Author: Neil Van Leeuwen

Black high-heeled shoe with red rose and gold mesh

Unnecessary Necessities

During the pandemic, you may have been watching Schitt’s Creek. Its characters inspired this month’s pandemic puzzle, which is about how to figure out the ideal balance between feeling like you need a lot to be happy, and feeling like you need very little.

Female track athletes at the finish line of a race.

Is Meritocracy Possible? (A Solution)

Last time, I asked: Given that meritocracy as traditionally defined is practically impossible, is there any point in appealing to it as a social ideal? This time, I suggest a way to peel off two ideas from the mirage ideal of meritocracy that might actually be feasible and worth striving for.

Female track athletes at the finish line of a race.

Is Meritocracy Possible? (Pt. I)

Modern economic life—where people have careers, advancements, successes, and failures—will always end up failing to be meritocratic, as traditionally defined. Given that, is there any point to appealing to meritocracy as a social ideal? And if not, why do people find this ideal so appealing?

Two small dogs cuddling close together.

When Do False Beliefs Exculpate? (Pt. I)

Another month of pandemic… and another philosophical puzzle from me to distract you from it. This time, the puzzle concerns beliefs and specifically whether acting under the guidance of false beliefs can exculpate someone of a moral wrongdoing.

Grieving family members surround a deceased woman's bed. A man kneels, head in hands, expressing profound sorrow.

Why We Argue About Fiction

From an evolutionary standpoint, it’s puzzling that humans consume fiction. Why waste valuable cognitive resources on information we know is unreal? But it is even more puzzling that we argue about such fictions! I explore some reasons why we do this.

Grieving family members surround a deceased woman's bed. A man kneels, head in hands, expressing profound sorrow.

Why Do People Argue about Fiction?

For this month’s puzzle, I’m focusing on the human ability to produce and consume fiction. Why do creatures evolved to survive in a harsh reality spend so much time, energy, and effort doing this? And why do we argue with one another about what “really” happened in these various fictional worlds?

Row of stylized skull sculptures with glowing eyes, illuminated in blue light.

Kant on Lying to Robots, Part II

I recently posed a puzzle about Kant’s moral philosophy. The puzzle was this: if lying is always wrong, would it be wrong (according to Kant’s theory) to lie to a robot with speech technology who came to your door trying to locate innocent people who were hiding from a tyrannical government?

Five red game pieces and one black game piece stand apart on a light blue background. Arts access debate.

Naïve Racism

Social psychology has shown that people tend to generalize on incidents of good behavior for their in-group, but generalize on bad behavior for members of out-groups. This tendency leads to a form of racism I call “naïve” because the racist person has no idea that their minds are operating this way.

Row of stylized skull sculptures with glowing eyes, illuminated in blue light.

Puzzle 3: Kant on Lying to Robots

Many of you know by now that I’ve committed to presenting philosophical puzzles for the duration of the Corona crisis. This month’s puzzle is somewhat sci-fi in nature, but not totally farfetched, as we’ll see. The motivating question is this: What should Kant say about lying to robots?

Religious leaders of different faiths stand together, symbolizing interfaith unity.

Puzzle 2: What is an Identity?

Continuing my series of puzzles to distract you from the current crisis, this month I’m asking: What is an identity? I mean the kind of identity that makes you a member of a certain social group (call these collective identities, social identities, or group identities), though that’s a rough characterization.

Signpost pointing left with the word "Belief" in bold text.

Puzzle 1: Are Beliefs Voluntary?

Need a distraction from the incessant stream of information and speculation about the Coronavirus? I certainly do. So for my next few blogs, I’m going to describe philosophical puzzles that are either old or new. I won’t help solve them until the next blog, at which point I’ll post links to various solutions. Enjoy!

Neon sign reading "COMEDY CLUB

Anti-Sacred Spaces

According to the “Blowing Off Steam” theory, rough humor—humor that deals with culturally sensitive issues in a way that bumps into or violates taboos—helps release people’s anxieties and stresses in a safe environment. Specifically, it is a release of sacred anxiety.

Three pears with funny, angry faces. Rough humor.

Rough Humor

One current culture war in North American society concerns rough humor—jokes, skits, writings, cartoons, etc. that deal with culturally sensitive issues in a way that bumps into or violates taboos. But is there something harmful about rough humor?

Man in suit speaking at podium, expressing jovial emotion.

Ken’s Unfinished Project

One Sunday in the spring of 2007, John and I walked into the back room of KALW to find Ken singing. Back then I was both Ken’s PhD student and the director of research for Philosophy Talk, so it was always a treat to catch my advisor and boss being playful. He was coming up with different lyrics for Sinatra’s classic “Love and Marriage.”

Many lit candles burning in a church

A Puzzle About Sacred Values Part II

Classic theories of choice posit that our preferences are transitive. But in a recent blog, I wrote about how sacred values have the puzzling feature of violating transitivity. So how should we interpret the fact some people seem to violate transitivity, when it comes to sacred values?