Podcasts about Bentham

kabbalahThis video transcript presents an introduction to a philosophy course on justice, centered around the famous "trolley problem" and other moral dilemmas. It begins by presenting a classic utilitarian scenario: a runaway trolley headed toward five workers, with the possibility of diverting it to a single person on a side track. Most people agree that sacrificing one to save five is the right choice. However, a variation—pushing a "fat man" off a bridge to stop the trolley and save five—elicits significant moral hesitation despite the similar outcome. This distinction introduces a tension between consequentialist and categorical ethical reasoning: whether morality depends solely on outcomes or on intrinsic qualities of the acts themselves.The course then explores further variations involving doctors deciding whom to save or sacrifice, highlighting the difficulty in applying simple utilitarian calculus when the acts feel more personal or direct. The two dominant moral philosophies emerge clearly: consequentialism, which judges actions by their results (most prominently utilitarianism), and categorical morality, rooted in absolute duties and rights regardless of consequences (most famously represented by Immanuel Kant).The transcript also discusses the political and personal risks of philosophical inquiry. Philosophy unsettles familiar assumptions, pushing individuals toward uncomfortable self-knowledge and detachment from societal conventions. It warns against the evasion of skepticism which, though tempting when enduring irresolvable debates, ultimately fails because these moral questions are unavoidable in daily life.Further, the video recounts a real-life legal case, Queen v. Dudley and Stephens, involving shipwreck survivors who kill a cabin boy to survive, raising the question of whether necessity justifies murder. This presents contrasting views: some see survival as an excuse, while others maintain that murder is inherently wrong. The concepts of consent, fairness (e.g., a lottery), and societal norms come under rigorous examination. The inhabitants of the discussion commonly reject murder even under dire circumstances, leading to complex questions about the moral force of consent and procedure, and how these can potentially justify actions otherwise deemed wrong.The video closes by outlining upcoming course content, which includes reading classic philosophical works by Bentham, Mill, Kant, and others, alongside engaging with contemporary political and legal controversies. The ultimate aim is to awaken critical thinking and moral reasoning, despite the challenging risks that philosophy poses both to individual belief and public engagement.Highlights ⚖️ The classic trolley problem introduces the tension between saving the many at the expense of the few.

So what, exactly, is the AI wedge? According to Ewan Morrison, author of For Emma, an already acclaimed novel about our dystopian biotech future, it means a “V-shaped” force that starts small but gradually drives people apart, replacing human connection with technological mediation."It starts off really small. You end up with something like internet dating... it begins as a novelty and then people become dependent on it," Morrison explains. What seemed harmless in the 1990s has evolved to the point where 60-70% of people now use dating apps, with younger generations saying they "don't wanna meet anyone outside of using an app because they don't trust anyone." But the wedge doesn't stop there. The final stage, Morrison warns, is the replacement of the humans completely by AI friends, partners, even therapists. The metaphor captures how each technological "solution" creates new dependencies while eroding our capacity for direct human interaction. As Morrison puts it, technology "removes that sort of tactile sense that humorous, trusting, improvisatory, make do sense that we have when we deal face to face with people." Morrison notes that "for some, it's easier. It's easier to have an AI friend because it's always going to tell you, you're wonderful." This highlights how the wedge works not just through dependency, but through the seductive appeal of artificial relationships that never require the messy, challenging work of real human connection.1. AI is Pure Hype, Not a Real Revolution"I think you just have to break it down and look at AI from a PR perspective and see what we were promised. We were promised human level AI by Marvin Minsky in 1970... And I think we're seeing the same cycle happening again."Morrison argues we're experiencing the third "AI winter" - a pattern of overpromising and eventual collapse that's repeated since the 1970s.2. The AI Wedge Drives Human Separation"They're a bit like a wedge, like a V-shaped wedge... So it starts off really small... and then the final stage of that wedge is the replacement of the humans completely by Mark Zuckerberg's AI friends, by AI partners, AI therapists, these human surrogates."Technology gradually separates us from authentic human connection through a three-stage process: novelty, dependency, replacement.3. Neuralink Represents Dangerous Human Experimentation"When it's a dirty operating table with surgical glue being squeezed into your skull as electronic treads have shaken themselves loose from deep in your brain... then it starts to become a different story entirely."Morrison warns that Silicon Valley's "move fast and break things" mentality becomes morally problematic when applied to human bodies and brains.4. We Shouldn't Ask AI Life's Big Questions"The tragedy that I'm trying to put forward in the book is that we shouldn't give that big question to computers to answer. We shouldn't ask AI, why are we alive?"His novel For Emma explores the danger of outsourcing fundamental human questions about meaning and purpose to artificial intelligence.5. The Utilitarian vs. Romantic Struggle Continues"We're never gonna solve this, but what will happen will be there will be periods in history where one side takes dominance over the other... And now we are seeing the return of the utilitarian mindset once again with the new technologies enabled by AI."Morrison sees current tech development as part of a historical cycle between utilitarian planning (Bentham-style) and romantic individualism, with AI representing a new form of surveillance society.I've know Morrison for many years and generally share his take on Big Tech. But I differ on his view about what he calls the coming 3rd “AI winter”. There's too much capital and technology now to imagine this kind of sharp freeze on the AI economy. For better or worse, this thing is happening now. The threshold has been crossed. It's already radically changing the nature of education and work. And we are still in the earliest chapters of the revolution. That AI wedge is going to get seriously painful. Keen On America is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

This is a link post. I wrote a reply to the Bentham Bulldog argument that has been going mildly viral. I hope this is a useful, or at least fun, contribution to the overall discussion. “One pump of honey?” the barista asked. “Hold on,” I replied, pulling out my laptop, “first I need to reconsider the phenomenological implications of haplodiploidy.” Recently, an article arguing against honey has been making the rounds. The argument is mathematically elegant (millions of bees, fractional suffering, massive total harm), well-written, and emotionally resonant. Naturally, I think it's completely wrong. Below, I argue that farmed bees likely have net positive lives, and that even if they don't, avoiding honey probably doesn't help them. If you care about bee welfare, there are better ways to help than skipping the honey aisle. Source Bentham Bulldog's Case Against Honey Bentham Bulldog, a young and intelligent [...] ---Outline:(01:16) Bentham Bulldog's Case Against Honey(02:42) Where I agree with Bentham's Bulldog(03:08) Where I disagree--- First published: July 2nd, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/znsmwFahYgRpRvPjT/eating-honey-is-probably-fine-actually Linkpost URL:https://linch.substack.com/p/eating-honey-is-probably-fine-actually --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Alan Dershowitz is one of the most prolific legal scholars (and civil rights litigators) in this country of ours. In his latest book, The Preventive State, he takes the first step in developing the jurisprudence of what Philip K. Dick called precrime. Dershowitz argues that we need a better — and more transparent — legal system for calculating how many civil liberties we're willing to sacrifice in order to prevent potential harm. He and Adaam debate what such a system would look like, what's at stake of being lost, where do rights even come from, and whether the law is a rebellion against God.On the agenda:-Starting a conversation while canceled-False positives and false negatives-Kant in the streets, Bentham in the sheets (or: the Straussian case for legal ambiguity)-Our rights come from our wrongs-AI paving the path to Omelas-The Talmudic rebellionAlso:-Read Adaam's piece on Jewish Law as the triumph against divine totalitarianismUncertain Things is hosted and produced by Adaam James Levin-Areddy and Vanessa M. Quirk. For more doomsday thoughts, subscribe to: http://uncertain.substack.com. Get full access to Uncertain Things at uncertain.substack.com/subscribe

Éthique et déontologie : même combat ? Dans le monde de l'iA, ces deux termes sont souvent confondus. Pourtant, derrière cette apparente synonymie se cache un débat philosophique majeur entre l'approche top-down de Bentham et la vision bottom-up de Kant.Une distinction cruciale pour comprendre les enjeux moraux de notre époque technologique.Philo Tech : la chronique philosophie de Trench Tech animée par Emmanuel Goffi.  ***** À PROPOS DE TRENCH TECH *****LE talkshow « Esprits Critiques pour Tech Ethique »Écoutez-nous sur toutes les plateformes de podcast

Is Morality ObjectivePlace your vote or view results.disagreeagree There is dispute among EAs--and the general public more broadly--about whether morality is objective. So I thought I'd kick off a [...] --- First published: June 24th, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/n5bePqoC46pGZJzqL/morality-is-objective --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Cos'è il trattato filosofico-morale? Storia e caratteristiche del trattato che rimette al centro l'uomo e l'analisi di ciò che è eticamente giusto o sbagliato.

Luke Bentham - The Dirty Nil I caught Luke spreading the word of Rock n Roll after his band finished soundcheck (on tour now in America). We get into his band the Dirty Nil and what they do and how they do it. There's also a healthy amount of talk about, Les Paul guitars, gear, songwriting and the magic and mystery of performing for an audience. The Dirty Nil - New album “The Lash” Out July 25 Tour dates and more at https://www.thedirtynil.com/ --- Join our Text list by texting MXPX to 844-923-0900 http://Linker.ee/mikeherrerapodcast Listen now! Share with a friend. Leave a voicemail- 360-830-6660 --------------------- Check out the new MxPx album 'Find A Way Home' at MxPx.com and streaming everywhere now! Listen or watch "Linoleum" here MXPX - Self Titled Deluxe Edition  I now have an Artist Series Music Man Stingray from Ernie Ball! You can order straight from the shop on the Music Man website.  A portion of proceeds goes to MusicCares! MIKE HERRERA SIGNATURE SERIES BASS If you like the podcast- Subscribe, rate and review on Apple. Support what I do at MXPX.com and also add MXPX and Mike Herrera to your music libraries on whatever streaming platfrom you use. Producing and editing by Bob McKnight. @Producer_Bob

Crosspost from my blog. Content warning: this article will discuss extreme agony. This is deliberate; I think it's important to get a glimpse of the horror that fills the world and that you can do something about. I think this is one of my most important articles so I'd really appreciate if you could share and restack it! The world is filled with extreme agony. We go through our daily life mostly ignoring its unfathomably shocking dreadfulness because if we didn't, we could barely focus on anything else. But those going through it cannot ignore it. Imagine that you were placed in a pot of water that was slowly brought to a boil until it boiled you to death. Take a moment to really imagine the scenario as fully as you can. Don't just acknowledge at an intellectual level that it would be bad—really seriously think about just [...] --- First published: June 2nd, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/rtZuWbsTA7GdsbpAM/the-horror-of-unfathomable-pain --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

Crosspost from my blog. I just got back from Effective Altruism Global London—a conference that brought together lots of different people trying to do good with their money and careers. It was an inspiring experience. When you write about factory farming, insect suffering, global poverty, and the torment of shrimp, it can, as I've mentioned before, feel like screaming into the void. When you try to explain why it's important that we don't torture insects by the trillions in insect farms, most people look at you like you've grown a third head (after the second head that they look at you like you've grown when you started talking about shrimp welfare). But at effective altruism conferences, people actually care. They're not indifferent to most of the world's suffering. They don't think I'm crazy! There are other people who think the suffering of animals matters—even the suffering of small [...] --- First published: June 9th, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/rZKqrRQGesLctkz8d/the-unparalleled-awesomeness-of-effective-altruism --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Crossposted from my blog. When I started this blog in high school, I did not imagine that I would cause The Daily Show to do an episode about shrimp, containing the following dialogue: Andres: I was working in investment banking. My wife was helping refugees, and I saw how meaningful her work was. And I decided to do the same. Ronny: Oh, so you're helping refugees? Andres: Well, not quite. I'm helping shrimp. (Would be a crazy rug pull if, in fact, this did not happen and the dialogue was just pulled out of thin air). But just a few years after my blog was born, some Daily Show producer came across it. They read my essay on shrimp and thought it would make a good daily show episode. Thus, the Daily Show shrimp episode was born. I especially love that they bring on an EA [...] --- First published: June 3rd, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/viSRgubpKDjQcatQi/the-importance-of-blasting-good-ideas-into-the-ether --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

Interview by Kris PetersAfter playing together in high school, guitarist Luke Bentham and drummer Kyle Fisher decided to take on the world by forming The Dirty Nil in 2006. The following year, they won the Juno Award for Breakthrough Group of the Year, kickstarting a career that would see the Canadian band rise to prominence over four albums and setting the band on a collision course with destiny.That meeting of superpowers seems set to transpire with the release of The Dirty Nil's fifth studio album, The Lash, on July 25. Recorded in just over two weeks, The Lash sees The Dirty Nil tap into an urgency of evolution that has been simmering quietly below the surface but has finally set itself free.Thematically, The Lash trades the band's usual romantic optimism for a cathartic scream, tackling everything from music industry burnout to heartbreak in a body of work that has been described as Luke's therapy record by Fisher. Stripping back the glitz and glam, The Dirty Nil go full-throttle on what matters most: no frills, just ferocity and good times in abundance.Bentham recently sat down with HEAVY to tell us more."We are gearing up to release our fifth studio album, The Lash, which unequivocally, in my opinion, is our best album," he began. "And I really do mean that sincerely. I know you probably get a lot of people on here saying that through perhaps gritted teeth, but this one, we do feel very strongly about it, and so we're extremely proud to present it to the world."We mention the more stripped back, raw sound promised on the album."The recording process was much faster and more stripped back than what we've pretty much ever done before," Bentham nodded. "We did it in two weeks with our friend down the street. Traditionally, we've worked with a producer from Seattle, who's an incredible producer with a huge resume of incredible albums, but this time we just did it with our friend down the street. So it was a very different process that way. During the album cycle for the last album, there wasn't a huge break or anything, and I think (with this one) we were just really feeling confident as a band, and the material came together very naturally and easily. I think that's part of the reason why I have such positive feelings about it, is because it wasn't a struggle."In the full interview, Luke highlighted the emotional depth of the album, expressing a connection to the darker aspects of human experience through music, and noted the introduction of strings as a new element in their sound. He shared an anecdote about a visit to the Vatican that inspired his songwriting, particularly a bronze relief that influenced the album's themes, although their attempt to use the artwork for the cover was halted by a cease and desist from the Vatican. He also reflected on the band's growth since their debut, emphasizing their increased musical competence and willingness to experiment, while remaining optimistic about future creative endeavours and more.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/heavy-music-interviews--2687660/support.

Joined by Luke Bentham of The Dirty Nil, we explore the divine and the raw — how he drew inspiration from the intense imagery of Vatican art and transformed it into the driving force behind the band's most dynamic record to date, The Lash out July 25.We talk about recording in a relaxed state — and why tension doesn't make great records. Luke also discusses ways to create from a clearer  and calm headspace, making words bounce, guitar tones that snap and what to expect with the new album. And yes… they will eventually get back to Australia.Photos Scott Legato, Drew Thomson

Luke of The Dirty Nil joins us this week on the Dadcast! Luke is here to chat about their new upcoming album THE LASH, available July 25th, as well as an extensive tour for the rest of 2025. Plus hear stories from the road, how Leo, Luke's dog was also in studio for the new album, and more! Thanks to our sponsor Threads of Society for our merch! Get merch for your next show, tour or event at threadsofsociety.rocks.

Tell Spencer your thoughts about this episode!Matthew Adelstein returns to Micro-Digressions to talk about the arguments for the existence of God at the top of his tier list. You can find his complete ranking of arguments for God's existence here:Arguments For God Tier-list - by Bentham's Bulldog

The boys drink and review Delicious IPA from Stone, then discuss prisons, and whether we're in a digital version of one. The "panopticon" is a prison design invented by the philosopher Jeremy Bentham. The idea is that if you make prisoners feel as if they're constantly under surveillance, the prisoners will regulate themselves and the guards won't have to bang them about so much. Modern prisons have adopted some of Bentham's ideas, but so have many other institutions. Foucault said this idea was the blueprint for all modern institutions. Schools, hospitals, and other organizations enforce conformity by defining what is "normal" and by constant surveillance. Stephen Cave added the concept of a "freedom quotient" by which we can determine how much freedom a person can exercise in any given situation. The boys tie it all together and ask whether the modern world is a digital prison. We know we're being surveilled. We know we're supposed to follow what the powerful have defined as "normal."

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for April 24, 2025 is: ostensible • ah-STEN-suh-bul • adjective Ostensible is used to describe something that seems or is said to be true or real, but is possibly not true or real. In other words, it is plausible rather than demonstrably true or real. // The ostensible purpose of a filibuster is to extend debate, but in reality it is used to delay or prevent action. See the entry > Examples: “No drums, no bass, no conventional song structures: Hosianna Mantra was a 40-minute contemplation of the cosmos and cosmic love, couched in words and sounds that explicitly linked it to humanity's grandest and most consistent way of considering meaning, religion. The ostensible polytheism conveyed by the name and the concept were only ways to realize how little we actually know, and how much we wager through mere survival.” — Grayson Haver Currin, Pitchfork, 19 Jan. 2025 Did you know? British philosopher and economist Jeremy Bentham once wrote to Indian religious leader Ram Mohan Roy asking him to “send me two letters—one confidential, another ostensible.” By ostensible he meant that, unlike the confidential letter, the latter was intended to be shown to people other than Bentham himself. This sense of ostensible shows clearly the influence of the word's Latin ancestor, the verb ostendere, meaning “to hold out for inspection,” “to show,” “to make clear by one's actions,” and “to demonstrate.” Ostensible is still used today as it is in Bentham's letter, but it is much more likely to suggest a discrepancy between a declared or implied aim or reason (i.e., the aim or reason that someone displays or “shows” to others) and the true one. For example, someone might give “seeing an old friend” as their ostensible reason for planning a trip when in reality they are planning on spending most of their time relaxing on the beach.

Part XVI - Jeremy Bentham, continued - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow For full shownotes visit: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Part XVI - Jeremy Bentham, continued - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow For full shownotes visit: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Part XV - Bentham - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Check out the book here: https://a.co/d/1qRii01 Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Part XV - Bentham - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Check out the book here: https://a.co/d/1qRii01 Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One Piece pausiert. Der Bänder Talk geht in die 56. Runde. Unseren Helden gelingt die Flucht aus dem Impel Down. Ein Band voller Fan Service für Ruffy, Jimbei, Sir Crocodile aber auch Bentham. Wird es Ruffy gelingen seinen Bruder auf Marineford zu retten? Findet es in dieser Folge heraus!

00:00 34. Дженинз (Jenyns) 13:41 35. Галлер (Haller) 17:23 36. Кокки (Cocchi) 24:06 37. Руссо (Rousseau) 44:05 38. Линней (Linne) 50:28 39. Бюффон (Buffon) 1:00:58 40. Хоксуэрт (Hawkesworth) 1:06:27 41. Пэли (Paley) 1:25:50 42. Прессавен (Pressavin) 1:33:44 43. Бернарден де Сен-Пиерр (Bernardin de St. Pierre) 1:46:13 44. Франклин, Говард, Сведенборг, Веслей и Гиббон (Franklin, Howard, Swedenborg, Wesley, Gibbon) 1:56:48 45. Купер (Cowper) 2:04:11 46. Освальд (Oswald) 2:25:37 47. Шиллер (Shiller) 2:31:09 48. Бентам (Bentham) 2:40:40 49. Синклер (Sinclair) 2:45:56 50. Гуфеланд (Hufeland) 2:50:26 51. Ритсон (Ritson) 3:16:20 52. Никольсон (Nicolson) 3:45:53 53. Абернети (Abernethy) 3:56:31 54. Ламбе (Laambe) 4:29:05 55. Ньютон (Newton) 4:42:12 56. Глейзе (Gleizes) 5:25:30 57. Шелли (Shelley) 6:37:37 58. Байрон (Byron) 6:47:59 59. Филлипс (Phillips) 7:21:24 60. Ламартин (Lamartine) ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

When the supernatural seeps into our world, it doesn't just leave behind fear—it can also leave sickness. From shadowy visitors to ominous dreams, some eerie paranormal encounters suggest that the price of witnessing the unknown may be paid in flesh and blood.IN THIS EPISODE: When the supernatural intrudes into our lives, it's not just our minds that are affected. We'll delve into a few bizarre cases where individuals fell gravely ill after brushes with the paranormal. Is it coincidence? Or something more sinister? And could these illnesses be due to the paranormal literally draining us of life? (Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned) *** Helen Duncan made a living from conducting séances—until her uncanny knowledge of classified World War II tragedies spooked British authorities. (Britain's Last Witch) *** Jeremy Bentham was a philosopher whose ideas about mortality and utility extended beyond death. Bentham's wish for his body to be preserved and displayed as an "auto-icon" – so it could be seen publicly by all. And while his wishes were granted, it came with a few hiccups along the way… mostly with his poor head. (The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse) *** Annie Dorman was discovered lifeless with a gunshot wound, sending shockwaves through her tight-knit community. Suicide seemed improbable, leaving detectives baffled and family perplexed. Was it a crime of passion, an accident, murder… or truly suicide? In a similar case, just a few years later, in the serene countryside of Greenwich, New York, the lifeless form of Maggie Hourigan is found, floating in a tranquil pool, speculation runs rampant. Were these cases suicide, as hastily concluded, horrible accidents… or sinister murders? (The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan) *** AND MORE!CHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Disclaimer and Lead-In00:02:28.923 = Show Open00:04:58.317 = Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned00:21:43.793 = The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan00:35:15.151 = Britain's Last Witch00:43:39.798 = The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse00:53:56.678 = Eccentric Habits of History's Elite01:03:57.830 = Show Close, Verse, and Final ThoughtSOURCES AND RESOURCES FROM THE EPISODE…“Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned” by Nick Redfern for Mysterious Universe:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/6bu93dju“The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan” by Robert Wilhelm for Murder By Gaslight:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/meu37k4m; https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/4y9mn9a4“The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse” by Melissa Sartore for Weird History: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/yt6uetju“Britain's Last Witch” by Parissa Djangi for National Geographic: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p8by87t“Eccentric Habits of History's Elite” by John Munoz for ListVerse: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/bdh2dw3x=====Darkness Syndicate members get the ad-free version. https://weirddarkness.com/syndicateInfo on the next LIVE SCREAM event. https://weirddarkness.com/LiveScreamInfo on the next WEIRDO WATCH PARTY event. https://weirddarkness.com/TV=====(Over time links seen above may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)= = = = ="I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness." — John 12:46= = = = =WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2025, Weird Darkness.=====Originally aired: April 17, 2024EPISODE PAGE at WeirdDarkness.com (includes list of sources): https://weirddarkness.com/SickenedByTheSupernatural

Tell Spencer your thoughts about this episode!Matthew Adelstein, the prolific young writer who posts at "Bentham's Bulldog" on Substack, has recently attracted attention for a tier ranking of philosophical arguments for the existence of God. Matthew and Spencer discuss the arguments at the bottom of his list, ascending from arguments that get an "F" to one in the C tier. 

When we built a calculator to help meat-eaters offset the animal welfare impact of their diet through donations (like carbon offsets), we didn't expect it to become one of our most effective tools for engaging new donors. In this post we explain how it works, why it seems particularly promising for increasing support for farmed animal charities, and what you can do to support this work if you think it's worthwhile. In the comments I'll also share our answers to some frequently asked questions and concerns some people have when thinking about the idea of an ‘animal welfare offset'. Background FarmKind is a donation platform whose mission is to support the animal movement by raising funds from the general public for some of the most effective charities working to fix factory farming. When we built our platform, we directionally estimated how much a donation to each of our [...] ---Outline:(00:50) Background(01:41) What it is and what it isn't(02:38) How it works(04:24) Why this is a promising way to encourage effective giving for animals(06:46) Case study: Bentham's Bulldog(07:30) How is this actionable for you?The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. The original text contained 4 images which were described by AI. --- First published: February 11th, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/nGQRBWyCAbcEYSyLL/using-a-diet-offset-calculator-to-encourage-effective-giving --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comRoss is a writer and a dear old colleague, back when we were both bloggers at The Atlantic. Since then he's been a columnist at the New York Times — and, in my mind, he's the best columnist in the country. The author of many books, including Grand New Party and The Decadent Society, his new one is Believe: Why Everyone Should Be Religious (which you can pre-order now). So in this podcast, I play — literally — Devil's advocate. Forgive me for getting stuck on the meaning of the universe in the first 20 minutes or so. It picks up after that.For two clips of our convo — on the difference between proselytizing and evangelizing, and the “hallucinations of the sane” — see our YouTube page.Other topics: Creation; the improbable parameters of the Big Bang; the “fine-tuning” argument I cannot understand; extraterrestrial life; Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy; Hitch; the atheist/materialist view; the multiverse; quantum physics; consciousness; John von Neumann; Isaac Newton; human evolution; tribal survival; the exponential unity of global knowledge; Stephen Barr's Modern Physics and Ancient Faith; the substack Bentham's Bulldog; why humans wonder; miracles; Sebastian Junger and near-death experiences; the scientific method; William James; religious individualists; cults; Vatican II; Pope Francis; the sex-abuse crisis in the Church; suffering and theodicy; Lyme Disease; the AIDS crisis; Jesus and the Resurrection; Peter J Williams' Can We Trust the Gospels?; and the natural selection of religions.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Jon Rauch on the tribalism of white evangelicals; Evan Wolfson on the history of marriage equality, Yoni Appelbaum on how America stopped building things, Chris Caldwell on the political shifts in Europe, Nick Denton on the evolution of new media, Francis Collins on faith and science, and Mike White of White Lotus fame. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

In this episode, I walk through my observations upon returning to the US from Japan and share what I witnessed after the outbreak of the LA fires, which have filled headlines worldwide.Commenting on current events is a bit out of the norm for the podcast. However, I offer a quick history of 13 years of life to help illustrate the personal perspective I have on the disaster. I also briefly mention Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue.For those of you who would like to get into the weeds with me about Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue, I wrote an all-to-short summary of his thesis below. He deserves to be studied deeply.In short, I will argue that we are indeed living in an age after virtue. A suffocating, growing, cold bureaucracy has filled that vacuum. But in the aftermath of the fires, I also witnessed the human spirit in the streets of Pasadena.The Enlightenment's MistakeAccording to MacIntyre, the Enlightenment thinkers (18th-century philosophers like Kant, Bentham) wanted to replace Aristotle's virtue ethics — which tied morality to shared human purpose (telos) — with “rational” systems like rights and utility. But by foregoing the idea that humans have a built-in moral purpose, they turned ethics into a free-for-all. Without a common “why” for morality, debates became clashes of personal preference, not mutual pursuits of truth through reason.The Death of VirtueAristotle's virtues (courage, justice, etc.) thrived in communities with shared goals. In the pursuit of maximizing individual freedom, the Enlightenment rejected Aristotelian virtue — throwing the baby out with the bathwater. People began treating ethics like a menu of opinions, prioritizing personal preference. This is why public discourse is so shrill in the modern era, according to MacIntyre. “Abortion is wrong” and “Gun ownership is wrong” are shallow arguments rooted in the speaker's likes and dislikes as opposed to a higher aim for human flourishing. This fractured the social fabric.MacIntry calls this emotivism. “X is wrong” just means “I dislike X.” Without a shared understanding of virtue, debates became manipulative power struggles. There's no common ground — just competing preferences.Bureaucracy's RiseInto this moral vacuum stepped bureaucrats. They claimed “neutral expertise” to manage society “scientifically.” But this is susceptible to human weakness and cowardice:* Managers pretend to be value-neutral but enforce their desires (profit, power, slacking off work, giving their friends a pass).* Institutions prioritize external goods (money, metrics) over internal goods (craftsmanship, care).In my opinion, this is one of many reasons why buildings are so ugly today. Craftsmanship is not valued today as it was in the old world. What is valued today is how quickly you can build something with efficiently priced labor and materials.Why Bureaucracy is a Moral Catastrophe* It Crowds Out Virtue: Bureaucracies reduce people to data points. Teachers “teach to tests,” universities chase quotas. Instead of mentoring students through childhood or accepting the most worthy applicant, for example, such moral judgment is replaced by compliance.* It Destroys Community: Bureaucracies fragment society into isolated individuals. In a virtuous society, communities cultivate trust through face-to-face relationships, reciprocal duties, and a common understanding of telos.This telos was perfectly illustrated in the generosity displayed after the outbreak of the LA fires. There was a shared story of “we're going to help each other out to rebuild”. Bureaucracies fragment these stories into isolated incidents to be "managed," divorcing actions from their moral context.To be honest, I deeply believe MacIntyre is right: We're in a moral dark age. But as I discuss in the episode, I saw decency in the aftermath of the fires. Fellow residents were lending a hand — no permits required. At the end of the day, Altadena and the Palisades will rebuild — not because a committee approved it, but because neighbors showed up.Books Mentioned In This Episode:When you purchase a book (or anything on Amazon) with the links below, you support me and the podcast at no extra cost to you:* After Virtue by Alasdair MacIntyreLinks to More Resources:* Americana at Brand* Rick Caruso* Hyatt Regency in Austin, TX* Buc-ee's* California, the most regulated state in the USA* Cafe Frosch in Kyoto* Yumeji Vintage Villa in Kyoto* Graduate Institute Geneva Maison de la Paix building* Picciotto Student Residence Building* Japan Tobacco International Building* WWOOF: World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms* Change.org Poll Demanding the Immediate Recall of LA Mayor Karen Bass* Learn Ikebana in Kobe (with me and a local expert!) on TripAdvisor* The Akiya Project on YouTube This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit akiyaproject.substack.com/subscribe

“Walking across some snowy fields with my dog, Toby, who joyfully runs up and bites the wind sock on my mic as he runs by.”

“My dog Toby joins in by digging in the earth next to me.”

Professor Philip Schofield hosts Social Scientist Dr Jonathan Galton, to explore his research into the perceived political tension on the progressive left between queerness and Islam. Discussing the historical and cultural context surrounding queerness and Islam, they find surprising affinities between Bentham's writing on freedom of religion and sexual liberty, and the contemporary theological work reinterpreting Quranic verses on homosexuality today. Host: Professor Philip Schofield (Director of the Bentham Project, UCL) Guest: Dr Jonathan Galton (IOE - Social Research Institute, UCL) Commissioners: Professor David Docherty OBE & Dr Paul Ayris (Pro-Vice-Provost LCCOS: Library, Culture, Collections and Open Science, UCL) Director: Justin Hardy (IOE - Culture, Communication & Media, UCL) Producer: Stevie Doran Date: 21 October 2024 Duration: 26:35

Hello Interactors,We've entered fall here in the northern hemisphere, and you know what that means — pumpkin spice everything, cozy sweaters, and … economics! That's right, as the leaves change color (at least for those above 40°N latitude), it's the perfect time to explore how the changing seasons mirror shifts in human interaction, from the flow of resources to the balance of power and progress. This week, it's time to cozy up with Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and James Watt —three names you probably didn't expect to find together, but trust me, they make quite the trio. So grab your favorite fall beverage and join me on a journey through the Industrial Revolution, steam engines, and the forgotten role of moral feedback loops in economics. Let's find out why balancing wealth and well-being is harder than finding a public restroom in an old university. PURGING THE URGE FOR SYMPATHYI needed to pee. More specifically, the stretch receptors in the walls of my bladder, which monitor the volume of urine inside, became activated. That sent sensory signals to the spinal cord and brain through my pelvic nerves. The pons in the brainstem (which includes a dedicated urination control center) processed this information in coordination with my prefrontal cortex, which allowed for conscious control over my decision to urinate.It was a Sunday, and the campus was dead. Lucky for me a door was open, so I ducked in and began my search for a potty. The hallway was musty and narrow. The walls were old, but not as old as the 250-year-old structure surrounding it. There was no immediately visible sign for a restroom, but there were numerous potential doors and directions for me to attempt. As I approached one of them, the industrial grade door magically opened before I could even touch it. I cautiously inched forward half wondering if it would lock behind me.Now inside another chamber further in the interior, I was met with another set of mysterious doors. I stepped inside another narrower hallway that twisted suddenly to a sign above another door that read WC. Whatever Potter-esque ghosts had guided me here clearly had sympathy. And so did my parasympathetic nervous system. It simultaneously signaled the detrusor muscle of my bladder wall to contract and my urethral sphincter to relax. I stood there in relief wondering if I could find my way out.I was visiting the University of Glasgow, hoping to learn more about its famous figures, especially Adam Smith, whom I see as an important moral philosopher rather than just the “father of economics.” A few days later in Edinburgh, I tortured my family by leading them on a search for his gravestone. I was pleased to find it acknowledged his The Theory of Moral Sentiments, where sympathy balances self-interest, as well as his more popular The Wealth of Nations. Unsurprisingly, the nearby tourist plaque focused only on Wealth of Nations, reflecting the emphasis on economics over his broader moral philosophy.Adam Smith's moral philosophy was central to his life's work, with The Theory of Moral Sentiments being his enduring focus, while The Wealth of Nations but a brief but significant interlude. For Smith, economics was not just about market mechanics, but deeply intertwined with human nature, ethics, and the broader pursuit of communal well-being. He was more concerned with the motivations behind human actions than with the technical details of market forces, which came to dominate modern economics. Smith believed that the drive for self-betterment was not solely about personal wealth but was intrinsically linked to the well-being of communities, where self-interest was balanced by sympathy for others.In Smith's view, economic actions should be guided by moral virtues, such as prudence and justice, ensuring that individual efforts to improve one's own life would ultimately contribute to the greater good of society. His exploration of economics was always part of a larger moral framework, where community engagement and ethical behavior were essential for both individual and societal progress. Today, this broader moral context is often overlooked, but for Smith, economics was inseparable from philosophical inquiry into human behavior. He emphasized how the improvement of human life goes far beyond just the accumulation of material wealth.MORALS MEET MARKET MANIPULATIONMany conservatives today may brush this interpretation as being too ‘woke'. Well, some eventually did back then too. As the British economy was expanding in Smith's later years, he spoke in favor of capping interest rates with usury law. Usury is defined as the practice of making unethical or immoral loans that unfairly enrich the lender, often involving excessive or abusive interest rates. He believed exorbitant rates could lead to preying on the disadvantaged during a time of need resulting in growing disadvantages to the larger community.Historically, many societies including ancient Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and Buddhist communities considered charging interest of any kind as wrong or illegal. Smith was rooted in elements of Christian morals, but critics claimed he was being hypocritical. They pointed to examples in his publications, often out of context, of where he suggested government can't know better than individuals about their own risks, costs, and benefits and thus should not meddle.But even in The Wealth of Nations Smith was clear about three conditions necessary for an effective economy and with each he paired moral values also found in The Theory of Moral Sentiments:* State-Justice: Smith argued, “Commerce and manufacturers…can seldom flourish long in any state which does not enjoy a regular administration of justice,” emphasizing the need for laws that ensure security and regulate excessive accumulation of wealth.* Market-Liberty: He valued the “liberty of trade…notwithstanding some restraints,” while warning that monopolies “hurt…the general interest of the country.”* Community-Benevolence: Rooted in moral sentiments, Smith believed in a shared commitment to community, where “many reputable rules…must have been laid down and approved of by common consent.”Smith's main usury critic was the philosopher Jeremy Bentham, known for developing the philosophy of utilitarianism. A letter written to Smith in 1787 stated:“Should it be my fortune to gain any advantage over you, it must be with weapons which you have taught me to wield, and with which you yourself have furnished me…I can see scarce any other way of convicting you of any error or oversight, than by judging you out of your own mouth.”Bentham is most famous for the idea of “maximizing the greatest happiness for the greatest number” which helped promote legal reforms and social progress including welfare, equal rights for women, the separation of church and state, and the decriminalization of homosexual acts. But his ultimate focus of utilitarianism was on the practical outcomes of policies going so far as to develop mathematical formulas, called felicific calculus, to determine how much pleasure or pain must be inflicted in society to achieve the most happiness for the greatest number.He was also a staunch economic expansionist, believing, as verified in his calculus, that it would expand good for most. It would be his student, John Stuart Mill, who expanded on but also critiqued Bentham's utilitarianism later in the mid 1800s.“I conceive Mr. Bentham's writings to have done and to be doing very serious evil. It is by such things that the more enthusiastic and generous minds are prejudiced against all his other speculations, and against the very attempt to make ethics and politics a subject of precise and philosophical thinking.”Mill too was an expansionist, but acknowledged utilitarian reasoning could be used to defend exploitive and immoral colonial practices, including slavery. Mill believed slavery "effectually brutifies the intellect" of both slave and the enslaver and condemned the notion that certain races were inherently inferior and required subjugation.Nevertheless, early colonizers and imperialists, as well as modern day neo-liberals weaponized elements of utilitarianism much like they did with The Wealth of Nations. They used (and continue to use) select elements to justify laissez-faire economics, deregulation, and the exploitation of labor, often prioritizing economic efficiency over moral considerations such as fairness and social equity.For example, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan both used utilitarian logic believing their policies would maximize overall economic growth and prosperity, benefiting society as a whole, even at the expense of rising inequality and social welfare. Their consequentialist approach justified market-driven reforms for a perceived greater good. Given today's historic wealth imbalances, the result of that calculus is less than convincing.Bentham also failed to convince Smith in that fateful letter, but to many it marked a notable shift in economic thinking and philosophy. Smith passed away three years after his exchange with Bentham and theoretical mathematical utilitarianism became the ultimate measure of right and wrong in governance and ethics in the UK and the US. Smith's morality, which emphasized moral virtues guiding economic actions, lost out to consequentialisms focus solely on outcomes, often justifying exploitation and suffering if it maximized societal gain and economic expansion for the expansionists — despite John Stuart Mill's, and countless others, objections.ECONOMIC ENGINES IN MORAL MACHINESDuring Adam Smith's lifetime, the Industrial Age rapidly emerged, transforming economies and wealth structures. Technological advancements, like the steam engine, fueled industrial capitalism, driving unprecedented economic growth and wealth accumulation. This focus on efficiency relied on maximizing productivity, whether through steam-powered machines, the exploitation of enslaved people, the working poor, or the displacement of Indigenous populations, prioritizing economic gain over human well-being.In 1783, while Smith and Bentham were debating economic philosophy, James Watt was at the University of Glasgow, focused on regulating unchecked power —specifically the excessive speed of steam engines which he helped to invent. To prevent mechanical failures from fluctuating steam pressure, Watt invented the centrifugal governor. This device used weighted iron balls that spun outward with centrifugal force as the engine's speed increased, raising a spindle that adjusted a valve to control steam flow. By automatically reducing steam when the engine ran too fast and increasing it when it slowed, the governor ensured safe and efficient operation. Watt's invention, introduced in 1788, was in full production by 1790, paving the way for innovations like the first steam locomotive in 1804.Watt's governor symbolized the need to impose limits on unchecked mechanical power, ensuring the engine operated within safe and efficient parameters. This technological innovation mirrored a broader theme of the Industrial Revolution — the balance between harnessing new, powerful technologies for economic growth while recognizing the risks of unregulated force, whether in machines or the rapid, unrestrained accumulation of wealth and resources in society. Watt's governor was an early acknowledgment that unchecked power, whether mechanical or economic, could lead to instability and disaster."I am never content until I have constructed a mechanical model of the subject I am studying. If I succeed in making one, I understand. Otherwise, I do not." – Lord KelvinOur brains also act as a kind of governor on the unchecked power of our kidneys, just as moral feedback loops serve as a governor on unchecked economic ambition. Like the stretch receptors in our bladder sensing when fluid volume builds, moral reasoning, as Smith envisioned, detects the social and ethical consequences of unfettered economic expansion. These signals, akin to the centrifugal force moving the governor's spindle, prompt individuals and society to regulate their actions, guiding decisions based not only on self-interest but on moral duty.In contrast, Bentham's utilitarian calculus, much like a theoretical mathematical model divorced from natural systems, ignores these ethical feedback loops. By relying solely on abstract calculations of happiness and efficiency, Bentham's approach, like a machine operating without awareness of its environment, risks distorting human and social behaviors. Where Smith's model calls for moral constraints on economic behavior, much like the body's signals to prevent overstretching, Bentham's framework lacks the necessary human safeguards, leading to potential exploitation and imbalance in pursuit of theoretical utility maximization.I do wonder what our economic systems would look like if, like our bodies, they were designed to self-regulate, ensuring that the pursuit of wealth doesn't come at the expense of human well-being? Just as our bodily functions rely on natural feedback loops to maintain equilibrium, why have we allowed our economies to run unchecked, often leading to exploitation and inequality? Adam Smith believed in moral constraints on ambition, yet today, much of our economic thinking prioritizes growth without those safeguards.As walked off campus that day, I reflected on Watt's governor regulating the steam engine and the moral feedback loops Smith envisioned. I wondered if Smith and Watt made the metaphoric connection in their encounters with one another, maybe even on their way to relieve themselves in the very building in which I found myself. Perhaps they each happened on this connection in their own thought experiments, which makes me wonder why more don't today? Surely there's a morally sound way to balance personal gain with the greater good — a bit like public restrooms. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

I. Bentham's Bulldog Blogger “Bentham's Bulldog” recently wrote Shut Up About Slave Morality. Nietzsche's concept of “slave morality” (he writes) is just a dysphemism for the usual morality where you're not bad and cruel. Right-wing edgelords use “rejection of slave morality” as a justification for badness and cruelty: When people object to slave morality, they are just objecting to morality. They are objecting to the notion that you should care about others and doing the right thing, even when doing so doesn't materially benefit you. Now, one can consistently object to those things, but it doesn't make them any sort of Nostradamus. It makes them morally deficient, and also generally philosophically confused. The tedious whinging about slave morality is just a way to pass off not caring about morality or taking moral arguments seriously as some sort of sophisticated and cynical myth-busting. But it's not that in the slightest. No one is duped by slave morality, no one buys into it because of some sort of deep-seated ignorance. Those who follow it do so because of a combination of social pressure and a genuine desire to help out others. That is, in fact, not in any way weak but a noble impulse from which all good actions spring. https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/matt-yglesias-considered-as-the-nietzschean 

Spurred by comments from a couple of episodes ago, we wanted to make sure we didn't misrepresent Matthew's position and he agreed to come lay it out for us on the show. Check out the links below to dive in … Continue reading →

Cremated, buried or donated to science? How much have you thought about what happens to you or your body after you die? Who owns your body after you die? And is having a legacy truly important? In this podcast, Nick, Peter and Fraser revisit the Hull funeral investigation, touch on how different cultures, religions and the animal kingdom deal with death and grief, and ask if what happens to us after we die really matters. A few things we mentioned in this podcast: - Legacy funeral pair were arrested at Heathrow - police https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-68631122 - Blackstone on Property https://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/blackstone-on-property-1753 - Law Regarding Who Has the Right to Deal with an Adult's Body after Death https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/english-legal-system/law-regarding-who-has-the-right-to-deal-with-an-adults-body-after-death-3419.php - R. v Bentham (2005) - A hand cannot be an imitation firearm https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/firearms#:~:text=Putting%20a%20hand%20inside%20a,Bentham%20%5B2005%5D%20UKHL%2018. - The Depths of Animal Grief https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/animal-grief/ For more information on Aleph Insights visit our website https://alephinsights.com or to get in touch about our podcast email podcast@alephinsights.com

Hey everyone! I'm bringing back my friend Ryan Bentham, who some of you may know from having appeared in three previous Detox episodes, and who others may know from the Life on the Swingset podcast. Ryan (AKA Prof) and I talk (somewhat loosely) about sexy stuff, but we also talk about his long road back from a major health setback and how going through the experience changed his life. We talk about almost being an empty nester and what it feels like having raised two successful adult men. What does communication mean to him these days? What does gratitude mean? All this and more during our conversation. Hope you enjoy!

IN THIS EPISODE: When the supernatural intrudes into our lives, it's not just our minds that are affected. We'll delve into a few bizarre cases where individuals fell gravely ill after brushes with the paranormal. Is it coincidence? Or something more sinister? And could these illnesses be due to the paranormal literally draining us of life? (Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned) *** Helen Duncan made a living from conducting séances—until her uncanny knowledge of classified World War II tragedies spooked British authorities. (Britain's Last Witch) *** Jeremy Bentham was a philosopher whose ideas about mortality and utility extended beyond death. Bentham's wish for his body to be preserved and displayed as an "auto-icon" – so it could be seen publicly by all. And while his wishes were granted, it came with a few hiccups along the way… mostly with his poor head. (The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse) *** Annie Dorman was discovered lifeless with a gunshot wound, sending shockwaves through her tight-knit community. Suicide seemed improbable, leaving detectives baffled and family perplexed. Was it a crime of passion, an accident, murder… or truly suicide? In a similar case, just a few years later, in the serene countryside of Greenwich, New York, the lifeless form of Maggie Hourigan is found, floating in a tranquil pool, speculation runs rampant. Were these cases suicide, as hastily concluded, horrible accidents… or sinister murders? (The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan) *** AND MORE!SOURCES AND REFERENCES FROM THE EPISODE…“Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned” by Nick Redfern for Mysterious Universe: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/6bu93dju“The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan” by Robert Wilhelm for Murder By Gaslight:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/meu37k4m; https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/4y9mn9a4“The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse” by Melissa Sartore for Weird History: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/yt6uetju“Britain's Last Witch” by Parissa Djangi for National Geographic: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p8by87t“Eccentric Habits of History's Elite” by John Munoz for ListVerse: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/bdh2dw3xWeird Darkness theme by Alibi Music Library. = = = = =(Over time links seen above may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)= = = = ="I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness." — John 12:46= = = = =WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2024, Weird Darkness.= = = = =Originally aired: April 17, 2024PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT: https://weirddarkness.com/can-the-paranormal-drain-life-from-us/

This week I wrap up a multi-part discussion of Foucault's theories of panoptic power, institutional knowledge, and discourses used to endorse awful ideas and beliefs about drugs and drug users. I also talk about Michel Foucault's car accident while high on opium, the notion of panoptic power, Jeremy Bentham's panoptic prison, discourse, stigma and stereotype. Foucault audio at intro and outro from Century of the Self lecture series. Support the show

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Stories from the origins of the animal welfare movement, published by Julia Wise on March 12, 2024 on The Effective Altruism Forum. This is a Draft Amnesty Week draft. It may not be polished, up to my usual standards, fully thought through, or fully fact-checked. This post is adapted from notes I made in 2015 while trying to figure out how EA compared to other movements. Society went from treating animals as objects to sometimes treating them as beings / moral patients, at least dogs and horses. A few lone voices (including Bentham) in the 1700s, then more interest in the 1800s, first bill introduced 1809, first bills passed in 1820s (Britain and Maine). Richard Martin "Humanity Dick" - Irish politician who got some success on the 1822 "Ill Treatment of Cattle Bill" after a series of failed anti-cruelty bills. His work was interrupted when he fled to France after losing his seat in Parliament, which meant he was no longer immune to being arrested for his gambling debts. First success with enforcement came from publicity stunt (in case about abuse of donkey, bringing the donkey into court) which caused coverage in media and popular song Animal welfare work was initially thought of as largely for the benefit of human morality (it's bad for your soul to beat your horse) or to prevent disgust caused by witnessing suffering, not necessarily for the animals themselves. British movement had several false starts; failed legislation and "societies" which died out. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals took off in 1824 led by a minister and four members of parliament (including William Wilberforce, main leader of British abolition movement), but lost steam after an initial burst of fundraising. Office was closed and they met in coffee houses. Main staff member was jailed for the society's debts, another staff member continued working as a volunteer. Fortune turned when Princess Victoria (later Queen) and her mother decided they liked the organization, became the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. RSPCA. 1837 essay competition with equivalent of $1500 prize led to four essays being published as books. One man (Henry Bergh) imported the movement to NYC in the 1860s after hearing about it in London during his work as a diplomat. Pushed first animal abuse legislation through NY legislature and was its single-handed enforcer; got power to arrest and prosecute people despite not being an attorney. Founded the ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals), initially self-funded. Early on, a supporter died and left the society the equivalent of $2.8 million. Bergh did a lecture tour of the western US resulting in several offshoot societies. Got enough print coverage of his work that legislation spread to other states. Summary of his character based on interviews: "He was a cool, calm man. He did not love horses; he disliked dogs. Affection, then, was not the moving cause. He was a healthy, clean-living man, whose perfect self-control showed steady nerves that did not shrink sickeningly from sights of physical pain; therefore he was not moved by self-pity or hysterical sympathy….No warm, loving, tender, nervous nature could have borne to face it for an hour, and he faced and fought it for a lifetime. His coldness was his armor, and its protection was sorely needed." Widespread mockery of main figures as sentimental busybodies. Bergh was mocked as "the great meddler." Cartoon depicting him as overly caring about animals while there are people suffering - feels very parallel to some criticisms of EA. Welfare movements for children and animals were entwined both in Britain and US (American Humane was for both children and animals almost from the beginning). Early norm that both children and animals more or less belonged to their owners a...

A new episode of Off Center in which Scott and Mathias Klang, a lawyer and professor at Fordham University, talk about surveillance microcosms and how spying is shaping our lives.   In this episode, Scott and Jhave, a previous guest on Off Center, give the first 5-minute AI update. Sign up for ⁠⁠⁠the CDN newsletter⁠⁠⁠ here. References Rettberg, Jill Walker. 2024. Machine Vision: How Algorithms Are Changing the Way We See the World. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.  Bentham, Jeremy, 1748-1832. 1995. The Panopticon Writings. London; New York: Verso.  Orwell, George. 1949. 1984. England: Secker & Warburg.  Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Books.  Suno Inc. 2024. Suno AI. https://www.suno.ai/.  Johnston, D. J. 2018. ReRites. Anteism Books. https://glia.ca/rerites/.  Forsgren, Seth & Hayk Martiros. 2022. Riffusion. https://www.riffusion.com/.   sp0n, Inc. 2017. Citizen. Android & iOS. 

On présente souvent l'utilitarisme comme une philosophie qui prône l'égoïsme. Mais est-ce réellement le cas ? Ne confondons-nous pas prôner l'égoïsme et reconnaître son existence ? Et surtout, que valent les systèmes moraux qui prétendent dénoncer l'égoïsme ? Telles sont les questions auxquelles nous allons tenter de répondre dans cet épisode. Vous pouvez me soutenir : ★En devenant contributeur sur Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/leprecepteurpodcast Vous pourrez ainsi accéder au podcast sans pub et en avant-première et surtout à mon contenu inédit ! ★Ou en faisant un don ponctuel sur PayPal : http://paypal.me/leprecepteurpodcast Pensez à laisser une note et un avis sur la plateforme de podcast où vous m'écoutez. Cela prend quelques secondes, et c'est un geste très utile pour le référencement du podcast ! Et bien sûr, continuez à partager les émissions que vous préférez sur vos réseaux sociaux. Le Précepteur Podcast a été créé pour vous et continuera d'exister grâce à vous. (Pour toute demande : leprecepteurpodcast@gmail.com)

Extrait de l'épisode BENTHAM - Sommes-nous tous égoïstes ? Cet épisode sera publié sur YouTube et en podcast vendredi prochain le Il est d'ores et déjà disponible en intégralité sur ma page Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/posts/avant-premiere-97693348

durée : 00:58:59 - Entendez-vous l'éco ? - par : Tiphaine de Rocquigny - Critique de Say, proche de Bentham, Stendhal se confronte aux théories économiques de son temps. De l'utilitarisme au malthusianisme en passant par la question de la division du travail, le célèbre écrivain était aussi économiste. - invités : Christophe Reffait Maître de conférences en littérature française, Université de Picardie Jules Verne

It's the end of the year again and time to rant! This year's collection of rants includes:Jarrod Blair on bad habits that crush the philosophical spiritMatthew Adelstein on the stupidity and depravity of Effective Altruism criticsMatt Lutz on possible world confusionsMark Oppenheimer on the Israel-Gaza warOliver Traldi on the university presidents' testimony to CongressJP Andrew on naturalism as a dogma in philosophySpencer Case on scientific dogmatismJason Werbeloff on moralizing vegetariansAlex Byrne on social constructionLinks:Virtue Vibes Podcast:https://www.virtuevibes.org/Bentham's Bulldog substack:https://benthams.substack.com/Brain in a Vat podcast:https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/brain-in-a-vat/id1509951964Humean Being Substack:https://humeanbeing.substack.com/

Way back in 1960, Leo Strauss wrote in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences that "Natural law, which was for many centuries the basis of the predominant Western political thought, is rejected in our time by almost all students of society who are not Roman Catholics." In the decades since then, however, natural law has enjoyed a revival of sorts, and is implicated today in the rise of constitutional originalism at the Supreme Court. But it is also a confusing subject, because many so-called "new natural law" theories seem to concede too much to modern philosophy, as if the great tradition of natural law begins with Bentham. To be sure, the classical authors such as Aristotle, Cicero, and Aquinas were not simple thinkers on the subject, but their work tends not bog down with specialized jargon or abstruse theory. One person stands out for rescuing the older tradition of natural law: Hadley Arkes, author of Mere Natural Law: Originalism and the Anchoring Truths of the Constitution. In this conversation, Steve Hayward draws out the basics of the argument from Prof. Arkes, and extends the line of reasoning to today's controversies about free speech and "cancel culture," which are more confused than ever with the sudden eruption of anti-Semitism on college campuses.

Luke Bentham returns to PCH to talk all about The Dirty Nils new record Free Rein to Passions, his guitar rig, touring the U.K, how the best Nil songs are written (according to Luke) and much more!https://thedirtynil.comhttps://thedirtynil.bandcamp.comhttps://www.instagram.com/TheDirtyNilhttps://www.instagram.com/lukenukem90PCHInstagram - www.instagram.com/powerchordhourTwitter - www.twitter.com/powerchordhourFacebook - www.facebook.com/powerchordhourYoutube - www.youtube.com/channel/UC6jTfzjB3-mzmWM-51c8LggSpotify Episode Playlists - https://open.spotify.com/user/kzavhk5ghelpnthfby9o41gnr?si=4WvOdgAmSsKoswf_HTh_MgDonate to help show costs -https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/pchanthonyhttps://cash.app/$anthmerchpowerchordhour@gmail.comCheck out the Power Chord Hour radio show every Friday night at 8 to 11 est/Tuesday Midnight to 3 est on 107.9 WRFA in Jamestown, NY. Stream the station online at wrfalp.com/streaming/ or listen on the WRFA app.Special Thanks to my buddy Jay Vics for the behind the scenes help on this episode!https://www.meettheexpertspodcast.comhttps://www.jvimobile.com

Today we talk about Jeremy Bentham's concept of the Panopticon. Michel Foucault's comparison to society in 1975. The historical role of intelligence as a justification for dominance. The anatomy of free will, and how a digital world may systematically limit our free will without us knowing it.    Thank you to the sponsors of this episode:  LMNT - www.drinkLMNT.com/PHILO Better Help - www.betterhelp.com/PHILTHIS   Get more: Website: https://www.philosophizethis.org/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/philosophizethis Philosophize This! Clips: https://www.youtube.com/@philosophizethisclips   Be social: Twitter: https://twitter.com/iamstephenwest Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/philosophizethispodcast TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@philosophizethispodcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/philosophizethisshow   Thank you for making the show possible.

High school debate is considered an ideal extracurricular activity for aspiring lawyers, politicians, or anyone seeking to learn the tools of effective communication and persuasion. But a slew of recent reports argue that high school debate is being captured by political ideology, rendering certain arguments off-limits, some debate topics undebatable, and ad hominem attacks fair game. Debate judges disclose their judging paradigms by saying things like, “I will listen to conservative-leaning arguments, but be careful,” or, “Before anything else, including being a debate judge, I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. . . . I cannot check the revolutionary proletarian science at the door when I'm judging.” Some debates even devolve into personal attacks, spurred on by judges who say they “will consider indictments of an opponent on the basis that they have done [or] said something racist, gendered, [or] -phobic in their personal behavior.” On today's show, we're joined by two former high school debaters who are dismayed by these trends. James Fishback is the founder of Incubate Debate, which hosts free debate tournaments for students in Florida. Matthew Adelstein is a rising sophomore studying philosophy at the University of Michigan and publishes Bentham's Newsletter, a newsletter about utilitarianism. Show notes: Transcript of episode “Part I: At high school debates, debate is no longer allowed” by James Fishback “Part II: At high school debates, watch what you say” by James Fishback “How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate” by Maya Bodnick Nico's current reading list on critical theory: “Grand Hotel Abyss” by Stuart Jeffries and “America's Cultural Revolution” by Christopher F. Rufo www.sotospeakpodcast.com YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@freespeechtalk Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/ Email us: sotospeak@thefire.org

The “panopticon” might be the best known prison concept in the world. In the original design, all the cells are built around a central guard tower, designed to maintain order just by making prisoners believe that they are constantly being watched.  Over time, the panopticon has turned into something way bigger than just a blueprint for penitentiaries. It's become the metaphor for the surveillance state. Philosopher Michel Foucault had probably the most popular take on the panopticon concept. He used it to warn society that what actually keeps all of us in check isn't necessarily that someone is watching you. It's just the feeling that someone might be watching you. But very few actual prisons were built around this idea. Breda Dome is one of them.The Panopticon Effect