280 episodes

An 'informal and informative' philosophy podcast inspiring and supporting students, teachers, academics and free-thinkers worldwide. All episodes are available at www.thepanpsycast.com.

The Panpsycast Philosophy Podcast Jack Symes | Andrew Horton, and Oliver Marley

    • Society & Culture
    • 4.8 • 298 Ratings

An 'informal and informative' philosophy podcast inspiring and supporting students, teachers, academics and free-thinkers worldwide. All episodes are available at www.thepanpsycast.com.

    Episode 111, The Banality of Evil (Part III - The Essence of Evil)

    Episode 111, The Banality of Evil (Part III - The Essence of Evil)

    Introduction
    On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’
    As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts.
    One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality.


    Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved.




    Contents
    Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt
    Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem
    Part III. The Essence of Evil
    Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion




    Links
    Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book)
    Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book)
    Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book)
    Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book)
    Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book)
    Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book)
    Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book)
    Dana Vila, Arendt (Book)
    Eichmann Trial (YouTube)

    • 43 min
    Episode 111, The Banality of Evil (Part II - Eichmann in Jerusalem)

    Episode 111, The Banality of Evil (Part II - Eichmann in Jerusalem)

    Introduction
    On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’
    As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts.
    One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality.


    Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved.




    Contents
    Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt
    Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem
    Part III. The Essence of Evil
    Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion




    Links
    Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book)
    Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book)
    Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book)
    Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book)
    Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book)
    Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book)
    Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book)
    Dana Vila, Arendt (Book)
    Eichmann Trial (YouTube)

    • 58 min
    Episode 111, The Banality of Evil (Part I - The Life of Hannah Arendt)

    Episode 111, The Banality of Evil (Part I - The Life of Hannah Arendt)

    Introduction
    On April 11, 1961, a Monster was put on trial in the state of Israel and broadcasted to the world. The Monster, who was housed in a glass box, was accused of crimes against humanity and the Jewish people – of knowingly sending hundreds of thousands of people to their deaths. When the trial commenced, and the Monster was asked how he pleaded, he answered, ‘Not guilty, in the sense of the indictment.’
    As the trial proceeded, the Monster portrayed himself as a cog in a machine. He was a cog who was helpless to stop the inevitable – a cog that was merely performing its duty. To some who observed the trial, the ‘Monster’ who sat before them appeared all too human. Behind the glass, there was no demonic essence of evil. The Monster was, in fact, an average person: a normal person who was capable of committing terrifyingly evil acts.
    One observer went as far as to say that the manner in which the accused spoke, and the way he framed his story, was evidence that he simply lacked the ability to think. To this observer, it was no radical evildoer who sat in the glass box. In fact, his professed motives, and his inability to avoid cliches, were evidence of his banality.


    Music produced by Ovidiu Balaban – all rights reserved.




    Contents
    Part I. The Life of Hannah Arendt
    Part II. Eichmann in Jerusalem
    Part III. The Essence of Evil
    Part IV. Further Analysis and Discussion




    Links
    Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem (Book)
    Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (Book)
    Richard J. Bernstein, Why Read Hannah Arendt Now? (Book)
    Peter Hayes, Why? Explaining the Holocaust (Book)
    Anne Heller, Hannah Arendt: A Life in Dark Times (Book)
    Samantha Rose Hill, Hannah Arendt (Book)
    Deborah E. Lipstadt, The Eichmann Trial (Book)
    Dana Vila, Arendt (Book)
    Eichmann Trial (YouTube)

    • 1 hr 6 min
    Episode 110, ‘The Philosophy of Islam’ with Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

    Episode 110, ‘The Philosophy of Islam’ with Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

    Introduction
    “How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh.
    In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy.
    Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins.


    This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.




    Contents
    Part I. Allāh
    Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion




    Links
    Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (website).
    Mohammad Saleh Zarepour, Necessary Existence and Monotheism (book).
    Zain Ali, ‘Some Reflections on William Lane Craig’s Critique of Islam’ (paper).

    • 42 min
    Episode 110, ‘The Philosophy of Islam’ with Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (Part I - Allāh)

    Episode 110, ‘The Philosophy of Islam’ with Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (Part I - Allāh)

    Introduction
    “How did the universe come into existence?” It’s a question that most of the world’s religions seek to answer. According to the Abrahamic faiths, the world can only exist with the existence of a being who was not caused by something other than itself – and this they call ‘Yahweh’, ‘Allāh’, or ‘God’. Philosophical arguments to this end come in many forms, one of which – from the medieval Islamic philosopher Ibn Sina (known in the West as ‘Avicenna’) ­­­– claims that we can prove the existence of this necessary being with absolute certainty. If something can exist there must be an uncaused being, and from this concept alone, Avicenna says that we can deduce every other property that Muslims attribute to Allāh.
    In this interview, we’ll be discussing Avicenna and the philosophy of Islam with Dr Mohammad Saleh Zarepour. Currently Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Manchester, Dr Zarepour completed his first PhD at the Tarbiat Modares University in Iran and his second PhD at the University of Cambridge. Publishing extensively in philosophy of religion – and having worked on major initiatives such as the Global Philosophy of Religion Project – it is safe to say that Saleh is one of the world’s leading experts in Islamic philosophy.
    Islam claims to solve the problem of existence, but its implications extend far beyond the origin of the cosmos. Allāh is a being invested in his creation – a being that will judge, reward, or punish us for our good and bad deeds, who permits us to live and to suffer – and differs from the God of Judaism and Christianity in his nature and actions. Thus, we should ask not only whether belief in Allāh’s necessity is reasonable, but whether the beliefs of Muslims are more (or less) reasonable than those of their Abrahamic cousins.


    This episode is produced in partnership with The Global Philosophy of Religion Project at University of Birmingham, led by Yujin Nagasawa and funded by the John Templeton Foundation.




    Contents
    Part I. Allāh
    Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion




    Links
    Mohammad Saleh Zarepour (website).
    Mohammad Saleh Zarepour, Necessary Existence and Monotheism (book).
    Zain Ali, ‘Some Reflections on William Lane Craig’s Critique of Islam’ (paper).

    • 49 min
    Episode 109, The Mystery of Consciousness (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

    Episode 109, The Mystery of Consciousness (Part II - Further Analysis and Discussion)

    In this episode, you’ll be treated to a live performance of The Panpsycast. The event took place at Liverpool’s beautiful Tung Auditorium on 20th May 2022. Over three hundred of you purchased tickets to the event, with some of our most loyal patrons travelling thousands of miles to be with us in person.
    Before you listen to the audio, we just wanted to say a huge thank you to those who came along, as well as all of our wonderful panellists – Rowan Williams, Anil Seth, Laura Gow, and Philip Goff – for participating in the debate.
    A special thank you to Q Quartet, The Department of Philosophy at Liverpool University, and Premier Christian Radio for making this episode possible – as well as all of our incredible patrons. Thank you again for your support; we hope you enjoy the show.


    Contents


    Part I. The Debate
    Part II. Further Analysis and Discussion




    Links
    Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool
    Unbelievable? Premier Radio
    Anil Seth
    Laura Gow
    Rowan Williams
    Jack Symes
    Philip Goff

    • 28 min

Customer Reviews

4.8 out of 5
298 Ratings

298 Ratings

Statix69 ,

Awesome Sauce-some

Great show for studying, for learning, and for relaxing. Keep it going

jdwkma ,

Brilliant!!!

Absolutely fantastic! Really informative and interesting! Every episode is up to scratch! Well worth the listen :)

Jarretto_ ,

PaaanPaaanPaaaaan..

JUST discovered these dudes and bloody love them. Worth listening to for lots of laughs and lessons

You Might Also Like

IAI
Mark Linsenmayer, Wes Alwan, Seth Paskin, Dylan Casey
Edmonds and Warburton
Nigel Warburton
David Guignion
Tamler Sommers & David Pizarro