Advertise on podcast: American Socrates

Send us Fan Mail In this episode we explore the mechanics of Kant's moral system. From a description of duty to the application of imperatives including the categorical imperative, how is Kant Deontology supposed to offer us moral guidance.  Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail What makes an action morally good: What actually happened, or what you meant to do? This episode opens a study of Kantian ethics by making the positive case for intention as the foundation of moral evaluation. Aristotle argued that intention reveals character more accurately than action ever can; the same deed can flow from generosity, vanity, or guilt, and only the intention tells you which you're dealing with. Kant went further: the good will is the only thing in the world that is good without qualification, and an action done from duty has full moral worth even when it fails, while an action that produces excellent results through luck or self-interest has none. The law agrees: the entire distinction between murder and manslaughter rests on what was in the killer's mind, not what ended up on the floor. But there is a complication: we are remarkably bad at knowing our own intentions. Kant himself admitted we can never be certain our apparently dutiful actions aren't secretly driven by self-love. If intention is what matters morally, then honest self-examination isn't optional. It's the whole game. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail Is consequentialism, the idea that what makes an action right or wrong is entirely its consequences, the right framework for morality at all? This episode examines three structural failures that can't be fixed: moral luck, the doing/allowing collapse, and the license for atrocity. Consequentialism captures real moral truths, but it fails as a complete moral theory. And the alternative, a morality grounded not in outcomes but in the dignity of persons, might be where the cure begins. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail This episode of American Socrates deals with the trolley problem, drone strikes, COVID triage, and more to press the objection against utilitarian ethics: that it licenses using innocent people as instruments whenever the arithmetic favors it, with no principled basis for refusal. We also look at Bernard Williams's integrity objection that goes deeper still: a moral theory that requires you to always override your deepest commitments when the calculation demands it doesn't produce better moral agents. It produces people alienated from their own values. An episode of objections, each one more serious than the last. All pointing to the same conclusion: something is missing from the utilitarian account, and what is missing looks like the dignity of the individual person. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail If pleasure is all that matters, a contented pig lives better than a struggling philosopher — and you should plug into a machine that gives you perfect simulated happiness for the rest of your life. Most people find both conclusions obviously wrong. This episode of American Socrates asks why. It works through Mill's famous quality distinction — his argument that it is better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied, and why that argument quietly breaks the utilitarian framework he was trying to defend. Then it introduces Robert Nozick's experience machine: the thought experiment that has haunted philosophy for fifty years, and that reveals what we actually care about when we say we want a good life. Spoiler: it isn't just pleasure. And the gap between what we want and what utilitarianism measures is exactly where its most serious problems live. Image: Gustav Klimt, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail You've been living under utilitarian ethics your whole life, even if you didn't know it had a name. This episode of American Socrates introduces Jeremy Bentham's felicific calculus: the system that measures pleasure and pain across populations and chooses the action that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Then it shows what that system looks like in the real world. Ford calculated that your life was worth $200K and decided your life wasn't worth as much as their profits. Federal regulators currently value your life at $11 million for cost-benefit analysis. The NHS decides which treatments to fund based on how much a year of your life is worth in quality-adjusted terms. Bentham's calculus isn't a museum piece; it's the operating system of the modern capitalist society. And John Stuart Mill, his most important successor, tried to fix its most glaring problem and ended up leaning on Aristotle without quite admitting it. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail What does it actually mean to be happy — and is happiness even the right thing to be measuring? This episode of American Socrates traces the philosophical history of happiness from Aristotle's eudaimonia to Epicurus's radical simplicity to the birth of utilitarian ethics. Along the way, it corrects one of philosophy's most stubborn misrepresentations: Epicurus was not a hedonist in the vulgar sense. He ate bread and water, feared almost nothing, and argued that most human misery is self-generated by desires we were taught to have and don't actually need. Then it asks the question that opens the next four episodes: when Jeremy Bentham decided to measure happiness and maximize it across entire populations, what got left out — and what did that omission cost? Image: Leonardo da Vinci, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail Do you need to believe in God to be a good person? Most people have a gut answer to that question. This episode of American Socrates asks what happens when you actually examine it. First, we examine what history says about it. Then we examine the science, which is more complicated than either side admits. Third, we look at Kant, who built the most rigorous secular ethics, and Hegel, who pointed out a serious hole at its center. And finally, we look at Iris Murdoch, the philosopher and novelist who gave what might be the best answer so far. The need for something real and demanding outside yourself. Something you didn't author and can't dismiss. Be that God or something else. Image: Ten Commandments of Moses by Anton Losenko Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail Have you ever looked at the suffering of an innocent person — a sick child, someone who never had a chance — and thought: no loving God would allow this? You're not alone. Dostoevsky's Ivan Karamazov asked the same question in 1880 and has never been answered. This episode of American Socrates walks through the problem of evil and asks what Kierkegaard's leap of faith actually costs, and ends where Dostoevsky ends: not with an argument, but with a gesture. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail Can a serious, thinking person believe in God? William James says yes — and has a rigorous philosophical argument for why. Bertrand Russell says the evidence isn't there — and has an equally rigorous argument for that. This episode of American Socrates walks through both cases without flinching and without taking sides. But here's what might surprise you: these two agree on more than you'd think. Neither of them has any use for the faith a schoolboy once defined as 'believing something you know ain't true.' The real debate is about what honest belief looks like when the evidence runs out. And that's a question worth sitting with, wherever you land. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail In 1896, William Jennings Bryan invoked the crucifixion to defend working people from the gold standard. Today, prosperity gospel preachers invoke Jesus to extract money from working people and live in mansions. Same religion. Opposite directions. This episode of American Socrates explores how American Christianity got to something as seemingly anti-Christian as the prosperity gospel and poses the question: if Christianity is judged by the standard of the Sermon on the Mount, how much of what calls itself Christian in American public life today actually qualifies? Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail This episode of American Socrates asks what Christianity actually teaches — from the Sermon on the Mount to the Jesus/Paul distinction and poses the question the tradition itself demands: if blessed are the poor is the standard, how much of what calls itself Christian in American public life actually qualifies? Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail Most Americans already live a Confucian ethics — they just don't know it. If you define yourself by your roles as a parent, child, friend, or worker, if your deepest moral instinct is about loyalty and not letting people down, Confucius gave that instinct a name 2,500 years ago. This episode of American Socrates unpacks what he actually taught: a relational ethics built not on rules or divine commands, but on the integrity you bring to every relationship in your life. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail A 2,500-year-old prince walked away from everything — and what he found still cuts to the heart of why modern life feels so hollow. This episode of American Socrates breaks down Buddhist ethics for non-Buddhists: the Four Noble Truths, the Eightfold Path, and why the Buddha's diagnosis of human suffering is one of the most practically useful ideas in the history of philosophy. No incense required. Support the show Question Everything!

Send us Fan Mail After six episodes exploring Aristotle's ethics — eudaimonia, teleology, the golden mean, and the politics of the good life — we turn to the thinker who took that framework and transformed it into the philosophical backbone of Western Christianity: Saint Thomas Aquinas. The 13th-century Dominican friar didn't just borrow Aristotle. He baptized his ideas in Catholicism, taking Aristotle's "natural order" and reframed it as God's design; a creation overflowing with meaning, moral law, and divine purpose baked into the structure of reality itself. This episode isn't really about religion. It's about power. Because Aquinas's natural law idea has traveled through centuries of Catholic doctrine, into modern conservative political philosophy, and ultimately into the reasoning behind some of the most consequential Supreme Court decisions of our time, including the Dobbs decision. Who gets to define what's "natural"? Who benefits when a specific version of natural law becomes the law of the land? That's what we need to find out. Support the show Question Everything!