What are we trying to do here? Why should you bother to listen to us?
You can also see them organized by topic. For episodes marked "Preview," you can access the full episode at our store, or you could become a PEL Citizen and get them from our Free Stuff for Citizens page.
Discussing Plato’s “Apology.” Does studying philosophy make you a better person? No.
More discussion of Plato’s “Apology.”
On Descartes’s Meditations 1 and 2.
Discussing Hobbes’s Leviathan, Chapters 13-15.
Discussing Camus’s “An Absurd Reasoning” and “The Myth of Sisyphus” (1942).
Discussing Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Books I and II.
Discussing Liebniz’s Monadology.
Discussing the beginning (through around 3.1) of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.
Continuing last ep’s discussion of Wittgenstein’s Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus with some Rudolph Carnap from his 1935 book Philosophy and Logical Syntax.
Discussing Jeremy Bentham’s An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation chapters 1-5, John Stuart Mill’s Utilitarianism, and Peter Singer’s “Famine, Affluence, and Morality.”
Discussing Fundamental Principles (aka Groundwork) of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785).
Discussing The Genealogy of Morals (mostly the first two essays) and Beyond Good and Evil Ch. 1 (The Prejudices of Philosophers), 5 (Natural History of Morals), and 9 (What is Noble?).
On the “Chuang Tzu,” Chapters 2, 3, 6, 18, and 19. With guest Erik Douglas.
On Werner Heisenberg’s Physics and Philosophy. Dylan Casey’s first appearance (as a guest).
Discussing Niccolò Machiavelli’s The Prince and Ch. 1-20 of The Discourse on the First Ten Books of Titus Livy
Discussing G.W.F Hegel’s Introduction to the Philosophy of History.
Discussing three essays by Arthur Danto from The Philosophical Disenfranchisement of Art (1986): the title essay, “The Appreciation and Interpretation of Works of Art,” and “The End of Art.” I understand you may not have heard of Danto, and you may think modern art is goofy, but you’ll definitely enjoy this discussion and the reading anyway. Note that Danto listened to this episode and liked it.
On David Hume’s An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding (1748). Hume thinks that all we can know are our own impressions, but that no experience shows us one event causing another event. So, causality must just be regular patterns of conjoined events.
Discussing Plato’s Theatetus and Meno. In the Theaetetus, Plato considers and rejects a series of mostly very lame conceptions of knowledge and replaces them at the end with… NOTHING. In the Meno, knowledge is “remembrance” (maybe).”