A live argument over whether analytic philosophy clarified thought or fenced it in.
Philosophy for Our Times treats the analytic-versus-continental split as a real quarrel over what philosophy is allowed to count as serious work.

Philosophers publicly disagree live on morality, power, and whether social media builds 'solipsism machines.'
Philosophy For Our Times stages philosophy as public reasoning, with talks, interviews, and debates on ideas that still have consequences. Recent episodes move from animal ethics and Marxism to universities, narrative, therapy, rewards, and the contested legacy of the Enlightenment.
PRESS PLAY
Philosophy for Our Times is a panel-debate show built from recorded discussions and live events tied to the Institute of Art and Ideas, including its philosophy conferences. Each episode puts two or three guests with differing, often incompatible, positions in conversation on one question, and a moderating host keeps the argument moving rather than steering it toward agreement. Hosts identified across episodes include Barry C. Smith, Ganesh Taylor, and a host credited only as Ed, suggesting the show rotates moderators rather than relying on a single fixed host. Guests skew toward working academic philosophers — professors of ethics, metaethics, philosophy of mind, and Africana philosophy — but the show also brings in journalists, filmmakers, and cultural writers when a topic (such as Gen Z mental health or capitalism and joy) benefits from a non-academic voice. Recurring subject matter includes moral realism versus anti-realism, the relationship between morality and power, the analytic/continental divide within academic philosophy, and how technology and social media reshape experience and identity. Classical figures such as Plato, Kant, and Nietzsche are invoked regularly as reference points for live arguments rather than as the subject of standalone lectures. The tone is argumentative and unresolved by design: episodes are framed around genuine disagreement between named specialists rather than a single explainer's conclusion. The show suits listeners already comfortable with technical philosophical vocabulary — moral intuitionism, metaethics, idealism, solipsism — rather than newcomers wanting a primer. It also touches on how philosophical arguments intersect with history and politics, including colonialism, abolition, and inequality. Episodes run roughly 45 to 65 minutes and are structured as a moderated conversation among the assembled guests rather than a one-on-one interview.
Made for: Listeners already familiar with philosophical vocabulary who want to hear specialists openly disagree on ethics, metaphysics, and political theory rather than receive one settled answer.
What sets it apart: Structured as moderated multi-guest debates between academics with opposing views, recorded at Institute of Art and Ideas events, rather than single-host explainer or interview-format philosophy shows.
Philosophy for our Times is a free philosophy podcast bringing you the latest talks and debates from the world’s leading thinkers. We host weekly episodes on today’s biggest ideas in news, society, culture, politics, science and arts. Subscribe today to never miss an episode.
Based on 6 episodes we listened to · September 2026
It makes philosophical disagreement audible, connecting contested ideas about morality, institutions, technology, and ethics to their consequences in public life.
Philosophy For Our Times turns large claims into arguments with visible points of friction. Moderated panels and individual talks move among moral objectivity, university funding, rival philosophical traditions, technology's effect on fun, neoliberal statecraft, and animal…
Moral realism meets factory farming and phone-addled fun, with your certainty politely asked to leave.
Press play if you want
Short reviews from the PlayNext desk, based on the episodes we processed.
A live argument over whether analytic philosophy clarified thought or fenced it in.
Philosophy for Our Times treats the analytic-versus-continental split as a real quarrel over what philosophy is allowed to count as serious work.
A serious case for treating animal suffering as a matter of justice.
Martha Nussbaum's case for a new theory of ethics is organized around three short animal stories before it turns to what they imply about sentience, flourishing, and justice.
A debate about universities, public funding, viewpoint diversity, and the value of higher education in the AI era.
Universities are cast here as a continuing fight over free thought, public funding, student loans, viewpoint diversity, and whether students should be treated as customers.
A hard-edged debate where morality is set against power, history, and competing views of objectivity.
Philosophy for Our Times sets up a direct clash over morality and power, with Barry C. Smith steering Tommy Curry, Mellis Erdor, and Michael Huma through a disagreement about whether morality is objective or shaped by contingency and historical coincidence.
A sharp, grounded argument about fun, purpose, and modern life.
This episode treats fun as a real question rather than a throwaway mood, asking whether people still know how to enjoy themselves and whether purpose should come first.





NHPR's Jason Moon investigates the Bear Brook barrel murders and a New Hampshire wrongful-conviction case.

This episode features an interview with Babette Babich, discussing Nietzsche's philosophy, particularly his ideas on the birth of tragedy and the technology trap.
Philosophy for Our Times hosts a live panel with philosopher James Tartaglia, journalist Myriam François, and writer Freya India to debate whether fun is essential rather than superficial, drawing on statistics showing drug use among young people has fallen by over a third since 2003 and only half of Americans report having fun regularly.
Ed introduces a panel debate on the split between analytic and continental philosophy.
Philosophy for Our Times hosts a talk by University of Chicago philosopher Martha Nussbaum, who argues for a new theory of animal justice she calls the capabilities approach.
Recorded at the How the Light Gets In festival in early 2025, the episode starts with a question about what universities are for.
This episode debates whether modern society's reliance on rewards and incentives for good behavior is harmful to human wellbeing and autonomy.
Historian Aviva Chomsky critically examines the Enlightenment, exploring its intersections with Eurocentrism, racism, colonial war, science, industry, and progress.
Terry Eagleton re-evaluates Karl Marx's ideas and their relevance to modern society.
A debate exploring how narratives shape our understanding of reality and can both help and trap us.
This interview with psychotherapist Susie Orbach explores the origins of psychotherapy, its role in modern society, and issues like AI in therapy and class disparities in mental health access.
This episode features an interview with philosopher Peter Singer, discussing his life, moral philosophy, and influential work like Animal Liberation.
A live debate exploring the relationship between price and value in economics and society.
A debate exploring the nature of novelty and originality in art, from cave paintings to AI.
This episode features a debate comparing Jean-Paul Sartre's and James Baldwin's philosophical views on whether humans can truly know the experience of others.
This episode explores the philosophy of geopolitics, examining historical and contemporary political philosophies that guide state decisions, with articles from experts like John Milbank and Slavoj Žižek.
Barry C.
A philosophical debate on the moral implications of Thanksgiving and the need to address historical injustices against indigenous peoples.
Philosopher Ben Ware discusses the philosophy of extinction, urging acceptance of extinction and living better in its face.
Fiona Ellis discusses the metaphysics of naturalism and its application to the question of life's meaning, proposing a middle ground between polarized philosophical approaches.
A philosophical talk exploring whether the natural and supernatural worlds are fundamentally opposed, featuring Professor Fiona Ellis defending a form of naturalism.
Stuart Hameroff argues that consciousness came first and triggered the origin of life, exploring the intersection of quantum mechanics and consciousness.
This episode explores the philosophy of horror, including dehumanization and why audiences crave horror, through articles and discussions.
Psychologist Paul Bloom explores why people have a desire to do bad things and why immoral thoughts shouldn't cause guilt.
A panel debate exploring the nature of self-discovery and whether there is a self to discover.
A debate on whether scientific methods can fully explain consciousness, featuring philosophers and scientists.
Continental philosopher Ben Ware discusses philosophical responses to extinction and humanity's role in it.
A debate exploring whether science can solve the problem of consciousness, featuring philosophers and scientists.
Slavoj Žižek discusses ideology through the anecdote of Niels Bohr's horseshoe, exploring concepts of belief and freedom.
An interview with Slavoj Žižek discussing quantum mechanics, experimental metaphysics, and his upcoming panel with Roger Penrose and Sabine Hossenfelder.
Slavoj Žižek discusses the war in Ukraine and broader societal issues in a philosophical lecture.
Philosopher Barry Smith discusses why philosophy has historically neglected senses like smell, touch, and taste, and his research on these overlooked senses.
This episode continues a debate on whether metaphysics is unavoidable in science and philosophy, featuring perspectives from Eric Weinstein, Becky Parker, and Hilary Lawson.
This episode features a debate between physicist Eric Weinstein, physicist Becky Parker, and philosopher Hilary Lawson on whether metaphysics is necessary or speculative nonsense in today's science-dominated world.