Keith Burgess-Jackson, J.D., Ph.D.

Here are highlights from Stage 7 of Paris-Nice.

While it should be obvious to us all, I would like to thank the Tribune Editorial Board for reminding its readers that “Russia is an adversary not only with nuclear power but also with a view of the world antithetical to America’s.” U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia interfered in our last election and will do so again. To punish Russia, the U.S. House voted 419-3 and the U.S. Senate 98-2 to enact increased sanctions on our adversary.

Yet, our “America First” president has refused to implement these sanctions. And now Russian President Vladimir Putin has boasted to the world that his country possesses nuclear weapons capable of evading our defense systems and striking the U.S. mainland. When it comes to Russia, what is President Donald Trump doing to protect the American people? Nothing. The question is why. I believe we will soon find out when special counsel Robert Mueller concludes his investigation.

— Greg Klaiber, Evanston

Note from KBJ: If Hillary Clinton had won the election, nobody—including Greg Klaiber and the idiots at CNN—would be talking about Russia.

In the first hours after hearing that North Korea’s leader wanted to meet with me to talk denuclearization and that missile launches will end, the press was startled & amazed.They couldn’t believe it. But by the following morning the news became FAKE.They said so what, who cares!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 10, 2018

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

Now, as a final task we must devote ourselves to answering the question that is sure to be asked: What is the use of Philosophy? To answer the question properly would obviously require a philosophical criticism of the conception of use, an examination of the assumption at the back of our minds when we employ it. Do we mean, How will Philosophy help us to make a living? or how will it help us to make ourselves, and perhaps others, more materially comfortable? Or what? But such an examination cannot be undertaken here. We must content ourselves with trying to suggest what Philosophy may do, what effect it may have on us: and leave it to each one to decide for himself of what use be considers that to be.

I think for most of us the question has the implication, 'What will the study of Philosophy enable us to do besides studying Philosophy?' And for the person who really takes up such study because it interests him, the question is largely irrelevant. He examines his assumptions just because he wants to get clear about them. He wants to know what they mean, and whether they are well-founded. And that for him is sufficient reason for spending time in examining them. For those who believe that knowledge is in itself one of the highest goods, and that philosophical knowledge is one of the highest forms of knowledge, the study needs no further justification. But it can probably be shown that it has beyond this, certain results which are of the highest value.

(G. C. Field, What Is Philosophy? A Public Lecture Delivered at the University of Liverpool [Liverpool: The University Press, 1920], 26)

Here.

Here.

Here are highlights from Stage 6 of Paris-Nice.