The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify patreon

Paywalled and Ad-Free Episodes

Citizen Feed Episodes: Paywalled and Ad-Free

Available only to PEL Citizens: All of our paywalled and ad-free regular episodes in a single feed. That includes paywalled full episodes from the back catalogue, Nightcap and (Starting in September 2020) Part 2 of all episodes.  You can add this feed to the podcast app of your choice by following the instructions here. You can download them, listen to them here, or get them on the podcast app of your choice by following the instructions here. Not a Citizen? Join here.

Ep. 267: Avicenna on God and Soul w/ Peter Adamson (Part Two for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

Continuing on Avicenna’s argument for the existence of God and on the “flying man” argument for the soul’s immateriality.

We fill out Avicenna’s metaphysical picture: his concept of necessity, how knowledge means knowing necessary attributions (why self-knowledge can grasp the soul’s character), “mental existence,” infinity, and how God’s character established his uniqueness, simplicity, generosity, and other characteristics.

Ep. 267: Avicenna on God and Soul w/ Peter Adamson (Part One for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

On selections and commentary about Avicenna’s argument from around 1020 C.E. for the existence of God as a necessary being, plus arguments to prove that God has the person-like properties that Islam imputes to him, and his “flying man” argument for the soul’s essential independence from matter. Featuring Mark, Dylan, and our guest Peter Adamson from the History of Philosophy podcast.

PEL Nightcap Early April 2021

by 15 Comments

Recorded 3/16, with a little genetic testing talk, then teaching/audience interaction things we have considered doing. We look forward to Avicenna and an Indian philosophy episode, consider Emily Dickenson, and talk more about our parameters re. what to cover in light of the fun we had with Lear, which was both a secondary source (bad) and basically a third Plato episode in a row (also bad).

Ep. 266: Jonathan Lear’s Plato: Psyche and Society (Part One for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

On essays from Lear’s Open Minded: Working Out the Logic of the Soul (1988): “Inside and Outside the Republic,” “Eros and Unknowing: The Psychoanalytic Significance of Plato’s Symposium,” and “An Interpretation of Transference,” which compares Socrates’ questioning with psychotherapy.

Is Plato’s analogy between mind and state in The Republic a good one? What can we learn from it about what makes for a stable, healthy character? How does eros (desire) fit into this picture? Lear gives a creative, helpful reading of Plato informed by psychoanalysis.

PEL Nightcap Late March 2021

by 4 Comments

Recorded on March 2 after the Phaedo and before recording on Jonathan Lear’s Open Minded. We talk death, arrogance, and answer letters: one from Cambodia and one asking “IS PEL OVER?” It is not.

Ep. 265: Plato’s “Phaedo”: Philosophy as Training for Death (Part One for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

On Plato’s middle dialogue depicting the death of Socrates (390 BCE) depicting the death of Socrates. Should philosophers fear death?

In the course of giving arguments for the immortality of the soul, we get an elaboration of the recollection theory of knowledge (from the Meno) into Plato’s first full account of Forms. But how literally are we supposed to take the words of Socrates as he comforts himself facing mortality?

Ep. 264: Plato’s “Timaeus” on Cosmology (Part Two for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

Continuing on the Timaeus, we consider some quotes and details starting at the beginning of the dialogue where Plato argues for differences between the perceived, created, impermanent world and its perfect model. We cover time (established by the movement of the planets), space (a characterless but substantial “receptacle” to which Forms are applied to create matter), alternatives to Plato’s model of creation, and the ethical implications of the cosmology Timaeus describes.

Ep. 264: Plato’s “Timaeus” on Cosmology (Part One for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

On the later Platonic dialogue from around 360 BCE.

How is nature put together? Plato speaks through the fictional Timaeus (not Socrates) to give a “likely story” about the universe, physics, and biology involving a Craftsman (Demi-Urge) who created everything based on a pre-existing perfect model (the Forms!). Timaeus derives his whole story from the principle that the world is good, and so the Craftsman must necessarily optimize creation, with any imperfections being introduced only by the necessity involved when a perfect blueprint gets embodied to create ever-shifting, impermanent matter.

PEL Nightcap Late February 2021

by 6 Comments

We do some post-gaming on ep. 263: How did you like us covering a secondary source and having two guests sitting in for two hosts? We think about an Badiou episode; should we invite a guest for that? Should we ever cover secondary literature again? Finally, we anticipate Plato’s Timaeus.

PEL Nightcap Early February 2021

by 3 Comments

The Partially Examined Life (Citizens): (Protected Content)Recorded on Jan. 28, we first consider the question “what are the dumbest ideas in philosophy?” The particular Philosophers’ Zone episode that our questioner pointed us to was this one on “The Worst Argument in the World.” We consider again the Angela Davis episode idea as a way of getting into a discussion of Continue Reading …

Ep. 262: Nietzsche on Self-Denial (Part Two for Supporters)

by 1 Comment

Continuing on Friedrich Nietzsche’s The Genealogy of Morals (1887), “Third essay: what do ascetic ideals mean?”

We try to fit asceticism into Nietzsche’s overall ethical picture, examine his critique of the scientific attitude, explore the (partially positive) function of the priest, try briefly to apply N’s social critique to modern politics, and wrap up by discussing his perspectivism.

Ep. 262: Nietzsche on Self-Denial (Part One for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

On Friedrich Nietzsche’s The Genealogy of Morals (1887), “Third essay: what do ascetic ideals mean?”

Self-regulation, where we tamp down certain aspects of our personality, is necessary for disciplined action, but it can clearly go too far. Nietzsche uses this concept of asceticism to analyze both geniuses and the masses. It is a chief tool of the will to power, highly dangerous to human flourishing but also unleashing many new capabilities beyond our animal nature. Does this picture of motivation and greatness make sense?

PEL Nightcap Late January 2021

by 1 Comment

Recorded on Jan. 14, we give some off-the-cuff updates to our take on the pandemic and our coping strategies. Plus, updates on PEL book, transcripts, and a potential black history month episode (Angela Davis?).

Ep. 261: Derek Parfit on Personal Identity (Part Two for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

Continuing on Reasons and Persons, ch. 10-13. Start with part one.

We get into more of Parfit’s examples, including his responses to Bernard Williams’ physicalist argument. Plus, split brains, In short, the concept of personal identity breaks down when applied to tricky cases, and and so we should be reductionists about personal identity: We get rid of that concept and just talk about the facts about physical and psychological continuity instead.

Ep. 261: Derek Parfit on Personal Identity (Part One for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

On Reasons and Persons (1984), ch. 10-13. What makes a person persist over time?

After using various sci-fi examples to test the Lockean (personhood=psychological continuity), physicalist (same brain=same person), and Cartesian (same soul=same person) theories, Parfit concludes that the whole notion is incoherent and isn’t actually what we care about when wondering “will I die?”

Ep. 260: Locke on Moral Psychology (Supporters Only)

by Leave a Comment

One last take on John Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689), covering Book II, ch. 21 and 28.

What makes a moral claim true? Do we have free will? What makes us choose the good, or not? In this coda to our long treatment of Locke’s opus, we bring together all he has to say about morality, which is strangely modern yet also just strange.

PEL Nightcap Early January 2021

by 4 Comments

An extra-long Nightcap looking forward to PEL coverage in 2021, with some political dialogue on the state of the country and what we might want to do about it. Plus, we respond to listener emails: Will doing philosophy put a crimp in your science career (or other prep for your legit day job)?

Ep. 259: Locke Clarifies Misleading Complex Ideas (Citizen Edition)

by 1 Comment

On Book II (ch. 22-33) of John Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689).

Simple ideas get complex quickly when you put them into words, and can give rise to various philosophical problems that are either easily cleared up when you figure out how the complex idea is built out of simple ideas, or if they can’t be so broken down, then we really don’t know what we’re talking about and should just shut up. We take on relations, cause and effect, personal identity, and more.

Ep. 258: Locke on Acquiring Simple Ideas (Citizen Edition)

by 1 Comment

On the first half of Book II of John Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689).

How do we get our ideas? Simple ideas must come in through perception, but this doesn’t just mean the senses; also reflection on our own minds, and this added layer of complexity allows us to bring in memory, concepts, time, and more.

Ep. 257: Locke Against Innate Ideas (Citizen Edition)

by 2 Comments

On Book I of John Locke’s Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689).

How do we know things? Locke thought all knowledge comes from experience, and this might seem uncontroversial, but what are the alternatives? We consider the idea that there are some ideas we’re just born with and don’t need to learn. But what’s an “idea,” and how is it different from a principle? Clearly we have instincts (“knowhow”) but is that knowledge? We consider occurrent vs. dispositional nativism, the role of reason, and what Locke’s overall project is after.

Ep. 256: Kropotkin’s Anarchist Communism (Part Two for Supporters)

by 6 Comments

Continuing on Peter Kropotkin’s The Conquest of Bread (1892).

If Kropotkin is right that mutual aid is a natural tendency and so communism is very much feasible, why hasn’t it happened already? We consider K’s version of the “you didn’t build that” argument, plus guaranteed minimum income, identity and criminal justice in a stateless world, religion, and more.

Ep. 256: Kropotkin’s Anarchist Communism (Part One for Supporters)

by 2 Comments

On Peter Kropotkin’s The Conquest of Bread (1892). If we want an egalitarian society, do we need the state to accomplish this? Kropotkin says no, that in fact the state inevitably serves the interests of the few, and that if we got rid of it, our natural tendencies to cooperate would allow us through voluntary organizations to keep everyone not only fed and clothed, but able to vigorously pursue callings like science and art.

Is this naïve? Can we concretely even “imagine no possessions” and “there’s no countries”? Kropotkin has actuarial tables to show you that sure, we can feed everyone, and he presents examples of group action that he think show that we’re perfectly capable of mass organization without the state.

PEL Nightcap Late October 2020 (Citizens Only)

by 3 Comments

We talk about why we left academia and what our current stances are toward it now. Dylan relates his true life Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance adventure. We talk a bit about PEL decision-making, pandemic coping, and back in the day in grad school at U. Texas.

Ep. 254: Michael Sandel Interview: Against Meritocracy (Part One for Supporters)

by 1 Comment

On The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good? (2020).

Do people get the wealth and status they deserve? And if they did, would that be good? Michael critiques the meritocracy: It’s not actually fair, leaves most people feeling humiliated, and makes those on the top arrogant and disconnected. The commitment to meritocracy is shared by both political parties and helps explain our current dysfunction.

PEL Nightcap Early October 2020 (Citizens Only)

by 8 Comments

We talk about the decision to pull part 2’s behind the paywall, whether we’re “woke” in treating policing, Butler, etc. Wes confesses to anti-wokeness, Mark hypothesizes re. whether we can classify a practice as racist if it’s part of a racist tradition. Seth investigates Femsplainers and Jordan Peterson.

PEL Nightcap Late September 2020 (Citizens Only)

by 4 Comments

We answer listener emails and/or reflect on what secondary sources we use, anarchism, having on as guests adherents of the philosophy we’re discussing, which reading that we’ve covered that’s pleasantly surprised each of us the most, and how to front-load our episodes so that non-paying listeners are more OK with only hearing part one.

Ep. 252: Habermas on Communication as Sociality (Part Two for Supporters)

by Leave a Comment

Continuing from part one on Jürgen Habermas’ “Actions, Speech Acts, Linguistically Mediated Interactions, and the Lifeworld” (1998), with guest John Foster.

We get into the details on the validity claims built into speech, how this provides the foundation for society, and Habermas’ the multi-layered “life-world.”

To listen to this, become a supporter at partiallyexaminedlife.com/support. Listen to a preview.

Ep. 251: Simone Weil’s Ideal Society (Citizen Edition)

by Leave a Comment

On “Theoretical Picture of a Free Society” (1934).

What’s the ideal living situation for us all, given the peculiarities of human nature? Weil describes fulfillment as coming from being able to picture goals and plans and knowingly put them into effect, so social groups need to maximize that power by being small and cooperative.

End song: “Libreville” by Bill Bruford, as interviewed for Nakedly Examined Music #25.

PEL Nightcap Early September 2020 (Citizens Only)

by 1 Comment

The fourth in our series of fun, supporter-only, extra fun off-week discussions. Here we anticipate our Habermas reading, talk about our favorite podcast apps, non-gendered pronouns, the (sub)Text launch, and we discuss listener feedback asking about the history of “rights,” and blasting the approach in our early episodes. What kinds of criticism are worth responding to?

PEL Nightcap Late August 2020 (Citizens Only)

by 3 Comments

More listener email and postings about things we could potentially cover. Edith Stein? Dietrich von HIldebrand? Fichte? Schelling? F.H. Bradley? Eric Hoffer? What’s everybody’s favorite era of philosophy? One listener suggests we do another political one surrounding the upcoming election. Or maybe redo things we covered many years ago.

But first, more about podcast and lecture listening habits. Hear Wes on vacation without his real microphone!

Ep. 250: Simone Weil on Human Needs (Citizen Edition)

by 5 Comments

On “The Needs of the Soul” from The Need for Roots (1943) and “Meditation on Obedience and Liberty” (1937).

What are our needs that should then drive what kind of society would be best for us? Weil says we need liberty yet obedience, equality yet hierarchy, security yet risk… and none of these words mean quite what you’d think. And to start off, why do the many obey the few?

End song: “Even Though the Darkest Clouds” by liar, flower. Mark interviewed singer KatieJane Garside on Nakedly Examined Music #127.

PEL Nightcap Early August 2020 (Citizens Only)

by 4 Comments

Our supporter exposure continues! This time we talk about whether we should do more non-Western philosophy, and if not, does that make us racist? Also, maybe more episodes on communications and rhetoric? Or finally personal identity? Also, outreach to supporters re. PEL Live Remote 2020 and ongoing topic suggestions.

Ep. 249: Dewey on Education and Thought (Citizen Edition)

by 1 Comment

On John Dewey’s How We Think (1910) ch. 1 and Democracy and Education (1916) ch. 1, 2, 4, and 24.

What model of human nature should serve as the basis for education policy? Dewey sees learning as growth, and the point of education as to enable indefinite growth. With guest Jonathan Haber.

End song: “Too Far to Turn Around” by The Ides of March, whose leader Jim Peterik appears on Nakedly Examined Music #126.

About The Partially Examined Life

The Partially Examined Life is a philosophy podcast by some guys who were at one point set on doing philosophy for a living but then thought better of it. Each episode, we pick a text and chat about it with some balance between insight and flippancy. You don’t have to know any philosophy, or even to have read the text we’re talking about to (mostly) follow and (hopefully) enjoy the discussion

Become a PEL Citizen!

As a PEL Citizen, you’ll have access to a private social community of philosophers, thinkers, and other partial examiners where you can join or initiate discussion groups dedicated to particular readings, participate in lively forums, arrange online meet-ups for impromptu seminars, and more. PEL Citizens also have free access to podcast transcripts, guided readings, episode guides, PEL music, and other citizen-exclusive material. Click here to join.

Blog Post Categories

Follow:

Twitter | Facebook | Google+ | Apple Podcasts