New links…
- The Sorites Paradox isn’t just about concepts, the Problem of the Many isn’t just about objects — and there is an underlying commonality to these two classic puzzles of vagueness, argue Isa Kooiman & Robert van Rooij
- What caused humans to think of time as a line, and what did thinking of time that way lead to? — Emily Thomas on representations of time
- “The question isn’t whether to engage. It’s whether we’ll shape how our content is used or be shaped by others’ decisions” — Wikipedia’s 25-yr. anniversary report is about more than Wikipedia: there are lessons and warnings in it for anyone who writes or produces knowledge
- “How can images that everyone knows aren’t real cause harm?” — Alex Fisher on X’s AI-generated images
- Would you take a pill that made you love everyone? — Meghan Sullivan on the virtue of love
- “All of my hobbies involve basically micro-dosing epiphanies” — a profile of philosopher C. Thi Nguyen on the occasion of the publication of his new book, The Score
- “The task of tracing where and when a tradition of thought has gone off the rails is usually complex and ambiguous. But in this case, the answer is amazingly clear-cut” — John Quiggin blames utilitarianism’s problems on Sidgwick. But Richard Yetter Chappel thinks Quiggin is making a mistake of “not appreciating the costs of the alternatives” to Sidgwick’s view.
Mini-Heap posts usually appear when several new items accumulate in the Heap of Links, a collection of items from around the web that may be of interest to philosophers. The Heap of Links consists partly of suggestions from readers; if you find something online that you think would be of interest to the philosophical community, please send it in for consideration for the Heap. Thank you.
Previous edition.
This discussion of Sidgwick by Quiggin here has made me curious to add him to my ethics survey. But I’m having a lot of trouble locating the third main quotation, referenced as being from Book IV, ch.3, sec.3:
I’ve searched through the first, fourth, and seventh editions (as found on Hathi trust) and come up with nothing. Can anybody help?
For later readers, the author of the post has removed this quotation, saying “Even though I have a clear memory of locating the third quotation in the Gutenberg edition, I can’t find it now. So, I’ve edited the post to deleted it. Apologies for this. I’m assuming the quote I found was some kind of AI confabulation, and that I slipped up on the check. I will need to double check more carefully in future.”
I find that depressing—and damning.