This is a short introduction to ontological arguments. It begins with a brief characterization of ontological arguments that proceeds mainly by way of example. The rest of the discussion is given over to consideration of what looks like a very simple ontological argument. This consideration turns up many of the issues that arise when more complex ontological arguments are examined.

Any philosophy which aspires to universality is caught in a perennial tension: the attempt to transcend the particularities of the individual thinker and her time and place can only be made by specific individuals in specific times and places. Anglophone philosophy deals with this tension by ignoring it.

In a philosophical dialogue, Thomas the traditionalist, Harvey the hedonist, and Eric the economist each discuss their respective views concerning the ethics of human sex acts. In the course of their conversation, it becomes clear that if sex is to be treated like any other pleasure (and therefore enjoyed indiscriminately), it is very difficult to explain what is so bad about rape and/or other forms of sexual assault. Taking any kind of sexual assault to be bad, therefore, requires adopting a more traditional view towards sex.

The aim of this article is not to make any arguments that oppose veganism or having children or, in any way, to denigrate those who make them. Rather, the intention is twofold: (1) To attack the inconsistency of those who make arguments for veganism in relation to climate change and the natural world, but who omit to make arguments against having children and the problem of rapidly increasing global population on the same grounds. (2) To attack a form of sanctimony which manifests itself in inconsistent applications of such arguments and which exploits genuine and very serious problems in ways that aim to bring power to their advocates by inducing a sense of shame in their victims. In this way, such moralists try to strengthen the legitimacy of their own preferences – preferences that often run into conflict with other concerns based on the same arguments.

Theories of truth are designed to help us understand this fundamental philosophical concept. But some theories of truth do too little while others do too much. Some theories omit important aspects of truth while other theories place limits on what's true and what we can know. Because theories that do too much can have significant drawbacks I propose what I call the Goldilocks Principle. Theories of truth should not do too much or too little but aim to be just right.

This article is about David Hume's account of mixed emotions. Hume on mixed emotions is connected with Sir Isaac Newton's optical experiments and subsequent invention of the colour wheel, as well as more recently to Robert Plutchik's colour wheel of emotions.

Empathy is an underexplored dimension of the moral life. What if we could enter a machine that let us feel another person's subjective life? What kind of effect would that have on our moral awareness? Since this cannot (yet) be done, I suggest several ways to increase empathy and deepen our moral sensitivities.

An appropriate description for the Buddha's philosophy of persons within the frame of materialist philosophy of mind, prima facie, would understandably be a kind of reductionism, given that the Buddha reduced the self to nothing but a collection of impersonal and impermanent psychophysical elements. In this article, I argue that this view is only appropriate for understanding the self within conventional reality, as is the term used by Buddhists, and does not tackle the other half, namely, ultimate reality. I claim that eliminative materialism provides a more accurate description of the Buddha's prescriptive practice, and although falling prey to the same problems that reductionism faces, creates a good basis for an alternative position of the Buddha as a Hard Eliminativist.

Ten philosophical sonnets.

A comparison of Lewis Carroll and philosopher John Locke on meaning.

Thirty-eight million Polo Mints are consumed every day, apparently without a second thought. However, could this humble little minty fella actually be the gateway to true knowledge about life, the Universe and everything? We have drawn on the inspiration of Sartre, the Dalai Lama, Tao Ti Ching, Heidegger and Mahayana Buddhism to find five reasons why the Polo Mint's inner emptiness, with its sweet minty after taste, can lead to contemplations of the ultimate truth.