Podcast appearances and mentions of Tamler Sommers

When Very Bad Wizards meets Very Culty Popperians. We finally decided to have a real life professional philosopher on the pod to call us out on our nonsense, and are honored to have on Tamler Sommers, from the esteemed Very Bad Wizards podcast, to argue with us about the Problem of Induction. Did Popper solve it, or does his proposed solution, like all the other attempts, "fail decisively"? (Warning: One of the two hosts maaay have revealed their Popperian dogmatism a bit throughout this episode. Whichever host that is - they shall remain unnamed - apologizes quietly and stubbornly under their breath.) Check out Tamler's website (https://www.tamlersommers.com/), his podcast (Very Bad Wizards (https://verybadwizards.com/)), or follow him on twitter (@tamler). We discuss What is the problem of induction? Whether regularities really exist in nature The difference between certainty and justification Popper's solution to the problem of induction If whiskey will taste like orange juice next week What makes a good theory? Why prediction is secondary to explanation for Popper If science and meditiation are in conflict The boundaries of science References Very Bad Wizards episode on induction (https://verybadwizards.com/episode/episode-294-the-scandal-of-philosophy-humes-problem-of-induction) The problem of induction, by Wesley Salmon (https://home.csulb.edu/~cwallis/100/articles/salmon.html) Hume on induction (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/induction-problem/#HumeProb) Errata Vaden mentions in the episode how "Einstein's theory is better because it can explain earth's gravitational constant". He got some of the details wrong here - it's actually the inverse square law, not the gravitational constant. Listen to Edward Witten explain it much better here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A_9RqsHYEAs). Socials Follow us on Twitter at @IncrementsPod, @BennyChugg, @VadenMasrani, @tamler Come join our discord server! DM us on twitter or send us an email to get a supersecret link Trust in our regularity and get exclusive bonus content by becoming a patreon subscriber here (https://www.patreon.com/Increments). Or give us one-time cash donations to help cover our lack of cash donations here (https://ko-fi.com/increments). Click dem like buttons on youtube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_4wZzQyoW4s4ZuE4FY9DQQ) If you are a Very Bad Wizards listener, hello! We're exactly like Tamler and David, except younger. Come join the Cult of Popper over at incrementspodcast@gmail.com Image credit: From this Aeon essay on Hume (https://aeon.co/essays/hume-is-the-amiable-modest-generous-philosopher-we-need-today). Illustration by Petra Eriksson at Handsome Frank. Special Guest: Tamler Sommers.

Yes, I do recommend the book. These excerpts are from a recent chat with Tamler Sommers and John Thorne that I also highly recommend: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gBboz52kIs John's new Mulholland Drive book can be ordered here: https://www.amazon.com/dp/0997108150 Also cool: Tamler's Mulholland Drive episode: https://verybadwizards.fireside.fm/121 #MullhollandDrive #DavidLynch

Tamler teaches philosophy at The University of Houston and hosts the Very Bad Wizards podcast. He joins Mark and Bill to talk about personal identity and whether the "self" is necessarily co-extensive with a particular body. Plus: meditation, Daniel Day Improv's method acting, All of Me vs. Regarding Henry, what does "metaphysics" mean to YOU, dreams as improv, unstuck-in-time Grandma the last slaveholder, and more. Mark philosophizes at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Bill improvises (and teaches) at chicagoimprovstudio.com. Hear more at philosophyimprov.com. Support the podcast to get all our post-game discussions, a video version of the podcast, and other bonus stuff.

Featuring John Thorne and Tamler Sommers. These guys are solid gold: synergistic in agreement and disagreement. After answering some excellent questions about his own "Ominous Whoosh" theories, John adds to Tamler's hypothesis in-progress. This was a thrilling discussion for me! Highlights (and don't miss the book preview at the end) include: 1:29 - Books that'd be cool to write 7:36 - The reality of Las Vegas in Twin Peaks: The Return 9:44 - The reality of Dougie (pre- and post-Cooper) 14:20 - Twin Peaks as a mediated narrative (Cooper's “dream”?) 18:33 - So what IS happening in Vegas? (and how) 24:50 - Psychology and POV (in Twin Peaks and Mulholland Dr.) 30:22 - Dream theories, when yes when no? 42:12 - What does 'dream logic' mean? 43:20 - The beauty of the "Laura is the one" phrase 49:44 - Cosmic chess match or personal story (it's a Frost-Lynch production!) 56:29 - Dale Cooper: crosser of thresholds 1:01:40 - David Lynch's clues for unlocking Mulholland Drive 1:07:31 - Previewing John's *new book on Mulholland Drive* 1:21:05 - Appreciating good feedback & conversation For more: https://twitter.com/tamler | https://www.tamlersommers.com https://twitter.com/thornewip | https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B0BBBB5VPH The "Artists Love Twin Peaks" podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/2aa3aHgtjDQZ1197N07N9y #TwinPeaks #MulhollandDrive #LauraPalmer #DavidLynch #MarkFrost

I'm still thinking about Tamler's ideas and questions! Tamler Sommers is an author/philosopher ("Why Honor Matters"), a podcaster ("Very Bad Wizards"), and best of all a Twin Peaks dad. Please enjoy: 1:01 - A decade-plus of podcasting 4:10 - Tamler's deep dives into Lynch's works 7:49 - Some current thoughts on The Return and "The One" 11:08 - Appreciating the r/FindLaura venture 14:57 - Sharing (and obsessing about) Twin Peaks with loved ones 20:06 - Nadine's journey and endpoint 27:12 - Who killed Laura Palmer? (mysteries, endings, & optimisms) 47:22 - Season 3 is great -- and a magical collaboration 52:19 - Was "Alice Tremond" a last-minute invention? If so, WOW 58:56 - Reality vs projections of reality (key Lynchian theme) 1:03:16 - Interpretation & puzzlement: Philosophy, David Lynch, & Plato 1:16:05 - Skepticism & intuition (friends or foes?) 1:24:18 - 'Continental philosophy' might be closest to Lynchian 1:27:04 - The playwriting to philosophy to "public intellectual" path 1:36:15 - The concept of Honor 1:46:57 - Spending time with this fictional show 1:54:34 - Appreciating the Diane podcast 1:59:12 - Some Dougie questions for John T 2:09:52 - Even more potential roles for Cooper 2:13:26 - Twin Peaks speed round 2:15:52 - Some recommendations Connections & References: https://twitter.com/tamler | https://www.tamlersommers.com/ https://twitter.com/verybadwizards | https://verybadwizards.com/episode/episode-121-the-beauty-of-illusion-david-lynchs-mulholland-drive https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwVK2ZiuISU - Why Honor Matters https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ti3iWJluM5g - CPF https://www.reddit.com/r/FindLaura/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obS0JpjFbRs - Ominous Whoosh https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3HwagpDezM - Laura's Ghost https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvgZuIlUjjQ - Lynch & Tarkovsky https://twitter.com/DianePodcast 25YL: https://25yearslatersite.com/category/twin-peaks/ The "Artists Love Twin Peaks" podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/2aa3aHgtjDQZ1197N07N9y Tamler, thanks again! --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/artists-love-twinpeaks/message

How the Overton window is shifting after October 7 ... Israel's 9/11, Israel's overreaction, and liberal Zionism ... The power of the Israel lobby ...

How the Overton window is shifting after October 7 ... Israel's 9/11, Israel's overreaction, and liberal Zionism ... The power of the Israel lobby ...

...

...

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit nonzero.substack.comRobert Wright and Tamler Sommers discuss what you can and can't say about UFOs.Robert Wright (Bloggingheads.tv, The Evolution of God, Nonzero, Why Buddhism Is True) and Tamler Sommers (Very Bad Wizards, University of Houston, Why Honor Matters). Recorded August 03, 2023.Nonzero Twitter: https://twitter.com/NonzeroPods Very Bad Wizards: https://verybadwizards.com/

David Pizarro is Professor of Psychology at Cornell University. While he teaches and publicly discusses a wide variety of material in the discipline, his primary research interest is in moral judgment. In this episode, Robinson and David discuss some of the conceptual underpinnings of moral psychology before turning to the research on praise, blame, social cognition, and the relationship between disgust and political affiliation. David is also the co-host of two podcasts, Very Bad Wizards with Tamler Sommers and Psych with Paul Bloom. David's Website: http://peezer.net David's Twitter: https://twitter.com/peez Very Bad Wizards: https://verybadwizards.fireside.fm Psych: https://psych.fireside.fm OUTLINE 00:00 In This Episode… 00:39 Introduction 02:52 David's Interest in Moral Psychology 06:42 Morality, Judgment, and Intuition in Psychology 30:40 Did Psychology Advance Too Fast 33:44 The Psychology of Praise and Blame 56:26 Why Do We Blame Objects and Robots? 01:10:09 Ostracism, Loneliness, and the Human Condition 01:14:27 The Psychology of Disgust 01:32:26 Disgust and Moral Judgement 01:40:10 Disgust Sensitivity and Political Affiliation Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

A new mini-series with Tamler Sommers and Robert Wright on the range of politically acceptable discourse for a given topic and how this “Overton window” changes over time. This episode is available for free for everyone, the remaining episodes will appear at the Very Bad Wizards Patreon and Robert Wright's Nonzero Newsletter on Substack.    

What is this new Overton Windows series about? ... Tamler's connections to Israel and Bob's experiences there ... What does Zionism mean in practice? ... The shifting Overton window around Israel/Palestine ... The heavy-handed response to the BDS movement ... What the Israel/Palestine discourse says about Overton windows ... So where should the boundaries be set? ...

What is this new Overton Windows series about? ... Tamler's connections to Israel and Bob's experiences there ... What does Zionism mean in practice? ... The shifting Overton window around Israel/Palestine ... The heavy-handed response to the BDS movement ... What the Israel/Palestine discourse says about Overton windows ... So where should the boundaries be set? ...

David and Tamler take the first excursion into the work of Haruki Murakami and talk about his short story “Sleep.” A thirty-year-old woman, the wife of a dentist and mother of a young boy, has a terrifying dream and when she wakes up, she no longer needs to sleep. This isn't insomnia, it's something else – she has never felt so alive, strong, and awake. She can swim laps for an hour in the afternoon and read Anna Karenina with perfect concentration until dawn. What is this condition? Is it real? What does it tell us about her past, her sense of self, her alienation from friends, family, and her role? This is a banger of a story folks, check it out. Plus - if you had to say one word or sentence to distinguish yourself from an AI, what would you say?

The great Paul Bloom returns to the show to explore the many mysteries of Todd Field's 2022 film “Tár.” Is it a ghost story? A movie about cancel culture and abuse of power? Guilt? Professional disappointment? The anxiety of getting old, losing touch with youth and reality? Reminds me of my freshman year at Smith… Plus – Paul gets into trouble on Twitter for saying he's mildly pro-trigger warnings in certain cases. But is he ignoring the science??? Special Guest: Paul Bloom.

David and Tamler talk about William James' chapter on mysticism from his book "Varieties of Religious Experience." What defines a mystical experience? Why do they defy expression and yet feel like a state of knowledge, a glimpse into the window of some undiscovered aspect of reality? Is Tamler right that David has a little mystic inside of him just waiting to burst forth from his breast? Plus – another edition of VBW does conceptual analysis and we're sticking with ‘c' words – this time the definitive theory of ‘creepy.'

David and Tamler deliver a PODCAST episode, one of many that comes from the INTERNET, that you'll probably listen to through Air Pods or some other kind of WIRELESS HEADPHONES as you go about your day. (Incidentally, the topic of the episode is Marshall McLuhan and his ideas about how new forms of media profoundly shape our experience and identity, but in a way that makes us focus on the content of the specific medium and not the medium itself.) Plus, can algorithms help to optimize our well-being, and Steven Pinker transforms his ideas into a new asset class of NFTs.

Here's an episode with something for both of us – a healthy serving of Kantian rationalism for David with a dollop of Marxist criminology for Tamler. We discuss and then argue about Jeffrie Murphy's 1971 paper “Marxism and Retribution.” For Murphy, utilitarianism is non-starter as a theory of punishment because it can't justify the right of the state to inflict suffering on criminals. Retributivism respects the autonomy of individuals so it can justify punishment in principle – but not in practice, at least not in a capitalist system. So it ends up offering a transcendental sanction of the status quo. We debate the merits of Murphy's attack on Rawls and social contract theory under capitalism, along with the Marxist analysis of the roots of criminal behavior. Plus – the headline says it all: Blame The Brain, Not Bolsonaro, For Brazil's Riots.

Honour calls a person to defend their teammates, support their family, and have self-respect. To heed the call of honour, say those who listen, leads us towards a good life. Yet, honour does not bear the marks of modern liberal morality. Honour does not focus on the universal but the particular, nor does it claim impartiality. Rather, honour is deeply personal and emotional. For some, the call of honour is like that of the sirens of Greek mythology: causing the illusion of what is good. In reality, pursuing that good causes us to crash on the rocks of family feuds, cycles of violence, and the subjection of women. But is this really the full story? Must a culture of honour result in revenge and injustice? And is modern liberal morality fit to play the role many thinkers wish it to? In this interview, we'll be speaking to Tamler Sommers, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Houston and host of the Very Bad Wizards podcast. Tamler is the author of several books, including, Relative Justice, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain, and – the focus of our interview – Why Honor Matters. It is time, according to Sommers, for those who are sceptical or separated from the importance of honour to reassess their relationship with it. To do so raises questions of criminal justice, morality, love, friendship, and personal integrity. In short, honour can be a great motivator across almost all areas of human life, says Sommers, and it is time we give it the respect it deserves. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tamler's website Tamler Sommers, Why Honour Matters Tamler Sommers, Relative Justice: Cultural Diversity, Free Will, and Moral Responsibility Tamler Sommers, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain Tamler Sommers, publications Very bad wizard, podcast Tamler Sommers, twitter

David and Tamler get lost in the world of Susanna Clarke's "Piranesi," a hauntingly beautiful and thrilling novel with echoes of Borges, Plato, C.S. Lewis, and even Parfit. The first part of our conversation is spoiler-free so you can listen to that section if you haven't read it yet. (But seriously read this book! We both read it in a few days.) Plus, watch out ladies - Sydney the Bing chatbot is coming to steal your man.

Honour calls a person to defend their teammates, support their family, and have self-respect. To heed the call of honour, say those who listen, leads us towards a good life. Yet, honour does not bear the marks of modern liberal morality. Honour does not focus on the universal but the particular, nor does it claim impartiality. Rather, honour is deeply personal and emotional. For some, the call of honour is like that of the sirens of Greek mythology: causing the illusion of what is good. In reality, pursuing that good causes us to crash on the rocks of family feuds, cycles of violence, and the subjection of women. But is this really the full story? Must a culture of honour result in revenge and injustice? And is modern liberal morality fit to play the role many thinkers wish it to? In this interview, we'll be speaking to Tamler Sommers, Associate Professor of Philosophy at the University of Houston and host of the Very Bad Wizards podcast. Tamler is the author of several books, including, Relative Justice, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain, and – the focus of our interview – Why Honor Matters. It is time, according to Sommers, for those who are sceptical or separated from the importance of honour to reassess their relationship with it. To do so raises questions of criminal justice, morality, love, friendship, and personal integrity. In short, honour can be a great motivator across almost all areas of human life, says Sommers, and it is time we give it the respect it deserves. Contents Part I. Everything is Clear Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion Links Tamler's website Tamler Sommers, Why Honour Matters Tamler Sommers, Relative Justice: Cultural Diversity, Free Will, and Moral Responsibility Tamler Sommers, A Very Bad Wizard: Morality Behind the Curtain Tamler Sommers, publications Very bad wizard, podcast Tamler Sommers, twitter

Tamler's earlier self committed to doing an episode on Parfit, and David holds his current self to that promise, which shows how unconvinced David was by Parfit's skepticism about personal identity. Or something like that. We argue about the value of Parfit's sci-fi thought experiments and the implications of believing there's no clear sense of “me.” Plus, we talk about a recent article on aphantasia – the inability to conjure images in your mind – and the question that pops into everyone's head when they hear about this condition.

It's the episode that Tamler has been waiting for – a long deep dive into Andrei Tarkovsky's mysterious masterpiece "Stalker." A writer and professor are led by their guide (Stalker) into a cordoned off “zone” that may have been visited by a meteorite (or aliens) a couple of decades earlier. Their destination – a room in the zone that according to legend grants people their deepest desire, the one that has made them suffer the most. We gush over Tarkovsky's filmmaking, his use of sound and music, and the richness of the questions this movie raises about meaning, art, delusion, desire, science, and faith. Plus, does having a small penis make you want to buy a sports car? Pre-crisis social psychology is back!

This episode centers around the specter of violence and surfaces some of Sam's most controversial positions and difficult conversations. We begin with author and former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss, who delivers some potentially life-saving aspects of “tactical empathy,” which can also be applied to less extreme circumstances. Author and security expert Gavin de Becker then lays out his thesis from The Gift of Fear, which recasts this unfairly maligned emotion as an important attention-demanding, evolved signal. We then spend time with Sam's position on “profiling” and the moral and political complexities woven into it. This careful consideration leads to a conversation with author and firearms instructor Scotty Reitz, as they paint a stark picture of certain extremes of violence and consider what responsible gun ownership might look like. Sam then answers questions directly on his often criticized and often misunderstood position on gun ownership before we turn to author and former Navy Seal Jocko Willink to apply pressure on the philosophical stance of pacifism. We conclude with the philosopher Tamler Sommers, who ponders the idea of “honor” in society and inspects how third-party delegation of violence might generate an illusive sense of justice.   About the Series Filmmaker Jay Shapiro has produced The Essential Sam Harris, a new series of audio documentaries exploring the major topics that Sam has focused on over the course of his career. Each episode weaves together original analysis, critical perspective, and novel thought experiments with some of the most compelling exchanges from the Making Sense archive. Whether you are new to a particular topic, or think you have your mind made up about it, we think you'll find this series fascinating.  

This episode centers around the specter of violence and surfaces some of Sam’s most controversial positions and difficult conversations. We begin with author and former FBI hostage negotiator Chris Voss, who delivers some potentially life-saving aspects of “tactical empathy,” which can also be applied to less extreme circumstances. Author and security expert Gavin de Becker then lays out his thesis from The Gift of Fear, which recasts this unfairly maligned emotion as an important attention-demanding, evolved signal. We then spend time with Sam’s position on “profiling” and the moral and political complexities woven into it. This careful consideration leads to a conversation with author and firearms instructor Scotty Reitz, as they paint a stark picture of certain extremes of violence and consider what responsible gun ownership might look like. Sam then answers questions directly on his often criticized and often misunderstood position on gun ownership before we turn to author and former Navy Seal Jocko Willink to apply pressure on the philosophical stance of pacifism. We conclude with the philosopher Tamler Sommers, who ponders the idea of “honor” in society and inspects how third-party delegation of violence might generate an illusive sense of justice. About the Series Filmmaker Jay Shapiro has produced The Essential Sam Harris, a new series of audio documentaries exploring the major topics that Sam has focused on over the course of his career. Each episode weaves together original analysis, critical perspective, and novel thought experiments with some of the most compelling exchanges from the Making Sense archive. Whether you are new to a particular topic, or think you have your mind made up about it, we think you’ll find this series fascinating.

David and Tamler dive into Seneca's “On the Happy Life” and stoicism, the topic selected by our beloved patreon supporters. Why is stoicism so popular today? What does Seneca actually think about Epicureanism? Can Seneca's philosophy be reconciled with his life as a wealthy Roman aristocrat? Are stoics too cold and detached or is that an unfair caricature? And why can't David and Tamler fully embrace this undeniably wise approach to life? Plus the return of… GUILTY CONFESSIONS and some favorite things from 2022.

This is a Very Special Boxing Day Episode of Where We Go Next, with longtime friend of the show Jay Shapiro. We discuss Jay's recent move to Mexico City, how we find and make meaning in community, the history of Boxing Day, what Jay's been up to with Sam Harris, and we analyze two films that are meaningful to us: SLC Punk! and Wendy and Lucy.How to watch Jay's Movie, SLC Punk! - JustWatchHow to watch Michael's movie, Wendy and Lucy - JustWatchwhatjaythinks.comDedicated: The Case for Commitment in an Age of Infinite BrowsingWhy Honor Matters, by Tamler Sommers#126 - In Defense of Honor - Making Sense with Sam Harris (featuring Tamler Sommers)Standings Bar, NYC - Instagram66: Embracing Commitment in an Age of Infinite Browsing, with Pete Davis - Where We Go NextThe Last Dance - Netflix"You're actually rooting for the clothes, when you get right down to it." - Jerry SeinfeldBoxing Day - WikipediaThe Human Capacity - An Essay from the Writer of The Essential Sam Harris, by Jay Shapiro  63: Choosing Between a Drowning Child and a New Pair of Shoes, with Jay Shapiro - Where We Go NextHype! (1996) - WikipediaNothing Gold Can Stay, by Robert FrostReality Bites - WikipediaKelly Reichardt - WikipediaLynn Shelton - WikipediaJohn Cassavetes - WikipediaJeremy Kagan - WikipediaHow to watch A Woman Under the Influence - JustWatch@GEN - Gen Kimura's YouTube ChannelHusbands - WikipediaYour Sister's Sister - WikipediaOld Joy - WikipediaObserver Effect - WikipediaCastaway - WikipediaS01E01: Fire at the Louvre - Susan Wolf - Dilemma PodcastSometimes a Great Notion (film) - Wikipedia----------Are you a fan of Where We Go Next? Your feedback is valuable. Listen to the very end of this episode for details.Email: wherewegopod@gmail.comInstagram: @wwgnpodcast

David and Tamler wind their way through another Borges story - "The Immortal"- about a Roman soldier who seeks the secret of immortality and, much to his horror, finds it. Plus some thoughts on the utterly shameless ChatGPT.

We often think of metaphors as poetic flourishes, a nice way to punctuate your ideas and make them more relatable. But what if metaphors aren't simply tools of language but part of thought itself? David and Tamler “dive into” George Lakoff's theory of metaphors and “explore” the implications of his view that metaphors shape and constrain the ways we conceptualize our experience of the world. Plus if we're really living in cancel culture, we might as well do some cancelling. Say goodbye to "Singing in the Rain," Latinx, and punny academic titles among other things. Oh and it's our 250th episode! It's been quite a journey. Have we come a long way or are we just spinning our wheels? And for a fun detour, check out our bonus podcast series “The Ambulators” on the great TV series Deadwood.

David and Tamler gild and stain David Hume's essay “The Sceptic” with their sentiments. If nothing is inherently valuable or despicable, desirable or hateful, then what do philosophers have to offer when it comes to happiness? If reason is powerless, does it all come down to our emotions and “humours”? Or does the study of philosophy and liberal arts naturally lead to a fulfilling and virtuous life? Plus we look at a new non-traditional social psych paper on how we always imagine that things could be better, and tip our caps to the queen of handling Twitter pile-ons (and former VBW guest) – Candy Mom.

In this podcast we examine a recent argument for the view that chess is not, in fact, a game. We discuss the Grasshopper's claim that all games must have a prelusory goal, as well as Skepticus' objection to the giant Grasshopper concerning chess. We then turn to a broader analysis of the Suitsian account of games. Does the existence of illusory checkmates offer Grasshopper an avenue for replying to Skepticus? Should we bite the bullet and agree that chess is not a game? What is a lusory attitude? Is Tamler losing his mind? Why is David so giddy? Plus – how should Arthur C. Clarke's novel "2001: A Space Odyssey" affect our understanding of Kubrick's movie? And a little more on Kanye.

We welcome Sam Harris back to the show for a deep dive into Stanley Kubrick's confounding 1968 masterpiece "2001: A Space Odyssey." How long is the Dawn of Man? What does the second monolith do exactly? Why are the humans so banal and expressionless? What are HAL'S motivations? Has he planned his mutiny from the start, or does the Council's deception make him manlfunction? Or something else? Who is the Council anyway? Was HAL meant to go through the stargate? What is the final leap forward in consciousness? The hotel room, the starchild, all the rectangles, rectangles everywhere, the music – what does it all mean???? Plus Sam has some thoughts about our Rorty episode and David tries to rile Tamler up about Kanye's antisemitism. note: there's a bit of an abrupt transition between our brief opening and Sam telling a story about Rorty in around the 9 minute mark... couldn't be helped. Special Guest: Sam Harris.

We dive into David Foster Wallace's sprawling 1993 essay “E Unibus Pluram: Television and U.S. Fiction.” How do TV and new forms of media keep their hold on us when we know at some level that they're reinforcing our loneliness and passivity? That's easy, Wallace says, post-modern cool. Flatter me, let me think we're all in the joke together, give me “an ironic permission-slip to do what I do best whenever I feel confused and guilty: assume, inside, a sort of fetal position, a pose of passive reception to comfort, escape, reassurance.” But in the years since this essay, the TV landscape has completely transformed. Has it transcended its function as a surrogate companion for lonely people, or has it just found new ways to keep us isolated and passive? Plus, we talk about the recent new SPSP guidelines and Jon Haidt's recent essay on why he's resigning from the organization. (Sorry, Jon!)

David and Tamler take their first real look at pragmatism via Richard Rorty's “Solidarity or Objectivity.” Can we discover facts about the world as it “really is,” independent of our own culturally influenced methods of inquiry? If not, does that make us relativists? Is David right about pragamatism being an ass-backward approach to scientific truth, or is he just a pragmatist who's not ready to admit that to himself? Plus, does "The Little Mermaid" have to be white? What about Clark Kent? And we select the topic finalists for our Patreon listener selected episode.

David and Tamler return to Borges land to get lost in the infinite, this time with his legendary and tragic character Funes the memorious. What would it be like to have perfect memory, to have full access to every perceived detail no matter how trivial? Would life be infinitely richer, with present experience and memory merging into a perfect Heraclitan flow? Or is William James correct to say that one condition of remembering is to forget, and that “if we remembered everything, we should on most occasions be as ill off as if we remembered nothing.”? Plus, we're sorry, but after 10 years (!) we thought we had the right to get a little self-indulgent and naval-gazey. We do a bit of reminiscing (“though we have no right to speak that sacred verb..”) in the first segment about how the podcast has changed since 2012, and the impact it has made on our lives. Thanks for the memories!

David and Tamler continue their discussion of Leo Tolstoy's “A Confession.” When we left him last time, the famous author had bottomed out just years after writing two of the greatest novels ever written. Our eventual death, Tolstoy thought, strips life of all meaning and purpose – all answers to the question “so what?”. How does he emerge from this state of suicidal depression? What role does faith or “irrational knowledge” play in his account? What's the meaning of the cryptic dream at the conclusion of the memoir? Plus, bombarded with this recommendation, we were going to talk about a certain article that came out in Qualitative Research about masturbating to Japanese shota comics – we even had a guest – but had to scrap it. Instead, we discuss a recent study on conspiracy theories that shows that liberals are just as likely to believe in them as conservatives. Mostly we just talk about the conspiracies.

We have a sneak peek for our listeners--the first episode our new Patreon bonus series on David Milch's brilliant (but short-lived) series "Deadwood." In this inaugural edition of "The Ambulators" (we promise the name makes sense), Tamler and David discuss the pilot episode "Deadwood."

David and Tamler find themselves unable to attach rational meaning to a single act in their entire lives. Let's say we publish more articles and books. What then? What about our kids? They're going off to college. Why? What for? We think about the future of the podcast. Let's say we get bought out by Spotify and become more famous than Joe Rogan, Dolly Parton, and even Yoel Inbar -- more famous than all the podcasters in the world. So what? And we can find absolutely no reply. Plus, we take a test to determine whether we can we tell an AI apart from an analytic philosopher. When should we start getting scared of what AIs are gonna do to us, or what we're doing to them? *Note: the main segment is on the first half of Tolstoy's great memoir "A Confession," but you don't need to be familiar with the text to appreciate the discussion for this one.

David and Tamler mask up and wander through the audio and visual orgy of Stanley Kubrick's final masterpiece Eyes Wide Shut. What is this movie really about? Dreams? Wealth and power? Marriage? Jealousy? Female sexuality? Masculinity issues? The Illuminati? Pedophilia? Sex cults? Prostitution, both literal and figurative? Missing out, always on the outside looking in? Why does Tom Cruise repeat everything? Why is Nicole Kidman such a lightweight? Why can't a successful Upper West Side couple get better weed? We explore all these themes and more in a film that raises so many more questions than it answers. Plus, a study on masturbation, gender, and sexual dissatisfaction – right in our wheelhouse, or is it?

David and Tamler descend into the dark pits of Hell to look Satan in the eyes and discover the nature of evil. OK…that's not fully accurate, we just read and talk about a couple of philosophy articles that analyze the concept. What are the features of evil people and acts? Does evil just mean ‘really really really really bad' or is it categorically different in some way? Can you be evil without ever actually causing harm? Is Tony Soprano evil? Plus we take a "moral alignment" quiz (inspired by role playing games like Dungeons and Dragons). We both want to end up as ‘chaotic good' but does it turn out that way? And what kind of character is a unicorn?

David and Tamler lose themselves in Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's (pr. ‘chick sent me high') classic paper on the concept of flow. We talk about the features of flow activities – loss of ego, the merging of your awareness with the activity, and autotelic (not what you think) enjoyment. What makes flow activities so rewarding? Do you need to develop skills over many years to experience them? Do easy and natural social interactions count as flow? Plus as men of pure virtue, we call an audible and choose not to make fun of a recent paper (with a student as lead author). Instead we pilot a not fully formed idea: “Substack Starters." Now that the economy is tanking, do we have any heterodox beliefs that might lead to profitable Substacks?

Ivan Ilyich is a man. All men are mortal. So Ivan Ilyich is mortal. Sure absolutely, that's true for Ivan Ilyich and for all men. But we're not Ivan Ilyich and we're not ‘all men'- so what does this have to do with us? Right? David and Tamler confront their mortality as they discuss Leo Tolstoy's brilliant and chilling short story “The Death of Ivan Ilyich.” Plus the ‘Why I am leaving academia' essay has become its own genre. But is this profession really that much worse relative to others?

David and Tamler explore the many variations of simulation theory, the view that our universe is just a computer generated model created by an advanced civilization that has reached “technological maturity.” What does the growing popularity of simulation theories reveal about contemporary life? Are any of the arguments for simulation theory compelling or are they just post-hoc ways of justifying what you already believe on faith? If we are living in a simulation, does that mean we can go around killing people? Would it change anything about how we should live? Rodney Ascher's (Room 237, The Nightmare) excellent documentary "A Glitch in the Matrix" gets the discussion going. Plus the return of the VBW does conceptual analysis segment - a careful, rigorous, systematic inquiry into the concept “cringe.”* *Note: if you think the opening segment is itself cringe, that's because we're doing seventh dimensional Zoomer meta shit and you just didn't get it.

We welcome Paul Bloom to talk about the first season of "Severance," the new mind-bending and mind-splitting TV series on Apple TV+. What happens when you separate your home life from your work life? Do you create a completely different person? Is it a form of self-slavery? How important is autobiographical memory to your identity? And what's the deal with the break room… and the goats? Plus, what happens when you combine the obsessions of evolutionary psychology with the methodological problems of social psychology? You (finally) get an explanation for the female orgasm. Special Guest: Paul Bloom.

In the most ambitious crossover since the Fraggles met the Muppets, this week we have a special joint episode with moral psychologist https://twitter.com/peez?lang=en (David Pizzaro) and famed philosopher and ghost detective, Tamler Sommers. Also known as the hosts of a small academic podcast Very Bad Wizards. Stealing the format of their show we have a culture war heavy intro section featuring discussion of Joe Rogan censorship, covid debates, Japanese maid cafes, and the great ghost debate of 2022. Following that we move on to an in-depth round-table discussion of the 2012 Paul Thomas Anderson movie 'The Master'. The movie explores the relationship between a wastrel and a cult leader and features performances by Joacquin Phoenix, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Amy Adams. There is no denying it's an acting masterclass (and thematically relevant for the show!) but is it any good? Join us and help us as we attempt to decode with the wizards. Links https://www.verybadwizards.com/ (Very Bad Wizards podcast) https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ev-237-defining-religion-with-chris-kavanagh/id1213974770?i=1000558258706 (Embrace the Void 237: Defining "religion" with Chris Kavanagh) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g_aGJMLSGKE ('Here We Are Podcast' Ep. 381 Internet Gurus w/ Dr. Chris Kavanagh) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlXxxdwQ2ME (The Stoa: Truth, Trust, and Culture War w/ Zubin Damania, Christopher Kavanagh, Ben Burgis, and David Fuller)

Panpsychism didn't give us river spirits or mischievous sootballs, so this time we go straight to the source - a defense of animism, and in a top 10 analytic philosophy journal. Could a failed argument for the existence of God establish the existence of trees and mountains with “interiority” and “social characteristics”? Tamler wants to believe, but is the argument that'll push him over the edge?  Plus – speaking of top journals, a doozy of social psych article: Is forgiveness better than revenge at rehumanizing the self? Let's check the voodoo dolls to find out. Tamler is delighted by David's reaction to this one. 

David and Tamler conclude their discussion of "The Trial," Franz Kafka's darkly comic vision of an opaque and impenetrable bureaucracy that comes for us all in the end. Plus we interrupt our previously scheduled opening segment because apparently something happened at the Oscars last week.

David and Tamler wander through the bewildering dream-like world of Franz Kafka's "The Trial." In part one of a two-part discussion we discuss the circumstances of its publication, the various interpretative approaches that can be taken to the novel, and all the ways that Kafka's prose gets under your skin, making you feel what's happening even if you don't fully understand it. Recorded in the decidedly un-Kafka-esque location of Nosara, Costa Rica – thanks to the Harmony Hotel for having us back! Plus – Social Psychologists for Peace send an open letter to Vladimir Putin urging him to reverse course on the tragic invasion of Ukraine. Putin seems intent on toppling the Ukranian government but has he considered Sherif et al (1961), Tajfel (1977), Festinger (1954), and Brewer (1991)?

It's the topic voted on by our beloved Patreon patrons, panpsychism! David and Tamler delve into the resurgent debate over whether consciousness is the fundamental stuff that makes up the universe. We hoped we might be entering Miyazaki land - river spirits, benevolent radishes, a universal mind. But is this just the same old philosophy of mind debate with different words? Are there any stakes to this debate or is it purely terminological? Plus – we answer some last-minute questions from listeners on dissertations, Ukraine, pseudoscience, and the music from "The Shield."