Author Archives: Steven Mazie

Dating Websites for Love-Seeking Philosophy Buffs

Ayn Rand devotees are now finding love connections at, but what is out there for philosophers whose tastes run less libertarian?  We need websites to fill the void.  For starters: (“Maximizing the romantic potential of the least desirable Americans since 1971”)

More ideas here.

Posted in Notices | Leave a comment

Kant vs. drones

An exchange on the Praxis blog at Big Think on how Kant would evaluate the Obama administration’s escalation of drone warfare:

Last week’s post built a case against drones based on the categorical imperative.  Today’s essay argues that the second appendix of Perpetual Peace provides a more apposite evaluative lens.

Posted in Notices | Leave a comment

This Just In: Kant Endorses Obama

Yes, the metaphysician has wrangled a Twitter account from his home in the noumenal realm and is taking sides in today’s election.

Posted in Notices | Leave a comment

Is it Irrational to Vote?

A response at the Economist to Katherine Magnu-Ward’s argument in Reason against the rationality of voting.

Posted in Notices | Leave a comment

New Economist blog post: “How Much Equality Would You Like?”

Behavioral economist Dan Ariely recently argued in the Atlantic that “Americans want to live in a much more equal country (they just don’t realize it).”

A new post in the Economist refutes Ariely’s conclusion by challenging his interpretation of survey data and his understanding of Rawls’s theory of justice: “How Much Equality Would You Like?”

Another post on Big Think expands on the critique: “Do Americans Really Envy Sweden’s Egalitarianism?

— Steven Mazie

Posted in Notices | 1 Comment

Follow-up post at Big Think: “Why Failing the Rationality Quiz Shouldn’t Alarm You”

Recent best-selling books by cognitive psychologists point toward a thesis of human irrationality — a claim that hasn’t greeted with enough critical analysis by political philosophers.

If you took the three-question quiz linked here last week, chances are you answered some items incorrectly. I argue today that the human capacity for reason may be fragile and partial but is not belied by studies in which large percentages of subjects answer a few tricky questions incorrectly.

Public Reason members and readers are invited to contribute their reactions and insights.


Posted in Notices | Leave a comment