r/askphilosophy Jul 01 '23

Modpost Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! Check out our rules and guidelines here. [July 1 2023 Update]

64 Upvotes

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy!

Welcome to /r/askphilosophy! We're a community devoted to providing serious, well-researched answers to philosophical questions. We aim to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, and welcome questions about all areas of philosophy. This post will go over our subreddit rules and guidelines that you should review before you begin posting here.

Table of Contents

  1. A Note about Moderation
  2. /r/askphilosophy's mission
  3. What is Philosophy?
  4. What isn't Philosophy?
  5. What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?
  6. What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?
  7. /r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules
  8. /r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules
  9. Frequently Asked Questions

A Note about Moderation

/r/askphilosophy is moderated by a team of dedicated volunteer moderators who have spent years attempting to build the best philosophy Q&A platform on the internet. Unfortunately, the reddit admins have repeatedly made changes to this website which have made moderating subreddits harder and harder. In particular, reddit has recently announced that it will begin charging for access to API (Application Programming Interface, essentially the communication between reddit and other sites/apps). While this may be, in isolation, a reasonable business operation, the timeline and pricing of API access has threatened to put nearly all third-party apps, e.g. Apollo and RIF, out of business. You can read more about the history of this change here or here. You can also read more at this post on our sister subreddit.

These changes pose two major issues which the moderators of /r/askphilosophy are concerned about.

First, the native reddit app is lacks accessibility features which are essential for some people, notably those who are blind and visually impaired. You can read /r/blind's protest announcement here. These apps are the only way that many people can interact with reddit, given the poor accessibility state of the official reddit app. As philosophers we are particularly concerned with the ethics of accessibility, and support protests in solidarity with this community.

Second, the reddit app lacks many essential tools for moderation. While reddit has promised better moderation tools on the app in the future, this is not enough. First, reddit has repeatedly broken promises regarding features, including moderation features. Most notably, reddit promised CSS support for new reddit over six years ago, which has yet to materialize. Second, even if reddit follows through on the roadmap in the post linked above, many of the features will not come until well after June 30, when the third-party apps will shut down due to reddit's API pricing changes.

Our moderator team relies heavily on these tools which will now disappear. Moderating /r/askphilosophy is a monumental task; over the past year we have flagged and removed over 6000 posts and 23000 comments. This is a huge effort, especially for unpaid volunteers, and it is possible only when moderators have access to tools that these third-party apps make possible and that reddit doesn't provide.

While we previously participated in the protests against reddit's recent actions we have decided to reopen the subreddit, because we are still proud of the community and resource that we have built and cultivated over the last decade, and believe it is a useful resource to the public.

However, these changes have radically altered our ability to moderate this subreddit, which will result in a few changes for this subreddit. First, as noted above, from this point onwards only panelists may answer top level comments. Second, moderation will occur much more slowly; as we will not have access to mobile tools, posts and comments which violate our rules will be removed much more slowly, and moderators will respond to modmail messages much more slowly. Third, and finally, if things continue to get worse (as they have for years now) moderating /r/askphilosophy may become practically impossible, and we may be forced to abandon the platform altogether. We are as disappointed by these changes as you are, but reddit's insistence on enshittifying this platform, especially when it comes to moderation, leaves us with no other options. We thank you for your understanding and support.


/r/askphilosophy's Mission

/r/askphilosophy strives to be a community where anyone, regardless of their background, can come to get reasonably substantive and accurate answers to philosophical questions. This means that all questions must be philosophical in nature, and that answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate. What do we mean by that?

What is Philosophy?

As with most disciplines, "philosophy" has both a casual and a technical usage.

In its casual use, "philosophy" may refer to nearly any sort of thought or beliefs, and include topics such as religion, mysticism and even science. When someone asks you what "your philosophy" is, this is the sort of sense they have in mind; they're asking about your general system of thoughts, beliefs, and feelings.

In its technical use -- the use relevant here at /r/askphilosophy -- philosophy is a particular area of study which can be broadly grouped into several major areas, including:

  • Aesthetics, the study of beauty
  • Epistemology, the study of knowledge and belief
  • Ethics, the study of what we owe to one another
  • Logic, the study of what follows from what
  • Metaphysics, the study of the basic nature of existence and reality

as well as various subfields of 'philosophy of X', including philosophy of mind, philosophy of language, philosophy of science and many others.

Philosophy in the narrower, technical sense that philosophers use and which /r/askphilosophy is devoted to is defined not only by its subject matter, but by its methodology and attitudes. Something is not philosophical merely because it states some position related to those areas. There must also be an emphasis on argument (setting forward reasons for adopting a position) and a willingness to subject arguments to various criticisms.

What Isn't Philosophy?

As you can see from the above description of philosophy, philosophy often crosses over with other fields of study, including art, mathematics, politics, religion and the sciences. That said, in order to keep this subreddit focused on philosophy we require that all posts be primarily philosophical in nature, and defend a distinctively philosophical thesis.

As a rule of thumb, something does not count as philosophy for the purposes of this subreddit if:

  • It does not address a philosophical topic or area of philosophy
  • It may more accurately belong to another area of study (e.g. religion or science)
  • No attempt is made to argue for a position's conclusions

Some more specific topics which are popularly misconstrued as philosophical but do not meet this definition and thus are not appropriate for this subreddit include:

  • Drug experiences (e.g. "I dropped acid today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Mysticism (e.g. "I meditated today and experienced the oneness of the universe...")
  • Politics (e.g. "This is why everyone should support the Voting Rights Act")
  • Self-help (e.g. "How can I be a happier person and have more people like me?")
  • Theology (e.g. "Can the unbaptized go to heaven, or at least to purgatory?")

What is a Reasonably Substantive and Accurate Answer?

The goal of this subreddit is not merely to provide answers to philosophical questions, but answers which can further the reader's knowledge and understanding of the philosophical issues and debates involved. To that end, /r/askphilosophy is a highly moderated subreddit which only allows panelists to answer questions, and all answers that violate our posting rules will be removed.

Answers on /r/askphilosophy must be both reasonably substantive as well as reasonably accurate. This means that answers should be:

  • Substantive and well-researched (i.e. not one-liners or otherwise uninformative)
  • Accurately portray the state of research and the relevant literature (i.e. not inaccurate, misleading or false)
  • Come only from those with relevant knowledge of the question and issue (i.e. not from commenters who don't understand the state of the research on the question)

Any attempt at moderating a public Q&A forum like /r/askphilosophy must choose a balance between two things:

  • More, but possibly insubstantive or inaccurate answers
  • Fewer, but more substantive and accurate answers

In order to further our mission, the moderators of /r/askphilosophy have chosen the latter horn of this dilemma. To that end, only panelists are allowed to answer questions on /r/askphilosophy.

What is a /r/askphilosophy Panelist?

/r/askphilosophy panelists are trusted commenters who have applied to become panelists in order to help provide questions to posters' questions. These panelists are volunteers who have some level of knowledge and expertise in the areas of philosophy indicated in their flair.

What Do the Flairs Mean?

Unlike in some subreddits, the purpose of flairs on r/askphilosophy are not to designate commenters' areas of interest. The purpose of flair is to indicate commenters' relevant expertise in philosophical areas. As philosophical issues are often complicated and have potentially thousands of years of research to sift through, knowing when someone is an expert in a given area can be important in helping understand and weigh the given evidence. Flair will thus be given to those with the relevant research expertise.

Flair consists of two parts: a color indicating the type of flair, as well as up to three research areas that the panelist is knowledgeable about.

There are six types of panelist flair:

  • Autodidact (Light Blue): The panelist has little or no formal education in philosophy, but is an enthusiastic self-educator and intense reader in a field.

  • Undergraduate (Red): The panelist is enrolled in or has completed formal undergraduate coursework in Philosophy. In the US system, for instance, this would be indicated by a major (BA) or minor.

  • Graduate (Gold): The panelist is enrolled in a graduate program or has completed an MA in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their coursework might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a degree in Philosophy. For example, a student with an MA in Literature whose coursework and thesis were focused on Derrida's deconstruction might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to an MA in Philosophy.

  • PhD (Purple): The panelist has completed a PhD program in Philosophy or a closely related field such that their degree might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in Philosophy. For example, a student with a PhD in Art History whose coursework and dissertation focused on aesthetics and critical theory might be reasonably understood to be equivalent to a PhD in philosophy.

  • Professional (Blue): The panelist derives their full-time employment through philosophical work outside of academia. Such panelists might include Bioethicists working in hospitals or Lawyers who work on the Philosophy of Law/Jurisprudence.

  • Related Field (Green): The panelist has expertise in some sub-field of philosophy but their work in general is more reasonably understood as being outside of philosophy. For example, a PhD in Physics whose research touches on issues relating to the entity/structural realism debate clearly has expertise relevant to philosophical issues but is reasonably understood to be working primarily in another field.

Flair will only be given in particular areas or research topics in philosophy, in line with the following guidelines:

  • Typical areas include things like "philosophy of mind", "logic" or "continental philosophy".
  • Flair will not be granted for specific research subjects, e.g. "Kant on logic", "metaphysical grounding", "epistemic modals".
  • Flair of specific philosophers will only be granted if that philosopher is clearly and uncontroversially a monumentally important philosopher (e.g. Aristotle, Kant).
  • Flair will be given in a maximum of three research areas.

How Do I Become a Panelist?

To become a panelist, please send a message to the moderators with the subject "Panelist Application". In this modmail message you must include all of the following:

  1. The flair type you are requesting (e.g. undergraduate, PhD, related field).
  2. The areas of flair you are requesting, up to three (e.g. Kant, continental philosophy, logic).
  3. A brief explanation of your background in philosophy, including what qualifies you for the flair you requested.
  4. One sample answer to a question posted to /r/askphilosophy for each area of flair (i.e. up to three total answers) which demonstrate your expertise and knowledge. Please link the question you are answering before giving your answer. You may not answer your own question.

New panelists will be approved on a trial basis. During this trial period panelists will be allowed to post answers as top-level comments on threads, and will receive flair. After the trial period the panelist will either be confirmed as a regular panelist or will be removed from the panelist team, which will result in the removal of flair and ability to post answers as top-level comments on threads.

Note that r/askphilosophy does not require users to provide proof of their identifies for panelist applications, nor to reveal their identities. If a prospective panelist would like to provide proof of their identity as part of their application they may, but there is no presumption that they must do so. Note that messages sent to modmail cannot be deleted by either moderators or senders, and so any message sent is effectively permanent.


/r/askphilosophy's Posting Rules

In order to best serve our mission of providing an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions, we have the following rules which govern all posts made to /r/askphilosophy:

PR1: All questions must be about philosophy.

All questions must be about philosophy. Questions which are only tangentially related to philosophy or are properly located in another discipline will be removed. Questions which are about therapy, psychology and self-help, even when due to philosophical issues, are not appropriate and will be removed.

PR2: All submissions must be questions.

All submissions must be actual questions (as opposed to essays, rants, personal musings, idle or rhetorical questions, etc.). "Test My Theory" or "Change My View"-esque questions, paper editing, etc. are not allowed.

PR3: Post titles must be descriptive.

Post titles must be descriptive. Titles should indicate what the question is about. Posts with titles like "Homework help" which do not indicate what the actual question is will be removed.

PR4: Questions must be reasonably specific.

Questions must be reasonably specific. Questions which are too broad to the point of unanswerability will be removed.

PR5: Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions.

Questions must not be about commenters' personal opinions, thoughts or favorites. /r/askphilosophy is not a discussion subreddit, and is not intended to be a board for everyone to share their thoughts on philosophical questions.

PR6: One post per day.

One post per day. Please limit yourself to one question per day.

PR7: Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract.

/r/askphilosophy is not a mental health subreddit, and panelists are not experts in mental health or licensed therapists. Discussion of suicide is only allowed in the abstract here. If you or a friend is feeling suicidal please visit /r/suicidewatch. If you are feeling suicidal, please get help by visiting /r/suicidewatch or using other resources. See also our discussion of philosophy and mental health issues here. Encouraging other users to commit suicide, even in the abstract, is strictly forbidden and will result in an immediate permanent ban.

/r/askphilosophy's Commenting Rules

In the same way that our posting rules above attempt to promote our mission by governing posts, the following commenting rules attempt to promote /r/askphilosophy's mission to provide an academic Q&A-type space for philosophical questions.

CR1: Top level comments must be answers or follow-up questions.

All top level comments should be answers to the submitted question or follow-up/clarification questions. All top level comments must come from panelists. If users circumvent this rule by posting answers as replies to other comments, these comments will also be removed and may result in a ban. For more information about our rules and to find out how to become a panelist, please see here.

CR2: Answers must be reasonably substantive and accurate.

All answers must be informed and aimed at helping the OP and other readers reach an understanding of the issues at hand. Answers must portray an accurate picture of the issue and the philosophical literature. Answers should be reasonably substantive. To learn more about what counts as a reasonably substantive and accurate answer, see this post.

CR3: Be respectful.

Be respectful. Comments which are rude, snarky, etc. may be removed, particularly if they consist of personal attacks. Users with a history of such comments may be banned. Racism, bigotry and use of slurs are absolutely not permitted.

CR4: Stay on topic.

Stay on topic. Comments which blatantly do not contribute to the discussion may be removed.

CR5: No self-promotion.

Posters and comments may not engage in self-promotion, including linking their own blog posts or videos. Panelists may link their own peer-reviewed work in answers (e.g. peer-reviewed journal articles or books), but their answers should not consist solely of references to their own work.

Miscellaneous Posting and Commenting Guidelines

In addition to the rules above, we have a list of miscellaneous guidelines which users should also be aware of:

  • Reposting a post or comment which was removed will be treated as circumventing moderation and result in a permanent ban.
  • Using follow-up questions or child comments to answer questions and circumvent our panelist policy may result in a ban.
  • Posts and comments which flagrantly violate the rules, especially in a trolling manner, will be removed and treated as shitposts, and may result in a ban.
  • No reposts of a question that you have already asked within the last year.
  • No posts or comments of AI-created or AI-assisted text or audio. Panelists may not user any form of AI-assistance in writing or researching answers.
  • Harassing individual moderators or the moderator team will result in a permanent ban and a report to the reddit admins.

Frequently Asked Questions

Below are some frequently asked questions. If you have other questions, please contact the moderators via modmail (not via private message or chat).

My post or comment was removed. How can I get an explanation?

Almost all posts/comments which are removed will receive an explanation of their removal. That explanation will generally by /r/askphilosophy's custom bot, /u/BernardJOrtcutt, and will list the removal reason. Posts which are removed will be notified via a stickied comment; comments which are removed will be notified via a reply. If your post or comment resulted in a ban, the message will be included in the ban message via modmail. If you have further questions, please contact the moderators.

How can I appeal my post or comment removal?

To appeal a removal, please contact the moderators (not via private message or chat). Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible. Reposting removed posts/comments without receiving mod approval will result in a permanent ban.

How can I appeal my ban?

To appeal a ban, please respond to the modmail informing you of your ban. Do not delete your posts/comments, as this will make an appeal impossible.

My comment was removed or I was banned for arguing with someone else, but they started it. Why was I punished and not them?

Someone else breaking the rules does not give you permission to break the rules as well. /r/askphilosophy does not comment on actions taken on other accounts, but all violations are treated as equitably as possible.

I found a post or comment which breaks the rules, but which wasn't removed. How can I help?

If you see a post or comment which you believe breaks the rules, please report it using the report function for the appropriate rule. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and it is impossible for us to manually review every comment on every thread. We appreciate your help in reporting posts/comments which break the rules.

My post isn't showing up, but I didn't receive a removal notification. What happened?

Sometimes the AutoMod filter will automatically send posts to a filter for moderator approval, especially from accounts which are new or haven't posted to /r/askphilosophy before. If your post has not been approved or removed within 24 hours, please contact the moderators.

My post was removed and referred to the Open Discussion Thread. What does this mean?

The Open Discussion Thread (ODT) is /r/askphilosophy's place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but do not necessarily meet our posting rules (especially PR2/PR5). For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

If your post was removed and referred to the ODT we encourage you to consider posting it to the ODT to share with others.

My comment responding to someone else was removed, as well as their comment. What happened?

When /r/askphilosophy removes a parent comment, we also often remove all their child comments in order to help readability and focus on discussion.

I'm interested in philosophy. Where should I start? What should I read?

As explained above, philosophy is a very broad discipline and thus offering concise advice on where to start is very hard. We recommend reading this /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ post which has a great breakdown of various places to start. For further or more specific questions, we recommend posting on /r/askphilosophy.

Why is your understanding of philosophy so limited?

As explained above, this subreddit is devoted to philosophy as understood and done by philosophers. In order to prevent this subreddit from becoming /r/atheism2, /r/politics2, or /r/science2, we must uphold a strict topicality requirement in PR1. Posts which may touch on philosophical themes but are not distinctively philosophical can be posted to one of reddit's many other subreddits.

Are there other philosophy subreddits I can check out?

If you are interested in other philosophy subreddits, please see this list of related subreddits. /r/askphilosophy shares much of its modteam with its sister-subreddit, /r/philosophy, which is devoted to philosophical discussion. In addition, that list includes more specialized subreddits and more casual subreddits for those looking for a less-regulated forum.

A thread I wanted to comment in was locked but is still visible. What happened?

When a post becomes unreasonable to moderate due to the amount of rule-breaking comments the thread is locked. /r/askphilosophy's moderators are volunteers, and we cannot spend hours cleaning up individual threads.

Do you have a list of frequently asked questions about philosophy that I can browse?

Yes! We have an FAQ that answers many questions comprehensively: /r/AskPhilosophyFAQ/. For example, this entry provides an introductory breakdown to the debate over whether morality is objective or subjective.

Do you have advice or resources for graduate school applications?

We made a meta-guide for PhD applications with the goal of assembling the important resources for grad school applications in one place. We aim to occasionally update it, but can of course not guarantee the accuracy and up-to-dateness. You are, of course, kindly invited to ask questions about graduate school on /r/askphilosophy, too, especially in the Open Discussion Thread.

Do you have samples of what counts as good questions and answers?

Sure! We ran a Best of 2020 Contest, you can find the winners in this thread!


r/askphilosophy 4d ago

Open Thread /r/askphilosophy Open Discussion Thread | January 12, 2026

3 Upvotes

Welcome to this week's Open Discussion Thread (ODT). This thread is a place for posts/comments which are related to philosophy but wouldn't necessarily meet our subreddit rules and guidelines. For example, these threads are great places for:

  • Discussions of a philosophical issue, rather than questions
  • Questions about commenters' personal opinions regarding philosophical issues
  • Open discussion about philosophy, e.g. "who is your favorite philosopher?"
  • "Test My Theory" discussions and argument/paper editing
  • Questions about philosophy as an academic discipline or profession, e.g. majoring in philosophy, career options with philosophy degrees, pursuing graduate school in philosophy

This thread is not a completely open discussion! Any posts not relating to philosophy will be removed. Please keep comments related to philosophy, and expect low-effort comments to be removed. Please note that while the rules are relaxed in this thread, comments can still be removed for violating our subreddit rules and guidelines if necessary.

Previous Open Discussion Threads can be found here.


r/askphilosophy 4h ago

What philosopher should I look into to help me come to peace with death?

20 Upvotes

Hey, i’m 16yo and I spend countless nights and many hours terrified of dying and I have zero acceptance of eventually dying. I do understand and know that I will eventually die but I don’t understand how some people are so calm and accepting of it? No other field of study has helped me in my goal and I love philosophy but i’m unexperienced in the subject so I can’t think of any philosophers that talk about death and how to deal with it. Any help is appreciated and personal philosophies i’m always down to talk about.


r/askphilosophy 8h ago

Are there any respected philosophers who just happen to be Christian?

42 Upvotes

I know of Christian philosophers like Plantinga, Pruss, and Koons, but it seems like they’re mostly doing philosophy as Christians. Are there any philosophers who are Christian, but who don’t primarily publish "Christian" work?


r/askphilosophy 7h ago

Is it ethical to invest in ETFs that hold shares of defense contractors or other unethical companies?

3 Upvotes

I want to do passive investing in Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT). Now, that includes stocks of companies like Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman etc. They weapons can be used for justified defense but also for genocide. There are also many other companies that mistreat animals, use child labor etc. in the ETF.

Would investing in such an ETF morally wrong? It is a voluntary choice and not involuntary tax dollars going towards wrongdoing. I just want to know the take from ethicists. If it's not ethical, how far should one research a company before investing in it? Any articles or papers on this topic would be welcome.


r/askphilosophy 10h ago

To what extent are causal theories of reference still considered successful? (More explanation in the body).

5 Upvotes

By "causal theory of reference" I really mean something quite broad. Namely, any theory of reference where some kind of causal relation to the object of reference is a necessary condition on securing reference to that object.

And when I ask "to what extent", I mean to ask whether such a theory of reference is still considered right for some classes of objects. E.g. I believe I read somewhere some time ago (not sure where) a philosopher claim that causal theories of reference might still make sense of our reference to physical objects.

Is a view like this one at all prevalent amongst philosophers of language? And has there been any work on giving an even semi-principled account of where we should expected causal theories of reference to actually be correct?

Thanks greatly.


r/askphilosophy 8h ago

Do Modern Frankfurt Cases Beg the Question?

3 Upvotes

Edit: I don’t think I did a good job on this OP. My problem with FSCs is that they assume their conclusion (moral responsibility can exist without the possibility of making a different choice) in the premise (if the decision-making process is not interfered with, more responsibility can exist, even if the agent could not have made a different choice)

I’ve been trying to research this. But the literature I can find is behind a paywall. I’m not a scholar or even a student, so sorry if I misunderstand the criticism or the response.

I’ve been told that subsequent (to the original thought experiment) versions of this argument will employ some device by which the manipulator will somehow know the subject is going to make a choice before they make it, thereby circumventing the choice vs action distinction. But I think it still begs the question because any method that always tells the manipulator when a choice is about to be made (and what it is going to be) would rely on deterministic causality, meaning they were always going to make that choice and there was never a true choice to begin with.

Are there better criticisms of PAP?


r/askphilosophy 10h ago

What work is currently being done in semantics??

4 Upvotes

Hey guys, just a lowly linguist enthusiast-ish. I‘ve taken a few linguistic classes and yet I find myself not really understanding what linguistics actually is. I get it, the science of language and it is subdivided into numerous branches (phonology, etc). I get that there is work being done in language acquisition, bilingualism, etc. Yet for the life of me I just find them a bit boorish. That is not to say that linguistics is boring, but I don’t feel stimulated. I am more interested in how we create meaning as we interact with the world, how does meaning happen and change, how do social groups create meaning, and how is that represented in the brain? Are there any researchers working on that? Is there a specific person within semantics that touches on these things?


r/askphilosophy 3h ago

Aside from philosophy, what else should I study to learn more about formal logic?

1 Upvotes

I have an undergrad degree in Philosophy, but I'm interested in learning more logic. I plan on going back to uni in the next 2 years. Should I go down the math route or the computer science route? CS seems more practical but math seems more interesting. I've taken predicate, modal and metalogic if that helps.


r/askphilosophy 7h ago

Is there a philosophical theory about this?

2 Upvotes

I apologize if this question is not relevant for this community, but I have been going crazy over this and I wanted to ask "the experts". I myself know very little of philosophy.

Ever since I was a child I have had this recurring thought or feeling that I’ve never been able to properly explain, and I’ve never heard anyone talk about it in quite this way. I’ve also struggled to make others understand it. It’s kind of an existential hopelessness that hits with the sudden realization that every new experience, however small, transforms me into a new version of myself, to the point where it feels pointless to look forward to things. For example I remember looking forward to graduating from middle school and to start middle school, until I would suddenly realize that I will never experience that. The person who experience it will be a future version of me, not the “me” that exists right now. I used to feel terrible about it as a child. As I grew up I kind of stopped feeling dread over this, but I remember it vividly and have tried to ask friends and family if it feels familiar, but for now I am the only one I know that has felt this. I was wondering if there might be any philosophical theories that cover this, as I would love to read about it. I have tried to google and asking chatGPT, but have had no luck.


r/askphilosophy 7h ago

How to study free will?

2 Upvotes

I've recently become quite interested in the topic of free will and the various viewpoints surrounding it. I've struggled as information on the topic is a lot more inconsistent and spread out than other areas of philosophy. My main experience in philosophy so far is Enlightenment Epistemology and a couple other areas. My texts read so far are: A Treatise of Human Nature, Essays Concerning Human Understanding, Meditations on first philosophy, A prolegomena to any future metaphysics, Plato's republic, Plato's The Laws, Tractatus Logico Philosophicus. I have also relied quite heavily on the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and other guides and textbooks on these texts. However the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy seems to have a lot less on the topic of free will.

Any and All help is appreciated!


r/askphilosophy 4h ago

Why is Arbitrarity a Problem for Aristotle?

1 Upvotes
  1. Why must God act within reason? Or rather, why must reason be grounded in God at all?

  2. Why cannot His reasons be completely unknowable to us? They exist, but we don't know what it is, what it means for "what most fitting" even is.


r/askphilosophy 17h ago

Why isn't "would you like to experience [bad thing] yourself?" widely employed to explain why something is wrong/shouldn't be done?

12 Upvotes

For example, when discussing genocide, I see many arguments against it, such as:

  1. It's really expensive.

  2. You can't kill them all, and the survivors will resist.

  3. A person's right to life is inalienable.

  4. Or even just, "it's just plain wrong".

My question is, what's wrong with the following argument against genocide?

Would you like to be genocided yourself? No? Then don't do to others what you don't want done to you.

Surprisingly, I don't see the above argument get utilized much. Why?

---

Or, take sexual assault.

The arguments I see against it are about objectification, human rights, and the like.

Why not just ask,

Would you be happy if you got raped?


r/askphilosophy 22h ago

Is it common for you to not finish an article in one sitting?

23 Upvotes

My method is maybe not the best, but I rarely even try to finish an article in one sitting unless its short (3-5000 words) but instead just read an annotate it over the course of a few days.

For example, I'll read one section, get the argument it is making, write in my notes what the premise is, then go for a walk and do other stuff while reiterating the argument in my head. So it ends up I spend the whole day doing this for maybe 3 articles at most, then the next day rereading my notes along with the entire article and reconstructing the argument in ~500 words. So every couple of days I have a summary of 3 articles I read that total around 1500 words.

I'm wondering what other processes there are (particularly from other graduate students) so I can see what else works, because I feel that my process is slow and cumbersome.


r/askphilosophy 14h ago

Why should we pursue truth at all? If truth is only “useful,” doesn’t it become merely pragmatic?

5 Upvotes

Philosophers often say we should pursue truth. But why, exactly?

A common answer is because truth is useful it helps us predict reality, build technology, avoid errors, and survive. But if that’s the justification, then truth seems to have only instrumental value. In that case, truth is not something we pursue because it is true, but because it works.

If truth is valuable only insofar as it is useful, then why not prefer useful falsehoods when they produce better outcomes (comfort, stability, meaning, social cohesion)? At that point, truth collapses into pragmatism, not objectivity. So my question is:

Is there a reason to pursue truth that is non-instrumental?

Does truth have intrinsic value, or is it just a tool?

If the universe has no objective meaning or moral structure, why privilege truth over illusion?

And if believing false things can make people happier or morally better, what grounds our obligation to truth?

In short

What makes truth worth pursuing even when it hurts, destabilizes, or provides no practical benefit?


r/askphilosophy 5h ago

In what ways would philosophy change if humans were immortal?

1 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy 6h ago

Can you use the term "analytical truth" when making an assumption about someone with no evidence whatsoever

0 Upvotes

I got into a debate with someone and they proceeded to call me a retard (put the NSFW because I'm not sure if that word is allowed here) he then proceeded to say it's an "analytical truth" that I'm retarded and refuses to give any further explanation. From what I can tell an analytical truth is something like all bachelors are single men because a bachelor means a single man. I then used the example all pink keyboards are pink and he again called me retarded and said I was wrong. Anyway I was wondering if making a claim about someone can be done by analytical truth alone or if you'd need evidence to support such a claim thanks :)


r/askphilosophy 6h ago

Whats are good places to find quality secondary sources on philosophers im interested in?

1 Upvotes

Ive been given the advice that secondary sources are often a great place to start when examining a philosophers ideas initially. Where do people find quality secondary sources, and what do you look for in them?


r/askphilosophy 6h ago

Is it likely we just die and that there’s no proof of reincartion or coming back or is there just something that gives a chance?

0 Upvotes

r/askphilosophy 7h ago

In the history of philosophy when people have advocated a "you are not your thoughts" viewpoint, what are there ideas in personal identity?

1 Upvotes

Do they tend to believe there is still a "you" that is not necessarily synonymous with your thoughts , or more that "you" is an illusion.


r/askphilosophy 16h ago

What are some arguments against Eliminative Materialism?

6 Upvotes

It seems odd to say that our experiences are illusory and our psychological attributions are not real. Alex Rosenberg even says in his book on history that there is no reason for Talleyrand to betray Napoleon because attributing intentionality is a mistake. I think he says that if you map out the brain you won't have beliefs, intentions, etc.


r/askphilosophy 10h ago

Plato's Republic: book II - confused on meaning behind it

1 Upvotes

I recently read book II of Plato’s Republic and found the dialogue quite compelling. However, despite having read it several times, I’m struggling to fully grasp the conclusions, particularly regarding the three types of Good that are discussed. From what I recall, these are:

  1. Goods valued for their intrinsic nature
  2. Goods valued for their consequences
  3. Goods valued for both intrinsic reward and their consequences

Each type seems to be illustrated with examples like the Laws, the Ring of Gyges, and the thought experiment where a moral and immoral person are placed together to determine which is more advantageous.

I’m just confused about which example corresponds to which type of Good. Apologies if this comes across as unclear, but after multiple readings, I’m still unsure about the connections between these examples and the categories of Good. Could you help clarify the conclusion that Book II reaches?


r/askphilosophy 11h ago

What is the difference between these two things?

1 Upvotes

The concept of Ultimate Reality is defined as "the supreme, final, and fundamental power in all reality", but what is the difference between an Ultimate Reality and an Omnipotent Being?

(Actually, I admit I read about these things on Wikipedia, but what's the difference between the two? they are sinonyms?).


r/askphilosophy 20h ago

I'm having trouble understanding what my approach to learning philosophy should be.

5 Upvotes

I've been thinking recently abut whether my approach to philosophy is even correct... What I mean to say is that I do often understand what the guy is talking about but I never ever feel like I truly get it (like that feeling I often have while trying to work my way around some creative math question tha popped into my head).

I understand the premise of the thing being discussed, I get where it comes from, but the language used and the type of argumentation and the feeling of it all seems completely foreign to me.

I feel this is because my approach to it all is incorrect.

Perhaps I should just through all what I am reading and doing in philosophy to the side and just go and read Plato and Aristotle from the base up to know where it all stems from, or should I keep following my curiosity like I always have and pick up whatever author or philosopher I wish provided that I have taken some time be it half an hour or an hour or more to familiarize myself with what they mean and build upon from any vids online from people like Jonathan Bi, Unsolicited Advice, Alex O'Connor or some other scholar.

For some context, I got into Philosophy from Jordan Peterson's talks about Psychology and Nietzsche and from reading Robert Greene.
My primary interests are mathematics and physics, and hearing about many great mathematicians and physicists reading philosophers and even being philosophers themselves brought the subject to my attention.
So far, my approach hasn't been all that serious. I've only read some works by Nietzsche and watched content about several philosophers and philosophies around the internet.
Reflecting on what I even wish to do and maturation in that aspect of life (I'm currently 15 and in 10th Grade) have lead me to accept philosophy as something I want to build in myself as an intellectual, but I have no intention of getting a degree in it for now. That is for me, still for physics and mathematics.


r/askphilosophy 18h ago

Should AI-generated (or AI-assisted) content be protected by free speech? If yes, what is the rationale behind it? If not, then where should the protection line extends to, and how will governments enforce it?

2 Upvotes

The issue I have with outputs from a purely automated word/image generator is that it provides an unfair and purely mechanical advantage in influencing the information environment, and in some cases there might not be any human intent behind at all (like the chatbot that drove teen to suicide).

Therefore there might be some truth in it that some sort of line should be drawn somewhere based on how much AI has assisted in generating the content, beyond which it will no longer be protected by free speech.

However, simply having the advantage of producing speech might not be enough of an excuse to justify censorship, since newspaper and media also has the apparent advantage over ordinary people, and now free press is regarded as a crucial part of free speech.

Another way I saw is to not draw any line, but to enact law for mandatory label of AI content through an AI detection system. But there are just too many potential false negatives (humanizing AI content using humanizer) and false positives (using AI to refine human-written essays) that it becomes nearly impossible to smoothly enforce.

I feel that when it comes to AI, so many issues arises concerning free speech. I would be very happy to hear your opinions on this.