Comments Page

Please leave any general comments here, or if your comment relates to a particular podcast, please post it on the relevant podcast page. You can also leave comments on Peter's blog.

For any technical issues concerning the website please use this form or email history.philosophy.gaps.podcast@gmail.com.

ADD NEW COMMENT

 

Peter Adamson on 23 October 2011

Filling the Gaps

Hi David,

Actually you're not the first person to suggest that... I think I will record it as I speak and then see whether the results are worth putting online (in terms of both content and sound quality).

Thanks,

Peter

Debora on 21 October 2011

Thank you!

Dear Prof. Adamson,

I am a student from Germany (still in high school though) and luckily philosophy can be chosen as a bilingual subject at my school. So far, we have 'only' dealt with English philosophers, such as Bertrand Russell (no offense), and thus left out most of the ancient philosophers, who I do regard as very crucial to modern-day philosophy. With that being said, your podcast has saved me innumerable and exhausting hours in the library doing research on the roots of philosophy. Therefore, I am more than happy that you have put a lot of effort and time in creating this amaizing podcast and given me an equally amaizing train ride.

Best regards

Debora

Peter Adamson on 27 October 2011

Philosophy in Germany

Dear Deborah,

Thanks for writing, I'm glad that the podcast is helpful. Strange that they aren't exposing you at least to some German philosophers, but maybe it makes sense if they are teaching this option in English.

Thanks and happy listening,

Peter

Stacey Goguen on 19 October 2011

"without any gaps"

This is an ambitious project, and it looks like it's well on its way to being successful in its goals. 

After browsing your website and reading your about section, I'm curious about what this project is trying to accomplish by emphasizing "without any gaps," especially since it is focusing on the "major" (Western) philosophers in history.

1) What does it mean to have no gaps when you've already truncated your project down to just Western philosophy and left out Eastern philosophy?

2) What does it mean to have no gaps when you're focusing on the "major" philosophers and off-handedly mention the lesser-known philosophers when it is precisely these 'lesser-known' ones that would be filling the gaps between the 'giants'?

3) What does it mean to have no gaps when there is no mention of filling the gaps left by the Western tradition itself insofar as it has drawn  from a narrow set of groups of people (mostly men of above average socio-economic status who are identified as or associated with being white (to cover the ancients))?

If you do address any of these points in your project, an expanded "about" section could be worthwhile since, as it stands, the non-mention of these issues suggests that they will not be addressed.

As a woman in philsophy myself, it's...hard to see the normal list of men in the past doing philosophy and to see this described as our tradition of philosophy "without any gaps." This implies that the lack of people who share my social idenity isn't a significant gap, which implies that my social group being discouraged or outright excluded from philosophy would not have a significant impact on the quality of philosophy, since it would not create any "gaps".  And since my social group is still systamtically discouraged from philosophy (http://beingawomaninphilosophy.wordpress.com/) this implies that I don't have anything too important to contribute to philosophy, since if lots of people like me were not in philosophy, our absence would leave no gap. 

I in no way mean to imply you intended to imply all this. The project probably was not thinking about what having "gaps" would mean in this context. So I encourage the project to consider the various historical and cultural ways in which the history of Western philosophy has "gaps". 

Peter Adamson on 19 October 2011

No gaps?

Dear Stacey,

Thanks for this thoughtful message. There are three potential gaps you identify:

1. Minor philosophers: I'm not sure where you got the impression I am only doing major thinkers; to the contrary the whole point is to look at major thinkers but also minor ones. (That's the meaning of the "no gaps" slogan.) For instance next week I'm doing Xenocrates, Speusippus and Theophrastus. Perhaps you read too quickly an overview of the podcast saying that I do the major thinkers _but also_ the minor ones?

2. Non-Western traditions: Here I plead guilty. As I say in episode 1, ideally one should cover Indian, Chinese, African philosophy and no doubt other areas as well, but that is just way beyond the bounds of my competence. If someone else does a similar podcast on non-Western philosophy I will be the first to listen to it! By the way I will be devoting lots of attention to the Islamic world, which is actually my main area of speciality. That tradition, unlike some other world philosophical traditions, is intimately connected to Greek philosophy so it will be part of the sustained narrative I'm trying to create here.

3. Women and other historically disadvantaged groups: Couldn't agree more. A sad fact about the history of philosophy is that only privileged men have done it in the Western tradition, until very recently, with a few exceptions like Hypatia the Neoplatonist or Mary Wollstonecraft. I will certainly cover women authors when they come along in the history, but ultimately we're stuck with the fact that the history of philosophy is a history of ideas in surviving texts, and very few surviving texts from before a couple of centuries ago were written by women -- in any field, never mind philosophy. The same goes for other disadvantaged groups, for instance non-rich people, though again there are exceptions (Epictetus was a slave).

Thanks again,

Peter

Stacey Goguen on 19 October 2011

Point #1

Thank you for the response.  Sorry if #1 was unclear.  My point was that while the well-known giants of philosophy are referred to by name in your short "about" section, the lesser-known philosophers are presented as a much less-significant part of your project, since they are tacked onto the end and no specific ones are mentioned by name. That's what I meant by saying the project "focuses" on major philosophers and only off-handedly refers to lesser-known ones. If the "no gaps" slogan refers primarily to the presence of lesser-known philosophers, that doesn't come across in the "about" section. It might be worth puting some of your discussion about "no gaps" in the first episode in text on the website.

Also, if you haven't already heard of Anne Conway, she's an interesting lesser-known philosopher from the 1600s. Sadly, although we do have some of her work, she is rarely mentioned among the 'giants' of Descartes, Leibnitz, etc.

There is also Christine de Pizan, an author from the 15th century.  While she is not labeled a philosopher, one of her works is a dialogue with "reason", "justice", and "rectitude" that she uses to talk about gender and society. (Tthe fact that she may be one of the first European proto-feminist authors makes her work philosophically interesting.)

You're certainly right that a lack of texts from under-represented thinkers is problem.  Another aspect of the problem, however, is what you mentioned in response to #2.  Very few philosophers know about them, so very few philosophers are adept at talking about their philosophy in depth, so they continued to not get mentioned, or studied, or discussed.  Hopefully projects like this one will begin to break this cycle. 

Peter Adamson on 21 October 2011

Women in philosophy

Yes, those are good examples of women philosophers from the early modern period -- which is, I guess, when we first start getting numerous female philosophers who have left surviving texts (though one might also think of theological-mystical authors from the medieval period, if one has a generous definition of what counts as "philosophy," as I tend to). So perhaps I was being too pessimistic in talking of women only coming in very recently. Anyway this is certainly something I will try to cover in the podcast as I go along -- the podcast's goal of covering the whole history of Western thought actually gives me a good opportunity to focus on the contribution of some of these unjustly forgotten figures.

I should have mentioned that, although I myself am not an expert on Eastern traditions, at King's we do offer courses on Indian Philosophy taught by my colleague Will Rasmussen.

Randall Teal on 17 October 2011

Intuition in Aristotle?

 

Hi Peter,

First of all I wanted to say what a pleasure it is to have access to your podcast – well done! Your focus, particular perspective, and delivery make the episodes both enjoyable and enlightening. I love the mix of erudition and humor and well as the inclusion of outside experts.

Secondly, I have a specific question for you and would love to hear your thoughts if you have a spare moment. I teach beginning design at University of Idaho. Recently, I have been thinking about and drawing upon Aristotle’s discussion of the five ways of knowing truth in the NicomacheanEthics as a means of encouraging students to envision a richer and more complex notion of thinking.  I do this in part to counteract what seems to be a common tendency among students to count linear logic alone as thought and the memorization of facts as knowledge. Not only are these tendencies problematic generally, but in design  specifically, where there is usually a wide range of  potential solutions to the single problem (i.e. there is no “answer”), it  becomes critical that young designers grasp other modes of processing, modes that will allow them to more effectively engage the inherent ambiguity of the design problem. One of the modes of processing that we talk about a lot is intuition. Herein lies my question: I have been wondering what (if anything) in Aristotle might be termed intuition? It seems that nous might be related, although from what you have said it seems a very particular means of grasping the universal in the particular—perhaps a bit like Husserl’s categorical intuition?  It also strikes me that there is something in Aristotle’s focus on ‘habits of excellence’ that might also draw upon intuitive capacities. If you have time, I would love to hear your thoughts about the notion/role of intuition in Aristotle.  

In any case, thanks again for all your work on the podcast – it is a fantastic resource.

Kind Regards,

Randall Teal

Peter Adamson on 17 October 2011

Intuition

Dear Randall,

Thanks for your kind remarks! The question is a really interesting one. As you say, the word "nous" in Posterior Analytics II.19 in particular has often been translated as "intuition," though it is the same word as is used for "intellect" in other works like the De Anima. I am a bit skeptical of this. In a paper I published on that chapter (see the further reading for episode 36), and which I mention in episode 50, I argue that Aristotle is just using the word "nous" because of its Platonic associations. So he doesn't really mean much by it there, on my reading, beyond "I'm happy to call this highest state of cognition 'nous' if you want to call it that, Plato."

Another place to look would be Aristotle's invocation of "acumen" in Post An I.34, which is talent for finding the middle term in a syllogism. One could describe this as seeing (perhaps all of a sudden, as in intuition, even if it is after thinking about it for a while) the missing link in a chain of reasoning. Avicenna develops this in his epistemology and uses the word ḥads for it, which is often translated as "intuition." But it's worth stressing that in both cases the role of intuition or acumen would be finding a way to complete a rational sequence of thought, so it wouldn't be anything mystical or irrational.

Hope that helps,

Peter

Felix on 16 October 2011

Malmesbury Philosophy Town

Went to this fabulous event yesterday: http://philosophytown.co.uk/events

Malmesbury is the birth place of Thomas Hobbes and residents have instigated an annual philosophy weekend.

This is about the 3rd year and my first visit. The talks were at varying levels from beginner to more scholarly and were all very well presented.

I got to meet Professor Angie Hobbs and and discuss reading material for 12 year old girls (since we each have one). Also, myself and another chap both mentioned that we listened to Peter's podcast and she was really pleased since apparently she knows Peter.

Stayed up till 2am talking with other amateur philosophers. Great fun!

For anybody in England or Wales this is an event that you should really visit if you can!

Peter Adamson on 16 October 2011

Me vs Angie Hobbs

Hi Felix,

Sounds like a great event! I do indeed know Angie, who is the queen of "In Our Time" -- she's on it frequently and is always excellent. In fact I have played football against Angie, in a charity philosophers' football match! I was a fullback (they put me there so that I could do as little harm as possible to our own team) and she came on as a striker so I got to tackle her at one point.

Thanks for mentioning the podcast!

Peter

Shiloh on 6 October 2011

The music

Dear Peter, 

Thank you for without any gaps. I'm glad I've only discovered your podcast now so that I don't (for a while, at least) wait a whole week for each podcast to be released! ;) I love the way you present this material. 

This isn't a question about philosophy, rather, what is that piece of music?? It's beautiful. Sorry if someone has already asked this question!

Shiloh

Peter Adamson on 6 October 2011

The music

Hi Shiloh,

Thanks, I'm glad you're enjoying the podcast. I agree the music is great -- someone did ask before, if you read down on this Comments page you'll see a post and link to it. It's by Stefan Hagel.

I'll be changing to a different music clip when I get to Hellenistic Philosophy but it is also by Hagel, playing on a zither rather than an aulos (Greek double flute).

Peter

Inés on 5 October 2011

Thank You!

Dear Prof. Adamson,

I wanted to take a few minutes to write you and thank you for your wonderful podcast. I am listening every day during my long commutes in and out of Brooklyn (NY), and I couldn't think of a better way to start and end my days. 

Thank you for all your hard work!

Inés

Bernard. on 24 September 2011

THANK YOU.

 

Dear Professor Adamson,

I just want to say how grateful I am for the huge amount of work you are doing. I am a horticulturalist from Melburne and have been consuming your podcasts voraciously since I discovered them, at work and in the evenings. Having now "caught up", the pleasure wil be made more exquisate as I will have to wait for each new episode!

It has been a pleasure to follow your consice, comprehensive, accessible yet rigorous, and very often amusing lectures so far. To a lowly autodidact from the antipodes, you podcasts are pure gold. They exemplify that which I value most highly in "this whole internet thing": the wide dissemination of, and access to, education and culture. It is through the hard work and dedication of people such as yourself that this potentiality is realised.

Now if we can just get the animated version for children up and running.. Starring Haiwatha the giraffe, of course, with commentary(!) by Buster Keaton and soundtrack by James Brown.

My thanks also to King's College: you should give professor Adamson a pay rise!

Kind regards,

Bernard.

Peter Adamson on 24 September 2011

The animated version

Dear Bernard,

Thanks very much for your message! I like the idea of an animated version... perhaps people can submit some artwork and we'll be up and running. By the way if you are a horticulturalist you should look forward to episode 51, when we get to Theophrastus (author of "On Plants").

Really glad you are enjoying the episodes, it's always good to have feedback like this because it makes me feel like it is a worthwhile project (as opposed to a self-indulgent hobby... to be honest it's that as well!).

Best wishes,

Peter

Bill Radcliffe on 26 September 2011

Of course its a worthwhile

Of course its a worthwhile project!!!!!

If only there weren't so many other worthwhile projects I want to attend to.

Keep up the good work.

Monte on 29 August 2011

composition and Ibn Sina's proof

Professor Adamson,

 

Ive listened to your concise exposition of Ibn Sina's cosmological argument at Philosophy bites - thank you for summarising the proof and the counterarguments so clearly.  You note that one of the replies to the proof accuses it of comitting the fallacy of composition.  Do you know of any works that explore this further?  It seems to me (from a little reading and thinking) that the fallacy of composition only holds if the attribute predicated is relative, or in some way dependant on external factors for its instantiation.  For example, the following all commit this fallacy:

1. All parts of this object are small, therefore the whole object is small.  [Small is relative to some standard]

2. All parts of this object are colourless, therefore the whole is colourless.  [Being colourful is dependent on the power of sense perception of the observer - an external factor]

3.  All parts of this object are square, therefore the object is square.  [Being square depends on how the objects are arranged, and arrangement is an external factor]

 

On the otherhand, being contingent or necessary is not a relative matter, and is not dependent on external factors, but is purely a function of the entities intrinsic makeup.  As I say Ive only done a little reading on this, so Im probably missing something obvious... I'd be interested to read what others have thought about this. 

Many thanks,

Monte

ps, do you personally find the proof to have any weight?

Peter Adamson on 30 August 2011

Avicenna's proof

Hi Monte,

That's a very interesting comment, thanks. Well, to start with the PS I guess that I don't find the proof decisive but I do think it's the most impressive philosophical proof for the existence of God. (The ontological argument is impressive in a different way, perhaps, but I don't think it's very convincing -- just hard to pinpoint what is wrong with it.) Weak points in the proof: it invokes the impossibility of an infinite regress of causes, which stands in need of further argument; and above all it presupposes that a contingent thing is something that cannot exist without a cause. This is just true by definition on Avicenna's understanding of what "contingent" means but I think one could say, "look, the universe didn't have to exist, but it just happens to exist, without any further cause." Or at least, we need a story about why one _isn't_ allowed to say that, and he just rules it out by defining the modal concepts as he does. (To put it another way, Avicenna would say that the universe's having no cause would just mean it is necessary; but I wouldn't allow that inference to go through without some further discussion.)

As for the main question of whether modal properties (necessity/contingency) are passed from parts to whole, I tend to share your intuition that they would be. Given that if each part is contingent, then it could not exist, it's hard to see why it would be impossible for the whole thing not to exist. So the whole thing should be contingent. It's not clear to me that this is really about intrinsic vs extrinsic, though; for instance, to modify your example of small, take the predicate "one inch wide." That looks like an intrinsic feature: it is not relative to anything because it doesn't invoke comparison as "small" would do. But a whole made up of one-inch wide parts clearly will not be one inch wide. Or if you don't like that example, take the predicate "non-human": the parts of my body are not humans, and that is intrinsic to them. But together they form a human.

By the way I don't know of any literature directly on this question of the fallacy of composition in Avicenna's proof, I think probably most people just tend to agree the modal properties would be transferred from part to whole.

Thanks again!

Peter

Monte on 30 August 2011

Thanks for the detailed and

Thanks for the detailed and prompt reply, some very interesting points!  I need to do more thinking!

Monte

Sarah on 16 September 2011

Dear Peter, Which podcast

Dear Peter,

Which podcast about Ibn Sina was Monte referring to?

Thank you

Sarah

Dan on 28 August 2011

Blue Giraffes and Buster Keaton

Mr. (Dr.?) Adamson -

I have been greatly enjoying your very insightful and informative pod casts. As a Fedex driver, I probably take the "listening while driving" trend to the extreme. I love the mostly objective way you are handling Aristotle. He can be a rather divisive figure. I also wanted to let you know what a kick I get out of your running gags featuring Blue Giraffes and silent film superstars. Every time you add another tongue-in-cheek gag out of left field (for instance: Hiawatha) I chuckle most heartily. I am really looking forward to continued episodes.

           Thanks again,

            Dan, Montana, USA

Peter Adamson on 29 August 2011

Giraffes and Keaton

Dear Dan,

Thanks so much! You'll be glad to know then that I've been busily writing more scripts over the past month, many of which feature giraffes or Keaton (sometimes both).

Happy listening and save driving!

(Professor) Peter

Louise on 26 August 2011

Thanks

Hi Peter

Thank you so much for all the hard work you are putting into your podcasts. I've been listening to them mostly down at the allotment, while weeding my vegetables. If I get a bit distracted by a tough dandelion, I can always listen again! As an academic myself (in a completely unrelated area) I understand how much effort you must be putting into this and it's a joy to receive the gift of learning something new just for the pleasure of learning. I hope you're enjoying your break and you deserve plenty of impact factor when REF comes round.

Louise

Anonymous on 8 August 2011

Intro music

Hey, love your podcast! Very informative.

I'm just wondering, where does the music in the intro of your podcast come from?

- Kenneth, Norway

Peter Adamson on 8 August 2011

Intro music

Hi Kenneth,

The music is by Stefan Hagel, an expert on ancient music who builds and performs on reconstructed ancient instruments. In this case an aulos (double flute). His website, where you can hear the whole clip from which this was drawn, is here:

http://www.oeaw.ac.at/kal/agm/

Best,

Peter

Peter Adamson on 23 July 2011

August Break

Hi everyone,

Just to say that I will unfortunately be taking a podcasting break in August, while I write some more scripts. I'll return with episode 44 on September 4 or 5, and that will be the first of three episodes on Aristotle's ethics. 

Thanks for listening!

Peter

Peter Adamson on 22 July 2011

Thanks for thanks

Just want to thank everyone for the positive feedback, which definitely keeps me motivated! It's also nice to think about people listening all over the world. I'm beginning to think this "internet" thing isn't all bad.

Harlon on 21 July 2011

thanks

Just a note to say thanks, from a fairly new listener in Philadelphia. I first discovered these podcasts while on vacation at the Jersey shore recently and spent many hours walking up and down the boardwalk listening to installments...what a pleasure!  Looking forward to many more episodes...I've some catching up to do!

Victor Mariategui on 21 July 2011

podcasts

Prof. Adamson,

I would just like to add my sincere thanks for your outstanding series of podcasts.  I was visitng Mel Thompson's web site and followed a link he provided to your site.  Like finding buried treasure!!!!!!

I find philosophy simply fascinating and have read various books on the subject and although they were thought provoking and interesting I found many "gaps" in their presentation.

I had to smile when I read in a previous comment about how your soothing voice puts the writer to sleep.  I have to admit that at times I do the same thing. 

Once again, thank you for providing us all with this outstanding series and of course for filling in those "gaps."

Listening from the mountains of Spain,

Vic~

joe f. on 29 June 2011

Great series

Prof. Adamson:

     Just wanted to thank you and your crew for the podcasts.  I'm taking a distance-education Great Books-based program, so I find myself reading a lot of philosophy.  There's a survey course on what they call the Great Conversation and the Great Ideas (and other Great Things), but after that all you get is short biographical notes and lots of time with the works themselves.  And since I'm focusing on rhetoric (thus far), I don't even necessarily read the whole work. I get a chapter here, an act there and lots of dialogues, Aristotle and Augustine.  I've done extra on the side to get more context, but your podcasts have provided a dimension -- the dimension, really -- that I was missing.  I'm only up to 17 so far because I play them twice each, once on the way to work and once on the way home.  I also find them very valuable just because they help me focus on life and bigger, more interesting issues than what I deal with during the day. I used to race around the curves in my Mini and listen to hard rock, now I race around the curves and listen to the History of Philosophy.  There can be no higher praise than knocking rock 'n' roll off my radio.  Thanks again.  joe f.

Cate on 23 June 2011

Thanks

Hi Peter,

Thanks so much for these podcasts, they're brilliant. I did the intercalated philosophy bsc at kings a couple of years ago and this is a great way to keep a bit of philosophy going and fill in the many 'gaps'.

It's also the perfect way to end a busy day, I look forward to curling up and dozing off to a podcast each night, ( though I only get a couple of minutes at a time as they send me straight to sleep ( relaxing and interesting, not boring-perfect cure for insomnia)

So i really hope you keep them going, if you do a full history of philosophy I'll learn everything i want to know and at my speed can look forward to a couple of years of good sleeps!

Cate

Peter Adamson on 25 June 2011

Cure for insomnia

Thanks! I can't help noticing that the previous comment mentions listening to the podcast while driving, and this one mentions it as an aid for going to sleep. Let's hope that these two uses don't overlap.
 

Anonymous on 20 June 2011

You have made the drive enjoyable

Peter,

I came to your podcast after listening to you on the Philosopher's Zone and I love it.

I have the good fortune of driving 2 hours a day through the countryside to work, and your podcast has made the trek even more enjoyable. There is an amazing synergy between the rolling hills of rural Australia and a discussion on Greek philosophy.

James Miller on 14 June 2011

Splendid Podcasts

Dear Professor Adamson,

May I say how much I have been enjoying your podcasts and how useful I have found them. As well as refreshing my knowledge of Plato and introducing some of the dialogues I don't know as I ought, it promises some exciting new avenues into areas of which I am wholly ignorant. 

I thought you might like to know that alongside Nigel Warburton's Philosophy Bites  your podcasts are also becoming part of my A-Level teaching and that my students are making use of them to get insights and opinions I have not offered. I merely provide a sheet of timed questions and some headphones and set them off. Happily several have then gone on to listen to all those others not immediately relevant. 

Keep up the good work.

 

James

Peter Adamson on 14 June 2011

A Level philosophy

Dear James,

Wow, that's amazing! I actually had in mind that A level students doing philosophy might get something out of the podcasts, so it's great to hear that this is coming to fruition. Thanks for getting in touch to let me know about this... and if you get a chance to tell other teachers about it, please do!

best,

Peter

Derik on 9 June 2011

Philosophy online course

Dear Peter,

Thank you for your wonderful podcasts on philosophy.

Have you considered starting an online philosophy course that could organise our

thinking and enjoyment of philosophy, and study for a certificate or diploma?

Studying for a qualification helps to focus reading, thinking and exploration of ideas,

and a systamatic study would be so enjoyable.

Would you please consider an online course, as some of us may be home based,

and there are so few and inaccessable philosophy courses to study.

 

Thank you. I will enjoy all your podcasts.

Derik

Peter Adamson on 10 June 2011

Online degrees

Hi Derik,

Glad you are enjoying the podcasts. Actually in London there is already an external Philosophy course, see:

http://www.londoninternational.ac.uk/prospective_students/undergraduate…

And that is for students who wish to study from afar. I have to admit I don't have much to do with this external course, it is run out of Birkbeck College. (I do a bit of marking for it.) There is also the Open University which offers similar degrees, I think.

Still, it's something to consider! Though I am finding the podcast plenty to keep me busy just at the moment.

Felix on 10 June 2011

Details of philosophy modules

Details of philosophy modules available from the Open University are here: http://bit.ly/jfuOof

I must say that the course linked to by Peter has a much better selection. Plato and the pre-Socractics. Yay!

However it does not seem to have any pupil - teacher or pupil - pupil interaction.

Joni on 5 June 2011

Thank You

I just discovered this podcast as I was reading the Meno in preparation for an online seminar. I, like many in my age group, received a more specialized, career-focused higher education which neglected much of the liberal arts curriculum. I was introduced to the "Great Books" several years ago when I uncovered some of Mortimer Adler's great books study guides at the bottom of a pile of sale books at a used book shop.

Listening to your podcast has added much enjoyment to my daily walks with my dogs. They are informative and entertaining, yet have enough depth to encourage one to reflect on the content and, at least in my case, generate enough interest in the content to seek out the selections and read them for myself.

I own a small independent bookstore and I appreciate your suggestions for further reading. I also have been wanting to start a discussion group on some of these classic texts and your podcast will certainly be helpful.

Furthermore, I am excited about the thoroughness of your coverage of the History of Philosophy, the concept of "without any gaps", helps to put the ongoing conversation of man in greater perspective. I am especially looking forward to your discussion of Islamic thought.

So, thank you for taking the time and effort to provide this wonderful resource. I have become and will remain a faithful listener.

Joni Montover
ParagraphsBooks.com

Felix on 5 June 2011

Discussion Group

Joni,

I, too, have been encouraged to go beyond the podcast and seek out the originals and further resources relating to them.

However, it seems that what one really needs for the study of Plato is discussion partners.  So far I haven't found any real or virtual location where I could discuss these with other interested people. (I am in the UK)

Therefore your mention of an online seminar catches my attention. Can you tell me more?

Also, If anybody knows of such places or where they may be searched for, I would be most interested.

Thanks

 

A few things I have found useful are:

Audio book of The Republic http://bit.ly/kGCFBP

Yale lectures on Socrates and Plato's Apology, Crito & Republic http://bit.ly/iPowIl

Simon Blackburn's short book on The Republic http://amzn.to/loIRNI

There also seems to be a fair bit of Plato in this Yale lecture series on Death which I haven't yet watched  http://bit.ly/hp3Scy

Peter Adamson on 7 June 2011

Further reading

Just to say to both Felix and Joni how pleased I am if the podcasts inspire you to read the actual texts. That would definitely be mission accomplished! I hope that the "further readings" will be of some help. When we get into more obscure topics, I'll try to remember to indicate where you can find translations of the works of these thinkers, not just secondary literature. But I've already put suggestions for the best things to borrow/buy/steal (just kidding about the stealing!) for Plato, Aristotle and so on.

Otter Bob on 20 November 2020

discussion group

I came very late to noticing this post, but if you are still interested in an online seminar or in-depth discussion group you may contact me at otterbob44@gmail. com for the details.

Sybantcho on 2 June 2011

Thanks for doing this excellent podcast

Dear Peter,

Just thought I would write in and thank you for your podcast. Its something I really look forward to each week.

 

I studied classics at school way back (did a summer school in greek at Kings) and still like to read around in the subject. That is how I initially stumbled upon your great series. However I am looking forward to other periods - I am guessing that the classical and late-antiquity periods will take a while.

By the way does no gaps mean that you will be wandering into theological history pagan v christian thought..and will Aristotle or at least his philosophical ghost be popping up now and then at least as far as the late Middle Ages/Renaissance?

Thanks for the podcasts and my only quibble is that the sound could be improved by some basic soundproofing of the rooms you are in...eggboxes or even a sweater fixed to the wall?!!

Top marks for this stimulating and entertaining podcast - a real delight!

Saibancho

Peter Adamson on 7 June 2011

Later periods

Hi, and thanks for the positive feedback! The audio quality is indeed a problem, though I hope it has only been an issue with some of the interviews (which I occasionally have to do "in the field"). But I am trying to take more care to do the interviews in total silence or as close to that as can be had in London, and the future ones should, I hope, sound better. (The ones with Frisbee Sheffield and Fiona Leigh were unfortunately particularly bad.)

I will certainly be covering late antique thought, including pagans vs. Christians, in some detail. My main area of expertise actually starts then, since my research mostly concerns Neoplatonism and medieval philosophy (especially Islamic). Aristotle will be a constant presence for sure, especially once we get past Hellenistic philosophy where his influence is minor.

Thanks again!

Peter

Felix on 23 May 2011

Philosophy Audio books

I recently found this podcast / audio book of The Republic: http://www.learnoutloud.com/Catalog/Philosophy/Political-Philosophy/Pla…

It's 12 hours long but probably a good way for many of your listeners to be exposed to the full text. The narration is excellent, however I don't know which translation it is. I was amused when it was stated that in the transition from the small ideal society to the larger model one of the extra requirements would be 'call girls'!

Do you know of any other similar recordings of philosophical works that have the advantage of being either free or particularly good?

p.s. I recently left a new comment of which I am quite pleased on the Facebook discussion re Zeno :-)

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=163670583644929&topic=702

Peter Adamson on 24 May 2011

Audiobooks Philosophy

Hi Felix,

That's a good question. I know there is Nigel Warburton's podcast "Philosophy: the Classics" which is free on iTunes but I believe that isn't reading the works out but instead giving an introduction to them. I think I would find it frustrating to listen to a primary text, I'd want to keep slowing down and rewinding, I suspect. I did notice a while back that the service "Audible" which is advertised on some podcasts (like "History of Rome" and "This American Life") has some philosophy offerings, like Aristotle and the like. Not sure how good the reading is though.

I'll check out the Zeno comment...

Peter

P. J. O'Brien on 18 May 2011

Getting Started

Hello, Peter.

I'm 19 years old and have recently developed a passing interest in philosophy. Before I go ahead and start to learn on a more in-depth level about particular philosophers, I'm trying to develop a good core knowledge of the whole subject. That way, I can choose which aspects appeal to me the most and find some more specialised material on them.

Your podcast series is a brilliant starting point for me, since you talk in a way that even somebody, like me, who is not a student in the subject can understand. You don't assume that the person listening to the podcast is already educated in philsosphy like some of the other resources that I have found do.

I cannot thank you enough for taking time out of your day to record this series week, after week, after week. Please continue with this ambitious project and don't leave it unfinished. You genuinley are helping a lot of people. Not all of them may let it be known, but you definitely have a big audience there.

Thanks again.

 

~ Paul

 

P.S. Do you think that 'A History of Western Philisophy' by Russell Bertrand is a decent book for somebody wanting to get a general solid understanding of the whole history of western philsophy, like me? If not, do you know of any other books that may be suitable? Thanks.

Peter Adamson on 20 May 2011

Histories of philosophy

Dear Paul,

Thanks, I'm really glad you are finding the podcast rewarding. It's good to know people are actually listening to it! As for your last question, I think the consensus on Russell's history is that it's interesting because he wrote it, and he's an interesting person, but it's pretty far from being a reliable source on the history of philosophy. (His remarks about Islamic philosophy, which is my main field, are particularly dire.) The usual single-author work on the whole history of philosophy is by Frederick Copleston, which is rather out-of-date now but still sells copies I think and is in print. To be honest though I would steer you towards series which cover the subject in multiple volumes by various authors. The Cambridge Companion series is good for this, both on periods and individual thinkers; more in depth is the "Cambridge History" series (e.g. the new "Cambridge History of Medieval Philosophy," but they have volumes on various periods). There are also Blackwell Companions and Oxford Handbooks to various figures and periods. In fact just about every academic publisher has some sort of series along these lines. So I would more recommend a recent series like that rather than Russell or Copleston.

Peter

Felix on 19 June 2011

Do you have any opinion on

Do you have any opinion on Anthony Kenny's A New History of Western Philosophy?

It is approximately twice the length of Rusell, and yet a quarter of the length of Coppleston, and could (if it is well thought of) be a suitable replacement for the general reader.

Peter Adamson on 19 June 2011

Kenny's History

Unfortunately I haven't managed to read it yet, though Kenny certainly knows his stuff especially when it comes to Aristotle and Aquinas. Anyone else want to give a view?

MIke K on 13 May 2011

Intro Book to Presocratics

Peter,

I've recently found your podcast and have been trying to catch up. I'm on the Hippocrates podcast now. They really are wonderful. Thank you for doing this!

I have a question. I noticed on the webpages for the Presocratics you recommended a few books. I was wondering if you have any opinion on one book that I used for my Ancient Greek philosophy class in the early 90's: An Introduction to Early Greek Philosophy by Robinson. I'm a bit disappointed that he doesn't consider Thales to be the first true Presocratic. It was written around 1970-do you think that it is still a good resource or should I look into one of the newer books?

Peter Adamson on 13 May 2011

Robinson on the Presocratics

Hi there - I have to confess I don't know the Robinson book, looked it up online and it is from 1968. Quite a bit has happened then, in terms of scholarship. (Out of curiosity who does he think is the first true Presocratic?) To me the main thing to read has to be Kirk Raven and Schofield, since it gives you the fragments (in both Greek and English!) and helpful commentary. Jonathan Barnes is probably the place to turn for a really hardcore analytic analysis of the fragments. And for a general introduction I would strongly recommend James Warren's book on the Presocratics, that is probably the best general survey out there.

Mike K on 13 May 2011

Poor Thales!

Wow thanks for the quick response!

I actually have Warren's book in the cart on Amazon along with the Cambridge Companion to the Presocratics and Waterfield's The First Philosophers (Oxford World Classics). I was trying to decide between the three (now 4-I'll take a look at Kirk Raven Schofield as well).

As for Robinson-he has Anaximander as the first one. Interestingly enough he actually has a chapter on Hesiod to contrast the Presocratics with the "old school" Greeks, and in an Appendix he talks about Thales. He felt that Thales was more interested in explaining particular natural phenomena, not general questions that Anaximander and Anaximenes were trying to figure out.

Shoo Rayner on 11 May 2011

Thanks

Hi Peter,

 

Thanks for these podcasts. I listen to them if I wake up in the middle of the night. It would be cruel to say they send me to sleep, but they often do, having satisfied some question that is ringing around my head.

I don't think I'd ever have the time to catch up with all this stuff myself. Your style leads us gently along, and having them as podcasts means that I can replay bits I didn't quite get.

I'm thrilled with the Plato's vision of Winged Horses pulling chariots - very left/right brain and will be using the analogy in one of my youtube drawing videos soon - I'll give you a mention, for what it's worth. www.youtube.com/users/shooraynerdrawing

Keep up the good work, and could you ask for an extra microphone on interviews? They sound like they are done in the room next door!

 

All the best

 

Shoo Rayner www.shoorayner.com

Peter Adamson on 13 May 2011

Bedtime philosophy

Hi -- actually you are not the first person to tell me they fall asleep to the podcasts. Better than smoking in bed, I guess. Anyway I'm glad you enjoy them! I agree the last two interviews didn't sound too good but it's not really the microphone, it was the background noise... I will be careful about this in the future. (Or, as they say in the UK, "in future." Very strange, that.)

Peter

Felix on 7 May 2011

Best introductory philosophy text for children

I have recently heard A.C. Grayling say that he found philosophy via the Charmides, and also that Aristotle's Nichomachean Ethics could be read by a 12 year old.

Since my daughters 12th birthday is coming up, and I can occasionally persuade her to read 'serious' books, I was wondering what would be the 'best' text to give her.

Obviously it should be able to catch her interest and not to long.

Thanks

Peter Adamson on 7 May 2011

Philosophy for kids

I think you can't go wrong with Plato, like maybe the Euthyphro which is quite short (the Charmides is rather challenging, I'd say, despite what Anthony Grayling experienced!). Alternatively there are good books for introducing philosophy to kids now. There is "Sophie's World," a novelized version of the history of philosophy; and also check out Peter Worley's "The If Machine" which is a how-to guide for introducing philosophy to kids. He runs a program called the Philosophy Shop, and they send people into schools here in the UK to teach philosophy to kids, even kids much younger than your daughter. Their website is: http://www.thephilosophyshop.co.uk/

Felix on 7 May 2011

Thanks Peter. I recently

Thanks Peter.

I recently read Sophie's World and am saving that one for when my daughter is the same age as Sophie (15th birthday?)

I will go with the Euthyphro, and also check out philosophy Shop.

Peter Halliday on 23 April 2011

This series

Just wanted to say how immensely enjoyable and thought-provoking this series has been; many thanks to Peter and all who make it possible. I particularly value the contributions from MM McCabe. If there is a philosophy equivalent to the Oscars, this series deserves to win every award.

Peter Adamson on 23 April 2011

And the Oscar goes to...

Thanks very much! I'll tell MM that she has another fan (there has been a lot of good feedback on her episodes, unsurprisingly; she will return!).

Anonymous on 19 April 2011

Virtue as in being in our own best interest.

Hi Peter

Thank you for your excellent podcasts, they've been very helpful with my greek philosophy revision.

It seems to me that a key part of Plato's argument that virtue=knowledge, is the idea that with true knowledge we would see the virtuous action is always the best course for us.

I was wondering if you could advise on the best place to look for a good account of Plato's arguments for this claim?

Thanks 

Peter Adamson on 19 April 2011

The benefit of virtue

Hi, glad the podcasts have been helpful. For the general claim that virtue (which is knowledge) would benefit us, one can look at numerous Socratic dialogues -- sometimes he suggests that knowledge is a necessary condition for all benefit, as in the Euthydemus, for instance. But I think for what you're after the Gorgias might be the best dialogue to look at, since he argues for the thesis at length there.

Anonymous on 30 March 2011

But what about King's

Dear Professor Adamson,

May I use your comments page to request that the Department of Philosophy breaks its silence about recent developments at King's College London, the attempt to sack Professor Lappin and his colleagues., and the whole process of 'consultation'? How many members of your Department have taken early retirement? Was it the decision of members of the Department to take early retirement which saved Professor Lappin, or was there a real change of policy? Did the saving of Professor Lappin and his colleagues ensure that other posts in other Departments at King's had to be cut? Is it an accident that Sir Richard Trainor is on the Council of the AHRC at the time when they make 'The Big Society' a funding project?

I know that Departments rarely discuss this sort of thing. But surely philosophers, and Professors of Ethics, are best placed to guide the rest of us. Despite your efforts to teach the history of philosophy, it is for arbitrary cuts that King's College London is best known worldwide. The UK journalist Iain Pears has provided cogent arguments that these cuts do not save money, and reveal how far King's is run by managers with a very strange agenda. King's refuses to enter into dialogue with Pears, presumably hoping he will go away. But to an outsider like myself he seems to be reasonable. 

May I urge you to ask your colleagues in the Department of Philosophy to think about this aspect of their public interaction? 

Peter Adamson on 30 March 2011

King's

I saw you were also asking about this on facebook. The Department did put a remark about it up on our website last year, after the issue was resolved, which you may have seen. As for further discussion, I don't think it is really my place to speak for the whole Department on such a sensitive issue, especially not here. There is still the other facebook page about Philosophy cuts at King's, and that might be a more relevant forum.

Nick Fallows on 23 March 2011

Brilliant

This is seriously brilliant and so generous of you. What is the good? I'll tell you. This is the good.

Felix on 21 March 2011

Have any philosophical problems been finally solved?

Have any philosophical problems been finally solved?

I saw this question here today: http://bit.ly/f9qhte but it has been concerning me for a while :-)

Peter Adamson on 30 March 2011

Solutions

Dear Felix, I thought about this one for a while since it's quite difficult. Some questions that once counted as "philosophical" have arguably been solved -- e.g. how does motion through space work, a topic discussed by Aristotle and now covered in classical physics. Of course such issues are no longer thought of as philosophical given the narrowing definition of "philosophy" in recent centuries.

Part of the problem is what "finding a solution" means. If it is a non-empirical question then the discovery of a solution is probably going to mean something like "everyone agreeing on a certain view" but even that is always subject to revision. I think that at least in the English-language tradition there is broad agreement on a few key issues, for instance most analytic philosophers believe the mind cannot exist separate from the body, and are compatibilists about free will and determinism. Also I get the impression that a large majority are atheists. But of course there are many exceptions; these are just majority viewpoints and it would be silly to say that the problem of God's existence has been "solved" just because a majority of philosophers become atheists (any more than it was "solved" in the medieval period because all of them were theists).

A final thought would be that there are certain distinctions and tools that get developed that do seem to be clear steps forward, e.g. the distinction between sense and reference, or the contrast between necessary and sufficient conditions. Even if these distinctions were implicitly made earlier, being able to make them explicitly is a big advantage. But this isn't the same as solving a problem.

Anyone else have any candidates to suggest?

Bryan Keniry on 17 March 2011

Fantastic

Hi Peter

I am really loving the podcasts so far.

It is a really ambitious project you have set yourself but I think it absolutely needs to be done.

I have so far especially appreciated the podcasts on the pre-socratics. I know a fair bit about Plato and Aristotle but haven't really had much occasion to study the pre-socratics except in passing.

While I will listen with interest to the coming podcasts on Plato and Aristotle, since there are many of their works I'm not familiar with, I am especially looking forward to when you get to the Hellenistic period and Late antiquity.

Hope to hear many more podcasts from you, and I hope the project continues (it will take years I think).

Rob Loftis on 4 March 2011

Request for podcast on Plato's academy

Hi Peter,

Thanks so much for these podcasts. They make my driving time so much more interesting.

Do you take requests? While you are on Plato, I’d like to know more about the other denizens of his Academy. The nice thing about these podcasts is learning about all the second tier figures and people who don’t make it into regular surveys. (I’d somehow missed Xenophanes until now.) So I’m wondering now about the second tier figures who were right there with Plato, interacting with him on a daily basis.

Just a suggestion. Thanks

Rob

Peter Adamson on 4 March 2011

Academy

Hi Rob,

My plan is actually to devote an episode to Plato's and Aristotle's students (basically, Xenocrates, Speusippus, and Theophrastus) when I am done with Plato and Aristotle. Sadly you'll have to wait: by my reckoning that will be episode 51! (Lots of Aristotle to get through.) Another figure one could mention here is Eudoxus, a mathematician who worked in the academy, and I may mention him briefly when I talk about Aristotle's cosmology. So, I'll get there ("without any gaps") but you'll have to be a bit patient! Thanks for listening.

Natalia Doran on 2 March 2011

four elements allegorical?

As you requested in your very generous and very prompt response to my email, I will repeat my question in this format:

Kant - admittedly as a complete one-off throw-away remark in the Critique of Pure Reason - offers an allegorical interpretation of the classical four elements. Earth is the principle of permanence, stability, fire of influence, interaction, air and water media, respectively inaccessible and accessible, where the interaction takes place. How justified is such an interpretation, does it have any pedigree at all, maybe in late antiquity .?..  

You did not request it, but I will also repeat my complements: wonderfully informative and listenable-to podcasts, cannot wait for more.

Peter Adamson on 3 March 2011

Kant on the elements

Thanks Natalia, this is interesting. Well, I don't know the Kant passage (I could check with my colleague John Callanan at KCL who is a Kant expert). But there is a fairly long tradition of this, going back at least to Plato, who says (as we'll see in the Timaeus episode) that earth is responsible for solidity, whereas water and fire are fast moving or flowing. That isn't actually meant to be an allegory, it's just a physical explanation. Then later authors do bring in more "symbolic" or Pythagorean interpretations of the elements. One author I know well, the Muslim thinker al-Kindi, has a treatise on "Why the Ancients Ascribed the Five Geometrical Shapes to the Elements." And he does talk about numerical relations, certain shapes as "in between" others and so on. More generally, though, Aristotle lays out a theory where the four elements would naturally form concentric circles: fire at the top, earth at the bottom (a sphere), and air and water in between. So that idea that air and water are a kind of medium between fire and earth is just basic Aristotelian (hence ancient/medieval) cosmological doctrine. The elements must then somehow be mixed or combined, and it's traditionally thought that this is done by celestial motion.

Natalia Doran on 4 March 2011

Kant on the elements

Thank you, Timaeus is the perfect next step, cannot wait for the podcast! The added benefit for me will be learning to pronounce the title of the dialogue - as an autodidact (though, I promise you, not of the Sartrian variety), I only read things and do not know how they are supposed to sound.

The Kant passage I was referring to comes just before the Transcendental Doctrine of Method part of the Critique, in the Appendix to the Transcendental Dialectic Of the Regulative Use of the Ideas of Pure Reason, A646, B674.

Andre on 1 March 2011

Plato

Peter,

 

Great podcast!  With all the turmoil in Africa and Middle East these days, can you talk about in one of your podcast, what you think Plato/Socrates would say about these new regimes?  

Thanks

Peter Adamson on 1 March 2011

Modern tyranny

Hi Andre,

Well, I don't think I'll stray very far into current events in the podcasts; not really my strong point. But I guess Plato might think that what is going on in Libya right now illustrates his points about tyranny rather well (especially what he says in the Republic, which I'll be talking about in a few weeks).

Thanks for listening!

Andre on 7 March 2011

Modern tyranny

Peter,

 

Thank you very much for the quick response.  I look forward to hearing podcast on Republic in next few weeks.  

Anonymous on 28 February 2011

Great Podcast

Peter,

thank you so much for your efforts and for sharing your extensive knowledge.  Your podcasts are very well prepared, articulated and entertaining.  I look forward to each new episode with zeal.

Felix on 22 February 2011

Comment Formatting

Peter,
no doubt you have noticed that all line breaks are removed when posing comments.
Do you have somebody you can ask to fix this?

Peter Adamson on 24 February 2011

Line Breaks

Ok, thanks for pointing this out.

If this shows as a new line then it's been fixed... looks like it works! Thanks Julian (the HoP web wizard).
 

Felix on 14 February 2011

Can't get enough!

Peter,

I love the podcast and can't wait for the next episode to come out. I would say that once a week isn't often enough. How about Monday and Thursday releases?

Also, a little niggle, after checking the website three times a day for a week, today (14th Feb) the latest episode 20 says that it was posted on the 6th Feb. This leads to self-doubt!

Keep up the good work! (Just work even harder!)

Peter Adamson on 14 February 2011

Twice a week?

And here I thought once a week was possibly too ambitious! Anyway, glad you are enjoying the podcasts. Well spotted on the posting date. The page for this most recent podcast was in fact created Feb 6, but I didn't add the actual podcast file until yesterday, and then "published" it this morning.