Question On Philosophers And Imprisonment

An Iranian philosopher – Ramin Jahanbegloo – is presently imprisoned (apparently in solitary confinement). (On Jahanbegloo, a collection of his papers and an interview with Postel.)

While there is a tradition of philosophers being imprisoned – Socrates springs to mind – it seems somewhat discordant with the state of the discipline at present. This raises an interesting question – are there any views that, as a philosopher, you would be prepared to endure imprisonment for?

On the Dictionary of War

An interesting project, coming out of Germany, attempting to set out one hundred concepts – in the form of a dictionary – associated with war. [Via Utne.]

On Dreyfus

‘Human justice makes human errors. No human effort is immune from error’ – Justice Michael Kirby (High Court of Australia), ‘The Dreyfus Case a Century On – Ten Lessons for Australia’

Today marks the centenary of the Dreyfus acquittal.

[This is also the 100th post on epideixis, which is considerably less significant.]

The Death of Foucault

I started reading Derrida the other day, only to be hit with the thought, why? It seemed like something that I should be interested in, but it all seems a bit irrelevant now. Who was the last deconstructionist you met? Or the last person who actually read Derrida?

So i stopped reading Derrida and started reading Habaermas. Martin then asked me 'why would you want to read Habermas?' Sadly it feels a little true, despite being the kind of thing that I would want to read, there doesn't seem to be a point. People have stopped being interested in the Marxist/post-modernist tradition in the last year or so, almost like it had reached its logical conclusion or proliferated to the point of ceasing to make sense or something.

There seems to be a distinct lack of it in blogs. Infact, it feels like everyone just got bored with it one day and thought maybe it was time to give the other guys a go for a bit and headed down the more analytic side of things? Am I imagining things or have other people noticed this? Or is it just the general trend in the small philosophical circles which I am associated? It seemed like Foucault was a perfectly good answer to everything, but now it has to be something a bit more scientific, a little more 'provable'. Maybe its just me and its been this way all the time: I only thought Foucault was the answer.

Hart On Morality

‘Morality, what crimes may be committed in thy name!’ – HLA Hart, ‘Immorality and Treason’.

[There’s not been a sermon here in some months; this sort of feels like one … possibly delivered by Nietzsche in the midst of the Genealogy …]

Philosopher’s Carnival, No. thirty-two

The 32nd Philosopher’s Carnival is being hosted by Adventures in Ethics and Science.

On Singer’s ‘The Freedom to Ridicule Religion-and Deny the Holocaust’

Peter Singer – recently listed by The Bulletin as one of the hundred most influential Australians, alongside philosophical spectre John Anderson – has argued that Austria’s laws criminalising Holocaust denial are a contravention of free speech which demonstrate the hypocrisy inherent in Europe’s attitude towards free speech.

Why does reading Singer so often result in a sense of ‘if only things were so simple’?

What is it like to be a blog – Philoblog Notice

What is it like to be a blog – a wide ranging, and young, grad-philoblog.

[It may be noticed that these have become notices rather than reviews, simply because they are more notices than reviews …]

On Carl Schmitt

Long Sunday has attempted to conclude the discussion of Carl Schmitt it instigated …

On Hamdan v Rumsfeld

The Supreme Court of The United States of America opinions in Hamdan v Rumsfeld have been released.

Legal Theory has this collection of the early commentary.

On ‘The Primacy of the Subjective: Foundations for a Unified Theory of Mind and Language’

For Samuel: Steven Horst’s review (for NDPR) of Nicholas Georgalis' recent work on the interplay between minds and language – another item to add to the doctoral reading list …

On ‘Aussie rules in the Pacific’

An all to brief critique of Australia’s ‘re-colonisation’ of the Pacific, authored by a member of the Sovereignty And It’s Discontents working group.

There remain a number of political questions about this new trend in Australia’s foreign policy – none the least of which is the extent to which this approach should be deployed, and all of which have to do with the role that Australia should play in the governance of the Pacific as this century progresses.