Kellan Head is a Ph.D. pupil at Syracuse University. His pursuits are largely metaethical: Kellan’s analysis primarily examines normativity and the character of worth, particularly within the epistemic realm. He can be taken with theories of well-being.
What is your favourite guide of all time?
Nightwood by Djuna Barnes. It’s a reasonably quick novel revealed in 1936. Its most outstanding characteristic is its superbly florid—however not cloying—prose. For my cash, Barnes’s writing type is just the most effective there’s. Some different High Modernist works can come off as pretentious due to their abstruseness. But whereas Nightwood is likely to be complicated, it’s not alienating. It’s in a position to prolong its attraction past the merely tutorial and manages to be authentically charming.
What additionally resonates with me is the immense tenderness Nightwood is ready to specific, a tenderness I’ve not seen different authors come near efficiently embodying of their work. Barnes’s characters, purportedly primarily based on herself and her real-life acquaintances, are exceptionally vivid, and it’s the sympathy that she has for them which is so partaking. The characters radiate with such unimaginable depth, and whereas studying you may nearly really feel them present as actual, real, emotional beings past and undefined by any context of time, place, or scenario. They’re actual individuals, simply as confused or annoyed or exuberant or love-drunk as we’re. But what stands out most is the truth that Barnes refuses to impart any judgment on them. Whatever flaws a personality may need don’t come again to hang-out them like they’d in some hoary morality story. Like different modernist works, Nightwood tackles varied existential themes, however regardless of its persistently darkish tone it’s in a position to take action with an insightful, even heat, human sensitivity. Totally really helpful.
What are you engaged on proper now?
I’m placing the ultimate touches on a paper that argues in opposition to ethical encroachment in epistemology. Moral encroachment theorists declare that ethical concerns relating to a perception/perception state can encroach upon the epistemic and might straight have an effect on the assumption’s epistemic justificatory standing. I argue that is false and declare that the epistemic and the ethical are in reality separate, distinct normative realms. I level to circumstances by which evidently an agent is sacrificing an epistemic good in favor of an ethical good. If ethical encroachment had been true, brokers couldn’t have interaction in such a sacrifice.
I’m additionally writing a paper that examines alienation issues for judgment subjectivist theories of well-being. Judgment subjectivism says that our doxastic attitudes (judgments) set up our welfare items: x is an effective that positively contributes to our well-being iff now we have the assumption that x is sweet for us. But I’m unconvinced. We can typically discover ourselves holding beliefs that don’t mirror ‘who we really are’ particularly since our beliefs are sometimes on the mercy of no matter our proof occurs to be. In quick: it’s attainable to consider that some x is sweet for us even once we are successfully alienated from x, and nothing alien may truly be good for us (in response to the core tenets of subjectivism).
Ultimately, my dissertation will study the character of epistemic worth. I declare that there are (a minimum of) two distinct sorts of epistemic worth—worth derived from veracity and reality, and one other kind of worth (that also is wholly epistemic) which has to do with coherence and intelligibility. The second form of worth is the one achieved once we expertise the ‘making sense of’ phenomenon once we grasp a physique of information and perceive it.
If you could possibly solely use one condiment for the remainder of your life, which condiment would you choose and why?
Mustard, every kind. But my favourite particularly is affordable, brilliant yellow, plastic-bottle mustard. It’s so piquant and vigorous. Since I used to be a really small individual, my go-to fast snack has been a mustard sandwich—two (or, once I’m feeling formidable, three) items of plain bread caught along with goopy yellow mustard. Amazing.
What excites you about philosophy?
I’m excited by the usual thrilling issues about philosophy: gaining readability of thought, buying extra data, spending time fascinated with essential subjects, and so on. But one factor that I’ve observed doesn’t get talked about typically on this dialog is philosophy’s capability to forge connections between people and communities. There’s one thing profoundly empathetic about holding and dealing with the identical ideas as others, or about (aiming at) understanding them and their subjective experiences. I feel it’s tough to do that once we’re tired of inquiring previous our personal subjective and quick worlds, or once we’re not keen to abide by the calls for of rationality. Philosophy can a minimum of purpose to stretch throughout the crevices that separate us from one another.
And right here once I discuss doing philosophy, I don’t imply doing strictly tutorial philosophy. I simply imply questioning assumptions, partaking in dialogue with different individuals, fostering a love for studying new issues, and holding your individual pondering and reasoning processes to sure requirements.
What’s your poison? (Favorite drink.)
I may wax Dionysian speaking about wine for hours, so as a substitute I’ll simply deal with cocktails. My favourite is the Negroni. An equal measure of simply three elements: gin, Campari, and candy vermouth. What is outstanding concerning the Negroni is that it’s, so far as I’m involved, an ideal instance of an entire that’s larger than the sum of its elements. Somehow, the unforgiving bitterness of Campari can harmonize with the spicy heat of gin, and the candy vermouth provides a cushty dried-fruit base that calms every thing down simply sufficient to make an extremely full and refreshing drink. The stability of the three elements is a fragile one which’s tough to duplicate, so I’m notably impressed by slight variations on the Negroni which might be nonetheless in a position to successfully do the Negroni factor.
Runner-up can be what’s known as a Scotch Violets. This time, 4 elements: reasonably smokey Scotch, a good quantity of crème de violette, honey syrup, and lemon juice. The proportions will differ primarily based on the power of the honey syrup and kind of Scotch used. I extremely suggest this.
This part of the APA Blog is designed to get to know our fellow philosophers a little bit higher. We’re together with profiles of APA members that highlight what captures their curiosity not solely contained in the workplace, but additionally exterior of it. We’d love so that you can be part of it, so please contact us through the interview nomination kind right here to appoint your self or a buddy.