On Sunday’s Philosophy in Action Radio, I answered questions on replying to intrusive inquiries, changing minds on gay marriage, dealing with overzealous ideologues, buying from chinese companies, and more with Greg Perkins. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading. You’ll find it on the episode’s archive page, as well as below.

Remember, you can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:

• Enhanced M4A Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player
• Standard MP3 Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player

Podcast: Protecting Privacy, Gay Marriage, Chinese Goods, and More

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 1:12:02
• Download: Enhanced M4A File (25.9 MB)
• Download: Standard MP3 File (24.8 MB)

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

You can download or listen to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction (0:00)

My News of the Week: I’ve been enjoying life and working on updates to Philosophy in Action, including updating the Newsletter Also. I’ve been worrying about Joshua Lipana. You can help this brave defender of liberty by contributing to his medical fund.

Question 1: Replying to Intrusive Inquiries (3:12)

In this segment, I answered a question on replying to intrusive inquiries.

How should a person respond when pressured to reveal private information? Some people think themselves entitled to know about the private lives of their co-workers, acquaintances, family, or friends. They won’t take a hint, and they might even demand the information in front of other people or in a public forum. How should a person who wishes to protect his privacy respond to such invasive inquiries? Is lying justifiable?

My Answer, In Brief: A person can protect his privacy by identifying his limits in advance, as well as cultivating his social skills and better habits. Dishonesty is not necessary to protect privacy, but instead exacerbates the problem of “snoopers.”

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 14:59
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Communication, Conflict, Ethics, Honesty, Privacy, Rationality, Relationships

Links:

• Miss Manners: The Right Thing To Say by Judith Martin
• NoodleFood: The False Dichotomy Between Honesty and Privacy

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Changing Minds on Gay Marriage (18:11)

In this segment, I answered a question on changing minds on gay marriage.

How might social conservatives be convinced to support gay marriage? Rob Portman, a Republican Senator from Ohio, recently decided to openly support gay marriage after his son came out to him and his wife. What can be done to help other conservatives see gay marriage in a new light – as a matter of liberty and individual identity?

My Answer, In Brief: The way the change more minds on gay marriage is by exposing people to the facts about gays and gay marriage, then integrating that experience with core American values. Most conservatives will come around in the next decade or two.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 16:46
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Activism, Culture, GLBT, Marriage, Politics

Links:

• Gay couples also deserve chance to get married by Rob Portman
• The Atlantic: The Key to Same-Sex Marriage’s Fast Acceptance: The Courage to Come Out
• TIME: How Gay Marriage Won
• Washington Monthly: Under the Gaydar
• “I am Married … to a Woman” by Ron Pisaturo
• Philosophy in Action: State Involvement in Marriage and Speaking Out Against Bigotry

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Dealing with Overzealous Ideologues (34:58)

In this segment, I answered a question on dealing with overzealous ideologues.

How can a person deal with overzealous ideologues? Suppose that an overzealous follower of a particular belief system constantly monitors and polices the behavior of other followers. When he sees what he believes to be a failure by someone to live up to their ideals, he attacks that person publicly, trying to shame him into proper behavior. What is the proper response if I am attacked by this overzealous follower in public? What if the attacks are private? Should I respond if my friends and acquaintances are attacked?

My Answer, In Brief: The problem of overzealous ideologues is part of a broader conflict between openness and quality control in advocacy movements. Understand that – and then exclude such people from your life as much as possible.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 23:02
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Activism, Communication, Friendship, Integrity, Justice, Objectivist Movement, Paleo, Rationality, Relationships

Links:

• NoodleFood: WTFuffles
• Ed Cline’s comments on “I am Married … to a Woman”

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 4: Buying from Chinese Companies (58:05)

In this segment, I answered a question on buying from chinese companies.

Is it moral to buy products from Chinese companies? Recently I discovered several online companies based in China that sell clothing of reasonable quality for very low prices. I’ve made a few purchases, and I am happy with the items received. But I wonder: is it moral to purchase goods made in a communist country? Granted China has changed a lot in the past two decades, but the communists still rule in a totalitarian fashion. Am I supporting that kind of regime by sending my money there, or am I supporting the entrepreneurial class which might exist in China?

My Answer, In Brief: In today’s global economy, it’s not possible to avoid Chinese-made goods – and it’s perfectly moral to buy them because China is not a communist dictatorship or other enemy.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 5:30
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags: Business, China, Ethics, Foreign Policy, Politics

Links:

• Philosophy in Action: Robert Garmong on Should We Fear or Embrace China?
NoodleFood: Correction on Chinese Gulags

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions (1:03:35)

In this segment, I answered questions impromptu. The questions were:

• What do you think about conservatives being upset at Google’s “doodle” for today (Easter Sunday)?
• Why do so many people accuse Ayn Rand of being an Nietzsche wannabe?
• How does one distinguish evil from mere madness?

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 6:50
• Download: MP3 Segment

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion (1:10:26)

Be sure to check out my blog NoodleFood and to submit and vote on questions for upcoming episodes.

About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio applies rational principles to the challenges of real life in live internet radio shows on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

Share This Post

On Sunday’s Philosophy in Action Radio, I answered questions on being someone’s extramarital affair, epistemic effects of government controls, the boundaries of art, and more with Greg Perkins. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading. You’ll find it on the episode’s archive page, as well as below.

Remember, you can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:

• Enhanced M4A Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player
• Standard MP3 Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player

Podcast: Extramarital Affairs, Government Controls, Art, and More

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 1:09:23
• Download: Enhanced M4A File (25.0 MB)
• Download: Standard MP3 File (23.9 MB)

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

You can download or listen to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction (0:00)

My News of the Week: SnowCon was fabulous, fabulous fun!

Question 1: Being Someone’s Extramarital Affair (3:51)

In this segment, I answered a question on being someone’s extramarital affair.

Is it wrong to have a romantic relationship with a married person? In Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged, Dagny Taggart had an affair with Hank Rearden, knowing that he was married. How should those actions be judged in real life? Clearly, Hank’s cheating was dishonest and wrong. Was Dagny wrong to pursue the affair? What should she have done instead? Or, imagine that Dagny didn’t know that Hank was married until after they’d slept together. What should she have done in that case upon finding out the truth? Should she stop the affair? Should she inform the wife about the cheating? Should she apologize to the wife? Also, if your answer is different than Dagny’s, how do you reconcile that?

My Answer, In Brief: Fiction is not always the best guide: it’s morally wrong and practically dangerous to be the “other man” or the “other woman” in another person’s marriage.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 19:00
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand, Character, Honesty, Infidelity, Integrity, Moral Wrongs, Relationships, Romance, Sex

Links:

• Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
• Philosophy in Action: Imitating the ‘Rape’ Scene in The Fountainhead

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Epistemic Effects of Government Controls (22:52)

In this segment, I answered a question on epistemic effects of government controls.

How do government controls encourage short-range thinking in business? In your discussion of the principle of sustainability in December 2011, you said that government controls encourage people to think short-range – to grab what they can and run with it – including in business. Why is that? What are some examples?

My Answer, In Brief: When the government can change the rules of the game anytime by new laws and regulations, people cannot rationally plan for the long run, so many people get what they can while they can.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 15:05
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Ethics, Government, Psycho-Epistemology, Regulations, Rights

Links:

• Philosophy in Action: The Principle of Sustainability
• The Housing Boom and Bust by Thomas Sowell

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: The Boundaries of Art (37:57)

In this segment, I answered a question on the boundaries of art.

What counts as art? Ayn Rand defined art as “a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist’s metaphysical value-judgments.” What does that mean? If art is a selective re-creation of reality, does that mean that anything can be art – such as a shoe or my kitchen trash? If art involves metaphysical value-judgments, does that mean that all art is implicitly a kind of philosophy?

My Answer, In Brief: Ayn Rand’s definition of art identifies the core similarities between certain kinds of human creations, namely those with the most potential to serve as spiritual fuel.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 20:28
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Aesthetics, Art, Personal Values, Spiritual Values

Links:

• The Romantic Manifesto by Ayn Rand
• Philosophy in Action: Spiritual Values

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions (58:26)

In this segment, I answered questions impromptu. The questions were:

• Is it true that all snowboarders are knuckle-dragging, retrograde delinquents?
• How are we to decide which parts of fiction to carry into real life and which parts are only “devices” for the story?

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 9:25
• Download: MP3 Segment

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion (1:07:51)

Be sure to check out my blog NoodleFood and to submit and vote on questions for upcoming episodes.

About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio applies rational principles to the challenges of real life in live internet radio shows on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

Share This Post

On Sunday’s Philosophy in Action Radio, I answered questions on universalization as an ethical test, regretful parents, online privacy, disruptive kids in public school, and more with Greg Perkins. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading. You’ll find it on the episode’s archive page, as well as below.

Remember, you can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:

• Enhanced M4A Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player
• Standard MP3 Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player

Podcast: Universalization, Regretful Parents, Online Privacy, and More

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 1:02:58
• Download: Enhanced M4A File (22.7 MB)
• Download: Standard MP3 File (21.7 MB)

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

You can download or listen to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction (0:00)

My News of the Week: I’ve been planning the last-minute details of SnowCon, plus frantically putting the house in order by Thursday. Then we flew out to attend the wedding of Eric Daniels and Rachael Griffin. It was lovely! Also, this will be my 200th podcast!

Question 1: Universalization as an Ethical Test (2:39)

In this segment, I answered a question on universalization as an ethical test.

Are arguments of the form “what if everyone did that” valid or not? Often, people will claim that some action is wrong on the grounds that not everyone could or should act that way. For example: it’s wrong for a couple not to have children because if no one had children, civilization would collapse. Or: it’s wrong for you not to donate to charity for the poor because if no one donated, lots of innocent people would suffer. Or: it’s wrong for any doctor to limit his practice to concierge service because if every doctor did that, most people would not have access to medical care. What’s right or wrong with this kind of argument?

My Answer, In Brief: While proper ethical principles are universal, universalization is not a valid test of morality. Ethics should be based on the factual requirements of human life and happiness, including the virtues.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 16:17
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Duty Ethics, Ethics, Justice, Kant, Personal Values, Universality

Links:

• Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals by Immanuel Kant: Kindle or Paperback

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Regretful Parents (18:56)

In this segment, I answered a question on regretful parents.

What should parents do if they regret ever having children? In 2008, Nebraska permitted parents to abandon children of any age without penalty. As a result, quite a few older children were abandoned before the state changed the law. That shows that some parents deeply regret ever having children, and surely many more parents have major regrets, even though they’d never abandon their children. What should a parent do if he or she realizes that having kids was a mistake? What should prospective parents do to ensure that they’ll not regret having kids?

My Answer, In Brief: Parents who regret having kids should not force those kids to pay for their mistakes. They are obliged to parent well – or, as a last resort, find a substitute.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 9:48
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Children, Ethics, Moral Wrongs, Parenting, Rights

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Online Privacy (28:45)

In this segment, I answered a question on online privacy.

What kinds of privacy can people reasonably expect online? Online privacy is an increasing concern in the media and the culture. The FTC is working on redefining what companies are and are not allowed to do with data they collect online. But given that the internet functions by sending your data through lots and lots of different systems, what rights and/or reasonable expectations should people have concerning their privacy online?

My Answer, In Brief: Online privacy is partly protected by contractual provisions about privacy. However, a person needs to take responsibility for his own privacy online by not sharing private information on insecure networks and using robust passwords.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 13:46
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Ethics, Internet, Privacy, Responsibility, Rights

Links:

• Philosophy in Action Newsletter: Tidbit on Password Security

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 4: Disruptive Kids in Public School (42:31)

In this segment, I answered a question on disruptive kids in public school.

How should a public school teacher discipline unruly students? Since school attendance is mandatory, what is the proper and moral way to handle discipline in class? I’m a Spanish teacher in public school, and I hate to threaten or punish the few unruly kids. But for the sake of students who are truly interested to learn Spanish, I have to resort to methods like assigning detention and taking away phones for students who are not interested in Spanish. They are in my class only because they are pressured by their counselors. How can I deal with disruptive students in a way that respects their rights?

My Answer, In Brief: In this case, the problem is not public school, but rather the more general problem of dealing with a bored student. The critical issue is that any disruptive student should not be permitted to slow down or halt the learning of students who do wish to learn.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 8:08
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags: Children, Education, Ethics, Government, Rights

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions (50:40)

In this segment, I answered questions impromptu. The questions were:

• Do we see a little bit of the univeralization effect in the used car market? Everyone assumes that the used car salesperson is lying about the condition of the car, so everyone discounts the price.
• Does the Institute for Justice advocate for any causes that you don’t support?
• Why is belief often treated as a choice? If I’m not convinced by an argument isn’t that the end of that?
• Do you have any advice for advocating gun rights outside the US?
• What do you think of the Obama Administration’s policy of drone killings, including of other Americans?

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 10:52
• Download: MP3 Segment

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion (1:01:32)

Be sure to check out my blog NoodleFood and to submit and vote on questions for upcoming episodes.

About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio applies rational principles to the challenges of real life in live internet radio shows on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

Share This Post

On Sunday’s Philosophy in Action Radio, I answered questions on the value of happiness, being an atheist in a religious school, privacy from government intrusion, the wrong of incest between consenting adults, and more with Greg Perkins. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading. You’ll find it on the episode’s archive page, as well as below.

Remember, you can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:

• Enhanced M4A Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player
• Standard MP3 Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player

Podcast: The Value of Happiness, Atheist Student, Privacy and More

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 1:10:27
• Download: Enhanced M4A File (25.3 MB)
• Download: Standard MP3 File (24.2 MB)

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

You can download or listen to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction (0:00)

My News of the Week: I’ve been preparing for SnowCon and working like mad on house repairs!

Question 1: The Value of Happiness (3:03)

In this segment, I answered a question on the value of happiness.

Is happiness overrated? Recently, I had a conversation in which the other person told me that “happiness is overrated.” Basically, the person claimed that people should spend less time thinking about their own personal happiness. Instead, people should focus on acting rightly, and then take whatever pleasure they can in that. Is that view right or wrong?

My Answer, In Brief: A person’s happiness should be of supreme value, and such happiness can only be achieved within the framework of rational moral principles.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 22:34
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Duty Ethics, Egoism, Ethics, Happiness, Life, Religion, Values

Links:

• Philosophy in Action: The Nature of Happiness
• The Objectivist Ethics by Ayn Rand

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Being an Atheist in a Religious School (25:38)

In this segment, I answered a question on being an atheist in a religious school.

How can an atheist teenager maintain his integrity in a religious school? A few years ago, I read Ayn Rand’s novel “Atlas Shrugged” for the first time. After a year of struggling between faith and reason, I chose reason. Unfortunately, I am a teenager, and I am forced to attend church and a religious school. For a time, I was fine coexisting with religious people. However, in the next academic year, I will have to take a class entitled “Christian Apologetics” in which I will have to pretend to be a Christian theologian. Now my integrity is at stake. How should I confront my religious family about my atheism? How can I persuade them to enroll me a different school?

My Answer, In Brief: The student should talk to his parents, and then to his teacher, about what’s required in the class and whether he can write papers that reflect his actual beliefs.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 15:14
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Academics, Atheism, Children, Communication, Education, Ethics, Integrity, Parenting, Religion

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Privacy from Government Intrusion (40:53)

In this segment, I answered a question on privacy from government intrusion.

If a person isn’t doing anything wrong, should he care to protect his privacy? Defenders of intrusive government programs (and other forms of meddling) often assume that only guilty people would object to granting others access to their private information. What, after all, does an honest and decent person have to hide? Or these people assume that everyone is guilty, and that’s what justifies monitoring everyone. What’s wrong with these arguments? Should an honest and innocent person object to government inquiries into his private life?

My Answer, In Brief: The government should not monitor or otherwise gather data about people, absent evidence of involvement in criminal activity. For the government to do so exposes innocent people to major risks.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 13:11
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Ethics, Free Society, Law, Politics, Privacy, Rights

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 4: The Wrong of Incest Between Consenting Adults (54:04)

In this segment, I answered a question on the wrong of incest between consenting adults.

Why is consensual incest between adults morally wrong? In late 2010, David Epstein, a professor of political science at Columbia University, was charged with incest for a consensual sexual relationship with his adult daughter. That case raised uncomfortable questions about the morality and legality of consensual incest. What constitutes incest? Why is it wrong? Should it be outlawed?

My Answer, In Brief: The primary evils of incest lie in exploitation and the destruction unleashed on the family – even when done purely by consenting adults. It should not be illegal, however.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 14:45
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags: Family, Health, Sex

Links:

• Wikipedia: Incest
• Salon: The law on “consensual” incest and Is father-daughter incest always rape?
• CNN: Unknowing twins married, lawmaker says
• Slate: Incest Is Cancer and The Love That Dare Not Speak Its Surname by William Saletan

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Listen or Download:

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion (1:08:50)

Be sure to check out my blog NoodleFood and to submit and vote on questions for upcoming episodes.

About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio applies rational principles to the challenges of real life in live internet radio shows on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

Share This Post

On Sunday’s Philosophy in Action Radio, I answered questions on spiritual values, advancing liberty through a new political party, welfare reform versus immigration reform, declining a friend’s plans for business partnership, and more with Greg Perkins. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading. You’ll find it on the episode’s archive page, as well as below.

Remember, you can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:

• Enhanced M4A Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player
• Standard MP3 Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player

Podcast: Spiritual Values, Political Parties, Immigration, and More

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 1:02:25
• Download: Enhanced M4A File (22.5 MB)
• Download: Standard MP3 File (21.5 MB)

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

You can download or listen to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction (0:00)

My News of the Week: I’ve been super-busy with house repairs, but don’t forget to register for SnowCon!

Question 1: Spiritual Values (3:11)

In this segment, I answered a question on spiritual values.

What are “spiritual” values? In your recent discussion of “Materialism in Marriage,” you talked about the importance of “spiritual values.” However, I found that confusing, since I’ve always associated “spirituality” with religion, often of the woozy variety. So what are spiritual values? How are they different from material values? Why are they important?

My Answer, In Brief: Understood rationally, “spiritual values” are values that sustain and nourish the mind. They are objective requirements of a person’s life and happiness.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 21:21
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Art, Ethics, Friendship, Introspection, Pleasure, Spiritual Values, Values

Links:

• Philosophy in Action: Materialism in Marriage

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Advancing Liberty Through a New Political Party (24:33)

In this segment, I answered a question on advancing liberty through a new political party.

When would creating a political party advance the cause of liberty? At the moment, creating a new political party might not make sense in the United States because the Republicans and Democrats dominate the elections and the media. But when would be the right time to do so, if ever? In other countries, even tiny parties are discussed in the news, and they can win a few seats. Under those circumstances, does it make sense to create a political party advocating for individual rights? If so, what would be a good name for such a party?

My Answer, In Brief: With the two-party system firmly in place in the US, an activist would be wasting his time by creating a new political party. At present, activism outside of political parties is likely most effective.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 15:03
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Activism, Elections, Government, Politics

Links:

• Wikipedia: History of Political parties in the United States
• Freedom Party of Canada
• Philosophy in Action: 2012 Election Results
• American Slavery, American Freedom by C. Bradley Thompson

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Welfare Reform Versus Immigration Reform (39:37)

In this segment, I answered a question on welfare reform versus immigration reform.

Is the welfare state a good reason to restrict immigration? Conservatives – and even some Objectivists – claim that immigrants are flocking to the United States for our welfare benefits. They claim that immigration must be restricted until the welfare state is curtailed. Doesn’t this view amount to punishing would-be immigrants for our own welfare state?

My Answer, In Brief: Restricting immigration due to concerns about welfare evades the core problem of the welfare state, while massively violating the rights of would-be immigrants and everyone else.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 11:26
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags:

• Activism, Conservatism, Immigration, Justice, Law, Politics, Rights, Welfare

Links:

• Philosophy in Action: Proper Immigration Policy
• The Objective Standard: Immigration and Individual Rights by Craig Biddle
• Cato Institute: Podcast Interview: The Myths of Immigrants on Public Assistance and The Use of Public Assistance Benefits by Citizens and Non-citizen Immigrants in the United States by Leighton Ku and Brian Bruen

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 4: Declining a Friend’s Plans for Business Partnership (51:03)

In this segment, I answered a question on declining a friend’s plans for business partnership.

How can I say no to a friend’s request to become a business partner? Over the past several years, I developed a home craft business. Now that it is successful, one of my friends wants to be involved. She sends messages asking to get together to discuss ideas for new products and expanding the business. However, I am not interested in having a partner. How can I let her know that I don’t want a partner – without coming across as mean or hurting her feelings? Also, since I want to support and encourage my friends’ interests, I’m struggling with guilt for saying “no.” How can I overcome that?

My Answer, In Brief: You need to be clear with your friend about the boundaries of your business, in a kind way – and perhaps apologize for any mixed signals sent in the past.

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 6:33
• Download: MP3 Segment

Tags: Business, Communication, Ethics, Friendship, Moral Wrong, Relationships

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions (57:37)

In this segment, I answered questions impromptu. The questions were:

• Is there such a thing as “rational religion”?

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 2:36
• Download: MP3 Segment

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion (1:00:13)

Be sure to check out my blog NoodleFood and to submit and vote on questions for upcoming episodes.

About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio applies rational principles to the challenges of real life in live internet radio shows on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.

Remember, with every episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, we show how rational philosophy can help you find joy in your work, model virtue for your kids, pursue your goals effectively, communicate with respect, and advocate for a free society. We can’t do that without your support, so please remember to tip your philosopher!

Share This Post