About Us
The podcasters were all graduate students in philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin back in the Clinton years. They all left the program at some point before getting their doctorates and have consequently since had time to get outside that whole weird world of academia and reflect on it and the various philosophical topics with a different, and probably much more lazy, perspective.
Mark Linsenmayer has lived in Madison, WI since 2000, has two little kids, and works from home writing about transportation research. He’s got a band (http://www.newpeopleband.com), a big catalog of work with previous bands, and dabbles in fiction (read this: http://marklint.com/World_6_2-19-09.pdf). When in grad school for philosophy, he mostly studied continental philosophy and philosophy of mind, with interests in phenomenology and explanations of consciousness. He more recently taught an ethics course for several semesters at Lakeland College.
After growing up as an Air Force brat, Seth Paskin went to Austin TX in 1992 for grad school and never left. After 10 years in various roles in the technology industry, he is now works as a business and marketing consultant. Seth is strongly committed to the Austin community and has spent 5 years on the Board of CPI, an area non-profit that serves ex-offenders (http://www.cpiaustin.org). In grad school he focused on German philosophy, particularly Martin Heidegger, and spent some time looking at the intersection of Jewish and Western thought.
Wes Alwan lives in Boston, Massachusetts, where he works at home as a writer and researcher. In his spare time he takes classes in psychoanalysis, drinks bourbon, and tries to do a little writing. Born in Savannah, GA, he spent part of his childhood in England and Ireland, and has also lived in Maryland, Texas, Manhattan, Maine, and Virginia. In grad school he focused on Kant and Nietzsche, after a brief flirtation with ancient philosophy. For his undergraduate degree he attended a small liberal arts (“great books”) school in Annapolis Maryland, called St. John’s college, where he studied the history of science, philosophy, and comparative literature. His erstwhile political blog, ketchupandcaviar.com, will be back up and running shortly.
- No trackbacks yet.
#1 by Andres Erazo on December 31st, 2009
I fell asleep to your “Kant and ethics” cast. Not because it was boring but because it was so long. I wasn’t prepared for it. I like hearing new shit when going to bed. I will probably hear them all but my question is or maybe just a comment: Can you guys discuss some Foucault. I have enjoyed rereading his Madness and Civilization and wonder if you make references to him in any other of your p-casts. I wonder if it is really worth learning french just so I can read him better. This philosopher in particular likes to play with words.
#2 by Mark Linsenmayer on December 31st, 2009
Yes, the podcasts can be long… still shorter than an actual graduate seminar, but we do get into it. I’m not sure if spreading it over multiple listening sessions makes you lose the thread…
Foucault is definitely on the list, though it may be a while before we get to him. After Husserl and Heidegger, for sure, to make it comprehensible.
Thanks for your comment, Andres!
-ML
#3 by Seth Paskin on January 2nd, 2010
I haven’t fallen asleep yet while we are recording an episode, but I suppose there is that possibility…
I’m a fan of Foucault, very much enjoyed The Order of Things and Discipline and Punish (particularly the latter). Perhaps we can use one of his published lectures as a text.
By all means learn French for any number of reasons, but I think there is much to get out of Foucault in translation.
#4 by Wes Alwan on January 2nd, 2010
And check out this debate between Foucault/Chomsky — lots of fun. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WveI_vgmPz8
Chomsky hates postmodernists (Foucault of course would deny being one), but he respected Foucault and apparently they were friends.
For a quick course in French for reading: http://www.amazon.com/French-Reading-Knowledge-Joseph-Palmeri/dp/096618436X
#5 by Daniel Horne on March 3rd, 2010
Great great podcast, you guys. I think you could expand your listenership even further were you to set up a PartiallyExaminedLife Twitter.com account. You laugh, but clever leveraging of the “#” hashtags, will double your listenership within 3 months. (I’ll buy a mug if I’m wrong!) I just checked; Twitter has hashtags like #phenomenology, #heidegger, #camus, etc. It’s just a thought – you guys perform a great and rare service, and I want to see your project succeed!
#6 by Wes Alwan on March 5th, 2010
Hi Daniel,
Thanks very much — I think Mark has been looking into this but I’m not sure how far we’ve gotten; and the hash tags are good advice. If it works we’ll buy you the mug!
Wes
#7 by Greg Wilson on March 6th, 2010
Gentlemen,
This is just a quick note to thank you for creating your podcast. Your conversations bring me a much richer understanding, humor and practical application to what have been otherwise difficult to interpret subjects.
I trust that future conversations will include Russell, Popper and Sartre among others. Please keep it going and know your efforts are truly appreciated.
Greg Wilson
Sarasota, FL
#8 by Wes Alwan on March 7th, 2010
Thanks very much Greg!
#9 by Linda OReilly on March 18th, 2010
I was pretty sure that I’d died and gone to heaven when I found your p-casts.
Substantial, humorous, up to date.
Bless your hearts,
Linda
Tacoma, WA
#10 by Wes Alwan on March 18th, 2010
Thanks Linda — much appreciated!
#11 by Kathleen Ryan on April 24th, 2010
I started listening to your podcasts with a predisposition to hate them, to think you’d tend to go off in unnecessarily trivial directions (like the phil. classes I’m taking now at a graduate level). Esp. when I noted how long they were. Also thought I’d hate 3 potentially “a-hole” guys shooting off their mouths as though they owned the world (also similar to my phil. classes). Was I dead wrong! You guys are very substantive, and really try to make things clear and comprehensible, even/esp. as you try to unwrap your disagreements. PLUS: you all sound like really wonderful people (how little I know; I recognize the problem here
)))). So my complements to you. Plan to listen to everything you’ve got now, instead of just picking and choosing what is coincidentally related to my grad school course plan. Many thanks to your making life (though not necessarily MINE!! 
)) ) worth examining.
#12 by Seth Paskin on April 24th, 2010
Thanks Kathleen! I won’t try and read into your ‘predisposition to hate’ based on your current phil. classes but suspect I understand where you are coming from. In any case I am glad you find us substantive, clear and suspect we are ‘wonderful’.
I won’t disabuse you of any of those views – but check back in after a couple more episodes and let us know. Also, let us know topics you might be interested to have us address and share where/what you are studying, if you care to.
–seth
#13 by Wes Alwan on April 26th, 2010
Kathleen, that’s a great compliment — I love the redemption of going from asshole to wonderful in a few minutes! Like Seth, I hope other episodes don’t disappoint.
#14 by Jonathan on May 10th, 2010
Let me begin by saying that I have almost actively avoided philosophy in my academic exploits. However, as I get older (26) I am seeing that, especially in political science, a good philosophy foundation is imperative. I cycled through so many dry and academic podcasts, articles, journals, and videos until I stumbled upon your podcast on open culture. I cannot thank you guys enough for finally giving me a good launching pad. I love the fact that I do not agree with any of you all the time and I never disagree with anyone all the time. As my first comment, hopefully not my last, I just wanted to ask Seth about what exactly he does with his non-profit? I have been bouncing around trying to find my direction and am currently disgusted by how our system of higher learning is set up. I have been recently reading a lot about mass incarceration and the issues surrounding it, including of course getting ex-prisoners adjusted back into society. I was hoping maybe Seth could help explain a little about his work, it sounds very interesting. I also want to say that sometime soon, after reading some Peter Singer, I will surely comment on the failure of current aid strategies because I think you guys missed a few points on the limitations and successes that could come from global initiatives. Thank you guys again and I hope that I can jump in an contribute to the discussion even as a mere novice.
#15 by Seth Paskin on May 11th, 2010
Jonathan–
I’ll give you the short answer here – we can correspond privately if you’d like to dig deeper. The organization I work with is Crime Prevention Institute (www.cpiaustin.org), which provides case management and transitional services to offenders in the state jail near Austin and a women’s prison about 2 hours away.
The bulk of our clients are the men, so I’ll focus on them. The type of crime committed determines where offenders are housed. The state jail typically houses guys who commit non-violent drug and property crimes and are habitual repeat offenders. These are the hardest guys to work with, caught in the proverbial ‘cycle of crime’.
Ironically, in addition to having no systemic pre-release treatment to try and rehabilitate them, Texas also does not provide post-release help to these offenders. In other words, there is no ‘parole’ program for these guys – when their 6 month to 2 year sentences are up, if no one comes to get them, they are simply bussed downtown and dropped off.
Many have no state issued ID, no family or no way to contact them, no money and only the clothes on their back. It’s not hard to see that many easily fall back into the patterns of behavior that got them arrested in the first place (drug use, theft), perhaps some of them intentionally.
Our organization attempts to break into the cycle by working with the offenders directly, 1×1, starting up to 6 months prior to their release. Clients are self-selecting as there is no court or jail mandated requirement to join our program. We help them to examine behaviors and past experiences, understand the environmental and psychological triggers that cause their behavior, teach them how to do things like fill out a job application and take an interview and, when released, get them transitional housing, clothing, ID and help them find a job.
Employment is the #1 counter-indicator for recidivism, so our post-release program is focused on the guys getting jobs and keeping them. We provide financial ‘bonuses’ at certain milestones if they can get and keep a job. CPI was originally founded specifically for this purpose.
In any case, that’s a thumbnail sketch. If you’d like to explore further, let me know.
–seth
#16 by Fernando Rossello on July 30th, 2010
Dear Mark, Seth and Wes,
My name is Fernando Rossello. I am a PhD student and I live in Mlebourne, Australia.
Thank you all for the podcast and information posted within, I really enjoy it and find it entertaining and clarifying.
I do not know whether this is the right place to write what follows and I am sorry if it is not.
I am a about to submit my PhD thesis in plant molecular biology and, from the 2nd. year of my PhD, I realised that I am not enjoying what I am doing at all and do not see myself working in this field in the future.
I have always been interested in Philosophy and I have been reading general introductory books, plus some epistemology, since I was an undergraduate.
My question/s is/are whether you think there is a chance for me to start/do Philosophy? Do I need another PhD? Is there any chance to start even though I come from a completely different background?
Thanks in advance.
Kind regards,
Fernando.
#17 by Mark Linsenmayer on July 31st, 2010
Hi, Fernando. Thanks for the kind words.
Re. your dilemma, my personal advice would be to (of course) finish your current PhD since you’re that far already (congratulations!), get some kind of non-academic job that uses the skills you’ve acquired, and take at least a year or two in that to see how much you miss academia and to build up some cash, which philosophy will not get you in any case. There are certainly some philosophy-related jobs like Dylan Casey’s at St. John’s that don’t require a philosophy degree, i.e. he has a particle physics PhD and worked in that for a couple of years, but I expect they are few and far between.
So, get a livable life using these livable skills you’ve already learned, then use that as a foundation for learning more philosophy, whether that means taking classes or learning more on your own or whatever. Yes, I imagine that getting a PhD in philosophy would require mostly starting over as far as your academic credits are concerned, though maybe you could chop a year off or something, but that’s a question for your guidance counselor. As a PhD, I also imagine that you should be able to get into a philosophy program, and likely you could gain some philosophy credits at your current institution that would help… heck, if it’s only a matter of another year or two for a M.A. and you can afford the time and expense, check with your administration there if you can jump right in and earn that.
Good luck!
#18 by Fernando Rossello on July 31st, 2010
Thanks for your advice and enthusiasm Mark. I really, really appreciate them. Sometimes I am kind of lost and find it hard to hear sensible arguments.
Thanks again.
Fernando.
#19 by Wes Alwan on August 2nd, 2010
Fernando — I say go for it. You’ll need another degree if you want to teach it at the college level, although as Mark points out there are exceptions such as St. John’s. But I think that those degrees would make a great combination — and there are lots of departments who will be interested in someone with a doctorate in biology.
#20 by Fernando Rossello on August 2nd, 2010
Thanks Wes! I’ll start exploring these options while I finish my writing up. I have less than two months till my submission deadline (lots of fun).
I really appreciate all your suggestions.
Fernando.
#21 by Simon on September 2nd, 2010
Hello guys!
I’ve listen to the first episode but I think you guys may have influenced my future and career position. Indeed, Im 18 and became a philosophy fan last year. Like you, I believed philosophy was the base of every science and that I would be a better person. Slowly, I have gained a sort of intellectual arrogance. I was really interested to study philosophy in university. By listening to this podcast, I felt angry at first. Suddenly, I discovered that a life over-examined wasnt really worth it. I lost my passion…in 40 min. Is it true? Is there really no money to be made? Should philosophy be partially part of my life instead of becoming one? I feel worthless…(sry I know this is not a therapy)