How did philosophy contribute to the treatment of irrationality that prevailed in public discourse during the days of the pandemic? Was the crisis a golden opportunity for an era of renewed communism, as Zizek imagined? What was the moral criterion of many Western countries that delayed the implementation of strict protective measures? Populism, capitalism and the various manifestations of utilitarianism, in the first article of the series on issues of philosophical discourse during the global crisis of COVID-19.

Children are bombarded with stupid things. They grow up in a world whose defining characteristic is stupidity. Everything moves fast, rolling on the surface of knowledge with such ease, that the “ice” that separates us from its essence is never cracked.

On the occasion of the cancellation of Woody Allen's book publication by Hachette Publishing, some thoughts on free speech, censorship, and the totalitarianism of morality defenders.

In this second phase of the pandemic, a protocol of small everyday behaviors that we will carefully observe is a huge contribution to keeping us all safe. But if we want to be responsible for our own actions, as moral agents acting in accordance with their duty, then we must do so by choice, not as puppets who behave the way someone else forces them to.

In managing a crisis like the current one, our actions have an impact on a network of relationships that includes us, our close family, our companions and friends, our professional circle, the local community and the state itself. Our responsibility to all of them means obligations, duties and ultimately particular decisions, actions and behavior.

Some thinkers are considering "business ethics" as "oxymoron" while others see it as an imperative to ensure the 'market' and the entrepreneurship. The dilemmas we examine in this essay, focuses on the responsibility of legal - artificial - entities such as companies, toward: [A] persons (employees, shareholders and consumers), [B] other artificial entities (organizations or systems as companies, society, state, etc.) and, [C] the natural environment.

Following the recent global financial crisis, there was extensive debate on companies social and moral responsibility. In Kantian terms, to evaluate an act as moral, the person who is acting has to be free. The fact that a company has to adopt principles for a reason (for example: "to" build a social profile or 'to' gain a profit or "to" create an image or loyalty etc) cannot be considered as a free choice of moral principles. According to the Kantian theory, if a person choose his principles for empirical reasons, (in this case to yield some sort of profit) this choice cannot considered as moral choice because in fact this choice is non-free. 

Businesses act and grow within a market system characterized by synergies and complementarity. In a complementary system, I cannot cause damage to someone, without harming myself as well, in the short or in the long term.

Philosophy for beginners books are a good reason to entry in a different world. A world of ideas and values that you cannot perceive in everyday life. We can imagine these books as a key, not as enlightenment, but rather as a chance to unlock the reality and find out what is behind the door. In this article I am presenting eight popular books, published in Greek between 2010 and 2012.

In recent years the philosophy for beginners books, are becoming popular and best sellers. In this article, I am presenting and evaluating some of these publications. Keywords: Philosophy for beginners Gounaris, Α. ((2010). Philosophy for the Μasses. 

What happens to reality when we perceive the world through our sensory filters? What is the mental content? How can we be sure that what we perceive is what that really exist? These are some of the questions this article is dealing with, attempting at the same time an overview of perception -reality problem through classic philosophical examples. 

If someone browse the Diagnostic and Statistical Manuals of Mental Disorders (DSM) over the years will conclude that our tolerance to what we are considering healthy is eventually decreasing. This discussion is about behavior related mental disorders that we evaluate as undesirable and therefore unhealthy. 

Michel Foucault’s “History of Madness” and then the “Foucault – Derrida” debate on the relation of madness and sanity before and after Descartes, was the occasion for this investigation.  In extension, this research focuses on the positions of modern psychiatry, and approaches the madness philosophically, not only as a social 'otherness', as a deviation from what we consider as normal, or as an “enemy” of the "castle" of sanity, but also as an opportunity to reset issues associated with the normality and the nature of what we call logic and what is called the Logos. 

How can a Jewish woman, persecuted and imprisoned by the Nazis, cause negative reactions when she closely follows the trial of the Nazi “High Priest” for his crimes against humanity? How does her unconventional thinking and her daring to see "clearly" manage to disgruntle everyone, and how, while disgruntling everyone, can she still be regarded as one of the most important figures of political philosophy of the 20th century?