Ryan W. Davis – författare

She's much more than a showgirl. Taylor Swift has long been celebrated as a masterful storyteller, but her songwriting is also full of deep philosophical reflection. Hidden beneath the gleaming surfaces of cliffside pools and the shattered edges of mirror balls are philosophical insights for the ages. It's easy to get lost in the labyrinth of her lyrics, but our philosophical guides are here to take you by the hand and lead you through the secret philosophical gardens in Swift's mind. It's worth it. As she tells us, she's only cryptic and Machiavellian because she cares. The Philosophy of Taylor Swift gathers twenty-two original essays that illuminate the philosophical richness of Swift's catalogue. Written by philosophers with various areas of expertise--including ethics, political philosophy, epistemology, the philosophy of religion, and the philosophy of science--and bringing to bear the passion of a fan for an obsessive deep-dive into Swift's music and lyrics, this book of friendly but rigorous essays treats Swift not merely as a pop icon but as a serious intellectual interlocutor. Contributors use philosophy's unique toolkit to analyze her songwriting, showing that she can play ball with Aristotle and that her words are worth much more than meets the cynical eye. For philosophers, the volume offers a methodologically innovative approach to popular culture, demonstrating how an artist's lyrics can sustain substantive philosophical inquiry. For Swifties, it offers new lenses through which to understand the themes that animate Swift's music: accountability and forgiveness, ambition and vulnerability, moral injury and revenge, love in its many registers, and the search for meaning in a complicated world.The result is a vibrant, interdisciplinary exploration of one of the most distinctive and thought-provoking voices of the twenty-first century.

She's much more than a showgirl. Taylor Swift has long been celebrated as a masterful storyteller, but her songwriting is also full of deep philosophical reflection. Hidden beneath the gleaming surfaces of cliffside pools and the shattered edges of mirror balls are philosophical insights for the ages. It's easy to get lost in the labyrinth of her lyrics, but our philosophical guides are here to take you by the hand and lead you through the secret philosophical gardens in Swift's mind. It's worth it. As she tells us, she's only cryptic and Machiavellian because she cares. The Philosophy of Taylor Swift gathers twenty-two original essays that illuminate the philosophical richness of Swift's catalogue. Written by philosophers with various areas of expertise--including ethics, political philosophy, epistemology, the philosophy of religion, and the philosophy of science--and bringing to bear the passion of a fan for an obsessive deep-dive into Swift's music and lyrics, this book of friendly but rigorous essays treats Swift not merely as a pop icon but as a serious intellectual interlocutor. Contributors use philosophy's unique toolkit to analyze her songwriting, showing that she can play ball with Aristotle and that her words are worth much more than meets the cynical eye. For philosophers, the volume offers a methodologically innovative approach to popular culture, demonstrating how an artist's lyrics can sustain substantive philosophical inquiry. For Swifties, it offers new lenses through which to understand the themes that animate Swift's music: accountability and forgiveness, ambition and vulnerability, moral injury and revenge, love in its many registers, and the search for meaning in a complicated world.The result is a vibrant, interdisciplinary exploration of one of the most distinctive and thought-provoking voices of the twenty-first century.

Why It’s OK to Own a Gun explores the right to self-defense, but also looks beyond it to what gun ownership fundamentally means in American life. Guns can provide a source of meaning that doesn’t depend on how much money you have or how important your job is. Guns can offer a sense of shared identity that’s not hung up on intellectual credentials or ideological orthodoxy. For many responsible gun owners, owning a gun is a way of positively reclaiming one’s own agency in the world.It’s true that guns matter to only a minority of Americans, but the same could be said for many important political liberties. Like freedom of religion and freedom of expression, guns should be on the list of basic rights. In fact, they are: as some in America’s founding generation anticipated, gun rights have offered a bulwark for republican freedom. Because there is nothing morally wrong with any of these values, owning a gun is OK.Key Features:Discusses the grounds of the political rights of gun ownershipConnects the debate over guns with the sociology of gun ownershipDescribes genuinely worthwhile features of a way of life that’s unfamiliar to many readersConsiders empirical and normative aspects of the gun debateThinks about individual rights in the context of state power

Why It’s OK to Own a Gun explores the right to self-defense, but also looks beyond it to what gun ownership fundamentally means in American life. Guns can provide a source of meaning that doesn’t depend on how much money you have or how important your job is. Guns can offer a sense of shared identity that’s not hung up on intellectual credentials or ideological orthodoxy. For many responsible gun owners, owning a gun is a way of positively reclaiming one’s own agency in the world.It’s true that guns matter to only a minority of Americans, but the same could be said for many important political liberties. Like freedom of religion and freedom of expression, guns should be on the list of basic rights. In fact, they are: as some in America’s founding generation anticipated, gun rights have offered a bulwark for republican freedom. Because there is nothing morally wrong with any of these values, owning a gun is OK.Key Features:Discusses the grounds of the political rights of gun ownershipConnects the debate over guns with the sociology of gun ownershipDescribes genuinely worthwhile features of a way of life that’s unfamiliar to many readersConsiders empirical and normative aspects of the gun debateThinks about individual rights in the context of state power

Why It’s OK to Own a Gun explores the right to self-defense, but also looks beyond it to what gun ownership fundamentally means in American life. Guns can provide a source of meaning that doesn’t depend on how much money you have or how important your job is. Guns can offer a sense of shared identity that’s not hung up on intellectual credentials or ideological orthodoxy. For many responsible gun owners, owning a gun is a way of positively reclaiming one’s own agency in the world.

It’s true that guns matter to only a minority of Americans, but the same could be said for many important political liberties. Like freedom of religion and freedom of expression, guns should be on the list of basic rights. In fact, they are: as some in America’s founding generation anticipated, gun rights have offered a bulwark for republican freedom. Because there is nothing morally wrong with any of these values, owning a gun is OK.

Key Features:

Discusses the grounds of the political rights of gun ownership Connects the debate over guns with the sociology of gun ownership Describes genuinely worthwhile features of a way of life that’s unfamiliar to many readers Considers empirical and normative aspects of the gun debate Thinks about individual rights in the context of state power

Why It’s OK to Own a Gun explores the right to self-defense, but also looks beyond it to what gun ownership fundamentally means in American life. Guns can provide a source of meaning that doesn’t depend on how much money you have or how important your job is. Guns can offer a sense of shared identity that’s not hung up on intellectual credentials or ideological orthodoxy. For many responsible gun owners, owning a gun is a way of positively reclaiming one’s own agency in the world.

It’s true that guns matter to only a minority of Americans, but the same could be said for many important political liberties. Like freedom of religion and freedom of expression, guns should be on the list of basic rights. In fact, they are: as some in America’s founding generation anticipated, gun rights have offered a bulwark for republican freedom. Because there is nothing morally wrong with any of these values, owning a gun is OK.

Key Features:

Discusses the grounds of the political rights of gun ownership Connects the debate over guns with the sociology of gun ownership Describes genuinely worthwhile features of a way of life that’s unfamiliar to many readers Considers empirical and normative aspects of the gun debate Thinks about individual rights in the context of state power

Effective Altruism is a movement and a philosophy that has reinvigorated the debate about the nature of beneficence. At base, it is the consistent application of microeconomic principles to beneficent action. The movement has exposed that many forms of giving do little good (or do active harm), but others do tremendous good.Questioning Beneficence uses Effective Altruism as a launch pad to ask hard questions about beneficence more generally. Must we be Effective Altruists, or are Effective Altruism and the ideas driving the movement a mistake? How much should we give—if anything— and how should we give it? What are the respective roles of different kinds of institutions? Is charity anti-democratic and do billionaire philanthropists have too much power? Is Effective Altruism just utilitarianism in disguise?Questioning Beneficence is written by four philosophers, each with distinct points of view. It introduces a new standard for debating ideas in philosophy as each author poses and answers three questions and each of his three co-authors responds to those questions in turn. Finally, the first author replies to his co-authors’ responses. Throughout the book, there is a spirit of curiosity, intellectual risk taking, and truth-seeking, rather than point-scoring and one-upmanship. This book demonstrates what open-minded, real dialogue on an important issue can be at its very best.Key Features:Introduces a new roundtable format for philosophical debates: each of four authors takes the lead in constructing and answering three questions, each co-author then responds, and the first author then replies to the others’ responses.Explores salient philosophical questions raised by beneficence, likeCan philanthropy be undemocratic?Why are people so bad at charity and what can we do about it?How important is beneficence compared to other values?Can Effective Altruism be part of a meaningful moral life? Consistently written in a clear and engaging style, suitable for both undergraduate students and curious general readers

Effective Altruism is a movement and a philosophy that has reinvigorated the debate about the nature of beneficence. At base, it is the consistent application of microeconomic principles to beneficent action. The movement has exposed that many forms of giving do little good (or do active harm), but others do tremendous good.Questioning Beneficence uses Effective Altruism as a launch pad to ask hard questions about beneficence more generally. Must we be Effective Altruists, or are Effective Altruism and the ideas driving the movement a mistake? How much should we give—if anything— and how should we give it? What are the respective roles of different kinds of institutions? Is charity anti-democratic and do billionaire philanthropists have too much power? Is Effective Altruism just utilitarianism in disguise?Questioning Beneficence is written by four philosophers, each with distinct points of view. It introduces a new standard for debating ideas in philosophy as each author poses and answers three questions and each of his three co-authors responds to those questions in turn. Finally, the first author replies to his co-authors’ responses. Throughout the book, there is a spirit of curiosity, intellectual risk taking, and truth-seeking, rather than point-scoring and one-upmanship. This book demonstrates what open-minded, real dialogue on an important issue can be at its very best.Key Features:Introduces a new roundtable format for philosophical debates: each of four authors takes the lead in constructing and answering three questions, each co-author then responds, and the first author then replies to the others’ responses.Explores salient philosophical questions raised by beneficence, likeCan philanthropy be undemocratic?Why are people so bad at charity and what can we do about it?How important is beneficence compared to other values?Can Effective Altruism be part of a meaningful moral life? Consistently written in a clear and engaging style, suitable for both undergraduate students and curious general readers

Effective Altruism is a movement and a philosophy that has reinvigorated the debate about the nature of beneficence. At base, it is the consistent application of microeconomic principles to beneficent action. The movement has exposed that many forms of giving do little good (or do active harm), but others do tremendous good.

Questioning Beneficence uses Effective Altruism as a launch pad to ask hard questions about beneficence more generally. Must we be Effective Altruists, or are Effective Altruism and the ideas driving the movement a mistake? How much should we give—if anything— and how should we give it? What are the respective roles of different kinds of institutions? Is charity anti-democratic and do billionaire philanthropists have too much power? Is Effective Altruism just utilitarianism in disguise?

Questioning Beneficence is written by four philosophers, each with distinct points of view. It introduces a new standard for debating ideas in philosophy as each author poses and answers three questions and each of his three co-authors responds to those questions in turn. Finally, the first author replies to his co-authors’ responses. Throughout the book, there is a spirit of curiosity, intellectual risk taking, and truth-seeking, rather than point-scoring and one-upmanship. This book demonstrates what open-minded, real dialogue on an important issue can be at its very best.

Key Features:

Introduces a new roundtable format for philosophical debates: each of four authors takes the lead in constructing and answering three questions, each co-author then responds, and the first author then replies to the others’ responses. Explores salient philosophical questions raised by beneficence, like Can philanthropy be undemocratic? Why are people so bad at charity and what can we do about it? How important is beneficence compared to other values? Can Effective Altruism be part of a meaningful moral life? Consistently written in a clear and engaging style, suitable for both undergraduate students and curious general readers