The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

A Philosophy Podcast and Philosophy Blog

Subscribe on Android Spotify patreon

Episode 210: Frantz Fanon’s Black Existentialism (Part One)

by 8 Comments

On Black Skin White Masks (1952).

How does growing up in a racist society mess people up? Fanon’s “clinical study” includes phenomenology, poetry, and a lot of existentialism, which means that the “let’s embrace negritude in the face of bigotry” solution isn’t ultimately available to him: We’re all radically free, with no race-specific essence, whether positive or negative. With guest Lawrence Ware.

Don’t wait for part two; get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen Edition now. Please support PEL! Don’t miss PEL Live in NYC on April 6.

Sponsor: Visit thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a one-month free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service.

Episode 209: Francis Fukuyama on Identity Politics (Part Two: Discussion)

by 7 Comments

Continuing on Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment (2018).

Fukuyama recommends a “creedal national identity” as a solution for tribalism; does this work? Is this “demand for recognition” that he describes foundational for the act of making an ethical claim? For self-consciousness itself? How does ideology prejudice the sort of theorizing that Fukuyama engages in?

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

End song: “Cornerstone” by Richard X. Heyman, as discussed on Nakedly Examined Music #61.

Sponsors: Visit thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service. Visit the St. John’s College Graduate Institute: partiallyexaminedlife.com/sjcgi.

See PEL Live in NYC on April 6.

Episode 209: Guest Francis Fukuyama on Identity Politics (Part One)

by Leave a Comment

Talking with the author about Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment (2018).

What motivates people? Frank points to thymos, the demand for recognition, as at the root of both the “end of history” (i.e., democracy as demand for equal recognition) and our current tribalist stalemates, involving desires to be seen—in virtue of group membership—as superior. Thymos may in fact be central to self-consciousness, ethics, and the origins of political association.

See PEL Live in NYC on April 6. Get your 2019 PEL Wall Calendar with free domestic shipping!

Sponsor: Visit thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a one-month free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service.

Episode 209: Guest Francis Fukuyama on Identity Politics (Citizen Edition)

by 27 Comments

An interview and discussion on Identity: The Demand for Dignity and the Politics of Resentment (2018).

What motivates people? Frank points to thymos, the demand for recognition, as at the root of both the “end of history” (i.e., democracy as demand for equal recognition) and our current tribalist stalemates, involving desires to be seen—in virtue of group membership—as superior. Thymos may in fact be central to self-consciousness, ethics, and the origins of political association.

End song: “Cornerstone” by Richard X. Heyman, as discussed on Nakedly Examined Music #61.

See PEL Live in NYC on April 6.

Episode 199: Guest Elizabeth Anderson on Private Government (Part Two)

by 3 Comments

Continuing on Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (2017) and “What Is the Point of Equality?” (1999).

Should the amount of respect that a worker gets be proportional to his or her market value? Our guest tells us more about how all citizens have the right to have their interests considered and what this means for how the relationship between employers and employees might change. We talk health care, income inequality, Tyler Cowen, libertarianism, and more.

Start with part one. We’ll do some post-guest discussion in part 3, but you needn’t wait: Get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen Edition now. Please support PEL.

If you enjoyed Mark’s music on our episodes 1–149, please contribute to the new album through patreon.com/marklint.

Episode 199: Guest Elizabeth Anderson on Private Government (Part One)

by 7 Comments

The U. of Michigan prof joins us to discuss Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don’t Talk about It) (2017) and “What Is the Point of Equality?” (1999).

What is a government? Liz argues that this includes companies, and that we should thus apply political science concepts in evaluating their power. Her egalitarianism involves everyone retaining a minimum level of inalienable autonomy, and we should resist encroachments on this not just by the state but from employers as well.

Continue on parts two and three, or get them together via the ad-free Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

Episode 199: Guest Elizabeth Anderson on Private Government (Citizen Edition)

by 12 Comments

The U. of Michigan prof joins us to discuss Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don’t Talk about It) (2017) and “What Is the Point of Equality?” (1999).

What is a government? Liz argues that this includes companies, and that we should thus apply political science concepts in evaluating their power. Her egalitarianism involves everyone retaining a minimum level of inalienable autonomy, and we should resist encroachments on this not just by the state but from employers as well.

End song: “Straight Job” by Rod Picott. Hear him on Nakedly Examined Music #80.

Episode 188: Discussing “Lysistrata” and Politics with Lucy and Emily (Part Two)

by 2 Comments

Concluding our discussion of Aristophanes’s play with Lucy Lawless and Emily Perkins. We focus on trying to connect its lessons to the here and now: Is Lysistrata’s victory properly described as the ascension of some kind of “feminine spirit” over warlike values, and how does that actually relate to women’s struggles now to attain positions of power?

Listen to our performance and then part one of the discussion before listening to this (or get the ad-free, unbroken Citizen Edition). Please support PEL!

Sponsors: Visit thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a one-month free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service. Get 20% off your first order of premium menswear essentials at mackweldon.com, promo code PEL.

Episode 188: Discussing “Lysistrata” and Politics with Lucy and Emily (Part One)

by 12 Comments

We are rejoined by actresses Lucy Lawless and Emily Perkins to discuss Aristophanes’s bawdy play. Listen to us perform it first.

Supplementary readings included Jeffery Henderson’s introduction to his 1988 translation of the play; “Sexual Humor and Harmony in Lysistrata” by Jay M. Semel (1981); and “The ‘Female Intruder’ Reconsidered: Women in Aristophanes’ Lysistrata and Ecclesiazusae” by Helene P. Foley (1982).

Continue with part two, or get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

Sponsors: Get a free trial and 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain at squarespace.com/examined, offer code EXAMINED. Visit thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a one-month free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service. Please also check out the St. John’s College Graduate Institute: partiallyexaminedlife.com/sjcgi.

Episode 188: Discussing “Lysistrata” and Politics with Lucy and Emily (Citizen Edition)

by Leave a Comment

We are rejoined by actresses Lucy Lawless and Emily Perkins to discuss Aristophanes’s bawdy play. Listen to us perform it first.

Supplementary readings included Jeffery Henderson’s introduction to his 1988 translation of the play; “Sexual Humor and Harmony in Lysistrata” by Jay M. Semel (1981); and “The ‘Female Intruder’ Reconsidered: Women in Aristophanes’ Lysistrata and Ecclesiazusae” by Helene P. Foley (1982).

End song: “Women of Industry (ABWA Charm)” by Jill Sobule, as interviewed on Nakedly Examined Music #18.

PREVIEW-Episode 187: The Limits of Free Speech (Part Three)

by Leave a Comment

Three substantial chunks of a follow-up conversation to our free speech episode. Mark and Wes discuss Jordan Peterson on speech, organizations promoting certain speech (as opposed to restricting), insults vs. arguments, offense vs. harm, “incoherence” arguments like Fish’s, fundamental principles in ethics, and more.

Get the full discussion by becoming a PEL Citizen or Patreon supporter.

Episode 187: The Limits of Free Speech (Part Two)

by 9 Comments

Continuing our free-form discussion, trying to make sense of Stanley Fish’s “There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech, and It’s a Good Thing, Too” (1994) and other potential rationales for prohibiting hate speech. How might the same sentence or idea be used in different speech acts, some of which might be legitimately censured but others not?

Listen to part one first, or get the Citizen Edition, along with the full-length follow-up discussion by Mark and Wes.

Sponsors: Visit Squarespace.com for a free trial and 10% off with offer code EXAMINED and the St. John’s College Graduate Institute: partiallyexaminedlife.com/sjcgi.

Episode 187 Follow-Up: The Limits of Free Speech (Citizens Only)

by 20 Comments

Mark and Wes continue the discussion from ep. 187. We watched some Jordan Peterson, so we talk about his position a bit, and about the appropriateness of organizations encouraging certain kinds of speech, the offense principle, the difference (and overlap!) between good-faith arguments and insults, conspiracy theories, “incoherence arguments” like Fish’s (also used by Kant, Rand, and others), and “fundamental moral principles”: Does that concept even make sense given that any principle requires judgement and probably sub-principles to apply it to real situations?

End song: “Combine Man” by RHEMA, as discussed on Nakedly Examined Music #67.

Episode 187: The Limits of Free Speech (Part One)

by 7 Comments

A free-form discussion drawing on Stanley Fish’s “There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech, and It’s a Good Thing, Too” (1994), Joel Feinberg’s “Limits to the Free Expression of Opinion” (1975), and other sources.

What are the legitimate limits on free speech? Feinberg delves into the harm and offense principles. Fish argues that every claim to free speech has ideological assumptions actually favoring some types of speech baked into it. A lively back and forth ensues!

Don’t wait for part two! Get the full, unbroken Citizen Edition now! Please support PEL! We’ll also be soon releasing a full-length follow-up discussion to this one between Mark and Wes, just for supporters.

Episode 187: The Limits of Free Speech (Citizen Edition)

by 5 Comments

A free-form discussion drawing on Stanley Fish’s “There’s No Such Thing as Free Speech, and It’s a Good Thing, Too” (1994), Joel Feinberg’s “Limits to the Free Expression of Opinion” (1975), and other sources.

What are the legitimate limits on free speech? Feinberg delves into the harm and offense principles. Fish argues that every claim to free speech has ideological assumptions actually favoring some types of speech baked into it. A lively back and forth ensues, which Mark and Wes then continued in a supporter-only, 90-minute follow-up.

End song: “We Don’t Talk about It” by Steve Wynn, as interviewed on Nakedly Examined Music #43.

Episode 183: Mill on Liberty (Part Two)

by 6 Comments

Continuing on John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty. We discuss “partial truths,” whether “truth will out,” whether we can discard some “experiments in living” as established failures, education, “barbarians,” how Mill compares to Nietzsche, and more.

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

End song: “Flavor” by Tori Amos with strings by John Philip Shenale, interviewed on Nakedly Examined Music #12.

Sponsors: Visit Squarespace.com for a free trial and 10% off with offer code PEL, thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a one-month free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service, and textexpander.com/podcast for 20% off pain-free insertion of your heavy-use text snippets into your apps.

Episode 183: Mill on Liberty (Part One)

by 6 Comments

Discussing John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty (1859).

If we disapprove of certain behaviors, when is it okay to prohibit them legally? What about just shaming people? Mill’s “harm principle” says that we should permit anything (legally and socially) unless it harms other people. But what constitutes “harm”? And how can we discourage someone from, e.g., just being drunk all the time?

Mark, Wes, and Dylan bring this debate to current issues and explore some of the weirder aspects of Mill’s view.
Don’t wait for part 2! Get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen Edition now. Please support PEL!

Sponsors: Visit MUBI.com/PEL for 30 days of free curated movies, thegreatcoursesplus.com/PEL for a one-month free trial of The Great Courses Plus Video Learning Service, and Squarespace.com for a free trial and 10% off with offer code EXAMINED.

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