Keeping Secrets, Ultimate Ends, Studying History, and More
Q&A Radio: Sunday, 29 September 2013
I answered questions on keeping secrets, choosing an ultimate end, studying history, moral blacks and whites, and more on Philosophy in Action Radio on Sunday, 29 September 2013. Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers was my co-host. You can listen to or download the podcast below.Remember, Philosophy in Action Radio is available to anyone, free of charge. That's because our goal is to spread rational principles for real life far and wide, as we do every week to thousands of listeners. We love doing that, but each episode requires our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar. We suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. You can send your contribution via Dwolla, PayPal, or US Mail.
My News of the Week: I've been putting the finishing touches on my forthcoming book, Responsibility & Luck: A Defense of Praise and Blame. Alas, my horse Lila is still slightly lame.
- Duration: 1:11:29
You can automatically download that and other podcasts by subscribing to Philosophy in Action's Podcast RSS Feed:
For many years, I've enjoyed countless excellent courses from The Great Courses (formerly, The Teaching Company). I've received a fabulous second college education with stellar teachers such as Bart Ehrman, Elizabeth Vandiver, Alan Kors, and others. Their courses are a great bargain when on sale, particularly compared to the price of college courses!
If you're not quite sure where to start, try Bart Ehrman's stellar course on the history of early Christianity: From Jesus to Constantine.
By using any of these links to purchase from The Great Courses, you help support Philosophy in Action at no extra cost to yourself. You can also support Philosophy in Action with a direct contribution to the tip jar.
Segments: 29 September 2013
Question 1: Keeping Secrets (3:21)
Question: When should I respect a person's request to keep information secret? Often, people ask me to keep something they've told me (or will tell me) to myself. Or, they'll ask me not to share it with anyone other than my spouse. Such secrets might consist of happy news that will soon be known, such as future career plans or a pregnancy. That's no problem. However, when the matter is more serious – like psychological struggles, personal wrongdoings, marital troubles, and conflicts with mutual friends – I feel like I'm caught in a bind. Often, I have reason to fear that other people I care about might be hurt, and I feel an obligation to warn them. Is that right? Or am I obliged to keep secrets scrupulously?
Answer, In Brief: Discretion about private or sensitive information is important to functional and decent relationships. Iron-clad secrecy, however, is morally perilous for everyone.
Question: Can a person choose an ultimate value other than his own life? Ayn Rand claims that each person's life is his own ultimate value. Similarly, Aristotle says that each person's final end is his own flourishing or well-being. Does that mean that a person cannot have a different ultimate value or final end? Or just that they should not?
Answer, In Brief: There is only one rational and justified ultimate end: a person's own life and happiness. Yet a person can pursue other values – whether genuine values or not – as his ultimate end. The results of that are not good for anyone, however.
Question 3: Studying History (34:42)
Question: How should a person approach the study of history? I've always prided myself on being a "student of history" – meaning that I read and think a great deal about the past and try to apply its lessons to the future. Is this a valid approach? Am I missing a bigger picture? Do you have any tips on being a better "student of history"?
Answer, In Brief: A person can choose from a variety of rational approaches to history, depending on his purpose. Beware of ideologically heavy and overbroad histories, as they'll be impoverished on facts.
Question: Can life be morally black and white? People often say life is not "black and white," meaning that sometimes we must navigate morally gray zones, particularly when dealing with complex decisions involving other people. However, if we make decisions based on objective absolutes, doesn't that eliminate these so-called "morally gray zones"?
Answer, In Brief: Reality is black and white, but grasping that is often difficult – even when armed with clear and true principles.
Rapid Fire Questions (1:05:54)
- What do you think of the looming government shutdown?
Thank you for joining us for this episode of Philosophy in Action Radio! If you enjoyed this episode, please contribute to contribute to our tip jar.
Support Philosophy in Action
Remember, Philosophy in Action Radio is available to anyone, free of charge. That's because our goal is to spread rational principles for real life far and wide, as we do every week to thousands of listeners. We love doing that, but each episode requires our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar. We suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. You can send your contribution via Dwolla, PayPal, or US Mail.
Thank you, if you've contributed to Philosophy in Action! You make our work possible every week, and we're so grateful for that!
If you enjoy Philosophy in Action, please help us spread the word about it! Tell your friends about upcoming broadcasts by forwarding our newsletter. Link to episodes or segments from our topics archive. Share our blog posts, podcasts, and events on Facebook and Twitter. Rate and review the podcast in iTunes (M4A and MP3). We appreciate any and all of that!
About Philosophy in Action Radio
I'm Dr. Diana Hsieh. I'm a philosopher specializing the application of rational principles to the challenges of real life. I received my Ph.D in philosophy from the University of Colorado at Boulder in 2009. My first book, Responsibility & Luck: A Defense of Praise and Blame, is available for purchase in paperback, as well as for Kindle and Nook. The book defends the justice of moral praise and blame of persons using an Aristotelian theory of moral responsibility, thereby refuting Thomas Nagel's "problem of moral luck."
My radio show, Philosophy in Action Radio, broadcasts live over the internet on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. On Sunday mornings, I answer four meaty questions applying rational principles to the challenges of real life in a live hour-long show. Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers co-hosts the show. On Wednesday evenings, I interview an expert guest about a topic of practical importance.
If you join us for the live broadcasts, you can ask follow-up questions and make comments in the text-based chat. Otherwise, you can listen to the podcast by subscribing to our Podcast RSS Feed. You can also peruse the show archives, where episodes and questions are sorted by date and by topic.
I can be reached via e-mail to [email protected].