39 episodes

Much as it says on the tin, this podcast is about everyday ethics. We pose the kind of questions we enjoy debating; the kind you might wonder about in the course of regular life. It’s been flatteringly described as “Like listening to your mates argue in the pub, except they’re not rude to each other and they sound like they know what they’re talking about”. Somehow, we're now in the Top 2% of podcasts worldwide, so thanks, that's pretty cool. If you'd like to support the show, checkout our Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/moedtSubscribe to our email updates at https://moedt.substack.com
If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Morality of Everyday Things Ant and Jake

    • Society & Culture
    • 4.5 • 15 Ratings

Much as it says on the tin, this podcast is about everyday ethics. We pose the kind of questions we enjoy debating; the kind you might wonder about in the course of regular life. It’s been flatteringly described as “Like listening to your mates argue in the pub, except they’re not rude to each other and they sound like they know what they’re talking about”. Somehow, we're now in the Top 2% of podcasts worldwide, so thanks, that's pretty cool. If you'd like to support the show, checkout our Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/moedtSubscribe to our email updates at https://moedt.substack.com
If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    Replay - Is it time to get rid of the royals?

    Replay - Is it time to get rid of the royals?

    REPLAY - in light of the queen's death and power transfering to Charles III, whilst we offer our condolensces it's more pertinent than ever to ask during these lavish ceremonies and high air-time events...should we even be maintaining our royal families? Here's a replay of our old episode, previously titled 'should we abolish the monarchy?'
    Previous description:
    In this episode, Jake and Ant look at the ethics of abolishing the monarchic institutions that are present in the UK and several other EU countries (but really focusing on the UK as a specific example).

    The key arguments discussed and considered are:
    1 - democracy, 2 - elitism, 3 - corruption/abuse of power, 4 - history & tradition, 5 - entertainment, 6 - soft power, 7 - the practical nuisance of disbanding the royals.

    Ant is writing this and I maintain that it's a grossly inequitable institution that doesn't much contribute cash beyond what would be achieved regardless of their maintenance (not that money would even be a good justification anyway)...but hey, listen to the whole pod and form your own opinion!

    As always, reviews really help us, please follow and review on your podcast platform of choice and contact us on your social media of choice. Sign up to our newsletter here to receive a breakdown of the arguments presented, some memes and updates on future episodes: https://moedt.substack.com/ If you'd like to support the show, checkout our patreon at: https://www.patreon.com/moedt

    If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    • 1 hr 23 min
    Are luxuries immoral? Part 2

    Are luxuries immoral? Part 2

    The second in a two-parter where we discuss whether luxury goods are immoral. In a true return to form, this is a specific argument we have literally had over the office lunch table, originating from Ant's throwaway statement that he "doesn't get the point of jewellery" and "thinks it's ridiculously wasteful". In order to dissect whether luxuries are immoral, we first break down what exactly counts as a luxury, and secondly explore what exactly would make them immoral.
    In this episode, it's all about discussing the opportunity cost of money spent on things that aren't strictly needed. Particularly, this comes through the lens of our last episode where we discuss luxuries of 2 sorts, expensive but perhaps 'good value' and offering some valid sort of self-esteem/self actualisation benefit within Maslow's hierarchy of needs, or another sort where it's frivolous and perhaps the user derives self esteem, but we may question whether that's a legitimate sort of esteem. We then particularly frame this morally considering the ideas of Peter Singer (i.e. all money you spend could be used to save lives, how should that affect your decision making?) vs Susan Wolf (i.e. not everything is about optimizing moral outcomes, it would create a sad and dreary life where we could not pursue anything of what makes the human experience so rich).
    Support the show:
    Please leave us a review! Spotify even now let's you do it - see that little star icon - go on, give it a click. Reviews are a great way to help others find the show, and it makes us feel all warm and fuzzy inside. If you’re a fan of the show, please consider signing up to our Patreon. A small subscription of just $1 goes a long way towards supporting the show - and it makes us feel pretty great too. https://www.patreon.com/moedt.
    Know anyone who likes to think about or debate the kind of topics we cover? Spread the word - and you’ll have our gratitude. Keep up to date with future episodes on our website here: https://moedt.substack.com/
    If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    • 39 min
    Are luxuries immoral? Part 1

    Are luxuries immoral? Part 1

    The first in a two-parter where we discuss whether luxury goods are immoral. In a true return to form, this is a specific argument we have literally had over the office lunch table, originating from Ant's throwaway statement that he "doesn't get the point of jewellery" and "thinks it's ridiculously wasteful". In order to dissect whether luxuries are immoral, we first break down what exactly counts as a luxury, and secondly explore what exactly would make them immoral.
    In this episode, it's all about discussing what luxuries even are. We begin with some general and economic definitions, and then get into what makes something feel like a luxury, beyond some sterile definitions. It all comes down to what is and isn't necessary, and we come up with 2 sub-sets of luxuries to consider: things that are expensive and not necessary, but at least conceivably 'good value', and things that are expensive and not necessary, and are purely expensive as a means of conspicuous spending. We discuss Maslow's heirarchy of needs, distinguishing the difference between 'needs' for literal survival, and 'needs' for greater fulfillment, and several interesting examples of ostentatious spending.
    Support the show:
    Please leave us a review! Spotify even now let's you do it - see that little star icon - go on, give it a click. Reviews are a great way to help others find the show, and it makes us feel all warm and fuzzy inside. If you’re a fan of the show, please consider signing up to our Patreon. A small subscription of just $1 goes a long way towards supporting the show - and it makes us feel pretty great too. https://www.patreon.com/moedt.
    Know anyone who likes to think about or debate the kind of topics we cover? Spread the word - and you’ll have our gratitude. Keep up to date with future episodes on our website here: https://moedt.substack.com/
    If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    • 45 min
    When is it ok to put down a human being? Part 3

    When is it ok to put down a human being? Part 3

    The third in our series on euthanasia and assisted suicide - later named with the much more provocative title, 'When is it ok to put down a human being?'. In this series we explore how much control we (and other people) should have over our own death. This is primarily focused on circumstances where death is near and inevitable, and life/treatment is becoming pretty horrible in the interim, but we do broaden the discussion a little beyond these boundaries. As we clarify in the episode, agency creates an extremely important distinction between assisted suicide and euthanasia, but even the most liberal countries draw some lines on where agency is not enough to bring us to support someone's wish for death.
    In this episode, we talk through some of the pros and cons, including the classic 'slippery slope' argument as a negative and the limits of our autonomy, specifically bodily autonomy, in the pros column. We draw on some of the philosophical concepts from last episode as well as religious context and actual context. Ultimately, Jake and Ant - in classic Jake and Ant fashion - end up largely agreeing that respect for autonomy wins out in contexts where one can't be considered impaired in their judgement, in a way that can't be altered (physical pain may be an unavoidable impairment on your normal judgement, when near death).
    Support the show:
    Please leave us a review! Spotify even now let's you do it - see that little star icon - go on, give it a click. Reviews are a great way to help others find the show, and it makes us feel all warm inside. If you’re a fan of the show, please consider signing up to our Patreon. A small subscription goes a long way towards supporting the show - and it makes us feel all warm inside too. https://www.patreon.com/moedt.
    Know anyone who likes to think about or debate the kind of topics we cover? Spread the word - and you’ll have our gratitude. Keep up to date with future episodes on our website here: https://moedt.substack.com/
    --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/moedt/message If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    • 28 min
    When is it ok to put down a human being? Part 2

    When is it ok to put down a human being? Part 2

    The second in our series on euthanasia and assisted suicide - later named with the much more provocative title, 'When is it ok to put down a human being?'. In this series we explore how much control we (and other people) should have over our own death. This is primarily focused on circumstances where death is near and inevitable, and life/treatment is becoming pretty horrible in the interim, but we do broaden the discussion a little beyond these boundaries. As we clarify in the episode, agency creates an extremely important distinction between assisted suicide and euthanasia, but even the most liberal countries draw some lines on where agency is not enough to bring us to support someone's wish for death.

    In this episode, we talk through some typical moral/philosophical frameworks and what they may have to say about choosing, or being designated, to die. We romp through the typically out-there (by modern standards) ancient greek perspectives - you better be a 'good citizen', or else you're in trouble... - up to typical Kantian/utilitarian perspectives and also looking into "What we owe each other", which is much more than a pop framework that gets a mention in 'The Good Place'.

    Support the show:
    Please leave us a review! Spotify even now let's you do it - see that little star icon - go on, give it a click. Reviews are a great way to help others find the show, and it makes us feel all warm inside. If you’re a fan of the show, please consider signing up to our Patreon. A small subscription goes a long way towards supporting the show - and it makes us feel all warm inside too. https://www.patreon.com/moedt.
    Know anyone who likes to think about or debate the kind of topics we cover? Spread the word - and you’ll have our gratitude. Keep up to date with future episodes on our website here: https://moedt.substack.com/
    --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/moedt/message If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    • 26 min
    When is it ok to put down a human being?

    When is it ok to put down a human being?

    The first in our series on euthanasia and assisted suicide - later named with the much more provocative title, 'when is it ok to put down a human being?'. In this series we explore how much control we (and other people) should have over our own death. This is primarily focused on circumstances where death is near and inevitable, and life/treatment is becoming pretty horrible in the interim, but we do broaden the discussion a little beyond these boundaries. As we clarify in the episode, agency creates an extremely important distinction between assisted suicide and euthanasia, but even the most liberal countries draw some lines on where agency is not enough to bring us to support someone's wish for death.We'll begin the series by clarifying the terms (what's the difference between assisted suicide, euthanasia, and the active/passive forms of either) and a discussion of the current legal state of affairs across a range of countries - including how hard it is to do any of this in the UK and a little price check of a one-way trip to Switzerland.Support the show:
    Please leave us a review! Spotify even now let's you do it - see that little star icon - go on, give it a click. Reviews are a great way to help others find the show, and it makes us feel all warm inside. If you’re a fan of the show, please consider signing up to our Patreon. A small subscription goes a long way towards supporting the show - and it makes us feel all warm inside too. https://www.patreon.com/moedt.
    Know anyone who likes to think about or debate the kind of topics we cover? Spread the word - and you’ll have our gratitude. Keep up to date with future episodes on our website here: https://moedt.substack.com/
    --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/moedt/message If you'd like to listen ad-free (on any podcast app) and support us as creators, become a member for as little as $2 per month at: https://plus.acast.com/s/moedt.



    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    • 35 min

Customer Reviews

4.5 out of 5
15 Ratings

15 Ratings

Sj6767 ,

Loving every episode

Thank you for the wonderful content and thorough research. The facts/statistics, debating from each point of view, the involvement of psychological theory to where a smooth brain like me can understand, and your clean and clear final thoughts are what really make this podcast my favorite. My listening preference is when it’s just you two, but there is nothing wrong with experimenting! Keep them coming!

Alexitect ,

“Is it immoral to eat meat?”

Surprisingly objective analysis, for carnists.

Boosted! ,

Important topics in a fun format

Recently discovered this pod and love it. Keep it up guys!

You Might Also Like

Jack Rhysider
Christopher Kavanagh and Matthew Browne
Freakonomics Radio + Stitcher
Sam Harris
Vox
Mercatus Center at George Mason University