Listening to a podcast on the morning commute, drowning out the office noise with your favourite album, getting lost in an audiobook as you walk home – for many of us, navigating the world through headphones is second nature. But is there more to these everyday experiences than listening to our favourite content? Is there more to headphone listening than meets our ears? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the philosophy and psychology of sound and headphone listening with Dr Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Departmental Lecturer in Music at the University of Oxford. Named as one of 2024’s BBC New Generation Thinkers, Jacob’s research takes place at the intersection between sound studies and continental philosophy, and seeks to reveal how headphone use shapes our minds and the fabric of society. According to Downs, headphones do more than play our favourite sounds. They transport us into sensory shelters – intimate spaces of comfort and focus – and our own private theatres. Headphone listening, he argues, is about safety, control, and reconnecting with feelings of home. Yet, not all sounds are soothing; as we shall see, sometimes our intimate sonic spaces can be exploited as a means of torture, brainwashing, and corrupting our sense of self. Don’t worry, though; you’re safe with us. Plug in your headphones; it’s time to relax. After all, there’s no place like home. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/warms up your headphones Links Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Website Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Acoustic Territories of the Body: Headphone Listening, Embodied Space, and the Phenomenology of Sonic Homeliness’ (paper) Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Headphones, Auditory Violence and the Sonic Flooding of Corporeal Space’ (paper)

Listening to a podcast on the morning commute, drowning out the office noise with your favourite album, getting lost in an audiobook as you walk home – for many of us, navigating the world through headphones is second nature. But is there more to these everyday experiences than listening to our favourite content? Is there more to headphone listening than meets our ears? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the philosophy and psychology of sound and headphone listening with Dr Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Departmental Lecturer in Music at the University of Oxford. Named as one of 2024’s BBC New Generation Thinkers, Jacob’s research takes place at the intersection between sound studies and continental philosophy, and seeks to reveal how headphone use shapes our minds and the fabric of society. According to Downs, headphones do more than play our favourite sounds. They transport us into sensory shelters – intimate spaces of comfort and focus – and our own private theatres. Headphone listening, he argues, is about safety, control, and reconnecting with feelings of home. Yet, not all sounds are soothing; as we shall see, sometimes our intimate sonic spaces can be exploited as a means of torture, brainwashing, and corrupting our sense of self. Don’t worry, though; you’re safe with us. Plug in your headphones; it’s time to relax. After all, there’s no place like home. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/warms up your headphones Links Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Website Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Acoustic Territories of the Body: Headphone Listening, Embodied Space, and the Phenomenology of Sonic Homeliness’ (paper) Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Headphones, Auditory Violence and the Sonic Flooding of Corporeal Space’ (paper)

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, instantly killing up to 80,000 civilians, with another 40,000 dying soon after from burns and radiation poisoning. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the surrender of the Japanese Army, marking the end of the most destructive war in history. War has been a constant throughout history. Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have waged war against one another. Some argue that war is ingrained in human nature, from our ancestors battling over resources and empires seeking expansion, to biblical genocides and acts of human sacrifice—Homo sapiens are seemingly insatiable for conflict. Others, however, believe war is not inevitable and that we have the capacity for humility, justice, and kindness without resorting to armed conflict. We must remember that explaining war is not the same as justifying it. While pacifism, as exemplified by Jesus and Gandhi, is often seen as noble, is non-violence truly effective against regimes intent on ethnic cleansing? If not, how do we determine when war is justified and what defines proportional force? Can the killing of innocent civilians ever be justified? And, if not, how do they differ from innocent combatants? War, huh, good god, what is it good for? Links A.C. Grayling, War: An Enquiry (book) Richard Overy, Why War? (book) Jeff Mcmahan, Killing in War (book) Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (book) Carl von Clausewitz, On War (book) War, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, instantly killing up to 80,000 civilians, with another 40,000 dying soon after from burns and radiation poisoning. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the surrender of the Japanese Army, marking the end of the most destructive war in history. War has been a constant throughout history. Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have waged war against one another. Some argue that war is ingrained in human nature, from our ancestors battling over resources and empires seeking expansion, to biblical genocides and acts of human sacrifice—Homo sapiens are seemingly insatiable for conflict. Others, however, believe war is not inevitable and that we have the capacity for humility, justice, and kindness without resorting to armed conflict. We must remember that explaining war is not the same as justifying it. While pacifism, as exemplified by Jesus and Gandhi, is often seen as noble, is non-violence truly effective against regimes intent on ethnic cleansing? If not, how do we determine when war is justified and what defines proportional force? Can the killing of innocent civilians ever be justified? And, if not, how do they differ from innocent combatants? War, huh, good god, what is it good for? Links A.C. Grayling, War: An Enquiry (book) Richard Overy, Why War? (book) Jeff Mcmahan, Killing in War (book) Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (book) Carl von Clausewitz, On War (book) War, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, instantly killing up to 80,000 civilians, with another 40,000 dying soon after from burns and radiation poisoning. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the surrender of the Japanese Army, marking the end of the most destructive war in history. War has been a constant throughout history. Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have waged war against one another. Some argue that war is ingrained in human nature, from our ancestors battling over resources and empires seeking expansion, to biblical genocides and acts of human sacrifice—Homo sapiens are seemingly insatiable for conflict. Others, however, believe war is not inevitable and that we have the capacity for humility, justice, and kindness without resorting to armed conflict. We must remember that explaining war is not the same as justifying it. While pacifism, as exemplified by Jesus and Gandhi, is often seen as noble, is non-violence truly effective against regimes intent on ethnic cleansing? If not, how do we determine when war is justified and what defines proportional force? Can the killing of innocent civilians ever be justified? And, if not, how do they differ from innocent combatants? War, huh, good god, what is it good for? Links A.C. Grayling, War: An Enquiry (book) Richard Overy, Why War? (book) Jeff Mcmahan, Killing in War (book) Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (book) Carl von Clausewitz, On War (book) War, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

They say money can’t buy happiness, but it can buy power, freedom, and security. The one per cent – who control nearly half of the world’s wealth – understand this better than anyone. In capitalist democracies, corporations spend billions on political donations and lobbying to influence economic policies in line with their own interests. The trillions spent by governments in propping up the banks following the 2008 financial crash – and the bailing out of the largest corporations through the Covid Corporate Financing Facility – speak volumes: the state and the economy are not separate entities. The goal of the state is clear: “Steady the ship and maintain course.” Corporations don’t just pose a threat to our economic freedoms, but the future of the natural world. Just a handful of firms are responsible for over seventy per cent of carbon emissions, and despite public pressure, corporate action on the climate crisis has been largely ineffective. We shouldn’t be surprised; after all, industry holds the power, and turkeys don’t vote for Christmas. Links Grace Blakeley (website) Grace Blakeley (twitter) Grace Blakeley, Vulture Capitalism: Corporate Crimes, Backdoor Bailouts and the Death of Freedom

Philosophy is about concepts – what it is to be moral, to be in love, or belong to the human species – and these concepts pervade every aspect of our lives. Yet, what images come to mind when you think of Immanuel Kant, David Hume, or René Descartes? For many of us, we imagine Descartes in his armchair, Hume at his desk, and Kant on one of his solitary walks. We certainly don’t imagine these figures, wearing boiler suits… For Mary Midgley, the image of a philosopher withdrawn from the realities of everyday affairs represents precisely where philosophy has gone wrong. For Midgley, philosophy is best understood – not as an exercise of self-indulgent scholarship – but as a sort of plumbing. Our concepts run through our societies like the pipes through our homes, and it’s the job of the philosopher – that is, the plumber – to examine the pipes and keep the water from swamping the kitchen floor. For Midgley, we need philosophy, just as we need plumbing…philosophy’s not a luxury; it’s a necessity. Joining us to discuss the philosophy of Mary Midgley is Dr Ellie Robson. Dr Robson is a British Society for the History of Philosophy Postdoctoral Fellow and Teaching Associate at Nottingham University. Ellie – whose work primarily focuses on the history of philosophy and meta-ethics – is one of the leading scholars of philosophy on Mary Midgley’s life and work. In this episode, she’ll illustrate Midgley’s meta-philosophy and meta-ethics through her analysis of the concept of beastliness. Let’s dig up the floorboards and see what’s leaking. Contents Part I. The Roots of Human Nature Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Ellie Robson (website) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley’s Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature: a re-appraisal (paper) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley on Water and Thought: Is Public Philosophy Like Plumbing? (article) Mary Midgley, The Concept of Beastliness (paper) Mary Midgley, Beast and Man (book) Mary Midgley, The Myths We Live By (book) Mary Midgley, What Is Philosophy For? (book) Gregory McElwain, Mary Midgley: An Introduction (book)

Philosophy is about concepts – what it is to be moral, to be in love, or belong to the human species – and these concepts pervade every aspect of our lives. Yet, what images come to mind when you think of Immanuel Kant, David Hume, or René Descartes? For many of us, we imagine Descartes in his armchair, Hume at his desk, and Kant on one of his solitary walks. We certainly don’t imagine these figures, wearing boiler suits… For Mary Midgley, the image of a philosopher withdrawn from the realities of everyday affairs represents precisely where philosophy has gone wrong. For Midgley, philosophy is best understood – not as an exercise of self-indulgent scholarship – but as a sort of plumbing. Our concepts run through our societies like the pipes through our homes, and it’s the job of the philosopher – that is, the plumber – to examine the pipes and keep the water from swamping the kitchen floor. For Midgley, we need philosophy, just as we need plumbing…philosophy’s not a luxury; it’s a necessity. Joining us to discuss the philosophy of Mary Midgley is Dr Ellie Robson. Dr Robson is a British Society for the History of Philosophy Postdoctoral Fellow and Teaching Associate at Nottingham University. Ellie – whose work primarily focuses on the history of philosophy and meta-ethics – is one of the leading scholars of philosophy on Mary Midgley’s life and work. In this episode, she’ll illustrate Midgley’s meta-philosophy and meta-ethics through her analysis of the concept of beastliness. Let’s dig up the floorboards and see what’s leaking.   Contents Part I. The Roots of Human Nature Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Ellie Robson (website) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley’s Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature: a re-appraisal (paper) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley on Water and Thought: Is Public Philosophy Like Plumbing? (article) Mary Midgley, The Concept of Beastliness (paper) Mary Midgley, Beast and Man (book) Mary Midgley, The Myths We Live By (book) Mary Midgley, What Is Philosophy For? (book) Gregory McElwain, Mary Midgley: An Introduction (book)

Birds sing joyfully, dogs smile as they fetch their sticks, and philosophers laugh at their own jokes on podcasts. It is a happy world after all. In fact, if we ponder upon such delights for long enough, it is possible to infer – even during our darkest days – that these are gifts bestowed by a benevolent creator, for these are not necessary for our survival but are gratuitous goods. Yet, says another, what if these delights are no more proof of a benevolent creator than they are a malevolent one? What if these goods are given just to amplify our suffering when they are inevitably taken from us? And, what if, for every reason given for believing in a good-god, there was room for an evil-god to just as easily take his place? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the evil-god challenge with Dr Jack Symes, teacher and researcher at Durham University and editor Bloomsbury’s popular book series, Talking about Philosophy. According to Symes, whilst the evil-god challenge has its merits, we should be sceptical about its attempts to draw parallel arguments to those in favour of god’s goodness. Ultimately, for Symes, there are enough asymmetries in these parallel arguments that we should consider the evil-god challenge defeated. Contents Part I. Defeating the Evil-God Challenge Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Jack Symes (website) Jack Symes, Defeating the Evil-God Challenge: In Defence of God’s Goodness (book)

Birds sing joyfully, dogs smile as they fetch their sticks, and philosophers laugh at their own jokes on podcasts. It is a happy world after all. In fact, if we ponder upon such delights for long enough, it is possible to infer – even during our darkest days – that these are gifts bestowed by a benevolent creator, for these are not necessary for our survival but are gratuitous goods. Yet, says another, what if these delights are no more proof of a benevolent creator than they are a malevolent one? What if these goods are given just to amplify our suffering when they are inevitably taken from us? And, what if, for every reason given for believing in a good-god, there was room for an evil-god to just as easily take his place? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the evil-god challenge with Dr Jack Symes, teacher and researcher at Durham University and editor Bloomsbury’s popular book series, Talking about Philosophy. According to Symes, whilst the evil-god challenge has its merits, we should be sceptical about its attempts to draw parallel arguments to those in favour of god’s goodness. Ultimately, for Symes, there are enough asymmetries in these parallel arguments that we should consider the evil-god challenge defeated. Contents Part I. Defeating the Evil-God Challenge Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Jack Symes (website) Jack Symes, Defeating the Evil-God Challenge: In Defence of God’s Goodness (book)

In the early part of the twentieth century, three thinkers – Nishida Kitarō, Tanabe Hajime, and Nishitani Keiji – founded the Kyoto School of Philosophy, a group of scholars working at the intersection of Japanese and European thought. The Kyoto School, deeply influenced by the German tradition, wrote extensively on the works of Kant, Hegel, and Heidegger exploring themes such as the limits of our reason and the nature of nothingness. Tanabe, himself a student of Heidegger, explored such topics at length, building on the rich body of thought and – as we shall see – igniting his own philosophy. In this episode, we’ll be investigating the profound insights of Tanabe’s philosophy with two of the world’s leading Tanabe scholars: Associate Professor of Philosophy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Gregory S. Moss and Lecturer in Non-Western Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh, Takeshi Morisato. As we explore Tanabe’s work, we’ll see Japan’s, Kyoto School’s, and Tanabe’s histories, unique philosophical paths, and the many questions they illuminate along the way. As we do so, we’ll uncover the invaluable insights of their work and the legacy they left behind. Contents Part I. The Kyoto School Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Gregory S. Moss (website) Takeshi Morisato (website) The Dialectics of Absolute Nothingness: The Legacies of German Philosophy in the Kyoto School (book)

In the early part of the twentieth century, three thinkers – Nishida Kitarō, Tanabe Hajime, and Nishitani Keiji – founded the Kyoto School of Philosophy, a group of scholars working at the intersection of Japanese and European thought. The Kyoto School, deeply influenced by the German tradition, wrote extensively on the works of Kant, Hegel, and Heidegger exploring themes such as the limits of our reason and the nature of nothingness. Tanabe, himself a student of Heidegger, explored such topics at length, building on the rich body of thought and – as we shall see – igniting his own philosophy. In this episode, we’ll be investigating the profound insights of Tanabe’s philosophy with two of the world’s leading Tanabe scholars: Associate Professor of Philosophy at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, Gregory S. Moss and Lecturer in Non-Western Philosophy at the University of Edinburgh, Takeshi Morisato. As we explore Tanabe’s work, we’ll see Japan’s, Kyoto School’s, and Tanabe’s histories, unique philosophical paths, and the many questions they illuminate along the way. As we do so, we’ll uncover the invaluable insights of their work and the legacy they left behind. Contents Part I. The Kyoto School Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Gregory S. Moss (website) Takeshi Morisato (website) The Dialectics of Absolute Nothingness: The Legacies of German Philosophy in the Kyoto School (book)

‘The clouds are grey, the sun obscured and you are walking through the countryside in the overcast of winter. Passing from field to woodland, the trees shed coats of frosty bark to celebrate the passing of another icy season. It feels too early for spring, but echoes of swallows in the canopies sing songs of new beginnings. You pause to catch a glimpse of your woodland companions. With effortless precision, your eyes track the birds as they zip between empty branches and, combining countless neurons, you forecast the birds’ trajectory each time they fall out of view. You walk on, emerging from the trees, and return to the open fields. You look back, appreciate the woods and see a river flowing into the trees from the east. Where does the river begin? Escaping the clouds, the sun will soon be free of the sky altogether; if you want to discover the river’s source, you had better get walking.’ Contents Part I. Out of Nothing Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (book)

‘The clouds are grey, the sun obscured and you are walking through the countryside in the overcast of winter. Passing from field to woodland, the trees shed coats of frosty bark to celebrate the passing of another icy season. It feels too early for spring, but echoes of swallows in the canopies sing songs of new beginnings. You pause to catch a glimpse of your woodland companions. With effortless precision, your eyes track the birds as they zip between empty branches and, combining countless neurons, you forecast the birds’ trajectory each time they fall out of view. You walk on, emerging from the trees, and return to the open fields. You look back, appreciate the woods and see a river flowing into the trees from the east. Where does the river begin? Escaping the clouds, the sun will soon be free of the sky altogether; if you want to discover the river’s source, you had better get walking.’ Contents Part I. Out of Nothing Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (book)

‘The kitchen needs cleaning, but only one of us seems to notice. I mean, he looked straight at the dishes in the sink…and just stacked his dish on top of them. How high does this precarious tower of crockery have to be until he decides to wash the dishes or, more likely, they collapse into an unrepairable heap? I suppose I’ll have to wash them. They won’t get washed otherwise, and I’d rather get them off my mind.’ The unequal distribution of household labour is a familiar concern amongst feminists. Despite the progress in women’s rights and freedoms, women across the world continue to bear the responsibility of domestic chores and childcare. This raises an important question: why do women in monogamous, opposite-sex relationships continue to shoulder a disproportionate amount of housework work despite their political gains? In this episode, we’ll be exploring this question with two outstanding philosophers of morality and mind: Paulina Sliwa (Professor of Philosophy at the University of Vienna) and Thomas McClelland (Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Cambridge).  According to Paulina and Tom, our disparities and perception of domestic labour are determined by our feelings, beliefs, and social norms. In other words, the way we perceive the world is radically different. The dishes don’t call out to some – in need of cleaning – in a moment of perception, as they do to others. So what can we do to change this disparity…that is, if it’s in need of changing at all. Contents Part I. Affordance Perception Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas McClelland and Paulina Sliwa, Gendered Affordance Perception and Unequal Domestic Labour (paper) Coverage of Gendered Addordance Perception in the media (website) Thomas McClelland (website) Paulina Sliwa (website)

‘The kitchen needs cleaning, but only one of us seems to notice. I mean, he looked straight at the dishes in the sink…and just stacked his dish on top of them. How high does this precarious tower of crockery have to be until he decides to wash the dishes or, more likely, they collapse into an unrepairable heap? I suppose I’ll have to wash them. They won’t get washed otherwise, and I’d rather get them off my mind.’ The unequal distribution of household labour is a familiar concern amongst feminists. Despite the progress in women’s rights and freedoms, women across the world continue to bear the responsibility of domestic chores and childcare. This raises an important question: why do women in monogamous, opposite-sex relationships continue to shoulder a disproportionate amount of housework work despite their political gains? In this episode, we’ll be exploring this question with two outstanding philosophers of morality and mind: Paulina Sliwa (Professor of Philosophy at the University of Vienna) and Thomas McClelland (Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Cambridge).  According to Paulina and Tom, our disparities and perception of domestic labour are determined by our feelings, beliefs, and social norms. In other words, the way we perceive the world is radically different. The dishes don’t call out to some – in need of cleaning – in a moment of perception, as they do to others. So what can we do to change this disparity…that is, if it’s in need of changing at all. Contents Part I. Affordance Perception Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas McClelland and Paulina Sliwa, Gendered Affordance Perception and Unequal Domestic Labour (paper) Coverage of Gendered Addordance Perception in the media (website) Thomas McClelland (website) Paulina Sliwa (website)

Alongside life and liberty, the Declaration of Independence marked the pursuit of happiness as the foundation of American democracy. Yet, as the history of philosophy has taught us, understanding happiness is no easy task. Pursuing happiness as the cessation of desire, a feeling of perpetual pleasure, or as a state of human flourishing are very different projects…so, which conception of happiness did America’s Founding Fathers take to be an ‘inalienable right’? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature of happiness with Professor Jeffrey Rosen, President and CEO of the National Constitution Center. According to Rosen, in tracing the Founding Fathers’ intellectual development – inspired by Greek and Roman philosophy – we see that the Founders understood happiness as a pursuit of moral excellence rather than immediate gratification. No doubt, Western understandings of happiness have shifted…today, happiness means something closer to feeling good than being good. Our question is whether this cultural shift was a mistake. In carving out our futures, ought we look to the past? In defining the purpose of our lives and the destination of our states, should we turn to America’s Founding Fathers and their ancient teachers? Contents Part I. The Founding Fathers Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Jeffrey Rosen, Twitter The National Constitution Center, Website Jeffrey Rosen, The Pursuit of Happiness: How Classical Writers on Virtue Inspired the Lives of the Founders and Defined America (Amazon) Jeffrey Rosen, The Pursuit of Happiness: How Classical Writers on Virtue Inspired the Lives of the Founders and Defined America (Simon & Schuster)

Alongside life and liberty, the Declaration of Independence marked the pursuit of happiness as the foundation of American democracy. Yet, as the history of philosophy has taught us, understanding happiness is no easy task. Pursuing happiness as the cessation of desire, a feeling of perpetual pleasure, or as a state of human flourishing are very different projects…so, which conception of happiness did America’s Founding Fathers take to be an ‘inalienable right’? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature of happiness with Professor Jeffrey Rosen, President and CEO of the National Constitution Center. According to Rosen, in tracing the Founding Fathers’ intellectual development – inspired by Greek and Roman philosophy – we see that the Founders understood happiness as a pursuit of moral excellence rather than immediate gratification. No doubt, Western understandings of happiness have shifted…today, happiness means something closer to feeling good than being good. Our question is whether this cultural shift was a mistake. In carving out our futures, ought we look to the past? In defining the purpose of our lives and the destination of our states, should we turn to America’s Founding Fathers and their ancient teachers? Contents Part I. The Founding Fathers Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Jeffrey Rosen, Twitter The National Constitution Center, Website Jeffrey Rosen, The Pursuit of Happiness: How Classical Writers on Virtue Inspired the Lives of the Founders and Defined America (Amazon) Jeffrey Rosen, The Pursuit of Happiness: How Classical Writers on Virtue Inspired the Lives of the Founders and Defined America (Simon & Schuster)

There’s great pleasure to be found in make-believe. Instantly shifting our perspectives and belief systems gives rise to new possibilities – possibilities that are unavailable to the serious and sober-minded. Yet, as time passes, so does our desire to play. Adults – and, perhaps more so, philosophers – are instructed to ‘grow up’, to build their lives and views on sensible grounds, and leave their disposition for laughter, disruption, and mischief in the playground. For C. T Nguyen – Professor of Philosophy at the University of Utah – this is a foolish mistake. C. T Nguyen is one of the most innovative aestheticians of our time. As well as being published across philosophy’s leading journals, Nguyen’s work – which focuses on art, games, and agency – has earned him several notable prizes, including the American Philosophical Association 2021 Award, for his book Games: Agency as Art. In this episode, we’ll be speaking to Nguyen about intellectual playfulness. For Nguyen, playfulness should be understood as a virtue and not a vice. When we explore philosophical ideas through our usual perspectives, we close ourselves off from a rich set of alternative possibilities, and risk re-directing good-faith inquiry into bad-faith results. Playfulness, however, allows us to escape these traps in our thinking, and open ourselves up to the possibility of creativity. This episode is produced in partnership with the Aesthetics and Political Epistemology Project at the University of Liverpool, led by Katherine Furman, Robin McKenna, and Vid Simoniti and funded by the British Society of Aesthetics. Contents Part I. The Ideal Thinker Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links C. Thi Nguyen, ‘Playfulness Versus Epistemic Traps’ (paper) C. Thi Nguyen, Games: Agency As Art (book) C. Thi Nguyen, website C. Thi Nguyen, X (Twitter) John Gierach, Fly Fishing Small Streams (book) Natasha Dow Schüll, Addiction by Design: Machine Gambling in Las Vegas (book) Monster Train (game)

There’s great pleasure to be found in make-believe. Instantly shifting our perspectives and belief systems gives rise to new possibilities – possibilities that are unavailable to the serious and sober-minded. Yet, as time passes, so does our desire to play. Adults – and, perhaps more so, philosophers – are instructed to ‘grow up’, to build their lives and views on sensible grounds, and leave their disposition for laughter, disruption, and mischief in the playground. For C. T Nguyen – Professor of Philosophy at the University of Utah – this is a foolish mistake. C. T Nguyen is one of the most innovative aestheticians of our time. As well as being published across philosophy’s leading journals, Nguyen’s work – which focuses on art, games, and agency – has earned him several notable prizes, including the American Philosophical Association 2021 Award, for his book Games: Agency as Art. In this episode, we’ll be speaking to Nguyen about intellectual playfulness. For Nguyen, playfulness should be understood as a virtue and not a vice. When we explore philosophical ideas through our usual perspectives, we close ourselves off from a rich set of alternative possibilities, and risk re-directing good-faith inquiry into bad-faith results. Playfulness, however, allows us to escape these traps in our thinking, and open ourselves up to the possibility of creativity. This episode is produced in partnership with the Aesthetics and Political Epistemology Project at the University of Liverpool, led by Katherine Furman, Robin McKenna, and Vid Simoniti and funded by the British Society of Aesthetics. Contents Part I. The Ideal Thinker Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links C. Thi Nguyen, ‘Playfulness Versus Epistemic Traps’ (paper) C. Thi Nguyen, Games: Agency As Art (book) C. Thi Nguyen, website C. Thi Nguyen, X (Twitter) Natasha Dow Schüll, Addiction by Design: Machine Gambling in Las Vegas (book) Monster Train (game)

Days grow shorter, rain turns to sleet, and nature’s creatures are forced into hibernation. Winter is here; when the world wages war on us, through darkness, danger, and impending depression. But from the clouds of winter’s despair, therein shines a light: gatherings among families and friends, spirits of fellowship and forgiveness, and scenes of feasts and festivities. It is Christmas, who shepherds us together – when we would otherwise be apart – and spares us from the cold, and into loving arms. As we shall see, the festival of Christmas has snowballed with the passing of many winters – from the early celebrations of the Romans and Vikings to the Christian nativity and commercialisation – but what has held this snowball together? Let us burn candles, logs, and line our homes with dancing lights; let us bring in trees and celebrate the hope of new life; and let us give generously and extend goodwill to our neighbours here, and around the world. Contents Part I. The Nativity Part II. The Nativity Continued Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Pope Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives (book) Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (book) Judith Flanders, Christmas: A History (book) Bruce Forbes, Christmas: A Candid History (book) Brent Landau, Revelation of the Magi: The Lost Tale of the Wise Men's Journey to Bethlehem (book) Robert J. Miller, Born Divine: The Births of Jesus and Other Sons of God (book) Richard C. Trexler, The Journey of the Magi: Meanings in History of a Christian Story (book) Attributions The following sounds were used with the permission of the copyright holder. Medieval City, OGsoundFX; Night Farmfields, klankbeeld; Baby Breath, m3fuss; all other sounds were produced by Epidemic Sound and The Panpsycast.

Days grow shorter, rain turns to sleet, and nature’s creatures are forced into hibernation. Winter is here; when the world wages war on us, through darkness, danger, and impending depression. But from the clouds of winter’s despair, therein shines a light: gatherings among families and friends, spirits of fellowship and forgiveness, and scenes of feasts and festivities. It is Christmas, who shepherds us together – when we would otherwise be apart – and spares us from the cold, and into loving arms. As we shall see, the festival of Christmas has snowballed with the passing of many winters – from the early celebrations of the Romans and Vikings to the Christian nativity and commercialisation – but what has held this snowball together? Let us burn candles, logs, and line our homes with dancing lights; let us bring in trees and celebrate the hope of new life; and let us give generously and extend goodwill to our neighbours here, and around the world. Contents Part I. The Nativity Part II. The Nativity Continued Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Pope Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives (book) Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (book) Judith Flanders, Christmas: A History (book) Bruce Forbes, Christmas: A Candid History (book) Brent Landau, Revelation of the Magi: The Lost Tale of the Wise Men's Journey to Bethlehem (book) Robert J. Miller, Born Divine: The Births of Jesus and Other Sons of God (book) Richard C. Trexler, The Journey of the Magi: Meanings in History of a Christian Story (book) Attributions The following sounds were used with the permission of the copyright holder. Medieval City, OGsoundFX; Night Farmfields, klankbeeld; Baby Breath, m3fuss; all other sounds were produced by Epidemic Sound and The Panpsycast.

Days grow shorter, rain turns to sleet, and nature’s creatures are forced into hibernation. Winter is here; when the world wages war on us, through darkness, danger, and impending depression. But from the clouds of winter’s despair, therein shines a light: gatherings among families and friends, spirits of fellowship and forgiveness, and scenes of feasts and festivities. It is Christmas, who shepherds us together – when we would otherwise be apart – and spares us from the cold, and into loving arms. As we shall see, the festival of Christmas has snowballed with the passing of many winters – from the early celebrations of the Romans and Vikings to the Christian nativity and commercialisation – but what has held this snowball together? Let us burn candles, logs, and line our homes with dancing lights; let us bring in trees and celebrate the hope of new life; and let us give generously and extend goodwill to our neighbours here, and around the world. Contents Part I. The Nativity Part II. The Nativity Continued Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Pope Benedict XVI, Jesus of Nazareth: The Infancy Narratives (book) Raymond E. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah: A Commentary on the Infancy Narratives in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke (book) Judith Flanders, Christmas: A History (book) Bruce Forbes, Christmas: A Candid History (book) Brent Landau, Revelation of the Magi: The Lost Tale of the Wise Men's Journey to Bethlehem (book) Robert J. Miller, Born Divine: The Births of Jesus and Other Sons of God (book) Richard C. Trexler, The Journey of the Magi: Meanings in History of a Christian Story (book) Attributions The following sounds were used with the permission of the copyright holder. Medieval City, OGsoundFX; Night Farmfields, klankbeeld; Baby Breath, m3fuss; all other sounds were produced by Epidemic Sound and The Panpsycast.

Two people can encounter the same state of affairs – a crime, a book, a building – and yet their attention, interests, and emotional responses can be radically different. The perspectives of others are closed off from us, and our perspectives are closed off from them … that is until we share our stories. In recent years, social and political movements have utilised the power of storytelling by encouraging the sharing of first-personal accounts. For example, the #MeToo movement and #ShoutYourAbortion campaign encouraged women to share their experiences of sexual violence, harassment, and abortion in order to challenge the ideologies that allow sexism and misogyny to exist. According to Dr Rachel Fraser, these narratives play an indispensable role that can never be performed by theory and statistics. In this episode, we’ll be speaking to Dr Fraser, Associate Professor at the University of Oxford, about how personal narratives allow us to challenge social scripts, refocus our attention, and alter the perspectives that, ultimately, shape our lives and institutions. For Fraser – who specialises in a range of fields, including epistemology, aesthetics, philosophy of language, and social and political philosophy – narratives offer a window into our lives and reveal moral truths that serve to critique dangerous ideologies and overcome injustice. Silencing ourselves and others is a surefire way to perpetuate inequality; if we want to bring about a better world, then we must learn to speak and listen. This episode is produced in partnership with the Aesthetics and Political Epistemology Project at the University of Liverpool, led by Katherine Furman, Robin McKenna, and Vid Simoniti and funded by the British Society of Aesthetics. Contents Part I. Disrupting Ideology Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Rachel Fraser, Website Rachel Fraser, Papers

Two people can encounter the same state of affairs – a crime, a book, a building – and yet their attention, interests, and emotional responses can be radically different. The perspectives of others are closed off from us, and our perspectives are closed off from them … that is until we share our stories. In recent years, social and political movements have utilised the power of storytelling by encouraging the sharing of first-personal accounts. For example, the #MeToo movement and #ShoutYourAbortion campaign encouraged women to share their experiences of sexual violence, harassment, and abortion in order to challenge the ideologies that allow sexism and misogyny to exist. According to Dr Rachel Fraser, these narratives play an indispensable role that can never be performed by theory and statistics. In this episode, we’ll be speaking to Dr Fraser, Associate Professor at the University of Oxford, about how personal narratives allow us to challenge social scripts, refocus our attention, and alter the perspectives that, ultimately, shape our lives and institutions. For Fraser – who specialises in a range of fields, including epistemology, aesthetics, philosophy of language, and social and political philosophy – narratives offer a window into our lives and reveal moral truths that serve to critique dangerous ideologies and overcome injustice. Silencing ourselves and others is a surefire way to perpetuate inequality; if we want to bring about a better world, then we must learn to speak and listen. This episode is produced in partnership with the Aesthetics and Political Epistemology Project at the University of Liverpool, led by Katherine Furman, Robin McKenna, and Vid Simoniti and funded by the British Society of Aesthetics. Contents Part I. Disrupting Ideology Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Rachel Fraser, Website Rachel Fraser, Papers

What is the underlying nature of reality? For Thales, the essence of the world was water; for the Stoics, it was Logos; for Heraclitus, the universe consisted, fundamentally, of fire, life-energy, or the ‘thinking faculty’. The search for the building blocks of our world has a rich philosophical history and, today is intertwined with cutting-edge research in the physical sciences. In this episode, we’ll be focusing on those who defend the idea of substances. According to this view, at the heart of our cosmos exist simple, independent, ungrounded entities (called ‘substances’) from which everything else in the world is made and sustained. Perhaps these are particles, strings, or space–time; maybe they’re consciousness, selves, or gods. Our guide to substances and the nature of reality is Dr Donnchadh O’Conaill, post-doctoral researcher at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Dr O’Conaill – currently working on the Swiss National Science Foundation project, The Subject of Experiences – has made several important contributions to the literature, including through his recent book, Substance, published by Cambridge University Press. As we shall see, Dr O’Conaill is a leading scholar on the role and nature of substances, as well as the contentious question of their existence. Ultimately, that’s our focus: whether the world depends on independent, ungrounded entities and what these hidden entities might look like. Contents Part I. Substance Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Donnchadh O'Conaill, Website Donnchadh O'Conaill, Substance (2022)

What is the underlying nature of reality? For Thales, the essence of the world was water; for the Stoics, it was Logos; for Heraclitus, the universe consisted, fundamentally, of fire, life-energy, or the ‘thinking faculty’. The search for the building blocks of our world has a rich philosophical history and, today is intertwined with cutting-edge research in the physical sciences. In this episode, we’ll be focusing on those who defend the idea of substances. According to this view, at the heart of our cosmos exist simple, independent, ungrounded entities (called ‘substances’) from which everything else in the world is made and sustained. Perhaps these are particles, strings, or space–time; maybe they’re consciousness, selves, or gods. Our guide to substances and the nature of reality is Dr Donnchadh O’Conaill, post-doctoral researcher at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Dr O’Conaill – currently working on the Swiss National Science Foundation project, The Subject of Experiences – has made several important contributions to the literature, including through his recent book, Substance, published by Cambridge University Press. As we shall see, Dr O’Conaill is a leading scholar on the role and nature of substances, as well as the contentious question of their existence. Ultimately, that’s our focus: whether the world depends on independent, ungrounded entities and what these hidden entities might look like. Contents Part I. Substance Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Donnchadh O'Conaill, Website Donnchadh O'Conaill, Substance (2022)

Whaling, poaching, factory farming: we know they’re wrong. Yet, most of us do nothing about them. In fact, for each trip around the sun, we satisfy our collective tastebuds with over seventy billion land animals and seven trillion sea creatures. Still, one might ask, what is it that’s wrong with how we treat our fellow creatures? This is the central question of Martha Nussbaum’s latest book, Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility. Nussbaum, who has won the most prestigious prizes in the field – including the 2016 Kyoto Prize in Arts and Philosophy, the 2018 Berggruen (Bergruin) Prize in Philosophy and Culture, and the 2021 Holberg Prize – is currently the Ernst Freund (Froind) Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago. With over twenty-five books, five hundred academic papers, and fifty-five honorary degrees, it’s safe to say that Martha Nussbaum is one of the most prolific and distinguished philosophers of our time. For Nussbaum, humans have a collective responsibility to support the activities and conditions that allow our fellow creatures to flourish. It’s time we put a stop to the injustice and bring about a better world. Her call to action? Justice for Animals.

Whaling, poaching, factory farming: we know they’re wrong. Yet, most of us do nothing about them. In fact, for each trip around the sun, we satisfy our collective tastebuds with over seventy billion land animals and seven trillion sea creatures. Still, one might ask, what is it that’s wrong with how we treat our fellow creatures? This is the central question of Martha Nussbaum’s latest book, Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility. Nussbaum, who has won the most prestigious prizes in the field – including the 2016 Kyoto Prize in Arts and Philosophy, the 2018 Berggruen (Bergruin) Prize in Philosophy and Culture, and the 2021 Holberg Prize – is currently the Ernst Freund (Froind) Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago. With over twenty-five books, five hundred academic papers, and fifty-five honorary degrees, it’s safe to say that Martha Nussbaum is one of the most prolific and distinguished philosophers of our time. For Nussbaum, humans have a collective responsibility to support the activities and conditions that allow our fellow creatures to flourish. It’s time we put a stop to the injustice and bring about a better world. Her call to action? Justice for Animals. Contents Part I. The Capabilities Approach Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Martha Nussbaum, Website. Martha Nussbaum, Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility (2023) Peter Singer, Animal Liberation Now (2023)

Introduction 'I was sold a story about the modern world. I was told that I could connect with friends for free and that I could have everything conveniently tailored to my tastes. I was also promised I’d be kept safe from those who wished to attack me and my values. All in all, I was told I would be empowered to live my life as I saw fit. In time, I began to hear another story. I started to hear that what I had shared with friends was actually a product that social media sold to others. I was told that some of my wants and desires were, in reality, the wants and desires of people whom I had never met. I was made aware that the promise of safety came at a cost which appears never to have been proven worthwhile. The power, as it turns out, was not really with me – it was with those who sold me the original story. The choices I made when I knew no better helped them understand me and others like me better. They could do this because they were watching. When I wanted them to stop watching, they told me that if I had nothing to hide, then I had nothing to fear.' Contents Part I. Privacy is Power Part II. Privacy in Peril Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kirstie Ball, Kevin Haggerty, and David Lyon, Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies (book). Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity and Love in the Digital Age (book). Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, We Know All About You: The Story of Surveillance in Britain and America (book). Neil Richards, Why Privacy Matters (book). Edward Snowden, Permanent Record: A Memoir of a Reluctant Whistleblower (book). Carissa Véliz, Privacy is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data (book). Raymond Wacks, Privacy: A Very Short Introduction (book).

Introduction 'I was sold a story about the modern world. I was told that I could connect with friends for free and that I could have everything conveniently tailored to my tastes. I was also promised I’d be kept safe from those who wished to attack me and my values. All in all, I was told I would be empowered to live my life as I saw fit. In time, I began to hear another story. I started to hear that what I had shared with friends was actually a product that social media sold to others. I was told that some of my wants and desires were, in reality, the wants and desires of people whom I had never met. I was made aware that the promise of safety came at a cost which appears never to have been proven worthwhile. The power, as it turns out, was not really with me – it was with those who sold me the original story. The choices I made when I knew no better helped them understand me and others like me better. They could do this because they were watching. When I wanted them to stop watching, they told me that if I had nothing to hide, then I had nothing to fear.' Contents Part I. Privacy is Power Part II. Privacy in Peril Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kirstie Ball, Kevin Haggerty, and David Lyon, Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies (book). Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity and Love in the Digital Age (book). Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, We Know All About You: The Story of Surveillance in Britain and America (book). Neil Richards, Why Privacy Matters (book). Edward Snowden, Permanent Record: A Memoir of a Reluctant Whistleblower (book). Carissa Véliz, Privacy is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data (book). Raymond Wacks, Privacy: A Very Short Introduction (book).

Introduction 'I was sold a story about the modern world. I was told that I could connect with friends for free and that I could have everything conveniently tailored to my tastes. I was also promised I’d be kept safe from those who wished to attack me and my values. All in all, I was told I would be empowered to live my life as I saw fit. In time, I began to hear another story. I started to hear that what I had shared with friends was actually a product that social media sold to others. I was told that some of my wants and desires were, in reality, the wants and desires of people whom I had never met. I was made aware that the promise of safety came at a cost which appears never to have been proven worthwhile. The power, as it turns out, was not really with me – it was with those who sold me the original story. The choices I made when I knew no better helped them understand me and others like me better. They could do this because they were watching. When I wanted them to stop watching, they told me that if I had nothing to hide, then I had nothing to fear.' Contents Part I. Privacy is Power Part II. Privacy in Peril Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kirstie Ball, Kevin Haggerty, and David Lyon, Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies (book). Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity and Love in the Digital Age (book). Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, We Know All About You: The Story of Surveillance in Britain and America (book). Neil Richards, Why Privacy Matters (book). Edward Snowden, Permanent Record: A Memoir of a Reluctant Whistleblower (book). Carissa Véliz, Privacy is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data (book). Raymond Wacks, Privacy: A Very Short Introduction (book).

Introduction This episode features Jack Symes in conversation with four of the biggest names in philosophy: Richard Dawkins (representing science and atheism), Jessica Frazier (on Hinduism), Silvia Jonas (speaking on Jewish philosophy), and Richard Swinburne (defending Christianity). With over six-hundred people registering for tickets, we were absolutely overwhelmed by your support; thank you to everybody who came along! A very special thank you to our Patrons and the Global Philosophy of Religion Project at the University of Birmingham for making the event possible. We hope you enjoy the show! ‘The origin of our universe is the greatest mystery of all. Why is there something rather than nothing? Further still, how did we come to exist in a world with such precise laws of nature and complex creatures? As we shall see, how we answer these questions determines everything: from the meaning of our lives to the secrets of our futures.’ Contents Part I. The Debate Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links General The Global Philosophy of Religion Project, University of Birmingham. Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (Bloomsbury, 2024). Richard Dawkins The Selfish Gene (book). The Blind Watchmaker (book). The God Delusion (book). Outgrowing God (book). Flights of Fancy (book). www.richarddawkins.com www.richarddawkins.net Jessica Frazier About (webpage). Reality, Religion, and Passion (book). The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies (book). Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality (book). Categorisation in Indian Philosophy: Thinking Inside the Box (book). BBC In Our Times: Hindu Creation (podcast). History of Philosophy without Any Gaps (podcast). Silvia Jonas Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). Richard Swinburne The Existence of God (book). Is There a God? (book). More books by Richard Swinburne.

Introduction This episode features Jack Symes in conversation with four of the biggest names in philosophy: Richard Dawkins (representing science and atheism), Jessica Frazier (on Hinduism), Silvia Jonas (speaking on Jewish philosophy), and Richard Swinburne (defending Christianity). With over six-hundred people registering for tickets, we were absolutely overwhelmed by your support; thank you to everybody who came along! A very special thank you to our Patrons and the Global Philosophy of Religion Project at the University of Birmingham for making the event possible. We hope you enjoy the show! ‘The origin of our universe is the greatest mystery of all. Why is there something rather than nothing? Further still, how did we come to exist in a world with such precise laws of nature and complex creatures? As we shall see, how we answer these questions determines everything: from the meaning of our lives to the secrets of our futures.’ Contents Part I. The Debate Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links General The Global Philosophy of Religion Project, University of Birmingham. Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (Bloomsbury, 2024). Richard Dawkins The Selfish Gene (book). The Blind Watchmaker (book). The God Delusion (book). Outgrowing God (book). Flights of Fancy (book). www.richarddawkins.com www.richarddawkins.net Jessica Frazier About (webpage). Reality, Religion, and Passion (book). The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies (book). Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality (book). Categorisation in Indian Philosophy: Thinking Inside the Box (book). BBC In Our Times: Hindu Creation (podcast). History of Philosophy without Any Gaps (podcast). Silvia Jonas Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). Richard Swinburne The Existence of God (book). Is There a God? (book). More books by Richard Swinburne.

Beauty is nothing trivial. We get up in the morning, look in the mirror, and ask ourselves: ‘How do I look?’ The thinner, firmer, smoother, and younger we seem, the better our self-image and prospects. If you are not improving the way that you look, then you’re doing something wrong. Do not let yourself go, focus on self-care, and put the work in. The alternative? Be prepared to pay the social and economic price. In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature and ethics of beauty ideals with Heather Widdows, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Warwick. Professor Widdows has become a global thought leader due to the success of her ‘ground-breaking’ book, Perfect Me: Beauty as an Ethical Ideal. According to Widdows, the more committed to the beauty ideal we are, the higher the demands – the more is required to be normal – and the further our sense of self is determined by appearance. It’s time we faced the ugly truth: we have come to see beauty as a direct reflection of worth and character. Contents Part I. The Beauty Ideal Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Heather Widdows, Perfect Me: Beauty as an Ethical Ideal (book) Everyday Lookism, Website Heather Widdows, Website Heather Widdows, Twitter

Beauty is nothing trivial. We get up in the morning, look in the mirror, and ask ourselves: ‘How do I look?’ The thinner, firmer, smoother, and younger we seem, the better our self-image and prospects. If you are not improving the way that you look, then you’re doing something wrong. Do not let yourself go, focus on self-care, and put the work in. The alternative? Be prepared to pay the social and economic price. In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature and ethics of beauty ideals with Heather Widdows, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Warwick. Professor Widdows has become a global thought leader due to the success of her ‘ground-breaking’ book, Perfect Me: Beauty as an Ethical Ideal. According to Widdows, the more committed to the beauty ideal we are, the higher the demands – the more is required to be normal – and the further our sense of self is determined by appearance. It’s time we faced the ugly truth: we have come to see beauty as a direct reflection of worth and character. Contents Part I. The Beauty Ideal Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Heather Widdows, Perfect Me: Beauty as an Ethical Ideal (book) Everyday Lookism, Website Heather Widdows, Website Heather Widdows, Twitter

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

For Judaism, it is practice over theology. The most important aspect of one’s faith is not philosophical reflection on God, but the rules and actions of the faithful. After all, according to Maimonides – arguably the most significant philosopher in the history of Jewish thought – we can never know God’s nature, and, therefore, there is more to be gained from what we do than trying to know what God is like. For Maimonides, ‘We are only able to apprehend that He is.’ This raises a problem, however, for if we cannot learn about, come to build a relationship, or increase our knowledge of God, then what is the point of religious observance? In this episode, we’ll be discussing Judaism, knowledge, understanding and the rationality of theism with Professor Silvia Jonas of the University of Bamberg and the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy. According to Jonas, Maimonides’s insights are valuable; yet he misses a crucial piece of the puzzle – a distinction between knowledge and understanding. Beyond understanding the ineffable, Jonas argues that theism shouldn’t try to compete with modern science. That doesn’t mean, however, that questions of God aren’t important. For Jonas, God is a worthy object of philosophical investigation, not because God completes our grand ‘theory of everything’, but because God shapes people’s everyday lives. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. Judaism: Knowledge and Understanding Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Silvia Jonas, Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). The Global Philosophy of Religion Project (website). Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (book).

For Judaism, it is practice over theology. The most important aspect of one’s faith is not philosophical reflection on God, but the rules and actions of the faithful. After all, according to Maimonides – arguably the most significant philosopher in the history of Jewish thought – we can never know God’s nature, and, therefore, there is more to be gained from what we do than trying to know what God is like. For Maimonides, ‘We are only able to apprehend that He is.’ This raises a problem, however, for if we cannot learn about, come to build a relationship, or increase our knowledge of God, then what is the point of religious observance? In this episode, we’ll be discussing Judaism, knowledge, understanding and the rationality of theism with Professor Silvia Jonas of the University of Bamberg and the Munich Center for Mathematical Philosophy. According to Jonas, Maimonides’s insights are valuable; yet he misses a crucial piece of the puzzle – a distinction between knowledge and understanding. Beyond understanding the ineffable, Jonas argues that theism shouldn’t try to compete with modern science. That doesn’t mean, however, that questions of God aren’t important. For Jonas, God is a worthy object of philosophical investigation, not because God completes our grand ‘theory of everything’, but because God shapes people’s everyday lives. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. Judaism: Knowledge and Understanding Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Silvia Jonas, Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). The Global Philosophy of Religion Project (website). Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (book).

Honour calls a person to defend their teammates, support their family, and have self-respect. To heed the call of honour, say those who listen, leads us towards a good life. Yet, honour does not bear the marks of modern liberal morality. Honour does not focus on the universal but the particular, nor does it claim impartiality. Rather, honour is deeply personal and emotional. For some, the call of honour is like that of the sirens of Greek mythology: causing the illusion of what is good. In reality, pursuing that good causes us to crash on the rocks of family feuds, cycles of violence, and the subjection of women. But is this really the full story? Must a culture of honour result in revenge and injustice? And is modern liberal morality fit to play the role many thinkers wish it to? In this interview, we’ll be speaking to Tamler Sommers, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Houston and host of the Very Bad Wizards podcast. Tamler is the author of several books, including, Relative Justice, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain, and – the focus of our interview – Why Honor Matters. It is time, according to Sommers, for those who are sceptical or separated from the importance of honour to reassess their relationship with it. To do so raises questions of criminal justice, morality, love, friendship, and personal integrity. In short, honour can be a great motivator across almost all areas of human life, says Sommers, and it is time we give it the respect it deserves. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tamler’s website Tamler Sommers, Why Honour Matters Tamler Sommers, Relative Justice: Cultural Diversity, Free Will, and Moral Responsibility Tamler Sommers, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain Tamler Sommers, publications Very bad wizard, podcast Tamler Sommers, twitter

Honour calls a person to defend their teammates, support their family, and have self-respect. To heed the call of honour, say those who listen, leads us towards a good life. Yet, honour does not bear the marks of modern liberal morality. Honour does not focus on the universal but the particular, nor does it claim impartiality. Rather, honour is deeply personal and emotional. For some, the call of honour is like that of the sirens of Greek mythology: causing the illusion of what is good. In reality, pursuing that good causes us to crash on the rocks of family feuds, cycles of violence, and the subjection of women. But is this really the full story? Must a culture of honour result in revenge and injustice? And is modern liberal morality fit to play the role many thinkers wish it to? In this interview, we’ll be speaking to Tamler Sommers, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Houston and host of the Very Bad Wizards podcast. Tamler is the author of several books, including, Relative Justice, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain, and – the focus of our interview – Why Honor Matters. It is time, according to Sommers, for those who are sceptical or separated from the importance of honour to reassess their relationship with it. To do so raises questions of criminal justice, morality, love, friendship, and personal integrity. In short, honour can be a great motivator across almost all areas of human life, says Sommers, and it is time we give it the respect it deserves. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tamler’s website Tamler Sommers, Why Honour Matters Tamler Sommers, Relative Justice: Cultural Diversity, Free Will, and Moral Responsibility Tamler Sommers, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain Tamler Sommers, publications Very bad wizard, podcast Tamler Sommers, twitter

Our sensory experiences make up the fabric of our worlds. It’s a fabric that keeps us warm; a fabric that makes the world worth living in. If you couldn’t hear the cry of your new-born child, if you couldn’t taste your grandfather’s famous brussels sprouts at Christmas, or feel the embrace of your lifelong partner, then your life wouldn’t just include less experiences, but less meaning. Given the value we place on our sensory experiences, it seems important that we understand the nature of them. What is happening, exactly, when we hear, taste, and feel? What are sensory experiences made of? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature of sensory phenomenology with Dr Laura Gow, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool. Formerly of Warwick University, Cambridge University, and the University of Antwerp, Dr Gow – whose work focuses on the philosophy of perception and the metaphysics of consciousness – is one of the UK’s leading phenomenologists. From hallucinations and colour to empty space and silence, Laura’s research covers a broad range of topics, but in this episode we’ll be focusing on transparency. According to the transparency view, when we undergo a perceptual experience, the only properties we’re aware of are located externally. There are no perceptual properties, says Gow, inside of us – despite what it may seem. This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Laura Gow (website) Laura Gow, Colour (paper) Laura Gow, Everything is Clear (paper) Laura Gow, Empty Space, Silence, and Absence (paper) Laura Gow, A New Theory of Absence Experience (paper) Laura Gow, Perceptual Experience and Physicalism (paper) Laura Gow, The Limitations of Perceptual Transparency (paper)

Our sensory experiences make up the fabric of our worlds. It’s a fabric that keeps us warm; a fabric that makes the world worth living in. If you couldn’t hear the cry of your new-born child, if you couldn’t taste your grandfather’s famous brussels sprouts at Christmas, or feel the embrace of your lifelong partner, then your life wouldn’t just include less experiences, but less meaning. Given the value we place on our sensory experiences, it seems important that we understand the nature of them. What is happening, exactly, when we hear, taste, and feel? What are sensory experiences made of? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature of sensory phenomenology with Dr Laura Gow, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool. Formerly of Warwick University, Cambridge University, and the University of Antwerp, Dr Gow – whose work focuses on the philosophy of perception and the metaphysics of consciousness – is one of the UK’s leading phenomenologists. From hallucinations and colour to empty space and silence, Laura’s research covers a broad range of topics, but in this episode we’ll be focusing on transparency. According to the transparency view, when we undergo a perceptual experience, the only properties we’re aware of are located externally. There are no perceptual properties, says Gow, inside of us – despite what it may seem. This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Laura Gow (website) Laura Gow, Colour (paper) Laura Gow, Everything is Clear (paper) Laura Gow, Empty Space, Silence, and Absence (paper) Laura Gow, A New Theory of Absence Experience (paper) Laura Gow, Perceptual Experience and Physicalism (paper) Laura Gow, The Limitations of Perceptual Transparency (paper)

‘630 million threatened by rising seas!’; ‘Study blames climate change for 37% of worldwide heat deaths!’; ‘Fossil fuels must stay underground!’ Despite the headlines and 97% of climate scientists agreeing that human activity is one of the major causes of climate change, just seven in ten Americans believe that climate change is real and only six in ten consider human activity to be a leading cause. As a survey of beliefs, these statistics are concerning. The bigger problem, however, is that they aren’t held in a vacuum, but are formed within and contribute to the functioning of democratic societies.  If we want a genuinely democratic state, how can we establish public policies – informed by our very best science – if a sizable minority of people reject the science? What can be done, descriptively and ethically, to change the minds of those who hold (what experts might consider) unreasonable beliefs? According to Robin McKenna, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, these questions demonstrate the role and importance of contemporary epistemology. Drawing from the latest empirical research on how we form beliefs and how and why we change our minds, McKenna argues that we can improve our epistemic situations by creating environments in which we are more likely to form beliefs that align with the science. To bring about a better world, people must recognise that their beliefs aren’t formed in an ideal and impartial state. To protect democracy and the natural world, says McKenna, we must combat misinformation and political bias through ethical and effective marketing. Contents Part I. Communicating Science Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Robin McKenna (website). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Intellectual Autonomy (chapter). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Epistemic Paternalism (paper). This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy.

‘630 million threatened by rising seas!’; ‘Study blames climate change for 37% of worldwide heat deaths!’; ‘Fossil fuels must stay underground!’ Despite the headlines and 97% of climate scientists agreeing that human activity is one of the major causes of climate change, just seven in ten Americans believe that climate change is real and only six in ten consider human activity to be a leading cause. As a survey of beliefs, these statistics are concerning. The bigger problem, however, is that they aren’t held in a vacuum, but are formed within and contribute to the functioning of democratic societies.  If we want a genuinely democratic state, how can we establish public policies – informed by our very best science – if a sizable minority of people reject the science? What can be done, descriptively and ethically, to change the minds of those who hold (what experts might consider) unreasonable beliefs? According to Robin McKenna, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, these questions demonstrate the role and importance of contemporary epistemology. Drawing from the latest empirical research on how we form beliefs and how and why we change our minds, McKenna argues that we can improve our epistemic situations by creating environments in which we are more likely to form beliefs that align with the science. To bring about a better world, people must recognise that their beliefs aren’t formed in an ideal and impartial state. To protect democracy and the natural world, says McKenna, we must combat misinformation and political bias through ethical and effective marketing. Contents Part I. Communicating Science Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Robin McKenna (website). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Intellectual Autonomy (chapter). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Epistemic Paternalism (paper). This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy.

You’re going to a party, but you don’t care if the other guests will like your dress. You pull onto your drive; you don’t consider what your neighbours will think of your car. You sell books that you’ve written, share photographs that you’ve taken, and post your thoughts on the world to any internet user who will listen – yet, you are unmoved and unmotivated by the popularity of your work. Imagine if you didn’t have to worry about your career, your fame, or wealth. Imagine if you didn’t have to fret about falling in love or maintaining that love once you’ve found it. Imagine never feeling daunted by the fact you’re going to die, and that something may or may not be waiting for you beyond the grave. If you could free yourself from these anxieties, do you think you would be happy? Well, isn’t happiness the goal of life, after all? According to the Epicureans, we should answer these questions with a resounding ‘yes’. For his followers, Epicurus worked out exactly how we can achieve this state of happiness and tranquillity, and the good news is that it is within reach for all of us. All we need to do is follow one principle: pursue pleasure and avoid pain. It’s just that simple. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga backpacks.   Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSYCAST. Contents Part I. The Path to Tranquility Part II. Metaphysics, God, and Death Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Haris Dimitriadis, Epicurus And The Pleasant Life: A Philosophy of Nature Daniel Klein, Travels with Epicurus: Meditations from a Greek Island on the Pleasures of Old Age Epicurus and John Strodach, The Art of Happiness John Sellars, The Fourfold Remedy: Epicurus and the Art of Happiness James Warren, The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism Catherine Wilson, Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction Catherine Wilson, The Pleasure Principle: Epicureanism: A Philosophy for Modern Living

You’re going to a party, but you don’t care if the other guests will like your dress. You pull onto your drive; you don’t consider what your neighbours will think of your car. You sell books that you’ve written, share photographs that you’ve taken, and post your thoughts on the world to any internet user who will listen – yet, you are unmoved and unmotivated by the popularity of your work. Imagine if you didn’t have to worry about your career, your fame, or wealth. Imagine if you didn’t have to fret about falling in love or maintaining that love once you’ve found it. Imagine never feeling daunted by the fact you’re going to die, and that something may or may not be waiting for you beyond the grave. If you could free yourself from these anxieties, do you think you would be happy? Well, isn’t happiness the goal of life, after all? According to the Epicureans, we should answer these questions with a resounding ‘yes’. For his followers, Epicurus worked out exactly how we can achieve this state of happiness and tranquillity, and the good news is that it is within reach for all of us. All we need to do is follow one principle: pursue pleasure and avoid pain. It’s just that simple. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga backpacks. Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSYCAST. Contents Part I. The Path to Tranquility Part II. Metaphysics, God, and Death Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Haris Dimitriadis, Epicurus And The Pleasant Life: A Philosophy of Nature Daniel Klein, Travels with Epicurus: Meditations from a Greek Island on the Pleasures of Old Age Epicurus and John Strodach, The Art of Happiness John Sellars, The Fourfold Remedy: Epicurus and the Art of Happiness James Warren, The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism Catherine Wilson, Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction Catherine Wilson, The Pleasure Principle: Epicureanism: A Philosophy for Modern Living

You’re going to a party, but you don’t care if the other guests will like your dress. You pull onto your drive; you don’t consider what your neighbours will think of your car. You sell books that you’ve written, share photographs that you’ve taken, and post your thoughts on the world to any internet user who will listen – yet, you are unmoved and unmotivated by the popularity of your work. Imagine if you didn’t have to worry about your career, your fame, or wealth. Imagine if you didn’t have to fret about falling in love or maintaining that love once you’ve found it. Imagine never feeling daunted by the fact you’re going to die, and that something may or may not be waiting for you beyond the grave. If you could free yourself from these anxieties, do you think you would be happy? Well, isn’t happiness the goal of life, after all? According to the Epicureans, we should answer these questions with a resounding ‘yes’. For his followers, Epicurus worked out exactly how we can achieve this state of happiness and tranquillity, and the good news is that it is within reach for all of us. All we need to do is follow one principle: pursue pleasure and avoid pain. It’s just that simple. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga backpacks.   Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSYCAST. Contents Part I. The Path to Tranquility Part II. Metaphysics, God, and Death Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Haris Dimitriadis, Epicurus And The Pleasant Life: A Philosophy of Nature Daniel Klein, Travels with Epicurus: Meditations from a Greek Island on the Pleasures of Old Age Epicurus and John Strodach, The Art of Happiness John Sellars, The Fourfold Remedy: Epicurus and the Art of Happiness James Warren, The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism Catherine Wilson, Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction Catherine Wilson, The Pleasure Principle: Epicureanism: A Philosophy for Modern Living

A prick of the skin; the sorrow of grief; the inevitability of change; our dependence on the whim of the cosmos. Suffering bleeds into every aspect of our existence and, according to Siddhārtha Gautama (the Buddha), the anguish of our misfortune stems from our ignorance and confusion. If we were to see the world for how it really is – a place of impermanence, interdependence, and emptiness – then, according to Buddhism, we might free ourselves from illusion and discover the path to liberation and enlightenment. Today, this insight is shared by over half a billion people. Yet, most philosophy departments in Europe and America offer no courses in Buddhist philosophy and (within the leading journals) academic papers focusing on the central tenets of Buddhist philosophy of religion are vastly outweighed by their Abrahamic (and predominantly Christian) counterparts. Professor Jay Garfield, our guest for this episode, is the exception to this rule. Championing the globalisation of philosophy and reshaping perceptions of Buddhist scholarship, Professor Garfield is Chair of Philosophy at Smith College in Massachusetts, Visiting Professor at Harvard Divinity School, Professor at Melbourne University, and adjunct Professor at the Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies. Named amongst the 50 most influential philosophers of the past decade – with over 30 books and over 200 publications – it is safe to say that Professor Garfield is one of the leading exponents of Buddhist philosophy in contemporary academia. For Garfield, if philosophy won’t diversify, then let’s call it out for what it is: a colonial discipline that ignores the rich and relevant insights of non-Western thought. As philosophers, we cannot afford to ignore the metaphysical, ethical, epistemological, and existential insights of Buddhist scholarship. It’s time to engage with Buddhism, and rid ourselves of our prejudices, ignorance, and confusion. Buddhism is a philosophy of the present, not a philosophy of the past, and it’s time we treated it that way. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. The Nature of Reality Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Jay Garfield, Personal Website. (Website) Jay Garfield, Engaging Buddhism. (Book) Jay Garfield, Practicing without a License. (Essay) Books by Jay Garfield. (Website)

A prick of the skin; the sorrow of grief; the inevitability of change; our dependence on the whim of the cosmos. Suffering bleeds into every aspect of our existence and, according to Siddhārtha Gautama (the Buddha), the anguish of our misfortune stems from our ignorance and confusion. If we were to see the world for how it really is – a place of impermanence, interdependence, and emptiness – then, according to Buddhism, we might free ourselves from illusion and discover the path to liberation and enlightenment. Today, this insight is shared by over half a billion people. Yet, most philosophy departments in Europe and America offer no courses in Buddhist philosophy and (within the leading journals) academic papers focusing on the central tenets of Buddhist philosophy of religion are vastly outweighed by their Abrahamic (and predominantly Christian) counterparts. Professor Jay Garfield, our guest for this episode, is the exception to this rule. Championing the globalisation of philosophy and reshaping perceptions of Buddhist scholarship, Professor Garfield is Chair of Philosophy at Smith College in Massachusetts, Visiting Professor at Harvard Divinity School, Professor at Melbourne University, and adjunct Professor at the Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies. Named amongst the 50 most influential philosophers of the past decade – with over 30 books and over 200 publications – it is safe to say that Professor Garfield is one of the leading exponents of Buddhist philosophy in contemporary academia. For Garfield, if philosophy won’t diversify, then let’s call it out for what it is: a colonial discipline that ignores the rich and relevant insights of non-Western thought. As philosophers, we cannot afford to ignore the metaphysical, ethical, epistemological, and existential insights of Buddhist scholarship. It’s time to engage with Buddhism, and rid ourselves of our prejudices, ignorance, and confusion. Buddhism is a philosophy of the present, not a philosophy of the past, and it’s time we treated it that way. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. The Nature of Reality Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Jay Garfield, Personal Website. (Website) Jay Garfield, Engaging Buddhism. (Book) Jay Garfield, Practicing without a License. (Essay) Books by Jay Garfield. (Website)

Introduction On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’ As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts. One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality. Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved. Contents Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem Part III. The Essence of Evil Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book) Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book) Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book) Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book) Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book) Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book) Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book) Dana Vila, Arendt (Book) Eichmann Trial (YouTube)

Introduction On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’ As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts. One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality. Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved. Contents Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem Part III. The Essence of Evil Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book) Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book) Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book) Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book) Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book) Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book) Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book) Dana Vila, Arendt (Book) Eichmann Trial (YouTube)

Introduction On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’ As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts. One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality. Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved. Contents Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem Part III. The Essence of Evil Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book) Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book) Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book) Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book) Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book) Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book) Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book) Dana Vila, Arendt (Book) Eichmann Trial (YouTube)

Introduction On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’ As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts. One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality. Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved. Contents Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem Part III. The Essence of Evil Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book) Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book) Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book) Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book) Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book) Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book) Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book) Dana Vila, Arendt (Book) Eichmann Trial (YouTube)

Introduction “How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh. In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy. Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. Allāh Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (website). Mohammad Saleh Zarepour, Necessary Existence and Monotheism (book). Zain Ali, ‘Some Reflections on William Lane Craig’s Critique of Islam’ (paper).

Introduction “How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh. In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy. Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. Allāh Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (website). Mohammad Saleh Zarepour, Necessary Existence and Monotheism (book). Zain Ali, ‘Some Reflections on William Lane Craig’s Critique of Islam’ (paper).

In this episode, you’ll be treated to a live performance of The Panpsycast. The event took place at Liverpool’s beautiful Tung Auditorium on 20th May 2022. Over three hundred of you purchased tickets to the event, with some of our most loyal patrons travelling thousands of miles to be with us in person. Before you listen to the audio, we just wanted to say a huge thank you to those who came along, as well as all of our wonderful panellists – Rowan Williams, Anil Seth, Laura Gow, and Philip Goff – for participating in the debate. A special thank you to Q Quartet, The Department of Philosophy at Liverpool University, and Premier Christian Radio for making this episode possible – as well as all of our incredible patrons. Thank you again for your support; we hope you enjoy the show. Contents Part I. The Debate Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool Unbelievable? Premier Radio Anil Seth Laura Gow Rowan Williams Jack Symes Philip Goff

In this episode, you’ll be treated to a live performance of The Panpsycast. The event took place at Liverpool’s beautiful Tung Auditorium on 20th May 2022. Over three hundred of you purchased tickets to the event, with some of our most loyal patrons travelling thousands of miles to be with us in person. Before you listen to the audio, we just wanted to say a huge thank you to those who came along, as well as all of our wonderful panellists – Rowan Williams, Anil Seth, Laura Gow, and Philip Goff – for participating in the debate. A special thank you to Q Quartet, The Department of Philosophy at Liverpool University, and Premier Christian Radio for making this episode possible – as well as all of our incredible patrons. Thank you again for your support; we hope you enjoy the show. Contents Part I. The Debate Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool Unbelievable? Premier Radio Anil Seth Laura Gow Rowan Williams Jack Symes Philip Goff

Introduction The flight of a hummingbird, the sprint of a cheetah, the breath of a whale, a daisy turning towards the sunlight. Given the complexity of the natural world, we can understand why – before the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species – people believed that the universe was the work of an intelligent designer. These days, however – although creationism continues to be defended by religious fundamentalists – the scientific consensus is that the world’s organisms evolved through the long and arduous process of natural selection. ‘With a complete physical explanation,’ say the new atheists, ‘there’s no need to appeal to the supernatural.’ In this interview, we’ll be discussing atheism with Professor Richard Dawkins. It’s no exaggeration to say that Richard Dawkins is one of the most influential scientists, and the most famous atheist, of all time. Alongside his invaluable contributions to evolutionary biology, his books – including The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, and The God Delusion – have a readership in the tens of millions, resulting in numerous prestigious awards and recognition as ‘the world’s top thinker’. ‘Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin’, says Dawkins, ‘Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.’ It is time we seized that possibility: that we embrace the godless universe, craft our own meaning, and stop suffering fools gladly. Contents Part I. Why I'm an Atheist Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene. Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion. Richard Dawkins, Outgrowing God. Richard Dawkins, Flights of Fancy. www.richarddawkins.com www.richarddawkins.net

Introduction The flight of a hummingbird, the sprint of a cheetah, the breath of a whale, a daisy turning towards the sunlight. Given the complexity of the natural world, we can understand why – before the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species – people believed that the universe was the work of an intelligent designer. These days, however – although creationism continues to be defended by religious fundamentalists – the scientific consensus is that the world’s organisms evolved through the long and arduous process of natural selection. ‘With a complete physical explanation,’ say the new atheists, ‘there’s no need to appeal to the supernatural.’ In this interview, we’ll be discussing atheism with Professor Richard Dawkins. It’s no exaggeration to say that Richard Dawkins is one of the most influential scientists, and the most famous atheist, of all time. Alongside his invaluable contributions to evolutionary biology, his books – including The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, and The God Delusion – have a readership in the tens of millions, resulting in numerous prestigious awards and recognition as ‘the world’s top thinker’. ‘Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin’, says Dawkins, ‘Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.’ It is time we seized that possibility: that we embrace the godless universe, craft our own meaning, and stop suffering fools gladly. Contents Part I. Why I'm an Atheist Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene. Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker. Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion. Richard Dawkins, Outgrowing God. Richard Dawkins, Flights of Fancy. www.richarddawkins.com www.richarddawkins.net

Introduction Art is created by people, but people are fallible. When the art we love is tainted by the brush of an artist’s biography, we must ask whether the shift in our aesthetic experience is reasonable. One might also wonder whether artworks can do wrong in and of themselves. If artworks can be intended as conveyers of truth, can they convey falsehoods or – more awkwardly – lies? These aren’t just conceptual problems. If artworks lie and immoral artists are inseparable from their artworks, how should we respond? Should we censor all art, some art, or no art at all? In this episode, we’ll be discussing the ethics of art with Cambridge University’s Dr Daisy Dixon. Dixon’s work, which explores the nature of (and responses to) unethical art, invites us to place art within its context – to consider artworks in relation to their artists, truth-functionality in relation to an artwork’s surroundings, and dangerous artworks in relation to their curation. If we do so, says Dixon, we’ll not only gain a better understanding of art but how we can bring about a better world. Contents Part I. Time Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Daisy Dixon, Website. Daisy Dixon, University Profile. Daisy Dixon, Conflicted art: how to approach works by morally bad artists. Daisy Dixon, Lies in Art. Daisy Dixon, Should we censor art?: a philosophical guide on how to manage dangerous art.

Introduction Art is created by people, but people are fallible. When the art we love is tainted by the brush of an artist’s biography, we must ask whether the shift in our aesthetic experience is reasonable. One might also wonder whether artworks can do wrong in and of themselves. If artworks can be intended as conveyers of truth, can they convey falsehoods or – more awkwardly – lies? These aren’t just conceptual problems. If artworks lie and immoral artists are inseparable from their artworks, how should we respond? Should we censor all art, some art, or no art at all? In this episode, we’ll be discussing the ethics of art with Cambridge University’s Dr Daisy Dixon. Dixon’s work, which explores the nature of (and responses to) unethical art, invites us to place art within its context – to consider artworks in relation to their artists, truth-functionality in relation to an artwork’s surroundings, and dangerous artworks in relation to their curation. If we do so, says Dixon, we’ll not only gain a better understanding of art but how we can bring about a better world. Contents Part I. Time Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Daisy Dixon, Website. Daisy Dixon, University Profile. Daisy Dixon, Conflicted art: how to approach works by morally bad artists. Daisy Dixon, Lies in Art. Daisy Dixon, Should we censor art?: a philosophical guide on how to manage dangerous art.

Introduction Enjoying a holiday in a small coastal village, a New York banker finds herself walking along a tranquil pier when she comes across a fisherman in a small, wooden boat. Inside the boat she spotted several rainbow-coloured fish. ‘Congratulations on a fine score. How long did it take you to catch them?’ ‘Only a little while,’ the fisherman replied. ‘That’s great,’ said the banker, ‘so, why don’t you stay out longer and catch a few more?’ The fisherman explained that he only caught what he needed to put fish on the table and a roof over his family’s heads. ‘But’, the puzzled banker enquired, ‘what do you do with the rest of your time?’ The fisherman smiled: ‘I sleep in late, I read books, I go dancing with my wife, and I write jokes about Adam Sandler.’ The banker scoffed, ‘You know, I could offer you my assistance with your fishing business.’ The fisherman raised his eyebrows. ‘If you spent more time fishing, you could sell more fish and buy a bigger boat. You’d catch more fish, buy more boats, and soon enough you could buy a fleet! Instead of selling your catch to a middleman, you would sell directly to the processor, and eventually open a cannery.’ The fisherman paused for a moment… ‘Right, but how long will this all take?’ The banker replied: ‘Ten to fifteen years?’  ‘But what then?’ asked the fisherman. The banker looked confused, ‘Then you could enjoy some time off: sleep in late, read books, go dancing with your wife, and write jokes about Adam Sandler.’ The fisherman smiled, ‘I suggest you stick around for a while. Have you been fishing before? Ha! Why don’t you climb aboard?’ Contents Part I. Time Part II. How to Use It Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Oliver Burkeman, Four Thousand Weeks. Bertrand Russell, In Praise of Idleness. Seneca, On the Shortness of Life.

Introduction Enjoying a holiday in a small coastal village, a New York banker finds herself walking along a tranquil pier when she comes across a fisherman in a small, wooden boat. Inside the boat she spotted several rainbow-coloured fish. ‘Congratulations on a fine score. How long did it take you to catch them?’ ‘Only a little while,’ the fisherman replied. ‘That’s great,’ said the banker, ‘so, why don’t you stay out longer and catch a few more?’ The fisherman explained that he only caught what he needed to put fish on the table and a roof over his family’s heads. ‘But’, the puzzled banker enquired, ‘what do you do with the rest of your time?’ The fisherman smiled: ‘I sleep in late, I read books, I go dancing with my wife, and I write jokes about Adam Sandler.’ The banker scoffed, ‘You know, I could offer you my assistance with your fishing business.’ The fisherman raised his eyebrows. ‘If you spent more time fishing, you could sell more fish and buy a bigger boat. You’d catch more fish, buy more boats, and soon enough you could buy a fleet! Instead of selling your catch to a middleman, you would sell directly to the processor, and eventually open a cannery.’ The fisherman paused for a moment… ‘Right, but how long will this all take?’ The banker replied: ‘Ten to fifteen years?’  ‘But what then?’ asked the fisherman. The banker looked confused, ‘Then you could enjoy some time off: sleep in late, read books, go dancing with your wife, and write jokes about Adam Sandler.’ The fisherman smiled, ‘I suggest you stick around for a while. Have you been fishing before? Ha! Why don’t you climb aboard?’ Contents Part I. Time Part II. How to Use It Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Oliver Burkeman, Four Thousand Weeks. Bertrand Russell, In Praise of Idleness. Seneca, On the Shortness of Life.

Introduction Enjoying a holiday in a small coastal village, a New York banker finds herself walking along a tranquil pier when she comes across a fisherman in a small, wooden boat. Inside the boat she spotted several rainbow-coloured fish. ‘Congratulations on a fine score. How long did it take you to catch them?’ ‘Only a little while,’ the fisherman replied. ‘That’s great,’ said the banker, ‘so, why don’t you stay out longer and catch a few more?’ The fisherman explained that he only caught what he needed to put fish on the table and a roof over his family’s heads. ‘But’, the puzzled banker enquired, ‘what do you do with the rest of your time?’ The fisherman smiled: ‘I sleep in late, I read books, I go dancing with my wife, and I write jokes about Adam Sandler.’ The banker scoffed, ‘You know, I could offer you my assistance with your fishing business.’ The fisherman raised his eyebrows. ‘If you spent more time fishing, you could sell more fish and buy a bigger boat. You’d catch more fish, buy more boats, and soon enough you could buy a fleet! Instead of selling your catch to a middleman, you would sell directly to the processor, and eventually open a cannery.’ The fisherman paused for a moment… ‘Right, but how long will this all take?’ The banker replied: ‘Ten to fifteen years?’  ‘But what then?’ asked the fisherman. The banker looked confused, ‘Then you could enjoy some time off: sleep in late, read books, go dancing with your wife, and write jokes about Adam Sandler.’ The fisherman smiled, ‘I suggest you stick around for a while. Have you been fishing before? Ha! Why don’t you climb aboard?’ Contents Part I. Time Part II. How to Use It Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion   Links Oliver Burkeman, Four Thousand Weeks. Bertrand Russell, In Praise of Idleness. Seneca, On the Shortness of Life.

Welcome to ‘Episode 105 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be analysing Hauskeller’s argument against transhumanist approaches to animals. We are all prisoners of our biology. Whether humans (and our non-human cousins) have the capacity to think, feel, or fly is dictated by their DNA, long before they have a say in the matter. It’s a living lottery that has lifted human beings to lofty heights; that is, above the world’s lowly, lesser creatures. With the emergence of new technologies, the age of the transhumanists is upon us: philosophers and scientists who believe that the lottery should be rigged towards self-design and the elimination of suffering. We have a moral imperative, say the transhumanists, to engineer a world that is better for everybody: to seek out technological solutions to ethical problems, not just for ourselves but the rest of the animal kingdom. After all, the question is not, ‘can they reason?’ – nor ‘can they talk?’ – but ‘can they suffer?’ In this episode, we’ll be discussing animals in transhumanism with Professor of Philosophy and Head of Department at the University of Liverpool, Michael Hauskeller. With over two hundred publications – across a vast range of philosophical questions – in both academic and public philosophy, Professor Hauskeller is, undoubtedly, one of the world’s most prominent philosophers. For Hauskeller, philosophy helps us navigate ourselves towards a better tomorrow: through philosophy, we can discover what kind of people we want to be, in what kind of world we want to live, and how we should steer the futures of our fellow creatures. Our question for today: should we take pity on the world’s poor brutes – those who live such lowly lives – and lift them up to our own lofty heights? Or should we leave them to dance the muddy dance of life? Contents Part I. How to Become a Post-Dog Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Michael Hauskeller, Academia Profile. Michael Hauskeller, How to Become a Post-Dog: Animals in Transhumanism (paper) Michael Hauskeller, Living Like a Dog: Can the Life of Non-Human Animals Be Meaningful? (paper) Michael Hauskeller, University Profile. Nick Bostrom, Golden Retriever – Live on Larry King! (paper)

Welcome to ‘Episode 105 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing animals in transhumanism with Michael Hauskeller. We are all prisoners of our biology. Whether humans (and our non-human cousins) have the capacity to think, feel, or fly is dictated by their DNA, long before they have a say in the matter. It’s a living lottery that has lifted human beings to lofty heights; that is, above the world’s lowly, lesser creatures. With the emergence of new technologies, the age of the transhumanists is upon us: philosophers and scientists who believe that the lottery should be rigged towards self-design and the elimination of suffering. We have a moral imperative, say the transhumanists, to engineer a world that is better for everybody: to seek out technological solutions to ethical problems, not just for ourselves but the rest of the animal kingdom. After all, the question is not, ‘can they reason?’ – nor ‘can they talk?’ – but ‘can they suffer?’ In this episode, we’ll be discussing animals in transhumanism with Professor of Philosophy and Head of Department at the University of Liverpool, Michael Hauskeller. With over two hundred publications – across a vast range of philosophical questions – in both academic and public philosophy, Professor Hauskeller is, undoubtedly, one of the world’s most prominent philosophers. For Hauskeller, philosophy helps us navigate ourselves towards a better tomorrow: through philosophy, we can discover what kind of people we want to be, in what kind of world we want to live, and how we should steer the futures of our fellow creatures. Our question for today: should we take pity on the world’s poor brutes – those who live such lowly lives – and lift them up to our own lofty heights? Or should we leave them to dance the muddy dance of life? Contents Part I. How to Become a Post-Dog Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Michael Hauskeller, Academia Profile. Michael Hauskeller, How to Become a Post-Dog: Animals in Transhumanism (paper) Michael Hauskeller, Living Like a Dog: Can the Life of Non-Human Animals Be Meaningful? (paper) Michael Hauskeller, University Profile. Nick Bostrom, Golden Retriever – Live on Larry King! (paper)

Introduction If we want to improve our public discourse, we must aim to be as objective as possible. When we raise our consciousness and work towards clearing our minds of personal interests, political affiliations, and the sophistry of art, we grow closer to rationality and knowledge. Art, on the other hand, is nothing more than the overly excited offspring of objectivity: films, paintings, music, and dance contribute nothing unique to our understanding of the world. At worst, art muddies the waters of our discourse; at best, it merely reflects the insights of political philosophy and science. Opposing this view – and championing the cognitive advantages of artworks as political discourse – is Dr Vid Simoniti, Lecturer in Philosophy of Art at the University of Liverpool. As well as being a rising star in the worlds of academic philosophy and art history, Dr Simoniti’s work as a BBC New Generation Thinker – and his collaborations with public-facing projects such as the Liverpool bi-annual – is bringing conversations about art and philosophy into the public square. When we enjoy a play at the theatre, rock our heads to a song on the radio, or wiggle the joysticks on our PlayStation controllers: does it leave us more attuned to how the world is? For Simoniti, in the context of art as political discourse, the answer is unequivocally ‘yes’. This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy. Contents Part I. Public Health Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Vid Simoniti, Website. Vid Simoniti, Art Against the World (Podcast). Vid Simoniti, ‘Art as Political Discourse’ (Paper).

Introduction If we want to improve our public discourse, we must aim to be as objective as possible. When we raise our consciousness and work towards clearing our minds of personal interests, political affiliations, and the sophistry of art, we grow closer to rationality and knowledge. Art, on the other hand, is nothing more than the overly excited offspring of objectivity: films, paintings, music, and dance contribute nothing unique to our understanding of the world. At worst, art muddies the waters of our discourse; at best, it merely reflects the insights of political philosophy and science. Opposing this view – and championing the cognitive advantages of artworks as political discourse – is Dr Vid Simoniti, Lecturer in Philosophy of Art at the University of Liverpool. As well as being a rising star in the worlds of academic philosophy and art history, Dr Simoniti’s work as a BBC New Generation Thinker – and his collaborations with public-facing projects such as the Liverpool bi-annual – is bringing conversations about art and philosophy into the public square. When we enjoy a play at the theatre, rock our heads to a song on the radio, or wiggle the joysticks on our PlayStation controllers: does it leave us more attuned to how the world is? For Simoniti, in the context of art as political discourse, the answer is unequivocally ‘yes’. This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy. Contents Part I. Public Health Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Vid Simoniti, Website. Vid Simoniti, Art Against the World (Podcast). Vid Simoniti, ‘Art as Political Discourse’ (Paper).

Introduction Given the choice, who wouldn’t increase the balance in their bank account, switch into a fit and healthy body, find themselves in a meaningful career, and cultivate happiness and love in their relationships? These are preferences we all share, but few of us achieve them. Perhaps we could, if only we made better choices. We all want to make better decisions – the salad over the burger, the restful night’s sleep over ‘one more episode’ – yet we continue to succumb to our desires. Perhaps we need some help: maybe we need something to nudge us in the right direction? In this episode, we’ll be discussing the philosophy of nudges with Professor Thomas Schramme. Chair of Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, Thomas’s research focuses on moral and political philosophy and the philosophy of health and medicine. With over one hundred publications and heading several innovative projects – including ‘How Does it Feel? Interpersonal Understanding and Affective Empathy’ – Professor Schramme is not only an expert in his field but always communicates his ideas through accessible and engaging prose. As we’ll find in this interview, Schramme challenges some of the most prominent ideas in contemporary politics and psychology. According to Daniel Kehneman, nudges ‘have changed the world’… but, asks Schramme, do they always change it for the better? This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy. Contents Part I. Public Health Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Schramme, University Profile. Thomas Schramme, Publications. Thomas Schramme, Free-riders, collective benefit and the philosophy of mandatory vaccination. Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness, The Final Edition.

Introduction Given the choice, who wouldn’t increase the balance in their bank account, switch into a fit and healthy body, find themselves in a meaningful career, and cultivate happiness and love in their relationships? These are preferences we all share, but few of us achieve them. Perhaps we could, if only we made better choices. We all want to make better decisions – the salad over the burger, the restful night’s sleep over ‘one more episode’ – yet we continue to succumb to our desires. Perhaps we need some help: maybe we need something to nudge us in the right direction? In this episode, we’ll be discussing the philosophy of nudges with Professor Thomas Schramme. Chair of Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, Thomas’s research focuses on moral and political philosophy and the philosophy of health and medicine. With over one hundred publications and heading several innovative projects – including ‘How Does it Feel? Interpersonal Understanding and Affective Empathy’ – Professor Schramme is not only an expert in his field but always communicates his ideas through accessible and engaging prose. As we’ll find in this interview, Schramme challenges some of the most prominent ideas in contemporary politics and psychology. According to Daniel Kehneman, nudges ‘have changed the world’… but, asks Schramme, do they always change it for the better? This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy. Contents Part I. Public Health Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Schramme, University Profile. Thomas Schramme, Publications. Thomas Schramme, Free-riders, collective benefit and the philosophy of mandatory vaccination. Richard Thaler and Cass Sunstein, Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth and Happiness, The Final Edition.

The existence of God is the most discussed, and perhaps the most important, question in philosophy. For the majority of the world’s population, God provides meaning, morality, metaphysics, and hopefully, salvation. A rich history of scholarship defending God’s existence has meant theism has long been considered to be a reasonable worldview; however, with the rise of secularism and the new atheist movement, a fiery and passionate debate has ensued: one of science vs. religion. Our question: can the two be reconciled? In this episode, we’ll be discussing God’s existence with one of contemporary philosophy’s most influential thinkers, Professor Richard Swinburne. Best known for his great trilogy of books – The Coherence of Theism, The Existence of God, and Faith and Reason – Professor Swinburne’s impact on philosophy of religion has been enormous... from high school classrooms to university halls, every teacher knows his name and every student must wrestle with his work. According to Swinburne, theism is the friend – and not the enemy – of science; for God ‘explains everything that we observe’, from the universe’s existence and the scientific laws which operate within it, to its extraordinary miracles and conscious creatures. ‘If we want a complete explanation of the universe’, says Swinburne, ‘then science needs God.’ Contents Part I. Is there a God? Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Existence of God, Richard Swinburne (book). Is There a God?, Richard Swinburne (book). More books by Richard Swinburne.

The existence of God is the most discussed, and perhaps the most important, question in philosophy. For the majority of the world’s population, God provides meaning, morality, metaphysics, and hopefully, salvation. A rich history of scholarship defending God’s existence has meant theism has long been considered to be a reasonable worldview; however, with the rise of secularism and the new atheist movement, a fiery and passionate debate has ensued: one of science vs. religion. Our question: can the two be reconciled? In this episode, we’ll be discussing God’s existence with one of contemporary philosophy’s most influential thinkers, Professor Richard Swinburne. Best known for his great trilogy of books – The Coherence of Theism, The Existence of God, and Faith and Reason – Professor Swinburne’s impact on philosophy of religion has been enormous... from high school classrooms to university halls, every teacher knows his name and every student must wrestle with his work. According to Swinburne, theism is the friend – and not the enemy – of science; for God ‘explains everything that we observe’, from the universe’s existence and the scientific laws which operate within it, to its extraordinary miracles and conscious creatures. ‘If we want a complete explanation of the universe’, says Swinburne, ‘then science needs God.’ Contents Part I. Is there a God? Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Existence of God, Richard Swinburne (book). Is There a God?, Richard Swinburne (book). More books by Richard Swinburne.

Imagine the smile on your parent’s face as you rush to meet them at the school gates, the soft heat of the sand between your toes on a first holiday, waking up in the haze of a late afternoon after dancing all night, the drop in your stomach when you realize you’ll never hear their voice again. These are conscious experiences. Without them, what is there to life? In this sense, we all know what consciousness is – there’s nothing we know more intimately – yet it remains one of life’s greatest mysteries. Despite the incredible advances made in physical science, it doesn’t seem like we’re any closer to an explanation of where consciousness comes from. How is it, exactly, that the brain’s 86 billion neurons give rise to conscious experience? As we’ll see, our answer to this question will not only shape our understanding of the human mind, but the fabric of reality itself. – Extract from Philosophers on Consciousness

Introduction Imagine the smile on your parent’s face as you rush to meet them at the school gates, the soft heat of the sand between your toes on a first holiday, waking up in the haze of a late afternoon after dancing all night, the drop in your stomach when you realize you’ll never hear their voice again. These are conscious experiences. Without them, what is there to life? In this sense, we all know what consciousness is – there’s nothing we know more intimately – yet it remains one of life’s greatest mysteries. Despite the incredible advances made in physical science, it doesn’t seem like we’re any closer to an explanation of where consciousness comes from. How is it, exactly, that the brain’s 86 billion neurons give rise to conscious experience? As we’ll see, our answer to this question will not only shape our understanding of the human mind, but the fabric of reality itself. – Extract from Philosophers on Consciousness Contents Part I. The Fabric of Reality Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Philosophers on Consciousness: Talking about the Mind (Bloomsbury; Jack Symes).

The Panpsycast is now five years old. In which time, we have never failed to release a weekly instalment of the show. We’re exceptionally proud of what we’ve accomplished with your support. From our audiobook and upcoming book series to our big interviews and collaborations with leading organisations – it’s incredible that so many of you tune in week in, week out and support us on Patreon. Producing the podcast takes a lot of work, and every project has its peaks and valleys. The beginning of the pandemic marked a difficult time for us behind the scenes, and we’ve reached a point where we need to take a short step back. So, The Panpsycast will be taking a break; set to return on November 7th, 2021.  Throughout our hiatus, we’ll be pausing all Patreon payments. So, for August, September, and October, you won’t be charged anything if you’ve already pledged your support. We hope that you’ll stick around so we can keep producing the show when we return, and we’re incredibly grateful for your patience and understanding. If you’re missing us over the next three months, we’ve got over 250 instalments of the show in our back-catalogue, a 24-chapter Christianity audiobook on our website, and absolutely loads of bonus content over on our Patreon – including heaps of After Shows and insider interviews. If you’ve already been through our content… then, wow! You should really check out Philosophy Bites… just kidding. We’re incredibly grateful for your support and hope the content we’ve released will inspire you to hit the book shops whilst we’re away. We know how much the show means to so many of you, and we haven’t taken this decision lightly. Producing the show means so much to all of us, and we can’t wait to get back.  We’ll see you back here on November 7th, 2021. ___ ‘The Cave’, written and performed by Andrew Horton.

A philosophical education can feel like a long and arduous path. Sometimes you think you have seen the light; you think that you have knowledge, only to discover you knew nothing. It is times like this where the learner must examine their blind spots and begin their path to understanding once again while accepting that the next attempt might too end where it began. The philosopher Plato likened this path to the ascent from a dark cave up into the light of the sun. He also said that those who have seen the illuminated world above have a responsibility to go back to show others the way. Today we go back, not because we have seen the sun, but because we have travelled the path enough to know we can do a little better than we did before. The blind leading the blind? Perhaps, but we might stumble into something interesting along the way. With special thanks to the following creators for their sound samples. InspectorJ, InspectorJ(2), InspectorJ(3), InspectorJ(4), straget, jameswrowles, JG_Booysen, ethang, womb_affliction, bennychico11, HerbertBoland, ShadyDave, and 3bagbrew. Contents Part I. Forms Part II. Souls Links Plato, The Republic (Online). Plato, The Republic (Book).

A philosophical education can feel like a long and arduous path. Sometimes you think you have seen the light; you think that you have knowledge, only to discover you knew nothing. It is times like this where the learner must examine their blind spots and begin their path to understanding once again while accepting that the next attempt might too end where it began. The philosopher Plato likened this path to the ascent from a dark cave up into the light of the sun. He also said that those who have seen the illuminated world above have a responsibility to go back to show others the way. Today we go back, not because we have seen the sun, but because we have travelled the path enough to know we can do a little better than we did before. The blind leading the blind? Perhaps, but we might stumble into something interesting along the way. With special thanks to the following creators for their sound samples. InspectorJ, InspectorJ(2), InspectorJ(3), InspectorJ(4), straget, jameswrowles, JG_Booysen, ethang, womb_affliction, bennychico11, HerbertBoland, ShadyDave, and 3bagbrew. Contents Part I. Forms Part II. Souls Links Plato, The Republic (Online). Plato, The Republic (Book).

Introduction It cannot have escaped your attention that there is a small contingent of our nation that poses a threat to our way of life. They want us to stop farming our most prized delicacy on the grounds of their ‘moral concerns’. We must not let them push us around. As you well know, it has always been an important part of our culture. Why should we assume that this small group of radicals have got it right and that our ancestors have all been wrong? Think of all the memories we’ve shared when eating the meat around the table with our families. It is a wonderful thing. Secondly, I have yet to come across anyone who doesn’t gain great satisfaction from the delicious taste of the meat. Whether it is in patties, ground mince or slices, it is enjoyed by billions every day. Imagine the backlash if we showed sympathy to the radicals! Think about all the businesses that rely on meat for their income. It would be political suicide. Finally, and most importantly, we must always remember the natural order of things. We are top of the food chain, and it is our right to exercise our dominion. Every test we have conducted on the creatures have proven them to be inferior, be it intelligence, strength, or a capacity to live what we’d all say is a fulfilling life. I know that you must feel the same; all I ask is for permission to deal with the radicals. Eating human meat should never be up for debate. Contents Part I. History Part II. Fellow Creatures Part III. Mere Instruments Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Carl Cohen, ‘Why Animals Have No Rights’. David DeGrazia, Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals. Lori Gruen, Entangled Empathy: An Alternative Ethic for Our Relationships with Animals. Christine M. Korsgaard, Fellow Creatures: Our Obligations to the Other Animals. Philip Lymbery, Farmageddon in Pictures: The True Cost of Cheap Meat. Mary Midgley, Animals and Why They Matter. Matthieu Ricard, A Plea for the Animals: The Moral, Philosophical, and Evolutionary Imperative to Treat All Beings with Compassion. Peter Singer, Animal Liberation.

Introduction It cannot have escaped your attention that there is a small contingent of our nation that poses a threat to our way of life. They want us to stop farming our most prized delicacy on the grounds of their ‘moral concerns’. We must not let them push us around. As you well know, it has always been an important part of our culture. Why should we assume that this small group of radicals have got it right and that our ancestors have all been wrong? Think of all the memories we’ve shared when eating the meat around the table with our families. It is a wonderful thing. Secondly, I have yet to come across anyone who doesn’t gain great satisfaction from the delicious taste of the meat. Whether it is in patties, ground mince or slices, it is enjoyed by billions every day. Imagine the backlash if we showed sympathy to the radicals! Think about all the businesses that rely on meat for their income. It would be political suicide. Finally, and most importantly, we must always remember the natural order of things. We are top of the food chain, and it is our right to exercise our dominion. Every test we have conducted on the creatures have proven them to be inferior, be it intelligence, strength, or a capacity to live what we’d all say is a fulfilling life. I know that you must feel the same; all I ask is for permission to deal with the radicals. Eating human meat should never be up for debate. Contents Part I. History Part II. Fellow Creatures Part III. Mere Instruments Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Carl Cohen, ‘Why Animals Have No Rights’. David DeGrazia, Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals. Lori Gruen, Entangled Empathy: An Alternative Ethic for Our Relationships with Animals. Christine M. Korsgaard, Fellow Creatures: Our Obligations to the Other Animals. Philip Lymbery, Farmageddon in Pictures: The True Cost of Cheap Meat. Mary Midgley, Animals and Why They Matter. Matthieu Ricard, A Plea for the Animals: The Moral, Philosophical, and Evolutionary Imperative to Treat All Beings with Compassion. Peter Singer, Animal Liberation.

Introduction It cannot have escaped your attention that there is a small contingent of our nation that poses a threat to our way of life. They want us to stop farming our most prized delicacy on the grounds of their ‘moral concerns’. We must not let them push us around. As you well know, it has always been an important part of our culture. Why should we assume that this small group of radicals have got it right and that our ancestors have all been wrong? Think of all the memories we’ve shared when eating the meat around the table with our families. It is a wonderful thing. Secondly, I have yet to come across anyone who doesn’t gain great satisfaction from the delicious taste of the meat. Whether it is in patties, ground mince or slices, it is enjoyed by billions every day. Imagine the backlash if we showed sympathy to the radicals! Think about all the businesses that rely on meat for their income. It would be political suicide. Finally, and most importantly, we must always remember the natural order of things. We are top of the food chain, and it is our right to exercise our dominion. Every test we have conducted on the creatures have proven them to be inferior, be it intelligence, strength, or a capacity to live what we’d all say is a fulfilling life. I know that you must feel the same; all I ask is for permission to deal with the radicals. Eating human meat should never be up for debate. Contents Part I. History Part II. Fellow Creatures Part III. Mere Instruments Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Carl Cohen, ‘Why Animals Have No Rights’. David DeGrazia, Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals. Lori Gruen, Entangled Empathy: An Alternative Ethic for Our Relationships with Animals. Christine M. Korsgaard, Fellow Creatures: Our Obligations to the Other Animals. Philip Lymbery, Farmageddon in Pictures: The True Cost of Cheap Meat. Mary Midgley, Animals and Why They Matter. Matthieu Ricard, A Plea for the Animals: The Moral, Philosophical, and Evolutionary Imperative to Treat All Beings with Compassion. Peter Singer, Animal Liberation.

Introduction It cannot have escaped your attention that there is a small contingent of our nation that poses a threat to our way of life. They want us to stop farming our most prized delicacy on the grounds of their ‘moral concerns’. We must not let them push us around. As you well know, it has always been an important part of our culture. Why should we assume that this small group of radicals have got it right and that our ancestors have all been wrong? Think of all the memories we’ve shared when eating the meat around the table with our families. It is a wonderful thing. Secondly, I have yet to come across anyone who doesn’t gain great satisfaction from the delicious taste of the meat. Whether it is in patties, ground mince or slices, it is enjoyed by billions every day. Imagine the backlash if we showed sympathy to the radicals! Think about all the businesses that rely on meat for their income. It would be political suicide. Finally, and most importantly, we must always remember the natural order of things. We are top of the food chain, and it is our right to exercise our dominion. Every test we have conducted on the creatures have proven them to be inferior, be it intelligence, strength, or a capacity to live what we’d all say is a fulfilling life. I know that you must feel the same; all I ask is for permission to deal with the radicals. Eating human meat should never be up for debate. Contents Part I. History Part II. Fellow Creatures Part III. Mere Instruments Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Carl Cohen, ‘Why Animals Have No Rights’. David DeGrazia, Animal Rights: A Very Short Introduction. Jonathan Safran Foer, Eating Animals. Lori Gruen, Entangled Empathy: An Alternative Ethic for Our Relationships with Animals. Christine M. Korsgaard, Fellow Creatures: Our Obligations to the Other Animals. Philip Lymbery, Farmageddon in Pictures: The True Cost of Cheap Meat. Mary Midgley, Animals and Why They Matter. Matthieu Ricard, A Plea for the Animals: The Moral, Philosophical, and Evolutionary Imperative to Treat All Beings with Compassion. Peter Singer, Animal Liberation.

Introduction Christianity is the largest religion in the world: with almost 2.5 billion followers across the globe, nearly one in three people have faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Essential to the Christian worldview is the belief that the universe was created by a maximally great God: a being who is invested in the moral lives of his people and offers salvation to all who embrace his teachings. He is a God of three persons, a God of maximal power and intelligence, and a God who loves us all unconditionally. For many Christians, this belief is a matter of faith, but is this faith reasonable? Joining us this episode to discuss the nature and existence of God is Visiting Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology and Professor of Philosophy at Houston Baptist University, Dr William Lane Craig. With over thirty books and two hundred publications, Dr Craig has had a profound and lasting impact on academic debates within philosophy and theology. As well as being one of the leading philosophers of our time, Dr Craig’s work extends beyond the dusty chalkboards of university campuses. As the founder of the hugely popular non-profit organisation Reasonable Faith, Dr Craig is best known for his online lectures and for taking on the world’s most prominent philosophers and scientists in defence of Christianity. In the words of James Porter Moreland, ‘It is hard to overstate the impact that William Lane Craig has had for the cause of Christ. He is simply the finest Christian apologist of the last half century.’ Without God, says Craig, morality is groundless, metaphysics is hopeless, and life is meaningless. The God of Christianity is the wellspring from which all life and values come into being. It is God who made us without dust, and it is to God to whom we shall return. Global Philosophy of Religion This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.   Contents Part I. Reasonable Faith Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion   Links William Lane Craig, Popular Books. William Lane Craig, Academic Books. _ Reasonable Faith with William Lane Craig (website). Reasonable Faith (Facebook). Reasonable Faith (Twitter). _ ‘William Lane Craig and A. C. Grayling Debate on God & Evil’.

Introduction Christianity is the largest religion in the world: with almost 2.5 billion followers across the globe, nearly one in three people have faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Essential to the Christian worldview is the belief that the universe was created by a maximally great God: a being who is invested in the moral lives of his people and offers salvation to all who embrace his teachings. He is a God of three persons, a God of maximal power and intelligence, and a God who loves us all unconditionally. For many Christians, this belief is a matter of faith, but is this faith reasonable? Joining us this episode to discuss the nature and existence of God is Visiting Professor of Philosophy at Talbot School of Theology and Professor of Philosophy at Houston Baptist University, Dr William Lane Craig. With over thirty books and two hundred publications, Dr Craig has had a profound and lasting impact on academic debates within philosophy and theology. As well as being one of the leading philosophers of our time, Dr Craig’s work extends beyond the dusty chalkboards of university campuses. As the founder of the hugely popular non-profit organisation Reasonable Faith, Dr Craig is best known for his online lectures and for taking on the world’s most prominent philosophers and scientists in defence of Christianity. In the words of James Porter Moreland, ‘It is hard to overstate the impact that William Lane Craig has had for the cause of Christ. He is simply the finest Christian apologist of the last half century.’ Without God, says Craig, morality is groundless, metaphysics is hopeless, and life is meaningless. The God of Christianity is the wellspring from which all life and values come into being. It is God who made us without dust, and it is to God to whom we shall return. Global Philosophy of Religion This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.   Contents Part I. Reasonable Faith Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion   Links William Lane Craig, Popular Books. William Lane Craig, Academic Books. _ Reasonable Faith with William Lane Craig (website). Reasonable Faith (Facebook). Reasonable Faith (Twitter). _ ‘William Lane Craig and A. C. Grayling Debate on God & Evil’.

Introduction Over a year has passed since COVID-19 forced the world to shut its doors. Millions of lives have been lost, and millions more have undergone radical change. At times, many of us have wished to see loved ones, friends, and colleagues; we’ve longed to play sports, attend shows, and travel the world. We’ve hoped that everything can return to normal. But should they? What if this pandemic has highlighted issues in our societies that have been ignored or marginalised for too long? What if normal made the pandemic worse than it needed to be, and what if normal is part of the problem? According to philosopher Vittorio Bufacchi, this is precisely the case: everything must change. Vittorio Bufacchi is a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at University College Cork, specialising in questions concerning social injustice, human rights, and political violence. As we shall see, Bufacchi’s work demonstrates that philosophy can and should engage with the most pressing social issues of our time. Philosophy, says Bufacchi, can navigate us towards better ideas and a better world; and it is during times of crisis that we need it most. Contents Part I. The Pandemic Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Everything Must Change: Philosophical Lessons From Lockdown. Vittorio Bufacchi, Website. Vittorio Bufacchi, Twitter.

Introduction Over a year has passed since COVID-19 forced the world to shut its doors. Millions of lives have been lost, and millions more have undergone radical change. At times, many of us have wished to see loved ones, friends, and colleagues; we’ve longed to play sports, attend shows, and travel the world. We’ve hoped that everything can return to normal. But should they? What if this pandemic has highlighted issues in our societies that have been ignored or marginalised for too long? What if normal made the pandemic worse than it needed to be, and what if normal is part of the problem? According to philosopher Vittorio Bufacchi, this is precisely the case: everything must change. Vittorio Bufacchi is a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at University College Cork, specialising in questions concerning social injustice, human rights, and political violence. As we shall see, Bufacchi’s work demonstrates that philosophy can and should engage with the most pressing social issues of our time. Philosophy, says Bufacchi, can navigate us towards better ideas and a better world; and it is during times of crisis that we need it most. Contents Part I. The Pandemic Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Everything Must Change: Philosophical Lessons From Lockdown. Vittorio Bufacchi, Website. Vittorio Bufacchi, Twitter.

Introduction If I told you I was a proud and angry person, what would you think of me? Would you conjure up the image of an entitled, arrogant aggressor? The devil’s turn from God was born of pride after all. What if you thought of a person with standards, a person with integrity who wants the best for themselves and others? Would that be a fair assumption? What I’m asking is: are pride and anger virtues or vices? In the right light, emotions seem to lead to a better life… or perhaps they just create that impression until we realise we’ve become something we’d rather not admit. These two emotions govern our self-worth, they shape our relationships with others, and they determine how we bring about a better world. In short, how we think about these two emotions matters and it’s imperative that we understand their nature. Contents Part I. Pride Part II. Anger Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Agnes Collard, On Anger. (Book) Martha C. Nussbaum, Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice. (Book) Melissa M. Shew and Kimberly K. Garchar, Philosophy for Girls: An Invitation to the Life of Thought. (Book) Julia Driver, Modesty and Ignorance. (Paper) Philippa Foot, Virtues and Vices. (Paper) Claudia Mills, Bragging, Boasting, and Crowing: The Ethics of Sharing One’s Glad Tidings with Others. (Paper) Tara Smith, The Practice of Pride. (Paper)

Introduction If I told you I was a proud and angry person, what would you think of me? Would you conjure up the image of an entitled, arrogant aggressor? The devil’s turn from God was born of pride after all. What if you thought of a person with standards, a person with integrity who wants the best for themselves and others? Would that be a fair assumption? What I’m asking is: are pride and anger virtues or vices? In the right light, emotions seem to lead to a better life… or perhaps they just create that impression until we realise we’ve become something we’d rather not admit. These two emotions govern our self-worth, they shape our relationships with others, and they determine how we bring about a better world. In short, how we think about these two emotions matters and it’s imperative that we understand their nature. Contents Part I. Pride Part II. Anger Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Agnes Collard, On Anger. (Book) Martha C. Nussbaum, Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice. (Book) Melissa M. Shew and Kimberly K. Garchar, Philosophy for Girls: An Invitation to the Life of Thought. (Book) Julia Driver, Modesty and Ignorance. (Paper) Philippa Foot, Virtues and Vices. (Paper) Claudia Mills, Bragging, Boasting, and Crowing: The Ethics of Sharing One’s Glad Tidings with Others. (Paper) Tara Smith, The Practice of Pride. (Paper)

Introduction If I told you I was a proud and angry person, what would you think of me? Would you conjure up the image of an entitled, arrogant aggressor? The devil’s turn from God was born of pride after all. What if you thought of a person with standards, a person with integrity who wants the best for themselves and others? Would that be a fair assumption? What I’m asking is: are pride and anger virtues or vices? In the right light, emotions seem to lead to a better life… or perhaps they just create that impression until we realise we’ve become something we’d rather not admit. These two emotions govern our self-worth, they shape our relationships with others, and they determine how we bring about a better world. In short, how we think about these two emotions matters and it’s imperative that we understand their nature. Contents Part I. Pride Part II. Anger Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Agnes Collard, On Anger. (Book) Martha C. Nussbaum, Anger and Forgiveness: Resentment, Generosity, Justice. (Book) Melissa M. Shew and Kimberly K. Garchar, Philosophy for Girls: An Invitation to the Life of Thought. (Book) Julia Driver, Modesty and Ignorance. (Paper) Philippa Foot, Virtues and Vices. (Paper) Claudia Mills, Bragging, Boasting, and Crowing: The Ethics of Sharing One’s Glad Tidings with Others. (Paper) Tara Smith, The Practice of Pride. (Paper)

Introduction Conspiracies happen. Sometimes there really are people who are plotting. Sometimes people use their power to undermine the power of others and harm people for their own personal gain. Sometimes, your paranoia is justified. Perhaps then, we should all be a little more suspicious. After all, don’t we want to protect the freedoms of our families, friends, and neighbours? Perhaps… but perhaps not. What if our suspicions lead us down a never-ending rabbit hole? What if our quest for ‘seeing things as they really are’ only erodes our ability to see the truth? What if our convictions and suspicions actually make it easier for truly dangerous people to remain hidden from our view? What do you mean ‘that’s exactly how they want you to think’? Who are ‘they’? Ah, I see. Contents Part I. Origins Part II. Solutions Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Conspiracy Theories, Quassim Cassam. (Book) Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories, Rob Brotherton. (Book) Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked untie an Intellectual Black Hole, Stephen Law. (Book) Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories, Michael Shermer. (Audiobook) Alex Jones Chases a Guy Across the Street. (YouTube) Alex Jones and Andrew Neil, BBC. (YouTube)

Introduction Conspiracies happen. Sometimes there really are people who are plotting. Sometimes people use their power to undermine the power of others and harm people for their own personal gain. Sometimes, your paranoia is justified. Perhaps then, we should all be a little more suspicious. After all, don’t we want to protect the freedoms of our families, friends, and neighbours? Perhaps… but perhaps not. What if our suspicions lead us down a never-ending rabbit hole? What if our quest for ‘seeing things as they really are’ only erodes our ability to see the truth? What if our convictions and suspicions actually make it easier for truly dangerous people to remain hidden from our view? What do you mean ‘that’s exactly how they want you to think’? Who are ‘they’? Ah, I see. Contents Part I. Origins Part II. Solutions Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Conspiracy Theories, Quassim Cassam. (Book) Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories, Rob Brotherton. (Book) Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked untie an Intellectual Black Hole, Stephen Law. (Book) Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories, Michael Shermer. (Audiobook) Alex Jones Chases a Guy Across the Street. (YouTube) Alex Jones and Andrew Neil, BBC. (YouTube)

Introduction Conspiracies happen. Sometimes there really are people who are plotting. Sometimes people use their power to undermine the power of others and harm people for their own personal gain. Sometimes, your paranoia is justified. Perhaps then, we should all be a little more suspicious. After all, don’t we want to protect the freedoms of our families, friends, and neighbours? Perhaps… but perhaps not. What if our suspicions lead us down a never-ending rabbit hole? What if our quest for ‘seeing things as they really are’ only erodes our ability to see the truth? What if our convictions and suspicions actually make it easier for truly dangerous people to remain hidden from our view? What do you mean ‘that’s exactly how they want you to think’? Who are ‘they’? Ah, I see. Contents Part I. Origins Part II. Solutions Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Conspiracy Theories, Quassim Cassam. (Book) Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories, Rob Brotherton. (Book) Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked untie an Intellectual Black Hole, Stephen Law. (Book) Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories, Michael Shermer. (Audiobook) Alex Jones Chases a Guy Across the Street. (YouTube) Alex Jones and Andrew Neil, BBC. (YouTube)

Introduction Western civilisation is the most successful in history. Built on the shoulders of science, industry and democracy, enlightenment philosophy gave birth to the scientific revolution that has increased the quality of life for millions. The Western political drive for democracy has given rise to the largest political representation of people in history, and supranational bodies like the United Nations ensure that inequality and injustice are a thing of the past. Shortly, a Green New Deal and universal basic income will solve the remaining of society’s problems. For Kehinde Andrews, Professor of Black Studies at Birmingham City University, nothing could be further from the truth. In his eyes, Western civilisation is built not on Enlightenment ideals, but on the shoulders of genocide, slavery and colonialism. Since 1492, when Columbus sailed the ocean blue, the West has systematically murdered, exploited, and hoarded the wealth of black and brown nations. Unfortunately, this is not a thing of the past. Today we live not only with the legacy of Empire, but firmly within it! The age of Empire is alive and well, and its colonial, racist, white supremacist logic shapes every part of our lives today. Although the prospects look bleak, a revolution is possible. As Andrews says, Malcolm X was right: ‘the ballot or the bullet, liberty or death, freedom for everybody or freedom for nobody’. Contents Part I. The Logic of Empire Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kehinde Andrews, The New Age of Empire: How Racism and Colonialism Still Rule the World. Kehinde Andrews, Back to Black: Black Radicalism for the 21st Century. Kehinde Andrews, Birmingham City University. Kehinde Andrews, Twitter.

Introduction Western civilisation is the most successful in history. Built on the shoulders of science, industry and democracy, enlightenment philosophy gave birth to the scientific revolution that has increased the quality of life for millions. The Western political drive for democracy has given rise to the largest political representation of people in history, and supranational bodies like the United Nations ensure that inequality and injustice are a thing of the past. Shortly, a Green New Deal and universal basic income will solve the remaining of society’s problems. For Kehinde Andrews, Professor of Black Studies at Birmingham City University, nothing could be further from the truth. In his eyes, Western civilisation is built not on Enlightenment ideals, but on the shoulders of genocide, slavery and colonialism. Since 1492, when Columbus sailed the ocean blue, the West has systematically murdered, exploited, and hoarded the wealth of black and brown nations. Unfortunately, this is not a thing of the past. Today we live not only with the legacy of Empire, but firmly within it! The age of Empire is alive and well, and its colonial, racist, white supremacist logic shapes every part of our lives today. Although the prospects look bleak, a revolution is possible. As Andrews says, Malcolm X was right: ‘the ballot or the bullet, liberty or death, freedom for everybody or freedom for nobody’. Contents Part I. The Logic of Empire Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kehinde Andrews, The New Age of Empire: How Racism and Colonialism Still Rule the World. Kehinde Andrews, Back to Black: Black Radicalism for the 21st Century. Kehinde Andrews, Birmingham City University. Kehinde Andrews, Twitter.

Introduction Hinduism is the world’s oldest living religion, and it won’t be disappearing any time soon. This ancient worldview currently boasts over one billion devotees, making it the third most popular religion in the world. Despite its popularity, scholarship in philosophy of religion continues to ignore its influence, with academic papers on the Abrahamic faiths vastly outnumbering those devoted to Hinduism. Our classrooms don’t paint a prettier picture. In UK schools, Hinduism is scarcely taught in comparison to the other major world religions, with reports showing that educators lack the confidence and subject knowledge to teach Hinduism properly. Fortunately, thanks to the work of scholars such as Jessica Frazier, things are changing. Jessica Frazier is Lecturer in Theology and Religion at Trinity College, Oxford and Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies. Frazier is one of the world’s leading experts on Hindu philosophy, reshaping and globalising philosophy of religion for the 21st century. As well as being the founding editor of the Journal of Hindu Studies, she is best known for her books Reality, Religion and Passion, The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies, and most recently, Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality. Far from your ivory tower academic, Jessica is a committed public philosopher, broadening the horizons of academics and the general public through her captivating writing style and regular media appearances.  As we will see, Frazier’s work demonstrates Hinduism's rich and insightful philosophical tradition; a tradition that can shed light on life’s greatest questions: from the nature of life, god and suffering, to the fundamental structure of reality. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. Fundamental Reality Part II. Death, Evil, and Suffering Links Jessica Frazier, About (webpage). Jessica Frazier, Reality, Religion, and Passion (book). Jessica Frazier, The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies (book). Jessica Frazier, Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality (book). Jessica Frazier, Categorisation in Indian Philosophy: Thinking Inside the Box (book). Jessica Frazier, BBC In Our Times: Hindu Creation (podcast). Jessica Frazier, History of Philosophy without Any Gaps (podcast).

Introduction Hinduism is the world’s oldest living religion, and it won’t be disappearing any time soon. This ancient worldview currently boasts over one billion devotees, making it the third most popular religion in the world. Despite its popularity, scholarship in philosophy of religion continues to ignore its influence, with academic papers on the Abrahamic faiths vastly outnumbering those devoted to Hinduism. Our classrooms don’t paint a prettier picture. In UK schools, Hinduism is scarcely taught in comparison to the other major world religions, with reports showing that educators lack the confidence and subject knowledge to teach Hinduism properly. Fortunately, thanks to the work of scholars such as Jessica Frazier, things are changing. Jessica Frazier is Lecturer in Theology and Religion at Trinity College, Oxford and Fellow of the Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies. Frazier is one of the world’s leading experts on Hindu philosophy, reshaping and globalising philosophy of religion for the 21st century. As well as being the founding editor of the Journal of Hindu Studies, she is best known for her books Reality, Religion and Passion, The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies, and most recently, Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality. Far from your ivory tower academic, Jessica is a committed public philosopher, broadening the horizons of academics and the general public through her captivating writing style and regular media appearances.  As we will see, Frazier’s work demonstrates Hinduism's rich and insightful philosophical tradition; a tradition that can shed light on life’s greatest questions: from the nature of life, god and suffering, to the fundamental structure of reality. This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation. Contents Part I. Fundamental Reality Part II. Death, Evil, and Suffering Links Jessica Frazier, About (webpage). Jessica Frazier, Reality, Religion, and Passion (book). Jessica Frazier, The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies (book). Jessica Frazier, Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality (book). Jessica Frazier, Categorisation in Indian Philosophy: Thinking Inside the Box (book). Jessica Frazier, BBC In Our Times: Hindu Creation (podcast). Jessica Frazier, History of Philosophy without Any Gaps (podcast).  

In Plato’s ideal state, the wisest amongst the populous would be selected to rule. These rulers, who could see beyond the shadows to glimpse the light of truth, would be trusted to make choices to the benefit of all. The gender of these leaders, said Plato, was not to matter – despite him labelling them ‘the philosopher kings’. That ideal was never realised but the conversation started by Plato and his contemporaries inspired what many think of as the birth of ‘Western Philosophy’. The central tenets being: the nature of reality, truth and knowledge, how to live the good life, and most importantly, the practice of prudence and the pursuit of justice. To the Ancient Greeks, Prudence and Justice were personified as females. The term ‘philosophy’ itself contains the Greek word ‘Sophia’ meaning wisdom – which was also personified in the female form. Thus, it is a great irony that much of the history of philosophy has focused on the achievements of men: at its lowest points using its own intellectualising to oppress women. Prudence and justice seemed only to exist for men. However, there have always been women concerning themselves with the big questions, seeing beyond the darkness and shadows that kept their societies stuck in male-centric thinking. Now more than ever, there are people dedicated to pointing the spotlight on women’s ideas, women’s lives, and women’s achievements. Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting call them, ‘the philosopher queens’. Contents Part I. Women in Philosophy Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Philosopher Queens, Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting (IndieBound). The Philosopher Queens, Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting (Unbound). The Philosopher Queens, Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting (Amazon).

In Plato’s ideal state, the wisest amongst the populous would be selected to rule. These rulers, who could see beyond the shadows to glimpse the light of truth, would be trusted to make choices to the benefit of all. The gender of these leaders, said Plato, was not to matter – despite him labelling them ‘the philosopher kings’. That ideal was never realised but the conversation started by Plato and his contemporaries inspired what many think of as the birth of ‘Western Philosophy’. The central tenets being: the nature of reality, truth and knowledge, how to live the good life, and most importantly, the practice of prudence and the pursuit of justice. To the Ancient Greeks, Prudence and Justice were personified as females. The term ‘philosophy’ itself contains the Greek word ‘Sophia’ meaning wisdom – which was also personified in the female form. Thus, it is a great irony that much of the history of philosophy has focused on the achievements of men: at its lowest points using its own intellectualising to oppress women. Prudence and justice seemed only to exist for men. However, there have always been women concerning themselves with the big questions, seeing beyond the darkness and shadows that kept their societies stuck in male-centric thinking. Now more than ever, there are people dedicated to pointing the spotlight on women’s ideas, women’s lives, and women’s achievements. Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting call them, ‘the philosopher queens’. Contents Part I. Women in Philosophy Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Philosopher Queens, Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting (IndieBound). The Philosopher Queens, Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting (Unbound). The Philosopher Queens, Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting (Amazon).

‘History has ended, and capitalism is the last man standing. The innovations and freedoms enjoyed by the Global North have shown that the free market is the only viable economic system; it is almost impossible to imagine a coherent alternative.’ This was certainly the view of Margaret Thatcher, who was elected as Prime Minister amidst the turbulence of 1980s’ Britain. For many, unleashed from the shackles of pre-1970s’ economics, Thatcher restored order and long-term prosperity to a country in crisis: solving industrial disputes, taking on the unions, cutting income tax, and creating a nation of entrepreneurs and homeowners. As we will hear, economic commentator Grace Blakeley has little sympathy for this view. For Blakeley, neoliberalism was a system geared towards maximising share profits over goods and services: a dangerous economic model that puts shareholders first, customers second, and workers last. As we left ‘the golden age of capitalism’, the rising tides of climate catastrophe, global poverty, and vast increases in income inequality eventually came knocking at the doors of world governments... but nobody answered. As prime ministers and presidents pretended they weren’t home, a guest arrived who hadn’t the courtesy of knocking. In 2008, the world watched on as the market collapsed in the biggest economic crash since 1929. The house of cards had fallen – the contradictions of Western, free market economics had caught up with us. After the crash, governments announced £500bn in spending as they bailed out the world’s banks. Now, history repeats itself once more in the wake of the Corona Crash. Contents Part I. A World in Crisis Part II. A Green Future, Further Analysis and Discussion Links Grace Blakeley, Stolen: How to Save the World from Financialisation Grace Blakeley, The Corona Crash: How the Pandemic Will Change Capitalism

‘History has ended, and capitalism is the last man standing. The innovations and freedoms enjoyed by the Global North have shown that the free market is the only viable economic system; it is almost impossible to imagine a coherent alternative.’ This was certainly the view of Margaret Thatcher, who was elected as Prime Minister amidst the turbulence of 1980s’ Britain. For many, unleashed from the shackles of pre-1970s’ economics, Thatcher restored order and long-term prosperity to a country in crisis: solving industrial disputes, taking on the unions, cutting income tax, and creating a nation of entrepreneurs and homeowners. As we will hear, economic commentator Grace Blakeley has little sympathy for this view. For Blakeley, neoliberalism was a system geared towards maximising share profits over goods and services: a dangerous economic model that puts shareholders first, customers second, and workers last. As we left ‘the golden age of capitalism’, the rising tides of climate catastrophe, global poverty, and vast increases in income inequality eventually came knocking at the doors of world governments... but nobody answered. As prime ministers and presidents pretended they weren’t home, a guest arrived who hadn’t the courtesy of knocking. In 2008, the world watched on as the market collapsed in the biggest economic crash since 1929. The house of cards had fallen – the contradictions of Western, free market economics had caught up with us. After the crash, governments announced £500bn in spending as they bailed out the world’s banks. Now, history repeats itself once more in the wake of the Corona Crash. Contents Part I. A World in Crisis Part II. A Green Future, Further Analysis and Discussion Links Grace Blakeley, Stolen: How to Save the World from Financialisation Grace Blakeley, The Corona Crash: How the Pandemic Will Change Capitalism

Introduction I am Ixion, strapped to the burning wheel of fire in the underworld that is my life. A bleak assessment to be sure, but I put it to you that it is the truth. For what is life if not an ever-swinging pendulum of pain and boredom, kept in motion by the insatiable will? I constantly strive for the things that I want, but what I want is never enough; long-term satisfaction is tedium elegantly veiled. This alone is a cruel trick to the individual, but in a world of many, it is the ultimate tragedy. The wills of the multitude cannot avoid the inevitable conflict, as one will’s ends treats another as its means. The tiger feasts on the wild dog, who feasts on the baby turtle, all to propagate life so that future generations can play out this tragic scene ad infinitum. In human life - save rare moments of true compassion - we are little better. Yet, there is a hint of salvation.  What if we all realised that, at our core, we are the same will? What if we could make the wheel of Ixion stand still, if only for a moment? Would it be possible to see beauty? Would it be possible to see to fellow sufferers rather than fellow egos? I suspect it might, but I am afraid that I, and many others, are easily fooled. ‘The Will’ will do as it pleases, and not what pleases us. Contents Part I. The Life of Arthur Schopenhauer Part II. The World as Representation Part III. The World as Will Part IV. Suffering, Aesthetics, and Ethics Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Bernardo Kastrup, Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics (book) Christopher Janaway, Schopenhauer: A Very Short Introduction (book) Bryan Magee, The Philosophy of Schopenhauer (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, Essay and Aphorisms (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation — Vol. 1 (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The Two Fundamental Problems of Ethics (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and Other Writings (book) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online) Intern Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online)

Introduction I am Ixion, strapped to the burning wheel of fire in the underworld that is my life. A bleak assessment to be sure, but I put it to you that it is the truth. For what is life if not an ever-swinging pendulum of pain and boredom, kept in motion by the insatiable will? I constantly strive for the things that I want, but what I want is never enough; long-term satisfaction is tedium elegantly veiled. This alone is a cruel trick to the individual, but in a world of many, it is the ultimate tragedy. The wills of the multitude cannot avoid the inevitable conflict, as one will’s ends treats another as its means. The tiger feasts on the wild dog, who feasts on the baby turtle, all to propagate life so that future generations can play out this tragic scene ad infinitum. In human life - save rare moments of true compassion - we are little better. Yet, there is a hint of salvation.  What if we all realised that, at our core, we are the same will? What if we could make the wheel of Ixion stand still, if only for a moment? Would it be possible to see beauty? Would it be possible to see to fellow sufferers rather than fellow egos? I suspect it might, but I am afraid that I, and many others, are easily fooled. ‘The Will’ will do as it pleases, and not what pleases us. Contents Part I. The Life of Arthur Schopenhauer Part II. The World as Representation Part III. The World as Will Part IV. Suffering, Aesthetics, and Ethics Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Bernardo Kastrup, Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics (book) Christopher Janaway, Schopenhauer: A Very Short Introduction (book) Bryan Magee, The Philosophy of Schopenhauer (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, Essay and Aphorisms (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation — Vol. 1 (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The Two Fundamental Problems of Ethics (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and Other Writings (book) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online) Intern Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online)

Introduction I am Ixion, strapped to the burning wheel of fire in the underworld that is my life. A bleak assessment to be sure, but I put it to you that it is the truth. For what is life if not an ever-swinging pendulum of pain and boredom, kept in motion by the insatiable will? I constantly strive for the things that I want, but what I want is never enough; long-term satisfaction is tedium elegantly veiled. This alone is a cruel trick to the individual, but in a world of many, it is the ultimate tragedy. The wills of the multitude cannot avoid the inevitable conflict, as one will’s ends treats another as its means. The tiger feasts on the wild dog, who feasts on the baby turtle, all to propagate life so that future generations can play out this tragic scene ad infinitum. In human life - save rare moments of true compassion - we are little better. Yet, there is a hint of salvation.  What if we all realised that, at our core, we are the same will? What if we could make the wheel of Ixion stand still, if only for a moment? Would it be possible to see beauty? Would it be possible to see to fellow sufferers rather than fellow egos? I suspect it might, but I am afraid that I, and many others, are easily fooled. ‘The Will’ will do as it pleases, and not what pleases us. Contents Part I. The Life of Arthur Schopenhauer Part II. The World as Representation Part III. The World as Will Part IV. Suffering, Aesthetics, and Ethics Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Bernardo Kastrup, Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics (book) Christopher Janaway, Schopenhauer: A Very Short Introduction (book) Bryan Magee, The Philosophy of Schopenhauer (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, Essay and Aphorisms (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation — Vol. 1 (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The Two Fundamental Problems of Ethics (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and Other Writings (book) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online) Intern Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online)

Introduction I am Ixion, strapped to the burning wheel of fire in the underworld that is my life. A bleak assessment to be sure, but I put it to you that it is the truth. For what is life if not an ever-swinging pendulum of pain and boredom, kept in motion by the insatiable will? I constantly strive for the things that I want, but what I want is never enough; long-term satisfaction is tedium elegantly veiled. This alone is a cruel trick to the individual, but in a world of many, it is the ultimate tragedy. The wills of the multitude cannot avoid the inevitable conflict, as one will’s ends treats another as its means. The tiger feasts on the wild dog, who feasts on the baby turtle, all to propagate life so that future generations can play out this tragic scene ad infinitum. In human life - save rare moments of true compassion - we are little better. Yet, there is a hint of salvation.  What if we all realised that, at our core, we are the same will? What if we could make the wheel of Ixion stand still, if only for a moment? Would it be possible to see beauty? Would it be possible to see to fellow sufferers rather than fellow egos? I suspect it might, but I am afraid that I, and many others, are easily fooled. ‘The Will’ will do as it pleases, and not what pleases us. Contents Part I. The Life of Arthur Schopenhauer Part II. The World as Representation Part III. The World as Will Part IV. Suffering, Aesthetics, and Ethics Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Bernardo Kastrup, Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics (book) Christopher Janaway, Schopenhauer: A Very Short Introduction (book) Bryan Magee, The Philosophy of Schopenhauer (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, Essay and Aphorisms (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation — Vol. 1 (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The Two Fundamental Problems of Ethics (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and Other Writings (book) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online) Intern Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online)

Introduction I am Ixion, strapped to the burning wheel of fire in the underworld that is my life. A bleak assessment to be sure, but I put it to you that it is the truth. For what is life if not an ever-swinging pendulum of pain and boredom, kept in motion by the insatiable will? I constantly strive for the things that I want, but what I want is never enough; long-term satisfaction is tedium elegantly veiled. This alone is a cruel trick to the individual, but in a world of many, it is the ultimate tragedy. The wills of the multitude cannot avoid the inevitable conflict, as one will’s ends treats another as its means. The tiger feasts on the wild dog, who feasts on the baby turtle, all to propagate life so that future generations can play out this tragic scene ad infinitum. In human life - save rare moments of true compassion - we are little better. Yet, there is a hint of salvation.  What if we all realised that, at our core, we are the same will? What if we could make the wheel of Ixion stand still, if only for a moment? Would it be possible to see beauty? Would it be possible to see to fellow sufferers rather than fellow egos? I suspect it might, but I am afraid that I, and many others, are easily fooled. ‘The Will’ will do as it pleases, and not what pleases us. Contents Part I. The Life of Arthur Schopenhauer Part II. The World as Representation Part III. The World as Will Part IV. Suffering, Aesthetics, and Ethics Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Bernardo Kastrup, Decoding Schopenhauer’s Metaphysics (book) Christopher Janaway, Schopenhauer: A Very Short Introduction (book) Bryan Magee, The Philosophy of Schopenhauer (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, Essay and Aphorisms (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as Will and Representation — Vol. 1 (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, The Two Fundamental Problems of Ethics (book) Arthur Schopenhauer, On the Fourfold Root of the Principle of Sufficient Reason and Other Writings (book) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online) Intern Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Arthur Schopenhauer (online)

Introduction I write this in secret, hoping that these notes be passed on outside Russia. The author of the diary and the diary itself may, of course, be imaginary. Nevertheless, it is clear that such persons as the Underground Man do exist in our society. We have tried to expose him to the public but so far there has been no luck. If only people knew of the power of the Underground. He is one of the representatives of a generation still living, a generation waiting patiently for the right moment. His notes were discovered long after his passing, written on tatty paper in cheap ink, covered in cigarette burns and dust…. Don’t listen to the ants who would rather slave over the anthill than accept the truth. These notes are yours now, spread them to every corner of the globe. Long live the Underground! Contents Part I. The Life of Fyodor Dostoevsky Part II. Underground Part III. Apropos of the Wet Snow Part IV. Body and Blood Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky (pdf). Teaching Nineteenth-Century Russian Literature (book). Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time (Joseph Frank). The Case against Rational Egoism in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, James P. Scanlan (paper). Symbolism of Rats and Mice in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, Michael Haltresht (paper). Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky - Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (book).

Introduction I write this in secret, hoping that these notes be passed on outside Russia. The author of the diary and the diary itself may, of course, be imaginary. Nevertheless, it is clear that such persons as the Underground Man do exist in our society. We have tried to expose him to the public but so far there has been no luck. If only people knew of the power of the Underground. He is one of the representatives of a generation still living, a generation waiting patiently for the right moment. His notes were discovered long after his passing, written on tatty paper in cheap ink, covered in cigarette burns and dust…. Don’t listen to the ants who would rather slave over the anthill than accept the truth. These notes are yours now, spread them to every corner of the globe. Long live the Underground! Contents Part I. The Life of Fyodor Dostoevsky Part II. Underground Part III. Apropos of the Wet Snow Part IV. Body and Blood Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky (pdf). Teaching Nineteenth-Century Russian Literature (book). Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time (Joseph Frank). The Case against Rational Egoism in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, James P. Scanlan (paper). Symbolism of Rats and Mice in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, Michael Haltresht (paper). Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky - Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (book).

Introduction I write this in secret, hoping that these notes be passed on outside Russia. The author of the diary and the diary itself may, of course, be imaginary. Nevertheless, it is clear that such persons as the Underground Man do exist in our society. We have tried to expose him to the public but so far there has been no luck. If only people knew of the power of the Underground. He is one of the representatives of a generation still living, a generation waiting patiently for the right moment. His notes were discovered long after his passing, written on tatty paper in cheap ink, covered in cigarette burns and dust…. Don’t listen to the ants who would rather slave over the anthill than accept the truth. These notes are yours now, spread them to every corner of the globe. Long live the Underground! Contents Part I. The Life of Fyodor Dostoevsky Part II. Underground Part III. Apropos of the Wet Snow Part IV. Body and Blood Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky (pdf). Teaching Nineteenth-Century Russian Literature (book). Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time (Joseph Frank). The Case against Rational Egoism in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, James P. Scanlan (paper). Symbolism of Rats and Mice in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, Michael Haltresht (paper). Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky - Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (book).

Introduction I write this in secret, hoping that these notes be passed on outside Russia. The author of the diary and the diary itself may, of course, be imaginary. Nevertheless, it is clear that such persons as the Underground Man do exist in our society. We have tried to expose him to the public but so far there has been no luck. If only people knew of the power of the Underground. He is one of the representatives of a generation still living, a generation waiting patiently for the right moment. His notes were discovered long after his passing, written on tatty paper in cheap ink, covered in cigarette burns and dust…. Don’t listen to the ants who would rather slave over the anthill than accept the truth. These notes are yours now, spread them to every corner of the globe. Long live the Underground! Contents Part I. The Life of Fyodor Dostoevsky Part II. Underground Part III. Apropos of the Wet Snow Part IV. Body and Blood Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky (pdf). Teaching Nineteenth-Century Russian Literature (book). Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time (Joseph Frank). The Case against Rational Egoism in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, James P. Scanlan (paper). Symbolism of Rats and Mice in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, Michael Haltresht (paper). Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky - Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (book).

Introduction I write this in secret, hoping that these notes be passed on outside Russia. The author of the diary and the diary itself may, of course, be imaginary. Nevertheless, it is clear that such persons as the Underground Man do exist in our society. We have tried to expose him to the public but so far there has been no luck. If only people knew of the power of the Underground. He is one of the representatives of a generation still living, a generation waiting patiently for the right moment. His notes were discovered long after his passing, written on tatty paper in cheap ink, covered in cigarette burns and dust…. Don’t listen to the ants who would rather slave over the anthill than accept the truth. These notes are yours now, spread them to every corner of the globe. Long live the Underground! Contents Part I. The Life of Fyodor Dostoevsky Part II. Underground Part III. Apropos of the Wet Snow Part IV. Body and Blood Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky (pdf). Teaching Nineteenth-Century Russian Literature (book). Dostoevsky: A Writer in His Time (Joseph Frank). The Case against Rational Egoism in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, James P. Scanlan (paper). Symbolism of Rats and Mice in Dostoevsky's Notes from Underground, Michael Haltresht (paper). Notes from Underground, Dostoevsky - Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky (book).

Introduction Jack was walking down a street. It was a day like any other. As ever, his mind was a flurry of thoughts, worries, and anxieties, stimulated by coffee and the bright light of his phone. In a bid to relieve his stress, he put his phone in his pocket, and tried to notice the details he would usually ignore.  As he walked past the pharmacy, he saw a sick man coughing and spluttering; he was throwing medication back to stop his disease from decaying his body. Jack kept walking and came across an old woman waiting at a bus stop. She was fragile, crooked, and anxious; clearly age had taken much from her. Crossing the road away from the bus stop, he waited for the traffic to pass. Driving slowly past him was a hearse: a coffin on full display, surrounded by flowers, proceeded by a stream of weeping mourners.  Jack fell to his knees, overwhelmed with despair, “we all get sick, we all age, and we all die. We cannot escape this fate!” His head against the pavement, he didn’t move for almost an hour. When he got up, he was approached by a homeless man, to whom he said, “sorry, I don’t have any change.” The man replied, “It is you who needs a little change, young monk. I know why you fall to your knees in despair: the inescapable suffering of life weighs on us all. Let me tell you of someone who was once like you, who tried to remove suffering from our minds… let me tell you the story of Siddhartha Gotama, The Buddha.” Contents Part I. The Life of Siddhārtha Gautama Part II. The Four Noble Truths Part III. The Cycle of Life Part IV. The Eightfold Path Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Buddhist Ethics: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright. Book. The Foundations of Buddhism, Rupert Gethin. Book. Buddhism, The Great Courses. Lecture series. What the Buddha Taught, Walpola Rahula. Pdf. The Problem of Mindfulness, Sahanika Ratnayake. Online essay. Buddha, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage. Buddha, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage.

Introduction Jack was walking down a street. It was a day like any other. As ever, his mind was a flurry of thoughts, worries, and anxieties, stimulated by coffee and the bright light of his phone. In a bid to relieve his stress, he put his phone in his pocket, and tried to notice the details he would usually ignore.  As he walked past the pharmacy, he saw a sick man coughing and spluttering; he was throwing medication back to stop his disease from decaying his body. Jack kept walking and came across an old woman waiting at a bus stop. She was fragile, crooked, and anxious; clearly age had taken much from her. Crossing the road away from the bus stop, he waited for the traffic to pass. Driving slowly past him was a hearse: a coffin on full display, surrounded by flowers, proceeded by a stream of weeping mourners.  Jack fell to his knees, overwhelmed with despair, “we all get sick, we all age, and we all die. We cannot escape this fate!” His head against the pavement, he didn’t move for almost an hour. When he got up, he was approached by a homeless man, to whom he said, “sorry, I don’t have any change.” The man replied, “It is you who needs a little change, young monk. I know why you fall to your knees in despair: the inescapable suffering of life weighs on us all. Let me tell you of someone who was once like you, who tried to remove suffering from our minds… let me tell you the story of Siddhartha Gotama, The Buddha.” Contents Part I. The Life of Siddhārtha Gautama Part II. The Four Noble Truths Part III. The Cycle of Life Part IV. The Eightfold Path Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Buddhist Ethics: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright. Book. The Foundations of Buddhism, Rupert Gethin. Book. Buddhism, The Great Courses. Lecture series. What the Buddha Taught, Walpola Rahula. Pdf. The Problem of Mindfulness, Sahanika Ratnayake. Online essay. Buddha, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage. Buddha, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage.

Introduction Jack was walking down a street. It was a day like any other. As ever, his mind was a flurry of thoughts, worries, and anxieties, stimulated by coffee and the bright light of his phone. In a bid to relieve his stress, he put his phone in his pocket, and tried to notice the details he would usually ignore.  As he walked past the pharmacy, he saw a sick man coughing and spluttering; he was throwing medication back to stop his disease from decaying his body. Jack kept walking and came across an old woman waiting at a bus stop. She was fragile, crooked, and anxious; clearly age had taken much from her. Crossing the road away from the bus stop, he waited for the traffic to pass. Driving slowly past him was a hearse: a coffin on full display, surrounded by flowers, proceeded by a stream of weeping mourners.  Jack fell to his knees, overwhelmed with despair, “we all get sick, we all age, and we all die. We cannot escape this fate!” His head against the pavement, he didn’t move for almost an hour. When he got up, he was approached by a homeless man, to whom he said, “sorry, I don’t have any change.” The man replied, “It is you who needs a little change, young monk. I know why you fall to your knees in despair: the inescapable suffering of life weighs on us all. Let me tell you of someone who was once like you, who tried to remove suffering from our minds… let me tell you the story of Siddhartha Gotama, The Buddha.” Contents Part I. The Life of Siddhārtha Gautama Part II. The Four Noble Truths Part III. The Cycle of Life Part IV. The Eightfold Path Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Buddhist Ethics: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright. Book. The Foundations of Buddhism, Rupert Gethin. Book. Buddhism, The Great Courses. Lecture series. What the Buddha Taught, Walpola Rahula. Pdf. The Problem of Mindfulness, Sahanika Ratnayake. Online essay. Buddha, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage. Buddha, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage.

Introduction Jack was walking down a street. It was a day like any other. As ever, his mind was a flurry of thoughts, worries, and anxieties, stimulated by coffee and the bright light of his phone. In a bid to relieve his stress, he put his phone in his pocket, and tried to notice the details he would usually ignore.  As he walked past the pharmacy, he saw a sick man coughing and spluttering; he was throwing medication back to stop his disease from decaying his body. Jack kept walking and came across an old woman waiting at a bus stop. She was fragile, crooked, and anxious; clearly age had taken much from her. Crossing the road away from the bus stop, he waited for the traffic to pass. Driving slowly past him was a hearse: a coffin on full display, surrounded by flowers, proceeded by a stream of weeping mourners.  Jack fell to his knees, overwhelmed with despair, “we all get sick, we all age, and we all die. We cannot escape this fate!” His head against the pavement, he didn’t move for almost an hour. When he got up, he was approached by a homeless man, to whom he said, “sorry, I don’t have any change.” The man replied, “It is you who needs a little change, young monk. I know why you fall to your knees in despair: the inescapable suffering of life weighs on us all. Let me tell you of someone who was once like you, who tried to remove suffering from our minds… let me tell you the story of Siddhartha Gotama, The Buddha.” Contents Part I. The Life of Siddhārtha Gautama Part II. The Four Noble Truths Part III. The Cycle of Life Part IV. The Eightfold Path Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Buddhist Ethics: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright. Book. The Foundations of Buddhism, Rupert Gethin. Book. Buddhism, The Great Courses. Lecture series. What the Buddha Taught, Walpola Rahula. Pdf. The Problem of Mindfulness, Sahanika Ratnayake. Online essay. Buddha, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage. Buddha, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage.

Introduction Jack was walking down a street. It was a day like any other. As ever, his mind was a flurry of thoughts, worries, and anxieties, stimulated by coffee and the bright light of his phone. In a bid to relieve his stress, he put his phone in his pocket, and tried to notice the details he would usually ignore.  As he walked past the pharmacy, he saw a sick man coughing and spluttering; he was throwing medication back to stop his disease from decaying his body. Jack kept walking and came across an old woman waiting at a bus stop. She was fragile, crooked, and anxious; clearly age had taken much from her. Crossing the road away from the bus stop, he waited for the traffic to pass. Driving slowly past him was a hearse: a coffin on full display, surrounded by flowers, proceeded by a stream of weeping mourners.  Jack fell to his knees, overwhelmed with despair, “we all get sick, we all age, and we all die. We cannot escape this fate!” His head against the pavement, he didn’t move for almost an hour. When he got up, he was approached by a homeless man, to whom he said, “sorry, I don’t have any change.” The man replied, “It is you who needs a little change, young monk. I know why you fall to your knees in despair: the inescapable suffering of life weighs on us all. Let me tell you of someone who was once like you, who tried to remove suffering from our minds… let me tell you the story of Siddhartha Gotama, The Buddha.” Contents Part I. The Life of Siddhārtha Gautama Part II. The Four Noble Truths Part III. The Cycle of Life Part IV. The Eightfold Path Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Buddhism: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Buddhist Ethics: A Very Short Introduction. Book. Why Buddhism Is True, Robert Wright. Book. The Foundations of Buddhism, Rupert Gethin. Book. Buddhism, The Great Courses. Lecture series. What the Buddha Taught, Walpola Rahula. Pdf. The Problem of Mindfulness, Sahanika Ratnayake. Online essay. Buddha, Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage. Buddha, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Webpage.

Introduction One day when Jack, Olly, and Andy were accompanying Confucius, Confucius said: “Why don’t each of you tell me what you have your mind set on.” Andy was the first to reply, he said he wanted to be as profitable and the prestigious as the Duke of Zhou. Once he had profit and prestige, he could have all things his heart desired.   Jack, having suspected that Andy had given a poor response, said he wished to cultivate humanness by helping others to help themselves. He wanted to allow others to see how their selfishness prevented them from becoming truly human and from experiencing true joy.   Finally, Olly simply responded that he wished not to make any promises he couldn’t keep but that he hoped to learn from the ancients, respect the roles he had been assigned, and care for his friends and family.   Confucius sat quietly for a moment and then said: “Andy, you have mistaken what made the Duke of Zhou so well pleased. Jack, you have said the right words but for the wrong reason. Olly, you can learn from the ancients but also from your less capable friends, see if you share any of their qualities.” Contents Part I. The Life of Confucius Part II. The Analects Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Analects (pdf). The Analects (Oxford Classics). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Confucius from the Heart, Yu Dan (Pan Macmillan). The Great Courses, The Analects of Confucius (Audible). Confucius: A Guide for the Perplexed, Yong Huang (Bloomsbury). Confucianism: A Very Short Introduction, Daniel Gardner (Oxford).

Introduction One day when Jack, Olly, and Andy were accompanying Confucius, Confucius said: “Why don’t each of you tell me what you have your mind set on.” Andy was the first to reply, he said he wanted to be as profitable and the prestigious as the Duke of Zhou. Once he had profit and prestige, he could have all things his heart desired.   Jack, having suspected that Andy had given a poor response, said he wished to cultivate humanness by helping others to help themselves. He wanted to allow others to see how their selfishness prevented them from becoming truly human and from experiencing true joy.   Finally, Olly simply responded that he wished not to make any promises he couldn’t keep but that he hoped to learn from the ancients, respect the roles he had been assigned, and care for his friends and family.   Confucius sat quietly for a moment and then said: “Andy, you have mistaken what made the Duke of Zhou so well pleased. Jack, you have said the right words but for the wrong reason. Olly, you can learn from the ancients but also from your less capable friends, see if you share any of their qualities.” Contents Part I. The Life of Confucius Part II. The Analects Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Analects (pdf). The Analects (Oxford Classics). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Confucius from the Heart, Yu Dan (Pan Macmillan). The Great Courses, The Analects of Confucius (Audible). Confucius: A Guide for the Perplexed, Yong Huang (Bloomsbury). Confucianism: A Very Short Introduction, Daniel Gardner (Oxford).

Introduction One day when Jack, Olly, and Andy were accompanying Confucius, Confucius said: “Why don’t each of you tell me what you have your mind set on.” Andy was the first to reply, he said he wanted to be as profitable and the prestigious as the Duke of Zhou. Once he had profit and prestige, he could have all things his heart desired.   Jack, having suspected that Andy had given a poor response, said he wished to cultivate humanness by helping others to help themselves. He wanted to allow others to see how their selfishness prevented them from becoming truly human and from experiencing true joy.   Finally, Olly simply responded that he wished not to make any promises he couldn’t keep but that he hoped to learn from the ancients, respect the roles he had been assigned, and care for his friends and family.   Confucius sat quietly for a moment and then said: “Andy, you have mistaken what made the Duke of Zhou so well pleased. Jack, you have said the right words but for the wrong reason. Olly, you can learn from the ancients but also from your less capable friends, see if you share any of their qualities.” Contents Part I. The Life of Confucius Part II. The Analects Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Analects (pdf). The Analects (Oxford Classics). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Confucius from the Heart, Yu Dan (Pan Macmillan). The Great Courses, The Analects of Confucius (Audible). Confucius: A Guide for the Perplexed, Yong Huang (Bloomsbury). Confucianism: A Very Short Introduction, Daniel Gardner (Oxford).

Introduction One day when Jack, Olly, and Andy were accompanying Confucius, Confucius said: “Why don’t each of you tell me what you have your mind set on.” Andy was the first to reply, he said he wanted to be as profitable and the prestigious as the Duke of Zhou. Once he had profit and prestige, he could have all things his heart desired.   Jack, having suspected that Andy had given a poor response, said he wished to cultivate humanness by helping others to help themselves. He wanted to allow others to see how their selfishness prevented them from becoming truly human and from experiencing true joy.   Finally, Olly simply responded that he wished not to make any promises he couldn’t keep but that he hoped to learn from the ancients, respect the roles he had been assigned, and care for his friends and family.   Confucius sat quietly for a moment and then said: “Andy, you have mistaken what made the Duke of Zhou so well pleased. Jack, you have said the right words but for the wrong reason. Olly, you can learn from the ancients but also from your less capable friends, see if you share any of their qualities.” Contents Part I. The Life of Confucius Part II. The Analects Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links The Analects (pdf). The Analects (Oxford Classics). Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Confucius. Confucius from the Heart, Yu Dan (Pan Macmillan). The Great Courses, The Analects of Confucius (Audible). Confucius: A Guide for the Perplexed, Yong Huang (Bloomsbury). Confucianism: A Very Short Introduction, Daniel Gardner (Oxford).

There was once a wise farmer named Oliver who, enjoying the evening’s sun at the end of a summer’s day, watched on as one of his prized horses escaped from his farm. That evening, having heard the news, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver’s farm to express their sympathies. Oliver turned to his neighbours upon their arrival and said, “maybe.” The next day the horse returned, but brought with it six wild horses. Jack and Andrew, seeing the horses from their homes, ran to Oliver’s exclaiming his good fortune. Olly turned to the men and said, “maybe.” The following day, Oliver tried to saddle and ride one of the wild horses. He was thrown off the horse’s back and broke his leg. Jack and Andrew came to offer their condolences for the misfortune. Sat upright in his bed, without a wince, Oliver spoke clearly to the men once more, “maybe.”  The day after that, conscription officers came to the village to recruit soldiers for the army, but because of his broken leg, Oliver was rejected.  Relieved, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver to proclaim how fortunately everything had turned out. Olly turned to them and answered, “maybe.” Contents Part I. The Life of Lao Tzu Part II. The Tao Te Ching Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tao Te Ching (Penguin) Lao Tzu (Stanford Encyclopedia) Taoism (Stanford Encylopedia) The Tao of Pooh and the Te of Piglet, Benjamin Hoff Compare Translations of the Tao Te Ching

There was once a wise farmer named Oliver who, enjoying the evening’s sun at the end of a summer’s day, watched on as one of his prized horses escaped from his farm. That evening, having heard the news, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver’s farm to express their sympathies. Oliver turned to his neighbours upon their arrival and said, “maybe.” The next day the horse returned, but brought with it six wild horses. Jack and Andrew, seeing the horses from their homes, ran to Oliver’s exclaiming his good fortune. Olly turned to the men and said, “maybe.” The following day, Oliver tried to saddle and ride one of the wild horses. He was thrown off the horse’s back and broke his leg. Jack and Andrew came to offer their condolences for the misfortune. Sat upright in his bed, without a wince, Oliver spoke clearly to the men once more, “maybe.”  The day after that, conscription officers came to the village to recruit soldiers for the army, but because of his broken leg, Oliver was rejected.  Relieved, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver to proclaim how fortunately everything had turned out. Olly turned to them and answered, “maybe.” Contents Part I. The Life of Lao Tzu Part II. The Tao Te Ching Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tao Te Ching (Penguin) Lao Tzu (Stanford Encyclopedia) Taoism (Stanford Encylopedia) The Tao of Pooh and the Te of Piglet, Benjamin Hoff Compare Translations of the Tao Te Ching

There was once a wise farmer named Oliver who, enjoying the evening’s sun at the end of a summer’s day, watched on as one of his prized horses escaped from his farm. That evening, having heard the news, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver’s farm to express their sympathies. Oliver turned to his neighbours upon their arrival and said, “maybe.” The next day the horse returned, but brought with it six wild horses. Jack and Andrew, seeing the horses from their homes, ran to Oliver’s exclaiming his good fortune. Olly turned to the men and said, “maybe.” The following day, Oliver tried to saddle and ride one of the wild horses. He was thrown off the horse’s back and broke his leg. Jack and Andrew came to offer their condolences for the misfortune. Sat upright in his bed, without a wince, Oliver spoke clearly to the men once more, “maybe.”  The day after that, conscription officers came to the village to recruit soldiers for the army, but because of his broken leg, Oliver was rejected.  Relieved, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver to proclaim how fortunately everything had turned out. Olly turned to them and answered, “maybe.” Contents Part I. The Life of Lao Tzu Part II. The Tao Te Ching Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tao Te Ching (Penguin) Lao Tzu (Stanford Encyclopedia) Taoism (Stanford Encylopedia) The Tao of Pooh and the Te of Piglet, Benjamin Hoff Compare Translations of the Tao Te Ching

There was once a wise farmer named Oliver who, enjoying the evening’s sun at the end of a summer’s day, watched on as one of his prized horses escaped from his farm. That evening, having heard the news, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver’s farm to express their sympathies. Oliver turned to his neighbours upon their arrival and said, “maybe.” The next day the horse returned, but brought with it six wild horses. Jack and Andrew, seeing the horses from their homes, ran to Oliver’s exclaiming his good fortune. Olly turned to the men and said, “maybe.” The following day, Oliver tried to saddle and ride one of the wild horses. He was thrown off the horse’s back and broke his leg. Jack and Andrew came to offer their condolences for the misfortune. Sat upright in his bed, without a wince, Oliver spoke clearly to the men once more, “maybe.”  The day after that, conscription officers came to the village to recruit soldiers for the army, but because of his broken leg, Oliver was rejected.  Relieved, Jack and Andrew came to Oliver to proclaim how fortunately everything had turned out. Olly turned to them and answered, “maybe.” Contents Part I. The Life of Lao Tzu Part II. The Tao Te Ching Part III. Practices Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tao Te Ching (Penguin) Lao Tzu (Stanford Encyclopedia) Taoism (Stanford Encylopedia) The Tao of Pooh and the Te of Piglet, Benjamin Hoff Compare Translations of the Tao Te Ching

Misogyny is the hatred of women, practiced only by a few bigoted men. A hatred, which is far from systemic. Sexual and domestic violence are at record lows and continue to decline. Women are entitled to equal pay, positions of power, and bodily autonomy, and these rights and liberties have been enshrined in law and accepted by the general population. Feminism is the rule, misogyny the exception: we are all feminists now. This couldn’t be further from the view of Kate Manne, Associate Professor at Cornell University and author of the hugely popular and multi-award-winning, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Today, Kate is not only one of the world’s leading feminist philosophers (labelled as “The Simone de Beauvoir of the 21st century” by Amanda Marcotte), but according to Prospect Magazine, one of the “World’s Top 10 Thinkers”. Today we’ll be discussing Kate’s newly released, Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women. Kate calls us to radically rethink our understanding of the nature and function of misogyny. Misogyny is not the hatred of women and girls, practiced by the few, it is controlling and punishing those who challenge male entitlement, practiced by the many. Misogyny is the law enforcement branch of the patriarchal order - a deterrent, a warning, a whip - which sustains the hierarchy of men over women. As history and the personal experiences of women so often attest to, those at the top of hierarchies often expect things from those beneath them. Contents Part I. Entitled Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kate Manne, Twitter. Kate Manne, Website. Kate Manne, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Kate Manne, Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women.

Misogyny is the hatred of women, practiced only by a few bigoted men. A hatred, which is far from systemic. Sexual and domestic violence are at record lows and continue to decline. Women are entitled to equal pay, positions of power, and bodily autonomy, and these rights and liberties have been enshrined in law and accepted by the general population. Feminism is the rule, misogyny the exception: we are all feminists now. This couldn’t be from further the view of Kate Manne, Associate Professor at Cornell University and author of the hugely popular and multi-award-winning, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Today, Kate is not only one of the world’s leading feminist philosophers (labelled as “The Simone de Beauvoir of the 21st century” by Amanda Marcotte), but according to Prospect Magazine, one of the “World’s Top 10 Thinkers”. Today we’ll be discussing Kate’s newly released, Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women. Kate calls us to radically rethink our understanding of the nature and function of misogyny. Misogyny is not the hatred of women and girls, practiced by the few, it is controlling and punishing those who challenge male entitlement, practiced by the many. Misogyny is the law enforcement branch of the patriarchal order - a deterrent, a warning, a whip - which sustains the hierarchy of men over women. As history and the personal experiences of women so often attest to, those at the top of hierarchies often expect things from those beneath them. Contents Part I. Entitled Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kate Manne, Twitter. Kate Manne, Website. Kate Manne, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Kate Manne, Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women.

Introduction Resting on our shoulders is the most complex object in the known universe: 86 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others. From Plato to Descartes, to the modern-day, philosophers have largely been ignorant of the workings of the brain, despite many questions in philosophy seeming to be intimately linked with its nature. Questions like: What are the origins of our moral intuitions, our conscience? What is the nature of decision-making? And how does the brain produce consciousness?  Following the recent upsurge of interest and research into neuroscience (reaching full steam in the 1970s), Patricia Churchland describes the emergence of neurophilosophy as ‘inevitable’, coining the term in her now classic book, Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind-Brain in 1986. Alongside Neurophilosophy, Patricia Churchland is best known for her books Touching a Nerve, Braintrust, and most recently Conscience, which (together with hundreds of other publications, interviews, public talks, and awards) have led her to be considered one of, if not the, world’s leading neurophilosopher.  Currently Professor Emerita in Philosophy at the University of California, San Diego, Patricia Churchland has knocked down the wall between science and philosophy, inspiring a new wave of thinking about life’s most challenging questions. For some, however, the wall was there for a reason: questions of philosophy should not be confused with questions of science. After all, what can neuroscience tell us about the origin of consciousness or the nature of morality? Our topics for this episode... Contents Part I. The Hornswoggle Problem Part II. The Conscience Links Patricia Churchland, Website. Patricia Churchland, Books. Patricia Churchland, The Hornswoggle Problem. Patricia Churchland, Conscience (IndieBound). Patricia Churchland Conscience (Amazon).

Introduction Resting on our shoulders is the most complex object in the known universe: 86 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others. From Plato to Descartes, to the modern-day, philosophers have largely been ignorant of the workings of the brain, despite many questions in philosophy seeming to be intimately linked with its nature. Questions like: What are the origins of our moral intuitions, our conscience? What is the nature of decision-making? And how does the brain produce consciousness?  Following the recent upsurge of interest and research into neuroscience (reaching full steam in the 1970s), Patricia Churchland describes the emergence of neurophilosophy as ‘inevitable’, coining the term in her now classic book, Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind-Brain in 1986. Alongside Neurophilosophy, Patricia Churchland is best known for her books Touching a Nerve, Braintrust, and most recently Conscience, which (together with hundreds of other publications, interviews, public talks, and awards) have led her to be considered one of, if not the, world’s leading neurophilosopher.  Currently Professor Emerita in Philosophy at the University of California, San Diego, Patricia Churchland has knocked down the wall between science and philosophy, inspiring a new wave of thinking about life’s most challenging questions. For some, however, the wall was there for a reason: questions of philosophy should not be confused with questions of science. After all, what can neuroscience tell us about the origin of consciousness or the nature of morality? Our topics for this episode... Contents Part I. The Hornswoggle Problem Part II. The Conscience Links Patricia Churchland, Website. Patricia Churchland, Books. Patricia Churchland, The Hornswoggle Problem. Patricia Churchland, Conscience (IndieBound). Patricia Churchland, Conscience (Amazon).

Introduction The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. How do 100 billion neurons come together to bring about a unified, conscious mind, and the rich tapestry of qualities that make up our world? This might be the most difficult problem in philosophy and science. No matter how rich our description of the brain, it seems that we’ll still be left with this same question: where does consciousness come from and what is its place in nature? Having coined the term ‘the hard problem’ in 1994, today, David Chalmers finds himself ranked amongst the world’s most prominent thinkers. David is currently Professor of Philosophy and Neural Science at New York University, co-director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, Honorary Professor of Philosophy at the Australian National University, and co-director of the academic database PhilPapers. Amongst his many contributions, David is the author of The Conscious Mind, The Character of Consciousness, and Constructing the World. David’s hundreds of papers, interviews, and talks, make up some of the most influential contributions to the field, breathing new life into the debate and inspiring a new wave of scholarship. For many, the problem of consciousness goes beyond the dusty chalkboards of seminar rooms and into our day-to-day lives. Consciousness may well be the determining factor of what constitutes a worthwhile existence, or whether or not a being deserves our moral consideration.  The stakes are higher than the nature of the world itself. It’s time to wake up and smell the roses… how can we explain consciousness? Contents Part I. Consciousness Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links David Chalmers, Website David Chalmers, Books (IndieBound) David Chalmers, Books (Amazon) David Chalmers, Papers David Chalmers, Talks

Introduction The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. How do 100 billion neurons come together to bring about a unified, conscious mind, and the rich tapestry of qualities that make up our world? This might be the most difficult problem in philosophy and science. No matter how rich our description of the brain, it seems that we’ll still be left with this same question: where does consciousness come from and what is its place in nature? Having coined the term ‘the hard problem’ in 1994, today, David Chalmers finds himself ranked amongst the world’s most prominent thinkers. David is currently Professor of Philosophy and Neural Science at New York University, co-director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, Honorary Professor of Philosophy at the Australian National University, and co-director of the academic database PhilPapers. Amongst his many contributions, David is the author of The Conscious Mind, The Character of Consciousness, and Constructing the World. David’s hundreds of papers, interviews, and talks, make up some of the most influential contributions to the field, breathing new life into the debate and inspiring a new wave of scholarship. For many, the problem of consciousness goes beyond the dusty chalkboards of seminar rooms and into our day-to-day lives. Consciousness may well be the determining factor of what constitutes a worthwhile existence, or whether or not a being deserves our moral consideration.  The stakes are higher than the nature of the world itself. It’s time to wake up and smell the roses… how can we explain consciousness? Contents Part I. Consciousness Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links David Chalmers, Website David Chalmers, Books (IndieBound) David Chalmers, Books (Amazon) David Chalmers, Papers David Chalmers, Talks

The smell of coffee, the taste of asparagus, the warmth of a hug, and the agony of death: conscious experience makes up the fabric of our world, yet many consider it to be the most intractable mystery in philosophy and science. What is it like to undergo experience? What is the function of consciousness? Where does consciousness occur? What are the contents of this experience? Is our stream of consciousness unified? The hardest problem of all, might be the origin of consciousness itself: how, why, or are we, subjects of experience? In one sense, it shouldn’t come as a surprise - after all, in the words of physicist Michio Kaku, ‘Sitting on your shoulders is the most complicated object in the known universe; 100 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others’. However, for many, the brain doesn’t seem like the right type of thing to give rise to consciousness. How can soggy grey matter feel like anything? As McGinn put it, you might as well believe that numbers emerge from biscuits or ethics from rhubarb! Challenging our understanding of consciousness and reframing the mystery is psychologist and author, Visiting Professor at Plymouth University, Dr Susan Blackmore. Best known for her books The Meme Machine, Zen and the Art of Consciousness, Consciousness: An Introduction, and Seeing Myself, Susan’s work spans across hundreds of publications in over 20 different languages, making huge contributions in the fields of psychology, memetics, religion, philosophy of mind, supernatural experience, and many other areas. It is no surprise to find her ranked amongst 2013’s 30 Most Influential Psychologists Working Today and 2015’s Top 100 Global Minds. It’s time to smell the coffee, and reflect on your experience, to see the dark with the light on: what is the nature of consciousness? Contents Part I. Mystery and Illusion Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Susan Blackmore, Website. Books by Susan Blackmore. Amazon. Susan Blackmore, A Very Short Introduction to Consciousness. Amazon. Susan Blackmore, A Very Short Introduction to Consciousness. IndieBound.

The smell of coffee, the taste of asparagus, the warmth of a hug, and the agony of death: conscious experience makes up the fabric of our world, yet many consider it to be the most intractable mystery in philosophy and science. What is it like to undergo experience? What is the function of consciousness? Where does consciousness occur? What are the contents of this experience? Is our stream of consciousness unified? The hardest problem of all, might be the origin of consciousness itself: how, why, or are we, subjects of experience? In one sense, it shouldn’t come as a surprise - after all, in the words of physicist Michio Kaku, ‘Sitting on your shoulders is the most complicated object in the known universe; 100 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others’. However, for many, the brain doesn’t seem like the right type of thing to give rise to consciousness. How can soggy grey matter feel like anything? As McGinn put it, you might as well believe that numbers emerge from biscuits or ethics from rhubarb! Challenging our understanding of consciousness and reframing the mystery is psychologist and author, Visiting Professor at Plymouth University, Dr Susan Blackmore. Best known for her books The Meme Machine, Zen and the Art of Consciousness, Consciousness: An Introduction, and Seeing Myself, Susan’s work spans across hundreds of publications in over 20 different languages, making huge contributions in the fields of psychology, memetics, religion, philosophy of mind, supernatural experience, and many other areas. It is no surprise to find her ranked amongst 2013’s 30 Most Influential Psychologists Working Today and 2015’s Top 100 Global Minds. It’s time to smell the coffee, and reflect on your experience, to see the dark with the light on: what is the nature of consciousness? Contents Part I. Mystery and Illusion Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Susan Blackmore, Website. Books by Susan Blackmore. Amazon. Susan Blackmore, A Very Short Introduction to Consciousness. Amazon. Susan Blackmore, A Very Short Introduction to Consciousness. IndieBound.

Approximately 13.8 billion years ago, an infinitely dense state of an infinitely large universe lay dormant upon the backdrop of existence. Then, the expansion of everything. The potential for trillions of galaxies sprung out from this same point, and today, they shine like fairy lights in the darkness of the vast cosmos. From our own little planet, bursting with life, art, culture, and science, we can observe the effects of the big bang and the universes’ continuing expansion. We can see the beginning, but we can also see the end. In about five billion years, the sun will swell to around 250 times its current size, leaving our once blue and white planet a lifeless, magma-covered rock. That’s settled, the apocalypse is coming: the land will fry and the seas will boil - but there is more at stake than the Earth. What matters now is the bigger question: how will the universe end? In this episode, we’ll be discussing the impending doom of the cosmos with theoretical astrophysicist Katherine Mack. Katie is Assistant Professor of Physics at North Carolina State University. As well as making huge contributions to the field of astrophysics, Katie is one of the most active public-facing scientists in the world today. From publications in Slate, Scientific America, and Time Magazine, to featuring on the BBC and being quoted in the song lyrics of Hozier, Katie’s work is expanding into the furthest corners of our planet. Grab the cosmic popcorn, it’s a question as old as time itself: how will the universe end? Contents Part I. The Death of the Universe Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Katie Mack, Twitter. Katie Mack, Website. Katie Mack, The End of Everything (Amazon). Katie Mack, The End of Everything (IndieBound).

Approximately 13.8 billion years ago, an infinitely dense state of an infinitely large universe lay dormant upon the backdrop of existence. Then, the expansion of everything. The potential for trillions of galaxies sprung out from this same point, and today, they shine like fairy lights in the darkness of the vast cosmos. From our own little planet, bursting with life, art, culture, and science, we can observe the effects of the big bang and the universes’ continuing expansion. We can see the beginning, but we can also see the end. In about five billion years, the sun will swell to around 250 times its current size, leaving our once blue and white planet a lifeless, magma-covered rock. That’s settled, the apocalypse is coming: the land will fry and the seas will boil - but there is more at stake than the Earth. What matters now is the bigger question: how will the universe end? In this episode, we’ll be discussing the impending doom of the cosmos with theoretical astrophysicist Katherine Mack. Katie is Assistant Professor of Physics at North Carolina State University. As well as making huge contributions to the field of astrophysics, Katie is one of the most active public-facing scientists in the world today. From publications in Slate, Scientific America, and Time Magazine, to featuring on the BBC and being quoted in the song lyrics of Hozier, Katie’s work is expanding into the furthest corners of our planet. Grab the cosmic popcorn, it’s a question as old as time itself: how will the universe end? Contents Part I. The Death of the Universe Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Katie Mack, Twitter. Katie Mack, Website. Katie Mack, The End of Everything (Amazon). Katie Mack, The End of Everything (IndieBound).

What was life like before we emerged from hunter-gatherer tribes and pulled ourselves into the civilised world? Notoriously, this same question was asked by the great philosopher Thomas Hobbes in the seventeenth century. His answer? The state of nature is a ‘time of war, where every man is enemy to every man’; where all live in ‘continual fear’, and in ‘danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’ This is human nature. Left to our own devices, we are led to fight by diffidence, competition, and glory. Here our inner demons come out to play: predatory, revengeful, dominant, and sadistic. We are survival machines, but ultimately, the best way for us all to survive is to create a new machine, a great Leviathan - viz, the dawn of the state. Thirty years after Hobbes’ death saw the birth of his rival, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It is here, at the origin of the state, says Rousseau, where human nature is corrupted: society is the curse of humankind. In his own words, ‘many writers have hastily concluded that man is naturally cruel, and requires civil institutions to make him more mild; whereas nothing is more gentle than man in his primitive state… according to the axiom of the wise Locke: There can be no injury, where there is no property.’ Be sure not to listen to Hobbes the imposter. We are lost, but we can find ourselves again. In this episode, we’ll be discussing the views of Hobbes and Rousseau with returning guests Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman. Steven Pinker, Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, is one of the leading thinkers in the field. Steven has an extraordinary list of accomplishments and awards, considered by many, including Foreign Policy and Time magazine, to be amongst the 100 Most Influential People in the World Today. Historian and author, Rutger Bregman, is acclaimed for his bestselling book, Utopia for Realists: and how we can get there. Described by The Guardian as ‘the Dutch wunderkind of new ideas’ and by TED as ‘one of Europe's most prominent young thinkers’, Bregman’s vision of (and for) humankind is a call to rethink our understanding of the past, and our vision for the future. Coinciding with the rise of the homo sapien, this might be the oldest and most important philosophical question: what is human nature?

What was life like before we emerged from hunter-gatherer tribes and pulled ourselves into the civilised world? Notoriously, this same question was asked by the great philosopher Thomas Hobbes in the seventeenth century. His answer? The state of nature is a ‘time of war, where every man is enemy to every man’; where all live in ‘continual fear’, and in ‘danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’ This is human nature. Left to our own devices, we are led to fight by diffidence, competition, and glory. Here our inner demons come out to play: predatory, revengeful, dominant, and sadistic. We are survival machines, but ultimately, the best way for us all to survive is to create a new machine, a great Leviathan - viz, the dawn of the state. Thirty years after Hobbes’ death saw the birth of his rival, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It is here, at the origin of the state, says Rousseau, where human nature is corrupted: society is the curse of humankind. In his own words, ‘many writers have hastily concluded that man is naturally cruel, and requires civil institutions to make him more mild; whereas nothing is more gentle than man in his primitive state… according to the axiom of the wise Locke: There can be no injury, where there is no property.’ Be sure not to listen to Hobbes the imposter. We are lost, but we can find ourselves again. In this episode, we’ll be discussing the views of Hobbes and Rousseau with returning guests Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman. Steven Pinker, Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, is one of the leading thinkers in the field. Steven has an extraordinary list of accomplishments and awards, considered by many, including Foreign Policy and Time magazine, to be amongst the 100 Most Influential People in the World Today. Historian and author, Rutger Bregman, is acclaimed for his bestselling book, Utopia for Realists: and how we can get there. Described by The Guardian as ‘the Dutch wunderkind of new ideas’ and by TED as ‘one of Europe's most prominent young thinkers’, Bregman’s vision of (and for) humankind is a call to rethink our understanding of the past, and our vision for the future. Coinciding with the rise of the homo sapien, this might be the oldest and most important philosophical question: what is human nature? Contents Part I. Humankind Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Rutger Bregman, Humankind: A Hopeful History. Steven Pinker, The Better Angels of Our Nature: A History of Violence and Humanity.

Meet Jack. Jack, like most individuals, takes great care of his health, appearance, the fulfilment of his projects, and the quality of his relationships with friends and family. Today Jack is preparing for another episode of his iconic philosophy podcast. He has been reading diligently, noting fastidiously, and practicing his jokes in the mirror. Fully invested in his work, he goes to great lengths to ensure that the podcast is well received. But today is no ordinary day for Jack, something is about to happen that he could never prepare for. Sat at his desk with his nose in Thomas Nagel’s Mortal Questions, Jack reaches for his cafetière to refill his Nietzsche coffee mug - when he hears the sound of a heavy creak above him. The room begins to shake, the coffee mug spills, and Jack jumps out of his chair as dust begins to fall around him. Fearing that the roof will cave, he runs out of the house, but finds that the streets are shaking too. Like the set of a stage, the neighbourhood before his eyes begins to fall backwards. As the walls hit the ground, Jack sees countless figures in black uniforms running frantically in all directions. He looks up to the sky and sees several tall figures on ladders: a blue figure holds a large, blinding torch, a white figure holds a watering can, and a black figure holds what seems to be a large block of cheese. Jack is overwhelmed with disbelief - he is standing in the middle of a stage. Suddenly, one of the figures shouts instructions to another, who frantically pulls on a rope - the stage rising back to its original position, the figures disappearing. It dawns on him: Jack is the actor in a play. What of his life? His childhood? His family and friends? What of his projects? Will he ever be able to return, to his old life? Jack ponders the thought for a moment and walks back into his home. He cleans up the coffee, brushes up the dust, sits back down in his chair… and continues, with his reading. Contents Part I. Thomas Nagel Part II. Camus, Criticisms, and Comparison Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Nagel, The Absurd (1971). Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus (1942).

Meet Jack. Jack, like most individuals, takes great care of his health, appearance, the fulfilment of his projects, and the quality of his relationships with friends and family. Today Jack is preparing for another episode of his iconic philosophy podcast. He has been reading diligently, noting fastidiously, and practicing his jokes in the mirror. Fully invested in his work, he goes to great lengths to ensure that the podcast is well received. But today is no ordinary day for Jack, something is about to happen that he could never prepare for. Sat at his desk with his nose in Thomas Nagel’s Mortal Questions, Jack reaches for his cafetière to refill his Nietzsche coffee mug - when he hears the sound of a heavy creak above him. The room begins to shake, the coffee mug spills, and Jack jumps out of his chair as dust begins to fall around him. Fearing that the roof will cave, he runs out of the house, but finds that the streets are shaking too. Like the set of a stage, the neighbourhood before his eyes begins to fall backwards. As the walls hit the ground, Jack sees countless figures in black uniforms running frantically in all directions. He looks up to the sky and sees several tall figures on ladders: a blue figure holds a large, blinding torch, a white figure holds a watering can, and a black figure holds what seems to be a large block of cheese. Jack is overwhelmed with disbelief - he is standing in the middle of a stage. Suddenly, one of the figures shouts instructions to another, who frantically pulls on a rope - the stage rising back to its original position, the figures disappearing. It dawns on him: Jack is the actor in a play. What of his life? His childhood? His family and friends? What of his projects? Will he ever be able to return, to his old life? Jack ponders the thought for a moment and walks back into his home. He cleans up the coffee, brushes up the dust, sits back down in his chair… and continues, with his reading. Contents Part I. Thomas Nagel Part II. Camus, Criticisms, and Comparison Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Nagel, The Absurd (1971). Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus (1942).

Meet Jack. Jack, like most individuals, takes great care of his health, appearance, the fulfilment of his projects, and the quality of his relationships with friends and family. Today Jack is preparing for another episode of his iconic philosophy podcast. He has been reading diligently, noting fastidiously, and practicing his jokes in the mirror. Fully invested in his work, he goes to great lengths to ensure that the podcast is well received. But today is no ordinary day for Jack, something is about to happen that he could never prepare for. Sat at his desk with his nose in Thomas Nagel’s Mortal Questions, Jack reaches for his cafetière to refill his Nietzsche coffee mug - when he hears the sound of a heavy creak above him. The room begins to shake, the coffee mug spills, and Jack jumps out of his chair as dust begins to fall around him. Fearing that the roof will cave, he runs out of the house, but finds that the streets are shaking too. Like the set of a stage, the neighbourhood before his eyes begins to fall backwards. As the walls hit the ground, Jack sees countless figures in black uniforms running frantically in all directions. He looks up to the sky and sees several tall figures on ladders: a blue figure holds a large, blinding torch, a white figure holds a watering can, and a black figure holds what seems to be a large block of cheese. Jack is overwhelmed with disbelief - he is standing in the middle of a stage. Suddenly, one of the figures shouts instructions to another, who frantically pulls on a rope - the stage rising back to its original position, the figures disappearing. It dawns on him: Jack is the actor in a play. What of his life? His childhood? His family and friends? What of his projects? Will he ever be able to return, to his old life? Jack ponders the thought for a moment and walks back into his home. He cleans up the coffee, brushes up the dust, sits back down in his chair… and continues, with his reading. Contents Part I. Thomas Nagel Part II. Camus, Criticisms, and Comparison Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Nagel, The Absurd (1971). Albert Camus, The Myth of Sisyphus (1942).

Imagine two possible worlds. In the first world, Andrew is driving home from an intimate dinner party with Olly and Jack. He has been enjoying a range of delicious cheeses and wines, despite being the designated driver. With the exception of Andrew’s singing, the drive is uneventful, and the party arrives home, safe and sound. In the second world, the same initial conditions apply. Andrew has enjoyed a plethora of gastronomic delights, and finds himself behind the wheel, singing without reservation. Driving through the familiar country roads, where sadly it has been known for deer to meet the paths of oncoming traffic, Andrew sees an unknown shape ahead. Too slow to react, the car strikes the figure, and Andrew feels the crunch of the object beneath his wheels. The following morning, Andrew switches on Radio 4: ‘Police are requesting any information the public might have relating to a hit and run on Country Road yesterday evening, where a 6-year-old boy unfortunately lost his life. Anybody with information relating to the event, believed to have occurred in the hours in which one could be expected to be travelling home from an intimate dinner party, should contact their local police station immediately’. Andrew realises that it was not a deer he hit with his car, and turns himself in to the police station. For Bernard Williams and Thomas Nagel, this is a classic case of moral luck. In both possible worlds, Andrew’s actions and intentions were the same. In the first, Andrew wakes up and continues with his life. In the second, we expect him to face up to fourteen years in prison. Our question: should we judge Andrew’s moral character any more harshly in the second case than the first - do they not deserve the same punishment? Contents Part I. Bernard Williams Part II. Thomas Nagel Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Nagel, Moral Luck Bernard Williams, Moral Luck Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moral Luck Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moral Luck

Imagine two possible worlds. In the first world, Andrew is driving home from an intimate dinner party with Olly and Jack. He has been enjoying a range of delicious cheeses and wines, despite being the designated driver. With the exception of Andrew’s singing, the drive is uneventful, and the party arrives home, safe and sound. In the second world, the same initial conditions apply. Andrew has enjoyed a plethora of gastronomic delights, and finds himself behind the wheel, singing without reservation. Driving through the familiar country roads, where sadly it has been known for deer to meet the paths of oncoming traffic, Andrew sees an unknown shape ahead. Too slow to react, the car strikes the figure, and Andrew feels the crunch of the object beneath his wheels. The following morning, Andrew switches on Radio 4: ‘Police are requesting any information the public might have relating to a hit and run on Country Road yesterday evening, where a 6-year-old boy unfortunately lost his life. Anybody with information relating to the event, believed to have occurred in the hours in which one could be expected to be travelling home from an intimate dinner party, should contact their local police station immediately’. Andrew realises that it was not a deer he hit with his car, and turns himself in to the police station. For Bernard Williams and Thomas Nagel, this is a classic case of moral luck. In both possible worlds, Andrew’s actions and intentions were the same. In the first, Andrew wakes up and continues with his life. In the second, we expect him to face up to fourteen years in prison. Our question: should we judge Andrew’s moral character any more harshly in the second case than the first - do they not deserve the same punishment? Contents Part I. Bernard Williams Part II. Thomas Nagel Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Nagel, Moral Luck Bernard Williams, Moral Luck Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moral Luck Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moral Luck

Imagine two possible worlds. In the first world, Andrew is driving home from an intimate dinner party with Olly and Jack. He has been enjoying a range of delicious cheeses and wines, despite being the designated driver. With the exception of Andrew’s singing, the drive is uneventful, and the party arrives home, safe and sound. In the second world, the same initial conditions apply. Andrew has enjoyed a plethora of gastronomic delights, and finds himself behind the wheel, singing without reservation. Driving through the familiar country roads, where sadly it has been known for deer to meet the paths of oncoming traffic, Andrew sees an unknown shape ahead. Too slow to react, the car strikes the figure, and Andrew feels the crunch of the object beneath his wheels. The following morning, Andrew switches on Radio 4: ‘Police are requesting any information the public might have relating to a hit and run on Country Road yesterday evening, where a 6-year-old boy unfortunately lost his life. Anybody with information relating to the event, believed to have occurred in the hours in which one could be expected to be travelling home from an intimate dinner party, should contact their local police station immediately’. Andrew realises that it was not a deer he hit with his car, and turns himself in to the police station. For Bernard Williams and Thomas Nagel, this is a classic case of moral luck. In both possible worlds, Andrew’s actions and intentions were the same. In the first, Andrew wakes up and continues with his life. In the second, we expect him to face up to fourteen years in prison. Our question: should we judge Andrew’s moral character any more harshly in the second case than the first - do they not deserve the same punishment? Contents Part I. Bernard Williams Part II. Thomas Nagel Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Thomas Nagel, Moral Luck Bernard Williams, Moral Luck Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moral Luck Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Moral Luck

Olivia Coombes is a philosopher and teacher at the University of Edinburgh whose research focuses on issues about the possibility of time travel, the paradoxes involved in time travel, and how these topics relate to the question of free-will. In addition to this, Liv is also the co-host of the Edinburgh-based podcast Two Philosophers: One Podcast, No Problems. Since the philosopher David Lewis, and before, philosophers, scientists, movie fans (pretty much everybody), have deliberated the possibility of time travel. People have asked questions like: What is the order of time? If we could build a powerful enough machine, would we be able to travel through time? Causation goes forwards in time, but is there anything stopping it going backwards? And, if it could, can we have causal loops in time? In this episode we’re going to be focusing on the grandfather paradox, which is one instance of the question: can time travellers change the past? This paradox asks us whether or not we could go back in time and kill our own grandfathers. Many people say no: it is logically impossible, like squaring circles, or making something from nothing. However, Olivia Coombes thinks differently. She thinks that we can kill our grandfathers, and that we are able to change the past. Contents Part I. Time Traveller Abilities Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Olivia Coombes, University Profile. Olivia Coombes, Twitter. Two Philosophers: One Podcast, No Problems. David Lewis, The Paradoxes of Time Travel (1976).

Olivia Coombes is a philosopher and teacher at the University of Edinburgh whose research focuses on issues about the possibility of time travel, the paradoxes involved in time travel, and how these topics relate to the question of free-will. In addition to this, Liv is also the co-host of the Edinburgh-based podcast Two Philosophers: One Podcast, No Problems. Since the philosopher David Lewis, and before, philosophers, scientists, movie fans (pretty much everybody), have deliberated the possibility of time travel. People have asked questions like: What is the order of time? If we could build a powerful enough machine, would we be able to travel through time? Causation goes forwards in time, but is there anything stopping it going backwards? And, if it could, can we have causal loops in time? In this episode we’re going to be focusing on the grandfather paradox, which is one instance of the question: can time travellers change the past? This paradox asks us whether or not we could go back in time and kill our own grandfathers. Many people say no: it is logically impossible, like squaring circles, or making something from nothing. However, Olivia Coombes thinks differently. She thinks that we can kill our grandfathers, and that we are able to change the past. Contents Part I. Time Traveller Abilities Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Olivia Coombes, University Profile. Olivia Coombes, Twitter. Two Philosophers: One Podcast, No Problems. David Lewis, The Paradoxes of Time Travel (1976).

All my life, I have been fed apples from that tree. I was told it was the only tree worth eating from. Every day, whether it was in school or in the church, someone would arrive with a basket, and I would take what they offered. Today a similar basket lays in front of me, full of apples I've been saving so to take a closer inspection. Check those apples for me would you? Why so worried? Surely if they are good, there is nothing to worry about. You've heard of the Italian who was punished for checking, you say? I understand. I will do it myself. There are too many in there to check one by one. I shall take them all out and only place back in the basket the ones that are certifiably good! I think the Italian might have been onto something, they all look rotten! I must check closer. I refuse to accept that they are all bad! Ah, there is one. That will do. Perhaps the seeds can be used to grow more good apples... Contents Part I. The Life of René Descartes. Part II. Meditations on First Philosophy, 1-2. Part III. Meditations on First Philosophy, 3-4. Part IV. Meditations on First Philosophy, 5-6. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy: in which are demonstrated the existence of God and the distinction between the human soul and body (Early Modern Texts).

All my life, I have been fed apples from that tree. I was told it was the only tree worth eating from. Every day, whether it was in school or in the church, someone would arrive with a basket, and I would take what they offered. Today a similar basket lays in front of me, full of apples I've been saving so to take a closer inspection. Check those apples for me would you? Why so worried? Surely if they are good, there is nothing to worry about. You've heard of the Italian who was punished for checking, you say? I understand. I will do it myself. There are too many in there to check one by one. I shall take them all out and only place back in the basket the ones that are certifiably good! I think the Italian might have been onto something, they all look rotten! I must check closer. I refuse to accept that they are all bad! Ah, there is one. That will do. Perhaps the seeds can be used to grow more good apples... Contents Part I. The Life of René Descartes. Part II. Meditations on First Philosophy, 1-2. Part III. Meditations on First Philosophy, 3-4. Part IV. Meditations on First Philosophy, 5-6. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy: in which are demonstrated the existence of God and the distinction between the human soul and body (Early Modern Texts).

All my life, I have been fed apples from that tree. I was told it was the only tree worth eating from. Every day, whether it was in school or in the church, someone would arrive with a basket, and I would take what they offered. Today a similar basket lays in front of me, full of apples I've been saving so to take a closer inspection. Check those apples for me would you? Why so worried? Surely if they are good, there is nothing to worry about. You've heard of the Italian who was punished for checking, you say? I understand. I will do it myself. There are too many in there to check one by one. I shall take them all out and only place back in the basket the ones that are certifiably good! I think the Italian might have been onto something, they all look rotten! I must check closer. I refuse to accept that they are all bad! Ah, there is one. That will do. Perhaps the seeds can be used to grow more good apples... Contents Part I. The Life of René Descartes. Part II. Meditations on First Philosophy, 1-2. Part III. Meditations on First Philosophy, 3-4. Part IV. Meditations on First Philosophy, 5-6. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy: in which are demonstrated the existence of God and the distinction between the human soul and body (Early Modern Texts).

All my life, I have been fed apples from that tree. I was told it was the only tree worth eating from. Every day, whether it was in school or in the church, someone would arrive with a basket, and I would take what they offered. Today a similar basket lays in front of me, full of apples I've been saving so to take a closer inspection. Check those apples for me would you? Why so worried? Surely if they are good, there is nothing to worry about. You've heard of the Italian who was punished for checking, you say? I understand. I will do it myself. There are too many in there to check one by one. I shall take them all out and only place back in the basket the ones that are certifiably good! I think the Italian might have been onto something, they all look rotten! I must check closer. I refuse to accept that they are all bad! Ah, there is one. That will do. Perhaps the seeds can be used to grow more good apples... Contents Part I. The Life of René Descartes. Part II. Meditations on First Philosophy, 1-2. Part III. Meditations on First Philosophy, 3-4. Part IV. Meditations on First Philosophy, 5-6. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy: in which are demonstrated the existence of God and the distinction between the human soul and body (Early Modern Texts).

All my life, I have been fed apples from that tree. I was told it was the only tree worth eating from. Every day, whether it was in school or in the church, someone would arrive with a basket, and I would take what they offered. Today a similar basket lays in front of me, full of apples I've been saving so to take a closer inspection. Check those apples for me would you? Why so worried? Surely if they are good, there is nothing to worry about. You've heard of the Italian who was punished for checking, you say? I understand. I will do it myself. There are too many in there to check one by one. I shall take them all out and only place back in the basket the ones that are certifiably good! I think the Italian might have been onto something, they all look rotten! I must check closer. I refuse to accept that they are all bad! Ah, there is one. That will do. Perhaps the seeds can be used to grow more good apples... Contents Part I. The Life of René Descartes. Part II. Meditations on First Philosophy, 1-2. Part III. Meditations on First Philosophy, 3-4. Part IV. Meditations on First Philosophy, 5-6. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links René Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy: in which are demonstrated the existence of God and the distinction between the human soul and body (Early Modern Texts).

With the dominance of humankind has come a new age, an age of global warming, ecological collapse, and sixth mass extinction. In 2018, it was reported that of all the Earth’s mammals, 96% are humans and livestock. Our overpopulation, overconsumption, and exploitation have caused a climate catastrophe, but we are not our only victims. Each year, over 70 billion land creatures and 7 trillion sea animals are killed for food, and despite growth in public awareness, the overwhelming majority of these animals continue to endure unimaginable suffering throughout their lives.  The religions of ancient India - Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism - are no strangers to practicing ahimsa and vegetarianism. Their Abrahamic cousins have a very different past. For the advocate of animal rights, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have a long and dark history in their treatment of our fellow creatures. A history, many theologians, want to condemn to the history books. One such theologian is David Clough, professor of theological ethics at the University of Chester. Through his systematic theology On Animals, Professor Clough has inspired a new wave of scholarship on Christian attitudes towards our fellow creatures, and the Earth as a whole, calling Christians to unshackle themselves from Aristotelian ways of thinking and embrace Darwinian theories of the natural world. Contents Part I. The Rise of the Vegangelicals. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

With the dominance of humankind has come a new age, an age of global warming, ecological collapse, and sixth mass extinction. In 2018, it was reported that of all the Earth’s mammals, 96% are humans and livestock. Our overpopulation, overconsumption, and exploitation have caused a climate catastrophe, but we are not our only victims. Each year, over 70 billion land creatures and 7 trillion sea animals are killed for food, and despite growth in public awareness, the overwhelming majority of these animals continue to endure unimaginable suffering throughout their lives.  The religions of ancient India - Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism - are no strangers to practicing ahimsa and vegetarianism. Their Abrahamic cousins have a very different past. For the advocate of animal rights, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have a long and dark history in their treatment of our fellow creatures. A history, many theologians, want to condemn to the history books. One such theologian is David Clough, professor of theological ethics at the University of Chester. Through his systematic theology On Animals, Professor Clough has inspired a new wave of scholarship on Christian attitudes towards our fellow creatures, and the Earth as a whole, calling Christians to unshackle themselves from Aristotelian ways of thinking and embrace Darwinian theories of the natural world. Contents Part I. The Rise of the Vegangelicals. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Football is the most popular sport on the planet. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who’s experienced the excitement of matchday. It’s hard to remain indifferent when thousands of tightly packed fans, each patriotically sporting the colours of their team, sing, cheer and heckle in unison. The thrill of a crunching challenge, a derby victory, or a last-minute winner will undoubtedly elicit excitement.  For the sceptic, there is nothing beyond this superficial appeal. Fool-ball is simply a game of chance, in which the sport’s novelty appeal is only sustained through blind patriotism. Football is push-pin, and it is not to be confused with poetry. Durham University’s Stephen Mumford defends football in the face of this attack. For Mumford, football has an intellectual depth that rewards more detailed consideration. When we watch football through a philosophical lens, we are called to deliberate a great wealth of ideas; from categories of aesthetic virtue, and the role of chance, control and victory, to the nature of a team, and the persistence of a ‘club’ throughout time. __ Contents Part I. The Philosophy Behind the Game. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Football is the most popular sport on the planet. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who’s experienced the excitement of matchday. It’s hard to remain indifferent when thousands of tightly packed fans, each patriotically sporting the colours of their team, sing, cheer and heckle in unison. The thrill of a crunching challenge, a derby victory, or a last-minute winner will undoubtedly elicit excitement.  For the sceptic, there is nothing beyond this superficial appeal. Fool-ball is simply a game of chance, in which the sport’s novelty appeal is only sustained through blind patriotism. Football is push-pin, and it is not to be confused with poetry. Durham University’s Stephen Mumford defends football in the face of this attack. For Mumford, football has an intellectual depth that rewards more detailed consideration. When we watch football through a philosophical lens, we are called to deliberate a great wealth of ideas; from categories of aesthetic virtue, and the role of chance, control and victory, to the nature of a team, and the persistence of a ‘club’ throughout time. __ Contents Part I. The Philosophy Behind the Game. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Let me tell you about the day Socrates drank the poison. You must be aware of his trial and apology? The Athenians have not stopped talking about it since Meletus and the others condemned him. Do not worry, he did not die in fear and nor is he truly gone. He argued his case much like he always had. He died the philosopher’s death, having practiced for it his entire life. What does this mean? Socrates spoke persuasively about matters concerning the immortality of the soul. He said the life of a true philosopher helps the prisoner, chained hand and foot in their body, to escape from the dark cave of ignorance and into the light of wisdom. This, in turn, provides the soul with the perfect means to release itself from the body after death. When the hour arrived, and Socrates finally took the hemlock, he did not flinch. Those of us who bore witness could not help but shed a tear – we were not as brave as the wise man who lay before us. What? You would like to hear more? Are you not convinced of the immortality that Socrates proposed? Come, take a seat, I will tell you the full story… Contents Part I. The Soul and Body Part II. Arguments for the Soul’s Immortality Part III. In Defence of Immortality Part IV. The Death of Socrates, Further Analysis and Discussion Attributions Thank you to the following creators for allowing us to use their work in this episode. Tri-Tachyon: https://soundcloud.com/tri-tachyon/albums. PSOVOD: https://freesound.org/people/PSOVOD/sounds/416057. All other music and sound effects used in Episode 73, Plato’s Phaedo (Parts I-IV) are fully licensed. To request certificates, please contact [email protected]. Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf). David Bostock, Plato’s Phaedo (Amazon).  

Let me tell you about the day Socrates drank the poison. You must be aware of his trial and apology? The Athenians have not stopped talking about it since Meletus and the others condemned him. Do not worry, he did not die in fear and nor is he truly gone. He argued his case much like he always had. He died the philosopher’s death, having practiced for it his entire life. What does this mean? Socrates spoke persuasively about matters concerning the immortality of the soul. He said the life of a true philosopher helps the prisoner, chained hand and foot in their body, to escape from the dark cave of ignorance and into the light of wisdom. This, in turn, provides the soul with the perfect means to release itself from the body after death. When the hour arrived, and Socrates finally took the hemlock, he did not flinch. Those of us who bore witness could not help but shed a tear – we were not as brave as the wise man who lay before us. What? You would like to hear more? Are you not convinced of the immortality that Socrates proposed? Come, take a seat, I will tell you the full story… Contents Part I. The Soul and Body Part II. Arguments for the Soul’s Immortality Part III. In Defence of Immortality Part IV. The Death of Socrates, Further Analysis and Discussion Attributions Thank you to the following creators for allowing us to use their work in this episode. Tri-Tachyon: https://soundcloud.com/tri-tachyon/albums. PSOVOD: https://freesound.org/people/PSOVOD/sounds/416057. All other music and sound effects used in Episode 73, Plato’s Phaedo (Parts I-IV) are fully licensed. To request certificates, please contact [email protected]. Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf). David Bostock, Plato’s Phaedo (Amazon).  

Let me tell you about the day Socrates drank the poison. You must be aware of his trial and apology? The Athenians have not stopped talking about it since Meletus and the others condemned him. Do not worry, he did not die in fear and nor is he truly gone. He argued his case much like he always had. He died the philosopher’s death, having practiced for it his entire life. What does this mean? Socrates spoke persuasively about matters concerning the immortality of the soul. He said the life of a true philosopher helps the prisoner, chained hand and foot in their body, to escape from the dark cave of ignorance and into the light of wisdom. This, in turn, provides the soul with the perfect means to release itself from the body after death. When the hour arrived, and Socrates finally took the hemlock, he did not flinch. Those of us who bore witness could not help but shed a tear – we were not as brave as the wise man who lay before us. What? You would like to hear more? Are you not convinced of the immortality that Socrates proposed? Come, take a seat, I will tell you the full story… Contents Part I. The Soul and Body Part II. Arguments for the Soul’s Immortality Part III. In Defence of Immortality Part IV. The Death of Socrates, Further Analysis and Discussion Attributions Thank you to the following creators for allowing us to use their work in this episode. Tri-Tachyon: https://soundcloud.com/tri-tachyon/albums. PSOVOD: https://freesound.org/people/PSOVOD/sounds/416057. All other music and sound effects used in Episode 73, Plato’s Phaedo (Parts I-IV) are fully licensed. To request certificates, please contact [email protected]. Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf). David Bostock, Plato’s Phaedo (Amazon).  

Let me tell you about the day Socrates drank the poison. You must be aware of his trial and apology? The Athenians have not stopped talking about it since Meletus and the others condemned him. Do not worry, he did not die in fear and nor is he truly gone. He argued his case much like he always had. He died the philosopher’s death, having practiced for it his entire life. What does this mean? Socrates spoke persuasively about matters concerning the immortality of the soul. He said the life of a true philosopher helps the prisoner, chained hand and foot in their body, to escape from the dark cave of ignorance and into the light of wisdom. This, in turn, provides the soul with the perfect means to release itself from the body after death. When the hour arrived, and Socrates finally took the hemlock, he did not flinch. Those of us who bore witness could not help but shed a tear – we were not as brave as the wise man who lay before us. What? You would like to hear more? Are you not convinced of the immortality that Socrates proposed? Come, take a seat, I will tell you the full story… Contents Part I. The Soul and Body Part II. Arguments for the Soul’s Immortality Part III. In Defence of Immortality Part IV. The Death of Socrates, Further Analysis and Discussion Attributions Thank you to the following creators for allowing us to use their work in this episode. Tri-Tachyon: https://soundcloud.com/tri-tachyon/albums. PSOVOD: https://freesound.org/people/PSOVOD/sounds/416057. All other music and sound effects used in Episode 73, Plato’s Phaedo (Parts I-IV) are fully licensed. To request certificates, please contact [email protected]. Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf). David Bostock, Plato’s Phaedo (Amazon).  

Have you ever considered the invisible power of the law? How a contract is signed without ever putting pen to paper? Do not underestimate the importance of that which cannot be seen or grasped, since you unknowingly benefit from its presence and would suffer greatly in its absence. Therefore, if the law has kept you safe for all your best years, should you look to criticise it the moment it accuses? Be careful not to pull too hard at that thread, for the social fabric appears tightly woven but is actually patched over the ages by many inadequate tailors. If you decide that the law doesn’t suit you now, are you not making yourself a special case? Isn’t everyone a special case? Would not everyone be pardoned? So, what will it be: accept the law and therefore your fate, or set a precedent that demonstrates the contract is in fact as real as it is visible? Contents Part I. The Dialogue Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf).

Have you ever considered the invisible power of the law? How a contract is signed without ever putting pen to paper? Do not underestimate the importance of that which cannot be seen or grasped, since you unknowingly benefit from its presence and would suffer greatly in its absence. Therefore, if the law has kept you safe for all your best years, should you look to criticise it the moment it accuses? Be careful not to pull too hard at that thread, for the social fabric appears tightly woven but is actually patched over the ages by many inadequate tailors. If you decide that the law doesn’t suit you now, are you not making yourself a special case? Isn’t everyone a special case? Would not everyone be pardoned? So, what will it be: accept the law and therefore your fate, or set a precedent that demonstrates the contract is in fact as real as it is visible? Contents Part I. The Dialogue Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf).

Gentleman of our most prestigious Court of Athens, may I praise your patience and diligence in the presentation of the prosecution. I, Meletus stand before you unequivocally convinced that the criminal is guilty as charged. The hideous, snub-nosed Socrates is charged with corrupting the young men of Athens with his rhetoric and poisonous oratory skill, an undeniable fact. Socrates also stands before you charged with denying the gods their authority and challenging the beliefs of every genuine Athenian. He insults our great city with his relentless irritating presence, a fly in great need of a spider. He shows no signs of remorse for his conduct or apology for his crimes, a true reflection of his guilt. I beg you loyal judicators of Athens, listen to his words, hear him twist them for his own malevolent purpose. Look into his eyes, see his lack of contrition. He says he knows nothing! I know at least one thing, the evidence presented by the prosecution proves Socrates is guilty, and he should accept the judgement of the Athenian Court. Contents Part I. The Dialogue Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf).

Gentleman of our most prestigious Court of Athens, may I praise your patience and diligence in the presentation of the prosecution. I, Meletus stand before you unequivocally convinced that the criminal is guilty as charged. The hideous, snub-nosed Socrates is charged with corrupting the young men of Athens with his rhetoric and poisonous oratory skill, an undeniable fact. Socrates also stands before you charged with denying the gods their authority and challenging the beliefs of every genuine Athenian. He insults our great city with his relentless irritating presence, a fly in great need of a spider. He shows no signs of remorse for his conduct or apology for his crimes, a true reflection of his guilt. I beg you loyal judicators of Athens, listen to his words, hear him twist them for his own malevolent purpose. Look into his eyes, see his lack of contrition. He says he knows nothing! I know at least one thing, the evidence presented by the prosecution proves Socrates is guilty, and he should accept the judgement of the Athenian Court. Contents Part I. The Dialogue Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf).

Did you hear the news of Socrates? He’s finally to answer for his sophistry! At last, the great lampooning, moral gadfly is to stand before the Court of Athens and answer for his crimes. To think, one could have the audacity to trade in talentless talk and lies, to lead our youth astray, and deny our gods, only to play the fool once more, and plead ignorance when his number is called. Oh, magnificent Socrates, ‘the great rhetorician’ - his followers are deluded. A more fitting label? ‘Socrates, the great casuist clown!’ Lacking all reason and logic, he makes a mockery of our institutions. Like the fool who claims others cannot see, because he himself is blind, Socrates has only ever opened his mouth to appease his own lack of wisdom. Justly, he now finds himself in a tricky dilemma; may the gods have mercy on his impious soul. Contents Part I. The Dialogue Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf).

Did you hear the news of Socrates? He’s finally to answer for his sophistry! At last, the great lampooning, moral gadfly is to stand before the Court of Athens and answer for his crimes. To think, one could have the audacity to trade in talentless talk and lies, to lead our youth astray, and deny our gods, only to play the fool once more, and plead ignorance when his number is called. Oh, magnificent Socrates, ‘the great rhetorician’ - his followers are deluded. A more fitting label? ‘Socrates, the great casuist clown!’ Lacking all reason and logic, he makes a mockery of our institutions. Like the fool who claims others cannot see, because he himself is blind, Socrates has only ever opened his mouth to appease his own lack of wisdom. Justly, he now finds himself in a tricky dilemma; may the gods have mercy on his impious soul. Contents Part I. The Dialogue Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Plato, The Complete Works (pdf).

Galileo Galilei is widely considered to be the father of modern science and one of the greatest philosophers to have lived. Galileo played a pivotal role in the developments of the scientific revolution, overturning key tenets of Aristotelian physics and most significantly, advocating mathematics as the language of science. For Galileo, the physics of the past was plagued with unhelpful sensory qualities like colours, tastes, smells and sounds; for science to make progress, he thought, ‘the book of the universe’ must be written in a purely quantitative language. For Durham University’s Philip Goff, this was Galileo’s Error. The hard problem of consciousness was born when Galileo stripped consciousness away from the scientific picture. Somehow, we must find a way back. We must lay the foundations for a new science - a new science of consciousness. Contents Part I. Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Philip Goff, Galileo’s Error (2019). Philip Goff, Website. Philip Goff, Twitter.

Galileo Galilei is widely considered to be the father of modern science and one of the greatest philosophers to have lived. Galileo played a pivotal role in the developments of the scientific revolution, overturning key tenets of Aristotelian physics and most significantly, advocating mathematics as the language of science. For Galileo, the physics of the past was plagued with unhelpful sensory qualities like colours, tastes, smells and sounds; for science to make progress, he thought, ‘the book of the universe’ must be written in a purely quantitative language. For Durham University’s Philip Goff, this was Galileo’s Error. The hard problem of consciousness was born when Galileo stripped consciousness away from the scientific picture. Somehow, we must find a way back. We must lay the foundations for a new science - a new science of consciousness. Contents Part I. Foundations for a New Science of Consciousness Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Philip Goff, Galileo’s Error (2019). Philip Goff, Website. Philip Goff, Twitter.

Abigail Thorn is an actor and educator, best known as the creator and host of the popular YouTube channel Philosophy Tube. Boasting around half a million subscribers, Abigail’s channel is notorious for its well-researched content and colourful presentation. With over six years of videos under her belt, it is fair to say that Abigail is going over and above in her goal of giving away her philosophy degree for free. In this episode, we’ll be getting at the person behind Philosophy Tube, discussing the role and responsibilities of those contributing to public-facing philosophy. When we present philosophy in the public sphere, what are our goals? Should they the same as those in the philosophy seminar room - our desire being rigorous, detailed, delicate contemplation - or does public media demand something else? In short, do we need to change our ways to make philosophy accessible? [Note: Abigail Thorn came out as a transgender woman in January 2021. This episode was recorded pre-transition.] Contents Part I. Behind Philosophy Tube Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Philosophy Tube, YouTube Channel Philosophy Tube, Twitter Philosophy Tube, Patreon Interview: Philosophy Tube, What’s it like to be a philosopher?

Abigail Thorn is an actor and educator, best known as the creator and host of the popular YouTube channel Philosophy Tube. Boasting around half a million subscribers, Abigail’s channel is notorious for its well-researched content and colourful presentation. With over six years of videos under her belt, it is fair to say that Abigail is going over and above in her goal of giving away her philosophy degree for free. In this episode, we’ll be getting at the person behind Philosophy Tube, discussing the role and responsibilities of those contributing to public-facing philosophy. When we present philosophy in the public sphere, what are our goals? Should they the same as those in the philosophy seminar room - our desire being rigorous, detailed, delicate contemplation - or does public media demand something else? In short, do we need to change our ways to make philosophy accessible? [Note: Abigail Thorn came out as a transgender woman in January 2021. This episode was recorded pre-transition.] Contents Part I. Behind Philosophy Tube Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Philosophy Tube, YouTube Channel Philosophy Tube, Twitter Philosophy Tube, Patreon Interview: Philosophy Tube, What’s it like to be a philosopher?

Report: March 2nd After the successes we have had with Algernon, and with much deliberation, I have officially chosen our first research subject. Charlie Gordon, 32, was recommended to us by Alice Kinian from the Beekman School for Retarded Adults and she has assured us of his desire to increase his intellect. I have scheduled for Charlie to come to the lab over the next few days where Burt Selden will run some preliminary psych tests. We are also going to test his mental flexibility with a few maze puzzles with Algernon. All that remains is the consent of a family member to grant permission for the operation. According to Alice Kinian, his sister Norma might be the most appropriate person to seek out. Providing there are no warning signs during the testing, and consent is provided, we will be on the cusp of something truly ground-breaking. All these years of hard work will be vindicated and the trust of my wife and those who fund me will have been justified. Dare I say it, I might be remembered amongst the pantheon of great scientists. Strauss has insisted that we keep a close eye on his mental state and emotional growth. I am inclined to agree but feel we cannot be held fully accountable for the man’s personality. The success or failure of this experiment will rest on his increased intelligence, or lack thereof. One thing is certain, if the experiment works, Charlie Gordon’s life will change forever. Professor Harold Nemur Contents Part I. Life and Context. Part II. The Story: The Rise of Charlie Gordon. Part III. The Story: The Fall of Charlie Gordon. Part IV. The Meaning. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links Flowers for Algernon, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Algernon, Charlie, and I: A Writer’s Journey, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Charly (1968), Full Movie (YouTube).

Report: March 2nd After the successes we have had with Algernon, and with much deliberation, I have officially chosen our first research subject. Charlie Gordon, 32, was recommended to us by Alice Kinian from the Beekman School for Retarded Adults and she has assured us of his desire to increase his intellect. I have scheduled for Charlie to come to the lab over the next few days where Burt Selden will run some preliminary psych tests. We are also going to test his mental flexibility with a few maze puzzles with Algernon. All that remains is the consent of a family member to grant permission for the operation. According to Alice Kinian, his sister Norma might be the most appropriate person to seek out. Providing there are no warning signs during the testing, and consent is provided, we will be on the cusp of something truly ground-breaking. All these years of hard work will be vindicated and the trust of my wife and those who fund me will have been justified. Dare I say it, I might be remembered amongst the pantheon of great scientists. Strauss has insisted that we keep a close eye on his mental state and emotional growth. I am inclined to agree but feel we cannot be held fully accountable for the man’s personality. The success or failure of this experiment will rest on his increased intelligence, or lack thereof. One thing is certain, if the experiment works, Charlie Gordon’s life will change forever. Professor Harold Nemur Contents Part I. Life and Context. Part II. The Story: The Rise of Charlie Gordon. Part III. The Story: The Fall of Charlie Gordon. Part IV. The Meaning. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links Flowers for Algernon, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Algernon, Charlie, and I: A Writer’s Journey, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Charly (1968), Full Movie (YouTube).

Report: March 2nd After the successes we have had with Algernon, and with much deliberation, I have officially chosen our first research subject. Charlie Gordon, 32, was recommended to us by Alice Kinian from the Beekman School for Retarded Adults and she has assured us of his desire to increase his intellect. I have scheduled for Charlie to come to the lab over the next few days where Burt Selden will run some preliminary psych tests. We are also going to test his mental flexibility with a few maze puzzles with Algernon. All that remains is the consent of a family member to grant permission for the operation. According to Alice Kinian, his sister Norma might be the most appropriate person to seek out. Providing there are no warning signs during the testing, and consent is provided, we will be on the cusp of something truly ground-breaking. All these years of hard work will be vindicated and the trust of my wife and those who fund me will have been justified. Dare I say it, I might be remembered amongst the pantheon of great scientists. Strauss has insisted that we keep a close eye on his mental state and emotional growth. I am inclined to agree but feel we cannot be held fully accountable for the man’s personality. The success or failure of this experiment will rest on his increased intelligence, or lack thereof. One thing is certain, if the experiment works, Charlie Gordon’s life will change forever. Professor Harold Nemur Contents Part I. Life and Context. Part II. The Story: The Rise of Charlie Gordon. Part III. The Story: The Fall of Charlie Gordon. Part IV. The Meaning. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links Flowers for Algernon, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Algernon, Charlie, and I: A Writer’s Journey, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Charly (1968), Full Movie (YouTube).

Report: March 2nd After the successes we have had with Algernon, and with much deliberation, I have officially chosen our first research subject. Charlie Gordon, 32, was recommended to us by Alice Kinian from the Beekman School for Retarded Adults and she has assured us of his desire to increase his intellect. I have scheduled for Charlie to come to the lab over the next few days where Burt Selden will run some preliminary psych tests. We are also going to test his mental flexibility with a few maze puzzles with Algernon. All that remains is the consent of a family member to grant permission for the operation. According to Alice Kinian, his sister Norma might be the most appropriate person to seek out. Providing there are no warning signs during the testing, and consent is provided, we will be on the cusp of something truly ground-breaking. All these years of hard work will be vindicated and the trust of my wife and those who fund me will have been justified. Dare I say it, I might be remembered amongst the pantheon of great scientists. Strauss has insisted that we keep a close eye on his mental state and emotional growth. I am inclined to agree but feel we cannot be held fully accountable for the man’s personality. The success or failure of this experiment will rest on his increased intelligence, or lack thereof. One thing is certain, if the experiment works, Charlie Gordon’s life will change forever. Professor Harold Nemur Contents Part I. Life and Context. Part II. The Story: The Rise of Charlie Gordon. Part III. The Story: The Fall of Charlie Gordon. Part IV. The Meaning. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links Flowers for Algernon, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Algernon, Charlie, and I: A Writer’s Journey, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Charly (1968), Full Movie (YouTube).

Report: March 2nd After the successes we have had with Algernon, and with much deliberation, I have officially chosen our first research subject. Charlie Gordon, 32, was recommended to us by Alice Kinian from the Beekman School for Retarded Adults and she has assured us of his desire to increase his intellect. I have scheduled for Charlie to come to the lab over the next few days where Burt Selden will run some preliminary psych tests. We are also going to test his mental flexibility with a few maze puzzles with Algernon. All that remains is the consent of a family member to grant permission for the operation. According to Alice Kinian, his sister Norma might be the most appropriate person to seek out. Providing there are no warning signs during the testing, and consent is provided, we will be on the cusp of something truly ground-breaking. All these years of hard work will be vindicated and the trust of my wife and those who fund me will have been justified. Dare I say it, I might be remembered amongst the pantheon of great scientists. Strauss has insisted that we keep a close eye on his mental state and emotional growth. I am inclined to agree but feel we cannot be held fully accountable for the man’s personality. The success or failure of this experiment will rest on his increased intelligence, or lack thereof. One thing is certain, if the experiment works, Charlie Gordon’s life will change forever. Professor Harold Nemur Contents Part I. Life and Context. Part II. The Story: The Rise of Charlie Gordon. Part III. The Story: The Fall of Charlie Gordon. Part IV. The Meaning. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links Flowers for Algernon, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Algernon, Charlie, and I: A Writer’s Journey, Daniel Keyes (Amazon). Charly (1968), Full Movie (YouTube).

No book can teach you how to tame the raging river of fortune, for it has many plans contrary to ambitious minds. Yet to submit powerlessly to fate with lamentation, as if God has not instilled you with freedom of the will, is a sign of disrespect and the ultimate folly of our kind. For the river splits into many paths and those that appear to drag us towards the abyss, may, in the end, lead us to glory if only we persist in our efforts. That is not to say that fortune always favours the brave. The acts of life should be understood as drama rather than science, and sometimes the heroes lose. Nevertheless, if it just so happens that you wish to play the role of the Prince or Princess, and be responsible for guiding others to a better future, there is wisdom you can learn from your time and through history to aid your cause. Before we go any further, however, I must warn you that the practicalities of ruling come with demands that are not for the faint-of-heart. Human nature dictates that at times, you will need to adopt the methods of the Fox and the Lion. You must be like the Fox in order to spot the traps laid by those who wish to see you fail and you must be like the Lion so that those same people will never try too hard for fear of the repercussions. This might sound harsh, but let me remind you that the road to hell is often pathed with good intentions and that sometimes to be good you must learn… to be cruel. This episode is sponsored by Rachel Poulton’s The Little Book of Philosophy. For more information about the book, please click the following link: https://tinyurl.com/y4csq4no. Contents Part I. Life and Context Part II. The Prince Part III. Machiavellianism Today Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince (Amazon). Niccolò Machiavelli, The Discourses on Livy (Amazon). Quentin Skinner, Machiavelli: A Very Short Introduction (Amazon). Erica Benner, Be Like the Fox (Amazon). The Great Courses, Machiavelli in Context (Audible). Alan Ryan, On Politics (Amazon). Cary J. Nedermand, Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide (Amazon). Dick Morris, New Prince: Machiavelli Updated for the Twenty-First Century (Amazon).

No book can teach you how to tame the raging river of fortune, for it has many plans contrary to ambitious minds. Yet to submit powerlessly to fate with lamentation, as if God has not instilled you with freedom of the will, is a sign of disrespect and the ultimate folly of our kind. For the river splits into many paths and those that appear to drag us towards the abyss, may, in the end, lead us to glory if only we persist in our efforts. That is not to say that fortune always favours the brave. The acts of life should be understood as drama rather than science, and sometimes the heroes lose. Nevertheless, if it just so happens that you wish to play the role of the Prince or Princess, and be responsible for guiding others to a better future, there is wisdom you can learn from your time and through history to aid your cause. Before we go any further, however, I must warn you that the practicalities of ruling come with demands that are not for the faint-of-heart. Human nature dictates that at times, you will need to adopt the methods of the Fox and the Lion. You must be like the Fox in order to spot the traps laid by those who wish to see you fail and you must be like the Lion so that those same people will never try too hard for fear of the repercussions. This might sound harsh, but let me remind you that the road to hell is often pathed with good intentions and that sometimes to be good you must learn… to be cruel. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga. Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSY. Contents Part I. Life and Context Part II. The Prince Part III. Machiavellianism Today Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince (Amazon). Niccolò Machiavelli, The Discourses on Livy (Amazon). Quentin Skinner, Machiavelli: A Very Short Introduction (Amazon). Erica Benner, Be Like the Fox (Amazon). The Great Courses, Machiavelli in Context (Audible). Alan Ryan, On Politics (Amazon). Cary J. Nedermand, Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide (Amazon). Dick Morris, New Prince: Machiavelli Updated for the Twenty-First Century (Amazon).

No book can teach you how to tame the raging river of fortune, for it has many plans contrary to ambitious minds. Yet to submit powerlessly to fate with lamentation, as if God has not instilled you with freedom of the will, is a sign of disrespect and the ultimate folly of our kind. For the river splits into many paths and those that appear to drag us towards the abyss, may, in the end, lead us to glory if only we persist in our efforts. That is not to say that fortune always favours the brave. The acts of life should be understood as drama rather than science, and sometimes the heroes lose. Nevertheless, if it just so happens that you wish to play the role of the Prince or Princess, and be responsible for guiding others to a better future, there is wisdom you can learn from your time and through history to aid your cause. Before we go any further, however, I must warn you that the practicalities of ruling come with demands that are not for the faint-of-heart. Human nature dictates that at times, you will need to adopt the methods of the Fox and the Lion. You must be like the Fox in order to spot the traps laid by those who wish to see you fail and you must be like the Lion so that those same people will never try too hard for fear of the repercussions. This might sound harsh, but let me remind you that the road to hell is often pathed with good intentions and that sometimes to be good you must learn… to be cruel. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga. Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSY. Contents Part I. Life and Context Part II. The Prince Part III. Machiavellianism Today Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince (Amazon). Niccolò Machiavelli, The Discourses on Livy (Amazon). Quentin Skinner, Machiavelli: A Very Short Introduction (Amazon). Erica Benner, Be Like the Fox (Amazon). The Great Courses, Machiavelli in Context (Audible). Alan Ryan, On Politics (Amazon). Cary J. Nedermand, Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide (Amazon). Dick Morris, New Prince: Machiavelli Updated for the Twenty-First Century (Amazon).

No book can teach you how to tame the raging river of fortune, for it has many plans contrary to ambitious minds. Yet to submit powerlessly to fate with lamentation, as if God has not instilled you with freedom of the will, is a sign of disrespect and the ultimate folly of our kind. For the river splits into many paths and those that appear to drag us towards the abyss, may, in the end, lead us to glory if only we persist in our efforts. That is not to say that fortune always favours the brave. The acts of life should be understood as drama rather than science, and sometimes the heroes lose. Nevertheless, if it just so happens that you wish to play the role of the Prince or Princess, and be responsible for guiding others to a better future, there is wisdom you can learn from your time and through history to aid your cause. Before we go any further, however, I must warn you that the practicalities of ruling come with demands that are not for the faint-of-heart. Human nature dictates that at times, you will need to adopt the methods of the Fox and the Lion. You must be like the Fox in order to spot the traps laid by those who wish to see you fail and you must be like the Lion so that those same people will never try too hard for fear of the repercussions. This might sound harsh, but let me remind you that the road to hell is often pathed with good intentions and that sometimes to be good you must learn… to be cruel. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga. Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSY. Contents Part I. Life and Context Part II. The Prince Part III. Machiavellianism Today Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Niccolò Machiavelli, The Prince (Amazon). Niccolò Machiavelli, The Discourses on Livy (Amazon). Quentin Skinner, Machiavelli: A Very Short Introduction (Amazon). Erica Benner, Be Like the Fox (Amazon). The Great Courses, Machiavelli in Context (Audible). Alan Ryan, On Politics (Amazon). Cary J. Nedermand, Machiavelli: A Beginner's Guide (Amazon). Dick Morris, New Prince: Machiavelli Updated for the Twenty-First Century (Amazon).

University of Sheffield philosopher, Assistant Professor Ryan Byerly is best known for his work in philosophy of religion, epistemology and virtue theory. Publishing widely in these areas, Ryan is also Reviews Editor for the European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Treasurer for the British Society for Philosophy of Religion, and a member of Sheffield’s Centre for Engaged Philosophy. Amongst many other fascinating papers in philosophy of religion, Ryan is the author of ‘The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism’, which forms our focus for today’s discussion. Ryan’s argument for pantheism (the belief that ‘God is the universe and the universe is God’) provides an exciting and unique take on not just the type of god we should believe in, but also the way in which we might come to establish its existence. In short, Ryan thinks that the emotion of awe - that profound, ineffable feeling that one has when they see Van Gogh’s Starry Night or a meteor burning up in the atmosphere - can point us in the direction of things which are divine. The greatest object of awe, says Byerly, is the cosmos, and therefore, the cosmos is the most divine thing. Contents Part I. The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links Ryan Byerly, The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism. Ryan Byerly: University of Sheffield Profile. Ryan Byerly: Website.

University of Sheffield philosopher, Assistant Professor Ryan Byerly is best known for his work in philosophy of religion, epistemology and virtue theory. Publishing widely in these areas, Ryan is also Reviews Editor for the European Journal for Philosophy of Religion, Treasurer for the British Society for Philosophy of Religion, and a member of Sheffield’s Centre for Engaged Philosophy. Amongst many other fascinating papers in philosophy of religion, Ryan is the author of ‘The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism’, which forms our focus for today’s discussion. Ryan’s argument for pantheism (the belief that ‘God is the universe and the universe is God’) provides an exciting and unique take on not just the type of god we should believe in, but also the way in which we might come to establish its existence. In short, Ryan thinks that the emotion of awe - that profound, ineffable feeling that one has when they see Van Gogh’s Starry Night or a meteor burning up in the atmosphere - can point us in the direction of things which are divine. The greatest object of awe, says Byerly, is the cosmos, and therefore, the cosmos is the most divine thing. Contents Part I. The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links Ryan Byerly, The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism. Ryan Byerly: University of Sheffield Profile. Ryan Byerly: Website.

Michelle Montague is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. As well as publishing extensively in phenomenology and philosophy of mind, Michelle is also the author of Non-Propositional Intentionality, Cognitive Phenomenology, and our focus for this episode, her 2016 book, The Given: Experience and its Content. This episode is all about what some philosophers have called ‘the given’, that is, what is given to us in our immediate experience. From Aristotle to Hume, philosophers have tried to account for the categories, types, and distinctions within the mind. Michelle’s work continues in this tradition, however it takes a new and exciting turn away from the orthodox positions in philosophy of mind - she thinks that phenomenology comes first, that phenomenology is responsible for our mind’s ability to represent the world, and that there are many more types of phenomenology than we’ve currently admitted.

Michelle Montague is Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. As well as publishing extensively in phenomenology and philosophy of mind, Michelle is also the author of Non-Propositional Intentionality, Cognitive Phenomenology, and our focus for this episode, her 2016 book, The Given: Experience and its Content. This episode is all about what some philosophers have called ‘the given’, that is, what is given to us in our immediate experience. From Aristotle to Hume, philosophers have tried to account for the categories, types, and distinctions within the mind. Michelle’s work continues in this tradition, however it takes a new and exciting turn away from the orthodox positions in philosophy of mind - she thinks that phenomenology comes first, that phenomenology is responsible for our mind’s ability to represent the world, and that there are many more types of phenomenology than we’ve currently admitted.

Andrei Buckareff is Associate Professor of Philosophy and Co-Director of the Cognitive Science Program at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, New York, and Associate Editor of the journal Science, Religion, and Culture. Andrei’s work focuses on a range of fascinating topics, from metaphysics, philosophy of mind, epistemology and the philosophy of action, to philosophy of religion, the afterlife, pantheism, and alternative concepts of God. Andrei is a prolific writer, publishing extensively in these fields, and his influence cannot be overstated. Alongside Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation, Andrei is also the co-leader of the ‘the Pantheism and Panentheism Project’, which will form our focus for today. In this episode, we’ll be speaking to Andrei about alternative concepts of God; more specifically, on Andrei’s recent work surrounding pantheism and panentheism. In a word, Andrei argues that if we are to understand God as ‘acting in space-time’, we should be inclined to believe that this God exists within time and space, at all spatial locations. Moreover, if we are inclined to think that God is omniscient, then we should also believe that God ‘is the universe’ – that is, God and the universe are essentially made of the same stuff, with God being either identical with or constituted by the cosmos. Andrei’s work calls the orthodox theist to radically reconceptualise their understanding of God, in the light of a more philosophically plausible philosophy. Our question, if we are theists, do we need to change the way we think about God? This episode is produced in partnership with ‘the Pantheism and Panentheism Project’, which is led by Andrei Buckareff and Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.

Andrei Buckareff is Associate Professor of Philosophy and Co-Director of the Cognitive Science Program at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, New York, and Associate Editor of the journal Science, Religion, and Culture. Andrei’s work focuses on a range of fascinating topics, from metaphysics, philosophy of mind, epistemology and the philosophy of action, to philosophy of religion, the afterlife, pantheism, and alternative concepts of God. Andrei is a prolific writer, publishing extensively in these fields, and his influence cannot be overstated. Alongside Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation, Andrei is also the co-leader of the ‘the Pantheism and Panentheism Project’, which will form our focus for today. In this episode, we’ll be speaking to Andrei about alternative concepts of God; more specifically, on Andrei’s recent work surrounding pantheism and panentheism. In a word, Andrei argues that if we are to understand God as ‘acting in space-time’, we should be inclined to believe that this God exists within time and space, at all spatial locations. Moreover, if we are inclined to think that God is omniscient, then we should also believe that God ‘is the universe’ – that is, God and the universe are essentially made of the same stuff, with God being either identical with or constituted by the cosmos. Andrei’s work calls the orthodox theist to radically reconceptualise their understanding of God, in the light of a more philosophically plausible philosophy. Our question, if we are theists, do we need to change the way we think about God? This episode is produced in partnership with ‘the Pantheism and Panentheism Project’, which is led by Andrei Buckareff and Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.

Imagine you are in an open field which stretches in every direction, further than your eyes can see. Since there is nothing of interest in your immediate surroundings, you set your sights on the horizon. You begin to walk with purpose; long strides eventually break into a run until you are sprinting as fast as you can. After a while, you begin to slow down. Not just because of a lack of breath, but because something doesn’t quite feel right. Your steps relax to a strolling pace as you turn back to glance at where you started — but it isn’t clear how far you’ve come. You continue walking; at first for hours, then days, and then weeks. Eventually, although the anxiety set in days ago, you come to a stop. No matter how many steps you had taken, the horizon never came any closer. The goal was never realised, regardless of your efforts. This short passage might tell you something about your own life, or at least a way of thinking which has occupied your mind at one time or another. The horizon in the story is an analogy for instrumental goods. Instrumental goods are those things in life that you want because you believe them to be necessary for your well-being or happiness. A new job or a trip that you’ve always wanted to take, for example. We think that once we meet these goals, we will somehow achieve happiness as if it was some state which could be reached and maintained forever. But these ideas are sorely misguided. We cannot find and maintain happiness by seeking it in instrumental goods. You see, permanent, unchanging happiness is like the horizon in the story. No matter how hard you work for it, no matter how many promotions you achieve, how many new trips you take, you simply cannot find happiness in this way. Contents Part I. The Context and Life of Epictetus. Part II. The Discourses and The Enchiridion. Part III. Modern Stoicism. Part IV. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links How to Be Free: An Ancient Guide to the Stoic Life, A. A. Long (Amazon). A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, William Irvine (Amazon). Discourses and Selected Writings, Epictetus (Amazon). Psychotherapy: A Very Short Introduction, Tom Burns and Eva Burns-Lundgren (Amazon). Meditations, Marcus Aurelius (Amazon). A Handbook for New Stoics: How to Thrive in a World Out of Your Control, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). How To Be A Stoic: Ancient Wisdom for Modern Living, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). The Happiness Hypothesis: Putting Ancient Wisdom to the Test of Modern Science, Jonathan Haidt (Amazon). Classical Philosophy: A history of philosophy without any gaps, Volume 1, Peter Adamson (Amazon). The Partially Examine Life, Episode 124: The Stoic Life with Epictetus (Podcast).

Imagine you are in an open field which stretches in every direction, further than your eyes can see. Since there is nothing of interest in your immediate surroundings, you set your sights on the horizon. You begin to walk with purpose; long strides eventually break into a run until you are sprinting as fast as you can. After a while, you begin to slow down. Not just because of a lack of breath, but because something doesn’t quite feel right. Your steps relax to a strolling pace as you turn back to glance at where you started — but it isn’t clear how far you’ve come. You continue walking; at first for hours, then days, and then weeks. Eventually, although the anxiety set in days ago, you come to a stop. No matter how many steps you had taken, the horizon never came any closer. The goal was never realised, regardless of your efforts. This short passage might tell you something about your own life, or at least a way of thinking which has occupied your mind at one time or another. The horizon in the story is an analogy for instrumental goods. Instrumental goods are those things in life that you want because you believe them to be necessary for your well-being or happiness. A new job or a trip that you’ve always wanted to take, for example. We think that once we meet these goals, we will somehow achieve happiness as if it was some state which could be reached and maintained forever. But these ideas are sorely misguided. We cannot find and maintain happiness by seeking it in instrumental goods. You see, permanent, unchanging happiness is like the horizon in the story. No matter how hard you work for it, no matter how many promotions you achieve, how many new trips you take, you simply cannot find happiness in this way. Contents Part I. The Context and Life of Epictetus. Part II. The Discourses and The Enchiridion. Part III. Modern Stoicism. Part IV. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links How to Be Free: An Ancient Guide to the Stoic Life, A. A. Long (Amazon). A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, William Irvine (Amazon). Discourses and Selected Writings, Epictetus (Amazon). Psychotherapy: A Very Short Introduction, Tom Burns and Eva Burns-Lundgren (Amazon). Meditations, Marcus Aurelius (Amazon). A Handbook for New Stoics: How to Thrive in a World Out of Your Control, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). How To Be A Stoic: Ancient Wisdom for Modern Living, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). The Happiness Hypothesis: Putting Ancient Wisdom to the Test of Modern Science, Jonathan Haidt (Amazon). Classical Philosophy: A history of philosophy without any gaps, Volume 1, Peter Adamson (Amazon). The Partially Examine Life, Episode 124: The Stoic Life with Epictetus (Podcast).

Imagine you are in an open field which stretches in every direction, further than your eyes can see. Since there is nothing of interest in your immediate surroundings, you set your sights on the horizon. You begin to walk with purpose; long strides eventually break into a run until you are sprinting as fast as you can. After a while, you begin to slow down. Not just because of a lack of breath, but because something doesn’t quite feel right. Your steps relax to a strolling pace as you turn back to glance at where you started — but it isn’t clear how far you’ve come. You continue walking; at first for hours, then days, and then weeks. Eventually, although the anxiety set in days ago, you come to a stop. No matter how many steps you had taken, the horizon never came any closer. The goal was never realised, regardless of your efforts. This short passage might tell you something about your own life, or at least a way of thinking which has occupied your mind at one time or another. The horizon in the story is an analogy for instrumental goods. Instrumental goods are those things in life that you want because you believe them to be necessary for your well-being or happiness. A new job or a trip that you’ve always wanted to take, for example. We think that once we meet these goals, we will somehow achieve happiness as if it was some state which could be reached and maintained forever. But these ideas are sorely misguided. We cannot find and maintain happiness by seeking it in instrumental goods. You see, permanent, unchanging happiness is like the horizon in the story. No matter how hard you work for it, no matter how many promotions you achieve, how many new trips you take, you simply cannot find happiness in this way. Contents Part I. The Context and Life of Epictetus. Part II. The Discourses and The Enchiridion. Part III. Modern Stoicism. Part IV. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links How to Be Free: An Ancient Guide to the Stoic Life, A. A. Long (Amazon). A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, William Irvine (Amazon). Discourses and Selected Writings, Epictetus (Amazon). Psychotherapy: A Very Short Introduction, Tom Burns and Eva Burns-Lundgren (Amazon). Meditations, Marcus Aurelius (Amazon). A Handbook for New Stoics: How to Thrive in a World Out of Your Control, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). How To Be A Stoic: Ancient Wisdom for Modern Living, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). The Happiness Hypothesis: Putting Ancient Wisdom to the Test of Modern Science, Jonathan Haidt (Amazon). Classical Philosophy: A history of philosophy without any gaps, Volume 1, Peter Adamson (Amazon). The Partially Examine Life, Episode 124: The Stoic Life with Epictetus (Podcast).

Imagine you are in an open field which stretches in every direction, further than your eyes can see. Since there is nothing of interest in your immediate surroundings, you set your sights on the horizon. You begin to walk with purpose; long strides eventually break into a run until you are sprinting as fast as you can. After a while, you begin to slow down. Not just because of a lack of breath, but because something doesn’t quite feel right. Your steps relax to a strolling pace as you turn back to glance at where you started — but it isn’t clear how far you’ve come. You continue walking; at first for hours, then days, and then weeks. Eventually, although the anxiety set in days ago, you come to a stop. No matter how many steps you had taken, the horizon never came any closer. The goal was never realised, regardless of your efforts. This short passage might tell you something about your own life, or at least a way of thinking which has occupied your mind at one time or another. The horizon in the story is an analogy for instrumental goods. Instrumental goods are those things in life that you want because you believe them to be necessary for your well-being or happiness. A new job or a trip that you’ve always wanted to take, for example. We think that once we meet these goals, we will somehow achieve happiness as if it was some state which could be reached and maintained forever. But these ideas are sorely misguided. We cannot find and maintain happiness by seeking it in instrumental goods. You see, permanent, unchanging happiness is like the horizon in the story. No matter how hard you work for it, no matter how many promotions you achieve, how many new trips you take, you simply cannot find happiness in this way. Contents Part I. The Context and Life of Epictetus. Part II. The Discourses and The Enchiridion. Part III. Modern Stoicism. Part IV. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links How to Be Free: An Ancient Guide to the Stoic Life, A. A. Long (Amazon). A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, William Irvine (Amazon). Discourses and Selected Writings, Epictetus (Amazon). Psychotherapy: A Very Short Introduction, Tom Burns and Eva Burns-Lundgren (Amazon). Meditations, Marcus Aurelius (Amazon). A Handbook for New Stoics: How to Thrive in a World Out of Your Control, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). How To Be A Stoic: Ancient Wisdom for Modern Living, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). The Happiness Hypothesis: Putting Ancient Wisdom to the Test of Modern Science, Jonathan Haidt (Amazon). Classical Philosophy: A history of philosophy without any gaps, Volume 1, Peter Adamson (Amazon). The Partially Examine Life, Episode 124: The Stoic Life with Epictetus (Podcast).

Imagine you are in an open field which stretches in every direction, further than your eyes can see. Since there is nothing of interest in your immediate surroundings, you set your sights on the horizon. You begin to walk with purpose; long strides eventually break into a run until you are sprinting as fast as you can. After a while, you begin to slow down. Not just because of a lack of breath, but because something doesn’t quite feel right. Your steps relax to a strolling pace as you turn back to glance at where you started — but it isn’t clear how far you’ve come. You continue walking; at first for hours, then days, and then weeks. Eventually, although the anxiety set in days ago, you come to a stop. No matter how many steps you had taken, the horizon never came any closer. The goal was never realised, regardless of your efforts. This short passage might tell you something about your own life, or at least a way of thinking which has occupied your mind at one time or another. The horizon in the story is an analogy for instrumental goods. Instrumental goods are those things in life that you want because you believe them to be necessary for your well-being or happiness. A new job or a trip that you’ve always wanted to take, for example. We think that once we meet these goals, we will somehow achieve happiness as if it was some state which could be reached and maintained forever. But these ideas are sorely misguided. We cannot find and maintain happiness by seeking it in instrumental goods. You see, permanent, unchanging happiness is like the horizon in the story. No matter how hard you work for it, no matter how many promotions you achieve, how many new trips you take, you simply cannot find happiness in this way. Contents Part I. The Context and Life of Epictetus. Part II. The Discourses and The Enchiridion. Part III. Modern Stoicism. Part IV. Cognitive Behavioural Therapy. Part V. Further Analysis and Discussion. Links How to Be Free: An Ancient Guide to the Stoic Life, A. A. Long (Amazon). A Guide to the Good Life: The Ancient Art of Stoic Joy, William Irvine (Amazon). Discourses and Selected Writings, Epictetus (Amazon). Psychotherapy: A Very Short Introduction, Tom Burns and Eva Burns-Lundgren (Amazon). Meditations, Marcus Aurelius (Amazon). A Handbook for New Stoics: How to Thrive in a World Out of Your Control, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). How To Be A Stoic: Ancient Wisdom for Modern Living, Massimo Pigliucci (Amazon). The Happiness Hypothesis: Putting Ancient Wisdom to the Test of Modern Science, Jonathan Haidt (Amazon). Classical Philosophy: A history of philosophy without any gaps, Volume 1, Peter Adamson (Amazon). The Partially Examine Life, Episode 124: The Stoic Life with Epictetus (Podcast).

Co-founder of Humanity+, formerly known as the World Transhumanist Association, David Pearce is a leading figure of the transhumanist movement. David is perhaps best known for his 1995 manifesto, The Hedonistic Imperative, in which he argues that we can, and will, abolish suffering throughout the living world. Following The Hedonistic Imperative, David has published extensively on topics surrounding utilitarianism, veganism, abolitionism and transhumanism; culminating in his most recent 2017 collection of essays, Can Biotechnology Abolish Suffering? Alongside his careful philosophical thinking, David’s captivating writing-style has inspired philosophers across the world to look forward into the ‘philosophy of the future’. A world as David hopes, that is free from suffering, ageing and stupidity. Contents Part I. Transhumanism. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Co-founder of Humanity+, formerly known as the World Transhumanist Association, David Pearce is a leading figure of the transhumanist movement. David is perhaps best known for his 1995 manifesto, The Hedonistic Imperative, in which he argues that we can, and will, abolish suffering throughout the living world. Following The Hedonistic Imperative, David has published extensively on topics surrounding utilitarianism, veganism, abolitionism and transhumanism; culminating in his most recent 2017 collection of essays, Can Biotechnology Abolish Suffering? Alongside his careful philosophical thinking, David’s captivating writing-style has inspired philosophers across the world to look forward into the ‘philosophy of the future’. A world as David hopes, that is free from suffering, ageing and stupidity. Contents Part I. Transhumanism. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Hello good sir! If you do not mind me saying, you look as if you’re in limbo. Lost? It might please you to know that most of the tourists, and the locals for that matter, don’t know where they’re heading in these parts. If I could be so bold as to make an assessment, I would take you for the sophisticated type but with a little bit of an edge? Your smile says it all. Nothing wrong with indulging in the simple things in life every now and then. Do you see that bar over there? Yes, the one with the peculiar name. Mexico City, here in Amsterdam. You’ll likely find one or two characters in that place; the brute who runs the place for instance. On a good night, you can end up in the type of conversation which only drunken stranger can have – putting the world to rights. On an even better night, you might learn something about yourself. Intrigued? I knew you were an adventurous sort the moment I lay eyes on you. Enjoy your time here in Amsterdam. No better place in the world for a bit of escapism! The only problem some have is not being able to escape the thought of it after they visit! What? Oh, I meant nothing by it. A slip of the tongue. Before you leave, can I make one final suggestion? I’d take the coat off if I were you. This place can get a lot hotter than limbo if you catch my drift…

Hello good sir! If you do not mind me saying, you look as if you’re in limbo. Lost? It might please you to know that most of the tourists, and the locals for that matter, don’t know where they’re heading in these parts. If I could be so bold as to make an assessment, I would take you for the sophisticated type but with a little bit of an edge? Your smile says it all. Nothing wrong with indulging in the simple things in life every now and then. Do you see that bar over there? Yes, the one with the peculiar name. Mexico City, here in Amsterdam. You’ll likely find one or two characters in that place; the brute who runs the place for instance. On a good night, you can end up in the type of conversation which only drunken stranger can have – putting the world to rights. On an even better night, you might learn something about yourself. Intrigued? I knew you were an adventurous sort the moment I lay eyes on you. Enjoy your time here in Amsterdam. No better place in the world for a bit of escapism! The only problem some have is not being able to escape the thought of it after they visit! What? Oh, I meant nothing by it. A slip of the tongue. Before you leave, can I make one final suggestion? I’d take the coat off if I were you. This place can get a lot hotter than limbo if you catch my drift…

Hello good sir! If you do not mind me saying, you look as if you’re in limbo. Lost? It might please you to know that most of the tourists, and the locals for that matter, don’t know where they’re heading in these parts. If I could be so bold as to make an assessment, I would take you for the sophisticated type but with a little bit of an edge? Your smile says it all. Nothing wrong with indulging in the simple things in life every now and then. Do you see that bar over there? Yes, the one with the peculiar name. Mexico City, here in Amsterdam. You’ll likely find one or two characters in that place; the brute who runs the place for instance. On a good night, you can end up in the type of conversation which only drunken stranger can have – putting the world to rights. On an even better night, you might learn something about yourself. Intrigued? I knew you were an adventurous sort the moment I lay eyes on you. Enjoy your time here in Amsterdam. No better place in the world for a bit of escapism! The only problem some have is not being able to escape the thought of it after they visit! What? Oh, I meant nothing by it. A slip of the tongue. Before you leave, can I make one final suggestion? I’d take the coat off if I were you. This place can get a lot hotter than limbo if you catch my drift…

Hello good sir! If you do not mind me saying, you look as if you’re in limbo. Lost? It might please you to know that most of the tourists, and the locals for that matter, don’t know where they’re heading in these parts. If I could be so bold as to make an assessment, I would take you for the sophisticated type but with a little bit of an edge? Your smile says it all. Nothing wrong with indulging in the simple things in life every now and then. Do you see that bar over there? Yes, the one with the peculiar name. Mexico City, here in Amsterdam. You’ll likely find one or two characters in that place; the brute who runs the place for instance. On a good night, you can end up in the type of conversation which only drunken stranger can have – putting the world to rights. On an even better night, you might learn something about yourself. Intrigued? I knew you were an adventurous sort the moment I lay eyes on you. Enjoy your time here in Amsterdam. No better place in the world for a bit of escapism! The only problem some have is not being able to escape the thought of it after they visit! What? Oh, I meant nothing by it. A slip of the tongue. Before you leave, can I make one final suggestion? I’d take the coat off if I were you. This place can get a lot hotter than limbo if you catch my drift…

Hello good sir! If you do not mind me saying, you look as if you’re in limbo. Lost? It might please you to know that most of the tourists, and the locals for that matter, don’t know where they’re heading in these parts. If I could be so bold as to make an assessment, I would take you for the sophisticated type but with a little bit of an edge? Your smile says it all. Nothing wrong with indulging in the simple things in life every now and then. Do you see that bar over there? Yes, the one with the peculiar name. Mexico City, here in Amsterdam. You’ll likely find one or two characters in that place; the brute who runs the place for instance. On a good night, you can end up in the type of conversation which only drunken stranger can have – putting the world to rights. On an even better night, you might learn something about yourself. Intrigued? I knew you were an adventurous sort the moment I lay eyes on you. Enjoy your time here in Amsterdam. No better place in the world for a bit of escapism! The only problem some have is not being able to escape the thought of it after they visit! What? Oh, I meant nothing by it. A slip of the tongue. Before you leave, can I make one final suggestion? I’d take the coat off if I were you. This place can get a lot hotter than limbo if you catch my drift…

Believe it or not, humans have been debating questions concerning God for as long as couples have been discussing what they fancy for dinner. Does God exist? Is God all-power, all-knowing and all-loving? Shall we try that new Mexican restaurant on Bold Street? In this episode, we’re going to be discussing the existence of God in relation to the problem of evil, more specifically, on what has come to be known as ‘the evil-god challenge’. Roughly stated, our question is as follows: why is belief in a good-god significantly more reasonable than belief in an evil-god? Contents Part I. For God’s Sake: Paradise and the Snake. Part II. Weighing the Scales of Evil: How Heavy is God’s Heart? Part III. Audience Questions, Further Analysis and Discussion.

Emily Thomas is an Assistant Professor in Philosophy at Durham University; whose work focuses primarily on the history of metaphysics and the metaphysics of space and time. Thomas’ work in these areas has had a great impact, most notably, through her 2018 books Absolute Time: Rifts in Early Modern British Metaphysics and Early Modern Women on Metaphysics. In this episode, we’ll be discussing Emily Thomas’ forthcoming work on The Idealism and Pantheism of May Sinclair. Born in 1863, May Sinclair was a prolific novelist, as well as a deeply influential poet, translator, critic and philosopher. It Is this last field, philosophy, which perhaps she is least well known for her work. Amongst her many great novels, short stories and poems, May Sinclair published her philosophical treatise in A Defence of Idealism in 1917, and The New Idealism in 1922, which both form the focus of today’s discussion. Sinclair’s unusual take on questions concerning space and time, god, and classic philosophical problems such as Zeno’s paradox, provide us with a refreshing and exciting approach to our understanding of the universe. Combined with her great passion, wit, and her breathtaking writing style, it is no stretch to say that May Sinclair is one of the 20th-centuries most underrated philosophers.

Emily Thomas is an Assistant Professor in Philosophy at Durham University; whose work focuses primarily on the history of metaphysics and the metaphysics of space and time. Thomas’ work in these areas has had a great impact, most notably, through her 2018 books Absolute Time: Rifts in Early Modern British Metaphysics and Early Modern Women on Metaphysics. In this episode, we’ll be discussing Emily Thomas’ forthcoming work on The Idealism and Pantheism of May Sinclair. Born in 1863, May Sinclair was a prolific novelist, as well as a deeply influential poet, translator, critic and philosopher. It Is this last field, philosophy, which perhaps she is least well known for her work. Amongst her many great novels, short stories and poems, May Sinclair published her philosophical treatise in A Defence of Idealism in 1917, and The New Idealism in 1922, which both form the focus of today’s discussion. Sinclair’s unusual take on questions concerning space and time, god, and classic philosophical problems such as Zeno’s paradox, provide us with a refreshing and exciting approach to our understanding of the universe. Combined with her great passion, wit, and her breathtaking writing style, it is no stretch to say that May Sinclair is one of the 20th-centuries most underrated philosophers.

Specialising in philosophy of mind, Sam Coleman is a reader in philosophy at the University of Hertfordshire. Coleman’s main work centres around questions concerning consciousness, predominantly, on what has come to be known as ‘the hard problem of consciousness’. To paraphrase Colin McGinn, the problem can be summarised as follows: how does soggy grey matter give rise to vivid technicolour experience? In this episode, we’re going to be focusing on Coleman’s views concerning ‘Personhood, Consciousness and God’, specifically relating to pantheism. In a word, pantheism is the view that God is identical with the universe, as the pantheist slogan goes, “God is everything and everything is God.” If we are to think of personal identity as a stream of uninterrupted consciousness, Coleman argues that pantheism runs into significant problems. Instead, Coleman suggests an alternative theory of personhood which leaves open the possibility of a personal God, which is identical with the universe. As we will find, Coleman’s view bridges fascinating philosophical questions concerning personal identity, metaphysics of consciousness and God, into an original and exciting pantheist theory.

Specialising in philosophy of mind, Sam Coleman is a reader in philosophy at the University of Hertfordshire. Coleman’s main work centres around questions concerning consciousness, predominantly, on what has come to be known as ‘the hard problem of consciousness’. To paraphrase Colin McGinn, the problem can be summarised as follows: how does soggy grey matter give rise to vivid technicolour experience? In this episode, we’re going to be focusing on Coleman’s views concerning ‘Personhood, Consciousness and God’, specifically relating to pantheism. In a word, pantheism is the view that God is identical with the universe, as the pantheist slogan goes, “God is everything and everything is God.” If we are to think of personal identity as a stream of uninterrupted consciousness, Coleman argues that pantheism runs into significant problems. Instead, Coleman suggests an alternative theory of personhood which leaves open the possibility of a personal God, which is identical with the universe. As we will find, Coleman’s view bridges fascinating philosophical questions concerning personal identity, metaphysics of consciousness and God, into an original and exciting pantheist theory.

Rutger Bregman is a historian and author, best known for his bestselling book, Utopia for Realists: and how we can get there. Arguing for new utopian ideas such as a fifteen-hour work week and universal basic income, Utopia for Realists has been translated into over 30 different languages, making headlines and sparking movements across the world. Despite the fact we’ve never had it better, says Bregman, here in the Land of Plenty, we lack the desire and vision to improve society. The crisis of our times, of our generation “is not that we have it good, or even that we might be worse of later, but that we can’t come up with anything better… Notching up purchasing power another percentage point, or shaving off our carbon emissions; perhaps a new gadget – that’s about the extent of our vision.” At best, Bregman provides us with a desirable and achievable vision of human progress; a world with no borders, 15-hour work weeks and a universal basic income for everybody. At worst, Bregman wakes us up from our dogmatic slumber, encouraging us to ask important questions about 21st-century life. In his own words: “Why have we been working harder and harder since the 1980s despite being richer than ever? Why are millions of people still living in poverty when we are more than rich enough to put an end to it once and for all? And why is more than 60% of your income dependent on the country where you just so happen to have been born?” Part I. Utopia for Realists. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Rutger Bregman is a historian and author, best known for his bestselling book, Utopia for Realists: and how we can get there. Arguing for new utopian ideas such as a fifteen-hour work week and universal basic income, Utopia for Realists has been translated into over 30 different languages, making headlines and sparking movements across the world. Despite the fact we’ve never had it better, says Bregman, here in the Land of Plenty, we lack the desire and vision to improve society. The crisis of our times, of our generation “is not that we have it good, or even that we might be worse of later, but that we can’t come up with anything better… Notching up purchasing power another percentage point, or shaving off our carbon emissions; perhaps a new gadget – that’s about the extent of our vision.” At best, Bregman provides us with a desirable and achievable vision of human progress; a world with no borders, 15-hour work weeks and a universal basic income for everybody. At worst, Bregman wakes us up from our dogmatic slumber, encouraging us to ask important questions about 21st-century life. In his own words: “Why have we been working harder and harder since the 1980s despite being richer than ever? Why are millions of people still living in poverty when we are more than rich enough to put an end to it once and for all? And why is more than 60% of your income dependent on the country where you just so happen to have been born?” Part I. Utopia for Realists. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Published in 1915, Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis is a gruelling and ironic depiction of the pressures imposed by family and profession in the Twentieth Century. The novella centres around travelling salesman Gregor Samsa who, one morning, finds himself transformed into an insect. What follows, depending on the interpretation, is a reflection of how modern life provides a misunderstanding of predicament and a lack of empathy towards those who have been beaten down by an unforgiving capitalist system. Equally, The Metamorphosis asks questions of Gregor himself. Over time he has continued to disregard his own well-being and autonomy, seeing himself as the saviour of his family’s debts. Yet, by doing so, he has missed the fact that his family appear to resent the house he has chosen to rent, or that their debts are not quite as bad as they seemed. He has taken a cross which he need not have beared. In the words of Vladimir Nabokov, “In The Metamorphosis, contract and unity, style and matter, manner and plot are most perfectly integrated”. Contents Part I. The Life of Franz Kafka. Part II. The Plot. Part III. The Meaning. Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Published in 1915, Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis is a gruelling and ironic depiction of the pressures imposed by family and profession in the Twentieth Century. The novella centres around travelling salesman Gregor Samsa who, one morning, finds himself transformed into an insect. What follows, depending on the interpretation, is a reflection of how modern life provides a misunderstanding of predicament and a lack of empathy towards those who have been beaten down by an unforgiving capitalist system. Equally, The Metamorphosis asks questions of Gregor himself. Over time he has continued to disregard his own well-being and autonomy, seeing himself as the saviour of his family’s debts. Yet, by doing so, he has missed the fact that his family appear to resent the house he has chosen to rent, or that their debts are not quite as bad as they seemed. He has taken a cross which he need not have beared. In the words of Vladimir Nabokov, “In The Metamorphosis, contract and unity, style and matter, manner and plot are most perfectly integrated”. Contents Part I. The Life of Franz Kafka. Part II. The Plot. Part III. The Meaning. Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Published in 1915, Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis is a gruelling and ironic depiction of the pressures imposed by family and profession in the Twentieth Century. The novella centres around travelling salesman Gregor Samsa who, one morning, finds himself transformed into an insect. What follows, depending on the interpretation, is a reflection of how modern life provides a misunderstanding of predicament and a lack of empathy towards those who have been beaten down by an unforgiving capitalist system. Equally, The Metamorphosis asks questions of Gregor himself. Over time he has continued to disregard his own well-being and autonomy, seeing himself as the saviour of his family’s debts. Yet, by doing so, he has missed the fact that his family appear to resent the house he has chosen to rent, or that their debts are not quite as bad as they seemed. He has taken a cross which he need not have beared. In the words of Vladimir Nabokov, “In The Metamorphosis, contract and unity, style and matter, manner and plot are most perfectly integrated”. Contents Part I. The Life of Franz Kafka. Part II. The Plot. Part III. The Meaning. Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Published in 1915, Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis is a gruelling and ironic depiction of the pressures imposed by family and profession in the Twentieth Century. The novella centres around traveling salesman Gregor Samsa who, one morning, finds himself transformed into an insect. What follows, depending on the interpretation, is a reflection of how modern life provides a misunderstanding of predicament and a lack of empathy towards those who have been beaten down by an unforgiving capitalist system. Equally, The Metamorphosis asks questions of Gregor himself. Over time he has continued to disregard his own well-being and autonomy, seeing himself as the saviour of his family’s debts. Yet, by doing so, he has missed the fact that his family appear to resent the house he has chosen to rent, or that their debts are not quite as bad as they seemed. He has taken a cross which he need not have beared. In the words of Vladimir Nabokov, “In The Metamorphosis, contract and unity, style and matter, manner and plot are most perfectly integrated”. Contents Part I. The Life of Franz Kafka. Part II. The Plot. Part III. The Meaning. Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Currently Visiting Professor of Science and Religion at Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York, Robert Wright’s work in journalism, psychology and philosophy has been deeply influential. Robert is the author of many best-selling books including ‘The Moral Animal: Why We Are the Way We Are: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology’, ‘Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny’, ‘The Evolution of God’, and most recently, ‘Why Buddhism is True: The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment’. Our focus for this episode is Robert Wright’s latest book, Why Buddhism is True. In a word, Wright defends the Buddhist view that ‘the reason we suffer is because we don’t see the world clearly’. The reason we don’t see the world clearly, says Buddhism, is because our perception of our own minds and ‘the outside world’ is impaired by illusions. Viewing Buddhism through the lens of evolutionary psychology, Wright argues that we have good reason to think that this Buddhist claim (that suffering is caused by illusion) is true, and that Buddhism also holds the answer to how we can alleviate ourselves from illusion and suffering. Part I. Why Buddhism is True. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Currently Visiting Professor of Science and Religion at Union Theological Seminary in the City of New York, Robert Wright’s work in journalism, psychology and philosophy has been deeply influential. Robert is the author of many best-selling books including ‘The Moral Animal: Why We Are the Way We Are: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology’, ‘Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny’, ‘The Evolution of God’, and most recently, ‘Why Buddhism is True: The Science and Philosophy of Meditation and Enlightenment’. Our focus for this episode is Robert Wright’s latest book, Why Buddhism is True. In a word, Wright defends the Buddhist view that ‘the reason we suffer is because we don’t see the world clearly’. The reason we don’t see the world clearly, says Buddhism, is because our perception of our own minds and ‘the outside world’ is impaired by illusions. Viewing Buddhism through the lens of evolutionary psychology, Wright argues that we have good reason to think that this Buddhist claim (that suffering is caused by illusion) is true, and that Buddhism also holds the answer to how we can alleviate ourselves from illusion and suffering. Part I. Why Buddhism is True. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), a man who suffered greatly from bodily ills, considered himself somewhat of a physician. Yet, his remedies were not aimed towards physical conditions of the body, but rather the personal and societal ills of his time. Nietzsche, often poetically and rhetorically, dissected what he perceived to be the root of the suffering or apathy many of his contemporaries were facing. His diagnosis focussed primarily on the human tendency to deny life. Life denying, for Nietzsche, came in many ways: the asceticism of the Buddha or Arthur Schopenhauer, the herd-like mentality of what Nietzsche called “the Last Man”, and most famously – the otherworldly illusions of Christianity. To him, these were all attempts to cower in the face of an objectively indifferent reality. Nietzsche’s prognosis? To stand in the face of this indifference and shout yes! To affirm life and strive for personal excellence. How he envisioned this is subject to much scholarly debate but Nietzsche provides certain clear themes over his prolific authorship. His masterwork Thus Spoke Zarathustra suggests we should look forward to the “Ubermensch” or “Superman”, a spiritually healthier individual who approaches the world in an honest and fearless way. Similarly, continuing his claim from The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra also reminds the reader that “God is dead”. Nietzsche wanted people to recognise the void in values left by God’s absence and the responsibility we have been given to create our own meaning. Nietzsche’s legacy is an interesting one. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, along with the Bible, ironically, were given to German soldiers during the First World War. He also, after his death, was accused of being a proto-Nazi due to his sister’s influence over his final posthumous works. Nietzsche’s thoughts on his own works are remarkable in their irony and grandiosity. He hoped his messages would strike a chord with people and force them to look deep into their own intentions and actions. He also hoped they would provide a basis for personal change. A passage from Ecce Homo gives us an insight into his style and desired effect: “I know my fate. One day my name will be associated with the memory of something tremendous — a crisis without equal on earth, the most profound collision of conscience, a decision that was conjured up against everything that had been believed, demanded, hallowed so far. I am no man, I am dynamite.”

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), a man who suffered greatly from bodily ills, considered himself somewhat of a physician. Yet, his remedies were not aimed towards physical conditions of the body, but rather the personal and societal ills of his time. Nietzsche, often poetically and rhetorically, dissected what he perceived to be the root of the suffering or apathy many of his contemporaries were facing. His diagnosis focussed primarily on the human tendency to deny life. Life denying, for Nietzsche, came in many ways: the asceticism of the Buddha or Arthur Schopenhauer, the herd-like mentality of what Nietzsche called “the Last Man”, and most famously – the otherworldly illusions of Christianity. To him, these were all attempts to cower in the face of an objectively indifferent reality. Nietzsche’s prognosis? To stand in the face of this indifference and shout yes! To affirm life and strive for personal excellence. How he envisioned this is subject to much scholarly debate but Nietzsche provides certain clear themes over his prolific authorship. His masterwork Thus Spoke Zarathustra suggests we should look forward to the “Ubermensch” or “Superman”, a spiritually healthier individual who approaches the world in an honest and fearless way. Similarly, continuing his claim from The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra also reminds the reader that “God is dead”. Nietzsche wanted people to recognise the void in values left by God’s absence and the responsibility we have been given to create our own meaning. Nietzsche’s legacy is an interesting one. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, along with the Bible, ironically, were given to German soldiers during the First World War. He also, after his death, was accused of being a proto-Nazi due to his sister’s influence over his final posthumous works. Nietzsche’s thoughts on his own works are remarkable in their irony and grandiosity. He hoped his messages would strike a chord with people and force them to look deep into their own intentions and actions. He also hoped they would provide a basis for personal change. A passage from Ecce Homo gives us an insight into his style and desired effect: “I know my fate. One day my name will be associated with the memory of something tremendous — a crisis without equal on earth, the most profound collision of conscience, a decision that was conjured up against everything that had been believed, demanded, hallowed so far. I am no man, I am dynamite.”

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), a man who suffered greatly from bodily ills, considered himself somewhat of a physician. Yet, his remedies were not aimed towards physical conditions of the body, but rather the personal and societal ills of his time. Nietzsche, often poetically and rhetorically, dissected what he perceived to be the root of the suffering or apathy many of his contemporaries were facing. His diagnosis focussed primarily on the human tendency to deny life. Life denying, for Nietzsche, came in many ways: the asceticism of the Buddha or Arthur Schopenhauer, the herd-like mentality of what Nietzsche called “the Last Man”, and most famously – the otherworldly illusions of Christianity. To him, these were all attempts to cower in the face of an objectively indifferent reality. Nietzsche’s prognosis? To stand in the face of this indifference and shout yes! To affirm life and strive for personal excellence. How he envisioned this is subject to much scholarly debate but Nietzsche provides certain clear themes over his prolific authorship. His masterwork Thus Spoke Zarathustra suggests we should look forward to the “Ubermensch” or “Superman”, a spiritually healthier individual who approaches the world in an honest and fearless way. Similarly, continuing his claim from The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra also reminds the reader that “God is dead”. Nietzsche wanted people to recognise the void in values left by God’s absence and the responsibility we have been given to create our own meaning. Nietzsche’s legacy is an interesting one. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, along with the Bible, ironically, were given to German soldiers during the First World War. He also, after his death, was accused of being a proto-Nazi due to his sister’s influence over his final posthumous works. Nietzsche’s thoughts on his own works are remarkable in their irony and grandiosity. He hoped his messages would strike a chord with people and force them to look deep into their own intentions and actions. He also hoped they would provide a basis for personal change. A passage from Ecce Homo gives us an insight into his style and desired effect: “I know my fate. One day my name will be associated with the memory of something tremendous — a crisis without equal on earth, the most profound collision of conscience, a decision that was conjured up against everything that had been believed, demanded, hallowed so far. I am no man, I am dynamite.”

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), a man who suffered greatly from bodily ills, considered himself somewhat of a physician. Yet, his remedies were not aimed towards physical conditions of the body, but rather the personal and societal ills of his time. Nietzsche, often poetically and rhetorically, dissected what he perceived to be the root of the suffering or apathy many of his contemporaries were facing. His diagnosis focussed primarily on the human tendency to deny life. Life denying, for Nietzsche, came in many ways: the asceticism of the Buddha or Arthur Schopenhauer, the herd-like mentality of what Nietzsche called “the Last Man”, and most famously – the otherworldly illusions of Christianity. To him, these were all attempts to cower in the face of an objectively indifferent reality. Nietzsche’s prognosis? To stand in the face of this indifference and shout yes! To affirm life and strive for personal excellence. How he envisioned this is subject to much scholarly debate but Nietzsche provides certain clear themes over his prolific authorship. His masterwork Thus Spoke Zarathustra suggests we should look forward to the “Ubermensch” or “Superman”, a spiritually healthier individual who approaches the world in an honest and fearless way. Similarly, continuing his claim from The Gay Science, Thus Spoke Zarathustra also reminds the reader that “God is dead”. Nietzsche wanted people to recognise the void in values left by God’s absence and the responsibility we have been given to create our own meaning. Nietzsche’s legacy is an interesting one. Thus Spoke Zarathustra, along with the Bible, ironically, were given to German soldiers during the First World War. He also, after his death, was accused of being a proto-Nazi due to his sister’s influence over his final posthumous works. Nietzsche’s thoughts on his own works are remarkable in their irony and grandiosity. He hoped his messages would strike a chord with people and force them to look deep into their own intentions and actions. He also hoped they would provide a basis for personal change. A passage from Ecce Homo gives us an insight into his style and desired effect: “I know my fate. One day my name will be associated with the memory of something tremendous — a crisis without equal on earth, the most profound collision of conscience, a decision that was conjured up against everything that had been believed, demanded, hallowed so far. I am no man, I am dynamite.”

Dr Skye Cleary is a philosopher and author, best known for her work in the field of existentialism. As well as teaching at Columbia, Barnard College and the City College of New York, Skye is also the associate director of the Center for New Narratives in Philosophy at Columbia University. Skye’s contribution to the world of public philosophy has been extensive, writing for a wealth of publications, including The Paris Review, TED-Ed, the Los Angeles Review of Books, Aeon, Business Insider, The Independent and New Philosopher magazine. Skye is also the editor of the American Philosophical Association blog and the author of our focus for this episode, her 2015 book, Existentialism and Romantic Love. We’re going to be discussing with Skye the idea of romantic love, and what we can learn about love from existentialist philosophers such as Max Stirner, Soren Kierkegaard, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir and Friedrich Nietzsche. In a world of romantic cinema, novels, love songs, dating apps, and self-help books, the dream of romantic love has been sold to many of us, but Skye Cleary thinks we need to take a step back. The worry, is that we might blindly sacrifice our freedom, offload our happiness onto another person, or use them as a means to our own ends. Existentialism teaches us that we should aim to live authentically and embrace our freedom. Our question for this episode, is whether or not our current understanding of romantic love is compatible with such a view. Can Jack meet Jill fall in love, and not fall down the hill? Should we, can we, and why, should we love?

Dr Skye Cleary is a philosopher and author, best known for her work in the field of existentialism. As well as teaching at Columbia, Barnard College and the City College of New York, Skye is also the associate director of the Center for New Narratives in Philosophy at Columbia University. Skye’s contribution to the world of public philosophy has been extensive, writing for a wealth of publications, including The Paris Review, TED-Ed, the Los Angeles Review of Books, Aeon, Business Insider, The Independent and New Philosopher magazine. Skye is also the editor of the American Philosophical Association blog and the author of our focus for this episode, her 2015 book, Existentialism and Romantic Love. We’re going to be discussing with Skye the idea of romantic love, and what we can learn about love from existentialist philosophers such as Max Stirner, Soren Kierkegaard, Jean-Paul Sartre, Simone de Beauvoir and Friedrich Nietzsche. In a world of romantic cinema, novels, love songs, dating apps, and self-help books, the dream of romantic love has been sold to many of us, but Skye Cleary thinks we need to take a step back. The worry, is that we might blindly sacrifice our freedom, offload our happiness onto another person, or use them as a means to our own ends. Existentialism teaches us that we should aim to live authentically and embrace our freedom. Our question for this episode, is whether or not our current understanding of romantic love is compatible with such a view. Can Jack meet Jill fall in love, and not fall down the hill? Should we, can we, and why, should we love?

Simone de Beauvoir was a pioneer for the second-wave feminist movement and one of the most famous philosophers to have lived. Strikingly, Beauvoir did not label herself as a philosopher, since she never attempted to provide an original treatise which aimed to fully encapsulate the truth of the world or the human condition. Instead, she considered herself as a writer, commentator and novelist. Beauvoir’s identification should not, however, discredit her as a philosopher. Jean-Paul Sartre’s work on existentialism is heavily indebted to Beauvoir’s careful eye and scholarly expertise, and her book The Ethics of Ambiguity, is considered by many as one of the most significant texts in moral philosophy and existentialism; the ethical text which Sartre promised, but never produced. Simone de Beauvoir’s most famous text is The Second Sex; a detailed examination on what it means to be a woman through the lens of existentialism. The Second Sex was highly controversial at the time of its publication; receiving backlash from certain areas of male-dominated academia and the press. Nevertheless, it is still considered to be one of the greatest works in feminist philosophy.

Simone de Beauvoir was a pioneer for the second-wave feminist movement and one of the most famous philosophers to have lived. Strikingly, Beauvoir did not label herself as a philosopher, since she never attempted to provide an original treatise which aimed to fully encapsulate the truth of the world or the human condition. Instead, she considered herself as a writer, commentator and novelist. Beauvoir’s identification should not, however, discredit her as a philosopher. Jean-Paul Sartre’s work on existentialism is heavily indebted to Beauvoir’s careful eye and scholarly expertise, and her book The Ethics of Ambiguity, is considered by many as one of the most significant texts in moral philosophy and existentialism; the ethical text which Sartre promised, but never produced. Simone de Beauvoir’s most famous text is The Second Sex; a detailed examination on what it means to be a woman through the lens of existentialism. The Second Sex was highly controversial at the time of its publication; receiving backlash from certain areas of male-dominated academia and the press. Nevertheless, it is still considered to be one of the greatest works in feminist philosophy.

Simone de Beauvoir was a pioneer for the second-wave feminist movement and one of the most famous philosophers to have lived. Strikingly, Beauvoir did not label herself as a philosopher, since she never attempted to provide an original treatise which aimed to fully encapsulate the truth of the world or the human condition. Instead, she considered herself as a writer, commentator and novelist. Beauvoir’s identification should not, however, discredit her as a philosopher. Jean-Paul Sartre’s work on existentialism is heavily indebted to Beauvoir’s careful eye and scholarly expertise, and her book The Ethics of Ambiguity, is considered by many as one of the most significant texts in moral philosophy and existentialism; the ethical text which Sartre promised, but never produced. Simone de Beauvoir’s most famous text is The Second Sex; a detailed examination on what it means to be a woman through the lens of existentialism. The Second Sex was highly controversial at the time of its publication; receiving backlash from certain areas of male-dominated academia and the press. Nevertheless, it is still considered to be one of the greatest works in feminist philosophy.

Simone de Beauvoir was a pioneer for the second-wave feminist movement and one of the most famous philosophers to have lived. Strikingly, Beauvoir did not label herself as a philosopher, since she never attempted to provide an original treatise which aimed to fully encapsulate the truth of the world or the human condition. Instead, she considered herself as a writer, commentator and novelist. Beauvoir’s identification should not, however, discredit her as a philosopher. Jean-Paul Sartre’s work on existentialism is heavily indebted to Beauvoir’s careful eye and scholarly expertise, and her book The Ethics of Ambiguity, is considered by many as one of the most significant texts in moral philosophy and existentialism; the ethical text which Sartre promised, but never produced. Simone de Beauvoir’s most famous text is The Second Sex; a detailed examination on what it means to be a woman through the lens of existentialism. The Second Sex was highly controversial at the time of its publication; receiving backlash from certain areas of male-dominated academia and the press. Nevertheless, it is still considered to be one of the greatest works in feminist philosophy.

Rachael Wiseman is a lecturer of philosophy at the University of Liverpool and previously an Addison Wheeler Research Fellow at Durham University. She, and her colleague Dr Clare MacCumhaill, are co-leaders on the British Academy funded project, In Parenthesis, which explores the work and friendship of the philosophical wartime quartet: Mary Midgley, Elizabeth Anscombe, Philippa Foot, and Iris Murdoch. Dr Wiseman, along with her colleague Professor Amber Carpenter, are also co-leaders of the Integrity Project, which looks at the meaning, relevance, and importance of ‘integrity’ across many spheres: moral, political, and even integrity in public philosophy. Dr Wiseman publishes research at the intersection of philosophy of mind, action and ethics, and has written on Elizabeth Anscombe’s approach to the hard problem of consciousness, the nature of the self and action, and a monograph on Elizabeth Anscombe’s own monograph, Intention. In this episode, we will be talking to Dr Wiseman about her In Parenthesis project and the four female philosophers that she argues constitute a school of philosophy, one which is regularly omitted from the orthodox canon of ‘great thinkers’ or ‘schools of thought’. In the words of Rachael and here colleague Clare MacCumhaill: The history of Analytic Philosophy we are familiar with is a story about men… [and] The male dominance is not just in the names of the ‘star’ players. Michael Beaney’s 2013 Oxford Handbook of the History of Analytic Philosophy begins by listing the 150 most important analytic philosophers. 146 of them are men. For women who wish to join in this conversation, the odds seem formidably against one.

Rachael Wiseman is a lecturer of philosophy at the University of Liverpool and previously an Addison Wheeler Research Fellow at Durham University. She, and her colleague Dr Clare MacCumhaill, are co-leaders on the British Academy funded project, In Parenthesis, which explores the work and friendship of the philosophical wartime quartet: Mary Midgley, Elizabeth Anscombe, Philippa Foot, and Iris Murdoch. Dr Wiseman, along with her colleague Professor Amber Carpenter, are also co-leaders of the Integrity Project, which looks at the meaning, relevance, and importance of ‘integrity’ across many spheres: moral, political, and even integrity in public philosophy. Dr Wiseman publishes research at the intersection of philosophy of mind, action and ethics, and has written on Elizabeth Anscombe’s approach to the hard problem of consciousness, the nature of the self and action, and a monograph on Elizabeth Anscombe’s own monograph, Intention. In this episode, we will be talking to Dr Wiseman about her In Parenthesis project and the four female philosophers that she argues constitute a school of philosophy, one which is regularly omitted from the orthodox canon of ‘great thinkers’ or ‘schools of thought’. In the words of Rachael and here colleague Clare MacCumhaill: The history of Analytic Philosophy we are familiar with is a story about men… [and] The male dominance is not just in the names of the ‘star’ players. Michael Beaney’s 2013 Oxford Handbook of the History of Analytic Philosophy begins by listing the 150 most important analytic philosophers. 146 of them are men. For women who wish to join in this conversation, the odds seem formidably against one.

Corey Mohler is a software engineer from Portland, Oregon, USA. With no formal education in philosophy, it might come as a surprise that Corey is the author of the incredibly popular philosophy webcomic, Existential Comics. Founded in December 2013, Existential Comics describes itself as “a philosophy webcomic about the inevitable anguish of living a brief life in an absurd world. Also jokes.” The comic receives well over one million views per month, making it one of the most popular philosophy websites on the internet. In Part I, we’re going to be discussing the ideas bubbling behind ‘Existential Comics’, and in Part II, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion, as well as asking some listener questions. Contents Part I. Behind Existential Comics Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Corey Mohler is a software engineer from Portland, Oregon, USA. With no formal education in philosophy, it might come as a surprise that Corey is the author of the incredibly popular philosophy webcomic, Existential Comics. Founded in December 2013, Existential Comics describes itself as “a philosophy webcomic about the inevitable anguish of living a brief life in an absurd world. Also jokes.” The comic receives well over one million views per month, making it one of the most popular philosophy websites on the internet. In Part I, we’re going to be discussing the ideas bubbling behind ‘Existential Comics’, and in Part II, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion, as well as asking some listener questions.   Contents Part I. Behind Existential Comics Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Professor Rebecca Newberger Goldstein is one of the most influential thinkers in the world of public philosophy. Amongst many other philosophical texts, Goldstein is the author of The Mind-Body Problem, Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction and Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won’t Go Away. For many, Goldstein’s talent for bringing philosophy to life through her wit and beautiful storytelling is unapparelled. In the words of A. C. Grayling, “Like Plato… Goldstein has both literary and philosophical gifts of the highest order: the combination is superb.” The list of Goldstein’s accomplishments is exhaustingly extensive; let us mention just five of many. Professor Goldstein was named a MacArthur Fellow (popularly known as the “genius award”) in 1996 and elected to The American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2005. In 2011, she was designated Free-thought Heroine by the Freedom from Religion Foundation and Humanist of the Year by The American Humanist Association, and in September of 2015, awarded the National Humanities Medal by President Obama in a ceremony at the White House. The reason cited? "For bringing philosophy into conversation with culture. In scholarship, Dr Goldstein has elucidated the ideas of Spinoza and Gödel, while in fiction, she deploys wit and drama to help us understand the great human conflict between thought and feeling."

Welcome to 'Episode 48 (Part I)', where we'll be talking to Rebecca Newberger Goldstein about the nature and purpose of philosophy. Professor Rebecca Newberger Goldstein is one of the most influential thinkers in the world of public philosophy. Amongst many other philosophical texts, Goldstein is the author of The Mind-Body Problem, Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity, 36 Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction and Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won’t Go Away. For many, Goldstein’s talent for bringing philosophy to life through her wit and beautiful storytelling is unapparelled. In the words of A. C. Grayling, “Like Plato… Goldstein has both literary and philosophical gifts of the highest order: the combination is superb.” The list of Goldstein’s accomplishments is exhaustingly extensive; let us mention just five of many. Professor Goldstein was named a MacArthur Fellow (popularly known as the “genius award”) in 1996 and elected to The American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2005. In 2011, she was designated Free-thought Heroine by the Freedom from Religion Foundation and Humanist of the Year by The American Humanist Association, and in September of 2015, awarded the National Humanities Medal by President Obama in a ceremony at the White House. The reason cited? "For bringing philosophy into conversation with culture. In scholarship, Dr Goldstein has elucidated the ideas of Spinoza and Gödel, while in fiction, she deploys wit and drama to help us understand the great human conflict between thought and feeling."

Hedda Hassel Mørch is a philosopher and post-doc at the University of Oslo, previously at The Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness at New York University. Dr Mørch’s research focuses on panpsychism, neutral monism and liberal conceptions of physicalism. More specifically, how such views can respond to problems in philosophy of mind and metaphysics, such as the hard problem of consciousness (namely, how does soggy grey matter give rise to technicolour experience), the problem of mental causation (how can the mind interact the world), and the metaphysics of causation (what does it really mean for one event to ‘cause’ another). In this episode, we’re going to be discussing these topics with Hedda, but focus more specifically, on her views on consciousness and Integrated Information Theory. In Hedda’s own words: "The nature of consciousness seems to be unique among scientific puzzles. Not only do neuroscientists have no fundamental explanation for how it arises from physical states of the brain, we are not even sure whether we ever will." --- Contents Part I. Integrated Information Theory. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Hedda Hassel Mørch is a philosopher and post-doc at the University of Oslo, previously at The Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness at New York University. Dr Mørch’s research focuses on panpsychism, neutral monism and liberal conceptions of physicalism. More specifically, how such views can respond to problems in philosophy of mind and metaphysics, such as the hard problem of consciousness (namely, how does soggy grey matter give rise to technicolour experience), the problem of mental causation (how can the mind interact the world), and the metaphysics of causation (what does it really mean for one event to ‘cause’ another). In this episode, we’re going to be discussing these topics with Hedda, but focus more specifically, on her views on consciousness and Integrated Information Theory. In Hedda’s own words: "The nature of consciousness seems to be unique among scientific puzzles. Not only do neuroscientists have no fundamental explanation for how it arises from physical states of the brain, we are not even sure whether we ever will." --- Contents Part I. Integrated Information Theory. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.  

Peter Adamson is Professor of Late Ancient and Arabic philosophy at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and the host of the History of Philosophy without and gaps podcast. The range of Peter’s expertise is phenomenal. The depth and breadth of his podcast History of Philosophy without any gaps is simply unrivalled, and the success of Peter’s projects has led him to publish a range of books in the aforementioned areas. Contents Part I. The History of Women in Philosophy. Part II. Further Analysis, Discussion and 'The Man Behind the Podcast'.

Peter Adamson is Professor of Late Ancient and Arabic philosophy at the Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, and the host of the History of Philosophy without any gaps podcast. Peter’s main publications focus on Classical Philosophy, Philosophy in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds, and Philosophy in the Islamic World, but the range of Peter’s expertise is phenomenal. The depth and breadth of his podcast History of Philosophy without any gaps is simply unrivalled, and the success of Peter’s projects has led him to publish a range of books in the aforementioned areas. So, in Part I, we’ll be speaking to Peter Adamson about the history of women in philosophy, and in Part II, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion, asking some listener questions, and getting at ‘the man behind the podcast’. Contents Part I. The History of Women in Philosophy. Part II. Further Analysis, Discussion and 'The Man Behind the Podcast'.

Out now! Our audiobook ‘Developments in Christian Thought’ is free to download on all major podcast apps and at our website www.thepanpsycast.com/audiobook. For more information, take a little peak in the iTunes description (or at the bottom of this page). The audiobook is made up of 24-chapters, equally divided into 2-parts, which have been imaginatively named Part I and Part II. Part I contains 12 in-depth discussions, in which we talk through the history of theological thought within Christianity (as specified by the OCR Developments in Christian Thought specification). In Part II, we'll be interviewing some of the biggest names in theology and philosophy, to name but a few, Yujin Nagasawa, Joseph Shaw, Eric Metaxas, Christopher Rowland, Alison Stone, Michael Wilcockson, David Ford, Peter Ochs and Tim Mawson! Next week, normal service will resume with ‘Episode 46, Peter Adamson and the History of Women in Philosophy (Part I)’. Thank you for all of your support, especially all of our patrons. Projects like this would not be possible without you. If you want to support the show you can do so by visiting www.patreon.com/panpsycast. If you listened to last week’s episode, rather than jumping over to our audiobook page, kick back and enjoy 'Chapter VIII. Gender and Society (Part II)'. Audiobook Link: www.thepanpsycast.com/audiobook Audiobook on iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/developments-in-christian-thought/id1434044057?mt=2

We've been working tirelessly on our upcoming audiobook, Developments in Christian Thought, which is due to be released, free of charge, on August 28th 2018. If you're listening to this past August 28th, you can find a link to the audiobook in the iTunes description (or at the bottom of this page). We can't wait to share it with you. So we decided to release one of our favourite chapters early. What you're about to hear is Part I of 'Chapter VIII. Gender and Society'. In this instalment, we look at the history of the Church, relating to issues surrounding sex and gender.  Next week, we'll be releasing the second instalment of this chapter, where we'll be looking at secular challenges to the church, through the work of thinkers such as Simone de Beauvoir and Harriet Taylor. The audiobook is 24-chapters long. As well as 12 discussions between myself, Olly and Andrew, you can expect interviews with Yujin Nagasawa, Daniel Hill, Thom Atkinson, Peter Adamson, Joseph Shaw, Eric Metaxas, Christopher Rowland, Alison Stone, Michael Wilcockson, David Ford, Peter Ochs and Tim Mawson. As I mentioned, it's free, so hit the link in the iTunes description. If it's not August 28th yet, then kick back and enjoy 'Chapter VIII. Gender and Society (Part I)'. Audiobook Link: www.thepanpsycast.com/audiobook Audiobook on iTunes: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/developments-in-christian-thought/id1434044057?mt=2

As Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, Steven Pinker’s list of accomplishments is incredible; he has been named Humanist of the Year, a top “100 Global Thinker” by Foreign Policy and included in Time magazine’s “100 Most Influential People in the World Today.” Steven has also been awarded eight honorary doctorates and his research on language, vision and social relations has won prizes from the National Academy of Sciences, the Royal Institution of Great Britain, the Cognitive Neuroscience Society, the American Psychological Association, and the Association for Psychological Science. Needless to say, that Steven’s work has been deeply influential. Amongst his most well-read works, Steven in the author of, The Language Instinct, How The Mind Works, Words and Rules, The Blank Slate, The Stuff of Thought, Better Angels of Our Nature, and most recently, Enlightenment Now.

Galen Strawson is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. Amongst countless papers in metaphysics and philosophy of mind, Galen is the author of Freedom and Belief, The Subject of Experience, Consciousness and Its Place in Nature and most recently, Things That Bother Me: Death, Freedom, the Self, Etc.  The widespread impact of these works cannot be understated. In the words of Stephen Fry: Galen Strawson has a marvellous gift for untangling even the most complex lines in philosophical thinking and laying them straight. He writes with humour, clarity and always from a recognizably human place. Even the most complex and controversial areas in modern philosophy come into the light when you are in his benign company…. He opens windows and finds light-switches like no other philosopher writing today.

Galen Strawson is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. Amongst countless papers in metaphysics and philosophy of mind, Galen is the author of Freedom and Belief, The Subject of Experience, Consciousness and Its Place in Nature and most recently, Things That Bother Me: Death, Freedom, the Self, Etc.  The widespread impact of these works cannot be understated. In the words of Stephen Fry: Galen Strawson has a marvellous gift for untangling even the most complex lines in philosophical thinking and laying them straight. He writes with humour, clarity and always from a recognizably human place. Even the most complex and controversial areas in modern philosophy come into the light when you are in his benign company…. He opens windows and finds light-switches like no other philosopher writing today.

For religious believers, considering the questions that surround the nature or attributes of God, is important in their attempt to form a coherent understanding of their creator. In the Summa Theologica, shortly after arguing for the existence of God, Saint Thomas Aquinas writes the following: “Having recognised that a certain thing exists, we have still to investigate the way in which it exists, that we may come to understand what it is that exists.” This seems like a peculiar thing to state. I know that there exists something, but I have no idea as to what this thing is. As Brian Davies points out in his book Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology, this not such an odd statement after all. Suppose I attempt to open a door, and something stops it from opening. I might say, ‘well something is certainly in the way’. If it makes sense to make this statement, it also makes sense to ask, 'what is it'?

For religious believers, considering the questions that surround the nature or attributes of God, is important in their attempt to form a coherent understanding of their creator. In the Summa Theologica, shortly after arguing for the existence of God, Saint Thomas Aquinas writes the following: “Having recognised that a certain thing exists, we have still to investigate the way in which it exists, that we may come to understand what it is that exists.” This seems like a peculiar thing to state. I know that there exists something, but I have no idea as to what this thing is. As Brian Davies points out in his book Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology, this not such an odd statement after all. Suppose I attempt to open a door, and something stops it from opening. I might say, ‘well something is certainly in the way’. If it makes sense to make this statement, it also makes sense to ask, 'what is it'?

In the Summa Theologica, shortly after arguing for the existence of God, Saint Thomas Aquinas writes the following: “Having recognised that a certain thing exists, we have still to investigate the way in which it exists, that we may come to understand what it is that exists.” This seems like a peculiar thing to state. I know that there exists something, but I have no idea as to what this thing is. As Brian Davies points out in his book Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology, this not such an odd statement after all. Suppose I attempt to open a door, and something stops it from opening. I might say, ‘well something is certainly in the way’. If it makes sense to make this statement, it also makes sense to ask, 'what is it'?

For religious believers, considering the questions that surround the nature or attributes of God, is important in their attempt to form a coherent understanding of their creator. In the Summa Theologica, shortly after arguing for the existence of God, Saint Thomas Aquinas writes the following: “Having recognised that a certain thing exists, we have still to investigate the way in which it exists, that we may come to understand what it is that exists.” This seems like a peculiar thing to state. I know that there exists something, but I have no idea as to what this thing is. As Brian Davies points out in his book Philosophy of Religion: A Guide and Anthology, this not such an odd statement after all. Suppose I attempt to open a door, and something stops it from opening. I might say, ‘well something is certainly in the way’. If it makes sense to make this statement, it also makes sense to ask, 'what is it'?

Bringing together contemporary psychology and moral philosophy, the work of Christian B. Miller in character education has been tremendously influential. Christian Miller is the A.C. Reid Professor of Philosophy at Wake Forest University and the Director of the Character Project funded by the John Templeton Foundation and the Templeton World Charity Foundation. As well as publishing over 75 papers, Professor Miller is the author of Moral Character: An Empirical Theory, Character and Moral Psychology, and The Character Gap: How Good Are We? Links to all of which can be found on our website. In today’s interview, we’ll be talking to Professor Miller about his latest book, The Character Gap. In his own words: Here is the predicament that most of us seem to be in. We are not virtuous people. We simply do not have characters that are good enough to qualify as honest, compassionate, wise, courageous and the like. We are not vicious people either – dishonest, callous, foolish cowardly, and so forth. Rather, we have a mixed character with some good sides and some bad sides. This, I have claimed, is the most plausible interpretation of what psychology tells us. It is also true to our lived experience in the world. Those are the facts as I see them. Now comes the value judgement – this is a real shame. . . Excellence of character, or being virtuous, is what we should all strive for.

Bringing together contemporary psychology and moral philosophy, the work of Christian B. Miller in character education has been tremendously influential. Christian Miller is the A.C. Reid Professor of Philosophy at Wake Forest University and the Director of the Character Project funded by the John Templeton Foundation and the Templeton World Charity Foundation. As well as publishing over 75 papers, Professor Miller is the author of Moral Character: An Empirical Theory, Character and Moral Psychology, and The Character Gap: How Good Are We? Links to all of which can be found on our website. In today’s interview, we’ll be talking to Professor Miller about his latest book, The Character Gap. In his own words: Here is the predicament that most of us seem to be in. We are not virtuous people. We simply do not have characters that are good enough to qualify as honest, compassionate, wise, courageous and the like. We are not vicious people either – dishonest, callous, foolish cowardly, and so forth. Rather, we have a mixed character with some good sides and some bad sides. This, I have claimed, is the most plausible interpretation of what psychology tells us. It is also true to our lived experience in the world. Those are the facts as I see them. Now comes the value judgement – this is a real shame. . . Excellence of character, or being virtuous, is what we should all strive for.

Rebecca Roache is a Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at Royal Holloway, University of London. Dr Roache specialises in practical ethics, logic, philosophy of mind, philosophy of psychiatry and early modern philosophy, but in this episode, we’ll be speaking to Rebecca specifically about the philosophy of language and swearing.  In the words of Rebecca Roache: "With a little imagination, we can find limitless and powerful ways to offend people if that’s what we want to do. We don’t need to give a f*ck about whether our favourite swear words are declining in their capacity to shock." (Ethics Centre,2015  - click for full article) This interview is produced ‘in association with The Institute of Art and Ideas and the Philosophy for Our Times podcast’. A very special thank you to everybody at the Institute of Art and Ideas for making this interview possible. *We apologise for the audio quality of this episode. We recorded the interview at How the Light Gets In Festival, and although the rain had stopped for us momentarily, you’ll be able to hear festival-goers celebrating the outbreak of sunshine in the background. We’ll be back in the studio after this episode. Thank you, we hope you enjoy the show!

Bence Nanay is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Antwerp and Research Associate in philosophy at the University of Cambridge. Nanay is also the principal investigator of the European Research Council project, Seeing Things You Don’t See: Unifying the Philosophy, Psychology and Neuroscience of Multimodal Mental Imagery.  As well as publishing more than 100 peer-reviewed articles, Nanay is the author of Between Perception and Action (2013) and Aesthetics as Philosophy of Perception (2016). It will, therefore, come as no surprise that our focus today will be Nanay’s work in the field of ‘philosophy of perception’. In a rare intersection between psychology, neuroscience and philosophy, ‘the philosophy of perception’ is concerned with the status of perceptual data, the nature of perceptual experience, and how this data and these experiences relate to beliefs about, or knowledge of, the world. This interview is produced ‘in association with The Institute of Art and Ideas and the Philosophy for Our Times podcast’. A very special thank you to everybody at the Institute of Art and Ideas for making this interview possible. To celebrate the release of this interview, we’re giving away three signed copies of Nanay’s Between Perception and Action– to be in with a chance of winning, just head over to our Twitter page. *We apologise for the length and audio quality of this episode. We recorded the interview in-between Bence’s talks at How the Light Gets In Festival, where it was tipping it down with rain.

Rick Lewis took his first degree in physics and philosophy of science at the University of Manchester, and later an MA in philosophy at the University of York.  Making philosophy accessible and encouraging the person on the street to engage in philosophy in their everyday life was, and is, hugely important to Rick. That’s why in 1991 Rick founded the magazine Philosophy Now, of which, he has been the editor ever since. Soon after launching the magazine, Philosophy Now became the first philosophy title to appear on UK news-stands.  This episode Jack, Andy, Olly and Rick will be discussing ‘the role of philosophy in everyday life’. For many, philosophy is something which can not only enrich our own lives but the lives of our fellow humans. For many others, philosophy is a waste of a life, something that diminishes, something which fails to enrich... Part I. Philosophy in Everyday Life. Part II. Philosophy Now, Further Analysis and Discussion.

Rick Lewis took his first degree in physics and philosophy of science at the University of Manchester, and later an MA in philosophy at the University of York.  Making philosophy accessible and encouraging the person on the street to engage in philosophy in their everyday life was, and is, hugely important to Rick. That’s why in 1991 Rick founded the magazine Philosophy Now, of which, he has been the editor ever since. Soon after launching the magazine, Philosophy Now became the first philosophy title to appear on UK news-stands.  This episode Jack, Andy, Olly and Rick will be discussing ‘the role of philosophy in everyday life’. For many, philosophy is something which can not only enrich our own lives but the lives of our fellow humans. For many others, philosophy is a waste of a life, something that diminishes, something which fails to enrich... Part I. Philosophy in Everyday Life. Part II. Philosophy Now, Further Analysis and Discussion.

Get 20% How The Light Gets In Festival 2018 using the discount code “PANPSYCAST20” at the final checkout page! Visit: https://hay.htlgi.iai.tv/?utmsource=panpsycast. Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Broadly speaking, the term 'religious language' refers to statements or claims made about God or gods. Many problems arise in the field of religious language, but our principal focus in this episode will be the problems that arise within the Abrahamic religions (that is, Judaism, Christianity and Islam). Simply put, it is unclear how one could use human-made language, to talk meaningfully about something infinitely powerful, infinitely knowledgeable and infinitely loving. This problem is worrisome to believers as it has the potential to undermine their traditions; if we cannot speak meaningfully about God, then the texts and teachings of Abrahamic faiths can only be deemed unintelligible (i.e. impossible to understand). In his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, the 18th Century Scottish philosopher David Hume alluded to the problem as follows: “But when we look beyond human affairs… when we carry our speculations into the two eternities, before and after the present state of things; into the creations and formulation of the universe; the existence and properties of spirits; the powers and operations of one universal Spirit existing without beginning and without end; omnipotent, omniscient, immutable, infinite and incomprehensible: We must be far removed from the smallest tendency to scepticism not to be apprehensive, that we have here got quite the reach of our faculties.” In Part I we’re discussing ‘the via negativa’, in Part II, Thomas Aquinas and Ludwig Wittgenstein, in Part III, the verification and falsification principles, and in Part IV we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Get 20% How The Light Gets In Festival 2018 using the discount code “PANPSYCAST20” at the final checkout page! Visit: https://hay.htlgi.iai.tv/?utmsource=panpsycast. Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Broadly speaking, the term 'religious language' refers to statements or claims made about God or gods. Many problems arise in the field of religious language, but our principal focus in this episode will be the problems that arise within the Abrahamic religions (that is, Judaism, Christianity and Islam). Simply put, it is unclear how one could use human-made language, to talk meaningfully about something infinitely powerful, infinitely knowledgeable and infinitely loving. This problem is worrisome to believers as it has the potential to undermine their traditions; if we cannot speak meaningfully about God, then the texts and teachings of Abrahamic faiths can only be deemed unintelligible (i.e. impossible to understand). In his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, the 18th Century Scottish philosopher David Hume alluded to the problem as follows: “But when we look beyond human affairs… when we carry our speculations into the two eternities, before and after the present state of things; into the creations and formulation of the universe; the existence and properties of spirits; the powers and operations of one universal Spirit existing without beginning and without end; omnipotent, omniscient, immutable, infinite and incomprehensible: We must be far removed from the smallest tendency to scepticism not to be apprehensive, that we have here got quite the reach of our faculties.” In Part I we’re discussing ‘the via negativa’, in Part II, Thomas Aquinas and Ludwig Wittgenstein, in Part III, the verification and falsification principles, and in Part IV we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Get 20% How The Light Gets In Festival 2018 using the discount code “PANPSYCAST20” at the final checkout page! Visit: https://hay.htlgi.iai.tv/?utmsource=panpsycast. Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Broadly speaking, the term 'religious language' refers to statements or claims made about God or gods. Many problems arise in the field of religious language, but our principal focus in this episode will be the problems that arise within the Abrahamic religions (that is, Judaism, Christianity and Islam). Simply put, it is unclear how one could use human-made language, to talk meaningfully about something infinitely powerful, infinitely knowledgeable and infinitely loving. This problem is worrisome to believers as it has the potential to undermine their traditions; if we cannot speak meaningfully about God, then the texts and teachings of Abrahamic faiths can only be deemed unintelligible (i.e. impossible to understand). In his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, the 18th Century Scottish philosopher David Hume alluded to the problem as follows: “But when we look beyond human affairs… when we carry our speculations into the two eternities, before and after the present state of things; into the creations and formulation of the universe; the existence and properties of spirits; the powers and operations of one universal Spirit existing without beginning and without end; omnipotent, omniscient, immutable, infinite and incomprehensible: We must be far removed from the smallest tendency to scepticism not to be apprehensive, that we have here got quite the reach of our faculties.” In Part I we’re discussing ‘the via negativa’, in Part II, Thomas Aquinas and Ludwig Wittgenstein, in Part III, the verification and falsification principles, and in Part IV we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Get 20% How The Light Gets In Festival 2018 using the discount code “PANPSYCAST20” at the final checkout page! Visit: https://hay.htlgi.iai.tv/?utmsource=panpsycast. Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Broadly speaking, the term 'religious language' refers to statements or claims made about God or gods. Many problems arise in the field of religious language, but our principal focus in this episode will be the problems that arise within the Abrahamic religions (that is, Judaism, Christianity and Islam). Simply put, it is unclear how one could use human-made language, to talk meaningfully about something infinitely powerful, infinitely knowledgeable and infinitely loving. This problem is worrisome to believers as it has the potential to undermine their traditions; if we cannot speak meaningfully about God, then the texts and teachings of Abrahamic faiths can only be deemed unintelligible (i.e. impossible to understand). In his Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, the 18th Century Scottish philosopher David Hume alluded to the problem as follows: “But when we look beyond human affairs… when we carry our speculations into the two eternities, before and after the present state of things; into the creations and formulation of the universe; the existence and properties of spirits; the powers and operations of one universal Spirit existing without beginning and without end; omnipotent, omniscient, immutable, infinite and incomprehensible: We must be far removed from the smallest tendency to scepticism not to be apprehensive, that we have here got quite the reach of our faculties.” In Part I we’re discussing ‘the via negativa’, in Part II, Thomas Aquinas and Ludwig Wittgenstein, in Part III, the verification and falsification principles, and in Part IV we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need, including links to all of Daniel C. Dennett’s work, can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. In the words of A. C. Grayling, Professor "Daniel C. Dennett is perhaps the most distinguished philosopher in the world". In a 2013 study by Gottlieb Duttweiler Institute, alongside philosophers Slavoj Zizek and Peter Singer, Daniel Dennett was ranked amongst the top 5 global thought leaders. Currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies and the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy at Tufts University, Daniel is best known for his contributions to cognitive science, philosophy of mind and philosophy of religion. His works Consciousness Explained, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, Breaking the Spell and his latest work, From Bacteria to Bach and Back have had an immense impact in the worlds of philosophy and science.  For many, Daniel Dennett, known as ‘one of the four horsemen of new atheism’, is a household name, celebrated as a man who has explained away the hard problem of consciousness, religion, and fundamental questions surrounding free-will.

Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need, including links to all of Daniel C. Dennett’s work, can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. In the words of A. C. Grayling, Professor "Daniel C. Dennett is perhaps the most distinguished philosopher in the world". In a 2013 study by Gottlieb Duttweiler Institute, alongside philosophers Slavoj Zizek and Peter Singer, Daniel Dennett was ranked amongst the top 5 global thought leaders. Currently the co-director of the Center for Cognitive Studies and the Austin B. Fletcher Professor of Philosophy at Tufts University, Daniel is best known for his contributions to cognitive science, philosophy of mind and philosophy of religion. His works Consciousness Explained, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea, Breaking the Spell and his latest work, From Bacteria to Bach and Back have had an immense impact in the worlds of philosophy and science. For many, Daniel Dennett, known as ‘one of the four horsemen of new atheism’, is a household name, celebrated as a man who has explained away the hard problem of consciousness, religion, and fundamental questions surrounding free-will. We’re going to be discussing Daniel Dennett’s approach to philosophy of religion in Part I, before we dive into philosophy of mind in Part II.

Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Email RecoverMe: [email protected] Everything else you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Sexual ethics is the study of human sexuality and sexual behaviour. In a word, it seeks to understand and evaluate the moral conduct of relationships and sexual activities from a philosophical perspective. Sex is hugely important to us all. Sex is an expression of love. It forms the foundation of our family lives, our social lives and even our self-identities. For many, we should celebrate sex, for we owe it our very existence! On the other hand, sex can be the cause of great pain and suffering. While sex brings life, no doubt, it ruins the lives of many. Cases of exploitation, harassment, assault and rape, show the darkest side of humanity.  Sex can both make and corrupt humans. For Christians, different sexual acts and preferences can lead them closer to, and further away from God. For many moral philosophers, sexual acts can lead them closer to and further away from what is right. Moral philosophers and theologians have long pondered questions surrounding this sensitive topic, and there is a lot more to be said that goes beyond the scope of this episode. In this episode, we will exclusively be tackling issues surrounding marriage and sexuality.

Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Email RecoverMe: [email protected] Everything else you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Sexual ethics is the study of human sexuality and sexual behaviour. In a word, it seeks to understand and evaluate the moral conduct of relationships and sexual activities from a philosophical perspective. Sex is hugely important to us all. Sex is an expression of love. It forms the foundation of our family lives, our social lives and even our self-identities. For many, we should celebrate sex, for we owe it our very existence! On the other hand, sex can be the cause of great pain and suffering. While sex brings life, no doubt, it ruins the lives of many. Cases of exploitation, harassment, assault and rape, show the darkest side of humanity.  Sex can both make and corrupt humans. For Christians, different sexual acts and preferences can lead them closer to, and further away from God. For many moral philosophers, sexual acts can lead them closer to and further away from what is right. Moral philosophers and theologians have long pondered questions surrounding this sensitive topic, and there is a lot more to be said that goes beyond the scope of this episode. In this episode, we will exclusively be tackling issues surrounding marriage and sexuality.

Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Email RecoverMe: [email protected] Everything else you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Sexual ethics is the study of human sexuality and sexual behaviour. In a word, it seeks to understand and evaluate the moral conduct of relationships and sexual activities from a philosophical perspective. Sex is hugely important to us all. Sex is an expression of love. It forms the foundation of our family lives, our social lives and even our self-identities. For many, we should celebrate sex, for we owe it our very existence! On the other hand, sex can be the cause of great pain and suffering. While sex brings life, no doubt, it ruins the lives of many. Cases of exploitation, harassment, assault and rape, show the darkest side of humanity.  Sex can both make and corrupt humans. For Christians, different sexual acts and preferences can lead them closer to, and further away from God. For many moral philosophers, sexual acts can lead them closer to and further away from what is right. Moral philosophers and theologians have long pondered questions surrounding this sensitive topic, and there is a lot more to be said that goes beyond the scope of this episode. In this episode, we will exclusively be tackling issues surrounding marriage and sexuality.

Our Patreon page: www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Email RecoverMe: [email protected] Everything else you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Sexual ethics is the study of human sexuality and sexual behaviour. In a word, it seeks to understand and evaluate the moral conduct of relationships and sexual activities from a philosophical perspective. Sex is hugely important to us all. Sex is an expression of love. It forms the foundation of our family lives, our social lives and even our self-identities. For many, we should celebrate sex, for we owe it our very existence! On the other hand, sex can be the cause of great pain and suffering. While sex brings life, no doubt, it ruins the lives of many. Cases of exploitation, harassment, assault and rape, show the darkest side of humanity.  Sex can both make and corrupt humans. For Christians, different sexual acts and preferences can lead them closer to, and further away from God. For many moral philosophers, sexual acts can lead them closer to and further away from what is right. Moral philosophers and theologians have long pondered questions surrounding this sensitive topic, and there is a lot more to be said that goes beyond the scope of this episode. In this episode, we will exclusively be tackling issues surrounding marriage and sexuality.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support! That’s www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Peter Singer is often described as the world's most influential philosopher. Professor Singer is currently the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics in the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne. His work has helped to launch the animal rights and effective altruism movements, as well as making significant contributions in bioethics.   Peter Singer is most famous for his developments to the normative ethical theory utilitarianism. Loosely stated, utilitarianism is the view that we should maximise happiness and pleasure, and reduce pain, suffering and unhappiness, for the greatest number of humans and/or non-human animals. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation, in which he argues in favour of vegetarianism, and his essay Famine, Affluence, and Morality, in which he argues in favour of donating to help the global poor.  Practical Ethics, The Life You Can Save, The Most Good You Can Do, One World: The Ethics of Globalisation, Ethics in the Real World - Peter Singer's list of bestselling publications is extensive - but his work goes beyond the written page. Peter Singer is also the founder of the charity The Life You Can Save and co-founder of Animals Australia.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support! That’s www.patreon.com/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Peter Singer is often described as the world's most influential philosopher. Professor Singer is currently the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics in the University Center for Human Values at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne. His work has helped to launch the animal rights and effective altruism movements, as well as making significant contributions in bioethics.   Peter Singer is most famous for his developments to the normative ethical theory utilitarianism. Loosely stated, utilitarianism is the view that we should maximise happiness and pleasure, and reduce pain, suffering and unhappiness, for the greatest number of humans and/or non-human animals. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation, in which he argues in favour of vegetarianism, and his essay Famine, Affluence, and Morality, in which he argues in favour of donating to help the global poor.  Practical Ethics, The Life You Can Save, The Most Good You Can Do, One World: The Ethics of Globalisation, Ethics in the Real World - Peter Singer's list of bestselling publications is extensive - but his work goes beyond the written page. Peter Singer is also the founder of the charity The Life You Can Save and co-founder of Animals Australia.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support - www.patreon.com/panpsycast! Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. For more Information on Yujin Nagasawa, please visit: www.yujinnagasawa.co.uk. Yujin’s latest book: Yujin Nagasawa, Miracles: A Very Short Introduction - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Miracles-Very-Short-Introduction-Introductions-ebook/dp/B07663TS81. The paper we are discussing this episode: Yujin Nagasawa, The Problem of Evil for Atheists - https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/6d4b8e_e2fede5338c949e29637ccd5b79b6609.pdf. Yujin Nagasawa is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Birmingham, as well as President of the British Society for the Philosophy of Religion and Co-Director of the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion. Obtaining his PhD from the Australian National University in 2004, Nagasawa’s work in philosophy is extensive, focusing on a range of topics from the problems surrounding consciousness to the nature and existence of God. Our focus for Episode 33, is Nagasawa’s ‘The Problem of Evil for Atheists’. The argument can be stated as follows; atheists believe that the world is generally good and they are happy and grateful to exist, i.e. they are existential optimists. However, our entire evolutionary biological system is based upon the painful, miserable suffering of the weak. So, why should we think that the world is overall good and that we should be grateful to exist, if our existence depends on a violent, cruel and unfair biological system which guarantees pain and suffering for unaccountably many sentient animals? Nagasawa argues that the theist is in a better position to answer this question than the atheist, suggesting that the problem of evil provides a good reason to abandon atheism and adopt theism. Part I. ‘The Problem of Evil for Atheists’. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support - www.patreon.com/panpsycast! Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. For more Information on Yujin Nagasawa, please visit: www.yujinnagasawa.co.uk. Yujin’s latest book: Yujin Nagasawa, Miracles: A Very Short Introduction - https://www.amazon.co.uk/Miracles-Very-Short-Introduction-Introductions-ebook/dp/B07663TS81. The paper we are discussing this episode: Yujin Nagasawa, The Problem of Evil for Atheists - https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/6d4b8e_e2fede5338c949e29637ccd5b79b6609.pdf. Yujin Nagasawa is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Birmingham, as well as President of the British Society for the Philosophy of Religion and Co-Director of the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion. Obtaining his PhD from the Australian National University in 2004, Nagasawa’s work in philosophy is extensive, focusing on a range of topics from the problems surrounding consciousness to the nature and existence of God. Our focus for Episode 33, is Nagasawa’s ‘The Problem of Evil for Atheists’. The argument can be stated as follows; atheists believe that the world is generally good and they are happy and grateful to exist, i.e. they are existential optimists. However, our entire evolutionary biological system is based upon the painful, miserable suffering of the weak. So, why should we think that the world is overall good and that we should be grateful to exist, if our existence depends on a violent, cruel and unfair biological system which guarantees pain and suffering for unaccountably many sentient animals? Nagasawa argues that the theist is in a better position to answer this question than the atheist, suggesting that the problem of evil provides a good reason to abandon atheism and adopt theism. Part I. ‘The Problem of Evil for Atheists’. Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support! (www.patreon.com/panpsycast) This episode is proudly sponsored by The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast. For information, please visit www.partiallyexaminedlife.com. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral claims? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral assertions? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support! (www.patreon.com/panpsycast) This episode is proudly sponsored by The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast. For information, please visit www.partiallyexaminedlife.com. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral claims? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral assertions? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support! (www.patreon.com/panpsycast) This episode is proudly sponsored by The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast. For information, please visit www.partiallyexaminedlife.com. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral claims? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral assertions? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Please visit our Patreon page and show your support! (www.patreon.com/panpsycast) This episode is proudly sponsored by The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast. For information, please visit www.partiallyexaminedlife.com. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral claims? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral assertions? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

This episode is proudly supported by the New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Ludwig Wittgenstein was an Austrian-British philosopher whose work focused on the philosophy of mathematics, logic, the philosophy of mind, and most notably, the philosophy of language. Wittgenstein’s influence on the world of philosophy has been phenomenal. The study of philosophy was immensely important to Wittgenstein, not only as an academic discipline but as a form of therapy. In Ludwig’s own words, he describes philosophy as, "the only work that gives me real satisfaction". Wittgenstein’s work can be divided into an early period, exemplified by the Tractatus (our focus for Part I), and a later period, articulated in the Philosophical Investigations (which is our focus for Part II). Early Wittgenstein was concerned with the logical relationship between propositions and the world. He thought that by providing an account of this relationship, he had solved every philosophical problem. The later Wittgenstein rejected many of the assumptions of the Tractatus, arguing that the meaning of words is best understood as their use within a given language-game. Wittgenstein’s life and work are astonishing. His mentor, Bertrand Russell, described him as "the most perfect example I have ever known of genius as traditionally conceived; passionate, profound, intense, and dominating". Part I. The Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (08:00 in Part I), Part II. The Philosophical Investigations (start of Part II), Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion (45:45 in Part II).

This episode is proudly supported by the New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Ludwig Wittgenstein was an Austrian-British philosopher whose work focused on the philosophy of mathematics, logic, the philosophy of mind, and most notably, the philosophy of language. Wittgenstein’s influence on the world of philosophy has been phenomenal. The study of philosophy was immensely important to Wittgenstein, not only as an academic discipline but as a form of therapy. In Ludwig’s own words, he describes philosophy as, "the only work that gives me real satisfaction". Wittgenstein’s work can be divided into an early period, exemplified by the Tractatus (our focus for Part I), and a later period, articulated in the Philosophical Investigations (which is our focus for Part II). Early Wittgenstein was concerned with the logical relationship between propositions and the world. He thought that by providing an account of this relationship, he had solved every philosophical problem. The later Wittgenstein rejected many of the assumptions of the Tractatus, arguing that the meaning of words is best understood as their use within a given language-game. Wittgenstein’s life and work are astonishing. His mentor, Bertrand Russell, described him as "the most perfect example I have ever known of genius as traditionally conceived; passionate, profound, intense, and dominating". Part I. The Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (08:00 in Part I), Part II. The Philosophical Investigations (start of Part II), Part III. What can Nietzsche teach us? (45:45 in Part II).

This episode is proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Partially Examined Life: www.partiallyexaminedlife.com. Gregory B. Sadler on YouTube: www.youtube.com/gbisadler. Born in Rocken, in Prussia in 1844, Nietzsche set out his career in philology but later turned to writing idiosyncratic philosophical treatise and collections of aphorisms. He directed these against the pious dogmas of Christianity and traditional philosophy. He saw both as self-serving veils drawn over the harsher realities of life. He felt we needed not a high moral or theological ideals but a deeply critical form of cultural genealogy that would uncover the reasons why we humans are as we are and how we have come to be this way. He believed that every great philosopher actually a kind of involuntary and unconscious memoir rather than conducting an impersonal search for knowledge. Studying our own moral genealogy cannot help us escape or transcend ourselves but it can enable us to see our illusions more clearly and lead a more vital, assertive existence. There is no God in this picture. The human beings who created God have also killed him. It is now up to us alone. The way to live is not to throw ourselves into faith but into our own lives, conducting them in affirmation of every moment, exactly as it without wishing anything was different and without harbouring resentment for others or our fate (Sarah Bakewell, The Existentialist Cafe, p.19-20). Part I. What is the philosophical underpinning of Nietzsche? (36:40 in Part I), Part II. An Introduction to Nietzsche’s Thought (50:00 in Part I), Part III. What can Nietzsche teach us? (00:05 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion. (28:15 in Part II).

This episode is proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Partially Examined Life: www.partiallyexaminedlife.com. Gregory B. Sadler on YouTube: www.youtube.com/gbisadler. Born in Rocken, in Prussia in 1844, Nietzsche set out his career in philology but later turned to writing idiosyncratic philosophical treatise and collections of aphorisms. He directed these against the pious dogmas of Christianity and traditional philosophy. He saw both as self-serving veils drawn over the harsher realities of life. He felt we needed not a high moral or theological ideals but a deeply critical form of cultural genealogy that would uncover the reasons why we humans are as we are and how we have come to be this way. He believed that every great philosopher actually a kind of involuntary and unconscious memoir rather than conducting an impersonal search for knowledge. Studying our own moral genealogy cannot help us escape or transcend ourselves but it can enable us to see our illusions more clearly and lead a more vital, assertive existence. There is no God in this picture. The human beings who created God have also killed him. It is now up to us alone. The way to live is not to throw ourselves into faith but into our own lives, conducting them in affirmation of every moment, exactly as it without wishing anything was different and without harbouring resentment for others or our fate (Sarah Bakewell, The Existentialist Cafe, p.19-20). Part I. What is the philosophical underpinning of Nietzsche? (36:40 in Part I), Part II. An Introduction to Nietzsche’s Thought (50:00 in Part I), Part III. What can Nietzsche teach us? (00:05 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion. (28:15 in Part II).

This episode is proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Dr Stephen Law is a Reader in philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London, and editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal THINK. Amongst many other books, Stephen Law is the author of A Very Short Introduction to Humanism, The War for Children's Minds, The Philosophy Gym, and Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked into an Intellectual Black Hole. Stephen Law has debated many Christian philosophers, including William Lane Craig, John Lennox and Alvin Plantinga. Our central focus today is Law’s main argument against the existence of God – 'The Evil-God Challenge'. The evil-god challenge can be stated as follows: why should we consider the hypothesis that there exists a good-god, significantly more reasonable than the hypothesis that there exists an evil-god? Part I. The Evil-God Challenge (start of Part I), Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part II).

This episode is proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Dr Stephen Law is a Reader in philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London, and editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal THINK. Amongst many other books, Stephen Law is the author of A Very Short Introduction to Humanism, The War for Children's Minds, The Philosophy Gym, and Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked into an Intellectual Black Hole. Stephen Law has debated many Christian philosophers, including William Lane Craig, John Lennox and Alvin Plantinga. Our central focus today is Law’s main argument against the existence of God – 'The Evil-God Challenge'. The evil-god challenge can be stated as follows: why should we consider the hypothesis that there exists a good-god, significantly more reasonable than the hypothesis that there exists an evil-god? Part I. The Evil-God Challenge (start of Part I), Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part II).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Most people understand conscience as something which tells us right from wrong. The conscience is that little voice in your head that tells you to do your homework, go to bed on time and eat 5 a day. In fact, the Oxford Dictionary defines conscience as: “A person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.” We’re going to be questioning this definition extensively. What is conscience? Where does the conscience come from? Where does the word conscience come from? Is conscience fundamental in its own right, or is it acquired through our development? Does the conscience carry any moral authority, and if so, what should be the function of conscience in ethical decision-making? Is conscience just an illusion? To aid our exploration of these questions, we’re going to be consulting C. S. Lewis’ Studies in Words in Part I, Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae in Part II and Sigmund Freud’s The Ego and the Id in Part III. In Part IV we’ll wrap up the show with some further analysis and discussion and the return of philosophical ultimatum.

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Most people understand conscience as something which tells us right from wrong. The conscience is that little voice in your head that tells you to do your homework, go to bed on time and eat 5 a day. In fact, the Oxford Dictionary defines conscience as: “A person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.” We’re going to be questioning this definition extensively. What is conscience? Where does the conscience come from? Where does the word conscience come from? Is conscience fundamental in its own right, or is it acquired through our development? Does the conscience carry any moral authority, and if so, what should be the function of conscience in ethical decision-making? Is conscience just an illusion? To aid our exploration of these questions, we’re going to be consulting C. S. Lewis’ Studies in Words in Part I, Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae in Part II and Sigmund Freud’s The Ego and the Id in Part III. In Part IV we’ll wrap up the show with some further analysis and discussion and the return of philosophical ultimatum.

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Most people understand conscience as something which tells us right from wrong. The conscience is that little voice in your head that tells you to do your homework, go to bed on time and eat 5 a day. In fact, the Oxford Dictionary defines conscience as: “A person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.” We’re going to be questioning this definition extensively. What is conscience? Where does the conscience come from? Where does the word conscience come from? Is conscience fundamental in its own right, or is it acquired through our development? Does the conscience carry any moral authority, and if so, what should be the function of conscience in ethical decision-making? Is conscience just an illusion? To aid our exploration of these questions, we’re going to be consulting C. S. Lewis’ Studies in Words in Part I, Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae in Part II and Sigmund Freud’s The Ego and the Id in Part III. In Part IV we’ll wrap up the show with some further analysis and discussion and the return of philosophical ultimatum.

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Most people understand conscience as something which tells us right from wrong. The conscience is that little voice in your head that tells you to do your homework, go to bed on time and eat 5 a day. In fact, the Oxford Dictionary defines conscience as: “A person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.” We’re going to be questioning this definition extensively. What is conscience? Where does the conscience come from? Where does the word conscience come from? Is conscience fundamental in its own right, or is it acquired through our development? Does the conscience carry any moral authority, and if so, what should be the function of conscience in ethical decision-making? Is conscience just an illusion? To aid our exploration of these questions, we’re going to be consulting C. S. Lewis’ Studies in Words in Part I, Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae in Part II and Sigmund Freud’s The Ego and the Id in Part III. In Part IV we’ll wrap up the show with some further analysis and discussion and the return of philosophical ultimatum.

Website: www.thepanpsycast.com Twitter: www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast Karl Marx is one of the most influential figures in human history. The Prussian-born philosopher, economist, political theorist, sociologist, and revolutionary socialist, produced some of the most controversial and influential works in the past two-hundred years. A champion of human rights for many and a dangerous radical for many others; Karl Marx, the communist, is considered one of the principal architects of modern social science. Regardless of your own points of view, it is hard to deny that Marx's critique of capitalism is relevant today. In January 2017, Oxfam published An Economy for the 99%, which found that the richest 8 men in the world are worth more than the poorest 3.6 billion. In 1848, alongside Friedrich Engels, Marx produced the Manifesto of the Communist Party. In the concluding remarks, Marx writes, "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!"

Website: www.thepanpsycast.com Twitter: www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast Karl Marx is one of the most influential figures in human history. The Prussian-born philosopher, economist, political theorist, sociologist, and revolutionary socialist, produced some of the most controversial and influential works in the past two-hundred years. A champion of human rights for many and a dangerous radical for many others; Karl Marx, the communist, is considered one of the principal architects of modern social science. Regardless of your own points of view, it is hard to deny that Marx's critique of capitalism is relevant today. In January 2017, Oxfam published An Economy for the 99%, which found that the richest 8 men in the world are worth more than the poorest 3.6 billion. In 1848, alongside Friedrich Engels, Marx produced the Manifesto of the Communist Party. In the concluding remarks, Marx writes, "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!"

Website: www.thepanpsycast.com Twitter: www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast Karl Marx is one of the most influential figures in human history. The Prussian-born philosopher, economist, political theorist, sociologist, and revolutionary socialist, produced some of the most controversial and influential works in the past two-hundred years. A champion of human rights for many and a dangerous radical for many others; Karl Marx, the communist, is considered one of the principal architects of modern social science. Regardless of your own points of view, it is hard to deny that Marx's critique of capitalism is relevant today. In January 2017, Oxfam published An Economy for the 99%, which found that the richest 8 men in the world are worth more than the poorest 3.6 billion. In 1848, alongside Friedrich Engels, Marx produced the Manifesto of the Communist Party. In the concluding remarks, Marx writes, "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!"

Website: www.thepanpsycast.com Twitter: www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast Karl Marx is one of the most influential figures in human history. The Prussian-born philosopher, economist, political theorist, sociologist, and revolutionary socialist, produced some of the most controversial and influential works in the past two-hundred years. A champion of human rights for many and a dangerous radical for many others; Karl Marx, the communist, is considered one of the principal architects of modern social science. Regardless of your own points of view, it is hard to deny that Marx's critique of capitalism is relevant today. In January 2017, Oxfam published An Economy for the 99%, which found that the richest 8 men in the world are worth more than the poorest 3.6 billion. In 1848, alongside Friedrich Engels, Marx produced the Manifesto of the Communist Party. In the concluding remarks, Marx writes, "The Communists disdain to conceal their views and aims. They openly declare that their ends can be attained only by the forcible overthrow of all existing social conditions. Let the ruling classes tremble at a Communistic revolution. The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win. Working men of all countries, unite!"

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. In the words of David Chalmers, “The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. When we think and perceive, there is a whir of information-processing, but there is also a subjective aspect. As Nagel has put it, there is something it is like to be a conscious organism. This subjective aspect is experience. When we see, for example, we experience visual sensations: the felt quality of redness, the experience of dark and light, the quality of depth in a visual field. What unites all of these states is that there is something it is like to be in them. All of them are states of experience.” Debating the question, 'Does physicalism address the hard problem of consciousness?' are Philip Goff (www.philipgoffphilosophy.com) and David Papineau (www.DavidPapineau.com).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. In the words of David Chalmers, “The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. When we think and perceive, there is a whir of information-processing, but there is also a subjective aspect. As Nagel has put it, there is something it is like to be a conscious organism. This subjective aspect is experience. When we see, for example, we experience visual sensations: the felt quality of redness, the experience of dark and light, the quality of depth in a visual field. What unites all of these states is that there is something it is like to be in them. All of them are states of experience.” Debating the question, 'Does physicalism address the hard problem of consciousness?' are Philip Goff (www.philipgoffphilosophy.com) and David Papineau (www.DavidPapineau.com).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. In the words of David Chalmers, "The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. When we think and perceive, there is a whir of information-processing, but there is also a subjective aspect. As Nagel has put it, there is something it is like to be a conscious organism. This subjective aspect is experience. When we see, for example, we experience visual sensations: the felt quality of redness, the experience of dark and light, the quality of depth in a visual field. What unites all of these states is that there is something it is like to be in them. All of them are states of experience." Debating the question, 'Does physicalism address the hard problem of consciousness?' are Philip Goff (www.philipgoffphilosophy.com) and David Papineau (www.DavidPapineau.com).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Philosopher and master of the New College of the Humanities professor A. C. Grayling is considered by many to be amongst the greatest and most influential philosophers of our time. Professor Grayling has published around 40 books in philosophy, history of ideas, human rights and ethics. These include the Refutation of Scepticism, The Future of Moral Values, Wittgenstein, The Meaning of Things, The God Argument and The Age of Genius. Professor Grayling is an exceptional example of someone who has lived the examined life. In this fascinating interview, we ask Professor Grayling about a broad range of philosophical topics. This is a must listen for anyone interested in philosophy. Part I. The Examined Life, Part II. A. C. Grayling: The Philosopher.

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Philosopher and master of the New College of the Humanities professor A. C. Grayling is considered by many to be amongst the greatest and most influential philosophers of our time. Professor Grayling has published around 40 books in philosophy, history of ideas, human rights and ethics. These include the Refutation of Scepticism, The Future of Moral Values, Wittgenstein, The Meaning of Things, The God Argument and The Age of Genius. Professor Grayling is an exceptional example of someone who has lived the examined life. In this fascinating interview, we ask Professor Grayling about a broad range of philosophical topics. This is a must listen for anyone interested in philosophy. Part I. The Examined Life, Part II. A. C. Grayling: The Philosopher.

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The following is a quotation from Colin Heydt: Writing of John Stuart Mill a few days after Mill’s death, Henry Sidgwick claimed, “I should say that from about 1860-65 or thereabouts he ruled England in the region of thought as very few men ever did: I do not expect to see anything like it again.” Mill established this rule over English thought through his writings in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs. One can say with relative security, looking at the breadth and complexity of his work, that Mill was the greatest nineteenth-century British philosopher. Part I. Utilitarianism (7:30), Part II. On Liberty (17:00), Part III. Subjection of Women (00:05 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (23:15 in Part II).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The following is a quotation from Colin Heydt: Writing of John Stuart Mill a few days after Mill’s death, Henry Sidgwick claimed, “I should say that from about 1860-65 or thereabouts he ruled England in the region of thought as very few men ever did: I do not expect to see anything like it again.” Mill established this rule over English thought through his writings in logic, epistemology, economics, social and political philosophy, ethics, metaphysics, religion, and current affairs. One can say with relative security, looking at the breadth and complexity of his work, that Mill was the greatest nineteenth-century British philosopher. Part I. Utilitarianism (7:30), Part II. On Liberty (17:00), Part III. Subjection of Women (00:05 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (23:15 in Part II).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Born in Somerset, England 1632 and died in Essex, at the age of 72 in 1704, John Locke was among the most famous philosophers and political theorists of the 17th century. Locke's main political work, Two Treatise of Government, was published in anonymously in 1689. The First Treatise is a sentence-by-sentence refutation of Robert Filmer's Divine Right of Kings, whilst the Second Treatise outlines Locke's ideas for civilized society based on natural rights and contract theory. Our main focus today is the second treatise of government. Locke begins by describing the state of nature, a picture much more stable than Thomas Hobbes' state of nature that recall, is "war of every man against every man,". Locke argues that all men are created equal in the state of nature by God. He proceeds by explaining the hypothetical rise of property and civilisation, in the process explaining that the only legitimate governments are those consented to by the people. Ultimately for Locke, a government that rules without the consent of the people can ultimately be overthrown. For many, the language of the second treatise of government echoes throughout the declaration of independence. In the words of Thomas Jefferson: "Bacon, Locke and Newton, I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived". Part I. State of Nature (19:15), Part II. Property (00:05 in Part II), Part III. Civil Society (15:50 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (31:40 in Part II).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Born in Somerset, England 1632 and died in Essex, at the age of 72 in 1704, John Locke was among the most famous philosophers and political theorists of the 17th century. Locke's main political work, Two Treatise of Government, was published in anonymously in 1689. The First Treatise is a sentence-by-sentence refutation of Robert Filmer's Divine Right of Kings, whilst the Second Treatise outlines Locke's ideas for civilized society based on natural rights and contract theory. Our main focus today is the second treatise of government. Locke begins by describing the state of nature, a picture much more stable than Thomas Hobbes' state of nature that recall, is "war of every man against every man,". Locke argues that all men are created equal in the state of nature by God. He proceeds by explaining the hypothetical rise of property and civilisation, in the process explaining that the only legitimate governments are those consented to by the people. Ultimately for Locke, a government that rules without the consent of the people can ultimately be overthrown. For many, the language of the second treatise of government echoes throughout the declaration of independence. In the words of Thomas Jefferson: "Bacon, Locke and Newton, I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived". Part I. State of Nature (19:15), Part II. Property (00:05 in Part II), Part III. Civil Society (15:50 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (31:40 in Part II).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Few political thinkers can be considered as influential as Thomas Hobbes. Published in 1651, Hobbes’s most famous work, the Leviathan (or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil), argues that to leave a hypothetical state of nature, we must sign a social contract and submit ourselves to be ruled by an absolute sovereign. The state of nature is “a war of all against all”. The only rational way out for Hobbes is to establish a strong and undivided government. In this episode we’ll be asking questions like; Who was Hobbes and why is he important? What is human nature? Why do we need government? Part I. Life and Historical Context (03:00), Part II. The State of Nature (13:45), Part III. The Solution (00:10 - in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (18:15 - in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Few political thinkers can be considered as influential as Thomas Hobbes. Published in 1651, Hobbes’s most famous work, the Leviathan (or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil), argues that to leave a hypothetical state of nature, we must sign a social contract and submit ourselves to be ruled by an absolute sovereign. The state of nature is “a war of all against all”. The only rational way out for Hobbes is to establish a strong and undivided government. In this episode we’ll be asking questions like; Who was Hobbes and why is he important? What is human nature? Why do we need government? Part I. Life and Historical Context (03:00), Part II. The State of Nature (13:45), Part III. The Solution (00:10 - in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (18:15 - in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. This episode benchmarks the beginning of our mini-series on political philosophy. Plato provides a strong critique of democracy through his formulation of a utopian city-state. By attempting to find justice in the city, Plato prompts us to question whether or not democracy can promote the common good. In this episode we'll be asking questions like; What is justice? Is democracy worthless? and What can we learn from Plato today? Part I. Socratic Dialogues in Gorgias and The Republic (08:15), Part II. The Republic (31:35), Part III. Real World Application (00:10 - in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (22:40 - in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. This episode benchmarks the beginning of our mini-series on political philosophy. Plato provides a strong critique of democracy through his formulation of a utopian city-state. By attempting to find justice in the city, Plato prompts us to question whether or not democracy can promote the common good. In this episode we'll be asking questions like; What is justice? Is democracy worthless? and What can we learn from Plato today? Part I. Socratic Dialogues in Gorgias and The Republic (08:15), Part II. The Republic (31:35), Part III. Real World Application (00:10 - in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (22:40 - in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

All the reading can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. For Episode 19, I'm joined by Gregory Miller and Dr Thom Atkinson from the University of Liverpool. As well as introducing the questions and problems surrounding consciousness and mind; we'll be discussing substance dualism, materialism and panpsychism. Part I. Substance Dualism (09:20), Part II. Materialism (33:45), Part III. Panpsychism (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (16:40 in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

All the reading can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. For Episode 19, I'm joined by Gregory Miller and Dr Thom Atkinson from the University of Liverpool. As well as introducing the questions and problems surrounding consciousness and mind; we'll be discussing substance dualism, materialism and panpsychism. Part I. Substance Dualism (09:20), Part II. Materialism (33:45), Part III. Panpsychism (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (16:40 in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

All the reading can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Albert Camus (1913-1960) is perhaps the most read philosopher of the 20th century. Camus is generally considered to be the father of absurdism, the idea that life's meaning is beyond our reach and that we should embrace what he called the absurd. Given the extraordinary number of people that have read Camus' work, it is no surprise that he is one of the most romanticised philosophers to have lived. In this two-part special on Camus, we're going to be asking questions like; Who was Albert Camus? Is life worth living? What is the absurd? And How should we deal with the absurd? Part I. The Life of Camus (04:20), Part II. The Absurd (16:40), Part III. Camus' Response to the Absurd (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (15:25 in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

All the reading can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Albert Camus (1913-1960) is perhaps the most read philosopher of the 20th century. Camus is generally considered to be the father of absurdism, the idea that life's meaning is beyond our reach and that we should embrace what he called the absurd. Given the extraordinary number of people that have read Camus' work, it is no surprise that he is one of the most romanticised philosophers to have lived. In this two-part special on Camus, we're going to be asking questions like; Who was Albert Camus? Is life worth living? What is the absurd? And How should we deal with the absurd? Part I. The Life of Camus (04:20), Part II. The Absurd (16:40), Part III. Camus' Response to the Absurd (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (15:25 in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

All the reading can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) was arguably the most influential philosopher of the 20th century. The quintessential existentialist, Sartre encapsulates the very essence of existentialism through his various philosophical works and plays. Sartre still has much to teach us. Still, Sartre would argue too many people live in Bad faith. They ignore that they are "condemned to be free". Amongst other things, we'll be asking, Why did 50,000 people attend his funeral? Are we condemned to be free? And Are we living in bad faith? Part I. The Life of Sartre (03:35), Part II. "Man is condemned to be free" (18:15), Part III. Bad Faith (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (31:40 in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

All the reading can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980) was arguably the most influential philosopher of the 20th century. The quintessential existentialist, Sartre encapsulates the very essence of existentialism through his various philosophical works and plays. Sartre still has much to teach us. Still, Sartre would argue too many people live in Bad faith. They ignore that they are "condemned to be free". Amongst other things, we'll be asking, Why did 50,000 people attend his funeral? Are we condemned to be free? And Are we living in bad faith? Part I. The Life of Sartre (03:35), Part II. "Man is condemned to be free" (18:15), Part III. Bad Faith (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (31:40 in Part II). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) was a man who did not consider himself a philosopher but rather a poet. He showed disdain to the rigid academic systems that theology and philosophy were producing during his time, and his writings were often in complete opposition to their way of thinking. For Kierkegaard, the importance of philosophy lay with self-discovery; developing into a true, authentic self. Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. The Life of Kierkegaard (11:11), Part II. The Basis of Kierkegaard's Philosophy (32:35), Part III. The Three Spheres of Life (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (00:10 in Part III). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) was a man who did not consider himself a philosopher but rather a poet. He showed disdain to the rigid academic systems that theology and philosophy were producing during his time, and his writings were often in complete opposition to their way of thinking. For Kierkegaard, the importance of philosophy lay with self-discovery; developing into a true, authentic self. Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. The Life of Kierkegaard (11:11), Part II. The Basis of Kierkegaard's Philosophy (32:35), Part III. The Three Spheres of Life (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (00:10 in Part III). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1855) was a man who did not consider himself a philosopher but rather a poet. He showed disdain to the rigid academic systems that theology and philosophy were producing during his time, and his writings were often in complete opposition to their way of thinking. For Kierkegaard, the importance of philosophy lay with self-discovery; developing into a true, authentic self. Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. The Life of Kierkegaard (11:11), Part II. The Basis of Kierkegaard's Philosophy (32:35), Part III. The Three Spheres of Life (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (00:10 in Part III). Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Do corporations have ethical responsibilities? If so, what are they? Is whistleblowing ethical? When are we legally protected to do so? Not only do we have the questions, but this week we have some of the answers! Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. Corporate Social Responsibility (2:20), Part II. Whistleblowing (28:00), Part III. "Good Ethics Is Good Business" (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Globalisation, Further Analysis and Discussion (16:45 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsycast.com. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Thank you to Desaparecidos for allowing us to play Slacktivist from their new album Payola. To find out more about the band click here: www.desaparecidosband.com

Do corporations have ethical responsibilities? If so, what are they? Is whistleblowing ethical? When are we legally protected to do so? Not only do we have the questions, but this week we have some of the answers! Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. Corporate Social Responsibility (2:20), Part II. Whistleblowing (28:00), Part III. "Good Ethics Is Good Business" (00:10 in Part II), Part IV. Globalisation, Further Analysis and Discussion (16:45 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsycast.com. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Do we have a right to die? Is it ever okay to end the life of another? Is there a slippery slope? Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. Types Of Euthanasia (2:45), Part II. Relevant Concepts in Natural Law and Situation Ethics (11:45), Part III. Application in real life cases (00:05 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (27:00 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsycast.com. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Do we have a right to die? Is it ever okay to end the life of another? Is there a slippery slope? Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. Types Of Euthanasia (2:45), Part II. Relevant Concepts in Natural Law and Situation Ethics (11:45), Part III. Application in real life cases (00:05 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (27:00 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsycast.com. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsycast.com. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. Mystical Experience (in Part I, 10:35), Part II. Conversion Experience (in Part I, 39:40), Part III. Ways in which individual religious experience can be understood (in Part II, 25:40), Part IV. Criticisms, Analysis and Discussion (start of Part III).

You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsycast.com. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. Mystical Experience (in Part I, 10:35), Part II. Conversion Experience (in Part I, 39:40), Part III. Ways in which individual religious experience can be understood (in Part II, 25:40), Part IV. Criticisms, Analysis and Discussion (start of Part III).

Tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsycast.com. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. Mystical Experience (in Part I, 10:35), Part II. Conversion Experience (in Part I, 39:40), Part III. Ways in which individual religious experience can be understood (in Part II, 25:40), Part IV. Criticisms, Analysis and Discussion (start of Part III).

Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. Love, Agape and the Six Propositions (in Part I, 5:35), Part II. The Four Presuppositions (in Part I, 46:40), Part III. Application (in Part II), Part IV. Criticisms, Analysis and Discussion (in Part II, 16:35).

Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. Love, Agape and the Six Propositions (in Part I, 5:35), Part II. The Four Presuppositions (in Part I, 46:40), Part III. Application (in Part II), Part IV. Criticisms, Analysis and Discussion (in Part II, 16:35).

You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. Plantinga’s Reformed Epistemology (Episode 11, Part I). Part II. Analysis and discussion (Episode 11, Part II).

You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. Plantinga’s Reformed Epistemology (Episode 11, Part I). Part II. Analysis and discussion (Episode 11, Part II).

You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. The Problem of Evil (start of Episode 10, (Part I)), Part II. Theodicies (start of Episode 10, (Part II)), Part III. The Free Will Defence (34:00 in Episode 10, (Part II)), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Episode 10, (Part III)).

You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. The Problem of Evil (start of Episode 10, (Part I)), Part II. Theodicies (start of Episode 10, (Part II)), Part III. The Free Will Defence (34:00 in Episode 10, (Part II)), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Episode 10, (Part III)).

In this first instalment, we focus on Mackie's logical problem and Rowe's evidential problem. You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode! Part I. The Problem of Evil (start of Episode 10, (Part I)), Part II. Theodicies (start of Episode 10, (Part II)), Part III. The Free Will Defence (34:00 in Episode 10, (Part II)), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Episode 10, (Part III)).

You best get prime moving! Moving house? Visiting a hotel? Returning a book to the library? This is the podcast for you! Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. St. Thomas Aquinas 5:10, Part II. Leibniz 34:50, Part III. Criticisms of the Cosmological Argument 00:05 (in Part II), Part IV. Further Discussion and Analysis 11:34 (in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

You best get prime moving! Moving house? Visiting a hotel? Returning a book to the library? This is the podcast for you! Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. St. Thomas Aquinas 5:10, Part II. Leibniz 34:50, Part III. Criticisms of the Cosmological Argument 00:05 (in Part II), Part IV. Further Discussion and Analysis 11:34 (in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Watch out! It’s Part II/II on the Teleological Argument! Are things that appear to be designed, actually designed? Is the world made for us? Who will win philosophical ultimatum? The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/proves the existence of God a posteriori. Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. William Paley (4:45), Part II. St. Thomas Aquinas (51:50), Part III. Other Formulations (00:00 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (12:06 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Watch out! Time’s ticking as the boys go bowling in part one of our wicked awesome super mega two-part special on the teleological argument! The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/proves the existence of God a posteriori. Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. William Paley (4:45), Part II. St. Thomas Aquinas (51:50), Part III. Other Formulations (00:00 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (12:06 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Flying through space on a magic unicorn… eating ice-cream. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/proves the existence of God a priori. In this two-part episode, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at St. Anselm of Canterbury and the ontological argument. Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. Anselm and the Argument (12:00), Part II. Gaunilo and the island (28:15), Part III. General criticisms (00:30 in Part II), Part IV. Further analysis and discussion (28:10 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Flying through space on a magic unicorn… eating ice-cream. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/proves the existence of God a priori. In this two-part episode, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at St. Anselm of Canterbury and the ontological argument. Tweet us your thoughts www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Part I. Anselm and the Argument (12:00), Part II. Gaunilo and the island (28:15), Part III. General criticisms (00:30 in Part II), Part IV. Further analysis and discussion (28:10 in Part II). You can find links to all the reading at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Make sure you’ve subscribed to us on iTunes to get new episodes as and when they’re released! Thank you, we hope you enjoy the episode!

Kant, Pirates and the fantastic institute that is ‘the Wimpy’… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/uncovers a priori moral truths. In this three-part special, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at Kantian Ethics. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/thepanpsychist. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I.  Duty and the Hypothetical Imperative (in Part I): 11:18, Part II. The Categorical Imperative and its Three Formulations (in Part II): 00:16, Part III. The Three Postulates and Application (in Part II): 27:05, Part IV. Further Discussion and Analysis (in Part III): 00:05. Thank you again for all of your support.

Kant, Pirates and the fantastic institute that is ‘the Wimpy’… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/uncovers a priori moral truths. In this three-part special, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at Kantian Ethics. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/thepanpsychist. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I.  Duty and the Hypothetical Imperative (in Part I): 11:18, Part II. The Categorical Imperative and its Three Formulations (in Part II): 00:16, Part III. The Three Postulates and Application (in Part II): 27:05, Part IV. Further Discussion and Analysis (in Part III): 00:05. Thank you again for all of your support.

Kant, Pirates and the fantastic institute that is ‘the Wimpy’… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/uncovers a priori moral truths. In this three-part special, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at Kantian Ethics. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/thepanpsychist. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I.  Duty and the Hypothetical Imperative (in Part I): 11:18, Part II. The Categorical Imperative and its Three Formulations (in Part II): 00:16, Part III. The Three Postulates and Application (in Part II): 27:05, Part IV. Further Discussion and Analysis (in Part III): 00:05. Thank you again for all of your support.

Bentham, Mill and banter… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/measures the pleasure and pain it may cause. In this three-part special, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at Utilitarianism. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/thepanpsychist. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I. Bentham and Utilitarianism (start of EP1) Part II. John Stuart Mill and Utilitarianism (start of EP2), Part III. Preference Utilitarianism (EP2, 43:15), Part IV. Further discussion and analysis (start of EP3). The voices in this episode are owned by Jack Symes, Andrew Horton and Ollie Marley. Thank you again for all of your support.

Bentham, Mill and banter… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/measures the pleasure and pain it may cause. In this three-part special, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at Utilitarianism. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/thepanpsychist. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I. Bentham and Utilitarianism (start of EP1) Part II. John Stuart Mill and Utilitarianism (start of EP2), Part III. Preference Utilitarianism (EP2, 43:15), Part IV. Further discussion and analysis (start of EP3). The voices in this episode are owned by Jack Symes, Andrew Horton and Ollie Marley. Thank you again for all of your support.

Bentham, Mill and banter… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/measures the pleasure and pain it may cause. In this three-part special, we take an insightful and fun-filled look at Utilitarianism. Follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/thepanpsychist. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I. Bentham and Utilitarianism (start of EP1) Part II. John Stuart Mill and Utilitarianism (start of EP2), Part III. Preference Utilitarianism (EP2, 43:15), Part IV. Further discussion and analysis (start of EP3). The voices in this episode are owned by Jack Symes, Andrew Horton and Ollie Marley. Thank you again for all of your support.

Part II: Masturbation, peasants and pineapples… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/becomes one with God. In this two-part special, we take a look at St Thomas Aquinas and natural law. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Sections: I. Aquinas and Teleology (Part I: 8:55) II. Four Tiers of Law (Part I: 26:10), III. The Precepts (Part I: 43:35), IV. Further discussion and Analysis (Part II: 19:00). The voices in this episode are owned by Jack Symes, Andrew Horton and Ollie Marley. Apologies for the low quality of the audio in sections of this podcast; we had serious production issues with this one. Rather than rerecording the entire episode, we thought it would be best to fix it up to the best of our abilities and distribute it. Thank you again for all of your support.

Part I: Masturbation, peasants and pineapples… The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/becomes one with God. In this two-part special, we take a look at St Thomas Aquinas and natural law. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Sections: I. Aquinas and Teleology (Part I: 8:55) II. Four Tiers of Law (Part I: 26:10), III. The Precepts (Part I: 43:35), IV. Further discussion and Analysis (Part II: 19:00). The voices in this episode are owned by Jack Symes, Andrew Horton and Ollie Marley. Apologies for the low quality of the audio in sections of this podcast; we has serious production issues with this one. Rather than rerecording the entire episode, we thought it would be best to fix it up to the best of our abilities and distribute it. Thank you again for all of your support.

Episode 3 - fifty shades of brain scientists. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/interacts with physical properties. In this episode, we wrap up our discussion on Plato and Aristotle. We jump forward to some more contemporary philosophy, looking into materialism and dualism. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I. Aristotle and Plato on the Soul (1:22), Part II. Cartesian Dualism (17:40), Part III. Materialism (37:00), Part IV. Further Discussion (53:30).

Episode 2 - science, plates of coffee and nipples. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/fulfils its telos. This episode fulfils the function of tackling Aristotle's basic philosophies. Special thanks to the prime mover for your help in the production of this recording. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsychist.com/panpsycast. Part I. Aristotle and Teleology (3:30) Part II. The Four Causes (20:15) Part III. The Prime Mover (40:30) Part IV. Aristotle and Plato (54:15).

Episode 1 - caves, slaves and coffee cups. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/escapes the cave. This episode has been rerecorded. The original now exists in the realm of the forms. Just kidding, it was terrible. Enjoy the new recording. Links to all the reading can be found at www.thepanpsycast.com. Part I. The Allegory of the Cave (2:00), Part II. The Doctrine of the Forms (17:00), Part III. The reasons and reasoning behind the Cave (28:35), Part IV. Criticisms and Analysis (50:35).

What started off as just myself, Olly and Andrew (my co-hosts) talking philosophy at the University of Birmingham in the early episodes, has blossomed into something extraordinary. Bear in mind, that when this project started, we had never podcasted before. So, expect some poor audio quality, and some even poorer jokes in the first 15-16 episodes. Now, The Panpsycast team goes beyond the original three. Greg Miller, Emily Rose Ogland, Phoebe Light and Thom Atkinson have joined the club, and as a consequence, we've produced some amazing content.   From our humble beginnings, we have gone from strength to strength and looking back, we’ve been lucky enough to interview some of the biggest names in philosophy - A. C. Grayling, Daniel C. Dennett, Peter Singer, Yujin Nagasawa, Bence Nanay, Alison Stone, Christian B Miller, Rebecca Roache, Galen Strawson, Steven Pinker - and the list goes on.  Not only do we interview big thinkers, but we also release informal discussions focusing on a broad range of areas within philosophy - existentialism, moral philosophy, political philosophy, philosophy of mind, philosophy of religion - there really is something for everyone, and we always pitch our discussions at non-specialists. Every episode, we want somebody who is completely unfamiliar with a particular topic or thinker, to come out the other end at the forefront of the contemporary discussion - but most importantly, come out of the other end with a smile on their face.  To quote William James, “Good-humor is a philosophic state of mind; it seems to say to Nature that we take her no more seriously than she takes us. I maintain that one should always talk of philosophy with a smile.” Thank you, we hope you enjoy the show.