Mark Rowlands's Blog, page 4
November 20, 2012
The Dark Side of Nikeplus
As the previous post makes evident, I'm unlikely to complain if Nikeplus throw the odd world record my way, comically implausible though it may be. However, I take a much dimmer view of any attempt to deny me hard won miles. Like, for example, the perfectly good ten miles that I ran the Sunday before last which, though acknowledged by the Nikeplus website, has not been added to my total miles run. Give me my miles you b*******s!
November 2, 2012
New World Record
Either Nikeplus, my ipod, or both were having technical problems a few days ago ... or, I broke Hicham El Gerrouj's world mile record. Now, I know some might regard with scepticism the idea that an old and talentless runner who, previously. has never even got anywhere near a five minute mile should suddenly be able to run sub four - especially when running chained to a dog who insists on stopping to mark his territory every few hundred yards. Nevertheless, whenever I log into Nikeplus these days, there it is on the screen in front of me. Proof in pixels. Think I'll whack it on the cv.
October 24, 2012
The Kindness of Beasts
Here is a link to an article of mine that came out today in Aeon Magazine - the new digital magazine of ideas and culture.
October 17, 2012
Can Animals Be Moral?
My latest book - Can Animals Be Moral? (Oxford University Press) - is apparently out and about. Here it is:
And the blurb from the OUP website:
Description
From eye-witness accounts of elephants apparently mourning the death of family members to an experiment that showed that hungry rhesus monkeys would not take food if doing so gave another monkey an electric shock, there is much evidence of animals displaying what seem to be moral feelings. But despite such suggestive evidence, philosophers steadfastly deny that animals can act morally, and for reasons that virtually everyone has found convincing.
In Can Animals be Moral?, philosopher Mark Rowlands examines the reasoning of philosophers and scientists on this question--ranging from Aristotle and Kant to Hume and Darwin--and reveals that their arguments fall far short of compelling. The basic argument against moral behavior in animals is that humans have capabilities that animals lack. We can reflect on our motivations, formulate abstract principles that allow that allow us to judge right from wrong. For an actor to be moral, he or she must be able scrutinize their motivations and actions. No animal can do these things--no animal is moral. Rowland naturally agrees that humans possess a moral consciousness that no animal can rival, but he argues that it is not necessary for an individual to have the ability to reflect on his or her motives to be moral. Animals can't do all that we can do, but they can act on the basis of some moral reasons--basic moral reasons involving concern for others. And when they do this, they are doing just what we do when we act on the basis of these reasons: They are acting morally.
Features
This book defends a very controversial thesis: animals can act morally.
Reviews
"Mark Rowlands is one of the rarest creatures today: a genuine intellectual, a fearless interrogator, and a frighteningly capable person who can who can turn his attention to practically any subject and provide insightful commentary.... Can Animals Be Moral? is a brilliant book, superbly written with wit and panache--it will be remembered as a classic."--Andrew Linzey, Director, Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics
"In his well-argued book that blends philosophical inquiry with empirical data, Mark Rowlands argues that animals can and sometimes do act for moral reasons. I couldn't agree more. People with varying interests will find this book to be a welcomed addition to their required reading list. Despite having been long interested in the moral lives of animals, I learned a lot from this wide-ranging book."--Marc Bekoff, University of Colorado, Boulder, author (with Jessica Pierce) of Wild Justice: The Moral Lives of Animals
"Rowlands carves out a space where animals can act for moral reasons without being as self-reflective (or self-congratulatory) as humans sometimes are. With clear-headed thinking, he maps out the terrain where ethics, philosophy of mind, and cognitive ethology meet. This book will be an indispensable to everyone concerned about justifying moral respect for animals."--Colin Allen, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, Indiana University
October 16, 2012
Writing and Madness
A new study here indicates that being an author is, I quote 'specifically associated with increased likelihood of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, unipolar depression, anxiety disorders, substance abuse, and suicide.'
It all makes sense now.
October 8, 2012
J J C Smart 1920-2012
I was deeply saddened to hear of the death, on Saturday, of J J C Smart. It has been a number of years since I last saw Jack but I will remember him, as I am sure will everyone else who knew him, not only as one the architects of contemporary materialism, but also as one of the nicest people in this business. He was an excellent philosopher and a gentlemen.
August 7, 2012
Help The Iberian Wolf
A couple of years ago I was fortunate enough to visit the Centro de Recuperacao do Lobo Iberico, a recovery centre for the Iberian wolf, located about a hour north of Lisbon. (See the blog entry posted 8/7/2010). It is a fantastic place that does wonderful work.
At present the Centre finds itelf in the position of having to buy the land on which it has been located for the last 25 years. Details of the campaign can be found at:
July 15, 2012
Is 'Chinny' a Natural Kind? Reflections on Khan-Garcia
You have to feel a bit sorry for Amir Khan. For years – since Breidis Prescott – he’s been labeled ‘chinny’. Last night’s tribulations against Danny Garcia, however, clearly had little to do with his ‘chin’ as such. Garcia’s decisive punch was to the neck – and almost certainly triggered a vasovagal episode. Nasty little things they are too. They can also be triggered by a punch to the jaw that whips the head around violently – hence ‘chinny’. Strengthening of one’s neck muscles can, to a limited extent, mitigate this sort of episode.
But a straight punch, or an uppercut, to the jaw – would that trigger the same sort of reaction? I don’t know the answer (and if anyone reading this blog does, I would appreciate their letting me know).
The only time I’ve been clearly knocked out cold was in rugby, courtesy of a blow that, subsequent evidence (a relocation of the facial feature in question) suggested, was to my nose. The instrument of my downfall here was not a fist but someone’s head. But there’s no reason to suppose that a punch could not have been as hard. I doubt there was a vasovagal episode involved in this case (but still guessing), and if that is right, then a knockout blow can, as we philosophers put it, clearly be ‘multiply realized’
At issue here is the age old philosophical question: Is ‘chinny’ a natural kind? I suspect not.
July 11, 2012
British Wittgenstein Society
I've just returned from a few very enjoyable days in Hatfield, just north of London. I was at the British Wittgenstein Society's annual conference: 'Wittgenstein, Animal Minds, and Enactivism', where I gave a paper entitled. 'Enactivism, Intentionality and Content'. Also, speaking were Colin Allen, Dorit Bar-On, Ned Block, Peter Carruthers, Dan Hutto, Hans-Johann Glock, Daniel Moyale-Sharrock, and Michael Tomasello. It was good to see my old friend Dan Hutto again, and I am grateful to him and Daniele Moyal-Sharrock for organizing the event.
Incidentally, if any readers of this blog are interested in my more academic writings (papers, conference papers, etc), they can be found at the very useful academia.edu site:
Lennox, RIP
The first I heard of Lennox was, I believe, a few hours after he had been murdered, when an Italian reader of this blog alerted me to his situation.
Lennox was a dog, seized from his home two years ago, even though he had lived a blameless life. He was seized on the grounds that he was a ’Pit Bull type’ dog – a judgment made by dog wardens on the basis of measuring parts of him with a dressmakers tape!
Those, in Belfast City Council, involved in this process – from Lennox’s incarceration to his execution – have made decisions that, at best, can only be describe as stupid and vicious. They should all hang their heads in shame, but of course they won’t – people who make decisions like this rarely do. And this desperately sad and completely avoidable episode highlights, once again, the monstrous nature of Breed Specific Laws.
Mark Rowlands's Blog
- Mark Rowlands's profile
- 149 followers
