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

Episode 112, ‘The Philosophy of Buddhism’ with Jay Garfield (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 112 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing the broader metaphysics (and psychology) of Buddhism with Professor Jay Garfield.

A prick of the skin; the sorrow of grief; the inevitability of change; our dependence on the whim of the cosmos. Suffering bleeds into every aspect of our existence and, according to Siddhārtha Gautama (the Buddha), the anguish of our misfortune stems from our ignorance and confusion. If we were to see the world for how it really is – a place of impermanence, interdependence, and emptiness – then, according to Buddhism, we might free ourselves from illusion and discover the path to liberation and enlightenment. Today, this insight is shared by over half a billion people. Yet, most philosophy departments in Europe and America offer no courses in Buddhist philosophy and (within the leading journals) academic papers focusing on the central tenets of Buddhist philosophy of religion are vastly outweighed by their Abrahamic (and predominantly Christian) counterparts.

Professor Jay Garfield, our guest for this episode, is the exception to this rule. Championing the globalisation of philosophy and reshaping perceptions of Buddhist scholarship, Professor Garfield is Chair of Philosophy at Smith College in Massachusetts, Visiting Professor at Harvard Divinity School, Professor at Melbourne University, and adjunct Professor at the Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies. Named amongst the 50 most influential philosophers of the past decade – with over 30 books and over 200 publications – it is safe to say that Professor Garfield is one of the leading exponents of Buddhist philosophy in contemporary academia.

For Garfield, if philosophy won’t diversify, then let’s call it out for what it is: a colonial discipline that ignores the rich and relevant insights of non-Western thought. As philosophers, we cannot afford to ignore the metaphysical, ethical, epistemological, and existential insights of Buddhist scholarship. It’s time to engage with Buddhism, and rid ourselves of our prejudices, ignorance, and confusion. Buddhism is a philosophy of the present, not a philosophy of the past, and it’s time we treated it that way.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/alleviates your suffering

This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.

Contents

Part I. The Nature of Reality

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 112, ‘The Philosophy of Buddhism’ with Jay Garfield (Part I - The Nature of Reality)

Welcome to ‘Episode 112 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing the four noble truths with Professor Jay Garfield.

A prick of the skin; the sorrow of grief; the inevitability of change; our dependence on the whim of the cosmos. Suffering bleeds into every aspect of our existence and, according to Siddhārtha Gautama (the Buddha), the anguish of our misfortune stems from our ignorance and confusion. If we were to see the world for how it really is – a place of impermanence, interdependence, and emptiness – then, according to Buddhism, we might free ourselves from illusion and discover the path to liberation and enlightenment. Today, this insight is shared by over half a billion people. Yet, most philosophy departments in Europe and America offer no courses in Buddhist philosophy and (within the leading journals) academic papers focusing on the central tenets of Buddhist philosophy of religion are vastly outweighed by their Abrahamic (and predominantly Christian) counterparts.

Professor Jay Garfield, our guest for this episode, is the exception to this rule. Championing the globalisation of philosophy and reshaping perceptions of Buddhist scholarship, Professor Garfield is Chair of Philosophy at Smith College in Massachusetts, Visiting Professor at Harvard Divinity School, Professor at Melbourne University, and adjunct Professor at the Central Institute of Higher Tibetan Studies. Named amongst the 50 most influential philosophers of the past decade – with over 30 books and over 200 publications – it is safe to say that Professor Garfield is one of the leading exponents of Buddhist philosophy in contemporary academia.

For Garfield, if philosophy won’t diversify, then let’s call it out for what it is: a colonial discipline that ignores the rich and relevant insights of non-Western thought. As philosophers, we cannot afford to ignore the metaphysical, ethical, epistemological, and existential insights of Buddhist scholarship. It’s time to engage with Buddhism, and rid ourselves of our prejudices, ignorance, and confusion. Buddhism is a philosophy of the present, not a philosophy of the past, and it’s time we treated it that way.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/alleviates your suffering

This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.

Contents

Part I. The Nature of Reality

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 110, ‘The Philosophy of Islam’ with Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 110 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing evil and the afterlife with Dr Zarepour.

“How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh.

In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy.

Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/contemplates the Necessary Existent

This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.

Contents

Part I. Allāh

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 110, ‘The Philosophy of Islam’ with Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (Part I - Allāh)

Welcome to ‘Episode 110 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing the nature and existence of Allāh with Mohammad Saleh Zarepour.

“How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh.

In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy.

Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/contemplates the Necessary Existent

This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.

Contents

Part I. Allāh

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 109, The Mystery of Consciousness (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 109 (Part II of II)’, the final instalment of our debate – featuring Rowan Williams, Anil Seth, Laura Gow, and Philip Goff – in which our panelists take questions from our live audience.

In this episode, you’ll be treated to a live performance of The Panpsycast. The event took place at Liverpool’s beautiful Tung Auditorium on 20th May 2022. Over three hundred of you purchased tickets to the event, with some of our most loyal patrons travelling thousands of miles to be with us in person.

Before you listen to the audio, we just wanted to say a huge thank you to those who came along, as well as all of our wonderful panellists – Rowan Williams, Anil Seth, Laura Gow, and Philip Goff – for participating in the debate.

A special thank you to Q Quartet, The Department of Philosophy at Liverpool University, and Premier Christian Radio for making this episode possible – as well as all of our incredible patrons. Thank you again for your support; we hope you enjoy the show.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/finds its spark of life

Contents

Part I. The Debate

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 109, The Mystery of Consciousness (Part I - The Debate)

Welcome to ‘Episode 109 (Part I of II)’, the first instalment of our live show featuring Rowan Williams, Anil Seth, Laura Gow, and Philip Goff.

In this episode, you’ll be treated to a live performance of The Panpsycast. The event took place at Liverpool’s beautiful Tung Auditorium on 20th May 2022. Over three hundred of you purchased tickets to the event, with some of our most loyal patrons travelling thousands of miles to be with us in person.

Before you listen to the audio, we just wanted to say a huge thank you to those who came along, as well as all of our wonderful panellists – Rowan Williams, Anil Seth, Laura Gow, and Philip Goff – for participating in the debate.

A special thank you to Q Quartet, The Department of Philosophy at Liverpool University, and Premier Christian Radio for making this episode possible – as well as all of our incredible patrons. Thank you again for your support; we hope you enjoy the show.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/finds its spark of life

Contents

Part I. The Debate

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 108, The Richard Dawkins Interview (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 108 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be continuing our discussion with Professor Richard Dawkins.

The flight of a hummingbird, the sprint of a cheetah, the breath of a whale, a daisy turning towards the sunlight. Given the complexity of the natural world, we can understand why – before the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species – people believed that the universe was the work of an intelligent designer. These days, however – although creationism continues to be defended by religious fundamentalists – the scientific consensus is that the world’s organisms evolved through the long and arduous process of natural selection. ‘With a complete physical explanation,’ say the new atheists, ‘there’s no need to appeal to the supernatural.’

In this interview, we’ll be discussing atheism with Professor Richard Dawkins. It’s no exaggeration to say that Richard Dawkins is one of the most influential scientists, and the most famous atheist, of all time. Alongside his invaluable contributions to evolutionary biology, his books – including The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, and The God Delusion – have a readership in the tens of millions, resulting in numerous prestigious awards and recognition as ‘the world’s top thinker’.

‘Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin’, says Dawkins, ‘Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.’ It is time we seized that possibility: that we embrace the godless universe, craft our own meaning, and stop suffering fools gladly.

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

Contents

Part I. Why I'm an Atheist

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 108, The Richard Dawkins Interview (Part I - Why I'm an Atheist)

Welcome to ‘Episode 108 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing the existence of God with Professor Richard Dawkins.

The flight of a hummingbird, the sprint of a cheetah, the breath of a whale, a daisy turning towards the sunlight. Given the complexity of the natural world, we can understand why – before the publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species – people believed that the universe was the work of an intelligent designer. These days, however – although creationism continues to be defended by religious fundamentalists – the scientific consensus is that the world’s organisms evolved through the long and arduous process of natural selection. ‘With a complete physical explanation,’ say the new atheists, ‘there’s no need to appeal to the supernatural.’

In this interview, we’ll be discussing atheism with Professor Richard Dawkins. It’s no exaggeration to say that Richard Dawkins is one of the most influential scientists, and the most famous atheist, of all time. Alongside his invaluable contributions to evolutionary biology, his books – including The Selfish Gene, The Blind Watchmaker, and The God Delusion – have a readership in the tens of millions, resulting in numerous prestigious awards and recognition as ‘the world’s top thinker’.

‘Although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin’, says Dawkins, ‘Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.’ It is time we seized that possibility: that we embrace the godless universe, craft our own meaning, and stop suffering fools gladly.

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

Contents

Part I. Why I'm an Atheist

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 107, ‘The Ethics of Art’ with Daisy Dixon (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 107 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing lies and censorship.

Art is created by people, but people are fallible. When the art we love is tainted by the brush of an artist’s biography, we must ask whether the shift in our aesthetic experience is reasonable. One might also wonder whether artworks can do wrong in and of themselves. If artworks can be intended as conveyers of truth, can they convey falsehoods or – more awkwardly – lies? These aren’t just conceptual problems. If artworks lie and immoral artists are inseparable from their artworks, how should we respond? Should we censor all art, some art, or no art at all?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the ethics of art with Cambridge University’s Dr Daisy Dixon. Dixon’s work, which explores the nature of (and responses to) unethical art, invites us to place art within its context – to consider artworks in relation to their artists, truth-functionality in relation to an artwork’s surroundings, and dangerous artworks in relation to their curation. If we do so, says Dixon, we’ll not only gain a better understanding of art but how we can bring about a better world.

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

Contents

Part I. Time

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 107, ‘The Ethics of Art’ with Daisy Dixon (Part I - Immoral Art)

Welcome to ‘Episode 107 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing immoral artists with Daisy Dixon.

Art is created by people, but people are fallible. When the art we love is tainted by the brush of an artist’s biography, we must ask whether the shift in our aesthetic experience is reasonable. One might also wonder whether artworks can do wrong in and of themselves. If artworks can be intended as conveyers of truth, can they convey falsehoods or – more awkwardly – lies? These aren’t just conceptual problems. If artworks lie and immoral artists are inseparable from their artworks, how should we respond? Should we censor all art, some art, or no art at all?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the ethics of art with Cambridge University’s Dr Daisy Dixon. Dixon’s work, which explores the nature of (and responses to) unethical art, invites us to place art within its context – to consider artworks in relation to their artists, truth-functionality in relation to an artwork’s surroundings, and dangerous artworks in relation to their curation. If we do so, says Dixon, we’ll not only gain a better understanding of art but how we can bring about a better world.

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

Contents

Part I. Time

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 105, ‘Animals in Transhumanism’ with Michael Hauskeller (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 105 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be analysing Hauskeller’s argument against transhumanist approaches to animals.

We are all prisoners of our biology. Whether humans (and our non-human cousins) have the capacity to think, feel, or fly is dictated by their DNA, long before they have a say in the matter. It’s a living lottery that has lifted human beings to lofty heights; that is, above the world’s lowly, lesser creatures. With the emergence of new technologies, the age of the transhumanists is upon us: philosophers and scientists who believe that the lottery should be rigged towards self-design and the elimination of suffering. We have a moral imperative, say the transhumanists, to engineer a world that is better for everybody: to seek out technological solutions to ethical problems, not just for ourselves but the rest of the animal kingdom. After all, the question is not, ‘can they reason?’ – nor ‘can they talk?’ – but ‘can they suffer?’

In this episode, we’ll be discussing animals in transhumanism with Professor of Philosophy and Head of Department at the University of Liverpool, Michael Hauskeller. With over two hundred publications – across a vast range of philosophical questions – in both academic and public philosophy, Professor Hauskeller is, undoubtedly, one of the world’s most prominent philosophers. For Hauskeller, philosophy helps us navigate ourselves towards a better tomorrow: through philosophy, we can discover what kind of people we want to be, in what kind of world we want to live, and how we should steer the futures of our fellow creatures.

Our question for today: should we take pity on the world’s poor brutes – those who live such lowly lives – and lift them up to our own lofty heights? Or should we leave them to dance the muddy dance of life?

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

This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy.

Contents

Part I. How to Become a Post-Dog

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 105, ‘Animals in Transhumanism’ with Michael Hauskeller (Part I - How to Become a Post-Dog)

Welcome to ‘Episode 105 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing animals in transhumanism with Michael Hauskeller.

We are all prisoners of our biology. Whether humans (and our non-human cousins) have the capacity to think, feel, or fly is dictated by their DNA, long before they have a say in the matter. It’s a living lottery that has lifted human beings to lofty heights; that is, above the world’s lowly, lesser creatures. With the emergence of new technologies, the age of the transhumanists is upon us: philosophers and scientists who believe that the lottery should be rigged towards self-design and the elimination of suffering. We have a moral imperative, say the transhumanists, to engineer a world that is better for everybody: to seek out technological solutions to ethical problems, not just for ourselves but the rest of the animal kingdom. After all, the question is not, ‘can they reason?’ – nor ‘can they talk?’ – but ‘can they suffer?’

In this episode, we’ll be discussing animals in transhumanism with Professor of Philosophy and Head of Department at the University of Liverpool, Michael Hauskeller. With over two hundred publications – across a vast range of philosophical questions – in both academic and public philosophy, Professor Hauskeller is, undoubtedly, one of the world’s most prominent philosophers. For Hauskeller, philosophy helps us navigate ourselves towards a better tomorrow: through philosophy, we can discover what kind of people we want to be, in what kind of world we want to live, and how we should steer the futures of our fellow creatures.

Our question for today: should we take pity on the world’s poor brutes – those who live such lowly lives – and lift them up to our own lofty heights? Or should we leave them to dance the muddy dance of life?

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

This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy.

Contents

Part I. How to Become a Post-Dog

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 104, ‘Art and the Future’ with Vid Simoniti (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 104 (Part II of II)’, where we’ll be analysing Simoniti’s view that art offers something unique to political discourse.

If we want to improve our public discourse, we must aim to be as objective as possible. When we raise our consciousness and work towards clearing our minds of personal interests, political affiliations, and the sophistry of art, we grow closer to rationality and knowledge. Art, on the other hand, is nothing more than the overly excited offspring of objectivity: films, paintings, music, and dance contribute nothing unique to our understanding of the world. At worst, art muddies the waters of our discourse; at best, it merely reflects the insights of political philosophy and science.

Opposing this view – and championing the cognitive advantages of artworks as political discourse – is Dr Vid Simoniti, Lecturer in Philosophy of Art at the University of Liverpool. As well as being a rising star in the worlds of academic philosophy and art history, Dr Simoniti’s work as a BBC New Generation Thinker – and his collaborations with public-facing projects such as the Liverpool bi-annual – is bringing conversations about art and philosophy into the public square.

When we enjoy a play at the theatre, rock our heads to a song on the radio, or wiggle the joysticks on our PlayStation controllers: does it leave us more attuned to how the world is? For Simoniti, in the context of art as political discourse, the answer is unequivocally ‘yes’.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/offers something unique

This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy.

Contents

Part I. Public Health

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 104, ‘Art and the Future’ with Vid Simoniti (Part I - Art as Political Discourse)

Welcome to ‘Episode 104 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing the nature of political art with Vid Simoniti.

If we want to improve our public discourse, we must aim to be as objective as possible. When we raise our consciousness and work towards clearing our minds of personal interests, political affiliations, and the sophistry of art, we grow closer to rationality and knowledge. Art, on the other hand, is nothing more than the overly excited offspring of objectivity: films, paintings, music, and dance contribute nothing unique to our understanding of the world. At worst, art muddies the waters of our discourse; at best, it merely reflects the insights of political philosophy and science.

Opposing this view – and championing the cognitive advantages of artworks as political discourse – is Dr Vid Simoniti, Lecturer in Philosophy of Art at the University of Liverpool. As well as being a rising star in the worlds of academic philosophy and art history, Dr Simoniti’s work as a BBC New Generation Thinker – and his collaborations with public-facing projects such as the Liverpool bi-annual – is bringing conversations about art and philosophy into the public square.

When we enjoy a play at the theatre, rock our heads to a song on the radio, or wiggle the joysticks on our PlayStation controllers: does it leave us more attuned to how the world is? For Simoniti, in the context of art as political discourse, the answer is unequivocally ‘yes’.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/offers something unique

This episode is produced in partnership with the Philosophy and the Future project at the University of Liverpool. For more information about philosophy at Liverpool, head over to www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy.

Contents

Part I. Public Health

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion