Splitting Words

Splitting single words into two words which, together, make sense

Numerically Palindromic Words

A listing of words whose letters create palindromes when written out in numbers based on their order in the alphabet

Noah\u27s Consonants

The title refers to he of the Ark as distinct from he of the dictionary. Noah\u27s Ark is a honeymoon haven for words because Noah only admits those words in which each consonant has a partner. In practice he\u27s even more picky, refusing entry to any such words with less than 3 different consonants (6 consonants in total). He also turns away hyphenated examples, phrases, coinages, palindromes, tautonyms and pair isograms. Here, we attempt to discover some of those words which have made it past Noah into the Ark

Life\u27s Secret Files

In each of the groups of 3 words below, the first and second words make a 2-word phrase; the second and third words also make a 2-word phrase. Easy you might say and you would be right, if it wasn\u27t for the fact that a third constraint requires that the first and third words be related. They may both be transposals, synonyms, antonyms, homophones, heterophones, different tenses of the same verb, palindromes, reversals, mutual shifts, rhyming words, AEIOU words, and so on

Removing Common Endings to Make Words

Pairs of words which end with the same group of letters have their common letter group removed so that the remaining letters form a word

Playing With Digits

A word game using numbers assigned to letters with a goal of finding words that match a specific value

The geography of rural settlement in the Durham region

No abstract availabl

Kant, Guyer, and Tomasello on the Capacity to Recognize the Humanity of Others

On the surface Kant himself seems quite clear about who is deserving of respect: The morally relevant others are all “rational, free beings” or all “human beings.” It is clear, however, that Kant does not want to identify “human beings” in this sense with members of a particular biological species, for he is explicitly open to the idea that there might be non-biologically human rational beings. Thus, for example he is explicitly open to the possibility of extraterrestrial rational beings, who would not be members of the same biological species as us, but who would, presumably be worthy of respect. And it would seem possible that there are members of our biological species who are not “human” in the morally relevant sense. Given these facts, a Kantian needs to give some account of how we are to recognize who or what counts as “human” in the morally relevant sense. I argue that to be “human” in the morally relevant sense is to have the capacity for morality, and that this involves: (a) the capacity to recognize others as ends rather than merely as means and (b) the capacity to enter into relations of ethical community with us. I defend a position I name moral reliabilism. According to this position: (a) We have a quasi-perceptual capacity to directly ascribe moral status to various bits of the world around us. I will argue that this capacity is best thought of in Gibsonian terms as a capacity to pick up on certain types of social affordances; morally relevant others have the capacity to engage in ethical interaction with us, and recognizing the humanity of others involves picking up on this capacity. Those beings who are “human” in the morally relevant sense, then, afford interaction based on mutual respect. (b) We should assume as a postulate of practical reason that this capacity is reliable (although fallible)

Alternate Additions

Start by adding a single letter to the beginning of a 2-letter word to make a 3-letter word then add a single letter to the end of the word to make a 4-letter word. Continue adding single letters alternately in this manner

Adding a Third Vowel

Begin with a 2-vowel word in which the two vowels are different. Insert, or attach at the beginning or the end, a third different vowel to make a 3-vowel word