Dialogues, Meditations, and Analyses

In this episode, Drs. Lindsey Fiorelli and Rob Willison rejoin the podcast to continue our conversation about the meaning of life. The three of us break down and argue about Susan Wolf's Fitting Fulfillment View of meaning in life, as well as Willison's own alternative view. I then point out that both Wolf and Willison's views (and ways of arguing for their views) are paradigmatically philosophical, according to influential accounts of the nature of philosophy offered by Wilfrid Sellars and Kristie Dotson. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I'm joined by Dr. Rob Willison and Dr. Lindsey Fiorelli to discuss Albert Camus and Thomas Nagel's respective takes on the meaning (or meaninglessness) of life, and especially the question of how we ought to live upon being confronted with the recognition that life is absurd. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, Dr. Lindsey Fiorelli and Dr. Justin Bernstein rejoin the podcast to figure out whether we've all done a morally horrible thing by becoming professors rather than making bank as Wall Street bankers. Even if we reject his utilitarian view of morality, Peter Singer has a strong argument that we should dramatically restructure our lives in order to give as much as we can to charity. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I'm rejoined by returning champions Dr. Ben Baker and Dr. Justin Bernstein to discuss Kwame Anthony Appiah's arguments against racism in all of its guises. We focus on two questions. First, should we consider most racism in our society to be a result of cognitive failings, moral failings, or something else? Second, is race a morally tenable basis for solidarity? See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I introduce Eddington's infamous "two tables"—his table made out of solid oak (according to sense perception and dendrology) and his table made up mostly of empty space (according to fundamental physics)—and discuss how Gilbert Ryle's dissolution of this supposed conflict between the "everyday world" and the "world of science" opens more philosophical cans of worms than it closes. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, Dr. Nabeel Hamid returns to delve deeper into the relationship between faith and reason, discussing Alvin Plantinga's evolutionary argument against naturalism, Daniel Dennett's faith in science in a Godless world, and the promises and pitfalls of Plantinga and Dennett's respective epistemologies. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I'm joined by Dr. Nabeel Hamid and Dr. Ben Baker to discuss the design argument for God's existence, the relationship between faith and reason, and other themes from David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I discuss Descartes's truth rule--that everything he clearly and distinctly perceives is true--and how he leverages that rule (along with the existence of a non-deceiving God) to establish a metaphysical distinction between mind and body. I then discuss the Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia's incisive critique of Descartes's substance dualism, as well as the more nuanced dualism that Elisabeth prefers. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I discuss the Aristotelian worldview that Descartes attempted to overthrow, and introduce the listener to the Cogito: Descartes's famous, purportedly indubitable claim that "I think, therefore I am". See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I invite you, the listener, to meditate with me on reasons to doubt everything you thought you knew. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I ask one of the most confounding questions in the study of ancient philosophy: was Socrates a bullshitter?There won't be another episode of this podcast for a couple weeks. In the meantime, go check out Peter Adamson's episodes on Socrates, the Meno, and the Phaedo, over at his superb podcast on the History of Philosophy without any Gaps. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I'm joined by Dr. Lindsey Fiorelli to discuss two analyses of bullshit: Harry Frankfurt's view that bullshitting involves indifference to truth, and G.A. Cohen's view that bullshit is unclarifiably unclear. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I draw on remarks by the philosophers Iris Murdoch and Susan Stebbing to discuss the art of philosophical conversation, with an emphasis on how it revolves around argumentation. Then, a couple of non-philosophers model an attainably successful submission for the philosophical conversation assignment that's due twice over the course of the semester. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In this episode, I discuss what you're supposed to be learning in Problems of Philosophy. Then, Dr. Justin Bernstein of Florida Atlantic University tells us about the philosopher Alex Guerrero's idea that using a lottery to select our political representatives would be more effective--and indeed more democratic--than voting. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This brief introductory episode gives the listener advice about how to use the podcast. The philosopher Cornel West opens the episode with a concise statement of one of the main goals of the next fourteen episodes of the podcast.Thanks to Galen Curry (of folk-rock band The Currys) for the theme music! See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.