What are the most intellectual podcasts?

Sam Harris
Not even kidding.

JAR media

>>8515677
I still don't know why everyone is shitting on him.

Philosophize This is a pretty good introduction to major philosophers

>>8515815
Because he's part of the new positivist school who are without exceptions banal and reductive

>>8515580
In our time with Melvyn Bragg

>>8515842
What's wrong with positivism?
Do you actually think there is anything else beyond the material world?

History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps
Philosophize This (though he has a bit of a rough start)
In Our Time
Invisibilia

>>8515842
That's a stupid way to criticize him.
There are countless physicalist/materialist/reductionist/positivist intellectuals, why focus and attack that part of Sam?

Also aside from ridiculing, no one made an argument against Sam's ethics.
So there's that.

>>8515867

Yes, the noumenal world.

>>8515881
Oh, I thought you had something legitimate to say.
Only masturbation.
Open a neuroscience book, understand what and how we perceive and then slap yourself.

>>8515881
Do you think tall those philosophers aren't aware of it?
They're adult enough to understand what constitutes as useful theory and what doesn't.

You, being a young revolutionary le mind=bllown student of thought, might think that is cool, oh well, cheers, you have plenty of intellectual growing up to do.

>>8515846
Hadn't heard of this one and just looked it up. Sounds really interesting, thanks for the recommendation

File: HappyFour[1].jpg (139KB, 800x532px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 800x532px

Partially Examined Life. These guys are probably the smartest people I have ever listened to.

File: Zizek-wedding-0002.jpg (53KB, 467x627px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 467x627px

>>8515880

Zizek made the bestest arguments.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWwYtJye1Cg

>>8515951
How is Zizek such a retard?
He made non-arguments and did the most despicable thing, took Sam's ideas out of context.
>hur dur he's aggressive atheist EXCEPT FOR BUDDHISM
As if that means Sam is a hypocrite.
Sam is arguing simply for any dogma, religious or not (although he put emphasis on religion) that produces uncessesary conflict.

He just saw real merits in buddhism.
Which negates Zizek's argument, that Sam is some ignorant atheist that discriminates all religions equally.

I really baffles me how some philosophers can be so fucking shallow.

>>8515951
>I hate it!!
>He sux XD

>bestest argument
You deserve Zizek.

>>8515924
This description seems more apt for Sam Harris than for whoever questions his positivist, utilitarist stupidity

>>8515580
bret easton ellis. literally a top 5 living author

>>8515991
So you're angry that Sam is blind to non-positivist ideas?
If we're going to talk about morality and ethics, we have to talk about it in real terms, he makes the best case of secular morality, it's USEFUL, not elegant and pure.

You think it's useful to suck hyper abstract dick when it comes to applied ethics, guess the what.

>>8515580
Who /ChapoTrapHouse/ here?

>>8515965
Sam Harris CLEARLY doesn't engage with buddhism anywhere beyond the "it's a way of life brah xD not a boring old religion for SQUARES like jesus".

His problem is exactly that he doesn't discriminate every religion ever, he's very selective in which religions he discriminates against, all the while he doesn't understand the reason religious institutions came to be or even how the religious thought of whatever religion he's attacking (or defending) evolved and where it is now.

He simply takes a VERY BIG leap of faith with his "We can objectively measure happiness" mumbojumbo of neoliberal scientificism that clearly has a very narrow and western concept of "happiness" or "comfort" or whatever, while failing to realize how flimsy his epistemological basis is.

>>8516000
Yes, he is. He's even blind to some positivist ones,as he said himself. He has no authority on ethics or morals, only a questionable (or so I've been told, I couldn't care less about neuroscience, the only real function it should have is building us dank prosthetics with laser swords and shit, and beyond that, it's balooney for scientificist retards) neuroscience background, and yet he feels comfortable to pass judgement on the whole field while also failing to recognize his utilitarist bullshit has already been tried and failed.

How can you measure usefulness?

>>8515815
People shit on him because his philosophy is terrible. He acts like since he spent three years getting a degree he has solved philosophy. I live with and know many people who are more qualified philosophically than him (all of whom shit on him). A degree in philosophy is a passport to start to actual philosophy, not a proof of anything approaching mastery. Another way of thinking about it. Make a list of all the people who have made real advances in philosophy in the 20th century who don't have a PhD in philosophy. This should make it obvious that the time and rigor required to get a PhD is almost mandatory to possess the requisite knowledge to know what you are talking about.
Try finding his actual contributions to philosophical journals. For the most part he avoids confrontation with actual philosophers (except for where he got wrecked by Chomsky on twitter). Check out Dennett (an actual respectable philosopher) for someone who laid a smack-down on Harris. I'm aware that this isn't an actual argument against his ideas but this should set off at least a good few warning signs about the man.

>>8515939
I really enjoy the podcast and have been listening for about four years now. My only problem is you can tell they aren't actual academics when they discuss something that is outside of their field of interest but part of yours. For example their Nietzsche is usually pretty good because most of them are clearly aware of him before the podcast and I'm pretty sure Wess (Wes?) and Seth have actually studied him but their talk on Epictetus just made me angry how they fell into the exact same holes that most people with no philosophical background do.

>>8515846
Love this. Really fucking comfy

Jordan B Peterson is also highly interesting https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6CsGY8wpGw

Radiolab's More Perfect podcast.

http://www.wnyc.org/shows/radiolabmoreperfect

>>8515896
Pick one:
>Explain colors
>Fuck off back to /sci/

>>8515815
He believes in objective morality and is one of the four popular atheists going around crusading against the destructive Christianity or some shit.

Major red flags for me.

Cum Town

>>8516240
>Belief in objective morality being a red flag
Sounds like you don't know much about contemporary philosophy.

>>8515580

I find npr's planet money extremely interesting. I'd say it's worth a listen even if you're not explicitly interested in economics, finance, business, etc.

KulturKampf

>>8516757
There cannot be objective morality without a God.

And no, 'muh reason' or 'muh cultural universals' is not objective.

>>8515867
There is no material world.
>>8515896
>Open a neuroscience book, understand what and how we perceive and then slap yourself.
le science is right cuz i sed so
>Only masturbation.
lol thats gay if i cant make money with it its dumb and useless
>>8515924
IF IT DOESNT DIRECTLY APPLY TO LE SCIENCE AND DOESNT MAKE MONEY ITS LE USELESS

'useful' is a meaningless statement.
>>8515880
Sam Harris is more popular, thereby more likely to influence a huge part of the population that is prone to these trends.
>>8516125
>real advances
Meaningless statement.

There has been no real advances in philosophy since the very beginning of the Enlightenment, just different sides of obfuscation and reductionism. It has become little but a tool for politics, mathematics, and science.

>>8516824
Then why are 3/4 or ethicists moral realists? Don't get me wrong, moral non-realism is a fine position and hardly niche but to say that being a moral realist is some sort of red flag just shows that either you are a super genius that has solved the problem of the grounding of ethics which would make you one of the most important philosophers ever or you don't know much about modern philosophy.

>>8516862
Yep, because our knowledge of logic is exactly the same as it was 400 years ago.

Where the fuck do you guys get your ideas from? Clearly not from university.

>>8517035
>Then why are 3/4 or ethicists moral realists?
dude they think something so they're right

You ignored my itty-bitty critique of two methods too.

Modern philosophy has been ignoring everything that is fundamental to challenging it since its inception. You are severely delusional in not seeing this.
>Yep, because our knowledge of logic is exactly the same as it was 400 years ago.
You presupposing knowledge and logic exists sure does make it seem so.
>Clearly not from university.
Stop making lame appeals to authority you undergrad.

>>8517035
>to say that being a moral realist is some sort of red flag just shows that either you are a super genius that has solved the problem of the grounding of ethics which would make you one of the most important philosophers ever
Ever heard of Nietzsche?

File: bill-burr.jpg (82KB, 618x412px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 618x412px

>>8515580
ole billy fucking redface ova heah

Seriously he's surprisingly smart and insightful, a top cunt through and through.

>>8517058
>inb4 epistemology has no relation to logic cuz i sed so or some other awful justification

Entitled Opinions.

>>8517058
>You ignored my itty-bitty critique of two methods too
Saying muh isn't a critique.

>You are severely delusional in not seeing this
No, you are delusional to believe that you are more intelligent and insightful then the tens of thousand of highly trained specialists whose job it is to know about these things. Even moral non-realists take moral realism seriously so you are also claiming a mental superiority over them as well. You are literally saying you are above all academia.

>>8517069
Except he didn't do that, the debate is still going on.

File: Mysselhoj_da_070407.jpg (105KB, 800x533px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 800x533px

>>8516820

KulturKampf is great

I listen to PhilosophizeThis at work but I just discovered Dan Carlin's Hardcore History and it's great

Entitled Opinions. Yes that is the actual name of the podcast. Please respond if u can get through the intro song and opening monologue

>>8517120
Pointing out a flaw is.
>No, you are delusional to believe that you are more intelligent and insightful then the tens of thousand of highly trained specialists whose job it is to know about these things.
Another lame appeal to authority.
>Even moral non-realists take moral realism seriously so you are also claiming a mental superiority over them as well.
I never started anything about either, you illiterate.

In fact, not only did I voice an opinion on either, I said I was a 'moral realist'.
>You are literally saying you are above all academia.
A rat's tail is worth more than all of academia, academia turns all pure pursuits into a pursuit of profit, and has since the act of education for a price and institutes of the educated (not intelligent, creative, revolutionary, personable, virtuous, loving, graceful, or any other aesthetically positive adjective; just educated, which alongside 'incestuous' are the only two adjectives that can describe the whole of the institution.)

Would you happen to be French?

>>8515867
awwww shit here we go

>>8516125
What did they say about Epictetus that you disagree with?

Chap Trap House

Norm Macdonald Live

>>8517201
Everything. Not even kidding. The misunderstandings about what he means by the terms he uses are so great that pretty much everything they say in the whole episode is wrong. If you are interested they do another episode about a stoic very shortly afterwards where they get someone who knows better to keep them in line a bit.

>>8515880
>Also aside from ridiculing, no one made an argument against Sam's ethics.

Nietzsche already made them 130 years ago. Lurk moar, read moar.

>>8515867
jesus

a16z

Used to be run by Andreessen Horowitz, this silicon valley VC, now it's some chink bitch. Still good though. They host all sorts of professionals in Tech and talk about technology and it's trajectory. It's really fucking good and consistently has a lot really fucking smart people on.

Also, check Tim Ferriss. He's got a couple really good episodes. Start with Kevin Kelly, he's the shit and probably one of the most interesting people on the planet.

>>8517073
He's not that smart. Maybe he's smarter than your average, but he's still plenty retarded. Funny, but retarded

>>8515846
Fuck yeah. I dread the day he kicks the bucket.

>>8516125
Tldr justifying his phd

>>8515815
He is not a philosopher. Period. His works showcase an ignorance about the field that should be obvious to anyone who is familiar with it (his fanboys aren't). His ideas are not new, not interesting, and not correct.

U guys really take all this shit way to personal.

>>8515580
BBC4's in our time is pretty fun, a few hundred topics. from erasmus to joyce. nothing so erudite that it will blow your socks off, but it's still a nice discussion on their chosen topics.

for anyone interested, on rutracker, you can find all of the in our time broadcasts in a couple of torrents at around 12 gigs total, something like from the 1980s to 2015 is available in two torrents. i had to snap that up posthaste.

>>8517495
Shut the fuck up you wimp

>>8517546
>>8517495
Not even memeing, dont post here again. We're better off without phony secure cunts like you

Do we duel now?

>>8517552
Not even meming, dont talk to me or my wifes son ever again.

>>8517703
>wifes
You can't even write a single sentence properly.

>>8517733
>forgetting "dont"

You can't even correct properly.

>>8517073
Zip...............RECRUITER

You Made it Weird is filled with pseuds and new age spirituality but it's enjoyable to listen to when someone who doesn't put up with Pete Holme's shit comes on. The Dave Attell episode is especially great.

>>8515874
I listened to the first Invisibila and thought it was pretty shit. Does it get better or is it just not for me?

>>8517873
>who doesn't put up with pete's shit

like who?

>>8515965

Harris and Zizek deserve each other.

Any podcasts that don't spend 10 minutes talking about where so and so was born and what his dog smelled like?

>>8517869
>tfw you have 'padoo too too me undieees me undieeees' stuck in your head all day

bill makes every commercial into a meme

>>8518426
Brian Greene the physicist was on and basically just explained science and told Pete why he was wrong while Pete laughed

>>8518751

I'd laugh at a Materialist too. I don't think Pete or most of his guests are that insightful but the only reaction to Materialism is laughter after a certain point.

File: 14c.jpg (7KB, 207x253px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 207x253px

>>8515867

Bob Dobbs

http://achieveradio.com/payday/

He has the best guests on like Derrick de Kerkhove and others

>>8516007
Easily the best podcast I listen to. Glad to see /lit/ tunes in.

>>8516007
this title sounds like some ridiculous black twitter meme

>>8517362
his brand of 'smart retarded' is sort of the charm

he's intelligent enough to come up with dumb shit about subjects he knows nothing about to be very entertaining

A bunch of Mark Rosewaters Drive to Work.
Thorin's Thoughts.

>>8516278
this

>>8515580
No jumper
The coolest podcast in the world

File: Headshot2.jpg (547KB, 400x499px) Image search: [Google]

547KB, 400x499px

>>8515815
Because he's dumb

>Christianity is bad. its fundamentally twisted and prevents us from getting
>But Islam is worse because muh Quran quotes
>Actually no, its worse because muh Enlightenment got rid of most of the bad elements of Christianity
>Even though its still bad, just not as bad because reasons
>Therefore lets limit immigration from Middle Eastern countries
>Obama is too soft on terrorism, which is why he has ordered more drone strikes and violence than Bush.
>The U.S.A. is amazing Chomsky, stop questioning our bullshit policies, we are perfect in everyway

>Also Buddhism and other eastern schools of thought are great religions that unlike Christianity don't obscure the eternal truthes with dogma
>That is, so long as you strip out basically everything involved with Buddhism and just leave the meditation and mindfulness stuff
>Like every other hippy, buy my neo-new age book to learn more

>What do you mean India has the highest rates of honor killings in the world? Even in areas that practice Hinduism?
>What do you mean Eastern countries also practice Islam?
>What do you mean 60% of Islamic practitioners come form Asian countries?
>No I don't think we should limit their immigration, that would be stupid
>Only limit the sand people

And so on

>>8515874
>History of Philosophy Without Any Gaps
This. Greta companion listening to the actual works.

>>8521613

the guy that interviews rappers?

>>8521683

Is he reddit: The Person?

File: Moderate Islam.png (435KB, 774x447px) Image search: [Google]

435KB, 774x447px

>>8521683

Islam is objectively worse than Christianity though. The worst religion, in fact.

>>8521697
More like a better educated /pol/ack of the esoteric variety.

>its like, the truth bro. Christianity is for cucks. My particular brand of spirituality is for smart people.

>>8521707
>The worst religion, in fact.
What are you basing that on though? Because Sam's reasons are shit and/or barely distinct from any other idealogical nonsense.

File: Moderate Islam intensifies.jpg (45KB, 600x634px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 600x634px

>>8521717

>What are you basing that on though?

Reality.

File: Misogynygraph.jpg (106KB, 1500x936px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1500x936px

>>8521721
Thats an interesting take on the social and cultural conditions that inform the impact of the religion. Oh wait

File: tips swamp.jpg (18KB, 353x334px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 353x334px

>>8521725

>Implying I prefer Christianity to Islam anyway
>Implying I'd not rather be rid of the entire desert trilogy

>>8521725
>all those countries are majority black
lol

>>8521725

somehow this statistic cannot be right since it doesn't include egypt

I mean literally close to 100% of all egyptian women have been sexually harrassed, youd think that means they have a higher rape rate than sweden?

>>8521725
>idiots keep on posting the misleading Sweden stat

Sweden counts every sexual attack as a crime on its own, while other countries 'bulk' them if victim and perpetrator are the same. For example, if you're raped by your husband 350 times during your marriage most countries have it as one rape, while Sweden counts 350. Sweden also counts 'minor' things such as groping as sexual assaults.

That's why Sweden's stats are so large.

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Sweden

>>8516278
>>8516007

My dudes. Didn't expect to see these here.

>>8515896

Someone didn't start with the greeks.

>>8515867

Explain mathematics as a material phenomenon.

>>8521553
>Thorin's Thoughts
Yo senpai

Supposedly his second non-esports related channel is coming soon. I'm looking forward to it.

Richard Lewis has been good lately too. Like a less annoying Joe Rogan.

>>8516125
>Make a list of all the people who have made real advances in philosophy in the 20th century who don't have a PhD in philosophy.
1. Wittgenstein

>>8522024
Despite this fame, he could not initially work at Cambridge as he did not have a degree, so he applied as an advanced undergraduate. Russell noted that his previous residency was sufficient to fulfill eligibility requirements for a PhD, and urged him to offer the Tractatus as his thesis. It was examined in 1929 by Russell and Moore; at the end of the thesis defence, Wittgenstein clapped the two examiners on the shoulder and said, "Don't worry, I know you'll never understand it."[151] Moore wrote in the examiner's report: "I myself consider that this is a work of genius; but, even if I am completely mistaken and it is nothing of the sort, it is well above the standard required for the Ph.D. degree."[152] Wittgenstein was appointed as a lecturer and was made a fellow of Trinity College.

>>8517191
>Another lame appeal to authority.
it sound more like appeal to common sense to me

>>8522029
the tractatus was written when he didn't have a PhD, nor a B.A.

>>8516125
>Make a list of all the people who have made real advances in philosophy in the 20th century who don't have a PhD in philosophy.
Karl Sagan

File: 1462077799717.png (638KB, 864x588px) Image search: [Google]

638KB, 864x588px

>>8516813
>npr
>intellectual

try a bigger bait

>>8521683
Sand people are cancer though.

>>8522479

no bait. i don't listen to npr regularly but they do have some decent pieces occasionally.