Mindblown: a blog about philosophy.

About twenty years ago, PoT blogger Michael Young and I started a philosophy discussion group that we somewhat pretentiously called The McCormick-Taber Seminar in Philosophy (MTSP), idiosyncratically named for the locations where the first seminars took place in the early 2000s: McCormick Park in Princeton, New Jersey, where I lived at the time, and Taber…

Two addenda to my paper Existence, We are: Primacies of Existence and Physical Existence, contra Kant, contra Rand ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Prospectus for print following on EW

In reply to djr. David — It occurs to me that I did not answer the two questions of your last reply directly, instead addressing (in a confused way) some relevant distinctions between kinds of views that might (or might not) count as “contractual…

“On January 4, Romanski was in the middle of a 36-hour shift when she received an email from Burnette. She was no longer employed by HospitalMD — and, in effect, the hospital, he wrote. Should I continue working? Do I even have malpractice …

In reply to Irfan Khawaja. Two quick replies. (a) I mean ‘appropriate’ in a normative way, not a dispositional way. As in the fitting-attitudes analysis of value, as in what actions you ought to resent (or otherwise have moral anger at). So…

A depressing footnote that makes my story seem like a walk in the park by comparison: https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/93759 LikeLiked by 1 person

Depressing footnote: LikeLike

In reply to Roderick T. Long. Quick further reply to Roderick’s point. The contractualist has an effective reply: justifiability to others might constitute not-being-a-wronging independently of whether we have any reason at all to justify our act…

In reply to mlyoung57. I agree with (I), but not with (II). Here’s II: To be a victim is just for it to be appropriate that one have the relevant sort of moral anger (e.g., resentment) toward the agent for doing some particular thing (having som…

[…] ← Health Care: A Series […] LikeLike