On Sunday, 9 December 2012, I broadcast a new episode of Philosophy in Action Radio, answering questions on nihilism, radical honesty, poor effort in a terrible job, and more. Greg Perkins of Objectivist Answers was the episode’s co-host.

If you missed the live broadcast, you can listen to the audio podcast any time. You’ll find the podcast on the episode’s archive page, as well as below.

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

Q&A Radio: Episode: 9 December 2012

The Whole Episode

My News of the Week: I’ve been dealing with the multiple leaks, mold, and rotting wood Chez Hsieh. I’ve also made some progress on preparing my dissertation for publication. On Wednesday, I had great interview with Dr. Doug McGuff on Strength Training Using Body by Science!

Listen or Download:

You can also download or listen to particular questions from this episode.

Question 1: Nihilism (3:56)

In this segment, I answered a question on nihilism.

What is philosophic nihilism? Some people seem to be quick to apply the label “nihilistic” to a broad range of phenomena, particularly art and ideas. So how should the term be used? Can a philosophy be very harmful and destructive without it being nihilistic?

My Answer, In Brief: Nihilism explicitly embraces misery, futility, and meaninglessness as essential to the human condition. Unlike most destructive ideologies, nihilism doesn’t present any positive vision or hope for better, and that makes it much more explicitly evil.

Listen or Download:

Tags: Ethics, Nihilism, Philosophy, Values

Relevant Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 2: Radical Honesty (18:45)

In this segment, I answered a question on radical honesty.

Should people be ‘radically honest’? Psychotherapist Brad Blanton claims that people should be “radically honest” – meaning that they should say what they think all the time. Is that a life-serving policy – or simply an excuse for rudeness? For example, if my friend is telling me a story that I don’t care to hear, should I tell her of my disinterest? Would that foster a more authentic and valuable relationship? Should I try to gently signal my disinterest? Or should I try to cultivate some interest in her story? In other words, is tact a value – or a destructive form of pretense?

My Answer, In Brief: “Radical Honesty” is not a way to practice the virtue of honesty. It’s a destructive rule requiring a person to share every stray thought or feeling – meaning that a person must be a rude, creepy bore without any privacy.

Listen or Download:

Tags: Communication, Emotions, Ethics, Honesty, Psycho-Epistemology, Relationships

Relevant Links:

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Question 3: Poor Effort in a Terrible Job (36:03)

In this segment, I answered a question on poor effort in a terrible job.

Is it wrong for a person to do less than his best at work? At work, I used to go above and beyond my basic obligations routinely. However, I was never recognized or rewarded for my superior performance. Instead, I was paid the same as those who barely functioned in their jobs. To this day, my employer uses only collective or team recognition; he does not appreciate individuals. Also, those who do poorly or make serious mistakes are not being disciplined, while those of us who work hard are given more duties. My response has been to lower my own work output. While I meet the minimum standards of my employment and still do far more than my equally paid coworkers, I am not performing nearly close to the level I could. Is that wrong of me? Should I do my best at work, even though my employer doesn’t seem to value that? Should I continue to suggest ideas for improvement – and perhaps work on them on the side, in secret, if ignored?

My Answer, In Brief: If your employer does not value your best, then you are not obliged to give it to him. Instead, do the work that you’re paid to do, and seek employment elsewhere.

Listen or Download:

Tags: Ambition, Business, Career, Character, Ethics, Productiveness, Work

To comment on this question or my answer, visit its comment thread.

Rapid Fire Questions (51:50)

In this segment, I answered questions impromptu. The questions were:

  • How to you stop exchanging presents with people who you don’t really like to give to?
  • What do you do when a friend seems to be developing signs of mental illness?
  • What is the relationship between determinism and intrinsicism, particularly religion?
  • Why does America have a government-run postal service?
  • Would someone with super sensitive but unaided hearing have greater leniency in privacy violations?
Listen or Download:

To comment on these questions or my answers, visit its comment thread.

Conclusion (1:04:09)

Thank you for joining us for this episode! If you enjoyed this episode, please contribute to contribute to our tip jar. Also, please submit and vote on questions for upcoming shows in in the question queue.

Support Philosophy in Action

Our Work
Remember, Philosophy in Action Radio is available to anyone, free of charge. That’s because our goal is to spread rational principles for real life far and wide, as we do every week to thousands of listeners. So if you enjoy and value our work, please contribute to our tip jar! We suggest $5 per episode or $20 per month, but any amount is welcome. You can send your contribution via Dwolla, PayPal, or US Mail.

Philosophy in Action

Philosophy in Action Radio broadcasts on Sunday mornings and Wednesday evenings. For information on upcoming shows, visit the Episodes on Tap.

To automatically download every new episode of Philosophy in Action, subscribe to the podcast RSS feed in your music player:

Keep in touch with Philosophy in Action:

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

Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha