Philosophy Talk

Revoking support or a platform from someone who is perceived to have behaved badly has recently been dubbed “cancel culture.” Many complain that this pervasive practice promotes mob mentality and stifles free speech. But is “cancel culture” a real phenomenon, or has it become an overused and meaningless concept? Is publicly censuring others for something they’ve done or said itself a form of free speech? And is there a moral difference between “canceling” public figures and “canceling” ordinary folks who get caught on tape behaving badly? Josh and Ray provide a platform to Adrian Daub from Stanford University, author of The Cancel Culture Panic: How an American Obsession Went Global.

According to a recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center, the number of Americans who trust in science is steadily declining. While politicization is partly to blame, another reason may be that the “truths” of science seem to shift endlessly. So why should we trust science? Is it still reliable, even if it doesn’t seem to settle on a single truth? And what can be done to increase the general public’s confidence in medicine, climate research, or statistics? Josh and Ray rely on Ann Thresher from Stanford University, co-author of The Tangle of Science: Reliability Beyond Method, Rigour, and Objectivity.

What happened over the last twelve months that challenged our assumptions and made us think about things in new ways? The Year in Developed Nations at War with Tamsin Shaw from NYU, author of Nietzsche’s Political Skepticism The Year in Supreme Court Controversy with Bernadette Meyler from the Stanford Law School, author of Theaters of Pardoning The Year in Deep Space Photography with Nick Riggle from the University of San Diego, author of This Beauty: A Philosophy of Being Alive

The moon landing was faked! JFK Jr. is still alive! Finland doesn’t exist! Conspiracy theories of all sorts have been gaining traction, thanks partly to the ease with which they spread online. But what makes someone more inclined to believe in vast conspiracies? Are marginalized groups who have been lied to by authorities more likely to be distrustful of official narratives? Or do common cognitive biases make all humans susceptible to this kind of thinking? And what can we do to combat the spread of conspiracy theorizing? Ray and guest-host Blakey Vermeule hatch a plot with Christopher French from the University of London, co-author of Anomalistic Psychology: Exploring Paranormal Belief and Experience.

Marcel Proust’s In Search of Lost Time challenges us to think hard about what we can know, who we really are, why memory matters, and how we can find enchantment in a world without God. But some might wonder why we need a 3,000 page novel to do that. Are there things a novel can do that a philosophy book can’t? Does it take a great person to produce great art? And why read Proust in the twenty-first century? Ray and guest-host Blakey Vermeule find a spot on the guestlist for Josh and his new book, The World According to Proust.

Many democracies are founded on the ideals of 18th- and 19th-Century British Liberalism: the idea that human beings deserve the right to self-government because we are born free, equal, and capable of rationality. Yet Liberalism was used to justify colonialism, which deprived people around the world of the right to govern themselves. How could a political philosophy that claims to be pro-freedom be used to take freedom away from so many people? Was Liberalism misunderstood, or were its moral flaws built-in from the beginning? How can we design a political philosophy that liberates everyone, not just the citizens of a few wealthy and powerful nations? Josh and Ray talk liberally with Uday Singh Mehta from the CUNY Graduate Center, author of Liberalism and Empire: A Study in Nineteenth-Century British Liberal Thought, for an episode generously sponsored by the Stanford Global Studies program.

Catastrophic storms, floods, droughts, and fires are increasing in frequency all over the globe, and the polar ice caps are melting twice as fast as initially predicted. Despite this, we struggle to take meaningful action that could avert—or at least mitigate—the impending climate disaster. So why is it so hard for people to coordinate on doing the right thing, when the threat is so urgent? Is it a failure of human rationality, a lack of will, or something else? And how do we overcome the obstacles we face and take collective action that will make a real difference? Josh and Ray collect their thoughts with Kieran Setiya from MIT, author of Life Is Hard: How Philosophy Can Help Us Find Our Way.

Fashion designers, musicians, and Halloween costume wearers have been accused of engaging in cultural appropriation. In some cases, the alleged appropriator is quick to apologize; in others, they defend their actions as a way of appreciating a different culture. So why is cultural appropriation such a morally fraught issue? Is there a clear-cut way to tell whether we’re exploring or exploiting? And can we come up with principles that allow artists to be inspired while also allowing communities to hold on to what is theirs? Josh and Ray mix it up with Dominic Lopes from the University of British Columbia, author of Aesthetic Injustice: A Cosmopolitan Theory (forthcoming).

Most people agree that it’s good to help others, but philosophers disagree about how much good we need to do, and for whom. Effective altruists claim that you have a moral obligation to do the most good you can—even when that means setting aside the needs of your nearest and dearest in order to help strangers. So what does morality demand of us? Are we justified in caring more about our own communities than faraway strangers? And is it ever okay to pursue a personal project when you could be helping others? Josh and Ray demand much of Theron Pummer from the University of St. Andrews, author of The Rules of Rescue: Cost, Distance, and Effective Altruism.

We all know our society is economically unequal: some people have more money and resources than others. But equality isn’t just a matter of who has which things. Political equality involves respect and participation in the political process—but those aren’t resources that can be divided up like pie. So what is political equality in the first place? How do we know when we’ve achieved it? And can we prevent politics from being an elite activity concentrated among the educated and wealthy? Josh and Ray push for equality with Margaret Levi, Director of the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University and co-author of A Moral Political Economy: Present, Past, and Future.