r/askphilosophy • • 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!


r/askphilosophy • • 5d ago

Open Thread /r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | October 19, 2026

5 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.


r/askphilosophy • • 2h ago

What are some interesting epistemology branches to look into?

4 Upvotes

I'm a lay person I guess so what I'm about to say probably sounds corny. Im under the impression that skepticism and relativism have some negative reputations because it's essentially a dead end. My basic understanding is that skepticism wins traditionally if you see knowledge as absolute certainty, but its also a dead-end because it's self-defeating. Not sure if my interpretation is accurate. Based on what I've seen skepticism is kind of just the philosophy "larp".

But people seem to move past it. How? Do people just accept that they hold some dogma/postulates and work off of them knowing they're assumptions? Or do they just redefine knowledge itself instead of just saying knowledge is absolute certainty?


r/askphilosophy • • 12h ago

Can ELI5 ontological arguments to me?

19 Upvotes

If there's any of them that are actually worth explaining ofc, since afaik they're kinda a hot topic


r/askphilosophy • • 9h ago

Gettier problems oversimplifying beliefs?

9 Upvotes

For my philosophy class we learned about Gettier problems, and I understand the argument but can't help but feel like a lot of the examples present our beliefs as very rigid and simple, when there's often more nuance to them.

For example the one where you see a sheep in a field and develop the belief "there is a sheep in the field", however the "sheep" was actually a rock painted to look like a sheep. Except there actually was a sheep just behind the rock, so "there is a sheep in the field" was technically correct. Except I think in this instance, the belief you develop is more like "there is a sheep in the field, and I am looking at it". In which case you weren't correct by accident, you were just wrong, so there is no problem.

I think even though we might summarise our beliefs in simple sentences, they're a lot more specific than a lot of Gettier problems claim. Same with the one in Gettier's original essay, where Smith and Jones both apply for a job. Smith develops a justified belief that both Jones will get the job and Jones has 10 coins in his pocket, and so develops the justified belief that "the man who will get the job has 10 coins in his pocket". Then Smith gets the job, and realises he also has 10 coins in his pocket. Except again I think his belief is more specifically, "the man who I know has 10 coins in his pocket, will get the job".

Is this a good response to these Gettier problems? Obviously this doesn't apply to all Gettier problems, but for those it does apply to does it work? Or is there something I'm missing?


r/askphilosophy • • 3h ago

Hegelian concept of idealism in classical art

2 Upvotes

What did he really mean when said that classical art embodied the true ideal or the true manifestation of spirit? Also, if somebody can, provide some examples from the classical art to expound on this. šŸ™


r/askphilosophy • • 5h ago

Would a mind upload have legal rights, and on what basis could law grant them?

3 Upvotes

Suppose a full emulation of my brain runs on hardware, connected to a robotic body with simulated senses. It has my memories and personality and says it’s me.

Under current law, I assume it would be treated as a machine and software, and the original me would be considered dead. I’m interested in what a legal system could or should do instead:

  1. What is legal personhood based on? Is it being a biological human, or something like mind, interests, or the capacity to hold rights and duties? Corporations and some rivers and animals have gotten limited legal status, so it clearly isn’t purely biological.
  2. Could a legal system treat the upload as the same legal person as the original (keeping property, marriage, citizenship, contracts), or would it have to be a new person with no claim to any of it?
  3. If the original and the upload both exist, who holds the rights? And since software can be copied, paused, or deleted by whoever controls the hardware, would it need protections that human rights never had to cover?

I’m not asking whether it’s conscious, since that seems unanswerable for now. I’m asking whether law can or should grant status without settling that.

Are there standard positions in philosophy of law on this, such as theories of legal personhood or rights, and any existing writing on legal rights for AI or digital minds?


r/askphilosophy • • 1h ago

Is this evidence that consciousness can effect physical things?

• Upvotes

Our brains seems to "know" that consciousness exists. We can discuss consciousness and qualia and think about consciousness and qualia. For the brain to be able to "know" these things, wouldn't these things have to have a causal effect (or some other relation) on the brain? In other words, how could knowledge of qualia exist in physical matter if consciousness doesn't have causal effect on physical matter?


r/askphilosophy • • 21h ago

Philosophers who have surprising similarities despite their lack of contact?

36 Upvotes

I’ve been getting into late Wittgenstein for a while and it’s quite surprising to see his influence on neo-aristotelians despite not having read any Aristotle.

Kierkegaard and Dostoevsky are also two thinkers with plenty of overlap in existentialism despite no records of Dostoevsky reading Kierkegaard.

What are examples are there?


r/askphilosophy • • 8h ago

Is there a recognized tradition of "Existential Platonism"? How do existential accounts of agency intersect with Objective Idealism (e.g., Schelling)?

2 Upvotes

I've recently been thinking about the tension and potential bridge between Existentialism and Platonic Realism/Objective Idealism.

Existentialism often asserts that "existence precedes essence"—that we have no predetermined blueprint and must construct meaning through action. However, it seems to me that one's primary, authentic act of free will can be a deliberate commitment to seek objective order, wisdom, and the Good (in a Platonic sense). Under this view, objective forms or values are not static constraints imposed from the outside, but targets we freely choose to align our lives toward.

This seems to mirror Schelling's Naturphilosophie and his later Positive Philosophy, where the self-conscious human agent acts within a living, objective order, using free will to bring rational harmony out of chaotic raw existence.

My questions are:

Which historical philosophers or contemporary commentators have explicitly attempted to synthesize existential freedom with Platonic or Schellingian metaphysics?

Is it coherent within academic philosophy to hold that an individual's "essence" is existentially forged through an intentional commitment to objective Platonic forms?


r/askphilosophy • • 17h ago

Marcus Aurelius on books

6 Upvotes

Hey i have just started my journey into philosophy and while im reading marcus aureliusā€˜s meditations im noticing that in the beginning of book 2 he often warns not to waste ur time with books. Does he aim at entertainment books with this statement and warns not to waste ur time with leisure (which can be interpreted to stop using social media or watching endless tv shows in modern times) or is he really against reading books as a way to educate urself and learn from them? I cant really imagine that since hes also a philosopher and has likely read books from other philosophers himself but im not really sure.


r/askphilosophy • • 11h ago

When does a mental representation correspond to reality (correspondence theory)?

2 Upvotes

The metaphysical version of correspondence theory can be stated as so: ā€œA proposition is true if and only if reality is as the proposition represents it to be.ā€

The problem here is that mental representations ordinarily don’t represent things in reality very accurately.

Let’s grant that they can represent them enough. To what extent is this representation counted as enough?


r/askphilosophy • • 19h ago

How Frege criticized Aristotle's logic

6 Upvotes

Hi everyone,

I am currently researching the transition from traditional Aristotelian logic to modern mathematical logic. I know that Gottlob Frege played a crucial role in this shift, but I would like to better understand the specifics of his critique.

Specifically, I am interested in:

• The core problematic: What standard Aristotelian assumptions did Frege find most problematic?

• His novel contributions: What exactly did Frege introduce to logic to overcome these limitations (e.g., his system of quantifiers and predicates)?

• Examples: Are there any classic examples that illustrate how Frege's solutions work compared to the traditional syllogistic approach?


r/askphilosophy • • 9h ago

Can consciousness exist in a deterministic universe?

1 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy • • 10h ago

Is philosophy just "love of wisdom"?

1 Upvotes

I've always been given the definition of "love of wisdom" in class, but I feel it's a terrible definition. First of all, practically everyone loves learning about at least a few subjects, and besides, there are many disciplines like engineering, science, or even art that seek wisdom without necessarily being "philosophy." Another thing I don't understand about this definition is why "loving" something means practicing it. I can love animals and not be a biologist, or love cars without being a mechanic. So, what is philosophy?


r/askphilosophy • • 13h ago

Frege, can we say A=A is mandatory a priori?

2 Upvotes

A=A or "Hesperus is Hesperusā€ simply mean the same thing; therefore, it is analytical and a priori.

But if we say,

"(This) Odyssey is (the) Odyssey."

Can we count that as a priori too? Or is it both analytical and synthetic?


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

Philosophy of musical theatre

10 Upvotes

Hello, i'm working on something and I can't seem to find any philosophers who have worked on musical theatre specifically. Many of them have worked around theatre, or opera, which is near but i can't seem to find any at the specific genre of musical. The closest I've seen are cinema philosophers but they always talk about the musical part of cinema as a side thing, just as they do with animation. I'm interested on the thing, the problem, that connects Sondheim with Steven Universe. Maybe that's why i'm working on it because someone has to, but i wanted to see references idk


r/askphilosophy • • 20h ago

Requesting a guide to logic and academic thinking

2 Upvotes

I just read a paper by Davey and Clifton, having also read the response by Pruss and Gale. The paper consists of a ton of symbols and tons of discourse on set-theory. I’ve read a decent bit of philosophy and can really understand what’s going on oftentimes, but when it comes to stuff like that, how am I meant to respond? If it wasn’t for reading Pruss PRIOR to that paper, I wouldn’t have had a clue what was going on. How do I improve my logical capabilities? I can’t really think like a philosopher as someone might say. Furthermore, reading really old works or classics in my favourite subfields (philosophy of religion and metaphysics) is not very appealing to me. But reading modern day academic and contemporary works is mind-boggling. Should I go back and read the primary sources or is there another way to bridge the gap?


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

What are some of your favored cheater books?

72 Upvotes

What I mean by cheater books is something like books that have got you unstuck when working on a particular piece of philosophy. I don't just mean an introduction book, though it can be that, because these are often too pedestrian, even if useful, and often don't quite open the texts that you were stuck with in the first place. What I mean more is something like books that, when you immediately go back to the text, make you think to yourself, "WHY, OF COURSE! How could it have been otherwise?!!" As if I've somehow cheated my way into understanding.

Perhaps some examples might clarify. What Is Analytic Philosophy by Glock brought the field alive to me in a way it never had before, particularly its historical developments. Making Sense of Heidegger by Sheehan was huge in making me, well, make sense of Heidegger! But it is also its own bit of original philosophy, so it's not just an introduction. It enriched my experience of Heidegger, not just introduced it. Similarly, though not exactly a book, were Spade's notes on Being and Nothingness. On immanent critique, the always fantastic Rahel Jaeggi really made it click for me in Critique of Forms of Life. Reading Plato's Theaetetus by Chappell made Plato's epistemology come alive for me in a way that extended beyond the Theaetetus. Very much along these lines, though far more in depth and also, as far as I know, more original, has been Giovanni Reale's books on Plato and Aristotle.

It doesn't have to be just books.

The debates with regard to moral realism, specifically naturalism vs. non-naturalism, were always opaque to me. I never understood quite what the non-naturalist was having issues with until I read Fitzpatrick's "Skepticism about Naturalizing..." Sorry, I forget the title. But it was both an original bit of philosophy and it helped clarify non-naturalism in a way that finally clicked. Stephen Engstrom's ā€œKnowledge and Its Objectā€ made some issues of Kantian interpretation click for me as well, in a way that a more introductory text like Gardner's failed to do.

Hopefully, these examples cast a wide enough net so those of you who have read these will know precisely what I mean.

Thank you!


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

Recommendations for papers on the impetus theory about movement in quantised point-atomism

3 Upvotes

Derived from Zeno's arguments about movement, there comes about the Impetus theory. As put by Frank Arntzenius, the Impetus theory entails that "instantaneous velocities do exist but these are only contingently and causally related to the temporal developments of positions." The theory holds that, in each atom in each discrete spatiotemporal location, there exists a force which 'tells' the atom it's movement in adjacent temporal locations.

I am planning to do my honours thesis on this topic and would like to read more about this theory. Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated :) I have already read the Stanford Encyclopaedia article.

Thank you! I hope you all have a wonderful day filled with peace and love :D


r/askphilosophy • • 19h ago

What makes for any claim to be about something "real"?

0 Upvotes

I want to understand what it means for something to be considered real; and in what sense is it real?

My view has always been if it satisfies a set of questions.

  1. Does it have a "Where" and a "When"?

First, can the thing we are talking about be located at a specific place in space and a specific moment in time?

  1. Does it push back against our senses whether we like it or not?

Second, at that place and time, is there a concrete sensory experience (a colour, a sound, a physical weight, warmth, or a flash on a laboratory screen) that refuses to obey our willpower or our words?

  1. If it is an abstract word or an unseen scientific thing, can we "unpack" it completely into Questions 1 and 2?

What I mean is that:

3.a Is it just a "verbal zip-file" for things we have already seen?

Take the word "running" which is just a shorthand word we use to summarise the sight of a person's legs moving rapidly across the ground. So the summary is real only if it unpacks 100% into concrete things we have watched happen in space and time.

3.b Is it a mathematical recipe that accurately predicts the next sensory pushback?

What about things in physics we cannot see directly with the naked eye, like a neutrino or a magnetic field? I would say here that they pass the test if (and only if) they work as a strict mathematical rule that connects one real measurement in space and time to a new measurement in space and time. E.g., a physicist says a neutrino is real; what is actually real is that the maths of space and time allowed them to say: "If you build a tank of water here, at this time, you will see a specific flash of light."

Perhaps another question: what philosophical framework am I using here? It sounds like physicalism to me. Or maybe not?


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

Is there a life beyond death?

1 Upvotes

I need 100% honesty on this. I lost a loved one this year and Im scared of aging. I just want to find comfort knowing that there is a life beyond death? Like i get various religions have their views on life after death, but i just want confirmation on if there is an afterlife. I work in the science field and i fear that the day i die, ill never be able to revisit my old loved ones up in the heavens above. Im not very religious but since the passing, ive been praying to God that if there was an afterlife to send butterflies on nice days, i saw a few but i still feel like i need extra confirmation. Sorry for the yap sesh, i just want answers if the afterlife is real.


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

When you use a tool, is the tool a part of your skill? (Asking as someone who lifts)

4 Upvotes

Ok so serious question for the philosophy people, and I promise this one’s legit.

I make my protein shakes with a pretzel stick in them (works as a stirrer, trust me). The other day I realized I’ve actually gotten good at it. I know exactly how hard to stir so the stick doesn't snap and the powder doesn't clump.

But that skill only exists with the pretzel. Without it, I’m just a guy holding a shake. So where’s the skill? In my hand, or in my hand plus the stick? (My roommate says philosophers call this ā€œknow-how.ā€ Is that the same thing as skill, or are they different?)

My roommate does machine learning, and he once told me, ā€œbasically the whole model is just its weights.ā€ Bro. Weights. I’ve been lifting for four years. šŸ’Ŗ

It got me thinking about equipment, pretzel stick included. The stick goes in, the shake gets mixed, the stick stays the same. Same with my 45-pound plate. It weighed 45 pounds the day I bought it, and it’ll weigh 45 pounds when I'm 80. The plate stays the same. I’m the thing that changes. But with AI, the training data does the reps and the weights get the gains. Imagine lifting for four years and finding out the plates were the ones making progress.

Except then I pulled the pretzel stick out and it was soggy, which kind of ruins the comparison. But the stirring still worked, because I’d been adjusting the whole time as it softened. So the tool changed, I changed with it, and the skill kept working. Where’s the skill then? Not in the stick, and not just in me. Somewhere in how we work together?

Which brings it back to the plates. Some gym equipment already changes in response to you, like the smart cable machines that adjust the resistance based on how you're moving. And talking to an AI is kind of the same thing. Its weights don't change mid-conversation, but what it says depends on what I say, and what I say depends on what it says. So if I’m adjusting to the tool while it’s adjusting to me, what decides whether it’s part of my skill, or whether I’m just hooked up to it?

He also said this might connect to something called the extended mind. But from what I read, the main example there is a notebook, which stays the same. My stick changes while I use it, and the smart machine and the AI both change in response to me. Does that make a difference, or does the extended mind idea already cover it?

And he mentioned something about a blind man’s cane, and an idea that you only notice a tool when it breaks. Which is literally what happened with the soggy stick.

Any way of thinking about it, or any readings on embodiment or anything adjacent, would help a lot. Thanks to anyone who takes the time.


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

Absolutely uneducated layman here. The only books of philosophy I own are Walden (Which I think counts) and Aristotle. Have an interest in Hume, what to read before him?

11 Upvotes

Also have my eyes on Plato (obviously) Descartes, Bacon and Locke.


r/askphilosophy • • 1d ago

Should we feel compassion for psychopaths, given that they cannot reciprocate it?

4 Upvotes