On Sunday’s episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, Greg Perkins and I answered questions on “the friend zone”, making hard choices, frivolous lawsuits, and more. The podcast of that episode is now available for streaming or downloading.

You can automatically download podcasts of Philosophy in Action Radio by subscribing to Philosophy in Action’s Podcast RSS Feed:

• Enhanced M4A Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player
• Standard MP3 Feed: Subscribe via iTunes or another podcast player

Whole Podcast: 31 August 2014

Listen or Download:

• Duration: 1:08:43
• Download: Enhanced M4A File (24.7 MB)
• Download: Standard MP3 File (23.6 MB)

Remember the Tip Jar!

The mission of Philosophy in Action is to spread rational principles for real life… far and wide. That’s why the vast majority of my work is available to anyone, free of charge. I love doing the radio show, but each episode requires an investment of time, effort, and money to produce. So if you enjoy and value that work of mine, please contribute to the tip jar. I suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is appreciated. In return, contributors can request that I answer questions from the queue pronto, and regular contributors enjoy free access to premium content and other goodies.

Podcast Segments: 31 August 2014

You can download or listen to my answers to individual questions from this episode below.

Introduction

My News of the Week: I’ve been inputting the final edits for the print study guide of Explore Atlas Shrugged.

Question 1: “The Friend Zone”

Question: Is there any validity to the concept of “the friend zone”? The “friend zone” is used to describe the situation of a man who is interested in a woman, but she’s not interested in being more than friends with him. Then, he’s “in the friend zone,” and he can’t get out except by her say-so. So “nice guys” in the friend zone often use the concept to describe the frustration of watching the women they desire date “bad boys” while they sit over to the side waiting for their chance to graduate from being just friends to being something more. Feminists suggest that this concept devalues a woman’s right to determine the context and standard of their sexual and romantic interests, that it treats a woman’s sexual acceptance as something that a man is entitled to by virtue of not being a jerk. Is that right? Or do women harm themselves by making bad choices about the types of men they date versus the types they put in the “friend zone?”

My Answer, In Brief: Too often, the concept of “the friend zone” is a passive-aggressive snipe at women by men who refuse to take an active role in expressing and pursuing their romantic interests. If you want a romantic relationship with another person, you must do something other than just be a friend.

Listen or Download:

• Start Time: 3:55
• Duration: 21:32
• Download: MP3 Segment
• Tags: Assertiveness, Causality, Communication, Dating, Ethics, Friendship, Honesty, Relationships, Romance, Sexism, Values

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Making Hard Choices

Question: How can a person make better hard choices? How to make hard choices was the subject of a recent TED talk from philosopher Ruth Chang. Her thesis is that hard choices are not about finding the better option between alternatives. Choices are hard when there is no better option. Hard choices require you to define the kind of person you want to be. You have to take a stand for your choice, and then you can find reasons for being the kind of person who makes that choice. Her views really speak to me. In your view, what makes a choice hard? How should a person make hard choices?

My Answer, In Brief: Philosopher Ruth Chang offers a new perspective on hard choices: when the options are “on a par,” the decision is about what kind of person you want to be and what kind of life you want to have. If that’s helpful to you, make use of it!

Listen or Download:

• Start Time: 25:28
• Duration: 21:18
• Download: MP3 Segment
• Tags: Decision-Making, Epistemology, Ethics, Psychology, Values

Links:

• TED: How to Make Hard Choices by Ruth Chang
• Philosophy in Action: Overcoming Paralyzing Indecision

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Frivolous Lawsuits

Question: Should judges refuse to hear cases from lawyers behind frivolous suits? In your 15 May 2014 show, you expressed curiosity about possible improvements to the justice system. I came up with the following idea after sitting on a jury for a civil trial where, after the plaintiff presented his case, the judge dismissed the suit without even having the defendant present his defense. In cases where a judge thinks everyone’s time and money were wasted by a pointless case, the judge should refuse to hear any future cases from the lawyer for the losing side. That would cause the lawyer to think twice about representing any frivolous cases, since he would risk being banned from the presiding judge’s courtroom henceforth. In addition, judges who know each other could share lawyer blacklists, preventing the lawyer from wasting other judges’ time as well. Would this be possible? Would it fix the problem of frivolous lawsuits?

My Answer, In Brief: The problem of frivolous lawsuits cannot simply be fixed: every proposed reform to exclude frivolous lawsuits would affect legitimate cases too. However, some reforms for the better are possible.

Listen or Download:

• Start Time: 46:47
• Duration: 13:35
• Download: MP3 Segment
• Tags: Incentives, Justice, Law, Torts

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions

Questions:

• What do you think of Richard Dawkins’ recent comments about abortion and Down’s syndrome? Can it ever be right to advocate eugenics, as he was doing?
• Could it ever be moral to be involved in an orgy?

Listen or Download:

• Start Time: 1:00:22
• Duration: 6:29
• Download: MP3 Segment

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion

Be sure to check out the topics scheduled for upcoming episodes! Don’t forget to submit and vote on questions for future episodes too!

• Start Time: 1:06:52

About Philosophy in Action Radio

Philosophy in Action Radio focuses on the application of rational principles to the challenges of real life. It broadcasts live on most Sunday mornings and many Thursday evenings over the internet. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap. For podcasts of past shows, visit the Show Archives.