A couple of months ago, while promoting her superb TV-movie Temple Grandin on The Late Late Show with Craig Ferguson, star Claire Danes happened to Read the full post.
Apr 2
2010
12:07 PM ET
I want Claire Danes' father-in-law to have his own TV show
- Comments 79
- Add comment
Latest News
- Matthew Fox accuser drops assault claim
- Emma Stone set for an 'iCarly' cameo
- 'Hatfield and McCoys' sets ratings record
- 'Iron Man 3': Hints on the new villain?
- Kathie Lee Gifford: Awkward TV moments
- 'Friends' vet is new 'Whitney' showrunner
- 'Toddlers & Tiaras' star gets TLC spinoff
- 'Devil Wears Prada' sequel in the works
Fear the robot:
http://www.dvrassassin.com/2010/04/open-letter-to-craig-ferguson.html
I have to say, I was unimpressed. Perhaps because I’m a college professor, but a social scientist. His refusal to define morality or right and wrong just left a tautological argument. “People do moral things, but not because they have a principle to tell them what is right or wrong. They just do it.” My college students would skin me alive in an argument if that were all that I gave them!
It’s called intelligent conversation. Somewhat unique on TV these days.
That was quite interesting. Craig was adding in funny bits, but actually seemed to care about what Professor Dancy was saying. It was quite an enlivening discussion.
Hrdwhat, I agree. As someone who has taken masters level courses on moral development (also in the social sciences), I found the conversation to be circular, dizzying, and unproductive. I guess philosophy is not for me. I did love Craig’s ability to keep up and his genuine interest. While I would probably never watch a PBS series with Professor Dancy, I’ll tell you what I would watch. . . an appearance by Professor Dancy on The Big Bang Theory. The banter between he and Dr. Sheldon Cooper would be something to behold. Let the intellectual gymnastics (albeit fictional gymnastics) begin!
This was one of the best conversations that Craig Ferguson has had with a guest. It was informative and made you want to hear more. Craig’s versatility as a host was evident in his fun segment with Robin Williams and then his ability to shift gears with the interview with Professor Dancy. Craig asked the Professor to return and I am really looking forward to another conversation between these two interesting people.
Why there isn’t there a country that models itself on the Socratic method or Game Theory? Airports are a perfect society; we tend to be more polite when we travel because we are crammed into tight places with strangers. We’re more likely to move seats so a family can sit together and we wait patiently in long lines to get through security or buy a Big Mac. It probably helps that travelers are a homogenous group; businessmen, families, soldiers, students and tourists; everyone has a purpose for being there and a place to go. Then we land and cabbies, pickpockets and thiefs are ripping us off. So a perfect world is one without criminals of any kind obviously, which explains why cane-crazy Singapore is so clean, safe and orderly. You can get arrested for spitting your gum onto the sidewalk in Singapore; harsh but the tradoff is perfect safety. John Carpenter had it right; at some point we’ll get sick of crime in all forms and exile every thief and murderer to some remote island.
am I the only one who cringed when they were discussing the morality of “the golfer” as his daughter-in-law is well known for her actions with married co-stars.
I love Craig’s wit and intelliegence, took it very personally when he got married.
Mr. Dancy was FAScinating and I’d love to hear more, know more about Moral Particularism; it is quite intriguing. Kudos to Craig. ( call me!)
To make you all jealous, I am currently studying ethics with Jonathan Dancy, and he is every bit as fabulous, brilliant, and quick-witted as he appeared in this interview. So happy to see philosophy getting attention in this most interesting of places!
I found the interview frustrating. The guest took any valid argument off the table right away. Moral particularism is repackaged relativism and I found it insulting to the intellect to have him frame his argument so narrowly.