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. 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 freedom means not only understanding that you 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. 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 freedom means not only understanding that you 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 …