Monthly Archives: May 2020

Critical Thinking & COVID-19 XIII: Death Analogies

Critical Thinking & COVID-19 XIII: Death Analogies
by Professor

One stock argument against social distancing and other restricted responses to the pandemic is to conclude that these measures should not be taken because we do not take similar approaches to comparable causes of death. Continue reading Critical Thinking & COVID-19 XIII: Death Analogies

Arthur C. Brooks: “Three Equations for a Happy Life”

The Three Equations for a Happy Life, Even During a Pandemic” in “The Atlantic.” I generally don’t like his work as he is a  religious and political ideologue. He was president for a decade of the ultra-conservative American Enterprise Institute, and he was converted to Catholicism after he believed the Virgin Mary appeared to him. I’m not kidding. Continue reading Arthur C. Brooks: “Three Equations for a Happy Life”

Critical Thinking & COVID-19: Argument Against Expertise

Einstein 1921 by F Schmutzer - restoration.jpg

Critical Thinking & COVID-19: Argument Against Expertise
by Professor

In a previous essay, I went over the argument from authority and the standards to use to distinguish between credible and non-credible experts. While people often make the mistake of treating non-experts as credible sources, they also make the mistake of rejecting credible experts because the experts are experts. Continue reading Critical Thinking & COVID-19: Argument Against Expertise

Philosophy cannot resolve the question ‘How should we live?’

</p> <p>Medical workers in Wuhan embrace. 8 April 2020. <em>Photo by Hector Retamal/AFP/Getty</em></p> <p>

The question How should we live? is one that many ask in a crisis, jolted out of normal patterns of life. But that question is not always a simple request for a straightforward answer, as if we could somehow read off the ‘correct’ answer from the world. Continue reading Philosophy cannot resolve the question ‘How should we live?’