On Sunday’s episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, Greg Perkins and I answered questions on open minds, long-distance relationships, peanut bans in schools, love at first sight, Objectivist Free State Project, virtue as a mean, 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:


Whole Podcast: 1 May 2011

Listen or Download:

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: 1 May 2011

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

Introduction

My News of the Week: On Tuesday, I hope to put a dent in Colorado’s campaign finance laws. Also, I’m still working on my updates to Explore Atlas Shrugged.

Question 1: Open Minds

Question: When should a rational person be open-minded? Many people seem to have a mistaken idea of what it means to have an open mind. Where should a person draw the line between (a) listening to an opinion/idea and considering its value and (b) writing off the idea/opinion as hogwash?

My Answer, In Brief: A person needs an active, critical mind – not an open mind.

Listen or Download:

Links:

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

Question 2: Long-Distance Relationships

Question: What do you think of long-distance relationships? Do you see any dangers in long-distance relationships? Hasn’t the internet made such relationships nearly as good as living in the same city?

My Answer, In Brief: Long-distance relationships are a pale shadow of in-person relationships, because two people cannot integrate their lives long-distance.

Listen or Download:

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

Question 3: Peanut Bans in Schools

Question: Are peanut bans in schools immoral? In particular, do restrictions on certain types of food in schools (such as peanuts due to a known peanut allergy) infringe on the rights of the parents of the non-allergic kids to determine the type of diet their children follow? Are the parents of the non-allergic kids making an immoral sacrifice by following the ‘no-peanut’ rules? What about parents who choose to ignore the rule and send the food to school anyway? Would this scenario be any different in a private school versus a government school?

My Answer, In Brief: For school to ban peanuts due to serious allergy of student is morally right and proper, because it’s the most simple and effective means of eliminating a major risk to life and health of a kid in its care.

Listen or Download:

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

Question 4: Love at First Sight

Question: Do you believe in love at first sight? Why or why not?

My Answer, In Brief: Attraction and interest is possible at first sight, but not love, because love requires deep knowledge of a person and deep affinity based on fundamental values.

Listen or Download:

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

Question 5: Objectivist Free State Project

Question: Where is the best place in the country for an Objectivist to live? The Free State Project in New Hampshire is proving to be a success for libertarians; especially in the town of Keene. I wonder if there might be some potential for a critical mass of Objectivists along similar lines. Is this even worthwhile?

My Answer, In Brief: An Objectivist “Free State” Project would not be effective, nor selfish. Instead, every rationally selfish person should live in whatever location most suits his values.

Listen or Download:

Links:

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

Question 6: Virtue as a Mean

Question: Is Aristotle’s concept of virtue as a mean between extremes of vices valid? In philosophy class my professor attributed the idea of the “Golden Mean” to Aristotle. I understand the concept, and I agree with the principle to some extent, but it still does not sit right with me somehow. (Perhaps the problem is the idea of moderation for moderation’s sake.) Is this idea valid as is, or is the essence right with a sloppy framework?

My Answer, In Brief: Aristotle’s doctrine of virtue as a mean is an attempt to make ethics objective. The theory is wrong, but not as wrong as the common doctrine of “moderation for moderation’s sake.”

Listen or Download:

Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, 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: 59:09


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.

Philosophy in Action's NewsletterPhilosophy in Action's Facebook PagePhilosophy in Action's Twitter StreamPhilosophy in Action's RSS FeedsPhilosophy in Action's Calendar


   
Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha