How the World Thinks with philosopher Julian Baggini and Andrea Hiott

Philosophy and Identity with Julian Baggini
Join host Andrea for an enlightening conversation with renowned philosopher and best-selling author Julian Baggini, as they explore the intersections of global philosophical traditions and personal identity. Discover how Baggini’s book 'How the World Thinks' delves into the balance between individualism and community, cultural context, and the integration of diverse ways of thinking. This episode unpacks critical thinking, its ethical dimensions, and the psychological and embodied aspects of personal experiences. Julian reflects on memory, trauma, dementia, and the importance of continuous learning while discussing the foundations of our thoughts and identities. Whether you are new to philosophy or a seasoned enthusiast, this episode offers enriching perspectives on how philosophy shapes our worldviews and daily lives.
Check out Julian's website: www.julianbagg...
How the World Thinks: www.amazon.com...
How to Think Like a Philosopher, the book: press.uchicago...
How to think like a philosopher, the podcast: www.julianbagg...
In Our Time: www.bbc.co.uk/...
#philosophy #world #thinking #julianbaggini #andreahiott
00:00 Introduction to Julian Baginni
01:10 Julian's Philosophical Journey
01:42 Exploring Relational and Atomistic Views
02:30 The Role of Truth and Respect in Philosophy
05:12 Julian's Scholarship and The Philosophers Mag
06:57 Global Philosophy and Its Challenges
11:17 Defining Philosophy Across Cultures
30:16 The Importance of Place in Philosophy
37:35 Balancing Individualism and Belonging
42:12 Integrating Eastern and Western Philosophies
43:01 The Concept of a Global Philosophy
44:21 The Mixing Desk Analogy for Moral Values
46:58 Dynamic Systems and Knowledge
48:24 The Process of Understanding Reality
58:45 The Ethical Practice of Philosophy
01:11:09 Personal Identity and the Self
01:21:29 The Role of Philosophy in Critical Thinking
01:24:20 Julian's Journey as a Philosopher
Join the Substack: lovephilosophy...
Go deeper with Community Philosophy: communityphilo...
Join this channel to get access to perks, or just give a dollar in beautiful support:
/ @waymaking23

[@dsjwhite]

How lovely. A great conversation. Thank you.

[@waymaking23]

Thank you
@dsjwhite

[@shawnewaltonify]

Sometimes a simple concept or practice needs to be applied in brand new contexts, and over and over and in more new contexts. The reason for this is because the practice or technique is a universal truth; and we just falsely believe we need something new and that the growth we are getting from fronteiring/ discovering new situations/places/ways to apply it has reached plateau. It's not a plateau, it's just fatigue and ebbs and flow to the growth. What technique am I talking about? The scientific method of making inferences and resisting our addiction to make a conclusion before collecting sufficient evidence, and making our conclusions tentative and anticipating the probability of future counter arguments/evidence. That's it. That's all we need to do. It's astounding, the number of ways we deceive each other out of this merely because of conditioning to enable. Enable the addiction as a way to hurt others. "Enabling" is the equivalent to how in nature, beings enable other beings to succumb to forces of nature because it is letting nature take its course. An example of the scientific method in nature is: emerging properties. There is the selective pressure aspect of Evolutionary Biology and the Innovation aspect, and the scientific method is among the latter. The measurable degree to which you hold your own knowledge and opinion as tentative and open to improvement is saying something about your contribution to Evolutionary Biology as a whole.

[@waymaking23]

Would love to hear what part of the conversation sparked these thoughts

[@shawnewaltonify]

@@waymaking23 the title. I will watch the rest now. lol. maybe I will have more...

[@waymaking23]

@@shawnewaltonify this last comment cracked me up! love it that all that poured forth from the title alone :)

[@shawnewaltonify]

@@waymaking23 thanks Andrea, my experience writing TH-cam comments is that I am as surprised as others may be by what arises within me when I do so, and so that is why I do it. Thanks for producing such amazing content.

[@waymaking23]

@@shawnewaltonify great! stream-of-consciousness-like replies with learning & substance, much appreciated, thank you for watching!

[@shawnewaltonify]

You don't have to choose between pluralism and cultural relativism as you do. For example, there are ethics that are culturally relative but on other levels of absolute truth of morality there is pluralism. In an eventual world where we achieve a population that abides by absolute moral truth, there will still exist cultural relativity of ethics. The goal according to this prediction about the future is to reduce pluralism of morality. Not only this, but if you do not have empirical data to support any conclusion about a universal absolute moral truth, then you may keep it to yourself as tentative; meaning, anything you believe to be subject to pluralism, may one day prove not to be. I think you have to make claims about pluralism relative to time, and make it dynamic.

[@waymaking23]

beyond dichotomy !