Episode 128, ‘Domestic Labour’ with Paulina Sliwa & Tom McClelland (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 128 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be analysing the role and relevance of gendered affordance perception.

‘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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/takes out the trash

Contents

Part I. Affordance Perception

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 128, ‘Domestic Labour’ with Paulina Sliwa & Tom McClelland (Part I - Affordance Perception)

Welcome to ‘Episode 128 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing philosophy of mind and domestic labour.

‘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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/takes out the trash

Contents

Part I. Affordance Perception

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 127, ‘The Pursuit of Happiness’ with Jeffrey Rosen (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 127 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be analysing the role of virtue and the lives of the Founding Fathers.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/strives for happiness

Contents

Part I. The Founding Fathers

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 127, ‘The Pursuit of Happiness’ with Jeffrey Rosen (Part I - The Founding Fathers)

Welcome to ‘Episode 127 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the lives and philosophies of Founding Fathers.

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?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/strives for happiness

Contents

Part I. The Founding Fathers

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 126, ‘Playfulness Versus Epistemic Traps’ with C. Thi Nguyen (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 126 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the ethics and aesthetics of gameplay.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/strives to play

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

Episode 126, ‘Playfulness Versus Epistemic Traps’ with C. Thi Nguyen (Part I - The Ideal Thinker)

Welcome to ‘Episode 126 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the virtues of playfulness with C. Thi Nguyen.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/strives to play

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

Episode 124, ‘Narrative Critique’ with Rachel Fraser (Part II – Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 124 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be analysing the strengths and limits of criticising ideologies through narratives.

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.

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

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

Episode 124, ‘Narrative Critique’ with Rachel Fraser (Part I – Disrupting Ideology)

Welcome to ‘Episode 124 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be speaking to Rachel Fraser about narrative critiques of patriarchal ideology.

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.

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

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

Episode 123, ‘The Building Blocks of Reality’ with Donnchadh O'Conaill (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 123 (Part II of II)’, in which we analyse the nature and existence of substances.

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.

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

Contents

Part I. Substance

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 123, ‘The Building Blocks of Reality’ with Donnchadh O'Conaill (Part I - Substance)

Welcome to ‘Episode 123 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be speaking to Donnchadh O'Conaill about the metaphysics of substances.

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.

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

Contents

Part I. Substance

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 122, ‘Justice for Animals’ with Martha Nussbaum (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 122 (Part II of II)’, in which we analyse Martha Nussbaum’s approach to animal ethics.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/fulfils its specific end

Contents

Part I. The Capabilities Approach

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 122, ‘Justice for Animals’ with Martha Nussbaum (Part I - The Capabilities Approach)

Welcome to ‘Episode 122 (Part I of II)’, in which we discuss animal ethics with Professor Martha Nussbaum.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/fulfils its specific end

Contents

Part I. The Capabilities Approach

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 120, The Mystery of Existence (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 120 (Part II of II)’, where we continue our live debate – and take audience questions – at the Royal Institution Threate.

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.’

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/holds itself in existence

Contents

Part I. The Debate

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 120, The Mystery of Existence (Part I - The Debate)

Welcome to ‘Episode 120 (Part I of II)’, the first instalment of our live show at the Royal Institution Theatre.

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.’

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/holds itself in existence

Contents

Part I. The Debate

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 119, ‘Perfect Me’ with Heather Widdows (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 119 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be continuing our discussion of beauty ideals with Professor Heather Widdows.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/reaches its ideal form

Contents

Part I. The Beauty Ideal

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 119, ‘Perfect Me’ with Heather Widdows (Part I - The Beauty Ideal)

Welcome to ‘Episode 119 (Part I of II)’, where we’ll be discussing the ethics of beauty standards with Professor Heather Widdows.

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.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/reaches its ideal form

Contents

Part I. The Beauty Ideal

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 117, ‘The Rationality of Theism’ with Silvia Jonas (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 117 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be speaking to Silvia Jonas about the role and value of philosophy of religion.

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.

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

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

Episode 117, ‘The Rationality of Theism’ with Silvia Jonas (Part I - Judaism: Knowledge and Understanding)

Welcome to ‘Episode 117 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be speaking to Silvia Jonas about Judaism, Maimonides, and understanding God.

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.

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

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

Episode 116, 'Why Honour Matters’ (Part II – Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 116 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be speaking to Tamler Sommers about restorative justice and the dark side of honour.

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.

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

Contents

Part I. Everything is Clear

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 116, 'Why Honour Matters’ (Part I - The Centre of Morality)

Welcome to ‘Episode 116 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be speaking to Tamler Sommers about the nature of honour.

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.

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

Contents

Part I. Everything is Clear

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion