The Panpsycast Philosophy Podcast

Jack Symes | Andrew Horton, Oliver Marley, and Rose de Castellane
undefined
Nov 3, 2024 • 37min

Episode 136, ‘A World Unmade’ with Peter Hitchens (Part I - The Rage Against God)

The Western world faces a tidal wave of secularisation, which shows no signs of receding. In the UK, Christian self-identification has plummeted – dropping, for example, from 72% in 2001 to 47% in 2021. The secularists argue that this trend reflects a shift towards an inclusive and intellectually progressive society; their critics, however, warn that the decline of faith erodes our moral foundations and frays our social ties. “The secular flood isn’t just about church attendance,” they say, “but strikes at the heart of our nation’s identity and stability.” For many conservatives, nowhere is this betrayal of our values more evident than our education system. In the UK, the 1944 Education Act introduced free secondary education to all children for the first time – with grammar schools said to offer exceptional educations to our most talented students. Today, grammar schools are in decline, and the founding of new ones prohibited. It was argued that these schools favoured the middle classes and perpetuated social divisions; others, however, believe that closing these pathways has reduced educational and social opportunities. Like the Christian identity of the nation, grammar schools are at risk of being confined to history books. In this episode, we’ll be speaking with Peter Hitchens – British journalist, author, and social critic – about what religious and educational changes mean for the soul of Britain. Together, we’ll explore whether this shift marks the dawn of a more inclusive era – or the washing away of a once Great Britain. Links Peter Hitchens, Mail Online: Blog Peter Hitchens, The Spectator Peter Hitchens, The Rage Against God (book) Peter Hitchens, A Revolution Betrayed (book)
undefined
Oct 20, 2024 • 30min

Episode 135, ‘The Philosophy of Headphones’ with Jacob Kingsbury Downs (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Listening to a podcast on the morning commute, drowning out the office noise with your favourite album, getting lost in an audiobook as you walk home – for many of us, navigating the world through headphones is second nature. But is there more to these everyday experiences than listening to our favourite content? Is there more to headphone listening than meets our ears? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the philosophy and psychology of sound and headphone listening with Dr Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Departmental Lecturer in Music at the University of Oxford. Named as one of 2024’s BBC New Generation Thinkers, Jacob’s research takes place at the intersection between sound studies and continental philosophy, and seeks to reveal how headphone use shapes our minds and the fabric of society. According to Downs, headphones do more than play our favourite sounds. They transport us into sensory shelters – intimate spaces of comfort and focus – and our own private theatres. Headphone listening, he argues, is about safety, control, and reconnecting with feelings of home. Yet, not all sounds are soothing; as we shall see, sometimes our intimate sonic spaces can be exploited as a means of torture, brainwashing, and corrupting our sense of self. Don’t worry, though; you’re safe with us. Plug in your headphones; it’s time to relax. After all, there’s no place like home. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/warms up your headphones Links Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Website Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Acoustic Territories of the Body: Headphone Listening, Embodied Space, and the Phenomenology of Sonic Homeliness’ (paper) Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Headphones, Auditory Violence and the Sonic Flooding of Corporeal Space’ (paper)
undefined
Oct 6, 2024 • 40min

Episode 135, ‘The Philosophy of Headphones’ with Jacob Kingsbury Downs (Part I - There’s No Sound Like Home)

Listening to a podcast on the morning commute, drowning out the office noise with your favourite album, getting lost in an audiobook as you walk home – for many of us, navigating the world through headphones is second nature. But is there more to these everyday experiences than listening to our favourite content? Is there more to headphone listening than meets our ears? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the philosophy and psychology of sound and headphone listening with Dr Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Departmental Lecturer in Music at the University of Oxford. Named as one of 2024’s BBC New Generation Thinkers, Jacob’s research takes place at the intersection between sound studies and continental philosophy, and seeks to reveal how headphone use shapes our minds and the fabric of society. According to Downs, headphones do more than play our favourite sounds. They transport us into sensory shelters – intimate spaces of comfort and focus – and our own private theatres. Headphone listening, he argues, is about safety, control, and reconnecting with feelings of home. Yet, not all sounds are soothing; as we shall see, sometimes our intimate sonic spaces can be exploited as a means of torture, brainwashing, and corrupting our sense of self. Don’t worry, though; you’re safe with us. Plug in your headphones; it’s time to relax. After all, there’s no place like home. The file size is large, please be patient whilst the podcast buffers/downloads/warms up your headphones Links Jacob Kingsbury Downs, Website Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Acoustic Territories of the Body: Headphone Listening, Embodied Space, and the Phenomenology of Sonic Homeliness’ (paper) Jacob Kingsbury Downs, ‘Headphones, Auditory Violence and the Sonic Flooding of Corporeal Space’ (paper)
undefined
Sep 22, 2024 • 40min

Episode 134, The Philosophy of War (Part III - Further Analysis and Discussion)

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, instantly killing up to 80,000 civilians, with another 40,000 dying soon after from burns and radiation poisoning. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the surrender of the Japanese Army, marking the end of the most destructive war in history. War has been a constant throughout history. Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have waged war against one another. Some argue that war is ingrained in human nature, from our ancestors battling over resources and empires seeking expansion, to biblical genocides and acts of human sacrifice—Homo sapiens are seemingly insatiable for conflict. Others, however, believe war is not inevitable and that we have the capacity for humility, justice, and kindness without resorting to armed conflict. We must remember that explaining war is not the same as justifying it. While pacifism, as exemplified by Jesus and Gandhi, is often seen as noble, is non-violence truly effective against regimes intent on ethnic cleansing? If not, how do we determine when war is justified and what defines proportional force? Can the killing of innocent civilians ever be justified? And, if not, how do they differ from innocent combatants? War, huh, good god, what is it good for? Links A.C. Grayling, War: An Enquiry (book) Richard Overy, Why War? (book) Jeff Mcmahan, Killing in War (book) Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (book) Carl von Clausewitz, On War (book) War, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
undefined
Sep 8, 2024 • 44min

Episode 134, The Philosophy of War (Part II - In Pursuit of Power)

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, instantly killing up to 80,000 civilians, with another 40,000 dying soon after from burns and radiation poisoning. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the surrender of the Japanese Army, marking the end of the most destructive war in history. War has been a constant throughout history. Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have waged war against one another. Some argue that war is ingrained in human nature, from our ancestors battling over resources and empires seeking expansion, to biblical genocides and acts of human sacrifice—Homo sapiens are seemingly insatiable for conflict. Others, however, believe war is not inevitable and that we have the capacity for humility, justice, and kindness without resorting to armed conflict. We must remember that explaining war is not the same as justifying it. While pacifism, as exemplified by Jesus and Gandhi, is often seen as noble, is non-violence truly effective against regimes intent on ethnic cleansing? If not, how do we determine when war is justified and what defines proportional force? Can the killing of innocent civilians ever be justified? And, if not, how do they differ from innocent combatants? War, huh, good god, what is it good for? Links A.C. Grayling, War: An Enquiry (book) Richard Overy, Why War? (book) Jeff Mcmahan, Killing in War (book) Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (book) Carl von Clausewitz, On War (book) War, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
undefined
Aug 25, 2024 • 43min

Episode 134, The Philosophy of War (Part I - The Human Condition)

On August 6, 1945, an atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, instantly killing up to 80,000 civilians, with another 40,000 dying soon after from burns and radiation poisoning. The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki led to the surrender of the Japanese Army, marking the end of the most destructive war in history. War has been a constant throughout history. Since the dawn of agriculture, humans have waged war against one another. Some argue that war is ingrained in human nature, from our ancestors battling over resources and empires seeking expansion, to biblical genocides and acts of human sacrifice—Homo sapiens are seemingly insatiable for conflict. Others, however, believe war is not inevitable and that we have the capacity for humility, justice, and kindness without resorting to armed conflict. We must remember that explaining war is not the same as justifying it. While pacifism, as exemplified by Jesus and Gandhi, is often seen as noble, is non-violence truly effective against regimes intent on ethnic cleansing? If not, how do we determine when war is justified and what defines proportional force? Can the killing of innocent civilians ever be justified? And, if not, how do they differ from innocent combatants? War, huh, good god, what is it good for? Links A.C. Grayling, War: An Enquiry (book) Richard Overy, Why War? (book) Jeff Mcmahan, Killing in War (book) Michael Walzer, Just and Unjust Wars (book) Carl von Clausewitz, On War (book) War, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
undefined
4 snips
Aug 11, 2024 • 48min

Episode 133, 'Vulture Capitalism' with Grace Blakeley: Live at Glastonbury Festival

In an engaging conversation, Grace Blakeley, an economics commentator and author of 'Vulture Capitalism,' tackles the sinister dynamics of corporate power. She discusses the troubling collusion between government and corporations, exemplified by the Boeing 737 MAX failures. Blakeley critiques the superficiality of freedom in capitalism, advocating for collective ownership and grassroots movements. The talk also highlights the detrimental effects of digital capitalism on self-worth and the environment, calling for community action to reclaim societal values.
undefined
Jul 28, 2024 • 33min

Episode 132, ‘The Concept of Beastliness’ with Ellie Robson (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Philosophy is about concepts – what it is to be moral, to be in love, or belong to the human species – and these concepts pervade every aspect of our lives. Yet, what images come to mind when you think of Immanuel Kant, David Hume, or René Descartes? For many of us, we imagine Descartes in his armchair, Hume at his desk, and Kant on one of his solitary walks. We certainly don’t imagine these figures, wearing boiler suits… For Mary Midgley, the image of a philosopher withdrawn from the realities of everyday affairs represents precisely where philosophy has gone wrong. For Midgley, philosophy is best understood – not as an exercise of self-indulgent scholarship – but as a sort of plumbing. Our concepts run through our societies like the pipes through our homes, and it’s the job of the philosopher – that is, the plumber – to examine the pipes and keep the water from swamping the kitchen floor. For Midgley, we need philosophy, just as we need plumbing…philosophy’s not a luxury; it’s a necessity. Joining us to discuss the philosophy of Mary Midgley is Dr Ellie Robson. Dr Robson is a British Society for the History of Philosophy Postdoctoral Fellow and Teaching Associate at Nottingham University. Ellie – whose work primarily focuses on the history of philosophy and meta-ethics – is one of the leading scholars of philosophy on Mary Midgley’s life and work. In this episode, she’ll illustrate Midgley’s meta-philosophy and meta-ethics through her analysis of the concept of beastliness. Let’s dig up the floorboards and see what’s leaking. Contents Part I. The Roots of Human Nature Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Ellie Robson (website) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley’s Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature: a re-appraisal (paper) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley on Water and Thought: Is Public Philosophy Like Plumbing? (article) Mary Midgley, The Concept of Beastliness (paper) Mary Midgley, Beast and Man (book) Mary Midgley, The Myths We Live By (book) Mary Midgley, What Is Philosophy For? (book) Gregory McElwain, Mary Midgley: An Introduction (book)
undefined
Jul 14, 2024 • 35min

Episode 132, ‘The Concept of Beastliness’ with Ellie Robson (Part I - The Roots of Human Nature)

Philosophy is about concepts – what it is to be moral, to be in love, or belong to the human species – and these concepts pervade every aspect of our lives. Yet, what images come to mind when you think of Immanuel Kant, David Hume, or René Descartes? For many of us, we imagine Descartes in his armchair, Hume at his desk, and Kant on one of his solitary walks. We certainly don’t imagine these figures, wearing boiler suits… For Mary Midgley, the image of a philosopher withdrawn from the realities of everyday affairs represents precisely where philosophy has gone wrong. For Midgley, philosophy is best understood – not as an exercise of self-indulgent scholarship – but as a sort of plumbing. Our concepts run through our societies like the pipes through our homes, and it’s the job of the philosopher – that is, the plumber – to examine the pipes and keep the water from swamping the kitchen floor. For Midgley, we need philosophy, just as we need plumbing…philosophy’s not a luxury; it’s a necessity. Joining us to discuss the philosophy of Mary Midgley is Dr Ellie Robson. Dr Robson is a British Society for the History of Philosophy Postdoctoral Fellow and Teaching Associate at Nottingham University. Ellie – whose work primarily focuses on the history of philosophy and meta-ethics – is one of the leading scholars of philosophy on Mary Midgley’s life and work. In this episode, she’ll illustrate Midgley’s meta-philosophy and meta-ethics through her analysis of the concept of beastliness. Let’s dig up the floorboards and see what’s leaking.   Contents Part I. The Roots of Human Nature Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Ellie Robson (website) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley’s Beast and Man: The Roots of Human Nature: a re-appraisal (paper) Ellie Robson, Mary Midgley on Water and Thought: Is Public Philosophy Like Plumbing? (article) Mary Midgley, The Concept of Beastliness (paper) Mary Midgley, Beast and Man (book) Mary Midgley, The Myths We Live By (book) Mary Midgley, What Is Philosophy For? (book) Gregory McElwain, Mary Midgley: An Introduction (book)
undefined
Jun 30, 2024 • 45min

Episode 131, 'In Defence of God's Goodness' with Jack Symes (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

Birds sing joyfully, dogs smile as they fetch their sticks, and philosophers laugh at their own jokes on podcasts. It is a happy world after all. In fact, if we ponder upon such delights for long enough, it is possible to infer – even during our darkest days – that these are gifts bestowed by a benevolent creator, for these are not necessary for our survival but are gratuitous goods. Yet, says another, what if these delights are no more proof of a benevolent creator than they are a malevolent one? What if these goods are given just to amplify our suffering when they are inevitably taken from us? And, what if, for every reason given for believing in a good-god, there was room for an evil-god to just as easily take his place? In this episode, we’ll be exploring the evil-god challenge with Dr Jack Symes, teacher and researcher at Durham University and editor Bloomsbury’s popular book series, Talking about Philosophy. According to Symes, whilst the evil-god challenge has its merits, we should be sceptical about its attempts to draw parallel arguments to those in favour of god’s goodness. Ultimately, for Symes, there are enough asymmetries in these parallel arguments that we should consider the evil-god challenge defeated. Contents Part I. Defeating the Evil-God Challenge Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Jack Symes (website) Jack Symes, Defeating the Evil-God Challenge: In Defence of God’s Goodness (book)

The AI-powered Podcast Player

Save insights by tapping your headphones, chat with episodes, discover the best highlights - and more!
App store bannerPlay store banner
Get the app