Join philosopher Dr. Diana Hsieh for a lively hour-long broadcast in the next episode of Philosophy in Action Q&A Radio! She'll answer questions on warning others about dangerous people, explaining a firing, investment versus sacrifice, downloading music after hard drive failure, and more. The show will be broadcast live on Sunday, 20 May 2012, at 8 am PT / 9 am MT / 10 am CT / 11 am ET. (Due to her travel schedule, Diana won't be broadcasting on Wednesday, May 23rd.)


Metaphysics

  • Cultivating Good Luck: Q&A Webcast: 8 Apr 2012, Question 1
  • Question: Can and should a person try to cultivate his own "good luck"? For example, a construction worker might leave his business card with neighbors in case they or anyone they might know happens to need his services in the future. Similarly, an investor might look to buy stock in companies with promising patents pending or forthcoming products. Is pursuing these kinds of uncertain opportunities a means of cultivating good luck?

  • Explaining Atheism: Q&A Webcast: 29 Jan 2012, Question 4
  • Question: How can I effectively explain my atheism to religious believers? When I discuss religion with believers – mostly Christians – I find that I can't easily explain why I don't believe in God. Should I appeal to the principle of the "primacy of existence"? Should I explain the problems with the arguments for the existence of God? Or should I try a different approach?

  • Ignosticism Versus Atheism: Q&A Webcast: 29 Jan 2012, Question 3
  • Question: Should rational people describe themselves as "ignostics" rather than "atheists"? By rational principles, no cognitive consideration should be given to arbitrary assertions. Since the concept of God is invariably a floating abstraction and incoherent in its definition, shouldn't the claim that God exists be dismissed as arbitrary and invalid – rather than being answered in the negative? If so, shouldn't rational people describe themselves as ignostics? In contrast to atheism, ignosticism is "[the] view that a coherent definition of God must be presented before the question of the existence of God can be meaningfully discussed. Furthermore, if that definition is unfalsifiable, the ignostic takes the theological noncognitivist position that the question of the existence of God (per that definition) is meaningless." [Wikipedia]

  • Being Pragmatic: Q&A Webcast: 29 Jan 2012, Question 1
  • Question: What's wrong with being pragmatic? My dictionary defines being pragmatic as "dealing with things sensibly and realistically in a way that is based on practical rather than theoretical considerations." What's wrong with that, if anything? Is that the same as "pragmatism"?

  • The Evidence for Free Will: Q&A Webcast: 16 Oct 2011, Question 3
  • Question: Is there objective evidence for free will? After doing some research on free will and determinism, the existence of free will seems pretty unlikely to me – even though the thought of free will is comforting. An argument often used to refute determinism is that the determinist says that we should accept determinism, since on his view, he only advocates determinism because he's determined. That seems unsatisfying, however, since that doesn't prove the existence of free will. Also, even if each person can say of himself, "I have free will," how do you determine whether others have free will? How would you know whether a toddler, a teenager, a person with a brain tumor, or a person with dementia has free will or not?

  • The Evil of Immanuel Kant: Q&A Webcast: 12 June 2011, Question 2
  • Question: Was Immanuel Kant evil rather than just wrong – and if so, why and how? I understand that Kant's ideas are very wrong, even evil. But couldn't he have been honestly mistaken, perhaps not taking his own work seriously? Given that he never advocated or did anything even remotely comparable to Hitler's genocide, why should he be regarded as evil, if at all?

  • Desires and Determinism: Q&A Webcast: 17 Apr 2011, Question 6
  • Question: How do you validate free will? For example, if a man is hungry and he values his life, then wouldn't his eating be predetermined?

  • Causality and Free Will: Q&A Webcast: 30 Jan 2011, Question 5
  • Question: How are causality and free will compatible? If my mind is an effect of my brain, and my brain is a complex physical system which operates in a deterministic way, doesn't that mean that my thoughts and actions are ultimately determined, too? What is wrong with the popular notions of causality and free will that make them appear incompatible?

  • Black and White Thinking: Q&A Webcast: 26 Dec 2010, Question 6
  • Question: Isn't it wrong to be a "black and white" thinker? To a lot of people that is not a good trait. Life isn't black and white. Black and white thinking limits you. It closes doors instead of opening them and it also closes minds. In the case of gray, you can give and take. Why is black and white thinking a necessary part of Objectivism? Shouldn't common contradicting viewpoints be welcome in a healthy discussion?

  • Objectivism Versus Theism: Q&A Webcast: 5 Dec 2010, Question 5
  • Question: Can an Objectivist believe in God? Can a person be a theist and an Objectivist? Or is that too fundamental a conflict? If so, why?

    Share This Page