Robert Gressis (Cal State Northridge), Dan Kaufman (Missouri State) and Kevin Currie-Knight (East Carolina) discuss what is and isn't realistic to expect of philosophy. Topics include Realism (Rob) and Anti-Realism (Dan and Kevin), Foundationalism (maybe Rob) and anti-Foundationalism (Dan and Kevin), and what we do when we attempt to ground and justify our positions to others. The conversation sprang from a set of articles at the Electric Agora. In one, Dan argued that philosophy is largely incapable of making sense of even basic moral considerations; in two others, Kevin argued that individual temperament plays a significant role in forming our philosophies.
Kevin Currie-Knight (East Carolina University) chats with Wendy Syfret (VICE Asia) about her new book The Sunny Nihilist: How a Meaningless Life Can Make...
Crispin’s book chapter on the nature of truth ... Do different uses of the word “truth” have a family resemblance? ... The challenge of...
Why does bad CGI make us feel weird? ... Where digital effects work (The Avengers) vs. where they don't (CATS) ... Gollum vs. Thanos,...