Podcasts about humanists uk

Lord Alf Dubs is a Labour peer and former MP. He came to the UK from Prague in 1939 on one of the Kindertransport trains organised by Sir Nicholas Winton which rescued mostly Jewish children from Nazi-occupied Czechoslovakia.Alf was born in Prague in 1932. His father was from a Jewish background and was brought up in what was then Northern Bohemia while his mother came from Austria. His father left Prague for London as soon as the Nazis invaded Czechoslovakia in March 1939. In June, when he was six-years-old, Alf was put on a Kindertransport train, arriving at Liverpool Street station two days later where he was met by his father. His mother eventually joined them in London the day before war broke out. Alf studied Politics and Economics at the London School of Economics and was elected as the Member of Parliament for Battersea South in May 1979. He lost his seat in 1987 and the following year he was appointed director of the Refugee Council, becoming the first refugee to head up the charity.In March 2016 Alf tabled an amendment to the 2016 Immigration Act (known as the Dubs Amendment) which asked the Government to accept 3,000 unaccompanied refugee children into the UK. The amendment passed but the Government closed the scheme the following year after accepting 480 children.In 2016 Alf received the Humanist of the Year award by Humanists UK of which he is also a patron. In 2021 his Czech citizenship was restored making him the first Czech-British member of the House of Lords.DISC ONE: It's Easy To Remember (Take 4) - John Coltrane Quartet DISC TWO: Smetana: Má Vlast, JB1:112: 2. Vltava. Performed by Czech Philharmonic Orchestra, conducted by Jiří Bělohlávek DISC THREE: She's Leaving Home - The Beatles DISC FOUR: Bandiera Rossa - Canzoniere del Lame DISC FIVE: Mozart: Horn Concerto No. 1 in D Major, K. 412: I. Allegro. Performed by Barry Tuckwell (French horn), Academy of Saint Martin in the Fields, conducted by Neville Marriner DISC SIX: Danny Boy - Daniel O'Donnell DISC SEVEN: Take This Waltz - Leonard Cohen DISC EIGHT: Ode to Joy. Composed by Ludwig van Beethoven and performed by Gewandhausorchester Leipzig, conducted by Herbert BlomstedtBOOK CHOICE: Germinal by Émile Zola LUXURY ITEM: Walking boots CASTAWAY'S FAVOURITE: It's Easy To Remember (Take 4) - John Coltrane Quartet Presenter Lauren Laverne Producer Paula McGinley

Andrew Copson speaks to Professor of Palaeobiology and Humanists UK patron Anjali Goswami about how her study of the history of life on Earth profoundly shapes her humanist worldview and sense of interconnectedness. Anjali discusses how a childhood encounter with a tiger has led the course of her career as well as humanity's responsibility towards a sustainable future in the face of ‘‘selfish nihilism'. Please note, this episode unfortunately has some audio quality issues.  What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member. You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to Labour MP for Morecambe and Lunesdale and Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group, Lizzi Collinge, about the practical application of humanist principles within the often-turbulent world of politics. It's a glimpse into the unique challenges and 'profound' rewards of being a humanist voice in Westminster, and how MPs can work within the system to create collective and meaningful change. This podcast was recorded on 11 June 2025. What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member. You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to economist James Forder about his view on individual freedom and limited government as a self described 'old-fashioned liberal'. He discusses his belief in free enterprise as not just an economic engine but a powerful moral good that fosters self-reliance and the pursuit of individual goals. He also delves into the profound philosophical implications of our finiteness and how this very limitation gives life its meaning.  What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member. You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Physician assisted suicide and the economic impossibility of safeguardingFor best results and links to related articles and to read my other work, find this post on Substack: https://shirabatya.substack.com/p/death-affirmative-care.------------------Last Friday, the UK Parliament voted by a narrow margin to legalise physician-assisted suicide.Since then, there has been much discussion of the possibility that the House of Lords could tighten up safeguarding for this bill, which has been criticised widely for lacking sufficient safeguards for people who are mentally ill, anorexic, diabetic, or simply socially isolated and therefore easily suggestible by doctors who, according to this law, will be allowed to raise the topic of suicide with patients who have not raised the issue first themselves.In fact, Parliament explicitly rejected an amendment to prevent doctors from suggesting to patients that they may wish to end their lives, voting only to protect children from such suggestions. Similarly, although Parliament approved an amendment that prevented patients from being deemed terminal due to voluntary stopping of eating and drinking (VSED), this does not apply to anorexics, whose refusal of food is due to a mental health condition and therefore is arguably involuntary.The erosion of safeguarding is not a matter of if, but of when. It is not a bug but a feature.A number of people who have concerns about the bill are hopeful that with the correct amendments in the House of Lords, it will be made fit for purpose and add the safeguards that are currently lacking. Although safeguards are obviously to be welcomed, I believe that such people are failing to recognise a more fundamental problem with this proposal, which comes down to economics. In the end, whatever safeguards are officially agreed, as long as this matter is framed in terms of a “right to die”, over time, practical constraints will lead to an erosion of safeguards as has occurred in places such as Australia and Canada. The erosion of safeguarding is not a matter of if, but of when. It is not a bug but a feature.For those who are in favour of physician-assisted suicide, the discussion about this legislation has been framed in terms of patient choice and the “right to die”. How dare I restrict the choice of somebody else who has freely consented to ending their life? It's their life, not mine. Their body. Their choice.For those of us who have followed the child gender transition debacle of recent years, this conversation is oddly familiar. It is no coincidence that people such as Kathleen Stock and Fred Sargeant who are critical of physician-assisted gender transition, have also been concerned about physician-assisted suicide. In gender critical circles, we know to be careful when people talk about bodily autonomy and choice; we know that the issues of safeguarding or gatekeeping or autonomy are never as simple as people might think.How will the NHS deal with this backlog of people demanding to die, particularly if the service is framed in terms of people having a right to die?Already in recent days, health secretary Wes Streeting has raised concerns about the cost of implementing physician-assisted suicide, possibly topping £15,000 per patient. A whole new service needs to be set up in the NHS to provide this procedure. Personnel need to be trained to assess requests from patients and to determine which patients should be allowed to die, and which should be told “no, not you”. This will also divert resources away from other treatments, possibly away from the important palliative care, provision of which is known already to be inadequate. Adequate palliative care is crucial if patients are to have a real choice between ending their lives and having a dignified death free of excessive pain.Whether or not the House of Lords strengthens safeguards, we know that implementing this legislation will be difficult and costly. The greater the safeguards that may be added, the greater this cost, as savings are generated only after sick people actually do die. We have already seen that practical constraints (economics) have led to changes in the safeguarding process. A shortage of available high court judges forced the bill's proponents to remove the safeguard that such a person would need to approve applications, in favour of a more practical panel without a person of such high legal qualifications.We must ask: What will happen in a few years' time, when there is a backlog of say hundreds or thousands of patients who have requested assisted suicide? What will we do when the safeguards necessary to make sure that their suicide has not occurred under duress or due to inappropriate factors such as mental illness — when these safeguards lead to unacceptable delays because systems are overwhelmed. How will the NHS deal with this backlog of people demanding to die, particularly if the service is framed in terms of people having a right to die?Imagine a few years hence, if careful safeguarding and gatekeeping is in place, if the process has not devolved into the informed consent model in which a patient's “right to die” is simply affirmed and they are pushed down the pipeline towards death. Someone will be frustrated by the delays from “excessive gatekeeping” that interferes with their “right to die” and they will sue complaining that they are being coerced into remaining alive. If strong safeguards are kept in place, this lawsuit will happen (again, not a matter of if but of when). More likely, organisations such as Humanists UK will push for a reduction in safeguards to avoid such delays.Those of us who have been following the issue of gender-affirmative care in medicine cannot help seeing the obvious parallel: the similarity to another story in which gatekeeping was eroded due to the reality of practical constraints or economics. Years ago, when Dutch doctors initially decided to begin to transition a small number of gender non-conforming children in order, theoretically, to provide them better cosmetic outcomes as fully transitioned adults, there were significant safeguards in place.Let's leave aside the question about whether, in principle, we think that one should ever block the puberty of a child and medically transform a young person to look like the opposite sex. Leave aside that question for the moment and simply consider the matter of safeguarding. Leave aside for the moment the very valid criticisms of the Dutch protocol, which I know was severely flawed research. Nonetheless they did have safeguards in place. If you have followed the New York Times podcast, The Protocol, you will recall that one had to undergo several months or years of therapy. There was screening for all sorts of mental health problems that disqualified patients from puberty blockers or medical transition.Thus the “gender-affirmative” care model began to view gatekeeping as a pejorative, something we should not do as we had a duty to affirm patients…So what happened when American and British doctors saw what was happening in Holland and decided to bring these procedures back to their own countries to replicate them so that patients in their own countries could have access to this new apparently ground-breaking treatment protocol? Quickly, in both the UK and the US is, the number of children seeking “gender-affirmative care” far exceeded what clinics they could cope with following the Dutch model, because along with the patients they expected to see (those who had been gender nonconforming from a young age, mostly boys), there came a multitude of distressed adolescents (mostly girls) with no prior history of gender dysphoria. Thousands of patients built up on waiting lists, or in the case of the United States, patients sought treatment at hospitals hundreds of miles from their homes, and so they could not reasonably be expected to show up for months and months of appointments and therapy sessions (See NYT The Protocol, episode 3).As a result, as explained in the NYT podcast, the process was changed. It was streamlined to get through the waiting lists. Months of therapy often turned into a single assessment. And thus we ended up with problems that far exceeded those from the Dutch protocol. Again, I am not saying that the Dutch protocol was itself a good process or defending that research, which is deeply flawed. But certainly, what happened in the USA and UK etc. was far, far worse. It became a free-for-all.You will change the product to fit constraints just like any vendor of any product in a market economy. Therefore, if it is impractical, expensive or onerous, safeguarding gets cast aside.Johanna Olson Kennedy explains on the Protocol (again episode 3) that she realised it actually made no sense to engage in these sorts of safeguarding / gatekeeping procedures in order to decide which patients should be getting gender-affirmative care and which should not. Gatekeeping did not work because, of course, doctors could not easily tell which patients should and should not be transitioned, and patients would simply change what they told doctors in order to get past gatekeepers, thus hiding other mental health problems. Again, this is a matter of economics, of practical constraints and incentives (people may not be honest with doctors if that does not get them what they want).Olson Kennedy therefore decided that patients who wanted to transition should be allowed to transition, should be affirmed. Thus the “gender-affirmative” care model began to view gatekeeping as a pejorative, something we should not do as we had a duty to affirm patients and believe them when they claimed a gender identity. Transition was no longer a treatment which would be provided or not based on medical judgment by a trained professional. Rather, transition became purely the exercise of what was framed as “trans rights.”You could say that this was an ideological development, but I'm going to look at this purely from an economic point of view, since I am trained as an economist. Set aside the culture wars, “woke”, queer theory, all of that. It was inevitable that this would happen. If the resources are not available to do the safeguarding that you would like to implement and you have a backlog of cases, then you will then adapt your product to fit the circumstances so that you can provide a service that satisfies your clients, patients, customers (whatever you wish to call them). You will change the product to fit constraints just like any vendor of any product in a market economy. Therefore, if it is impractical, expensive or onerous, safeguarding gets cast aside.The better safeguarding functions, the more we will hear people criticizing the gatekeeping that prevents people from dying when they want to.Of course, to avoid cognitive dissonance, you will then be attracted to an ideology that justifies your actions. Alternatively, jobs providing this care will attract ideologically compatible personnel — people whose mindset allows them to do this new job and still to sleep at night. Self-selection of compatibly minded people will inevitably lead to group think within these clinics. None of this requires any conspiracy, any neo-Marxist strategy to take over the Academy and inflict queer theory on students. This is a process driven by the economics. Ideology is a secondary result.In short, I don't think that what happened in the States was in any way surprising. It's exactly what you would expect to happen because the only practical alternative to getting rid of all the safeguards would have been what's happening now in so many US States and countries, which is to halt provision of this service completely. You can't transition any children at all because we can't tell which patients should or should not be transitioning as children. Because the reality is that, at any reasonable cost, within realistic practical constraints, it is just not possible to put in place safeguarding or appropriate gatekeeping so that only the correct patients get the treatment. You either have a free for all or you stop doing it completely.This brings us back to physician-assisted suicide in the UK. I predict that if this law gains royal assent, even if the House of Lords agrees extra safeguards, it will not actually make that much difference. Yes of course, it will help if safeguards are put in place. Some vulnerable patients can of course be protected from killing themselves and it is better if the law closes the anorexia loophole, the diabetes loophole, the doctor-suggestion loophole, etc. However, when it comes down to it, whatever safeguarding we do will be constrained not by what the law says those safeguards should be, but by the economics.Safeguarding / gatekeeping will be constrained by the funds available to pay personnel on review panels, meaning quicker decisions by less qualified people. It will be constrained by the ability to train health workers for jobs implementing the service, and these new jobs in death-affirmative care will self-select for those who are ideologically committed to the right to die, just as clinicians in “gender-affirmative youth medicine” self-selected for those who believed in queer theory or had themselves transitioned or had supported the transition of a partner or child. We must expect that gatekeeping will not protect vulnerable patients. When this failure occurs, it will not be a surprise, but an economic inevitability of enshrining a “right to die” and to have this death provided by the NHS.Initially, we may have a good service with careful decisions. Morally problematic, but perhaps analogous to the Dutch protocol. However, over the course of time, as the number of people seeking assistance for suicide increases, as the caseload and the backlog of cases builds up, as the systems in place to provide careful safeguarding become overwhelmed and more ideologues are attracted to the death-affirmative care profession, the death-provision procedure will be streamlined, and safeguarding will be reduced. The better safeguarding functions, the more we will hear people criticizing the gatekeeping that prevents people from dying when they want to: for example, discrimination against the disabled or the mentally ill who all have an equal right to die.Doctors are paternalistic. They offer us treatments that evidence shows to be beneficial, not treatments we demand as our “right”. We are patients, not customers.No matter what safeguards are put in place, the reality will be that these safeguards will not be adequate because they cannot be adequate because to put adequate safeguards in place will simply cost too much and place too many obstacles in front of those who see this as a right. Thus, people will find a way of rationalising why a more streamlined approach is consistent with the intention of parliament, or the law will be amended to solve practical difficulties — meaning to remove safeguards that are practically impossible to implement.There will be lawsuits by patients affected by the delays that will force pragmatism by the NHS. And in the end, we will institute an easy pipeline towards death in the same way that there was, until recently, an easy pipeline in the United States towards gender transition of children. And as we found in the United States to do with child gender transition, the only way to actually stop the abuses of the system will be to abolish the service completely. Except in this case, it is unlikely that a reversal will occur. We will have become efficient at killing off those who are an economic or medical drain on society. The economic cost of reversing this progress will be far too high.There is a deeper lesson here. The fact is that there are some kinds of choices, medical decisions, medical procedures, where theoretically we might say that some people should get them, but where we can't allow this to become normative medicine paid for by the state or by insurance, because we know that the reality is that the safeguards that one would need to put in place are actually impossible. There is no way to make the care widely available to your target group without catching all sorts of other people who may be harmed if this becomes normalised and paid for by institutions, particularly if this care is framed as a human right.This is why it is fundamentally wrong to have physician-assisted suicide in the UK, provided by the NHS, framed in terms of a “right to die”. It cannot be done, and the reason is not because I don't think that it is morally justified for people to be able to end their lives if they so choose. This is not because I feel that I have a moral right to tell other people whether they ought to live or die. Rather, the reality is that if you try to put in place physician-assisted suicide based on a right to die, you will end up with exactly the same problem happening that happened with child gender transition. Because even if you believe that some children should be transitioned, (which I don't), there is no way to offer such a service without being swamped by patients who definitely should not be receiving it.If a service is demand-led, you end up finding it impossible to safeguard patients and to distinguish between those who should be treated, and those who should not. You end up with an assembly line and a free-for-all and a lack of gatekeeping. It is a process driven by the economics, once it receives an initial ideological green light to begin.Does this mean that it is impossible for there ever to be physician-assisted suicide provided to any patient with any health condition? What about people with terminal cancer, suffering intolerable pain in their final days or hours of life? Do we leave them to suffer in agony? I actually believe there may be a way to help such patients. The key is that any such assisted death must not be framed in the terms of the right to die, in the same way that medical alteration of sex development cannot be framed in terms of a “right to transition” — paid for by the NHS or insurance as the case may be.This is because there is no “right” to have any particular kind of healthcare. We do not waltz into a doctors office and demand antibiotics because we feel we have an infection. We require a diagnosis, and if the treatment is appropriate, we get the penicillin. Otherwise, the doctor says no. Doctors are paternalistic. They offer us treatments that evidence shows to be beneficial, not treatments we demand as our “right”. We are patients, not customers. The failure to understand this basic fact lies at the root of the scandal that is gender-affirmative care.Can doctors ever offer death as an option to patients? Possibly yes, but this would have to be offered like any other medical treatment. If there are particular medical circumstances (such as end stage cancer), where evidence shows that even with the best palliative care, a patient cannot control excruciating pain, so that the best treatment possible may be to increase morphine to deadly levels, one might be able to make a clinical argument to offer this. But this would be a very specific clinical judgment, and it is not about whether someone has the “right to die.” It is about caring for a patient who is dying, so that his or her death is less painful.I think this scenario is what comes to mind for those who make the most emotive arguments for assisted dying. In that case, what a law could do is give authority to NICE to look into the possibility of hastened death being elected by patients with that particular health condition, in order to allow their death to be less agonizing.But we cannot frame this in terms of the right to die. It's not about a patient making a choice and then demanding that the NHS provides death to order, with the patient as consumer. Rather, we're talking here about doctors engaging in what effectively is a form of health care for a patient, where medical evidence indicates they may be better served if they are allowed to die sooner, and therefore they are given this as one treatment option.Even here, the offer would be fraught with risk. This would entail legislation that would protect doctors from prosecution when they offer such help but only subject to enormous safeguards, similar to those proposed for the assisted suicide bill, but not framed in terms of a “right to die.” Moreover, if we are talking about just a small number of conditions for which there is solid medical evidence that palliative care alone cannot prevent an agonising death, we may find that the economics does not necessarily lead to an erosion of safeguarding. Even here, we would need to compare a hastened death to the best possible palliative care, so that patients are not effectively forced to choose death because they are not being provided for properly otherwise.The key to understanding this is to avoid a misconception about informed consent: namely the mistaken notion that it is reasonable to offer death to patients if they have capacity to consent to that death. This is not how informed consent normally works in medicine. Rather, even where informed consent applies, doctors act paternalistically. They evaluate which treatments can help a patient, and then a patient must consent to treatment and has a right to refuse treatment. But patients do not have a right to demand treatments that doctors do not deem helpful. There is a right to say no, not a right to demand yes.The problem we have with the so-called “right to die” is similar to what happened with gender-affirmative care. There, treatments were framed in terms of a right to transition as opposed to being framed in terms of evidence-based health care. And that's how we ended up in the mess we're in with a complete free-for-all with the elimination of safeguarding or gatekeeping because patients felt they had a right to the care whether or not there was any evidentiary basis for it.The key here is to realise that, when given by healthcare providers, death is no more a right of patients than any other kind of healthcare a doctor could give. Doctors do not have a duty to give any patient any medical procedure, any outcome that the patient wants. They have a duty to give healthcare which is evidenced and sensible and also cost effective. When a particular kind of treatment becomes a “right”, we throw out of the window the most important question: whether the treatment does or does not benefit patients, based on evidence. Because if it is truly a right, then it is equally a right for a patient dying in agony of cancer, and for a nineteen year-old with anorexia who has just given up on life and wants doctors to end it. This way of framing medicine is a very, very dangerous, dangerous path to take.Thanks for reading Heterodox Jewish Woman! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. https://shirabatya.substack.com/ This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit shirabatya.substack.com

Andrew Copson speaks to a leading voice in human-technology interaction, Dr Kate Devlin, about becoming the unexpected 'face of sex robots' and why our fascination with artificial companions reveals more about us than the machines. Kate discusses repeating patterns of human fear and adaptation in the face of new technology, the critical ethical challenges of AI – from algorithmic bias impacting facial recognition to the darker side of its supply chain – as well as the need for value-driven and human-centric AI development. This episode was recorded in April 2024.   What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member. You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review!   What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.  

Andrew Copson speaks to bestselling author Sarah Bakewell who discusses her intellectual journey through the lives and ideas of history's great thinkers. From Montaigne's enduring wisdom to the existentialists' quest for meaning and the rich tapestry of humanism, Sarah discusses how she uncovers the 'inhabited philosophy' of fascinating individuals from the past and what these explorations reveal about the particularities and universalities of being human. What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member. You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to journalist and political powerhouse Ian Dunt about the uncomfortable truths of liberalism, the rise of populism, and tensions between freedom to Vs freedom from.  This episode was recorded in January 2024.   What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member: You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to acclaimed novelist and Humanists UK patron Jane Fallon about the beliefs that have shaped her journey from vegetarianism to veganism, her lifelong love for animals, and her transition from TV producer to the author of 14 bestselling books. What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member: You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to Labour peer, campaigner, humanist, and former child refugee Lord Alf Dubs who shares the beliefs that have shaped his lifelong quest for social justice, including a childhood encounter with discrimination in 1940s UK and finding himself unexpectedly part of history as a hospital patient on the day the NHS began. He also opens up fleeing the Nazis, travelling as a child refugee on Nicholas Winton's Kindertransport. What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member: You can follow Humanists UK on Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

“If we focus so much on the 5% that divides us, we miss the 95% we already share.” — Alan PalmerAlan Palmer is the former Chair of Central London Humanists, a trustee of Humanists UK, and a long-time NHS Trust Director. With over 17 years of experience in grassroots organising, Alan shares how London's most active humanist group grew from pub chats to public campaigns, and how dialogue, ethics, and diversity remain central to its mission.In This EpisodeHow Central London Humanists became the UK's largest humanist groupWhy participation is harder in a more secular, but less mobilised, societyLessons from pioneering Catholic-Humanist and Muslim-Humanist dialogueThe power of repeating others' views honestly in effective dialogueWorking on COVID-19 triage ethics as an NHS Trust DirectorWhy diversity, campaigning, and neutrality all matter in modern humanismReflections on political inclusivity and unity across difference

"Isn't it true that we are the stories we tell ourselves?" — S.I. MartinThis week on Humanism Now, we're joined by S.I. Martin—historian, author, and patron of Humanists UK—whose work has reshaped how we understand Black British history and the power of storytelling.From his upbringing in a religious family in Bedford to decades spent uncovering erased narratives, Steve shares how early exposure to music, books, and doubt led him to scepticism and ultimately humanism.We discuss:The importance of embedding Black British history into everyday landscapes and classroomsRobert Wedderburn, revolutionary preacher and free thinkerUnique challenges faced by Black atheists in religious communitiesHow historical fiction can reshape cultural imagination and offer new identitiesWhy humanist groups must evolve to become more inclusive, especially for younger generationsThe hidden social history of Black-owned pubs in 18th- and 19th-century LondonExplore S.I. Martin's work:

This special episode of Humanism Now is released as part of Podcastathon 2025, the world's largest podcast charity initiative. We're proud to dedicate this episode to Faith to Faithless, a programme by Humanists UK supporting those leaving high-control religious groups. Three incredible guests—George, Leena, and Sarah—share raw, courageous accounts of their journeys out of fundamentalist religions and the new communities they're helping to build.Faith to Faithless is proudly marking its 10th anniversary in 2025, celebrating a decade of support, solidarity, and advocacy for apostates.⭐ Episode HighlightsLife inside high-control religious groupsThe emotional toll of shunning and "thought crimes"How Faith to Faithless supports apostates across the UKStarting new peer groups and reclaiming lost experiencesWhy public services and mental health professionals must understand apostasy better

Send us a textHumanist ceremonies—weddings, namings, and funerals—are growing rapidly worldwide, offering non-religious, deeply personal ways to mark life's most significant moments. Laimingas Žmogus (Happy Human) is a social enterprise based in Lithuania, dedicated to making these ceremonies accessible and meaningful. This week we are delighted to be joined by Urtė Žukauskaitė-Zabukė, Founder and CEO, and Gerda Surgautaitė, Co-Founder of Laimingas Žmogus to share insights into establishing meaningful non-religious ceremonies that resonate with diverse populations and the launch of the Humanist Ceremonies Accelerator, a pioneering initiative designed to help humanist organisations around the world establish sustainable social enterprises through humanist ceremonies.  The episode covers;- The rapid growth of humanist ceremonies globally - Introduction of the Humanist Ceremonies Accelerator programme- Addressing the unique challenges to secularism in Lithuania- Inspiring stories of uniquely tailored ceremonies - Practical advice for starting humanist social enterprises If you're interested in the Humanist Ceremonies Accelerator, visit the Humanist International webpage for details about participation. Apply here by 14th March 2025: https://humanists.international/blog/join-the-humanist-ceremonies-accelerator/Follow Laimingas Žmogus (Happy Human Lithunia)

As everyone else these days we are moving from X to Bluesky, any help in driving traffic our way is much appreciated. The Humanists UK has published a new exciting book called What I Believe, named after podcast by the same name. You should check it out! In TWISH we hear about how the (then) Prince of Wales got his favorite charity for SCAM (So-Called Alternative Medicine) struck from the UK Charity Commission. Then, we head for the news:INTERNATIONAL: 2024 will be the first year above 1.5°CINTERNATIONAL: Climate crisis to blame for dozens of ‘impossible' heatwaves, studies revealINTERNATIONAL: Retraction Watch is hiring!SPAIN: Video does not show ‘HAARP ship' floating near Spain before floodsINTERNATIONAL: WHO teams up with TikTok to combat misinformation on social mediaThe Really Wrong Award goes to the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam for making a chiropractor professor.Enjoy!https://theesp.eu/podcast_archive/theesp-ep-454.htmlSegments:0:00:27 Intro0:00:50 Greetings0:11:56 TWISH0:16:37 News0:36:14 Really Wrong0:40:55 Quote0:42:32 Outro0:43:47 Outtakes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At the end of this month, MP's will debate and vote on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. Kim Leadbeater, the Labour member behind the proposal, says that the current ‘status quo is not fit for purpose' as it leads to people ‘having very harrowing, very distressing deaths – both for themselves and for their family.'But, is the legalising of assisted dying the best answer to this dilemma? Would there be adequate safeguards? And when traditional Christian teaching has always affirmed that human life is sacred, how much of the argument is still swayed by religious faith? In the studio to discuss these issues are Dr Idris Baker, a palliative medicine consultant in Swansea and a Church elder; Kathy Riddick – Wales coordinator for Humanists UK; and Rev Simon Walkling – a United Reformed Church minister and former hospice chaplain.

Since the election of an overwhelmingly secular Labour government, people who describe themselves as humanists have a spring in their step: for example, there's a prospect that humanist weddings will be legally recognised in England and Wales (they already are in Scotland). But what exactly is a humanist? Definitions vary and there's a heated debate about to what extent the ethical but firmly atheist beliefs of the rather loosely organised modern humanist movement are descended from Christianity. In this episode of Holy Smoke we'll hear from Andrew Copson, CEO of Humanists UK since 2010 & President of Humanists International, and the theologian and Spectator contributor Theo Hobson, author of God created Humanism: the Christian Basis of Secular Values. Damian Thompson spoke to them earlier and, as you'll hear, it was a lively encounter.   Produced by Patrick Gibbons.

Since the election of an overwhelmingly secular Labour government, people who describe themselves as humanists have a spring in their step: for example, there's a prospect that humanist weddings will be legally recognised in England and Wales (they already are in Scotland). But what exactly is a humanist? Definitions vary and there's a heated debate about to what extent the ethical but firmly atheist beliefs of the rather loosely organised modern humanist movement are descended from Christianity. In this episode of Holy Smoke we'll hear from Andrew Copson, CEO of Humanists UK since 2010 & President of Humanists International, and the theologian and Spectator contributor Theo Hobson, author of God created Humanism: the Christian Basis of Secular Values. Damian Thompson spoke to them earlier and, as you'll hear, it was a lively encounter.   Produced by Patrick Gibbons.

Send us a textWelcome back to Humanism Now for a special episode coinciding with the critical upcoming UK Parliament vote on assisted dying — a pivotal moment we've long campaigned for and debated. In this episode we hear how what the bill entails, why it matters and how safe assisted dying aligns with values of compassion and autonomy.Joining us is Nathan Stilwell, Humanists UK's Assisted Dying Campaign Coordinator, Campaigns and Communications Manager at My Death My Decision and a member of The Assisted Dying Coalition Secretariat. Nathan joins us to discuss the context of this crucial vote, why Humanists UK champions this cause, and why now is the right time for change. We also address key societal concerns and shares how you can get involved to promote this cause and other important humanist issues. SUPPORT THE CAMPAIGN - WRITE TO YOUR MPContact & follow Nathan Stilwell

After a new bill attempting to legalise assisted dying in the UK was introduced to the House of Commons, the Green Party MP Sian Berry, former Lord Chancellor and Labour Peer Lord Falconer, and Nathan Stillwell, assisted dying campaigner at Humanists UK, join host Alain Tolhurst to look at how likely Kim Leadbeater's private member's bill is to eventually become law, the scope it might cover, how other countries like Canada have introduced and managed the process, and how to assuage the concerns of those worried about coercion, and that passing the law might start a slippery slope towards legalised euthanasia. To sign up for our newsletters click here Presented by Alain Tolhurst, produced by Nick Hilton for Podot

When illness makes life unbearable, should we be permitted – and helped – to end our time in this place on our own terms? The topic of assisted dying is back in the political spotlight thanks to a Private Member's Bill from Spen Valley MP Kim Leadbeater. It's a difficult topic for many to discuss, encompassing morality, freedom and, often, religion. In this Quiet Riot special, Naomi Smith takes a nuanced look at the issues with Andrew Copson, CEO of Humanists UK. Andrew is in favour of assisted dying but puts both sides of the argument. Some form of assisted dying is allowed in 31 countries but the law here has not been changed in six decades, although it is now under discussion in both Westminster and Holyrood. Call to action To find out more about the Humanist movement, visit https://humanists.uk/ and, for details on their campaigning on the issue of assisted dying, click here. And for an interview with Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, setting out the counterargument, click here. Assisted suicide is illegal under the terms of the Suicide Act (1961) and is punishable by up to 14 years' imprisonment. Trying to kill yourself is not a criminal act. The BBC summarises the main issues here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

An accessible and gratifying introduction to the world of paranormal beliefs and bizarre experiences.Ghostly encounters, alien abduction, reincarnation, talking to the dead, UFO sightings, inexplicable coincidences, out-of-body and near-death experiences. Are these legitimate phenomena? If not, then how should we go about understanding them? In this fascinating book, Chris French investigates paranormal claims to discover what lurks behind this “weird shit.” French provides authoritative evidence-based explanations for a wide range of superficially mysterious phenomena, and then goes further to draw out lessons with wider applications to many other aspects of modern society where critical thinking is urgently needed.Using academic, comprehensive, logical, and, at times, mathematical approaches, The Science of Weird Shit convincingly debunks ESP, communicating with the dead, and alien abduction claims, among other phenomena. All the while, however, French maintains that our belief in such phenomena is neither ridiculous nor trivial; if anything, such claims can tell us a great deal about the human mind if we pay them the attention they are due. Filled with light-bulb moments and a healthy dose of levity, The Science of Weird Shit is a clever, memorable, and gratifying read you won't soon forget.Chris French is Emeritus Professor and Head of the Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit in the Psychology Department at Goldsmiths, University of London. He is a Fellow of the British Psychological Society and of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry and a Patron of Humanists UK. He is the coauthor of Anomalistic Psychology: Exploring Paranormal Belief and Experience.Buy the book from Wellington Square Bookshop - ​https://www.wellingtonsquarebooks.com/book/9780262048361

Do books have a future in the new digital world order? And can we engage productively with problematic cultural content?This week luminary philosopher A.C Grayling and cultural content creator Mary McGillivray join host Lloyd Vogelman on the couch for an unfiltered conversation that digs into the personal side of the Principle of Charity.A. C. Grayling CBE MA DPhil is the Principal of Northeastern University London and its Professor of Philosophy. He is a Supernumerary Fellow of St Anne's College, Oxford. He is the author of over thirty books of philosophy, biography, history of ideas and essays. He was a columnist for The Guardian, The Times and Prospect Magazine. He has twice been a judge for The Booker Prize, in 2014 serving as the Chair of the judging panel. He is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature, a Vice President of Humanists UK, Patron of the Defence Humanists, Honorary Associate of the Secular Society and a Patron of Dignity in Dying.Mary McGillivray is a content creator making visual culture analysis accessible for the next generation. She holds a Masters degree in History of Art and Architecture from The University of Cambridge and is currently a PhD candidate at The University of Melbourne. Mary has worked with art galleries and cultural institutions across Australia, the UK and Europe to bring their collections to a massive online audience of highly engaged young viewers and she also appears on ABC Arts.CREDITSYour hosts are Lloyd Vogelman and Emile Sherman This podcast is proud to partner with The Ethics CentreFind Lloyd @LloydVogelman on Linked inFind Emile @EmileSherman on Linked In and XThis podcast is produced by Jonah Primo and Sabrina OrganoFind Jonah at jonahprimo.com or @JonahPrimo on Instagram Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this episode, we are joined by Alastair Lichten, a humanist community builder with Humanists UK, and the author of the blog, Humanist Dad. Alastair has been using the blog to explore how his humanist worldview informs the challenging decisions he makes as a parent raising children in the UK. We talk about the ways humanist values are reflected in addressing thorny issues like what (if anything) to teach kids about religion, what kind of rituals humanist parents perform without religion, and how to deal with intrusive influences from the dominant religious culture. We also learn whether a True Humanist wishes their kids grow up to be humanists.Read more on Alastair's blog, Humanist Dad: https://humanistdad.uk/Follow Nathan on BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/nathgalexander.bsky.social Beyond Atheism is produced and distributed by Atheists United Studios: https://www.atheistsunited.org/au-studios

Sonia Sodha of The Observer assesses the latest developments at Westminster. Following the Prime Minister's speech on global insecurity she speaks to former Conservative Defence Secretary, Sir Liam Fox MP, and former Labour International Development Secretary, Douglas Alexander. Theo Bertram, director of the Social Market Foundation and a former Labour adviser, discusses whether election 'pledge' cards are a good idea following Sir Keir Starmer's campaign event this week. After a knife-edge vote on excluding from Parliament MPs accused of serious offences, Sonia speaks to Liberal Democrat Chief Whip Wendy Chamberlain MP and Conservative MP Nigel Mills. And, after claims a Liberal Democrat candidate was deselected because of his Christian faith, Sonia brings together the Rt Rev Nick Baines, Bishop of Leeds, and Polly Toynbee, journalist and vice president of Humanists UK, to discuss whether Christianity and modern politics are compatible.

As the malaria vaccine is rolled out across sub Saharan Africa, medical experts are concerned about the impact of anti vaccine sermons from influential religious figures. An example is Pastor Chris Oyakhilome, a multi-millionaire televangelist in Nigeria whose promotion of anti-vax conspiracy theories risks undercutting the country's efforts to deal with malaria. William Crawley speaks to Julius Ogunro, a media and political consultant in Abuja who's been writing about the pastor's anti-vax views.Lady Bushra has been gracing stages across the UK and America with a drag and comedy act representing South Asian communities, wearing traditional Desi makeup and rocking a Saree. Behind the make-up is the Bradford-born artist and performer Amir Dean, who spoke to William Crawley just before one of his shows in Manchester.As Humanists UK release a book of interviews called ‘What I Believe', we ask what they do believe, apart from the assertion that there is no God. We hear from Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of Humanists UK and Nichola Raihani, Professor of Evolution and Behaviour at University College London.Presenter: William Crawley Producers: Bara'atu Ibrahim & Peter Everett Production Coordinator: David Baguley Editor: Jonathan Hallewell

Adam Rutherford is a scientist, writer, broadcaster and President of Humanists UK.He is a Lecturer in Biology and Society at University College London, where he teaches the history of eugenics, race science, genetics, and science communication.He is one of the UK's most well-known science communicators and in 2021 was awarded The Royal Society David Attenborough Award in recognition of his contribution to strengthening public confidence in science through radio, TV, films, talks and books, and in particular, for challenging racist pseudoscience.His BBC programmes include Start The Week, Inside Science and The Curious Cases of Rutherford and Fry. He's written several books including 'A Brief History Of Everyone Who's Ever Lived', 'How To Argue With A Racist' and 'Control: The dark history and troubling present of eugenics'.https://www.adamrutherford.com/https://www.ucl.ac.uk/biosciences/people/dr-adam-rutherfordhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Rutherfordhttps://twitter.com/AdamRutherfordhttps://www.youtube.com/live/hIIgAIB5AWw?si=Cgj0Q8DATkF2ucRdNOTES: When Adam mentions 'the Hammersmith Apollo with Brian and Robin', he's talking about an annual science, comedy and music charity event in London held at the Eventim Apollo (which depending on your age you actually refer to as the Hammersmith Odeon or the Hammersmith Apollo, rather than its current name) or at the Royal Albert Hall, hosted by Professor Brian Cox and comedian Robin Ince.Trump's Obsession with Genetic Superiority and Bloodlines https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V6iSgqFahoMNick Bostrom's paper ‘Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios and Related Hazards' (pdf): https://nickbostrom.com/existential/risks.pdfElon Musk Is Totally Wrong About Population Collapse (paywall): https://www.wired.com/story/elon-musk-population-crisis/The Cluster F Theory Podcast is edited by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada.Subscribe for free to The Cluster F Theory Podcast. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit theclusterftheory.substack.com

Professor Francesca Stavrakopoulou is a biblical scholar and broadcaster. She is Professor of Hebrew Bible and Ancient Religion at the University of Exeter in the UK. Her research is on ancient Israelite and Judahite religions, and portrayals of the religious past in the Hebrew Bible. Her most recent book deals with ancient constructs of God's body, it's called ‘God: An Anatomy'. It won the PEN Hessell-Tiltman Prize for non-fiction; was shortlisted for the Wolfson History Prize; named a best book of the year in both the Economist and Sunday Times, and was serialised on BBC Radio 4's Book of the Week. Francesca is also very active as a public speaker and in the media, appearing on and presenting various tv shows in the UK including ‘The Bible: A History' and ‘The Bible's Buried Secrets'. She is an atheist and a Patron of Humanists UK… and as you can imagine that really pisses off a lot of people interested in her work.Francesca Stavrakopoulou's faculty page: https://theology.exeter.ac.uk/staff/stavrakopoulou/Twitter: https://twitter.com/ProfFrancescaWikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francesca_Stavrakopoulou‘God: An Anatomy' publisher's page: https://www.panmacmillan.com/authors/francesca-stavrakopoulou/god/9781509867370NOTES: In Indonesia, a Blurred Boundary Between the Living and the Dead (New York Times): https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/14/travel/torajan-death-rituals-indonesia.htmlHans Holbein's The Body of the Dead Christ in the Tomb: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Body_of_the_Dead_Christ_in_the_TombWhy Greeks are exhuming their parents (BBC) https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34920068The Cluster F Theory Podcast is edited by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada.Subscribe on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/the-cluster-f-theory-podcast/id1736982916Subscribe on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5V4bBn54hiImeoyDNmTcIr?si=729367e48b0940d9Thanks for reading The Cluster F Theory Podcast! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support the show. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit theclusterftheory.substack.com

The Muslim holy month of Ramadan is normally a time of fasting, family and prayer for Muslims around the world. How can the people of Gaza observe Ramadan in the middle of conflict, displacement and desperate food shortages? Ghada Ouda, a journalist in Rafah in the south of Gaza, tells us about her preparations.The first ever helpline in the UK dedicated to people leaving controlling groups or experiencing religious trauma has just been set up. Terri O'Sullivan, Apostate Services Development Officer, at Humanists UK explains who is using the service.As Christians mark the fourth Sunday in Lent, Mothering Sunday, we ask is it ok to avoid church? Lizzie Lowrie discusses the alternative liturgy she helped create for those who find the day difficult.Editor: Dan Tierney Presenter: Emily Buchanan Producers: Alexa Good and James Leesley Studio Managers: Simon Highfield and Kelly YoungProduction Coordinator: Pete Liggins

This week the Media Bill has been scrutinised and debated in the House of Lords. The aim is of the bill is to reform decades-old legislation for Public Service Broadcasters (including the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and S4C), but in its current form it will remove the requirement for specific genres of programmes on religion, arts and science.With religious programming already in decline, some groups are concerned that this will deal a serious blow to faith broadcasting. Others argue it's a necessary step, giving broadcasters greater flexibility and reflecting a post-Christian Britain. What might happen if there isn't a a requirement to make programmes about religion and belief? With a rapidly changing religious landscape in Britain, do current faith programmes meet audience needs? To what extent does religious broadcasting matter? Azim Ahmed is joined by four guests to explore the issues; Tony Stoller, Chair of the Sandford St. Martin Trust, Tim Pemberton, Head of Religion and Ethics for BBC Audio, Kathryn Riddick from Humanists UK and journalist and broadcaster Remona Aly.

Andy Kind hosts today's Unbelievable where the debate topic is Does Secular Humanism or Christianity offer a brighter future for the UK? We have teamed up with our friends at Aylesbury Vale Youth For Christ a pioneering youth ministry that holds debates in UK schools in the style of Unbelievable to engage the students in the big questions of life, faith and differing worldviews. A key component is that the students get to put their questions directly to the debaters. So grab your schoolbag as we join a fascinating debate held at the end of 2023 between secular humanist Neil McKain and Christian apologist Sara Stevenson. Neil McKain is also the vice-chairman of Humanists UK, and a religious studies teacher. Sara Stevenson who is a writer, speaker and theologian from the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics. This was a debate held at St Michaels School in Aylesbury, UK. The debate was moderated by head of Religious Studies, Mark Smallwood.  https://www.theocca.org/ https://aylesburyvale.yfc.co.uk/ https://standrewsbookshop.co.uk/product/hidden-in-plain-sight-2-2/ • Subscribe to the Unbelievable? podcast: https://pod.link/267142101 • More shows, free eBook & newsletter: https://premierunbelievable.com • For live events: http://www.unbelievable.live • For online learning: https://www.premierunbelievable.com/training • Support us in the USA: http://www.premierinsight.org/unbelievableshow • Support us in the rest of the world: https://www.premierunbelievable.com/donate

Researchers at the University of Birmingham have conducted a wide-ranging survey on perceptions of religion and science, which suggests that half the UK population believes that religion does more harm than good. 50% of respondents said religion 'has more negative societal consequences than positive', 30% said it 'has more positive societal consequences' and 20% didn't know. We discuss the findings and weigh up the religious ‘balance sheet' with Professor Alice Roberts, anatomist, broadcaster and Vice President of Humanists UK; and Dr Musharraf Hussain, Imam, scientist and charity worker in Nottingham.Also in the programme:This week saw the UK cinema release of ‘One Life' – a film about the British man Nicholas Winton who, in the months leading up to World War II, rescued 669 mostly Jewish Czechoslovakian children from the Nazis. One of those children, Milena Grenfell-Baines, tells her story.The Church of Scotland is on a five-year mission to close places of worship made unviable by a lack of ministers, falling income and dwindling congregations. Reporter Moira Hickey visits Birnie Kirk, near Elgin in Moray, which recently held its last service after nearly 900 uninterrupted years of Christian worship. Producers: Dan Tierney and Catherine Murray Production co-ordinator: David Baguley Editor: Helen Grady

Andrew Copson speaks to award-winning writer, comedian, and former doctor Adam Kay who shares the beliefs that have shaped his life and career. From the original values of the NHS, to questions about its future, he lifts the lid on one of the UK's most cherished institutions, founded by humanist Nye Bevan, and offers a glimpse into the challenges facing patients, healthcare workers, and the NHS as a service.   Adam's new book, Kay's Incredible Inventions, is out now: https://www.waterstones.com/book/kays-incredible-inventions/adam-kay/henry-paker/9780241540787   He is a patron of Humanists UK: https://humanists.uk/about/our-people/patrons/adam-kay/   In May 2023, Humanists UK held an 'In Conversation Event' with Adam Kay, hosted by its President, Adam Rutherford: https://humanists.uk/2023/05/17/humanists-uk-presents-adam-kay-with-the-voltaire-lecture-medal/ What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member:  You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to Liberal Democrat peer and patron of Humanists UK, Baroness Lynne Featherstone who shares her political experiences as a Minister of the Conservative–Liberal Democrat Coalition Government (2010-2015). From being the chief architect of the same-sex marriage act, to the values that drive her liberal beliefs, it's must-listen episode about an individual whose actions have left a significant impact on the world of politics and social change. What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member:  You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to science communicator Alom Shaha who shares his experiences as a teacher and author. From growing up in a strict Bangladeshi Muslim area in south-east London, to the role of his teachers in shaping his worldview, it's a thought-provoking episode about the power of education and the thrill of intellectual endeavour.    Alom Shaha is a patron of Humanists UK. In 2012, he published The Young Atheist's Handbook: Living a Good Life Without God. The book chronicles his upbringing in a strict Bangladeshi Muslim area in south-east London in the 1970s and 80s and outlines the intellectual journey which led him to identify as a humanist. It was launched at an event organised by Humanists UK, which later ran a successful crowdfunder to distribute copies of the book to every school in the country. Alom is also a former trustee of Humanists UK.   What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by.   Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member:    You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson speaks to SNP MP Tommy Sheppard about his life and career as a politician. From his childhood in Northern Ireland during the Troubles, to his unwavering commitment to Scottish independence, it's an engaging episode that explores the importance of collective endeavour, democracy, and the need for progressive change in a rapidly changing world. Tommy Sheppard MP is the Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group, a cross-party group of Members of the House of Commons and the House of Lords of all the main parties, including members from the Crossbenches in the Lords: https://humanists.uk/about/humanists-in-parliament/   He secured a backbench business debate on the presence of 26 unelected bishops in the House of Lords in July 2023: https://humanists.uk/2023/07/06/mps-slam-automatic-right-for-bishops-to-sit-in-the-house-of-lords/   What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by. Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member:  You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review! What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.  

Andrew Copson chats to multi award-winning journalist, writer, and broadcaster Samira Ahmed who shares the secrets and skills behind her successful career. From questioning those in power, to taking an equal pay case against the BBC, it's an inspiring episode about the fight for equality and challenging the status quo. Samira Ahmed is a regular contributor to New Humanist magazine: https://newhumanist.org.uk/contributors/5253/samira-ahmed She also regularly chairs Humanists UK events: https://www.youtube.com/@HumanistsUK  What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by.  Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member: https://humanists.uk/ You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review!   What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

“A humanist celebrant or humanist officiant is a person who performs humanist celebrancy services, such as non-religious weddings, funerals, child namings, coming of age ceremonies and other rituals. Some humanist celebrants are accredited by humanist organisations, such as Humanists UK, Humanist Society Scotland (HSS), The Humanist Society (US), and the Humanist Association of Canada (HAC). Typically, a Humanist Chaplain works within an organisation, and within that organisation provides a Humanist perspective for those who want it. That can be anybody who just wants a friendly chat, education about Humanism, or discuss more difficult issues. Humanists have a positive outlook on life, guided by rational thought and focus on the importance of human cooperation and compassion for solving problems.” I will make the proper referrals when I need to in areas of resources. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/antonio-myers4/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/antonio-myers4/support

Andrew Copson chats with geneticist and author of How to Argue With a Racist Adam Rutherford about the motivations behind a career spent challenging false claims from religion and pseudoscience. From unshackling ourselves from the constraints of evolution, to charting the trajectory of our long history, it's a reflective discussion that emphasises our common humanity and capacity to build a better society.    Adam Rutherford is the current President of Humanists UK. He delivered Humanists UK's 2019 Voltaire Lecture, How to argue with a racist, which became the basis for his 2020 bestselling book of the same name: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYf-xNsIb2I   What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by.    Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member: https://humanists.uk/   You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review!     What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew Copson explores the life and work of eminent neurosurgeon and writer Henry Marsh who reflects on living with advanced prostate cancer and the motivations behind his world-renowned career. From his unconventional route into medicine, to his experiences as both doctor and patient, it's a thought-provoking discussion about the complexities of healthcare and the role of assisted dying in modern society.   Henry Marsh addressing parliament on assisted dying in 2022: https://humanists.uk/2022/05/25/dr-henry-marsh-addresses-parliamentary-humanists-on-assisted-dying/   Henry Marsh calling for an assisted dying parliamentary inquiry in 2021: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9arXH8D1tbo     What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about what they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by.    Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member: https://humanists.uk/   You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review!     What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Andrew deep dives into the fascinating world of comedian, author, and human rights advocate Sandi Toksvig who shares some of the experiences that have fueled her fervent commitment to equality and justice. From school days spent at a French-speaking convent (where she masterminded a school rebellion), to earlier this year challenging the Archbishop of Canterbury over the Church of England's stance on same-sex marriage, it's a thought-provoking conversation that's equal parts humour and heart.   For more info on Sandi's public call earlier this year for Church of England bishops to be removed from the House of Lords over its continued opposition to same-sex marriage: https://humanists.uk/2023/02/03/sandi-toksvig-calls-for-cofe-bishops-to-be-removed-from-lords-over-same-sex-marriage/   What I Believe was the title of two separate essays by the philosopher Bertrand Russell and the philosopher EM Forster in the early 20th century. These two humanists set out their approach to life, their fundamental worldview, in a way that was accessible to all. In this podcast, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, Andrew Copson, speaks to humanists today to understand more about they believe, to understand more about the values, convictions, and opinions they live by.    Humanists UK is the national charity working on behalf of non religious people to advance free thinking and promote a tolerant society. If you'd like to support the podcast or find out more about the humanist approach to life or the work that we do, please visit humanists.uk. If you like what you see, please consider joining as a member: https://humanists.uk/   You can follow Humanists UK on Twitter (X), Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok – and please remember to leave a 5 star review!     What I Believe is produced by Sophie Castle.

Professor Alice Roberts is a TV presenter and biological anthropologist - in her own words, she looks at old bones and tries to construct the person's history from their skeleton, and she loves the link betwwen the living and the dead.Her pink hair hints at her less traditional and more playful side, also illustrated by the amazing story that as a junior doctor she did some of her paediatric ward rounds on rollerblades, much to the children's joy! Alice was offered her first solo TV series just before she had her first baby. She presumed it was bad timing but to her surprise the executive producer suggested she take her her newborn baby with her on the filming, which she did successfully with the help of her husband who came along too.Alice has two children, now aged 10 and 13. She is vice president of Humanists UK. And she speaks out against faith schools, saying how children have a right not to have religion forced on them.Spinning Plates is presented by Sophie Ellis-Bextor, produced by Claire Jones and post-production by Richard Jones Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This week on Taking The Myth, Stephen Knight (@GSpellchecker) and Iram Ramzan of sedaa.org (@Iram_Ramzan) discuss all the big topics. 0:00 Intro 0:28 Barbie or Oppenheimer? 3:34 Iram stays overnight in a Welsh mine. 10:04 Kevin Spacey found not guilty in court. 18:49 Nigel Farage being ‘debanked' by Coutts 35:03 Sadiq Khan's ‘maaate' campaign and gender lunacy. 49:05 Keir Starmer causes controversy by saying a woman is an ‘adult human female'. 50:48 Ending membership with Humanists UK 55:20 Audience Question: Test Cricket in Manchester 56:30 Audience Question: Fight or leave in the face of institutional capture? 59:22 Audience Question: More on ‘maate'. 59:43 Tobias Ellwood's comments on Afghanistan Iram's Welsh mine article: https://www.mailplus.co.uk/edition/features/292700/now-thats-what-you-call-a-deep-sleep Stephen Knight's Substack: www.sknight.substack.com Sedaa: www.sedaa.org Support the podcast at www.patreon.com/gspellchecker Also available on iTunes, Stitcher, YouTube & Spotify.    

It's been a decade since the Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act received Royal Assent for England and Wales.Passing of the act came seven years after civil partnerships were legalised - but how much has actually changed? This month, the Church of England announced it's working towards drafting pastoral guidance needed to allow gay couples to receive blessings from priests.The Leader podcast's joined by Louise Calvey, director of Safer Foundations, who this year celebrates the 12th anniversary of civil partnership to her wife.In part two, we speak with Richy Thompson, director of public affairs and policy at Humanists UK, who says humanists have been frozen out of laws to formalise couples' legal rights, such as next-of-kin status. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

EPISODE 1548: In this KEEN ON episode, Andrew talks to Peter Cave, the author of HOW TO THINK LIKE A PHILOSOPHER, about the scholars, dreamers and sages who can teach us how to live Peter Cave read philosophy at University College London (UCL) and King's College, Cambridge. He has held lectureships in philosophy at UCL, University of Khartoum, Sudan, and City University London; he was an associate lecturer for many many years at the Open University (and is now Honorary) and New York University (London). Further, he is a principal examiner for the Chartered Insurance Institute. Peter is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Arts, Honorary Member of Population Matters, former member of the Council of the Royal Institute of Philosophy and Chair of Humanist Philosophers – and is a Patron of Humanists UK. He is also a keen supporter of the Wigmore Hall and for some years English National Opera (now under unjustified funding cuts). He was elected to The Athenaeum Pall Mall Club in 2007. Author of numerous philosophical papers, both serious and humorous, Peter's particular interests are paradoxes, ethical matters and life and death dilemmas. He has given guest philosophy lectures at, for example, Copenhagen, Stockholm and Bucharest and has edited collections and written articles for various publications. In previous decades, he was columnist on taxation and money myths for The Investor magazine. Peter has scripted and presented BBC radio philosophy programmes – from a series on the Paradox Fair to more serious ones on John Stuart Mill. He often takes part in public debates on religion, ethics and socio-political matters, in Britain and on the Continent – and believes that one should ‘stand up and be counted' when faced with some horrors, horrors that are often the result of religious belief or unbridled enthusiasm for capitalism. Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we spend the whole episode looking at the issues arising out of the Coronation.   The Bible as the Word of God.  Maintaining the Protestant Reformed Religion.  A Hindu reading that Jesus is the only Creator.  A disappointing sermon.  Great music.  The anointing of the Holy Spirit.  Marriage and hypocrisy.  The rehabilitation of Queen Camilla.   Prince William and the new Civic Religion. Humanists UK.  The Right to Protest.  NIck Cave.  The True Cross.  Psalm 24. 

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Adam Rutherford is Lecturer in Biology and Society at University College London's Department of Genes, Evolution, and Environment, and President of Humanists UK. His interests are in evolution, genetics and developmental biology, and the history of biology. He is the author of Control: The Dark History and Troubling Present of Eugenics. In this episode, we focus on Control. We start by discussing what eugenics is, and how old it is as an ideology. We discuss if it makes sense to talk about “good” and “bad” traits in evolutionary biology, and the importance of genetic diversity. We talk about medical interventions. We get into eugenics in the early 20th century, and how widespread it was in the West. We talk about how some geneticists contributed to eugenics. We discuss the concept of “race”. We talk about behavior genetics, and group differences. We also get into eugenics in contemporary academia and politics, and talk about the “great replacement theory” conspiracy theory. Finally, we discuss if we should be worried about genetic engineering. -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BERNARDO SEIXAS, OLAF ALEX, JONATHAN VISSER, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, JOHN CONNORS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, DAN DEMETRIOU, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, SIMON COLUMBUS, PHIL KAVANAGH, MIKKEL STORMYR, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, ALEXANDER DANNBAUER, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, ADANER USMANI, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, NICK GOLDEN, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, EDWARD HALL, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, MORTEN EIKELAND, DR BYRD, DANIEL FRIEDMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, MAU MARIA, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, ROOFTOWEL, DIOGO COSTA, ANTON ERIKSSON, CHARLES MOREY, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, PEDRO BONILLA, ZIEGLER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, STARRY, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, TOM ROTH, THERPMD, IGOR N, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, RICHARD BOWEN, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, AND CHRIS STORY! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, VEGA GIDEY, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, ROBERT LEWIS, AND AL NICK ORTIZ! AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, AND BOGDAN KANIVETS!

The recent release of Census statistics for religion suggests that the number of people with no religion now far exceeds the number of those purporting to be Christian. Roy Jenkins discusses the implication of these results with a panel including Dr Emma Whittick, chaplain of Trinity Saint Davids University of Wales at Lampeter and Carmarthen; George Craig, a retired civil servant and Methodist lay preacher; Kathy Riddick, Wales co-ordinator for Humanists UK; and Chris Street, who leads the Wales Leadership Forum, an organisation that aims to help church leaders to develop their mission.

Can empirical observation lead us to the truth?Looking for a link we mentioned? It's here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesFrom Newton to Darwin, Curie to Einstein, science has been built on empirical observation. Now the very idea of neutral observation is under threat. In a postmodern world it is claimed all observation is perspectival, everything we see influenced by what we already think. The founder of quantum mechanics, Heisenberg went further arguing that observing reality was not even possible. Are we at sea in a world of competing models? Or is it time to reassert the value of empirical observation, supported perhaps by machine learning and big data, as a means of choosing between incompatible theories?Steve Fuller is an academic studying science and technology. Fuller has published prolifically on such topics as intelligent design, the sociology of academia, and transhumanism. Angela Saini is an award-winning science journalist, author and broadcaster. She regularly presents science programmes for the BBC, and her writing has appeared in publications ranging from New Scientist, Wired and the Guardian.Rupert Sheldrake is a biologist and bestselling author. Best known for his 2012 book 'The Science Delusion' and the controversial, viral TED talk he gave which was banned by the organisation. Peter Atkins is a chemist and Fellow of Lincoln College. He's a Distinguished Supporter of Humanists UK, Atkins is outspoken in his opposition to religion. Danielle Sands hosts.There are thousands of big ideas to discover at IAI.tv – videos, articles, and courses waiting for you to explore. Find out more: https://iai.tv/podcast-offers?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=shownotes&utm_campaign=[iai-tv-episode-title] See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The poet Lucretius's major work is a six-book poem on epicurean philosophy and physics. Doesn't sound exactly promising? But his contemporaries and poetic descendants RAVED about it, even Cicero, who is mean about everyone. Ovid says that ‘the verses of sublime Lucretius will die only on the day the world ends'. But the world nearly did end for his work because only one manuscript survived, lost for centuries, only to be rediscovered in the Renaissance. ‘Rock star mythologist' and reformed stand-up Natalie Haynes is obsessed with the ancient world. Here she explores key stories from ancient Rome and Greece that still have resonance today. They might be biographical, topographical, mythological or epic, but they are always hilarious, magical and tragic, mystifying and revelatory. And they tell us more about ourselves now than seems possible of stories from a couple of thousand years ago. This is the eighth series (x 4) of the show and all the other episodes are available as podcasts on BBC Sounds. Guests include Professor Llewelyn Morgan and Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of Humanists UK. Producer: Mary Ward-Lowery