Search

This paper spells out the following line of thought: (A) How much we care about various things is in constant flux, even as the world remains as it was. Internal affective shifts due to changes in mood, arousal-states or even hunger cause us to be more or less concerned about something. (B) Further, there often isn't any fact of the matter about how much we ought to care about something. As I argue, it isn't the case that there are prudential or moral norms that fix how worried we should be about every state of affairs in the world. (C) And this suggests that what we should do, both prudentially and morally, is often subject to our affective shifts, at least if how much we (permissibly) care about something is an important element of practical reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses the aesthetic concept of boringness, of which there has been relatively little philosophical discussion, especially along its objective, nonpsychological dimensions. I begin by confronting skepticism about the validity of judgments about boringness and rebut suggestions to the effect that these judgments are inevitably compromised by mistakes or vices of the audience. The article then develops an account focused on certain kinds of reasonable expectations we form in a given aesthetic context. I go on to confront the question of whether boringness is inevitable given the internal imperatives of works of art and illustrate the discussion with Richard Wagner's Ring cycle. Although I focus on art, I conclude by drawing some connections with the boring in everyday life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a simple argument against life being the product of design. The argument rests on three points. (1) We can conceive of the debate in terms of likelihoods, in the technical sense – how probable the design hypothesis renders our evidence, versus how probable the competing Darwinian hypothesis renders that evidence. (2) God, as traditionally conceived, had many more options by which to bring about life as we observe it than were available to natural selection. That is, the relevant parameters were, in many cases, far more constrained under natural selection. (3) Utterly mundane features of the world, like that the earth is very old, are actually powerful evidence that the world was not designed, since that outcome was optional on the design hypothesis but nearly inevitable on natural selection. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The article presents information related to meta-reasoning. As reported, meta-reasoning is about how the people would reason under more favorable conditions seems capable of telling them what to do. It is also reported that advertising is special to metareasoning about vividness and should be ironed out. It is further reported that sometimes meta-reasoning is useful simply because people find certain errors in their first-level deliberations extremely difficult to avoid.

The article discusses love and death and how the reaction and recovery of individuals vary from one another. According to the author, studies show that contrary to common belief, most people demonstrate "resilience in the face of loss", saying that although at first they are traumatized, recovery comes fast and there's not much manifestation of long-term distress. The author stresses further that quick recovery doesn't seem to be a result of an unhappy relationship, rather, it could be that most people are simply capable of adapting well to their loss. The article also discusses the issue and degree of importance in opposition to resilience after a loss--people equate the significance of their existence to the intensity and duration of bereavement after their death.

This article discusses the philosophy and moral reasons of the interests between present people and the future people. The decisions related to consuming scarce resources and answers to some assumptions are explored. The analogy on the issue of delaying aid intended to prevent suffering is explained and not vindicated.

The article describes killing as a wrong deed because it inflicts the badness of death upon the victim. Based on the respect-based view, killing is wrong not because of the harm it causes, but because of the lack of respect for the victim killing implied on the part of the agent. According to the harm-based theory, killing is wrong because dying is bad.

Discusses arguments against marriage. Concept of marriage; Responsibilities of married people; Objectives of marriage.

Examines the argument against marriage. Possibility of a loveless marriage; Attitudes toward the risk involved in marriage; Involvement in a marriage commitment with the absence of mutual love.

Illustrates the asymmetrical attitudes toward future and past pains and pleasures by means of a thought experiment described by Derek Parfit. Consideration of the attitude toward painful and pleasant experiences; Reasons for the relief of past pain; Unbearability of the neutral pattern of concern.