Podcasts about rationalia

Is there anything in the universe that is not moving? Neil deGrasse Tyson and comedian Chuck Nice answer fan questions about stillness, humans on Mars, and what songs they would add to the Voyager Golden Record. NOTE: StarTalk+ Patrons can listen to this entire episode commercial-free here:https://startalkmedia.com/show/cosmic-queries-space-travelers-delight/Thanks to our Patrons Scott Nelson, Bjørn Furuknap, Paul Robinson, Jonasz Napiecek, Micheal Briggs, Blake Wolfe, Brett Maragno, Adam Stephensen, Cicero Artefon, and Paul Lesperance for supporting us this week.

Today's jet-lagged Ruminant finds Jonah haunted by uncomfortable memories of John Dean as he tries to make sense of what the Supreme Court's Bruen decision means for gun laws in America. Afterward, he offers philosophical musings on an array of topics, including consequentialist ethics, stoplights, and religious edicts. It all ends with a brief reflection on why Jonah is a conservative in the first place. Also, please note that this episode was recorded before the Supreme Court released its decision on Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization. Jonah will have plenty to say on the subject very soon.Show Notes:- The Wednesday G-File- John Dean's Worse than Watergate- The Bruen decision- The Fairbanks Midnight Sun Run- Consequentialism- Trump: “I whine until I win”- Rationalia?- Why stoplights use red- The Remnant (guest hosted by Chris Stirewalt) with Josh Kraushaar- The Remnant with Christine Rosen

This weekend’s edition of the Ruminant is a little bit like Christopher Hitchens’ D.C. apartment: a little bit of one thing right next to a little bit of the complete opposite thing. There’s a lot of ground covered in this, a practically record-breaking long episode of the podcast in which Jonah discusses his dad’s work for the wonderfully-acronymed NANA (North American Newspaper Alliance), dynamic scoring (a system in which this episode gets an A+), the necessity of telling the truth at a time in which even committed conservatives have a legitimate temptation to abandon their principles, the request from a listener for Goldberg Story Time, and much, much more.   Show Notes: -      Tim Russert interviews Bob Kerrey -      John Edwards’ bizarre stem cell comments -      CDC director “speaking in her personal capacity” -      TX Gov. Abbott lifts mask mandate -      Thomas Kuhn: The Structure of Scientific Revolutions -      “Rationalia” -      Jay Nordlinger’s Q&A -      Memogate/Rathergate -      “Slackjawed troglodytes” -      Voir dire, or, as Advisory Opinions likes to say, “Vwahr Dahr” -      “I don’t like the… stumps” -      Mit-Voche Epistle -      The Remnant with Steve Hayward and Charles Murray -      Kathryn Jean Lopez’ page at National Review -      Matt Lewis speaks to Bill Kristol See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It’s the Thanksgiving episode! David and Tamler give thanks to their listeners and Patreon supporters with an episode chosen by our top Patreon subscribers (it was the most enjoyable election we've had all month). It was close, we had a bunch of great suggestions (that we'll refer to for upcoming episodes), but the winner was this topic from Bryan Farrow: "In the vein of the Republic and Rationalia, I want to hear Peez and Tamler draft a constitution for "Oz", a sovereign state that maximizes whatever they cherish most. (Honor and porn, presumably.)" Bryan’s wish is our command. Welcome to “Honoraria” and “Puerto Rico”, currently at war over the five paragraph essay. Plus, Dave relates how it feels to get the bulk of the critical feedback for once. And we talk about a few other things we’re grateful for – including students who don’t try to bullshit us, “honeybuns”, academic PEDs -- and Tamler says a few words about his Mom.

In the same spirit as Neil DeGrasse Tyson's idea for "Rationalia", a fictional country that was ruled only by "reason", Steve decides he wants to start his own country.

David and Tamler break down the biggest question in moral philosophy -- can we derive value judgments from a set of purely factual claims? Like the Scottish Philosopher David Hume they're surprised when the usual copulation of propositions 'is' and 'is not' suddenly turn into conclusions in the form of 'ought' and 'ought not.' And what's the deal with all these copulating propositions anyway? Aren't they a little young for that?  Do propositions practice safe copulation?  Is proposition porn about to be the new fad? They also talk about Moore's Open Question Argument, which introduced the term "naturalist fallacy," and respond to angry criticism over last episode's Rationalia segment.     LinksListener C. Derek Varn's blog post: "The Dogmatic Slumber of Neil deGrasse Tyson" [symptomaticcommentary.wordpress.com]Hume's Moral Philosophy [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]Is-ought problem [wikipedia.org]GE Moore's Moral Philosophy [Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]Open-question argument [wikipedia.org]The Naturalistic Fallacy [wikipedia.org]

Do you have strong views on climate change, taxes, health care, or gun control? Do you think the evidence and reason support your side of the debate? How do you know you’re right? David and Tamler discuss a recent paper by Dan Kahan and colleagues showing how prone people are to make errors in processing information to favor positions they are predisposed to believe. And even more shocking: the higher your numeracy skills, the more prone you are to fall prey to this bias. So how do we correct for this? Can we know anything at all with any confidence? Could it be that 'Are You There God? It’s Me Margaret' in not in fact a completely accurate depiction of how young girls think about puberty? Plus, we decide whether to join Neil deGrasse Tyson as a citizen of Rationalia. To paraphrase Mr. T, I pity the newscasters!LinksReflections on Rationalia by Neal deGrasse Tyson [facebook.com]Vulcan learning pods from Star Trek (2009). [youtube.org]Kahan, D. M., Peters, E., Dawson, E. C., & Slovic, P. (2013). Motivated numeracy and enlightened self-government. Yale Law School, Public Law Working Paper, (307). [uoregon.edu]Ditto, P. H., & Lopez, D. F. (1992). Motivated skepticism: Use of differential decision criteria for preferred and nonpreferred conclusions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 568. [phi.org]

Join Mister Sinister, Thomas, Billy and Gator Ricky Ross as they discuss Neil DeGrasse Tyson's new form of government/virtual country Rationalia. The crew will discuss what that means and what it could potentially become in this increasingly irrational and polarizing world. The nation will also be discussing the recent fatal crash involving the self-driving cars that were introduced by auto maker Tesla, and what that could mean for the future of this ground-breaking feature for vehicles. The show will also include 4th of July plans and traditions,News with Billy, Uncultured with Gator Ricky Ross and Missed Connections. As always, calls will be taken throughout the show at 646-668-8869

Global warming, vaccines, evolution…it's pretty clear that scientific ideas aren't doing a very good job winning out. Neil DeGrasse Tyson has proposed building a country called Rationalia that would be entirely ruled by the evidence. But do scientists like Neil DeGrasse Tyson even know the evidence? Sadly, after over 200 episodes, it seems like they don't. The majority of them have become such narrow specialists that they don't even bother to read what other scientists have been up to and so many people with PhDs have heads filled with magical thinking. In this episode, we go through some of the different kinds of magical thinking that many scientists believe in from beliefs about their own brains, other people's brains and how ideas move. Hunter used to be the same way. Basically, he was like that dickhead in the Harvard bar in Good Will Hunting who thought that because he knew a bunch of facts that he had a realistic view of the world and the right to intellectually bully others to make himself feel big. Then, he hung out with a bunch of actors who talked endlessly about their feelings and he got so annoyed that he went off to see what science had to say about emotions. What he found left him profoundly humbled. The more he's read the more he's gotten a real education and come to realize that when Will talked to that Harvard dickhead he was talking to most people with fancy degrees: "See, the sad thing about a guy like you is, in 50 years you're gonna start doin' some thinkin' on your own and you're going to come up with the fact that there are two certainties in life: one, don't do that, and two, you dropped 150 grand on a fuckin' education you could have got for a dollar fifty in late charges at the public library!" The world believes in the magic of degrees. That's what you're paying for. But if you want a real education that allows you to achieve things in the real world you can study for free in the Mental Dojo of Master Kim (aka Bryan Callen). You can be Will and learn how to make Harvard dickheads submit and beg for mental mercy. While science's principles are perfect so is the Christian principle of loving thy neighbor as itself. Just because science has perfect principles that doesn't mean that the most powerful members of the institution built on those principles actually live them. When Jonathan Swift satirized science hundreds of years ago, he gave us a good idea of what Neal DeGrasse Tyson's country would look like. It would be a floating island filled with eggheads who were so interested in theories that they never bothered to question how they might be out of touch with reality. Featured Links The Reluctant Mr. Darwin The Double Helix The Autobiography of Ben Franklin Gulliver's Travels