Richard Norman examines justifications for war that are rooted in the right of self-defence.

In the second of our two articles focusing on the war in Iraq, Richard Ryder looks at a range of possible justifications, and finds them all wanting.

Ted Schick grapples with the New Age thinker Fritjof Capra. Is Capra right to suggest that the Eastern Mystics have been vindicated by the discoveries of modern science?

Michael Hauskeller discusses a famous thought-experiment that appears to show that we actually want far more then merely to feel happy.

In Think 7, philosopher Jenny Teichman accused the geneticist Professor Stephen Jones and other contemporary Darwinists of confusion and of overestimating Darwinism's explanatory power. Here, Micheal Ruse explains why he believes it is actually Teichman who is confused.

In Think 7, Nigel Warburton attacked Pascal's famous wager on the existence of God. Here, Douglas Groothuis resurrects Pascal to defend the wager.

Thinking Tools is a regular feature that introduces pointers on thinking clearly and rigorously. In this installment, we focus, not on faulty reasoning per se, but on an example of how we can be led astray or manipulated without our even realizing what is going on. Our critical faculties are entirely sidestepped!

Chris Horner opens our debate on pragmatism with this handy introduction to the subject. Those entirely new to the topic of pragmatism might also find helpful Stephen Law's article ‘Is it all relative?’ (see issue 2 of Think).

Neil Gascoigne explains the pragmatist attitude to science, contrasting it with both the realism of scientists like Susan Greenfield and Richard Dawkins, and the anti-realism of sociologists like Harry Collins.

The following is a transcript of a discussion about the question ‘What is Pragmatism?’ between Richard Rorty, Hilary Putnam, and James Conant. The discussion was part of a series of discussions on more or less philosophical subjects broadcast on Chicago Public Radio. This discussion is anchored by Gretchen Helfrich. Two listeners (Chris and Edwin) also took part.

I thank the participants for making the material available for a wider audience. I have deleted some passages in order to fit the space available for this subject (a nearly complete version appears in the next volume of The Wittgenstein Studies). I have tried to keep the character of a discussion. However, a transcript can hardly display the fine nuances of spoken words—and there are indeed some such nice nuances. However, the most important points were, of course, kept. How to think about them — that is up to the reader.

Richard Raatzsch, University of Leipzig, July 2004

Further note from Stephen Law: readers should be aware that this transcript has been edited. Some material — words, phrases, and passages — has been removed. Italicizations are my own.

This article was first presented as a lecture. In it, Hilary Putnam sets out what he thinks is unique about pragmatism, and also what he believes is valuable in it.

In this regular series Michael Clark, editor of the journal Analysis, presents a number of the most intriguing philosophical paradoxes. Here we examine the paradox of the gods.