« February 2008 | Main | April 2008 »
To the blowfly, horse dung makes a delightful, nourishing meal; to you, horse dung tastes like...well, like what it is -- plus, it might make you sick. In this way, value is species relative.
Continue reading "Species Relativism and Specific Vagueness" »
Consider this description of an imaginary species I'll call Homo atrox:
Homo atrox is in most respects similar to Homo sapiens, but with a far more pronounced disposition toward cruelty. In fact, studies show that atroxians who engage in wanton acts of exquisite cruelty lead substantially longer, happier, more productive lives than those who try to abstain from cruelty. [1]
Glenn Loury talks uncommon good sense about the Obama- and Clinton-camps' divide, the Wright brouhaha, and other topics. And John Whorter ain't bad either. (Not sure about John's conclusions about "Kay Callahan," though, the truth of which at the very least would turn on her class membership.)
(Via Mark Kleiman.)
They rise from the shoulder
Like stakes through the heart of the plain.
The tar and
sap slathered on for shelter against the heat
Heat up the
surrounding air like a desert;
That sweltering air rushes into my
lungs, charged with the smell of
Swamp and toolshed,
Axe and
chainsaw,
Cherry oak and crude.
. . .
First step up the metal rung, and the earth simmers below.
Conventional ethical relativism appeals to some set of social norms, traditions or practices, or personal convictions as truth-makers or grounds for moral justification. On this model, for any moral precept p, the statement 'p is true' means something like 'I (and/or those of my social group) accept p' -- where such acceptance in the assertor's moral theory (perhaps linked with some anthropological and psychological theses) constitutes the relevant "truth" or justification of p.
"[T]he folks that trust you, that just won't hear no bad about you nor even think it, those are the ones that are hard to fool. You can't put your heart in the job."
--From Jim Thompson's The Killer Inside Me.
Joining a party that started over at Ezra Klein's blog, Hilzoy riffs on the counter-Kripkean implications of Geraldine Ferraro's Obama gaffe: "[I]f I were a black man and had wheels, I would be the first black male trolleycar ever, not to mention the first being ever to be both a public transit vehicle and a mammal."
This is all very witty, of course. Then again, it's also all a bit too easy. After all, look at the fun that could have been had with Michelle Obama's "for the first time I'm proud of America" thoughts. It seems to me that if you actually wanted to be fair about construing Ferraro's woefully inartful remarks, you'd probably wind up with something like this:
Continue reading "Race and Gender as Aristotelian Accidents" »
Apropos of my NMR for March, I have decided to limit blogging to areas in which I want to develop expertise, viz., selected topics in philosophy (ethics, science, mind, Nietzsche), music, perhaps law.
While the odd impulse post might fall outside of those bounds, I hereby incorporate Daniel Davies's wisdom in "closing the books" on the following topics:
If it is any consolation,** my silence on these will probably not constitute any great loss.*
Quentin Smith, in his paper "Time Was Created by [née 'Began With'] a Timeless Point," gives the following strange argument:
Whether John McCain is a "natural born" citizen of the United States is a hot topic these days. (Not.)
Jack Balkin uses the question as a springboard into an entertaining discussion about how text and structure illuminate the issues; turns out, under Article II, sec. 1, clause 4, no one alive today is eligible to be president of the United States!
I come to something like the opposite view.
Recent Comments