The original purpose of this blog was to present pithy caricatures of sprawling philosophical debates. To some extent, that purpose remains.  

Philosophy has shown me that debates can be waged over almost everything, even the seemingly obvious or mundane. Objecting to common sense wisdom is necessarily radically subversive, and it is philosophy's propensity to problematize the everyday -- with a degree of analytic rigor that has to be taken seriously -- which draws me to the discipline. Examples of such debates include problems with the notion of the sanctity of human life, with how team sports express and embody many ideals that otherwise offend liberal societies, with how democracy gives every idiot power over my life, and so on. When I began the blog, my intention was to highlight these kinds of nifty ideas.

I also post stories and poems. I do this for two reasons. First, I am of the mind that these prettier forms of literature can express genuine philosophical ideas, and that we need not always approach authorial intention as some kind of arcane mystery. However, in many of the pieces I've posted, the author's point cannot be unambiguously located, which brings me to the second reason for posting such things: I like pretty poems and stories. 

I am a terrible blogger. I often go months and months without posting a word. But I have stockpiled several years of education worth of ideas, and my workload has recently been reduced, and I am filled with new-found ambition, so hopefully I will publish more frequently. 

Finally, if you have someting to add, please do comment. I find it very exciting when the blog becomes a forum for debate, and I usually respond within a few hours. Comments on this blog are rare, and usually the result of me nagging friends to comment, but interesting debates have emerged in the threads (one was even published in Peter Singer's new book).