Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Philosophy

WikiProject Philosophy was featured in a WikiProject Report in the Signpost on 25 July 2011.

This page was nominated for deletion on 21 January 2013. The result of the discussion was Withdrawn by nominator.

Archives

Index 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20
21, 22, 23, 24

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be auto-archived by .

Good article reassessment for Embodied cognition

Embodied cognition has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 23:52, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Edward Said

Edward Said has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:28, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article on Paul Seligman

Would there be any interest to create an article about Paul Seligman?

I am struggling to find sources when it comes to biographies, and there definitely are enough for his works The Apeiron of Anaximander and Being and Not-Being: An introduction to Plato's Sophist.

Anyone would be willing to aid? Thanks much Boyosoap (talk) 18:53, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dual loyalty (ethics)

Please add reliable sources. Bearian (talk) 02:15, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Im doing a bit of a search, this article does not seem to be that heavily developed. I found an acrticle about Dual Loyalty in Medical Ethicsand in reference to jurisprudence, also in a medical context and in health care treatment for prisoners, there also was a bill introduced in the 119th Congress called the Dual Loyalty Disclosure Act there are some references to the idea from the American Jewish Committee as part of their glossary of hateful terms I haven't found much in general on the idea of dual loyalty to even really credit the concept enough for an article to exist on it. ErrorTheory (talk) 03:59, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restructuring Moral Nihilism

I was reading a bit of the articles on Moral Nihilism, metaethics, and non-cognitivism. One question I have is whether or not it would be smart to group Non-cognitivism with Moral Nihilism, as kind an alternative to error theory. Further, I think that the article on Non-Cognitivism should have the frege-geech reference in it, since the problem it poses may be broader than to just Expressivism, and can apply to other versions of Non-cognitivism. In Moral Nihilism there is reference to the "so-what" problem posed to theories like moral error theory, but I think it could be developed, posing the now-what problem, the criticisms of the problem, as well as the potential solutions/reactions to it, such as moral conservationism, moral abolitionism, moral substitutionism, and fictionalism (note moral fictionalism has a reference at the end of the article on the broader fictionalism (maybe its reference there could be expanded as well). Also note that the frege-geach problem is referenced by articles on both Quasi-Realism and Expressivism. Searches for the Frege-Geach problem refer to both, but clicking on the it from either Frege's page or Geach's page each link to its reference in Expressivism. ErrorTheory (talk) 03:12, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest being WP:BOLD and making any changes you think make sense, disagreements can be discussed as they arise on the talk page. I wasn't sure what changes you were suggesting with your first point, sorry, although any changes should be guided by how high-quality reliable sources treat the relationship between moral nihilism and noncognitivism. I agree Frege-Geach is relevant to noncognitivism broadly so worth including in that article (note that it is already being discussed under the name "embedding problem", plenty of room for expansion though).

One consideration on the suggested changes to moral nihilism: make sure that the page does not become overly-detailed, it should always be first and foremost an article summarising moral nihilism at a high level, as accessible and concise as possible. If there is lots of info on all these topics, new pages can always be created focusing specifically on them. Broader overviews (like textbooks, specialist encyclopedia articles) are always a good guide for how much space to give to different topics.

These are just my opinions though, would be interested what other editors here think. Shapeyness (talk) 00:26, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FAC of Aesthetics

The article Aesthetics is currently a candidate for featured article status. Reviews and other feedback are appreciated at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Aesthetics/archive1. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:57, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A well written article. Goes fast in a good way. I noticed you cite Wolterstorff but do not mention his own contribution to aesthetics (particularly in music) in the article. The same could be said of Noel Carroll. Also, nothing on the paradox of fiction? Cake (talk) 17:47, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MisterCake and thanks for your feedback! I found a way to mention Noel Carroll and the paradox of fiction. Wolterstorff could also be included but he gets less attention from the overview sources that I'm aware of. There are other cases where philosophers are cited but not mentioned, but it's not feasible to mention all of them if we want to keep the article concise. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:15, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see. The paradox of fiction especially. Theories of make believe influence thinkers in fields outside art too (mathematical fictionalism for instance). While I understand, I guess I am team thorough rather than team concise. Wolterstorff and Scruton are two I would mention. I put Guyer's high praise for Scruton on the aesthetic section of the analytic philosophy page. You can also see there that at least to me Wolterstorff is much more clearly on team "social theory" than Goodman. But that is probably why I need another editor, as I respect Guyer and you a good deal. Cake (talk) 19:03, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These decisions are not easy and may depend on context. For example, both The Routledge Companion to Aesthetics and the Historical Dictionary of Aesthetics have very little on Wolterstorff. However, they seek to cover aesthetics at large. Works focusing on contemporary aesthetics may give more weight to Wolterstorff's views. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think I would argue the reason Wolterstorff and Scruton are sources for the article is because they are prominent in the field, rather than mere historians or commentators. You are right he isn't so prominent that the Stanford Encyclopedia has a "Wolterstorff's aesthetics" page like it does for Goodman (which reads to me more like Quine than a 'social construct' guy like the article says, but what do I know). It does have a philosophy of music article with two sources from Wolterstorff. Cake (talk) 17:36, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterCake: I added short sentences on Wolterstorff and Scruton. By the way, would you be interested in writing a few comments at the FA review page? The nomination hasn't attracked enough attention yet. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development

Lawrence Kohlberg's stages of moral development has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Analytic philosophy

As others have noted on the talk page, the article was a mess. It is a work in progress, but I think I put some amount of work into it, such that now I hope a decent article is taking shape. I am not an expert in anything and so hardly an expert at everything. Any help is appreciated. Cake (talk) 04:19, 24 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction: Meet Petunia - spirituality and social change

Greetings. My contribution(s) to this Wikipedia team effort is to work with individuals who are keen to see and support new advances and insights into human well-being. If this is you, please join me in strengthening a recently submitted for review article about spirituality and social change. (I hope this is an ok request. I’m a new editor.) From my review of Wiki Projects, I would like to especially invite those from the following projects: Philosophy, Religion, Education, Psychology, Sociology and Physics-Metaphysics/Cosmology.

The help I need now is to get a strong article framework published that can be built out by future contributors across fields and disciplines. My commitment to this transdisciplinary focus is to keep putting forth material until we achieve a stable article.

If you have the passion, energy and imagination to build-out a fantastic, comprehensive social psychology theory that reformulates/reforms the phenomenon known as Maslow’s theory of self-transcendence and peak-experience. This is the place for you.

Please know that I understand that this possibly transdisciplinary effort is not a Wiki Project. Rather, it is an invitation to check out the Article under review and have fun! Your experience and expertise in your fields will be a great contribution to what I believe more likely than not is a profound addition to the fields of social psychology. I can not do this alone. Your comments, feedback, critiques, and strategies, etc. are welcomed. Thank you for your consideration. Excelsior! Petuniabaa (talk) 17:52, 29 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have a gross misunderstanding as to the purpose of Wikipedia. I suggest you take the time to correct this, starting by reading Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, with particular attention to the sections entitled 'Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought' and 'Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion'. If you want to 'support new advances and insights into human well-being' you will have to do so elsewhere, since Wikipedia is a tertiary source, only covering topics which can be shown to meet our notability criteria, which is entirely dependant on there being in-depth coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. Accordingly, even if your draft (Draft:Clark Unitive Effect theory I presume) wasn't entirely unencyclopaedic in tone, and giving every impression of being written by an inferior imitation of ChatGPT, if it isn't an attempt at satire, it would still be rejected. AndyTheGrump (talk) 11:10, 2 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

feedback and article reassessment request - Contractualism

Hello! I’ve expanded the Contractualism page. It originally had only about 2,000 bytes and just one short paragraph as most of the previous content had been deleted. I added new sections, structure, and content. This is my very first contribution to Wikipedia, and it’s part of my Wiki Education assignment for my course (Psych 220A). I’d really appreciate any feedback on how to make the article better, as well as a reassessment of its current rating.

Thank you! Ztahmasebi (talk) 01:35, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about WikiProject banner templates

For WikiProjects that participate in rating articles, the banners for talk pages usually say something like:

"This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale."

There is a proposal to change the default wording on the banners to say "priority" instead of "importance". This could affect the template for your group. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Proposal to update wording on WikiProject banners. Stefen 𝕋ower ^{Huddle • Handiwerk} 19:48, 6 December 2025 (UTC) (on behalf of the WikiProject Council)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Jean le Rond d'Alembert#Requested move 29 November 2025

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Jean le Rond d'Alembert#Requested move 29 November 2025 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. TarnishedPath^talk 02:19, 7 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello,
Please note that Judgement, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
_{Delivered by — MusikBot ^talk 00:05, 8 December 2025 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team}[reply]