Contact details can be found here:
https://www.gc.cuny.edu/Page-Elements/Academics-Research-Centers-Initiatives/Doctoral-Programs/Philosophy/Faculty-Bios/Massimo-Pigliucci

Yeah, for sure, life experience can teach us a lot. Our being here is part of that exploration.

If you have read any dead philosopher's works then you might have enjoyed your own dialogue along the way. Asking questions of the text...looking for answers...

Failing that - you might find someone alive and kicking. Someone who might have developed a deeper appreciation and understanding of the author and topic.
I dunno...maybe a Guest Speaker ?

Ah, OK - that sounds good. So, everything in writing - no chance of being a movie star...

Yes, it is unfortunate that there are some who put a downer on a potential uplift.
My school motto was 'Surgo in lucem'. I rise into the light. Never forgotten it.

Thanks for clarifying the process. What kind of a space would be set up ?
Having problems envisaging it. Perhaps I am dazzled by the light :cool:

One way to engage with Massimo Pigliucci - an interview article followed by questions.
@jamalrob @Baden - what are your thoughts so far ?

[ Like most authors, he might appreciate questions on his book 'How to Be a Stoic' ? - £9.00.
Also, in kindle there is for a mere £2.99 ''Answers for Aristotle: How Science and Philosophy Can Lead Us to A More Meaningful Life'. ]

A possible template from https://philosophynow.org/issues/120/Raymond_Tallis
It begins:

Our columnist has just released a major book on the philosophy of time. Grant Bartley interviews him about Of Time and Lamentation.

Lovely to see you Professor Tallis, to talk about your new magnum opus, Of Time and Lamentation. What were your motivations for writing this book?

Well, it’s part of a much bigger project. As a secular humanist, I feel I’ve managed to liberate myself from supernatural accounts of humanity, but the alternative for many people is a naturalistic account – the idea that we’re just ‘pieces of nature’. One aspect of that is the notion that the natural sciences are ultimately going to give us a complete account, not only of the rest of the universe, but of ourselves in it. It’s this scientism that has been one of my targets over many years, and it’s one of the drivers for writing this book about time. There are other motives. But the scientific reduction of time to ‘little t’ is a very good example of where scientism gets us, and it’s a rather dismal place. — Grant Bartley with Raymond Tallis

There follows a forum discussion on the topic. Not sure how informative it is...
I think we could do better :wink:

Ciceronianus the White, and other's what are your thoughts about these questions? If (any) seem too broad or imprecise, they are up for revision. — Wallows

I wondered why you zoomed in on @Ciceronianus the White in particular and then noticed a thread I missed:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/336619

Good stuff.

Religion seems to have an overall ability to inhibit and even block thinking in lots of people. So to The Lounge. — tim wood

If this is the case, then all the more reason to discuss it.
It is clearly a vital issue. Get it out in the open.

To be brief, I think the evidence of the site is that a philosophical discussion of religion is not possible here. I vote, then, that the forum be "disappeared." And any post on such a topic be folded into The Lounge. — tim wood

The evidence shows that there is a desire for such discussion. About various aspects of religion and spirituality. Clearly, it is possible. Why on earth should it be 'folded' ?
The philosophical perspective remains pertinent.
The mods are there to overview any problems.
If you have concerns about content, follow the guidance and let them do their job.

As to a potential interview format, and how difficult it might be - here is Zizek:

https://highprofiles.info/interview/slavoj-zizek/

A full list of interviews:
https://highprofiles.info/interviews/

Since we're mostly philosophy kindergarten, this is a bad idea. — frank

How do you expect to grow and develop ?
Who would you listen to ?
What questions might you have ?

At the same time, "celebrity" guests are likely to be professionals or have a professional level of understanding, and that level of gearing simply is not going to mesh with many of us, me included. It's like getting into the ring with a professional boxer, or playing chess against a grandmaster with a 2000+ rating, or acting as your own lawyer. — tim wood

Utter nonsense.
This is not about a fight or a game.
It is about listening to someone who has a special interest and experience in their field.
Or it might just be a simple interview with questions afterwards.

If memory serves, there used to be debates on this or the old forum — tim wood

There is a debate section in this forum. I think the idea is to revive it.
I look forward to seeing how this develops.

what are your thoughts about these questions? If (any) seem too broad or imprecise, they are up for revision.
Thanks, and looking forward to reaching out to Professor Pigliucci on Facebook. — Wallows

This is wonderful of you. You have given this much thought; your questions reflect your knowledge.
I look forward to hearing what others have to say.

For me, this Guest Speaker thing is a novelty. I note various concerns raised.
I think the success of an interaction depends on clarification of our aims and sensible preparation.
To get the most out of it, rather than rush in to any discussion, I think I would like time to read around the guest, the topic and previous works. Refresh my memory and look at current issues.

For example:
https://philosophynow.org/issues/134/How_To_Be_A_Stoic_by_Massimo_Pigliucci
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massimo_Pigliucci

My post from the other thread:

'Massimo fantastico tweets:
Philosophy Day is on Thursday, 21 November! This year’s event feature at CCNY: Ben Vilhauer on “Taking free will skepticism seriously.” Elise Crull on “Metaphysics & the Multiverse.” More info here: https://philosophydayatccny.wordpress.com

Someone asks: Will the discussions be livestreamed anywhere for those of us in flyover country?
Yes he says - and includes video of previous event.'

I am not on Twitter or Facebook. However, it seems that Massimo Pigliucci is open to all !
As to timing: if Philosophy Day is on November 21st, perhaps it might be worthwhile to engage with this first ?

Thoughts welcome.

I want a feminist speaker to make an appearance for a change.
— Wallows

Why ?
Who would you suggest ? — Amity

Underappreciated virtue ethicists of care, such as Nel Noddings (she will make a departure soon to the other world) or Carol Gilligan really make philosophy more than just a matter of commitment to cherished beliefs or dogma intertwined with word play.
This is where I see the future of philosophy gearing towards. — Wallows

You make good points.
I think I would broaden it out to female philosophers.
The likes of Mary Midgley who passed away on 10th October 2018.
Interviewed here:
https://highprofiles.info/interview/mary-midgley/

A list of women philosophers:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_philosophers

Mary Midgley was one of 4 great women philosophers celebrated here:
https://www.dur.ac.uk/research/news/item/?itemno=39138

The ultimate aim is to see the Quartet achieve recognition as a school in Analytic Philosophy and rewrite the history of 20th Century philosophy in the UK, which has mostly ignored women philosophers.

Dr Clare Mac Cumhaill is from our Department of Philosophy and is the co-director of In Parenthesis with Dr Rachael Wiseman from University of Liverpool. To mark the birth centenary of Iris Murdoch they have organised the #PhilosophybyPostcard initiative - https://www.philosophybypostcard.com/.

So, a guest speaker might not be a 'celebrity' in the sense of being famous.
However, Dr Clare Mac Cumhaill and Dr. Rachael Wiseman might be considered well known in their field.
Worthy of being interviewed at least?

Massimo fantastico tweets:

Philosophy Day is on Thursday, 21 November! This year’s event feature at CCNY: Ben Vilhauer on “Taking free will skepticism seriously.” Elise Crull on “Metaphysics & the Multiverse.” More info here: https://philosophydayatccny.wordpress.com

Someone asks: Will the discussions be livestreamed anywhere for those of us in flyover country?

Yes he says - and includes video of previous event.

You know what? I'm going to reach out to Massimo and ask him if he can answer a list of some 3-5 questions prepresented to him. He's very active on Facebook, and maybe he can make some time for us.

What do you think, Amity? I can't fathom what kind of questions to ask though. I'll think about it... — Wallows

Great that you have this informal contact.
However, I think you should post this suggestion in the thread:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/7047/arguing-with-guests-your-choice

Where any formal request might proceed
@Baden is 'Happy to take suggestions and invite on that basis provided @jamalrob agrees.'
Also, others might help out with questions to ask.

Do you translate German ?
This is the poem I think I must have been reminded of.
By Goethe:
Wanderer's Nightsong II

Über allen Gipfeln
Ist Ruh,
In allen Wipfeln
Spürest du
Kaum einen Hauch;
Die Vögelein schweigen im Walde.
Warte nur, balde
Ruhest du auch.


There are various translations:

1. https://www.poetryintranslation.com/PITBR/German/Goethepoems.php#anchor_Toc74652097
Translated by A. S. Kline

Over all the hill-tops
Is Rest,
In all the tree-tops
You can feel
Scarcely a breath:
The little birds quiet in the leaves.
Wait now, soon you
Too will have peace.

----------

2. From wiki: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanderer%27s_Nightsong
(Tr. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow)

O’er all the hilltops 
Is quiet now, 
In all the treetops 
Hearest thou 
Hardly a breath; 
The birds are asleep in the trees: 
Wait, soon like these 
Thou too shalt rest. 
----------
3. From:
http://poemsintranslation.blogspot.com/2009/09/jw-goethe-wayfarers-evening-song-from.html

Translated by A.Z. Foreman

Over every hilltop
comes repose.
From every treetop
there blows
barely a breath toward you. 
Birds in the woodland cease their song.
Wait, now. Before long
You will rest, too.

Quick work for a wallower. In bed or otherwise.

Heh, I'm a wallowing pig, Banno is some combination of goat-chimp-man, and then we have @unenlightened who rather has the dual characteristic of being either a frog or a horse. It's a zoo in here! — Wallows

Otherkins ?
https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/why-be-human-when-you-can-be-otherkin

Many adopt images of cats or wolves. I knew a bear once...

'm glad you liked my translation of L'infinito. I tried to render more (some of) the feeling than a literal translation (which is basically impossible in this case), so am happy you felt it. — boethius

Leopardi. I had never heard of. However, wiki has given me an inkling.
Do you have a special interest in him - or do you just go around translating any old poem ?
I so admire translators especially those who can capture both the rhythm and the feel.
I would imagine it to be a work of love...

Understood.

I want a feminist speaker to make an appearance for a change. — Wallows

Why ?
Who would you suggest ?

So to get back to my burning question...
I'm guessing that your favoured Guest Speaker would be...Orson Scott Card ?
Or who else...one of the actors ?
What would you ask ?

https://web.archive.org/web/20170820102813/http://www.hatrack.com/osc/books/endersshadow/endersshadow.shtml

So...I have no idea of most productive format. I'm sure admin have a few ideas...
I think an initial interview by a knowledgeable, experienced person would be good. Perhaps posted as an OP as usual, or an article. Then, questions or comments from the forum, with the Guest able to then choose...

However, initial questions to forum members:

Who would you like to hear ?
And why ?
What would be a burning question ?

Prego :cool:

Even if the 'Guest Speaker' thing doesn't take off, it would still be great to hear of live and fascinating movers and shakers, philosophical in their way...

reminds me of a song suggested by some phil forum friend...again I can't remember. — Amity

Got it.
I Talk To The Wind - King Crimson

Simple enough lyrics with haunting music. Some might say depressing...

Always dear to me is this lonely hill I keep coming to
and this hedge and all its details,
hiding from me the ultimate horizon.
Yet crouched and staring, endless
is the space beyond, that humanless
emptiness, and that depth of stillness,
my thoughts drift; not far
the heart, the terror. Then, the wind speaks,
swaying the trees, and the
infinite silence and these rustling leaves,
I compare the two: I remember the eternal,
the seasons of death, the present,
the living, the sound of it. In this,
immensity, my thoughts start to drown:
and I drift off sweetly into this sea of thoughts.

"l'infinito" of Leopardi — boethius

I love this. It reminds me of some other translated piece I read a few years ago.
Might even have talked about it on another forum. Unfortunately I am very bad at keeping records and can't for the life of me remember who or what. Most frustrating.

'The wind speaks, swaying the trees'
Also reminds me of a song suggested by some phil forum friend...again I can't remember.
The moral of the story...

More of a Cynic as of late. It oscillates, a lot between the two. And, I have interacted with Massimo, on Facebook, good guy. Likes ducks a lot for some reason. — Wallows

Well, not a lot of people know that :gasp:
I'm not on Facebook, do you think he would enjoy coming here as a guest speaker ?

Who would you choose to speak about being a Cynic ? Or could both be a topic for Massimo...
I've started a new thread:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/7047/arguing-with-guests-your-choice

How about a brief encounter with Massimo Pigliucci ?

According to @Wallows Massimo likes ducks, a lot.
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/6979/i-want-to-learn-but-its-so-difficult-as-it-is

So, ducks. Do they have to be stoical, cynical or tasty ?

https://philosophynow.org/issues/134/How_To_Be_A_Stoic_by_Massimo_Pigliucci

No need to thank Wallows. It was only natural. — Wallows

A Wallows might not need thanks but an Amity needs to send them; sealed with a K.I.S.S. :wink:

@boethius gave some good advice, including this:

There's also a philosophy magazine (philosophynow.org) that provides short articles on philosophy subjects. — boethius

Here's an example:

https://philosophynow.org/issues/134/How_To_Be_A_Stoic_by_Massimo_Pigliucci

Wallows has been asking for and receiving advice for as long as. He has been around long enough to know and predict all the likely replies.

You made some excellent points and suggestions but look at the response.
It's an addictive pattern.
— Amity

1. Even if you are right, what is it to me? what is it to you?
2. If the content is not appropriate, it is a question for the moderators, and I need not trouble myself.
3. Perhaps some lessons take decades to learn.
4. Perhaps others have similar questions and may benefit in any case. — boethius

1. What is it to me ? Initially I spent time and effort engaging with Wallows because I care and because I want to help. Like many others here. The thread that sticks in my mind, and where I realised the addictive pattern :
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/5018/musings-of-a-failed-stoic
There are more. Sometimes I re-engage; but always with the tired feeling that nothing much will change.
But that's just me.
As to what it might be for you, that's for you to decide.

2. The mods do a fantastic job. Previously there have been attempts to slow down any compulsive element by restricting amount of threads started.

3. Perhaps. But I am not sure this is about learning lessons. We can have knowledge about what might be a good path to walk but still lack the will or desire to follow it, for various reasons.

4. Yes. Others ( including myself ) can learn from either responding or by listening. That is one of the reasons I participate here. I have thanked Wallows before for provoking thought and interest.

If indeed philosophy is an addiction here, how are we to intervene? If philosophy has failed, as you suggest is the case, perhaps we must widen our perspective, seek in poetry some help for this condition that seems persist indefinitely: — boethius

I wasn't talking about philosophy being an addiction.
However, there are those who are, and admit to being, addicted to the forum. It's a bit like a soap opera.
Fascinating characters and story lines. No need to intervene. However, for some it can get out of hand and they either decide to take a break or provoke the mods into taking action.

I am not suggesting that philosophy has failed. Philosophy has as wide or narrow a perspective as one wishes. And that includes poetry. And much else besides.

I think it a pity that a continuing sense of failure in overcoming difficulties can be so overwhelming.
It can stifle creativity and drive.
It's kind of a vicious circle.

Thanks for answering all my questions. Best wishes :up:

Yes, indeed. Real Hard Work. @fdrake must have felt a real sense of achievement.
Hope y'all had a sparkling party :party:
Many Congrats to All the Team and Long May The Forum Prosper :sparkle:

Gonzo - as in gonzo journalism.

...guest speakers. Need to get in gear and get something done about all that. — Baden

Would it help to have people suggest who they would like to listen to ?
If you couldn't get hold of a guest speaker who would wish to be here, then how about discussing a previous online interview ?

For example, I am reading 'So You've Been Publicly Shamed' by Jon Ronson *
I know little of him, apart from another book of his: 'The Psychopath Test'.

However, it seems he has a strong online presence:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Ronson
https://www.c-span.org/video/?325619-1/depth-jon-ronson

* He examines how the internet can gang up on individuals e.g. using Twitter to shame and victimise, whether one is deserving of it, or not. How one image, joke, thoughtless comment can ruin lives.
Ronson does this via case studies - following and interviewing people who have created outrage.
There is a chapter about his own experience of being publicly shamed.

I wonder what he makes of the current Brexit crisis, the image of the Lying Tory, who apparently feels no shame but does make apologies e.g. Grenfell:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/nov/05/too-late-rees-mogg-faces-furious-backlash-over-grenfell-apology-stormzy

There can be a very frustrating dynamic, for both people, when the posting styles mismatch. A long form commenter might get frustrated that the counterpoints are irrelevant, a short form commenter might get frustrated that they have to read so much irrelevant waffle. — fdrake

Posting styles aren't always fixed to either extreme.
The same person can use a different voice or text depending on interest and context.
Frustration can arise if there is a lack of attention. There can be various reasons for this; some complain of having attention deficit disorder. Or they are slow readers.
So, if we want to catch and hold some participants we can K.I.S.S.

I like one of your favourite quotations:
'Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity)' - Grice

In some cases, short pieces work well and can more easily be understood - other times 'Keeping It Short and Simple' is not so Sweet. Some dismiss such as cryptic one-liners. However, a questioning mind might relish the challenge.
We can all learn when someone points out e.g. our tendency to waffle or to make excessive use of quotes. Paraphrasing is another skill I need to develop...

Mismatch is fine. It would be helluva boring if we were all the same, all of the time.
However, a bit of tolerance wouldn't go amiss. Neither would a bit of patience and practice at careful, quality thinking, listening and writing.

This conversation has been a great exercise in collaboration, so far...

How one should go about doing philosophy in general is a different topic. Maybe write an article on it. I'll give you three lines. — Baden

One line will do.
Look at how words are being used, and find a way to make them coherent. — Banno

Just found the Who and What of a formal debate :wink:
Now, the next question: How ?

That is one thing I miss, the 1. formal structured debates and 2. commentary discussions. Along with the 3. short story competition and 4. guest speakers. Need to get in gear and get something done about all that. — Baden

Right. So, if you managed to write an article in an afternoon this should be easy-peasy.
Just make it so :cool:

1. I had a look at the Debate section. There's probably a reason why formal debate doesn't work so well online. However, it would hold a fascination - depending on the who and what.
2. What is a 'commentary discussion' ?
3. I remember talking about that before - about a year ago ?
4. Who did you have as a guest speaker ? How did that work - like an interview ?

It could do with a little more exemplification here and there, but I feel like it was an afternoon well-spent anyhow. — Baden

I have read it again. This time I paid more attention to the examples you provided regarding Objections to Evidence and Reasoning. From the latter:

Logical Objections
Logical objections focus on the form of reasoning, which may include logical structure and implications either within a single reason (intra-consistency) or across several reasons (inter-consistency). Logical fallacies, of which there are many (a few of the more common ones are listed here) are typical objections in this sphere. — Baden

This included a link which I missed first time round; it leads to an excellent source:
https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-know/

A list of 15 logical informal fallacies well presented with relevant examples, including vids and a short quiz to check understanding.

I intend to better know and develop my skills in spotting flawed reasoning and rhetorical errors. Even more important to me than winning an online argument is to get my thoughts out there for examination and exploration. That takes dialogue... a bit of chat...all kinds of everything. Perhaps even effective reading, reflecting and writing ?

I tend to laziness...
The thought of writing an article in an afternoon...it would take me months, even if.
However, I guess if you've already done the research and have the sources and information ready, then it's a walk in the park.

Thanks again for all hard work :smile:

I'll talk to jrob about getting the article section of the site active again. — Baden

Articles, Essays or Reviews.
That would be good.
A Book Review article might act as a complement to the 'Reading Groups' section.
Then again...

I especially like the section on warrant, the use in this context which I'd not come across before. — StreetlightX

Yes. I hadn't heard of this before and have had to read it a few times. Still not completely sure of it.

Establish your 'enemy' early (even an idealized one, if there isn't an existing one) — StreetlightX

Yes. You can be your own best 'enemy'.

If we can establish the motivations for why this claim matters, it becomes a lot easier to follow lines of argumentation. — StreetlightX

Yes. Also, question motivations in choice of material. There can be an inclination to push own agenda by omitting contrary evidence.

https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/process/revisingargument/
A downloadable handout with 8 specific strategies for revising an argument. No.6 might be the most challenging: Look for dissonance.

A key to strengthening a paper through considering dissonance is to look critically—really critically—at your draft. Read through your paper with an eye towards content, assertions, or logical leaps that you feel uncertain about, that make you squirm a little bit, or that just don’t line up as nicely as you’d like. Some possible sources of dissonance might include:

• logical steps that are missing
• questions a skeptical reader might raise that are left unanswered
• examples that don’t actually connect to what you’re arguing
• pieces of evidence that contradict each other
• sources you read but aren’t mentioning because they disagree with you.

Thanks for that excellent read. My fuller response there :smile: