The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android

Episode 167: Hume on Intelligent Design (Part Two)

by 1 Comment

Continuing on David Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779), with guest Stephen West. We get further into what’s wrong with the design argument and why Hume thinks that it’s merely a verbal dispute whether we want to say that God designed the orderly universe or just say that the universe is orderly. Also, the problem of evil!

Listen to part 1 first, or get the ad-free, unbroken Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

End song: “Shittalkers” by Ken Stringfellow, as interviewed on Nakedly Examined Music ep. 39.

Check out the St. John’s College Graduate Institute: partiallyexaminedlife.com/sjcgi.

Episode 167: Hume on Intelligent Design (Part One)

by 2 Comments

On David Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779). How should the scientifically minded argue for God’s existence? Is the order and complexity of nature enough to prove an infinite God of the traditional sort? With guest Stephen West.

Don’t wait until next week for part 2; get the rest of the discussion now with your ad-free Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

To capture your real-life hero’s story, visit www.en.familysounds.net/podcast and get a discount with promo code PEL.

Episode 167: Hume on Intelligent Design (Philosophize This! Crossover) (Citizen Edition)

by Leave a Comment

On David Hume’s Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779). How would a scientifically minded person argue for the existence of God?

In Hume’s dialogue, a character named Cleanthes argues from this point of view for God’s existence based on the complexity and order apparent in nature: It looks designed. But how good is that argument, and is it enough to prove an infinite God of the traditional sort? With guest Stephen West.

End song: “Here Comes the Flood” by The Security Project. Listen to Mark’s interview with Trey Gunn on Nakedly Examined Music #21.

Episode 166: Spinoza on Politics and Religion (Part One)

by 4 Comments

On Benedict de Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 12–20 and the Tractatus Politicus (1677).

What’s the relationship between ethics and political power? Given that religious factions tend to create strife, what’s the optimal role of the government in mitigating that damage? Is theocracy in any way a good idea?

Don’t wait for the rest of the discussion! Get the ad-free, unbroken Citizen Edition right now.

Get a free audiobook when starting a 30-day trial at Audible.com/PEL. Experience 7 days of free online counseling at Betterhelp.com/pel. Go to blueapron.com/PEL for three free meals with free shipping. Get The Rise and Fall of D.O.D.O. at nealstephenson.com.

Episode 166: Spinoza on Politics and Religion (Citizen Edition)

by 8 Comments

On Benedict de Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 12–20 and the Tractatus Politicus (1677).

What’s the relationship between ethics and political power? Given that religious factions tend to create strife, what’s the optimal role of the government in mitigating that damage? Is theocracy in any way a good idea?

End song: “Shittalkers” by Ken Stringfellow, as interviewed on Nakedly Examined Music ep. 39.

Episode 165: Spinoza on Biblical Criticism (Part Two)

by Leave a Comment

Continuing on the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 1–11. We go more into natural laws vs. ordinances; does it make sense to say that God makes rules for people? Also, how does Spinoza deal with alleged miracles given that natural laws are absolute regularities?

Continued from part 1, or get the ad-free Citizen Edition now. Please support PEL!

Get The Rise and Fall of Dodo at nealstephenson.com.

Episode 165: Spinoza on Biblical Criticism (Part One)

by 5 Comments

On Benedict de Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 1–11.

For Spinoza, the Bible was a political issue, and he was interested in a way to read it that didn’t lead to people fighting wars and persecuting each other. Spinoza argues that a respectful reading is one that looks for the central message and doesn’t paper over many places where the text was tailored to its original audience’s prejudices, or where for historical reasons we can’t now really know what it meant to them.

Episode 165: Spinoza on Biblical Criticism (Citizen Edition)

by 2 Comments

On Benedict de Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 1–11.

For Spinoza, the Bible was a political issue, and he was interested in a way to read it that didn’t lead to people fighting wars and persecuting each other. Spinoza argues that a respectful reading is one that looks for the central message and doesn’t paper over many places where the text was tailored to its original audience’s prejudices, or where for historical reasons we can’t now really know what it meant to them.

End song: “Spinoza’s Dream” (2016) by Dave Nachmanoff, as discussed on Nakedly Examined Music ep. 20.

REISSUE-Ep. 24: Spinoza on God and Metaphysics

by 7 Comments

Discussing Spinoza’s Ethics (1677), books 1 and 2. God is everything, therefore the world is God as apprehended through some particular attributes, namely insofar as one of his aspects is infinite space (extension, i.e. matter) and insofar as one of his aspects is mind (our minds being chunks or “modes” of the big God mind). A 2010 discussion with a new intro by Dylan and Mark.

Get ep. 25 that continues this discussion by becoming a PEL Citizen, a $1 subscriber at patreon.com/partiallyexaminedlife, or publicly sharing the post from our FB page for this episode.

Check out the St. John’s College Graduate Institute: partiallyexaminedlife.com/sjcgi. Visit Talkspace.com/examined; use code “EXAMINED” for 30% off your first month of online therapy.

Episode 129: Is Faith Rational? (Part One)

by 17 Comments

Nathan Gilmour (Christian Humanist podcast) and Rob Dyer (God Complex Radio) join Mark and Wes for to discuss the reasonableness of religious belief reading Antony Flew’s “The Presumption of Atheism,” Norwood Russell Hanson’s “The Agnostic’s Dilemma,” Steven Cahn’s “The Irrelevance of Proof to Religion,” Alvin Plantinga’s “Is Belief in God Properly Basic?” Merold Westphal’s “Sin and Reason,” Basil Mitchell’s “Faith and Criticism,” Peter van Inwagen’s “Clifford’s Principle,” William Alston’s “Experience in Religious Belief,” Richard Swinburne’s “The Voluntariness of Faith” and “The World and Its Order,” and Paul Helm’s “Faith and Merit.”

Read synopses of all these at partiallyexaminedlife.com.

Episode 129: Is Faith Rational? (Citizen Edition)

by 5 Comments

Nathan Gilmour (Christian Humanist podcast) and Rob Dyer (God Complex Radio) join Mark and Wes for to discuss the reasonableness of religious belief reading Antony Flew’s “The Presumption of Atheism,” Norwood Russell Hanson’s “The Agnostic’s Dilemma,” Steven Cahn’s “The Irrelevance of Proof to Religion,” Alvin Plantinga’s “Is Belief in God Properly Basic?” Merold Westphal’s “Sin and Reason,” Basil Mitchell’s “Faith and Criticism,” Peter van Inwagen’s “Clifford’s Principle,” William Alston’s “Experience in Religious Belief,” Richard Swinburne’s “The Voluntariness of Faith” and “The World and Its Order,” and Paul Helm’s “Faith and Merit.” Learn more.

Get the 2016 calendar, Mark Lint CD, and/or Nietzsche mug from our store.

End song: “Let Us Meet” by Mark Lint, setting an old poem by Kim Casey Linsenmayer.

Topic for #129: Is Religious Faith Rational?

by 6 Comments

Nathan Gilmour (Christian Humanist podcast) and Rob Dyer (God Complex Radio) joined Mark and Wes for a wide-ranging discussion on the reasonableness of religious belief, covering short articles by Alvin Plantinga, Antony Flew, Richard Swinburne, and others.

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+ | iTunes