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 106, Four Thousand Weeks (Part III - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 106 (Part III of III)’, in which we’ll be evaluating Burkeman’s views on time management.

Enjoying a holiday in a small coastal village, a New York banker finds herself walking along a tranquil pier when she comes across a fisherman in a small, wooden boat. Inside the boat she spotted several rainbow-coloured fish. ‘Congratulations on a fine score. How long did it take you to catch them?’

‘Only a little while,’ the fisherman replied. ‘That’s great,’ said the banker, ‘so, why don’t you stay out longer and catch a few more?’ The fisherman explained that he only caught what he needed to put fish on the table and a roof over his family’s heads. ‘But’, the puzzled banker enquired, ‘what do you do with the rest of your time?’ The fisherman smiled: ‘I sleep in late, I read books, I go dancing with my wife, and I write jokes about Adam Sandler.’

The banker scoffed, ‘You know, I could offer you my assistance with your fishing business.’ The fisherman raised his eyebrows. ‘If you spent more time fishing, you could sell more fish and buy a bigger boat. You’d catch more fish, buy more boats, and soon enough you could buy a fleet! Instead of selling your catch to a middleman, you would sell directly to the processor, and eventually open a cannery.’ The fisherman paused for a moment… ‘Right, but how long will this all take?’ The banker replied: ‘Ten to fifteen years?’ 

‘But what then?’ asked the fisherman. The banker looked confused, ‘Then you could enjoy some time off: sleep in late, read books, go dancing with your wife, and write jokes about Adam Sandler.’

The fisherman smiled, ‘I suggest you stick around for a while. Have you been fishing before? Ha! Why don’t you climb aboard?’

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

Contents

Part I. Time

Part II. How to Use It

Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 106, Four Thousand Weeks (Part II - How to Use It)

Welcome to ‘Episode 106 (Part II of III)’, in which we’ll be discussing the Oliver Burkeman’s solutions to our time-related problems.

Enjoying a holiday in a small coastal village, a New York banker finds herself walking along a tranquil pier when she comes across a fisherman in a small, wooden boat. Inside the boat she spotted several rainbow-coloured fish. ‘Congratulations on a fine score. How long did it take you to catch them?’

‘Only a little while,’ the fisherman replied. ‘That’s great,’ said the banker, ‘so, why don’t you stay out longer and catch a few more?’ The fisherman explained that he only caught what he needed to put fish on the table and a roof over his family’s heads. ‘But’, the puzzled banker enquired, ‘what do you do with the rest of your time?’ The fisherman smiled: ‘I sleep in late, I read books, I go dancing with my wife, and I write jokes about Adam Sandler.’

The banker scoffed, ‘You know, I could offer you my assistance with your fishing business.’ The fisherman raised his eyebrows. ‘If you spent more time fishing, you could sell more fish and buy a bigger boat. You’d catch more fish, buy more boats, and soon enough you could buy a fleet! Instead of selling your catch to a middleman, you would sell directly to the processor, and eventually open a cannery.’ The fisherman paused for a moment… ‘Right, but how long will this all take?’ The banker replied: ‘Ten to fifteen years?’ 

‘But what then?’ asked the fisherman. The banker looked confused, ‘Then you could enjoy some time off: sleep in late, read books, go dancing with your wife, and write jokes about Adam Sandler.’

The fisherman smiled, ‘I suggest you stick around for a while. Have you been fishing before? Ha! Why don’t you climb aboard?’

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

Contents

Part I. Time

Part II. How to Use It

Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 106, Four Thousand Weeks (Part I - Time)

Welcome to ‘Episode 106 (Part I of III)’, in which we’ll be discussing the problem of time management and finitude.

Enjoying a holiday in a small coastal village, a New York banker finds herself walking along a tranquil pier when she comes across a fisherman in a small, wooden boat. Inside the boat she spotted several rainbow-coloured fish. ‘Congratulations on a fine score. How long did it take you to catch them?’

‘Only a little while,’ the fisherman replied. ‘That’s great,’ said the banker, ‘so, why don’t you stay out longer and catch a few more?’ The fisherman explained that he only caught what he needed to put fish on the table and a roof over his family’s heads. ‘But’, the puzzled banker enquired, ‘what do you do with the rest of your time?’ The fisherman smiled: ‘I sleep in late, I read books, I go dancing with my wife, and I write jokes about Adam Sandler.’

The banker scoffed, ‘You know, I could offer you my assistance with your fishing business.’ The fisherman raised his eyebrows. ‘If you spent more time fishing, you could sell more fish and buy a bigger boat. You’d catch more fish, buy more boats, and soon enough you could buy a fleet! Instead of selling your catch to a middleman, you would sell directly to the processor, and eventually open a cannery.’ The fisherman paused for a moment… ‘Right, but how long will this all take?’ The banker replied: ‘Ten to fifteen years?’ 

‘But what then?’ asked the fisherman. The banker looked confused, ‘Then you could enjoy some time off: sleep in late, read books, go dancing with your wife, and write jokes about Adam Sandler.’

The fisherman smiled, ‘I suggest you stick around for a while. Have you been fishing before? Ha! Why don’t you climb aboard?’

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

Contents

Part I. Time

Part II. How to Use It

Part III. 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

Episode 103, 'Nudges' with Thomas Schramme (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 103 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be continuing our discussion of public health nudges with Professor Thomas Schramme.

Given the choice, who wouldn’t increase the balance in their bank account, switch into a fit and healthy body, find themselves in a meaningful career, and cultivate happiness and love in their relationships? These are preferences we all share, but few of us achieve them. Perhaps we could, if only we made better choices. We all want to make better decisions – the salad over the burger, the restful night’s sleep over ‘one more episode’ – yet we continue to succumb to our desires. Perhaps we need some help: maybe we need something to nudge us in the right direction?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the philosophy of nudges with Professor Thomas Schramme. Chair of Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, Thomas’s research focuses on moral and political philosophy and the philosophy of health and medicine. With over one hundred publications and heading several innovative projects – including ‘How Does it Feel? Interpersonal Understanding and Affective Empathy’ – Professor Schramme is not only an expert in his field but always communicates his ideas through accessible and engaging prose.

As we’ll find in this interview, Schramme challenges some of the most prominent ideas in contemporary politics and psychology. According to Daniel Kehneman, nudges ‘have changed the world’… but, asks Schramme, do they always change it for the better?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/nudges you in the 'right' direction

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 103, 'Nudges' with Thomas Schramme (Part I - Public Health)

Welcome to ‘Episode 103 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing the philosophy of health nudges with Professor Thomas Schramme.

Given the choice, who wouldn’t increase the balance in their bank account, switch into a fit and healthy body, find themselves in a meaningful career, and cultivate happiness and love in their relationships? These are preferences we all share, but few of us achieve them. Perhaps we could, if only we made better choices. We all want to make better decisions – the salad over the burger, the restful night’s sleep over ‘one more episode’ – yet we continue to succumb to our desires. Perhaps we need some help: maybe we need something to nudge us in the right direction?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing the philosophy of nudges with Professor Thomas Schramme. Chair of Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, Thomas’s research focuses on moral and political philosophy and the philosophy of health and medicine. With over one hundred publications and heading several innovative projects – including ‘How Does it Feel? Interpersonal Understanding and Affective Empathy’ – Professor Schramme is not only an expert in his field but always communicates his ideas through accessible and engaging prose.

As we’ll find in this interview, Schramme challenges some of the most prominent ideas in contemporary politics and psychology. According to Daniel Kehneman, nudges ‘have changed the world’… but, asks Schramme, do they always change it for the better?

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/nudges you in the 'right' direction

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 102, The Richard Swinburne Interview (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 102 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be concluding our discussion with Richard Swinburne.

The existence of God is the most discussed, and perhaps the most important, question in philosophy. For the majority of the world’s population, God provides meaning, morality, metaphysics, and hopefully, salvation.

A rich history of scholarship defending God’s existence has meant theism has long been considered to be a reasonable worldview; however, with the rise of secularism and the new atheist movement, a fiery and passionate debate has ensued: one of science vs. religion. Our question: can the two be reconciled?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing God’s existence with one of contemporary philosophy’s most influential thinkers, Professor Richard Swinburne. Best known for his great trilogy of books – The Coherence of Theism, The Existence of God, and Faith and Reason – Professor Swinburne’s impact on philosophy of religion has been enormous... from high school classrooms to university halls, every teacher knows his name and every student must wrestle with his work.

According to Swinburne, theism is the friend – and not the enemy – of science; for God ‘explains everything that we observe’, from the universe’s existence and the scientific laws which operate within it, to its extraordinary miracles and conscious creatures. ‘If we want a complete explanation of the universe’, says Swinburne, ‘then science needs God.’

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/grows closer to God

Contents

Part I. Is there a God?

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 102, The Richard Swinburne Interview (Part I - Is there a God?)

Welcome to ‘Episode 102 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing the existence of God with Richard Swinburne.

The existence of God is the most discussed, and perhaps the most important, question in philosophy. For the majority of the world’s population, God provides meaning, morality, metaphysics, and hopefully, salvation.

A rich history of scholarship defending God’s existence has meant theism has long been considered to be a reasonable worldview; however, with the rise of secularism and the new atheist movement, a fiery and passionate debate has ensued: one of science vs. religion. Our question: can the two be reconciled?

In this episode, we’ll be discussing God’s existence with one of contemporary philosophy’s most influential thinkers, Professor Richard Swinburne. Best known for his great trilogy of books – The Coherence of Theism, The Existence of God, and Faith and Reason – Professor Swinburne’s impact on philosophy of religion has been enormous... from high school classrooms to university halls, every teacher knows his name and every student must wrestle with his work.

According to Swinburne, theism is the friend – and not the enemy – of science; for God ‘explains everything that we observe’, from the universe’s existence and the scientific laws which operate within it, to its extraordinary miracles and conscious creatures. ‘If we want a complete explanation of the universe’, says Swinburne, ‘then science needs God.’

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/grows closer to God

Contents

Part I. Is there a God?

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 101, Talking about the Mind (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Welcome to ‘Episode 101 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll be concluding our discussion of Philosophers on Consciousness.

Imagine the smile on your parent’s face as you rush to meet them at the school gates, the soft heat of the sand between your toes on a first holiday, waking up in the haze of a late afternoon after dancing all night, the drop in your stomach when you realize you’ll never hear their voice again. These are conscious experiences. Without them, what is there to life? In this sense, we all know what consciousness is – there’s nothing we know more intimately – yet it remains one of life’s greatest mysteries. Despite the incredible advances made in physical science, it doesn’t seem like we’re any closer to an explanation of where consciousness comes from. How is it, exactly, that the brain’s 86 billion neurons give rise to conscious experience? As we’ll see, our answer to this question will not only shape our understanding of the human mind, but the fabric of reality itself. – Extract from Philosophers on Consciousness

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/rids itself of the zombie implant

Contents

Part I. The Fabric of Reality

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode 101, Talking about the Mind (Part I - The Fabric of Reality)

Welcome to ‘Episode 101 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll discussing our forthcoming book, Philosophers on Consciousness.

Imagine the smile on your parent’s face as you rush to meet them at the school gates, the soft heat of the sand between your toes on a first holiday, waking up in the haze of a late afternoon after dancing all night, the drop in your stomach when you realize you’ll never hear their voice again. These are conscious experiences. Without them, what is there to life? In this sense, we all know what consciousness is – there’s nothing we know more intimately – yet it remains one of life’s greatest mysteries. Despite the incredible advances made in physical science, it doesn’t seem like we’re any closer to an explanation of where consciousness comes from. How is it, exactly, that the brain’s 86 billion neurons give rise to conscious experience? As we’ll see, our answer to this question will not only shape our understanding of the human mind, but the fabric of reality itself. – Extract from Philosophers on Consciousness

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/rids itself of the zombie implant

Contents

Part I. The Fabric of Reality

Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion

Episode X, The Cave

The Panpsycast is now five years old. In which time, we have never failed to release a weekly instalment of the show. We’re exceptionally proud of what we’ve accomplished with your support. From our audiobook and upcoming book series to our big interviews and collaborations with leading organisations – it’s incredible that so many of you tune in week in, week out and support us on Patreon.

Producing the podcast takes a lot of work, and every project has its peaks and valleys. The beginning of the pandemic marked a difficult time for us behind the scenes, and we’ve reached a point where we need to take a short step back. The Panpsycast will be taking a break; set to return on November 7th, 2021. 

Throughout our hiatus, we’ll be pausing all Patreon payments. So, for August, September, and October, you won’t be charged anything if you’ve already pledged your support. We hope that you’ll stick around so we can keep producing the show when we return, and we’re incredibly grateful for your patience and understanding.

If you’re missing us over the next three months, we’ve got over 250 instalments of the show in our back-catalogue, a 24-chapter Christianity audiobook on our website, and absolutely loads of bonus content over on our Patreon – including heaps of After Shows and insider interviews. If you’ve already been through our content… then, wow! You should really check out Philosophy Bites… just kidding. We’re incredibly grateful for your support and hope the content we’ve released will inspire you to hit the book shops whilst we’re away.

We know how much the show means to so many of you, and we haven’t taken this decision lightly. Producing the show means so much to all of us, and we can’t wait to get back. 

We’ll see you back here on November 7th, 2021.

The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/takes a short break

The Cave, written and performed by Andrew Horton.

Episode 100, Plato's Cave (Part II - Souls)

Welcome to ‘Episode 100 (Part II of II)’, in which we’ll discussing the nature of the Platonic soul.

A philosophical education can feel like a long and arduous path. Sometimes you think you have seen the light; you think that you have knowledge, only to discover you knew nothing. It is times like this where the learner must examine their blind spots and begin their path to understanding once again while accepting that the next attempt might too end where it began.

The philosopher Plato likened this path to the ascent from a dark cave up into the light of the sun. He also said that those who have seen the illuminated world above have a responsibility to go back to show others the way. Today we go back, not because we have seen the sun, but because we have travelled the path enough to know we can do a little better than we did before. The blind leading the blind? Perhaps, but we might stumble into something interesting along the way.

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

With special thanks to the following creators for their sound samples.

InspectorJ, InspectorJ(2), InspectorJ(3), InspectorJ(4), straget, jameswrowles, JG_Booysen, ethang, womb_affliction, bennychico11, HerbertBoland, ShadyDave, and 3bagbrew.

Contents

Part I. Forms

Part II. Souls

Episode 100, Plato's Cave (Part I - Forms)

Welcome to ‘Episode 100 (Part I of II)’, in which we’ll be discussing Plato’s allegory of the cave.

A philosophical education can feel like a long and arduous path. Sometimes you think you have seen the light; you think that you have knowledge, only to discover you knew nothing. It is times like this where the learner must examine their blind spots and begin their path to understanding once again while accepting that the next attempt might too end where it began.

The philosopher Plato likened this path to the ascent from a dark cave up into the light of the sun. He also said that those who have seen the illuminated world above have a responsibility to go back to show others the way. Today we go back, not because we have seen the sun, but because we have travelled the path enough to know we can do a little better than we did before. The blind leading the blind? Perhaps, but we might stumble into something interesting along the way.

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

With special thanks to the following creators for their sound samples.

InspectorJ, InspectorJ(2), InspectorJ(3), InspectorJ(4), straget, jameswrowles, JG_Booysen, ethang, womb_affliction, bennychico11, HerbertBoland, ShadyDave, and 3bagbrew.

Contents

Part I. Forms

Part II. Souls