I thought I'd take a break from more highfalutin topics and start a little series about Grant Park, focusing on its statues and reading-friendly spots.  I've got about a month before school starts up again, and relatively little to do.  I live about 1/4 of a mile from the start of the park.  Walking around … Continue reading Grant Park Photo Diary →

Tonight I caught ESPN's "30 for 30" on Bo Jackson: You Don't Know Bo. It was very good, as are all the 30 for 30 specials I've seen.  Anyway, I was struck by a comment halfway though about how if Bo Jackson had burst upon the scene 10-15 years later, everyone would have thought that … Continue reading God, Steroids, and Bo Jackson →

This is the third installment in my series of synopses of essays on the philosophical significance of disagreement.   In "You Can't Trust a Philosopher," Richard Fumerton offers us good news and bad news.  The good news is that epistemic peer disagreement (EPD) concerning philosophical issues does not, in itself, undermine the rational justification of … Continue reading Fumerton on Disagreement →

I'm only about 280 pages into this 1000+ page behemoth of a novel (and they're not smaller, wide-margin pages, or even pages with a lot of dialogue to help the pages turn by generating a lot of white space)... I wanted to share my first impressions of this book. I might regret such an overstatement … Continue reading Infinite Jest – first impressions →

This is the second installment in my series of posts on essays on the problem of disagreement. I like Carolyn's succinct description of the disagreement problem: The disagreement problem comes up when I (1) think that P, (2) think that some other person thinks that not P, and (3) think that that other person is … Continue reading Elgin on Persistent Disagreement →

Suppose David and Nates disagree about the morality of Capital Punishment.  David thinks that CP is unjustifiable, whereas Nates--ever the Kantian--thinks that CP may under certain circumstances be not only justified but morally required.  David and Nates are aware of their disagreement with each other--they're facing off in the seminar room.  Now consider this question: … Continue reading Disagreement: Stage-Setting and Kornblith’s Skepticism →

I've always been ambivalent about summers.  On the one hand, I love the freedom, but since I typically feel as if I squander my freedom, I often find myself depressed and down on myself during the summer.  I'd like to try to change this pattern and so I'm hereby announcing a number of summer reading … Continue reading Summer Reading Projects →

So I just discovered that Chuck Klosterman is now 'The Ethicist' for the NYT!  I expect readers of this blog are familiar with this regular column in the Times, and maybe familiar with Klosterman, who writes really cool, funny, smart essays on popular culture. But an 'ethicist'?  In his last column-- http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/02/magazine/can-i-use-the-same-paper-for-multiple-college-courses.html--Klosterman argues that there is … Continue reading Ethical Expertise? →

You should get rid of your car, because your life will be better.  Probably the best thing about not having a car is how much more I enjoy my life.  I've tried to describe that here.  This post will blend a bit into the "health" arguments - I think the dividing line will be between … Continue reading Get Rid of Your Car – The Argument from Quality of Life →

You should get rid of your car! I would like to prove this relatively simple proposition of policy in a series of simply argued posts. Last fall Brooke and I both got rid of our cars.  We now live in a densely populated area of Chicago which is adequately served by public transportation.  We were … Continue reading Get Rid of Your Car! The First Argument – Cost →