Episode 141, ‘Deadly Sins’ with Elizabeth Oldfield (Part I - Fully Alive)

Welcome to Episode 141 (Part I of II), where we’ll be discussing ethics and religion with Elizabeth Oldfield.

Much of ethics is relational: it’s about how we treat other people, the world around us, and how those relationships shape who we become. In philosophy, this often gets formalised as a set of virtues to cultivate, duties to obey, or harms to avoid. But today, we rarely talk about sins – let alone the seven deadly sins.

Historically rooted in the Christian tradition – pride, greed, lust, envy, gluttony, wrath, and sloth – have been understood not just as personal failings. They were taken seriously because they obscured what it meant to flourish: that is, to be fully alive. They are, fundamentally, habits of being that corrode our ability to love. So, what might we learn today from the seven deadly sins? How can these ancient categories illuminate our lives, in a world marked by disconnection and distraction?

In this episode, we’ll be speaking about the seven sins with Elizabeth Oldfield. Elizabeth is a writer, speaker, host of The Sacred podcast, and the former director of Theos Think Tank. In her recent book Fully Alive, she revives the seven deadly sins – not as a tool for moral condemnation, but as a lens through which to examine our practices and principles.

We’ll be talking with Elizabeth about how sin, properly understood, can help us confront the crisis of meaning and the collapse of community. We’ll also explore her Christian vision of moral transformation and why it’s vital to believers and non-believers alike.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/hosts space

Episode 140, ‘Interpersonal Art’ with Harry Drummond (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to Episode 140, where we’ll be discussing the philosophy of aesthetics and AI.

Reflecting on the experiences we value most, many that come to mind are those we share with others. Consider the strangers we sit alongside at the football, the romantic partners who share (or endure) our favourite television shows, the friends with whom we dance through the early morning hours. Despite the growing ease of on-demand, private aesthetic experiences, we find ourselves carving out time for public ones. But why?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the nature of interpersonal aesthetic experience with Dr Harry Drummond, Teacher in the Department of Continuing Education at the University of Liverpool. Co-editor of the British Society of Aesthetics’ journal Debates in Aesthetics, and editorial assistant for the British Journal of Aesthetics, Dr Drummond’s work sits at the intersection of aesthetics, psychology, and the philosophy of mind.

For Drummond, the presence of others amplifies, redirects, and even unlocks experiences that wouldn’t be available to us alone. We read each other’s cues, share reactions, and create meaning together in ways that are subtle but profound. The silence of a cinema, the synchronised movement of a dance floor, the shared laughter at a comedy show – these are not just personal experiences but collective ones, shaped and enriched by the presence of others.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/shares its experiences

Links

Dr Harry Drummond, PhilPapers

H Drummond (2024), Aesthetic Experiences with Others: An Enactive Account (paper)

H Drummond (forthcoming) Enactive Aesthetics: Insights Through AI – link will be added upon publication

Episode 140, ‘Interpersonal Art’ with Harry Drummond (Part I - Collective Experience)

Welcome to Episode 140, where we’ll be speaking to Dr Harry Drummond about the nature of shared experiences.

Reflecting on the experiences we value most, many that come to mind are those we share with others. Consider the strangers we sit alongside at the football, the romantic partners who share (or endure) our favourite television shows, the friends with whom we dance through the early morning hours. Despite the growing ease of on-demand, private aesthetic experiences, we find ourselves carving out time for public ones. But why?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the nature of interpersonal aesthetic experience with Dr Harry Drummond, Teacher in the Department of Continuing Education at the University of Liverpool. Co-editor of the British Society of Aesthetics’ journal Debates in Aesthetics, and editorial assistant for the British Journal of Aesthetics, Dr Drummond’s work sits at the intersection of aesthetics, psychology, and the philosophy of mind.

For Drummond, the presence of others amplifies, redirects, and even unlocks experiences that wouldn’t be available to us alone. We read each other’s cues, share reactions, and create meaning together in ways that are subtle but profound. The silence of a cinema, the synchronised movement of a dance floor, the shared laughter at a comedy show – these are not just personal experiences but collective ones, shaped and enriched by the presence of others.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/shares its experiences

Links

Dr Harry Drummond, PhilPapers

H Drummond (2024), Aesthetic Experiences with Others: An Enactive Account (paper)

H Drummond (forthcoming) Enactive Aesthetics: Insights Through AI – link will be added upon publication

Episode 139, Unanswered Questions

Welcome to Episode 139, where Jack and Olly will be answering some of your listeners questions.

A couple of weeks ago, Jack took part in a debate at Oriel College, University of Oxford, with Stephen Law on the evil-god challenge. It was a fantastic discussion, full of thought-provoking arguments and brilliant questions from the audience. It was also set to be our final episode on the topic. Unfortunately, due to Oxford’s unforeseen technical issues, the audio from the debate couldn’t be used.

This left us in a bit of a pickle. After nearly nine years of The Panpsycast, we’ve never missed a scheduled release, and we weren’t about to start now. So, instead of the debate, Jack and Olly had a wide-ranging one-to-one conversation on all things philosophy. We took the opportunity to dive into over three years’ worth of audience questions that we hadn’t yet had the chance to answer…until now.

As always, thank you for your support. We hope you enjoy the show!

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/questions

Episode 138, Plato's Symposium (Part III - The Ladder of Love)

Welcome to ‘Episode 138 (Part III of III)’, where we’ll be analysing Socrates’ speech, as well as engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

A Christmas party is where humanity’s deepest truths can be revealed. It’s a space where profound questions like "How much gravy is too much gravy?" “What is partridge doing in a pear tree?” mingle seamlessly with "What is the meaning of life?" The very act of gathering to celebrate is a tribute to our existential longing for connection, love, joy, and embarrassing drunken dance moves. Plato might have envisioned it as a quest for wisdom, but let’s be honest, sometimes the real enlightenment happens while debating who gets the last Brussels sprout.

Today, we're stepping into one of the most intriguing parties in philosophy — Plato’s Symposium. A gathering of Ancient Athens’ most brilliant minds, lounging on couches, wine flowing freely, engaging in an intense yet playful exchange about the nature of love. But make no mistake, this is no ordinary party. Hosted at the home of the tragic playwright Agathon, this gathering is filled with laughter, drama and impassioned speeches. A celebration of intellect and pleasure, a blend of wit, wisdom, and revelry. As the night goes on, the conversation turns from the playful to the profound. What insights do our guests discover? What, indeed, is love? So, grab a seat at the table—because in Plato’s Symposium, the ideas are nearly as intoxicating … as the wine.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/prepares for its speech

Note

Please note that two of our microphones experienced technical difficulties. We appreciate your understanding and assure you that our usual high-quality audio will resume in the next episode.

Episode 138, Plato's Symposium (Part II - A Whole Lot of Love)

Welcome to ‘Episode 138 (Part II of III)’, where we’ll be discussing the speeches of Eryximachus, Aristophanes, and – the host of our party – Agathon.

A Christmas party is where humanity’s deepest truths can be revealed. It’s a space where profound questions like "How much gravy is too much gravy?" “What is partridge doing in a pear tree?” mingle seamlessly with "What is the meaning of life?" The very act of gathering to celebrate is a tribute to our existential longing for connection, love, joy, and embarrassing drunken dance moves. Plato might have envisioned it as a quest for wisdom, but let’s be honest, sometimes the real enlightenment happens while debating who gets the last Brussels sprout.

Today, we're stepping into one of the most intriguing parties in philosophy — Plato’s Symposium. A gathering of Ancient Athens’ most brilliant minds, lounging on couches, wine flowing freely, engaging in an intense yet playful exchange about the nature of love. But make no mistake, this is no ordinary party. Hosted at the home of the tragic playwright Agathon, this gathering is filled with laughter, drama and impassioned speeches. A celebration of intellect and pleasure, a blend of wit, wisdom, and revelry. As the night goes on, the conversation turns from the playful to the profound. What insights do our guests discover? What, indeed, is love? So, grab a seat at the table—because in Plato’s Symposium, the ideas are nearly as intoxicating … as the wine.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/prepares for its speech

Note

Please note that two of our microphones experienced technical difficulties. We appreciate your understanding and assure you that our usual high-quality audio will resume in the next episode.

Episode 138, Plato's Symposium (Part I - The Hangover)

Welcome to ‘Episode 138 (Part I of III)’, the beginning of our reading and analysis of The Symposium.

A Christmas party is where humanity’s deepest truths can be revealed. It’s a space where profound questions like "How much gravy is too much gravy?" “What is partridge doing in a pear tree?” mingle seamlessly with "What is the meaning of life?" The very act of gathering to celebrate is a tribute to our existential longing for connection, love, joy, and embarrassing drunken dance moves. Plato might have envisioned it as a quest for wisdom, but let’s be honest, sometimes the real enlightenment happens while debating who gets the last Brussels sprout.

Today, we're stepping into one of the most intriguing parties in philosophy — Plato’s Symposium. A gathering of Ancient Athens’ most brilliant minds, lounging on couches, wine flowing freely, engaging in an intense yet playful exchange about the nature of love. But make no mistake, this is no ordinary party. Hosted at the home of the tragic playwright Agathon, this gathering is filled with laughter, drama and impassioned speeches. A celebration of intellect and pleasure, a blend of wit, wisdom, and revelry. As the night goes on, the conversation turns from the playful to the profound. What insights do our guests discover? What, indeed, is love? So, grab a seat at the table—because in Plato’s Symposium, the ideas are nearly as intoxicating … as the wine.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/prepares for its speech

Note

Please note that two of our microphones experienced technical difficulties. We appreciate your understanding and assure you that our usual high-quality audio will resume in the next episode.

Episode 137, Between God and Atheism: Live in London (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 137 (Part II of II)’, where our live debate continues and is followed by a Q&A from the audience.

This is a live recording from our recent show at The Royal Institution Theatre in London.

The panel includes returning guests Philip Goff (professor of philosophy at Durham) and Rowan Williams (former Archbishop of Canterbury), as well as two new panellists, Elizabeth Oldfield (the popular writer) and Alex O’Connor (the popular YouTuber).

It’s a very warm and good-spirited debate exploring the problems with traditional religion and atheism. The main arguments discussed are the argument for God from design and the argument against God from evil. Veteran listeners will be familiar with these arguments; still, in each case, it’s fascinating to hear the responses from both sides of the aisle on what their opponents take to be the strongest objections to their view.

Without further ado, here’s the audio from our live show…we hope you enjoy the conversation.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/traps itself in a cage of concepts

Episode 137, Between God and Atheism: Live in London (Part I - The Debate)

Welcome to ‘Episode 137 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the problems of fine-tuning and evil.

This is a live recording from our recent show at The Royal Institution Theatre in London.

The panel includes returning guests Philip Goff (professor of philosophy at Durham) and Rowan Williams (former Archbishop of Canterbury), as well as two new panellists, Elizabeth Oldfield (the popular writer) and Alex O’Connor (the popular YouTuber).

It’s a very warm and good-spirited debate exploring the problems with traditional religion and atheism. The main arguments discussed are the argument for God from design and the argument against God from evil. Veteran listeners will be familiar with these arguments; still, in each case, it’s fascinating to hear the responses from both sides of the aisle on what their opponents take to be the strongest objections to their view.

Without further ado, here’s the audio from our live show…we hope you enjoy the conversation.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/traps itself in a cage of concepts

Episode 136, ‘A World Unmade’ with Peter Hitchens (Part II - A Revolution Betrayed)

Welcome to ‘Episode 136 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the philosophy of education and grammar schools.

The Western world faces a tidal wave of secularisation, which shows no signs of receding. In the UK, Christian self-identification has plummeted – dropping, for example, from 72% in 2001 to 47% in 2021. The secularists argue that this trend reflects a shift towards an inclusive and intellectually progressive society; their critics, however, warn that the decline of faith erodes our moral foundations and frays our social ties. “The secular flood isn’t just about church attendance,” they say, “but strikes at the heart of our nation’s identity and stability.”

For many conservatives, nowhere is this betrayal of our values more evident than our education system. In the UK, the 1944 Education Act introduced free secondary education to all children for the first time – with grammar schools said to offer exceptional educations to our most talented students. Today, grammar schools are in decline, and the founding of new ones prohibited. It was argued that these schools favoured the middle classes and perpetuated social divisions; others, however, believe that closing these pathways has reduced educational and social opportunities. Like the Christian identity of the nation, grammar schools are at risk of being confined to history books.

In this episode, we’ll be speaking with Peter Hitchens – British journalist, author, and social critic – about what religious and educational changes mean for the soul of Britain. Together, we’ll explore whether this shift marks the dawn of a more inclusive era – or the washing away of a once Great Britain.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/lowers its standards

Episode 136, ‘A World Unmade’ with Peter Hitchens (Part I - The Rage Against God)

Welcome to ‘Episode 136 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the rise of secular society with Peter Hitchens.

The Western world faces a tidal wave of secularisation, which shows no signs of receding. In the UK, Christian self-identification has plummeted – dropping, for example, from 72% in 2001 to 47% in 2021. The secularists argue that this trend reflects a shift towards an inclusive and intellectually progressive society; their critics, however, warn that the decline of faith erodes our moral foundations and frays our social ties. “The secular flood isn’t just about church attendance,” they say, “but strikes at the heart of our nation’s identity and stability.”

For many conservatives, nowhere is this betrayal of our values more evident than our education system. In the UK, the 1944 Education Act introduced free secondary education to all children for the first time – with grammar schools said to offer exceptional educations to our most talented students. Today, grammar schools are in decline, and the founding of new ones prohibited. It was argued that these schools favoured the middle classes and perpetuated social divisions; others, however, believe that closing these pathways has reduced educational and social opportunities. Like the Christian identity of the nation, grammar schools are at risk of being confined to history books.

In this episode, we’ll be speaking with Peter Hitchens – British journalist, author, and social critic – about what religious and educational changes mean for the soul of Britain. Together, we’ll explore whether this shift marks the dawn of a more inclusive era – or the washing away of a once Great Britain.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/lowers its standards

Episode 135, ‘The Philosophy of Headphones’ with Jacob Kingsbury Downs (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 135 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be discussing headphone violence with Dr Jacob Kingsbury Downs.

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

Episode 135, ‘The Philosophy of Headphones’ with Jacob Kingsbury Downs (Part I - There’s No Sound Like Home)

Welcome to ‘Episode 135 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the phenomenology of headphone listening.

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

Episode 134, The Philosophy of War (Part III - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to the final instalment of Episode 134, in which we examine moral justifications for war and ethics within conflict.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/speeds away on a charriot

Episode 134, The Philosophy of War (Part II - In Pursuit of Power)

Welcome to our second instalment of Episode 134; in this instalment, we explore the sociological and cultural causes of war.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/speeds away on a charriot

Episode 134, The Philosophy of War (Part I - The Human Condition)

Welcome to the first instalment of Episode 134, where we explore the nature of war and the possibility of its evolutionary origins.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/speeds away on a charriot

Episode 133, 'Vulture Capitalism' with Grace Blakeley: Live at Glastonbury Festival

Welcome to Episode 133, where Jack speaks to returning guest Grace Blakeley about her new book, Vulture Capitalism, live from Glastonbury Festival.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/seizes the means of production

Episode 132, ‘The Concept of Beastliness’ with Ellie Robson (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 132 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be analysing the ethics and meta-philosophy of Mary Midgley with Dr Ellie Robson.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/becomes a beast

Contents

Part I. The Roots of Human Nature

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 132, ‘The Concept of Beastliness’ with Ellie Robson (Part I - The Roots of Human Nature)

Welcome to ‘Episode 132 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the philosophy of Mary Midgley with Dr Ellie Robson.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/becomes a beast

Contents

Part I. The Roots of Human Nature

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 131, 'In Defence of God's Goodness' with Jack Symes (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 131 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be continuting, and concluding, our discussion on the evil-god challenge.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/reduces itself to absurdity

Contents

Part I. Defeating the Evil-God Challenge

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion