The Panpsycast Philosophy Podcast

Two people can encounter the same state of affairs – a crime, a book, a building – and yet their attention, interests, and emotional responses can be radically different. The perspectives of others are closed off from us, and our perspectives are closed off from them … that is until we share our stories. In recent years, social and political movements have utilised the power of storytelling by encouraging the sharing of first-personal accounts. For example, the #MeToo movement and #ShoutYourAbortion campaign encouraged women to share their experiences of sexual violence, harassment, and abortion in order to challenge the ideologies that allow sexism and misogyny to exist. According to Dr Rachel Fraser, these narratives play an indispensable role that can never be performed by theory and statistics. In this episode, we’ll be speaking to Dr Fraser, Associate Professor at the University of Oxford, about how personal narratives allow us to challenge social scripts, refocus our attention, and alter the perspectives that, ultimately, shape our lives and institutions. For Fraser – who specialises in a range of fields, including epistemology, aesthetics, philosophy of language, and social and political philosophy – narratives offer a window into our lives and reveal moral truths that serve to critique dangerous ideologies and overcome injustice. Silencing ourselves and others is a surefire way to perpetuate inequality; if we want to bring about a better world, then we must learn to speak and listen. This episode is produced in partnership with the Aesthetics and Political Epistemology Project at the University of Liverpool, led by Katherine Furman, Robin McKenna, and Vid Simoniti and funded by the British Society of Aesthetics. Contents Part I. Disrupting Ideology Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Rachel Fraser, Website Rachel Fraser, Papers

What is the underlying nature of reality? For Thales, the essence of the world was water; for the Stoics, it was Logos; for Heraclitus, the universe consisted, fundamentally, of fire, life-energy, or the ‘thinking faculty’. The search for the building blocks of our world has a rich philosophical history and, today is intertwined with cutting-edge research in the physical sciences. In this episode, we’ll be focusing on those who defend the idea of substances. According to this view, at the heart of our cosmos exist simple, independent, ungrounded entities (called ‘substances’) from which everything else in the world is made and sustained. Perhaps these are particles, strings, or space–time; maybe they’re consciousness, selves, or gods. Our guide to substances and the nature of reality is Dr Donnchadh O’Conaill, post-doctoral researcher at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Dr O’Conaill – currently working on the Swiss National Science Foundation project, The Subject of Experiences – has made several important contributions to the literature, including through his recent book, Substance, published by Cambridge University Press. As we shall see, Dr O’Conaill is a leading scholar on the role and nature of substances, as well as the contentious question of their existence. Ultimately, that’s our focus: whether the world depends on independent, ungrounded entities and what these hidden entities might look like. Contents Part I. Substance Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Donnchadh O'Conaill, Website Donnchadh O'Conaill, Substance (2022)

What is the underlying nature of reality? For Thales, the essence of the world was water; for the Stoics, it was Logos; for Heraclitus, the universe consisted, fundamentally, of fire, life-energy, or the ‘thinking faculty’. The search for the building blocks of our world has a rich philosophical history and, today is intertwined with cutting-edge research in the physical sciences. In this episode, we’ll be focusing on those who defend the idea of substances. According to this view, at the heart of our cosmos exist simple, independent, ungrounded entities (called ‘substances’) from which everything else in the world is made and sustained. Perhaps these are particles, strings, or space–time; maybe they’re consciousness, selves, or gods. Our guide to substances and the nature of reality is Dr Donnchadh O’Conaill, post-doctoral researcher at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland. Dr O’Conaill – currently working on the Swiss National Science Foundation project, The Subject of Experiences – has made several important contributions to the literature, including through his recent book, Substance, published by Cambridge University Press. As we shall see, Dr O’Conaill is a leading scholar on the role and nature of substances, as well as the contentious question of their existence. Ultimately, that’s our focus: whether the world depends on independent, ungrounded entities and what these hidden entities might look like. Contents Part I. Substance Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Donnchadh O'Conaill, Website Donnchadh O'Conaill, Substance (2022)

Whaling, poaching, factory farming: we know they’re wrong. Yet, most of us do nothing about them. In fact, for each trip around the sun, we satisfy our collective tastebuds with over seventy billion land animals and seven trillion sea creatures. Still, one might ask, what is it that’s wrong with how we treat our fellow creatures? This is the central question of Martha Nussbaum’s latest book, Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility. Nussbaum, who has won the most prestigious prizes in the field – including the 2016 Kyoto Prize in Arts and Philosophy, the 2018 Berggruen (Bergruin) Prize in Philosophy and Culture, and the 2021 Holberg Prize – is currently the Ernst Freund (Froind) Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago. With over twenty-five books, five hundred academic papers, and fifty-five honorary degrees, it’s safe to say that Martha Nussbaum is one of the most prolific and distinguished philosophers of our time. For Nussbaum, humans have a collective responsibility to support the activities and conditions that allow our fellow creatures to flourish. It’s time we put a stop to the injustice and bring about a better world. Her call to action? Justice for Animals.

Whaling, poaching, factory farming: we know they’re wrong. Yet, most of us do nothing about them. In fact, for each trip around the sun, we satisfy our collective tastebuds with over seventy billion land animals and seven trillion sea creatures. Still, one might ask, what is it that’s wrong with how we treat our fellow creatures? This is the central question of Martha Nussbaum’s latest book, Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility. Nussbaum, who has won the most prestigious prizes in the field – including the 2016 Kyoto Prize in Arts and Philosophy, the 2018 Berggruen (Bergruin) Prize in Philosophy and Culture, and the 2021 Holberg Prize – is currently the Ernst Freund (Froind) Distinguished Service Professor of Law and Ethics at the University of Chicago. With over twenty-five books, five hundred academic papers, and fifty-five honorary degrees, it’s safe to say that Martha Nussbaum is one of the most prolific and distinguished philosophers of our time. For Nussbaum, humans have a collective responsibility to support the activities and conditions that allow our fellow creatures to flourish. It’s time we put a stop to the injustice and bring about a better world. Her call to action? Justice for Animals. Contents Part I. The Capabilities Approach Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Martha Nussbaum, Website. Martha Nussbaum, Justice for Animals: Our Collective Responsibility (2023) Peter Singer, Animal Liberation Now (2023)

Introduction 'I was sold a story about the modern world. I was told that I could connect with friends for free and that I could have everything conveniently tailored to my tastes. I was also promised I’d be kept safe from those who wished to attack me and my values. All in all, I was told I would be empowered to live my life as I saw fit. In time, I began to hear another story. I started to hear that what I had shared with friends was actually a product that social media sold to others. I was told that some of my wants and desires were, in reality, the wants and desires of people whom I had never met. I was made aware that the promise of safety came at a cost which appears never to have been proven worthwhile. The power, as it turns out, was not really with me – it was with those who sold me the original story. The choices I made when I knew no better helped them understand me and others like me better. They could do this because they were watching. When I wanted them to stop watching, they told me that if I had nothing to hide, then I had nothing to fear.' Contents Part I. Privacy is Power Part II. Privacy in Peril Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kirstie Ball, Kevin Haggerty, and David Lyon, Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies (book). Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity and Love in the Digital Age (book). Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, We Know All About You: The Story of Surveillance in Britain and America (book). Neil Richards, Why Privacy Matters (book). Edward Snowden, Permanent Record: A Memoir of a Reluctant Whistleblower (book). Carissa Véliz, Privacy is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data (book). Raymond Wacks, Privacy: A Very Short Introduction (book).

Introduction 'I was sold a story about the modern world. I was told that I could connect with friends for free and that I could have everything conveniently tailored to my tastes. I was also promised I’d be kept safe from those who wished to attack me and my values. All in all, I was told I would be empowered to live my life as I saw fit. In time, I began to hear another story. I started to hear that what I had shared with friends was actually a product that social media sold to others. I was told that some of my wants and desires were, in reality, the wants and desires of people whom I had never met. I was made aware that the promise of safety came at a cost which appears never to have been proven worthwhile. The power, as it turns out, was not really with me – it was with those who sold me the original story. The choices I made when I knew no better helped them understand me and others like me better. They could do this because they were watching. When I wanted them to stop watching, they told me that if I had nothing to hide, then I had nothing to fear.' Contents Part I. Privacy is Power Part II. Privacy in Peril Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kirstie Ball, Kevin Haggerty, and David Lyon, Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies (book). Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity and Love in the Digital Age (book). Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, We Know All About You: The Story of Surveillance in Britain and America (book). Neil Richards, Why Privacy Matters (book). Edward Snowden, Permanent Record: A Memoir of a Reluctant Whistleblower (book). Carissa Véliz, Privacy is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data (book). Raymond Wacks, Privacy: A Very Short Introduction (book).

Introduction 'I was sold a story about the modern world. I was told that I could connect with friends for free and that I could have everything conveniently tailored to my tastes. I was also promised I’d be kept safe from those who wished to attack me and my values. All in all, I was told I would be empowered to live my life as I saw fit. In time, I began to hear another story. I started to hear that what I had shared with friends was actually a product that social media sold to others. I was told that some of my wants and desires were, in reality, the wants and desires of people whom I had never met. I was made aware that the promise of safety came at a cost which appears never to have been proven worthwhile. The power, as it turns out, was not really with me – it was with those who sold me the original story. The choices I made when I knew no better helped them understand me and others like me better. They could do this because they were watching. When I wanted them to stop watching, they told me that if I had nothing to hide, then I had nothing to fear.' Contents Part I. Privacy is Power Part II. Privacy in Peril Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Kirstie Ball, Kevin Haggerty, and David Lyon, Routledge Handbook of Surveillance Studies (book). Danielle Keats Citron, The Fight for Privacy: Protecting Dignity, Identity and Love in the Digital Age (book). Rhodri Jeffreys-Jones, We Know All About You: The Story of Surveillance in Britain and America (book). Neil Richards, Why Privacy Matters (book). Edward Snowden, Permanent Record: A Memoir of a Reluctant Whistleblower (book). Carissa Véliz, Privacy is Power: Why and How You Should Take Back Control of Your Data (book). Raymond Wacks, Privacy: A Very Short Introduction (book).

Introduction This episode features Jack Symes in conversation with four of the biggest names in philosophy: Richard Dawkins (representing science and atheism), Jessica Frazier (on Hinduism), Silvia Jonas (speaking on Jewish philosophy), and Richard Swinburne (defending Christianity). With over six-hundred people registering for tickets, we were absolutely overwhelmed by your support; thank you to everybody who came along! A very special thank you to our Patrons and the Global Philosophy of Religion Project at the University of Birmingham for making the event possible. We hope you enjoy the show! ‘The origin of our universe is the greatest mystery of all. Why is there something rather than nothing? Further still, how did we come to exist in a world with such precise laws of nature and complex creatures? As we shall see, how we answer these questions determines everything: from the meaning of our lives to the secrets of our futures.’ Contents Part I. The Debate Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links General The Global Philosophy of Religion Project, University of Birmingham. Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (Bloomsbury, 2024). Richard Dawkins The Selfish Gene (book). The Blind Watchmaker (book). The God Delusion (book). Outgrowing God (book). Flights of Fancy (book). www.richarddawkins.com www.richarddawkins.net Jessica Frazier About (webpage). Reality, Religion, and Passion (book). The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies (book). Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality (book). Categorisation in Indian Philosophy: Thinking Inside the Box (book). BBC In Our Times: Hindu Creation (podcast). History of Philosophy without Any Gaps (podcast). Silvia Jonas Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). Richard Swinburne The Existence of God (book). Is There a God? (book). More books by Richard Swinburne.

Introduction This episode features Jack Symes in conversation with four of the biggest names in philosophy: Richard Dawkins (representing science and atheism), Jessica Frazier (on Hinduism), Silvia Jonas (speaking on Jewish philosophy), and Richard Swinburne (defending Christianity). With over six-hundred people registering for tickets, we were absolutely overwhelmed by your support; thank you to everybody who came along! A very special thank you to our Patrons and the Global Philosophy of Religion Project at the University of Birmingham for making the event possible. We hope you enjoy the show! ‘The origin of our universe is the greatest mystery of all. Why is there something rather than nothing? Further still, how did we come to exist in a world with such precise laws of nature and complex creatures? As we shall see, how we answer these questions determines everything: from the meaning of our lives to the secrets of our futures.’ Contents Part I. The Debate Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links General The Global Philosophy of Religion Project, University of Birmingham. Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (Bloomsbury, 2024). Richard Dawkins The Selfish Gene (book). The Blind Watchmaker (book). The God Delusion (book). Outgrowing God (book). Flights of Fancy (book). www.richarddawkins.com www.richarddawkins.net Jessica Frazier About (webpage). Reality, Religion, and Passion (book). The Bloomsbury Companion to Hindu Studies (book). Hindu Worldviews: Theories of Self, Ritual and Reality (book). Categorisation in Indian Philosophy: Thinking Inside the Box (book). BBC In Our Times: Hindu Creation (podcast). History of Philosophy without Any Gaps (podcast). Silvia Jonas Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). Richard Swinburne The Existence of God (book). Is There a God? (book). More books by Richard Swinburne.

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. Contents Part I. The Beauty Ideal Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Heather Widdows, Perfect Me: Beauty as an Ethical Ideal (book) Everyday Lookism, Website Heather Widdows, Website Heather Widdows, Twitter

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. Contents Part I. The Beauty Ideal Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Heather Widdows, Perfect Me: Beauty as an Ethical Ideal (book) Everyday Lookism, Website Heather Widdows, Website Heather Widdows, Twitter

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

Introduction I was told not to think too much about love. Obsess over it, let it dye the very fabric of my being: but do not think about it. Why, after all, would I want to overanalyse the magic and mystery? Would this not reduce a storybook to words and pages? I was told that I was incomplete and was to search for another who would make me whole. This search, I was promised, would lead me to a partner I would love and be happy with forever. And are love and happiness not required for a good life? Yet, these demands, these stories, and these questions feel restrictive and misleading. Why must I not think about what you say is so important? Why must I believe a story I have seen end in tears countless time? It is time we started taking control of love rather than letting love control us. There is no one size fits all approach given to us by nature: not everyone finds ‘the one’, not everyone wants to find the one, and not all relationships need to last. Imagine the lives we could craft if we loved proactively, with honesty and freedom. If we all did this together, we could choose what we wanted and not be pressured into what we’ve been told is good. And given the importance of love, is this not worth a try, even if the magic fades? Contents Part I. Happily Ever After Part II. What Love Is Part III. Sad Love Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Alain de Botton, Essays in Love. Skye Cleary, Existentialism and Romantic Love. Skye Cleary, How to Be Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love. Helen Fisher, Why We Love. A. C. Grayling, Friendship. Bell Hooks, All About Love. Carrie Jenkins, Sad Love. Carrie Jenkins, What Love Is (And What It Could Be). Troy Jollimore, Love’s Vision. Bertrand Russell, Marriage and Morals. Robert Nozick, Love’s Bond.

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. 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 Links Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Silvia Jonas, Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). The Global Philosophy of Religion Project (website). Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (book).

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. 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 Links Silvia Jonas (website). Silvia Jonas: Research (website). Silvia Jonas, Ineffability and its Metaphysics (book). The Global Philosophy of Religion Project (website). Philosophers on God: Talking about Existence (book).

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. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tamler’s website Tamler Sommers, Why Honour Matters Tamler Sommers, Relative Justice: Cultural Diversity, Free Will, and Moral Responsibility Tamler Sommers, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain Tamler Sommers, publications Very bad wizard, podcast Tamler Sommers, twitter

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. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tamler’s website Tamler Sommers, Why Honour Matters Tamler Sommers, Relative Justice: Cultural Diversity, Free Will, and Moral Responsibility Tamler Sommers, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain Tamler Sommers, publications Very bad wizard, podcast Tamler Sommers, twitter

Our sensory experiences make up the fabric of our worlds. It’s a fabric that keeps us warm; a fabric that makes the world worth living in. If you couldn’t hear the cry of your new-born child, if you couldn’t taste your grandfather’s famous brussels sprouts at Christmas, or feel the embrace of your lifelong partner, then your life wouldn’t just include less experiences, but less meaning. Given the value we place on our sensory experiences, it seems important that we understand the nature of them. What is happening, exactly, when we hear, taste, and feel? What are sensory experiences made of? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature of sensory phenomenology with Dr Laura Gow, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool. Formerly of Warwick University, Cambridge University, and the University of Antwerp, Dr Gow – whose work focuses on the philosophy of perception and the metaphysics of consciousness – is one of the UK’s leading phenomenologists. From hallucinations and colour to empty space and silence, Laura’s research covers a broad range of topics, but in this episode we’ll be focusing on transparency. According to the transparency view, when we undergo a perceptual experience, the only properties we’re aware of are located externally. There are no perceptual properties, says Gow, inside of us – despite what it may seem. 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. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Laura Gow (website) Laura Gow, Colour (paper) Laura Gow, Everything is Clear (paper) Laura Gow, Empty Space, Silence, and Absence (paper) Laura Gow, A New Theory of Absence Experience (paper) Laura Gow, Perceptual Experience and Physicalism (paper) Laura Gow, The Limitations of Perceptual Transparency (paper)

Our sensory experiences make up the fabric of our worlds. It’s a fabric that keeps us warm; a fabric that makes the world worth living in. If you couldn’t hear the cry of your new-born child, if you couldn’t taste your grandfather’s famous brussels sprouts at Christmas, or feel the embrace of your lifelong partner, then your life wouldn’t just include less experiences, but less meaning. Given the value we place on our sensory experiences, it seems important that we understand the nature of them. What is happening, exactly, when we hear, taste, and feel? What are sensory experiences made of? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the nature of sensory phenomenology with Dr Laura Gow, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool. Formerly of Warwick University, Cambridge University, and the University of Antwerp, Dr Gow – whose work focuses on the philosophy of perception and the metaphysics of consciousness – is one of the UK’s leading phenomenologists. From hallucinations and colour to empty space and silence, Laura’s research covers a broad range of topics, but in this episode we’ll be focusing on transparency. According to the transparency view, when we undergo a perceptual experience, the only properties we’re aware of are located externally. There are no perceptual properties, says Gow, inside of us – despite what it may seem. 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. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Laura Gow (website) Laura Gow, Colour (paper) Laura Gow, Everything is Clear (paper) Laura Gow, Empty Space, Silence, and Absence (paper) Laura Gow, A New Theory of Absence Experience (paper) Laura Gow, Perceptual Experience and Physicalism (paper) Laura Gow, The Limitations of Perceptual Transparency (paper)

‘630 million threatened by rising seas!’; ‘Study blames climate change for 37% of worldwide heat deaths!’; ‘Fossil fuels must stay underground!’ Despite the headlines and 97% of climate scientists agreeing that human activity is one of the major causes of climate change, just seven in ten Americans believe that climate change is real and only six in ten consider human activity to be a leading cause. As a survey of beliefs, these statistics are concerning. The bigger problem, however, is that they aren’t held in a vacuum, but are formed within and contribute to the functioning of democratic societies.  If we want a genuinely democratic state, how can we establish public policies – informed by our very best science – if a sizable minority of people reject the science? What can be done, descriptively and ethically, to change the minds of those who hold (what experts might consider) unreasonable beliefs? According to Robin McKenna, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, these questions demonstrate the role and importance of contemporary epistemology. Drawing from the latest empirical research on how we form beliefs and how and why we change our minds, McKenna argues that we can improve our epistemic situations by creating environments in which we are more likely to form beliefs that align with the science. To bring about a better world, people must recognise that their beliefs aren’t formed in an ideal and impartial state. To protect democracy and the natural world, says McKenna, we must combat misinformation and political bias through ethical and effective marketing. Contents Part I. Communicating Science Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Robin McKenna (website). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Intellectual Autonomy (chapter). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Epistemic Paternalism (paper). 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.

‘630 million threatened by rising seas!’; ‘Study blames climate change for 37% of worldwide heat deaths!’; ‘Fossil fuels must stay underground!’ Despite the headlines and 97% of climate scientists agreeing that human activity is one of the major causes of climate change, just seven in ten Americans believe that climate change is real and only six in ten consider human activity to be a leading cause. As a survey of beliefs, these statistics are concerning. The bigger problem, however, is that they aren’t held in a vacuum, but are formed within and contribute to the functioning of democratic societies.  If we want a genuinely democratic state, how can we establish public policies – informed by our very best science – if a sizable minority of people reject the science? What can be done, descriptively and ethically, to change the minds of those who hold (what experts might consider) unreasonable beliefs? According to Robin McKenna, Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Liverpool, these questions demonstrate the role and importance of contemporary epistemology. Drawing from the latest empirical research on how we form beliefs and how and why we change our minds, McKenna argues that we can improve our epistemic situations by creating environments in which we are more likely to form beliefs that align with the science. To bring about a better world, people must recognise that their beliefs aren’t formed in an ideal and impartial state. To protect democracy and the natural world, says McKenna, we must combat misinformation and political bias through ethical and effective marketing. Contents Part I. Communicating Science Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Robin McKenna (website). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Intellectual Autonomy (chapter). Robin McKenna, Persuasion and Epistemic Paternalism (paper). 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.

You’re going to a party, but you don’t care if the other guests will like your dress. You pull onto your drive; you don’t consider what your neighbours will think of your car. You sell books that you’ve written, share photographs that you’ve taken, and post your thoughts on the world to any internet user who will listen – yet, you are unmoved and unmotivated by the popularity of your work. Imagine if you didn’t have to worry about your career, your fame, or wealth. Imagine if you didn’t have to fret about falling in love or maintaining that love once you’ve found it. Imagine never feeling daunted by the fact you’re going to die, and that something may or may not be waiting for you beyond the grave. If you could free yourself from these anxieties, do you think you would be happy? Well, isn’t happiness the goal of life, after all? According to the Epicureans, we should answer these questions with a resounding ‘yes’. For his followers, Epicurus worked out exactly how we can achieve this state of happiness and tranquillity, and the good news is that it is within reach for all of us. All we need to do is follow one principle: pursue pleasure and avoid pain. It’s just that simple. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga backpacks.   Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSYCAST. Contents Part I. The Path to Tranquility Part II. Metaphysics, God, and Death Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Haris Dimitriadis, Epicurus And The Pleasant Life: A Philosophy of Nature Daniel Klein, Travels with Epicurus: Meditations from a Greek Island on the Pleasures of Old Age Epicurus and John Strodach, The Art of Happiness John Sellars, The Fourfold Remedy: Epicurus and the Art of Happiness James Warren, The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism Catherine Wilson, Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction Catherine Wilson, The Pleasure Principle: Epicureanism: A Philosophy for Modern Living

You’re going to a party, but you don’t care if the other guests will like your dress. You pull onto your drive; you don’t consider what your neighbours will think of your car. You sell books that you’ve written, share photographs that you’ve taken, and post your thoughts on the world to any internet user who will listen – yet, you are unmoved and unmotivated by the popularity of your work. Imagine if you didn’t have to worry about your career, your fame, or wealth. Imagine if you didn’t have to fret about falling in love or maintaining that love once you’ve found it. Imagine never feeling daunted by the fact you’re going to die, and that something may or may not be waiting for you beyond the grave. If you could free yourself from these anxieties, do you think you would be happy? Well, isn’t happiness the goal of life, after all? According to the Epicureans, we should answer these questions with a resounding ‘yes’. For his followers, Epicurus worked out exactly how we can achieve this state of happiness and tranquillity, and the good news is that it is within reach for all of us. All we need to do is follow one principle: pursue pleasure and avoid pain. It’s just that simple. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga backpacks. Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSYCAST. Contents Part I. The Path to Tranquility Part II. Metaphysics, God, and Death Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Haris Dimitriadis, Epicurus And The Pleasant Life: A Philosophy of Nature Daniel Klein, Travels with Epicurus: Meditations from a Greek Island on the Pleasures of Old Age Epicurus and John Strodach, The Art of Happiness John Sellars, The Fourfold Remedy: Epicurus and the Art of Happiness James Warren, The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism Catherine Wilson, Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction Catherine Wilson, The Pleasure Principle: Epicureanism: A Philosophy for Modern Living

You’re going to a party, but you don’t care if the other guests will like your dress. You pull onto your drive; you don’t consider what your neighbours will think of your car. You sell books that you’ve written, share photographs that you’ve taken, and post your thoughts on the world to any internet user who will listen – yet, you are unmoved and unmotivated by the popularity of your work. Imagine if you didn’t have to worry about your career, your fame, or wealth. Imagine if you didn’t have to fret about falling in love or maintaining that love once you’ve found it. Imagine never feeling daunted by the fact you’re going to die, and that something may or may not be waiting for you beyond the grave. If you could free yourself from these anxieties, do you think you would be happy? Well, isn’t happiness the goal of life, after all? According to the Epicureans, we should answer these questions with a resounding ‘yes’. For his followers, Epicurus worked out exactly how we can achieve this state of happiness and tranquillity, and the good news is that it is within reach for all of us. All we need to do is follow one principle: pursue pleasure and avoid pain. It’s just that simple. This episode is proudly sponsored by Gaston Luga backpacks.   Head over to www.gastonluga.com and get 15% off any purchase with the discount code PANPSYCAST. Contents Part I. The Path to Tranquility Part II. Metaphysics, God, and Death Part III. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Haris Dimitriadis, Epicurus And The Pleasant Life: A Philosophy of Nature Daniel Klein, Travels with Epicurus: Meditations from a Greek Island on the Pleasures of Old Age Epicurus and John Strodach, The Art of Happiness John Sellars, The Fourfold Remedy: Epicurus and the Art of Happiness James Warren, The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism Catherine Wilson, Epicureanism: A Very Short Introduction Catherine Wilson, The Pleasure Principle: Epicureanism: A Philosophy for Modern Living

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. 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 Links Jay Garfield, Personal Website. (Website) Jay Garfield, Engaging Buddhism. (Book) Jay Garfield, Practicing without a License. (Essay) Books by Jay Garfield. (Website)

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. 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 Links Jay Garfield, Personal Website. (Website) Jay Garfield, Engaging Buddhism. (Book) Jay Garfield, Practicing without a License. (Essay) Books by Jay Garfield. (Website)

Introduction On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’ As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts. One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality. Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved. Contents Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem Part III. The Essence of Evil Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book) Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book) Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book) Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book) Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book) Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book) Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book) Dana Vila, Arendt (Book) Eichmann Trial (YouTube)