In reply to Translations of Plato by Dan Urbach
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.
Thanks!
Thank you very much for making this podcast! I can only imagine how much work that has been.
But I think it was well worth the effort, the result is very entertaining, and I really like the in-depth coverage of even obscure thinkers.
I hope you enjoy making this podcast as much as I do listening to it!
In reply to Thanks! by Benjamin
Enjoyment
Yes, I do enjoy making the podcast, and as you can imagine I am learning quite a lot by doing it (though I may be forgetting stuff as fast as I am learning it). Probably my favorite part though is hearing from listeners like you, so thanks for getting in touch!
a century
Hi Peter,
I am writing on the occasion of just having passed my hundredth episode of THOPWAG. First of all, thank you. You always break down but never water down ideas (I have no background in philosophy), condense (by necessity) but don't leave gaps (naturally), and all with an entertaining sprinkling of questionable puns. Also, who knew the history of philosophy was good to work out to! ... Of course my listening has surged and ebbed — the Hellenistic schools had me holding on to the edge of my exercise bike, the neo-Platonists not so much — but even when my mind wanders, and I can't remember which Cappadocian you're talking about, I find myself pleasantly afloat on the vastness of human thought. So cheers, thanks again, and may you one day "catch up" with history, so that you can truly say, at the end of the final podcast, "... and then I said the words I am saying right now!"
Yours sincerely,
Cullen Gerst
Berkeley, CA
In reply to a century by Cullen Gerst
Catching up
Right, I had the similar idea that someday I could have episodes that begin, "this week on the History of Philosophy: this week in the history of philosophy." But it will be a while until I can use that joke.
Sixteenth Century Philosophy/Theology
Hi Dr. Adamson,
I am wondering if you plan to spend some time on sixteenth century protestant philosophy. Even if you don't plan to deal with the debates on free will or reason, I think you might be interested in the ethical thought of that period. So here's my case. First, the chapters that exist on that period in histories of ethics written by philosophers (you won't blame me if I don't name names) wouldn't pass muster if studied with the same care as other periods. Second, the thought of that period is intrinsically interesting and beneficial. For instance, I just gave a paper to the historical society on the way Peter Martyr Vermigli completes Aristotle's function argument. I have another paper in the works on how Vermigli uses Aristotle's discussion of arguing "to or from first principles" to interpret the 'Nicomachean Ethics' as a whole, and how this interpretation in turn attempts to reconcile what some 20th century folks call first and third personal perspectives or impartial and partial ethical considerations. Third, and if the first and second aren't persuasive enough for you, ethical thought in the sixteenth century goes virtually ignored by philosophers, which is a problem best remedied by your podcast.
There's an argument for you! I know that your resources are limited, but I'd love to see some attention given to that period if possible!
Best,
Dan
In reply to Sixteenth Century Philosophy/Theology by Dan Kemp
Sixteenth c
Thanks very much for the suggestion! I am not that far ahead with my planning but in general I am sure I will do quite a lot on Protestant theology, in fact I was thinking of calling a big section of the podcast and maybe one of the books "Philosophy During the Reformation". Perhaps you could email me some of your work on this, and I could save it to consult when the time comes? You can reach me at peter.adamson@lrz.uni-muenchen.de.
Indian Indian timeline?
In addition to my previous comment on the Modern phase of the Indian Timeline, I notice J.N. Mohanty’s reflections, analysis and interpretations of classical Indian Philosophy—ry Handbook of Indian Philosophy (my will be coming from Amazon.ca on November 23rd) has systematically excluded Aurobindo’s works—
fin
In reply to Indian Indian timeline? by Jay
India timeline
Well, that timeline is actually taken (mostly or entirely) from a volume that Jonardon is editing, so it may just be because none of the contributors in that volume mention Aurobindo. You may also notice it goes way, way past where we are stopping in the podcast series - I assume that one could actually add dozens and dozens of names if one wanted to mention all the interesting philosophers between, say, Dignāga and the early 21st century! There is a similar shortcoming in the Islamic world timeline in that it barely covers 19th, 20th and now 21st c philosophers. But the main goal of these timelines is just to help people orient themselves with figures mentioned in the podcast, so in a sense everything after the demise of Buddhism in India (which is roughly where we are stopping) is included gratuitously. Sorry, that is more an explanation than a justification!
Timeline
Hello Peter,
Excellent job with the timeline, but why Nehru and not Aurobindo? I don’t think Nehru’s History of India is comparable with The Life Divine, Synthesis of Yoga, Savitri, etc, etc?
Does he not worth mentioning?
Spanish thought
Hi Peter,
Thanks for your excellent podcast. I've been a faithful listener since the pre-Socratics. I was a little disappointed to see that in the Medieval philosophy timeline you have not really touched on any Iberian or Hispanic thinkers or literature (aside from Petrus Hispanus). I thought you'd talk about Raymond Lull at the end of the 13th century, on Alfonso X and his remarkable collection of law, the Partidas, or on the University of Salamanca, founded in the 12th century). True, some of them are not as well-known (though Lull is, I think), but then again, this is without any gaps!
Anyhow, just a suggestion. Thanks again for your great work.
In reply to Spanish thought by Pedro
Llull
Thanks for the suggestion - sorry, I only just saw this comment. Actually I am going to work Llull in, still, in an episode about medieval figures who seem to anticipate developments of the Renaissance. So he is still to come, somewhat out of chronological order admittedly.
Ecclesiastes
First- Thanks for the series- it's awesome!
I recently went through and studied Ecclesiastes, and I was surprised by how much of the philosophy there reminded me of Stoicism. The main tenants seems to be a lack of certain knowledge about anything, determinism, and the life philosophy to accept and be happy with one's lot in life. Most of the ideas expressed sound like they could have been lifted off a Stoic manuscript.
Traditional Jewish dating predates Ecclesiastes to the hellenistic movements by several centuries (ascribed to King Solomon in the 10th centrury BC), though most modern studies place the text around the Hellenistic era.
I was wondering if any works have been done comparing Ecclesiastes to stoicism and analyzing ideas drawn from each other?
In reply to Ecclesiastes by Josh S
Stoics and the Bible
I don't know about Ecclesiastes in particular but I know that there has, in general, been the suggestion that early Christian thought and perhaps even books of the Bible were influenced by Hellenistic philosophy. As you might have noticed I chickened out of trying to cover the Bible itself in this series, so I have not read up on this. But here for instance is a review of a book on Stoicism and early Christianity.
Modern philosophers when you get there?
First, what a treasure this site is. I have downloaded and look forward to listening during my daily commutes.
When you get to modern philosophers, I hope you will give a good treatment to Ayn Rand. She hits the diversity button and in all cases of philosophical dichotomies, she comes down on integration rather than extremism. (empiricism v rationalism, mind v body, idealism v materialism, etc)
In reply to Modern philosophers when you get there? by Zardoz
Rand
Thanks, glad you like the site!
I wonder what Ayn Rand would think of your arguing for her inclusion partially on the basis of diversity? Anyway, that is a decision I guess I won't have to reach until the 2030s or so. I have to admit that I am a bit nervous about tackling the 20th century at all - reminds me of what Mao supposedly (apparently not really, unfortunately) said when asked his views on the French Revolution: "too soon to say."
Transcendence
Hi Peter,
I am sure you have used the word "transcendence" or its variants somewhere in the medieval episodes, but I can't recall exactly in which. Meanwhile I am not sure if I really understood its meaning in different philosophical contexts, or even at all. Apparently Kant has coined the word in his Critique but I see the term is also used in connection with the literature on the islamic philosophy e.g. the title of the book of by Sadra who lived much earlier than Kant. And one often speaks of the transcendental realm/world in opposition to this/material world or maybe as an indication to the world of intellect.
So I am a bit confused and am looking for a kind of straightforward definition of the concept. Any hints is appreciated.
In reply to Transcendence by Xaratustrah
Transcendence
Yes, I think I have used it but not in the Kantian sense. I've used it when talking about divine ineffability: God "transcends" language in the sense that He is too exalted to be spoken of. So here "transcend" just means "to be beyond" and this is what is meant by talking about "transcendent philosophy" regarding Sadra or a transcendent world of intellect. Kant calls arguments "transcendent" when they focus on the conditions for the possibility of something, like, you could argue that God exists by saying that He is the condition for the possibility of things we see in the empirical world. (I guess the idea here is that you "transcend" or "go beyond" experience to grasp something that is the prerequisite for that which is experienced). So, bascially we are dealing with two different uses of the word. Hope that helps!
Gratitude
Thank you Peter for the enjoyable cruise down the history of ideas. I only wish I could upload the link to Salo ( the amiable droid from Tralfamdore in Vonnegut's Sirens of Titan ) on his lonely mission of peace to the edge of the Cosmos.
Blessings on you.
Richard Leader
Pre-islamic middle eastern philosophy
Hi Peter!
Firstly I would like to thank you for you wonderful series. Secondly I would like to ask you if you maybe plan to cover pre-islamic middle eastern philosophy like Babylonian or Persian?
Thank you for what you're doing again!
In reply to Pre-islamic middle eastern philosophy by mckenna36
Pre-Islamic Middle East
Firstly, thanks very much!
Secondly, yes and no - not classical Persia I think, because I don't know where that could come in. But there is already an episode written on Babylonian thought which will feature early in our series on Africana philosophy next year, as context for our discussion of ancient Egypt.
In reply to Pre-Islamic Middle East by Peter Adamson
Will that discussion on
Will that discussion on Mesoptamian thought include the Epic of Gilgamesh (literature) and the Code of Hammurabi (Ancient law)?
You can probably discuss Zoroastrianism (Mazda & Zurvanism) during the Ancient Egyptian mini series section since the Persians did conquer Egypt during the achaemenid empire (27th dynasty).
Regarding Manichaeism... you could include that when you are covering Classical Chinese Philosophy (whereby Manichaeism enters China with a sizable group of followers well up to the Ming dynasty).
In reply to Will that discussion on by dukeofethereal
Fitting stuff in
Yes, there is some mention of Hammurabi and a fair amount about Gilgamesh in the Babylonia chapter we have drafted.
I see what you mean about getting in Manicheanism etc but I think probably the right place to discuss Zoroastrianism as a topic in its own right would probably have been either in late antiquity or as a preface to the Islamic world episodes, so I may have missed the boat on that. It's not so clear to me though, that this is a crucial topic for a history of philosophy - even a very broad one like I am attempting - after all this is not the history of religion without any gaps, and I didn't cover e.g. the Bible or the Quran except by mentioning them as context for philosophical texts, as I also did with Manicheanism (e.g. when discussing Augustine). But as you know I try to err on the side of being open-minded so I would love to hear the argument to the contrary.
Edifice
Hi Peter,
I am a long time / big time zealot of HoPwaG. You're doing an amazing job so here's my chance to congratulate and thank you for this admirable edifice you're building.
Kind regards,
Thomas
[from Switzerland]
In reply to Edifice by Thomas
Edifice
And thanks to you for getting in touch! At the risk of mixing metaphors, I guess that if ever an edifice was built on the shoulders of giants it would be this one.
In reply to donate by Alexandra
Donations
Oh, thanks for asking, but you can't! I always wanted to make it freely available and keep money out of it (I am grateful that I get to do philosophy as my job in the first place and thought this would be a small way to pay society back for making this possible for me). You could however buy the books, if you want (see the link at the top of the page), or just leave a nice review on iTunes and/or tell other people about it.
Andalusia
Hi Peter,
First of all, my sincere thanks for the series that I follow from Morrocco since months (I've just reached the safavide period).
Just in case you may be interested, I share with you below the link of a new album of the Morrocan Nabyla Maan, where you'll find some andalusian classics poems revived on a new modern form.
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmyDMOpPJlUOvL_MB91Q60rQlOFP3MNmn
Hope you'll enjoy.
With kind regards
Ihsane
HPI Map
Hi Peter,
do you have a kind of visual map or diagram of the indian philosophy, at least the way it is presented in the podcast? I have some difficulties keeping the relationships, names, epochs etc. in my mind. By checking the map from time to time it would then be easier to classify the already learnt topics and get ready for the future episodes.
thanks!
In reply to HPI Map by Xaratustrah
Map
Amber Carpenter's book on Buddhism has a chart like that for Buddhism, I don't know of one that gets all the schools we have looked at. Basically though you have the six "orthodox" schools developing in step with one another and growing out of the Vedic tradition, and contemporaneous with that the branching development of Buddhism and Jainism. Carvaka is kind of on its own. We do also have the timeline here on the site for the thinkers mentioned and the thinkers are hyperlinked to the relevant episodes so that may help.
In reply to This series.... by Formoka
This series
Thanks! Glad you like it. The title of your comment made me nervous, I was afraid the rest of it would say "... is a huge disappointment."
Greek heritage
Hi Peter,
it is often stated that the philosophy in the islamic world is a continuation of the greek heritage. Has there been any "new" trends that didn't have roots in greek philosophy (e.g. maybe the illuminationism)? Also I wonder why philosophers in the islamic world drew more on Aristotle rather than Plato, whereas it seemed to me, that the description of God in Plato is rather a better match to that of Abrahamic religions?
thanks!
In reply to Greek heritage by Xaratustrah
Reception of Greek
The second question is a bit easier to answer: Plato was largely untranslated, apart from Arabic versions of summaries by Galen which did exert some influence (especially on Abu Bakr al-Razi for instance). The reasons for that are not so clear but bear in mind that already in late antiquity, the philosophical curriculum was oriented especially towards Aristotle who was thought to be more appropriate for students, despite the Platonist instructors.
As for the first question, of course throughout the podcast I emphasize that there is a lot of innovation etc even when engaging with Greek philosophy: the biggest leap forward and most influential thinker is Avicenna, who is incredibly original despite the fact that he is deeply engaged with Aristotle. As for Illuminationism, Suhrawardi actually claims to be depending closely on Greek thinkers (Plato, Pythagoras etc) but his thought, in my view, is more like a creative engagement with Avicenna, much as Avicenna was creatively engaging with Aristotle. For philosophy that is largely "independent" of Greek sources you really have to think in terms of Kalam and perhaps some parts of Sufism. As you know I think that counts as part of the history of philosophy but not everyone agrees.
Request to cover Jainism in depth in the series
Thank you for the all the episodes that give in depth analysis of Indian philosophy. Jainism being one of the mjaor schools of thought that has emerged and flourished in Ancient India definitely needs our attention. Hope you will cover Jainism in detail in the coming podcasts. I am sorry if it has already been announced in the podcasts.
In reply to Request to cover Jainism in depth in the series by Niranjan Vengallur
Jainism
That is indeed the plan! The last sub-series for India will be about Buddhism and Jainism, for the Jains we'll be focusing on Umasvati in particular. Pretty soon I'll be posting (on the blog and on Facebook) an episode list for this last run of episodes so you can see what we have planned.
And by the way I hope you saw that episode 15 on non-violence already discussed early Jainism at some length.
catch up
Hi Peter,
Thank you for the time and effort you put into these podcasts. I am new to Philosophy and find your podcasts a fantastic resource for helping guide me though a subject I have for a long time wanted to learn more about. I am determined to work through each one, and hopefully catch you up.
Thanks again
Chris
In reply to catch up by Christopher
Catching up
Great! Hope you enjoy the series. If you listen to two podcasts per week you will gain on me and catch up in about five years...
General Appreciation and Finding Resources on Yahya ibn 'Adi
Greetings Professor Adamson,
I have been a listener of the podcast for a little over two years now, and not too long after I started listening it became my favorite podcast to listen to by far. As a philosophy major who dropped out of college roughly five years ago, listening to your podcast makes it feel like I never really left the classroom. Learning about the general development of philosophy in the context of their historical periods and traditions provides an excellent way to engage with philosophy even as someone who is not presently enrolled in school; furthermore, we get to watch how new philosophical schools organically develop out of existing philosophical schools, which is a very "active" way to learn philosophy, so to speak.
I am still catching up to the current point in the podcast, but I am taking my time to digest the episodes thoroughly and enjoy the overall journey. Currently I am listening to the episodes on Avicenna, but learning about Islamic philosophy in general has been so much fun, since these figures are not mentioned in most undergraduate philosophy courses here in the US. Specifically, I enjoyed learning about the Baghdad School and their relationship to al-Farabi's and later Avicenna's philosophical ideas and approach. During those episodes, you mention a figure named Yahya ibn 'Adi, whom has greatly piqued my interest. However, in trying to find further resources online about ibn 'Adi, I find that there is not as much literature readily available about him as I might have hoped. Do you know where I can find out more about him and about the other members of the Baghdad School prior to al-Farabi?
Again, thank you so much for all the effort and time you dedicate to this project, and I have enjoyed hearing about giraffes and Buster Keaton with you. It has been a pleasure to be a long-term listener and student of yours, and I look forward to finally catching up to the current point one day, haha.
Kind Regards,
Cierra D. P.
In reply to General Appreciation and Finding Resources on Yahya ibn 'Adi by Cierra D. P.
Ibn 'Adi
Thanks for your generous comment! Glad you find the series valuable.
You're right that there is not as much info on Ibn 'Adi as there might be. One good overview would be in this volume that just appeared:
http://www.brill.com/products/reference-work/philosophy-islamic-world
If you cannot get a hold of it, shoot me an email and I will send you the pages on Ibn 'Adi.
I have the shakes
Hello Peter
I like to listen to the podcast by bingeing on all the episodes in a zip file. I found that when listening week by week, if you referred to somebody from a few episodes back, I had completely forgotten who they were. Now that I'm up-to-date I'm suffering from withdrawal symptoms waiting for the next zip file to be available.
One of the things I enjoy about your podcast is that you manage to explain something at just the right depth. On some podcasts, something fairly simple is given too much time and on some others, something fairly deep is rushed through. I was listening recently to a podcast about the Stoic atttude to death. Something they say we should be indifferent to. Quite profound with many implications. The podcast flashed through the ideas so fast I had to play it back again a couple of times to get an opportunity for those ideas to percolate and sink in. I nearly always find you pitch your explanations at just the right depth for me. Not dwelling on the straightforward and taking time to unpack the complex or counterintuitive. It's sometimes said you don't notice good writing, but you do notice bad writing. Maybe it's the same with podcasts. Or maybe there are podcasts out there at differing depths for differing people and this just happens to be the one suited to me. Whatever, it's a pleasure to listen to.
Thanks again for a great podcast.
In reply to I have the shakes by binge listener
Shaken not stirred
Great! Glad that you find it pitched at the right level - as you can imagine I think about that a lot, though in a sense there is no right answer because people with different backgrounds are bound to listen to it. But I'm glad it is right for you anyway. Thanks for listening!
Kudos
This is a great service.
I hope you can continue it for a long time!
I love that it is free.
Thank you!
Dear Prof Adamson
Thank you so much for your wonderful podcasts on the History of Philosophy, which I discovered a couple of weeks ago. I studied Philosophy at A-level and loved it, but always had aspirations of becoming a medical doctor. When it came to applying to university, I was so torn and decided I would try for medical school and if I didn't get in, I would pursue philosophy. I did get in and it's 12 years later and I still feel the pangs of what might have been.
Hopefully one day I will have the time and resources to go back and study philosophy, but in the mean time your podcasts have filled the void and brightened up my commute, my household chores, my grocery shopping!
Thank you so much again, for the effort you put in to create such a rich resource. It is so appreciated.
Warm wishes
Jemma
In reply to Thank you! by Jemma
12 years later
Great! I'm glad you enjoy the series. Hope that your medical career has flourished, perhaps philosophy's loss has been medicine's gain!
Thank you!
Dear Mr. Adamson,
I just discovered the podcasts a few weeks ago, and I've been listening to nothing else on my morning commute. I just wanted to say how brilliant they are, and how much they've rekindled my love for the subject. I don&'t think I've ever had history or philosophy explained so clearly to me while I was at school
It's a shame that more places don't teach philosophy. I grew up in Romania before I moved to the UK aged 18. Philosophy, logic, latin and economics were all in the curriculum around years 11 and 12 (before the baccalaureate exam/A level equivalent) and you can actually choose one of them as part of your final examination. They are some of the most underrated subjects while at school, yet consistently some of the most useful things I've ever learnt in my entire life.
Since I started listening to your podcast I felt both happy because of all of the above, but als sad, because I felt like I had a huge void in the form of islamic philosophy that was never taught in school. I'm really eager to fill that gap though I have a few hundred more episodes to go!
I guess this is a very long and enthusiastic post to say thank you for doing what you're doing!
Kind regards,
Andreea
In reply to Thank you! by Andreea
Thanks
Thank you so much for your note! Very encouraging, to say the least. I couldn't agree more about teaching philosophy in schools, I mean before university level. Even with very young kids it makes sense - there is truth to the cliche that children are natural philosophers!
Hope you enjoy the remaining episodes.
Great Stuff
hope this didn't get deleted when i missed the captcha. anyways - love the podcast. i'm wondering if anyone has ever got in touch with you re: best practices for putting something like this together. i think yours is an amazing resource, and one of the best uses i've seen of the podcast format to do more than just duplicate various characteristics of talk-shows/audiobooks. do you have a set of rules you follow in determining what gets an episode, how to structure them, where the big arcs will go, etc.? would love to listen to a history of music with no gaps - maybe someone in your music department wants to email pitchfork and get it started? i'd listen for sure!
In reply to Great Stuff by Spencer
Best practice
Thanks very much! No, I have never got a query like that though there is a Facebook group for podcasters where people trade tips and that might be the better place to go anyway. I guess if I were going to give advice I would probably do it in the form of "here are all the mistakes I made" since I have made plenty along the way!
Dear Prof. Adamson,
Dear Prof. Adamson,
Some years ago, when I was at a point in my life where I really was not quite sure what to do with it, I listened to the podcast a lot working random jobs. It kindled and confirmed my love for philosophy to the extend that it played a significant role in me choosing to study it at university. So as I am about to start working on my bachelor thesis next semester I would like to sincerely thank you for this excellent podcast. It truly is a great resource for anyone interested in (the history of) philsophy.
Kind regards,
Herman
In reply to Dear Prof. Adamson, by Herman
Wow
Well that made my day! Thanks for the comment, that was like an early Christmas present. Good luck with the thesis!
on another group of Authors
Dear Prof. Adamson
It was entertaining and enlightening to me discovering this website also refreshing after reading your book a short history.
I'm sure you are familiar with many other names of authors that are not really covered in the classical curriculum that we are alll in I want to mention some names here if you allow me:
From Al Andalua perhaps lisan ul Din Ibn Khatib (lived in the same period as Ibn Khaldoun) he wrore several treatises on Literature, Geography Philosophical sufism and political Philosophy such as Risalat fi al Siyasah and numerous others.
Perhaps from the Levant Sayf ul Din al-Amidi he has also unpublished manuscripts (one in Bratislava) that are still not reviewed.
And from the ottoman empire you did already had a podcast about Katib Calabi which I liked but but I am also interested to hear more from author's like Aghisari and Ibrahim Müferikka.
Least not last in Muslim india I am intersted to hear something about Shah Wallillah and Ahmad Sirhindi am not sure you sonsider them philosopher bus still I had to ask.
Sincerely
Ebnomer
In reply to on another group of Authors by Ebnomer Taha
Other authors
Thanks for the additional names - I am actually running a project here at the LMU in Munich that is looking at texts of Amidi, among others. Apart from that I should mention that Shah Wali Allah is actually discussed in the podcast, in episode 191. You can see a full list of the thinkers discussed in the timeline on the Islamic world, with links to the relevant episodes.
Kashmir Saivism
Hello Dr. Adamson
Will you also cover - within your Indian series - monistic Saiva philosophy, especially what is termed "Kashmir Shaivism" within an indological framework (including its most famous 10th century exponent Abhinavagupta)?
Kashmir Shaivism has been experiencing quite a scientific as well as popular reception within the last decades and as a student of Indian religion, I think it cannot be missed in any comprehensive approach on Indian philosophy.
Especially the works by Oxford professor Alexis Sanderson, Mark Dyczkowkski or David Lawrence ("Rediscovering God with transcendental argument") have been very influencing in this field. One of the densest and most important philosophical texts of this "tradition" is the Isvarapratyabhijnakarika by Utpaladeva which has been rendered into a nice English critical edition by Raffaelle Torella. There the influences of various philosophical schools of that time - Vedanta, Nyaya, Bartrihari's language school as well as Buddhist Sautrantika (the main "opponent" of this text in terms of the momentariness theory) - become very apparent. Not to mention the Tantric "encyclopedia" Tantralokah by Abhinavagupta himself who tried to do an exegesis of the existent Tantric traditions of the Kashmir valley of that time.
I'd say (and this can be taken in a normative sense) that this monistic Tantric philosophy can be considered as one of the most profound philosphical streams not only within Indian philosophy, but philosophy as a whole.
All the best,
Raphael
In reply to Kashmir Saivism by Raphael
Kashmir Saivism
Thanks, that's a very helpful suggestion. I think that this is actually chronologically later than we are going to go with this initial series on India, but we might come back and do more episodes on India later. I am actually planning an episode on Tantra in this initial series, though, and maybe I could get in some of this material there.
Raymond Lull
Dr. Adamson, if you don't mind my asking, why didn't Raymond Lull make the cut for the poscast?
In reply to Raymond Lull by Nathanael
Llull
He did, it's just that I am saving him for a 14th c episode on science - I want to discuss him there as background. He would deserve his own episode, I have to admit, but the medieval series is getting insanely long so I am putting some figures into thematic episodes like this.
Why reading Islamic philosophy?
Dear Dr. Adamson
Is there any philosophical, not historical, necessity to read Islamic philosophy? I know Avicenna, Suhrawardi and Mulla Sadra were leading figures of this philosophy, but I do not know why I ought to reflect on their philosophy.
In reply to Why reading Islamic philosophy? by Milad Rabiee
Why bother?
Well, in part this is just a version of the question "why study history of philosophy at all". I give a detailed answer to that in episode 250, so you might give that a listen. For this tradition in particular there would be a host of specific reasons too, for instance the importance of understanding the historical roots of today's Islam and its relations over time to other (including European) cultures, and of course just the fact that some of the philosophy is quite brilliant. For instance Avicenna's proof for the existence of God is, if not actually convincing, probably among the most powerful ever such proofs. But ultimately the proof is in the pudding, as they say: you sort of have to go through the material or in this case listen to the podcasts and see which ideas and arguments you find compelling, and how often they come along.
In reply to Why bother? by Peter Adamson
Dear Dr. Adamson
Dear Dr. Adamson
Thank you so much for your detailed reply. To be sure, I will listen to the podcast.
Before reading any philosopher, I have two questions in my mind:
1) What are his problems? If I find my problems in his philosophy, I would be eager to follow his philosophy;
2) What role does his philosophy as a whole play in the history of philosophy?
How could I find the replies, at least about the three main figures of Islamic philosophy?
In reply to Dear Dr. Adamson by Milad Rabiee
Top three?
So are you thinking that the three main figures are Avicenna, Suhrawardi and Mulla Sadra? They are all key figures for sure but I wouldn't necessarily single them out as more important than others, apart from Avicenna - so for instance Ibn Khaldun, al-Farabi, Fakhr al-Din al-Razi, Averroes, or Ibn 'Arabi probably rank as equal in importance with Suhrawardi and Sadra. Not that it's a competition! I just mention this because it sounds like you might be following an approach which turns on reading the whole tradition from the lens of Sadra, which I find rather limiting and unhelpful.
Anyway I obviously talk a lot about the second of your questions in the episodes; for the first I agree we should try to find out how philosophers speak to our concerns, but also remember to be aware that they have their own concerns and that we should be open to understanding what they were. Insisting that history of philosophy answers OUR questions means we miss one of the most important things it can give us, which is the realization that one might have other questions.
Seeking deeper-study advice
Hi Professor Adamson,
First off I would like to thank you for rekindling my interest in philosophy with you excellent podcast -- I must confess that I started at, and am working my way through, the Arab section of the episodes -- but I plan to go back to the beginning after that.
I wonder if you could recommend books/resources for a self-study path I have in mind: tracing Aristotle to the Copenhagen Interpretation of Physics, with a special emphasis on the potential compatibility of the latter with Ashari occasionalism e.g. al-Ghazali.
I realize this is probably ambitious verging on the absurd, but I would be interested to try. I imagine a path from Organum to Incoherence of the Philosophers to Newton to Heisenberg, but I am not sure which texts would be best, nor whether authors prior to Aristotle would be worth studying for such a focus.
Many thanks for a great podcast and all the puns.
In reply to Seeking deeper-study advice by Punforgettable
Indeterminism
Yes, that is indeed ambitious. I think there is the core of a sensible idea there though which is to think about the history of indeterminism in physics. For that the key ancient idea would probably be the swerve in Epicureanism (cf episode 55). I would be careful not to conflate indeterminism with occasionalism, as we see it in e.g. Asharism or Malebranche. It is one thing to say that physical events can happen without being determined by physical causes, another to say that they are determined, but not by physical causes - since they are determined by God instead.
Query re copyright issues
Professor Adamson,
Thank you for your incredible work. I would like to add links to some of your podcasts in my online class. I'm writing to ask for permission to do that and also to ask how you would prefer that I ackowledge your work.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Many thanks,
Janet
In reply to Query re copyright issues by Janet G
Links
Yes please do! The more people link to and hear the podcast the better. I'd be curious to hear more about your class and how you're using the podcasts in it.
"Plato's Podcasts" by Mark Vernon
Hello,
I have been slowly working my way through your podcast, which I find very interesting and accessible. I don't have much background in history or philosophy and I'm very grateful for this podcast.
I have a rather odd question I was hoping you wouldn't mind me asking. I am taking a basic world civ history class this semester in college, and this week the unit covered 1000-350 BCE. A few extremely short YouTube videos amounting to basically soundbites about a few famous Greek philosophers, intending to acquaint the class briefly with the subject. The videos were all by someone named Mark Vernon and the series is apparently titled "Plato's Podcasts"; he has also written a book of the same title.
The problem is this: even accounting for the brevity of the videos, they are still very strange and do not accord with what I understood from your podcast. For example, in the minute devoted to Plato, he said that Plato's philosophy was basically all about love, and he read a few lines that he said were Plato speaking in the first person about people he personally was passionately in love with. I remember you saying many times that Plato didn't leave us anything in his own voice, and wrote in dialogues; also, I have not gotten the impression that his philosophy was at root all about love. As another example, in the video on Zeno, he said that Zeno taught in shops because how you shop tells you a lot about a person, and that philosophy should be practical, and that stoicism is named after the Greek word for store or shop. I looked up that last bit and what I found indicated just "the painted porch" not stores or shops in particular.
I am wondering if you are familiar with this person or his work at all, and if you know if it is accurate in general? Do you know of any relatively short multimedia sources I could suggest to the history department to use instead?
Here's a link to the video on Plato: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bXEp2kSDf9M&feature=youtu.be
And to the book on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/Platos-Podcasts-Ancients-Modern-Living/dp/185168…
Thanks for your time,
Deborah Bell
In reply to "Plato's Podcasts" by Mark Vernon by Deborah Bell
Vernon
Wow, that's pretty wacky. I googled around a bit - the only hit I could get for his Plato poem is from an old "miscellaneous poem" collection but maybe he's recounting some kind of ancient legends about Plato (which of course would have no basis in fact). Vernon seems to be a therapist or lifestyle guru type who dabbles in amateur ancient philosophy. I'd steer clear, though in fairness I have only spent 5 minutes in his company so perhaps he is more serious than he seems to be at first glance.
Encouragement
Dear Peter,
Since my first comment got deleted it seems, let me quickly summarize it. Thank you ever so much for the wonderful podcast you make, especially for us, who never majored or minored at philosophy for one reason or another, and through your great work, still get the chance to feel part of the philosophy community and enjoy the discussion and think about it. It means very much for me that you do this, and wish you'd never stop making the podcasts.
And in case noone ever have said this to you: Please don't stop with the puns. I love them
Thanks for all you do.
Iván Gábor
In reply to Encouragement by Gábor Iván
Encouragement
Thanks so much! I have to admit that it is indeed very encouraging to get messages like this from listeners - it would be hard to stay motivated if it all just went out into the void of the internet without the audience ever responding.
Glad you like the puns, since I probably couldn't persuade myself to stop including them even if I tried.
HOPWAG Yoga
Namaskar Peter,
I am an assistant Prof of English Lit/philosophy in Taiwan, researching Tantric, Daoist, and Buddhist thought. I am on episode 213, and episode 10 of Indian Philo. Your work is succint, thought-provoking, and just down-right suitable as background to my daily yoga. I have recommended my colleagues listen in, and they are hooked. I guess CJ is a former classmate of mine at National Taiwan University ;)
Historically speaking, you might find it interesting that the pre-historical dating of the Rg Veda is about as contested as it gets. There are many (myself included) who argue that the oral tradition of proto-Tantra-Yoga and Vedic thought arose several millennia before the 1500 BCE terminus a quo accepted by many Western Indologists. The relevance of the oral traditions and geological data like the flow of the Sarasvati river etc. and the so called Aryan invasion/migration theory to this historiography bears following. The Indian philosopher and Tantric Guru P.R. Sarkar has particularly interesting things to say about proto-Tantra existing before 5500 BCE and that some Vedic hymns were first composed in 10-12000 BCE. As polemical as this may sound, the longevity of oral accounts suggest the Vedic material might have been around long before scripts. Perhaps you know all this but it might be interesting for you listeners to hear this side of the story - kind of like a meta-historiography of Indian though contextualized by the critical role of the religion/spirituality in the narrative of India. (this is also a shameless but well deserved plug for Sarkar who stands out for his reformation of Shiva Tantra, social philosophy, political ideology, and Neo-humanism to name but a few of the areas he has impacted).
Once again, you are doing a sterling job, and if you are ever in Taiwan please look me up. I will hook you up with some fine croissants.
In reply to HOPWAG Yoga by JustinH
Date of the Vedas
Right, I did see when I was reading up on the early India episodes that the dating of the early Vedas is very difficult. You tend to see things like "composed over several centuries and in such-and-such a century if not earlier." It's like trying to date Homer - ultimately if we are dealing with oral traditions, certainty is impossible.
Incidentally in the next couple of weeks I am scheduled to write a draft script on the Yoga Sutra!
In reply to Date of the Vedas by Peter Adamson
reply
Excellent, the Yogasūtras will be one I will watch out for. It would be fun if you could also get into the whole Buddhist-Tantra-Yoga atman debate. These discussions on ipseity and mind are far more sophisticated than what modern phenomenology has pulled off. I am sure Jonardon would agree.
Thank You
Dear Peter
Just wanted to say hello and thank you for a brilliant and very helpful series of podcasts. I am currently writing a PhD on Shakespeare and Renaissance Poetics, and my areas of of interests touch on the relationship between Plato and Neoplatonist philosophies and Elizabethan Poetry, especially with regards to/in tension with late medieval 'Nominalism'.
Anyway, just wanted to say I am really enjoying the podcast (am some 200 episodes behind though, just started on the Skeptics) even though I seem to have developed a habit of warning my students midway through a seminar with a 'Now, I know what you're thinking'. Can't seem to shake it off.
All the best,
Valentin
In reply to Thank You by Valentin
Shakespeare
Thank you very much! I am actually planning on covering Shakespeare when I get to the Renaissance, so if you have any tips please let me know.
Eventually I dropped the "I know what you're thinking thing," it was getting old and doesn't feature in later episodes. But I kept the giraffes.
Long-term Plans
Just so you know, I really, really enjoy your blog! As a student of literature, I benefit greatly from your without any gaps strategy in bolstering my own grasp of the history of philosophy.
So how recent do you plan on bringing this podcast? I think recent developments in philosophy are fascinating, but it can take some time for philosophers to be canonized. Also, how do you plan on tackling the analytic-Continental divide?
Cheers, and keep it up!
(PS. I find your work ethic mind-boggling! Do take care of yourself.)
In reply to Long-term Plans by CJ
Future plans
Thanks very much! I actually address your question in the FAQ here on the site (at the bottom of the page) and also I touch on the Continental philosophy question in episode 250. The short answer is, I have no plans to stop anytime soon. I would be inclined not to do a sharp analytic-continental contrast if and when I get there, but to see them perhaps as two often intertwined aspects of early 20th century philosophy.
Dr. Adamson, I am a big fan
Dr. Adamson, I am a big fan of the podcast, though I'm late to the party (I started listening this spring and I'm almost caught up, which means I will soon have to go at a normal pace instead of blazing through 1-2 episodes a day). I know it's a long way away but I was wondering if you were planning on covering Protestant philosophers like Petrus Ramus, Bartholomäus Keckermann, Johann Heinrich Alsted, and Johannes Althusius when you (eventually) reach the 16th century.
In reply to Dr. Adamson, I am a big fan by Nathanael
Protestants
Thanks, glad you like the series! I will definitely cover the Protestant Reformation in considerable detail though I don't have a plan for exactly which figures to cover beyond the most obvious ones. Actually I have an even more basic problem which is how to integrate the story of the Reformation with the Renaissance - it may be that the Reformation is its own sub-series and book. We'll see! Anyway thanks for the suggested names.
In reply to Protestants by Peter Adamson
Drawing Lines Is Hard
Yeah, that's a tough one. It's my understanding that although the first (and some of the second) generation reformers used some pretty strong anti-philosophical rhetoric, by the time the second and third generation Lutheran and Reformed thinkers established Protestant universities and set university curricula, they didn't look that much different than the post-Trent Catholic universities, philosophically speaking (obviously, there were major theological differences). So the textbooks of Protestant folks like Keckermann, Clemens Timpler, and Franco Burgersdijk on the Reformed side and Cornelius Martini on the Lutheran side are still working very much in a broadly Aristotelian framework.
I know that some later Reformed and Lutheran (and Catholic) folks in the 17th century followed Descartes but others defended a more medieval philosophical outlook, writing some excellently titled books like Novitatum Cartesianarum Gangraena (by Petrus van Mastricht). See: http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199937943.001…
Anyway, good luck figuring out where to draw the lines in the 15th-17th centuries! That is an era whose philosophy has attracted far too little attention, so I look forward to your coverage, but it sure makes your job difficult!
The Digital Garden
Hello to the HoP crew. Thanks for all the hard work you put into the show. Me and my giraffe just can't get enough of it. There's nothing that we love more than kicking back with a few almond croissants, putting on our Buster Keaton costumes, and bumping this sh**.
In reply to The Digital Garden by Glen Perry
You and your giraffe
Thanks! Hiawatha says to say hi to your giraffe and if s/he is ever in the neighborhood to stop by for some acacia leaves.
Add the podcasts to Google Play!
Hey Peter, thanks so much for all the work you put into the podcasts, I look forward to every episode. My wife thinks I'm crazy, but it makes my day brighter getting to learn from you.
I wanted to let you know, if you didn't already, that Google Play Music now has a podcast aggregation functionality. That means that every Android phone out there (which is something like 80% of the smartphone market worldwide) finally has a native podcast app! I have been able to find all my technology and history podcasts, but your work was noticeably absent from my searches. Might be worth looking into, that's a huge audience!
Best wishes,
~ Adam
In reply to Add the podcasts to Google Play! by Adam Smith
Google Play
Oh, thanks for the tip! This is my problem as a podcaster, I don't really know much about the technical side of things and what people are actually using to access podcasts! I'll look into it.
Another thank you!
Peter, thanks so much for this podcast! I'm on #208 (started with #1) and I'm now thoroughly enjoying the trip through medieval philosophy. I'm especially grateful for the balanced and fair way you present the faiths that are part of the history of philosophy. I have a background in Christian theology and have developed a passion for philosophy later in life, so I'm playing catch up. This podcast is perfect for that. Keep up the good work! Lonnie
In reply to Another thank you! by Lonnie Gentry
Theology
Great, I'm glad you are enjoying the series! Some listeners are not so enthusiastic about all the details about the religious traditions, so it's nice to hear from listeners who do find this aspect interesting (for myself, I think that like it or not taking religion seriously is just unavoidable if you really want to get deeply into the history of philosophy for almost all periods).
In reply to Theology by Peter Adamson
Religion
I think one of the best things about studying philosophy from different cultures (and let's be real, medieval Europe is a different culture too) is that you get down to that nitty-gritty detail tha you never get in school. Studying religion through philosophy gives both subjects a context that makes them much more meaningful than looking at them in a vacuum, and following doctrine to its logical (or a possible logical) conclusion helps us understand why certain religions take the actions or make the stands that they do. Don't shy away from doing more about religion when it's relevant to the discussion, please!
thank you
i need this in my life. your work is a benefit to us all. thank you for providing this extensive and satisfying podcast.
Thank you
Thank you for your way of sharing thoughts.
I'm looking forward to your spotlights on Levinas. Someday.
However, even 'gaps' (Tao Te Ching #11) have their value, so of course I wouldn't even hold your main goal against you. :)
Kind regards,
geert
Hey Peter,
Hey Peter,
I am a long time listener now and was thinking it would be time to say thanks for the great podcast series. I sometimes imagine that we HoPWAG fans sit around you in a garden and you explain and we listen, all wearing chlamys, yours in black. Then I get lost into the details of the garden: it should be early summer time with the Sun high in the sky, the fresh breeze, fruits hanging from the trees, distant sound of a market musician playing a lyre, the paved paths in the garden, not stone or mosaic, but solid marble (no gaps), and the sign on the entrance that says:
“Μηδείς αντίκαμηλοπάρδαλη είσίτω μον τήν στέγην.”
then I realise that I need to rewind the several minutes of the pod cast that have passed without me paying attention. Maybe the quality of recordings is too good, you need to introduce some additive white noise for more attention! :-)
Thanks again and looking forward to more episodes…
In reply to Hey Peter, by Xaratustrah
Garden of delights
That sounds good to me! You would have made a great Epicurean.
Thanks for getting in touch!
More Sophistry, Please
How about some attention to Protagoras, Democritus, and Gorgias, and the tension between their epistemic stance, vs. Plato's idealism?
In reply to More Sophistry, Please by Robert
I actually covered that
I actually covered that pretty extensively didn't I? In the Sophists episode (number 14) and then throughout the episodes on Plato.
Have your own views changed?
Hi Peter, I'm a longtime listener and admirer of your podcast. What has most impressed me is when you have some back-and-forth with interviewees, and we get glimpses of your own views of what might be hidden weaknesses or problems in this or that view. What I would love to know is how, if at all, your own views have changed in the process of working through all of this material. (Maybe it's on the blog, which I haven't read.) It'd be really interesting to hear whether any of the arguments you've had to study to present them have changed your own positions--on metaphysics, ethics, phil. of relig. questions, or whatever. In a similar vein, it'd be fun to hear which philosophers have most impressed or surprised you. Who would make your top 10 for clever insights, or for durability of their contributions, etc. Or are there any who have most surprised you--who turned out on closer inspection to be different from the "textbook" version of them? A 20-minute segment where you summed up how this work has shaped you would be really fun. Keep up the good work!
In reply to Have your own views changed? by Jeremy
Changing views
Thanks, that's a very interesting question! Unfortunately it is too late for me to add a bit in episode 250 (a Q&A episode) on this, but just quickly, my basic answer would be that my views on philosophical issues as such have not changed a lot. But my views about the history of philosophy have changed greatly - I just have a much better sense of how little of it is actually included, usually, and how much interesting material there is in authors I previously didn't know about. Aside from the obvious area of Indian philosophy, which was unknown to me until we started tackling it in the podcast, I think the biggest surprises to me have been the Patristic authors (late ancient Christians) and later Islamic philosophy aside from Mulla Sadra, who I did know about. Both of these underappreciated periods have far more philosophically fascinating material than I at first expected. I think in both cases I was expecting to devote, say, 5 episodes to material that in the end became 15 or 20. Also I have gotten rather interested in the whole question of female thinkers, and which ones are overlooked or underappreciated - which connects to the question of mysticism's relation to philosophy since some but not all women thinkers (e.g. Rabia, Hildegard) are considered mystics as well as - or by some, instead of - philosophers.
Just love it! Would like to support
Dear Peter,
I've been hearing the podcast for about a year now. I'm currently around episode 103 and just loving it. I'm an engineer from Brazil who's very interested on philosophy at an amateur / non-academic level, and I find your podcast THE best around. I also follow others like: Philosophy Bites and The Partially Examined Life (pretty good!), each one has it's own focus, purpose and format, but the HOPWAG is indeed the most instructive and didactic one.
I'd like to see this work going on up to the contemporary philosophers of mind like Daniel Dennett et all. It would be a hell of a journey! Is there any way people can support your project? Do you plan to go all the way to 21th Century?
Well, what you've already accomplished is amazing and I'm grateful for having the opportunity to follow.
Congratulations and don't lose the steam!
Henrique
In reply to Just love it! Would like to support by Henrique Moraes
Thanks
Thanks, I'm glad you like the series! If you want to check out yet another philosophy podcast there is also "Elucidations" which is a bit more advanced. As far as supporting this project goes, thanks very much but really your encouragement is enough - you could, if you want, add a positive comment on the iTunes feed which always helps.
Plato and giraffes
Hello, reading through a book on animal ethics, during the historical section I came upon a remarkable passage. While stressing that for many ancient thinkers the differences between animals and man were a matter of degrees, the author mentioned that for Plato, the intelligence of a being was indicated by the distance between the ground and it's head. I was extremely excited, as that would de facto promote the giraffe to the title of the most intelligent being. So in your knowledge is there any truth in that? :)
Thank you!
In reply to Plato and giraffes by François Toutée
Plato on giraffes
Yes, fantastic point! Actually the passage I guess you're thinking of is Timaeus 69 and here he doesn't quite say that but does say that the divine part of the soul (reason) should be as far from the mortal soul (in the midriff) as possible. Hence it gets put in the head - and of course giraffes' heads are _much_ further from their midriffs than ours. So there you go.
On the other hand they have four stomachs, so perhaps the long neck only makes up for that.
250th episode question
Hello Peter,
Nice work. Loved the podcast. Twice and soon a third time. Can't wait to sink my ears into the indian and the african history of philosophy.
I keep feeling there is a ressemblance the dichotomy of platonic Forms and the material world on one side and the avicennan dichotomy of Essence and Existence. And I keep wishing I could find someone who explicitly distinguishes the notion of Forms from Essence and the notion of the material world from Existence.
Do you think you could answer this question in your 250th episode or simply give some pointers and reminders towards an author or authors who do see the ressemblance and distinguish one from the other
In reply to 250th episode question by Michel de Silva
forms and essence
Thanks - I'll put this on the list of questions to tackle!
downloading podcasts
Is there a means to download the podcasts, a friend wishes to listen to them while they drive in their car.
In reply to downloading podcasts by Christine
Downloading
Oh yes - you can download all the complete mini-series here on the website as .zip files. Or, you can subscribe via an rss feed (there are two, one that I've been using since the start and now a new one for Indian philosophy):
http://hopwag.podbean.com/feed/
http://hopwag2.podbean.com/feed/
Pre-Pre-Socratic Mediterranean Philosophy
I love the podcast! It must take a lot of work; thanks for doing it :)
A question for the 250th episode:
A couple people have mentioned to me in passing that there was ancient Egyptian and Jewish philosophy which predated Thales, but I've never seen a book that discusses this topic or heard of a class that covers it. Do we have enough information about these very ancient philosophers to say anything much about them at all? Being an expert on filling gaps, maybe you know of some nice books or papers on the topic that I could read?
Thanks!
In reply to Pre-Pre-Socratic Mediterranean Philosophy by Josh
Pre-pre-Socratic
Great question, thanks. I'll add that to the list. Quick answer so you don't have to wait for so long: you may want to check out the Egyptian History Podcast, which has among other things discussed ethical writings that I would classify as philosophical.
Looking forward to history of Indian philosophy
Thank you for starting the history of Indian philosophy podcast! I have subscribed and am starting to listen. I especially look forward to understanding how Indian philosophy has addressed issues of caste and gender.
20th Century Continental Phil
Any guess on the timetable for 20th Century Continental Philosophy? Particularly the poststructuralists. It's the bit I'm most looking forward too :)
In reply to 20th Century Continental Phil by khju
20th c Continental
Oh dear, I'm afraid you'll have to be very, very patient because I am going chronologically and (as you may have noticed) not all that quickly. Assuming I carry on up to the 20th century it will be years until I get there! But I would enjoy covering that, I think; would certainly stretch my phlosophical competence and interests since I am more of an analytic philosophy style historian.
Your sponsor
Hi,
Love the podcast. I'm at #67 and am looking forward to hearing them all.
At the beginning of each episode you name the sponsor, but the name is unfamiliar so I don't know what I'm hearing. Can you name them on your website somewhere?
Thanks!
In reply to Your sponsor by Charles
Sponsor
I think you mean the Leverhulme Trust? I had sponsorship for them for the first couple of years.
on avicenna
what do you think about the concern of avicenna when he states metaphisical distinction between existene and essence?i mean this distinction is logical when aristotel talk about it but avicenna speak of metaphisical distinction ant enter it to world and tell every thing has two aspects: one its existence and another its essence or quiddity
In reply to on avicenna by asmaa
Avicenna
Hi there - Well, I talk a lot about this in the podcast, in episodes 139 and 177 including this question of whether it is a merely conceptual or metaphysical distinction. So maybe you should check out those episodes?
In reply to on avicenna by asmaa
Existence And Essence
There are no metaphysical gaps in existence as a whole, however stated. As Parmenides knew, "Neither is there more Being here nor less Being there, but it is all together." Hegel knew this, for a moment, but then dialectically waltzed away. "...the ground, besides being the unity, is also the difference of identity and difference." As Rand knew, "Existence is identity."
Modern Teleology
Dear Mr. Adamson,
As an avid listener, I am grateful for the all-inclusive effort. In the age of specialized specialism, appreciation of the totality of anything is a breath of fresh, radical air.
I understand it might be way off in the future, but have you heard of Modern Teleology, a (mostly) French theoretical and perfectly anonymous undertaking comprising a thorough critique of all dominant currents (trends) of thought up to the first half of the XXth Century and attempting an entirely original re-thinking of all major philosophical concepts --indeed, of philosphy itself-- from concept to end (both end and finality), to reality and everything in between?
Just curious if this has ever come to your keen attention.
Cordially,
Raphael
In reply to Modern Teleology by Raphael Pallais
Modern teleology
Hi, and glad that you like the podcast! I have to admit Modern Theology is new to me (though that isn't too surprising since contemporary French thought isn't really my area). Is it inspired by Aristotelianism?
Renaissance phil
Will you be covering Ficino? I'd love to hear a podcast on Ficino's platonism and platonic commentaries.
In reply to Renaissance phil by Scott Sevier
Ficino
Oh absolutely. The plan is to move on to Byzantine philosophy after Latin medieval, followed by Renaissance. So (especially given that alternate weeks will be devoted to Indian philosophy for at least a year) it will be a while, but I will most definitely cover Ficino in some depth.
Musical intro
Hello, Peter! Congratulations for the great work!
I would like to know what is the music played in the greek flute. What is the recording?
Thank you!
In reply to Musical intro by sica
Congrats
Hello Peter
I just wanted to thank you for this amazing work. I'm also very intrigued on how do you manage your time in your daily living. Maybe I'm kind of a lazy human being, but I find amazing that you can deliver with such order so many different episodes of a wide range of topics, with all the preparation it seems to require, and I imagine also work as a teacher... Maybe you have some advices for those like me who find difficult to manage our time properly.
Anyway, thank you very much.
In reply to Congrats by Phillip
Time management
Thanks very much! I guess the answer to your question is that I basically see the podcast as my hobby, or at least not as part of my day job, so I don't mind working on it in my free time, so to speak. And as you may have noticed I really like philosophy and it is such a good excuse to learn about the topic that I am always excited to go on to the next topic and read about it. And of course if all else fails, the weekly schedule is like a gun I'm holding to my own head...
This Just Has To Stop (Not)
Here I am, bearing down hard to understand a podcast and you slip in one of these hilarious off-hand remarks, e.g., Germans throwing potato dumplings, the possible origin of juicing a baseball, the peasant that lost the plot or the funky idea that soul is a ham hock in your cornflakes. Maybe I have been hanging around you risible animals too long, but I'm convulsing with laughter, nearly falling off my log and completely loosing my train of thought. I have to hit the pause button and take a coffee break (Organic French Roast) just to compose myself, let alone begin to think again. It seems to be getting worse with each podcast. Well, I really like my coffee, so please keep hamming it up and juicing the podcasts. (couldn't resist)
German Idealism, Schelling and Romanticism
Since this is a History of Philosophy without any gaps I'm assuming you are going to cover Schelling when you reach early 19th German Philosophy but I would also appreciate if you also included the German Romantics (Goethe, Novalis, Schiller, Hölderin etc) in one episode as well for they had a noteworthy influence not only on Schelling but Hegel and Schopenhauer that cannot be ignored. Also a passing mention of Jakob Böhme's undercurrent influence on this period would be nice as well.
Also Western Philosophy>Eastern Philosophy.
Excellent podcast.
In reply to German Idealism, Schelling and Romanticism by Alexander
German romantics
Hi - that's all a ways off of course but I can't imagine skipping any of them when I get there. As it happens I'm particularly interested in that part of 19th century thought anyway, plus I live in Germany! So I should also be able to get some good interview guests.
Thanks for listening!
Heresy of the Free Spirit
Hey Peter,
First of all, thanks for the great podcast. It's been especially wonderful for someone like me who's been using it to fill in the "gaps" from my own undergrad in philosophy - particularly the whole era from late antiquity through to the modern!
I haven't caught all the way up yet, so maybe you've mentioned it somewhere, but I was wondering if you would be covering the various heretical movements, especially the so-called Heresy of the Free Spirit. I assume that Meister Eckhart's on your list, but I'm a bit more interested in some of the more marginal figures, like Marguerite Porete in particular. I never see her get any mention in the literature, and when she does crop up, it tends to only be on feminist reading courses, rather than as a topic of genuine theological or philosophical interest (not to diminish any interst she might hold for feminist readings). In fact, I only learned of Porete and the Sister Catherine Treatise from reading Raoul Vanageim.
Not only that, but after reading Eco's "The Name of the Rose" it really sparked my interest in the various other heretical movements that may have existed. Arguments over such things as whether Christ ever laughed in the Bible, and whether humor is therefore justified or not... I can't decide if it's silly or an actually incredibly interesting topic! The theological and religious disputes of the medieval ages clearly went far beyond anything I was exposed to in undergrad.
May I ask if you've sketched out plans to tackle such subjects?
Thanks again,
David
In reply to Heresy of the Free Spirit by David
Marguerite Porete
Thanks for your message! Yes, there will be an episode coming up (not yet written but it will appear in early August I think), where I talk about the three "Beguine mystics" namely Hadewijch, Mechtild of Magdeburg, and Marguerite Porete. Later I will also talk about attitudes towards various heresies (like the Cathars) when I get to the condemnations of Paris in the 1270's.
School of Salamanca and Second Scholastic
Hi Peter,
I know you're still quite a bit away from the 16th century Renaissance, and that you probably get a lot of questions on "ill you cover this or that?", but I thought I'd give you the idea ahead of time so, if you think it's worth it, you can include it in your plans. My question is if you were planning to cover the School of Salamanca when you get there. I'm speaking of people like Francisco de Vitoria, Domingo de Soto, Martín de Azpilcueta, Bartolomé de Las Casas, etc., and also including Francisco Suárez, Luis de Molina, St. Robert Bellarmine, and others. Together they make up a "second Scholastic" whcih formed tha backdrop to much of the 17th century's critics of Schlastic philosophy, like Descartes and Hobbes, but they also had a tremendous influence on them (for example, the clear import of Suárez's concept of right on Locke).
This also brings me to ask if you plan to cover some of the more important Thomist commentators, against whom several nominalists, Humanists, and rationalists wrote, people like Cardinal Cejatan and John of St. Thomas.
I hope you do!
Best!
In reply to School of Salamanca and Second Scholastic by Pedro José
Salamanca
Thanks, those are great suggestions and in fact this is what I was planning in any case. In fact, I thought I would approach the Renaissance by breaking up the material geographically, partially to emphasize the importance of the Iberian Penninsula (again, after the episodes on Islamic Andalusia!). I was thinking Italy, then Iberia, then Protestant countries. But that's still just a gleam in my eye.
And I would certainly also cover the Thomists, especially Cajetan.
In reply to Salamanca by Peter Adamson
Salamanca--and Avila
f philosophy without gaps rocks all throughout California! I love history of philosophy, among others as a philosophy and history double major here in UCLA and I always look forward to your podcasts... I'm ecstatic when you made the tentative plan of covering geographically the Silver Age of Scholasticism. You mentioned including Cajetan in Italy; Suarez, Vitoria, Molina in Iberia; then the Northerners and Low Countries. I hope that when you cover Iberia, you'll include Teresa de Avila and John of the Cross, together with the Scholastics. They have also been Spain's great luminaries.. I hope you'll cover them esp. Teresa, the first woman to be declared doctor of the Church. Thank you Dr. Adamson!
In reply to Salamanca--and Avila by Garry Soronio
Silver Age
Thanks very much! Yes, I'd imagine I will cover all those people - especilaly Teresa since as you know I go out of my way to include female thinkers whenever possible.
Said Nursi
Hello Peter,
First of all I want to thank you for your invaluable work, I really enjoyed listening all your podcats and learned a lot.
I am curious whether you know about Said Nursi who was born in modern Turkey during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and wrote extensively on philosophical issues (But I think in the Kalam tradition and I believe he could be considered as Asharite). His books deal with issues such as the existence of God, afterlife, freewill, and predestination.
His books are widely read among Turkish speaking people for spritual guidance (available in English too), but as far as I know there is no work on his philisophy. As you know the madrasah tradition ended abruptly in Turkey with the founding of the modern state, so his works I believe are underappreciated. I think he is an outstanding scholar, and I am looking forward for sometime reading a philospher's take on his works.
Anyways I just want to share this with you.
Thanks for everything
Mert
In reply to Said Nursi by mert sahin
Said Nursi
Oh yes, I have heard the name but didn't think of looking into his works to include him in the Islamic world episodes. I will see whether I can fit him into the book version, at least briefly. Thanks for the suggestion.
Tremendous
Hello,
I just wanted to take a moment and thank you for your work. I'm blown away by the thoroughness of the podcasts themselves, and even the additional readings properly cited on each page! Kudos to you. Do you intend to work all the way up through postmodern philosophy?
-Justin
In reply to Tremendous by Justin Bonanno
The future
Thanks very much! As for how long I'll keep going, see question 7 under the FAQ at the bottom of the page...
on the name of the project
Thank You very much for this laudable effort to bring history of western philosophy to such a large audience "without any gaps". It remedies the lacuna by including practice of philosophy in Islamic world. But the project also ingnite expectation of more accuracy in the very name of the project, it is history of WESTERN philosophy "without any gaps", but it does not take into account Indian, Chinese, Japanese, African philosophies from classical to modern(post-modern era!!) at all. citing name of Jonardon Ganeri to my mind positively suggest discussion on Indian philosophy. It did talk about India very briefly at the last episode on philosophy in Islamic world, but it is inadequate it didn't take into account innovation that took place in the interface with modern western, islamic and Hindu philosophies that Ganeri talked about in his book "The Lost Age of Reason"!!!
I hope in future we will see a thorough inclusion of these Other philosophies, otherwise it cannot shook off what Derrida called "white mythology". otherwise it will remain within Orientalist framework if not entirely.
In reply to on the name of the project by tathagata biswas
Non-Western philosophy
Thanks for your feedback. Please take a look at the first entry under FAQ at the bottom - with Jonardon Ganeri, I am launching a series of episodes on Indian philosophy later this year. (I've also announced this previously on the feed, and on Facebook and Twitter.)
Byzantine philosophy
Dear Peter Adamson,
as far as I can remember you talked about extending the podcast on Byzantine philosophy as well. When will this be the case? After the parts on European medieval philosophy and Indian philosophy? I'm following your podcast zealously and even had the opportunity to incorporate a podcast into my seminars. :)
In reply to Byzantine philosophy by Johannes
Byzantine
Thanks very much! Yes, Byzantine (followed by Renaissance) is next up after Latin medieval. Should kick off in 2016 at some point I suppose. I plan to give it a fairly thorough treatment (of course), maybe a dozen episodes or so plus some interviews.
Ethopia
Hi Peter,
Love the show, been listening since the begining. Wondering if you are planning on doing an episode on Ethiopian philosopher Zera Yaekob? I think it would be a great addition.
Keep up the good work!
In reply to Ethopia by Connell Vaughan
Ethiopia
Amazingly, you are the first (as far as I can remember) to ask about African philosophy, but I had given this some thought. As you may have seen I am planning a kind of spin-off (i.e. not in the same chronological narrative, and on a separate RSS feed) series on Indian philosophy which will launch later this year. And I had thought of doing Chinese philosophy later, maybe, and then a further obvious idea would be to cover other traditions including African philosophy. Which would be fantastically interesting, I would love to do it despite my total ignorance. So stay tuned - but if it happens it will not be for quite a while, I'm afraid, since Europe and India are going to give me plenty to worry about for the next couple of years I think.
In reply to Ethiopia by Peter Adamson
Thanks so much for your reply
Thanks so much for your reply. I am looking forward to the spin offs that you have planned. From the little that I know on Zera Yacob (as the name suggests) he was within a Christian tradition. It was for this reason that I thought that it could be an interesting gap to fill in the context of your curent project. Much in the same way that your empasis on the Islamic World has brilliantly disrupted the standard narrative of the history of Western philosophy. But perhaps you are correct in seeing him as part of a more African tradition or at the very least requiring a major diversion in the future. In any case, I will happily stay tuned. Keep up the good work.
No Eastern Philosophy
A quick ctrl-f search of all your episodes shows you don't have anything mentioning "dao," "confucianism," "east," or "asia." That is really disappointing for a site that suggests you cover philosophy WITHOUT ANY GAPS. I wouldn't normally comment on such a thing, but since it seems to be a point of pride to you, I thought you should know you have a HUGE GAP. A whole hemisphere, to be exact.
In reply to No Eastern Philosophy by Thomas
Eastern
Hi - thanks for your comment. But have a look at the first point in the FAQ at the bottom of this page: as explained there I'll be starting in on Indian philosophy later this year and hope to tackle Chinese philosophy later. I have also announced this in various episodes of the podcast itself.
Gnosticism?
Hi, was there no place for a piece about gnosticism in the section on later antiquity? I havn't actually listened to those podcasts yet so you may well cover it in the context of other thinkers/schools? I was under the impression that gnosticism was rather influential in its day?
In reply to Gnosticism? by Tom
Gnosticism
I do actually talk about them a lot in the late antiquity episodes, both as opponents of the Neoplatonists and as the object of critique from the ancient Christians.
Giraffes
Peter -- just to continue on the giraffe theme, here is a video demonstrating the agility of giraffes:
http://www.thisiscolossal.com/2015/04/5-metres-80-giraffes-nicolas-deve…
Your wonderful podcasts and book.
I fell in love with philosophy and humanities at university many years ago but could not devote much time to them because of busy science then medical school then practice schedule. Now I'm nearing retirement and can read things for enjoyment rather than compulsory pressures. Devoured your book Classical Philosophy and am looking forward for the next installment and the next, etc. You have to write faster!
In reply to Your wonderful podcasts and book. by Robert Smith MD
Faster!
Thanks very much! I'm writing as fast as I can, believe me. So glad you are enjoying the series, it sounds like you are exactly the sort of person I was hoping to produce it for. (Well, one of the sorts of person.)
- Add new comment
- 178065 views
Plato
What you want is the Hackett collection edited by Cooper, the translations are by lots of different people actually. I believe it is even available in paperback, though for the desert island you may want something more robust.