David and Tamler return to the work of Richard Shweder and colleagues, focusing this time on his foundational paper "The "Big Three" of Morality (Autonomy, Community, Divinity) and the "Big Three" Explanations of Suffering. What are the various ways that people explain suffering and illness across cultures? What do we lose when we only emphasize biomedical explanations? Why can't social psychology be more like this? Plus a new Chalmers (not that one) paper argues that monogamy is impermissible. Hello ladies! <a href= "https://www.patreon.com/c/verybadwizards/membership">Join at the right Patreon tier and vote on an episode topic!</a> [patreon.com] Chalmers, H. (2019). <a href= "https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/harry-chalmers-is-monogamy-morally-permissiblee"> Is monogamy morally permissible?.</a> The Journal of Value Inquiry, 53(2), 225-241. Harry Chalmers' <a href= "https://noeticpathways.substack.com/p/monogamy-moorean-shifting-and-commonsense"> Substack post on Monogamy </a> Shweder, R. A., Much, N. C., Mahapatra, M., & Park, L. (1997). <a href= "s/Shweder-Much-Mahapatra-Park-1997.pdf" target="_blank" rel= "noopener">The "big three" of morality (autonomy, community, and divinity) and the "big three" explanations of suffering.</a> In A. Brandt & P. Rozin (Eds.), Morality and health (pp. 119–169). Routledge.

Podurama

Home

Trending

Personal

Your Podcasts

New Episodes

My Files

Favourite Episodes

Tags (Folders)

Recently Played

Bookmarks

Followed Playlists

Episode 329: Why We Suffer

Very Bad Wizards

AI Chapters

AI Insights

Reviews