Episode 35, Sexual Ethics (Part II - Extramarital Sex)

Welcome to Episode 35, where we'll be discussing sexual ethics.

Sexual ethics is the study of human sexuality and sexual behaviour. In a word, it seeks to understand and evaluate the moral conduct of relationships and sexual activities from a philosophical perspective.

Sex is hugely important to us all. Sex is an expression of love. It forms the foundation of our family lives, our social lives and even our self-identities. For many, we should celebrate sex, for we owe it our very existence! On the other hand, sex can be the cause of great pain and suffering. While sex brings life, no doubt, it ruins the lives of many. Cases of exploitation, harassment, assault and rape, show the darkest side of humanity. 

Sex can both make and corrupt humans. For Christians, different sexual acts and preferences can lead them closer to, and further away from God. For many moral philosophers, sexual acts can lead them closer to and further away from what is right.

Moral philosophers and theologians have long pondered questions surrounding this sensitive topic, and there is a lot more to be said that goes beyond the scope of this episode. In this episode, we will exclusively be tackling issues surrounding marriage and sexuality.

In Part I we’ll be discussing premarital sex, in Part II extramarital sex, in Part III homosexuality, and in Part IV we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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

Part I. Premarital Sex

Part II. Extramarital Sex

Part III. Homosexuality

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 35, Sexual Ethics (Part I - Premarital Sex)

Welcome to Episode 35, where we'll be discussing sexual ethics.

Sexual ethics is the study of human sexuality and sexual behaviour. In a word, it seeks to understand and evaluate the moral conduct of relationships and sexual activities from a philosophical perspective.

Sex is hugely important to us all. Sex is an expression of love. It forms the foundation of our family lives, our social lives and even our self-identities. For many, we should celebrate sex, for we owe it our very existence! On the other hand, sex can be the cause of great pain and suffering. While sex brings life, no doubt, it ruins the lives of many. Cases of exploitation, harassment, assault and rape, show the darkest side of humanity. 

Sex can both make and corrupt humans. For Christians, different sexual acts and preferences can lead them closer to, and further away from God. For many moral philosophers, sexual acts can lead them closer to and further away from what is right.

Moral philosophers and theologians have long pondered questions surrounding this sensitive topic, and there is a lot more to be said that goes beyond the scope of this episode. In this episode, we will exclusively be tackling issues surrounding marriage and sexuality.

In Part I we’ll be discussing premarital sex, in Part II extramarital sex, in Part III homosexuality, and in Part IV we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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

Part I. Premarital Sex

Part II. Extramarital Sex

Part III. Homosexuality

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 34, The Peter Singer Interview (Part II)

Welcome to Episode 34, where we'll be interviewing Peter Singer and discussing utilitarianism (Part II of II).

Peter Singer is often described as the world's most influential philosopher. Professor Singer is currently the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics in the University Center for Human values at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne. His work has helped to launch the animal rights and effective altruism movements, as well as making significant contributions in bioethics. 

Peter Singer is most famous for his developments to the normative ethical theory utilitarianism. Loosely stated, utilitarianism is the view that we should maximise happiness and pleasure, and reduce pain, suffering and unhappiness, for the greatest number of humans and/or non-human animals. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation, in which he argues in favour of vegetarianism, and his essay Famine, Affluence, and Morality, in which he argues in favour of donating to help the global poor. 

Practical Ethics, The Life You Can Save, The Most Good You Can Do, One World: The Ethics of Globalisation, Ethics in the Real World - Peter Singer's list of bestselling publications is extensive - but his work goes beyond the written page. Peter Singer is also the founder of the charity The Life You Can Save and co-founder of Animals Australia.

In Part I, we'll be discussing Peter Singer's theory of utilitarianism, and in Part II, we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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

Part I. Utilitarianism.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Episode 34, The Peter Singer Interview (Part I)

Welcome to Episode 34, where we'll be interviewing Peter Singer and discussing utilitarianism (Part I of II).

Peter Singer is often described as the world's most influential philosopher. Professor Singer is currently the Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics in the University Center for Human values at Princeton University and Laureate Professor at the University of Melbourne. His work has helped to launch the animal rights and effective altruism movements, as well as making significant contributions in bioethics. 

Peter Singer is most famous for his developments to the normative ethical theory utilitarianism. Loosely stated, utilitarianism is the view that we should maximise happiness and pleasure, and reduce pain, suffering and unhappiness, for the greatest number of humans and/or non-human animals. He is known in particular for his book Animal Liberation, in which he argues in favour of vegetarianism, and his essay Famine, Affluence, and Morality, in which he argues in favour of donating to help the global poor. 

Practical Ethics, The Life You Can Save, The Most Good You Can Do, One World: The Ethics of Globalisation, Ethics in the Real World - Peter Singer's list of bestselling publications is extensive - but his work goes beyond the written page. Peter Singer is also the founder of the charity The Life You Can Save and co-founder of Animals Australia.

In Part I, we'll be discussing Peter Singer's theory of utilitarianism, and in Part II, we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

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

Part I. Utilitarianism.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Episode 33, Yujin Nagasawa and 'The Problem of Evil for Atheists' (Part II)

Welcome to Episode 33 on 'The Problem of Evil for Atheists' (Part II of II).

Yujin Nagasawa is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Birmingham, as well as President of the British Society for the Philosophy of Religion and Co-Director of the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion. Obtaining his PhD from the Australian National University in 2004, Nagasawa’s work in philosophy is extensive, focusing on a range of topics from the problems surrounding consciousness to the nature and existence of God. 

Our focus for Episode 33, is Nagasawa’s ‘The Problem of Evil for Atheists’. The argument can be stated as follows, atheists believe that the world is generally good and they are happy and grateful to exist i.e. they are existential optimists. However, our entire evolutionary biological system is based upon the painful, miserable suffering of the weak. So, why should we think that the world is overall good and that we should be grateful to exist, if our existence depends on a violent, cruel and unfair biological system which guarantees pain and suffering for unaccountably many sentient animals? Nagasawa argues that the theist is in a better position to answer this question than the atheist, suggesting that the problem of evil provides good reason to abandon atheism and adopt theism.

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

Part I. 'The Problem of Evil for Atheists'.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Episode 33, Yujin Nagasawa and 'The Problem of Evil for Atheists' (Part I)

Welcome to Episode 33 on 'The Problem of Evil for Atheists' (Part I of II).

Yujin Nagasawa is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Birmingham, as well as President of the British Society for the Philosophy of Religion and Co-Director of the John Hick Centre for Philosophy of Religion. Obtaining his PhD from the Australian National University in 2004, Nagasawa’s work in philosophy is extensive, focusing on a range of topics from the problems surrounding consciousness to the nature and existence of God. 

Our focus for Episode 33, is Nagasawa’s ‘The Problem of Evil for Atheists’. The argument can be stated as follows, atheists believe that the world is generally good and they are happy and grateful to exist i.e. they are existential optimists. However, our entire evolutionary biological system is based upon the painful, miserable suffering of the weak. So, why should we think that the world is overall good and that we should be grateful to exist, if our existence depends on a violent, cruel and unfair biological system which guarantees pain and suffering for unaccountably many sentient animals? Nagasawa argues that the theist is in a better position to answer this question than the atheist, suggesting that the problem of evil provides good reason to abandon atheism and adopt theism.

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

Part I. 'The Problem of Evil for Atheists'.

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion.

Episode 32, Meta-Ethics (Part IV - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to Episode 32 on Meta-Ethics (Part IV of IV) where we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral claims? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral assertions? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? 

This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/invents right and wrong

Part I. Naturalism

Part II. Intuitionism

Part III. Emotivism

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 32, Meta-Ethics (Part III - Emotivism)

Welcome to Episode 32 on Meta-Ethics (Part III of IV) focusing on emotivism.

Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral claims? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral assertions? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? 

This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/invents right and wrong

Part I. Naturalism

Part II. Intuitionism

Part III. Emotivism

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 32, Meta-Ethics (Part II - Intuitionism)

Welcome to Episode 32 on Meta-Ethics (Part II of IV) focusing on intuitionism.

Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral claims? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral assertions? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? 

This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/invents right and wrong

Part I. Naturalism

Part II. Intuitionism

Part III. Emotivism

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 32, Meta-Ethics (Part I - Naturalism)

Welcome to Episode 32 on Meta-Ethics (Part I of IV) focusing on naturalism.

Meta-ethics is the attempt to understand the metaphysical, semantic, epistemological and psychological presuppositions of moral thought. It investigates our ethical language, in search of the meaning that lies behind it. Meta-ethics is concerned with are a broad range of puzzles, for example: What do we mean we make moral assertions? Do our preferences or feelings motivate moral claims? Or are we stating facts when we make moral claims? Is morality more a matter of taste than truth - and if it is a matter of truth, how do we learn about the moral facts? 

This episode we’ll be introducing you to three meta-ethical views. In Part I, we’ll be discussing naturalism, in Part II, we’ll be looking at intuitionism, in Part III, we’re going to dive into emotivism, and finally, in Part IV, we’ll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/invents right and wrong

Part I. Naturalism

Part II. Intuitionism

Part III. Emotivism

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 31, Ludwig Wittgenstein with Prof. Richard Gaskin (Part II - Philosophical Investigations)

Welcome to Episode 31 on Ludwig Wittgenstein (Part II of II) with Prof. Richard Gaskin.

Ludwig Wittgenstein was an Austrian-British philosopher whose work focused on the philosophy of mathematics, logic, the philosophy of mind, and most notably, the philosophy of language.

Wittgenstein’s influence on the world of philosophy has been phenomenal. The study of philosophy was immensely important to Wittgenstein, not only as an academic discipline but as a form of therapy. In Ludwig’s own words, he describes philosophy as, "the only work that gives me real satisfaction".

Wittgenstein’s work can be divided into an early period, exemplified by the Tractatus (our focus for Part I), and a later period, articulated in the Philosophical Investigations (which is our focus for Part II). Early Wittgenstein was concerned with the logical relationship between propositions and the world. He thought that by providing an account of this relationship, he had solved every philosophical problem. The later Wittgenstein rejected many of the assumptions of the Tractatus, arguing that the meaning of words is best understood as their use within a given language-game.

Wittgenstein’s life and work are astonishing. His mentor, Bertrand Russell, described him as "the most perfect example I have ever known of genius as traditionally conceived; passionate, profound, intense, and dominating".

This week in Part II, we'll be discussing Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations from 1953. 

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/throws away the ladder after it has climbed it

Part I. The Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (08:00 in Part I)

Part II. The Philosophical Investigations (start of Part II)

Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion (45:45 in Part II)

Episodes 29-31 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. 

Episode 31, Ludwig Wittgenstein with Prof. Richard Gaskin (Part I - Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus)

Welcome to Episode 31 on Ludwig Wittgenstein (Part I of II) with Prof. Richard Gaskin.

Ludwig Wittgenstein was an Austrian-British philosopher whose work focused on the philosophy of mathematics, logic, the philosophy of mind, and most notably, the philosophy of language.

Wittgenstein’s influence on the world of philosophy has been phenomenal. The study of philosophy was immensely important to Wittgenstein, not only as an academic discipline but as a form of therapy. In Ludwig’s own words, he describes philosophy as, "the only work that gives me real satisfaction".

Wittgenstein’s work can be divided into an early period, exemplified by the Tractatus (our focus for Part I), and a later period, articulated in the Philosophical Investigations (which is our focus for Part II). Early Wittgenstein was concerned with the logical relationship between propositions and the world. He thought that by providing an account of this relationship, he had solved every philosophical problem. The later Wittgenstein rejected many of the assumptions of the Tractatus, arguing that the meaning of words is best understood as their use within a given language-game.

Wittgenstein’s life and work are astonishing. His mentor, Bertrand Russell, described him as "the most perfect example I have ever known of genius as traditionally conceived; passionate, profound, intense, and dominating".

This week in Part I, we'll be discussing Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus from 1921. 

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/throws away the ladder after it has climbed it

Part I. The Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (08:00 in Part I)

Part II. The Philosophical Investigations (start of Part II)

Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion (45:45 in Part II)

Episodes 29-31 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. 

Episode 30, Friedrich Nietzsche - with Mark Linsenmayer and Gregory Sadler (Part II)

Welcome to Episode 30 (Part II of II) on Friedrich Nietzsche with Mark Linsenmayer and Dr Gregory Sadler.

Born in Rocken, in Prussia in 1844, Nietzsche set out his career in philology but later turned to writing idiosyncratic philosophical treatise and collections of aphorisms. He directed these against the pious dogmas of Christianity and traditional philosophy. He saw both as self-serving veils drawn over the harsher realities of life. He felt we needed not a high moral or theological ideals but a deeply critical form of cultural genealogy that would uncover the reasons why we humans are as we are and how we have come to be this way. He believed that every great philosopher actually a kind of involuntary and unconscious memoir rather than conducting an impersonal search for knowledge. Studying our own moral genealogy cannot help us escape or transcend ourselves but it can enable us to see our illusions more clearly and lead a more vital, assertive existence. 

There is no God in this picture. The human beings who created God have also killed him. It is now up to us alone. The way to live is not to throw ourselves into faith but into our own lives, conducting them in affirmation of every moment, exactly as it without wishing anything was different and without harbouring resentment for others or our fate (Sarah Bakewell, The Existentialist Cafe, p.19-20).

This week in Part II, we'll be looking at what Nietzsche can teach us, as well as engaging in some further analysis and discussion. 

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.

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

Part I. What is the philosophical underpinning of Nietzsche? (36:40 in Part I)

Part II. An Introduction to Nietzsche’s Thought (50:00 in Part I)

Part III. What can Nietzsche teach us? (00:05 in Part II)

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion. (28:15 in Part II)

Episodes 29-31 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. 

Episode 30, Friedrich Nietzsche - with Mark Linsenmayer and Gregory Sadler (Part I)

Welcome to Episode 30 (Part I of II) on Friedrich Nietzsche with Mark Linsenmayer and Dr Gregory Sadler.

Born in Rocken, in Prussia in 1844, Nietzsche set out his career in philology but later turned to writing idiosyncratic philosophical treatise and collections of aphorisms. He directed these against the pious dogmas of Christianity and traditional philosophy. He saw both as self-serving veils drawn over the harsher realities of life. He felt we needed not a high moral or theological ideals but a deeply critical form of cultural genealogy that would uncover the reasons why we humans are as we are and how we have come to be this way. He believed that every great philosopher actually a kind of involuntary and unconscious memoir rather than conducting an impersonal search for knowledge. Studying our own moral genealogy cannot help us escape or transcend ourselves but it can enable us to see our illusions more clearly and lead a more vital, assertive existence. 

There is no God in this picture. The human beings who created God have also killed him. It is now up to us alone. The way to live is not to throw ourselves into faith but into our own lives, conducting them in affirmation of every moment, exactly as it without wishing anything was different and without harbouring resentment for others or our fate (Sarah Bakewell, The Existentialist Cafe, p.19-20).

This week in Part I, we'll be looking at the thinkers who influenced Nietzsche, as well as introducing you to his philosophy. 

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.

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

Part I. What is the philosophical underpinning of Nietzsche? (36:40 in Part I)

Part II. An Introduction to Nietzsche’s Thought (50:00 in Part I)

Part III. What can Nietzsche teach us? (00:05 in Part II)

Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion. (28:15 in Part II)

Episodes 29-31 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. 

Episode 29, Stephen Law and 'The Evil-God Challenge' (Part II)

Welcome to Episode 29 (Part II), where we'll be interviewing Dr Stephen Law and discussing his 'Evil-God Challenge'.

Dr Stephen Law is a Reader in philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London, and editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal THINK. Amongst many other books, Stephen Law is the author of A Very Short Introduction to Humanism, The War for Children's Minds, The Philosophy Gym, and Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked into an Intellectual Black Hole.

Stephen Law has debated many Christian philosophers, including William Lane Craig, John Lennox and Alvin Plantinga. Our central focus today is Law’s main argument against the existence of God – 'The Evil-God Challenge'. The evil-god challenge can be stated as follows: why should we consider the hypothesis that there exists a good-god, significantly more reasonable than the hypothesis that there exists an evil-god?

This week in Part II, we'll be analysing the 'Evil-God Challenge'.

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/rejects the good-god hypothesis
Part I. The Evil-God Challenge (start of Part I)
Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part II)

Episodes 29-31 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. 

Episode 29, Stephen Law and 'The Evil-God Challenge' (Part I)

Welcome to Episode 29 (Part I), where we'll be interviewing Dr Stephen Law and discussing his 'Evil-God Challenge'.

Dr Stephen Law is a Reader in philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London, and editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal THINK. Amongst many other books, Stephen Law is the author of A Very Short Introduction to Humanism, The War for Children's Minds, The Philosophy Gym, and Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked into an Intellectual Black Hole.

Stephen Law has debated many Christian philosophers, including William Lane Craig, John Lennox and Alvin Plantinga. Our central focus today is Law’s main argument against the existence of God – 'The Evil-God Challenge'. The evil-god challenge can be stated as follows: why should we consider the hypothesis that there exists a good-god, significantly more reasonable than the hypothesis that there exists an evil-god?

This week in Part I, we'll be introducing Stephen and setting up the 'Evil-God Challenge'.

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/rejects the good-god hypothesis
Part I. The Evil-God Challenge (start of Part I)
Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part II)
Episodes 29-31 are proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. 

Episode 28, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics (Part IV)

Welcome to Episode 28 (Part IV) on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.

The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students.

The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it?

This week in Part IV, we'll be engaging in some further analysis and discussion.

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads virtuously
Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments. (start of Part I)
Part II. Virtue as Excellence. (start of Part II)
Part III. Book X and Application. (start of Part III)
Part IV.  Further Analysis and Discussion. (start of Part IV)

Episode 28, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics (Part III)

Welcome to Episode 28 (Part III) on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.

The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students.

The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it?

This week in Part III, we'll be applying virtue ethics and looking at Book X of the Nicomachean Ethics.

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads virtuously
Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments. (start of Part I)
Part II. Virtue as Excellence. (start of Part II)
Part III. Book X and Application. (start of Part III)
Part IV.  Further Analysis and Discussion. (start of Part IV)

Episode 28, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics (Part II)

Welcome to Episode 28 (Part II) on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.

The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. 

The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it?

This week in Part II, we'll be looking at what Aristotle meant by 'virtue'.

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads virtuously
Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments. (start of Part I)
Part II. Virtue as Excellence. (start of Part II)
Part III. Book X and Application. (start of Part III)
Part IV.  Further Analysis and Discussion. (start of Part IV)

Episode 28, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics (Part I)

Welcome to Episode 28 (Part I) on Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics.

The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. 

The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it?

This week in Part I, we'll be looking at Aristotle’s approach and fundamental arguments in the Nicomachean Ethics.

Share your thoughts and feedback @thepanpsycast.