The 70th Philosophers’ Carnival
31 May 2008 – 8:36 am by The Big Ideas Team
Welcome to the 70th edition of the Philosophers’ Carnival, a fortnightly round-up of quality philosophical posts from the blogs of the world. It seems to have been a busy two weeks, so hopefully there’s something here for everyone; apologies to those who didn’t make it in.
Matters Metaphysical
In which we consider the universe, matter, the supreme being, and so on.
John Symons of Objects and Arrows has a draft book chapter telling the history of ontology in the analytic tradition.
Maverick Philosopher gets into Peter Lupu’s “thin” theory of existence.
Holy Cyclops asks “What’s Wrong with St. Anselm’s Ontological Argument?”
Alan Rhoda, too, has it in for the old saint, describing his position on scriptural authority as a “theologian’s paradox“.
Meanwhile, on a similar topic, The Barefoot Bum takes a run at Plantinga’s ontological argument, which uses a bit of modal logic.
Arbitrary Marks considers the metaphysics of gender.
Matters Mental and Epistemological
In which we wonder what we know, and what knows it.
A Brood Comb considers what the word “consciousness” means, and touches on the topic of ordinary words becoming “technical terms” in philosophy.
Selbsttatigkeit thinks about self-consciousness and what I mean when I think “I”.
Probably Possible asks whether we have to know something in order to take an attitude of surprise, disappointment etc towards it.
The Uncredible Hallq posts a report from the 2008 Wisconsin Epistemology Conference, which sounds like it was a really good gig.
The Ends of Thought looks at what makes something a “desire”…
…while The Space of Reasons examines Davidson’s account of giving into it.
Evolving Thoughts has a substantial post discussing a recent paper on the evolution of consciousness.
Accepting Ignorance has a go at convincing you that conscousness can’t be physical, claiming, “It is logically impossible for me to be wrong”.
Logic and Rational Interaction has an interesting interview with “formal” epistemologist Clark Glymour.
Way To Go Godot wonders about the relationship between time and consciousness from a psychotherapeutic perspective.
Panexperientialism invites us to consider whether the universe might be thought of as a conscious entity.
And finally… Armchair Programmer contemplates attempts to understand aliens’ emotions in a nice dialogue form. Can we have more dialogues, oh philosophical bloggers, please? (We’ll try to put our own house in order on this matter).
Matters Ethical and Political
In which we consider what ought to be done.
PEA Soup looks at whether there are ethical truths that are strictly unknowable.
Feminist Philosophers asks where the women are in philosophy.
Philosophy Etc considers value realism and “rooted” ethics.
Shattered Paradigm decries the intellectual fashion for getting rid of most of the world’s population as a solution to all our woes (those of us who are left, that is).
Philosophy Journal has an interesting post on philosophical views of physical disability.
Public Reason chews over the hybrid embryos debate.
The Garden of Forking Paths considers the idea of diminished responsibility due to mental incapacity.
Jean Kazez writes at Talking Philosophy about the meek inheriting the Earth — at least, but perhaps not only, in the animal kingdom.
Philosophy, Etc looks at the ethical distinction between doing something and allowing it to happen.
A new blog, Hobbes Today, has some brief interrogative posts about the relevance of Hobbes’s philosophy to us.
Matters Formal
In which we consider how machines might be taught to think.
Matters Metaphysical has a chunky post on truth, presence and tensed statements.
Possibly Philosophy questions Theodore Sider’s argument for unrestricted mereological composition from vagueness.
Brains offers up a rough taxonomy of different kinds of information.
Matters Cultural
In which we consider what makes us us.
In matters auditory, On an Overgrown Path plugs internet Future Radio which will, among other things, be playing in August a complete and uninterrupted performance of Sorabji’s epic Opus Clavicemballisticum, the very last, swooning, ecstatic gasp of musical Romanticism. He also has a good post on serial music and architecture.
Staying with the ears for a moment, Two Minds points us, with raised eyebrow, at a claim that musical aptitude is inherited.
In matters visual, Squares of Wheat looks afresh at English sculptures of lions.
In matters architectural, Movement of Existence writes up some notes on “delight” and proportion.
Those Belonging to the Emperor
In which we consider other matters.
If you’re considering studying philosophy formally in the future, or just want to know what it’s like to do so, go visit The Uncredible Hallq who’s posted the text of an introductory lecture for first-time philosophy students.
…and then see how Noah Greenstein handles a related hoary old question, “What is philosophy?”
Tomkow.com dissects the methodology of an experimental philosophy paper on the ethical distinction between commission and omission.
Bryan van Norden guests at The Splintered Mind to offer a hermeneutic account of what philosophy’s for.
Knowledge and Experience remarks on the two cultures and the distinction between the “hard” and the “human” sciences, so-called.
On a related note, Metamorphosis argues for the place of the aesthetic in the “hard” sciences.
Daniel Anthony O’Reilley has been inhaling Nietzsche’s notebooks and breathing out the results.
The pic of the drummers is courtesy of Mike from Zurich. The smaller mask icon is adapted from a photo by Chiara Marra.
8 Trackback(s)