?

Log in

Philosophy Graduate Students [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
I think therefore I like philosophy

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

Links
[Links:| Philosophy Resources on the Internet § Guide to Philosophy on the Internet § ephilosopher § Philosophy Forums § Philosophical Gourmet Report ]

re: doctoral project help [Feb. 1st, 2006|06:44 pm]
I think therefore I like philosophy
leahsearch
Hello Everyone,

I'm trying to finish my Psy.d. this year. In order to do so, I'm looking for individuals willing to participate in a study on emerging adulthood. If you are between the ages of 18-29 years old, and willing to participate, please go to
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.asp?u=761421654317

The survey will take you less than half an hour to complete.

I apologize for soliciting... I know that this site is not supposed to be for psychology postings...I'm looking for a wide sample from the population.

For those of you who participate... I thank you in advance for your help.
Leah
LinkLeave a comment

buddhist philosophy [Jun. 14th, 2005|01:20 am]
I think therefore I like philosophy
gyag_mangpo
can anyone suggest philosophy programs that focus on non-western philosophy? specifically, i'm interested in studying mahayana buddhist philosophy, but any place that deals with asian and/or other non-western traditions would be good.
Link4 comments|Leave a comment

Non-voters, voting, democracy, and anarchism [Sep. 17th, 2004|06:25 pm]
I think therefore I like philosophy
juvenalian
[Current Mood |creativecreative]

All non-votes by eligible voters in a presidential election should count as votes against the idea of presidency and state.

I just formulated this 'theory.' I'm not sure if someone else has come up with it before; if they have, then I wasn't aware of it (I admit I haven't read all the major works in political philosophy, so excuse my ignorance if someone has already come up with that idea). I think it's a good idea. It would also solve voter 'apathy', and it would establish REAL democracy. Deciding on whether or not the people want a state.

Agree?
Disagree?
Thoughts?

x-posted to political_phil
Link1 comment|Leave a comment

Thoughts? [Jul. 30th, 2004|10:12 pm]
I think therefore I like philosophy
juvenalian
[Current Mood |thoughtfulthoughtful]

Debate: Is it possible to have absolute equality (/equal opportunity)? Why or why not?

My argument: It's not possible to achieve it. Since there are differences (big or small) in most aspects of people's background, lives, and society. Where there are differences, equality is impossible to achieve. If we attempt to achieve it, it will be at the expense of another group, which would essentially mean that it's an infinite loop. Achieving equality through inequality results in more inequality.. You could always get a certain group to be closer to being equal to another one, but I doubt that you can do it without bringing the other side a bit down on the scale in the process. Of course, you could always argue that well, it doesn't matter if the other side loses a bit of something, that's not inequality, because in the end they're going to be closer to equality, but when talking about equality, we should always consider fairness as well. Not to mention, one could always argue that while it's the right (or accepted as a fact) of the minority party that's seeking equality to either stay PUT in its position or go UP on the scale (rather than go DOWN), the other party might be moving DOWN the scale to bring the two closer. Which means that the two parties are not being given the SAME rights, because there are double standards. And where there are double standards, there can be no real equality, or at least not a step closer to equality than before. The argument that the rich have not acquired their wealth by fair means and therefore it's only fair that they're brought down to the same level as those seeking equality is irrelevant. Just because they haven't acquired their wealth fairly doesn't mean we have the right to be unfair to them. Each situation should be judged separately. It is not fair to take them down to level zero, just because others couldn't acquire their wealth the same way. Because we're not starting from point zero anyway (i.e the development of minorities and wealthy groups). So taking them down all the way back to 0 is not fair.

Related readings: Rawls
Link1 comment|Leave a comment

Welcome [Jul. 26th, 2004|10:52 pm]
I think therefore I like philosophy
juvenalian
[Current Mood |creativecreative]

Welcome to the Philosophy Graduate Students community. My name is Dan, and I'm a prospective grad student in philosophy. I will be posting philosophical excerpts and articles here from time to time. Feel free to add your own observations, etc. You could also ask any questions you might have about philosophy in general, grad school, applying, research, and so on.
LinkLeave a comment

navigation
[ viewing | most recent entries ]