In my most recent post, I consider the question of whether there could ever be a work of art in which every part—every turn of phrase, every scene, every shot, every jot of paint—is maximally beautiful. Or must beauty, even in the greatest works, sometimes falter? [Link below]
Here I discuss “Surrounded,” the viral debate show from Jubilee Media. I argue that, while its unusual “one vs. many” format does some things well, the show could be altered in a few key ways to make the discussions more substantive. (Link below)
Happy to recommend a new philosophy podcast: Surprising Ethics, by @will_gildea.
One of the early episodes (https://t.co/I24xrw2xwb) very thoughtfully discusses some of my work on the moral status of (non-)monogamy.
To me, it makes much more sense to wonder why it matters that my desires be satisfied than why it matters that moral value be furthered.
I know some philosophers feel precisely the opposite way. I suspect this difference faintly touches on one of the key divisions in metaethics.
Here I take on three classic objections to the quality theory of love: objections involving clones, improved copies, and parental love. I argue that the quality theory stands strong against them all.
(Link below.)
In this post, I consider whether the truth of moral nihilism would be tragic—and whether the particular kind of tragedy at issue might unexpectedly be fashioned into an argument against nihilism. (Link below.)