Daily Philosophy

Dear friends of Daily Philosophy, When one is teaching philosophy for years or decades, it is easy to get into a lecturing mode that focuses on facts and answers rather than uncertainty and questioning. After all, we’re paid to answer students’ questions. We are the experts, those who are supposed to know things.

Dear friends of Daily Philosophy, As you know, I am always happy to receive submissions not only by academic philosophers, but also by authors who have actual life experiences that are worth analysing philosophically, and who are also able to write about them and to give us a glimpse of a life that is so different from our own. Today I am therefore very happy to bring you an article by David G. Villanueva, who is writing about the effectiveness of our prison systems.

Suppose one day your child says: “I want to become a modern-day Confucius.” -- Would you feel proud or worried? Perhaps the first reaction of many parents would not be to ask what their child wants to research or what they hope to contribute to society. Instead, they would ask very practical questions: How will you make a living? Can philosophy support you? Why not study medicine, law, or technology, fields with more stable futures? Daily Philosophy is a reader-supported publication.

Dear friends of Daily Philosophy, We’re back from the holidays, and things are starting to normalise again. Over the summer, I received a great number of fascinating articles, and I am excited to share them with you over the coming months. One of them is the article below, by John Shand. What I found immediately relatable is the argument that having evidence (usually in the form of some measurable quantity) does not guarantee that one will make good decisions — and the other way round.

He will live badly who knows not how to die well. — Seneca In the United Kingdom there has recently been vigorous debates — sometimes with outrage; sometimes with tears — concerning proposed legislation instituting assisted dying. The debate is soon to be resurrected (autumn 2026); hence, the philosopher Kathleen Stock’s latest work arguing against the legislation is highly relevant.

Dear friends and supporters of Daily Philosophy, Last week we discussed how you can use AI to create good-looking, interactive timelines for the history of philosophy with just one simple prompt. I know that many of you are skeptical of AI, and I am myself in many ways, but I think that using AI to create media that support learning (rather than replacing it) is a good use of the technology.

Maybe every life is equally a series of disappointments, but certainly the academic career is. While still in secondary school, I imagined how great it would be to study at a famous university, to learn all those wonderful thoughts that occupied mankind’s greatest minds, to be steeped in the wisdom and knowledge of the ages. The only thing worth doing turned out to be discussing with one’s friends over a few beers in a pub in the evenings.

Every day we see news about lay-offs due to AI or how this or that job will soon automate. And while both the workers and sceptics are right to decry the cruelty of the transition, this is also a chance for a work reform that past generations could only dream of. The future is now, but are we ready for it? A hundred years ago, the eight-hour workday was supposed to be just a step towards even shorter shifts.

Imagine being asked to make a sacrifice for someone you will never meet. Not merely a stranger living in another country, but a person who does not yet exist and may not be born for another hundred years. Most of us would hesitate. Yet this is precisely what sustainability quietly demands. We are told to consume less, preserve resources, and limit environmental damage for future generations. But why should we? What obligations, if any, do the living owe to the unborn?

Dear friends of Daily Philosophy, I received an email a few days ago from a reader who had suspicions about one of our articles having been written by AI. They had tested the article with an AI detecting program online, which had confirmed that the article had been written by AI. And they expressed their disappointment that DP now publishes AI-written articles. Since I think that this is a very important topic, I started writing a reply right here, in this article you are reading now.