from believing, suspending, or having a particular credence in a proposition. 1 requirement of epistemic rationality3. Reading O as “rationally required”, Φ as representing a doxastic attitude, and B as representing belief, the principle can be stated as follows: Enkratic Principle: O (BOΦ → Φ) The Enkratic Principle says that rationality requires either having the attitudes you believe you ought to have, or giving up the belief that you ought to have those attitudes.
  • On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: the Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies

    On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: the Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies

    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 482 462 TM 035 389 AUTHOR Onwuegbuzie, Anthony J.; Leech, Nancy L. TITLE On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher: The Importance of Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Research Methodologies. PUB DATE 2003-11-00 NOTE 25p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association (Biloxi, MS, November 5-7, 2003). PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Pragmatics; *Qualitative Research; *Research Methodology; *Researchers ABSTRACT The last 100 years have witnessed a fervent debate in the United States about quantitative and qualitative research paradigms. Unfortunately, this has led to a great divide between quantitative and qualitative researchers, who often view themselves in competition with each other. Clearly, this polarization has promoted purists, i.e., researchers who restrict themselves exclusively to either quantitative or qualitative research methods. Mono-method research is the biggest threat to the advancement of the social sciences. As long as researchers stay polarized in research they cannot expect stakeholders who rely on their research findings to take their work seriously. The purpose of this paper is to explore how the debate between quantitative and qualitative is divisive, and thus counterproductive for advancing the social and behavioral science field. This paper advocates that all graduate students learn to use and appreciate both quantitative and qualitative research. In so doing, students will develop into what is termed "pragmatic researchers." (Contains 41 references.) (Author/SLD) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. On Becoming a Pragmatic Researcher 1 Running head: ON BECOMING A PRAGMATIC RESEARCHER U.S.
  • An Examination of Charles Hartshorne's Concept of God

    An Examination of Charles Hartshorne's Concept of God

    THE DIVINE BECOMING: AN EXAMINATION OF CHARLES HARTSHORNE'S CONCEPT OF GOD By TERRY RICHARD HALL ~ Bachelor of Arts Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 1971 Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate College of the Oklahoma State University in partial fulfillment of the requirem~nts for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS July, 1975 \he~~_s l ~15 1-111'fcl verf· ;;L STATE UNl'.'ERSITY Liaf<ARY OCT 23 1975 THE DIVINE BECOMING: AN EXAMINATION OF CHARLES HARTSHORNE'S CONCEPT OF GOD Thesis Approved: Dean of the Gl'a!uate C9llege 923517 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to acknowledge my debt to t~e members of the Philosophy Department· at Oklahoma. State University. They have helped immeasurably in.my sometimes faltering efforts to achieve intellectual maturity. I, would like to espe­ cially mention Dr. Walter Scott, my thesis adviser, and Dr. Edward La~ry, who first.acquainted me with the thought of Charles Hartshorne. They have been a constant source of aid and encouragement in my· attempts to think through the topics covered in this thesis; without, their guidance and advice this-thesis could not, have been written. In addi­ tton, grateful appreciation is·· extended to Professor Charles. Hartshorne; with whom I was privileged to discuss some of these ideas during his visit to the Oklahoma State Univer­ sity campus in the spring of.1975. I am also grateful for the patien'l; assistance of my Wife, Valerie. It·is a singular good fortune.when one's wife is also a philosopher, and many of the.ideas treated herein became clearer as a result of her perceptive com­ ments.
  • University of Pardubice Faculty of Arts and Philosophy Truth in the Works of George Orwell Petr Škaroupka Diploma Thesis 2020

    University of Pardubice Faculty of Arts and Philosophy Truth in the Works of George Orwell Petr Škaroupka Diploma Thesis 2020

    University of Pardubice Faculty of Arts and Philosophy Truth in the Works of George Orwell Petr Škaroupka Diploma Thesis 2020 Prohlašuji: Tuto práci jsem vypracoval samostatně. Veškeré literární prameny a informace, které jsem v práci využil, jsou uvedeny v seznamu použité literatury. Byl jsem seznámen s tím, že se na moji práci vztahují práva a povinnosti vyplývající ze zákona č. 121/2000 Sb., o právu autorském, o právech souvisejících s právem autorským a o změně některých zákonů (autorský zákon), ve znění pozdějších předpisů, zejména se skutečností, že Univerzita Pardubice má právo na uzavření licenční smlouvy o užití této práce jako školního díla podle § 60 odst. 1 autorského zákona, a s tím, že pokud dojde k užití této práce mnou nebo bude poskytnuta licence o užití jinému subjektu, je Univerzita Pardubice oprávněna ode mne požadovat přiměřený příspěvek na úhradu nákladů, které na vytvoření díla vynaložila, a to podle okolností až do jejich skutečné výše. Beru na vědomí, že v souladu s § 47b zákona č. 111/1998 Sb., o vysokých školách a o změně a doplnění dalších zákonů (zákon o vysokých školách), ve znění pozdějších předpisů, a směrnicí Univerzity Pardubice č. 7/2019 Pravidla pro odevzdávání, zveřejňování a formální úpravu závěrečných prací, ve znění pozdějších dodatků, bude práce zveřejněna prostřednictvím Digitální knihovny Univerzity Pardubice. V Pardubicích dne 20.4.2020 Petr Škaroupka ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank Mgr. Michal Kleprlík, Ph.D for accepting this diploma thesis and his valuable suggestions during the writing process. ANNOTATION This diploma thesis focuses on Orwell’s views on truth in his written works. With the aid of the contemporary philosophical literature, the notion of truth, as well as related epistemological and metaphysical issues and concepts, are described in the first part of the paper.
  • Predeterminism and Moral Agency in the Hodayot

    Predeterminism and Moral Agency in the Hodayot

    Predeterminism and Moral Agency in the Hodayot Carol A. Newsom 1 Introduction For reasons that are not yet entirely clear, sharp disagreements about pre- determinism and free will became a significant feature of Jewish theological stances in the Hellenistic and Roman periods. Josephus provides the most ex- plicit consideration of these issues in ancient Jewish sources, as he attempts to distinguish the positions of the three major Jewish sects with respect to the philosophical category of “fate” (εἱμαρμένη). Josephus identifies the position of the Essenes as believing strongly in fate, to the apparent exclusion of free will (Ant. 13.172). Similarly, modern scholarly treatments of the Qumran yaḥad have acknowledged the very strong predeterminist element in their thinking, attested in a variety of sectarian or closely related texts.1 At the same time, there has been a degree of perplexity as to what to do with the obviously volun- tarist statements and assumptions that are present in these same documents. A variety of suggestions have been made, mostly to the effect that the sectar- ians were inconsistent or not fully systematic in their beliefs.2 This may in- deed be the case, though Jonathan Klawans argues that, properly understood, all deterministic systems are consistent with voluntarism in a rather minimal 1 I take the Qumran yaḥad movement to be Essene, though I consider it possible that the term “Essene” may also have referred to groups not formally part of the yaḥad. For examinations of the phenomenon of predestination in Qumran sectarian literature and closely related texts, see J. Licht, “The Concept of Free Will in the Writings of the Sect of the Judean Desert,” in Studies in the Dead Sea Scrolls: Lectures Delivered at the Third Annual Conference (1957) in Memory of E.
  • Philosophy (PHIL) 1

    Philosophy (PHIL) 1

    Philosophy (PHIL) 1 Philosophy (PHIL) Courses PHIL 5210. Special Topics in Philosophy. 3 Credit Hours. Arranged each semester. Please consult the instructor. Level Registration Restrictions: Must be enrolled in one of the following Levels: Graduate. Repeatability: This course may be repeated for additional credit. PHIL 5211. Intermediate Logic. 3 Credit Hours. This course will go through the soundness and completeness proofs for a first-order deductive system (i.e., the kind used in intro logic). The main goal of the course will be to deepen the students' understanding of logic by acquainting them with these formal results. But we'll also try to spend a little time on some philosophical issues (e.g., what, if anything, does logic have to do with reasoning). Level Registration Restrictions: Must be enrolled in one of the following Levels: Graduate. Repeatability: This course may not be repeated for additional credits. PHIL 5216. Philosophy of Science. 3 Credit Hours. Basic issues in the current philosophy of science, and particularly various accounts of such key notations of science as hypotheses, confirmation, laws, causation, explanation, and theories. Level Registration Restrictions: Must be enrolled in one of the following Levels: Graduate. Repeatability: This course may not be repeated for additional credits. PHIL 5217. Feminist Epistemology and the Philosophy of Science. 3 Credit Hours. This course explores the effects of gender on scientific creativity, method and decision making. Thomas Kuhn, in The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962), was one of the first to show that political, social and psychological factors affect scientific change. Feminist criticisms of science, developed over the last thirty years, are one way in which his views have been developed.
  • Philosophy 1

    Philosophy 1

    Philosophy 1 for an Advanced Placement score of 4 or 5 in any discipline recognized PHILOSOPHY by the College. One unit of credit is awarded for a score of 6 or 7 on a Higher Level International Baccalaureate Examination in a liberal arts Philosophy is concerned with fundamental questions about the nature subject. One unit of credit is awarded for a score of A/A* or B on an A- of reality; the foundations of science, ethics and art; and the nature Level exam in a liberal arts subject. The College does not award credit and scope of human knowledge. Philosophy is actually the meeting for the IB Standard Exam or the AS-Level Exam. AP, IB, and A-Level credit place for all disciplines, for any discipline becomes philosophical once may be used to satisfy deficiencies and common area requirements. it begins seriously to examine its own methodology and fundamental Each academic department has its own policy regarding the use of presuppositions. Ultimately, philosophy is much more than the AP or IB credit for placement in courses and progress in the major. acquisition of a certain kind of knowledge. It is the ability to think The Department Chair must also review the A-Level score to determine reflectively and to raise questions about problems that lie at the root placement in courses and progress in the major. See departmental of what might appear self-evident. The study of philosophy is therefore descriptions for further information. recommended to all students, regardless of their major. Jeffrey A. Bernstein, Ph.D., Professor and Chair Philosophy involves both systematic forms of inquiry and a prolonged reflection upon its own history.
  • Introduction Writer Biographies for B&N Classics A. Michael Matin Is a Professor in the English Department of Warren Wilson

    Introduction Writer Biographies for B&N Classics A. Michael Matin Is a Professor in the English Department of Warren Wilson

    Introduction Writer Biographies for B&N Classics A. Michael Matin is a professor in the English Department of Warren Wilson College, where he teaches late-nineteenth-century and twentieth-century British and Anglophone postcolonial literature. His essays have appeared in Studies in the Novel, The Journal of Modern Literature, Scribners’ British Writers, Scribners’ World Poets, and the Norton Critical Edition of Kipling’s Kim. Matin wrote Introductions and Notes for Conrad’s Lord Jim and Heart of Darkness and Selected Short Fiction. Alfred Mac Adam, Professor at Barnard College–Columbia University, teaches Latin American and comparative literature. He is a translator of Latin American fiction and writes extensively on art. He has written an Introductions and Notes for H. G. Wells’s The Time Machine and The Invisible Man and The War of the Worlds, Pierre Choderlos de Laclos’ Les Liasons Dangereuses, and Jane Austen’s Northanger Abbey. Amanda Claybaugh is Associate Professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University. She is currently at work on a project that considers the relation between social reform and the literary marketplace in the nineteenth-century British and American novel. She has written an Introductions and Notes for Harriet Beecher Stowe’s Uncle Tom’s Cabin and Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park. Amy Billone is Assistant Professor at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville where her specialty is 19th Century British literature. She is the author of Little Songs: Women, Silence and the Nineteenth-Century Sonnet and has published articles on both children’s literature and poetry in numerous places. She wrote the Introduction and Notes for Peter Pan by J.
  • Is There a Genetic Fallacy in Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals?*

    Is There a Genetic Fallacy in Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals?*

    Is There a Genetic Fallacy in Nietzsche’s Genealogy of Morals?* Paul S. Loeb (University of Puget Sound) y title-question typically arises in response to Nietzsche’s famous prefatory demand for M“a critique of moral values”: “the value of these values is itself to be called into question for the first time—and for that there is needed a knowledge of the conditions and circumstances out of which they grew, under which they evolved and changed” (GM P:6).1 Alexander Nehamas, having quoted this sentence, sets out to “determine if and how the investigation of the descent (Herkunft) of moral values can affect our own evaluation of the moral point of view.”2 Granting Nietzsche’s identifi ca tion of the moral point of view with altruism or selflessness, he com ments as follows upon Nietzsche’s claim “that this connec tion [between goodness and altruism] is the specific creation of the slave revolt in morality”: Now Nietzsche’s view of the origin of our current values, even if it is correct, does not show that we should not identify goodness with altruism or utility. Nothing is objec tionable simply because it has an objectionable origin. Had Nietzsche made this argu ment he would indeed have been, as he sometimes seems to be, guilty of falling into the genetic fallacy, which amounts to confusing the origin of something with its nature or value. But Nietzsche is quite aware that such an argument is unacceptable: he himself exposes it in section 345 of The Gay Science ... His argument, as we shall see, is in any case more subtle and more complicated.3 In this passage Nehamas summarizes a prevalent strategy for countering the charge of a genetic fallacy in Nietzsche’s geneal ogy of morality: In fact, (1) Nietzsche does not claim that his genealogical results prove the disvalue of altruistic values; of course, (2) if Nietzsche had claimed this, he would have to admit commit ting the genetic fallacy; but, (3) Nietzsche himself 1 Friedrich Nietzsche, Zur Genealogie der Moral, in Sämtliche Werke: Kritische Studienausgabe [=KSA], ed.
  • Can Libertarianism Or Compatibilism Capture Aquinas' View on the Will? Kelly Gallagher University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

    Can Libertarianism Or Compatibilism Capture Aquinas' View on the Will? Kelly Gallagher University of Arkansas, Fayetteville

    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville ScholarWorks@UARK Theses and Dissertations 8-2014 Can Libertarianism or Compatibilism Capture Aquinas' View on the Will? Kelly Gallagher University of Arkansas, Fayetteville Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd Part of the Comparative Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Gallagher, Kelly, "Can Libertarianism or Compatibilism Capture Aquinas' View on the Will?" (2014). Theses and Dissertations. 2229. http://scholarworks.uark.edu/etd/2229 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UARK. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UARK. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Can Libertarianism or Compatibilism Capture Aquinas’ View on the Will? Can Libertarianism or Compatibilism Capture Aquinas’ View on the Will? A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Philosophy by Kelly Gallagher Benedictine College Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, 2010 Benedictine College Bachelor of Arts in Theology, 2010 August 2014 University of Arkansas This thesis is approved for recommendation to the Graduate Council. Dr. Thomas Senor Thesis Director Dr. Lynne Spellman Dr. Eric Funkhouser Committee Member Committee Member Abstract The contemporary free will debate is largely split into two camps, libertarianism and compatibilism. It is commonly assumed that if one is to affirm the existence of free will then she will find herself in one of these respective camps. Although merits can be found in each respective position, I find that neither account sufficiently for free will. This thesis, therefore, puts the view of Thomas Aquinas in dialogue with the contemporary debate and argues that his view cannot be captured by either libertarianism or compatibilism and that his view offers a promising alternative view that garners some of the strengths from both contemporary positions without taking on their respective shortcomings.
  • Ethical Theory and Sexual Ethics

    Ethical Theory and Sexual Ethics

    Ethical Theory and Sexual Ethics Ideas about ethics, and what counts as an ethical choice, have seen rapid change. This set of notes will suggest that there is a movement towards an evolutionary understanding of morality and outline what that emergent framework is beginning to look like for human sexual relationships. Western culture carries the last vestiges of a religious framework but increasingly there is broad acceptance of the view that Laws and morality are a human construct. Utilitarian frameworks are well established and provide a secular mechanism for moral decision-making. Utilitarianism Utilitarian frameworks all argue that morality is a rational activity and can be calculated. All maintain that the morally right course of action is that which leads to the greatest good for the greatest number. For Bentham, like Epicurus, the good is defined by actions that maximize the quantity of pleasure and minimize the quantity of pain. While Mill and Singer make minor adjustments to this they agree that morality depends on the accurate prediction of consequences, and that the end justifies the means. Morality can be, and should be, calculated and all people involved count equally for the purpose of the calculation. Bentham and Mill recommend that we pursue our natural inclinations towards pleasure (and against pain) and that this is where morality lies. In a number of ways the recommendations that flow from this ethical framework cohere with the values of the Christian civilisation from which it emerged. The desirability of ultimate and equal respect for persons is at the heart of the Gospel message.