2

I have a couple of areas that Id putting a more considered lens to might be of value. I thought they may be applicable to Philosophy SE but based on the description and the Q&A I've seen I'm not quite sure so would like to get that clarified.

For example below are some I've areas I've thought of asking about.

  • Why is it a problem for a mortgage broker to receive a commission but for a supermarket, there is no question about them taking a margin, what's the difference? How would I consider this? This comes from a recent royal commission into Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry in Australi.

  • Questions about offence and being offended and whose problem are it with the intent on looking at ways to understand who should change.

  • 1
    The first question is borderline, it is an example of an applied ethics question which could be written so as to focus on that aspect of it as compared to getting bogged down in the business studies details. The second one sounds like it will almost assuredly be closed for other being subjective ("who should change" is not within the scope of what this site is about), or for not being a question about philosophy. Offense and being offended are sociology/psychology questions in the same way that "what are the ultimate constituents of matter" looks philosophical and once was but is now physics. – Not_Here Mar 3 at 23:58
  • That is to say, "What are the ultimate constituents of matter?" is not a question on topic here, it's one for physics.se. A question about offense and being offended and what should change is not a question about philosophy and is not appropriate here, it's a question for psychologists and sociologists. – Not_Here Mar 4 at 0:00

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .