Friday, 3 February 2012
Sunday, 29 January 2012
Until the 19th century, some communities in India believed that a widow ought to throw herself on her husband’s funeral pyre. The fact that sati, as this practice is called, was normal at the time did not make it right. Likewise, nothing follows about the rightness of any way to grieve simply because it is the norm. This is easily understood, but it is remarkable how difficult it can be to shake a conviction which is rooted in nothing more than the fact that this is how it is and has always been.Latest column in this weekend's FT Magazine
If you were to ask an academic philosopher which of their colleagues from the past 50 years will still be read in a century’s time, the answer is likely to be John Rawls (1921-2002).Short piece supplementing main interview on John Rawls in this weekend's FT(see bottom of page)
Saturday, 28 January 2012
For the record, I spoke on a panel today at an event called The Afterlife: ‘And then what happens?’ at the Queen Elizabeth Hall, Southbank Centre. The chair was Bidisha and other panelists were Dr Desmond Biddulph, Canon Giles Goddard and Huma Qureshi.
Labels: Talks and events
Friday, 27 January 2012
The idea that, if the laws of physics don't mention it, it isn't real is also totally unjustified. To a physicist, biological organisms are ultimately as much collections of atoms as chairs and tables. Some would go so far as to say that, in principle at least, biology is reducible to physics. But does that mean that zebras aren't real? Any physicist who insists on this can't see the wood for the carbon.Short piece on time in the January edition of The Times's Eureka Science magazine, Only available online through the Murdoch pay wall.