The Blog

NoodleFood

NoodleCast #135: Q&A Radio Podcast: Disclosures, Spouses, Advertising, and More

 NoodleCast, Radio Shows
May 302012
 

On Sunday, 27 May 2012, I broadcast a new episode of my Philosophy in Action Q&A Radio. This week, we discussed questions on disclosing atheism to babysitters, outing yourself to bigots, spousal sabotage, skipping advertisements, and more. William E. Perry joined me on audio, and the audience posted comments and questions in a text chat.

Philosophy in Action Q&A Radio is a live, hour-long internet radio show, broadcast every Sunday morning at 8 am PT / 9 am MT / 10 am CT / 11 am ET via BlogTalkRadio. In each episode, I answer questions from the queue, applying rational principles to the challenges of real life.

As usual, if you can’t attend the live show, you’ll find the audio recording of the whole episode, as well as individual questions, posted to the episode’s archive page: Q&A Radio: 27 May 2012.

To automatically download every new episode, just subscribe to the Philosophy in Action Podcast RSS Feed in your music player:

Also, check out the Show Archives, sorted by date or by topic to listen to the audio from whole episodes or just selected questions. Visit to the Question Queue to submit and vote on questions for upcoming shows. And don’t forget to Connect with Us via social media, e-mail, RSS feeds, and more.

Philosophy in Action's NewsletterPhilosophy in Action's Facebook PagePhilosophy in Action's Twitter StreamPhilosophy in Action's RSS FeedPhilosophy in Action's YouTube Channel

The Podcast: Episode: 27 May 2012

Listen Now


    Duration: 1:02:49
Download the Episode
The Segments: Episode: 27 May 2012

The following segments are marked as chapters in the M4A version of the podcast. Thanks to Tammy Perkins for helping compile the show notes!

Introduction (0:00)

I’m broadcasting live from the awesomeness that is ATLOSCon 2012!

Philosophy in Action’s broadcasts are available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing them, but they’re not free to produce: they require our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar!

Question 1: Disclosing Atheism to Babysitters (2:38)

Question: Should I mention we are atheists when interviewing babysitters? I am looking for a babysitter. The question is: How do I handle the fact that many of the candidates will be very very strong Christians? Should I bring up the fact we are atheists right away or would that be creating an issue when there could be none? I definitely have to set some boundaries like “No praying with my children,” but what is the appropriate way to handle it?

My Answer, In Brief: If you don’t want a conflict between your babysitter and your children over religion and other sensitive matters, you should talk to him or her in advance about it in a friendly, easygoing way.

Question 2: Outing Yourself to Bigots (9:41)

Question: Am I obliged to disclose that I am gay if I know that the person then wouldn’t wish to do business with me? Let’s say that I have a job that I enjoy, but I find out that my boss does not like gay people and would refuse to hire or would fire anyone that she knew was gay. Somehow, she doesn’t know that I am, in fact, gay. Should I tell her knowing that she would want to fire me – a decision that I think is wrong, but nonetheless something she should be free to do? Assume that in every other regard I enjoy my work and job, and sharing her discriminatory view is by no means a requirement for my work.

My Answer, In Brief: You’re not under any obligation to out yourself to bigots, including at work. However, closets are uncomfortable places to live, and you should do what’s needed to solve this problem as soon as possible.

Question 3: Spousal Sabotage (21:05)

Question: How can I stop my spouse from sabotaging my self-improvement? Over the course of my 15 years of marriage, I’d gained over 100 pounds. After feeling disgusted with myself for too long, I decided to change my habits. So I switched to a paleo-type diet and started lifting weights. So far, I’ve lost 40 pounds, as well as shed some health problems. My husband still eats what he pleases, and I don’t pester him about that, although he needs to eat better too. However, he’s constantly attempting to undermine my efforts – for example, by bringing home and encouraging me to eat doughnuts. I want him to celebrate and support my new-found success, but he seems to want me to be fat, unhealthy, and miserable. What should I do?

My Answer, In Brief: Your husband sounds like he has some serious psychological problems that need to be addressed, whether by you two together or perhaps with a psychologist. Ultimately, you need to act for your own good, even if that requires divorce.

Links:

Question 4: Skipping Advertisements (31:27)

Question: Is it wrong to skip over advertisements? Many people use plug-ins that block advertisements on web sites, and many more people skip advertisements on television by recording shows with a DVR. Is this moral? Is it a failure to act as a trader?

My Answer, In Brief: You’re not under any obligation to consume advertising, even if that’s the means of supporting some free offering to you.

Links:

Rapid Fire Questions (47:22)

In this segment, I answered a variety of questions off-the-cuff. The questions were:

  • What do you say to a speaker at a conference if he asks you what you thought of his presentation and you really didn’t like it?

  • Should you attend a conference if you have major philosophical problems with a speaker or several speakers?

  • Cloth diapers or throw-away diapers – does it matter?

  • Should a person rely on local health inspection signs, such as the A, B, C system that some cities use?

  • Why do you think that so many Christians of every generation believe that the Rapture will happen in their lifetimes?
Conclusion (1:01:27)

Support Philosophy in Action

Philosophy in Action’s broadcasts are available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing them, but they’re not free for us to produce: they require our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar!




If you’d like to make a one-time contribution in an amount not listed, use this link. For instructions on canceling or revising your monthly contribution, visit the support page.

Thank you, if you’ve contributed to our tip jar! You make our work possible, and we’re so grateful for that! Also, whether you’re able to contribute financially or not, we always appreciate your helping us spread the word about Philosophy in Action to anyone you think might be interested, as well as submitting and voting on questions for upcoming episodes.

 Posted by on 30 May 2012 at 3:00 pm  No Responses »

NoodleCast #134: Q&A Radio Podcast: Wrongdoers, Firings, Sacrifice, IP, and More

 NoodleCast, Radio Shows
May 212012
 

On Sunday, 20 May 2012, I broadcast a new episode of my Philosophy in Action Q&A Radio. This week, we discussed questions on warning others about dangerous people, responding to an unjust firing, investment versus sacrifice, downloading music after hard drive failure, and more. Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers joined me on audio, and the audience posted comments and questions in a text chat.

Philosophy in Action Q&A Radio is a live, hour-long internet radio show, broadcast every Sunday morning at 8 am PT / 9 am MT / 10 am CT / 11 am ET via BlogTalkRadio. In each episode, I answer questions from the queue, applying rational principles to the challenges of real life.

As usual, if you can’t attend the live show, you’ll find the audio recording of the whole episode, as well as individual questions, posted to the episode’s archive page: Q&A Radio: 20 May 2012.

To automatically download every new episode, just subscribe to the Philosophy in Action Podcast RSS Feed in your music player:

Also, check out the Show Archives, sorted by date or by topic to listen to the audio from whole episodes or just selected questions. Visit to the Question Queue to submit and vote on questions for upcoming shows. And don’t forget to Connect with Us via social media, e-mail, RSS feeds, and more.

Philosophy in Action's NewsletterPhilosophy in Action's Facebook PagePhilosophy in Action's Twitter StreamPhilosophy in Action's RSS FeedPhilosophy in Action's YouTube Channel

The Podcast: Episode: 20 May 2012

Listen Now


    Duration: 1:06:50
Download the Episode
The Segments: Episode: 20 May 2012

The following segments are marked as chapters in the M4A version of the podcast. Thanks to Tammy Perkins for helping compile the show notes!

Introduction (0:00)

I’ll be travelling, then broadcasting from ATLOSCon 2012 next week! Due to those travels, I won’t be broadcasting my “Advice Radio” show on Wednesday evening.

Philosophy in Action’s broadcasts are available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing them, but they’re not free to produce: they require our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar!

Question 1: Warning Others about Dangerous People (3:05)

Question: Should you warn others about vicious people in your community? If you know a person to be dishonest, but that person is well-regarded in your community, should you tell others in that community what you know? Does it matter if the person is in a position of authority (perhaps over an organization’s finances), such that he could do a whole lot of damage? What kinds of immorality would be serious enough to warrant warning others?

My Answer, In Brief: If you know of a wolf in sheep’s clothing threatening your values and your community, don’t remain silent. You need to speak and act – but do that carefully.

Question 2: Responding to an Unjust Firing (21:37)

Question: Should an employer have to explain and justify his firing of an employee? Should an employer be able to fire an employee for some alleged misconduct, even though the employer never bothered to verify the misconduct, nor asked the employee for his side of the story? For example, suppose that when the employee shows up for work he is simply told that he’s been fired because someone made a complaint about him. The employee could easily prove the complaint to be false but the employer isn’t concerned with proof or lack thereof. The employee’s reputation in the eyes of possible future employers is damaged, even if the employer never discusses the firing with anyone else. In such a case, should the employee be able to sue for having been fired without proper cause?

My Answer, In Brief: In a free society, absent a contract, employers are entitled to fire employees at will, including for unjust reasons or in unjust ways. An employee wrongfully fired should move on with his life, stating the facts about what happened as necessary to protect his reputation.

Links:

Question 3: Investment Versus Sacrifice (38:44)

Question: What is the difference between “investment” and “sacrifice”? In your February 26, 2012 webcast, you indicated that you regard sacrifices as something very different from investments. But doesn’t sacrifice just mean giving up something? In that case, don’t investments in the future require sacrifice now? Or: What’s the difference between sacrificing some ease and comfort for your goal versus investing time and work to achieve a goal?

My Answer, In Brief: The term “sacrifice” is a confused mess that conflates loss for its own sake with loss for the sake of greater gain. A person ought to pursue his own life and happiness, which means pursuing investments, not sacrifices.

Question 4: Downloading Music After Hard Drive Failure (51:50)

Question: Does respecting intellectual property require me to re-purchase my music collection lost due to hard drive failure? Over the years I have purchased quite a bit of digital music and have built quite a large library. Recently, due to a computer crash and lack of backup, a large segment of that library was erased. Since I paid for all of the music that was lost, I would like to restore it, whether by copying from my friends or by downloading illegal copies from the internet. But I am not entirely sure what I have the right to do based on my original purchases. What do you think?

My Answer, In Brief: It’s perfectly moral to obtain new copies of intellectual property that you’ve lost, but be careful about your choice of means: obtain the lost files from friends, not piracy-peddling web sites.

Rapid Fire Questions (1:01:07)

In this segment, I answered a variety of questions off-the-cuff. The questions were:

  • What’s the proper meaning of the word “greedy”?
Conclusion (1:05:58)

Support Philosophy in Action

Philosophy in Action’s broadcasts are available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing them, but they’re not free for us to produce: they require our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar!




If you’d like to make a one-time contribution in an amount not listed, use this link. For instructions on canceling or revising your monthly contribution, visit the support page.

Thank you, if you’ve contributed to our tip jar! You make our work possible, and we’re so grateful for that! Also, whether you’re able to contribute financially or not, we always appreciate your helping us spread the word about Philosophy in Action to anyone you think might be interested, as well as submitting and voting on questions for upcoming episodes.

 Posted by on 21 May 2012 at 8:00 am  No Responses »

NoodleCast #133: Advice Radio Podcast: Guilty Pleasures

 NoodleCast, Radio Shows
May 172012
 

On Wednesday, May 16th, I broadcast my fourth episode of Philosophy in Action Radio on BlogTalkRadio. The topic was “Guilty Pleasures.”

Topics Discussed

  • The problem with guilty pleasures

  • Techniques for dealing with guilty pleasures

  • Sugar as my guilty pleasure

  • Asking for help when overwhelmed with a new baby

  • Staying up too late surfing the internet

  • Snapping at people when in a bad mood

Listen Now


    Duration: 30:09

Download the Episode

Subscribe to the Feed

In all likelihood, I won’t be broadcasting a new show on Wednesday May 23rd, as I’ll be on the road. We’ll resume on May 30th. The theme of that show will be “Guilty Pleasures.” I hope that you’ll join us… and better yet, call in!

 Posted by on 17 May 2012 at 1:00 pm  No Responses »

NoodleCast #132: Q&A Radio Podcast: Self-Destructive Pleasures, Privacy in a High-Tech Society, Pushy Fundraising, Browsing Locally Then Buying Online

 NoodleCast, Radio Shows, Webcasts
May 142012
 

On Sunday, 13 May 2012, I broadcast a new episode of my live Philosophy in Action Webcast, where I answer questions on the application of rational principles to the challenges of living a virtuous, happy, and free life in a live, hour-long webcast. The webcast is broadcast live every Sunday morning at 8 am PT / 9 am MT / 10 am CT / 11 am ET. In the webcast, I broadcast on video, Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers is on audio, and the audience is in a text chat.

As usual, if you can’t attend the live webcast, you can listen to it later as audio-only podcast by subscribing to the Philosophy in Action Podcast RSS Feed:

You can also peruse the archives, listening to whole episodes or just individual questions. The archives are sorted by date and by topic.

We hope that you’ll join the live webcast, because that’s more lively and engaging than the podcast. People talk merrily in the text chat while watching the webcast. Greg and I enjoy the immediate feedback of a live audience – the funny quips, serious comments, and follow-up questions. So please join the live webcast when you can!

The Podcast: Episode: 13 May 2012

Listen Now


    Duration: 1:00:44
Download the Episode
Subscribe to the Feed
The Segments: Episode: 13 May 2012

The following segments are marked as chapters in the M4A version of the podcast. Thanks to Tammy Perkins for helping compile the show notes!

Introduction (0:00)

I’m experimenting with moving the webcast to an audio-only stream on BlogTalkRadio, as well as experimenting with my new call-in radio show on Wednesday evening. Soon, ATLOSCon 2012!

Question 1: Self-Destructive Pleasures (3:58)

It is wrong to pursue self-destructive pleasures? Suppose that you know that drinking to excess is not good for your mind or body, but you want to enjoy the oblivion of drunkenness. Or perhaps you know that sleeping with your ex-girlfriend is a very bad idea, but you want the pleasure of sex with a warm body. Is it wrong to pursue these pleasures, if you’re willing to accept their destructive consequences?

My Answer, In Brief: To live morally means to pursue your life and your values with gusto, not jump into the gutter. To yearn for self-destructive pleasures indicates psychological problems in need of fixing.

Links:

Question 2: Privacy in a High-Tech Society (11:53)

Do you have the right to privacy with respect to information that I can gather about you from observation of you while I’m on my own property? For instance, if I have technology that allows me to gather photons or sound waves that you emit from your property while I’m sitting on my property next door, can I post that information on YouTube or Facebook? For example, imagine that I have an infrared video of your activities emitted through your bedroom wall or the audio of your personal phone conversation that can be detected by sensitive microphones from 100 yards away. Have I violated your rights by gathering and publicizing information you’ve chosen to allow to be broadcast to anyone who can detect it with the right equipment?

My Answer, In Brief: Privacy is a value, and the law ought to recognize a fact-based distinction between private and public activities. The line should likely be drawn at what’s perceptible by the unaided senses or perceptible with ordinary technology.

Question 3: Pushy Fundraising (32:56)

How should I respond to the constant demands to contribute to fundraisers from my child’s school? I am barraged with “requests” for contributions to school fundraisers. This week, for example, each student in the band is asked to put together a “buddy bag” with sweets (against my views), a toy (more plastic junk to fill the landfills), and a gift (I can’t afford that). Every week, there’s another fundraiser, for which parents are asked to spend their money on things they don’t value or aren’t a fair value. Should I refuse these requests – and if so, how should I do so?

My Answer, In Brief: Be a good role model for your kids: recognize that you’re not obliged to contribute, establish your own standards for contribution, and be firm and clear in communicating what you’re willing to do (or not) to others.

Question 4: Browsing Locally Then Buying Online (37:59)

Is it wrong to browse in a local store but then buy online? Suppose that you shop for an item in a brick-and-mortar store, taking advantage of the opportunity to browse and get recommendations from staff, but then make your purchases at a discounted online retailer – for example, browsing through a local bookstore but then buying from Amazon at a lower price. Is that wrong or unfair?

My Answer, In Brief: It’s not wrong to buy online after browsing in a local store, provided that it’s done honestly – just as it’s not wrong to check out reviews online, but then buy in a local store. Be a self-interested consumer!

Links:

Rapid Fire Questions (46:35)

In this segment, I answered a variety of questions off-the-cuff. The questions were:

  • What should you do when you suspect that friends or acquaintances are depending on your opinion in second-handed ways?

  • Why would an egoist want to live in society?

  • What are some resources to communicate with tact and being more clear?

  • Is it wrong to “throw away your vote” on a candidate without any hope of being elected?

  • If the government didn’t own the roads, who would set and enforce traffic laws?
Conclusion (59:40)

Comments or questions? Contact us!

Support the Webcast

The Philosophy in Action Webcast is available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing it, but it’s not free for us to produce: it requires our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value what we’re doing, please contribute to the webcast’s tip jar!




If you’d like to make a one-time contribution in an amount not listed, use this link. For instructions on canceling or revising your monthly contribution, visit the support page.

Thank you, if you’ve contributed to the webcast! You make our work possible every week, and we’re so grateful for that! Also, whether you’re able to contribute financially or not, we always appreciate your helping us spread the word about this webcast to anyone you think might be interested, as well as submitting and voting on questions for upcoming webcasts.

 Posted by on 14 May 2012 at 8:00 am  No Responses »

NoodleCast: Please Rate and Review

 NoodleCast
May 112012
 

If you’re a fan of my podcasts, please help spread the word by rating and reviewing them in iTunes! Please do so for both the enhanced M4A feed and standard MP3 feed. (The content is the same: the only difference is the file type.)

That’s much appreciated!

 Posted by on 11 May 2012 at 2:00 pm  No Responses »

NoodleCast #131: Advice Radio: Apologies and Forgiveness

 NoodleCast, Radio Shows
May 102012
 

On Wednesday, May 9th, I broadcast my third episode of Philosophy in Action Radio on BlogTalkRadio. The topic was “Apologies and Forgiveness.”

Topics Discussed

  • The process of apology and forgiveness
  • Apologizing to destructive people
  • Apologizing years later
  • Accepting insincere apologies
  • Limits of forgivable wrongdoing
  • Moral wrongs versus other kinds of mistakes

Listen Now


    Duration: 36:28

Download the Episode

Subscribe to the Feed

The next episode of Philosophy in Action Advice Radio will be on Wednesday, May 16th at 9 pm ET / 8 pm CT / 7 pm MT / 6 pm PT. Once again, it will last for a half hour. The theme of that show will be “Guilty Pleasures.” I hope that you’ll join us… and better yet, call in!

 Posted by on 10 May 2012 at 8:00 am  No Responses »

NoodleCast #130: Webcast: Forgiving Yourself, Unforgivable Acts, The Meaning of Life, Respecting Intellectual Property Online

 NoodleCast, Webcasts
May 072012
 

On Sunday, 6 May 2012, I broadcast a new episode of my live Philosophy in Action Webcast, where I answer questions on the application of rational principles to the challenges of living a virtuous, happy, and free life in a live, hour-long webcast. The webcast is broadcast live every Sunday morning at 8 am PT / 9 am MT / 10 am CT / 11 am ET. In the webcast, I broadcast on video, Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers is on audio, and the audience is in a text chat.

As usual, if you can’t attend the live webcast, you can listen to it later as audio-only podcast by subscribing to the Philosophy in Action Podcast RSS Feed:

You can also peruse the archives, listening to whole episodes or just individual questions. The archives are sorted by date and by topic.

We hope that you’ll join the live webcast, because that’s more lively and engaging than the podcast. People talk merrily in the text chat while watching the webcast. Greg and I enjoy the immediate feedback of a live audience – the funny quips, serious comments, and follow-up questions. So please join the live webcast when you can!

The Podcast: Episode: 6 May 2012

Listen Now


    Duration: 1:02:26
Download the Episode
Subscribe to the Feed
The Segments: Episode: 6 May 2012

The following segments are marked as chapters in the M4A version of the podcast. Thanks to Tammy Perkins for helping compile the show notes!

Introduction (0:00)

I’ve been working on updates to Philosophy in Action, and I’m going to start preparing my talks for ATLOSCon 2012. And… Happy Birthday, Tammy!

Question 1: Forgiving Yourself (3:08)

Should we forgive ourselves? How can a person free himself from guilt over past errors and wrongs, particularly irrationality? Should such a person forgive himself – and if so, what does that entail?

My Answer, In Brief: The idea of “forgiving yourself” is somewhat metaphorical, but it’s useful for applying objective moral standards to yourself when recovering from a wrongdoing.

Links:

Question 2: Unforgivable Acts (18:05)

Can an ordinary person do something unforgivable? Could a friend act in a way that would make rational forgiveness impossible? Might a person do something so hurtful or unfair that you couldn’t ever trust them again? In such cases, how should the person wronged acted towards the unforgivable person?

My Answer, In Brief: People can do truly unforgivable things, particularly when they betray the fundamental basis of the relationship.

Links:

Question 3: The Meaning of Life (36:38)

Does life have a purpose or meaning? Religious people say that God gives their lives meaning, purpose, and direction. Other people find meaning in doing good for others or society as a whole. As an atheist and egoist, what do you think the purpose of life is? Does it have any inherent meaning – or should a person arbitrarily decide its meaning? And shouldn’t a person think that something is more important than himself and his own petty concerns?

My Answer, In Brief: A person who fully values himself will reject the idea of an externally-imposed purpose, but instead identify and pursue his own central purpose by reason.

Links:

Question 4: Downloading and Sharing Online Videos (49:10)

Is downloading music from YouTube a violation of intellectual property rights? Given that content creators can remove YouTube videos that violate their intellectual property rights, is it wrong to assume that they consent to the posting if they’ve not asked to remove it? It is wrong to watch or share clips that seem to be uploaded without permission? It is wrong to download music from YouTube for my own personal use, whether uploaded by the creator or someone else?

My Answer, In Brief: It’s often difficult to judge whether online intellectual property is legitimate or not. Use common sense to judge whether likely legitimate or not, and don’t attempt to sneak out of paying.

Links:

Rapid Fire Questions (57:56)

In this segment, I answered a variety of questions off-the-cuff. The questions were:

  • Could you give an example of a central purpose?

  • Is it morally okay to associate with a religious charity if you believe in its secular mission?
Conclusion (1:01:32)

Comments or questions? Contact us!

Support the Webcast

The Philosophy in Action Webcast is available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing it, but it’s not free for us to produce: it requires our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value what we’re doing, please contribute to the webcast’s tip jar!




If you’d like to make a one-time contribution in an amount not listed, use this link. For instructions on canceling or revising your monthly contribution, visit the support page.

Thank you, if you’ve contributed to the webcast! You make our work possible every week, and we’re so grateful for that! Also, whether you’re able to contribute financially or not, we always appreciate your helping us spread the word about this webcast to anyone you think might be interested, as well as submitting and voting on questions for upcoming webcasts.

 Posted by on 7 May 2012 at 8:00 am  No Responses »

NoodleCast #129: Advice Radio: Protecting Your Privacy

 NoodleCast, Radio Shows
May 032012
 

On Wednesday, May 2nd, I broadcast my second episode of Philosophy in Action Radio on BlogTalkRadio. The topic was “Protecting Your Privacy.”

Topics Discussed

  • Taking responsibility for your privacy
  • What others are entitled to know about you
  • Responding to people aggressively giving advice
  • Why lying to protect your privacy often ends badly
  • The privacy of spouses and children
  • How to draw boundaries kindly with people
  • More on what people are entitled to know
  • Keeping secrets for others

Listen Now


    Duration: 29:56

Download the Episode

Subscribe to the Feed

The next episode of Philosophy in Action Advice Radio will be on Wednesday, May 9th at 9 pm ET / 8 pm CT / 7 pm MT / 6 pm PT. Once again, it will last for a half hour. The theme of that show will be “Forgiveness.” I hope that you’ll join us! Also, if you have ideas for future topics, please e-mail me!

 Posted by on 3 May 2012 at 5:30 pm  No Responses »

NoodleCast #127: Advice Radio: Getting More Done

 NoodleCast, Productiveness, Productivity, Radio Shows
Apr 272012
 

On Wednesday, April 25th, I broadcast my first episode of Philosophy in Action Radio on BlogTalkRadio! It was hugely fun for me to do, and I think it went really well. Many thanks to everyone who called in!

My next will be on Wednesday, May 2nd at 9 pm ET / 8 pm CT / 7 pm MT / 6 pm PT. Once again, it will last for a half hour. The theme of that show will be “Protecting Your Privacy.”

The audio quality from the version recorded by BlogTalkRadio, so I used the audio file that I recorded locally. Hence, at the end, you’ll hear a few alerts from BTR about how much time I have left.

Topics Discussed

  • The nuts and bolts of this new call-in radio show
  • Productivity is not a matter of willpower
  • Doing a boring job that just pays the bills
  • Dealing with overwhelming quantities of email
  • Making progress on long-term projects
  • Dealing with burnout
  • Keeping motivation without deadlines

Listen Now

    Duration: 29:56

Download the Episode

Subscribe to the Feed

 Posted by on 27 April 2012 at 12:50 pm  No Responses »

NoodleCast #125: Live Philosophy in Action Webcast

 NoodleCast
Apr 162012
 

On Sunday, 15 April 2012, I broadcast a new episode of my live Philosophy in Action Webcast, where I answer questions on the application of rational principles to the challenges of living a virtuous, happy, and free life in a live, hour-long webcast. The webcast is broadcast live every Sunday morning at 8 am PT / 9 am MT / 10 am CT / 11 am ET. In the webcast, I broadcast on video, Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers is on audio, and the audience is in a text chat.

As usual, if you can’t attend the live webcast, you can listen to it later as audio-only podcast by subscribing to the NoodleCast RSS Feed:

You can also peruse the archives, listening to whole episodes or just individual questions. The archives are sorted by date and by topic.

We hope that you’ll join the live webcast, because that’s more lively and engaging than the podcast. People talk merrily in the text chat while watching the webcast. Greg and I enjoy the immediate feedback of a live audience – the funny quips, serious comments, and follow-up questions. So please join the live webcast when you can!

The Podcast: Episode: 15 April 2012

Listen Now


    Duration: 1:09:00
Download the Episode
Subscribe to the Feed
The Segments: Episode: 15 April 2012

The following segments are marked as chapters in the M4A version of the podcast. Thanks to Tammy Perkins for helping compile the show notes!

Introduction (0:00)

I’ve been busy working on transferring NoodleFood over to WordPress on Philosophy in Action. It’s still a work in progress!

Question 1: The Morality of Breaking the Law (3:44)

When is it moral to break the law? Laws should be written to protect individual rights. Unfortunately, many laws today violate rights. When should I abide by a rights-violating law, and when is it proper to break it?

My Answer, In Brief: A person does not have any moral obligation to submit to violations of his rights. However, the proper course – whether complying with the law, breaking the law overtly, or breaking the law covertly – depends on the particulars of the situation. Mostly, get legal advice first!

Links:

Question 2: The Morality of Vigilantism (20:48)

Where is the line between justice and vigilantism? When is it moral to take the law into your own hands – meaning pursuing, detaining, and/or punishing criminals as a private citizen? Suppose that you know – without a shadow of a doubt – that some person committed a serious crime against you or a loved one. If the justice system cannot punish the person due to some technicality, is it wrong for you to do so? If you’re caught, should a judge or jury punish you, as if you’d committed a crime against an innocent person?

My Answer, In Brief: The vigilante is not an agent of justice, but a threat to innocents and to the foundations of civilized society.

Links:

Question 3: Stealing Valor (36:37)

Should “stealing valor” be a crime? Rencently, a man was arrested by the FBI in Houston and charged with “stolen valor.” This is the charge made against someone who falsely poses as a decorated soldier. Is it proper to make this a crime? Why or why not?

My Answer, In Brief: Undoubtedly, “stealing valor” is reprehensible, but not everything reprehensible should be a crime. The legal response to “stealing valor” ought to be the same as for other kinds of credentials fraud, whether protect speech, civil fraud, or criminal fraud.

Links:

Question 4: Selling Sub-Optimal Products (48:50)

What should a businessman do if he decides that his product or service is not really good? More specifically, what should a businessman do if he’s rises up in the business world on promoting a particular product or service, only to learn decades into the ventures that there are better alternatives? As a fictional example, let’s take a mattress manufacturer CEO. He has spent decades of his life trying to make the most comfortable mattresses possible, but then read scientific studies that concludes that there is no healthier sleeping surface than the solid floor, and in using his honest judgment he agrees. Being so high up and so long involved in the mattress world, what are the moral range of options for him?

My Answer, In Brief: Morality in business does not requires producing optimal products, but only good products for honest trade. In this case, the businessman has a range of options, including some moral pitfalls to avoid.

Links:

Rapid Fire Questions (58:52)

In this segment, I answered a variety of questions off-the-cuff. The questions were:

  • Why are vigilante movies so popular?

  • How is a citizen’s arrest different from vigilantism?

  • Is there a lower threshold for when it’s okay to break a regulation?

  • Given the lack of Antonin Scalia’s “New Professionalism” in police action, is the exclusionary rule is an important safeguard?

  • If a government actor has ruined your life unjustly is vengeance a moral option?

  • Is moral perfection a habit and if so is it one of yours?

  • Must a political candidate be chosen by conflating him/her with the party they happen to be running under, or is it reasonable to select a candidate but not agree with the party they run under?

  • Where does Ayn Rand talk about a “central purpose” – and what does she mean by it?
Conclusion (1:08:02)

Comments or questions? Contact us!

Support the Webcast

The Philosophy in Action Webcast is available to anyone, free of charge. We love doing it, but it’s not free for us to produce: it requires our time, effort, and money. So if you enjoy and value what we’re doing, please contribute to the webcast’s tip jar!




If you’d like to make a one-time contribution in an amount not listed, use this link. For instructions on canceling or revising your monthly contribution, visit the support page.

Thank you, if you’ve contributed to the webcast! You make our work possible every week, and we’re so grateful for that! Also, whether you’re able to contribute financially or not, we always appreciate your helping us spread the word about this webcast to anyone you think might be interested, as well as submitting and voting on questions for upcoming webcasts.

 Posted by on 16 April 2012 at 8:00 am  1 Response »
Page 1 of 14 1 2 3 … 13 14
Home | Live | Archive | Blog | Queue | Connect | Contribute
Copyright 2012 Diana Hsieh | Web | Email | Twitter | Facebook
Philosophy in Action's Newsletter Philosophy in Action's Facebook Page Philosophy in Action's Twitter Stream Philosophy in Action's RSS Feed Philosophy in Action's YouTube Channel
Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha