« Applied Metaphysics | Main | Content Clauses/Complement Clauses »



I found this comment very interesting:

"I doubt that very many people who come across this blog will find the material on that one even remotely interesting."

I've looked at your main blog for about 6 seconds and noticed it seems to be about metaphysics and phil of language. So you suspect that people who are interested in those topics would not be interested in 'various arguments [which you find 'troubling'] concerning animal rights and environmental impacts of hunting / fishing.'

That's interesting, and, perhaps, troubling: many people find ethics & animals (&, less frequently, the environment) issues troubling because they concern pain, suffering, and death for beings who, in loose senses, do not 'deserve' any of that since they are 'innocent.'

So you are reporting that you suspect that most folks who are interested in metaphysics and language would not be interested in such topics, or just not interested in thinking about moral questions that arise because these things happen.

Is this not interested "philosophically," as in, "Oh, there are no 'deep' philosophical problems here, so nothing for me as a philosopher to think about..."?

Or is this (or would this be) some kind of "personal" lack of interest, as in, "Oh, I just tend to be indifferent to issues that concern pain, suffering and death, especially when they involve animals."

I'm curious to learn more about your motivations and reasons for what you said above. I totally agree, but (and?) think it's quite unfortunate, in many ways.



There were a number of reasons I made the comment. Probably foremost amongst them was just personal psychological insecurity. But here are some genuine ones: (i) since I have no praticular expertise in these issues, M&E types who want to know something of the debate might be more interested in listening to the experts; (ii) many of the posts are actually not so much philosophical, as practical hunting issues (though I did try to frame them in a way that they would be beneficial to people interested in the debate); (iii) much of what I say isn't highly analytical and I take it that most people reading this blog are analytically oriented.

Let me say more generally, however, that I do think many M&E types are seriously interested in lots of applied ethics issues. Look, for instance, at Jessica Wilson's and Benj Hellie's blog. Although you often hear in grad school about the tensions between M&E and Value Theory, its been my experience that serious philosophers in M&E pay a great deal of attention to what goes on on the other side of the isle, including the debate over animal welfare.

The comments to this entry are closed.

August 2011

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad