Brooks' Philosophy Backlash

I read David Brooks' column yesterday - and was intrigued by it, not because he was attacking philosophy, but because he seemed happy to allow intuitions - not reason - to take a central role in ethics. This seems like a smack to philosphers, but it also seems like a smack to conservatives like Brooks! I didn't have time to think about much else in the column (and he did make a lot of very broad assumptions), but Yglesias has, and he's right that emotions have been considered by philosophers (and sub-sets of philosphy) for quite some time.

And Hilzoy (an actual philosopher) has an excellent post showing how Brooks was really conflating two, very separate, philosophical questions.