The Badlands Politics & Philosophy Podcast

In this episode, we continue discussing "success culture". Does it promote the goal of living a meaningful life, or do those goals come into conflict? What about happiness? Does success and achievement make anyone happy?Toby Napoletano, Hanna Gunn

In this episode, we discuss "success culture". What is success and is it a worthy goal? Or does it monopolize our lives in unhealthy ways?Toby Napoletano, Hanna Gunn

In this episode, we discuss the complaints of artists that machine learning programs are using the works of human artists to mass produce similar kinds of art, and replacing the need for human artists. Can and does AI art have the same aesthetic value as human art? And if the complaints of the artists are justified, on what grounds?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we dig into the Supreme Court's recent decision to overturn Roe v Wade, thereby eliminating a constitutional right to an abortion. There are two main questions at issue: Was the reasoning in Roe sound? And then, separately, should it be overturned? We go over the arguments of the majority and concurring opinions, and also the criticisms of the dissent.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we dig into the Supreme Court's recent decision to overturn Roe v Wade, thereby eliminating a constitutional right to an abortion. There are two main questions at issue: Was the reasoning in Roe sound? And then, separately, should it be overturned? We go over the arguments of the majority and concurring opinions, and also the criticisms of the dissent.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we discuss whether Google's "Lambda" chat bot is sentient. If not, is it intelligent? Does it have moral standing? What do these terms even mean?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we continue discussing Adam Mastroianni's "Against All Applications" (https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/against-all-applications?s=r). What is wrong with the application process, both for hiring and for education, and what are the alternatives?Toby Napoletano. Michael Hughes

In this episode, we discuss Adam Mastroianni's "Against All Applications" (https://experimentalhistory.substack.com/p/against-all-applications?s=r). What is wrong with the application process, both for hiring and for education, and what are the alternatives?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we continue to discuss some of the ethical problems surrounding machine learning technologies, and particular concerns about their discriminatory uses. We use the Toronto Declaration, which applies a human rights framework to machine learning as our starting point. Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we discuss some of the ethical problems surrounding machine learning technologies, and particular concerns about their discriminatory uses. We use the Toronto Declaration, which applies a human rights framework to machine learning as our starting point. Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we consider whether, and why, it is wrong to use various performance enhancing drugs in sports. Should they be allowed? How and where do we draw the line? And what even is fairness in the context of sports?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

On today's episode, we consider whether, given the depressing state of the world, we are actually just living in a failed simulation. Is there reason to think we are living in a simulation? And should we have hope that things will improve, or would it be better to simply accept our failure?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

Pope Francis recently declared that couples who choose to have pets over kids are exhibiting a “form of selfishness” which “diminishes us and takes away our humanity.” In 2014 Francis claimed that having pets instead of children was “another phenomenon of cultural degradation”In this episode, we defend ourselves as childless cat-owners against this brutal personal attack.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we discussed Aldo Leopold's "Land Ethic", the idea that ecosystems--including the water, the soil, the rocks, the plants, animals, etc.--have intrinsic value. The idea sounds quite radical against a backdrop of standard moral theories, but whether the view is true or not, there might be lots of good reasons to adopt it.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn 

In this episode, we discussed Aldo Leopold's "Land Ethic", the idea that ecosystems--including the water, the soil, the rocks, the plants, animals, etc.--have intrinsic value. The idea sounds quite radical against a backdrop of standard moral theories, but whether the view is true or not, there might be lots of good reasons to adopt it.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn 

In this episode, we dive into the ethics of abortion. In particular, we ask: what positions on personhood, harm, and sacrifice does one have to hold in order to be anti-abortion WITHOUT also being committed to the moral (or legal) requirement of veganism or the mass redistribution of wealth. Turns out it's not so easy a question to answer.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we dive into the ethics of abortion. In particular, we ask: what positions on personhood, harm, and sacrifice does one have to hold in order to be anti-abortion WITHOUT also being committed to the moral (or legal) requirement of veganism or the mass redistribution of wealth. Turns out it's not so easy a question to answer.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we discuss the recent anti-abortion law passed in the state of Texas, which effectively tries to eliminate most abortions that occur after six weeks of pregnancy. The law is a blatant attempt to get around Roe vs. Wade, and creates a dangerous precedent wherein states can, at least temporarily, pass laws which violate constitutional rights.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we continue our discussion of conservative and liberal psychology. Is one cognitive style more rational than the other? How does philosophical conservatism fit in? And what, if anything, does this research suggest about how to do politics better?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we begin discussing the psychological and cognitive research on the differences between the brains, minds, and personalities of liberals and conservatives. Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

On today's episode, we continue our discussion on meritocracy and Michael Sandel's recent book The Tyranny of Merit, which argues that meritocracy is  "a hollow political project that reflects an impoverished conception of citizenship and freedom...". Meritocracy poisons our civic culture by dividing society into winners and losers, and breeds hubris and resentment which undermines the civic good.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

On today's episode, we revisit the topic of meritocracy and begin discussing Michael Sandel's recent book The Tyranny of Merit, which argues that meritocracy is  "a hollow political project that reflects an impoverished conception of citizenship and freedom...". Meritocracy poisons our civic culture by dividing society into winners and losers, and breeds hubris and resentment which undermines the civic good.

On today's episode, we continue our discussion of metaethics, explaining some of the traditional philosophical problems in metaethics, which have led  some philosophers to think that anti-realist or relativist views of morality might actually be right.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we begin a discussion about the possibility that morality is all relative, subject, or perhaps merely opinion. We give some objections to the some of the simpler forms of moral relativism, and consider some of the more sophisticated replies. Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we discuss some of the psychological findings on the powerful and the wealthy. Does having power or wealth make people less empathetic, more stingy, and generally worse? What kinds of people come to have power? And what can be done about the corrosive effects of power? Also, some really, really cool metatheory discussion.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we try to understand why it is that Twitter seems to be so awful, and can be so easily weaponized to destroy someone's reputation or career. We focus on a proposal from C. Thi Nguyen (University of Utah), who argues that one of the major problems with Twitter is that it gamifies communication, and in so doing, it warps the purposes of communication so that it aims only at likes, retweets, and follows. Also, just when is mass, online. public outrage warranted?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

Former Trump official John Ratcliffe (National Intelligence Director) recently suggested that there would be reports from the government that suggest the presence of alien spacecraft on Earth. Some members of the public, in response to this, have come to believe in alien visitation less. When would it be rational to believe that unexplained observations are aliens, and what does Hume's work on miracles have to do with this?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes 

In this episode, we discuss the idea that a significant portion of the population is being irrational, or "detached from reality", when it comes to politics. What does it mean to be irrational, and what are different ways that one could be irrational?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we take a look at the second (and more famous) red scare, led by Joseph McCarthy.  What were the conditions that led to that scare, and how did it end? What parallels and lessons can we draw for today's political hysteria, spearheaded by Trump?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we discuss the history and legacy of the first red scare, just after World War I. What were the forces that led to the anti-leftist hysteria and political persecution of people that were thought of as Communist sympathizers? And how did the first red scare lay the groundwork for future red-baiting of progressives? Can we learn any valuable lessons for today's toxic political environment?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we begin to take stock of the frightening state of American democracy, where it is good news that the sitting president probably won't steal an election. Why is the situation so dire? How did we get here? What do we do going forward, and can we come back from this? We focus on the epistemic estrangement of liberals and conservatives, and also the increasing epistemic derangement of conservatives in today's episode.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes 

In today's episode, we begin to take stock of the frightening state of American democracy, where it is good news that the sitting president probably won't steal an election. Why is the situation so dire? How did we get here? What do we do going forward, and can we come back from this? Two of the main ingredients to the problem that we discuss in this episode are a background of extreme political polarization and an allegiance to Trump which supersedes allegiance to democratic institutions.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes 

In this episode, we discuss the Supreme Court's decisions to allow or prohibit various extensions to the deadlines for mail-in ballots in the 2020 presidential election. In particular, we focus on Justice Kavanaugh's decision to prohibit a six-day extension on the receipt of mail-in ballots in Wisconsin, and Justice Kagan's dissenting opinion. What is a reasonable deadline for an election held amidst a pandemic? Should courts refrain from intervening so close to an election?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we try to have a cathartic chat about the miserable nightmare that was the first 2020 presidential debate between President Trump and Joe Biden. Boy was it depressing.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we discuss Hannah Arendt's classic Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report On the Banality of Evil. We discuss the sometimes surprising psychological underpinnings of evil, and the way that evil flourishes in the absence of thought. We also discuss some of the lessons that can be drawn from Arendt's discussion of Eichmann.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we discuss the recent report from Mike Pompeo's Commission on Unalienable Rights. We go through the document which, unfortunately, is largely self-congratulatory and intellectually vacuous, and discuss the relationship of the United States to the human rights project.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we continue our discussion of the Bostock vs. Clayton County, Georgia Supreme Court case, which, in a surprise decision, extended Title VII of the Civil Rights act to protect gay, lesbian, and transgender people against employment discrimination. This time, we focus on some of the more confusing aspects of Alito's dissent.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In today's episode, we begin our discussion of the Bostock vs. Clayton County, Georgia Supreme Court case, which, in a surprise decision, extended Title VII of the Civil Rights act to protect gay, lesbian, and transgender people against employment discrimination. We explain the decision, give some of the historical background, and discuss some of Alito's curious dissent.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we finish our discussion of the ethics of protest, and of whether or not violence in protest can be justified. Can thinking about the ethics of war help us understand whether violence in protest can be justified? Does the preservation of one's dignity sometimes require people to engage in acts of destruction? We also discuss the differing approaches to social resistance of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X, and discuss the ways in which some violence can actually make protest more effective.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn

In this episode, we begin our discussion of the ethics of protest, and of whether or not violence in protest can be justified. In the first part, we ask about the nature of protest itself, and discuss some of the sociology concerning the public's perception of protest, particularly as it relates the protests against police brutality against black Americans following the murder of George Floyd.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn

In this episode, we chat with Arthur Lieber about his recent book Political Introverts (How Empathetic Voters Can Help Save American Politics). Lieber explains how a significant, introverted portion of the electorate is turned off by the loudness and boastfulness of our politics. If politics can be made more slower and more thoughtful, he argues, then political introverts can help to transform the political culture. In addition, we discuss the ways our political culture and educational systems are implicated in the failures of American democracy.Toby Napoletano, Arthur Lieber

In today's episode, we discuss the ways in which economic inequality interacts makes a pandemic worse. As usual, the economically vulnerable are likely to suffer more, and in this case, the presence of economically vulnerable populations makes it harder to combat.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn 

In this episode, we continue our discussion of the coronavirus pandemic, focusing on the difficulties in weighing up the health and economic costs, and how this complicates figuring out what to do.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn

In today's episode, we begin our discussion on the coronavirus pandemic, focusing specifically on the epistemic challenges that face us as we try to figure out what to do, and the epistemic blunders that helped get us where we are. We will be talking about the challenges of balancing health risks and economic risks, and then the ways that inequality and economic insecurity make things worse in the coming weeks.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn

In this episode, we address some of the common (sometimes outlandish) anti-Sanders narratives that have been ubiquitous in recent weeks, especially as it looked like, briefly, he might be the front runner. Would Bernie get anything done as president? Is he electable? Is he a socialist? That and more.Toby Napoletano | Michael Hughes

In this episode, we talk about the state of the Democratic primary, and the extraordinary influence of the tiny Iowa caucus on the process. Why does it have such an outsized influence? Should it? Is it unfair to other parts of the electorate? And are there ways to do it better?

In this episode, we attempt a philosophical sketch of Joe Biden. In particular, we discuss how his general approach to politics and representation, which focuses on his individual qualities and experiences, rather than policy and underlying political principles, differs from progressives like Sanders and Warren. Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes

In this episode, we delve further into the philosophy of privacy, and try to pin down just what the right to privacy is, how much it covers, and what theories of privacy can tell us about online data collection.Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn

In this episode, we (half-seriously) debate the ethics of Christmas. Is Christmas, on the whole, a good thing or a bad thing? Does the uptick in charitable giving outweigh the explosion in consumption? Does Christmas ruin gift-giving? Does the fostering of community justify Christmas ham? Is the celebration of Christmas an act of cultural appropriation? And who has the better ham story?Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn

In this episode, we talk to philosopher Robert Talisse about his new book Overdoing Democracy: Why We Must Put Politics in Its Place. Could it be that our politically polarized and oversaturated environment is undermining our democracy? How has this happened, and are there things that we can do to restore civic friendship and the conditions needed for healthy democracy?

In this episode, we begin our discussion of privacy, surveillance, and data collection. We argue that privacy is, in fact, deeply valuable, and that peoples' apathy towards their privacy is deeply misguided. Toby Napoletano, Michael Hughes, Hanna Gunn