It's time to address over-representation of the English in my podcast reviews. Today I pay homage to the Australians, who come in at 10% of our listener/reader base, second only behind the US. By comparison, the UK is at 6%. Based on this one slim fact, I am prepared to claim that Australia is the most Philosophical country on earth. Exhibit A:
|
Population |
Relative Pop % |
Our Listenership % |
Relative Listenership % |
|
|
US |
307,006,550 |
79% |
58% |
78% |
|
UK |
61,414,062 |
16% |
6% |
8% |
|
Australia |
21,431,800 |
5% |
10% |
14% |
|
Total |
389,852,412 |
100% |
74% |
100% |
So by this special calculus, the US is as philosophical as it should be, the UK half so, and Australia almost three times as much. One asks oneself why the thinkers from Down Under have taken to us in such a disproportionately large number and why they contribute so much to the world-historical development of philosophy relative to their population (and location on the other side of the world). You'll recognize a few names on this list.
I, of course, cannot answer that question and that, in any case, wasn't the intent of this post. Rather, I'd like to talk about a little show called "The Philosopher's Zone" (TPZ).
Australia has the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), which I guess is kind of similar to the BBC. From what I can tell in reading their history and public records, it is a fully government-funded, service-to-the-public type organization. ABC Radio National carries "The Philosopher's Zone", a 30 minute show hosted by a gentleman named Alan Saunders and broadcast weekly at 1:35pm on Saturday, rebroadcast on Monday at the same time. Not "prime time" but the US certainly can't claim a nationally broadcast show dedicated to the subject of philosophy.
I've been getting the episodes of TPZ via iTunes for some time now. [There are currently only 5 episodes available through iTunes, but the TPZ website has an archive.] Although the format is varied (more on this in a second), its length doesn't really allow for anything other than a very lightweight introduction to any particular subject. What is intriguing and commendable about the show, however, is its willingness to address a much broader array of topics and thinkers than I have found in the English based philosophy podcasts and, indeed, PEL to this point.
For example, the last two shows were takes on the current Australian elections, which ended similarly to those in England with the need for a coalition government. TPZ took the opportunity first to talk about philosophy 'on the campaign trail' and then to discuss the concept of choice. Interesting and inventive ways to show how Philosophy can be relevant to a broader audience. A quick survey of comments on the episodes showed that the campaign one had by far more responses and discussion than previous episodes.
Other topics that TPZ has addressed have been the concept of self, New Atheism, moral education in public schools, "theory" in the academy, intelligent design and paradoxes, along with some standards like Nietzsche, Confucius, Spinoza, Leibniz, Camus and Wittgenstein. [For links, check out this page] Where I think TPZ has pushed beyond the narrowness I typically find in the philosophy podcast world is in covering more modern and/or less well known figures and topics who/which are interesting in their own right philosophically but may be forgotten, despised, unknown or simply unreflected upon by most. They've done episodes on Derrida, Leo Strauss, Pierre Bourdieu, the connection between Romanticism and rock music, illness and the right to health, probability theory, Russian philosophy via literature, and astronomy.
From a format perspective, the show is usually structured as studio interview between Saunders and one individual, with the topic limited to one episode. There have been several occasions where topics span several episodes and/or the format was a panel or an edited series of contributions from a conference. One nice touch is that they provide transcripts of all of the episodes through their website and the audio quality is consistently excellent. [Which PEL loyalists will know is a big deal to me]
You can imagine that with such broad and interesting topics and a net time of about 24:30 per episode to discuss them, there really isn't an opportunity to do much more than provide high-level background and introduce major themes and you would be correct. Saunders has a voice and delivery made for radio and he does a good job (mostly) of asking informed questions and getting out of the way of his guests. I feel, though, that often his line of inquiry is prepared and he doesn't really react to what his guests are saying. It can seem like he has an agenda he wants to get through and questions can sometimes seem unrelated to the immediate point made by the guest or speaker. In other words, it feels less of a dialogue and more of a bureaucratic interview. I've said it before, skilled, insightful questioning is an art.
So to close, the Australians are to be commended for providing a nationally broadcast, government-funded radio program dedicated to Philosophy and a philosophical approach to contemporary topics. [Yes, I'm aware of In Our Time]. Even though it leaves me wanting more (see my review of another 30 minute philosophy podcast) the diversity of topics and weekly production make it worth a recommendation from me. I don't know how it is received 'in country' or the size of the listenership or fan response (it seems like 10 or so responses is pretty typical for an episode) but again, by virtue of the slim fact that Aussies have reached beyond their borders in disproportionate numbers to connect with PEL, I'm going to make a leap and give at least some of the credit to Mr. Saunders, Kyla Slaven and The Philosopher's Zone.
| Population | Relative Pop % | Our Listenership % | Relative Listenership % | |
| US | 307,006,550 | 79% | 58% | 78% |
| UK | 61,414,062 | 16% | 6% | 8% |
| Australia | 21,431,800 | 5% | 10% | 14% |
| Total | 389,852,412 | 100% | 74% | 100% |
I would like to think we Australians are a thoughtful bunch. I would like to believe that Whitlam era efforts to promote access to higher education for all Australians has had a salutory effect. I would like to pretend that the Australian environment somehow promotes deep thinking.
However, I would not be surprised to learn that it is simply the result is a distortion resulting from the Australian love affair with consumer electronics and the internet.
I do like Mr Saunders and have been listening to the Philosphers Zone for a few years now. Despite the efforts of conservative politicians, our national public broadcaster offers a variety of interesting and engaging programs via Radio National. Background Briefing and Rear Vision are two personal Favourites.
But thanks for noticing, Seth.
Hi Seth
Geoff is partially right re Australians being thoughtful, however his belief that Gough Whitlam had anything to do with it just demonstrates his lack of knowledge of the traditions of Australian philosophical thought since federation.
TPZ has it’s moments however it really is little more than a teaser to get people more interested in philosophy. Alan Saunders does a pretty good job, however I can’t say I like his plummy english accent.
You guys do a great job on PEL, the only thing that grates with me is the overt left wing political viewpoint that seems to raise its ugly most programs. I’m not sure where I am politically, some people would place me as a conservative however I see myself as a Libertarian. I began my adult life as a left leaning person however I find that most lefties are those who like to take their thinking so far and then not take it any further. There is a bit of that in conservatives as well just not as pronounced. I guess I’m the result of reading Orwell and Hayek a bit too much.
Thanks Again for PEL.
Steve
I’ll let you guys fight it out about Australia, but I want to address your point about “the overt left wing political viewpoint that seems to raise its ugly most programs.” I’m not sure that’s a fair statement because I haven’t been monitoring it, but we have made a conscious decision to do our best not to make this a political blog or podcast and focus on the philosophy. Obviously that is easier done when looking at metaphysics, ontology and ethics, as we have been, but will be harder once we start more into economics, political and social philosophy.
The way you say “overt left wing” and “ugly” is pejorative and suggests a hidden agenda that I think a) is unfair to the way we run the blog and handle the conversations and b) sets a tone for discourse that is absolutely not in keeping either with what we do or what people who comment on our site do.
PEL has no stated or hidden political agenda, although each of us has our own political views. It may very well be the case that all three of us are more to the left than the right (on the scale of American politics), but at worst this has been expressed by examples and jokes about Bush or the right wing of American politics.
Even if this is the case, the burden is on you to make it clear to us how this affects your appreciation of the podcast, outside of ‘grating’ on you. If it is simply the case that you feel we are not ideologically aligned with you and our comments and asides cause you grief, but you otherwise believe we are doing a faithful job with the readings and analysis, that’s on you. If you have some examples where a particular point of view by one of us has colored our interpretation of a text or spun an idea in a direction for which there is a counterpoint, by all means let’s discuss it.
–seth
I think you are spot on Seth. There is indeed a well stated case by Mark on this site that explains in detail why he (and originators of the site) do not discuss political issues. The essay is titled “on wisconsin”.
Indeed one of the motivations for myself to frequent this site is to get away from political discussion. For me political sites like ‘truthdig’ do nothing but vent the same bilious droppings in slightly varied ways giving the appearance of new information.
I just arrived in Ausralia and found this article very interesting, and great news!
Hi Seth,
I’m a relative latecomer to the PEL blog and have just come across this post, brilliant stuff!
My two cents worth as a Sydneysider…
• From its formative years, Australia has had a strong connection with state, community and the world – revelling for the most part, in its diverse and secular societies. A broad public sphere of radio, TV, print and internet supported by public broadcasting networks such as ABC and SBS (Special Broadcasting Service – Australia’s multicultural and multilingual broadcaster) has given a voice to a multiplicity of viewpoints, stories and truths in their programing and therefore the public consciousness
• An inherent scepticism and questioning of authority from childhood ‘but why Mum?’ – if education doesn’t knock it out of them.
• I have to agree with Geoff in his comments above – yes, we are technology freaks! Despite a small population, enough of us have taken to technology, and in a big way, to make Australia a lively and interconnected global nation despite geographic distances. We are attracted to anything and everything on the internet, philosophy and cat videos included
• A mix of solitude for quiet rumination and the social – we’re all philosophers around the BBQ and kitchen table, especially after a couple of drinks
Finally, I think a lot of credit is due to you guys at PEL – the tone and level of discussion in the podcast episodes has been consistently good – informative, interesting and humerous. Newcomers may out of curiosity download one or two episodes, but I sense that PEL has attracted many followers who keep coming back for more episodes time and time again, introducing listeners to a plethora of old and new philosophers, thinkers and writers. Love it!
Thanks Angela! I should mention in re-reading this post that it looks like some wording and formatting got jacked when we moved to the new theme – I don’t typically make the kind of grammatical and formatting errors I see above.
An update on the numbers above: as we’ve matured and grown, a new player is on the scene and Australia’s representation has come more in line with it’s population. (apologies for formatting)
Country
Downloads
Population
Relative Pop
Relative Listenership
United States
4,221,913
313,900,000
72%
80%
Canada
483,986
34,880,000
8%
9%
United Kingdom
381,519
63,230,000
15%
7%
Australia
199,018
22,680,000
5%
4%
Cheers,
–seth