Steven Nadler talk on Spinoza - Part 2 of 2 riversonthemoon 2026-09-27 | Steven Nadler talk on Spinoza - Part 2 of 2
Diner Jukebox #2 riversonthemoon 2013-06-12 | From Superman II, Ken Thorne's slow version of Average White Band's 'Pick Up the Pieces', which plays during the final diner scene where Rocky gets his comeuppance.
Daniel Dennett on William Lane Craig riversonthemoon 2009-08-12 | Following a presentation of theistic arguments by William Lane Craig, Daniel Dennett gives an impromptu appraisal.Enjoy.And don't forget to rate and subscribe.
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 9 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-07 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion.The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting.Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_DennettAlister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology.In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 8 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-07 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion.The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting..Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_DennettAlister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology.In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 7 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-06 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion.The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting.Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_DennettAlister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology.In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 5 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-06 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion.The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting.Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_DennettAlister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology.In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 6 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-06 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion.The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting.Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_DennettAlister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology.In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 4 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-06 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion.The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting.Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_DennettAlister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology.In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 3 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-06 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion. The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting. Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dennett Alister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology. In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 2 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-06 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion. The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting. Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dennett Alister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology. In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Dennett vs McGrath - Part 1 of 9 riversonthemoon 2009-08-06 | This is a debate at the Royal Institution in London between philosopher Daniel C Dennett and professor of theology Alister McGrath. The debate is on the ideas presented in Dennett's book Breaking the Spell, such as the concept of the meme and the evolution of religion. The debate is moderated by Madeleine Bunting. Daniel Clement Dennett (born March 28, 1942 in Boston, Massachusetts) is a prominent American philosopher whose research centers on philosophy of mind, philosophy of science and philosophy of biology, particularly as those fields relate to evolutionary biology and cognitive science. He is currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies, the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy, and a University Professor at Tufts University. Dennett is also a noted atheist and advocate of the Brights movement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniel_Dennett Alister Edgar McGrath (born 23 January 1953) is a Christian theologian, who holds both a DPhil (in molecular biophysics) and an earned Doctor of Divinity degree from Oxford. He is noted for his work in historical, systematic and scientific theology. In his writing and public speaking, he promotes "scientific theology" and opposes antireligionism. McGrath was until recently Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, but has now taken up the chair of Theology, Religion and Culture at King's College London since September 2008. Until 2005, he was principal of Wycliffe Hall. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alister_McGrath
Fr. Frederick C. Copleston vs Bertrand Russell - Part 2 riversonthemoon 2009-07-15 | BBC Radio Third Programme Recording January 28, 1948. BBC Recording number T7324W. This is an excerpt from the full broadcast from cassette tape A303/5 Open University Course, Problems of Philosophy Units 7-8. Older than 50 years, out of UK/BBC copyright. Pardon the hissy audio. It was recorded 51 years ago after all. I tried to clean it up but I found that the voices were clearer without any filters. Meh. This is an excerpt from the famous BBC Radio debate between Father Frederick C. Copleston and Bertrand Russell. In this section, they discuss Leibniz's Argument from Contingency, which is a form of the Cosmological Argument. It differs from other Cosmological arguments (e.g. Kalam) in that it is consistent with an eternal universe, as it doesn't appeal to first causes, but rather the principle of sufficient reason. It can be summarized in this way: (1) Everything that exists contingently has a reason for its existence. (2) The universe exists contingently. Therefore: (3) The universe has a reason for its existence. (4) If the universe has a reason for its existence then that reason is God. Therefore: (5) God exists. For a transcript of the debate (including other topics discussed), follow this link: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/copleston.htm You can download the audio here: http://www.archive.org/details/DebateOnTheExistenceOfGodBertrandRussellV.Fr.FrederickCopleston Don't forget to comment, rate and subscribe.
Fr. Frederick C. Copleston vs Bertrand Russell - Part 1 riversonthemoon 2009-07-15 | BBC Radio Third Programme Recording January 28, 1948. BBC Recording number T7324W. This is an excerpt from the full broadcast from cassette tape A303/5 Open University Course, Problems of Philosophy Units 7-8. Older than 50 years, out of UK/BBC copyright. Pardon the hissy audio. It was recorded 51 years ago after all. I tried to clean it up but I found that the voices were clearer without any filters. Meh. This is an excerpt from the famous BBC Radio debate between Father Frederick C. Copleston and Bertrand Russell. In this section, they discuss Leibniz's Argument from Contingency, which is a form of the Cosmological Argument. It differs from other Cosmological arguments (e.g. Kalam) in that it is consistent with an eternal universe, as it doesn't appeal to first causes, but rather the principle of sufficient reason. It can be summarized in this way: (1) Everything that exists contingently has a reason for its existence. (2) The universe exists contingently. Therefore: (3) The universe has a reason for its existence. (4) If the universe has a reason for its existence then that reason is God. Therefore: (5) God exists. For a transcript of the debate (including other topics discussed), follow this link: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/copleston.htm You can download the audio here: http://www.archive.org/details/DebateOnTheExistenceOfGodBertrandRussellV.Fr.FrederickCopleston Don't forget to comment, rate and subscribe.
Thanksgiving Religious Debate - All in the Family riversonthemoon 2009-06-04 | This is a selection of clips from an episode of America's most popular TV show of the 1970's - All in the Family. The episode was in Season 6 and was titled 'The Little Atheist'. In this episode, Mike Stivic (an atheist) and his wife Gloria are expecting a baby and they are adamant about letting the child decide for itself whether it will follow a religion or not. Gloria's father, Archie Bunker, has other ideas, and at Thanksgiving dinner an argument ensues.Enjoy.My US subscribers will no doubt be familiar with the show, but for the benefit of my non-US subs and younger subs who don't know much about the show, here is the wikipedia link:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_in_the_family
The Rorty Discussion with Donald Davidson - Part 6 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-05-18 | An interesting discussion between two great philosophers of the latter half of the 20th century, exploring topics such as truth, meaning and reference. I apologize for the audio sync. It was a problem with the original file (not that it matters much, the video is simply two old men talking).Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#BiographyDonald Davidson (1917-2003) was one of the most important philosophers of the latter half of the twentieth century. His ideas, presented in a series of essays from the 1960's onwards, have been influential across a range of areas from semantic theory through to epistemology and ethics. Davidson's work exhibits a breadth of approach, as well as a unitary and systematic character, which is unusual within twentieth century analytic philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/davidson/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Davidson_(philosopher)
The Rorty Discussion with Donald Davidson - Part 5 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-05-18 | An interesting discussion between two great philosophers of the latter half of the 20th century, exploring topics such as truth, meaning and reference. I apologize for the audio sync. It was a problem with the original file (not that it matters much, the video is simply two old men talking).Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#BiographyDonald Davidson (1917-2003) was one of the most important philosophers of the latter half of the twentieth century. His ideas, presented in a series of essays from the 1960's onwards, have been influential across a range of areas from semantic theory through to epistemology and ethics. Davidson's work exhibits a breadth of approach, as well as a unitary and systematic character, which is unusual within twentieth century analytic philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/davidson/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Davidson_(philosopher)
The Rorty Discussion with Donald Davidson - Part 4 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-05-18 | An interesting discussion between two great philosophers of the latter half of the 20th century, exploring topics such as truth, meaning and reference. I apologize for the audio sync. It was a problem with the original file (not that it matters much, the video is simply two old men talking).Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#BiographyDonald Davidson (1917-2003) was one of the most important philosophers of the latter half of the twentieth century. His ideas, presented in a series of essays from the 1960's onwards, have been influential across a range of areas from semantic theory through to epistemology and ethics. Davidson's work exhibits a breadth of approach, as well as a unitary and systematic character, which is unusual within twentieth century analytic philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/davidson/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Davidson_(philosopher)
The Rorty Discussion with Donald Davidson - Part 3 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-05-18 | An interesting discussion between two great philosophers of the latter half of the 20th century, exploring topics such as truth, meaning and reference. I apologize for the audio sync. It was a problem with the original file (not that it matters much, the video is simply two old men talking).Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#BiographyDonald Davidson (1917-2003) was one of the most important philosophers of the latter half of the twentieth century. His ideas, presented in a series of essays from the 1960's onwards, have been influential across a range of areas from semantic theory through to epistemology and ethics. Davidson's work exhibits a breadth of approach, as well as a unitary and systematic character, which is unusual within twentieth century analytic philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/davidson/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Davidson_(philosopher)
The Rorty Discussion with Donald Davidson - Part 2 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-05-18 | An interesting discussion between two great philosophers of the latter half of the 20th century, exploring topics such as truth, meaning and reference. I apologize for the audio sync. It was a problem with the original file (not that it matters much, the video is simply two old men talking).Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#BiographyDonald Davidson (1917-2003) was one of the most important philosophers of the latter half of the twentieth century. His ideas, presented in a series of essays from the 1960's onwards, have been influential across a range of areas from semantic theory through to epistemology and ethics. Davidson's work exhibits a breadth of approach, as well as a unitary and systematic character, which is unusual within twentieth century analytic philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/davidson/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Davidson_(philosopher)
The Rorty Discussion with Donald Davidson - Part 1 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-05-18 | An interesting discussion between two great philosophers of the latter half of the 20th century, exploring topics such as truth, meaning and reference. I apologize for the audio sync. It was a problem with the original file (not that it matters much, the video is simply two old men talking).Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#BiographyDonald Davidson (1917-2003) was one of the most important philosophers of the latter half of the twentieth century. His ideas, presented in a series of essays from the 1960's onwards, have been influential across a range of areas from semantic theory through to epistemology and ethics. Davidson's work exhibits a breadth of approach, as well as a unitary and systematic character, which is unusual within twentieth century analytic philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/davidson/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Davidson_(philosopher)
The Persistence of Moral Disagreement - Part 6 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-04-26 | In this lecture, Stephen Stich attempts to answer the questions - Is moral disagreement fundamental? Can all moral disagreements be shown to be the result of disagreements about non-moral facts? Both moral realists and anti-realists agree that if it can't be shown, then moral realism is a dead end. He takes a look at the data of several studies including the ethics of Hopi Indians, cultures of honor, the differences between American southern gentlemen and their northern counterparts, and the differences between Western and Asian conceptions of self and their relation to each culture's morality. Enjoy and share your thoughts. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_... http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Persistence of Moral Disagreement - Part 5 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-04-26 | In this lecture, Stephen Stich attempts to answer the questions - Is moral disagreement fundamental? Can all moral disagreements be shown to be the result of disagreements about non-moral facts? Both moral realists and anti-realists agree that if it can't be shown, then moral realism is a dead end. He takes a look at the data of several studies including the ethics of Hopi Indians, cultures of honor, the differences between American southern gentlemen and their northern counterparts, and the differences between Western and Asian conceptions of self and their relation to each culture's morality. Enjoy and share your thoughts. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_... http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Persistence of Moral Disagreement - Part 4 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-04-26 | In this lecture, Stephen Stich attempts to answer the questions - Is moral disagreement fundamental? Can all moral disagreements be shown to be the result of disagreements about non-moral facts? Both moral realists and anti-realists agree that if it can't be shown, then moral realism is a dead end. He takes a look at the data of several studies including the ethics of Hopi Indians, cultures of honor, the differences between American southern gentlemen and their northern counterparts, and the differences between Western and Asian conceptions of self and their relation to each culture's morality. Enjoy and share your thoughts. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_... http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Persistence of Moral Disagreement - Part 3 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-04-26 | In this lecture, Stephen Stich attempts to answer the questions - Is moral disagreement fundamental? Can all moral disagreements be shown to be the result of disagreements about non-moral facts? Both moral realists and anti-realists agree that if it can't be shown, then moral realism is a dead end. He takes a look at the data of several studies including the ethics of Hopi Indians, cultures of honor, the differences between American southern gentlemen and their northern counterparts, and the differences between Western and Asian conceptions of self and their relation to each culture's morality. Enjoy and share your thoughts. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_... http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Persistence of Moral Disagreement - Part 2 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-04-26 | In this lecture, Stephen Stich attempts to answer the questions - Is moral disagreement fundamental? Can all moral disagreements be shown to be the result of disagreements about non-moral facts? Both moral realists and anti-realists agree that if it can't be shown, then moral realism is a dead end. He takes a look at the data of several studies including the ethics of Hopi Indians, cultures of honor, the differences between American southern gentlemen and their northern counterparts, and the differences between Western and Asian conceptions of self and their relation to each culture's morality. Enjoy and share your thoughts. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_... http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Persistence of Moral Disagreement - Part 1 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-04-26 | In this lecture, Stephen Stich attempts to answer the questions - Is moral disagreement fundamental? Can all moral disagreements be shown to be the result of disagreements about non-moral facts? Both moral realists and anti-realists agree that if it can't be shown, then moral realism is a dead end. He takes a look at the data of several studies including the ethics of Hopi Indians, cultures of honor, the differences between American southern gentlemen and their northern counterparts, and the differences between Western and Asian conceptions of self and their relation to each culture's morality. Enjoy and share your thoughts. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_... http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Definition of Morality - Part 5 of 5 riversonthemoon 2009-04-23 | Stephen Stich takes us on a journey through recent moral philosophy, meta-ethics, numerous studies in moral psychology, a discussion of the moral/conventional task, and some interesting moral dilemmas, in an attempt to define morality. Lots of interesting things to consider. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Stich http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Definition of Morality - Part 4 of 5 riversonthemoon 2009-04-23 | Stephen Stich takes us on a journey through recent moral philosophy, meta-ethics, numerous studies in moral psychology, a discussion of the moral/conventional task, and some interesting moral dilemmas, in an attempt to define morality. Lots of interesting things to consider. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Stich http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Definition of Morality - Part 3 of 5 riversonthemoon 2009-04-23 | Stephen Stich takes us on a journey through recent moral philosophy, meta-ethics, numerous studies in moral psychology, a discussion of the moral/conventional task, and some interesting moral dilemmas, in an attempt to define morality. Lots of interesting things to consider. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Stich http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Definition of Morality - Part 2 of 5 riversonthemoon 2009-04-23 | Stephen Stich takes us on a journey through recent moral philosophy, meta-ethics, numerous studies in moral psychology, a discussion of the moral/conventional task, and some interesting moral dilemmas, in an attempt to define morality. Lots of interesting things to consider. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Stich http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
The Definition of Morality - Part 1 of 5 riversonthemoon 2009-04-23 | Stephen Stich takes us on a journey through recent moral philosophy, meta-ethics, numerous studies in moral psychology, a discussion of the moral/conventional task, and some interesting moral dilemmas, in an attempt to define morality. Lots of interesting things to consider. Stich is primarily known in philosophy for his work in the philosophy of mind, cognitive science, epistemology, and moral psychology. In philosophy of mind and cognitive science, Stich (1983) has argued for a form of eliminative materialism—the view that talk of the mental should be replaced with talk of its physical substrate. Since then, however, he has changed some of his views on the mind. See Deconstructing the Mind (1996) for his more recent views. In epistemology, he has explored (with several of his colleagues) the nature of intuitions using the techniques of experimental philosophy, especially epistemic intuitions that vary among cultures. This work reflects a general skepticism about conceptual analysis and the traditional methods of analytic philosophy. In The Fragmentation of Reason he briefly sketched a form of epistemic relativism "in the spirit of pragmatism." http://www.rci.rutgers.edu/~stich/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Stich http://www.semionet.com/FR/default.htm
Owen Flanagan - Human Flourishing / Eudaimonics - Part 2 of 2 riversonthemoon 2009-04-09 | Owen FlanaganHuman Flourishing/EudaimonicsOctober 4, 2008Owen Flanagan is James B. Duke Professor of Philosophy at Duke University. He also holds appointments in Psychology and Neurobiology and is a Faculty Fellow in Cognitive Neuroscience. In 1998, he was recipient of the Romanell National Phi Beta Kappa award, given annually to one American philosopher for distinguished contributions to philosophy and the public understanding of philosophy. He has written several books; the most recent is The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World.http://fds.duke.edu/db/aas/Philosophy/ojfHis most recent book 'The Really Hard Problem - Meaning in a Material World' can be found here:http://www.amazon.com/Really-Hard-Problem-Material-Bradford/dp/0262512483/ref=sr_1_1/188-1320612-9407328?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239303925&sr=1-1Check out the entire conference at:http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-candles-in-the-dark
Owen Flanagan - Human Flourishing / Eudaimonics - Part 1 of 2 riversonthemoon 2009-04-09 | Owen FlanaganHuman Flourishing/EudaimonicsOctober 4, 2008Owen Flanagan is James B. Duke Professor of Philosophy at Duke University. He also holds appointments in Psychology and Neurobiology and is a Faculty Fellow in Cognitive Neuroscience. In 1998, he was recipient of the Romanell National Phi Beta Kappa award, given annually to one American philosopher for distinguished contributions to philosophy and the public understanding of philosophy. He has written several books; the most recent is The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World.http://fds.duke.edu/db/aas/Philosophy/ojfHis most recent book 'The Really Hard Problem - Meaning in a Material World' can be found here:http://www.amazon.com/Really-Hard-Problem-Material-Bradford/dp/0262512483/ref=sr_1_1/188-1320612-9407328?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1239303925&sr=1-1Check out the entire conference at:http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-candles-in-the-dark
Rorty on Posner and Dewey Q&A Part 4 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-05 | Pardon the audio quality. I had to boost the volume to make the questions audible. This is the Q & A session of the 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
Rorty on Posner and Dewey Q&A Part 3 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-05 | Pardon the audio quality. I had to boost the volume to make the questions audible. This is the Q & A session of the 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
Rorty on Posner and Dewey Q&A Part 2 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-05 | Pardon the audio quality. I had to boost the volume to make the questions audible. This is the Q & A session of the 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
Rorty on Posner and Dewey Q&A Part 1 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-05 | Pardon the audio quality. I had to boost the volume to make the questions audible. This is the Q & A session of the 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
Rorty on Posner and Dewey - Part 4 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-02 | The 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
Rorty on Posner and Dewey - Part 3 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-02 | The 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
Rorty on Posner and Dewey - Part 2 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-02 | The 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
Rorty on Posner and Dewey - Part 1 of 4 riversonthemoon 2009-04-02 | The 2006 Dewey Lecture in Law and Philosophy at the University of Chicago Law School. Richard Rorty (1931-2007) developed a distinctive and controversial brand of pragmatism that expressed itself along two main axes. One is negative—a critical diagnosis of what Rorty takes to be defining projects of modern philosophy. The other is positive—an attempt to show what intellectual culture might look like, once we free ourselves from the governing metaphors of mind and knowledge in which the traditional problems of epistemology and metaphysics (and indeed, in Rorty's view, the self-conception of modern philosophy) are rooted. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rorty/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Rorty#Biography Posner is the author of nearly 40 books on jurisprudence, legal philosophy, and several other topics, including The Problems of Jurisprudence; Sex and Reason; Overcoming Law; Law, Pragmatism and Democracy; and The Problematics of Moral and Legal Theory. One journal has identified Posner as the most cited legal scholar of all time. He is considered to be one of the most respected judges in the United States. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Posner John Dewey (October 20, 1859 June 1, 1952) was an American philosopher, psychologist, and educational reformer whose thoughts and ideas have been highly influential in the United States and around the world. Dewey, along with Charles Sanders Peirce and William James, is recognized as one of the founders of the philosophical school of pragmatism. He is also one of the founders of functional psychology and was a leading representative of the progressive movement in U.S. schooling during the first half of the 20th century. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dewey
George Santayana on Meaning in Life riversonthemoon 2009-01-17 | This is an audio clip from a great book entitled "The Story of Philosophy: The Lives and Opinions of the Great Philosophers of the Western World" by Will Durant, narrated by Grover Gardner. Since there's been a very interesting discussion going on recently on meaning in life started by Veritas48's video 'Why I Am Not An Atheist', I thought many would find this relevant. It presents the views of American philosopher and atheist George Santayana, with regards to meaning in life. Bertrand Russell was influenced by him, and I think you can recognize the roots of Russell's views on this subject, which ProfMTH discussed in his recent video response to Veritas48, 'Unyielding despair, you say?' Photos from Life: http://www.life.com/Life I highly recommend this book, you can get it here: http://www.amazon.com/Story-Philosophy-Opinions-Greatest-Philosophers/dp/0671739166 Info on George Santayana: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Santayana http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/santayana/ Info on Will Durant: http://www.willdurant.com/home.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_Durant Veritas48's initial video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bb6Rp7I0-J0 ProfMTH's response: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbGpm9Cwr2I
Is modern eugenics wrong? - Part 6 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-01-03 | The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering with Michael Sandel and William Haseltine speaking at the 2007 Aspen Ideas Festival. Elliot Gerson moderates the discussion. Eugenics is a dirty word. It is usually associated with forced sterilization, infanticide and all sorts of violations of human rights. But what about modern liberal consumer-driven eugenics? With the coercive and harmful aspects removed, is it still wrong? Tell me what you think. Would you want it for your child? http://fora.tv/2007/07/03/Ethics_in_the_Age_of_Genetic_Engineering
Is modern eugenics wrong? - Part 5 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-01-03 | The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering with Michael Sandel and William Haseltine speaking at the 2007 Aspen Ideas Festival. Elliot Gerson moderates the discussion. Eugenics is a dirty word. It is usually associated with forced sterilization, infanticide and all sorts of violations of human rights. But what about modern liberal consumer-driven eugenics? With the coercive and harmful aspects removed, is it still wrong? Tell me what you think. Would you want it for your child? http://fora.tv/2007/07/03/Ethics_in_the_Age_of_Genetic_Engineering
Is modern eugenics wrong? - Part 4 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-01-03 | The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering with Michael Sandel and William Haseltine speaking at the 2007 Aspen Ideas Festival. Elliot Gerson moderates the discussion. Eugenics is a dirty word. It is usually associated with forced sterilization, infanticide and all sorts of violations of human rights. But what about modern liberal consumer-driven eugenics? With the coercive and harmful aspects removed, is it still wrong? Tell me what you think. Would you want it for your child? http://fora.tv/2007/07/03/Ethics_in_the_Age_of_Genetic_Engineering
Is modern eugenics wrong? - Part 3 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-01-03 | The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering with Michael Sandel and William Haseltine speaking at the 2007 Aspen Ideas Festival. Elliot Gerson moderates the discussion. Eugenics is a dirty word. It is usually associated with forced sterilization, infanticide and all sorts of violations of human rights. But what about modern liberal consumer-driven eugenics? With the coercive and harmful aspects removed, is it still wrong? Tell me what you think. Would you want it for your child? http://fora.tv/2007/07/03/Ethics_in_the_Age_of_Genetic_Engineering
Is modern eugenics wrong? - Part 2 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-01-03 | The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering with Michael Sandel and William Haseltine speaking at the 2007 Aspen Ideas Festival. Elliot Gerson moderates the discussion. Eugenics is a dirty word. It is usually associated with forced sterilization, infanticide and all sorts of violations of human rights. But what about modern liberal consumer-driven eugenics? With the coercive and harmful aspects removed, is it still wrong? Tell me what you think. Would you want it for your child? http://fora.tv/2007/07/03/Ethics_in_the_Age_of_Genetic_Engineering
Is modern eugenics wrong? - Part 1 of 6 riversonthemoon 2009-01-03 | The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering with Michael Sandel and William Haseltine speaking at the 2007 Aspen Ideas Festival. Elliot Gerson moderates the discussion. Eugenics is a dirty word. It is usually associated with forced sterilization, infanticide and all sorts of violations of human rights. But what about modern liberal consumer-driven eugenics? With the coercive and harmful aspects removed, is it still wrong? Tell me what you think. Would you want it for your child? http://fora.tv/2007/07/03/Ethics_in_the_Age_of_Genetic_Engineering
Nita Farahany - This is Your Brain on Law - Part 2 of 2 riversonthemoon 2008-12-28 | Nita Farahany researches and writes about the intersection of criminal law, genetics, neuroscience and philosophy. She does so with an interdisciplinary background in Genetics from Dartmouth College, a master's degree concentrating in biology, from Harvard University, and a J.D., M.A. and Ph.D. in philosophy of biology and philosophy of law from Duke University. She is the editor of forthcoming volume Genes and Justice: The Impact of Behavioral Genetics and Neuroscience on Criminal Law.See the entire Beyond Belief: Candles in the Dark conference at:http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-candles-in-the-dark
Nita Farahany - This is Your Brain on Law - Part 1 of 2 riversonthemoon 2008-12-28 | Nita Farahany researches and writes about the intersection of criminal law, genetics, neuroscience and philosophy. She does so with an interdisciplinary background in Genetics from Dartmouth College, a master's degree concentrating in biology, from Harvard University, and a J.D., M.A. and Ph.D. in philosophy of biology and philosophy of law from Duke University. She is the editor of forthcoming volume Genes and Justice: The Impact of Behavioral Genetics and Neuroscience on Criminal Law.See the entire Beyond Belief: Candles in the Dark conference at:http://thesciencenetwork.org/programs/beyond-belief-candles-in-the-dark
