Le projet d’une apologétique que Blondel concrétise en 1913 dans Comment réaliser l’apologétique intégrale ? s’inscrit dans un contexte culturel français particulièrement riche et, de ce fait, complexe. Il est aussi marqué par un événement particulièrement grave, le décret romain du 5 mai 1913 suspendant les Annales de philosophie chrétienne dirigées par le P. Laberthonnière avec la collaboration de Blondel. L’auteur explicite d’abord le contexte de l’intervention de Blondel en 1913, contexte où les événements littéraires ont une grande part, mais (...) où les incidences politiques marquées d’anticléricalisme, ne sont pas négligeables. C’est dans ce contexte que paraît l’ouvrage de Blondel qui veut montrer que le Catholicisme est un fait qui s’impose inévitablement, le point de vue de l’interlocuteur étant primordial dans ses exigences de raison et la variété de ses objections. Fondamentalement, la tâche de l’apologiste est de répondre aux questions difficiles que se pose l’homme qui pense. L’importance de l’ouvrage de Blondel, qui tient aux prolégomènes qu’il expose, provoquera paradoxalement de nombreux malentendus dont l’auteur expose les principaux, permettant de rétablir l’originalité et la force du projet blondélien.The project of an apologetics that Blondel put together in 1913 in How to realise the integral apologetics ? fits into a French cultural context especially rich and, for this reason, complex. It is also marked by a particularly serious event, the Roman decree of May 5, 1913, suspending the Annales de philosophie chrétienne directed by Father Laberthonnière with Blondel’s collaboration. The author first describes the context of Blondel’s intervention in 1913, a context where literary events play a big part, but where political incidents, marked by anticlericalism, are not negligible. It is in this context that the work of Blondel appears. He wants to show that Catholicism is a fact that imposes itself inevitably, the point of view of the interlocutor being primordial in his demands of reason and the variety of his objections. Fundamentally, the work of the apologist is to answer the difficult questions that arise to the person who reflects. The importance of Blondel’s work, which is based on the prolegomena that he expounds, will paradoxically provoke many misunderstandings, of which the author exposes the principle ones, but allows the originality and power of Blondel’s project to be restored. (shrink)

_The Weight of Things_ explores the hard questions of our daily lives, examining both classic and contemporary accounts of what it means to lead 'the good life'. Looks at the views of philosophers such as Aristotle, the Stoics, Mill, Nietzsche, and Sartre as well as contributions from other traditions, such as Buddhism Incorporates key arguments from contemporary philosophers including Peter Singer, Martha Nussbaum, Robert Nozick, John Finnis, and Susan Wolf Uses examples from biography, literature, history, movies and media, and the (...) news Gives a fresh perspective on the hard questions of our daily lives An engaging read; an excellent book for both students and general readers. (shrink)

Advocates of veganism often assume that food enjoyment has little moral weight, because it involves mere taste pleasure. Because of the triviality of taste pleasure, they consider it obvious that harming animals to secure particular tastes is ‘unnecessary’. After discussing the elements of taste, defending the importance of taste, exploring what ‘unnecessary harm’ means, and introducing a number of taste related thought experiments, I argue that harm to animals is not always unnecessary, when what's at stake is taste. However, by (...) supplementing considerations involving necessity with considerations of character, I conclude that vegans are often, though not always, praiseworthy. (shrink)

The objective list account of wellbeing is usually taken to say that the same set of goods is relevant to wellbeing for any person, regardless of age. Coupled with reasonable assumptions about how goods are distributed over the lifespan, that leads to a picture of wellbeing as higher in midlife and lower in childhood and old age. I argue that a stage-relativized objective list theory is more plausible, after exploring several ways to understand the concept of a life stage. On (...) the stage-relativized view, lists of goods that define wellbeing vary in the sense that there are shifting thresholds and subcategories relevant to different stages of life, but also because there are goods that count at one stage and count less or not at all at others. After exploring the list of goods for old age, I argue that the old age form of wellbeing can be welcomed even if the goods it offers are not superior to midlife goods. (shrink)

Every aspect of having and raising a child leads to profound and challenging philosophical questions. The Philosophical Parent is a companion for parents and parents-to-be that explores the myriad worries that come with making and raising children. Kazez explores eighteen perplexities, arguing for a novel view of the parent-child relationship, with implications at every stage of parenthood.

This chapter contains sections titled: The Question Mind and Brain What It Does Global Availability The Grey Area What It's Like.

By exploring the ethical differences between humans and animals, _Animalkind_ establishes a middle ground between egalitarianism and outright dismissal of animal rights. A thought-provoking foray into our complex and contradictory relationship with animals Advocates that we owe each animal due respect Offers readers a sensible alternative to extremism by speaking of respect and compassion for animals, not rights Balances philosophical analysis with intriguing facts and engaging tales.

This chapter contains sections titled: The “Ur” Problem Respect Carnivores and Cannibals The Social Contract The Mini‐Beasts Compassion.

This chapter contains sections titled: Human, All Too Human Thinking Self and Other Locked in the Present? Human Morality Animal Morality? What Else?

Clearly some parental aims get the parent-child relationship started on the wrong foot. It’s not OK to have a child so you’ll later have a tennis partner. It is OK to want responsibility, focus, bonding with a partner, and the pleasures of daily life with children.

Clearly some parental aims get the parent-child relationship started on the wrong foot. It’s not OK to have a child so you’ll later have a tennis partner. It is OK to want responsibility, focus, bonding with a partner, and the pleasures of daily life with children.