Discussion Group

Wednesday's topic for discussion will be: justice and wealth. You'll want to check out my previous post on this topic. Richard Wilkinson's TED talk is especially interesting. You'll also find a handful of comments from various readers of this blog. This topic should make for a lively discussion.

Again, we're meeting tomorrow (1/18) at 6:30 at the Aud.

Undergraduate Conference

There will be a conference in May at Western Michigan University having to do with bioethics. Those of you that have taken my Ethics, Bioethics, or Philosophy and Public Issues courses should consider submitting a paper. I'd be happy to help you it up before you submit it. Also, I suspect that you could get some funding via our Undergraduate Research Award to attend the conference. Let me know if you're interested in this and I'll help you complete all the forms.

Undergraduate Biomedical Ethics Symposium

May 5, 2012
Hosted by University Center for the Humanities
2500 Knauss Hall

Biomedical ethics papers should be 3000 words (about 20 minutes presentation time) and prepared for blind review (name and identifying information should appear nowhere on the paper). Attach your paper and separate cover page that contains name, address, phone number, e-mail address and school affiliation as a Word or PDF file to the e-mail. The e-mail subject line should read “Undergraduate Biomedical ethics Paper Submission”

Submission deadline March 1st, 2012

Accepted authors will be notified by March 15th. Papers not prepared for blind review will be rejected. We respectfully request that we receive submissions only from those who plan to attend the conference if accepted.

e-mail submissions to ugbioethicswmu@gmail.com

Friday Paradox:

This one is from Bertrand Russell.

The Barber Paradox
A certain village has a barber named Saul. Saul is an affable fellow and is liked by everyone who knows him. But Saul has a peculiar practice from which he never waivers. He shaves all and only those adult male villagers who do not shave themselves. Now Saul is an adult male who lives in the village and he is clean-shaven. So an interesting question arises: Does he or does he not shave himself?

You might think that Saul does shave himself but this would contradict his practice of only shaving those individuals that do not shave themselves. Alternatively, you might think that Saul does not shave himself but this would contradict his practice of shaving all those individuals that do not shave themselves. Something has to give!?

* I should mention that Saul is a "normal" adult male and would have a beard if it were not for the fact that his face is regularly shaved.
(No cheating now... try to solve it on your own.)

Causes vs. Background Conditions

Consider a typical case of causation. Lucy strikes a match to light her grill. It's a beautiful sunny day and there's not a hint of wind. Not surprisingly, the match ignites and she is able to start her grill. I take it that it is the striking of the match that causes it to light.

But there are (what some might call) background conditions that are required for the match to light, like the presence of oxygen and a lack of rain and gusty winds. If the match were wet, then it wouldn't light. And if it were too windy, it wouldn't light. So here's an interesting question: Do the background conditions (also) cause the match to light? This might sound odd. We don't say things like "The striking of the match and the presence of oxygen caused the match to light."

Various theories of causation seem to entail that we should say that these background conditions count as causes (See, for example, David Lewis's view in his essay "Causation" and J.L. Mackie's view in his book The Cement of the Universe, among others). Some folks take the above to be a direct challenge to such theories while others bite the proverbial bullet and simply insist that such background conditions are indeed causes. What do you think about this?

If you think the background conditions are not causes, how exactly do you distinguish between the two and explain why these background conditions aren't causes?

If you think they are causes, then how do you explain our practice of not treating them as such? Why are so many people tempted to say that there's a metaphysical difference between causes and mere background conditions? How do you show that this is a mistake?

Friday Paradox:

I'll occasionally post a paradox or puzzling case on a Friday. Today's is an old one--4th century B.C. It's from Eubulides.

The Horn Paradox:
(1) You don't have horns.
(2) If you have not lost something, you still have it.
(3) You have not lost any horns.
(4) Therefore, you (still) have horns. (This follows from (2) and (3))
(5) But (4) contradicts (1) and so we're saddled with a paradox.

If you think you've got a solution to the paradox, please share it with the rest of us by making a comment to this post.

B.B. King on "Jazz Casual" from 1968

I'm in the midst my last stack of grading for the term! B.B. seems appropriate for the final stretch.

Topics for my class next term

I'm teaching a course called "Philosophy and Public Issues" next term and I'm in the midst polishing up the syllabus. This class is basically an ethics course in which we'll consider various moral theories and then analyze philosophical arguments related to controversial topics such as abortion, torturing suspected terrorists, climate change, etc. I'm reserving roughly the second half of the class for group presentations and class discussion. I have a number of topics in mind, but I'm hoping to get suggestions from readers of this blog. What current issues facing society do you think are the most important? Once I have a list of topics, I'll conduct a poll and I'll assign the winning topics to my students for their presentations. A "top three issues" would be helpful...

UPDATE 12/31/11: I posted a few additional topics in a second poll. Even if you've voted on the previous poll, feel free to pick an additional topic from the newest one. As of today, the leading topics are: economic inequality; same-sex marriage; health-care reform; climate change; and hydraulic fracturing. These have been added to the syllabus for the course. I'll conduct another poll in early January of the remaining topics and the winners will get added as well.

Discussion Group

Dr. Jessie Blackburn and I are starting a discussion group that will involve meeting once a month to banter about issues of political, social, and philosophical import. We will meet on the third Wednesday evening of each month at 6:30 pm. The group is open to all UPB students enrolled in the Scholars Program, as well as all philosophy minors. If you’re interested in attending and are not part of either of these groups, please email me. I plan on writing posts on this blog the week preceding each meeting related to the upcoming topic of discussion. I’ll there suggest some readings or other resources upon which our discussion will be based.

Our first meeting will be at 6:30 on Wednesday, January 18 at The Aud in Bradford.

The Aud Restaurant and Espresso Bar
30 Boylston Street
Bradford, PA 16701
814-331-4550

What is a soul exactly?

Various religious traditions and philosophers invoke the notion of a soul. It may be that I am to be identified with a particular soul and that when my body stops working properly my soul will ascend to Heaven. But what exactly is a soul? Many philosophers argue that souls must not be physical and that souls are the "subjects of consciousness." This simply means that my soul is the thing doing the thinking, but it's not a "thing" in the traditional sense. It's not a physical thing like a pen or gland in my body. OK. So it's a non-physical, thinking thing. But what exactly are we talking about here? I think there are some non-physical things like, perhaps, concepts (e.g., justice and multiplication) and fictional things (e.g., Harry Potter and Luke Skywalker). But souls appear to be something quite different from the sorts of things that I think are real and which are non-physical. My soul isn't just a concept and it's presumably not a fictional thing. Does anyone have any thoughts about what a soul is exactly? It would help if there were an analogous immaterial thing that would help shed light on souls, but it's difficult to come up with a satisfying example.

UPDATE 12/8/11: A kind reader of the blog emailed this short peice written by Bertrand Russell.