Favorite Area of Philosophy?

[Fifty]

So it seems like lots of ya'll have at least a minor interest in philosophy. At the very least, most of you seem to think that you know the answer (or why answers are impossibe) to every philosophical problem.

So what's your favorite area of philosophy, and why? Favorite can be seen in terms of which you think is the most interesting, most important, which is your favorite for casual study, which is your favorite for serious study, or whatever.

 

[Narz]

I voted for philosophy of mind.

 

[Fifty]

I voted for philosophy of mind.

wacha like about it?

 

[Narz]

wacha like about it?

Shoot, I don't know even what it means but it's the one that sounded the most interesting.

I assume it's the philosophy of how the mind works and different theories about it, if not please educate me.

 

[Fifty]

Shoot, I don't know even what it means but it's the one that sounded the most interesting.

I assume it's the philosophy of how the mind works and different theories about it, if not please educate me.

yeah its basically about like theories of what mental states are, what consciousness is, the relation between the crap that happens in our brain and the qualitative experience of consciousness, examining the limits of neuroscience, etc..

 

[Narz]

Hmm, I guess it was the right vote then. Though honestly I prefer reading research about the brain (not large studies particularly because statistics aren't really all that useful, IMO) but case studies of people who've gone from mediocre to exceptional (which all begins in the brain).

Is there a branch of philosophy (and/or a particular philosopher) which deals particularly with the difference between mediocrity and nobility?

 

[Fifty]

Is there a branch of philosophy (and/or a particular philosopher) which deals particularly with the difference between mediocrity and nobility?

Yeah, virtue ethics, which is a part of normative ethics.

 

[Narz]

Yeah, virtue ethics, which is a part of normative ethics.

Hmm, I should have used the word excellence instead of nobility. I care more about being great than being good.

I mean fundamentally I know I'm a good person, would never kill, maim or rape anyone, try to help people in need, etc. so I don't care much about moral perfection but I do about perfection of self (reaching one's full physical, emotional, intellectual, quality of life potential), I just couldn't think of a perfect word to describe this so I used nobility. Is there a specific philosophy about the quest for excellence (not really having any filler about morality bogging it down)?

 

[Taliesin]

Is there a specific philosophy about the quest for excellence (not really having any filler about morality bogging it down)?

Yes, there is; it's called virtue ethics.

 

[Fifty]

Hmm, I should have used the word excellence instead of nobility. I care more about being great than being good.

I mean fundamentally I know I'm a good person, would never kill, maim or rape anyone, try to help people in need, etc. so I don't care much about moral perfection but I do about perfection of self (reaching one's full physical, emotional, intellectual, quality of life potential), I just couldn't think of a perfect word to describe this so I used nobility. Is there a specific philosophy about the quest for excellence (not really having any filler about morality bogging it down)?

well, it would seem to be a certain sort of virtue ethics still, except with the underlying value (and here we get into value theory, which is metaethics sorta) not so much just living a life in accordance with moral norms.

 

[puglover]

Religious philosophy is my personal taste. Theology is my favorite field of study.

 

[Narz]

Yes, there is; it's called virtue ethics.

well, it would seem to be a certain sort of virtue ethics still, except with the underlying value (and here we get into value theory, which is metaethics sorta) not so much just living a life in accordance with moral norms.

Ok, thanks. I change my vote then (if any mods are watching and feeling like doing this ).

Edit : and BTW, based on my selection and basic knowledge of my personality from my posting/chat style, which philosopher(s) do you think I'd benefit from?

 

[Fifty]

Edit : and BTW, based on my selection and basic knowledge of my personality from my posting/chat style, which philosopher(s) do you think I'd benefit from?

Well here's a bibliography of virtue ethics stuff:

• Adams, Robert Merihew, 2006, A Theory of Virtue, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Annas, Julia, 1993, The Morality of Happiness, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Baron, Marcia W., Philip Pettit and Michael Slote, 1997, Three Methods of Ethics, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Crittenden, Paul, 1990, Learning to be Moral, New Jersey: Humanities Press International.
• Dent, N.J.H., 1984, The Moral Psychology of the Virtues, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Driver, Julia, 2001, Uneasy Virtue, New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Foot, Philippa, 1978, Virtues and Vices, Oxford: Blackwell.
• –––, 2001, Natural Goodness, Oxford, Clarendon Press
• Galston, William, 1991, Liberal Purposes: Goods, Virtues and Diversity in the Liberal State, New York, Cambridge University Press
• Geach, Peter, 1977, The Virtues, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
• Goldie, Peter, 2004, On Personality, London: Routledge.
• Halwani, Raja, 2003, Virtuous Liaisons, Chicago: Open Court.
• Hudson, Stephen, 1986, Human Character and Morality, Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Hooker, Brad, 2000, Ideal Code, Real World, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hurka, Thomas, 2001, Virtue, Vice, and Value, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hursthouse, Rosalind, 1999, On Virtue Ethics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• MacIntyre, Alasdair, 1985, After Virtue, London, Duckworth, 2nd Edition.
• –––, 1999, Dependent Rational Animals, Chicago: Open Court.
• Nussbaum, Martha Craven, 2006, Frontiers of Justice, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
• Slote, Michael, 2001, Morals from Motives, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Swanton, Christine, 2003, Virtue Ethics: A Pluralistic View, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Taylor, Gabriele, 2006, Deadly Vices, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Tessman, Lisa, 2005, Burdened Virtues, New York: Oxford University Press.
• Williams, Bernard, 1985, Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
• Carr, David and Jan Steutel (eds.), 1999, Virtue Ethics and Moral Education, New York: Routledge.
• Chappell, T. (ed.), 2006, Values and Virtues, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Crisp, Roger (ed.), 1996, How Should One Live? Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Crisp, Roger and Michael Slote (eds.), 1997, Virtue Ethics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Darwall, Stephen (ed.), 2003, Virtue Ethics, Oxford: Blackwell.
• Flanagan, Owen and Amelie Oksenberg Rorty (eds.), 1990, Identity, Character and Morality, Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
• French, Peter A., Theodore Uehling,Jr., and Howard Wettstein (eds.), 1988, Midwest Studies in Philosophy Vol. XIII Ethical Theory: Character and Virtue, Notre Dame, Indiana, University of Notre Dame Press.
• Statman, D. (ed.), 1997a, Virtue Ethics, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Walker, Rebecca L. and Philip J. Ivanhoe (eds.), 2007, Working Virtue, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Annas, Julia, "Virtue Ethics", forthcoming in a collection of David Copp's
• Oakley, J. "Varieties of Virtue Ethics", Ratio 9, (1996), pp.128-52
• Statman, Daniel,1997b, "Introduction to Virtue Ethics", in Statman, 1997a: 1-41
• Swanton, Christine, 2003, "75 Virtue Ethics", in International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Elsevier Science, www.e-products.elsevier.com
• Trianosky, Gregory Velazco y., 1990, "What is Virtue ethics All About?", American Philosophical Quarterly, 27: 335-44, reprinted in Statman, 1997a
• Athanassoulis, Nafsika, 2000, "A Response to Harman: Virtue Ethics and Character Traits," Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, Vol C, pp. 215-221.
• Anscombe, G.E.M., 1958, "Modern Moral Philosophy", Philosophy 33:1-19
• Badhwar, N.K., 1996,"The Limited Unity of Virtue", Nous 30:306-29.
• Doris, John M.(1998), "Persons, Situations and Virtue Ethics," Nous 32:4, 504-30.
• Foot, Philippa, 1994, "Rationality and Virtue", in H. Pauer-Studer (ed.), Norms, Values , and Society, Amsterdam, Kluwer, 205-16
• –––, 1995, "Does Moral Subjectivism Rest on a Mistake?", Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 15, 1-14
• Galston, William, 1992, "Introduction", in J.W. Chapman and W. Galston (eds.) Virtue. Nomos 34: 1-14
• Geach, P.T., 1956, "Good and Evil", Analysis 17: 33-42
• Harman,G. (1999), "Moral Philosophy Meets Social Psychology: Virtue Ethics and the fundamental Attribution Error," Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society New Series Vol CXIX, 316-31.
• Hursthouse, Rosalind, 1990-1, "After Hume's Justice", Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 91: 229-45
• McDowell, John, 1979, "Virtue and Reason", Monist 62: 331-50
• –––, 1980, "The Role of Eudaimonia in Aristotle's Ethics", reprinted in Essays on Aristotle's Ethics, ed. Amelie Oksenberg Rorty, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1980, 359-76
• –––, 1995, "Two Sorts of Naturalism", in Virtues and Reasons, R. Hursthouse, G. Lawrence and W.Quinn (eds.), Oxford, Oxford University Press, 149-79
• Nussbaum, Martha, 1988, Non-relative virtues: An Aristotelian Approach", in French et al. 1988, 32- 53.
• –––, 1990, "Aristotelian Social Democracy", in R. Douglass, G. Mara, and H. Richardson (eds.), Liberalism and the Good, New York, Routledge, 203-52
• Pincoffs, Edmund L., 1971, "Quandary Ethics", Mind 80: 552-71
• Slote, Michael, 1993, "Virtue ethics and Democratic Values", Journal of Social Philosophy 14: 5-37
• Solomon, David, 1988, "Internal Objections to Virtue Ethics", in French et al, 428-41, reprinted in Statman 1997a.
• Sreenivasan, Gopal, 2002, "Errors about Errors: Virtue Theory and Trait Attribution," Mind 111 (January): 47-68.
• Stocker, Michael, 1976, "The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories", Journal of Philosophy 14:453-66
• Swanton, Christine, 1995, "Profiles of the Virtues", Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 76:47-72.
• –––, 1998, "Outline of a Nietzschean Virtue Ethics", International Studies in Philosophy 30: 29-38.
• Watson, Gary, 1990, "On the Primacy of Character", in Flanagan and Rorty, 449-83, reprinted in Statman, 1997a.

source

 

[Taliesin]

Well, nobody does virtue ethics like Aristotle, but a woman named Rosalind Hursthouse did a great deal to rehabilitate the concept for late twentieth-century philosophers. I imagine you'd find Kierkegaard and Nietzsche amenable, too.

 

[Fifty]

A lot of virtue ethics is going to be stuff dealing with its interplay with consequentialism and deontology, which aint the type of stuff I think you'd like narzy.

One interesting way of looking at excellency is through looking at what it is to be non-excellent. To this end, it may be worth looking into modern theories of sin and vice (none of these draw upon religious concerns, I actually think they are the type of thing you'd really enjoy). To this end, I've read or have heard good things about:


The Seven Deadly Sins Today
Henry Fairlie

The Seven Deadly Sins
Solomon Schimmel

Ordinary Vices
Judith N. Shklar

 

[QuoVadisNation]

I particularly enjoy any philosophy that isn't horribly metaphysical. Philosophy of Mind, for example, is a horrible waste of resources and time. But hey, as long as it gives philosophers a job, right? (*cough* Chalmers *cough*)

umm, I have a specific preference for jurisprudence. Yet jurisprudence tends to encompass other political thought, normanitvism, deconstructionism, along with applied ethics.

 

[Narz]

Well, nobody does virtue ethics like Aristotle, but a woman named Rosalind Hursthouse did a great deal to rehabilitate the concept for late twentieth-century philosophers. I imagine you'd find Kierkegaard and Nietzsche amenable, too.

What by Kierkegaard do you recommend?

A lot of virtue ethics is going to be stuff dealing with its interplay with consequentialism and deontology, which aint the type of stuff I think you'd like narzy.

Probably not. I would weigh heavily on the side of consequentialism for the record.

To this end, I've read or have heard good things about:

The Seven Deadly Sins Today
Henry Fairlie

Had it at the 'brary, reserved thanks.

The Seven Deadly Sins
Solomon Schimmel

Couldn't get it at the 'brary.

Ordinary Vices
Judith N. Shklar

Couldn't get it at the 'brary but looked good enough for me to pay $7 ($3 + $4 ship) to get on the Zon.

Thanks.

 

[Fifty]

I particularly enjoy any philosophy that isn't horribly metaphysical.

So do you have any good reason why metaphysical stuff is horrible?

 

[WillJ]

There is one philosophy class I'm looking forward to taking more than any other, and that is Philosophy of Mind. But absolutely all the areas in the poll interest me a lot.

 

[Taliesin]

What by Kierkegaard do you recommend?

Fear and Trembling is the only work I know enough about to recommend.