In this episode we talk about Hitler's philosophers. There are three philosophers in particular which the podcast is based on. These are Martin Heidegger, Alfred Baeumler and Ernst Krieck. All three cultivated academic freedom and had developed a philosophy that fit with Nazism before Nazism came to power. Heidegger's romantic philosophy is central to our episode. Especially his hubristic idea that man can revolutionize the world spiritually. His goal was to get the German people to think anew. We link this and many of his other thoughts to cultural essentialism and the belief in politics as the distinction between friend and enemy. This ends up in a metaphysical decisionism. In such a realpolitical atmosphere, there is not much room for religious or ethical thinking.

In this episode, we ask whether AI can have a religious function. Can AI synthesize all religions into one religion, or can AI itself become the new religious authority in the world? These are just two of the questions we address. We also touch on the relationship between religion and ethics and what humans really need to be moral, and what about AI. Will it be possible for something artificial to motivate humans to do good deeds or political leaders to make wise choices? The last question is especially important because we largely know what should be done rationally, but many state leaders prioritize their own or their nation interests over the good of society as a whole. In the end, we are left with the question of what AI really is and can offer humans.

In this episode, we examine the phenomenon prophets. Much of the discussion is about understanding what a prophet is. We also touch on the question of whether there are modern prophets. After listening to our own conversation, we wonder if the prophets really have anything to say about their own position, or it is the followers who determine their status? There are no definitive answers here, but rather a multitude of different perspectives that are central to being able to gather revelation and wisdom.

This episode is about revelation. Is it only some who can reveal the truth about the divinity of the world, or is this something everyone can recognize if we open ourselves to such demention of life? How can we know this and how can we express what we know? These are some of the questions we address in this episode as an introduction to talking about prophets in the next episode.

In this episode we explore the possibility of using AI as a moral helper or even agent. Our guest on the episode is Varqa Abyaneh. The fundamental question is whether AI can make better moral choices than humans and not least whether they can practice these choices in a better way than humans can. This applies both to individuals and to what is morally best for the community. We present many important questions that touch on the connection between ethical rationality and the limits of ethical rationality and where metaphysics or faith come into play.

This episode is dedicated to Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. He was a French Jesuit, Catholic priest, scientist, paleontologist, philosopher, mystic, and teacher. The church refused to let him publish his works while he was alive, but they were published after his death. His works are unfortunately not that well known, but he has had a great influence both in art and science.

In this episode we try to bridge creation and the big bang with Brian Cranley. We get insight in his book The call of wonder, his inspiration and how he structured a book bridging the belief in a monetheisitc God, philosophical argumentation and natural science. One of the main dilemma is how to connect this notion of a God with a religous thought system and the how this phenomena is presented trough out such a system. To learn more on Brian Cranleys work, please visit: https://briancranley.com/

In this episode, we discuss different ways to argue about the relationship between religion and science. The most typical approach is to use religious premises to prove scientific facts or to use scientific premises to prove religious beliefs. Steven argues for a more circular form of argumentation, unfolding axioms that must serve as both the conclusion and the premise. A fourth way of arguing could be to explore the tacit knowledge of reality, experiencing the wonder of life and one’s own existence.