Select Episodes

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/technology-immortality

Some futurists believe we are not far from a time when technology and medicine will be so advanced that humans need no longer die of old age or other natural causes. Eventually, not only will we be able to replace our natural body parts, but we might even be able to “download” our selves into a new cybernetic body. But is this a realistic possibility or just a confused fantasy? Is the self the kind of thing that can be downloaded and persist through radical changes in its “hardware”? And if it were possible for people to indefinitely extend their biological lives, what would the moral implications be for social inequality and distribution of the planet’s finite resources? John and Ken look beyond the mortal coil with Kevin O'Neill from the University of Redlands, author of "Internet Afterlife: Virtual Salvation in the Twenty-First Century" (forthcoming).

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/reincarnation-past-lives-future-selves.

According to Buddhist tradition, all people must suffer illness, aging, and death. Yet the universe is seen as a vast living entity, in which cycles of individual life and death are repeated without cease. Therefore death is a necessary part of the process of life, making renewal and new growth possible. So what does this view mean about the eternality of the self? Is there a single subject or consciousness that persists through all the cycles of death and rebirth? What are the karmic consequences of one’s moral acts for future lives? And how can the view of endless death and rebirth lead to greater compassion for all life? John and Ken revisit their past with Robert Thurman from Columbia University, author of "Infinite Life: Awakening to Bliss Within."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/whats-next-death-and-afterlife.

The question of what happens to us after we die remains as mysterious now as it always was. Some think that death amounts to total annihilation of the self; others adhere to certain religious traditions, which teach that the immaterial soul (and, in some traditions, the resurrected body) can ultimately survive death. So how are we to judge between these radically different views of what happens to us in death? What would it mean for the self to persist beyond the destruction of the body? Is there room in a scientific account of the mind for the existence of an immaterial soul? John and Ken see the light with Richard Swinburne from the University of Oxford, author of "Mind, Brain, and Free Will."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/lure-immortality.

Would you like to live forever? It is a tempting notion that has been explored and imagined for centuries. Perhaps immortality is desirable, but it might also be that death is a significant part of what gives meaning to life. So what would a society of immortal individuals look like? What might some of the challenges or rewards of an immortal life be? How would living forever affect our relationships with one another, our life goals, or simply the way we perceive time? Would the impacts of immortality ultimately be beneficial or detrimental to us? John and Ken tempt fate with John Fischer from UC Riverside, author of "Our Stories: Essays on Life, Death, and Free Will."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/life-work-art.

We know what it means for a painting to be beautiful. But what about a life? Like great works of art, great people exhibit style, originality, and creativity. Maybe, then, to live well is just to practice an ART of living. But what do the values that are important to a good life – happiness, moral goodness, or friendship, for example – have to do with aesthetic beauty? Aren’t the qualities that make a work of art good different from the qualities that make a life good? Is there really such thing as a "beautiful" life? John and Ken paint their masterpiece with Lanier Anderson from Stanford University, recorded live on campus as part of the Stanford Continuing Studies series "The Art of Living."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/finding-meaning-material-world.

All there is in the world is physical stuff. That is the fundamental assumption of the materialist standpoint, and the picture given to us by science. But if there is no immaterial soul that survives the death of the body, no other realm to bestow meaning on our lives, how can we avoid despairing in light of this apparent pointlessness? Is there any way we can build meaning from the naturalistic building blocks that science provides? John and Ken talk materially with Owen Flanagan from Duke University, author of "The Really Hard Problem: Meaning in a Material World." Recorded live on campus as part of the Stanford Continuing Studies series "The Art of Living."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/freedom-and-free-enterprise.

“Freedom” means the human capacity to choose among options, based on one’s own preferences and reasoning. It also stands for the political status to exercise such freedom on matters of conscience and to express opinions without interference from the state. Enlightenment thinkers also included the right to buy and sell property in an open market with minimal government interference. So is the justification for our free-enterprise system a practical matter – an effective way of organizing resources and the distribution of goods – or does it rest on deeper principles? John and Ken test their entrepreneurial spirit with Shannon Stimson from UC Berkeley, co-author of "After Adam Smith: A Century of Transformation in Politics and Political Economy."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/ancient-wisdom-modern-times

If the Ancients found themselves transported to the modern world, they would have much to learn about science, technology, and human thinking. But is there something the Ancients can still teach us about how to live a good life? What relevance do the virtues – wisdom, courage, prudence, justice, and so on – have for our modern times? Could these ancient values help solve some of the most challenging problems of contemporary life? John and Ken talk old school with Melissa Lane from Princeton University, author of "Eco-Republic: What the Ancients Can Teach Us about Ethics, Virtue, and Sustainable Living." This program was recorded live on campus as part of the Stanford Continuing Studies series "The Art of Living."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/physics-philosophy-and-theology.

The world disclosed by the physical sciences can seem depressing. Modern physics, for example, has undermined the religious idea that the universe has a spiritual dimension. Quantum physics in particular seems to present the world as more paradoxical than rational. Is there room within – or in addition to – the world presented to us by the physical sciences for ideas such as freedom, dignity, justice, and even God? Or should these all be regarded as useful illusions? John and Ken search the heavens with Tim O'Connor from Indiana University, author of "Theism and Ultimate Explanation: The Necessary Shape of Contingency."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/faith-reason-and-art-living

It sounds plausible to require that all our beliefs be based on evidence and sound reasoning. Yet some people's most cherished beliefs, like their belief in a deity, are based on faith alone. Does that make those beliefs fundamentally irrational, or could there be some rational justification for such faith? And what about reason itself—are there limits to what can be known rationally? Does our reliance on reason demand a kind of faith of its own? Is there a way to reconcile faith and reason, or does the well-lived life demand that we choose one over the other? John Ken put reasonable faith in Howard Wettstein from UC Riverside, author of "The Significance of Religious Experience."