Claim OwnershipPhilosophy Bites
Subscribed: 49,078Played: 407,026
Subscribe
© copyright David Edmonds and Nigel Warburton
Description
David Edmonds (Uehiro Centre, Oxford University) and Nigel Warburton (freelance philosopher/writer) interview top philosophers on a wide range of topics. Two books based on the series have been published by Oxford University Press. We are currently self-funding - donations very welcome via our website http://www.philosophybites.com
393 Episodes
Reverse
What is distinctive about Mexican philosophy? How much is it linked to its geopolitical context? Carlos Alberto Sanchez, author of Blooming in the Ruins, a book about major themes in 20th century Mexican philosophy discusses this topic in conversation with David Edmonds. This episode was supported by the Ideas Workshop, part of Open Society Foundations.
Mary Midgley didn't begin publishing until she was 59 years old, but nevertheless made a significant impact and had a distinctive approach. In this episode of Philosophy Bites Ellie Robson discusses some of her key ideas about our relationship with other animals.
Many people think philosophical discucssion is a luxury in times of conflict, but the Palestinian philosopher Sari Nusseibeh is more optimistic. In this episode of Philosophy Bites, recorded in early 2025, he explains why.
1Democracy is about acting as a group, but, surprisingly, Robert Talisse argues that what it needs to function well is a degree of solitude for citizens. In-group and out-group dynamics mean that individuals become vulnerable to being pushed towards more extreme views than they would otherwise hold. There is, Talisse, maintains, a need to balance times of thinking together with times of thinking alone, at a distance from the fray.
How did morality evolve? Why do different cultures have such a similar set of moral norms and values? Hanno Sauer gives an evolutionary story that explains the genealogy of morality through human co-operation.
Most Western philosophers are deeply ignorant of Japanese philosophy. Takeshi Morisato who was brought up in Japan, and who has studied both continental and analytic Western traditions provides and introduction to some of the key strands in Japanese philosophy.
Melissa Lane, a classics scholar as well as a philosopher, discusses some key features of Plato's political philosophy and shows its continuing relevance.
Does Socrates still have something to teach us? Agnes Callard thinks he has. Here she discusses the great Athenian and his continuing relevance with David Edmonds.
Henri Bergson was once one of the most living famous philosophers. Now he is less well known. Emily Herring, his biographer, discusses this and some of his key ideas in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. Nigel Warburton is the interviewer.
For this episode in the Bio Bites strand of the Philosphy Bites podcast Nigel Warburton interviews Lyndsey Stonebridge, author of a recent book about Hannah Arendt, We Are Free To Change the World, about how her thought was affected by her circumstances as an emigré fleeing Nazism.
Sometimes, there is vagueness about whether it is morally permissible (or even in some situations required) to perform a certain act—moral vagueness. What is the source of moral vagueness? Ofra Magidor discusses this topic with Nigel Warburton. This episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast has been made in association with Vagueness & Ethics, a research project funded by the European Commission (grant agreement number 101028625 — H2020-MSCA-IF-2020) and led by Miguel Dos Santos at Uppsala University.
How can we make decisions under conditions of indeterminacy? Robert Williams discusses this challenging issue with Nigel Warburton. This episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast has been made in association with Vagueness & Ethics, a research project funded by the European Commission (grant agreement number 101028625 — H2020-MSCA-IF-2020) and led by Miguel Dos Santos at Uppsala University.
Peter Godfrey Smith is famous for his work on understanding the minds of other animals, particularly octopuses. In this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast he discusses animal minds with Nigel Warburton.
Hegel is a notoriously difficult philosopher to understand. Here Richard Bourke gives a clear route through his key ideas about history and how it unfolds in conversation with Nigel Warburton.
Recent zoological research has shown us that a wide range of animals are likely to have sentience. We don't know for sure. There is sufficient evidence to think that it is likely that, for example, lobsters can feel pain. What should we do in the light of this? Jonathan Birch of the LSE, author of The Edge of Sentience, discusses this important question with Nigel Warburton.
The Cambridge philosopher Frank Ramsey died aged 26, but in a short brilliant life he made significant contributions to philosphy and economics. Here in the Bio Bites strand of Philosophy Bites David Edmonds discusses Ramsey's life and thought with his biographer Cheryl Misak.
Moral heroes are usually thought of as people who go beyond what is obligatory. Elizabeth Harman discusses whether sometimes we ought to act as moral heroes. She is in conversation with David Edmonds for this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast.
Can AI help us make difficult moral decisions? Walter Sinnott Armstrong explores this idea in conversation with David Edmonds in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast.
David Edmonds discusses the life and work of Derek Parfit who died in 2017 in this episode of the Bio Bites strand of Philosophy. David is the author of a recent biography of Parfit.
Yascha Mounk discusses some of the ways in which focussing on gender, racial, and sexual identities can distort political argument and be counterproductive for oppressed minorities.
Download from Google Play
Download from App Store
United States
can't know she's a virgen
Surely all life is sentient. the ability to feel and sense (sentience) is a requirement for remaining alive, along with food and oxygen. This is an interesting podcast, but this episode is just silly.
Fascinating conversation for me as a writer. Perhaps it overlooked one factor: our reactions to emotions are not automatic. We don't always run away in response to fear for example. We are in control of our responses in life as in fiction.
the lack of meaningful push-back on claims like "schools are segregating the students" or "students have no choice" (while he's literally providing the opposite perspective at a university) is why I'm unsubbing. personal anecdotes dont count as evidence. equivocating overcorrection with the badness of a policy root is fallacious. and there's no philosophical value in removing intent from "cultural appropriation" - that action requires intent and would cover all costumes present at the party.
So, if I get sum it up, I rather to say that the idea of death and its fear, however being excruciating, still plays an important role in pushing us to live a better life. Thinking about death and afterlife might seem disturbing, yet consequently helpful, as it provokes us to fully live our life. It doesn't matter if we keep neglecting the uneasyness of death, since it is still there and ignoring it is only a mere attempt of escape, escaping from something that can save our life. #Death
there are already two of you speaking with accents, & almost the same exact voice, and adding a woman to that leaves me juggling. One of you should take testosterone.
The problem with this argument is it ignores the possibility of violence towards trans women. She doesn't bother to argue that overall violence will be reduced by excluding trans women from women's spaces; rather, she argues that any amount of violence towards women is unacceptable. She says that the argument does not imply trans women are particularly violent, but just that any violence that could potentially happen from a male-bodied person is unacceptable. But, why would we need to focus on this particular kind of violence? Why not focus on reducing violence overall? Despite her insisting otherwise, her argument only makes sense if one believes either a) trans women are particularly violent, or b) despite being statistically rare, violence against biological women from trans women should be considered morally worse than other types of violence (e.g. violence towards trans women), and therefore should be a priority. If you do not believe either a) or b), then the logical priority sho
A small but informative episode about plato's philosophy.
Just go and ruin the ending of 'To Kill a Mockingbird', then. Spoiler alert for 9:00.
good job explaining it arash ...easy to digest and a hot topic to talk about indeed love from one iranian to another
What was he even talking about? That was philosophical word garbage. The only coherent thought was his reference to 19th century philosophy. I am now dumber for having listened to that rambling halfwit puke his harebrained (what I think was) theory about.... I'm not actually sure because he didn't make any sense. This is why average people think philosophy is unimportant.
drivel
It would be great if you make more episodes about Arendt and specially Totalitarianism. Love your podcast, thank you so much 🤍🍀
Sad to see philosophy being infiltrated by modern gender studies. Kate has a respectable perspective on certain issues, but is obviously blinded by her preconceived ideology. She burned a strawman of the anti-abortion perspective. She even pulls out a vapid republican hypocrite stereotype, which even when absolutely the case, doesn't actually address the core moral argument over abortion. As a moral philosopher this an incredibly weak misdirection. Kate completely dodged the question of female entitlement. She again demonstrates she has a defined ideology and is inflexible in that regard. She's a modern femanist and asking her that is equivalent to asking a men's rights activist if men are toxic. It's rather ironic, implying women can't be meaningfully entitled or have any systemic control of human interaction is quite demeaning and evolutionarily ignorant towards females. It would seem her views, as with many modern social "science" arguments, are guilty of the bigotry of low expectat
this was almost therapeutic to listen to.. thank you
A wonderful framing of different points of view. clear and succinct. thank you
This is deep and scary
This episode is disappointing. While I understand the arguments, they are logically garbage. Arguing about women only spaces due to the violence they experience from men, and then holding that against trans-women is laughable. They, too, are disproportionately victimized by men. They, TOO, are escaping being attacked by people who wish to control their bodies. And to then reply to a question about evidence with "just read reddit, it just makes sense," mother of god. You couldnt provide a weaker defense if you had just pooped on the microphone.
👍👍👍
Personally I came to contrast infinity with zero. Both of them are arbitrary and malleable concepts. as opposed to contrasting it with an absolute concept like one. I do find both perspectives interesting and useful though.