The Partially Examined Life Philosophy Podcast

We quickly complete our treatment of G.E. Moore's "Proof of the External World" (1939) and move on to consider "Certainty" (1941). Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus content.

On G.E. Moore's "Proof of the External World" (1939) and "Certainty" (1941). Moore shows you his hands and says "these are my hands, which are physical objects, and thus the external world exists!" Does this defeat skepticism? Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion.

Recorded by Mark, Wes, and Dylan before our Moore discussion, we play one more listener appreciation clip that leads us into an examination of whether you listeners should try to read the texts we cover yourselves. If you're not hearing the full version of this part of the discussion , sign up via one of the options described at partiallyexaminedlife.com/support .

Continuing on "A Defense of Common Sense" (1925). Moore argues that physical facts are not dependent on minds and considers the various ways of analyzing the act of seeing and identifying your hand. Yes, he really does this! Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion including our year-end Nightcap discussion...

On "A Defense of Common Sense" (1925), featuring Mark, Wes, Seth, and Dylan. Moore defends our pre-philosophical certainty in beliefs about the existence of physical objects and other minds against skeptics and idealists. Is his apparently simple argument effective or just glib? Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonu...

Concluding on the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2021) Supreme Court decision. We talk more about the rationale for the decision and in particular the dissent by Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan. If you're not hearing the full version of this part of the discussion , sign up via one of the options described at partiallyexaminedlife.com/support .

Continuing on Ronald Dworkin's "Unenumerated Rights: Whether and How Roe Should be Overruled" (1992) and the Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2021) decision featuring guest Robin Linsenmayer. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion including the supporter-exclusive part three to this episode.

Does the U.S. Constitution guarantee the right to an abortion? We discuss Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization (2021) and Ronald Dworkin's "Unenumerated Rights: Whether and How Roe Should be Overruled" (1992). With guest Robin Linsenmayer. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion.

To conclude our discussion of Blood Meridian, we talk about the roles of maturation and regression in the novel, plus more on Judge Holden's philosophy, and more. If you're not hearing the full version of this part of the discussion , sign up via one of the options described at partiallyexaminedlife.com/support .

Continuing on McCarthy's 1985 novel, we discuss the philosophy of war held by the character Judge Holden, plus whether the book's violence is gratuitous and why it might be unfilmable. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion including the supporter-exclusive part three to this episode.

On McCarthy's 1985 anti-Western novel, featuring Wes, Seth, and Dylan. How does violence play a role in the way the world works? This novel about a rogue band of scalp hunters presents a pessimistic, nihilistic philosophy where violence is central to the human condition and is the way to self-knowledge. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free...

We recently put out a call among our supporters for some short audio clips of folks telling us about their relationship to PEL, and here they are. Mark, Seth, and Dylan play and respond to some of these. If you're not hearing the full version of this part of the discussion , sign up via one of the options described at partiallyexaminedlife.com/support .

Continuing on Roland Dworkin's "The Model of Rules" (1967) and Scott J. Shapiro's "The 'Hart-Dworkin' Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed" (2007), plus some of Dworkin's "Hard Cases" (1977). How do Hartians respond to Dworkin's initial attack? Can Hart's theory incorporate the fact that judges consult their culture's moral standards without making the law dependent on morality? Get more at par...

On Ronald Dworkin's "The Model of Rules" (1967) and Scott J. Shapiro's "The 'Hart-Dworkin' Debate: A Short Guide for the Perplexed" (2007). How do judges make decisions in hard cases? When the law "runs out" and doesn't definitively decide an issue, do judges then just draw on their personal moral judgments? Dworkin says no, that moral principles are (contra Hart) built into the legal principles w...

On The Concept of Law (1961), ch. 6, "Foundations of a Legal System," on Hart's concept of a rule of recognition that ultimately determines what will count as a law in a given society. This ends up being more complicated than merely "The Constitution," but the action itself of officials respecting, obeying, and enforcing that Constitution. If you're not hearing the full version of this part of the...

Continuing on "Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals" (1958) and The Concept of Law (1961), ch. 5 and 6. If law is not based on morality, then why obey the law? What makes a legal system exist at all, as opposed to a lawless state? Is saying something is legally required just a way of predicting that people will generally obey it? Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyex...

On "Positivism and the Separation of Law and Morals" (1958) and The Concept of Law (1961), ch. 5 and 6. What's the relationship between law and morality? If law isn't founded on morality, what is it founded on? Hart's legal positivism makes a sharp distinction between law as a human invention and morality. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-fr...

Mark, Wes, and eventually Dylan recap The Praise of Folly, getting into Erasmus' ambivalent take on asceticism. In the full episode, we get seriously personal and cover his sexism and comments on love, the folly of fandom, and the role of humor in philosophy. If you're not hearing the full version of this part of the discussion , sign up via one of the options described at partiallyexaminedlife.co...

Continuing on The Praise of Folly with guest Nathan Gilmour. Can foolishness actually make us more prudent? Is it necessary for us to all get along in the world and accomplish things? Erasmus critiques pretentious, performative theologians among many others. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion includin...

On Desiderius Erasmus' The Praise of Folly (1509), featuring Mark, Wes, Dylan, and Nathan Gilmour from the Christian Humanist podcast. Does some amount of foolishness enhance life? Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. Sponsor: Visit Shopify.com/pel to start your free trial growing your business.

Mark, Wes, and Dylan explore the question, "Is it necessary for us to have representatives of an affected group with us as guests when we talk about an issue in philosophy that affects that group?" What do you think? If you're not hearing the full version of this part of the discussion , sign up via one of the options described at partiallyexaminedlife.com/support .

Stephen West from the juggernaut Philosophize This! podcast joins Mark and Bill to learn to say no and talk about reason vs. emotion in grounding ethics. What do the voices in your head (or at your lunch table) say to you? Mark philosophizes at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Bill improvises (and teaches) at chicagoimprovstudio.com . Hear more at philosophyimprov.com . Support the podcast to get all o...

Jenny Hansen joins us to cover "On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion" by Mary Anne Warren (1973), with more thoughts on "A Defense of Abortion" (1971) by Judith Jarvis Thomson. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion including a supporter-exclusive Nightcap discussion of representation on our episodes...

Continuing on Judith Jarvis Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion" (1971), plus Don Marquis' "Why Abortion is Immoral" (1989) and a summary of Mary Anne Warren's "On the Moral and Legal Status of Abortion" (1973), which we'll continue next week in part three with Jenny Hansen. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com . Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discu...

Robyn has been producing a distinctive flavor of very British rock with surrealist lyrics for 35+ albums since 1979. We discuss "The Raging Muse" (and close by listening to "The Shuffle Man") from Shufflemania (2022), "Mad Shelly's Letterbox" from Robyn Hitchcock (2017), "Television" from Spooked (2004), and "Glass" from Fegmainia! (1985). Intro: "I Wanna Destroy You" by The Soft Boys from Underwa...