Tag Archives: Philosophy

The Film I Couldn’t Stop Thinking About

Have you ever watched a film and then begged others around you to watch it just because you couldn’t wait to talk about it?

That’s exactly how I felt about Ex Machina, the 2014 sci-fi psychological thriller, directed by Alex Garland.  A wealth of ideas bloomed in this movie, and I found myself thinking about its implications for quite some time.

Quite fortuitously I came across a podcast called Two Philosophers Drink Beer & Discuss Film.  The hosts, Dr. Gregory Jackson and Dr. Daniel Murphy, do an amazing job employing philosophical ideas to dissect themes in movies.  I invited them to be on Good Is In The Details to lend their expertise for an episode on Ex Machina.  We went over notions of beauty, consciousness, and the ethical questions relating to AI.  For anyone who enjoys philosophy and film this’ll be a treat.  I also highly recommend this for anyone teaching philosophy.  This episode highlights how working out the ideas of a film can bring greater understanding of key philosophical theories.

Click here for iTunes.  Click here for Spotify.

Feel free to leave comments here or get in touch on IG: @GoodIsInTheDetailsPod

 


What We Can Learn From Batman

I’ve often invited students in my Philosophy classes to use our course material to analyze something from film and/or pop culture.  This has yielded thoughtful term papers and course discussions.

It was a delight to have Professor Mark D. White on the podcast to talk about his book The Ethics of Batman.  In his work he explores the moral dilemmas Batman faces such as, can Batman be happy?, should he kill the Joker?, and does his extraordinary wealth hinder his moral position?

This episode was a lot of fun and brought about a nice intellectual inquiry into the complications of this superhero.  Feel free to leave feedback here or get in touch GoodIsInTheDetailsPod@gmail.com

 


Literature as Reflection

The latest podcast episode was something quite special.  It was a conversation with a lawyer, an activist, a philosopher, and an English teacher.  The topic flowed from the role of race and culture in the classroom, to the dynamics of Los Angeles, to the way in which literature ushers in discussions about society.

Do you have a favorite dystopian novel?  We take a look at how that genre in particular allows for reflection.  We then reviewed part 1 of The Raffle, by Randy Smith.  I highly recommend this read, and after listening to the show you’ll want a copy.  Feel free to leave your thoughts here in the comment section or email GoodIsInTheDetailsPod@gmail.com

It was a joy to be part of this, to produce it, and to now have the opportunity to share it.  For my fellow educators and bookworms, I think you’ll find a lot here.

 


On Being Explicit

Can a discussion about biological functions be deemed explicit? If I were to explain the workings of your lungs, for instance, would I need to be on guard and warn you that this  may not be appropriate?  How about circulation?  How about telling you the intricacies of an eardrum?

For the past two years I’ve been teaching a course called Philosophy of Sex and Love (you can click on my course readings tab for more information).  In researching for the class and preparing sub-topics one area has stood out to me as being a central issue worth pursuing underscoring assumptions: sex education.

Unlike the aforementioned functions of the body, the reproductive system is either not discussed or partially mentioned or fraught with misinformation.  It is tied to moral presuppositions and caution laced with notions of shame.  Proper names like vagina, vulva, and clitoris (gasp!) are treated like Lord Voldemort.

Silence around these terms are rooted in a failure to see the woman’s body (or people with vaginas) as important.  She is demoted due to her biological reality (thought to be merely a vessel) and that demotion is apparent when a deficit of basic language exists in education.  A lack of knowledge here has concrete consequences for both boys and girls.  It hinders honest conversations about intimacy, health, and most significantly, exposes one to harm if one cannot even understand this part of the body.

This weighed on me as I uploaded my latest podcast episode dedicated to a discussion about reproductive health, and because we use terms like “vagina” I found myself marking the episode “Explicit.”  That in and of itself is problematic.  There is nothing derogatory or pornographic in the conversation.  Yet, providing a platform to learn about how the reproductive system functions needed to be presented with a warning.

The vagina, vulva, and clitoris should not be a mystery.  Employing proper education reduces abuse, unsatisfying or painful sexual experience, and a tool for recognizing if a health problem exists.  This is not an immoral dialogue and I am pained to treat it as such by adding “E” next to the conversation.

Historically the woman’s body is simply meant for carrying a child.  Indeed that essentially described her worth.  How this functions or how her body responds to sex and pleasure (or desires for pleasure) is not part of the conversation.  By not considering this she becomes object.

I know what you’re thinking…you want to hear the episode, right?  I won’t keep you in suspense. Click below for the show on iTunes.

Good Is In The Details episode 35: “Naming Parts, Reproductive Health, and Sex Positive”

 


Love on the Mind

Welcome to 2020!  How are you beginning the New Year?

Currently reading…

IMG_2148

 

Latest podcasting…Episode “This is your Brain on Love,” an interview with neuropsychologist Dr. Jena Margalit Kravitz.

 

Getting ready to welcome a baby girl 🙂

919CC449-5A39-4FCA-9473-5F7D87272382


Improbable logic

I have no idea how this impeachment will unfold, but I have noticed conservative pundits and politicians banking on a few things that, regardless of the problematic logic, just might work in their favor.

  1. Most Americans don’t know where Ukraine is on a map. This was spouted by Fox Five host Jesse Waters. While it is an irrelevant claim, it might resonate with viewers and voters.
  2. Quid Pro Quo is done all the time. This is true; however, context matters. If I were to say: “I was driving and people do that all the time! Can you believe I was stopped?” And if one were to ask why I was stopped and I responded that I ran a red light, well, that information alters the banality of the notion that driving is done all the time. Moreover, to refer to point number 1, if I were to say it happened in Sierra Madre and no one knows where that is on a map, it would be irrelevant.
  3. The Democrats have wanted Trump out of office since the beginning. This is true. Again, it does not follow that because it is true the president did nothing wrong. They are two different claims.
  4. This is Russia hoax all over again. They (Right) are counting on people not having read or being familiar with the Mueller Report. And it might work to create this narrative. Anyone who had read the report (which is available for all and free of charge) would know that there were about 10 examples of obstruction and that Mueller said the president was not exonerated. In addition, the Department of Justice rules state that a sitting president cannot be indicted. There were over 30 indictments as a result of the investigation. Hardly a “hoax.”
  5. The Ukraine president did not know of a problem. This assumes that the president of Ukraine is on equal footing with the president of the United States. They (Right) expect viewers/voters to not know the history of Ukraine or this vulnerable and new presidency. On another note, being unaware of being a victim of a crime does not mean a crime did not happen. This is how pickpockets function.
  6. The notion of expertise is reduced to “someone’s opinion.” (Note Senator Kennedy of Fox News Sunday.) I suggest you read the book “The Death of Expertise: The Campaign Against Established Knowledge and Why It Matters,” by Tom Nichols. The weight of opinion hinges on one’s background and experience. They (Right) are hoping people assume all opinions are equal.
  7. This is a coup! They (Right) expect this language to not be checked. There is a difference between a violent overthrow (coup) and an impeachment (democratic process).
  8. The Whistleblower and people who have testified are “Never-Trumpers.” Even if that were true, and it could be, it does not follow the president did nothing wrong. Back to my running a red light example: if I were to say the officer writing my ticket hated his philosophy class, would that mean I shouldn’t get the ticket?
  9. Trump has allowed for more aid to Ukraine than Obama. Irrelevant to the crime.
  10. Trump was after corruption! To begin, Trump’s history in no way reflects an interest in corruption. Trump University, Foundation, lawyer and campaign manager in prison, his current lawyer might be in serious criminal trouble…the list goes on. Back to my red light example: “But officer, I was chasing the car in front of me and I think the person is someone who should be investigated…I heard.” Still irrelevant. If asked why I didn’t notify law enforcement of my suspicion (because, after all isn’t that who should be doing the chasing?) and I responded, “They’re all corrupt!” it would not mean I had not run the red light. This is essentially Trump’s view of Hunter Biden (the car in front of me) and the FBI (the people who should be doing the chasing). They (Right) are hoping no one notices the recycled campaign tactic of calling the political opponent corrupt, crooked, and someone who should be in jail.

Good Is In The Details

I have started up a new podcast! Conversations with experts!

Episode 1 is an interview with Stephen Elliott on the art of writing.

Episode 2 explores the significance and intricacies of infrastructure.

Episode 3 was a lovely conversation with Beauvoirian scholar, Professor Margaret Simons.

IG: Goodisinthedetailspod


On Love, Same-sex Relationships, and Christianity

Drinking with Socrates podcast featured an interview with Reverend Elizabeth McQuitty! Click here for SoundCloud. We’re also on iTunes.

We discuss faith, love, and tackle the question on the compatibility of same-sex relationships in the context of religion.  This was an absolute delight to record and I hope you enjoy the show!

IMG_0741IMG_0750Instagram: @gdol10 @mikeracanelli @Socratespod


A Homework Assignment

For my Philosophy 340 class, Current Debates in Sexuality, (also sometimes called Philosophy of Sex and Love), I gave the following assignment:

Find an article that has been written in the last two weeks with a reference/discussion about sexual assault.  Bring this to class.  I clarified that they needn’t agree with the article because the point was to examine how sexual assault is being presented in media.

Come class time the students had their articles, and I put them into groups of 3 and 4 to share with each other the content of the articles.  The room immediately roared to life with their exchanges.

It turned out to be a good exercise.  In terms of teaching methodology I enjoy when textbook theory can be highlighted and demonstrated in either fiction/film or current events. I don’t want my students to merely memorize an argument or a few definitions for the semester.  Engagement and discussion is key to making material from courses one’s own.

I must confess, I was surprised that out of 40 students no one brought the same article.

IMG_0585

 


Learning As I Go…

It all began with a simple “Yes” I typed in response to an email from the chair of the Philosophy Department.

I was in the throes of massive coffee consumption, grading exams, and preparing to give a talk at a conference in Chicago, and so, I admit, I didn’t entirely grasp what I was saying “Yes” to.

It turns out, I had agreed to take on another professor’s class: Philosophy of Sex. Well, okay then. I requested the same textbook to be ordered for the syllabus. No, I hadn’t read it.

My background is in Existentialism and Moral Theory. My course load is comprised of classes in that framework. To say Philosophy of Sex was outside of my comfort zone and area of expertise would be woefully understated.

Including my graduate years, I’ve been teaching for about…never mind. Let’s just say Friends was still running and we were in suspense about Ross and Rachel.

In all of my years of teaching I’ve entered the classroom with the echo of something my high school math teacher once stated: “It’s my job to make sure you know more when you leave this room than when you entered.” I’ve held myself to this standard every day I am with my students.

Until…

Taking on this Philosophy of Sex course had me stumbling, blushing, and a type of tired no amount of caffeine could fix. Some topics covered in the textbook were things I had no desire to discuss, like defining the language/terms of sex as opposed to oral sex, are there sexual duties, sodomy laws, BDSM, and all things Freud, like penis envy (that absurd-only-a-man-would-think-that-idea).

I finished every class with a heavy heart as I walked to my car feeling that I hadn’t ensured my students an education or, as my math teacher had put it, knowing more when they exited my classroom. And, for the first time, a student left a scathing review of me online calling me “awful.” I know I shouldn’t have cared about that, but I did.

I was literally going over the chapters of the textbook at the same pace as the students, coming into class to discuss what we’d all just read for the first time. It was a humbling experience, and one that reminded me of a truth I’ve always known but only felt now in a profound way; namely, to teach, in part, is to embrace also being a student. That is, teaching does not the mark the end of one’s education, it’s couched in the continuing process of it.

Fortunately, I recruited my friend, the fabulous writer Stephen Elliott, to give a guest lecture on his piece from The New York Times “Three Men and a Woman.” Class lecture on kink covered!

I also managed to get the incredibly interesting writer Antonia Crane (author of Spent: A Memoir) to speak on the politics of sex work. She was engaging and brought a great energy to the class (for which I am oh so grateful!).  I got to be present, take a seat, and learn right along with my students.

It is with little irony that throughout the academic term I was also starting a writing project, a book all about the dynamics of teaching. I’ve been toiling with an outline framing the various angles of what teaching means and how we learn. For this project I’ve been conducting interviews to include in this book.

So, for the last few weeks I’ve either been in the classroom wondering how to manage actual teaching conundrums or running about meeting people to gather their wisdom on teaching. I’ve kept coffee shops around me in business.

With every meeting, much to my delight, I was reminded of how to view my own plight in teaching a class I found challenging.

Here are some nuggets of wisdom from my interviews:

I traveled to Chicago to meet with two of my friends from grad school, Dan Hutmacher and Dr. Drew Dalton. Both are brilliant and my meetings with them not only gave me food for thought, but had the added bonus of transporting me to memories of our grad school days in Leuven. Dan has undergone quite a journey from academic studies, to the corporate world, to recovering with and dealing with Crohn’s. He’s devoted much time to teaching others about this disease. He told me he’d been teased in the corporate world for spending his studies in Philosophy. But, he said, when your body is trying to kill you and you’re in the hospital, philosophy is what saves you. He reminisced on the writings of Levinas. After much surgery and recovery, he’s devoted time to creating a blog teaching others about Crohn’s.

Drew spoke much about his love of being in the classroom as we walked all over downtown Chicago.  In the throes of conversation he’d point to this place and that offering a brief history.  He’s Yelp personified.  He proposed that the subject “philosophy of teaching” be inverted to “teaching as an act of philosophy.” He said, “In the classroom that’s where philosophy is happening.”

At a café in Atwater Village I met my friend Chris McKenna, a charming actor with an infectious smile. Seriously, one can’t help but smile around him. Or look up. He’s six foot three. I asked him how he continues to learn his craft. He told me he reviews his performances, studies them, and thinks of how to improve. In other words, Chris learns, in part, by self-reflection and a desire to be better.

In my hometown Pasadena, my friend Patil, a teacher at an Armenian high school, smiled as we spoke over coffee when she talked about her love for her students. She cares for them and invests in them. As a mother, she explained, I treat them how I’d want teachers to be for my daughters. This reminded me that teaching is not merely a job, it’s a relation to others.

One evening in Orange County, while enjoying sushi with my friend and roommate from college, Jennifer Arnoldt, I asked her what people should know about going into corporate America. She answered, that no one knows what they’re doing. But, she continued, you go to work and figure it out. Well, I certainly needed to hear that!

On Melrose in West Hollywood, and a bottle of wine into the interview, I asked my friend Mike Racanelli (a man of several creative feats: producing, writing, acting), what inspires you? He leaned back, folded his arms and said, that’s a good question. Thank you, I replied. Hmmm…what inspires me?, he halfway mumbled. Everyone I meet, he said. You’re welcome, I said. Mike clued me in on the importance of finding the interesting and the possibilities to flourish with every encounter.

At the Cal Poly Pomona campus café I chat with Professor Tom Keith about his work making documentaries and how he decided to make films. He gave a humble smile and admitted that his first film, Generation M, was a project he never expected to get any traction. Really? I asked. It’s insightful and I’ve shown it on more than one occasion to my classes. For him, it was a way to reach out with the medium a lot of students use. You have to meet them where they are, he said. He’s now working on his fifth film. His disposition regarding teaching is one where he respects how the students learn and not just approaching teaching as the way in which he wants to deliver the material.

And, at this point, I’ve reached the end of the academic term. It was with genuine surprise a few students in the Philosophy of Sex class told me they enjoyed the course. My heart warmed with the news. Because, in all honesty, it’s about them and I want for them to learn.

I knocked on the chair of the Philosophy Department’s door. I confessed that I wasn’t sure how the class went, that I fumbled through the lectures, and I may have made of mess of things. It’s okay, he said with a shrug. Want to do it again in the fall?

“Yes.”

 

Click for My Amazon Author Page