Podcasts about normativity

On lectures 3 and 4 of The Sources of Normativity (1996), where we get Korsgaard's positive view on how morality becomes obligatory for an individual, which has to do with identity, reason-giving, and our fundamentally social nature. And yet, her view is an interpretation of Kant! Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. Sponsors: Don't wait until the next bite—protect your home with Bzigo. Go to bzigo.com/discount/BUZZ10 to save 10%. Visit functionhealth.com/PEL to get the data you need to take action for your health. Learn about Mark's online political philosophy class at partiallyexaminedlife.com/class.

We dive further into the text of lectures 1 and 2 of The Sources of Normativity (1996). We give Korsgaard's account of the idea of reflective endorsement through Hume and Bernard Williams to get to her own view. When you come to know the origins of your moral sentiments, do you still stand behind them? Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. Learn more about Mark's fall online political philosophy class at partiallyexaminedlife.com/class. Sponsor: Visit functionhealth.com/PEL to get the data you need to take action for your health.

On The Sources of Normativity (1996), lectures 1 and 2. How are facts related to obligations? We don't want to merely explain our moral impulses, but justify them. Korsgaard walks us through the views of Hobbes, Hume, Bernard Williams and others to arrive at her own breed of Kantianism, which we'll lay out in ep. 371. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. Sponsor: Don't wait until the next bite—protect your home with Bzigo. Go to bzigo.com/discount/BUZZ10 to save 10%.

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biblical-studies

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/spiritual-practice-and-mindfulness

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/religion

For centuries, Jewish thinkers have asked two parallel questions. First, what is the reasoning behind an individual commandment and second, why bother heeding a command at all, something Dr. Brafman terms “reasons for” vs “reasons of” the commandments. In his newest book, Critique of Halakhic Reason: Divine Commandments and Social Normativity (Oxford UP, 2024), Dr. Brafman looks closely at the second of these questions. After considering answers from some of the most important Jewish thinkers of the 20th century, Joseph Soloveitchik, Yeshayahu Leibowitz, and Eliezer Berkovits, Dr. Brafman introduces his own system of thought. For him, the reasons for the commandments depend on a number of factors. We don't follow them blindly. And they don't always have to adhere to perfect and pure reason. Instead they are, to use a term he employs throughout is book, “constructed” based on any number of factors including our relationship with God and the norms that exist within our society. In conversation with some of the most important secular legal theorist and philosophers of the past 100 years, Dr Brafman charts a new course in Jewish theology, both defending and reimagining the place of our obligation to halakhah, Jewish law, for the 21st century. Professor Yonatan Brafman is Associate Professor of Modern Judaism in the Department of Religion, with a secondary appointment in the Department of Literary and Cultural Studies at Tufts University. Rabbi Marc Katz is the Senior Rabbi at Temple Ner Tamid in Bloomfield, NJ. He is most recently the author of Yochanan's Gamble: Judaism's Pragmatic Approach to Life (JPS)

Cognitive scientist Anna Riedl helps me get a sense of the emerging paradigm in cogsci and beyond dedicated to understanding how we make meaning in an uncertain and entropic world. After that, we tackle ideas Anna is working on informed by her experience with and critique of effective altruism: a framework she provisionally calls "autopoiethics," which relates to the normative decision-making processes of autopoetic systems.0:00 IntroductionI. State of the Art in Meaning Studies1:22 Meaning, Relevance, and Rationality 11:28 Synthesizing Abstract and Particular 21:56 Metarationality and the Transjective Frame30:03 A New Paradigm?40:41 Related Fields and ThinkersII. Autopoethics52:11 Normativity and Collective Welfare57:06 Autopoietic Normativity vs. Effective Altruism1:15:05 Perspectival Values1:26:50 Function vs. Process1:31:44 Conclusion To hear more, visit brendangrahamdempsey.substack.com

RU330: CRAIG VI SLEE ON CRIPKULT, COVID, ABLEISM, ANTI-NORMATIVITY, MAGIC, OCCULTURE http://www.renderingunconscious.org/philosophy/ru330-craig-slee-on-cripkult-covid-ableism-anti-normativity-magic-occulture/ Support Rendering Unconscious by becoming a paid subscriber to Patreon/ Substack, where we post exclusive content regularly. All paid subscribers receive a link to our Discord server where you can chat with us and others in our community with similar interests. So join us and join in the conversation! Vanessa & Carl's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/vanessa23carl Vanessa's Substack: https://vanessa23carl.substack.com Carl's Substack: https://thefenriswolf.substack.com Rendering Unconscious episode 330. Rendering Unconscious welcomes Craig VI Slee back to the podcast! Craig VI Slee is a writer, poet, consultant, and theorist, who lives in the North West of the UK. Born with Cerebral Palsy, and latterly a partial-foot amputee, he is a full-time wheelchair user whose work covers the intersections between disability, environment, philosophy, storytelling, magic, and myth. He blogs at https://cold-albion.net Follow him at BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/mrvi.cold-albion.net Mastodon: loci.onl/@mrvi Slee contributed the piece “Creeping Mortality: Some Thoughts on Cripkult” to Rendering Unconscious: Psychoanalytic Perspectives vol. 1 (Trapart Books, 2024) edited by Vanessa Sinclair: https://amzn.to/4eKruV5 And “The Occult Nature of Cripkult” to The Fenris Wolf 10 (Trapart Books, 2023) edited by Carl Abrahamsson: https://amzn.to/3EhJrfS This episode available at YouTube: https://youtu.be/4T80Ia-bfzw?si=WJ_lfqMrsD9wNdxo Check out this previous episode: RU12: CRAIG VI SLEE ON DISABILITY, MYTHOLOGY & PHILOSOPHY Join us for Kenneth Anger: American Cinemagician with Carl Abrahamsson, Begins February 2: https://www.morbidanatomy.org/classes/ Watch all of Carl's films at The Fenris Wolf Substack. https://thefenriswolf.substack.com Join us in London for the book launch for Meetings with Remarkable Magicians: Life in the Occult Underground by Carl Abrahamsson at Watkins Books, February 27th. https://www.watkinsbooks.com/event-details/meetings-with-remarkable-magicians-life-in-the-occult-underground-carl-abrahamsson Then on February 28th, join us at Freud Museum, London for “Be Careful What You Wish For – Female & Male Existential Malaise and Hysteric Approaches in ‘The Substance' and ‘Seconds'. https://www.freud.org.uk/event/be-careful-what-you-wish-for-female-male-existential-malaise-and-hysteric-approaches-in-the-substance-and-seconds/ Beginning March 23rd, join author Carl Abrahamsson and psychoanalyst Vanessa Sinclair for The Sentient Solar Cycle, a year long series of monthly workshops/meetings via Zoom. https://thefenriswolf.substack.com/p/the-sentient-solar-cycle Rendering Unconscious Podcast is hosted by Dr. Vanessa Sinclair, a psychoanalyst based in Sweden, who works with people internationally: http://www.drvanessasinclair.net Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/renderingunconscious/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@renderingunconscious Blusky: https://bsky.app/profile/drsinclair.bsky.social The Queerness of Psychoanalysis: From Freud and Lacan to Laplanche and Beyond (Routledge, 2025) edited by Vanessa Sinclair, Elisabeth Punzi and Myriam Sauer is now available. Be sure to check out this landmark volume! https://www.routledge.com/The-Queerness-of-Psychoanalysis-From-Freud-and-Lacan-to-Laplanche-and-Beyond/Sinclair-Punzi-Sauer/p/book/9781032603827 The song at the end of the episode is “Outer realities blend” from the album “We reign supreme” by Vanessa Sinclair and Pete Murphy. Available at Pete Murphy's Bandcamp Page: https://petemurphy.bandcamp.com Our music is also available at Spotify and other streaming services: https://open.spotify.com/artist/3xKEE2NPGatImt46OgaemY?si=jaSKCqnmSD-NsSlBLjrBXA Image: collage by Morrissette

This week on Sapphic Survival Guide, Cheyenne and Gina interview bisexual polyamorous expert, Michelle Hy! Follow her @polyamorouswhileasian!Submit your own questions by messaging us on Instagram or emailing us at sapphicsurvivalguide@gmail.com. You can also leave us a voicemail at 724-209-8877 (US. Only - You can also send a voice note via email. Unless stated otherwise, you are giving us permission to play your voicemail on the podcast.)CreditsProduced by Gina Finio and CheyenneEdited by Gina FinioCover Art by Sev & CheyenneMusic by PartnerSound Effects by Audio VampireFollow us on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and TikTok and subscribe to our Patreon for extras!Follow Cheyenne on Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, and TikTokFollow Gina on Instagram, TikTok, and her website

In light of the recent legislation to end Australia's live sheep trade by May 2028, Nick and Adam reflect on the history of the stop live export campaign. More specifically, the show covers: alliances between animal activists and slaughterhouse workers, “animal nationalism” and debates about the campaign within the movement. We discuss what animal activists can learn from this history, regardless of which campaign/s they're focused on.   When we discuss the history of the campaign, we primarily draw on Gonzalo Villanueva's book – A Transnational History of the Australian Animal Movement, 1970–2015: https://www.palgrave.com/gp/book/9783319625867  Additional links: Corey Wrenn's essay – Banning Live Export in Australia: https://www.coreyleewrenn.com/banning-live-export-in-australia/ Colin Salter's talk – Normativity, Intersectionality and States of Exception: https://archive.org/details/ColinSalter Check out Adam's Spotify playlist – Animal Lib & Vegan Songs: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/5hVygGomw9zax38quC6mhi?si=c14b3a19ccf74d67   Music: Animal liberation by Los Fastidios: https://www.losfastidios.net/ Pig by Weezer: https://weezer.lnk.to/music Seoul by Shoreline: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCxBdmVVlt8&pp=ygUQc2hvcmVsaW5lIHNlb3VsIA%3D%3D Dirty work by Ruby Gill: https://rubygill.bandcamp.com/track/dirty-work

Researcher Carmela Garcia Manas explains that children are followers, enforcers and creators of social norms. Carmela talks about an important finding from her research of just how highly influenced children are by the presence of the adult. To read and listen to the whole research series visit: https://thevoiceofearlychildhood.com/articles/sustainability/ Tune into next week's episode on: The essential skills for social sustainability  If you enjoyed this episode you might also like to listen to Carmela's previous episode with Zanna Clarke, Principal of Miss Daisy's Nursery Schools, on 'Life skills over academic achievement' - https://thevoiceofearlychildhood.com/life-skills-over-academic-achievement/  Episode break down: 00:00 - What do children understand of normativity and social norms? 03:00 - Children as followers, enforcers and creators of social norms 03:30 - 'Rich' or 'poor table' 09:05 - Children are highly influenced by the presence of an adult 14:19 - What does subordination mean? 16:00 - Conforming to social norms can become dangerous 19:00 - Children look for fairness 22:50 - How do we encourage children to question the adult? 27:00 - Allocating time for reflection 30:40 - A big change was seen at the end of the research 32:20 - House swap and property inflation in play! 36:00 - Value and demand 36:45 - Children's resourcefulness and adaptability: The sophistication of play 38:30 - Next episode... For more episodes visit The Voice of Early Childhood website: https://www.thevoiceofearlychildhood.com 

Co-host Kevin Hill and guest co-host Ross Von Hausen speak with Alan J. Torrance and Andrew B. Torrance about their new book,  Beyond Immanence: The Theological Vision of Kierkegaard and Barth (Eerdmans, 2023).  Alan J. Torrance is professor emeritus of systematic theology at the University of St. Andrews. He is the author of Persons in Communion: Trinitarian Description and Human Participation. He has also edited The Doctrine of God and Theological Ethics (with Michael Banner) and Scripture's Doctrine: Studies on the New Testament's Normativity for Christian Dogmatics (with Markus Bockmuehl). Andrew B. Torrance is a senior lecturer in theology at the University of St Andrews. He is the author of The Freedom to Become a Christian: A Kierkegaardian Account of Human Transformation in Relationship with God. He has also edited several volumes, including Knowing Creation and Christ and the Created Order: Perspectives from Theology, Philosophy, and Science (with Thomas H. McCall) and Soren Kierkegaard: Theologian of the Gospel (with Greg Marcar and Todd Speidell).

In this 219th in a series of live discussions with Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying (both PhDs in Biology), we talk about the state of the world through an evolutionary lens.In this episode, we discuss evolution and intelligent design, and why the failures of institutions and institutional science during Covid are causing people to question everything that science has concluded. We also discuss motonormativity—aka car brain—both steel manning it as a concept, and critiquing the research that named the phenomenon. Finally: sex chromosomes in cephalopods (octopus and their kin)—older than you think.*****Our sponsors:MUDWTR: is a coffee alternative with mushrooms and herbs (and cacao!) and is delicious, with 1/7 the caffeine as coffee. Visit www.mudwtr.com/darkhorsepod and use DARKHORSEPOD at check out for 15% off. ARMRA: Colostrum is our first food, and can help restore your health and resilience as an adult. Go to www.tryarmra.com/DARKHORSE to get 15% off your first order.MDHearing: To get our $397 when you buy a PAIR offer plus free charging case, head to shopmdhearing.com/DARKHORSE and use code DARKHORSE.*****Join us on Locals! Get access to our Discord server, exclusive live streams, live chats for all streams, and early access to many podcasts: https://darkhorse.locals.com/Heather's newsletter, Natural Selections (subscribe to get free weekly essays in your inbox): https://naturalselections.substack.comOur book, A Hunter-Gatherer's Guide to the 21st Century, is available everywhere books are sold, including from Amazon: https://a.co/d/dunx3atCheck out our store! Epic tabby, digital book burning, saddle up the dire wolves, and more: https://darkhorsestore.org*****Mentioned in this episode:“Giving Up Darwin” - Gelernter's review of Meyers' book: https://claremontreviewofbooks.com/giving-up-darwin/Motonormativity: critical car theory (at Principled Bicycling): https://substack.com/home/post/p-142960056Walker et al 2023. Motonormativity: how social norms hide a major public health hazard: https://www.inderscienceonline.com/doi/abs/10.1504/IJENVH.2023.135446?af=ROldest known animal sex chromosome evolved in octopuses 380 million years ago: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-00637-0Coffing et al 2024. Cephalopod Sex Determination and its Ancient Evolutionary Origin Revealed by Chromosome-level Assembly of the California Two-Spot Octopus: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.02.21.581452v2.full.pdfSupport the show

This episode turns to Christine Korsgaard's Tanner lectures, "The Sources of Normativity," to explore how morality might be rationally vindicated from within the nature of practical rationality. Korsgaard's project is an iteration of the Enlightenment's attempt to ground morality in human nature. Korsgaard suggests that the correct moral theory will not merely provide an explanation of our moral natures, but also be justified in the light of our status as reflective animals. Her constructivist account of normativity will conceive of obligations as integral to our sense of identity, which in turn depends on our status as deliberative agents who must act upon some principle. Is the source of normativity a product of the correct application of moral concepts to the sphere of action?  Are values the product of our self-legislating will? Can we understand unconditional obligations as derived from our shared identity as human beings? 

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: [Valence series] 2. Valence & Normativity, published by Steven Byrnes on December 8, 2023 on LessWrong. 2.1 Post summary / Table of contents Part of the Valence series. The previous post explained what I mean by the term "valence". Now in Post 2, I'll discuss the central role of valence in the "normative" domain of desires, preferences, values, and so on. In case you're wondering, there is also a relation between valence and the "positive" domain of beliefs, expectations, etc. - but we'll get to that in Post 3. The role of valence in the normative domain can scarcely be overstated: I think valence is the very substance out of which all normativity is built. To be clear, that does not mean that, once we understand how valence works, we understand absolutely everything there is to know about the whole normative universe. By analogy, "atoms are the very substance out of which all bacteria are built"; but if you want to understand bacteria, it's not enough to just understand what atoms are and how they work. You would still have a lot more work to do! On the other hand, if you don't know what atoms are, you'd have an awfully hard time understanding bacteria! So it is, I claim, with valence and normativity. The post is organized as follows: Section 2.2 discusses the misleading intuition that valence seems to be attached to real-world things, actions, plans, and so on. We say "That's a bad idea", as opposed to "When I hold that idea in my brain, it evokes a negative-valence 'badness' feeling". This is important context for everything that follows. Section 2.3 discusses situations where a valence assessment corresponds directly to a meaningful (albeit snap) normative assessment. For example, if I have a thought that corresponds to a concrete plan ("I will stand up"), then my brain is saying that this is a good plan or bad plan in accordance with whether the valence of that thought is positive or negative respectively - and if it's a good plan, I'm likely to actually do it. Likewise, if I imagine a possible future state of the world, the valence of that thought corresponds to an assessment of whether that state would be good or bad - and if it's good, my brain is liable to execute plans that bring it about, and if it's bad, my brain is liable to execute plans to avoid it. Thus, we get the expected direct connections between valence signals, felt desires, and our actions and decisions. Section 2.4 discusses a different case: the valence of concepts. For example, if I "like" communism, then a thought involving the "communism" concept is liable to be positive-valence. I argue that this cannot be directly interpreted as making a meaningful normative assessment about anything in particular, but instead we should think of these as learned normative heuristics that help inform meaningful normative assessments. I then talk about vibes-based "meaningless arguments", like arguing about whether to be "for" or "against" Israel. Section 2.5 discusses how valence gets set and adjusted, with a particular emphasis on innate drives (e.g., a drive to eat when hungry) as the ultimate grounding of valence assessments. Section 2.6 discusses the valence of metacognitive thoughts and self-reflective thoughts, including the distinction between ego-syntonic and ego-dystonic tendencies, and what people are talking about when they talk about their "values". Section 2.7 briefly covers how moral reasoning fits into this framework, first descriptively (when people are doing "moral reasoning", what are they doing?), and then musing on the implications for metaethics. Section 2.8 is a brief conclusion. 2.2 The (misleading) intuition that valence is an attribute of real-world things Recall from §1.3 of the previous post that, in my proposed model: Part of our brain "thinks a thought" which might involve thi...

Link to original articleWelcome 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: [Valence series] 2. Valence & Normativity, published by Steven Byrnes on December 8, 2023 on LessWrong. 2.1 Post summary / Table of contents Part of the Valence series. The previous post explained what I mean by the term "valence". Now in Post 2, I'll discuss the central role of valence in the "normative" domain of desires, preferences, values, and so on. In case you're wondering, there is also a relation between valence and the "positive" domain of beliefs, expectations, etc. - but we'll get to that in Post 3. The role of valence in the normative domain can scarcely be overstated: I think valence is the very substance out of which all normativity is built. To be clear, that does not mean that, once we understand how valence works, we understand absolutely everything there is to know about the whole normative universe. By analogy, "atoms are the very substance out of which all bacteria are built"; but if you want to understand bacteria, it's not enough to just understand what atoms are and how they work. You would still have a lot more work to do! On the other hand, if you don't know what atoms are, you'd have an awfully hard time understanding bacteria! So it is, I claim, with valence and normativity. The post is organized as follows: Section 2.2 discusses the misleading intuition that valence seems to be attached to real-world things, actions, plans, and so on. We say "That's a bad idea", as opposed to "When I hold that idea in my brain, it evokes a negative-valence 'badness' feeling". This is important context for everything that follows. Section 2.3 discusses situations where a valence assessment corresponds directly to a meaningful (albeit snap) normative assessment. For example, if I have a thought that corresponds to a concrete plan ("I will stand up"), then my brain is saying that this is a good plan or bad plan in accordance with whether the valence of that thought is positive or negative respectively - and if it's a good plan, I'm likely to actually do it. Likewise, if I imagine a possible future state of the world, the valence of that thought corresponds to an assessment of whether that state would be good or bad - and if it's good, my brain is liable to execute plans that bring it about, and if it's bad, my brain is liable to execute plans to avoid it. Thus, we get the expected direct connections between valence signals, felt desires, and our actions and decisions. Section 2.4 discusses a different case: the valence of concepts. For example, if I "like" communism, then a thought involving the "communism" concept is liable to be positive-valence. I argue that this cannot be directly interpreted as making a meaningful normative assessment about anything in particular, but instead we should think of these as learned normative heuristics that help inform meaningful normative assessments. I then talk about vibes-based "meaningless arguments", like arguing about whether to be "for" or "against" Israel. Section 2.5 discusses how valence gets set and adjusted, with a particular emphasis on innate drives (e.g., a drive to eat when hungry) as the ultimate grounding of valence assessments. Section 2.6 discusses the valence of metacognitive thoughts and self-reflective thoughts, including the distinction between ego-syntonic and ego-dystonic tendencies, and what people are talking about when they talk about their "values". Section 2.7 briefly covers how moral reasoning fits into this framework, first descriptively (when people are doing "moral reasoning", what are they doing?), and then musing on the implications for metaethics. Section 2.8 is a brief conclusion. 2.2 The (misleading) intuition that valence is an attribute of real-world things Recall from §1.3 of the previous post that, in my proposed model: Part of our brain "thinks a thought" which might involve thi...

In this episode, we discuss the social theory of the Kantian critical theorist Rainer Forst in his book Normativity and Power. We work through how well his theory of the relationship between power and reason accounts for economic domination, why he thinks power and violence ought to be distinguished, and whether critical theory can escape the problem of circularity in judging the difference between better and worse reasons for acting. Do we have reasons for acting? Does it matter? Come get Kant-pilled and leave your Hegel at home!This is just a short clip from the full episode, which is available to our subscribers on  Patreon: patreon.com/leftofphilosophy References: Rainer Forst, Normativity and Power: Analyzing Social Orders of Justification, translated by Ciaran Cronin (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017) Music: Vintage Memories by Schematist | schematist.bandcamp.com

In this episode of Voices with Vervaeke, Dr. John Vervaeke, Ken Lowry, and D.C. Schindler challenge conventional perspectives on God, reason, freedom, and community through the lenses of Neoplatonism and Hegelian philosophy. They deconstruct what it means to 'belong,' exploring the concept of 'home' not just as a physical space but as a philosophical construct tied to our intrinsic nature. The dialogue orbits around key principles like spirit, freedom, and the evolution of collective intelligence, or 'Geist.' They discuss Hegel's paradoxical views on Christianity, freedom's misunderstood definition in modern culture, and the transformative power of vows like marriage. Throughout the discussion, the panel navigates the nuanced terrains of reason, rationality, and individual vs. communal freedoms, offering listeners intellectual nourishment and fresh perspectives.   Resources:   D.C. Schindler: Website  Ken Lowry: YouTube | Substack | X  John Vervaeke: Website | Patreon | Facebook | X | YouTube   The Vervaeke Foundation Books   Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment - Robert Brandom Reason in Philosophy: Animating Ideas - Robert Brandom A Spirit of Trust: A Reading of Hegel's Phenomenology - Robert Brandom Incomprehensible Certainty: Metaphysics and Hermeneutics of the Image - Thomas Pfau Phenomenology of Spirit - G. W. F. Hegel Nihilism (Carthage Reprint) - Stanley Rosen  The Psychology of Belonging - Kelly-Ann Allen Supernatural Selection: How Religion Evolved - Matt Rossano  Zombies in Western Culture: A Twenty-First Century Crisis - John Vervaeke, Christopher Mastropietro, and Filip Miscevic Freedom from Reality: The Diabolical Character of Modern Liberty - D.C. Schindler Publications   The Enactment of Shared Agency in Teams Exploring Mars Through Rovers - Dan Chiappe, John Vervaeke The Experience of Presence in the Mars Exploration Rover Mission - Dan Chiappe, John Vervaeke Distributed Cognition and the Experience of Presence in the Mars Exploration Rover Mission - Dan Chiappe, John Vervaeke   Articles   Did Meditating Make Us Human? - Matt J. Rossano Genocide, Domicide and the Unnamed - Brian Walsh Timecodes:   [00:00:00] John Vervaeke introduces the episode and his guests, Ken Lowry and D. C. Schindler. [00:02:18] Vervaeke and Dan Chiappe's book project is revealed: exploring the psychology, cognitive science, and philosophy around reason and rationality. [00:04:33] The main topic of the episode is introduced: a daring reconceptualization of God, reason, freedom, and Geist. [00:07:33] D.C. Schindler delves into Hegel's nuanced relationship with Christianity, providing intellectual scaffolding for the dialogue. [00:09:52] Schindler's description of Hegel's concept of spirit underscores the social nature of consciousness. [00:16:17] Vervaeke touches on the critique of Hegel by Stanley Rosen, introducing alternative viewpoints. [00:19:40] Hegel's often-overlooked relationship with nature is put under the spotlight. [00:24:28] Vervaeke introduces 'niche construction' in biology, challenging Darwinian notions and tying back to the concept of 'home'. [00:27:51] The psychological and social implications of 'home' are unpacked by Vervaeke. [00:30:59] Schindler highlights the role of the hearth, tying it back to human development and spirituality. [00:33:15] Vervaeke delves into the hypnotic nature of fire and its evolutionary relevance. [00:37:35] D.C. Schindler posits the necessity of an 'absolute' in community formation, adding another layer to the discussion. [00:40:00] Hegel's master-slave dialectic and its connection to freedom are introduced by Schindler. [00:45:01] Ken Lowry discusses the modern definition of freedom and how it undermines the concept of community and interpersonal relationships. [00:48:00] Vervaeke dissects the flaws in associating freedom with economic choice. [00:53:20] Freedom and forgiveness are seamlessly tied together by Vervaeke. [01:00:47] Schindler's critique of Aristotle through Plotinus adds depth to the discussion on the concept of 'good'. [01:08:42] The Aristotelian notion of nature is explored by Schindler, touching upon the idea of intrinsic motion. [01:13:29] Schindler gives a poetic touch, with the essence of beauty being the 'surprise from the other'. [01:17:48] Ken Lowry highlights the importance of reflecting on concepts like freedom, rationality, and love.

#witchcraft #minorities #queer The relation between the practice of magic, witchcraft, Paganism, shamanism and minorities in society (e.g. LGBTQ, people with disabilities). Clarifications on the differences found in Paganism, Ceremonial Magic, Western Esotericism and Re-constructivists of pre-Christian traditions. CONNECT & SUPPORT

Andrew Barth Feldman and Alex Boniello are a power duo who have most recently teamed up for "Foul Play", a new online murder mystery series that's reinventing how the internet works. The two share where and when their friendship began and why Andrew thinks the two of them are an unlikely pairing—one that works so well. The story behind Foul Play is an interesting one – listen in as they discuss how it all started, how much of it is improv, and how they accidentally found themselves developing an entirely new online technology for entertainment in the process. Alex and Andrew also share what it was like finding the right people for the project through vibe check alone, what makes "Foul Play" special, including not counting on any one person to be a star and allowing them to be exactly who they are and letting people do their thing, which isn't far from what motivates the two of them: doing what makes you happy and supporting other people. Andrew Barth Feldman is an American actor, singer, and songwriter. He rose to fame for his portrayal of the lead role in the Broadway musical "Dear Evan Hansen" at the age of 16, becoming the youngest actor to do so. Aside from his Broadway debut, Feldman has also appeared in several theater productions, including "Romeo and Juliet" at the Guthrie Theater and "The Phantom Tollbooth" at the Kennedy Center. He took a role in "High School Musical: The Musical: The Series" and starred in "Ratatouille: The TikTok Musical", "A Tourist's Guide to Love" on Netflix as well as in the upcoming comedy film, "No Hard Feelings". He has also performed at various events and benefits, including the Tony Awards and "The Jimmy Awards," where he won the Best Actor award. Feldman is also a talented songwriter, having written original music for "It Could Be Worse: The Musical" and "Normativity," two off-Broadway productions. He is a vocal advocate for mental health awareness and is passionate about using his platform to support various charitable causes. Alex Boniello is an American actor, singer, and musician who's won Tony Awards for co-producing “Hades Town”. He is known for his work on Broadway and off-Broadway productions, as well as in film and television. Boniello made his Broadway debut in 2011 as the understudy for the role of Moritz Stiefel in the musical "Spring Awakening". He later played the role of the voice of the skateboarder in the Broadway musical "American Idiot". In 2018, he originated the role of Connor Murphy in the Broadway production of "Dear Evan Hansen". His other stage credits include “21 Chump Street: The Musical”, “Cruel Intentions: The '90s Musical”, and “I Am Harvey Milk”. Aside from his work on stage, Boniello has also appeared in films such as "The Intern" and "Friendsgiving", and in television series such as "Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt", “Ghosts” and "Jessica Jones". In addition to acting, Boniello is a musician and has released original music as a singer-songwriter. Alex will be seen in the upcoming follow-up to Disney's "Descendants" franchise. Andrew and Alex co-created and hosted Broadway Jackbox and Broadway Whodunit and recently, they have launched a new online murder mystery series called "Foul Play". Connect with Andrew and Alex: Watch Foul Play: foulplay.live Instagram: @alexboniello, @andrewbfeldman_, @foulplaymystery Twitter: @AlexBoniello, @andrewbfeldman TikTok: @andrewbfeldman_ Connect with The Theatre Podcast: Support us on Patreon: Patreon.com/TheTheatrePodcast Twitter & Instagram: @theatre_podcast TikTok: @thetheatrepodcast Facebook.com/OfficialTheatrePodcast TheTheatrePodcast.com Alan's personal Instagram: @alanseales Email me at feedback@thetheatrepodcast.com. I want to know what you think. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jason Ānanda Josephson Storm discusses conceptions of value after postmodernism. Is postmodernism a nihilistic relativism or an activist moralism? Critics have accused it of both. What values pervade the postmodern academic paradigm? How do value conceptions shift when the postmodern paradigm gets diffused in popular culture? Is the "is-ought distinction" actually valid? What would a positive value project look like, and what are its benefits? Finally, what comes next for metamodernism and Storm's work? 0:00 Introduction 0:52 Postmodernism: Relativist or Activist? Nihilist or Moralist? 9:11 Value vs. Critique 17:07 Politics and Academia 22:17 Postmodern Diffusions 31:04 Is vs. Ought: Who's Afraid of Normativity? 38:04 Systematic Metamodern Philosophy 43:08 Imagining a Positive Future: Ethics and Wisdom 55:55 How Can Academia Reincorporate Wisdom? 59:42:21 Towards a Paradigm Shift: The Future of Metamodernism 1:09:35 Paradigm Projects 1:14:49 What's Next?

Raymond de Oliveira joins Brendan to discuss the value in the Universe, whether it emerges from the logic of reality itself or is arbitrarily chosen, whether existence is inherently of value, nihilism and Buddhism, the QRI grand narrative of replicators vs. consciousness, the role of suffering in wisdom, and the "Three Realms" of conscious experience. 0:00 Introduction 1:43 From Is to Ought? 9:17 Is Life a Net Negative? Utilitarianism, Gnosticism, Transhumanism 22:30 Dual-Aspect Monism and Suffering 25:52 Is Consciousness Worth It? 31:00 Teleology and Agency 32:58 Fighting a Meme War against Potential Gods 36:50 Values and Vows 40:03 The Law of Choice 42:36 Is Wisdom Earned by Suffering? Nihilism and the Truth of Silenus?

Sourcesheet is here

Pat and Brian discuss the role relations play in moral normativity, among other things : ) 

I speak with Cameron Boult about his series of papers and forthcoming book on epistemic blame: what it means, when it's appropriate, and how we modify our epistemic relationships with others. Here's any links you'll need to dive deeper: https://cameronboult.weebly.com/ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/phpr.12726 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10670-021-00382-0 https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phc3.12762?af=R#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20emotion%2Dbased,culpably)%20violated%20some%20epistemic%20norm. Twitter: @JordanCMyers Personal Website: https://jordanmyers.org/ Email: platoscavepodcast@gmail.com Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD1RiH1j-M6C59z1upPXkWw?disable_polymer=true Plato's Cave Website: https://platoscave.fireside.fm/ Special Guest: Cameron Boult.

Discussing norms derived from nature with Margaret Davies, author of EcoLaw: Legality, Life, and the Normativity of Nature (2022). Nomos and nature are usually viewed in opposition. Here we ask, what are the norms to be derived from nature? How do they emerge and coexist?

Miroslav Volf has said that every Christian is a theologian. This is important not so much because it demands of an individual Jesus-follower to exert the best of her cognitive abilities, but because it demands of theologians that theology take seriously the experience, perception, and lived realities of human life. As part of our Future of Theology series, Keri Day (Princeton Theological Seminary) joins Matt Croasmun to discuss the purpose and promise of theology today, honing in on this phenomena and the temptation to see theology as an abstract exercise cut off from the particularities of faith. Keri Day is Associate Professor of Constructive Theology and African American Religion at Princeton Theological Seminary. She's author of Unfinished Business: Black Women, The Black Church, and the Struggle to Thrive in America as well as Religious Resistance to Neoliberalism: Womanist and Black Feminist Perspectives. About Keri DayKeri Day is Associate Professor of Constructive Theology and African American Religion at Princeton Theological Seminary. She's author of Unfinished Business: Black Women, The Black Church, and the Struggle to Thrive in America as well as Religious Resistance to Neoliberalism: Womanist and Black Feminist Perspectives. Production NotesThis podcast featured Keri Day and Matt CroasmunEdited and Produced by Evan RosaHosted by Evan RosaProduction Assistance by Nathan Jowers and Annie TrowbridgeEpisode Art by Luke StringerA Production of the Yale Center for Faith & Culture at Yale Divinity School https://faith.yale.edu/aboutSupport For the Life of the World podcast by giving to the Yale Center for Faith & Culture: https://faith.yale.edu/give

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: Science-informed normativity, published by Richard Ngo on May 25, 2022 on LessWrong. The debate over moral realism is often framed in terms of a binary question: are there ever objective facts about what's moral to do in a given situation? The broader question of normative realism is also framed in a similar way: are there ever objective facts about what's rational to do in a given situation? But I think we can understand these topics better by reframing them in terms of the question: how much do normative beliefs converge or diverge as ontologies improve? In other words: let's stop thinking about whether we can derive normativity from nothing, and start thinking about how much normativity we can derive from how little, given that we continue to improve our understanding of the world. The core intuition behind this approach is that, even if a better understand of science and mathematics can't directly tell us what we should value, it can heavily influence how our values develop over time. Values under ontology improvements By “ontology” I mean the set of concepts which we use to understand the world. Human ontologies are primarily formulated in terms of objects which persist over time, and which have certain properties and relationships. The details have changed greatly throughout history, though. To explain fire and disease, we used to appeal to spirits and curses; over time we removed them and added entities like phlogiston and miasmas; now we've removed those in turn and replaced them with oxidation and bacteria. In other cases, we still use old concepts, but with an understanding that they're only approximations to more sophisticated ones - like absolute versus relative space and time. In other cases, we've added novel entities - like dark matter, or complex numbers - in order to explain novel phenomena. I'd classify all of these changes as “improvements” to our ontologies. What specifically counts as an improvement (if anything) is an ongoing debate in the philosophy of science. For now, though, I'll assume that readers share roughly common-sense intuitions about ontology improvement - e.g. the intuition that science has dramatically improved our ontologies over the last few centuries. Now imagine that our ontologies continue to dramatically improve as we come to better understand the world; and that we try to reformulate moral values from our old ontologies in terms of our new ontologies in a reasonable way. What might happen? Here are two extreme options. Firstly, very similar moral values might end up in very different places, based on the details of how that reformulation happens, or just because the reformulation is quite sensitive to initial conditions. Or alternatively, perhaps even values which start off in very different places end up being very similar in the new ontology - e.g. because they turn out to refer to different aspects of the same underlying phenomenon. These, plus intermediate options between them, define a spectrum of possibilities. I'll call the divergent end of this spectrum (which I've defended elsewhere) the “moral anti-realism” end, and the convergent end the “moral realism” end. This will be much clearer with a few concrete examples (although note that these are only illustrative, because the specific beliefs involved are controversial). Consider two people with very different values: an egoist who only cares about their own pleasure, and a hedonic utilitarian. Now suppose that each of them comes to believe Parfit's argument that personal identity is a matter of degree, so that now the concept of their one “future self” is no longer in their ontology. How might they map their old values to their new ontology? Not much changes for the hedonic utilitarian, but a reasonable egoist will start to place some value on the experiences of peo...

This week we have another BONUS EPISODE! There is no guest for this one and instead Meghan and Cortland spend the episode discussing navigating relationship through deconstruction. Many of us who have left the limiting scripts handed to us by our evangelical or religious upbringing are left to re-frame our understanding of relationships outside of our previously rigid and binary understanding. We discuss the Billy Graham Rule which is the practice popularized by the late evangelist which said that married men should never be alone with any woman that wasn't their wife. This "rule" becomes a jumping off point for us to talk about breaking away from heteronormativity and compulsive (and toxic) monogamy. No matter your sexual orientation, relationship structure, or gender identity almost all of us have found that the way we were told to form and practice meaningful relationships in evangelicalism was limited and often unhelpful. Come along as we wander through this conversation, learn from each other, and answer some listener questions! As always, we love hearing from our listeners. Please consider leaving a rate and review on Apple Podcasts and reach out to say hello on social media! Twitter: Thereafter, Cortland, Meghan Instagram: Thereafter, Cortland, Meghan

If you thought that the COVID-19 pandemic knocked put the threat of terrorism to rest? Think again. Sondre Lindahl sees the threat of terrorism happening anywhere that there is political instability. The form it takes? Who perpetuates it, and how they carry out actions can vary widely, but rest assured, the threat of terror activities remains high. So how should the world prepare and respond? Sondre Lindahl suggests that the Global War on Terror was the wrong approach, and instead of using resources and political imaginations that way, can there be better global cooperation to work further upstream to prevent extremism? Tune in to find out. Sondre Lindahl is Associate Professor in Political Science at Østfold University College, Norway. He holds a PhD from the National Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies, University of Otago, New Zealand. His main research interest is counterterrorism, and he is the author of a A Critical Theory of Counterterrorism: Ontology, Epistemology and Normativity. He is a regular commentator on issues of security and terrorism in Norway. Follow Dr. Bob on Twitter: @ProfessorHuish

Katrina Maggiulli, PhD candidate, Environmental Studies, and 2021–22 OHC Dissertation Fellow. My dissertation seeks to better understand how popular essentialist understandings of species are operationalized through U.S. conservation policy to create materially specific species realities. I mark key foundations of these essentialist views on species in the eugenics-supported purity rhetoric of early U.S. conservation and show how contemporary debates over biotechnology as a conservation tool and speculative imaginaries of future species enable a rethinking of these restrictive and normative views on species being.

Kim talks to Rebecca Falkoff about hoarding. Her book on hoarding, Possessed, will be coming out with Cornell University press in April of 2021. In the episode, she references Giorgio Agamben's Stanze: La parola e il fantasma nella cutltura occidentale, translated into English as Stanzas: Words and Phantasm in Western Culture. by Ronald L. Martinez (University of Minnesota Press, 1993). And Arjun Appadurai's essay, “Mediants, Materiality, Normativity.” Public Culture 27 no. 2 (2015) doi: 10.1215/08992363-2841832 Rebecca is an assistant professor of Italian studies at NYU. She also has a blog on hoarding that you might want to check out: https://ifiwereahoarder.com/ The image is the future cover of Possessed. Painting by Carey Lin, Untitled (Screen shot 2009-10-19 at 1.20.48), 2011, Oil on canvas, 15 x 22 in. from the series Hardly nothing to do without Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Kim talks to Rebecca Falkoff about hoarding. Her book on hoarding, Possessed, will be coming out with Cornell University press in April of 2021. In the episode, she references Giorgio Agamben's Stanze: La parola e il fantasma nella cutltura occidentale, translated into English as Stanzas: Words and Phantasm in Western Culture. by Ronald L. Martinez (University of Minnesota Press, 1993). And Arjun Appadurai's essay, “Mediants, Materiality, Normativity.” Public Culture 27 no. 2 (2015) doi: 10.1215/08992363-2841832 Rebecca is an assistant professor of Italian studies at NYU. She also has a blog on hoarding that you might want to check out: https://ifiwereahoarder.com/ The image is the future cover of Possessed. Painting by Carey Lin, Untitled (Screen shot 2009-10-19 at 1.20.48), 2011, Oil on canvas, 15 x 22 in. from the series Hardly nothing to do without Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Kim talks to Rebecca Falkoff about hoarding. Her book on hoarding, Possessed, will be coming out with Cornell University press in April of 2021. In the episode, she references Giorgio Agamben's Stanze: La parola e il fantasma nella cutltura occidentale, translated into English as Stanzas: Words and Phantasm in Western Culture. by Ronald L. Martinez (University of Minnesota Press, 1993). And Arjun Appadurai's essay, “Mediants, Materiality, Normativity.” Public Culture 27 no. 2 (2015) doi: 10.1215/08992363-2841832 Rebecca is an assistant professor of Italian studies at NYU. She also has a blog on hoarding that you might want to check out: https://ifiwereahoarder.com/ The image is the future cover of Possessed. Painting by Carey Lin, Untitled (Screen shot 2009-10-19 at 1.20.48), 2011, Oil on canvas, 15 x 22 in. from the series Hardly nothing to do without Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

Over the past two centuries, colleges have slowly replaced theology departments with religious studies departments. But what happens when theology becomes religious studies? It can produce a more neutral, observational approach that might not fully appreciate the normative claims of religious adherents and their values, commitments, and beliefs.A careful historical and objective study of religious history and the dimensions of religious practice are deeply valuable. But engaging religious texts and voices without a serious appreciation for the normative elements—that is, the things about a theological or religious idea that means your life would have to change—that would be a problem. It would evacuate the true substance and meaning of theological claims as they're experienced by religious adherents. But it would also fail to form students of religion and the humanities in a way that poses significant challenges to their own lived experience. For living a life worthy of their humanity.Today, we share a conversation between Tyler Roberts and Matt Croasmun from November 2016. Tragically, Roberts died at the age of 61 on June 3, 2021. He was Professor of Religious Studies at Grinnell College. In this conversation, Roberts reflects on the contribution of theology to the humanities, the role of religious studies in a critical examination of theology, and the importance of appreciating the kinds of theological and moral claims that can change your life. May his memory be a blessing. Show NotesObituary: Tyler Roberts (1960-2021) (Political Theology)Production NotesThis podcast featured Tyler Roberts and Matt CroasmunEdited and Produced by Evan RosaHosted by Evan RosaProduction Assistance by Nathan Jowers and Luke StringerA Production of the Yale Center for Faith & Culture at Yale Divinity School https://faith.yale.edu/aboutSupport For the Life of the World podcast by giving to the Yale Center for Faith & Culture: https://faith.yale.edu/give

In the first of a two-part feature celebrating LGBTQ+ History Month, our presenter Roxana speaks to Dr Noreen Masud, BBC New Generation Thinker and Lecturer at the University of Bristol, about her work on flatness, negative affect, and the aphorism, and how each might help us resist heteronormativity. She also speaks to Talen Wright, PhD student at UCL Division of Psychiatry, about her research into trans mental health, microaggressions and microaffirmation. Both guests also discuss UCL's recent decision to cut ties with Stonewall, and the ramifications of this decision on trans safety and academic freedom within the university and society more broadly. For more information on UCL's recent decision to cut ties with Stonewall: https://thetab.com/uk/london/2022/01/21/vindictive-and-insensitive-students-and-staff-slam-ucl-decision-to-cut-ties-with-stonewall-44148 https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/dec/21/ucl-becomes-first-university-to-formally-cut-ties-with-stonewall Petition calling for UCL to re-join the scheme: https://www.change.org/p/ucl-ucl-staff-students-alumni-ask-ucl-to-rejoin-stonewall-schemes For more information on Talen Wright's study, and to take part, see Twitter @TransMMH and: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/psychiatry/research/epidemiology-and-applied-clinical-research-department/trans-microaggressions-mental-health The views and opinions expressed in this podcast are those of the individuals and do not necessarily reflect the official policies, views or positions of any institutions with which they are affiliated. For more information and to access the transcript: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/moveable-type/moveable-type-podcast-lgbtq-history-month-part-1-episode-3 Date of episode recording: 2022-02-09 Duration: 01:00:23 Language of episode: English Presenter: Roxana Toloza Chacon Guests: Dr Noreen Masud; Talen Wright Producer: Anna De Vivo; Damian Walsh

WATCH: https://youtu.be/B44_ISJZMlY Menachem Fisch is Joseph and Ceil Mazer Professor Emeritus of History and Philosophy of Science, and Director of the Center for Religious and Interreligious Studies at Tel Aviv University, and Senior Fellow of the Goethe University Frankfurt's Forschungskolleg Humanwisseschaften, Bad Homburg. He has published widely on the history of 19th century British science and mathematics, on confirmation theory and rationality, on the theology of the talmudic literature, and the philosophy of talmudic legal reasoning. His recent work explores the limits of normative self-criticism, the Talmud's dispute of religiosity, the possibilities of articulating a pluralist political philosophy from within the assumptions of halakhic Judaism, the history and philosophy of scientific framework transitions, and the theo-political roots of Israel's reaction against political Zionism. EPISODE LINKS: - Menachem's Website: https://menachemfisch.academia.edu/ - Menachem's Books: https://www.amazon.com/Menachem-Fisch/e/B001H6QT1K%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share - Menachem's Publications: https://scholar.google.co.il/citations?user=1gSAA4YAAAAJ&hl=en CONNECT: - Website: https://tevinnaidu.com/podcast - Instagram: https://instagram.com/drtevinnaidu - Facebook: https://facebook.com/drtevinnaidu - Twitter: https://twitter.com/drtevinnaidu - LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/drtevinnaidu TIMESTAMPS: (0:00) - Introduction (0:20) - Does science need philosophy? (& vice versa) (6:51) - Philosophical challenges of mind/brain research (14:03) - Neuroscience vs normativity (23:57) - Is it possible to predict feelings or qualia? (28:44) - Our perception of human complexity (35:32) - Karl Popper (science vs pseudoscience) (42:40) - Human consciousness and the self (47:30) - Psychiatric nosology (56:40) - Transcending normativity (1:02:07) - Teleology & religion (1:12:49) - Menachem's author recommendations (1:17:20) - Conclusion Website · YouTube

WATCH: https://youtu.be/B44_ISJZMlY Menachem Fisch is Joseph and Ceil Mazer Professor Emeritus of History and Philosophy of Science, and Director of the Center for Religious and Interreligious Studies at Tel Aviv University, and Senior Fellow of the Goethe University Frankfurt's Forschungskolleg Humanwisseschaften, Bad Homburg. He has published widely on the history of 19th century British science and mathematics, on confirmation theory and rationality, on the theology of the talmudic literature, and the philosophy of talmudic legal reasoning. His recent work explores the limits of normative self-criticism, the Talmud's dispute of religiosity, the possibilities of articulating a pluralist political philosophy from within the assumptions of halakhic Judaism, the history and philosophy of scientific framework transitions, and the theo-political roots of Israel's reaction against political Zionism. EPISODE LINKS: - Menachem's Website: https://menachemfisch.academia.edu/ - Menachem's Books: https://www.amazon.com/Menachem-Fisch/e/B001H6QT1K%3Fref=dbs_a_mng_rwt_scns_share - Menachem's Publications: https://scholar.google.co.il/citations?user=1gSAA4YAAAAJ&hl=en CONNECT: - Website: https://tevinnaidu.com/podcast - Instagram: https://instagram.com/drtevinnaidu - Facebook: https://facebook.com/drtevinnaidu - Twitter: https://twitter.com/drtevinnaidu - LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/drtevinnaidu TIMESTAMPS: (0:00) - Introduction (0:20) - Does science need philosophy? (& vice versa) (6:51) - Philosophical challenges of mind/brain research (14:03) - Neuroscience vs normativity (23:57) - Is it possible to predict feelings or qualia? (28:44) - Our perception of human complexity (35:32) - Karl Popper (science vs pseudoscience) (42:40) - Human consciousness and the self (47:30) - Psychiatric nosology (56:40) - Transcending normativity (1:02:07) - Teleology & religion (1:12:49) - Menachem's author recommendations (1:17:20) - Conclusion Website · YouTube · YouTube

In this interview, I'm joined by Dr. Anne Jeffrey, a professor of philosophy at Baylor University. In 2019, her book, God & Morality was published with Cambridge University Press. There are three sections of the book. The first section surveys the philosophical literature on God's role in grounding moral normativity. The second section of the book surveys the philosophical literature on God's role in explaining moral knowledge. Our interview will be a summary of these two sections, and Dr. Jeffrey will explain how "thin theism" does not explain moral normativity and moral knowledge as well as "thick theism." Here's the link to the Dr. Jeffrey's book- https://www.amazon.com/God-Morality-Elements-Philosophy-Religion/dp/1108469442/ref=sr_1_3?dchild=1&keywords=god+and+morality&qid=1613158960&sr=8-3 Please consider supporting TAC on patreon. Go to http://www.patreon.com/theanalyticchristian.com For more resources on Christian philosophy and theology check out my website. http://www.theanalyticchristian.com

Intolerable: Writings from Michel Foucault and the Prisons Information Group (1970-1980) (University of Minnesota Press, 2021), edited by Kevin Thompson and Perry Zurn, is a groundbreaking collection of writings by Michel Foucault and the Prisons Information Group documenting their efforts to expose France's inhumane treatment of prisoners Founded by Michel Foucault and others in 1970-71, the Prisons Information Group (GIP) circulated information about the inhumane conditions within the French prison system. Intolerable makes available for the first time in English a fully annotated compilation of materials produced by the GIP during its brief but influential existence, including an exclusive new interview with GIP member Hélène Cixous and writings by Gilles Deleuze and Jean Genet. These archival documents--public announcements, manifestos, reports, pamphlets, interventions, press conference statements, interviews, and round table discussions--trace the GIP's establishment in post-1968 political turmoil, the new models of social activism it pioneered, the prison revolts it supported across France, and the retrospective assessments that followed its denouement. At the same time, Intolerable offers a rich, concrete exploration of Foucault's concept of resistance, providing a new understanding of the arc of his intellectual development and the genesis of his most influential book, Discipline and Punish. Presenting the account of France's most vibrant prison resistance movement in its own words and on its own terms, this significant and relevant collection also connects the approach and activities of the GIP to radical prison resistance movements today. Kevin Thompson is professor of philosophy at DePaul University. He is author of Hegel's Theory of Normativity. Perry Zurn is assistant professor of philosophy at American University. He is coeditor of Curiosity Studies: A New Ecology of Knowledge (Minnesota, 2020) and Active Intolerance: Michel Foucault, the Prisons Information Group, and the Future of Abolition. Kirk Meighoo is Public Relations Officer for the United National Congress, the Official Opposition in Trinidad and Tobago. His career has spanned media, academia, and politics for three decades. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, we welcome Moses Lee on to talk about the difficulties and tension of Asian-American ministry and churches currently in America and possibly a look into the future for Asian-American churches.

In this episode of the HigherEd Podcast, Kamaar and first-time podcast co-host Nicole Karpel sit down with esteemed guest Danielle Shelton as they navigate the complexities of developing a positive social identity in a learning environment. They discuss how to express high self-esteem without devaluing the dignity, posterity, and pride of others. Danielle also focuses on the importance of being comfortable with the fact that your opinions and lifestyle may differ from the "norm." Check out this week's episode, we think you'll love it!

An interview with Mark G.E. Kelly about his new book For Foucault: Against Normative Political Theory. The Public Sphere is a podcast from Contrivers Review.