Subscribe to get parts 1 and 2 of this now, ad-free, plus tons of bonus content. Continuing from part one on "The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and Wrong" (1889), where starting on section 15, Brentano is getting into how we measure the comparative goodness of goods, actions, and purposes. We know that an action is appropriate if it fits and end we have, but how do we Continue Reading …
Ep. 363: Franz Brentano’s Moral Epistemology (Part One)
Subscribe to get parts 1 and 2 of this now, ad-free, plus tons of bonus content, including a brand new Nightcap recording. On "The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and Wrong" (1889), featuring Mark, Wes, and Seth. Sponsors: Get a $1/month e-commerce trial at shopify.com/pel. Learn about African history at historyofafricapodcast.podbean.com. Brentano was a descriptive Continue Reading …
Ep. 363: Franz Brentano’s Moral Epistemology (Part Two for Supporters)
Continuing from part one on "The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and Wrong" (1889), where starting on section 15, Brentano is getting into how we measure the comparative goodness of goods, actions, and purposes. We know that an action is appropriate if it fits and end we have, but how do we measure the values of ends? Like Aristotle, Brentano looks to what we actually will Continue Reading …
Ep. 363: Franz Brentano’s Moral Epistemology (Part One for Supporters)
On "The Origin of the Knowledge of Right and Wrong" (1889), featuring Mark, Wes, and Seth. Brentano was a descriptive psychologist best known for coming up with the idea that all mental states are "intentional"; they all point at something or other. You have a believe THAT [some proposition], or you perceive [some object or state of affairs], or feel an emotion about [some Continue Reading …
The Life of the Volunteer
David Hume said, "Be a philosopher; but amidst all your philosophy, be still a man." The thing is, studying philosophy may or may not have an effect on your life. Even if it does, people usually follow Hume's advice to compartmentalize. Meta-ethics is typical of philosophy here. Moral skeptics often clarify that they're motivated by all the right ethical principles, but Continue Reading …
Quasi-Moral Skepticism
Philosophy is littered with realisms and skepticisms. Meta-ethics is no different. Moral skepticisms abound and there are many moral realisms. It's a risk of excess to add one more to the pile, but hopefully the risk is worth it. This essay charts a middle course that could just as easily be called Quasi-realism, a more glass half-full name. That is, if Simon Blackburn hadn't Continue Reading …
The Inescapable Imperative
Moral reasons are strong. That's what you'd expect, at least. They're weighty but not dull, alive but not hedonistic. It's strange then that the term used time and again to describe the ultimate importance of moral reasoning is "objective," a word so bloodless and clinical. Still, there's something there that attempts to articulate the bottom-line concern. It's understandable, Continue Reading …
What’s the Deal with Why?
Philip Goff’s Why? lays out the case for cosmic purpose built into the universe from the very beginning, thereby showing our own lives to be imbued with meaning. It’s a bold work, touching on heady ideas like fine-tuning of the universe, the nature of probability, consciousness, and more. But the main idea remains - we can derive deep meaning and value in our lives, as we’re a Continue Reading …
Ep. 233: Plato’s “Protagoras” on Virtue (Part Two)
Continuing on the dialogue, where Socrates argues that Protagoras doesn't actually know what virtue is, because he thinks that the various virtues (especially courage) are distinct, a claim that Socrates refutes in several (logically suspect) ways. Is virtue actually knowledge? Also, should we use literary analysis to discuss philosophical points? (Socrates thinks Continue Reading …
Ep. 233: Plato’s “Protagoras” on Virtue (Part One)
On the Platonic dialogue written around 380 BCE about an encounter between Socrates and one of the leading Sophists of his day. What is virtue ("the political art" according to Protagoras), and can it be taught? What are the relations of the various virtues to each other? Do they really amount ultimately to one and the same thing, i.e., wisdom? For once in a Platonic Continue Reading …
Ep. 233: Plato’s “Protagoras” on Virtue (Citizen Edition)
On the Platonic dialogue written around 380 BCE about an encounter between Socrates and one of the leading Sophists of his day. What is virtue ("the political art" according to Protagoras), and can it be taught? What are the relations of the various virtues to each other? Do they really amount ultimately to one and the same thing, i.e., wisdom? For once in a Platonic Continue Reading …
Episode 145: Emmanuel Levinas: Why Be Ethical?
On "Ethics as First Philosophy" (1984). More existentialist ethics, with a Jewish twist this time! Seth rejoins Mark and Wes to discuss this difficult essay, with a bit of "Time and the Other" (1948) and "There Is: Existence Without Existents" (1946) thrown in, too. Levinas thinks that the whole train of Western thought with the advance of science and all has left us too Continue Reading …
Ep. 145: Emmanuel Levinas: Why Be Ethical? (Citizen Edition)
On "Ethics as First Philosophy" (1984). More existentialist ethics, with a Jewish twist this time! Seth rejoins Mark and Wes to discuss this difficult essay, with a bit of "Time and the Other" (1948) and "There Is: Existence Without Existents" (1946) thrown in, too. Levinas thinks that the whole train of Western thought with the advance of science and all has left us too Continue Reading …
Episode 140: Beauvoir on the Ambiguous Human Condition
On Simone De Beauvoir's The Ethics of Ambiguity (1947), parts I and II. For Wes Alwan's summary of this book, go here. We return to existentialism! Instead of describing our predicament as "absurd," de Beauvoir prefers "ambiguous": We are a biological organism in the world, yet we're also free consciousness transcending the given situation. Truly coming to terms with this Continue Reading …
Ep. 140: Beauvoir on the Ambiguous Human Condition (Citizen Edition)
On Simone De Beauvoir's The Ethics of Ambiguity (1947), parts I and II. For Wes Alwan's summary of this book, go here. We return to existentialism! Instead of describing our predicament as "absurd," de Beauvoir prefers "ambiguous": We are a biological organism in the world, yet we're also free consciousness transcending the given situation. Truly coming to terms with this Continue Reading …
Topic for #94: Schopenhauer on Reading, Writing, and Thinking
First, a sad story: on 4/27, we recorded a discussion of Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State, and Utopia with Slate's Stephen Metcalf. It went fairly well (Stephen was impressed, and gave us a nice traffic bump by promoting us on his Culture Gabfest podcast), but within the next couple of days, the hard drive on which my part and much of the guest's part were recorded on went Continue Reading …
Episode 93: Freedom and Responsibility (Strawson vs. Strawson)
On P.F. Strawson's "Freedom and Resentment" (1960), Galen Strawson's "The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility" (1994), and Gary Watson's "Responsibility and the Limits of Evil: Variations on a Strawsonian Theme" (1987). Do we ordinarily act with the right kind of freedom so that blame is justified? Galen Strawson says no: our choices stem from our character, which is not Continue Reading …
Episode 93: Freedom and Responsibility (Strawson vs. Strawson)
On P.F. Strawson's "Freedom and Resentment" (1960), Galen Strawson's "The Impossibility of Moral Responsibility" (1994), and Gary Watson's "Responsibility and the Limits of Evil: Variations on a Strawsonian Theme" (1987). Do we ordinarily act with the right kind of freedom so that blame is justified? Galen Strawson says no: our choices stem from our character, which is not Continue Reading …
Episode 88: G.E.M. Anscombe: Should We Use Moral Language?
On Elizabeth Anscombe's "Modern Moral Philosophy" (1958), Intention sections 22-27 (1957), and "War and Murder" (1961). Anscombe thinks that our moral language was developed in a theistic context, and without a law-giver, the idea of a moral law or obligation doesn't make sense. However, we can debate about what actions display "justice," whether some action is "harmful," Continue Reading …
Episode 88: G.E.M. Anscombe: Should We Use Moral Language?
On Elizabeth Anscombe's "Modern Moral Philosophy" (1958), Intention sections 22-27 (1957), and "War and Murder" (1961). Anscombe thinks that our moral language was developed in a theistic context, and without a law-giver, the idea of a moral law or obligation doesn't make sense. However, we can debate about what actions display "justice," whether some action is "harmful," Continue Reading …
Precognition of Ep. 88: G.E.M. Anscombe
Guest Philosophy Bro introduces Elizabeth Anscombe's "Modern Moral Philosophy," and Intention sections 22-27. Listen to the full PEL episode. Continue Reading …
Judgment without Morality
Both Sartre and Anscombe say that they're teasing out the logical consequences of atheism for ethics, and of course we saw this back in Nietzsche too. If you ask "are these figures moral realists or moral irrealists?", I think they're going to say you're missing the point. No, a sentence like "X is right" no longer becomes simply true or false, and this is because of some sort Continue Reading …
Precognition of Ep. 88: G.E.M. Anscombe
Guest Philosophy Bro introduces Elizabeth Anscombe's "Modern Moral Philosophy," and Intention sections 22-27. Listen to the full PEL episode. Continue Reading …
Episode 87: Sartre on Freedom and Self-Deception
On Jean-Paul Sartre's "Existentialism is a Humanism" (1946), "Bad Faith" (pt. 1, ch. 2 of Being & Nothingness, 1943), and his play No Exit (1944). What is human nature? Sartre says that there isn't one, but there is a universal human condition, which is our absolute freedom. This freedom is a basic certainty in our experience, and it comes out of the mere fact of our being Continue Reading …
Episode 87: Sartre on Freedom and Self-Deception
On Jean-Paul Sartre's "Existentialism is a Humanism" (1946), "Bad Faith" (pt. 1, ch. 2 of Being & Nothingness, 1943), and his play No Exit (1944). What is human nature? Sartre says that there isn't one, but there is a universal human condition, which is our absolute freedom. This freedom is a basic certainty in our experience, and it comes out of the mere fact of our being Continue Reading …
Rawls’s Second Principle: Compromise or Clusterf*#$?
Rawls's principle 2a, to remind you, is (quoting from wikipedia here): Social and economic inequalities are to be arranged so that (Rawls, 1971, p.302; revised edition, p. 47): (a) they are to be of the greatest benefit to the least-advantaged members of society, consistent with the just savings principle (the difference principle). This has appeal to modern liberals Continue Reading …
Bergmann as Philosopher (Before All that “New Work” Stuff)
We're barely more than a day away right now from our interview with Frithjof, which he says he's "thrilled" about, and I'm certainly looking forward to as well, though I can picture any number of things going less than ideally as I introduce these two known elements (Frithjof on the one hand and Seth/Wes/Dylan on the other) to each other. For me, this period of preparation has Continue Reading …
Speaker-Based Ethical Relativism and the Sanctity of an Ethical Community
One of the comments on Mark Satta's recent very hot post about universal salvation has been zooming 'round my brain, and demands, I think, a PEL episode at some point. A comment by our listener Bear stated: My questions about Atheists wanting to redefine orthodoxies of particular belief systems, be it Christian, Buddhist, Mormon, Islam &c., demanding those within the belief Continue Reading …
Norm Schultz (Mile High Sanity Project) on Aristotle’s Ethics
In preparation for our Aristotle Politics episode, I checked out a new semi-philosophy podcast called the Mile High Sanity Project, as they had an episode on Aristotle's ethics. I say "semi-philosophy," because the podcast is made up of three guys in different disciplines. They trade off being the lead guy on episodes, so the philosophy ones are "Norm's Conceptual Corner," Continue Reading …
Episode 59: Alasdair MacIntyre on Moral Justifications (Citizens Only)
On Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory (1981), mostly ch. 3-7 and 14-17. What justifies ethical claims? MacIntyre claims that no modern attempt to ground ethics has worked, and that's because we've abandoned Aristotle. We see facts and values as fundamentally different: the things science discovers vs. these weird things that have nothing to do with Continue Reading …
PREVIEW-Episode 59: Alasdair MacIntyre on Moral Justifications
This is a short preview of the full episode. Buy Now Purchase this episode for $2.99. Or become a PEL Citizen for $5 a month, and get access to this and all other paywalled episodes, including 68 back catalogue episodes; exclusive Part 2's for episodes published after September, 2020; and our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more Continue Reading …
Episode 58: What Grounds Ethical Claims? (Moore, Stevenson, MacIntyre) (Citizens Only)
On G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica, ch. 1 (1903); Charles Leslie Stevenson's "The Emotive Meaning of Ethical Terms" (1937), and Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue, ch. 1-2. Is there such a thing as moral intuition? Is "good" a simple property that we all recognize but can't explain like yellow? G.E. Moore thinks that any attempt to define good in terms of properties like Continue Reading …
PREVIEW-Episode 58: What Grounds Ethical Claims? (Moore, Stevenson, MacIntyre)
This is a short preview of the full episode. Buy Now Purchase this episode for $2.99. Or become a PEL Citizen for $5 a month, and get access to this and all other paywalled episodes, including 68 back catalogue episodes; exclusive Part 2's for episodes published after September, 2020; and our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more Continue Reading …
Topic for #58/#59: Is vs. Ought (G.E. Moore, C.L. Stevenson, Alasdair MacIntyre)
These two episodes cover some related approaches in 20th century ethics: First, we read Chapter 1 of G.E. Moore's Principia Ethica(1903), which argues against utilitarianism and other ethical philosophies by exposing the "naturalistic fallacy," which equates "good" with some natural property like pleasure or people's actual desires. This error, says Moore, also extends to Continue Reading …
Alan Watts on Buddhist and Christian Mythographies
http://youtu.be/w0FQoypdDTk Watch on YouTube. I liked the meta-discussion that kicked off the second PEL naturalized Buddhism episode, specifically on what knowledge we gain by assessing the supernatural "rules" contained within "religious" Buddhism. Even after rejecting a supernaturalist stance, there's value in reviewing the form of life revealed within Buddhism's Continue Reading …
PREVIEW-Episode 54: More Buddhism and Naturalism
This is a short preview of the full episode. Buy Now Purchase this episode for $2.99. Or become a PEL Citizen for $5 a month, and get access to this and all other paywalled episodes, including 68 back catalogue episodes; exclusive Part 2's for episodes published after September, 2020; and our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat more Continue Reading …
Episode 54: More Buddhism and Naturalism (Citizens Only)
Continuing our discussion of Owen Flanagan's The Bodhisattva's Brain: Buddhism Naturalized (2011). Are the basic tenets of Buddhism compatible with a respect for science? In episode 53, Owen Flanagan outlined a science-friendly project of comparative ethics, and touched on Buddhism's empiricist theory of knowledge and its metaphysics of impermanence. If that was the lecture, Continue Reading …
Lila Notes, Pt. 4: Pirsig Solves All Philosophical Problems in Five Pages
If my notes here have gotten a bit dismissive sounding, it's largely to provide a counterweight to Dave's discipleship. This is not to diss Dave (or Bo or other Pirsig fans posting on our board here), but my approach, and the approach I see in enthusiasts like Katie re. Foucault or Matt Evans did for Plato is yes, to try to figure how out to charitably elaborate and defend the Continue Reading …
Topic for #53/#54: Buddhism and Science with Guest Owen Flanagan
In episode 53, the full four-man PEL crew spoke with Duke University's Owen Flanagan, mostly about his book The Bodhisattva's Brain: Buddhism Naturalized, which has a number of aims: -To argue that supernatural beliefs can be removed (or "tamed") from Buddhism and still leave an elaborate enterprise relevant to modern life. -To put Buddhist conceptions of virtue and happiness Continue Reading …
Kenan Malik (via The Browser) on Morality without God (and the Euthyphro)
In this interview with Kenan Malik (a "scientific author," i.e. a psychology/biology guy who dabbles in philosophical issues) uses the Euthyphro to argue that presenting religion as the guardian of moral values "diminishing the importance of human agency in the creation of a moral framework." His enemy is "false certainty" in ethics, whether because you think that basic moral Continue Reading …
Episode 46: Plato on Ethics & Religion (Citizens Only)
Discussing Plato's Euthyphro. Does morality have to be based on religion? Are good things good just because God says so, or (if there is a God) does God choose to approve of the things He does because he recognizes those things to be already good? Plato thinks the latter: if morality is to be truly non-arbitrary, then, like the laws of logic, it can't just be a contingent Continue Reading …
PREVIEW-Episode 46: Plato on Ethics & Religion
This is a 30-minute preview of a 1 hr, 52-minute episode. Buy Now Purchase this episode for $2.99. Or become a PEL Citizen for $5 a month, and get access to this and all other paywalled episodes, including 68 back catalogue episodes; exclusive Part 2's for episodes published after September, 2020; and our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email and chat Continue Reading …
Paul Boghossian (via Philosophy Bites) on Moral Relativism
We've discussed Paul Boghossian and his book against relativism a bit in our Nelson Goodman episode. See my blog post on this from last year. In this interview on the Philosophy Bites podcast, Boghossian talks about moral relativism, giving some shades of the view: e.g. you could be a relativist about manners but not really about the underlying principles girding them ("be Continue Reading …
Episode 45: Moral Sense Theory: Hume and Smith (Citizens Only)
Discussing parts of David Hume's Treatise of Human Nature (1740) and Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759). Where do we get our moral ideas? Hume and Smith both thought that we get them by reflecting on our own moral judgments and on how we and others (including imaginary, hypothesized others) in turn judge those judgments. Mark, Wes, Seth, and guest Getty Continue Reading …
PREVIEW-Episode 45: Moral Sense Theory: Hume and Smith
This is a 33-minute preview of our vintage 1 hr, 46-minute episode. Buy Now Purchase this episode for $2.99. Or become a PEL Citizen for $5 a month, and get access to this and all other paywalled episodes, including 68 back catalogue episodes; exclusive Part 2's for episodes published after September, 2020; and our after-show Nightcap, where the guys respond to listener email Continue Reading …
Topic for #46: Plato’s Euthyphro
Does morality depend on religion? In Plato's early and fun (and short!) dialogue Euthyphro, Socrates questions Euthyphro (who's on his way to go and file murder charges against his own father) about the meaning of "piety." Is an action (like turning in your dad) pious because it's the kind of thing that the gods love? In modern terms, are pious actions justified just because of Continue Reading …
Topic for #45: Moral Sense Theory: Hume and Smith
Here's the recorded episode. In Ep. 41, we discussed David Hume's ethics both providing a challenge for any naturalist (meaning one compatible with a modern scientific world-view) ethics--you can't deduce "ought" from "is"--and as providing an approach to moral psychology. In this discussion, we grappled with selections from Hume’s Treatise of Human Nature (1740) and Adam Continue Reading …
Magnetic Morality Modulation
This September, PBS will re-broadcast an interesting episode of NOVA ScienceNOW, which touches on some points raised in PEL's interview with Patricia Churchland. The episode demonstrates a procedure called Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), which can influence a person's moral judgments as they are being made, simply by messing with the neural activity located within the Continue Reading …
Moral Psychology vs. Normativity
Given that Churchland focuses on the causal story (physiological, evolutionary, psychological, cultural) for where we get our moral sense, does that mean that the causal story is all there is to it, i.e. that by understanding the causal theory, you understand morality itself? Certainly Kant thought not: the causal story is only relevant for him in figuring out how to teach Continue Reading …
Episode 41: Pat Churchland on the Neurobiology of Morality, Plus Hume’s Ethics (Citizens Only)
We spoke with Patricia Churchland after reading her new book Braintrust: What Neuroscience Tells Us About Morality. We also discussed David Hume's ethics as foundational to her work, reading his Treatise on Human Nature (1739), Book III, Part I and his Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (1751), Section V, Parts I and II. What does the physiology of the brain have to Continue Reading …