The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast
A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog
Continuing on two of Hannah Arendt’s 1953 essays on totalitarianism. We further discuss its logic and in the full episode get into its relevance for contemporary political movements.
To hear that full second part, you’ll need to go sign up at partiallyexaminedlife.com/support.
Sponsors: See headspace.com/PEL for a free month’s access to a library of guided meditations. Try The Class X Podcast on Spotify or Apple, or look it up wherever you listen.
Continuing on “On the Nature of Totalitarianism” and On the Origins of Totalitarianism, ch. 13 (both from around 1953).
We further discuss the logic of totalitarianism and and its relevance for contemporary political movements. Has Arendt captured an authentic, novel danger, or is what she diagnoses more a modern manifestation of an old problem, or was it merely a horrific oddity of her historical period?
On “On the Nature of Totalitarianism” and On the Origins of Totalitarianism ch. 13 (both from 1953).
Is totalitarianism just an especially virulent form of tyranny, or something unique to the modern age? Arendt says that unlike other forms of government, totalitarianism is not animated by an active psychological principle that motivates its participants. Instead terror makes citizens incapable of agency altogether.
Sponsors: Get a free trial and save 20% on an annual membership of at TheGreatCoursesPlus.com/PEL. Learn about St. John’s College summer programs at SJC.edu/summer2021. Get a loan to lower your monthly payments at Upstart.com/PEL. Get $75 off your starter teeth-straightening kit via CandidCO.com/pel (code PEL). Get up to a $1000 donation matched at GiveWell.org/PEL (pick PODCAST and Partially Examined Life at checkout). Hear Wes’ “Stoic Guide to Happiness” at Himalaya.com/stoic (promo code stoic).
On “On the Nature of Totalitarianism” and On the Origins of Totalitarianism ch. 13 (both from 1953).
Is totalitarianism just an especially virulent form of tyranny, or something unique to the modern age? Arendt says that unlike other forms of government, totalitarianism is not animated by an active psychological principle that motivates its participants. Instead terror is designed to make citizens incapable of agency altogether.
Heidegger’s conception of authenticity, is both appealing (in that it accords due significance to mortality) and troubling (in completely prioritising the self over others). The core concept can be retained while introducing an other-regarding elementcourtesy of Simone de Beauvoir’s early work on ethics. Fanon’s commentary on authenticity from Black Skin, White Masks develops the links between Heidegger and Beauvoir.
On The Human Condition (1958), Prologue and Sections 1 and 2. How has our distinction between the private and public evolved over time? Arendt uses this history, and chiefly the differences between our time and ancient Athens, to launch a critique of modern society. The fab four conducted this podcast live at the Pittsburgh Continental Philosophy Conference.
End song: “Space” by Mark Lint. Read about it.
On The Human Condition (1958), Prologue and Sections 1 and 2. How has our distinction between the private and public evolved over time? Arendt uses this history, and chiefly the differences between our time and ancient Athens, to launch a critique of modern society. The fab four conducted this podcast live at the Pittsburgh Continental Philosophy Conference. Learn more.
End song: “Space” by Mark Lint (written 1997, recording completed 2010). Read about it.
On 9/26, 6:30 Eastern, tune in to watch us discuss Hannah Arendt’s The Human Condition, Parts 1 and 2, about what we need out of public and private realms to be fully human, free individuals and not pawns of society.
Hannah Arendt’s essay “The Jew as Pariah: A Hidden Tradition,” in which she locates exiled Jewish culture in pre-WWII works of film and literature, takes on new dimensions in light of current global conflicts.
The question of the “pernicious influence” of scientism on modern life and philosophy gets raised fairly often here at PEL. I get the sense that Wes and Seth think the influence ‘quite pernicious’ while Mark thinks ‘not so pernicious’. (Correct me if I’m wrong guys). So I thought it would be helpful to clarify what is implied by the term, Continue Reading …
