What would Plato tweet? Probably less about what he had for lunch and more about justice and wisdom. Rebecca Goldstein suggests Facebook and Twitter are ways we try to show that we matter … and then suggests philosophy is a better way to matter.
E3: What makes a good person good?
Older and wiser
Philosophy is the love of wisdom. At least that is the etymology of the word “philosophy.” But what is wisdom anyway? Perhaps “wisdom” is no longer a useful general term because it has been used to mean too many different things in and outside of philosophy. Even so, there have been many interesting attempts at a science of older and wiser.
Who are you deep down?
The deepest self. One model of the self is that you are unconscious impulses that are sometimes but not always restrained by conscious rational processes. But David Brooks says this is not your deepest self. Instead the deepest self is “built through freely chosen suffering” arising from the commitments you make over a lifetime.
Can you hijack your brain?
The fallacy of the hijacked brain. Is addiction a choice or a disease? Neither, says Peg O’Connor. The question is a “category mistake” that rests on a false dilemma.
The war on reason
“Scientists and philosophers argue that human beings are little more than puppets of their biochemistry. Here’s why they’re wrong.” This is Paul Bloom’s very good review of neuroscience’s claim that we are biochemical puppets and social psychology’s demonstration that factors we are unaware of influence our thoughts and acts. But Bloom concludes: “Yes, we are physical beings, and yes, we are continually swayed by factors beyond our control. But as Aristotle recognized long ago, what’s so interesting about us is our capacity for reason, which reigns over all. If you miss this, you miss almost everything that matters.”
We are puppets … but are we free or not?
Sam Harris and Daniel Dennett are determinists who agree that our thoughts and acts are completely determined by prior states of the universe and the laws of nature. But Harris is a hard determinist who thinks free will is simply an illusion while Dennett is a compatibilist who thinks we do have free will even though we are determined. In a review of Harris’ Free Will, Dennett says the book is veritable museum of mistakes. Harris replies with a lament that Dennett’s review is “a strange document—avuncular in places, but more generally sneering” and is itself a collection of distortions and mistakes. The review and reply are both lengthy, but a fairly quick look will give the student an idea of the differences between hard determinism and compatibilism.
The dangers of certainty
A lesson from Auschwitz. “We always have to acknowledge that we might be mistaken. When we forget that, then we forget ourselves and the worst can happen.”
Can ancient philosophy help people lead better lives?
Five books on ancient philosophy and modern life. Jules Evans “explores philosophy lessons of the ancients relevant to our globalised, information age – by way of cognitive behavioural therapy, and government measures of happiness.”
Free will, fate, chance
Some good books about freedom and luck. “Many philosophical theories try to evade the uncomfortable truth that luck and fate play a role in the conduct of our moral lives, argues philosopher Paul Russell. He chooses the best books on free will and responsibility. “
Socratically Speaking 