Mental health professionals are increasingly noticing a pattern of symptoms in both those who have left religion and those who are still practicing that mirror the symptoms of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. In 2011, Dr. Marlene Winell coined the term 'Religious Trauma Syndrome' (RTS) to give a name to the unique trauma that many face from their experiences with religion. Like PTSD, RTS symptoms sometimes fly under the radar or are attributed to other causes, such as major depression or an anxiety disorder. In this podcast, Caroline Winzenried will outline how to identify RTS and the hidden toll that it takes even years after leaving a religion.

Bio: Caroline Winzenried is a counsellor in Boronia, Victoria, Australia. She works from an existential-humanistic lens with individuals across the lifespan, from adolescent to older adults, on issues including anxiety, depression and interpersonal relationships. Her areas of special interest include working with religious trauma and grief and loss.

Credit to https://www.FesliyanStudios.com for the background music.

In this episode, Akiva Quinn and Usha Sista examine the notion of "The Good Life" from various viewpoints. We all want our lives to actualise some conception of "The Good Life" where this notion will generally include fulfilment, happiness or wellbeing for ourselves, our family, friends and other people. In addition, for many, to live the good life also entails living with concern for both self and others based on moral and practical or prudential considerations. Is the good life about experiencing lasting pleasure and minimizing suffering as Hedonism suggests? In contrast, Altruism proposes we should do "the most good" we can through our life choices, practical efforts and effective charity while Humanism promotes acting on values and concern for outcomes which respect and support other people and better their opportunities in the world.

How does one create or pursue "meaning IN life" if there is no cosmic "meaning OF life"? Does the absurdity of suffering and banality of repetitive human activities undermine meaning? Akiva Quinn offers perspectives on life as meaningful based on the projects and purposes we each adopt, drawing on existentialist and absurdist thinkers including Jean-Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Martin Buber and Viktor Frankl, among others. Akiva explores the extent to which meaning in life may be achieved through any number of personal choices about "what truly matters" to an individual and the possible role of shared moral values in creating and sustaining a life filled with purpose and meaning.

Recently, there has been a plethora of books and articles on the topic of democracy's demise. We find authors who point to a number of countries that are moving towards authoritarian rule (such as America, Hungary, Turkey and the Philippines), while others argue that, despite these exceptions, democracy is alive and well. In particular, Dr Vince Giuca will examine two important threats to democracy. First, populism, where (authoritarian) leaders claim to represent the people and their interests and, yet, introduce anti-pluralistic and anti-liberal measures. Second, digital technology, which is becoming all too pervasive in our lives and has significant implications for political power and civil liberties, and consequently, for democracy itself. Vince will introduce these ideas and ask questions about their ramifications for Australian democracy and whether we need to take action in defending and, perhaps, shoring up aspects of our body politic.

While democracy has widespread appeal, many consider it to be under threat. Dr Vince Giuca will open this discussion by asking what is 'democracy', teasing out the implications of 'rule of the people' — an amorphous concept for some who ask whether it is meaningless and should be abandoned altogether. This will be followed with consideration of where democracy is today with special attention to American politics in the age of Trumpism.

Subjectivists about morality say that all of our moral judgments are about nothing more than our personal preferences. Objectivists, on the other hand, claim that our moral valuations are based on a human-independent realm of moral facts. Is there a way to reconcile these two opposing views? In this second part of a two-part series, Leslie Allan explains the expressive function of moral language that gives it its subjective character. He’ll then return to filling out the case that ethics is also importantly ‘objective’ by looking at how ‘objective’ is formally defined and how it is used in legal reasoning. Leslie goes on to illustrate how the requirement for impartiality appears centrally in the five most prominent theories of ethics and in the long history of religious thinking on the subject.

Subjectivists about morality say that all of our moral judgments are about nothing more than our personal preferences. Objectivists, on the other hand, claim that our moral valuations are based on a human-independent realm of moral facts. Is there a way to reconcile these two opposing views? In this first part of a two-part series, Leslie Allan will get us thinking about this vexed problem by introducing us to a typical everyday moral argument. He’ll then discuss how four dominant views in moral philosophy seriously misconstrue how ethics can be objective. By properly contrasting different senses of ‘objective’ and ‘subjective’, Leslie will go on to articulate how being objective in moral reasoning does not preclude a necessary subjective element as well.

In this episode, Leslie Allan shares his early experiences and how they shape his humanist outlook today. He then outlines what he considers to be the three core principles underlying the humanist world view and illustrates their application with historical and contemporary examples. He concludes by drawing upon each of these principles to tease out what it means to live a good life; a life of meaning and purpose.

This synopsis tracks the story of Henrietta Dugdale, a leading light of the women’s liberation movement in pre-Federation Australia. Throughout the nineteenth century, women were treated as emotional and fragile, unable to govern themselves. In this social setting, Dugdale challenged the suffocating patriarchal structures of the day with her provocative prose and political willpower. She campaigned tirelessly for equality and for the victory of reason over cruel religious dogma. With her fellow suffragists, she changed irrevocably how women were treated within the family and the broader society.

The rise of Donald Trump and the outcome of the Brexit vote indicate that our democratic systems of government are under stress. Leslie Allan outlines the key principles underpinning democracy and some ideas on how to buttress them.