Skip to content

Philosophers’ Carnival CIX

by Dominic Wilkinson

Roll up, roll up for the 109th Philosophers' Carnival

There weren't a huge number of submissions, so the following is partly drawn from my own wanderings across the blogosphere. Thanks for all those who did submit posts.

Main tent – fight club

In the big top this month we have a series of high stakes clashes. Warning – those sitting in the front row may get blood on their shoes

What is a philosopher? In the red corner: Simon
(in his new New York Times blog), Some Guy and in the blue corner  Brian
, Jean Kazez, Jeremy Pierce and Roman
, (among others)

Is the 'paradox of the preface' the solution to religious
In the red corner Andrew Pessin thinks that it is, while in the blue
corner Jean Kazez, Jerry
, Ophelia Benson, and the
Apple Eaters
team up to throw counter punches

while here at PracticalEthicsNews (apologies for self-promotion)

Is Addiction a disease? In the red (against) corner Julian Savulescu
and Bennett Foddy
and in the blue corner (for) Walter
Sinnot Armstrong

those in a more reflective and less confrontational mood may like to try some of our other tents

Practical ethics tent

Jeff McMahan is interviewed on vegetarianism at philosophy bites

Norm Geras at Normblog wonders whether Texas Hold'em is a game of luck or of skill (and why should it matter?)

Iain Brassington ponders whether it is misleading or mistaken to talk about risk factors for medical misconduct at the JME Blog

Art Caplan on the implications of synthetic biology over at (see also our own special edition here)

Should we freeze ourselves after death? Ciphergoth argues that it may be wrong to decline cryonics, but that it is not obviously wrong over at Less Wrong

Moral Philosophy tent

Joshua Knobe asks What in the World is Weakness of Will? over at Flickers
of Freedom
. Knobe refers to a recent paper by Josh May and Richard Holton on moral valence and intuitions about akrasia. Is the bully who fails to go through with his planned bullying weak or strong?

Matthew Pianalto assesses the early 20th century philosopher JL Stock's idea of The Purpose of Morality? at The HEP Spot. Morality (like art) does not have an intrinsic purpose "it is rather a texture embroidered into the many purposes we set out
with in life". 

James investigates the implications of Moral Fideism in his new blog. He argues against the truth of moral facts, and that normativity arises from moral beliefs.

Morgan revisits an old problem for consequentialists – does
motive matter?
over at Incoherent Ramblings.

Ryan discusses Lubomira Radoilska's recent paper on the conflict between Liberalism and Public Health at Upon*the.People.

Meta-ethics and epistemology tents

Jussi Suikkanen ponders whether those who are convinced by error theory ever actually give up their (prior) moral thoughts in An argument for non-cognitivism at PEA Soup

Richard Chappell discusses ambiguous meta/normative theories at Philosophy etc

Jeremy Fantl discusses the role of stakes-shifting cases in arguing for epistemological views, especially ones involving pragmatic encroachment, over at Certain Doubts.

Avery Archer explains Explanation at The Space of Reasons.

Lewis Powell presents Expressivist Semantics and Locke's Theory of Language at Horseless Telegraph.

Image Credits:

1. def110 at flickr

2. On1stsite  at flickr

3. def110 at flickr

4. StuSeeger at flickr

That's it for the carnival this time. Check out the Philosophers' carnival site to see future and past hosts and to submit your favourite blog posts. The next carnival will feature on June 28th at… [insert your blog name here if you would like to volunteer!] – email Richard Chappell if you would like to host the next carnival or any future ones.

ADDIT – A volunteer has been found for the next Philosophers' carnival – it will be over at (Blog&~Blog)

Share on