Today’s episode is the revision of the topics on resources involving film and philosophy — you can support the 365DaysOfPhilosophy podcast by visiting www.patreon.com/kyliesturgess and review previous episodes at www.365daysofphilosophy.com.

If you can help the show continue, head to: https://www.patreon.com/kyliesturgess

Music from Jukedeck — create your own at http://jukedeck.com.

What does it mean to be an authentic person? What is reality? And what if the reality we are presented with is a sham? The Truman Show is an interesting thought experiment in what could happen if a corporation was able to own a human being — and then chose to use him as the topic of a reality TV show about their life. 

It’s one of the few films where Jim Carrey is able to demonstrate his acting skills beyond comedic roles (and he is certainly able to do this well), and with some very impressive special effects and technical skill, the life of Truman is set in the fairly plausible (if weirdly retro and pristine) “Seahaven”. One interesting theme that evolves is the hubris of god/director Christof and how Truman chooses reality over the carefully curated and advertorial life in his television-studio town. It led me to question what the audience expected from the show overall — and marvel at how they celebrated the exercising of Truman’s free will and independence at the conclusion. There’s a number of philosophical links about this film on the site at www.365daysofphilosophy.com, and it’s a useful one for teaching across the secondary years of school.

This interview was previously aired on the original 365 Days of Philosophy podcast in 2013.

Sean Faircloth was hired as the Secular Coalition for America’s Executive Director in June of 2009 and served a decade in the Maine State Legislature. In his last term he was elected the Majority Whip by his colleagues and was an accomplished legislator, successfully spearheading over thirty pieces of legislation, particularly involving children’s issues and justice system reform.

Sean Faircloth is a strong advocate of the separation of church and state and has received many awards of recognition including the 2006 Legislator of the Year Award from the Maine People’s Alliance, the 2005 Excellence in Advocacy Award from the American Heart Association’s Northeast Affiliate.

In 2009 Sean became the executive director of the Secular Coalition for America, advocating for separation of church and state, and for greater acceptance of nontheistic viewpoints in American life. In September 2011 he became the Director of Strategy and Policy for the Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science and was the opening speaker for Dawkins’ book tour.

His first book published by Pitchstone Press, Attack of the Theocrats! How the Religious Right Harms Us All — and What We Can Do About It was released in February 2012.

Humanism can be defined as a rationalist approach to life that prioritises human relations and concerns rather than divine or supernatural matters. It is the belief in the potential of human reason and secular approach to the future of humanity, which stems from the 18th century and the Enlightenment. 

Humanist groups have been celebrating World Humanist Day since the 1980s and there’s a range of links available on how to recognise and celebrate this day.

Clive Hamilton is an Australian author and public intellectual who is best known for his books on issues like climate change politics, consumerism and overconsumption. He is the Professor of Public Ethics at Charles Sturt University, author of the bestselling Requiem for a Species, and The Freedom Paradox and Growth Fetish.

His latest book Defiant Earth: The Fate of Humans in the Anthropocene, explores human beings and the impact that we are having on the planet. This interview was aired on RTRFM on 20th June 2017.

I know what you’re thinking… at least what you’re thinking if you were around the 90s when every single student who had the oportunity to analyse the film for every humanities subject you can think of… yes, it’s that film again. However, how well does The Matrix hold up after the popularity boom of Wachowski’s trilogy, as a philosophical text?

Honestly, I think it’s more fun than philosophical and always has been. As a movie that alludes to plenty of philosophical concepts such as recincarnation, ethics and computers, self-awareness, even the Platonic and (ahem) neo-Platonic references in Revolution and Reloaded — this can be seen as a science fiction film first and foremost and a discussion of metaphysical concepts second. Not that it makes it any less enjoyable or fun to dissect, it’s just that if you’re going to hope for too much more than a modern ‘allegory of the cave’ or René Descartes… it becomes challenging when ‘lots of guns’ become the primary solution to the ongoing conflict.

But then, perhaps it’s more about how we interpret the film than what it genuinely contains; we can see how it invites us to analyse its meaning — and then research for ourselves why ‘know thyself’ is important beyond just the characters in the movie, or why the ‘mind in a vat’ can be unpacked further beyond Morpheus’s revelations. In short, this is probably too violent for the average young learner of philosophy, but that hasn’t stopped it from being discussed and written about since as an enjoyable science fiction movie that is greatly informed and supported by using philosophical concepts.

This is an interview that previously featured on the 365 Days of Philosophy podcast, in 2013. Maryam Namazie is a political activist, campaigner and blogger, and the spokesperson for Fitnah — Movement for Women’s Liberation, and also the Equal Rights Now, One Law for All Campaign against Sharia Law in Britain and the Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain.

The official site for Fitnah: Movement for Women’s Liberation can be found at http://fitnah.org/, and is described as a protest movement demanding freedom, equality, and secularism and calling for an end to misogynist cultural, religious and moral laws and customs, compulsory veiling, sex apartheid, sex trafficking, and violence against women. It aims to remind the Islamic regime of Iran and Islamists everywhere that the women’s liberation movement is a source of fitnah for their rule alone.

Today’s episode is the revision of the topics on resources involving feminism and philosophy — you can support the 365DaysOfPhilosophy podcast by visiting www.patreon.com/kyliesturgess and review previous episodes at www.365daysofphilosophy.com.

If you can help the show continue, head to: https://www.patreon.com/kyliesturgess

Music from Jukedeck — create your own at http://jukedeck.com.

For Patreon subscribers, there’s further revision questions by heading to www.patreon.com/kyliesturgess.

2. What are the main considerations when it comes to defending the equality of the sexes?

3. How defensible is this statement: “There are no means of finding what either one person or many can do, but by trying — and no means by which anyone else can discover for them what it is for their happiness to do or leave undone.” — John Stuart Mill.

Is there a gender difference when it comes to ethical behaviour? This question is investigated by Dr Carol Gillian in her work In A Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women’s Development (1982). It examines Kohlberg’s moral reasoning scale and suggests that there may be a bias towards scoring on his test that tends towards different results for men and women.

Through conducting interviews for the book, she suggests that the difference between men and women’s results may be due to women’s valuing connecting with community and relationships, while men vale impartiality, independence and rights. The difference between the ‘ethic of care’ and ‘ethic of justice’ is debated, as is the validity of Kohlberg’s original testing, but whether ethics do focus on different aspects and whether gender, culture or time influence ethical standards is an ongoing discussion.