The Panpsycast Philosophy Podcast

This episode is proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Partially Examined Life: www.partiallyexaminedlife.com. Gregory B. Sadler on YouTube: www.youtube.com/gbisadler. Born in Rocken, in Prussia in 1844, Nietzsche set out his career in philology but later turned to writing idiosyncratic philosophical treatise and collections of aphorisms. He directed these against the pious dogmas of Christianity and traditional philosophy. He saw both as self-serving veils drawn over the harsher realities of life. He felt we needed not a high moral or theological ideals but a deeply critical form of cultural genealogy that would uncover the reasons why we humans are as we are and how we have come to be this way. He believed that every great philosopher actually a kind of involuntary and unconscious memoir rather than conducting an impersonal search for knowledge. Studying our own moral genealogy cannot help us escape or transcend ourselves but it can enable us to see our illusions more clearly and lead a more vital, assertive existence. There is no God in this picture. The human beings who created God have also killed him. It is now up to us alone. The way to live is not to throw ourselves into faith but into our own lives, conducting them in affirmation of every moment, exactly as it without wishing anything was different and without harbouring resentment for others or our fate (Sarah Bakewell, The Existentialist Cafe, p.19-20). Part I. What is the philosophical underpinning of Nietzsche? (36:40 in Part I), Part II. An Introduction to Nietzsche’s Thought (50:00 in Part I), Part III. What can Nietzsche teach us? (00:05 in Part II), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion. (28:15 in Part II).

This episode is proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Dr Stephen Law is a Reader in philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London, and editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal THINK. Amongst many other books, Stephen Law is the author of A Very Short Introduction to Humanism, The War for Children's Minds, The Philosophy Gym, and Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked into an Intellectual Black Hole. Stephen Law has debated many Christian philosophers, including William Lane Craig, John Lennox and Alvin Plantinga. Our central focus today is Law’s main argument against the existence of God – 'The Evil-God Challenge'. The evil-god challenge can be stated as follows: why should we consider the hypothesis that there exists a good-god, significantly more reasonable than the hypothesis that there exists an evil-god? Part I. The Evil-God Challenge (start of Part I), Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part II).

This episode is proudly supported by New College of the Humanities. To find out more about the college and their philosophy programmes, please visit www.nchlondon.ac.uk/panpsycast. Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Dr Stephen Law is a Reader in philosophy at Heythrop College, University of London, and editor of the Royal Institute of Philosophy journal THINK. Amongst many other books, Stephen Law is the author of A Very Short Introduction to Humanism, The War for Children's Minds, The Philosophy Gym, and Believing Bullshit: How Not to Get Sucked into an Intellectual Black Hole. Stephen Law has debated many Christian philosophers, including William Lane Craig, John Lennox and Alvin Plantinga. Our central focus today is Law’s main argument against the existence of God – 'The Evil-God Challenge'. The evil-god challenge can be stated as follows: why should we consider the hypothesis that there exists a good-god, significantly more reasonable than the hypothesis that there exists an evil-god? Part I. The Evil-God Challenge (start of Part I), Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part II).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. The Nicomachean Ethics is Aristotle’s (384 – 322 BC) best-known work on ethics. The work consists of ten books and is understood to be based on Aristotle’s lecture notes. These notes were never intended for publication. Sometimes his notes are merely cues to talk more generally about a subject, other times they are more representative of what Aristotle would have actually said to his students. The Nicomachean Ethics is amongst the most discussed texts in history and philosophers continue to debate its contents and intended purposes today.  One cannot deny, however, that Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics is concerned with key political and ethical questions – Questions like, How can we do what is best for citizens? and What is the good life and how do we achieve it? Part I. Aristotle’s Approach and Fundamental Arguments (start of Part I), Part II. Virtue as Excellence (start of Part II), Part III. Book X and Application (start of Part III), Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion (start of Part IV).

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Most people understand conscience as something which tells us right from wrong. The conscience is that little voice in your head that tells you to do your homework, go to bed on time and eat 5 a day. In fact, the Oxford Dictionary defines conscience as: “A person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.” We’re going to be questioning this definition extensively. What is conscience? Where does the conscience come from? Where does the word conscience come from? Is conscience fundamental in its own right, or is it acquired through our development? Does the conscience carry any moral authority, and if so, what should be the function of conscience in ethical decision-making? Is conscience just an illusion? To aid our exploration of these questions, we’re going to be consulting C. S. Lewis’ Studies in Words in Part I, Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae in Part II and Sigmund Freud’s The Ego and the Id in Part III. In Part IV we’ll wrap up the show with some further analysis and discussion and the return of philosophical ultimatum.

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Most people understand conscience as something which tells us right from wrong. The conscience is that little voice in your head that tells you to do your homework, go to bed on time and eat 5 a day. In fact, the Oxford Dictionary defines conscience as: “A person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.” We’re going to be questioning this definition extensively. What is conscience? Where does the conscience come from? Where does the word conscience come from? Is conscience fundamental in its own right, or is it acquired through our development? Does the conscience carry any moral authority, and if so, what should be the function of conscience in ethical decision-making? Is conscience just an illusion? To aid our exploration of these questions, we’re going to be consulting C. S. Lewis’ Studies in Words in Part I, Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae in Part II and Sigmund Freud’s The Ego and the Id in Part III. In Part IV we’ll wrap up the show with some further analysis and discussion and the return of philosophical ultimatum.

Everything you could need is on www.thepanpsycast.com! Please tweet us your thoughts at www.twitter.com/thepanpsycast. Most people understand conscience as something which tells us right from wrong. The conscience is that little voice in your head that tells you to do your homework, go to bed on time and eat 5 a day. In fact, the Oxford Dictionary defines conscience as: “A person's moral sense of right and wrong, viewed as acting as a guide to one's behaviour.” We’re going to be questioning this definition extensively. What is conscience? Where does the conscience come from? Where does the word conscience come from? Is conscience fundamental in its own right, or is it acquired through our development? Does the conscience carry any moral authority, and if so, what should be the function of conscience in ethical decision-making? Is conscience just an illusion? To aid our exploration of these questions, we’re going to be consulting C. S. Lewis’ Studies in Words in Part I, Aquinas’ Summa Theologiae in Part II and Sigmund Freud’s The Ego and the Id in Part III. In Part IV we’ll wrap up the show with some further analysis and discussion and the return of philosophical ultimatum.