Some audio tidbits to hint at the analytic glories in the second half of our discussion, getting deeper into the psychoanalytic/existential interpretations of the film. Get the discussion at patreon.com/partiallyexaminedlife or with a PEL Citizenship.

On the 1958 film and articles including Laura Mulvey's "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" (1975) and Robin Wood's "Vertigo" (1965). What is love? Are we really just loving a built image while remaining isolated? And is it just an illusionary social construct that keeps us all from feeling fundamental vertigo? Lacan, existentialism, and more!

Part 2 is for supporters only! It won't be on the public feed, so get the full discussion now at patreon.com/partiallyexaminedlife or through a PEL Citizenship.

More on Darwin's famous book. Why does it matter for philosophy, beyond providing an alternative to intelligent design? Is it really anti-religious? How can well tell if it's really a scientific theory? Talking about a species evolving trait X to enable survival sounds teleological; is it really, and is that bad? Why would the mind develop through natural selection?

Continues from part 1, or just get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

End song: "I Live" by Jason Falkner, as interviewed on Nakedly Examined Music #47.

On Charles Darwin's 1859 book, ch. 1–4, 6, and 14. What are the philosophical ramifications of Darwin's theory of evolution? We go through Darwin's arguments, compare his views to other theories of evolution like Lamarck's, and talk about how an evolutionary way of looking at things has influenced philosophers.

Please support PEL!

Continuing on David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779), with guest Stephen West. We get further into what's wrong with the design argument and why Hume thinks that it's merely a verbal dispute whether we want to say that God designed the orderly universe or just say that the universe is orderly. Also, the problem of evil!

Listen to part 1 first, or get the ad-free, unbroken Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

End song: "Here Comes the Flood" by The Security Project; one of its leaders Trey Gunn appeared on Nakedly Examined Music ep. 21.

On David Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (1779). How should the scientifically minded argue for God's existence? Is the order and complexity of nature enough to prove an infinite God of the traditional sort? With guest Stephen West.

Don't wait until next week for part 2; get the rest of the discussion now with your ad-free Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

Concluding on the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670) and Tractatus Politicus (1677).

What's the relationship between ethics, reason, and revelation? What could "faith" possibly mean to a hard-core rationalist like Spinoza? Is it possible to buy into the non-denominational "true religion" without believing any of the dogmas of traditional religion at all? And what kinds of limits on free speech is Spinoza committed to?

Continued from part one, or get the ad-free Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

End song: "Shittalkers" by Ken Stringfellow, as interviewed on Nakedly Examined Music ep. 39.

On Benedict de Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 12–20 and the Tractatus Politicus (1677).

What's the relationship between ethics and political power? Given that religious factions tend to create strife, what's the optimal role of the government in mitigating that damage? Is theocracy in any way a good idea?

Continues with Part Two. Get the ad-free, unbroken Citizen Edition. Please support PEL!

Continuing on the Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 1–11. We go more into natural laws vs. ordinances; does it make sense to say that God makes rules for people? Also, how does Spinoza deal with alleged miracles given that natural laws are absolute regularities?

Continued from part 1, or get the ad-free Citizen Edition now. Please support PEL!

End song: "Spinoza's Dream" by Dave Nachmanoff, as discussed on Nakedly Examined Music #20.

On Benedict de Spinoza's Tractatus Theologico-Politicus (1670), ch. 1–11.

For Spinoza, the Bible was a political issue, and he was interested in a way to read it that didn't lead to people fighting wars and persecuting each other. Spinoza argues that a respectful reading is one that looks for the central message and doesn't paper over many places where the text was tailored to its original audience's prejudices, or where for historical reasons we can't now really know what it meant to them.

Please support PEL!