Select Episodes

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/good-evil-and-divine-plan

A theodicy is an explanation by a philosopher or theologian about why a world created by a kind and all-powerful God contains so much suffering. It forces us to think about the nature of good and evil, whether the kind of knowledge an all-knowing God has leaves room for human freedom. Why do people who suffer often find their faith in God growing stronger? Is evil an illusion? Does God really need a defense attorney? John and Ken search for insight with Andrew Pinsent, Research Director of the Ian Ramsey Centre for Science and Religion at the University of Oxford.

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/demands-morality.

We all want to lead a moral life. But even if we all agreed on what that would mean, we still have to balance our own self-interest with the competing demands of morality. This becomes even more challenging when the decks are stacked against us, or when everyone around us is only looking out for themselves. So in the real world, what does it mean to live a moral life? Do we have a responsibility to act morally when others around us are not? And what do we do if morality makes excessive demands of us? John and Ken balance their own self-interests with Tamar Schapiro from Stanford University.

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/god-and-fine-tuned-universe.

If the precise value of many physical constants had been different, the universe would not have supported life, human life, consciousness, philosophy and us. Is it just luck – without which we wouldn't even be here to worry about it? Or is there a Creator who wanted things to turn out the way they did, and fine-tuned the universe to get that result? What if there were many universes, with many combinations of values for the basic constants, and we just exist in the one with the improbable combination for life? John and Ken fine-tune their arguments with Robin Collins from Messiah College, author of "God and the Laws of Nature."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/self.

What is a self? Merely a human being? Or perhaps a soul? Hume claimed he could not find a self when he looked within, only a succession of impressions. But other philosophers seem to find transcendental selves, momentary selves, and objective selves, among others. Do the modern physical and biological sciences shed light on the self, or do they suggest there is no room – and no need – for such things? John and Ken examine their selves and others with Jenann Ismael from the University of Arizona, author of "The Situated Self."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/unconditional-love.

According to Corinthians 13, “Love is patient, love is kind and envies no one.” But is love always unconditional? Should it be? If unconditional love means that we love no matter what our beloved’s actions or traits are, doesn’t that suggest we should love everyone in this way? If not, how do we select just a few to love unconditionally? Perhaps the feeling we reserve for those we cherish most in the world is better described as selfless rather than unconditional love, in which case we are confronted with another challenge. What happens when our beloved changes radically and loses the very features that caused us to love in the first place? John and Ken talk unconditionally with Lynn Underwood, editor of "The Science of Compassionate Love: Theory, Research and Applications."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/freedom-blame-and-resentment.

When someone acts without regard for our feelings or needs, a natural response is to feel resentment toward that person. But is that a rational response? What if there's no such thing as free will? Is blame still appropriate in a deterministic universe? Or are we simply genetically programmed to respond emotionally to perceived injuries? John and Ken talk freely with Pamela Hieronymi from UCLA, author of "Reflection and Responsibility."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/pantheism.

Pantheism is the doctrine that the world is either identical with God or an expression of His nature. Pantheistic ideas appear in many schools of Buddhism and Hinduism, and in the Tao-te-Ching. Pantheism also has had defenders in Western philosophy, including Heraclitus, Spinoza, Fichte, Schelling, and Hegel. Many of the Romantic poets, like Shelley, Keats, and Wordsworth, were considered pantheists. In modern times, the ecological movement has led to new interest in pantheism and its emphasis on nature as sacred. Is there a consistent world view that all these philosophies have in common? And how should we understand the claim that nature is to be worshipped? John and Ken welcome back Philip Clayton from the Claremont Graduate School, co-author of "The Predicament of Belief: Science, Philosophy and Faith."

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/forgive-and-forget.

At least forgive OR forget. Get things behind you. All good advice for those who don't want their life dominated by the bad things that have happened to them at the hands of others. This advice has also been applied to aggrieved populations following liberating reforms and revolutions, as in South Africa. But what is forgiveness? What are its limits? Does it make sense to forgive those who attempt genocide, for example? Does forgiveness entail a sacrifice of pride and dignity? John and Ken let bygones be bygones with their guest, Paul Hughes from the University of Michigan-Dearborn.

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/miracles.

Religions rely on miracles to demonstrate the authenticity of figures thought to have supernatural powers. Lots of people feel that key events in their lives were literally miracles. Many even claim to have witnessed miracles. But what counts as a miracle? Is it true, as Hume argued, that it's always more rational to disbelieve the testimony of a miracle than to believe in the miracle itself? John and Ken explore what miracles are, and what would constitute good reasons for believing in them, with Peter Graham from the University of California Riverside.

More at http://philosophytalk.org/shows/wisdom.

Philosophy is the love of wisdom – or is it? Is this traditional definition outmoded? Is wisdom an anachronism, an elitist concept deployed by old learned people with nothing of practical value to say? Do the professors of philosophy around the world (or on this program) love wisdom any more or less than anyone else? John and Ken wise up with Valerie Tiberius from the University of Minnesota, author of "The Reflective Life: Living Wisely With Our Limits."