The Panpsycast Philosophy Podcast

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