Brain in a Vat

Are Jews entitled to their own homeland? Is the Israeli response to the massacre of civilians perpetrated by Hamas on October 7th justified? Should there be a ceasefire? David's Article in Quillette: https://quillette.com/2023/10/21/its-not-the-occupation/ Raja Halwani wrote to us about Jason's exposition of his view at 33:06. Here is Raja's clarification:**I wanted to clarify a point that Jason made during the interview with David Benatar. Jason asked Benatar what he thought of the view that “the view is that the Gazans are an oppressed people. They've been oppressed for so long that they've acted out of desperation. And there's only two options that they have.” Jason goes on to say that I have defended the view that “the Gazans are an oppressed people who only have two options. The one option is to die and the other option is to attack, to attack Israel in order to secure some sort of freedom. Those are its only two options. And so ... Raja takes the view that if Hamas were to lay down its arms, then it's just a slow death for the Gazans. That's, that would be the future of Gaza.”However, I did not make this claim about having only two options, nor would I, because it reads as a justification of killing civilians, especially given the context of the Hamas attacks of October 7 (and other attacks against Israelis). It reads as a justification because if death is one of only two options, then the second, to attack, seems permissible. The last sentence in Jason's question, about Hamas laying down its arms, seems to especially imply this (though Jason did not intend to make me come out as justifying Hamas's actions).Jason attributes this view to me based on something I wrote in my blog (as he explained to me in personal correspondence). Here is the specific passage on which Jason bases his attribution:People are quick to condemn Hamas for the evil that it has wrought, but they are as quick to neglect that Hamas acts out of sheer desperation, out of the sheer desire, no matter how steep the price, to score a victory against Israel, a country whose military might not even its prime ministers fully comprehend, and out of the sheer hopelessness of the slow death that their people has been dying. Although to explain this is not to justify it, I also ask the reader: What options do the Palestinians have? What do you advise them to do? Their lives are going nowhere. Peace initiative after peace initiative has failed them (and, to add insult to injury, they are blamed for the failure). No Palestinian state has emerged, and none is likely to given the current map (just look and see whether a state can be built out of the Swiss cheese that is the West Bank). Their tunnel has been long and with no light at its end. So what should they do? They ought to sit still and “take it like a man.” To suck it up. To bear the unfair burden of history. We have to tell them, “Misfortune has fallen upon you, and you may not extricate yourselves from it by killing civilians. Even as you yourselves die, slowly, surely, with no justification, and with barely an explanation, you may not take the lives of the civilians of your enemy. This is the noble way.”Clearly, the passage is a bitter one about Palestinian loss and oppression, but it is as clearly morally ruling out the option of killing civilians. So even though Hamas might take up arms against civilians, this is not a morally viable options for Gazans or Palestinians in general. Hence, insofar as Jason's question attributes to me a justification of attacks on civilians, this clarification should clarify that this is not my position.**Chapters:[0:00] Introduction[0:22] Thought Experiment[7:52] Historical context[23:13] Two-State Solution[27:46] Ethical Blockade[31:37] What if Hamas laid down their arms?[36:06] Current War[45:46] Proportionality[54:59] Concluding thoughts[59:01] Outro

In this episode of Brain in a Vat, we examine two competing political visions through an AI debate between Plato and Robert Nozick. Plato defends rule by philosopher kings and a unified society, while Nozick argues for individual liberty and a minimal state. Following our previous episode featuring Mill and Kant, we continue investigating major philosophical divides through thought experiments like the Allegory of the Cave and the Experience Machine. The episode considers justice, autonomy, and the proper role of government. Join the conversation and decide which vision of society you find more compelling.[00:00] Introduction[00:30] Plato's Allegory of the Cave[01:30] Philosopher Kings and the Ideal State[03:28] Criticisms of Plato's Republic[18:54] Nozick's Experience Machine[24:04] The Minimal State and Taxation[26:14] Anarchy vs. State[36:12] Comparing Political Visions[47:14] Final Reflections

Should we be allowed to sell our organs on the open market? Would the poor be exploited under such a system? And does organ donation impose an unfair burden on the relatives of those that need a transplant?

Eric Sampson and Rebecca Tuvel explore the contested issue of academic freedom. They discuss the tensions that emerge when universities try to balance the promotion of diverse intellectual perspectives with concerns over potential harm to community members, as seen in controversies involving figures like philosopher Peter Singer. Drawing on debates about gender, race, and ethics, they analyze the institutional challenges of fostering open inquiry while ensuring a safe and respectful academic environment. Join this conversation to reflect on the evolving landscape of higher education and the fundamental questions at stake in preserving academic freedom.[00:00] Introduction[00:09] Thought Experiment: The Peter Singer Controversy[02:30] Academic Freedom vs. Harm and Danger[07:36] The Role of Universities in Handling Controversial Topics[11:46] Institutional Model of Academic Philosophy[17:25] Historical Shifts in Moral and Scientific Views[31:29] Debates on Harm in High-Stakes Moral Topics[34:02] Mischaracterization of Controversial Views[38:05] Protests and Speech Restrictions on Campus[50:20] Viewpoint Diversity and Government Enforcement[55:33] Donor Influence on Academic Freedom[58:31] Boycotts and Freedom of Research[01:02:01] Concerns of Indoctrination and Institutional Reforms[01:06:59] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Connor examines involuntary commitment, substance abuse disorders, and the ethical dilemmas surrounding parenting and children's welfare. Should children be allowed to transition genders? When is the state justified in removing children from harmful environments? And what is the role of non-parental caregivers in a child's life?Join us for this thought-provoking episode that pushes the boundaries of our intuitions and ethical considerations around children's rights.[00:00] Introduction and Guest Introduction[00:18] Thought Experiments on Involuntary Commitment[05:11] Parenting and Authority[06:19] Sufficiency vs. Maximality in Child Upbringing[10:33] Children's Rights and Associational Rights[20:56] Cultural and Parental Interests[24:49] Gender Identity and Child Welfare[36:55] Defensive Kidnapping and Ethical Dilemmas[01:01:34] Conclusion and Final ThoughtsCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

Jared Millson delves into the intriguing world of conspiracy theories, exploring well-known cases like Pizzagate and lesser-known but historically significant events such as the COINTELPRO. The discussion spans the definitions and philosophical debates about what constitutes a conspiracy theory, the criteria for evaluating these theories, and the psychological and sociopolitical impacts they have on society.Tune in to understand why some conspiracy theories should not be immediately dismissed and the role they play in democratic accountability.[00:00] Introduction and Special Guests[00:34] The Pizzagate Conspiracy Theory[02:37] The Police State Conspiracy Theory[06:37] Defining Conspiracy Theories[15:54] Evaluating Conspiracy Theories[29:35] The Unfalsifiability of Conspiracy Theories[31:54] The Role of Renegade Scientists[38:22] The Longevity of Conspiracy Theories[48:27] The Psychological Appeal of Conspiracy Theories[57:24] Final Thoughts

Peter Singer delves into difficult ethical questions regarding animal rights, the morality of factory farming, and difficult human-related ethical dilemmas.Singer discusses his views as a consequentialist, examining the impact of our choices on animal suffering, the ethical considerations around organ donation from anencephalic children, and the broader implications of such decisions.What are the moral implications of eating meat from factory farms versus ethically raised animals, and cannibalism under hypothetical scenarios with no harm to others?Singer emphasizes the need for considering the consequences of our actions, shedding light on the pressing need to reform our food production systems and make more ethical choices in our daily lives.Peter Singer's Substack: https://substack.com/profile/4270932-peter-singerPeter Singer's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@peter_singerPeter Singer's book, ‘Animal Liberation Now': https://www.amazon.com/Animal-Liberation-Now-Definitive-Classic/dp/0063226707[00:00] A Philosophical Dive into Animal Rights with Peter Singer[00:12] Exploring the Ethical Dilemmas of Human and Animal Lives[01:59] The Complexities of Organ Donation from Anencephalic Children[03:57] Comparing Human and Animal Rights in Medical Contexts[06:08] Consequentialism and Individual Case Analysis in Ethics0[7:42] The Ethical Quandaries of Parental Consent and Medical Decisions[15:54] Navigating the Slippery Slope of Euthanasia and Assisted Dying[25:41] The Ethical Considerations of Eating Meat and Factory Farming[33:29] The Harsh Realities of Factory Farming[34:45] Ethical Considerations and the Nature of Animal Suffering[36:50] Addressing Common Objections to Animal Rights[41:12] The Impact of Individual Choices on Animal Suffering[43:43] The Role of Vegetarianism and Veganism in Reducing Demand for Meat[01:00:46] Exploring the Ethical Implications of Consuming Expired or Discarded Meat[01:04:50] Concluding Thoughts and Reflections

Jess Flanigan argues that personal income tax is illegitimate. But is the state ever justified in extracting money from its population to pay for public goods? Are property taxes and privatization of state functions better options? And if taxes are illegitimate, are we permitted, or even obligated, to stop paying our taxes?[00:00] Introduction and Thought Experiment[02:40] Justifying Taxes for Public Goods[03:40] Alternative Tax Systems[07:27] The Egalitarian Distribution Debate[13:15] The Alienation of Labor in Capitalism[17:49] Privatization and the Role of the State[21:45] The Debate on Tariffs[27:56] Economic Impact of Industrialization and Labor[32:15] Debating Defensive Tariffs[38:49] Funding Public Goods: Challenges and Solutions[51:36] Libertarian Views on Government and Personal FreedomCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

If most voters are misinformed, is democracy legitimate? What sort of voting system should we have in its place? And should some votes count more than others?[00:00] Introduction to the Problems of Democracy[00:17] Brexit: A Case Study in Misinformed Voting[05:33] Voter Behavior: Social Benefits and Signaling[18:29] The Legitimacy of Democratic Systems[30:32] The Challenge of Political Incentives[33:02] The Abortion Debate and Judicial Power[36:41] Depoliticizing Social Life[43:10] Proposals for Enlightened Preference Voting[55:10] Global Voting and Democratic Legitimacy[58:28] Philosophical Reflections on Democratic TheoryCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

Does our common understanding of mass shootings help us to prevent them?Blankschaen argues that our common beliefs and media narratives around gun ownership, mental illness, and school policies are unhelpful in preventing future mass shootings.Can we even provide an adequate definition of mass shootings? Should we give up the concept of mass shootings altogether, and focus instead on the particular shooters and victims in each circumstance?Read Kurt's paper here: https://philpapers.org/rec/BLAAMS[00:00] Introduction and Thought Experiment[01:35 ] Exploring the Concept of Mass Shooters[06:56] Challenges in Profiling and Predicting[12:06] Defining Mass Shootings and Intent[24:10] Policy Implications and Conceptual Concerns[28:09] Terrorist Attacks vs. Mass Shootings[29:31] Tailoring Solutions to Different Types of Violence[35:54] Farm Murders in South Africa: A Case Study[40:14] The Role of Guns in Mass Shootings[42:53] Media Influence and Moral Panic[55:18] International Comparisons and Cultural Context[57:55] Conclusion and Final ThoughtsCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

Through comparisons to consequentialism and deontological ethics, Travis dissects the core principles and critiques of virtue ethics. Along the way, we discuss moral dilemmas, the application of virtues, and the real-world implications of ethical theories. Whether you're a student of philosophy or just curious about moral reasoning, this discussion provides deep insights into the essence of virtuous behavior and its place in ethical discourse.[00:00] Introduction and Welcome[00:14] The Drowning Child Thought Experiment[03:53] The Virtuous Agent Problem[04:45] Virtue Ethics vs. Other Ethical Theories[13:48] Virtue Ethics and Practical Advice[21:52] Challenges in Virtue Ethics[29:42] The Moral Theory Bug[33:26] Moral Rationalism and Obligations[44:54] Virtue Ethics as a Theory of Good Character[52:19] Eating Meat: Ethical Dilemmas[57:39] Concluding ThoughtsYou can also check out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/[00:00] Introduction and Welcome

What is the underlying logic of woke ideology? Is it consistent, and can it justify the pursuit of equality of outcome, such as redistributing wealth and land?Cofnas discusses the origins and evolution of wokeism, the moral and empirical premises underlying it, and the political dynamics between conservatives and liberals.Tune in to gain a deeper understanding of the ongoing debates around equity, discrimination, and social justice.You can also check out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/[00:00] Introduction and Welcome[00:16] Thought Experiment: Redheads and Slavery[08:16] Applying the Analogy to Race[17:00] Moral Responsibility and Social Justice[32:20] Reparations and Environmental Factors[37:17] Statistical Chance and Job Market Inequality[48:43] Conservative Resistance to Wokeism[54:59] The Long March Through Institutions[58:02] Trump's Impact on Wokeism[01:01:45] The Future of Wokeism and Conservative Strategy[01:05:21] Philosophical Foundations of Equality[01:10:47] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

How should we allocate our donations to address global issues effectively? Jacob discusses the principles guiding Effective Altruism, the importance of evidence-based charitable giving, the ethical implications of supporting local versus global causes, and the challenges of predicting long-term impacts.The episode also delves into the significant debate within the effective altruism community about how to prioritize immediate needs versus future generations, and the potential benefits and risks associated with artificial intelligence.Join us for a compelling conversation about making the most impact with your altruistic efforts.[00:00] Introduction to Effective Altruism[00:07] Thought Experiment: Allocating a Billion Dollars[01:18] Effective Altruism: Head and Heart Approach[05:12] Frameworks for Effective Altruism[06:27] Measuring Impact and Effectiveness[13:30] Obligations and Moral Considerations[16:28] Global Development and Animal Welfare[31:05] Long-Termism and Future Generations[52:23] AI: Potential and Risks[57:26] ConclusionCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

Is it possible for us to lead meaningful lives? Is there an ultimate point to our existence? Can we enrich our lives with the pursuit of love, knowledge and friendship? [00:00] Introduction to the Meaninglessness of Life[00:14] Tolstoy's Existential Crisis[01:39] The Appropriateness of Sadness[04:18] Everyday Meaning vs. Ultimate Meaning[06:13] The Metaphysical Argument[10:57] The Role of Accomplishments[17:42] Philosophical Temperaments and Existential Angst[23:14] The Value of Human Potential[25:55] Questioning the Concept of Ultimate Meaning[29:47] Objective vs. Subjective Meaning[31:32] The Role of Values in Life[34:22] Philosophical Perspectives on Immortality[40:39] Balancing Everyday and Ultimate Meaning[44:04] Cosmic Meaning and the Question of Suicide

Join us for a provocative episode on Brain in a Vat as we rejoin the infamous Stephen Kershnar, whose prior discussions have made headlines. This episode delves into affirmative action, demographic considerations in education and employment, and the ethics of statistical predictions informed by race.The discussion debates the legitimacy and consequences of using race, gender, and other demographic factors in decision-making processes across various fields, from medicine and law to parole decisions. The episode explores the balance between fairness and efficiency, and whether algorithms could replace human judgment in critical decisions.Don't miss this thought-provoking exploration of some of today's most contentious issues.[00:00] Introduction and Guest Reintroduction[00:25] Affirmative Action and Medical Care[02:23] Market Preferences and Performance[08:08] Challenges of Colorblind Policies[17:44] Fair vs. Unfair Discrimination[26:05] Statistical Predictors vs. Demographic Predictors[27:45] Correlation vs. Causation in Performance Prediction[31:31] IQ and Performance in Medicine[33:27] The Ethics of Using Demographics in Decision Making[41:59] Algorithmic Decision Making in Justice and BeyondCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

Was Kit Conner obligated to reveal his queer sexual orientation to play his role as a queer character on ‘Heartstopper'? Timmerman and Blankschaen argue that straight actors can authentically portray queer characters, addressing issues of character versus performer authenticity, potential harm to marginalized actors, and the broader impact on the industry. They respond to various objections and explore the philosophical and ethical nuances surrounding representation in media.Link to Blankschaen and Timmerman's paper: https://philpapers.org/rec/BLAAOS-2[00:00] Introduction and Episode Overview[00:19] Thought Experiment: Kit Conner's Role in Heartstopper[02:54] Character vs. Performer Authenticity[10:28] Consequentialist Views on Performer Authenticity[25:37] Public vs. Private Lives of Actors[33:29] Alternative Rules for Casting Queer Roles[37:03] Inclusivity vs. Exclusivity in Casting[47:01] Optimism in Media Evolution[49:30] Strongest Objections to the View[52:03] Extending the Argument to Other Groups[01:01:10] Final Thoughts and ConclusionCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

Who should be included in our 'moral circle' when we make our moral decisions? Jeff discusses the ethical responsibilities we might have towards non-human beings, such as Neanderthals, AIs, or even figments of our imagination. The conversation critically examines issues related to animal welfare, the complexities of population ethics, and the potential future implications of artificial intelligences with possible sentience.[00:00] Introduction and Guest Welcome[03:13] Neanderthal and Robot Roommates[04:48] Figment of Imagination: A Third Roommate[12:21] Ethical Decision Making Under Uncertainty[17:35] Chatbots and Moral Considerations[24:39] Factory Farming and Broader Ethical Concerns[35:10] Future Obligations to AI and Antinatalism[54:16] Distinctions in Suffering: Humans vs. Animals[01:00:39] Balancing Ethical Theories and Practicality[01:11:32] Concluding Thoughts and RecommendationsRead Sebo's book, 'The Moral Circle: Who Matters, What Matters, and Why,' here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/1324064803?ref=cm_sw_r_ffobk_cso_wa_apan_dp_P2YJTR05BK7S4PE59SBR&ref_=cm_sw_r_ffobk_cso_wa_apan_dp_P2YJTR05BK7S4PE59SBR&social_share=cm_sw_r_ffobk_cso_wa_apan_dp_P2YJTR05BK7S4PE59SBR&starsLeft=1&bestFormat=trueCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/.

Chris Freiman argues that we're justified in ignoring politics. Freiman, whose book 'Why It's Okay to Ignore Politics' delves into this controversial stance, presents thought experiments and addresses common objections. The conversation also explores effective altruism, the moral implications of individual actions, and the complexities surrounding charitable giving and political participation. Tune in for an engaging and thought-provoking discussion on the ethics of civic duty and altruism.[00:00] Introduction and Special Guests[00:28] Thought Experiment: Voting vs. Saving a Child[02:18] Opportunity Cost of Voting[11:24] Collective Action Problems and Individual Impact[20:14] Swing States and the Duty to Vote[26:16] Psychological Considerations and Moral Licensing[29:53] Effective Altruism: Set It and Forget It[30:35] A Disturbing Ethical Dilemma[44:46] Trust in Charities vs. Politicians[53:10] Long-Termism and Future Generations[57:29] Concluding Thoughts on Ethics and AltruismCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/.

In this special episode, Alix Spiegel, host and producer of ‘Invisibilia' and journalist for ‘This American Life', joins us to talk about storytelling.Alix discusses storytelling techniques, the philosophical and political dimensions of narrative choices, and the emotional journey of confronting climate change.[00:00] Introduction to the Guest: Elise Spiegel[00:23] The Story of Joy and Her Unique Ability[04:53] Exploring Dark Futures and Climate Change[08:23] The Art of Storytelling and Narrative Creation[11:15] Different Story Structures and Their Impact[14:41] The Process of Crafting a Story[30:47] Influences and Inspirations in Storytelling[35:26] The Ethics and Authenticity in Documentary StorytellingCheck out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/.

Dan Shahar defends the view that eating meat is permissible, even though meat farming is not. Is this a coherent position? [00:00] Introduction and Thought Experiment [00:48] The Alien Analogy [02:20] Moral Implications and Human Relationships [03:33] Vegetarian Perspective and Ethical Dilemmas [08:01] Super Cow Hypothetical [12:11] Real-World Ethical Challenges [21:59] Voting and Social Activism [26:39] Moral Implications of Indirect Harm [32:58] The Role of Social Norms in Ethical Decisions [37:01] Individual Actions and Collective Outcomes [48:09] Balancing Moral Obligations and Personal Values Check out FeedSpot's list of 90 best philosophy podcasts, where Brain in a Vat is ranked at 15, here: https://podcast.feedspot.com/philosophy_podcasts/

Parfit altered the landscape of the philosophy of identity. We speak to David Edmonds about his recently released biography on this influential philosopher, and ask: what made Parfit the man he was? [00:00] Introduction to David Edmunds [00:25] David's Personal Connection to Derek Parfit [01:42] Derek Parfit's Early Life and Education [04:17] Derek Parfit's Philosophical Contributions [08:39] The Teletransporter Thought Experiment [12:20] Derek Parfit's Views on Death and Identity [24:45] The Non-Identity Problem [28:47] David Benatar's View on Existence [30:00] Climate Change Thought Experiment [34:42] Derek Parfit's Life and Interests [37:15] The Academic Saint [43:17] Derek Parfit's Philosophical Impact [48:45] Writing Derek Parfit's Biography

Ben Stiller's superb series, Severance, raises fascinating questions about the nature of personal identity. Are we minds or brains? Is it possible for two persons to inhabit the same body? And can a person survive gaps in their existence? [00:00] Introduction to Severance [01:24] Philosophical Questions on Personal Identity [05:59] Real-Life Analogies and Thought Experiments [11:26] Ethical Implications and Moral Questions [22:20] Utilitarian Views and Moral Calculations [30:57] Navigating Hypothetical Moral Dilemmas [34:32] Severance and the Ethics of Suicide [38:42] Retirement and the Ethics of Ending Lives [41:02] Philosophical Puzzles of Personal Identity [49:11] The Anesthesia Conundrum [53:52] The Problem of Gradual Change in Identity [01:00:28] The Intractable Nature of Personal Identity

What do anti-semites and ultra-orthodox Jews have in common? How did the ivy league discriminate against Jews? Is America still a safe haven for Jews? Follow Mark's work on https://markoppenheimer.substack.com/ [00:00] Introduction and Confession [00:17] The Tree of Life Synagogue Shooting [03:59] Historical Context of Jewish Persecution [07:15] Understanding Antisemitism [13:38] Antisemitism and Bigotry [25:53] Jewish Identity and Group Affinity [35:04] Jewish Humor and Self-Deprecation [38:14] Jews in the Ivy League: A Historical Perspective [41:14] Direct vs. Indirect Discrimination [46:34] Affirmative Action and Quotas [55:59] The Complexity of Anti-Zionism [01:02:19] Concluding Thoughts on Jewish Identity

Oxford University Press refused to publish Alex Byrne's book on gender. We discuss whether women are adult human females and whether sex is the same as gender. [00:00] Introduction and Thought Experiment [02:38] Exploring Gender Identity [11:22] Historical Context and Gender Roles [19:00] Biological and Social Perspectives [27:51] Understanding Social Identity: 'One of the Boys' [28:17] Conrad Lorenz and the Ducklings: A Metaphor for Social Roles [33:58] The Debate on Context-Dependent Definitions of Sex [38:21] Legal and Social Implications of Gender Identity [52:41] The Controversy Over Publishing Gender Philosophy [01:00:49] Reflections on Academic Freedom and Gender Discourse

Is sex work actually work? Is prostitution always a form of exploitation? And show we legalize or decriminalize prostitution? [00:00] Introduction and Opening Remarks [00:14] The Moral and Legal Concerns of Prostitution [04:11] Debating Terminology: Prostitution vs. Sex Work [06:37] Legal Frameworks and Models of Prostitution [11:24] The Unique Harms of Prostitution [24:41] Sex Work as Labor: A Critical Examination [34:15] Civil Rights and Sexual Autonomy in Prostitution [35:33] Arguments Against Treating Prostitution as Regular Work [38:14] Historical Context of Civil Rights Legislation [45:52] The Nordic Model and Its Implications [48:57] Exploring the Intersection of Pornography and Prostitution [54:25] Consent and the Realities of Prostitution

Is the restriction on having additional sexual or romantic partners similar to the restriction on having additional friends? Should you allow your partner to be free to pursue other partners? And are we able to overcome the jealousy associated with non-monogamy? [00:00] Introduction to the Debate on Monogamy [00:11] Thought Experiment: Friendship Restrictions [03:17] Defending Monogamy: Common Arguments [06:35] The Morality of Consensual Restrictions [13:53] Exploring the Concept of Exclusivity [18:54] Workplace Analogies and Monogamy [22:45] Balancing Risks and Benefits [29:44] Questioning Monogamy's Blanket Ban [33:50] Forms of Non-Monogamous Relationships [37:52] Addressing Jealousy and Insecurity [47:42] Social Implications of Non-Monogamy [54:42] Monogamy vs. Non-Monogamy as Orientations

Is observing people in a public space from the privacy of your home an infringement of their rights? Can the widespread use of CCTV cameras be justified, or does it violate their privacy? And how do technological developments affect the delicate balance between safety and privacy? [00:00] Introduction [00:18] The Case of Mrs. A [02:06] Privacy and Public Surveillance [08:28] The Networking Effect [11:18] Tracking and Rights Violations [13:48] Real-Life Implications [14:18] Challenging the First Premise [22:56] Networking and Privacy Concerns [30:08] The Hidden Dangers of Private Spaces [32:13] The Right to Privacy Debate [35:18] The Superhuman Surveillance Argument [48:04] The Role of Intent in Surveillance [54:20] Balancing Privacy and Security [01:00:29] Concluding Thoughts on Surveillance

Are there different kinds of bullshit? Do bullshitters know they are full of it? What should we do to stem the tide? [00:00] Introduction [00:19] David Benatar's Joke [02:25] Defining Bullshit: Philosophical Perspectives [04:21] Academic Bullshit and Real-World Examples [09:34] The Ethics of Calling Out Bullshit [23:14] The Tragedy of the Bullshit Commons [36:06] Language, Slurs, and Bullshit [45:06] Navigating Misinformation and Critical Thinking [54:01 ] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Can the definition of privilege be nuanced enough to address the broad range of individual experiences and historical contexts? Does recognizing and discussing privilege lead to meaningful social change? Or does talk of privilege oversimplify complex issues? [00:00] Introduction and Welcome [00:14] Exploring the Privilege Walk [04:57] Discussion on Privilege and Comparative Advantage [17:05] Defining Privilege and Its Implications [22:31] Critiques and Counterarguments [28:54] Historical Gender Discrimination in Education [30:33] Men's Disadvantages and Social Perceptions [34:18] Privilege in Context: Examples and Critiques [38:31] Privilege Pedagogy and Its Implications [46:27] Supreme Court's Stance on Race-Based Admissions [52:13] Privilege and Individual Responsibility [56:25] Racial and Gender Criticism in Society [58:19] Concluding Thoughts

Is it permissible for members of one group to appropriate the cultural practices of another? Is there anything wrong with cultural appropriation at all, or are there benefits to cultural appropriation? [00:00] Introduction and Thought Experiment [00:29] Criticism and Cultural Appropriation [02:07] Ownership of Ideas [04:49] Intellectual Property and Cultural Rights [12:03] Personal Offense and Cultural Symbols [22:27] The Benefits of Cultural Appropriation [27:47] Three Objections to Cultural Appropriation [31:15] Consequentialism and Cultural Appropriation [34:34] Balancing Cultural Sensitivity and Utility [37:45] Case-by-Case Analysis of Cultural Appropriation [44:53] Challenges in Defining Cultural Ownership [51:29] Concluding Thoughts

Stephen Maitzen argues that the world is deterministic. But if all of our choices are determined, how should we understand free will, the meaning of life, and regret?   Read Maitzen's Book here: https://www.routledge.com/Determinism-Death-and-Meaning/Maitzen/p/book/9781032134185 [00:00] Introduction to Determinism and Thought Experiment [00:15] Clark Griswold's Christmas Lights: A Lesson in Determinism [04:01] Probabilistic Explanations vs. Deterministic Explanations [05:06] The Limits of Probabilistic Explanations [12:47] Human Behavior and Determinism [17:26] Infinite Regress and Brute Facts [20:31 ] Time Travel and Determinism [28:20] The Role of Deliberation in Determinism [29:24] Forward-Looking Rationality and Regret [30:50] Libertarian vs. Determinist Deliberation [32:00] Compatibilism and the Illusion of Free Will [33:53] The Rationality of Regret in Determinism [37:41] Counterfactuals and Deterministic Implications [44:40] Determinism and the Meaning of Life [47:56] Libertarianism and Disrupting the Causal Chain [55:13] Compatibilist Responses to Libertarian Objections [59:22] Final Thoughts

We explore the complex moral landscape of abortion through the perspectives of two philosophical giants, John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant, as simulated by AI. Mill defends abortion from a utilitarian standpoint, emphasizing individual autonomy and the consequences of our actions, while Kant objects to abortion from a deontological approach, focusing on inherent human dignity and universal moral laws. Join us as we delve into intense discussions on autonomy, moral duties, and the ethical implications of difficult choices, including thought experiments involving moral blackmail and the value of life at different stages. [00:00] Introduction and Special Guest Announcement [00:28] John Stuart Mill's Thought Experiment [02:13] Utilitarian Perspective on Sarah's Dilemma [05:57] Infanticide and Utilitarianism [07:21] Harm Principle and Moral Community [12:01] Free Speech and Moral Boundaries [18:35] Immanuel Kant's Perspective [19:36] Kant vs. Mill on Abortion [24:03] Moral Dilemmas and Ethical Principles [35:16] Utilitarianism vs. Deontological Ethics [42:32] Conclusion

Does Searle's Chinese Room show that AI is not intelligent or creative? Does AI learn the way humans do? And could AI ever be capable of truly creative thought? [00:00] Introduction to the Chinese Room Argument [03:55] The Evolution of Human Language [05:58] ChatGPT's Capabilities and Limitations [12:09] Human Understanding vs. AI Responses [15:33] The Complexity of Human Desires [20:24] The Nature of Human and Machine Intelligence [30:58] AI and Creativity: A Writer's Perspective [33:08] The Limits of AI Creativity [35:01] The Future of AI and AGI [36:05] Thermodynamics and Human Creativity [39:13] Live Experiment: AI Poetry [42:40] AI's Impressive Achievements [49:42] The Debate on AGI [59:53] Final Thoughts

'Lottocracy' is a system where political representation is determined randomly. Is this a better system than democracy? We discuss the shortcomings of current electoral democracies, including the influence of media and special interests, and examine innovative models like deliberative democracy and specialized legislative structures. How should we balance between expertise and random selection, and combat elite influence and corruption? [00:00] Introduction to the Thought Experiment [00:52] Moral Obligations in Crisis [05:14] Challenges of Political Institutions [06:51] Electoral Democracy vs. Lottocracy [14:44] Implementing Lottocracy [21:15] Potential Issues and Objections [29:20] Ensuring Representative Participation [36:41] Challenges of Single Party Dominance [37:32] Risks of Random Selection in Politics [38:39] Expertise and Agenda Setting [46:55] Corruption and Influence in Politics [55:34] Social Pressure and Decision Making

Georgi Gardiner discusses the intricate philosophy of safe sex, kink, and BDSM. She delves into the complexities of power dynamics, moral judgments, and ethical implications in kinky sex. How should we think about risk perception and its relation to STIs, and the value of sexual liberation? [00:00] Welcome and Introduction [00:10] A Curious Real Life Case [03:31] The Norms and Rules of Sexual Conduct [06:55] Kink, BDSM, and Power Hierarchies [11:32] The Morality of Sex and Sports [22:10] Balancing Grace and Accountability [32:37] Misconceptions About Safe Sex Practices [37:15] Misunderstanding Risks and Technological Advances [43:11] The Value of Sex and Sexual Freedom [48:56] Developing Sexual Mastery and Communication [58:31] Cultural Norms and Sexual Behavior [01:02:21] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Dive into the intersection of comedy and philosophy with South African comedian John Vlismas. We explore the power of humor as a political tool, its role in confronting societal issues, and the fine line between making people laugh and challenging their deeply held assumptions. Vlismas shares his insights on the evolving landscape of comedy, the ethics of jokes, and the responsibility of comedians. With captivating anecdotes and thought-provoking discussions, this episode is a must-watch for anyone interested in the transformative nature of comedy. [00:00] Introduction to John Vlismas [01:17] The Role of Comedy in Politics [04:18] Techniques of a Good Comic [08:47] The Power of Dark Humor [14:54] Comedy's Role in Society [23:12] Personal Stories and Humor [32:02] Suffering in Comedy [32:47] Judging Humor and Perspective [34:33] Comedy in Horror Films [38:39] Ethics and Boundaries in Comedy [45:29] Evolution of Comedy [52:32] Crafting and Performing Jokes [56:48] Mastering the Art of Comedy [58:57] Conclusion

Join hosts Mark Opennheimer and Travis Timmerman as they dive into the world of bad movies with Matt Strohl, author of 'Why It's Okay to Love Bad Movies.' The episode explores 'bad' films like 'Dancing It's On,' the creative triumphs of low-budget movies, and the merits of B-movies. The conversation then shifts to the controversial film 'Cannibal Holocaust,' examining its place within the Mondo genre, its ethical implications, and its raw portrayal of colonialism. Explore both the delight of unconventional cinema and the moral questions surrounding graphic content. [00:00] Introduction and Guest Introduction [00:28] Discovering 'Dancing It's On' [02:07] The Twitter Incident [07:39] The Value of Bad Movies [08:31] Bad Movie Love vs. Ridicule [12:13] The Artistic Merit of Bad Movies [15:56] The Role of Bad Movies in Aesthetic Life [33:02] The Enigmatic Creative Process [33:50] Ed Wood's Unconventional Genius [37:25] Cult Films and Their Unique Appeal [39:12] The Phenomenon of Film Modi [43:44] The Genuine vs. The Performative in Bad Movies [49:51] Production Houses and Their Impact [57:31] The Morality of Immoral Films [01:04:41] Concluding Thoughts on Cinema

Bradley Hillier-Smith argues that states have a duty not to harm refugees, and a duty to improve the lives of refugees. He argues that wealthier nations, therefore, have an obligation to accept and support at least some refugees. But what is the impact of refugee policies on citizens? And just how far do our obligations go toward helping refugees? [00:00] Introduction to Refugee Crisis [00:11] Personal Account of Calais Camp Clearance [03:21] State Obligations and Negative Duties [09:18] Different Types of Refugees [15:24] Balancing State Interests and Refugee Rights [23:03] Objections and Counter Arguments [38:18] Challenges in Refugee Resettlement [40:48] Moral Obligations and Fire Escape Analogy [42:13] Global Responsibility and Northern States [47:43] Positive Duty and the Drowning Child [55:02] Screening Refugees and Security Concerns [01:01:57] Balancing Interests and Moral Duties [01:10:15] Concluding Thoughts on Refugee Rights

Isaac Arthur, president of the American National Space Society, discusses the nature and likelihood of alien civilizations. What sort of alien civilizations are most likely do exist? Is 'uplifting' an alien species ethical? What level of intelligence, sociability, and language are aliens most likely to have? And is AI a form of alien intelligence? See Isaac Arthur's channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@isaacarthurSFIA [00:00] Introduction to Alien Civilizations [00:10] Thought Experiment: Meeting Alien Species [03:20] Intelligence and Sociability in Alien Species [07:02] Language and Communication Among Aliens [11:15] AI and Alien Intelligence [16:29] Speculating on Alien Life and Evolution [25:32] Hive Minds and Collective Intelligence [28:30] Messaging Extraterrestrial Intelligence [32:46] The Concept of Emotional Sliders [37:47] The Ethics of Uplifting Alien Cultures [44:23] Speculative Fiction and Alien Forms [47:14] The Fine-Tuned Universe and the Existence of God [50:27] The Fermi Paradox and Quiet Aliens [54:46] Humanity's Future in Space [01:01:45] The Hermit Shoplifter Hypothesis [01:03:24] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

This live episode of Brain in a Vat investigates the boundaries of animal creativity through real-life examples, thought experiments, and philosophical theories of art. What are the cognitive capacities of animals? What is the best way of understanding the apparent ‘art' of animals? And how should we value the lives of animals? [00:00] Introduction to Thought Experiments [00:17] Human vs. Animal Art [02:05] The Intentionality of Art [02:52] Defining Art: Human and Animal Perspectives [03:47] Ethical Considerations in Animal Art [17:31] The Problem of Other Minds [26:03] Legal and Moral Rights of Animals [41:33] Controversial Views on Animal and Human Rights [42:09] Peter Singer's Infamous Example [42:53] Philosophical Debates on Animal Ethics [44:01] Bestiality and Ethical Dilemmas [47:23] Species vs. Individual Ethics [51:46] Art, Animals, and Agency [52:18] Audience Questions and Insights [59:04] Defining Art and Talent [01:05:17] Philosophical Reflections on Art and Morality [01:24:22] Concluding Thoughts and Skepticism

Paul Morland, author of 'No One Left', joins the Brain in a Vat podcast to discuss demographic changes and Pronatalism. Paul explores the idea of having more children in response to declining fertility rates, demographic momentum, and the potential societal impacts of population collapse. Paul discusses potential solutions, including state intervention, cultural changes, and technological advancements. Read Morland's book here: https://www.amazon.co.uk/No-One-Left-World-Children/dp/1800754108 [00:00] Introduction [00:17] A Thought Experiment on Pronatalism [02:06] Debating the Value of Life [06:12] David Benatar's Perspective [10:28] Population Ethics and Decline [11:40] Challenges of Low Fertility Rates [18:43] Technology and Immigration as Solutions [24:08] The Role of AI in the Future Workforce [33:43] Skepticism Towards AI and Technological Solutions [35:42] The Changing Nature of Retirement and Aging [39:30] Economic Implications of Population Collapse [41:15] Environmental Concerns and Population Dynamics [46:11] Cultural and Political Influences on Fertility Rates [51:39] Potential Solutions and Government Interventions [01:08:37] Concluding Thoughts and Future Outlook

What is the difference between love, limerence, crushes and squishes? Can someone be mistaken about whether they're in love? And is limerence harmful, or can it also have therapeutic value? [00:00] Introduction to Love and Limerence [00:09] Thought Experiment: Terry and Sam Seder [01:38] Philosophical Debates on Love [03:37] The Power of Self-Descriptions [06:14] Exploring Limerence [10:10] Conceptual Interactions and Sexuality [29:23] Polyamory and Relationship Dynamics [31:58] Understanding New Relationship Energy (NRE) [34:02] Monogamous Perspectives on NRE and Limerence [35:55] The Power of Naming Emotions [36:47] Exploring Compersion [41:13] The Science Behind Limerence [45:28] Limerence in Therapy and Daily Life [49:53] Limerence vs. Love [01:01:18] Final Thoughts on Limerence and Love

How would we explain our social structures to aliens? Can we define our social groups in a way that is easy to articulate and understand? Jason Werbeloff argues that it's extremely difficult to answer even the simplest questions about the nature of our social groups. Does this mean we should exclude any talk of groups when describing ourselves on the Golden Record?  And should we understand ourselves as individuals, rather than as members of social groups? [00:00] Introduction and Welcome [00:21] The Voyager Golden Record [02:17] Philosophical Inquiry: Social Groups and Aliens [02:57] The Alien's Perspective on Social Groups [05:08] Defining Social Groups [12:25] Margaret Gilbert's Theory of Social Groups [14:16] Challenges to Gilbert's Theory [20:41] Alternative Theories and Eliminativism [27:08] Q&A and Further Discussion [36:20] The Vagueness of Group Identity [37:10] Dispositional Refinement and Group Membership [37:47] Challenges in Defining Group Membership [38:45] Moral Responsibility and Group Identity [40:08] Individual Accountability in Group Actions [44:09] Degrees of Group Membership [46:43] The Role of Group Leaders [48:56] Relational Properties and Group Persistence [01:05:41] Human Groups vs. Animal Groups [01:11:30] Concluding Thoughts

Has selfishness been misunderstood? Is there a way of defending Ayn Rand's egoism? Tara Smith confronts challenging questions about morality, individual rights, and the balance between personal and societal well-being. Read Smith's book here: https://a.co/d/5r4HfXb [00:00] Introduction to Ayn Rand and Egoism [00:21] Challenging Common Perceptions of Self-Interest [02:40] Objective vs. Subjective Self-Interest [05:17] The Role of Rationality in Human Flourishing [11:02] Principles of Human Flourishing [14:33] The Practicality of Moral Theories [26:54] Case-by-Case Basis in Moral Decisions [31:05] Identifying Through Lines in Ethics [31:46] Context Sensitivity in Moral Principles [36:06] Altruism and Self-Interest [36:52] Martians, Sociopaths, and Moral Obligations [39:29] Species Needs and Moral Values [42:48] Health, Psychology, and Individual Needs [48:03] Freedom, Government, and Individual Rights [54:16] Evolutionary Psychology and Randian Theory [01:03:01] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Is intelligent design the best theory for how perfectly calibrated our universe is? How does God as an explanation compare with competing theories, like the multiverse? Perhaps we can understand the fine-tuned complexity of the universe in the same way we understand the fine-tuned complexity of AI creations?  Tune in for a profound discussion on the innovative potential of combining human intellect with AI. [00:00] Guest Introduction [00:17] Thought Experiment [03:19] The Fine-Tuning Problem [07:05] Questioning the Designer [08:21] Fundamental Existence and Axioms [11:12] Evaluating Rival Explanations [18:57] The Complexity of the Universe [27:15] The Mystery of the Constants [30:17] Scientific Knowledge and Fine Tuning [31:21] Intelligent Cause vs. Multiverse Theory [33:25] Challenges to Multiverse Theory [39:31] Probability and Divine Psychology [43:12] Naturalistic Mysterianism vs. Theism [53:11] AI and the Appearance of Intentionality [59:40] Conclusion

Kate Manne discusses how fatphobia impacts the lives of fat-bodied people in various domains, including healthcare, education, and employment. Manne explores the relationship between weight and health, and challenges pervasive societal biases.  She argues for a deeper understanding of systemic oppression against fat-bodied people, and considers how fat we should choose to be. [00:00] Guest Introduction [00:17] Case Study: Jen Curran's Misdiagnosis [01:59] Defining Fatphobia [02:56] The Straitjacket Metaphor [04:20] Fatphobia in Education and Employment [08:04] Fatphobia in Healthcare [10:11] Intersectionality [15:14] Historical Roots of Fatphobia [18:54] Weight and Health: A Complex Relationship [29:54] The Ineffectiveness of Diets [35:44] Genetics and Weight [49:09] Moral and Prudential Considerations [01:04:45] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

What is the nature of social institutions? Is Searle correct that collective agreement is the key to understanding social phenomena, or should we pursue a different theoretical framework? Smit argues for a different understanding of institutions, which relies on the notion of a coordination game. Read Smit's publications here: https://philpeople.org/profiles/j-p-smit [00:00] Introduction and Guest Welcome [00:15] Thought Experiment: Prison Economy [01:29] The Nature of Money: Abstract vs. Physical [02:12] Searle's Explanation of Money [03:45] Philosophical Debates on Institutional Objects [05:02] Game Theoretical Account of Money [08:08] Analogy: Chess and Money [20:06] Critique of Complex Theories of Money [24:18] Coordination Games and Social Phenomena [35:36] Exploring Social Facts and Ontology [36:46] Human Existence and Social Phenomena [38:03] Borders and Incentives [41:47] Dormant Laws and Institutions [45:41] Legal Definitions and Descriptive Tasks [53:27] The Nature of Companies and Legal Entities [01:02:14] Social Groups and Identity [01:08:17] Concluding Thoughts

Oliver Traldi explores the polarization of modern politics, mechanisms of belief political formation, the influence of social costs on public reasoning, and the complexities of political reasoning and norms.  What is the relationship between political and moral reasoning? And what makes political decision making legitimate?  Read Traldi's book here: https://www.routledge.com/Political-Beliefs-A-Philosophical-Introduction/Traldi/p/book/9781032409108 [00:00] Introduction and Guest Welcome [00:10] Thought Experiment: The Hills Game [02:00] Polarization in Modern Politics [05:07] Public vs. Private Reasoning [09:37] Self-Delusion in Political Beliefs [11:14] Memory and Political Beliefs [28:13] Epistemic Democracy and Independent Thinking [32:53] Political Humility and Controversy [34:38] Political Beliefs vs. Political Knowledge [36:26] Descriptive vs. Normative Political Beliefs [37:40] Moral and Political Justification [39:22] Ideologies and Philosophical Theories [48:06] Liberalism and Neutrality [56:21] Conclusion

Why do we find swearing offensive, and should we? Is it wrong to use swear words despite causing offense? This episode is an eye-opener into the often overlooked depth and implications of everyday profanity. Listen to Rebecca's podcast here: https://www.academicimperfectionist.com/podcast [00:00] Introduction and Guest Introduction [00:19] Rebecca's Journey into Swearing [00:43] The Infamous Paper Incident [02:46] Philosophical Musings on Censorship [05:27] The Function of Swear Words [06:04] Cultural Reactions to Swearing [10:25] The Role of Context in Offense [20:26] Borderline Swear Words and Slurs [22:05] The Power of Offensive Words [29:38] Debating the Use of Offensive Words [32:05] Personal Experience with Slurs [33:33] Slurs vs. Swear Words: Key Differences [36:55] The Use-Mention Distinction [41:52] Legal and Moral Implications of Offensive Language [44:31] The Versatility of Swear Words [52:10] Swearing and Intelligence: Is There a Link? [55:25] The Value and Impact of Swearing [01:02:51] Comedy, Dignity, and Swearing [01:04:12] Conclusion and Final Thoughts

What does it mean to be patriotic, or to love your country? Some argue that patriotism is virtuous because it allows us to transcend our selfish needs and act for the good of our community. But others argue that patriotism is overly narrow-minded, arbitrary and sometimes immoral. Microdigressions Podcast: https://www.youtube.com/@Micro-Digressions [00:00] Introduction to Brain Nevada [00:27] Exploring John Lennon's 'Imagine' [01:11] Critique of Utopian Ideals [01:52] Possessions and National Identities [05:44] The Role of Security Companies [06:19] Metaphysics of Property and Groups [11:58] Patriotism and Fictional Nations [15:07] Patriotic Love and Social Constructs [17:44] Allegiance and National Identity [23:34] Rationality of Patriotism [27:46] The Complexity of Patriotism and Love [29:09] Patriotism Post-9/11: Sentiment and Criticism [30:56] Moral Conflicts in Patriotism [34:28] Patriotism and Unjust Wars [40:00] Loyalty and Its Limits [44:09] Patriotism in Historical Contexts [47:28] The Invisible Hand and Patriotism [49:23] Patriotism in a Globalized World [56:09] The Future of Nation States and Global Culture [58:55] Closing Thoughts and Community Engagement

David Shoemaker explores the intricate relationship between humor and morality. What makes a faux insult funny? Can wisecracks be both humorous and hurtful? The conversation delves into academic theories of humor, the significance of context and intentions, and the controversial topics of offensive jokes and the boundaries of humorous expression. [0:00] Introduction to Humor with David Shoemaker [00:10] The Faux Insult: Exploring Humor in Relationships [01:06] Hypotheticals and Humor Dynamics [03:24] Morality and Humor: A Complex Relationship [04:29] Wisecracks vs. Jokes: A Deeper Dive [08:04] Comic vs. Moral Domains: Finding the Balance [12:06] Theories of Humor: Incongruity, Superiority, and More [21:38] The Carrie Prank: When Cruelty Overpowers Humor [30:13] Exploring Humor in Relationships [31:01] The Controversy of Rape Jokes [32:49] Solidarity Through Humor [36:00] Consequences of Misinterpreted Jokes [38:23] The Morality of Jokes [40:31] Free Speech and Humor [57:22] Punching Up vs. Punching Down [01:02:03] Concluding Thoughts and Wisecracks --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/braininavat/message