The Panpsycast Philosophy Podcast

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

In this enlightening discussion, Professor Jay Garfield, a leading proponent of Buddhist philosophy, dives deep into the intricate world of samsara and the six realms of existence. He challenges individualistic views in capitalism, advocating for a more interconnected understanding of humanity. Garfield also elucidates the philosophical context of Buddhism, presenting it as a metaphor for suffering that transcends cultural boundaries. His playful comparisons and engaging banter highlight the importance of discourse in philosophy, making complex ideas accessible and relatable.

Join Professor Jay Garfield, a leading scholar in Buddhist philosophy, as he sheds light on the intricate teachings of Siddhārtha Gautama. They delve into the poignant themes of suffering, impermanence, and interdependence, questioning why these insights are often overlooked in Western philosophy. Garfield advocates for a reevaluation of how Buddhist thought can transform our understanding of happiness and morality. Prepare to explore the concept of emptiness and its role in cultivating a deeper appreciation of life.

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)

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)

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)

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)

Introduction “How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh. In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy. Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins. 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. Allāh Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (website). Mohammad Saleh Zarepour, Necessary Existence and Monotheism (book). Zain Ali, ‘Some Reflections on William Lane Craig’s Critique of Islam’ (paper).

Introduction “How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh. In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy. Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins. 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. Allāh Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (website). Mohammad Saleh Zarepour, Necessary Existence and Monotheism (book). Zain Ali, ‘Some Reflections on William Lane Craig’s Critique of Islam’ (paper).