Episode 92, 'The Philosopher Queens' with Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting (Part I - Women in Philosophy)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 92 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be talking to Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting about their book, The Philosopher Queens.

In Plato’s ideal state, the wisest amongst the populous would be selected to rule. These rulers, who could see beyond the shadows to glimpse the light of truth, would be trusted to make choices to the benefit of all. The gender of these leaders, said Plato, was not to matter – despite him labelling them ‘the philosopher kings’.

That ideal was never realised but the conversation started by Plato and his contemporaries inspired what many think of as the birth of ‘Western Philosophy’. The central tenets being: the nature of reality, truth and knowledge, how to live the good life, and most importantly, the practice of prudence and the pursuit of justice.

To the Ancient Greeks, Prudence and Justice were personified as females. The term ‘philosophy’ itself contains the Greek word ‘Sophia’ meaning wisdom – which was also personified in the female form. Thus, it is a great irony that much of the history of philosophy has focused on the achievements of men: at its lowest points using its own intellectualising to oppress women. Prudence and justice seemed only to exist for men.

However, there have always been women concerning themselves with the big questions, seeing beyond the darkness and shadows that kept their societies stuck in male-centric thinking. Now more than ever, there are people dedicated to pointing the spotlight on women’s ideas, women’s lives, and women’s achievements. Rebecca Buxton and Lisa Whiting call them, ‘the philosopher queens’.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/reflects on the lives and legacies of philosophy's unsung women

Contents

Part I. Women in Philosophy

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 91, ‘How to Save the World from Financialisation’ with Grace Blakeley (Part II - A Green Future, Further Analysis and Discussion)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 91 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing Grace Blakeley’s solution to the problems of financialisation and the climate emergency.

‘History has ended, and capitalism is the last man standing. The innovations and freedoms enjoyed by the Global North have shown that the free market is the only viable economic system; it is almost impossible to imagine a coherent alternative.’

This was certainly the view of Margaret Thatcher, who was elected as Prime Minister amidst the turbulence of 1980s’ Britain. For many, unleashed from the shackles of pre-1970s’ economics, Thatcher restored order and long-term prosperity to a country in crisis: solving industrial disputes, taking on the unions, cutting income tax, and creating a nation of entrepreneurs and homeowners.

As we will hear, economic commentator Grace Blakeley has little sympathy for this view. For Blakeley, neoliberalism was a system geared towards maximising share profits over goods and services: a dangerous economic model that puts shareholders first, customers second, and workers last.

As we left ‘the golden age of capitalism’, the rising tides of climate catastrophe, global poverty, and vast increases in income inequality eventually came knocking at the doors of world governments... but nobody answered. As prime ministers and presidents pretended they weren’t home, a guest arrived who hadn’t the courtesy of knocking. In 2008, the world watched on as the market collapsed in the biggest economic crash since 1929. The house of cards had fallen – the contradictions of Western, free market economics had caught up with us. After the crash, governments announced £500bn in spending as they bailed out the world’s banks. Now, history repeats itself once more in the wake of the Corona Crash.

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

Contents

Part I. A World in Crisis

Part II. A Green Future, Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 91, ‘How to Save the World from Financialisation’ with Grace Blakeley (Part I - A World in Crisis)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 91 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing global economics and the problems of financialisation with Grace Blakeley.

‘History has ended, and capitalism is the last man standing. The innovations and freedoms enjoyed by the Global North have shown that the free market is the only viable economic system; it is almost impossible to imagine a coherent alternative.’

This was certainly the view of Margaret Thatcher, who was elected as Prime Minister amidst the turbulence of 1980s’ Britain. For many, unleashed from the shackles of pre-1970s’ economics, Thatcher restored order and long-term prosperity to a country in crisis: solving industrial disputes, taking on the unions, cutting income tax, and creating a nation of entrepreneurs and homeowners.

As we will hear, economic commentator Grace Blakeley has little sympathy for this view. For Blakeley, neoliberalism was a system geared towards maximising share profits over goods and services: a dangerous economic model that puts shareholders first, customers second, and workers last.

As we left ‘the golden age of capitalism’, the rising tides of climate catastrophe, global poverty, and vast increases in income inequality eventually came knocking at the doors of world governments... but nobody answered. As prime ministers and presidents pretended they weren’t home, a guest arrived who hadn’t the courtesy of knocking. In 2008, the world watched on as the market collapsed in the biggest economic crash since 1929. The house of cards had fallen – the contradictions of Western, free market economics had caught up with us. After the crash, governments announced £500bn in spending as they bailed out the world’s banks. Now, history repeats itself once more in the wake of the Corona Crash.

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

Contents

Part I. A World in Crisis

Part II. A Green Future, Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 85, ‘How Male Privilege Hurts Women’ with Kate Manne (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 85 (Part II of II)’ where we’ll be continuing our discussion with Kate Manne about her new book, Entitled.

Misogyny is the hatred of women, practiced only by a few bigoted men. A hatred, which is far from systemic. Sexual and domestic violence are at record lows and continue to decline. Women are entitled to equal pay, positions of power, and bodily autonomy, and these rights and liberties have been enshrined in law and accepted by the general population. Feminism is the rule, misogyny the exception: we are all feminists now.

This couldn’t be further from the view of Kate Manne, Associate Professor at Cornell University and author of the hugely popular and multi-award-winning, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Today, Kate is not only one of the world’s leading feminist philosophers (labelled as “The Simone de Beauvoir of the 21st century” by Amanda Marcotte), but according to Prospect Magazine, one of the “World’s Top 10 Thinkers”.

Today we’ll be discussing Kate’s newly released, Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women. Kate calls us to radically rethink our understanding of the nature and function of misogyny. Misogyny is not the hatred of women and girls, practiced by the few, it is controlling and punishing those who challenge male entitlement, practiced by the many. Misogyny is the law enforcement branch of the patriarchal order - a deterrent, a warning, a whip - which sustains the hierarchy of men over women. As history and the personal experiences of women so often attest to, those at the top of hierarchies often expect things from those beneath them.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/gives you what you're entitled to

Contents

Part I. Entitled

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 85, ‘How Male Privilege Hurts Women’ with Kate Manne (Part I - Entitled)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 85 (Part I of II)’ where we’ll be speaking to Kate Manne about her latest book, Entitled.

Misogyny is the hatred of women, practiced only by a few bigoted men. A hatred, which is far from systemic. Sexual and domestic violence are at record lows and continue to decline. Women are entitled to equal pay, positions of power, and bodily autonomy, and these rights and liberties have been enshrined in law and accepted by the general population. Feminism is the rule, misogyny the exception: we are all feminists now.

This couldn’t be further from the view of Kate Manne, Associate Professor at Cornell University and author of the hugely popular and multi-award-winning, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. Today, Kate is not only one of the world’s leading feminist philosophers (labelled as “The Simone de Beauvoir of the 21st century” by Amanda Marcotte), but according to Prospect Magazine, one of the “World’s Top 10 Thinkers”.

Today we’ll be discussing Kate’s newly released, Entitled: How Male Privilege Hurts Women. Kate calls us to radically rethink our understanding of the nature and function of misogyny. Misogyny is not the hatred of women and girls, practiced by the few, it is controlling and punishing those who challenge male entitlement, practiced by the many. Misogyny is the law enforcement branch of the patriarchal order - a deterrent, a warning, a whip - which sustains the hierarchy of men over women. As history and the personal experiences of women so often attest to, those at the top of hierarchies often expect things from those beneath them.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/gives you what you're entitled to

Contents

Part I. Entitled

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 84, The Patricia Churchland Interview (Part II - The Conscience)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 84 (Part II of II)’ where we’ll be discussing the origins of our moral intuitions with Patricia Churchland.

Resting on our shoulders is the most complex object in the known universe: 86 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others. From Plato to Descartes, to the modern-day, philosophers have largely been ignorant of the workings of the brain, despite many questions in philosophy seeming to be intimately linked with its nature. Questions like: What are the origins of our moral intuitions, our conscience? What is the nature of decision-making? And how does the brain produce consciousness? 

Following the recent upsurge of interest and research into neuroscience (reaching full steam in the 1970s), Patricia Churchland describes the emergence of neurophilosophy as ‘inevitable’, coining the term in her now classic book, Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind-Brain in 1986. Alongside Neurophilosophy, Patricia Churchland is best known for her books Touching a Nerve, Braintrust, and most recently Conscience, which (together with hundreds of other publications, interviews, public talks, and awards) have led her to be considered one of, if not the, world’s leading neurophilosopher. 

Currently Professor Emerita in Philosophy at the University of California, San Diego, Patricia Churchland has knocked down the wall between science and philosophy, inspiring a new wave of thinking about life’s most challenging questions.

For some, however, the wall was there for a reason: questions of philosophy should not be confused with questions of science. After all, what can neuroscience tell us about the origin of consciousness or the nature of morality? Our topics for this episode...

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/hornswoggles you into a humdinger

Contents

Part I. The Hornswoggle Problem

Part II. The Conscience

Episode 84, The Patricia Churchland Interview (Part I - The Hornswoggle Problem)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 84 (Part I of II)’ where we’ll be discussing the problem of consciousness with Patricia Churchland.

Resting on our shoulders is the most complex object in the known universe: 86 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others. From Plato to Descartes, to the modern-day, philosophers have largely been ignorant of the workings of the brain, despite many questions in philosophy seeming to be intimately linked with its nature. Questions like: What are the origins of our moral intuitions, our conscience? What is the nature of decision-making? And how does the brain produce consciousness? 

Following the recent upsurge of interest and research into neuroscience (reaching full steam in the 1970s), Patricia Churchland describes the emergence of neurophilosophy as ‘inevitable’, coining the term in her now classic book, Neurophilosophy: Toward a Unified Science of the Mind-Brain in 1986. Alongside Neurophilosophy, Patricia Churchland is best known for her books Touching a Nerve, Braintrust, and most recently Conscience, which (together with hundreds of other publications, interviews, public talks, and awards) have led her to be considered one of, if not the, world’s leading neurophilosopher. 

Currently Professor Emerita in Philosophy at the University of California, San Diego, Patricia Churchland has knocked down the wall between science and philosophy, inspiring a new wave of thinking about life’s most challenging questions.

For some, however, the wall was there for a reason: questions of philosophy should not be confused with questions of science. After all, what can neuroscience tell us about the origin of consciousness or the nature of morality? Our topics for this episode...

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/hornswoggles you into a humdinger

Contents

Part I. The Hornswoggle Problem

Part II. The Conscience

Episode 83, The David Chalmers Interview (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 83 (Part II of II)’ where we’ll be continuing our discussion with David Chalmers on the hard problem of consciousness.

The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. How do 100 billion neurons come together to bring about a unified, conscious mind, and the rich tapestry of qualities that make up our world? This might be the most difficult problem in philosophy and science. No matter how rich our description of the brain, it seems that we’ll still be left with this same question: where does consciousness come from and what is its place in nature?

Having coined the term ‘the hard problem’ in 1994, today, David Chalmers finds himself ranked amongst the world’s most prominent thinkers. David is currently Professor of Philosophy and Neural Science at New York University, co-director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, Honorary Professor of Philosophy at the Australian National University, and co-director of the academic database PhilPapers. Amongst his many contributions, David is the author of The Conscious Mind, The Character of Consciousness, and Constructing the World. David’s hundreds of papers, interviews, and talks, make up some of the most influential contributions to the field, breathing new life into the debate and inspiring a new wave of scholarship.

For many, the problem of consciousness goes beyond the dusty chalkboards of seminar rooms and into our day-to-day lives. Consciousness may well be the determining factor of what constitutes a worthwhile existence, or whether or not a being deserves our moral consideration. 

The stakes are higher than the nature of the world itself. It’s time to wake up and smell the roses… how can we explain consciousness?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/frantically runs around with a hairdryer

Contents

Part I. Consciousness

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 83, The David Chalmers Interview (Part I - Consciousness)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 83 (Part I of II)’ where we’ll be discussing the hard problem of consciousness with David Chalmers.

The hard problem of consciousness is the problem of experience. How do 100 billion neurons come together to bring about a unified, conscious mind, and the rich tapestry of qualities that make up our world? This might be the most difficult problem in philosophy and science. No matter how rich our description of the brain, it seems that we’ll still be left with this same question: where does consciousness come from and what is its place in nature?

Having coined the term ‘the hard problem’ in 1994, today, David Chalmers finds himself ranked amongst the world’s most prominent thinkers. David is currently Professor of Philosophy and Neural Science at New York University, co-director of the Center for Mind, Brain, and Consciousness, Honorary Professor of Philosophy at the Australian National University, and co-director of the academic database PhilPapers. Amongst his many contributions, David is the author of The Conscious Mind, The Character of Consciousness, and Constructing the World. David’s hundreds of papers, interviews, and talks, make up some of the most influential contributions to the field, breathing new life into the debate and inspiring a new wave of scholarship.

For many, the problem of consciousness goes beyond the dusty chalkboards of seminar rooms and into our day-to-day lives. Consciousness may well be the determining factor of what constitutes a worthwhile existence, or whether or not a being deserves our moral consideration. 

The stakes are higher than the nature of the world itself. It’s time to wake up and smell the roses… how can we explain consciousness?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/frantically runs around with a hairdryer

Contents

Part I. Consciousness

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 82, ‘The Nature of Consciousness’ with Susan Blackmore (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 82 (Part II of II)’ where we’ll be continuing our discussion with Susan Blackmore on the nature of consciousness.

The smell of coffee, the taste of asparagus, the warmth of a hug, and the agony of death: conscious experience makes up the fabric of our world, yet many consider it to be the most intractable mystery in philosophy and science. What is it like to undergo experience? What is the function of consciousness? Where does consciousness occur? What are the contents of this experience? Is our stream of consciousness unified?

The hardest problem of all, might be the origin of consciousness itself: how, why, or are we, subjects of experience? In one sense, it shouldn’t come as a surprise - after all, in the words of physicist Michio Kaku, ‘Sitting on your shoulders is the most complicated object in the known universe; 100 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others’. However, for many, the brain doesn’t seem like the right type of thing to give rise to consciousness. How can soggy grey matter feel like anything? As McGinn put it, you might as well believe that numbers emerge from biscuits or ethics from rhubarb!

Challenging our understanding of consciousness and reframing the mystery is psychologist and author, Visiting Professor at Plymouth University, Dr Susan Blackmore. Best known for her books The Meme Machine, Zen and the Art of Consciousness, Consciousness: An Introduction, and Seeing Myself, Susan’s work spans across hundreds of publications in over 20 different languages, making huge contributions in the fields of psychology, memetics, religion, philosophy of mind, supernatural experience, and many other areas. It is no surprise to find her ranked amongst 2013’s 30 Most Influential Psychologists Working Today and 2015’s Top 100 Global Minds.

It’s time to smell the coffee, and reflect on your experience, to see the dark with the light on: what is the nature of consciousness?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/asks itself whether or not it's conscious

Contents

Part I. Mystery and Illusion

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 82, ‘The Nature of Consciousness’ with Susan Blackmore (Part I - Mystery and Illusion)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 82 (Part I of II)’ where we’ll be discussing the nature of consciousness with Susan Blackmore.

The smell of coffee, the taste of asparagus, the warmth of a hug, and the agony of death: conscious experience makes up the fabric of our world, yet many consider it to be the most intractable mystery in philosophy and science. What is it like to undergo experience? What is the function of consciousness? Where does consciousness occur? What are the contents of this experience? Is our stream of consciousness unified?

The hardest problem of all, might be the origin of consciousness itself: how, why, or are we, subjects of experience? In one sense, it shouldn’t come as a surprise - after all, in the words of physicist Michio Kaku, ‘Sitting on your shoulders is the most complicated object in the known universe; 100 billion neurons, each connected to 10,000 others’. However, for many, the brain doesn’t seem like the right type of thing to give rise to consciousness. How can soggy grey matter feel like anything? As McGinn put it, you might as well believe that numbers emerge from biscuits or ethics from rhubarb!

Challenging our understanding of consciousness and reframing the mystery is psychologist and author, Visiting Professor at Plymouth University, Dr Susan Blackmore. Best known for her books The Meme Machine, Zen and the Art of Consciousness, Consciousness: An Introduction, and Seeing Myself, Susan’s work spans across hundreds of publications in over 20 different languages, making huge contributions in the fields of psychology, memetics, religion, philosophy of mind, supernatural experience, and many other areas. It is no surprise to find her ranked amongst 2013’s 30 Most Influential Psychologists Working Today and 2015’s Top 100 Global Minds.

It’s time to smell the coffee, and reflect on your experience, to see the dark with the light on: what is the nature of consciousness?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/asks itself whether or not it's conscious

Contents

Part I. Mystery and Illusion

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 81, ‘The End of Everything: Astrophysically Speaking’ with Katie Mack (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 81 (Part II of II)’ where we’ll be discussing the philosophy of the universe’s end with theoretical astrophysicist Katie Mack.

Approximately 13.8 billion years ago, an infinitely dense state of an infinitely large universe lay dormant upon the backdrop of existence. Then, the expansion of everything. The potential for trillions of galaxies sprung out from this same point, and today, they shine like fairy lights in the darkness of the vast cosmos. From our own little planet, bursting with life, art, culture, and science, we can observe the effects of the big bang and the universes’ continuing expansion. We can see the beginning, but we can also see the end. In about five billion years, the sun will swell to around 250 times its current size, leaving our once blue and white planet a lifeless, magma-covered rock. That’s settled, the apocalypse is coming: the land will fry and the seas will boil - but there is more at stake than the Earth. What matters now is the bigger question: how will the universe end?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the impending doom of the cosmos with theoretical astrophysicist Katherine Mack. Katie is Assistant Professor of Physics at North Carolina State University. As well as making huge contributions to the field of astrophysics, Katie is one of the most active public-facing scientists in the world today. From publications in Slate, Scientific America, and Time Magazine, to featuring on the BBC and being quoted in the song lyrics of Hozier, Katie’s work is expanding into the furthest corners of our planet. Grab the cosmic popcorn, it’s a question as old as time itself: how will the universe end?

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

Contents

Part I. The Death of the Universe

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 81, ‘The End of Everything: Astrophysically Speaking’ with Katie Mack (Part I - The Death of the Universe)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 81 (Part I of II)’ where we’ll be discussing the death of the universe with Katie Mack.

Approximately 13.8 billion years ago, an infinitely dense state of an infinitely large universe lay dormant upon the backdrop of existence. Then, the expansion of everything. The potential for trillions of galaxies sprung out from this same point, and today, they shine like fairy lights in the darkness of the vast cosmos. From our own little planet, bursting with life, art, culture, and science, we can observe the effects of the big bang and the universes’ continuing expansion. We can see the beginning, but we can also see the end. In about five billion years, the sun will swell to around 250 times its current size, leaving our once blue and white planet a lifeless, magma-covered rock. That’s settled, the apocalypse is coming: the land will fry and the seas will boil - but there is more at stake than the Earth. What matters now is the bigger question: how will the universe end?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the impending doom of the cosmos with theoretical astrophysicist Katherine Mack. Katie is Assistant Professor of Physics at North Carolina State University. As well as making huge contributions to the field of astrophysics, Katie is one of the most active public-facing scientists in the world today. From publications in Slate, Scientific America, and Time Magazine, to featuring on the BBC and being quoted in the song lyrics of Hozier, Katie’s work is expanding into the furthest corners of our planet. Grab the cosmic popcorn, it’s a question as old as time itself: how will the universe end?

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

Contents

Part I. The Death of the Universe

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 80, ‘Human Nature’ with Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 80 (Part II of II)’ where we’ll be continuing our discussion on human nature with Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman.

What was life like before we emerged from hunter-gatherer tribes and pulled ourselves into the civilised world? Notoriously, this same question was asked by the great philosopher Thomas Hobbes in the seventeenth century. His answer? The state of nature is a ‘time of war, where every man is enemy to every man’; where all live in ‘continual fear’, and in ‘danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’ This is human nature. Left to our own devices, we are led to fight by diffidence, competition, and glory. Here our inner demons come out to play: predatory, revengeful, dominant, and sadistic. We are survival machines, but ultimately, the best way for us all to survive is to create a new machine, a great Leviathan - viz, the dawn of the state.

Thirty years after Hobbes’ death saw the birth of his rival, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It is here, at the origin of the state, says Rousseau, where human nature is corrupted: society is the curse of humankind. In his own words, ‘many writers have hastily concluded that man is naturally cruel, and requires civil institutions to make him more mild; whereas nothing is more gentle than man in his primitive state… according to the axiom of the wise Locke: There can be no injury, where there is no property.’ Be sure not to listen to Hobbes the imposter. We are lost, but we can find ourselves again.

EWVPmQ-XQAEYJ9V.jpeg

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the views of Hobbes and Rousseau with returning guests Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman. Steven Pinker, Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, is one of the leading thinkers in the field. Steven has an extraordinary list of accomplishments and awards, considered by many, including Foreign Policy and Time magazine, to be amongst the 100 Most Influential People in the World Today. Historian and author, Rutger Bregman, is acclaimed for his bestselling book, Utopia for Realists: and how we can get there. Described by The Guardian as ‘the Dutch wunderkind of new ideas’ and by TED as ‘one of Europe's most prominent young thinkers’, Bregman’s vision of (and for) humankind is a call to rethink our understanding of the past, and our vision for the future.

Coinciding with the rise of the homo sapien, this might be the oldest and most important philosophical question: what is human nature?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/leaves the state of nature

Contents

Part I. Humankind

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 80, ‘Human Nature’ with Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman (Part I - Humankind)

Panpsycast Logo 2020.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 80 (Part I of II)’ where we’ll be discussing human nature with Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman.

What was life like before we emerged from hunter-gatherer tribes and pulled ourselves into the civilised world? Notoriously, this same question was asked by the great philosopher Thomas Hobbes in the seventeenth century. His answer? The state of nature is a ‘time of war, where every man is enemy to every man’; where all live in ‘continual fear’, and in ‘danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’ This is human nature. Left to our own devices, we are led to fight by diffidence, competition, and glory. Here our inner demons come out to play: predatory, revengeful, dominant, and sadistic. We are survival machines, but ultimately, the best way for us all to survive is to create a new machine, a great Leviathan - viz, the dawn of the state.

Thirty years after Hobbes’ death saw the birth of his rival, Jean-Jacques Rousseau. It is here, at the origin of the state, says Rousseau, where human nature is corrupted: society is the curse of humankind. In his own words, ‘many writers have hastily concluded that man is naturally cruel, and requires civil institutions to make him more mild; whereas nothing is more gentle than man in his primitive state… according to the axiom of the wise Locke: There can be no injury, where there is no property.’ Be sure not to listen to Hobbes the imposter. We are lost, but we can find ourselves again.

EWVPmQ-XQAEYJ9V.jpeg

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the views of Hobbes and Rousseau with returning guests Steven Pinker and Rutger Bregman. Steven Pinker, Professor of Psychology at Harvard University, is one of the leading thinkers in the field. Steven has an extraordinary list of accomplishments and awards, considered by many, including Foreign Policy and Time magazine, to be amongst the 100 Most Influential People in the World Today. Historian and author, Rutger Bregman, is acclaimed for his bestselling book, Utopia for Realists: and how we can get there. Described by The Guardian as ‘the Dutch wunderkind of new ideas’ and by TED as ‘one of Europe's most prominent young thinkers’, Bregman’s vision of (and for) humankind is a call to rethink our understanding of the past, and our vision for the future.

Coinciding with the rise of the homo sapien, this might be the oldest and most important philosophical question: what is human nature?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/leaves the state of nature

Contents

Part I. Humankind

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 77, ‘Time Travel: The Grandfather Paradox and Abilities’ with Olivia Coombes (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 77 (Part II of II)', where we’ll be discussing time travel with Olivia Coombes.

Olivia Coombes is a philosopher and teacher at the University of Edinburgh whose research focuses on issues about the possibility of time travel, the paradoxes involved in time travel, and how these topics relate to the question of free-will. In addition to this, Liv is also the co-host of the Edinburgh-based podcast Two Philosophers: One Podcast, No Problems.

Since the philosopher David Lewis, and before, philosophers, scientists, movie fans (pretty much everybody), have deliberated the possibility of time travel. People have asked questions like: What is the order of time? If we could build a powerful enough machine, would we be able to travel through time? Causation goes forwards in time, but is there anything stopping it going backwards? And, if it could, can we have causal loops in time?

In this episode we’re going to be focusing on the grandfather paradox, which is one instance of the question: can time travellers change the past? This paradox asks us whether or not we could go back in time and kill our own grandfathers. Many people say no: it is logically impossible, like squaring circles, or making something from nothing. However, Olivia Coombes thinks differently. She thinks that we can kill our grandfathers, and that we are able to change the past.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/travels forwards in time

Contents

Part I. Time Traveller Abilities

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 75, ‘Christian Animal Ethics’ with David Clough (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 75 (Part II of II)', where we’ll be continuing our discussion with David Clough on Christian animal ethics.

With the dominance of humankind has come a new age, an age of global warming, ecological collapse, and sixth mass extinction. In 2018, it was reported that of all the Earth’s mammals, 96% are humans and livestock. Our overpopulation, overconsumption, and exploitation have caused a climate catastrophe, but we are not our only victims. Each year, over 70 billion land creatures and 7 trillion sea animals are killed for food, and despite growth in public awareness, the overwhelming majority of these animals continue to endure unimaginable suffering throughout their lives. 

The religions of ancient India - Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism - are no strangers to practicing ahimsa and vegetarianism. Their Abrahamic cousins have a very different past. For the advocate of animal rights, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have a long and dark history in their treatment of our fellow creatures. A history, many theologians, want to condemn to the history books.

One such theologian is David Clough, professor of theological ethics at the University of Chester. Through his systematic theology On Animals, Professor Clough has inspired a new wave of scholarship on Christian attitudes towards our fellow creatures, and the Earth as a whole, calling Christians to unshackle themselves from Aristotelian ways of thinking and embrace Darwinian theories of the natural world.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/lives on bread alone

Contents

Part I. The Rise of the Vegangelicals.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Episode 75, ‘Christian Animal Ethics’ with David Clough (Part I - The Rise of the Vegangelicals)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 75 (Part I of II)', where we'll be discussing Christian animal ethics with David Clough.

With the dominance of humankind has come a new age, an age of global warming, ecological collapse, and sixth mass extinction. In 2018, it was reported that of all the Earth’s mammals, 96% are humans and livestock. Our overpopulation, overconsumption, and exploitation have caused a climate catastrophe, but we are not our only victims. Each year, over 70 billion land creatures and 7 trillion sea animals are killed for food, and despite growth in public awareness, the overwhelming majority of these animals continue to endure unimaginable suffering throughout their lives. 

The religions of ancient India - Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism - are no strangers to practicing ahimsa and vegetarianism. Their Abrahamic cousins have a very different past. For the advocate of animal rights, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have a long and dark history in their treatment of our fellow creatures. A history, many theologians, want to condemn to the history books.

One such theologian is David Clough, professor of theological ethics at the University of Chester. Through his systematic theology On Animals, Professor Clough has inspired a new wave of scholarship on Christian attitudes towards our fellow creatures, and the Earth as a whole, calling Christians to unshackle themselves from Aristotelian ways of thinking and embrace Darwinian theories of the natural world.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/lives on bread alone

Contents

Part I. The Rise of the Vegangelicals.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Episode 74, ‘Football’ with Stephen Mumford (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 74 (Part II of II)', where we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion on the philosophy of football (soccer).

Football is the most popular sport on the planet. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who’s experienced the excitement of matchday. It’s hard to remain indifferent when thousands of tightly packed fans, each patriotically sporting the colours of their team, sing, cheer and heckle in unison. The thrill of a crunching challenge, a derby victory, or a last-minute winner will undoubtedly elicit excitement. 

For the sceptic, there is nothing beyond this superficial appeal. Fool-ball is simply a game of chance, in which the sport’s novelty appeal is only sustained through blind patriotism. Football is push-pin, and it is not to be confused with poetry.

Durham University’s Stephen Mumford defends football in the face of this attack. For Mumford, football has an intellectual depth that rewards more detailed consideration. When we watch football through a philosophical lens, we are called to deliberate a great wealth of ideas; from categories of aesthetic virtue, and the role of chance, control and victory, to the nature of a team, and the persistence of a ‘club’ throughout time.

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

Contents

Part I. The Philosophy Behind the Game.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Episode 74, ‘Football’ with Stephen Mumford (Part I - The Philosophy Behind the Game)

Classic Cast.jpg

Welcome to 'Episode 74 (Part I of II)', where we'll be discussing the philosophy of football (soccer), with Professor Stephen Mumford.

Football is the most popular sport on the planet. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone who’s experienced the excitement of matchday. It’s hard to remain indifferent when thousands of tightly packed fans, each patriotically sporting the colours of their team, sing, cheer and heckle in unison. The thrill of a crunching challenge, a derby victory, or a last-minute winner will undoubtedly elicit excitement. 

For the sceptic, there is nothing beyond this superficial appeal. Fool-ball is simply a game of chance, in which the sport’s novelty appeal is only sustained through blind patriotism. Football is push-pin, and it is not to be confused with poetry.

Durham University’s Stephen Mumford defends football in the face of this attack. For Mumford, football has an intellectual depth that rewards more detailed consideration. When we watch football through a philosophical lens, we are called to deliberate a great wealth of ideas; from categories of aesthetic virtue, and the role of chance, control and victory, to the nature of a team, and the persistence of a ‘club’ throughout time.

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

Contents

Part I. The Philosophy Behind the Game.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.