r/askphilosophy • • Jul 01 '23

Modpost Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! Check out our rules and guidelines here. [July 1 2023 Update]

65 Upvotes

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy!

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! We're a community devoted to providing serious, well-researched answers to philosophical questions. We aim to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, and welcome questions about all areas of philosophy. This post will go over our subreddit rules and guidelines that you should review before you begin posting here.

Table of Contents

  1. A Note about Moderation
  2. /r/askphilosophy's mission
  3. What is Philosophy?
  4. What isn't Philosophy?
  5. What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?
  6. What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?
  7. /r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules
  8. /r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules
  9. Frequently Asked Questions

A Note about Moderation

/r/askphilosophy is moderated by a team of dedicated volunteer moderators who have spent years attempting to build the best philosophy Q&A platform on the internet. Unfortunately, the reddit admins have repeatedly made changes to this website which have made moderating subreddits harder and harder. In particular, reddit has recently announced that it will begin charging for access to API (Application Programming Interface, essentially the communication between reddit and other sites/apps). While this may be, in isolation, a reasonable business operation, the timeline and pricing of API access has threatened to put nearly all third-party apps, e.g. Apollo and RIF, out of business. You can read more about the history of this change here or here. You can also read more at this post on our sister subreddit.

These changes pose two major issues which the moderators of /r/askphilosophy are concerned about.

First, the native reddit app is lacks accessibility features which are essential for some people, notably those who are blind and visually impaired. You can read /r/blind's protest announcement here. These apps are the only way that many people can interact with reddit, given the poor accessibility state of the official reddit app. As philosophers we are particularly concerned with the ethics of accessibility, and support protests in solidarity with this community.

Second, the reddit app lacks many essential tools for moderation. While reddit has promised better moderation tools on the app in the future, this is not enough. First, reddit has repeatedly broken promises regarding features, including moderation features. Most notably, reddit promised CSS support for new reddit over six years ago, which has yet to materialize. Second, even if reddit follows through on the roadmap in the post linked above, many of the features will not come until well after June 30, when the third-party apps will shut down due to reddit's API pricing changes.

Our moderator team relies heavily on these tools which will now disappear. Moderating /r/askphilosophy is a monumental task; over the past year we have flagged and removed over 6000 posts and 23000 comments. This is a huge effort, especially for unpaid volunteers, and it is possible only when moderators have access to tools that these third-party apps make possible and that reddit doesn't provide.

While we previously participated in the protests against reddit's recent actions we have decided to reopen the subreddit, because we are still proud of the community and resource that we have built and cultivated over the last decade, and believe it is a useful resource to the public.

However, these changes have radically altered our ability to moderate this subreddit, which will result in a few changes for this subreddit. First, as noted above, from this point onwards only panelists may answer top level comments. Second, moderation will occur much more slowly; as we will not have access to mobile tools, posts and comments which violate our rules will be removed much more slowly, and moderators will respond to modmail messages much more slowly. Third, and finally, if things continue to get worse (as they have for years now) moderating /r/askphilosophy may become practically impossible, and we may be forced to abandon the platform altogether. We are as disappointed by these changes as you are, but reddit's insistence on enshittifying this platform, especially when it comes to moderation, leaves us with no other options. We thank you for your understanding and support.


/r/askphilosophy's Mission

/r/askphilosophy strives to be a community where anyone, regardless of their background, can come to get reasonably substantive and accurate answers to philosophical questions. This means that all questions must be philosophical in nature, and that answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate. What do we mean by that?

What is Philosophy?

As with most disciplines, "philosophy" has both a casual and a technical usage.

In its casual use, "philosophy" may refer to nearly any sort of thought or beliefs, and include topics such as religion, mysticism and even science. When someone asks you what "your philosophy" is, this is the sort of sense they have in mind; they're asking about your general system of thoughts, beliefs, and feelings.

In its technical use -- the use relevant here at /r/askphilosophy -- philosophy is a particular area of study which can be broadly grouped into several major areas, including:

  • Aesthetics, the study of beauty
  • Epistemology, the study of knowledge and belief
  • Ethics, the study of what we owe to one another
  • Logic, the study of what follows from what
  • Metaphysics, the study of the basic nature of existence and reality

as well as various subfields of 'philosophy of X', including philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, philosophy of science and many others.

Philosophy in the narrower, technical sense that philosophers use and which /r/askphilosophy is devoted to is defined not only by its subject matter, but by its methodology and attitudes. Something is not philosophical merely because it states some position related to those areas. There must also be an emphasis on argument (setting forward reasons for adopting a position) and a willingness to subject arguments to various criticisms.

What Isn't Philosophy?

As you can see from the above description of philosophy, philosophy often crosses over with other fields of study, including art, mathematics, politics, religion and the sciences. That said, in order to keep this subreddit focused on philosophy we require that all posts be primarily philosophical in nature, and defend a distinctively philosophical thesis.

As a rule of thumb, something does not count as philosophy for the purposes of this subreddit if:

  • It does not address a philosophical topic or area of philosophy
  • It may more accurately belong to another area of study (e.g. religion or science)
  • No attempt is made to argue for a position's conclusions

Some more specific topics which are popularly misconstrued as philosophical but do not meet this definition and thus are not appropriate for this subreddit include:

  • Drug experiences (e.g. "I dropped acid today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Mysticism (e.g. "I meditated today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Politics (e.g. "This is why everyone should support the Voting Rights Act")
  • Self-help (e.g. "How can I be a happier person and have more people like me?")
  • Theology (e.g. "Can the unbaptized go to heaven, or at least to purgatory?")

What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?

The goal of this subreddit is not merely to provide answers to philosophical questions, but answers which can further the reader's knowledge and understanding of the philosophical issues and debates involved. To that end, /r/askphilosophy is a highly moderated subreddit which only allows panelists to answer questions, and all answers that violate our posting rules will be removed.

Answers on /r/askphilosophy must be both reasonably substantive as well as reasonably accurate. This means that answers should be:

  • Substantive and well-researched (i.e. not one-liners or otherwise uninformative)
  • Accurately portray the state of research and the relevant literature (i.e. not inaccurate, misleading or false)
  • Come only from those with relevant knowledge of the question and issue (i.e. not from commenters who don't understand the state of the research on the question)

Any attempt at moderating a public Q&A forum like /r/askphilosophy must choose a balance between two things:

  • More, but possibly insubstantive or inaccurate answers
  • Fewer, but more substantive and accurate answers

In order to further our mission, the moderators of /r/askphilosophy have chosen the latter horn of this dilemma. To that end, only panelists are allowed to answer questions on /r/askphilosophy.

What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?

/r/askphilosophy panelists are trusted commenters who have applied to become panelists in order to help provide questions to posters' questions. These panelists are volunteers who have some level of knowledge and expertise in the areas of philosophy indicated in their flair.

What Do the Flairs Mean?

Unlike in some subreddits, the purpose of flairs on r/askphilosophy are not to designate commenters' areas of interest. The purpose of flair is to indicate commenters' relevant expertise in philosophical areas. As philosophical issues are often complicated and have potentially thousands of years of research to sift through, knowing when someone is an expert in a given area can be important in helping understand and weigh the given evidence. Flair will thus be given to those with the relevant research expertise.

Flair consists of two parts: a color indicating the type of flair, as well as up to three research areas that the panelist is knowledgeable about.

There are six types of panelist flair:

  • Autodidact (Light Blue): The panelist has little or no formal education in philosophy, but is an enthusiastic self-educator and intense reader in a field.

  • Undergraduate (Red): The panelist is enrolled in or has completed formal undergraduate coursework in Philosophy. In the US system, for instance, this would be indicated by a major (BA) or minor.

  • Graduate (Gold): The panelist is enrolled in a graduate program or has completed an MA in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their coursework might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a degree in Philosophy. For example, a student with an MA in Literature whose coursework and thesis were focused on Derrida's deconstruction might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to an MA in Philosophy.

  • PhD (Purple): The panelist has completed a PhD program in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their degree might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in Philosophy. For example, a student with a PhD in Art History whose coursework and dissertation focused on aesthetics and critical theory might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in philosophy.

  • Professional (Blue): The panelist derives their full-time employment through philosophical work outside of academia. Such panelists might include Bioethicists working in hospitals or Lawyers who work on the Philosophy of Law/Jurisprudence.

  • Related Field (Green): The panelist has expertise in some sub-field of philosophy but their work in general is more reasonably understood as being outside of philosophy. For example, a PhD in Physics whose research touches on issues relating to the entity/structural realism debate clearly has expertise relevant to philosophical issues but is reasonably understood to be working primarily in another field.

Flair will only be given in particular areas or research topics in philosophy, in line with the following guidelines:

  • Typical areas include things like "philosophy of mind", "logic" or "continental philosophy".
  • Flair will not be granted for specific research subjects, e.g. "Kant on logic", "metaphysical grounding", "epistemic modals".
  • Flair of specific philosophers will only be granted if that philosopher is clearly and uncontroversially a monumentally important philosopher (e.g. Aristotle, Kant).
  • Flair will be given in a maximum of three research areas.

How Do I Become a Panelist?

To become a panelist, please send a message to the moderators with the subject "Panelist Application". In this modmail message you must include all of the following:

  1. The flair type you are requesting (e.g. undergraduate, PhD, related field).
  2. The areas of flair you are requesting, up to three (e.g. Kant, continental philosophy, logic).
  3. A brief explanation of your background in philosophy, including what qualifies you for the flair you requested.
  4. One sample answer to a question posted to /r/askphilosophy for each area of flair (i.e. up to three total answers) which demonstrate your expertise and knowledge. Please link the question you are answering before giving your answer. You may not answer your own question.

New panelists will be approved on a trial basis. During this trial period panelists will be allowed to post answers as top-level comments on threads, and will receive flair. After the trial period the panelist will either be confirmed as a regular panelist or will be removed from the panelist team, which will result in the removal of flair and ability to post answers as top-level comments on threads.

Note that r/askphilosophy does not require users to provide proof of their identifies for panelist applications, nor to reveal their identities. If a prospective panelist would like to provide proof of their identity as part of their application they may, but there is no presumption that they must do so. Note that messages sent to modmail cannot be deleted by either moderators or senders, and so any message sent is effectively permanent.


/r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules

In order to best serve our mission of providing an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, we have the following rules which govern all posts made to /r/askphilosophy:

PR1: All questions must be about philosophy.

All questions must be about philosophy. Questions which are only tangentially related to philosophy or are properly located in another discipline will be removed. Questions which are about therapy, psychology and self-help, even when due to philosophical issues, are not appropriate and will be removed.

PR2: All submissions must be questions.

All submissions must be actual questions (as opposed to essays, rants, personal musings, idle or rhetorical questions, etc.). "Test My Theory" or "Change My View"-esque questions, paper editing, etc. are not allowed.

PR3: Post titles must be descriptive.

Post titles must be descriptive. Titles should indicate what the question is about. Posts with titles like "Homework help" which do not indicate what the actual question is will be removed.

PR4: Questions must be reasonably specific.

Questions must be reasonably specific. Questions which are too broad to the point of unanswerability will be removed.

PR5: Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions.

Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions, thoughts or favorites. /r/askphilosophy is not a discussion subreddit, and is not intended to be a board for everyone to share their thoughts on philosophical questions.

PR6: One post per day.

One post per day. Please limit yourself to one question per day.

PR7: Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract.

/r/askphilosophy is not a mental health subreddit, and panelists are not experts in mental health or licensed therapists. Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract here. If you or a friend is feeling suicidal please visit /r/suicidewatch. If you are feeling suicidal, please get help by visiting /r/suicidewatch or using other resources. See also our discussion of philosophy and mental health issues here. Encouraging other users to commit suicide, even in the abstract, is strictly forbidden and will result in an immediate permanent ban.

/r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules

In the same way that our posting rules above attempt to promote our mission by governing posts, the following commenting rules attempt to promote /r/askphilosophy's mission to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions.

CR1: Top level comments must be answers or follow-up questions.

All top level comments should be answers to the submitted question or follow-up/clarification questions. All top level comments must come from panelists. If users circumvent this rule by posting answers as replies to other comments, these comments will also be removed and may result in a ban. For more information about our rules and to find out how to become a panelist, please see here.

CR2: Answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate.

All answers must be informed and aimed at helping the OP and other readers reach an understanding of the issues at hand. Answers must portray an accurate picture of the issue and the philosophical literature. Answers should be reasonably substantive. To learn more about what counts as a reasonably substantive and accurate answer, see this post.

CR3: Be respectful.

Be respectful. Comments which are rude, snarky, etc. may be removed, particularly if they consist of personal attacks. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Racism, bigotry and use of slurs are absolutely not permitted.

CR4: Stay on topic.

Stay on topic. Comments which blatantly do not contribute to the discussion may be removed.

CR5: No self-promotion.

Posters and comments may not engage in self-promotion, including linking their own blog posts or videos. Panelists may link their own peer-reviewed work in answers (e.g. peer-reviewed journal articles or books), but their answers should not consist solely of references to their own work.

Miscellaneous Posting and Commenting Guidelines

In addition to the rules above, we have a list of miscellaneous guidelines which users should also be aware of:

  • Reposting a post or comment which was removed will be treated as circumventing moderation and result in a permanent ban.
  • Using follow-up questions or child comments to answer questions and circumvent our panelist policy may result in a ban.
  • Posts and comments which flagrantly violate the rules, especially in a trolling manner, will be removed and treated as shitposts, and may result in a ban.
  • No reposts of a question that you have already asked within the last year.
  • No posts or comments of AI-created or AI-assisted text or audio. Panelists may not user any form of AI-assistance in writing or researching answers.
  • Harassing individual moderators or the moderator team will result in a permanent ban and a report to the reddit admins.

Frequently Asked Questions

Below are some frequently asked questions. If you have other questions, please contact the moderators via modmail (not via private message or chat).

My post or comment was removed. How can I get an explanation?

Almost all posts/comments which are removed will receive an explanation of their removal. That explanation will generally by /r/askphilosophy's custom bot, /u/BernardJOrtcutt, and will list the removal reason. Posts which are removed will be notified via a stickied comment; comments which are removed will be notified via a reply. If your post or comment resulted in a ban, the message will be included in the ban message via modmail. If you have further questions, please contact the moderators.

How can I appeal my post or comment removal?

To appeal a removal, please contact the moderators (not via private message or chat). Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible. Reposting removed posts/comments without receiving mod approval will result in a permanent ban.

How can I appeal my ban?

To appeal a ban, please respond to the modmail informing you of your ban. Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible.

My comment was removed or I was banned for arguing with someone else, but they started it. Why was I punished and not them?

Someone else breaking the rules does not give you permission to break the rules as well. /r/askphilosophy does not comment on actions taken on other accounts, but all violations are treated as equitably as possible.

I found a post or comment which breaks the rules, but which wasn't removed. How can I help?

If you see a post or comment which you believe breaks the rules, please report it using the report function for the appropriate rule. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and it is impossible for us to manually review every comment on every thread. We appreciate your help in reporting posts/comments which break the rules.

My post isn't showing up, but I didn't receive a removal notification. What happened?

Sometimes the AutoMod filter will automatically send posts to a filter for moderator approval, especially from accounts which are new or haven't posted to /r/askphilosophy before. If your post has not been approved or removed within 24 hours, please contact the moderators.

My post was removed and referred to the Open Discussion Thread. What does this mean?

The Open Discussion Thread (ODT) is /r/askphilosophy's place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but do not necessarily meet our posting rules (especially PR2/PR5). For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

If your post was removed and referred to the ODT we encourage you to consider posting it to the ODT to share with others.

My comment responding to someone else was removed, as well as their comment. What happened?

When /r/askphilosophy removes a parent comment, we also often remove all their child comments in order to help readability and focus on discussion.

I'm interested in philosophy. Where should I start? What should I read?

As explained above, philosophy is a very broad discipline and thus offering concise advice on where to start is very hard. We recommend reading this /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ post which has a great breakdown of various places to start. For further or more specific questions, we recommend posting on /r/askphilosophy.

Why is your understanding of philosophy so limited?

As explained above, this subreddit is devoted to philosophy as understood and done by philosophers. In order to prevent this subreddit from becoming /r/atheism2, /r/politics2, or /r/science2, we must uphold a strict topicality requirement in PR1. Posts which may touch on philosophical themes but are not distinctively philosophical can be posted to one of reddit's many other subreddits.

Are there other philosophy subreddits I can check out?

If you are interested in other philosophy subreddits, please see this list of related subreddits. /r/askphilosophy shares much of its modteam with its sister-subreddit, /r/philosophy, which is devoted to philosophical discussion. In addition, that list includes more specialized subreddits and more casual subreddits for those looking for a less-regulated forum.

A thread I wanted to comment in was locked but is still visible. What happened?

When a post becomes unreasonable to moderate due to the amount of rule-breaking comments the thread is locked. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and we cannot spend hours cleaning up individual threads.

Do you have a list of frequently asked questions about philosophy that I can browse?

Yes! We have an FAQ that answers many questions comprehensively: /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ/. For example, this entry provides an introductory breakdown to the debate over whether morality is objective or subjective.

Do you have advice or resources for graduate school applications?

We made a meta-guide for PhD applications with the goal of assembling the important resources for grad school applications in one place. We aim to occasionally update it, but can of course not guarantee the accuracy and up-to-dateness. You are, of course, kindly invited to ask questions about graduate school on /r/askphilosophy, too, especially in the Open Discussion Thread.

Do you have samples of what counts as good questions and answers?

Sure! We ran a Best of 2020 Contest, you can find the winners in this thread!


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

Open Thread /r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | October 26, 2026

8 Upvotes

Welcome to this week's Open Discussion Thread (ODT). This thread is a place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but wouldn't necessarily meet our subreddit rules and guidelines. For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • "Test My Theory" discussions and argument/paper editing
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

This thread is not a completely open discussion! Any posts not relating to philosophy will be removed. Please keep comments related to philosophy, and expect low-effort comments to be removed. Please note that while the rules are relaxed in this thread, comments can still be removed for violating our subreddit rules and guidelines if necessary.

Previous Open Discussion Threads can be found here.


r/askphilosophy • • 11h ago

How do philosophers ensure that a philosophical question isn't a grammatical illusion?

65 Upvotes

Natural language is very permissive. It allows us to construct sentences and questions that are 100% grammatically correct on the surface, yet don't actually make sense when you look closely at how the words work.

For example, English grammar allows me to turn an adjective or verb into an abstract noun and ask: "How do a sprinter's moving legs generate running?" or "Where does the speed go when a car stops?" Grammatically, those questions have the exact same structure as "How does the liver generate bile?"

It feels like checking whether a question is a grammatical illusion should be the very first step in philosophy, before anyone spends decades debating answers to it.

How do working philosophers actually test for this?


r/askphilosophy • • 1h ago

It feels like my PhD in philosophy is useless

• Upvotes

Does anyone have a feeling that your PhD deals with useless theories that don’t benefit the society unlike PhDs in medicine, science, math, psychology, etc do ?

When you do a PhD in philosophy either modern or ancient, you have to understand extremely abstract concepts and ideas in academic papers that constantly argue against one another, only to realize that the scholars often misinterpret each other and that, in the end, there is no solid proof or evidence for much of what they claim, especially if they are arguing about an original text on ancient philosophy written in Ancient Greek or Latin, the text which is itself super vague, left unexplained, and unclear in many places. You’re basically just learning a bunch of “sounds” from all those articles with fabricated evidence where no one knows that they are talking about. That’s what makes it so draining and devastating, especially when you do a PhD in the top university with insane requirements that keep you exhausted every day for 5-7 years (PhD in ancient/modern philosophy, not medicine where you have to save lives!….)

I sometimes envy those doing PhDs in sciences – there’s data, proof, rules, logic, evidence, everything adds up, the logic of the articles is clear, and there is far less ambiguity.

I wonder if anyone else in the final years of their humanities or who finished, especially in ancient/modern philosophy, feels the same way about their research and the articles read?


r/askphilosophy • • 8h ago

What philosophers are famous for doing drugs?

24 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy • • 1h ago

What makes one a good person?

• Upvotes

r/askphilosophy • • 14h ago

can i really do philosophy ? high schooler struggling at philosophy.

13 Upvotes

Hi folks!

I'm a high school student studying philosophy, and I'm looking for advice on how to become a better philosophical thinker THINKER. thinker being the key term. I genuinely find philosophy interesting, and I really like the ideas it explores.

but but but, I find the actual process of doing philosophy quite difficult. I often struggle with philosophical readings and find it hard to fully comprehend what an author is arguing, but even when I understand the general idea, I struggle to take it further and critically engage with it.

My biggest problem is that I can't seem to come up with original ideas or thoughts of my own. When I'm given a claim, a question or a stimulus, I often don't know where to begin. I struggle to identify implicit assumptions, recognise the philosophical issue or tension at the heart of an idea, develop objections, or construct arguments beyond the most obvious observations. I can understand and appreciate someone else's reasoning when it's explained to me, but generating my own thoughts and arguments feels like a completely different skill, and I often feel as though I'm missing something fundamental about how to approach philosophy.

Our exam involves responding to an unseen stimulus, which could be a short text excerpt or an image. We're expected to identify and unpack a philosophical issue raised by the stimulus, explicitly connect it to the core theme question, “What is a human being?”, construct a structured argument using different philosophical perspectives or thinkers, and critically evaluate those perspectives. Knowing what the exam requires is one thing, but actually being able to do it independently is another.

I'm also on a bit of a time crunch because my exams are next week, so I need to prepare for those in the short term, but putting the immediate exam stress aside, I genuinely want to develop these skills in the long run. I don't want to simply memorise philosophers' arguments or learn a formula for answering exam questions; I want to learn how to think for myself, generate ideas, question assumptions and engage meaningfully with philosophical problems. For those of you who study or teach philosophy, how do you actually learn to think philosophically and critically? How do you generate your own ideas rather than just understand and repeat other people's? How can I practise identifying assumptions, developing counterarguments and finding deeper philosophical questions in an unfamiliar stimulus? And how do you approach dense philosophical texts so that you can understand and critically evaluate them? I'd really realy really appreciate any practical advice, exercises, resources or insights from people who struggled with this when they first started. I find the subject genuinely fascinating, and I want to get better at it, but right now I feel quite lost about how to bridge the gap between being interested in philosophy and actually being able to do it.

thankss


r/askphilosophy • • 11h ago

What is longtermism?

8 Upvotes

I've already read the Wikipedia article on it, but I'd really appreciate it if someone elaborated on the fundamentals of longtermism and what academic philosophers think of it as an ethical stance.


r/askphilosophy • • 16h ago

Which of Aristotle's philosophical works remain pertinent? Which are nowadays mostly considered to be historical curiosities?

20 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy • • 5h ago

is a country still a democracy if most people vote to repress a tiny minority?

2 Upvotes

suppose most people in a country don’t like some tiny minority. they vote for a party that promises to go after them and that party gets a supermajority. the elections are completely fair, nobody’s votes are suppressed and everyone can still say whatever they want about the party.

then the government passes laws against that minority, like banning their religion or taking away their right to vote. it’s not some dictator doing this against the will of the people, the majority actually wants this.

obviously that’s wrong, but would that country still count as a democracy? because technically it’s just doing what most people voted for right?


r/askphilosophy • • 6h ago

Metaphysics Surrounding Prenatal Parental Obligations - The Non Identity Problem

2 Upvotes

I'm a philosophy undergrad current working on my senior capstone project. In short (and apparently metaphysically incorrect) I'm looking at prenatal genetic information ethics around balancing a parent's right-to-ignorance and their obligation ensure the health/safety of the future child.

When I met with my philosophy advisor (who is also not the professor leading the senior capstone class, therefore he had not seen my argument/topic before I had reached out. This meant that I had already done most of my research and had some parts written) he explained to me that I need to reformat my argument as "Obligation to future child" is metaphysically wrong, as it is impossible to have a directed obligation TO/Towards a non-existent entity.

The argument goes from "Parental obligation to ensure the health of their future unborn child" to "The indirect/impersonal parental obligation to not create a child who is below a certain health threshold". This seems somewhat fair, as I think I was basically arguing for a form of impersonal obligation (Parental obligation towards the amorphous possible future child) via a mix of causal and voluntarism backing theories around parental obligation. Specifically my idea was that obligations attached to being a future parent appear once a couple has voluntarily taken up the project of bearing a child, but only have obligations towards A born child (aka whoever ends up being born at the end of this process), and reasonable obligations towards any fetus they decide to bring to full birth (they can turn away from this project at any time, or the particular fetus at any time, as I want to ensure the right to abortion was permissible within my framework). This makes it so the parents have obligation towards the health of A born child, it frees them/covers off against the ideas that genetic testing doesn't benefit any particular person (usually you ignore/abort a fetus with a disease rather than curing it)). While voluntary taking up is necessary for obligations, there is also a causal element in that the parents are the ones creating the child that I think are important, the obligation stems from being causally connected, but during prenatal and natal stages the obligations are voluntary because the project is voluntary.

However, due to this metaphysical wrench thrown in my plans, this no longer seems like an argument I can make, as parental theories backing/my argument is based on can't apply as they are centered around directed obligation towards a specific existent someone, and my idea of an "obligation to A born child" doesn't work because its a directed obligation to a non-existent someone.

Unfortunately, a medical situation has forced my advisor to take medical leave for the rest of the year, and had to cancel day of our second meeting where he was going to help me work through how to reword my arguments and what research was now invalid for me to us + what other research I now had to look into (The Non-Identity Problem). I also still have this gut feeling, even having looked into the non-identity problem that my above argument (obligation to A born child, whoever ends up being born) seems possible and defendable, but I'm not knowledgeable enough in this field.

Any advice or ideas would be deeply appreciated! As I've had to stop actually writing my paper to now sorting out this metaphysical wrench my professor has thrown into my gears (and then walked away without helping /lh)

TLDR: My argument was about a parental obligation towards whatever child ends up being born, but this doesn't metaphysically work due to the non-identity problem. I'm now trying to figure out how to reword my argument and what research/backing I now need to do with this (somewhat slight) direction change


r/askphilosophy • • 10h ago

What are the best responses to feser's aristotelian/thomistic arguments.

3 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy • • 3h ago

On ne sais pas comment on comprends le sens des mots ?

1 Upvotes

D'apres les chercheurs c'est par association mais ce n est pas une explication complete


r/askphilosophy • • 10h ago

Does Zizek think that Ideology is irrational?

2 Upvotes

When I was reading The Sublime Object of Ideology, I recall seeing a passage that said something to the effect that Ideology, being an unconscious fantasy, was something to be worked through, the same way that a psychoanalyst works something through with a patient. Does Zizek think that Ideology is something irrational, or perhaps something that is faith-based (in the sense that Kierkegaard uses faith, i.e. a thing which is believed without or beyond reason)?


r/askphilosophy • • 4h ago

That’s What She Said: The Language of Sexual Negotiation by Rebecca Kukla

1 Upvotes

Hello everyone, I'm new to philosophy, and it’s my first time posting on this forum, so if there are any errors, please let me know! From the title, you can assume I recently read Rebecca Kukla's article on the Language of Sexual Negotiation. I wanted to discuss and share my thoughts on it, especially with the recent attention to these themes (finally!!). In the article, Kukla argues about the insufficiency of consent in relation to the pragmatics of language. Her main problem is that consent may not be a positive interaction; for example, she references Rae Langton's work on silencing and the difference between a request, which often creates a sense of obligation, and an invitation, which expresses a wish to share an experience without being coercive. This eventually leads her to the conclusion that though communication is important, so is the environment or conditions in which this communication is expressed. Following this, my question is: where does the responsibility lie when communication does fail? When I say this, I mean that since it depends on context, if the interaction was interpreted differently by both parties, who should take responsibility, or should both? My other question is in reference to Kukla's mention of invitations. Can invitations create pressure or a feeling of obligation rather than diminish the power imbalance usually responsible?


r/askphilosophy • • 5h ago

Why did the principle of charity develop in philosophy ?

1 Upvotes

It seems to especially contrast with epistemic skepticism. Is there a good reason for why it developed and the rationale behind the principle ?


r/askphilosophy • • 9h ago

If my first reading of the Four Confucian Classics are Ezra Pound’s, should I read others?

2 Upvotes

I’m in a mental health facility and only have access to the books I brought with me and the small library on site. One of these books is the LOA volume of Ezra Pound’s poems and translations, including the latter of the Four Confucian Classics. His Wikipedia mentioned they are “non literal”, and as much as I adore his translations of Chinese poetry, I am aware that they are not entirely accurate and some of his ideas about translation are considered outdated. I will definitely read them regardless, but should I read more “literal” translations at some point to get a full picture of things his version might be missing? Any feedback is appreciated.


r/askphilosophy • • 6h ago

How does a virtue ethicist deal with situations and not person being immoral?

1 Upvotes

I apologize as I am sure this must be a very basic, beginner question, but its screwing with me.

I lately have been interested for my own discipline, to take up stoicism (actual stoicism, not the "repress all your emotions" thing) and I know it to be a virtue ethics, where virtue is the only good as only it can lead to eudaimonia, also on Epicureanism which I am not sure but I think also considers virtues good for pleasure.

But the thing is, if what is good is located in myself and not in the world or external events, then what is bad about people being homeless, or people being stolen from, or assaulted, or people living in horrible conditions, or working in bad conditions? Shouldn't the solution according to such systems of virtue ethics (stoicism in particular) to just tell them to become virtous, rather than changing their situation?

I am aware one of the four main virtues is "justice" but still .... the virtue itself seems to be the goal rather than its external effects.

So that is my question.


r/askphilosophy • • 8h ago

What do philosophers have to say about logic and cold calculation vs compassion and kindness?

1 Upvotes

I found my rabbit in a not 100% healthy state last week, I took her to the vet, where the consultation alone cost me over £50 even when on their plan that gave me a discount, combined with the antibiotics which was also discounted I spent over £80; today, when I took her back to the vet, because she wasn't all the way healthy yet, not only was I given more antibiotics for her but also eye drops, and between the consultation, antibiotics and eye drops, once again all discounted for me, it cost me another £117; in total, I spent nearly £200 on her medical care.

Obviously I don't believe this is what I should have done, but what I can't get out of my head is that I could have just easily replaced my rabbit with a healthy baby one for £40, one fifth of what I spent on my rabbit's healthcare. Because I can't get this out of my head, I need to talk about it with other people, and I figured there must be philosophers who have explored this kind of thing. What do they have to say?


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

I am 26yo freshman philosophy student with about 5 years of autodidactic study. Is it too late for me to begin an academic/writing career given the timeline?

58 Upvotes

This semester I have started school and after meeting with students and professors, I am beginning to have concerns about what the future may look like for the field. Before I started, I tried to read as much as possible out of passion, but have not developed my writing or public thought at all. I am aware of the decline in academic jobs and opportunities, but I'm more concerned with my ability to branch out and contribute to the field, and the prospect of getting an academic job is more of a secondary for me.
Has anyone else been in a similar spot? What would you recommend?
Thanks in advance, and sorry if this doesn't fall within the rules.


r/askphilosophy • • 10h ago

Which is more plausible?

1 Upvotes

​

Pain and attachment give meaning its weight. Meaning becomes an organising structure, eventually producing the felt need to preserve itself as though it were necessary for existence?

Or perhaps existence appears to require meaning when the experienced necessity for meaning is itself an outcome of pain, attachment, and the structures built around them.

The mechanism that once organised experiences become something experience is organised to protect?


r/askphilosophy • • 10h ago

Does dualism (philosophy of mind) entails that there's something after death?

1 Upvotes

My question comes from the intuition that if it is true that consciousness and matter are separate, when matter disgregates, then consciousness keeps existing as nothing happened. This would entail some afterlife of some sort (either heaven/hell or rebirth or a neutral place for everyone or idk).

Does this make sense or am I making up things?


r/askphilosophy • • 23h ago

What are the most popular critiques of Schopenhauer's "Man can do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wills"?

6 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

How should I construct a philosophy syllabus for myself?

7 Upvotes

I’m a writer but I realized I’m not really exceptionally knowledgeable about something other than the craft of writing. And I wanna be really knowledgeable about something other than that.

So, I’ve decided to take up philosophy. I’m starting with Machiavelli since I like political philosophy already. And unfortunately I’m already explaining him to my friends.

I think I’ll move on to Kierkegaard or Descartes after. Eventually, I want to read Fanged Noumena since Nick Land really fascinates me.


r/askphilosophy • • 19h ago

Is there a methodology to identify new grounds on which discrimination should be morally impermissible ?

2 Upvotes

For a large part of history what minorities and vulnerable groups should not be discriminated against has been determined through conflict and uprising and the dominant group compromising. But is there a conflict free method of determining which groups or individuals should not be treated less or more than others ?

Some of the common grounds and reasons for recognition of certain groups like race and sexual orientation has been the innate nature of them however things like religion are not immutable or innate yet it has been a prohibited ground of discrimination. This further raises this question if the means of determining equality are arbitrary ?