Episode 65, 'The Awe-Some Argument' with Ryan Byerly (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 65 (Part II of II)', where we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/points you towards the divine

Contents

Part I. The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 65, 'The Awe-Some Argument' with Ryan Byerly (Part I - Pantheism)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 65 (Part I of II)', where we'll be discussing Ryan Byerly’s Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/points you towards the divine

Contents

Part I. The Awe-Some Argument for Pantheism.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 64, 'The Given - Experience and its Content' with Michelle Montague (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 64 (Part II of II)', where we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/undergoes a non-sensory, cognitive experience

Contents

Part I. The Given.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 64, 'The Given - Experience and its Content' with Michelle Montague (Part I - The Given)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 64 (Part I of II)', where we'll be discussing phenomenology with Michelle Montague.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/undergoes a non-sensory, cognitive experience

Contents

Part I. The Given.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 63, 'Pantheism and Panentheism' with Andrei Buckareff (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 63 (Part II of II)', where we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/allows itself to be realised in God's mind

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.


Contents

Part I. The Divine Mind.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 63, ‘Pantheism and Panentheism’ with Andrei Buckareff (Part I - The Divine Mind)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 63 (Part I of II)', where we'll be discussing ‘the divine of mind’ with Andrei Buckareff.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/allows itself to be realised in God's mind

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.


Contents

Part I. The Divine Mind.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 61, David Pearce on Transhumanism (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 61 (Part II of II)', where we'll be engaging in some 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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/evolves into something greater

Contents

Part I. Transhumanism.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 61, David Pearce on Transhumanism (Part I - Transhumanism)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 61 (Part I of II)', where we'll be discussing transhumanism with David Pearce.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/evolves into something greater

Contents

Part I. Transhumanism.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 58, ‘The Idealism and Pantheism of May Sinclair’ with Emily Thomas (Part II)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 58 (Part II)', where we'll be engaging in some 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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/moves through time

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.


Contents

Part I. The Idealism and Pantheism of May Sinclair.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 58, ‘The Idealism and Pantheism of May Sinclair’ with Emily Thomas (Part I)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 58 (Part I)', where we'll be discussing the philosophy of May Sinclair with Dr Emily Thomas.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/moves through time

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.


Contents

Part I. The Idealism and Pantheism of May Sinclair.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 57, ‘Pantheism: Personhood, Consciousness and God’ with Sam Coleman (Part II)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 57 (Part II)', where we'll be discussing pantheism, as well as engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/illuminates its unconscious qualia

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.


Contents

Part I. Personhood and Consciousness.

Part II. God, Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 57, ‘Pantheism: Personhood, Consciousness and God’ with Sam Coleman (Part I)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 57 (Part I)', where we'll be discussing personhood and consciousness with Sam Coleman.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/illuminates its unconscious qualia

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.


Contents

Part I. Personhood and Consciousness.

Part II. God, Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 56, ‘Utopia for Realists’ with Rutger Bregman (Part II)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 56 (Part II)', where we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion with Rutger Bregman.

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?”

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/strives towards a new utopia

Contents

Part I. Utopia for Realists.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 56, ‘Utopia for Realists’ with Rutger Bregman (Part I)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 56 (Part I)', where we'll be discussing Utopia for Realists with Rutger Bregman.

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?”

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/strives towards a new utopia

Contents

Part I. Utopia for Realists.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 54, Why Buddhism is True with Robert Wright (Part II)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 54 (Part II)', where we'll be engaging in some 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.

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

Contents

Part I. Why Buddhism is True.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 54, Why Buddhism is True with Robert Wright (Part I)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 54 (Part I)', where we'll be discussing why Robert Wright thinks Buddhism is true.

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.

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

Contents

Part I. Why Buddhism is True.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 52, Existentialism and Romantic Love with Skye Cleary (Part II)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 52 (Part II)', where we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/falls in romantic love

Contents

Part I. Existentialism and Romantic Love.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 52, Existentialism and Romantic Love with Skye Cleary (Part I)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 52 (Part I)', where we'll be discussing Skye Clearly’s 2015 book, Existentialism and Romantic 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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/falls in romantic love

Contents

Part I. Existentialism and Romantic Love.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 50, ‘The Golden Age of Female Philosophy’ with Rachael Wiseman (Part II)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 50 (Part II)', where we'll be asking some listener questions, and engaging in some further analysis and discussion, with Dr Rachael Wiseman.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/translates the Philosophical Investigations amongst cigarette butts and nappies

Episodes 47-50 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please click here


Contents

Part I. The Golden Age of Female Philosophers.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.


Episode 50, ‘The Golden Age of Female Philosophy’ with Rachael Wiseman (Part I)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 50 (Part I)', where we'll be discussing ‘The Golden Age of Female Philosophy’ with Rachael Wiseman.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/translates the Philosophical Investigations amongst cigarette butts and nappies

Episodes 47-50 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please click here


Contents

Part I. The Golden Age of Female Philosophers.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.