Lately I have been finding some free time on my hands. This generally means one thing for me – I have time to read. I used to take my reading time for granted but not anymore. It is rare that I actually can sit back and relax with nothing but a good book. And speaking of good books, have you heard of The Book of Dead Philosophers?

At first glance, it may not sound like an exciting read but hey, look at that title again and you will certainly feel something like a thrill. The Book of Dead Philosophers. How much more interesting can that be?

I have not had the chance to get my hands on this book but trust me, Amazon is my next stop after this post. After reading Laura Miller’s take on the book there is no other option. She shares some of the ideas to be found in the book:

According to Critchley, only the right kind of philosophy can teach “a readiness for death without which any conception of contentment, let alone happiness, is illusory.”

The universal truth of that assertion strikes me as debatable, as does much else in “The Book of Dead Philosophers,” but the link between philosophy and mortality is by necessity an intimate one. In philosophy, the human mind studies itself, and the same faculty that makes this study possible — our self-consciousness — also makes us aware of the inevitability of our own deaths in a way no other living creatures are. Philosophers, therefore, ought to be experts on the problem of how to die well. Since dying only happens once, and (if we’re lucky) it doesn’t take long, acquiring the skill of dying well might seem like a low priority…

While some people might fear death, we just might find something that will help overcome this fear in the book. Interesting reading, to say the least.

People like through around the world perfectionist nowadays but when you use the word are you really referring to – the philosophy or the psychology? Chances are that you’ve used the term perfectionist in both contexts at different times.

Perfectionism in psychology is defined as “a BELIEF that perfection can and must be obtained.” On the other hand, in philosophy it is defined as “the persistence of will in obtaining the optimal quality of spiritual, mental, physical, and material being.” Though they may sound pretty much the same since both aspires for the best possible results, however the major and critical difference lies in that the philosophy of perfectionism does not believe that perfection can actually be obtained.

Another thing that the term perfectionism share whether as a philosophical concept or as the psychological state of a person is that it does not always result in happy people. When it comes to psychology most people are already probably aware of the problems perfectionism can bring. Pathological perfectionists tend to obsess to much about perfection believing that anything less than perfect is as good worthless and since, unless you are a perfectionist, we know that perfection is unattainable then the person ends up disappointed time and again. When it comes to philosophy perfectionism can end up in discord primarily because people usually have differing ideas on what constitutes the best possible life, hence, an individual belonging in group may end up unhappy since the group has decided to strive for something that is not really what that person values in life.

We see a lot of people taking up higher studies. Normally these are the additional vocational degrees or the professional schools we know as Masters degrees. While not all people can have the time or afford to get into them, being adjudged a certified MBA degree holder logically holds a brighter future for anyone. Or does it?

For one, the philosophical hypothesis that most MBA graduates hold are often for the better in any business perspective. Advanced education often holds that people with MBA degrees are seasoned and adequately trained to handle real life issues in the world of business and management. But while that is something expected today, it seems that the surplus of MBA degree holders has been somewhat overflowing, making it a standoff as far as choosing the right person with the right degree to handle a business that wants to follow a certain route.

Especially now that most companies are experiencing a lot of turbulence in the business world, one cannot help but think if MBA degree holders still have a bearing in business entities. Are they a need at this point?

From the way things are going, it seems business can function without them. It is either that or companies are just trying to preserve their salary caps since MBA degree holders will be asking for the stars.

With that in mind, does the MBA philosophy make any sense? Why take up advanced professional studies if they are no longer recognized in the field of business? Maybe for entrepreneurs it is a requirement but as far as career is concerned, a lot of questions on why they should take an MBA degree is in the air.

Climate change and global warming issues have so far pushed us to lead eco-friendly lives. Many term it as going green but while others are able to cope and understand what it really means to really live an eco-conscious world, the fact remains that the whole philosophy surrounding eco-friendliness has to be further enhanced.

For one, many associate it with the color green. So with that in mind, trees, plants and nature are the first things that come into mind. This is partly true but if you want to generalize the whole eco-friendly philosophy, there is more to it that meets the eye. There is a reason why global warming and climate change are tagged part of it and if you would have your way, chances are you may discover that the branches included in it go a whole lot deeper.

You are bound to hear this topics when eco-friendly is in the air:

1. Recycling
2. Organic Living
3. Animal Extinction
4. Endangered Species
5. Alternative Energy
6. Alternative Fuel

Each of these topics are in a niche of their own. Sum them all up and they comprise the whole essence of global warming and climate change. But if you take on them separately, you may be surprised to note that they are only about 5% roughly if you want to sum up their relevance to global warming.

Al Gore hit it right when he addressed this issue. Apparently he is vindicated and today, many of us are finding our own way on how to survive this unusual glitch we are mainly responsible for.

Envy is an emotion everyone has at some point felt and needed to contend with. But what exactly is envy? When can you say that you are envious and when are you jealous? Is there are difference between the two? Is envy necessarily bad? All these questions about envy are answered in by Justin D’Arms’ paper on Envy. There he discussed the nature of envy, its rationality, and its relation to justice.

What interested me most about the whole article though is how he showed that envy is not always irrational and that despite the fact that it is often painted in a negative manner, even being considered to be one of the seven deadly sins, it can actually be benign. However, I we all understand why envy has earned its nasty reputation what with all the negative things that do tend to happen or at least the negative emotions that are invoked when the green-eyed monster makes it appearance. To be able to understand the whole concept of envy though and see why it can actually be benign, one needs to first understand its basic nature based on its definition and according to the following philosophers envy can be defined as follows:

Envy is pain at the good fortune of others. (Aristotle, Rhetoric, Bk II, Chapter 10)

Envy is a propensity to view the well-being of others with distress, even though it does not detract from one’s own. [It is] a reluctance to see our own well-being overshadowed by another’s because the standard we use to see how well off we are is not the intrinsic worth of our own well-being but how it compares with that of others. [Envy] aims, at least in terms of one’s wishes, at destroying others’ good fortune. (Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals 6:45)

In short, as D’Arms puts it arises from comparing how well you are doing with others. For the in-depth (and very fascinating) discussion on envy read Justin D’Arms’ article on Envy.

Image Source: Digerati Life

Experimental philosophy is still a relatively new field of study, which started last 2000 when a group of students decided to apply experimental procedures used in psychology to philosophy. According to the Experimental Philosophy Society “experimental philosophy involves the collection of empirical data to shed light on philosophical issues.” This empirical data is usually gathered through surveys wherein the participants are ordinary people. This is obviously a much different approach than the traditional analytical philosophy wherein philosophers based their arguments on premises they come up with. As can be expected, criticism regarding experimental philosophy abound.

Despite the resistance of many philosophers to experimental philosophy this emerging field in philosophy is also being welcomed quite warmly, not only among seasoned philosophers but among people from other field of studies. The reason for this is that due to the nature or experimental philosophy (data collection) those from related fields of study can contribute much. As the mission statement of the Experimental Philosophy Society states, “it is expected that the membership of the society will include faculty, students, and interested amateurs not only in philosophy but also in psychology, anthropology, sociology, law, and other related fields.”

Right now areas of research in experimental philosophy include consciousness, cultural diversity, determinism and moral responsibility, and intentional action. For an updated list of research using experimental philosophy visit the X-Phi wiki. You can even add your paper, as long as it uses experimental philosophy of course.

Blame is described in Wikipedia as “the act of censuring, holding responsible, making negative statements about an individual or group that their action or actions are socially or morally irresponsible.” Praise, on the other hand, is said to be “the act of making positive statements about a person, object or idea, either in public or privately. Praise is typically, but not exclusively, earned relative to achievement and accomplishment.”

They may be opposites in that one is negative and the other positive but they share a common thread, which is that assigning blame or giving praise to someone both means assigning responsibility to that person. Because of this the very tricky issue of “free will” has to come into play, after all how can anyone be held responsible for anything without free will. And so the classic debate that is still as ever goes on.

If you are interested in delving more into the free will, blame, and praise issue a must read would be Garrath Williams’ article “Praise and Blame”. There he “contrasts three influential philosophical accounts of our everyday practices of praise and blame, in terms of how they might be justified” including the Kantian approach (where the subject of free will is discussed), the utilitarian approach (discusses praise and blame in relation to their usefulness in terms of social benefits), and the Aristotelian approach (focuses on mutual accountability and moral education).

I just read Karl Paulnack’s welcome address to incoming freshmen at the Boston Conservatory of Music and was not only deeply moved by it but was really pleased with his take on music. As a music lover I never really had a philosophy about music but has instinctively known its importance to society. Paulnack’s speech is a really good insight to music and its function to society not because of its facts (though some facts were stated) but because it speaks of a truth that resonates in our emotions.

Here are snippets of his speech that focuses on his take on the Greek’s view of music as well as his own opinion on his and every musician’s purpose or job description.

“The first people to understand how music really works were the ancient Greeks. And this is going to fascinate you; the Greeks said that music and astronomy were two sides of the same coin. Astronomy was seen as the study of relationships between observable, permanent, external objects, and music was seen as the study of relationships between invisible, internal, hidden objects. Music has a way of finding the big, invisible moving pieces inside our hearts and souls and helping us figure out the position of things inside us.”

“If we were a medical school, and you were here as a med student practicing appendectomies, you’d take your work very seriously because you would imagine that some night at two AM someone is going to waltz into your emergency room and you’re going to have to save their life. Well, my friends, someday at 8 PM someone is going to walk into your concert hall and bring you a mind that is confused, a heart that is overwhelmed, a soul that is weary. Whether they go out whole again will depend partly on how well you do your craft. You’re not here to become an entertainer, and you don’t have to sell yourself. The truth is you don’t have anything to sell; being a musician isn’t about dispensing a product, like selling used Chevys. I’m not an entertainer; I’m a lot closer to a paramedic, a firefighter, a rescue worker. You’re here to become a sort of therapist for the human soul, a spiritual version of a chiropractor, physical therapist, someone who works with our insides to see if they get things to line up, to see if we can come into harmony with ourselves and be healthy and happy and well.”

How do you get someone who doesn’t care about philosophy but loves TV shows like The Simpsons, South Park, and the Sopranos? Simple. Get them a book about the philosophy of each show. Yes there really are books about the philosophy of these shows. There’s The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D’oh! of Homer (2001), South Park and Philosophy: Bigger, Longer, and More Penetrating (2007), and The Sopranos and Philosophy: I Kill Therefore I Am (2004). All books from the popular culture and philosophy series of Open Court Publishing. Just from the titles alone you’ll get their attention.

So how about if they don’t watch TV and like music instead well then you can recommend any of the following:

There are also books for geeks, movie lovers, Harley enthusiasts and more. If you don’t find your topic of particular interest what’s great is that you can submit the topic to Open Court Publishing and they’ll consider whether it is worth doing a philosophy volume on. They prefer very specific topics so make sure you think up something really interesting and specific. So far they’re at the 38th volume and have 14 more topics in line. Do check out their site I’m sure you’ll find something of interest.

Philosophy is a very broad area of study so that if you’re interested in just one specific branch of philosophy other branches might as well be relatively alien for you. To remind us just how wide and varied the topics are that can be studied philosophically I’ll be going back to the basics and list down the main areas of study, which include the following:

Metaphysics – This area of philosophy deals with the nature of being and seeks to understand the nature of how and why things exist. It’s traditional branches are cosmology and ontology.
Epistemology – The study of HOW we know things, it is concerned with the nature and scope of knowledge. Epistemology is used by philosophers to decide or at least try to decide the limits and boundaries of what can and can not be known.
Logic – Logic is what’s used in all areas of philosophy to arrive at conclusions. Logic can be represented in symbols via mathematical logic though philosophical logic is still very much in use.
Ethics – Deals with morality. An area that is very much a cause for debate but is very important since it answers the questions of how we should act and react with other people. Aesthetics
Politics – The study of government and its relationship to its citizens and the communities that make up the government.
Language – Philosophical approach to the nature, origins, and usage of language.
Aesthetics – This is the study of not only beauty and art but seeks to explain how and why we classify things as beautiful as well as the degree to which we consider things beautiful.