Reinstated

Good! I shared the same headline in class, the morning after. Once in a while, school administrators get things right:

Clarksville, TN — the APSU professor who was fired over a post he shared online about the death of Charlie Kirk, has been reinstated. He was fired for resharing a 2023 headline that said, "Charlie Kirk Says Gun Deaths 'Unfortunately' Worth it to Keep 2nd Amendment." Then Sen. Marsha Blackburn shared his post calling for the university to take action.

https://www.threads.com/@allie4tn/post/DS5n_efkU9J?xmt=AQF014Eu4a3E7IgbJRH9K1grF5eYm6lV-mQ2WUT-ibMys6o0yS3y7EznwdMpMbnV6n2NwryL&slof=1

A Philosopher Gives the Old Idea of Universalism a Radical New Spin

Omri Boehm’s new book argues that both the left and the right must abandon divisive identity politics and embrace the transformative power of Enlightenment ideals.

...Boehm’s lodestar is the philosopher Immanuel Kant, who defined the Enlightenment as “man’s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity.” Kant warned about the temptations of mechanical thinking — the lazy habit of falling back on an external authority (the will of the king, the consensus of public opinion) in order to avoid the difficult work of thinking for ourselves. When the Nazi official Adolf Eichmann stood trial in Jerusalem, he declared — absurdly and abominably — that he had lived his life according to Kant’s precepts, yet was helpless before his superiors’ command to follow orders. Boehm quotes Hannah Arendt’s response: “In Kant, nobody has the right to obey.”

Before I started reading this book, the title “Radical Universalism” struck me as an oxymoron. I associated the word “universalism” with an inclination toward complacency — an approach that deployed the tepid vocabulary of reform and individual rights to preserve the status quo. There seemed to be little that was radical about it.

But Boehm’s book has persuaded me that universalism could be more profoundly transformative than anything offered by the self-styled “radicals” on either end of the political spectrum. Recognizing our duty to one another will be a hard sell in a world where we have been encouraged to think only about our own convenience and interests. Boehm makes an inspiring case for why this impossible project is necessary work...

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/30/books/review/radical-universalism-omri-boehm.html?smid=em-share

Better thinkers

Studying philosophy does make people better thinkers, according to new research on more than 600,000 college grads.

https://buff.ly/SWhY0c0

the task of education

"Like Rousseau, Kant criticizes parents who have their children taught solely with an eye to their career prospects and making money, and rulers who see schools and universities as nothing more than training grounds to maximize the efficiency of their subjects. Instead, it is the task of education to improve the world by turning individuals into better people: "Good education is exactly that from which all good in the world arises." "

— Kant: A Revolution in Thinking by Marcus Willaschek

Short animations from Aristotle to Sartre

…short animated videos from BBC Radio 4, all covering the big questions: How did everything begin? What makes us human? What is love? How can I know anything at all? They've all come scripted by philosopher Nigel Warburton (he of Philosophy Bites podcast fame) and narrated by a host of notables from both sides of the pond like Stephen Fry, Gillian Anderson, Aidan Turner, and Harry Shearer. They've illustrated the philosophical concepts at hand not just with elaborate and joke-filled drawings that come to life before your eyes, but with direct reference to the ideas of history's best-known thinkers: Aristotle, Descartes, Hume, Wittgenstein, de Beauvoir, Sartre, Freud, Chomsky

https://www.openculture.com/2015/09/47-animated-videos-explain-the-history-of-ideas-from-aristotle-to-sartre.html

I Teach College Students How to Argue With Their Families

Good advice for the classroom, too:

…Few things can calm a savage heart like being genuinely listened to. Keep listening. Ask constructive questions. No reactions, not yet. Unless the speaker has a political psychopathology going on (which, in the current environment, is not as rare as it should be), he will soften. His voice will modulate; he'll stop sweating.

Now, finally, it's your turn. Speak your piece. Be detached, genial, even kind, but say what's on your mind. Prefix fraught opinions with a simple qualifier. "I might be wrong, but …."

I might be wrong: It's simple to the point of banality, but in my experience, highly effective.

Prepare by doing research. Do some reading. Be respectful. If you can create a rich, humane conversation, you may learn something. As Emerson says, "Every man I meet is my master in some point, and in that I learn from him."

…

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/24/opinion/jacques-lacan-holiday-arguments.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

Starry message

Carl Sagan's Pale Blue Dot

"…Let's consider our "cosmic address." It starts small—your house, your city, your country. But zoom out: you're on Earth, orbiting a modest star, tucked into a spiral arm of the Milky Way, itself just one galaxy among billions in a universe that's still expanding.

This perspective isn't meant to make us feel insignificant. Instead, it offers context and a sense of unity. Every atom in your body was forged in the core of ancient stars. Our planet—our home—is both fragile and extraordinary. It's the only place we know of, so far, where the universe has become conscious of itself..." Neil deGrasse Tyson

Artificial learning

Cautionary warning for my upcoming Philosophy in Recent American Fiction course:

"All I want for Christmas is to have my brain scrubbed of the memory of teaching a university-level literature course where most students used AI to tell them what the books were about and then also used AI to tell me what they thought about the books."

https://www.threads.com/@annasandyelrod/post/DSfpbY_iSuF?xmt=AQF0tMZ1NskaVYuYlU8maJd3ef_ngVHjxLuJ9bGQUAaJ2UyhV1ab79qOALAYfukA4ftq8Xa5&slof=1

What Happened When My College Students Gave Up Their Phones For Four Weeks

We're not going that far, but we are going to be screen-free... except for the big one that projects our "CoPhilosophy" site, and during the last 10 minutes of class when you can post comments on the day's reading and discussion (and when class is outside). Studies show that our focus, attention, and retention should grow... and taking notes long-hand will grow new neural connections.

Let's see how it goes...

Adults need to set up rules for students so that it's not on them to self-regulate when it comes to going tech-free.

...I'm no longer certain that the content of my course is where my greatest impact as a teacher lies. With the current generation, at least, what we as educators keep out is as important as what we put in. In creating containers, we give members of this technology-crushed generation a fair chance to be with their own thoughts, until they've made something of them and felt the oldfangled dopamine hit that comes with assembling meaning. I don't know what we owe our students if not that. nyt

Schopenhauer

"Nietzsche considered him one of his most important teachers, and Freud, astonishingly, thought him one of the half-dozen greatest individuals who had ever lived. One of the few professional philosophers to treat him as more than a crank was Wittgenstein, who perhaps saw in his work an anti-philosophy akin to his own."

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v47/n22/terry-eagleton/pregnant-with-monsters

A communal pursuit: Open Socrates

Remembering the beginning of 2025 can be like trying to recall a distant era. The news cycle has been so eventful that last month feels like it took place a decade ago. Then again, the surprise return of some old concerns (tariffs, measles) can make it seem as if the clock has been turned back 100 years.

But great books keep getting published. I still think about one of the books I reviewed in January: "Open Socrates: The Case for a Philosophical Life," by the philosopher Agnes Callard. Callard's approach to self-improvement is, in her words, "hard-line intellectualist" — not exactly an easy sell, but she is so obviously thrilled by her mission that it's hard not to be charmed by her singular combination of exacting intelligence and indefatigable enthusiasm. I was especially moved by her emphasis on thinking as a communal pursuit: "In the presence of others, something becomes possible that isn't possible when you are alone." 

Jennifer Szalai

NYTimes: Our Book Critics on Their Year in Reading

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/12/books/review/book-critics-2025.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share

John Searle (1932–2025)

"John Rogers Searle was a highly influential philosopher of the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, shaping discussions on language, mind, and the nature of understanding for over sixty years.

Born in Denver in 1932, Searle studied at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. He later won a Rhodes Scholarship to Oxford, where he earned his doctorate under J.L. Austin and Peter Strawson. Searle was deeply influenced by the 'ordinary language philosophy' of his supervisors, whose focus on the practical dimensions of speech laid the groundwork for his own further development of speech-act theory. His years in England significantly impacted his lifelong focus on how words not only describe the world but also act within it.

In 1959 Searle joined the University of California, Berkeley, where he would teach for the rest of his career. As the Slusser Professor of Philosophy of Mind and Language, Searle was known for his challenging yet clear teaching style and his unique blend of analytic precision and philosophical depth. He received numerous honors, including the National Humanities Medal and the Mind & Brain Prize. His academic recognition acknowledged not only the originality of his ideas but also his skill in translating complex philosophical issues, ranging from questions of consciousness to the foundations of society, into public discussion.

In his reflections on language, Searle emphasized that it is a crucial tool for expressing and communicating meaning, but that meaning itself does not reside in language; rather, it exists in the relationship between mental states and the world. Building on this idea, he rejected any form of reductionism that explains meaning solely in terms of physical processes, instead stressing the irreducibility of intentionality. In this context, 'intentionality' is a jargon term referring to the fact that consciousness is always about something, and usually something other than itself. It is a property material objects do not have, only minds. This understanding of meaning as grounded in the intentional relation between mind and world also shaped Searle's firm stance against 'computational functionalism'. For Searle, mental phenomena could not be fully described by theories that view the mind as merely a system of inputs, mechanical processing, and outputs.

Searle's insights into the philosophy of mind and the nature of computation remain highly relevant in a modern tech landscape dominated by systems like ChatGPT, just as they were in the 1980s when his 'Chinese Room' thought experiment challenged whether machines can genuinely understand rather than only simulate understanding.

In this thought experiment, Searle asks us to imagine a person in a sealed room who doesn't understand Chinese. They receive Chinese characters written on cards through a slot, and follow a detailed English rulebook to manipulate these symbols and send new sets of characters back. To outsiders, the responses appear fluent, as if a Chinese speaker were making them. However, the person inside doesn't understand the symbols; they're simply following formal rules about how to respond to the symbols presented. Searle argued that this is also how computers process information – by manipulating symbols based on preprogrammed rules of syntax and grammar, without understanding their meaning. So even when a computer produces intelligent, appropriate responses, it's just mechanically handling signs without any comprehension of them. Searle emphasized that this shows how genuine understanding requires more than computation, it involves consciousness – a quality unique to biological organisms. Therefore, for Searle, the human mind is not a program running on neural hardware, but a biological phenomenon grounded in consciousness. The Chinese Room argument can also be applied to Large Language Models, which despite their linguistic sophistication operate without genuine understanding. Searle would likely have viewed today's AI systems as impressive examples of symbol manipulation that nevertheless lack awareness or any form of subjective experience, including intentional states. In an era increasingly shaped by intelligent systems, Searle's arguments also remind us that ethical and political questions about responsibility and truth cannot be answered without understanding the systems involved.

Searle's academic career, however, came to an abrupt end before he could comment explicitly on the recent developments in AI. It was halted in 2017 by allegations of sexual harassment at Berkeley that led to the revocation of Searle's emeritus status and the cessation of his teaching responsibilities.

These events rightly cast doubt on his personal conduct and professional reputation. However, they do not diminish the intellectual importance of his philosophical contributions, which continue to influence discussions on language, mind, and consciousness. So his legacy, like that of many influential figures, remains both lasting and ambivalent. It reminds us that intellectual achievement and personal integrity must be judged together, even as the importance of an individual's ideas persists.

Amidst the public controversy Searle's private life entered a difficult phase too. Also in 2017 he faced the loss of his wife Dagmar, whose presence had quietly accompanied his philosophical journey for more than half a century. All of Searle's major philosophical works – ranging from The Rediscovery of Mind to Seeing Things As They Are – are dedicated to his wife.

Searle passed away on September 17, 2025. He was 93 years old. With his death, philosophy loses one of its most visible and argumentative voices."

--Mariam Awwad is a Research Assistant in the Department of Philosophy at Heinrich Heine University, Düsseldorf. ■

Philosophy Now
Dec '25

It's Commencement Day

And I'm not expecting much from our scheduled speaker. 

So here's a commencement speech worth your attention from Aussie comic Tim Minchin:

 

"...One: You don’t have to have a dream. Americans on talent shows always talk about their dreams. Fine if you have something you’ve always wanted to do, dreamed of, like in your heart, go for it. After all it’s something to do with your time, chasing a dream. And if it’s a big enough one it’ll take you most of your life to achieve so by the time you get to it and are staring into the abyss of the meaningless of your achievement you’ll be almost dead so it won’t matter.

I never really had one of these dreams and so I advocate passionate, dedication to the pursuit of short-term goals. Be micro-ambitious. Put your head down and work with pride on whatever is in front of you. You never know where you might end up. Just be aware the next worthy pursuit will probably appear in your periphery, which is why you should be careful of long-term dreams. If you focus too far in front of you you won’t see the shiny thing out the corner of your eye. Right? Good! Advice metaphor… look at me go.

Two: Don’t seek happiness. Happiness is like an orgasm. If you think about it too much it goes away. Keep busy and aim to make someone else happy and you might find you get some as a side effect. We didn’t evolve to be constantly content. Contented Homo Erectus got eaten before passing on their genes.

Three: Remember it’s all luck. You are lucky to be here. You are incalculably lucky to be born and incredibly lucky to be brought up by a nice family who encouraged you to go to uni. Or if you were born into a horrible family that’s unlucky and you have my sympathy but you are still lucky. Lucky that you happen to be made of the sort of DNA that went on to make the sort of brain which when placed in a horrible child environment would make decisions that meant you ended up eventually graduated uni. Well done you for dragging yourself up by your shoelaces. But you were lucky. You didn’t create the bit of you that dragged you up. They’re not even your shoelaces.

I suppose I worked hard to achieve whatever dubious achievements I’ve achieved but I didn’t make the bit of me that works hard any more than I made the bit of me that ate too many burgers instead of attending lectures when I was here at UWA. Understanding that you can’t truly take credit for your successes nor truly blame others for their failures will humble you and make you more compassionate. Empathy is intuitive. It is also something you can work on intellectually.

Four: Exercise. I’m sorry you pasty, pale, smoking philosophy grads arching your eyebrows into a Cartesian curve as you watch the human movement mob winding their way through the miniature traffic cones of their existence. You are wrong and they are right. Well you’re half right. You think therefore you are but also you jog therefore you sleep therefore you’re not overwhelmed by existential angst. You can’t be can’t and you don’t want to be. Play a sport. Do yoga, pump iron, and run, whatever but take care of your body, you’re going to need it. Most of you mob are going to live to nearly 100 and even the poorest of you will achieve a level of wealth that most humans throughout history could not have dreamed of. And this long, luxurious life ahead of you is going to make you depressed. But don’t despair. There is correlation between depression and exercise. Do it! Run, my beautiful intellectuals run.

Five: Be hard on your opinions. A famous bon mot asserts, opinions are like assholes in that everyone has one. There is great wisdom in this but I would add that opinions differ significantly from assholes in that yours should be constantly and thoroughly examined. I used to do exams in here… It’s revenge.

We must think critically and not just about the ideas of others. Be hard on your beliefs. Take them out onto the verandah and hit them with a cricket bat. Be intellectually rigorous. Identify your biases, your prejudices, your privileges. Most of society is kept alive by a failure to acknowledge nuance. We tend to generate false dichotomies and then try to argue one point using two entirely different sets of assumptions. Like two tennis players trying to win a match by hitting beautifully executed shots from either end of separate tennis courts.

By the way, while I have science and arts graduates in front of me please don’t make the mistake of thinking the arts and sciences are at odds with one another. That is a recent, stupid and damaging idea. You don’t have to be unscientific to make beautiful art, to write beautiful things. If you need proof – Twain, Douglas Adams, Vonnegut, McEwan, Sagan and Shakespeare, Dickens for a start. You don’t need to be superstitious to be a poet. You don’t need to hate GM technology to care about the beauty of the planet. You don’t have to claim a soul to promote compassion. Science is not a body of knowledge nor a belief system it’s just a term which describes human kinds’ incremental acquisition of understanding through observation. Science is awesome! The arts and sciences need to work together to improve how knowledge is communicated. The idea that many Australians including our new PM and my distant cousin Nick Minchin believe that the science of anthropogenic global warming is controversial is a powerful indicator of the extent of our failure to communicate. The fact that 30 percent of the people just bristled is further evidence still. The fact that that bristling is more to do with politics than science is even more despairing.

Six: Be a teacher! Please! Please! Please be a teacher. Teachers are the most admirable and important people in the world. You don’t have to do it forever but if you’re in doubt about what to do be an amazing teacher. Just for your 20s be a teacher. Be a primary school teacher. Especially if you’re a bloke. We need male primary school teachers. Even if you’re not a teacher, be a teacher. Share your ideas. Don’t take for granted your education. Rejoice in what you learn and spray it.

Seven: Define yourself by what you love. I found myself doing this thing a bit recently where if someone asks me what sort of music I like I say, “Well I don’t listen to the radio because pop song lyrics annoy me,” or if someone asks me what food I like I say, “I think truffle oil is overused and slightly obnoxious.” And I see it all the time online – people whose idea of being part of a subculture is to hate Coldplay or football or feminists or the Liberal Party.

We have a tendency to define ourselves in opposition to stuff. As a comedian I make my living out of it. But try to also express your passion for things you love. Be demonstrative and generous in your praise of those you admire. Send thank you cards and give standing ovations. Be pro stuff not just anti stuff.

Eight: Respect people with less power than you. I have in the past made important decisions about people I work with – agents and producers – big decisions based largely on how they treat the wait staff in the restaurants we’re having the meeting in. I don’t care if you’re the most powerful cat in the room, I will judge you on how you treat the least powerful. So there!

Nine: Finally, don’t rush. You don’t need to know what you’re going to do with the rest of your life. I’m not saying sit around smoking cones all day but also don’t panic! Most people I know who were sure of their career path at 20 are having mid-life crises now..."

 

Every day

Just kidding...

Philosophy classes, Spring 2026

PHIL 1030 – Introduction to Philosophy
3 credit hours Basic philosophical problems suggested by everyday experience integrated into a coherent philosophy of life through comparison with solutions offered by prominent philosophers.

PHIL 2110 – Elementary Logic & Critical Thinking 

Principles of deductive and inductive reasoning, problem solving, and  the analysis of arguments in everyday language.  

Dr. Bombardi 

PHIL 3150 - Ethics  

Examines major ethical theories, the moral nature of human beings, and  the meaning of good and right and applies ethical theories to resolving  moral problems in personal and professional lives.  

Dr. Johnson, Mr. Easley

 

PHIL 3170 - Ethics and Computing Technology  

Exposes students to the fundamentals of ethical theory and familiarizes  them with some of the practical, ethical, and legal issues with which  they would have to deal as computer scientists.  

Dr. Johnson 

PHIL 3600 – Philosophy and Film  

Examination of the cinematic expression of philosophical issues and  development of philosophical issues in cinema.  

Dr. Newman  

PHIL 4020 – History of Modern Philosophy  

The development of philosophical thought from Hobbes to Hegel.  Offered spring only.  

Dr. Bombardi  

PHIL 4100 – Aesthetics  

The nature of art, aesthetic experience, and artistic creation.  

Dr. Magada-Ward  

PHIL 4400 – Analytic Philosophy  

Examines twentieth-century analytic movement including logical  atomism, logical positivism, indeterminacy semantics, ordinary  language philosophy.  

Dr. Slack  

PHIL 4550 – Philosophy of Mind  

Classical philosophy of mind (emphases: the mind-body problem,  theories of consciousness) and contemporary applications of philosophy  to psychology (emphases: logic and cognition, emotion and reason,  artificial intelligence).  

Dr. Bombardi 

MALA 6050 – Philosophy in Recent American Fiction [undergrads welcome to audit, meeting Tuesdays 6 pm]

We'll read three novels together (Richard Ford, Be Mine. Richard Powers, Playground. Rebecca Newberger Goldstein, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction), and each of us will additionally read and report on either a fourth novel or on a specific author's life and works.

Dr. Oliver

==

And in Fall '26, I'll be teaching 

PHIL 4200 - Existentialism. 

"The nature, significance, and application of the teachings of several outstanding existential thinkers."

jpo

Your turn, students

"It is far too easy to attribute failure to a generation, way too simplistic to blame those with the power to change society for the better who did not exercise such power. Most of the people I have worked with did the best they could under circumstances over which they felt little control. But the stark reality—as I have traced it in these pages and lived it over the past seventy-eight years—is that the richest and most powerful nation in modern history, the America that emerged victorious from World War II and whose democracy was a beacon for much of the rest of the world, is now coming up short. Trump and Trumpism are consequences, not causes. As I hope I've made clear, the causes have been growing for more than forty years. We could have addressed them. We did not. The responsibility to remedy this—to restore genuine opportunity, strengthen democracy, and contain the bullies—now falls to those who come after us. They include my wonderful, brilliant students."

— Coming Up Short: A Memoir of My America by Robert B. Reich
https://a.co/fqG7dXJ

A virtual farewell

 Just for fun I asked ChatGPT to draft a farewell message. It's pretty good (thanks, I'd say with all due humility, to the quality of the prompts I gave it):

As our season of CoPhilosophy comes to a close, I hope you’ll allow yourselves a brief pause before rushing headlong into whatever waits outside this room. Look back at the ground you’ve covered. You began with Warburton’s Little History of Philosophy, that brisk walk through centuries of ideas—proof that the great questions don’t belong to specialists alone but to anyone brave enough to face them squarely. Neiman’s Why Grow Up? pushed you to think about adulthood not as resignation but as responsibility, as a refusal to hand your mind over to easy consolations. And Kaag, in Sick Souls, Healthy Minds, brought William James down from the high shelf and into the grit of lived experience, reminding you that philosophy is at its best when it remembers the stakes: how one keeps going, how one holds on.

Then there was Weiner’s Socrates Express urging you to treat philosophy as a way of traveling through the world—curious, unhurried, willing to be changed by what you meet. Around all of this swirled the recommended texts: Setiya’s sober counsel for hard times; Richardson’s luminous portraits of thinkers clawing their way back from grief; Tyson’s cosmic lens widening your field of vision; Buxton & Whiting’s Philosopher Queens recovering voices too long ignored; Baggini’s How the World Thinks reminding you there is no single center to human wisdom; Andersen’s Fantasyland warning how easily a culture can slip into magical thinking when it forgets to check its own stories.

Each of these works nudged you toward the same essential truth: philosophy is not a museum of old answers but a practice of living questions. It’s a social undertaking, as James insisted—a philosophy of co. You think better in dialogue. You see further when someone else is looking with you. And you grow wiser when you let your convictions stay permeable, provisional, open to revision.

Einstein once said that the important thing is never to stop questioning. Benjamin Paul Blood—through James’s delightfully odd affection for him—reminded us that “nothing has concluded, that we may conclude.” Take that seriously. Let it unsettle you in the right way. Let it keep you from shutting the book too soon on yourself or anyone else.

For those who struggle with social anxiety, hear Eleanor Roosevelt one more time: you wouldn’t worry so much about what others think of you if you understood how seldom they do. That’s not dismissal—it’s liberation. You have more room than you imagine. Use it well.

As you step away from this course, hold fast to the habits we practiced: ask more questions than you answer; listen more than you speak; resist the urge to seal the world into neat compartments; be skeptical, but never cynical; be hopeful, but never complacent. Wisdom grows in that tension.

And if this semester cracked the door open for you—even a little—I hope you’ll walk through it next Fall and join me for Existentialism. It’s another chance to wander these questions together, to sharpen your sense of what it means to be a self in a restless world.

For now, though: stay curious, stay courageous, stay open. Nothing has concluded. And that’s the best news you’ll hear today.

I'll just add: don't fear Artificial Intelligence, make it work for you as a tool and not a replacement. You still have the responsibility and the joy of thinking for--but not by--yourself. 

So go ahead and talk to AI, about your schoolwork or whatever, but be entirely transparent: clearly identify which statements are your own and which are AI's, and always corroborate its accurate information while calling out the hallucinations. Interact with it, don't passively absorb it.

I can't repeat Susan Neiman's message often enough: to be enlightened and grown up is to think for yourself, and to want to. Hannah Arendt was right: to be grown up is to love the world enough to take responsibility for it. It's what good parents do (and every responsible adult is a parent to the next generation, whether there are children under their roof or not).

So remember: no single stage of life is necessarily the best or worst. Be responsible, be happy, be good, enjoy your life, and share the joy.

Have a good break, and a good next semester. Maybe I'll see you next Fall in Existentialism.

Later. Au revoir.

jpo

Making of hell a heaven

Late in my professorial career, I keep discovering philosophers I'd never heard of. Is this guy any relation to Fred?

"…[John] Macmurray devotes as much space to spelling out an alternative to the egocentric bias of Western philosophy as he does to arguing against its theoretical bias. Regarding the theoretical bias, he concludes that 'I do' is more foundational than 'I think'. Regarding the egocentric bias, he argues that the fundamental unit of personal reality is not 'I', but 'you-and-I'. We can note a connection by observing that 'I do' implies a 'you' interacting with an 'I', but Macmurray's two criticisms remain distinct. Macmurray didn't argue for the importance of positive personal relationships, he started from it, observing that the most valued thing in our lives is the relationships central to them, giving our lives meaning. Sartre said "Hell is other people": Macmurray could equally have said "Heaven is other people." Both are true, but Macmurray is more inclined to dwell on the positive…"

Jeanne Warren
Philosophy Now
Oct/Nov '25

Peter Singer’s 19th century

The best 19th century Philosophy books, according to Peter Singer:

"I do think the nineteenth century was a particularly fertile period for ideas, and one in which ideas were taken seriously by many people"

https://fivebooks.com/best-books/nineteenth-century-philosophy-peter-singer/

==

There's a new bio of Schopenhauer just out, too:

Arthur Schopenhauer: The Life and Thought of Philosophy’s Greatest Pessimist is a wonderful book. It’s a beautifully written biography of Arthur Schopenhauer that is reminiscent in style of Sarah Bakewell’s How to Live: A Life of Montaigne. It’s highly readable and highly recommended.
https://fivebooks.com/book/arthur-schopenhauer-david-bather-woods/

And another of Kant:

In Kant: A Revolution in Thinking, even readers having no prior acquaintance with Kant’s ideas or with philosophy generally will find an adroit introduction to the Prussian polymath’s oeuvre, beginning with his political arguments, expanding to his moral theory, and finally moving to his more abstract considerations of natural science, epistemology, and metaphysics. Along the way, Kant himself emerges from beneath his famed works, revealing a magnetic personality, a clever ironist, and a man deeply engaged with his contemporary world. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674296107

Finish line in sight...

Final posting is now concluded. See you soon (on Tue or Thur, see schedule under NEXT) for the exam.* jpo

*

Exam 2 audio review

 Review the relevant texts addressing these questions... 

Chapter 2 of The Philosopher Queens: The Lives and Legacies of Philosophy's Unsung Women -- "Ban Zhao"

 

      The Philosopher Queens by Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting reveals the mostly unheard of history and ideas of female philosophers throughout history, ranging from enigmatic figures like Diotima to early feminist thinkers like Simone de Beauvoir. The chapter about Ban Zhao was written by Dr. Eva Kit Wah Man, who has a PhD in Philosophy and Chinese Studies.

     Before we talk about Ban Zhao, who is the focus of Chapter 2 in the book, I want to emphasize how important books like this are. Not only does it shed light on the ideas of women who seemed to be silenced or outright erased by history, it shows us more ideas that could serious impact our way of thinking and living our lives-- just like the ideas that the "official" and "important" philosophers gave us.

     Thank you all for reading this, and thank you for a good semester, Dr. Oliver!

 ---------------------------

 

      

    The book describes Ban Zhao as "perhaps the greatest intellectual woman in ancient Chinese history." (Man 15). It is hard to disagree when you learn of her accomplishments throughout her life. (c. 45-120 CE)

     Ban Zhao contributed heavily to the of the Book of the Later Han, referring to the Han Dynasty of China (c. 25-220 CE), eventually finishing it. Emperor He at the time recognized her intellectual talent and ordered her to complete the book after her father and brother died while writing it.

     Not only was she an exceptional historian, she was also a prolific writer in general.

     She wrote narrative poems, eulogies, arguments, commentaries, elegies and essays until she passed away in her old age. (Man 16). All of this while she gave guidance in manners and virtue to the palace concubines and empress.

 

      Probably her best remembered work was Lessons for Women (Nü Jie), a guide mainly for the upper class women of China concerning how they should conduct themselves in society and in their families. Each chapter in this "survival guide" covered concepts like humility, husband and wife, respect and caution, womanly qualities, wholehearted devotion, implicit obedience and harmony with younger brothers and sisters-in-law. (Man 17)

 

     Now, looking at those subjects might make you feel like Ban Zhao was a self-deprecating misogynist. That's what I thought at first, too.

    But if you think about the society she lived in at the time...Ancient China...patriarchal...hostile environments towards women...could she really have afforded to be a feminist? At least a feminist by today's standards? 

     I truly think her teachings probably saved several women's lives, especially since most of them were derived from her own experiences as a woman and wife. 

     She helped prepare women for married life, preserving her own safety and peace by being a "peaceful" and "docile" wife. This relates directly to her description of the relationship between a man and a woman:

"Yang's quality is hard and Yin's application is soft; men are valued for their strength while women are praised for their weakness." (Percepts [Lessons] for Women, Chapter 3).

 

 

 

     This is a directly Daoist and Confucianist principle, subjugating women as "weaker" and "inferior" to men. The Daoist principle of Wu Wei (or non-action) contributed to Ban Zhao's teachings of peace and submission, as well. 

 

 

 (I thought this video explained the different ideologies involved pretty well.)

 

 

    She also urged women to "choose [their] words carefully, and utter not vile words. Speak only at the appropriate moment. Avoid offending others." (Precepts [Lessons] for Women, Chapter 4)

    This piece of guidance would have been helpful for women in hostile homes, such as their husband's family's. Ban Zhao explained that "disrespect, accusations, quarrels and overt confrontation were inevitable, especially if a wife was not as submissive as she "needed" to be. Yin was some of the only protection a woman had in that society.

    The overall idea for these women was "if you don't resist or speak your mind, they won't have a good reason to harm you."

 

    Also, I found out that there is an opera dedicated to the events and legacy of Ban Zhao. I found this news article that announced that China National Peking Opera Company would be premiering "The Tribute to the Female Historian" Dec. 21, 2024. But then it said that the opera had already been staged as Yueju and Kunqu Opera (yes, there are several different forms of Chinese opera). 

     I could only find an adaptation of the story as Kunqu Opera, which I learned is the oldest form of Chinese opera still performed today.

    

 

 

 "The newly staged Kunqu opera "Ban Zhao" is a large-scale historical play performed by the Shanghai Kunqu Troupe in 2001. The play skillfully and harmoniously combines a rigorous historical perspective, a meticulous dramatic vision, and a splendid literary outlook. It depicts the extraordinary experiences of the talented woman Ban Zhao in compiling the "Book of Han," using the brushstrokes and thinking of the era to reveal the tragic and poignant inner world of scholars. The play won the Script Award at the 14th China Cao Yu Drama Awards."

 

 (This is what the description of the video translated to.)

      

    To conclude, I want to restate my opinion of her teachings not being oppressive for women at the time. She guided her "daughters" the best she could based on what she had observed as a woman and wife in Chinese society and likely helped many of them to survive in their homes.

    Thank goodness that not every women in our society needs to worry about their own families like this anymore. But that isn't to say that I think Ban Zhao's guidance is irrelevant. On a basic level, her Daoist virtues encourage people to "follow the flow of life" and to "look within" for self-improvement. I can't help but be reminded of Greek stoicism and the concept of "not worrying over what you cannot control" or "controlling your reactions." 

     I really enjoyed learning about Ban Zhao both from the book and outside of it! I'll definitely have to make some time to watch the opera based on her story, too. 

    Thank you! 

 Henry Corbin  (The French philosopher and orientalist)

  The Beginning

When I started to dig into the life of Henry Corbin, I found the teachings and philosophies of a man dedicated to understanding the world on a spiritual level. Though not as well known as others, he still deserves recognition for the life he lived in the pursuit of knowledge. Corbin dedicated his career to exploring how Persian philosophy shaped Islamic mysticism and spirituality. Through studying these religions, Corbin molded his own unique point of view. Henry Corbin. 

Throughout his career, Corbin emphasized the unique spiritual depth of Persian Islam. He argued that Persian Islam was not just an extension of Arabic thought but a continuation of ancient Zoroastrian spirituality. He believed that Persian philosophy preserved a unity between faith and knowledge that Western culture had lost over time. Corbin felt a deep connection to Shi’a Islam, the mystical branch of the faith he had studied for decades. His work helped introduce Western scholars to the profound spiritual traditions of Islamic Persia and reminded the world that philosophy and faith do not need to be separate from each other. Shi'a Mysticism. I am not sure I fully agree with this, though.  I think Western culture is heavily based on Christian traditions. The biggest aspect of Christianity is having faith in a God that is not visible. Since Christianity has steadily expanded, this equates to a vast number of people based on faith. I know that many of those followers may not have a substantial level of depth to their belief, but I think it still matters. If you are living out the Christian faith properly, then you are in a constant race for truth and spiritual growth.

  The Imaginal

In thinkers like Avicenna and Sohravardī, Corbin found a kind of “visionary philosophy,” where storytelling and mystical symbols carried deep philosophical meaning. Sohravardi. To him, true philosophy was not simply logical reasoning but a journey of the soul toward divine illumination. I think this approach to philosophy is very distinctive. It sounds like he views life as a path to enlightenment. To me, this is reminiscent of Buddhism.

I had not given much thought to mysticism before reading about Henry and his utter fascination with an “in-between” realm. But after I came into contact with these theories and ideas, I had to explore further. Henry Corbin coined the term imaginal. Meaning a real intermediate realm that lies between the material and spiritual world. After giving this some thought, I tried to relate it to other spiritual dominions. Was this “imaginal” plane of existence synonymous with limbo and purgatory, or was it referring to the astral realm? Corbin was not comparing this to experiencing heaven or hell, but instead to experiencing an intermediate state of being. I personally think that purgatory or limbo are more advanced than what Corbin was trying to connect with. That being said, the astral plane sounds more similar. There are many testimonies of astral projection, which is commonly referred to as an “out-of-body experience”. Astral Projection. In other words, you are experiencing the spiritual world while still tethered to the physical. Maybe Corbin meant something simpler. He could have been hinting at a state of mind or unlocking your high consciousness. Prenumbral Thoughts. It is widely known that we have an unconscious. Having full access to this part of our mind might be the “imaginal”. Corbin highlighted the distinct difference between imaginal and imaginary. Imaginal could possibly be the realist form of our imagination turned material. All that to say, I'm not sure I resonate with an intermediate realm. I think there is the spiritual and physical planes that are separated by a thin veil which allows for the two to interact with one another. Veil. 

 

 Beliefs

During his time in Turkey, Corbin learned what he later called “the virtues of silence and the discipline of the arcane.” The virtues of silence focus on the importance of self-control, careful thinking, and knowing when to speak. It means choosing not to waste words on unimportant or impulsive thoughts and instead speaking only when it truly matters. Silence gives us time to reflect, understand ourselves better, and think more deeply. In spiritual or mystical settings, silence is seen as a way to clear out distractions so a person can listen for deeper truths or even a divine voice. Personally, I believe the virtue of silence is something that everyone should practice.  The word arcane describes knowledge that is secret, mysterious, or known only to a small group of people. The “discipline” of the arcane refers to the careful and dedicated study of this kind of knowledge, as well as the responsibility to preserve it and share it only when appropriate. It suggests that certain powerful or complex ideas shouldn’t be used carelessly. Instead, they should be protected and taught only to those who are ready to understand them and use them wisely.  As far as the discipline of the arcane, I think that even though most people will not dedicate themselves to a specific ideology as much as Corbin, everyone should be exposed to complex ideas. Especially ones that pertain to our existence. We should try to spread the philosophical lifestyle. Being a Christian, I have many questions answered already, such as the meaning of life and whether there is life after death. However, I still have doubts and unanswered questions. This allows me to still think philosophically and have thought-provoking conversations with others who do not agree with me. While looking to previous philosophers is helpful, I additionally ask God about those questions. I am sure that other Christians ignore the harsh questions that seem to oppose our beliefs, but they may not realize that it's okay to seek God with those challenging thoughts. 

Final Thoughts 

Learning about Henry Corbin introduced me to a form of spirituality that blends philosophy, symbolism, and mysticism. His focus on Persian Islamic thought, and the idea that it preserves a unique spiritual depth, challenged me to consider how different cultures approach truth. While I don’t fully agree with his critique of the West, I do see value in his perspective. Corbin’s concept of the imaginal realm was my favorite subject.  Whether understood as a spiritual dimension or a deeper level of consciousness, it highlights the possibility that inner experiences can reveal meaningful truths. His emphasis on silence and careful engagement with complex ideas also reminded me of the importance of reflection and responsibility in the search for understanding.