054: Ep50 – Transitional Justice

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

In this fiftieth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast, we interview Dr. Colleen Murphy of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign about her recent book on “Transitional Justice.”

Dr. Colleen Murphy.

Cover of Colleen Murphy's 2018 book, The Conceptual Foundations of Transitional Justice.Colleen’s recent book is titled The Conceptual Foundations of Transitional Justice. This project is an extension of her work from a prior book, A Moral Theory of Political Reconciliation. Colleen is a Professor in the College of Law and the Departments of Philosophy and Political Science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. She is also the Director of the Women and Gender in Global Perspectives Program in International Programs and Studies, and Affiliate Faculty of the Beckman Institute. She is also an Associate Editor of the Journal of Moral Philosophy.

Listen for our “You Tell Me!” questions and for some jokes in one of our concluding segments, called “Philosophunnies.” Reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.


(62 mins)

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

Notes

  1. Colleen Murphy, The Conceptual Foundations of Transitional Justice (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2018), available for pre-order.
  2. Colleen Murphy, A Moral Theory of Political Reconciliation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012).

 

You Tell Me!

For our future “You Tell Me!” segments, Colleen posed the following question in this episode:

“What do you think counts as dealing justly with our own past here in the United States (or in your country)?”

Let us know what you think! Via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below.

058: Ep54 – BC11 – Super Cute PBB Promo

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

This fifty-fourth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast is our eleventh “breadcrumb” so far, this time featuring only a humorous radio spot that we recorded for the station, WRFL, to play throughout the week to promote the show. We had a lot of fun making this little promo, which features Weber’s 3-year-old son Sam. If you’d enjoy a chuckle, give this, our shortest breadcrumb, a listen.

Samuel Maxwell Weber, the star in our promo spot for Philosophy Bakes Bread.

While putting together this show takes a tremendous amount of work and some resources, we hope you can tell how much it’s been a labor of love, the Philo- part of Philosophy! If you enjoy this breadcrumb, share it with your friends, be sure you’ve subscribed to the show, and give us a positive rating and review on iTunes or your podcast outlet of choice!

As always, you can reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we may play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.

 

(4 minutes)

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

 

The logo for WRFL Lexington, 88.1 FM.Notes

  1. WRFL, Radio Free Lexington, 88.1 FM: Web site, Facebook page, and Twitter profile.
  2. Kentucky Child Labor Laws.

Let us know what you think via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below!

053: Ep49 – Public Philosophy and Polarization

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

In this forty-ninth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast, we interview Matt Yglesias on the subject of “Public Philosophy and Polarization.” Before starting his career as a pundit, writer, and philosophical blogger, Matt majored in Philosophy in his undergraduate studies.

Matt Yglesias.

Matt is a Senior Correspondent and a co-founder of Vox.com, which he started with Ezra Klein and Melissa Bell in 2014. Vox.com is a popular online news publication that offers commentary and explanations about news of the day. Matt’s writings focus on politics and economic policy. He also co-hosts The Weeds podcast twice a week, a show that gets into the weeds of politics and policy. In addition to his writings for Vox, Think Progress, The Atlantic, Talking Points Memo, and The American Prospect, Matt has authored two books, including most recently, The Rent Is Too Damn High, about the policy origins of the middle class housing affordability crisis in America.

Listen for our “You Tell Me!” questions and for some jokes in one of our concluding segments, called “Philosophunnies.” Reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.

(61 mins)

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

Notes

  1. Vox.com, which Matt co-founded.
  2. Morris Fiorina, The Myth of a Polarized America (New York: Longman, 2010).
  3. Oprah’s recent 60 Minutes episode, featuring discussion from people on the Left and Right, politically, predicting another civil war.
  4. Newsweek on FDR’s internment camps.

 

You Tell Me!

For our future “You Tell Me!” segments, Matt posed the following question in this episode:

“What issues do you think need to be written about and discussed more in the public sphere?”

Let us know what you think! Via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below.

Humanizing Monsters

Civil American, Volume 2, Article 5 (October 31, 2017), https://goo.gl/KRo5bY.

| By Casey Dorman |

Adobe logo, to serve as a link to the Adobe PDF version of the transcript.

I was listening to NPR recently and an interviewer was talking to Thomas Hegghammer, a Norwegian professor of political science, who had just published an edited collection of essays/research studies called Jihadi Culture: The Art and Social Practices of Militant Islamists. One of the interviewer’s questions was “Aren’t you afraid that your book will humanize jihadists?” This struck me as strange. Could seeing anyone as human, even someone who engaged in systematic killing, be harmful? We often describe the most horrific crimes, such as genocide in terms of one group viewing the other as less than human. We are all aware of Hitler’s genocidal actions against Jews, whom he believed were biologically inferior to what he called the Aryan race. When Hutus in Rwanda killed nearly a million of their Tutsi neighbors, they described them as “cockroaches.” Even the American founding fathers were only willing to count each African American slave as worth 3/5 of a White person. These are instances, not uncommon in history, when embracing an ideology that involved viewing others as less than full human beings led to systematic mistreatment, killing or enslavement of people. But should we then turn around and view those who subscribe to such ideologies as also less then human?

Image of a man walking towards a monster silhouetted in the mist.

Image by Kellepics, CC0 License.

What does it mean to regard another person as a human being? Although many racist ideologies have based their prejudices on notions of “inferiority,” most of us reject such views. Some individuals are stronger, taller, smarter, slower, fatter, etc. than others, but it does not lessen their humanity in most people’s eyes. We tend to see others as less human when we see the trait they express as “evil”—when they show themselves as capable of cruelty that we do not regard ourselves, or any “normal” person, as capable of producing. To many Westerners and also to many from other parts of the world, including mainstream Muslims, jihadists such as al Qaeda or ISIS are seen as “evil.” They rape women, chop off heads, and they conduct deadly terror attacks on civilians. After recent White Supremacy demonstrations in places such as Charlottesville, VA, many Americans view those who espouse neo-Nazi or KKK-like racist views as evil enough that they have become unrecognizable as fellow human beings. They have crossed a line beyond which normal human beings never tread. We view all or most members of such groups as, in the words of Chloe Valdary, “hateful monsters.”

Dr. Philip Zimbardo.

Dr. Philip Zimbardo. CC0 license.

There are two broad theories of how people can embrace actions we typically regard as “evil” as a way of behaving toward their fellow men: One theory, embodied by the work of British psychologist, Simon Baron-Cohen (2011), is that some people lack or suffer from a reduction in empathy, and those people are not sensitive to how others feel. At this extreme of the distribution of empathy, along with some people with relatively rare developmental disabilities, are psychopaths. The other theory, embodied by the work of American psychologist, Philip Zimbardo (2007), famous for the Stanford Prison Experiment, is that anyone can be coaxed into behaving evilly toward his fellow man, using the proper social techniques. Baron-Cohen’s theory is a dispositional one; Zimbardo’s is a situational one.

Baron-Cohen defines empathy as “our ability to identify what someone else is thinking or feeling and to respond to their thoughts and feelings with an appropriate emotion.” He claims that, “we all lie somewhere on the empathy spectrum (from high to low). People said to be evil or cruel are simply at one extreme of the empathy spectrum.” Despite describing empathy as “more like a dimmer switch than an all-or-none switch,” he also describes people with “zero degrees of empathy,” who may be “Zero-Negative.” Those who are Zero-Negative include psychopaths, those with borderline personality disorder and narcissists. Their lives, and the lives of those around them, are affected negatively by their lack of empathy combined with impairment in their experience of emotions. Although Baron-Cohen does not dismiss the role of social pressures, such as conformity, in producing cruel acts, he insists that “when cruel acts occur, it is because of malfunctioning of the empathy circuit.” This may be only temporary, but in those who are truly evil and capable of long-term, systematic cruelty, he says the empathy system is “permanently down,” due to a variety of biological and environmental factors and their interaction. In other words, the truly evil are not like the rest of us.

Dr. Stanley Milgram.

Stanley Milgram. Photo by Jewish Currents.

Philip Zimbardo describes what he calls, “The Lucifer Effect,” or “How Good People Turn Evil.” His point is that evil behavior, as demonstrated in examples such as the behavior of Nazis killing Jews or the inhumane treatment of prisoners by the American guards at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, is something of which we are all capable, and he tries to show the social forces that contribute to it. He uses many examples, but three are particularly telling: his own 1971 Stanford Prison Experiment, Stanley Milgram’s 1960’s experiments on obedience, and psychologist Christopher Browning’s 1992 account of Ordinary Men: Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland.

(more…)

052: Ep48 – BC10 – How to Read Philosophy? The Answer Might Surprise You

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

Dr. Nancy A. McHugh.This forty-eighth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast is our tenth “breadcrumb” episode so far, this time with Dr. Nancy McHugh, who was our featured guest in Episode 47. For this breadcrumb, Nancy said that she had a funny tidbit about how to read philosophy, and that the answer to the question might surprise us. We had to hear it!

An optical illusion image that makes it seem as though the image shifts and moves as you look at it.

In addition to being chair of the Philosophy department at Wittenberg University in Springfield, Ohio, Nancy also teaches in the Inside Out Prison Exchange Program, which is some of the background that helps to understand her answer to the question of how to read philosophy. Her most recent book is titled The Limits of Knowledge: Generating Pragmatist Feminist Cases for Situated Knowing (SUNY Press, 2016).

As always, you can reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we may play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.

 


(12 mins)

 

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

Notes

  1. Episode 47 of the show, in which Dr. McHugh was our guest for a full-length episode.
  2. The Inside Out Prison Exchange Program.
  3. A YouTube video about punching down dough, yes, really.

Let us know what you think via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below!

051: Ep47 – Philosophy and Social Change

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

In this forty-seventh episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast, we interview Dr. Nancy McHugh on the topic of “Philosophy and Social Change.” After the “Know Thyself!” segment, we talk about her recent book, The Limits of Knowledge, inspired by her experiences in Vietnam witnessing continuing victims of Agent Orange. Then, in the next segment, we ask her about her experience teaching in prison in the Inside Out Prison Exchange Program.

Dr. Nancy McHugh.

Dr. McHugh is Professor and Chair of the philosophy department at Wittenberg University. Before publishing The Limits of Knowledge in 2015, Nancy released Feminist Philosophies A-Z in 2007. Her teaching in the Inside-Out Prison Exchange Program is coordinated with the London Correctional Institute in London, Ohio.

Listen for our “You Tell Me!” questions and for some jokes in one of our concluding segments, called “Philosophunnies.” Reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.

(1hr 6 mins)

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

Notes

Dr. Joe Margolis.

Dr. Joe Margolis.

  1. Agent Orange,” via the History Channel Web site.
  2. Nancy McHugh, The Limits of Knowledge (Albany, NY: SUNY Press, 2015).
  3. Council on International Educational Exchange.
  4. Inside Out Prison Exchange Program.
  5. Joe Margolis, philosopher at Temple University.

 

You Tell Me!

For our future “You Tell Me!” segments, Nancy posed the following question in this episode:

“What is it that you will not do? Have you reflected upon what line in the sand you will not cross?”

Let us know what you think! Via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below.

050: Ep46 – Philosophy at Home

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

Amy Leask.In this forty-sixth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast, we interview Amy Leask of Red T Media and Enable Education on the subject of “Philosophy at Home: Re-envisioning Philosophy’s Reach Beyond the Academy.” Red T Media is a publisher and Web and mobile application provider for parents who want to introduce their kids to Philosophy. Among Red T Media’s most successful books is Amy’s Think About It! Series, including their most popular edition called How Do You Know What You Know? The series is subtitled “Philosophy for Kids!”

An image featuring Sophie, the heroine of the Think About It series, put out by Red T Media. Next to Sophie is a robot and the word "Wiseland," related to several of Red T Media's projects.

Amy is an educator, writer, and children’s digital media producer from Milton, Ontario, in Canada. She is the founder of Red T Media, and co-founder of Enable Education. Enable Education is a provider of online educational content, mobile apps, as well as print and audio-visual educational material, in areas including Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math, the so-called “STEM” fields from pre-school to post-secondary education. They are also industry leaders, keynote speakers, TEDx Talkers, and “edutech award winners.”

Listen for our “You Tell Me!” questions and for some jokes in one of our concluding segments, called “Philosophunnies.” Reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.

 

(1hr 2 mins)

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

 

NotesCover of Amy Leask's book, "Think About It! How Do You Know What You Know?

  1. Enable Education.
  2. Red T Media.
  3. Amy Leask (author) and Mark Hughes (illustrator), Epistemology: How Do You Know What You Know? (Ontario, Canada: Enable Education, 2014).
  4. Amy Leask (author), Jane Li (illustrator), and Octavian Ciubotariu (photographer), Zoom In, Zoom Out (Ontario, Canada: Enable Education, 2017).
  5. Valerie Straus, “Local Texas GOP rejects ‘critical thinking’ skills. Really.” The Washington Post, July 9, 2012.
  6. In this episode, we mentioned another episode (Ep37), with Nick Caltagiarone, who talked about teaching philosophy in high school. He was the one who mentioned the line, which he attributed to John Searle, about the importance of teaching young people how not to be taken in by nonsense.
  7. Michael Lynch, The Internet of Us: Knowing More and Understanding Less in the Age of Big Data (New York: Liveright, 2016).
  8. Amy references a poem, from a song, by Leonard Cohen, called “Anthem,” which includes the beautiful line: “There is a crack, a crack in everything
    That’s how the light gets in.”

 

You Tell Me!

For our future “You Tell Me!” segments, Amy posed the following questions in this episode:

“Are we entitled to our opinions?”

Let us know what you think! Via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below.

John Stuart Mill and Charlottesville

Civil American, Volume 2, Article 4 (October 20, 2017), https://goo.gl/zs3TDn.

| By Dale E. Miller |

Adobe logo, to serve as a link to the Adobe PDF version of the essay.

I consider myself a Millian—that is, a follower of the Victorian philosopher of morals, social life, and politics (and much else besides) John Stuart Mill (1806–73). Usually I’m a fairly confident Millian; some might even say smug. Mill’s work has, like the work of all important philosophers, been subjected to numerous serious objections. But I believe that many of these objections have already been adequately answered and that the prospects of our finding satisfactory answers to the rest are at least as good as the prospects of our finding satisfactory answers to the equally serious objections that have been pressed against the work of Aristotle, Kant, etc. Still, today my confidence is beginning to show some cracks. Recent events in the U.S. are casting serious doubts on one of the most celebrated and influential elements of Mill’s thought, his defense of the freedom of expression.

John Stuart Mill, black and white print.

Mill’s defense of the liberties of speech and the press appears in the second chapter of his 1859 essay On Liberty.[1] His case is grounded not on something like a “natural” right but rather on the social benefits of freedom of expression. This doesn’t mean that Mill believes that every use that people make of this freedom—every published article, every sign, every utterance—makes the world better off. But what he does believe is that there is great value in a vigorous marketplace of ideas, for which thoroughgoing freedom of expression is a prerequisite. According to Mill, the marketplace of ideas is a powerful engine not only for correcting intellectual errors and discovering truths of all sorts but also for motivating individuals who hold true ethical beliefs to base their lives on these beliefs. And the greater the extent to which people do this, Mill maintains (albeit without much argument), the happier that human life will be. This, for Mill, is the ultimate standard for moral rightness.[2]

The title page of J. S. Mill's 'On Liberty.'Mill’s case for freedom of expression unfolds in three stages; he asks first what society loses when it suppresses the expression of true ideas, next what it loses when it suppresses false ideas, and finally what it loses when it suppresses ideas that are both true and false in parts. I’m primarily interested in his answer to the second of these questions. It might seem surprising that Mill would believe that society loses anything of value when it censors ideas that genuinely are entirely false, as opposed to ideas that are thought to be entirely false but are in fact at least partly true. Yet he takes there to be several sources of loss in such cases.

One way in which society loses when it suppresses false ideas is that when these ideas cannot receive “any fair and thorough discussion … such of them as could not stand such a discussion, though they may be prevented from spreading, do not disappear.”[3] In other words, when false ideas cannot be brought into the light and openly confronted in fair and free debate, because defending them or perhaps even discussing them is proscribed, they fester. One of the benefits that Mill therefore claims for the liberties of speech and the press is that they enable us to (eventually) extinguish false doctrines, in the sense of bringing it about that they aren’t believed.

A second way in which society loses from restricting the expression of false ideas concerns how ethical beliefs are held. Suppose that society has made it impossible to challenge some widely accepted moral doctrine, so that contrary doctrines cannot be “fully, frequently, and fearlessly discussed.” In this case, Mill says, even if the widely accepted doctrine is completely correct it will be “held as a dead dogma, not a living truth.”[4] When we know that we’re likely at some point to be called upon to defend our creed against an opponent, he writes, we’re more likely both to ensure that we understand the considerations that favor that creed and to give the creed an important place in our thoughts and actions. On the other hand, “as soon as there is no enemy in the field,” we tend to lapse into giving our beliefs little more than lip service.[5] As evidence Mill points to the many “Sunday-morning” Christians in countries in which Christianity is the dominant faith. If such Christians are animated by anything in their religion through the rest of the week, he maintains, it is only by those parts of it that are distinctive to their particular sect and that they might need to defend against other sectarians. Thus another respect in which the liberties of speech and the press are beneficial is that they make it more likely that people who hold true moral doctrines will be “penetrated” by them, in the sense of holding them as more than dead dogmas.

Airforce commandos extinguishing an aircraft fire.

U.S. Department of Defense photos.

There is some tension between these two claims of Mill’s. After all, if false moral doctrines are extinguished, then no one will need to worry about debating their adherents. It therefore appears that freedom of expression can at most yield only one of these benefits with respect to any particular false moral doctrine, not both. The tension between these claims doesn’t rise to the level of contradiction, however. It can be true both that the long-run tendency of protecting the marketplace of ideas is to extinguish false views and that until a particular false ethical view is extinguished the fact that some people hold it will give those who hold the true view, or at least a truer one, a livelier appreciation of their own commitments. This is Mill’s stance; he observes that while it’s desirable for false moral doctrines to be extinguished, when this happens something of value is lost that society ought to try to replace to the extent possible. For instance, teachers may need to learn to defend certain false doctrines forcefully, to approximate for students the experience of debating someone who holds them.[6]

(more…)

049: Ep45 – Experimentation in Art and Law

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

Dr. Brian Butler.In this forty-fifth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast, we interview Dr. Brian Butler of the University of North Carolina Asheville. We talk with Brian about two applications of the idea known as “democratic experimentalism” that have been at the heart of his work. One application concerns Constitutional law. The other involves the history of Black Mountain College, an experiment in democratic experimentalism applied to higher education, where art was central to education in the college.

Sue Spayth (left) and unknown student in front of the Lee Hall, Blue Ridge Campus, 1938.

© Western Regional Archives, States Archives of North Carolina. This and other photos available at Metalocus.

Dr. Butler is the Thomas Howerton Distinguished Professor of Humanities and Professor of Philosophy at the UNC Asheville. He recently published his book, The Democratic Constitution: Experimentalism and Interpretation, with the University of Chicago Press. He was also the Project Director in 2010 for a large grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities’s “We the People” Grant program, which focused on “Black Mountain College: An Artistic and Educational Legacy.” Black Mountain College was founded in 1933 in North Carolina as was an experimental college with a central role for art in liberal arts education. John Dewey’s philosophy of education was a fundamental inspiration for the college.

Listen for our “You Tell Me!” questions and for some jokes in one of our concluding segments, called “Philosophunnies.” Reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.

 

(1hr 8 mins)

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

 

Notes

  1. Entry on H. L. A. Hart at Oxford Legal Philosophers.
  2. Ronald Dworkin’s obituary in The New York Times.
  3. Brian Butler, The Democratic Constitution: Experimentalism and Interpretation (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2017).
  4. A brief introduction to the history of Black Mountain College.
  5. Martin Duberman, Black Mountain: An Exploration in Community (Chicago: Northwestern University Press, 2009).
  6. Mary Caroline (M. C.) Richards, a former faculty member at Black Mountain College.
  7. The Black Mountain College Museum and Arts Center.
  8. State Archives of North Carolina.
  9. Visit Black Mountain College.

 

You Tell Me!

For our future “You Tell Me!” segments, Dr. Butler posed the following questions in this episode:

“How does democracy relate to evidence? What type of evidence should be allowed in a democracy and what kind of evidence should be excluded?”

Let us know what you think! Via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below.

048: Ep44 – On Philosophy, Leadership, & SOPHIA

Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast

Cover of Democracy and Leadership, which features a painting of a crowd at a political event. In this forty-fourth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast, Dr. Anthony Cashio decides that “turn-about is fair play.” He had been the guest in the very first episode of the show, and in this episode, he turns the tables and grills co-host Dr. Eric Thomas Weber as the guest for the day. The show focuses on Weber’s 2013 book, Democracy and Leadership, and then relates Weber’s theory of democratic leadership to his work as Executive Director of the Society of Philosophers in America, a.k.a. SOPHIA.

Dr. Eric Thomas Weber.

Dr. Weber is the author of four books, including most recently Democracy and Leadership(2013) and Uniting Mississippi (2015). In 2015 he was awarded the Mississippi Humanities Council’s Humanities Scholar Award in their Public Humanities Awards program. At the University of Mississippi, he was associate professor of public policy leadership from 2007 to 2016. In 2016, he moved to the University of Kentucky, where he is visiting associate professor in the philosophy department. In 2017, SOPHIA was awarded the major prize from the APA and the Philosophy Documentation Center for excellence and innovation in philosophy programs.

Listen for our “You Tell Me!” questions and for some jokes in one of our concluding segments, called “Philosophunnies.” Reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.


(1hr 8 mins)

Click here for a list of all the episodes of Philosophy Bakes Bread.

 

iTunes logo.Google PlayRSS logo feed icon and link.

Subscribe to the podcast! 

We’re on iTunes and Google Play, and we’ve got a regular RSS feed too!

 

 

Notes

  1. Weber, Eric Thomas, Democracy and Leadership (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2013).
  2. The Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA), and how to join.
  3. The American Philosophical Association and the Philosophy Documentation Center prize for Excellence and Innovation in Philosophy Programs.

 

You Tell Me!

For our future “You Tell Me!” segments, Dr. Weber posed a question in this episode:

“Do you have spaces and communities in which you can hold deep, philosophical conversations? If you don’t, do you want in?”

Let us know what you think! Via TwitterFacebookEmail, or by commenting here below.