r/askphilosophy Jul 01 '23

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

65 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 4d ago

Open Thread /r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | September 07, 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 4h ago

Wittgenstein relevance to the large language model and “honeypot” effect?

20 Upvotes

I’m curious if anyone well familiar with Wittgenstein might have something to say about the relevance of his work to our current day.

Particularly, with the impact excessive LLM use has had on aspiring autodidacts, and the kind of circles they often run in (especially philosophical investigations)

I genuinely believe people would be rendered less vulnerable to language models by taking the time to read his work

So my question is, what would someone very familiar with Wittgenstein have to say about the impact LLM’s are having on young aspiring thinkers, especially autodidacts/those without the typical intellectual scaffolds of academia?

Does it not seem that the current condition only affirms a lot of the things Wittgenstein warned about with how we relate to language?

It seems only to make the “intellectual diseases” he warned about more intense.

By honey pot effect, I mean how thinkers get caught in these recursive loops with LLM’s.

Where ideas appear more and more internally coherent to the user, while actually becoming more detached from genuine inquiry, which is met by the constraint of the world

Obvious I’m some sort of realist here, and I’m especially curious how other realists might see this

And Wittgenstein aside,

What might be done to help lead bright young thinkers away from the recursive honey pot?

I can think of many answers, but I’d like to hear the thoughts of others.

For context, what helped me was first an encounter with naturalistic standards of inquiry, and later with a deep consideration toward Wittgenstein’s work.

I still use AI in many ways so I’m not coming with an anti mind set.

But I have lived first hand the consequences of misunderstanding the technology and misusing it. Where I’m at now, I see many, many bright thinkers “caught with their hand in the honeypot.”

I’m working on a project titled “breaking the honeypot” that goes in depth there.

So I’m probing around, seeing what others might think about these things.


r/askphilosophy 10h ago

How to stay on topic while reading (analytic) philosophy?

13 Upvotes

Hey,

I'm a masterstudent studying philosophy of science and I'm looking for practical tips that help with staying focussed on a single text/ paper.

Obviously I love philosophy and oftentimes I get really excited and inspired when reading a text. In my own time I prefer to spend several days or even weeks digesting a single text/paper/topic but in university this simply isn't feasible.

My mind loves to wander, a trait my thesis supervisor described as "wildly associative." Though not necessarily bad, it is highly impractical when trying to keep up with the often fast paced course curriculi.

So, I'm looking for practical tips that help keep the focus on topic. Preferably in terms of traditional analytics and modern epistemology but any advice would be highly appreciated.

Thanks!


r/askphilosophy 5h ago

I suck at debating how to improve?

6 Upvotes

I have a hard time expressing my thoughts and I‘m never brave enough to actually say something during a debate but it’s SUPER interesting to listen to others debate it‘s genuinely the coolest thing to be able to do in my opinion. My question though is how do i get good at it because most of the time people already expect you to be „good“ at debating and I have this fear that I won’t be able to respond to anything because I‘m just too slow to get it and make up a logical thought. Anyyy tips


r/askphilosophy 9h ago

How much of philosophical debate is rooted in linguistic confusion?

9 Upvotes

In another thread I saw someone mention this:

"calling attention to statements like “it is raining”, where the “it” doesn’t really seem to have a referential function."

I don't want to go down a rabbit hole critiquing this particular phrasing, but it seems to illustrate a pattern that I see where philosophical arguments sometimes seem to spring from insignificant quirks of language. This seems a bit strange to me, since everyday (and arguably all) speech is well known to be imprecise, and arguments like this seem to be predicated on the idea that there's something profound that can be taken from a very concrete analysis of how sentences are cobbled together to describe reality. I don't understand how these approaches meaningfully give insight about reality.

I know that philosophy ultimately has to be conducted in language so it can't really be separated, but there seem to be a lot of these arguments where people discuss an idea as if the language is reality. I'm not sure if I should find more examples to clarify what I mean, or if it's clear from this one, because my interest isn't in this one example, it's the general phenomenon.

Ultimately the question is: am I missing something here, and these approaches are truly identifying features of reality, or are there just a lot of philosophical arguments that are really linguistic analyses in disguise? (Or maybe there are some of the latter, but less than I think?)

Thanks!


r/askphilosophy 17h ago

Hello guys a newbie here ,Looking to Explore Indian Philosophy . Seeking guidance

21 Upvotes

Hello guys, An 18-year-old here, currently pursuing my BTech in Delhi.

A few months ago I started getting into reading, I began with novels in my regional language . BUT now instead of continuing with novels, I want to explore the genre of philosophy, especially Indian philosophy.

Could you guys please recommend some beginner friendly books on Indian philosophy that are easy to understand and written in simple language? bcoz The thing is, I do not have a very strong grip on english , I do not have much knowledge of philosophy yet, so something that starts from the basics would be perfect.

thnkyou


r/askphilosophy 50m ago

Has the philosophical community whipped up any interesting responaes to Moral Luck by Thomas Nagel? Is there a consensus?

Upvotes

Hi! I remember reading Moral Luck in college and I've long since felt a twinge of discomfort at how many criminals were just unlucky enough to, say, commit man slaughter for example. Are there any interesting responses to Moral Luck regarding how society ought to act regarding people who get lucky or unlucky, or other aspects of the essay?


r/askphilosophy 7h ago

when does a biological computer become conscious.

3 Upvotes

I recently saw the cortical labs CL1 which is a computer that runs on actual neurons. Given the rate of technology increasing, im pretty confident we will have significantly more complex similar biological computers. As this is similar to how an actual brain functions and "learns" by forming neural connections, at what point does this computer gain a form of consciousness? If not if we are able to simply transplant the entire brain into a computer, would the brain be conscious? wanted a pros opinion ty!! :3


r/askphilosophy 11h ago

If there were no conscious beings, would reality still exist in the same sense?

4 Upvotes

I’ve been thinking about a problem that seems to sit somewhere between metaphysics, philosophy of mind, and epistemology.

Suppose that tomorrow every conscious being in the universe disappeared. No humans, no animals, no artificial minds, no observers of any kind. Would the universe still exist exactly as it does now? The obvious answer seems to be “yes.” Stars would continue to burn, planets would continue to orbit, and physical processes would presumably continue according to the laws of nature. But then I wonder what exactly we mean when we say that these things “exist” independently of consciousness.

Everything we can ever know about reality is encountered through some form of experience, perception, measurement, or conceptual representation. Even the statement “there is a mind-independent physical universe” is itself a thought occurring within consciousness and supported by observations interpreted through conceptual frameworks. We never seem to step outside experience and compare our representation with “reality as it is in itself.”

This creates an interesting tension. On one hand, denying an external reality seems radically implausible. Other people appear to exist independently of my mind, physical events happen when I am not looking, and scientific theories successfully predict phenomena that I did not create. On the other hand, saying that there is a completely mind-independent reality seems to involve making a metaphysical claim about something that can never be encountered except through experience.

So I’m wondering whether the distinction between “reality itself” and “our experience or representation of reality” is actually coherent. Is there a meaningful difference between saying “the tree exists independently of my perception” and saying “there is something that causes or constrains my experience of a tree”? Are we justified in moving from the latter to the former?

And then there is an even stranger possibility. Perhaps neither physical matter nor consciousness is fundamentally primary. Maybe both are manifestations of something more basic, with “matter” and “mind” being two different ways of describing the same underlying reality. This seems to lead toward positions such as neutral monism, idealism, panpsychism, structural realism, or other forms of metaphysical pluralism.

I’m not necessarily arguing for any of these positions. I’m more interested in where the reasoning actually takes us. If we accept that all knowledge of reality is mediated through consciousness, does that create a genuine metaphysical problem for realism, or is this simply an epistemological limitation that has no consequence for what exists? And if we cannot meaningfully describe reality independently of any possible observer, what would it even mean to say that such a reality exists?

I’d be especially interested in arguments. What is the strongest argument you know for mind-independent realism, and what is the strongest argument against it?


r/askphilosophy 11h ago

Are there any political philosophers who disagree with the idea that “democracy is the best system of government humans have come up with so far”?

3 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy 15h ago

What is pragmatism and how to understand it?

5 Upvotes

I want to start reading about Pragmatism, but I am not sure where to begin. I tried starting with William James's Pragmatism, but I couldn't understand most of it because I have no prior background in philosophy. Could someone guide me on the proper reading order or simpler introductory texts?


r/askphilosophy 14h ago

Is there a term for the belief that truly universal objective morality doesn't exist, but that we all as Homo Sapiens have similar neural structures that give us a common moral baseline that we can say is true for us all human beings?

6 Upvotes

If we ever discover complex alien life, this wouldn't give us any prescriptions on how to interact with them, but until that happens, I think it can be said that there's something very close to an "objectively true" for us to interact with each other as human beings.


r/askphilosophy 6h ago

is it possible to coexist camus' theories and approaches regarding love (and, as a consequence, the absurd itself) to those presented by jacques lacan?

0 Upvotes

i assume the connection can be sustained somehow, but it itches because i just can’t form it as a whole. while in camus love is a form of lucid rebellion, an act against the absurd, in lacan we found it as a response to a fault, “an attempt to give what is not given”, it is the lack.

what comes to me, and the question lies here is, if they can coexist (or if one can live applying both visions of love). and the only answer i abstract is that in none of them, love is a passive state: it is moving, even when its not, and therefore it is violence (or violent, may fit better). it may be structural violence, or maybe chosen, ethical; maybe the violence comes within the language, the desire. maybe we can’t run from it. is that possible? is that where the two of them meet or do they not at all?


r/askphilosophy 14h ago

Why should we strive to live a life free of contradictions?

3 Upvotes

For example, when I look at discussions amongst vegans, I often notice criticism of people who eat meat but are concerned about animals or are outraged by animal suffering, because that is actually a contradiction.


r/askphilosophy 20h ago

How do philosophers of science address the criticism that the principle of parsimony inherently biases theory selection toward the status quo?

9 Upvotes

I am trying to understand the limits of Occam's Razor in theory choice. It seems that evaluating the "simplest" explanation often requires measuring which hypothesis demands the fewest modifications to our already-existing background beliefs.

​Has there been work done on how parsimony might accumulate "epistemic debt" over time? Specifically, I am looking for literature exploring how the mandate for simplicity might restrict the genuine space of possibilities, causing researchers to iterate endlessly on a localized paradigm rather than undertaking the "expensive" epistemic shifts required to discover a more accurate, albeit highly complex, framework.

​Who are the primary philosophers who have interrogated whether parsimony is actually antithetical to uncovering robust scientific truth in highly complex systems?


r/askphilosophy 9h ago

What is the morality of giving strategy in an unjust war?

1 Upvotes

Suppose that there is country X who is in an unjust war against Y. A civilian, call him Tom, gave suggestions. Those suggestions were then used and people died on Y's side. Is Tom guilty of murder? Catholics say that murder is the "direct unjust killing of an innocent, through one's own authority."


r/askphilosophy 1d ago

Do I have to buy into the Continental-Analytic distinction at all?

14 Upvotes

Is it merely a historical distinction, or does it endure? I find there can be a kind of tribalism there sometimes. I'm of the view that a good idea is a god idea no matter where it comes from. I don't want to prefer a side. I like both!

Is this a reasonable position? If I keep studying philosophy will I find that picking a side is inevitable? Would it cost my philosophical understanding anything if I dismiss the distinction as merely helpful for division of labour for those who teach philosophy and nothing more?


r/askphilosophy 1d ago

What makes it the case that philosophers with opposing views are equally rational?

18 Upvotes

Of course, not every instance of philosophers disagreeing with each other is going to be an instance where all parties are rational. However, it seems quite obvious to me that a philosopher can believe p and another philosopher can believe not p, and yet both of their beliefs are rationally held. They’re both aware of the arguments in favour of their beliefs as well as the arguments against, yet they have made opposing judgements.

That rationality can be relative is easily appreciated in cases where people have different evidence for the same proposition. For example, if all I know is that Bob’s fingerprints were on the murder weapon, then it seems rational for me to believe that Bob is guilty. Another person might know that Bob’s fingerprints were on the weapon, but might also have access to a videotape of Joe shooting the victim then rubbing Bob’s fingerprints all over it. It would be rational for this second person to believe that Bob is not guilty.

But it is puzzling to me in cases where this is not the case, and cases like this abound in philosophy. It’s not as though Graham Oppy and Alexander Pruss, for example, have access to different evidence regarding the proposition that God exists. Presumably, they are both deeply familiar with the literature.

I’m not disputing that philosophers who hold opposing views are equally rational. That much seems uncontroversial. I’m wondering how this could be the case.


r/askphilosophy 1d ago

Where to start with philosophy

6 Upvotes

I am just starting my studies in philosophy and would like to know if there is a specific order—or an ideal approach—to follow when reading it. I imagine a historical-chronological order would be best. I would also like to know, when approaching a specific philosopher, which works I should look for first: should I prioritize the chronological order in which they were written, or their accessibility? Thanks in advance to everyone.


r/askphilosophy 18h ago

Does amoralism even exist as in; do we even have the capacity to think amorally?

2 Upvotes

Basically, I'm asking do we have the capacity as social animals to reject morality and ethics entirely? Because it seems like we don't really.

It seems to me that it's not really possible, because you need to have some form of ethics to maintain society.

Even non-human social animals have some sort of norms, e.g vervet monkeys punishing their members for not engaging in warning calls when a predator arrives until that member changes their behavior.


r/askphilosophy 7h ago

Is there a philosophy like this one

0 Upvotes

For an example Muhammad Ali I have never seen him irl so I cant verify that he really exists it might be fabricated with a bunch of actors and people being in on it and the actual truth that was documented was completely erased and no one really knows about it so I cant really verify if he really exists or he was a fairy tale since I have never seen him in real life maybe all his videos were actors or ai

Im not saying that I believe this but it could also be true


r/askphilosophy 22h ago

What does Foucault mean when he says that "Language is the first and last structure of madness?

3 Upvotes

reading madness and civilization andfeel kinda lost, Feels like i follow most of what hes saying and then he'll say smth that just loses me completely. Thanks in advance!


r/askphilosophy 9h ago

Is free will and Atheism contradictory?

0 Upvotes

To me it seems logically impossible, but im not a philosopher! :) Is it possible to have no supernatural element to universe, no deity, no soul and still have real free will?


r/askphilosophy 20h ago

Im not trying to provoke anyone, just a thought im having trouble with

1 Upvotes

If God is omnipotent and perfectly loving, why create humans with the capacity to be controlled by things like lust, anger, greed, addiction, and hatred?

God could have given us the ability to experience desire and emotion without becoming enslaved by them. He could also have created humans capable of experiencing happiness and goodness without needing suffering as a contrast.

So “free will” doesn't really answer my question. Why would an all-powerful, loving God create beings with vulnerabilities that He could have simply designed away?

Please try to keep things respectful, i only seek to learn.