<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Philosopher's Digest</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.philosophersdigest.com/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com</link>
	<description>Timely Reviews of Current Philosophy Articles</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 16:07:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>“Same-Sex Marriage in a Liberal Democracy: Between Rejection and Recognition” David Gilboa</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/uncategorized/%e2%80%9csame-sex-marriage-in-a-liberal-democracy-between-rejection-and-recognition%e2%80%9d-david-gilboa</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/uncategorized/%e2%80%9csame-sex-marriage-in-a-liberal-democracy-between-rejection-and-recognition%e2%80%9d-david-gilboa#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Aug 2010 16:06:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Russell DiSilvestro</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Public Affairs Quarterly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=928</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: justify;">Gilboa argues that a genuinely liberal society should allow for same-sex marital ceremonies but would not be discriminating against same-sex couples by denying them the benefits and protections of the marriage license.  (I review Jeremy Garrett’s response to this paper,&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/uncategorized/%e2%80%9csame-sex-marriage-in-a-liberal-democracy-between-rejection-and-recognition%e2%80%9d-david-gilboa/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Seeing Reasons&#8221; Jennifer Church</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philphen/seeing-reasons-jennifer-church</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philphen/seeing-reasons-jennifer-church#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Jul 2010 14:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Amy Kind</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Philosophy and Phenomenological Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Imagination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Perception]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reasons]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=920</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>I can see the broken window, but can I also see why the window is broken?  In this ambitious and interesting paper, Church argues for an affirmative answer to this question.  Just as we can have perceptual knowledge of a&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philphen/seeing-reasons-jennifer-church/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Philosophers Facing Phenomenal Consciousness, Online</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/journal-of-consciousness-studies/philosophers-facing-phenomenal-consciousness-online</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/journal-of-consciousness-studies/philosophers-facing-phenomenal-consciousness-online#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 May 2010 14:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Richard Brown</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Journal of Consciousness Studies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=892</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><em><strong>Editor’s Note:</strong> this post is a not a review of a single article, but a shorter summary of a series of articles. If you are interested in further detail on any of these articles, we invite you to post to the&#8230;</em></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/journal-of-consciousness-studies/philosophers-facing-phenomenal-consciousness-online/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Honest Illusion: Valuing for Nietzsche&#8217;s Free Spirits&#8221; Nadeem J. Z. Hussain</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philosophers-annual/honest-illusion-valuing-for-nietzsches-free-spirits-nadeem-j-z-hussain</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philosophers-annual/honest-illusion-valuing-for-nietzsches-free-spirits-nadeem-j-z-hussain#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:00:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daw-Nay Evans</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Philosopher's Annual]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fictionalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illusions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Metaethics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nietzsche]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Value]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=763</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: left">Most scholars agree that Nietzsche’s critique of morality is his most enduring philosophical legacy. However, there is no consensus on the precise nature of Nietzsche’s “positive ethical vision” (Leiter 2004). Moreover, there are thorny metaethical issues surrounding Nietzsche’s positive ethics&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philosophers-annual/honest-illusion-valuing-for-nietzsches-free-spirits-nadeem-j-z-hussain/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Knowledge ascriptions and the psychological consequences of thinking about error,&#8221; Jennifer Nagel</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philosophical-quarterly/knowledge-ascriptions-and-the-psychological-consequences-of-thinking-about-error-jennifer-nagel</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philosophical-quarterly/knowledge-ascriptions-and-the-psychological-consequences-of-thinking-about-error-jennifer-nagel#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Mar 2010 14:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Leo Iacono</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Philosophical Quarterly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heuristic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Knowledge]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=875</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p align="left">When attempting to determine whether the subject of an epistemology case has knowledge or mere true belief, many of us find that our judgments are influenced by whether the case explicitly describes a way in which the subject’s belief could&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/philosophical-quarterly/knowledge-ascriptions-and-the-psychological-consequences-of-thinking-about-error-jennifer-nagel/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Well-Being and Virtue&#8221; Daniel Haybron</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/uncategorized/well-being-and-virtue-daniel-haybron</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/uncategorized/well-being-and-virtue-daniel-haybron#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 17:34:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Russell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Uncategorized]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Aristotle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eudaimoism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eudaimonia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[happiness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perfectionism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Virtue]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[well being]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=829</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Originally published in <em>Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy</em> volume 2, number 2 (2007), pages 1-27.</p>
<p><em>Main authors discussed</em>: Daniel Haybron</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In this essay, Daniel Haybron discusses what he calls “Aristotelian perfectionism,” which he takes to be a central feature of Aristotelian theories&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/uncategorized/well-being-and-virtue-daniel-haybron/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Marriage Unhitched From the State: A Defense&#8221; Jeremy Garrett</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/public-affairs-quarterly/marriage-unhitched-from-the-state-a-defense-jeremy-garrett</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/public-affairs-quarterly/marriage-unhitched-from-the-state-a-defense-jeremy-garrett#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 13:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Vaughn Bryan Baltzly</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Public Affairs Quarterly]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marriage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=854</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Taking his lead from Robert Nozick (who observes that “the fundamental question … one that precedes questions about how the state should be organized, is whether there should be any state at all”), Jeremy Garrett investigates, not how the institution of civil marriage should be organized, but whether there should be any such institution at all.  Finding there to be a compelling prima facie case against the institution, and finding two important arguments against this prima facie case to be wanting, Garrett concludes that we should not, in fact, have the institution of civil marriage.  Instead, he defends a view called Marital Contractualism (henceforth ‘MC’), a proposal for a ‘privatized’, ‘dis-established’ marriage regime.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/public-affairs-quarterly/marriage-unhitched-from-the-state-a-defense-jeremy-garrett/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8220;Constitution of No Authority: Spoonerian Reflections&#8221; Gerard Casey</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/the-independent-review/constitution-of-no-authority-spoonerian-reflections-gerald-casey</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/the-independent-review/constitution-of-no-authority-spoonerian-reflections-gerald-casey#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Feb 2010 04:59:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>James Otteson</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[The Independent Review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Constitutional Interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social Contract]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spooner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=857</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><em>Main authors discussed</em>: Lysander Spooner, Edmund Burke, David Hume, Henry Sumner Maine.</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">In this brief but provocative article, Casey, a professor of philosophy at University College Dublin, revisits the radical argument Lysander Spooner made in his 1867 <em>No Treason: The Constitution&#8230;</em></p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/the-independent-review/constitution-of-no-authority-spoonerian-reflections-gerald-casey/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“Happiness, the Self, and Human Flourishing,” Daniel Haybron</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/utilitas/%e2%80%9chappiness-the-self-and-human-flourishing%e2%80%9d-daniel-haybron</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/utilitas/%e2%80%9chappiness-the-self-and-human-flourishing%e2%80%9d-daniel-haybron#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 18 Feb 2010 04:23:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Daniel Russell</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Utilitas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[eudaimonia]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Eudaimonism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[happiness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[perfectionism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[virtues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[welfare]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[well being]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=830</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Originally published in <em>Utilitas</em> volume 20, number 1 (2008), pages 21-49.</p>
<p><em>Main Authors Discussed</em>: Daniel Haybron</p>
<p style="text-align: justify">This essay offers a provisional account of Haybron’s “self-fulfillment” view of well-being: well-being is the fulfillment of one’s nature as a unique individual. Haybron argues that such a view&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/utilitas/%e2%80%9chappiness-the-self-and-human-flourishing%e2%80%9d-daniel-haybron/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>“The Sense of Deity and Begging the Question with Ontological and Cosmological Arguments” Daniel M. Johnson</title>
		<link>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/faith-and-philosophy/%e2%80%9cthe-sense-of-deity-and-begging-the-question-with-ontological-and-cosmological-arguments%e2%80%9d-daniel-m-johnson</link>
		<comments>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/faith-and-philosophy/%e2%80%9cthe-sense-of-deity-and-begging-the-question-with-ontological-and-cosmological-arguments%e2%80%9d-daniel-m-johnson#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:24:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>R. Zachary Manis</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Faith and Philosophy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Calvin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cosmological argument]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[natural theology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ontological argument]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plantinga]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reformed epistemology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rowe]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philosophersdigest.com/?p=807</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><em>Main authors discussed</em>: John Calvin, Alvin Plantinga, William Rowe</p>
<p style="text-align: justify;">Reformed epistemology often is thought to be on the opposite end of the theological spectrum from, if not outright opposed to, natural theology.  Johnson, however, aims to demonstrate that Calvin’s view of&#8230;</p>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philosophersdigest.com/faith-and-philosophy/%e2%80%9cthe-sense-of-deity-and-begging-the-question-with-ontological-and-cosmological-arguments%e2%80%9d-daniel-m-johnson/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic page generated in 0.647 seconds. -->
<!-- Cached page generated by WP-Super-Cache on 2010-09-02 15:21:40 -->
