-
6 votes
-
Nick Land's Fanged Noumena
5 votes -
Philosophy without a philosopher in sight: The Upanishads and the Bhagavad Gita: ancient Indian texts that challenge Western categories, yet influenced the course of modernity
9 votes -
The tyranny of the mask?
8 votes -
Charles Darwin vs Karl Marx
8 votes -
The Stoic self | An eminently practical take on who we are
10 votes -
Does philosophy reside in the unsayable or should it care only for precision? Carnap, Heidegger and the great divergence
5 votes -
How Ayn Rand ruined my childhood
21 votes -
Dislocating the self | The self is not in the brain, or the mind
4 votes -
How we can understand ourselves through games
4 votes -
The history of philosophy in global context: three case studies
6 votes -
The hard truth of poker — and life: You’re never ‘due’ for good cards
10 votes -
Are journal articles getting too long?
8 votes -
What happens when Hobbesian logic takes over discourse about protest – and why we should resist it
4 votes -
The intelligence of earthworms
9 votes -
How do we support Black Philosophers in our field?
9 votes -
The cutest little philosophers you’ve ever seen
4 votes -
Bertrand Russell’s infinite sock drawer
8 votes -
Does anyone else feel like it's really weird to be right here in the moment?
It feels so strange. I am right here in time. Not in the past, when I screwed up some stuff. Not in the future when I'll be living somehow, whether like a good adult or somehow else. It just feels...
It feels so strange. I am right here in time. Not in the past, when I screwed up some stuff. Not in the future when I'll be living somehow, whether like a good adult or somehow else. It just feels strange to be so aware of it. So aware of the moment, of the fact that I am currently typing stuff into a textbox on a website, hoping someone else relates to this feeling.
21 votes -
"My Immortal" as alchemical allegory
9 votes -
'Man becomes the sex organs of the machine world: Marshall McLuhan’s Understanding Media' (2012)
14 votes -
The philosophy of Antifa
21 votes -
A neurophilosophy of governance of artificial intelligence and brain-computer interface
2 votes -
Wise thoughts: Summaries of classic philosophical works in words of one syllable
7 votes -
What it means to be liberal
8 votes -
Electrons may very well be conscious
12 votes -
Against Set Theory (2005) [pdf]
11 votes -
In defense of hellfire: The rhetoric of damnation has been lost. But how else can we adequately condemn injustice?
8 votes -
The vampire problem: Illustrating the paradox of transformative experience
8 votes -
Why did GE Moore disappear from history?
9 votes -
At the limits of thought: Science today stands at a crossroads--will its progress be driven by human minds or by the machines that we’ve created?
3 votes -
Je regrette tout: Does moral growth demand regret?
7 votes -
A big little idea called legibility
10 votes -
Politics and the beautiful soul
6 votes -
Doing being rational: polymerase chain reaction
3 votes -
Truth be sold: How truth became a product
12 votes -
"Both studies ... sought to pin down how many times the human brain oscillates in and out of focus per minute."
6 votes -
Nihilism
7 votes -
How doctors die
21 votes -
What is space? It’s not what you think.
7 votes -
Modesty means more, not less
9 votes -
Bad company: The corporate appropriation of nature, divinity, and personhood in U.S. culture
6 votes -
The Stone Lion Racism Test - Who owns the Shisa?
8 votes -
Ignorance, a skilled practice
5 votes -
Do hierarchies lead to a stronger society?
7 votes -
Why the simple life is not just beautiful, it’s necessary
9 votes -
The parable of the pebbles
5 votes -
How do you convince someone of the value of egalitarianism?
An odd question to ask, I'll admit, but I think it's worth asking. It's hard to have a public conversation today about political or politicised topics because people will pipe up and tell you that...
An odd question to ask, I'll admit, but I think it's worth asking.
It's hard to have a public conversation today about political or politicised topics because people will pipe up and tell you that you're crazy and your ideas are completely backwards. And the reason why people say this is often driven by conflicts between personally held values rather than the ideas themselves. As a result, these conversations usually end up with both sides arguing past eachother and no concensus is ever made; nobody is happy.
One of the more common reasons for these arguements is typically because one party believes in egalitarianism - the belief that all people should be treated the same - and the other one does not. It's particularly strange to see given that so many countries have egalitarianism as a cornerstone to their government and laws. Yet we still see many people trying to take away rights and freedoms from certain classes of people.
Regardless of any particular conversation, what do you think is the best way to convince someone in the value of egalitarianism? How do you convince someone that they're not part of a higher class who has power over another?
13 votes -
The Principle of Charitable Interpretation
13 votes -
Why ‘nature’ has no place in environmental philosophy
4 votes