Good morning, readers!

Here are the March 2009 Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews:

Moral & Political Philosophy

Metaphysics

Epistemology

Aesthetics

Philosophers & History of Philosophy

Philosophy of Science

Philosophy of Literature

Asian Philosophy

Philosophy of Religion

Good morning, readers!

Here are the February 2009 reviews from Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews:

Philosophy of Law

  • Peter Goodrich, Florian Hoffmann, Michel Rosenfeld, Cornelia Vismann (eds.), Derrida and Legal Philosophy, Reviewed by Douglas Litowitz, Magnetar Capital LLC

Moral & Political Philosophy

Philosophers and History of Philosophy

Critical Theory

Philosophy of Language

Aesthetics

Perception

Personal Identity

Philosophy of Religion

Logic

  • Douglas Walton, Chris Reed, Fabrizio Macagno, Argumentation Schemes, Reviewed by Leo Groarke, Wilfrid Laurier University

Good morning, readers!

Here are the January 2009 Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews.  Though collection development is on hold for the time being at Robbins, are any of these worth considering for purchase at a later date?

Aesthetics

Philosophers

Metaphysics

Epistemology

History of Philosophy

Moral & Political Philosophy

Philosophy of Law

Philosophy of Religion

Philosophy of Science

Food, Wine, Beer and Philosophy

January 21st, 2009

Image at left taken from here.

Good morning, readers!

Last year, I wrote a post about pop culture and philosophy, talking about an editorial that used Batman v. the Joker to show how popular culture can be used to explore and discuss (charged) philosophical topics.

In the same spirit, I will review, today, three books which I’ve recently read.  The books, from the same Philosophy and Pop Culture series as Batman and Philosophy, are:

Now, before you hold your nose and pass on today’s reading, declaring them unfit for general philosophical consumption, let me rise to their defense and say that the books in this trilogy are well worth your time to read and ponder.

For one thing, there are some fascinating discussions of philosophy of language, aesthetics, ethics, and epistemology in this book.  For instance:

  • Why do we limit artistic and aesthetic pleasure to sight and sound alone, but not to taste, touch, or smell?
  • Just what is it that we are describing when we describe a bottle of wine?  Or in a glass of beer?  Are we using metaphor alone?  Or are we describing objective, measurable features of the wine or beer?
  • How do we account for things like taste?  Is taste purely subjective?  Or is there an objective component to it?
  • What sort of legal and Constitutional issues are involved in the prohibition of shipping alcohol across state lines? In limitations on homebrewing?  How do laws in regards to these differ in Canada as opposed to in the United States?
  • In regards to food: what do our cultural dietary consumption patterns reveal about us as a people? As individuals?
  • What are the arguments for and against hunting?
  • What does it mean to say that certain food experiences are both delicious and disgusting at the same time?

These are but some of the many questions discussed in the trilogy, covering a wide range of topics of interest to philosophers.

Another reason that I liked this trilogy is that many of the essays are simply hilarious even as they explicate some serious philosophical points.

For example, Steven Hales’ essay, “Mill v. Miller, or Higher and Lower Pleasures,” in Beer and Philosophy is a witty examination of what exactly goes into performing a hedonistic calculus according to John Stuart Mill, through the example of determining which beer (a greater amount of lower-quality, less pleasurable beer v. a lesser amount of higher-quality, more pleasurable beer) should be purchased with a limited sum of money.

Likewise, Glenn Kuehn’s “Food Fetishes and Sin-Aesthetics: Professor Dewey, Please Save Me From Myself,” in Food and Philosophy, examines why we have such guilt over food in American culture, with references to Kant, Dewey, and Indiana Jones.

Finally, as pedagogical tools, the essays in these books may help to illuminate questions of perception, epistemology, ethics, and aesthetics for students who may need a concrete example or two, to see how a theory might be applied in practice.

In short, I definitely recommend these books.  You will, I think, find them not only insightful, but amusing and helpful as well.

Good morning, readers!

Last week, we received the latest issue of the European Journal of PhilosophyEuropean Journal of Philosophy 16(3) December 2008 — which has a symposium on Joseph Raz, among other things.

Here is the Table of Contents:

Symposium on Joseph Raz

  • Respecting Value, Mark Eli Kalderon
  • The Myth of Practical Consistency, Niko Kolodny
  • Rationalism about Obligation, David Owens

Article

  • Rules, Regression and the ‘Background’: Dreyfus, Heidegger and McDowell, Denis McManus

Review Articles

  • Nihilism and the Affirmation of Life: A Review of and Dialogue with Bernard Reginster, Ken Gemes
  • Ricoeur on Recognition, Robert R. Williams

Reviews

  • Recognition and Power: Axel Honneth and the Tradition of Critical Social Theory, edited by Bert van den Brink and David Owen, Robin Celikates
  • Post-Analytic Tractatus, edited by Barry Stocker, Oskari Kuusela

Also arrived last week — the latest issue of the Canadian Journal of Philosophy Canadian Journal of Philosophy 38(2) June 2008 — here is its Table of Contents:

  • Two Models of Equality and Responsibility, Michael Blake, and Mathias Risse
  • Material Constitution and the Many-Many Problem, Robert A. Wilson
  • Husserl on Sensation, Perception, and Interpretation, Walter Hopp
  • Leibniz’s Theory of Universal Expression Explicated, Ari Maunu
  • Informative Identities in the Begriffsschrift and ‘On Sense and Reference’, Imogen Dickie
  • Analysis, Schmanalysis, Stephen Petersen

Both issues are currently online.  As always, you’ll need your Harvard ID and PIN to access these articles.

Enjoy!