After Dinner Conversation

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2023!STORY SUMMARY: After Dinner Conversation editor Kolby wraps up the Season Five podcast and answers ten listener questions.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short stories here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, TikTok

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: In this work of philosophical short story fiction, a civilization-sized space ship has been flying to populate the surrounding solar systems. They start with a skeleton crew, use ship resources and grow their population over generations, then arrive at a new planet. They drop off the extra people, replenish their raw resources, and do it all again. All is well until a weak radio signal makes them realize they are heading towards a planet that likely already has sentient alien life. If they don't stop, their population will burst at the seams in the ship and they will likely run out of resources before the next solar system. If they do stop, they are likely to, over time, subjugate the indigenous population. They have just weeks to decide if they plan to make a course correction.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.COMPANION PODCAST: Listen to our audiobook readings of After Dinner Conversation short stories (“Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Audiobooks”).MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Zoe gets a knock on her door from the Department of Public Health. They have detected increased biochemical signatures that lead them to believe she has been having sexual intercourse without a properly filed Intimate Partnership Agreement (IPA). The IPA's are for her protection to ensure that any potential partners are disease free. Initially, she denies the accusations, but the evidence from her Livewell stream is overwhelming. This time, it's just a fine, but if it happens again the punishments will get more severe, all the way up to having points deducted from her social confidence rating.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.COMPANION PODCAST: Listen to our audiobook readings of After Dinner Conversation short stories (“Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Audiobooks”).MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: When, if ever, is it okay to let evil win? Should all wars be fought to the bitter end, or is ending the suffering of your people more important? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, the Prime Minister is a long-time military man sworn to fighting the evil aggression of the Theocratic Republic of New Anglia. The war has been going on a long time. As a military leader, he ran on the platform of ending the war in his first term. He is elected and brings his most trusted military advisors with him to office. Albert was one of those trusted advisors he brought with him. Days before a large military operation, Swift Wind, is about to take place, Albert makes a startling discovery. There is a leak in the President's office, the Angelians know of the coming invasion. Albert rushes in to tell the Prime Minister who promptly locks him in the bathroom and tells him he is the one who is the leak. Swift Wind is meant to fail. The Prime Minster has decided that the only way to end the suffering is to lose the war.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.COMPANION PODCAST: Listen to our audiobook readings of After Dinner Conversation short stories (“Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Audiobooks”).MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: What makes a “religious” holiday? Does the combination of ritual, culture, and family custom all merge together to create “religion?” Does it even matter if the historical basis for religious stories are false? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, the spaceship computer AI wakes up a family in deep space hibernation to give them time to prepare for, and celebrate, Passover. There are many situations unique to being in space that must be overcome; determining the right time period when taking into consideration time dilation, not to mention missing ingredients for traditional foods. Also, they are short two people of the requisite ten and ask the computer AI to “convert” and serve the role of two additional Jewish people. Awkwardly, the computer reminds them that some of their traditional stories are not supported by archeological evidence. This all begs important questions about the complicated weaving of history, faith, culture, and family custom in religious ceremony.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.COMPANION PODCAST: Listen to our audiobook readings of After Dinner Conversation short stories (“Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Audiobooks”).MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: What do we lose when we leave childhood and become adults? Is this a good thing? Can we, at least for a moment, turn back time and see the world again as a child? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Becca and Adam are members of the Fairytale Fellowship, a group of children who can still see the magic in the world and protect the world from wrong-doing magical creatures. Becca and Adam find special glasses that allow anyone, even adults, to see the invisible magical creatures around them. They rush to get the glasses to the Fellowship, but are stopped by a Faun who steals the glasses and forces them to play a game to win the glasses back. They win the game, but valuable time has passed. Becca and Adam have aged out and experienced “The Shift” all children experience into adulthood that makes them unable to see magical things. Their worst fear has happened, they have grown up.DISCUSSION: Another really strong story, this one about growing up and what it means to grow up. That's the main question for discussion, what does it mean to grow up? What does it mean to play, and when is the last time you can remember being able to play in a child-like way? And what is the difference with that, and playing as an adult? Is it “intent?” If you really waned to could you even play without intent again? We went round and round on this one, and never really had great answers. Perhaps, after listening to the discussion, you will have developed some answers of your own.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.COMPANION PODCAST: Listen to our audiobook readings of After Dinner Conversation short stories (“Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Audiobooks”).MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: Is it appropriate to hold politicians accountable for their past votes, their past actions, and their past opinions, even if they are not reflective of them today? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Senator McCoy is 130 years old and is considered a “national treasure” for his nearly century of public service. Shortly before his retirement he is confronted by a member of an extremist organization (that supports eugenics) who have found evidence of a paper he published in college where he supports abortion. Given the modern political climate where every person is needed to build society, this information would forever stain his legacy. Senator McCoy hires a “fixer” to find and destroy the source material and preserve his legacy. However, things go wrong and the would-be blackmailer crashes the Senators party in an attempt to expose him. The Senator is nearly killed, but is finally able to enjoy an untarnished retirement legacy free from the truth of his past.DISCUSSION: An interesting story, for sure, and one that functions really well as a short story with a fully developed arc. There are also some really great questions in the story ripe for discussion. For example, are there votes that politicians might make that are “unforgivable?” So, are they never allowed to change with the times? And if there are unforgiveable votes, what is the thread in them that makes certain votes unable to ever be walked back, while others can be in the future if minds are changed? There is also a really interesting idea in the story about how malleable history is to fits the narrative of the day. The main person was pro-choice, but now, to fit the culture of the day, being pro-choice in the past means being pro-eugenics in the present. That reframing of history may happen far more than we would think. And finally, at least for Kolby, perhaps the biggest ethical error in the entire story is the cavalier way in which the Senator goes back and changes historical documents to secure his political legacy. Great story all around!BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.COMPANION PODCAST: Listen to our audiobook readings of After Dinner Conversation short stories (“Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Audiobooks”).MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: A review of “Newcomb's paradox” and “Roko's Basilisk,” asks the question, it is better to help build a super AI when failure to do so might later get you punished by it? This work of philosophical short story of fiction is written as a letter to a friend. The letter writer was told about, and is now working on, a computer program that will infiltrate and merge with other computers, eventually created a singularity of a super intelligent, conscious AI. This AI, the author argues, will have mastered time travel and will naturally want to go back in time and punish anyone who failed to help it come to life. The author concludes the letter by requesting $3,000 and making clear that failure to send the money might be viewed by the future AI (if it is ever created) as a punishable response for failing to help it get built.DISCUSSION: This is a great little one-trick-pony story about general AI and the creation of a super intelligence. It's a pretty clear short story version of Roko's Basilisk and that's just fine. So, if we got this letter demanding money, would we send money? We were split, Kolby said yes, Jeremy and Ashley seemed less interested. It also brings up an interesting questions about the ethics of even sending a letter like this, if you believe such things because, by sending the letter, you now have made it so your friend no longer has plausible deniability as to why they didn't help the AI get creating. If you send out 1000 letters like this asking for $100, how many would send you the money, we guessed more than a few.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: Should medicine developed through privately funded research be auctioned off to the highest bidder or distributed to those most in need? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Amaya has developed a “bug” based on a rare flower that actively finds and repairs damaged cells in the human body. Her friend, and later husband, helps her bring additional funding to the project. The important flower is quite rare and after more than a decade Amaya is unable to replicate the flower's properties. This puts her husband, and her investors, into a difficult situation of deciding if the neediest should get access to the limited treatments available, or if it should be auctioned off to the super rich. Amaya finally cracks the code and is able to replicate the flower's properties when she dies in a mysterious lab explosion. Her daughter, Jayde, grows up fighting against selling the limited supply of medicine to the highest bidder. Over time, Jayde grows old and dies. At her funeral the truth is revealed to her husband, the company had her killed in order to perpetuate scarcity and secure increased profits.DISCUSSION: This is a story we have seen in other variations, but this is the clearest example we have seen of the question, “How do you distribute medicine when resources are scarce?” It would seem obvious you would give them to those most in need. However, those able to pay the most mean more profits, and more resources to develop future treatments. What role, and how much, should the government have? There are no great answers for any of these questions, but they are useful fodder for discussion all the same.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: Is acceptable to consume art that reflects the “depraved, the cruel, the violent, and the heartless” aspects humanity? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Felix doesn't go for “moral relativism.” He believes there is good and evil, that art should not reflect the evil of the world, or enrich artists who are found wanting. Accordingly, Felix has gone about the lifelong process of removing all copies of the depraved art he can find, and afford to buy, in circulation. A police officer comes to his door because his sister in Arizona hasn't heard from him in months and has asked for a wellness check. Felix explains his abundant video and book collection to the officer who is at first confused, but later begins to understand Felix's reasoning.DISCUSSION: Brings up load of great questions about how we judge art in all its forms when associated with an artist. Would you hang a painting that was done by Hitler? Isn't there enough great music, literature, and art that doesn't get recognized that it's worth focusing on the obscure artists who need our support? That said, it's tough to know if it's the person or the situation, that makes them do these things. Would a normal person, given the money and power that comes with fame turn into a beast? And, of course, the economics of the whole idea of buying up art to remove it from circulation doesn't work, but we are willing to suspend this point to get to the better point of the story, should we judge art the artist? Does it matter if they are alive or dead? Does it matter if they ever had the chance to even know their belief system was wrong?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: Should a criminal suffering from the remorse of the crime he committed be permitted to be freed of that pain? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, Mr. Henmore's was convicted of a terrible crime many years ago. He served his time, and been paroled, and is genuinely remorseful for what he did. In fact, his pain is so great, even years later, he suffers severe, almost daily, mental anguish from the knowledge of what he did. His lawyer has gone before the Grand Rectification Council to ask permission to have Mr. Henmore's memory wiped clean of the crime he committed so as to enter his suffering. After making his case on behalf of his client, it is now up to the Council, should Mr. Henmore forever remember the horrible thing he has done?DISCUSSION: A hard story that caused us to go back and forth several times. First, can we really be sure that erasing the memory of the crime won't alter the person so as to make it more likely they will commit the crime in the future? If we are absolutely sure of that, is there an argument to be made that the punishment of remembering the crime you committed should last forever? Counterpoint, does society have a duty to create useful people of those who are safe to integrate into society? And finally, from an emotional standpoint, don't you want the person to committed the crime, simply to suffer with the knowledge of what they did? Lots of questions in this Gordian Knot of a story, but very few clear ethical answers. BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2022!STORY SUMMARY: How do you find common ground with those that believe in a vast, intricate, media conspiracy to hide the truth? In this work of philosophical short story of fiction, the narrator drives out to his parent's house to visit them for the holidays. Much to his surprise, when his parents open the door, they are only two feet tall! He is concerned that his parents, like many in the world, have shrunk to half their size. His parents, however, are equally concerned about their son because they believe he, and others in the world, have doubled in size. The son tries to explain to his parents that they have shrunk, that is why their house, and all their belongings, seem so large. However, his parents believe he, like many others, have an altered idea of what reality is, and that they have been lied to by the media and local officials. The son continues to come year after year to visit his tiny parents, who continue to refuse that they have changed, not the world around them.DISCUSSION: Story brings up some great questions. When do you argue with people, and when do you simply write them off and let them have wrong beliefs? Does the closeness of the person matter? Would you argue with your parents if they held an idea you thought was clearly wrong, but let a distant Uncle simply keep having their wrong belief system? And what if you turn out to be the the wrong one? How do you know who is wrong? Is it just a matter of who has the larger number of people in their belief camp? And to what extent does media coverage determine the size of the people sharing that belief?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free or an entire year for just $4.95!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Philosophy | Ethics Short Story Magazine: Code “Happy” for 12 Issues/$4.95! https://www.afterdinnerconversation.com/subscribe/yearlyNamed “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Are there certain things you shouldn't be able to insure against? In this work of philosophical short story fiction, the narrator has an eating disorder, and mental health issues. Regardless, she is a good employee at an insurance company. Just before closing, a call arrives from a good client, the local diocese who inquires about getting insurance to protect them against sexual abuse of children by priests. She takes the issue, and her concerns, to her boss who threatens to fire her if she fails to write the policy. It's not their job to judge, he says, it's their job to insure. A flashback shows why this point strikes so close home with the narrator. As a young child she was bullied on the school bus for being overweight. In an attempt to lose weight she started getting off the bus early to walk the last three miles home. Later, her bully accused the bus driver of touching her when they were on the bus alone together. Having come full circle, not much has changed. The narrator writes the contract, and sends it to the diocese to sign and return.DISCUSSION: A wonderful story set in Ireland in the 1980's that asks an important question about risk, and what you should and shouldn't be able to insure against. Of course, you can't crash your car and get an insurance payout. You can't burn down your own house and then make a claim. Can you insure against sexual assault allegations if you know those allegations are likely to be coming soon? What obligations, if any, does the insurance company have to ask questions first, or to report what they may know?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: After Dinner Conversation editor Kolby wraps up the Season Four podcast and answers ten listener questions.DISCUSSION:What got you interested in doing After Dinner Conversation?How do all of you know each other from the podcast?Why does your audio sound different each episode?How long do you think you will do the podcasts for?Why does Kolby always do the story introductions?How can I submit a story for consideration for the podcast? How do you find your stories?Do you ever talk to the authors before doing the podcast?Would you ever consider having a guest on the podcast?What kind of stories are you looking for?Would you ever consider reading the stories on the air instead of just discussing them?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short stories here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: The narrator is walking down a small-town street when he comes across the devil, relaxing on vacation for the holidays. The narrator knows it is the devil because of his horns and goat legs. He also has a few small demon children in tow. The narrator, surprised, stops the devil to talk to him. The devil is cordial and says he has outsourced most of the “hell work” and spends his time traveling around the world moving from place to place. He likes the small towns during the holidays and enjoys the peace and quiet. The narrator feels he should do something, perhaps confront the devil, rather than allowing him to exist in peace. Finally, the narrator has second thoughts, in part because he doesn't have a suitable weapon. The devil and his children continue in peace on their way.DISCUSSION: One of our shorter stories and more to the traditional form of what we tend to discuss; a single interesting question put into a short story framework. In this case, the question is just wonderful, that being, do you always have an obligation to fight evil when you see it, even when you are fighting alone and feel (or know) that your efforts are futile, and are likely to go unnoticed? This story serves as a wonderful allegory for fighting against political or corporate abuse and how small our single vote or purchasing choice feels. Feeling, as the story says, that we are equipped with nothing more than a set of knitting needles. And yet, someone like Greta Thunberg was just a single person and her lone voice did, and does, matter. Maybe the lesson is fight futile battles and lose them in a public way?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: The prison medical doctor is called in the middle of the night to take care of Fuzzy, an uneducated, mostly toothless, prisoner who has spent the majority of his life behind bars. Fuzzy, it seems, has gotten into eating cheese, something that strongly disagrees with his stomach and causes severe diarrhea. While the doctor waits for Fuzzy on the toilet and treats him for dehydration he learns Fuzzy's story. Fuzzy was a young child from a poor family when his brother got him into a small-time gang robbing homes. Fuzzy and his brother wanted to get out of their life and move to Houston to look for legitimate work, but need enough money from a big heist to cover their travel fees. Their final heist goes wrong and the police show up. Fuzzy watches his brother get wrongly gunned down and, in a panic, hops in the van to try to get away. In the process he hits and kills a police officer with the van. The remaining members of the gang are captured and found guilty. Fuzzy, it seems, was able to eat so much cheese as it was his “last meal” on death row and assumed he wouldn't be around for the results. However, there was a last-minute error with the electric chair so he was forced to face the retribution of his culinary choices. Hearing Fuzzy's story, the doctor feels greater sympathy for Fuzzy and his life.DISCUSSION: Fuzzy is an interesting character. Clearly, he is meant to be a sympathetic character, and he is. However, he might be someone we feel empathy for, but don't all actually like. And who's story is this? Is it the doctor's story? We think so. We think the story is the arc of the doctor that goes from seeing Fuzzy as a inmate who forced him out of bed in the middle of the night, to a human being who was wrongly put in jail for the rest of his life for a crime he committed when he was a child. This story, of course, begs the question, what is the purpose of putting Fuzzy in jail for his entire life? It's clearly not to reform him. It must be simply to punish him as it seems unlikely any of this is a deterrent of any kind to others. We also don't really know the truth. After 50 years of telling the same story over and over again, he will have crafted every word to be the perfect telling of his version of events. What we do know is the system failed in this case, and the author wants us to understand that that may often be the case for our judicial system.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Jane goes to visit her parents over the Christmas holiday. She has recently learned that her parents, under a program that favors the rich and elite, had had her genetically modified before she was born to be the best possible version of herself. Jane is crushed at learning that her life success has nothing to do with her hard work and is angry at her parents for having genetically modified her. Her father argues the problem of evil; that it was in his means to do good, and had he failed to do so, he would have been a god that allowed evil to exist. Jane is unhappy with his responses, but now must move forward with the choice of what she will do, when it is her time to have children.DISCUSSION: This discussion didn't go the way I thought it would. Jeremy and Sarah are both parents, but also have expressed a strong dislike for gene editing for the wealthy as a form of class-ism. Therefore, it was assumed they would be against gene editing your own child. However, they both agree that when it comes to our own child, you have a moral obligation to do everything you are legally allowed to do to give them the best chance at success in life, including doing legal things that violate your own personal morals. We also discuss the “problem of evil” and if a parent who fails to give their child the best chance of success, is, in fact, guilting for allowing the evil of lessor traits to exist. Can't lie, this discussion did not go the way I expected!BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Kiki has a problem, the computer program that continually whispers the best choices, the Infinity System, is broken. She has been using it for years and simply doing what it says. Following its advice has become second nature to her. She heads into the shop to get it looked at, and finds out it must be sent off for repairs. She will be making choices on her own for a few days. The friendly “Mastermind” service representative at the shop asks her out on a date. Without her Infinity System giving her advice, she decides to take a chance and say yes. She ends up getting drunk and sleeping with him. When she heads into the store to check to see if her Infinity System is repaired, she sees the same “Mastermind” using the same pickup lines on a new woman. She storms out. Finally, after several lost days, her repaired Infinity System is repaired and sent to her house. Now she is stuck with the final decision, will she start using it again?DISCUSSION: Interesting story that brings up important discussions about when services to help you go too far. Also, there is the issue of AI trying to decide what kind of life you should be leading. Someone is programming that AI, and that person is making choices. Not to mention, how do you know the company is really acting in your best interest and not giving you advice that other companies paid them to give you? Even assuming all that isn't happening, there is still the question of if you are using the tool in a way to help you, or you are deferring to it and it is becoming a crutch. It seems the people that would most use it (people who need help making choices) are the people who should least use it (people who need practice making decisions). Still, it's an interesting idea of running the thin line of when technology makes your life better or worse.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Beth and Bob are expecting a baby. However, in this future, womb carried babies have been almost entirely replaced by the far safer “womb farms.” Beth has already decided she wants to have a natural pregnancy and carry the baby to term herself. She is shunned by others who see it as dangerous and selfish. Their neighbor, Sandy is the daughter of a Neo-Shaker family who used science to have their daughter born neuter, that is to say, without sexual organs or gender. Sex, they argue, is no longer necessary and sinful as procreation can now be handled without sex. Sandy self-identifies as female and intends to undergo a dangerous and painful procedure to add female sexual organs to her body. Beth dies during childbirth, but her baby survives. Bob and Sandy continue their friendship, and, overtime, start to fall in love. Sandy is finally scheduled for the operation, but Bob tries to talk her out of it. He has lost too many loved ones already. Sandy insists she must be made the gender to match her mental state and does the procedure.DISCUSSION: Interesting story in that it shows a contrast about the use of medicine. Are their biological functions that can/should be eliminated by science because they are simply the product of the meat that is our human body functions? Or, do you get a more rich experience as a human by having these purely physical functions we must do? Is carrying a baby one of these “meat” functions? On the other hand, the asexual character is using science to change her from the way she was born. Can science both be denied as being inappropriate in allowing us to feel human, and yet also required in helping us feel more human? Should Bob have done more to argue his case with his wife? After all, while she is carrying the baby, raising the child is a shared parental experience.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: A traveling salesman sits at the bar after a long day drinking bourbon. He is approached and cleverly pitched a new product he has discovered on a distant rim planet, Life. The product stops the aging process. The first batch is free, and the salesman returns eight years later to get into the distribution business.DISCUSSION: There are really three things going on in the story. First, how would you live your life differently if you knew you were going to live forever? Would you value other lives more, or less? Would you take a different review of risk? Second, there is the idea in the story that your soul exists because you have choices, and if you have your ability to make choices taken away, you have had your soul taken away. In the story, arguably, in order to continue to get the elixir, you have to get other people into the pyramid scheme, which means you have no choice, and have no soul. The third minor point of the story is about countries (or a planet in this case) with a single valuable resource can best leverage that resource for prosperity and power without risking being conquered by others to secure the resource supply.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions. Use the discount code on our website to get the first month free!SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: The narrator is simply going about her life riding the bus home from work. A few stops later, a wolf gets on the bus, pays the bus ticket, and has a seat. The woman has heard about wolves and is apprehensive. At the next stop a few teenagers get on the bus. They see the wolf and immediately begin teasing it. The wolf refuses to fight back until, eventually, the narrator stands up for the wolf. The teenagers get off and the woman speaks to the wolf. Police, having been notified of a disturbance, get on the bus and begin the process of arresting the wolf based on the call received. The narrator, and the other bus patrons, stand up for the wolf and explain it was the teenagers who initiated the altercation. The police leave. The wolf explains to the narrator that if he defends himself, he will be confirming the stereotypes about wolves and that it is only through others standing up on his behalf, that opinions can change.DISCUSSION: Clearly an allegory related to racism, this is a story suited for adults, but would also work very well as a children's story. One of our shortest podcast discussions, but just an amazing story to read and discuss. Brings up an interesting question about who are the ones able to end racism, those in power observing, or those the actions are against? Is passive resistance to show the brutality of your attackers the only way to bring moderates to your side? It's the MLK vs. Malcolm X question regarding resistance. The story also forces us to wonder what kind of person we are? Have we ever been the person watching others be discriminated against and did nothing? What would we do if we were on the bus?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Jared has decided to enter a government program that, after 15 hours of counseling, will allow him to legally take his own life. Doctor Ansley is the top government therapist with 199 “saves” for the year. After several sessions it becomes clear that Jared has serious conviction about dying, but he also has a secret reason for his choice. Only after Doctor Ansley tricks him by giving him a fake test does he divulge his true reason for wanting to die. Jared believes the earth is feeding off of humans and has instilled, through chemical responses, our desire to stay alive so we will continue feeding it. In short, all humans are the earth's food source and, only by becoming unattached from being alive, can we break the cycle. Jared completes the required sessions and dies. And Doctor Ansley now has questions as well.DISCUSSION: A really fascinating story that brings up important questions about our core belief system, where it comes from, and the obligations others have (or do not have) to respect it. There is a case to be made that you have a moral duty to try and talk all people, regardless of belief, to not kill themselves. Or, is that a type of bias towards valuing our own belief system regarding right and wrong reasons to allow people to die? Are there valid, and invalid reasons to kill yourself? Is a story like this, that proposes the idea of “ending the cycle of living” a story too dangerous to allow the public to read? But isn't that a violation of our liberty and our freedom to come to our own conclusions? Loads to talk about in this story, and loads more we could have talked about. A must read, and a must listen podcast.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: The narrator is invited by his father to go duck hunting as part of their bonding time. The narrator wants to spend time with his father, but expresses ethical concerns about hunting ducks. The father asserts hunting is a natural part of human evolution. The debate continues as the narrator decides to go on the hunt, but is undecided if he will pull the trigger. The story ends with father and son in the blind just at the moment before the narrator must decide if he is going to pull the trigger.DISCUSSION: This isn't really a story about sport killing or not, at least to us. The really interesting part of the story is about how family, and those emotional ties, and those we need to be loved by and respect, might cause us to do things that we find personally morally objectionable. Here, the father gives the son several chances to not participate in the duck hunt, but it's clear he will be disappointed, and that it might limit their future ability to have father/son time. This sort of unintentional (or intentional) manipulation happens not just with family members, but those in authority, or those who we respect and want approval from.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Jack Benson gives his child a prototype toy from his company as a Christmas present. When they check the toy battery compartment, they find a sad poem written in Chinese. Jack decides to fly to China and visit the factory where the toy is produced. He pays an employee to read the poem over the factory floor loudspeaker. A woman on the factory line stands up in acknowledgement, then humbly returns to her work. Later, after the shift, she slips him a book of her writings, presumably, expressing more thoughts and emotions about her life.DISCUSSION: The obvious question for this story is, of course, do we have an obligation to know more about where our products are sourced and the labor that is being used to build them? His child shows the very disposable way we look at products of cheap labor. Also, it may have been irresponsible on the part of the narrator to put the poem writer at risk. What if she had been fired? She didn't specifically ask for help. In some ways he seems trapped in his wealthy life as well, just trapped in a different way.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Martha dies. She wakes up three years later with her consciousness put into the body of an android. She did not ask for this, it simply happened. She is forced to accept that Martha is dead, and that she must live out her new life as Echo. As an android, she has limited rights. She cannot see her former family or friends. She can only work for minimum wage. She cannot interact with any technology. She cannot go to the same location more than twice in a week. She cannot meet other androids for prolonged periods of time. She is not even allowed to terminate her own existence. Her only friend is a journalist who is trying to get the “android story” out. He does this by using an override switch that paralyzes Echo and allows him to download her complete data set since her inception.DISCUSSION: Story brings up wonderful points about what rights you are born with and what it is about you that earns you those rights. Is it your body, or something else? Is it inevitable that there are always lower class people to do the hard work and have limited rights? She was perfectly happy to take rights away from the androids until she was one. Even the person that is helping her takes her memories without her permission. The question we are wholly not qualified to answer is, when is AI “alive?”BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Sienna is living with a “Monster,” in this case, her father. He does not hit her, but he does yell, and rant, and breaks things. Sienna grows up always on edge that the “monster” will lash out at her. Over time, she builds up equally toxic defense mechanisms. She learns to yell back and to be as hate-filled as her father. This all changes when she goes to college and meets her roommate Clara. Clara does not lash out. She does not accuse. She does not go into conversations prepared for battle. She listens, she is empathetic. She does not “keep score” in their friendship. Sienna assumes Clara has an alternative motive, and continues to be skeptical. Eventually, Sienna comes to see Clara for what she is, a decent human being. Armed with her new knowledge, Sienna heads home for Thanksgiving and confronts her father. Her father credits himself with “breaking the cycle” and being a good father by not physically abusing Sierra that way his father was to him. Sienna is frustrated, and resolves to never speak to him again. Over the Christmas holiday, Sienna decides to visit Clara's family. Sienna's mother asks if she, and only she, can come visit. Sienna reluctantly agrees. Her mother arrives, father in tow. The story ends with Sienna in jail, having killed her father.DISCUSSION: Interesting story that brings up outstanding questions about the cycle of abuse and what is “getting better.” Sienna's father is better than his father was to him, and it would be hard to expect much more from him outside of him independently deciding to get help. We already see Sienna taking on the horrible traits of her father and, were it not for her roommate, would probably end up just like her father. Perhaps everyone is the hero in their own story?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: (Not suitable for children.) Bill believes in the Tooth Fairy. He is 28 years old. His girlfriend finds this odd, and sometimes socially awkward, but otherwise harmless. This changes, however, when Bill has his wisdom teeth removed and places them under his pillow with the expectation that the Tooth Fairy will accept his offering and provide him her payment as her showing of appreciation. To appease his belief system, Bill’s girlfriend decides to take the teeth and leave Bill some money, but unknowingly does not leave him payment in the “right” amount. Bill interprets this to mean the Tooth Fairy is unhappy with his offering of teeth and tries leaving a tooth from a denture. The tooth fairy never comes. Frustrated, Bill knocks out his own teeth so as to make another, and what he sees as proper, offering. DISCUSSION: Interesting story about how we decide what belief systems are acceptable, and unacceptable. Why is a belief in the tooth fairy more or less valid than one in God, the Devil, or that professional wrestling is real. Do we have a duty to be permissible of all other beliefs? Should we work to actively dispel them? Is it enabling a belief when we say nothing or simply say all ideas have value?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Simon is on trial for, literally, killing the devil. He did it by telling everyone he was going to kill the devil. Of course, the devil found out and came to visit him. Simon told the devil he was a cheap peddler of a product, fear, he had never personally experienced. To prove he feared nothing, the devil removed his immortality. When he did that, Simon shot and killed him. However, nothing changed in the world. Evil didn’t go away, or even get less.DISCUSSION: The story asks the important question where does evil reside? Are we tempted to evil, or is there simply evil inside all of us. Conversely, if our evil is from our own thoughts and actions, does that also mean our grace comes, not from God, but from inside us as well? Do we simply create an external person to relive ourselves of the burden of understanding we are the evil of the world? How can we create less evil in the world? Does anyone think they are evil? Aren’t we all the hero in our own stories? Should the killed of Satan be put in jail?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: After Dinner Conversation Editor, Kolby, answers questions from readers and recaps Season Three.DISCUSSION: Kolby answer reader mail and recaps Season Three. What are his favorite stories from Season Three? What does he consider to be the most quintessential stories After Dinner Conversation has published? Why did we switch from publishing short stories to a monthly magazine? How do you judge stories for publication, and what are the best ways to increase my changes of getting published? How can I help out/support the publication?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Peter finds out his partner Samir has been sneaking around behind his back to “try out dreaming.” According to Samir, he likes the way sleeping, and dreaming, makes him feel. And besides, he argues, it doesn’t do any harm; his work will never find out. Peter decides to break the law in support of their relationship and to stop taking the drug that makes sleep and dreams unnecessary, in order to better understand his partner. However, after one try Peter decides he doesn’t like the feeling of losing control and that sleep isn’t for him.DISCUSSION: The main question of the story is, are biological functions a necessary evil to be gotten rid of by science and, is sleeping one of those biological functions? Are cutting your nails, and going to the bathroom things we gain value from, or simple biological acts to be removed if possible? Does sleep service a purpose or is it just a biological act? If the ability to go without sleep was available, wouldn’t it eventually become necessary to stay competitive in a workplace? We all agree the government should not make sleeping illegal, but if given the chance, many of the group would do away with sleep for the extra time it provides. Would you be willing to do something illegal that your partner was doing, as in the story? What if the illegal thing went against your own values, would you still do it if your partner was? Is there a minimum age whereby you should not be allowed to made to go without sleep?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Roosevelt is a young black child who is obsessed with the life and philosophies of President “Teddy” Roosevelt. He is new at the school and due to an issue with other students is forced into the “Friends Group;” a social adjustment group for students the school have deemed at-risk. While in the group he meets Teddy, an overweight boy who has been in the group for years because he pulled an X-ACTO knife in art class on a fellow student who continued to bully him about his weight. The two misfit boys develop a friendship. Roosevelt teaches Teddy how to fight, as well as imparting bits of wit and wisdom from his hero, Teddy Roosevelt. Things go awry when they are caught swimming naked in Teddy’s pool. The school rumor mill spreads that they are gay. This leads to the school forcing the two boys to fight after school. Roosevelt decides that Teddy has more to lose and is less prepared to deal with the consequences of the altercation, so he allows himself to lose the fight. As Teddy Roosevelt said, “No man is worth his salt who is not ready at all times to risk his body – to risk his well-being – to risk his life – in a great cause.” This story was the runner-up of the Fall 2020 After Dinner Conversation Writing Competition.DISCUSSION: This story is one of the most expertly crafted stories we have ever discussed. It perfectly portrays the prejudice and attitudes of the early 1980’s. Of course, the interesting question in the story is the role that Teddy Roosevelt plays in influencing the main character that has lost his father. A book, and a long dead President, are serving the role of role model in his life. And, in turn, this is influencing his friendship with others. Is this a good thing? Are role models in sports, business, or history, a good thing? Some don’t want to be role models. Some are showing idealized versions of flawed real people. What role should role models have in crafting our personalities? Should we, as a society, be more careful, or put more controls in place, about the role models that have the ability to influence the opinions of children?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: A a young boy is in the government waiting room waiting to be assigned a new “dream.” He strikes up a conversation with other people in the waiting room. Some of them are anxious to get new dreams implanted into their brain as they have not found success. Others don’t want to let go of the failed dream they were originally assigned because they believe, in their heart-of-hearts, it is what they were born to do. The government is indifferent to the desires of the people. Society has needs, people have innate talents, and the government, as far as they are concerned, should focus on getting people to follow the dreams they are good at, as well as the dreams that are most needed by society. This story was the winner of the Fall 2020 After Dinner Conversation Writing Competition.DISCUSSION: Interesting story about if we should focus our attention and training on where we have natural abilities, or simply be average at the things we love? In this case, the government is choosing where people should focus, but that is not new. Historically, the wealthy would be patrons of the arts and focus on where talents should be focused. Is it selfish to want to be happy? Do we tend to be happy at the things for which we have natural ability anyway? Interesting the perspectives based on age as well. Young people often view success differently that those that are older, and why is success measured by money or quality? Also interesting the way the characters cling to dreams they have that were, at least originally, given to them by the government.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: A college student lives in a society dedicated to removing prejudice and judgment. They do this, in part, by having citizens live in mobile crates. They rarely see each other in person and putting down others is sure to get you re-education training. The main character, along with her friend, escape to a nearby society that has no such restrictions. In fact, each person is put into a societal category. Our intelligent protagonist, looking forward to finally being able to shine, assumes she will be put in a higher category, but things don’t go as planned. Eventually, the government recruits her to bring down the fence that dividesthe two cultures.DISCUSSION: Interesting story about the positive and negative place for prejudice and judgment. Which society is worse? If we had to chose, which would be pick? Is the problem with the judging society, not that they judge, but that we don’t like their criteria because it doesn’t play into our strengths? Which society would be the easier to fix? We can’t really ever expect the judging society to change as those in power rarely, if ever, are willing to give up their position of privilege without a violent revolution.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: A preacher arrives on an off-world planet inhabited by 7 foot tall, multi-colored, bears, aka “Teddies.” Her mission is to run her church and, if possible, convert the local Teddies to Christianity. Over time she makes no progress and her church is at risk of being shut down by those funding it. She heads to the local Teddy church and learns that, according to their faith, God can only return when everyone alive is fulfilling their “Purpose” and, if you cannot find your purpose, you should volunteer to die so that you can re-enter the wheel of life and try again. Appalled by this doctrine, the preacher turns her focus to feeding the hungry. This is a violation of the culture as the Teddies believe that those that starve do so because it as their purpose to starve.DISCUSSION: Really fascinating story and world building, and a wonderful springboard for a discussion about free will and choice. Is “Purpose” just another version of a Zen discussion about “the way?” Can your purpose change? Do people really have a single purpose? And yet, teachers, and others, refer to their careers as a “calling.” The wealthy have also, historically, told those without that they are hungry because it is God’s will. Is this a caste system, of sorts at work?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 20 Philosophy Podcast” for 2021!STORY SUMMARY: Set in the 1600’s, a traveling man of knowledge comes into town with his young assistant and assortment of books. Various townspeople come to visit him, paying to ask questions. Why do my gums bleed? Why does is steel I forge brittle? Finally, a wealthy man comes and asks if he should allow his daughter to marry the local guard. The traveling man says yes, that love is always a thing to respect. The wealthy man comes back later with his daughter and attempts to bribe the traveling man to have him say they should call the relationship off. The traveling man refuses and, in the process, gives his assistant an important lesson about positive externalities.DISCUSSION: Like all of our stories, this one is very well written and has the feel of being written by a very wise person, who just happens to also be a writer. It’s interesting the way each person who comes to pay for advice has a different question that allows the traveling man to expound upon a life lesson. Also, it seems like each question relates to the subtext of the thing going on in that person’s life as well. The story brings up an interesting point about the rare case of positive externalities. While they are typically associated with businesses pushing costs off to society, it can just as well be about a couple in love getting the benefit of the price paid for by their father.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: Douglas Junior and his wife both have a rare, recessive, genetic disease. They donate their blood to a lab to help them find a cure. Through a medical mix-up, Douglas Junior’s DNA is used to create his clone. 20 years later he finds out about his clone and reaches out to meet him. Things don’t go exactly as planned as Douglas Junior is a blue-collar working man, while his clone is a top-of-the-class gay student who plans to join the space program.DISCUSSION: Interesting story that mirror some of the research done with sexual orientation differences between identical twins, as well as nature vs. nurture. Creates a springboard for good discussions about what information we would want to know about our clone. For example, are there unexplored genetic aptitudes I missed out on? Douglas seems to be very picky about which science he believes in, and which he doesn’t believe in, as so much of it is tied up how he self identifies. His clone is rightly frustrated by all the questions and says what may often be on the mind of others gay individuals, “it’s not my job to teach everyone in the world ‘Gay 101’”.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.FOLLOW: Twitter, Instagram, Facebook

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A woman is diagnosed with a heart condition and is offered the ability to grow a new heart to replace hers. She declines based on her religious beliefs. Her husband, who has medical power of attorney, waits until she is unconscious and near death, and goes against her wishes and orders the life saving procedure. When she wakes and finds out what he has done she divorces him. Even after the divorce and going out of jail, he does not regret his choice.DISCUSSION: This seems like a very real possibility today, or in the near future. There might not be any bad guys in this story. Mad respect to the woman for having the conviction of her faith. Respect to the man for saving his wife in support of his own ethics. Interesting how the mother, who is also religious, came to the conclusion the transplant was fine. The man clearly loved his wife, enough to save her, and lose her. Maybe he should have told her he would be unable to fulfill her wishes and to give medical power to someone else? This might be different if it was about children.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A weak spirited loser is contacted by the government and informed he has a twin that is the head of a powerful mafia organization. The government will pay him $1 million dollars if he goes through their program to learn the mannerisms and speech of his mafia twin and replace him in the organization. As the twin learns how to act like the mafia boss, he becomes more like him until he escapes the training program with the money and a new personality.DISCUSSION: A story about nature vs nurture, and to the extent which the way we act effects are mood, as well as who we are. The group generally agreed that changing behavior can change personality and mood. Kolby was of the opinion this process could be “hacked” to help us create better versions of ourselves. Others suggested this was already being done by celebrity product endorsements selling a lifestyle as much as the product. Ashley thought this might be a time-travel story, where they are actually creating the mob boss. Everyone thought the story was interesting as a premise, but a bit confusing how the organization could have some much information on the mob boss, but needed this twin to get information before arresting him.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: The story is from the perspective of a mother and her interest in what she believes is her daughter’s pending marriage. She has mental health issues that lead her to be temporarily institutionalized after the birth of her child. The daughter meets with mother from time to time, but provides very little information about her life. The mother continues to get worse until she is picked up by the police after an episode at a perspective wedding venue. The daughter later informs her mother that she got married without inviting her to the “small” wedding.DISCUSSION: The core question in this story is how much do you involve, or limit, a family member in your life who suffers from mental health issues? The mother isn’t a bad person, she just struggles. Is it more humane to simply cut her out of your life so as to limit the information and stress you cause her? Is it better to only interact with her on your own terms? Would you invite your mother to your wedding if you knew she might have an episode and become the center of attention? We are split, as podcasters, in what we would do. The story both plays into and mocks Jewish stereotypes, but at its core, deals directly with how we decide of level of support for family members with mental health issues.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: The story is a flashback of a man telling a story from the 1970’s that has always stuck with him. He is a psychology student learning about the “F Test” a test that supposedly allows you to gauge your fascist tendencies. He friend, a Vietnam Vet, disagrees with the simplicity of the test. To prove his point he talks to, and easily manipulates, a bohemian woman in the bar to change her life. The narrator watches and does nothing, but is horrified by how easily this happens. The incident ends their friendship.DISCUSSION: The story of being a charismatic leader is all too common; they say things that “feel good” to our emotions but aren’t true. They lead us with persuasion and ask us to forgot our critical thinking skills. The vet shows the narrator how easy it is to manipulate others, including the narrator. This process of praying on the weak, or on everyone, happens every day, to almost everyone. The trick is to be aware you have these tendencies and to use logic to not allow your emotions to rule you.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: Set in hell, a demon, “Bub” asks the person he is torturing for eternity what he did to end up in hell. Turns out he stole a few bikes. This causes Bub to question his purpose and walk off the job. He climbs to limbo to take a break from it all. Eventually, Hermes comes to fetch him and bring him before Satan, who punishes him for eternity for walking off the job.DISCUSSION: Wonderful story, both for the questions it asks, and the humor it brings to the situation. Brings up good questions about the “fairness” of eternal punishment for any temporary act. Also, brings up the question of a god who would is all good, all powerful, and all knowing, and yet allows people to be tortured. Nice twist on the concept in that Satan is hurting people, not because he cares about people, but because he knows it hurts God to see his children being hurt. Kolby wonders if walking off the job because of concerns about the morality of his actions should be enough to earn Bub a place in heaven.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: Set in the future, the Dios are a group of super humans who, because of having the wealth over generations to make mental and physical enhancements, are a different, and superior, race. Humans on earth sometimes agree to go to live on Mars with the Dios as their pets. The narrator is one such person, that is, until he starts to ask too many questions.DISCUSSION: Great world building. A longer and more complete story than we usually do. Perhaps this is a warning, not about keeping people as pets, but about the long term effects of the wealthy having access to technology that allows them to further separate themselves from the poor over generations. What level of difference in ability makes it okay to keep another species as a pet? Maybe the differences in the story aren’t as great as the Dios want them to seem? Is this slavery? Is it fair that those on earth are so poor this is their only way out? Is that the crime here? Is this different than having a “sugar-daddy” that takes care of you?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A sixteen year old girl is put in charge of her parents’ shop that sells memories of your past in exchange for a year of your future. The girl loves her job and all the memories she can feel leaking through the files. A sad man comes in and asks to have the memory of his “last good day.” She sells him the day at a discounted price for the remainder of the life he has left. It was, he says, the last day before he learned a terrible secret he never recovered from, one that caused his wife to leave him.DISCUSSION: The story is so beautifully written. The energy of the young girl working alone, and the visuals of the memories and feelings as she walks by them draw you in so deeply to her joy. However, the story is terribly sad. Would you trade a year of your future for a past day? It means you think one year of your future can’t live up to one day of your past. It means you think your best days are behind you. It also means you are living in the past. Maybe would be worth doing it to see a dead parent again or to relive a past moment and provide forgiveness for past mistakes. The very fact that this is possible might make living for the future harder. It’s perfect that a young girl is working the shop, because she only sees the memories as positive, rather than in relation to the life people have today they compare those days to.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A Jesuit Priest researches other sentient beings in the universe looking for species that are incapable of committing one of the cardinal sins. He finds six different species that, because of their biology, he says, cannot commit one of the sins. He is unable to find a species without the sin of Pride. He questions, but finally confirms, that this strengthens his belief in God.DISCUSSION: Are their merits of earth closing itself off from the universe for years in order to maintain its “cultural purity.” Is this a good idea or doomed to cause issues? Are there ways to preserve culture without bans on other cultures? Next, is sin automatic with choice? As soon as you have a sentient choice, does the fact you can make the wrong choice mean we are capable of sin? The examples for various species are tough, because it’s not like they aren’t capable of sin. The issue is that their biology or environment makes the sin impossible. So, with different choices available to different species, could there be different sins possible? Are the number of sins infinite?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: Set in the future, 2% of the population have a genetic makeup that allows them to be enhanced. The intelligent are very intelligent, the beautiful, like Greek gods. Because of their enhanced abilities, they run the world. An enhanced “Social” meets up with an enhanced “Rational” to tell him about a newly discovered drug that would allow the other 98% of the world to be able to be enhanced as well, but it would cause the 2% to regress to average, or worse. The Rational takes the vial and releases it into the world. The Social kills herself.DISCUSSION: If things in this world are so amazing, why are the 98% causing civil unrest? Should the elite naturally be left to lead others? Does being super-human automatically make you super moral? Should the truly exception should lead the masses? if everyone is raised up, we are right back where we were, with people fighting to be on top and not enough to go around. Do we live in a meritocracy today? Doesn’t money allow those at the top to keep their children at the top today? The only ones with no choice are the 2% after the virus is released. Discussion about if we would release the virus.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A black pastor in New Orleans is trying to get a redevelopment project built for his poor community post Katrina. Things aren’t going well. A white person was robbed and beat up in the area, which scared off the banks from lending. The pastor goes to the local gang and pays them to keep white people safe. He also reaches out to another church group to help with protests. The white developer/partner comes and says he is going to make the project smaller and the church will get less. The pastor goes to the black mayor who also wants a cut of the development money for his re-election campaign. The pastor finally decides he’s had enough and calls the federal government to report corruption in the city.DISCUSSION: Seems a very realistic portrayal of how things get done. There aren’t any clear good guys in this story, just people with codes that go with their social group. Which comes first, your code that pushes you into a group, or a group you get into that pushes their code on you? Maybe the pastor has finally decided to stop making moral compromises and live by better ethics, maybe not.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A young boy heads to the park to play soccer with friends, they tease him and won’t let him play because he had his soul removed. Flash to the discovery of the soul. A doctor has modified a CAT Scan machine and found the soul in the appendix. When the appendix is inflamed, sometimes it is medically caused, sometimes it is because of an injured soul. Regardless of the cause, it can still be removed and the problem is fine. And the person with no soul seems no different. The mother comforts the boy when he gets home. Later, the boy goes to a friends house, his mother tells the boy her son died, because he was having appendix issues, and they refused to have them removed because they didn’t want to remove his soul.DISCUSSION: You must first accept the premise of the story, that the people in the story found the soul in the appendix. Knowing that, what good is it to have a soul in the story? Seems like everyone stays basically the same. Would you write on a piece of paper selling your soul to another person? If so, you must believe in a soul, regardless of what you say. Otherwise, the paper means nothing and it’s free money. Would you be friends with someone without a soul? Is the soul tied to an afterlife, if so, maybe the mother who let her child die did the right thing. Should the government be allowed to impose a medically necessary procedure that a parent refuses? Courts in the US say parents can refuse treatment for their children, if they are under 12 years old, with a court order.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A woman wakes up strapped to a lab table. An emotionless doctor asks her to choose what she would do for the trolley problem. She is then graphically shown the results of her choice. A new choice, do you push people out of an over-capacity life raft? She is again graphically show the result of her choice. This goes on for 1000’s of scenarios until the woman is totally exhausted from watching death. Only then does she realize she is being punished, 900 years after a choice she made, to kill children in order to find the cure to a disease.DISCUSSION: Loads of utilitarian questions in this story, just one after another. Scenario makes them fit in the story very organically. Would a person really get rattled from watching all that death, or get desensitized? In Greek plays, it was called catharsis. It hard to know, is the woman being punished for her past acts, or re-educated, or being used as a deterrent to others? Can a person be punished after they have died? Should they be punished longer than their lifetime, or a single death?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: A single mother and her son have coffee before school. His car is in the shop, so she drives him to high school. He calls his mom later to say he left his laptop in the car. She decides to go through his laptop, and finds out his son and two friends are planning on shooting up the school in just days. She searches his room, and finds guns and drugs. The mother is worried about how this will effect her college daughter, and herself, if the shooting happens. The next day she spikes her son’s morning coffee with drugs and waits for him to die in his room of an overdose. She calls the police and ambulance. She disposes of the guns and laptop on the outskirts of town. The police suspect nothing and her son’s death is deemed a suicide by drug overdose.DISCUSSION: The mother is a psychopath, and her priorities are all wrong. Her first concern is her daughter, and she treats her son like a stranger. She is emotionless in killing her son. This also hints that the son’s issues might be genetic from the mother. This is wrong behavior. She didn’t have to call the police, she could have taken him to the father, or for treatment. There are still two remaining kids planning to shoot up the school, and she doesn’t even tell the school about them. This is a story as much about the mother’s issues as about a school shooting. However, school shootings are now just the world we live in as the “new normal.”BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020!STORY SUMMARY: Four prisoners are made to draw straws for the order they stand in a row. Their prison guard plans to push his bayonet into the first person and see how far back it goes in the line of men. The first man in line panics, runs, and is shot. The narrator talks to the man in front of him and tries to convince him not to run so he might slow down the thrust. The heavy set man in the back thinks he is safe, but the guard changes his mind and stabs him instead. In the end, only the narrator survives.DISCUSSION: Story focuses on morality, game theory, value theory, and infinite game theory. Should the heavy set man have volunteered to be first in line to slow down the blade for everyone else? Is it selfish to run and, thus, cause those behind you to be more likely to die? Should the four men have simply tried to rush the guard? Does everyone find God when they are about to die? Game theory seems to only work when dealing with large numbers, not individuals. Value theory seems to state that, at the end of the day, nothing is worth more than your own life. This is an infinite, not a finite, game. The guard seems like an arm-chair philosopher.BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.MAGAZINE: Sign up for our monthly magazine and receive short stories that ask ethical and philosophical questions.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.

Named “Top 15 Podcast” for 2020! STORY SUMMARY: Set in the future, an addict takes a cab to an isolated part of town. He goes to a private, illegal club to break the law; he orders meat. The club is raided by the police, who kill a patron during their interrogation of her. The meat-eating addict sneaks away, knowing he will break the law again.DISCUSSION: Story with so many layers. First, the contrast between the “humane” society that has banned meat eating, but the brutality of the individual police. Do more serious laws allow for more brutal policing? Also, is this man protesting, or is he simply an addict? Seems to be just be an addict. Are there natural rights? If so, is eating meat one of those natural rights? Does it matter if the reason the law was passed was to protect animals, or to prevent climate change? If a law is passed you disagree with, does it change your behavior? Do you leave the party where they are eating meat? Does it depend on the level of the crime they are committing?BOOK LINK: Download the accompanying short story here.NEWSLETTER: Receive periodic emails with links to free ethical short stories by signing up for our newsletter.SUPPORT: Support us on Patreon.