Then & Now: Philosophy, History & Politics cover image

Then & Now: Philosophy, History & Politics

Latest episodes

undefined
Jan 19, 2021 • 16min

Inviting the Tigers to Tea: Demagogues in America

Winston Churchill once said that ‘Dictators ride to and fro upon tigers from which they dare not dismount. And the tigers are getting hungry.’ In the wake of what happened in Washington last week, I think this metaphor illustrates something deeper about the relationship between demagogues and their followers. Who are the tigers and why are they hungry? Riots - the voice of the unheard - clearly signify some issues within a society that if not resolved inevitably lead to the baring of teeth. Tigers only emerge from tears in the social fabric. The more the economic, social, or cultural chasm rips open, the more untamed emotions spill out of the void, and the more likely it becomes that a demagogue can saddle-up and offer a solution. Steve Bannon said that ‘we got elected on Drain the Swamp, Lock Her Up, Build a Wall….This was pure anger. Anger and fear is what gets people to the polls.”Many ancient philosophers were skeptical of democracy because it was vulnerable to the threat of demagogues. Plato argued in the Republic that because democracy must allow freedom of speech it was defenseless against strongmen who could make to the demos based on their fears and emotions. Joseph Goebbels said that ‘This will always remain one of the best jokes of democracy, that it gave its deadly enemies the means by which it was destroyed.’ So why is it that democracy is vulnerable to demagogues? What do demagogues offer and how might we protect against it? Then & Now is FAN-FUNDED! Support me on Patreon and pledge as little as $1 per video: http://patreon.com/user?u=3517018 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
undefined
Jan 14, 2021 • 16min

Foucault: Criticisms & Method

How can we untangle Madness & Civilization and think clearly about what Foucault is saying, both in the book, and by extension in later works?Looking at some criticisms of him are a good way to try to pin down exactly what’s going on with his method and view of the world, so let’s start there.In 1987 Lawrence Stone, for example, criticized Foucault as being ‘unconcerned with historical detail of time or place or with rigorous documentation.’ He said that Foucault ignored ‘enormous differences in the degree and organization of incarceration from country to country’ in Europe.How might Foucault respond to some of his critics? To understand it's important to look closely at his method, too.In short, his method is ‘to write the history of madness will therefore mean making a structural study of the historical ensemble – notions, institutions, judicial and police measures, scientific concepts.’A Foucauldian method searches for the consistent and compatible conceptual frameworks that set the criteria for what a normal human nature is at any given time, and broadly suggest the attitudes, perceptions, and sensibilities any given society holds. These phenomena form epistemes that historically have changed over time.Then & Now is FAN-FUNDED! Support me on Patreon and pledge as little as $1 per video: http://patreon.com/user?u=3517018 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
undefined
4 snips
Jan 11, 2021 • 25min

Foucault: Madness & Civilization (History of Madness)

The podcast delves into Michel Foucault's groundbreaking work on madness and civilization, exploring how societies have viewed and treated madness over time. It questions the blurred boundaries between reason and madness, the historical segregation of lepers and the mentally ill, and the paradox of madness as a form of wisdom in the Renaissance period. Foucault's work challenges traditional notions of reason, raising difficult questions about the nature of madness and society's attitudes towards it.
undefined
Dec 26, 2020 • 12min

Heidegger & Descartes: Being-in-the-world, Care, Anxiety & Existentialism

What did Descartes know for certain? That he is a thinking thing, a cogito. But what does it mean to think? Descartes lists a few modes of thinking: Doubting, affirming, denying, understanding.Heidegger embarks upon a similar project to Descartes. What, he asks, is the fundamental nature of our experience? Of our existence? Heidegger agrees with Descartes. If we want to live life well we need to be clear about its most fundamental components. Descartes answer is summarised by his phrase cogito ergo sum, which translates as thinking, therefore, being. For Heidegger, Descartes has it the wrong way around. He thinks that Descartes has neglected the sum, the being. What is it to be something? Heidegger’s answer comes in a number of forms: he says as well as being thinking things we have care for things, we have an anxiety about the world, we are existential, but most importantly, we are beings-in-the-world.Then & Now is FAN-FUNDED! Support me on Patreon and pledge as little as $1 per video: http://patreon.com/user?u=3517018 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
undefined
Dec 24, 2020 • 15min

Descartes' Error: Antonio Damasio's Somatic Marker Hypothesis

Descartes’ Error is a 1994 book by the neuroscientist Antonio Damasio which outlines the somatic marker hypothesis, a theory about how the mind and body not only interact, but are indissociable. Damasio argues that those feelings provide what he calls ‘somatic markers’ for the mind that aid decision making. They point us in the right (or wrong) direction.The rationalist or Cartesian view – what Damasio calls the ‘high-reason’ view – suggests that our mind is like a computer. We’re running through all of this incomplete knowledge about the job – the commute, the career prospects, the people, the location, while weighing up the advantages and disadvantages as if its a ledger. But Damasio writes ‘you will lose track. Attention and working memory have a limited capacity.’This is where somatic markers come in. He writes:‘before you apply any kind of cost/benefit analysis to the premises, and before you reason toward the solution of the problem, something quite important happens: When the bad outcome connected with a given response option comes into mind, however fleetingly, you experience an unpleasant gut feeling. Because the feeling is about the body, I gave the phenomenon the technical term somatic state.’He continues:The somatic marker ‘forces attention on the negative outcome to which a given action may lead, and functions as an automated alarm signal which says: Beware the danger ahead if you choose the option which leads to this outcome. The signal may reject, immediately, the negative course of action and thus make you choose among other alternatives.’Somatic markers – the collection of feelings we get from bodily and mental impulses – highlight certain options for us to deliberate while eliminating others. They’re a kind of screening process.Then & Now is FAN-FUNDED! Support me on Patreon and pledge as little as $1 per video: http://patreon.com/user?u=3517018 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
undefined
Dec 22, 2020 • 19min

Descartes Introduction: Meditations

This is an introduction to Rene Descartes' Meditations. Descartes - born in 1596 - is often considered the father of modern philosophy. He was a radical innovator, completely sweeping away the old and inaugurating a new method – simple, pure, clear, individual thought. He claimed he read very little, and most of his work was in the sciences. When a man asked to see his library he pointed to a half dissected calf. He was primarily a mathematician. He invented the Cartesian coordinates, but today he's mostly remembered for his philosophy.There are two key philosophical works – the Discourse on Method and the Meditations – the latter is a more complete statement of his philosophy.It’s short, it’s reasonably simple, its’ groundbreaking, it’s entertaining. Descartes wants to doubt everything he knows so as to put thought and philosophy on a firm footing; he wants to discover what is certain, indubitable. He is, then focusing exclusively on reason, he’s a rationalist.So, how do we go about discovering what we know to be certain?Cogito Ergo Sum. I think, therefore I am.Then & Now is FAN-FUNDED! Support me on Patreon and pledge as little as $1 per video: http://patreon.com/user?u=3517018 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
undefined
Nov 27, 2020 • 16min

Francis Bacon: Introduction to Induction & the Scientific Method

Explore the revolutionary thoughts of Francis Bacon, the father of empiricism, who challenged the rigid philosophies of his time. Discover how he proposed a practical approach to knowledge through observation and the scientific method, advocating for starting from specific details to derive broader truths. Learn about his intriguing concept of 'idols' that distort our understanding of truth, as well as his efforts to reform the legal system in 16th-century Britain. Bacon's legacy continues to shape modern scientific thought.
undefined
Nov 21, 2020 • 11min

Francis Bacon: A Critique

What did Bacon give us? Induction, the scientific method, experimentation, his was a theory of epistemology – a theory about knowledge.He said that knowledge about the world comes from the senses and should be carefully and systematically collected to make use of instrumentally.Ok, so there are two lines of criticism I’d like to discuss today. First, the idols – the idea that knowledge is distorted by human cognition. Second, the idea of discovery, specifically the difference between discovery and creation. My main argument will be that Bacon neglected the subjective element in epistemology. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
undefined
Nov 18, 2020 • 32min

Empires of Modernity: The East India Company and the Anarchy

Modernity is many things. Urbanization, industrialization, technologization. At its simplest, it’s a project of supposed improvement, science, and progress. As a project, then, modernity seeks to expand itself. If improvements can be made, they should be made.Exploration was at the heart of the modern expansionist drive that began in earnest in the 17th century. But why then? Why not before? What shifts in psychology led to this new attitude in Europe about an unexplored world?We can sometimes see shifts in the most unexpected places.In the early modern period, philosophers like Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes, and Adam Smith, began to reinterpret morality as the pursuit of pleasure, power, and profit. In 1747 Jean-Jacques Burlham wrote that ‘Now let man reflect but ever so little on himself, he will soon perceive that everything he does is with a view of happiness’. By 1776, Adam Smith could write that “It is not from the benevolence (kindness) of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest."Since, the scientific revolution it was beginning to be assumed that human nature was calculable, scientific, had simple principles, that people act in rational and predictable ways.Happiness, pleasure, utility, whatever it was, was pursued, stored up, or, to use a word that the utilitarian Jeremy Bentham invented in 1817, maximized. How did this have an effect on world history? On the mentalities and psychology of people in the West.We explore the links between modern philosophy and British Imperial, particularly through William Dalrymple’s book on the rise of the East India Company and the decline of the Mughal Empire – the Anarchy.The history looks at the life of the megalomaniacal Robert Clive, the idea of Gentlemanly Capitalism, theories of Imperialism, and, most horrifyingly, the Great Indian Bengal Famine of 1770, where a third of the population of Bengal died.Then & Now is FAN-FUNDED! Support me on Patreon and pledge as little as $1 per video: http://patreon.com/user?u=3517018 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
undefined
Nov 16, 2020 • 17min

Great Barrington Declaration: Science and Politics

How do we deal with coronavirus? I look at the 'Great Barrington Declaration' - a group of scientists against lockdowns - and the history of how science is always political.The Declaration has been signed by over 20,000 medical practitioners and scientists, including Professor Sunetra Gupta from Oxford.There are some problems, though. First, anyone can sign the form – a look through the signatures reveals signatures from Johnny Bananas and the notorious serial killer, Dr. Harold Shipman.But the so-called Great Barrington Declaration event was also hosted by a libertarian think-tank funded by multi-billionaires including the Koch Brothers. But this doesn’t immediately delegitimize their position.Another letter signed by Professor Gupta said:‘Any objective should be framed more broadly than COVID itself. To place all weight on reducing deaths from COVID fails to consider the complex trade-offs that occur: (i) with in any healthcare system; and (ii) between healthcare, society and the economy.’How do we make sense of this? I take a tour through history from the Scientific Revolution and Isaac Newton through to today's COVID-19 lockdown science to find out.Then & Now is FAN-FUNDED! Support me on Patreon and pledge as little as $1 per video: http://patreon.com/user?u=3517018 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts

Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
App store bannerPlay store banner