Q&A Webcast Episode: 24 April 2011
In this 24 April 2011 episode of Q&A Webcast, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered six questions on the basis of manners, brutal honesty, right to legal counsel, government medical insurance, promoting objectivism, the morality of sadism and masochism, and more in an hour-long broadcast. Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers was the audio co-host.
Remember, while Philosophy in Action's broadcasts are available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing them, but they're not free to produce: they require our time, effort, and money – week in and week out. So if you enjoy them, please contribute to our tip jar. We suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. You can contribute by PayPal to diana@philosophyinaction.com. If you prefer to send a check, please write "P/A" in the memo field and send it to "Diana Hsieh; P.O. Box 851; Sedalia, CO 80135."
My News of the Week: Please support my pledge-funded update to Explore Atlas Shrugged!
Listen Now 
- Duration: 1:07:29
Download the Episode 
Subscribe to the Feed
Share This Episode
Segments: 24 April 2011
Question 1: The Basis of Manners (5:00)
In this segment, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered a question on the basis of manners.
How do you objectively define manners? Is that even possible? What makes some action rude or polite? Is it purely subjective or based on personal values? For example, some people think that guests ought to take off their shoes in another person's house, while others don't care or even prefer shoes to remain on the feet. And some people think that putting elbows on the dinner table or feet on the coffee table is barbaric, while others regard that as fine. Since manners vary from person to person, how do you "mind your manners" when interacting with other people? Or should you not bother with that, and instead do what you please?
My Answer, In Brief: Manners are neither cultural whims, nor intrinsically good. When based on fact, they are social customs aimed at smoothing social interactions beyond demands of law and morality.
Tags: Culture, Ethics, Etiquette, Relationships
Listen or Download 
Watch Now
Relevant Links
Comments
Question 2: Brutal Honesty (18:38)
In this segment, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered a question on brutal honesty.
Is it rationally selfish to be brutally honest in some contexts? Often, you need to tell a person some hard truth, and you can do so either tactfully or brutally. In many instances, you might want to be brutally honest because you fear that the person will not understand what you say if you're tactful. So which approach is better?
My Answer, In Brief: A person should be frank and straightforward in his communications with others, neither concealing unpleasant truths nor pummeling the other person with them.
Tags: Ethics, Etiquette, Honesty
Listen or Download
Comments
Question 3: Right to Legal Counsel (30:01)
In this segment, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered a question on right to legal counsel.
Why is receiving the counsel of an attorney a right while receiving health care is not? In both cases, you would receive something that you need for free from the state. So what's the difference, if any? Why should a repeat offender have access to free legal counsel at taxpayer expense while an innocent, law-abiding sick person shouldn't receive life-saving medication or treatment at taxpayer expense? In the former case, the criminal might lose his liberty, but in the latter case the sick person might die. So what I am missing?
My Answer, In Brief: Check your premises! A person does not have a right to legal counsel at taxpayer expense but rather only the right to consult his own counsel in any legal proceeding, whether purchased by his own funds or freely-given charity.
Tags: Government, Justice, Law, Medicine, Rights
Listen or Download
Comments
Question 4: Government Medical Insurance (42:00)
In this segment, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered a question on government medical insurance.
Should a person with a pre-existing medical condition that disqualifies him from most major medical insurance plans sign up for a state-sponsored high-risk insurance pool? I'm a 1099 independent software contractor, and I'm responsible for my own health insurance. I have a pre-existing condition that disqualifies me from most of the major medical insurers. My current insurer offers few benefits, and the company is notorious for trying to deny claims. I was also diagnosed with a malignant tumor in my cheek. That's being treated, but I'll be all the more uninsurable in the future. However, the state where I live has a high-risk insurance pool available. Financially, this plan would be a much better deal than I have with my current insurance company. I would have to pay premiums, deductibles, and co-insurance, so this plan is not complete welfare. However, I'm obviously wary of becoming dependent on the government for such a plan, and I don't want to contribute to the continued socialization of the health-care system. I have some other options, like trying to find a job that offers benefits, but I love my current job. Am I trying to eat my cake and have it too by signing up for the state plan, which would allow me to stay in my current job without the worry of a major medical issue ruining me and my family financially?
My Answer, In Brief: For a person to accept government money as restitution for funds taken by force from him and/or due to government destruction of private markets is not wrong, provided that the person continues to oppose all such government welfare on principle.
Tags: Ethics, Government, Medicine, Rights
Listen or Download
Relevant Links
Comments
Question 5: Promoting Objectivism (51:03)
In this segment, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered a question on promoting objectivism.
How should one promote Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism? What are some right and wrong ways to do that? What are some good methods and target audiences?
My Answer, In Brief: Study, understand, and live the philosophy – then find ways of promoting the ideas that you're passionate about.
Tags: Activism, Ayn Rand, Culture, Objectivism, Sanction
Listen or Download
Relevant Links
Comments
Question 6: The Morality of Sadism and Masochism (57:53)
In this segment, Dr. Diana Hsieh answered a question on the morality of sadism and masochism.
Objectivism regards harming yourself or allowing others to harm you is immoral, but how does that apply to sex, particularly sadism and masochism? Should S&M acts be illegal?
My Answer, In Brief: Consensual S&M should be legal. However, S&M that's more than merely rough sex – when a person desires to hurt, dominate, humiliate his sexual partner (or to receive such) – reveals a self-destructive psychology.
Tags: Ethics, Law, Love, Psychology, Sex
Listen or Download
Comments
Conclusion (1:06:37)
Thank you for joining us for this episode! If you enjoyed this episode, please don't forget to contribute to contribute to our tip jar. Also, please don't forget to submit and vote on questions for upcoming broadcasts in in the question queue.
About Philosophy in Action Q&A Webcast
Every Sunday morning, philosopher Dr. Diana Hsieh answers four meaty questions applying rational principles to the challenges of real life in her live hour-long internet radio show, Philosophy in Action Advice Radio. Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers co-hosts the show. The audience can ask follow-up questions and make comments in the text-based chat.
You can listen to Philosophy in Action broadcasts as podcasts by subscribing to the Philosophy in Action's Podcast RSS Feeds. Be sure to sign up for the Newsletter and connect on social media.
You can also peruse the show archives, listening to whole episodes or just selected segments. The show archives are sorted by date and by topic.
For regular updates, commentary, and humor from Dr. Diana Hsieh, visit her blog NoodleFood, and subscribe to its rss feed.
Dr. Diana Hsieh is a philosopher specializing in practical ethics. She received her Ph.D in philosophy from the University of Colorado at Boulder in 2009. Her dissertation argued that Thomas Nagel's "problem of moral luck" can be resolved by an Aristotelian theory of moral responsibility. She began podcasting in 2009, then webcasting in 2010.
Support Philosophy in Action
Philosophy in Action's broadcasts are available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing them, but they're not free for us to produce: they require our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar!
If you'd like to make a one-time contribution in an amount not listed, use this link. For instructions on canceling or revising your monthly contribution, visit the support page.
Thank you, if you've contributed to our tip jar! You make our work possible, and we're so grateful for that! Also, whether you're able to contribute financially or not, we always appreciate your helping us spread the word about Philosophy in Action to anyone you think might be interested, as well as submitting and voting on questions for upcoming episodes.