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 disclosing atheism to babysitters, outing yourself to bigots, spousal sabotage, skipping advertisements, and more. The show will be broadcast live on Sunday, 27 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.)


Philosophy

  • The Wrong of Utilitarianism: Q&A Webcast: 29 Apr 2012, Question 1
  • Question: What's wrong with utilitarianism? The basic principle of utilitarianism is "the greatest happiness for the greatest number." What's wrong with that as a moral standard? Shouldn't a person act for the good of society?

  • Obligation, Responsibility, and Duty: Q&A Webcast: 22 Apr 2012, Question 1
  • Question: What is the difference between obligation, responsibility, and duty? Often, people use these terms interchangeably. What's difference between them, if any?

  • The Health of Cynicism and Sarcasm: Q&A Webcast: 11 Mar 2012, Question 3
  • Question: Are cynicism and sarcasm unhealthy? I know some very bright people who also frequently express cynicism and sarcasm towards world events, public figures, etc. Their remarks can often be quite witty and insightful. But is there something unhealthy about looking at the world in this way, or can that be an appropriate response to all the many real negative facts of reality?

  • Artificial Intelligence: Q&A Webcast: 12 Feb 2012, Question 3
  • Question: Is artificial intelligence possible? Can consciousness be created on a purely logical system such as a computer? Might consciousness and even free will somehow "emerge" out of a purely logical system? Also, what do you think of the "Turing Test" as a test of intelligence?

  • False But Beneficial Ideas: Q&A Webcast: 5 Feb 2012, Question 2
  • Question: Should you just keep quiet when a friend's bad philosophy works for him? If someone you know pretty well believes in something mystical, such as "The Law of Attraction" (from "The Secret"), or "The Power of Prayer," and this has helped them move their outlook on life toward a benevolent universe premise, and they are more productive and happier, is it better to leave them with their faulty metaphysics and avoid the topic, or should you try to show them the error? What do you say when they start trying to convince you of the truth of their view?

  • The Principle of Sustainability: Q&A Webcast: 4 Dec 2011, Question 1
  • Question: What's wrong with the principle of sustainability? In the discussion of "sustainable agriculture" in your October 9th webcast, you didn't explain the problem with the basic principle of the "sustainability movement," namely "that we must meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." Doesn't that just mean respecting rights? If not, what does it mean and why is it wrong?

  • Restrooms for the Transgendered in Transition: Q&A Webcast: 30 Oct 2011, Question 2
  • Question: Which bathroom should a pre-operative transgendered person use? The brutal attack at McDonald's on a transgendered person in April 2011 was apparently started because that person used the ladies restroom, which was already occupied by a 14 year old. Was the transgendered person wrong to use that restroom?

  • 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 Validity of Sustainable Agriculture: Q&A Webcast: 9 Oct 2011, Question 2
  • Question: Is "sustainable agriculture" a legitimate concept? Many advocates of a paleo diet also advocate "sustainable agriculture," including Robb Wolf and Mat Lelonde. Is sustainable agriculture a valid concept? What does (or should) it entail? Should consumers be concerned that their food producers practice "sustainable agriculture"?

  • Ayn Rand's Alleged Admiration for William Hickman: Q&A Webcast: 9 Oct 2011, Question 1
  • Question: Did Ayn Rand draw inspiration from the serial-killer William Hickman? I ask due to this article by Mark Ames on Alternet: "Ayn Rand, Hugely Popular Author and Inspiration to Right-Wing Leaders, Was a Big Admirer of Serial Killer." According to the article, Rand idolized the serial killer William Hickman and used him as inspiration for the leads male characters in her books, notably Howard Roark. Also, Rand is said to seek an environment in which sociopaths like Hickman can thrive. Are these claims true or not? If so, would they affect the validity of Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism?

  • Friendships with People of Opposite Philosophy: Q&A Webcast: 21 Aug 2011, Question 2
  • Question: How can I maintain my integrity in friendships with people of opposite philosophic views? I struggle to keep good relations with family and friends who support our current political system in which some people are helped at the expense of others, which I regard as slavery. They support ObamaCare, EPA restrictions, and welfare programs. Through years of caring discussions, I realize that they do not hold the individual as sacred but instead focus on what's best for "the group." At this point, I often feel more pain than pleasure being with them, even though we have many other values in common, yet I hate to cut them off. How can I maintain good relationships with them – or should I stop trying?

  • Announcing Life-Changing New Beliefs: Q&A Webcast: 10 July 2011, Question 1
  • Question: When a person adopts a life-changing set of beliefs, how should he present that to family and friends? The point would not be to try to convince them to follow, but to say "look... this is what I believe, these are the principles by which I now live my life now, and please respect my choice to do so."

  • Morality and Living Well: Q&A Webcast: 26 June 2011, Question 1
  • Question: What makes some action or choice of ethical concern? In your description of this webcast, you say that you answer questions on "practical ethics and the principles of living well." What's the line between those categories? When does a person acting unwisely cross the line into immorality? When does a person deserve moral praise for acting wisely? I'd appreciate a few examples, such as career choices, family relationships, eating habits, interacting with strangers, etc.

  • 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?

  • Growing Out of Ayn Rand: Q&A Webcast: 15 May 2011, Question 5
  • Question: What do people mean when they say "I liked Ayn Rand's ideas, but then I grew up"? On several occasions, I have discussed Rand's ideas with others. They have admitted to reading Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead when a teenager. They claim that they liked or even agreed with her ideas back then. "But, now I've grown up." I guess that is supposed to embarrass me since I am in my mid-40's. It doesn't. But I am left wondering, what is going on in their heads? Are they just jaded? Do they think life naturally leads to pragmatism or an acceptance of evil?

  • Virtue as a Mean: Q&A Webcast: 1 May 2011, Question 6
  • Question: Is Aristotle's concept of virtue as a mean between extremes of vices valid? In philosophy class my professor attributed the idea of the "Golden Mean" to Aristotle. I understand the concept, and I agree with the principle to some extent, but it still does not sit right with me somehow. (Perhaps the problem is the idea of moderation for moderation's sake.) Is this idea valid as is, or is the essence right with a sloppy framework?

  • Open Minds: Q&A Webcast: 1 May 2011, Question 1
  • Question: When should a rational person be open-minded? Many people seem to have a mistaken idea of what it means to have an open mind. Where should a person draw the line between (a) listening to an opinion/idea and considering its value and (b) writing off the idea/opinion as hogwash?

  • 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?

  • Progress in Objectivism: Q&A Webcast: 10 Apr 2011, Question 5
  • Question: What were Ayn Rand's shortcomings in her understanding and/or practice of Objectivism? After having listened to a number of Rationally Selfish Webcast episodes, some passing statements make it sound like Ayn Rand had a complete understanding and perfect execution of Objectivism. I'm attracted to Objectivism as a rational approach to morality and philosophy but bothered by how untouchable Ayn Rand appears to be. To compare, Isaac Newton did wonders for the world of physics, but if we hadn't evolved his theories, our world would be far less advanced. Maybe a better question would be: What progress in understanding has been made by Objectivists since Ayn Rand's death?

  • Ideological Conflicts in Romance: Q&A Webcast: 10 Apr 2011, Question 2
  • Question: How should a person deal with ideological conflicts with a spouse? In particular, if a person discovers and embraces Objectivism while already in a serious relationship (perhaps marriage) with a non-Objectivist, what's the best way to deal with conflicts that arise due to divergent principles?

  • Criticisms of Objectivism: Q&A Webcast: 3 Apr 2011, Question 5
  • Question: What do you think about Objectivism and the Corruption of Rationality: A Critique of Ayn Rand's Epistemology by Scott Ryan? I came across the book on Amazon, and I was wondering if it's worth reading. Would it change my view about Objectivism?

  • The Supererogatory: Q&A Webcast: 6 Feb 2011, Question 5
  • Question: Does the moral concept of 'supererogatory' have any place in an egoistic ethics? Recently, I stumbled on the concept of 'supererogatory' moral actions – i.e. actions that are morally praiseworthy but which, if one did not perform them, one would not be morally blameworthy. Any validity to this concept from the perspective of the Objectivist ethics?

  • Important Ideological Disagreements: Q&A Webcast: 9 Jan 2011, Question 4
  • Question: How can Diana and Greg 'co-exist' with their difference regarding the question of personhood at/before birth, as seen in the December 19th webcast? I ask this especially in light of the discussion in the December 26th webcast of reality being binary. One of you is wrong on the personhood issue and the issue is so fundamental, I could never tolerate a dispute at this level with a close friend.

  • Philosophy as Therapy: Q&A Webcast: 14 Nov 2010, Question 4
  • Question: What are your thoughts on using philosophy rather than psychology for therapy?

    Share This Page