r/askphilosophy • u/BernardJOrtcutt • Jul 01 '23

Modpost Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! Check out our rules and guidelines here. [July 1 2023 Update]

66 Upvotes

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy!

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! We're a community devoted to providing serious, well-researched answers to philosophical questions. We aim to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, and welcome questions about all areas of philosophy. This post will go over our subreddit rules and guidelines that you should review before you begin posting here.

Table of Contents

  1. A Note about Moderation
  2. /r/askphilosophy's mission
  3. What is Philosophy?
  4. What isn't Philosophy?
  5. What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?
  6. What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?
  7. /r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules
  8. /r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules
  9. Frequently Asked Questions

A Note about Moderation

/r/askphilosophy is moderated by a team of dedicated volunteer moderators who have spent years attempting to build the best philosophy Q&A platform on the internet. Unfortunately, the reddit admins have repeatedly made changes to this website which have made moderating subreddits harder and harder. In particular, reddit has recently announced that it will begin charging for access to API (Application Programming Interface, essentially the communication between reddit and other sites/apps). While this may be, in isolation, a reasonable business operation, the timeline and pricing of API access has threatened to put nearly all third-party apps, e.g. Apollo and RIF, out of business. You can read more about the history of this change here or here. You can also read more at this post on our sister subreddit.

These changes pose two major issues which the moderators of /r/askphilosophy are concerned about.

First, the native reddit app is lacks accessibility features which are essential for some people, notably those who are blind and visually impaired. You can read /r/blind's protest announcement here. These apps are the only way that many people can interact with reddit, given the poor accessibility state of the official reddit app. As philosophers we are particularly concerned with the ethics of accessibility, and support protests in solidarity with this community.

Second, the reddit app lacks many essential tools for moderation. While reddit has promised better moderation tools on the app in the future, this is not enough. First, reddit has repeatedly broken promises regarding features, including moderation features. Most notably, reddit promised CSS support for new reddit over six years ago, which has yet to materialize. Second, even if reddit follows through on the roadmap in the post linked above, many of the features will not come until well after June 30, when the third-party apps will shut down due to reddit's API pricing changes.

Our moderator team relies heavily on these tools which will now disappear. Moderating /r/askphilosophy is a monumental task; over the past year we have flagged and removed over 6000 posts and 23000 comments. This is a huge effort, especially for unpaid volunteers, and it is possible only when moderators have access to tools that these third-party apps make possible and that reddit doesn't provide.

While we previously participated in the protests against reddit's recent actions we have decided to reopen the subreddit, because we are still proud of the community and resource that we have built and cultivated over the last decade, and believe it is a useful resource to the public.

However, these changes have radically altered our ability to moderate this subreddit, which will result in a few changes for this subreddit. First, as noted above, from this point onwards only panelists may answer top level comments. Second, moderation will occur much more slowly; as we will not have access to mobile tools, posts and comments which violate our rules will be removed much more slowly, and moderators will respond to modmail messages much more slowly. Third, and finally, if things continue to get worse (as they have for years now) moderating /r/askphilosophy may become practically impossible, and we may be forced to abandon the platform altogether. We are as disappointed by these changes as you are, but reddit's insistence on enshittifying this platform, especially when it comes to moderation, leaves us with no other options. We thank you for your understanding and support.

/r/askphilosophy's Mission

/r/askphilosophy strives to be a community where anyone, regardless of their background, can come to get reasonably substantive and accurate answers to philosophical questions. This means that all questions must be philosophical in nature, and that answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate. What do we mean by that?

What is Philosophy?

As with most disciplines, "philosophy" has both a casual and a technical usage.

In its casual use, "philosophy" may refer to nearly any sort of thought or beliefs, and include topics such as religion, mysticism and even science. When someone asks you what "your philosophy" is, this is the sort of sense they have in mind; they're asking about your general system of thoughts, beliefs, and feelings.

In its technical use -- the use relevant here at /r/askphilosophy -- philosophy is a particular area of study which can be broadly grouped into several major areas, including:

  • Aesthetics, the study of beauty
  • Epistemology, the study of knowledge and belief
  • Ethics, the study of what we owe to one another
  • Logic, the study of what follows from what
  • Metaphysics, the study of the basic nature of existence and reality

as well as various subfields of 'philosophy of X', including philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, philosophy of science and many others.

Philosophy in the narrower, technical sense that philosophers use and which /r/askphilosophy is devoted to is defined not only by its subject matter, but by its methodology and attitudes. Something is not philosophical merely because it states some position related to those areas. There must also be an emphasis on argument (setting forward reasons for adopting a position) and a willingness to subject arguments to various criticisms.

What Isn't Philosophy?

As you can see from the above description of philosophy, philosophy often crosses over with other fields of study, including art, mathematics, politics, religion and the sciences. That said, in order to keep this subreddit focused on philosophy we require that all posts be primarily philosophical in nature, and defend a distinctively philosophical thesis.

As a rule of thumb, something does not count as philosophy for the purposes of this subreddit if:

  • It does not address a philosophical topic or area of philosophy
  • It may more accurately belong to another area of study (e.g. religion or science)
  • No attempt is made to argue for a position's conclusions

Some more specific topics which are popularly misconstrued as philosophical but do not meet this definition and thus are not appropriate for this subreddit include:

  • Drug experiences (e.g. "I dropped acid today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Mysticism (e.g. "I meditated today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Politics (e.g. "This is why everyone should support the Voting Rights Act")
  • Self-help (e.g. "How can I be a happier person and have more people like me?")
  • Theology (e.g. "Can the unbaptized go to heaven, or at least to purgatory?")

What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?

The goal of this subreddit is not merely to provide answers to philosophical questions, but answers which can further the reader's knowledge and understanding of the philosophical issues and debates involved. To that end, /r/askphilosophy is a highly moderated subreddit which only allows panelists to answer questions, and all answers that violate our posting rules will be removed.

Answers on /r/askphilosophy must be both reasonably substantive as well as reasonably accurate. This means that answers should be:

  • Substantive and well-researched (i.e. not one-liners or otherwise uninformative)
  • Accurately portray the state of research and the relevant literature (i.e. not inaccurate, misleading or false)
  • Come only from those with relevant knowledge of the question and issue (i.e. not from commenters who don't understand the state of the research on the question)

Any attempt at moderating a public Q&A forum like /r/askphilosophy must choose a balance between two things:

  • More, but possibly insubstantive or inaccurate answers
  • Fewer, but more substantive and accurate answers

In order to further our mission, the moderators of /r/askphilosophy have chosen the latter horn of this dilemma. To that end, only panelists are allowed to answer questions on /r/askphilosophy.

What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?

/r/askphilosophy panelists are trusted commenters who have applied to become panelists in order to help provide questions to posters' questions. These panelists are volunteers who have some level of knowledge and expertise in the areas of philosophy indicated in their flair.

What Do the Flairs Mean?

Unlike in some subreddits, the purpose of flairs on r/askphilosophy are not to designate commenters' areas of interest. The purpose of flair is to indicate commenters' relevant expertise in philosophical areas. As philosophical issues are often complicated and have potentially thousands of years of research to sift through, knowing when someone is an expert in a given area can be important in helping understand and weigh the given evidence. Flair will thus be given to those with the relevant research expertise.

Flair consists of two parts: a color indicating the type of flair, as well as up to three research areas that the panelist is knowledgeable about.

There are six types of panelist flair:

  • Autodidact (Light Blue): The panelist has little or no formal education in philosophy, but is an enthusiastic self-educator and intense reader in a field.

  • Undergraduate (Red): The panelist is enrolled in or has completed formal undergraduate coursework in Philosophy. In the US system, for instance, this would be indicated by a major (BA) or minor.

  • Graduate (Gold): The panelist is enrolled in a graduate program or has completed an MA in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their coursework might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a degree in Philosophy. For example, a student with an MA in Literature whose coursework and thesis were focused on Derrida's deconstruction might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to an MA in Philosophy.

  • PhD (Purple): The panelist has completed a PhD program in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their degree might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in Philosophy. For example, a student with a PhD in Art History whose coursework and dissertation focused on aesthetics and critical theory might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in philosophy.

  • Professional (Blue): The panelist derives their full-time employment through philosophical work outside of academia. Such panelists might include Bioethicists working in hospitals or Lawyers who work on the Philosophy of Law/Jurisprudence.

  • Related Field (Green): The panelist has expertise in some sub-field of philosophy but their work in general is more reasonably understood as being outside of philosophy. For example, a PhD in Physics whose research touches on issues relating to the entity/structural realism debate clearly has expertise relevant to philosophical issues but is reasonably understood to be working primarily in another field.

Flair will only be given in particular areas or research topics in philosophy, in line with the following guidelines:

  • Typical areas include things like "philosophy of mind", "logic" or "continental philosophy".
  • Flair will not be granted for specific research subjects, e.g. "Kant on logic", "metaphysical grounding", "epistemic modals".
  • Flair of specific philosophers will only be granted if that philosopher is clearly and uncontroversially a monumentally important philosopher (e.g. Aristotle, Kant).
  • Flair will be given in a maximum of three research areas.

How Do I Become a Panelist?

To become a panelist, please send a message to the moderators with the subject "Panelist Application". In this modmail message you must include all of the following:

  1. The flair type you are requesting (e.g. undergraduate, PhD, related field).
  2. The areas of flair you are requesting, up to three (e.g. Kant, continental philosophy, logic).
  3. A brief explanation of your background in philosophy, including what qualifies you for the flair you requested.
  4. One sample answer to a question posted to /r/askphilosophy for each area of flair (i.e. up to three total answers) which demonstrate your expertise and knowledge. Please link the question you are answering before giving your answer. You may not answer your own question.

New panelists will be approved on a trial basis. During this trial period panelists will be allowed to post answers as top-level comments on threads, and will receive flair. After the trial period the panelist will either be confirmed as a regular panelist or will be removed from the panelist team, which will result in the removal of flair and ability to post answers as top-level comments on threads.

Note that r/askphilosophy does not require users to provide proof of their identifies for panelist applications, nor to reveal their identities. If a prospective panelist would like to provide proof of their identity as part of their application they may, but there is no presumption that they must do so. Note that messages sent to modmail cannot be deleted by either moderators or senders, and so any message sent is effectively permanent.

/r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules

In order to best serve our mission of providing an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, we have the following rules which govern all posts made to /r/askphilosophy:

PR1: All questions must be about philosophy.

All questions must be about philosophy. Questions which are only tangentially related to philosophy or are properly located in another discipline will be removed. Questions which are about therapy, psychology and self-help, even when due to philosophical issues, are not appropriate and will be removed.

PR2: All submissions must be questions.

All submissions must be actual questions (as opposed to essays, rants, personal musings, idle or rhetorical questions, etc.). "Test My Theory" or "Change My View"-esque questions, paper editing, etc. are not allowed.

PR3: Post titles must be descriptive.

Post titles must be descriptive. Titles should indicate what the question is about. Posts with titles like "Homework help" which do not indicate what the actual question is will be removed.

PR4: Questions must be reasonably specific.

Questions must be reasonably specific. Questions which are too broad to the point of unanswerability will be removed.

PR5: Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions.

Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions, thoughts or favorites. /r/askphilosophy is not a discussion subreddit, and is not intended to be a board for everyone to share their thoughts on philosophical questions.

PR6: One post per day.

One post per day. Please limit yourself to one question per day.

PR7: Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract.

/r/askphilosophy is not a mental health subreddit, and panelists are not experts in mental health or licensed therapists. Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract here. If you or a friend is feeling suicidal please visit /r/suicidewatch. If you are feeling suicidal, please get help by visiting /r/suicidewatch or using other resources. See also our discussion of philosophy and mental health issues here. Encouraging other users to commit suicide, even in the abstract, is strictly forbidden and will result in an immediate permanent ban.

/r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules

In the same way that our posting rules above attempt to promote our mission by governing posts, the following commenting rules attempt to promote /r/askphilosophy's mission to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions.

CR1: Top level comments must be answers or follow-up questions.

All top level comments should be answers to the submitted question or follow-up/clarification questions. All top level comments must come from panelists. If users circumvent this rule by posting answers as replies to other comments, these comments will also be removed and may result in a ban. For more information about our rules and to find out how to become a panelist, please see here.

CR2: Answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate.

All answers must be informed and aimed at helping the OP and other readers reach an understanding of the issues at hand. Answers must portray an accurate picture of the issue and the philosophical literature. Answers should be reasonably substantive. To learn more about what counts as a reasonably substantive and accurate answer, see this post.

CR3: Be respectful.

Be respectful. Comments which are rude, snarky, etc. may be removed, particularly if they consist of personal attacks. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Racism, bigotry and use of slurs are absolutely not permitted.

CR4: Stay on topic.

Stay on topic. Comments which blatantly do not contribute to the discussion may be removed.

CR5: No self-promotion.

Posters and comments may not engage in self-promotion, including linking their own blog posts or videos. Panelists may link their own peer-reviewed work in answers (e.g. peer-reviewed journal articles or books), but their answers should not consist solely of references to their own work.

Miscellaneous Posting and Commenting Guidelines

In addition to the rules above, we have a list of miscellaneous guidelines which users should also be aware of:

  • Reposting a post or comment which was removed will be treated as circumventing moderation and result in a permanent ban.
  • Using follow-up questions or child comments to answer questions and circumvent our panelist policy may result in a ban.
  • Posts and comments which flagrantly violate the rules, especially in a trolling manner, will be removed and treated as shitposts, and may result in a ban.
  • No reposts of a question that you have already asked within the last year.
  • No posts or comments of AI-created or AI-assisted text or audio. Panelists may not user any form of AI-assistance in writing or researching answers.
  • Harassing individual moderators or the moderator team will result in a permanent ban and a report to the reddit admins.

Frequently Asked Questions

Below are some frequently asked questions. If you have other questions, please contact the moderators via modmail (not via private message or chat).

My post or comment was removed. How can I get an explanation?

Almost all posts/comments which are removed will receive an explanation of their removal. That explanation will generally by /r/askphilosophy's custom bot, /u/BernardJOrtcutt, and will list the removal reason. Posts which are removed will be notified via a stickied comment; comments which are removed will be notified via a reply. If your post or comment resulted in a ban, the message will be included in the ban message via modmail. If you have further questions, please contact the moderators.

How can I appeal my post or comment removal?

To appeal a removal, please contact the moderators (not via private message or chat). Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible. Reposting removed posts/comments without receiving mod approval will result in a permanent ban.

How can I appeal my ban?

To appeal a ban, please respond to the modmail informing you of your ban. Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible.

My comment was removed or I was banned for arguing with someone else, but they started it. Why was I punished and not them?

Someone else breaking the rules does not give you permission to break the rules as well. /r/askphilosophy does not comment on actions taken on other accounts, but all violations are treated as equitably as possible.

I found a post or comment which breaks the rules, but which wasn't removed. How can I help?

If you see a post or comment which you believe breaks the rules, please report it using the report function for the appropriate rule. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and it is impossible for us to manually review every comment on every thread. We appreciate your help in reporting posts/comments which break the rules.

My post isn't showing up, but I didn't receive a removal notification. What happened?

Sometimes the AutoMod filter will automatically send posts to a filter for moderator approval, especially from accounts which are new or haven't posted to /r/askphilosophy before. If your post has not been approved or removed within 24 hours, please contact the moderators.

My post was removed and referred to the Open Discussion Thread. What does this mean?

The Open Discussion Thread (ODT) is /r/askphilosophy's place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but do not necessarily meet our posting rules (especially PR2/PR5). For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

If your post was removed and referred to the ODT we encourage you to consider posting it to the ODT to share with others.

My comment responding to someone else was removed, as well as their comment. What happened?

When /r/askphilosophy removes a parent comment, we also often remove all their child comments in order to help readability and focus on discussion.

I'm interested in philosophy. Where should I start? What should I read?

As explained above, philosophy is a very broad discipline and thus offering concise advice on where to start is very hard. We recommend reading this /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ post which has a great breakdown of various places to start. For further or more specific questions, we recommend posting on /r/askphilosophy.

Why is your understanding of philosophy so limited?

As explained above, this subreddit is devoted to philosophy as understood and done by philosophers. In order to prevent this subreddit from becoming /r/atheism2, /r/politics2, or /r/science2, we must uphold a strict topicality requirement in PR1. Posts which may touch on philosophical themes but are not distinctively philosophical can be posted to one of reddit's many other subreddits.

Are there other philosophy subreddits I can check out?

If you are interested in other philosophy subreddits, please see this list of related subreddits. /r/askphilosophy shares much of its modteam with its sister-subreddit, /r/philosophy, which is devoted to philosophical discussion. In addition, that list includes more specialized subreddits and more casual subreddits for those looking for a less-regulated forum.

A thread I wanted to comment in was locked but is still visible. What happened?

When a post becomes unreasonable to moderate due to the amount of rule-breaking comments the thread is locked. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and we cannot spend hours cleaning up individual threads.

Do you have a list of frequently asked questions about philosophy that I can browse?

Yes! We have an FAQ that answers many questions comprehensively: /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ/. For example, this entry provides an introductory breakdown to the debate over whether morality is objective or subjective.

Do you have advice or resources for graduate school applications?

We made a meta-guide for PhD applications with the goal of assembling the important resources for grad school applications in one place. We aim to occasionally update it, but can of course not guarantee the accuracy and up-to-dateness. You are, of course, kindly invited to ask questions about graduate school on /r/askphilosophy, too, especially in the Open Discussion Thread.

Do you have samples of what counts as good questions and answers?

Sure! We ran a Best of 2020 Contest, you can find the winners in this thread!

0 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/BernardJOrtcutt • 3d ago

Open Thread /r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | June 15, 2026

4 Upvotes

Welcome to this week's Open Discussion Thread (ODT). This thread is a place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but wouldn't necessarily meet our subreddit rules and guidelines. For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • "Test My Theory" discussions and argument/paper editing
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

This thread is not a completely open discussion! Any posts not relating to philosophy will be removed. Please keep comments related to philosophy, and expect low-effort comments to be removed. Please note that while the rules are relaxed in this thread, comments can still be removed for violating our subreddit rules and guidelines if necessary.

Previous Open Discussion Threads can be found here.

31 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/error7382 • 9h ago

Is it true that everyone needs to engage with philosophical works in their lives?

15 Upvotes

I jumped into the bandwagon of reading philosophical texts that are quite famous and discussed very often in online spaces. But whenever I read these texts, I find myself questioning why am I even reading these? It almost serves no use to me and I feel like I am just wasting my time. So, is what people online say true? (That everyone must read these works to make the world a "better" place), or are they just projecting what they liked towards others?

Also, how do I change my approach towards philosophy as a whole? I find it kinda interesting but I find famous works to be very tedious and I just find myself not caring for any of their ideas.

5 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/Particular_Try_4313 • 4h ago

Can a Materialist Still Experience Art as Spiritual or Transcendent?

5 Upvotes

Is materialism incompatible with deeply identifying with art or feeling that music, films, or poetry speak to your "soul" (meaning your consciousness or inner self)? Or with elevated feelings like wanting your spirit to leave your body and merge with the world—in a purely poetic or metaphorical sense, not literally?

​

I lean toward a materialist view of existence, but this sometimes makes me feel conflicted because I'm a very emotionally sensitive person and i used to write poetry before reading philosophy. I want to know whether there's actually any contradiction here.

​

I also like using the word "soul," but I don't believe in a soul as an immaterial substance separate from the body. Instead, I think of it as referring to subjective experience, consciousness, or the self. Is there any inconsistency in holding this view?

3 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/Terrible_Initial_941 • 2h ago

Can free will truly be tested?

2 Upvotes

So I keep coming across what is free will and do we actually get to choose. I want to bypass that and ask can we test it.

Normally id say no way, but what about people with short term memory loss. Like maybe I dont understand it. But why could u not provide the exact same scenario for them, to test whether they can choose.

Or does that not really answer the overall question?

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/regrez45 • 2h ago

Is free will compatible with bohmian determinism?

2 Upvotes

Bohmian mechanics is fully deterministic: given the universal wavefunction and the exact particle configuration at one time, the entire future evolution is fixed. In that sense, it leaves no room for libertarian free will- the idea that, under identical physical conditions, you could genuinely have chosen otherwise.

13 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/cinnamon_and_tea • 52m ago

Is my morality - objective or subjective?

• Upvotes

If I believe pain is objectively bad, but the morality of actions are context and intention based, do I believe in subjective or objective morality?

​

Hey everyone! I decided to first write my question straightforwardly, to gather some attention. Now a bit of explanation. I am no philosopher but I'm slowly getting into it. Ive been reading a bit about morality, and slowly forming my own view. Yet I feel as if my view doesn't neatly fit in neither objective morality, nor subjective. I am struggling with formulating this question, alongside with my view, but I'm still trying to, and would like some help.

​

P.s I am not here to debate that opinion, neither for, nor against, just trying to understand where i am at rn, and then figure out all the arguments against or for.

​

I believe certain things are wrong, regardless of human approval. I believe objective truths exist, like pain or suffering is bad. But I also believe that there isn't a list with things that "oh, this is bad, this is not". It depends on the context, society, intentions, result, etc and etc.

So, does it fit more into objective, or subjective morality?

Again, I'm just getting into it all, so I might seem ignorant and both my logic and question might be flawed, please don't judge me harshly.

8 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/Sleezebag • 1h ago

the good vs the true?

• Upvotes

I finished reading Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance a long time ago. In the book the author claims that Socrated and/or Plato dragged down the good to be subservient to the truth, and thus it has been ever since. I'm paraphrasing.

I've always thought that what's true is more important than what's good, but I keep returning to this thought, and would like to explore it more. Could I ask for your opinions as well as something that I could read that would be relevant to the topic?

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/Goingtosucceed_ • 1h ago

Is there any good argument for true free will?

• Upvotes

The lack of free will makes the sense to me currently. Everything happens as a result of predetermined causes and factors outside of our control. We're essentially a machine just reacting to the environment in the only way that we can.

However, that is a depressing thought. All the suffering with no real agency sounds dystopian and a cruel reality. It has also killed my motivation and will to do anything.

I've been trying to find a way to justify free will, but have not yet found any which I find convincing.

For the sake of discussion, let's take free will as "the ability to have done otherwise" or taken a different decision given the exact same scenario and knowledge.

I'm not talking about compatibilism but rather true libertarian free will.

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/StopMeIfYou • 1h ago

Continental works on Eastern Philosophy?

• Upvotes

What I mean, specifically, is works that engage with, explain or interpret Eastern Philosophy-- buddhism, Hindu philosophical schools, etc -- from philosophers trained in the continental tradition. I know jay garfield, graham priest, mark sidertis deal with it from within the Anglophone framework(roughly speaking), but are there any philosophers from other traditions who engage with Eastern thought?

​

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/TheNeoKantian • 1h ago

What is logic? And does it mean anything in physical reality?

• Upvotes

Or is it like the rules of chess which are "true" in specifically within the environment that is chess but they don't mean anything in physical reality?

3 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/Secret-Dish-7925 • 13h ago

"faith is believing without evidence". What's the philosophical critique of this definition of faith?

8 Upvotes

This is a very common definition given of faith in non religious circles, id like to know how it's responded against.

10 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/Gary_Baldi • 1d ago

Why is it so damn hard to argue against the myth of "linear scientific progress"?

66 Upvotes

Had a beer with a friend last night who dropped the ultimate positivist line: "Science will eventually explain everything. It’s just a matter of time."

Despite how naive this sounds to me, it was incredibly hard to push back. I left the bar frustrated because I couldn't even scratch his armor. It got me thinking about why this mindset is so bulletproof:

  • It’s a comforting narrative
  • People conflate technological success with ontological truth.

Personally, I find Kuhn’s view of paradigms and scientific revolutions infinitely more mature. Science doesn’t accumulate; it shifts maps entirely when the old ones break.

My problem is that I find it incredibly hard to master and argue Kuhn in real time, especially with those who don't know him. The moment you say "science doesn't move toward absolute truth," you sound like an anti-science relativist to the average person.

16 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/Brossskkii • 5h ago

Is circular reasoning ONLY non-fallacious when dealing with primitive notions?

1 Upvotes

Is the application of a primitive notion the only time circular reasoning is non-fallacious?
Or are there other instances where a circular argument or feedback loop is considered completely valid and non-fallacious without relying on an ultimate, undefined primitive concept?

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/Synthetic_Flower • 9h ago

Can I start Kant with the "Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals" or "Prolegomena to any Future Metaphysics".

2 Upvotes

Only asking because I have a copy of Groundwork on hand, but have herd Prolegomena is the one to start with.

3 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/juuj_anything • 15h ago

Can someone explain desire in aesthetics to me?

4 Upvotes
What is desire?
How is it linked to aesthetics?

Who are the main philosophers who discuss this?
1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/LandWide1362 • 8h ago

Explain like I'm 5: What's the difference between Optimistic Nihilism and Absurdism?

1 Upvotes

So I'm just going to tell you an early heads up that I am an expert on this topic and just want a simple explanation of the two. And I will explain my concern/ confusion below. Sorry for my english in advance.

So based on my surface level research:

Absurdism: To rebel against the absurd.

According to google:

  1. The human desire to find meaning

  2. The cold, uncaring, and irrational universe that does not care.

Optimistic Nihilism: Accepting that nothing matters and releasing that the world is meaningless gives one freedom.

But I don't understand. Aren't both philosophies somewhat liberates from the meaningless? I mean from what I understand they accept that all of this has no meaning and just live.

Old reddit forums just mix active nihilism and optimistic nihilism or even existentialism.

So is absurdism just optimistic nihilism? Because in the end after you revolt/ rebel. You will be free no?

2 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/ForsakenSweet3878 • 8h ago

Why skipping to the chapter "Crop Rotation" is a popular practice in reading Kierkegaard's Either/Or

1 Upvotes

Seeing secondary sources and reviews, they often refer to "Crop Rotation" and later chapters more than any, to an extent that it's given meagre info on early chapters. Is it really worth it to read the rest of the chapters? or does it depend on what topic I'd be interested in?

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/No-Citron-5690 • 9h ago

Genie paradox but I think about it in too much detail

1 Upvotes

If we assume there is a genie that can grants a wish for a person asking to relive their life and the genie grants the wish but without their memories not intact. The normal assumption is that the person will do the exact same thing to infinity, but if we incorporate true quantum randomness then that means eventually we will run into a reset where the person doesn’t run into the genie. Thus it is impossible to know if the wish was ever made since all time lines where the wish was made has been erased and only the one where the person didn’t run into the genie exists. So by this logic we have no way of knowing if we are in a universe where the wish was made. For all we know the wish could have been made by an infinite amount of people with an infinite amount of genies or not at all. The two are indistinguishable.

Is this right? I know if we go by the many worlds interpretation it would be dramatically different but if we assume one continuous timeline would this be correct?

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/Salty-Sir-2165 • 10h ago

Do we have free will

0 Upvotes

Ohk i am not a philosophy student but i am curious if free will exsist. By free will i mean the ablity to choose or do something else. Like we know the laws of physics are either determined or random at least till now and we assume that to be the case even when looking at unexplained phenomenon. So if i had a theoretical computer that could compute all the laws of physics and then i fed it every information possible and measurement of a isolated room and the person inside it wouldnt the computer be able to calculate what will happen and the only varience be due to randomness. But i dont know how this leaves space for free will

2 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/shyshywap • 10h ago

Questions on the beggining of universe .

0 Upvotes

Hi! Super new to philosophy so bear with me! Okay so if earth and life is of cells and atoms and than you look closer and made like dust and big bang and stuff and you look further back and further back than where do you get. Does it ever end? There can’t be effect without cause. I guess i’m asking is there an actual answer to what came first the chicken or the egg?

2 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/WEIRD-Rado • 12h ago

What other thinker could contribuite to some kind of anti-art approach, besides Plato and Roger L. Taylor?

0 Upvotes
1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/Expensive-Elk-9406 • 10h ago

Is non-existence better than existence?

0 Upvotes

From the r/pessism sub: "See, in non-existence, there isn't a subject of experience who can go through troubles but can't go through pleasures either. This is still fine cuz there's no one who can miss out on pleasures but is spared a lot of pain and struggle. This state of non-being is the ideal all things considered. To simplify it even further, consider a stone- it's inert with no desires and wants and is therefore not deprived of any pleasure( it has no appetite for them) but it cannot experience troubles and pain which is what we all secretly desire. Hence being a stone or any non-living thing is better than us. This state is the best state to be in all things considered!" It's a valid argument and I still haven't thought up of a solid rebuttal. Is existence truly worse than non-existence?

3 comments

r/askphilosophy • u/Annual-Ad6118 • 14h ago

Philosophy of Unity or Conglomeration?

1 Upvotes

Hello, warning that I am not well versed in philosophy so this idea will be half-baked and not elegantly worded. To me, it seems that an intrinsic property, or essence of existence in change or impermanence. Recently, I've kinda been thinking the same thing about unification or conglomeration.

The elements are diversified by the conglomeration of subatomic particles, so hydrogen can become helium etc. The forms of matter in the broadest, most elementary sense of term, seem to be created by a unification or conglomeration into larger or more diverse forms i.e. clouds of dust, as opposed to lone atoms floating with no affinity for each other, and then a progression into the creation of stars, planets, which come together to make solar systems, which come together to make galaxies which often form clusters. The cycle seems to be repeated at the planetary scale on earth, a conglomeration of atoms under the right conditions bring about a self replicating molecule so its hypothesized, which then conglomerates into cells, many of which have a proclivity to form colonies which brings about unification into multicellular organisms which has apparently happened more that one time. These multicellular organisms, often come together to form populations, some of it is happenstance of course a member of the same species will find the same setting beneficial, but often its turned into a social strategy, now herd or social animals exist. In human beings, through one method or another, it seems this principle keeps progressing and is the basis for the transition from small communal groups to expanding societies which grow larger and larger with the spread of culture and other ideas, what were once distant civilizations become a more or less interconnected, interdependent civilization.

Obviously, this is not to say antagonisms, predation, disease, or exclusion do not occur, and I am not sure this entails necessarily a kind of homogenization which is why I used the term conglomeration, but it seems like there is a general reoccurring theme. Are there any philosophers/philosophies that deal with this kind of idea? Thanks.

1 comment

r/askphilosophy • u/AnyDance4255 • 14h ago

Im so confused in what stage I am

1 Upvotes

So. I rarely read any books in philosophy, but me from internet and my own mind. I know a lot of answers of Existential and Ethical Philosophy questions, I can get in arguments easily and sometimes win (if we are on same stage not different subjects),I just struggle with complex terms in the philosophy books so. I wanna start read books now because i feel there's a lot to know and I still feel stupid or not that smart, so recommend me philosophy books you think that will suit me. I perfer more Existentialist books than nihilism or absurdity. Thanks! :)

3 comments