The Guerrilla Radio Show

If Bob Dylanrsquo;s right, ldquo;the times they are changingrdquo;. But what is time anyway? We usually carve up time in terms of the past, the present and the future. But are all of these temporal divisions on an equal ontological footing? Or is there something ontologically special about the present moment, the now? If so, how should we conceive of the past and the future? Are they real? Does time really flow (like we think it does)? And whatrsquo;s the relationship between space and time? Are the laws of physics time reversible? Is time travel possible?nbsp;

Philosophers have always been interested in art and aesthetic value. But what is art anyway? How should we define the notion of art? And what is it that distinguishes art from non-art? How about aesthetic valuehellip; Is aesthetic value something that resides in the object itself? Or does it have more to do with a kind of feeling, judgment, or sense of satisfaction had by an observer? Do the intentions of the artist play a role here? Should art have a purpose, such as evoking pleasure or conveying truth?nbsp;

If God really does exist as an all-knowing, all-powerful, wholly-benevolent being, then how can the theist explain the existence of pain and suffering in the world? Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Is he able, but not willing? If he is both able and willing, whence then evil. And if he is neither able nor willing, why call Him God at all? What is lsquo;evilrsquo; anyway? Does it really exist? Are there different kinds of evil? If so, how do these differences affect the so-called problem of evil? Is the existence of pain and suffering logically incompatible with the existence of God? Or is there some way to rationally reconcile the existence of evil with the existence of God? Even if there is some way to resolve the apparent inconsistency, doesnrsquo;t the existence of evil at least make the existence of God improbable? Given the tremendous amount of senseless pain and suffering evident in the world, isnrsquo;t it highly unlikely that a benevolent God exists?

Does God exist? What are the arguments that have been offered for the existence of God? Are they like other kinds of philosophical arguments? Are they a priori arguments? a posteriori arguments? Transcendental arguments? Inferences to the best explanation? Are some arguments for the existence of god better than others? If so, what are they and why? Can we infer the existence of god from the idea of god alonendash; without any appeal to experience? Or would it be better to try and infer the existence of god from the effects of god supposedly evidenced in the world? What are the arguments for the existence of god meant to establish, anyway? Is the existence of god something that can be demonstrably proven? Or are the arguments for the existence of god only probabilistic arguments? Are they meant to convince non-believers to join the club? Or are they primarily intended to provide the believer with some kind of rational basis for their own theological beliefs?

What is a possible world? Where do possible worlds come from? And what are they used for? How many possible worlds are there? Are they real worlds? Concrete worlds? Or are they just descriptions or stories about the way things might have been? Are there any impossible worlds? If so, what are they? And why? How does it all work? What should we make of these modal mysteries? Is there any way to tame this important philosophical beast and remove some of the mystery that overshadows its merits? Is it possible to explain what possible worlds are and how philosophers use them without getting too technically entangled?

What is Meta-Ethics? What separates Meta-Ethics from other branches of moral philosophy? How should we understand the nature of moral properties, ethical statements, moral judgments and moral reasons? What is moral goodness? Are there any moral facts? If so, what are they and where are they located? Are there objective, absolute moral values or is moral value relative? What are the semantics of moral language? Whatrsquo;s the best way to analyze or define ethical terms such as lsquo;goodrsquo;, lsquo;oughtrsquo;, and lsquo;rightrsquo;. Should we be internalists or externalists about moral reasons? And how do moral attitudes motivate action? Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 14) The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

What is skepticism? Are there different varieties of skepticism? Is skepticism primarily an epistemological issue? Whatrsquo;s the aim of a skeptical argument? Should skeptical arguments be taken seriously? If so, why? Whatrsquo;s philosophically significant about skepticism? Can a certain amount of skepticism be healthy? Whatrsquo;s the best strategy for responding to skeptical arguments? Is there a rational response that could be offered against the skeptic? If not, what sort of implications are we left to deal with? Are we all just brains in vats? Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 13) The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

What is a paradox anyway? And why are philosophers so interested in paradoxes? Is a paradox just a fancy kind of riddle? Or is it some kind of demonstration that a contradiction (or absurd consequence) follows from apparently reasonable assumptions? Do paradoxes actually point out some inexplicable fact about the nature of the world? Or are they just logical/linguistic games? Perhaps the notion of paradox includes all of these elementshellip; or maybe none at all. What merit is there, if any, in analyzing and discussing philosophical paradoxes? Join the GRS crew as they consider the puzzling complexities of the Ship of Theseus, The Lottery and Kripkersquo;s Puzzle About Belief.

What is a paradox anyway? And why are philosophers so interested in paradoxes? Is a paradox just a fancy kind of riddle? Or is it some kind of demonstration that a contradiction (or absurd consequence) follows from apparently reasonable assumptions? Do paradoxes actually point out some inexplicable fact about the nature of the world? Or are they just logical/linguistic games? Perhaps the notion of paradox includes all of these elementshellip; or maybe none at all. What merit is there, if any, in analyzing and discussing philosophical paradoxes? Join the GRS crew as they consider the puzzling complexities of the Sorites and the Liar paradoxes.

What sort of thing is the mind? And whatrsquo;s the relationship between the mind and the body, between mental things and physical things? Is the mind composed of some sort of non-physical substance? Or is the mind just a particular sort of physical substance, perhaps organized in a distinctive way? Is there some other way of understanding the relationship between mind and body? Are minds merely brains? Are mental states just identical to certain kinds of brain states? Are mental states nothing more than certain dispositions to behave in certain ways? What is the nature of consciousness? Is it possible for a purely physical object to be conscious? Could a sophisticated machine be conscious? What is the nature of thought? How does the mind represent the world? Are the content of our thoughts determined by the brain or by the environment? Whatrsquo;s the relation between the philosophy of mind, psychology, neuroscience, artificial intelligence, cognitive science and other fields with interest in human minds? Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 12) The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

So whatrsquo;s the GRS all about, really? Over the years, many have inquired and tonight the crew hopes to set the record straight (that is, at least, insofar as the record can be straight!). Where did the GRS come from? What are the particular objectives (or goals) of the GRS? Is there any aim to the show at all? If so, what are we trying to do? What are we NOT trying to do? What about the particular format of the GRS? The music, commercials, monologues, discussions, guests and street interviewshellip; is there any method to the madness? Is this an appropriate way to do philosophy? Can a philosophy talk show be fun, sarcastic, informal, goofy AND informative, engaging, relevant and thought provoking? These are just some of the interesting questions that the GRS crew will be addressing during this special lsquo;tell-allrsquo; GRS exposeacute;ndash; So get ready, its The 28th Episode Spectacular on the GRS! A Special GRS Episode

What is the philosophy of language? How does the philosophy of language differ from linguistics, or from other branches of philosophy? Why do philosophers study language? What is the purpose of language? How does language relate to the mind, both of the speaker and the interpreter? How does language relate to the world? What is the nature of meaning? What is the relation between meaning and reference? How are sentences composed into a meaningful whole, and what are the meanings of the parts of sentences? Why do expressions have the meanings they have? How do words and sentences acquire meanings? Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 11) The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.

Whatrsquo;s the distinction (if any) between the philosophy of film, philosophy in film, philosophy and film or philosophy through film? Do these different titles refer to different disciplines with different objectives? Or is there some unifying relation between these notions? Whatrsquo;s the primary interest in pursuing the notion of philosophy #38; film? Is the interest interpretative (i.e., making use of philosophical positions, concepts, etc in the interpretation of films)? Or is the primary interest pedagogical (i.e., making use of film in order to illustrate some philosophical position, concept, etc)? Is it both? Neither? How does philosophy #38; film relate to (or deal with) more traditional philosophical questions related to aesthetics? Is film an art form? If so, what sort of art form is it? In what can the aesthetic value of a film consist? Are some films artworks, while other are just entertainment? If so, what is the difference? Is film somehow especially helpful when it comes to teaching and/or understanding philosophical positions, concepts, etc? If so, why? *** Unfortunately, due to technical difficulties at the radio station, the audio quality of the recorded version of this GRS broadcast is less than desirable. Sorry for the inconvenience.

What is Intelligent Design Theory? Is Intelligent Design Theory a scientific theory? Why or why not? If so, is it a good theory? What is the philosophical significance of the debate about intelligent design? How is Intelligent Design Theory different from other theories or theses involving design? What claims are Intelligent Design Theorists committed to? What claims are they not committed to? What is the explanatory aim of Intelligent Design Theory? Are we justified in teaching Intelligent Design Theory in public schools? What would make it justified or unjustified? Do certain religious views force one to decide between intelligent design and evolution? If so, why?

What is the philosophy of science? What is it that philosophers of science do? What sort of issues is the philosophy of science interested in investigating? What is the relationship between science and the philosophy of science? How do philosophers add to the work of scientists? Do scientists need philosophers of science? Can the structure and history of science tell us anything about how to do philosophy? What scientific fields ought to be studied more by philosophers of science? Philosophy 101 Series (Episode 10) The Philosophy 101 Series is designed to give the beginning philosopher (or non-philosopher) a brief introduction to the basic questions, concerns and methodologies associated with the various branches of philosophical inquiry.