The podcast critiques metamodernism, arguing that it fails to genuinely reconcile modernism and postmodernism. Instead of bridging the objective worldview of modernism with the relativism of postmodernism, it regressively merges modernist objectivity with pre-Enlightenment mysticism. This, the author contends, constitutes a nostalgic retreat rather than genuine intellectual progress, ultimately sidestepping the crucial insights of postmodern thought. The essay asserts that true progress necessitates confronting the inherent contingency of all belief systems, rather than seeking refuge in comforting but intellectually stagnant frameworks.

The podcast explores the nature of probability, arguing that while it's a useful tool in various fields, it's not an objective property of the world but rather a subjective construction based on assumptions and judgements. It examines the historical development of probability theory, contrasting aleatory and epistemic uncertainty, and highlighting the role of subjective assessments even in scientific contexts like the RECOVERY trials. The author uses examples ranging from weather forecasting to coin flips to illustrate the subjective nature of probability assessments. The article concludes that, while probability might not objectively exist in the everyday world, acting as if it does remains a pragmatic and valuable approach. Finally, a quiz is included to demonstrate the often-overconfident nature of subjective probability assessments.

See more at http://philosophics.blog

This segment contrasts the highly efficient, collective problem-solving of ants, specifically their practice of performing amputations to prevent infection, with humanity's often self-destructive individualism. It argues that humans' prioritization of profit and individual rights over collective well-being leads to preventable suffering. The author uses the ants' behaviour as a stark critique of human societal structures that allow for widespread inequality and environmental damage. The piece advocates for a more pragmatic, collective approach to solving societal problems, inspired by the ants' effective social health system. Ultimately, it suggests humans need to improve their collective action for survival.

This segment critiques the lack of accountability for unethical corporate behaviour, using the example of Brian Thompson. It argues that society rewards rather than punishes corporate wrongdoing, contrasting this with the historical example of Ancient Rome's treatment of outlaws. The author proposes a return to stronger moral codes and social consequences for corporate malfeasance, suggesting the current system normalises corruption. The piece expresses concern over societal desensitisation to corporate greed and advocates for a change in attitude. Ultimately, it calls for a re-evaluation of morality's application to the powerful.

This blog analyses Thomas Sowell's statement about "artificial stupidity" in education, arguing it's a rhetorically effective but ultimately flawed assertion. It critiques Sowell's broad generalisations about teachers and modern education, highlighting the vagueness and inherent contradictions within his claims. Bry Willis contends that Sowell uses emotionally charged language to appeal to a specific audience, rather than presenting a reasoned argument open to critical evaluation. The analysis exposes the statement as a form of dog-whistling, designed to reinforce pre-existing beliefs rather than encourage thoughtful discussion. Finally, the related blog proposes a more constructive approach to discussing educational issues, emphasising the need for specificity and critical thinking.

This podcast analyses the murder of a healthcare CEO through various philosophical lenses by summarising several blog posts by Bry Willis on Philosophics Blog. They critique the ethics of for-profit healthcare, comparing it to morally reprehensible industries like the arms trade and organised crime, highlighting the systemic issues that prioritise profit over human well-being. The authors explore the concepts of right livelihood and right action within a Buddhist framework and examine the assassination through the theories of René Girard, focusing on scapegoating and mimetic rivalry. Ultimately, the posts argue that addressing the underlying systemic injustices, rather than simply focusing on individual actors, is crucial for meaningful reform.

The podcast examines the ethical implications of various industries, particularly those profiting from human suffering, using the Buddhist principles of Right Livelihood and Right Action as a framework. It critiques industries like health insurance, tobacco, alcohol, and arms manufacturing for prioritising profit over human well-being, drawing parallels with organised crime. The author argues that these practices are morally reprehensible and advocates for a societal shift towards ethical and compassionate economic systems. The killing of a health insurance CEO is presented as a symptom of this larger ethical crisis, highlighting the need for systemic change rather than individual retribution. Finally, the text concludes by urging a commitment to building systems rooted in compassion and justice.

The podcast discusses the trolley problem as a metaphor for the US for-profit healthcare system. It argues that the system's profit motive incentivises the denial of care, leading to preventable deaths. The author contends that this is not accidental but a structural feature, comparing the CEOs of healthcare companies to individuals repeatedly choosing to sacrifice lives for profit. The text concludes by advocating for a single-payer healthcare system to remove the profit motive and break the cycle of death. This systemic issue, Bry asserts, is the root cause of the problem, not individual actors.

https://philosophics.blog/2024/12/10/the-trolley-problem-of-for-profit-healthcare/