(Sanjana Rajagopal’s essay below originally appeared in the Blog of the American Philosophical Association. Reprinted with permission.)
The novel coronavirus has managed to spread to all corners of the globe, altering our ways of life profoundly, bringing sickness and death everywhere it goes. Continue reading Thinking Our Way Through Coronavirus: Hannah Arendt’s Insights for Dark Times
“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
“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
“Critical Thinking & COVID-19: Argument from Authoritarian”
by Professor
While it would be irrational to reject medical claims of health care experts in favor of those made by President Trump, there are those who do just that. Considerations of why people do this is mainly a matter of psychology, but the likely errors in reasoning are a matter for philosophy. Continue reading Critical Thinking & COVID-19: Argument from Authoritarianism
Critical Thinking & COVID-19: Trump’s “Expertise”
by Professor
Donald Trump was elected president and hence he has the legal authority conferred by this office. By having legal authority is not the same as having authority as an expert. In this essay, I will assess Trump’s authority as a medical expert. Continue reading Critical Thinking & COVID-19: Trump’s “Expertise”