Emma Green’s “The Cold Logic of Drunk People.” What happens when you ask inebriated persons about the runaway trolley?
P1: What should I do?
Socrates considers snack mix
Dan Pashman humorously asks whether it is ethical to cherry-pick your favorite ingredient from a snack mix. Socrates, Hobbes, Kant, and Nietzsche weigh in.
What do we owe the hungry?
The United States is the wealthiest nation, has an obesity epidemic, and yet also has a very serious problem with hunger. Mike LaBossiere considers whether we have moral obligations to the hungry.
Are you a moral lark or a moral owl?
Does morality depend on the time of the day? Are you more likely to cheat in the morning or in the afternoon? Jalees Rehman reviews interesting questions about “how the external time of the day (the time according to the sun and our social environment) and the internal time (the time according to our internal circadian clock) affect moral decision-making.”
Hostages, ransom, and runaway trolleys
According to Nigel Warburton, although it won’t deter kidnappers to pay a ransom, rational calculations fall by the wayside when people you love are involved.
Philosophy for warriors
What can philosophy do for warriors? Very interesting interview with Nancy Sherman about philosophy and the military profession … with special attention to the blessings and curses of Stoicism.
Empathy … for and against
Paul Bloom claims that “if you want to be good and do good, empathy is a poor guide.” Some agree, some disagree, and that leads to a very interesting exchange of ideas on empathy.
The drowning child
Test your thoughts about what we owe others with this philosophy experiment based on articles by Peter Singer.
A better ice-bucket challenge
No one can doubt the decency of people who have support the ice-bucket challenge. Michael Specter doesn’t. And yet he asks if there is a better way to combat disease. “Once again, let me stress that I don’t think it is possible to question the good intentions of those who have anted up for A.L.S. But outcomes are another matter.” Yes, again it’s intentions v. consequences.
Kant confusion
Michael Rosen’s review of Onora O’Neill’s new book on Kantian ethics is a very nice introduction to Kant’s ethics, including some of the difficulties in interpreting and applying Kantian ethics. “In the extended chess tournament of the secondary literature [about Kant’s ethics], almost every conceivable analysis of the Groundwork has been tried out over the past two centuries, yet all have been found wanting in some way or other.”
Socratically Speaking 