Modern Wisdom #1012: Is Being Smart Worth the Depression?

Guests: Alex O’Connor (@CosmicSkeptic), Joe Folley (philosophy educator)
Host: Chris Williamson
Date: October 27, 2025

Episode Overview

This thought-provoking episode brings together Alex O’Connor and Joe Folley for an in-depth discussion on the practical value—and potential downsides—of being "smart" or philosophically informed. Drawing from ancient and modern philosophy, nihilism, pessimism, consciousness, meta-ethics, and the social responsibility of thinkers, the trio examines whether a deep engagement with life's hardest questions brings wisdom and well-being, or, conversely, leads to confusion or depression. With wit and candor, they dive into dark territory (nihilism, anti-natalism, the “incest question”) and surface-level debates, always circling back to the role of philosophy in everyday life.

Key Themes & Discussions

1. Philosophy: Then & Now

• Ancient vs. Modern Philosophy
  • Philosophy was originally more practical, oriented around “how to live a good life” (00:07). In antiquity, ethical and metaphysical theories were deeply intertwined (e.g., Stoicism, Epicureanism).
  • Joe:

    “A lot of ancient philosophy is incredibly practical. Especially one of the paramount questions that's asked by almost every ancient philosopher is how to live a good life.” (01:20)

• Loss of Metaphysical Foundations
  • Modern pop philosophy often divorces ancient ethics from their metaphysical groundwork, turning them into selectable “vibes” rather than robust, integrated systems.
  • Alex:

    “If all you have are the ethical commitments now, that there isn't really a way to make progress, because ethics is kind of conjectural if it doesn't have a metaphysical grounding.” (03:20)

• On Progress
  • Progress in philosophy is not cumulative like science but needs rediscovery each generation:
  • Alex:

    “You go from ignorance to knowledge over the course of one generation, and everybody has to sort of start afresh.” (06:41)

Timestamps:

• Practicality of ancient philosophy: 00:07–04:00
• Modern philosophy’s “intellectual masturbation”: 06:04–07:51

2. Dark Sides: Nihilism, Pessimism, Depression

• Nihilism & Suffering
  • Nihilism doesn’t necessitate misery, but grappling with purposelessness can be both liberating and crushing.
  • Alex:

    “Nihilism...just means there's sort of no purpose to it all… you could just as easily be having a wonderful time and think there is no rhyme or reason to this.” (22:46)

• Pessimistic Philosophers
  • Emile Cioran, Schopenhauer, and anti-natalists (e.g., David Benatar) are invoked as “darkest” philosophers, with Cioran described as both bleak and hilariously lighthearted.
  • Alex (on Cioran):

    “He occasionally just… breaks through into a kind of natural lightheartedness that I think is absolutely amazing.” (24:45–25:15)

• Anti-Natalism
  • Benatar’s argument: it’s better never to have been born, suffering outweighs pleasure, and procreation is immoral.
  • Alex:

    “For someone who doesn't exist, them not experiencing pleasure is not bad, but them not experiencing suffering is good.” (36:13)

• Can Philosophy Make You Depressed?
  • The podcast repeatedly circles back to whether increased philosophical insight leads to despair, or instead provides comfort and meaning.

Timestamps:

• Nihilism: 22:39–23:52
• Pessimists and anti-natalism: 24:03–37:00
• Benatar's asymmetry argument: 33:41–36:13

3. Reappraising Ancient Philosophers & Forgotten Traditions

• Beyond Stoicism
  • Rarely-discussed schools and metaphysical ideas, e.g., the four causes in Aristotle’s metaphysics (formal, material, efficient, final) and the legacy of Pre-Socratic thinkers.
  • Alex:

    “Aristotle’s… Nicomachean Ethics is… the most useful book of philosophy for anyone to read. Even after over 2000 years.” (15:52)

• Virtue & Friendship
  • Aristotle’s theory of friendship and the “golden mean” are lauded as vital but neglected sources of wisdom.
  • Joe:

    “Aristotle thinks that having a group of friends… is… halfway to the good life, effectively is an insight that we could really use.” (19:06–20:10)

Timestamps:

• Underrated ancient ideas: 12:15–15:52
• Friendship and virtue: 15:52–21:09

4. Philosophy of Mind & Panpsychism

• Consciousness as Fundamental
  • The discussion covers the “combination problem” for panpsychism (how simple consciousnesses combine into unified minds), split-brain research, and challenges for both materialist and panpsychist accounts.
  • Alex:

    “People are beginning to realize that consciousness is, so to speak, fundamental… Panpsychism is growing in popularity...” (57:54)

• Split-Brain Patients
  • Empirical findings challenge the unity of consciousness, with implications for both the nature of self and the plausibility of emergent vs. fundamental consciousness.
• Social Metaphors and the ‘China Brain’ Experiment
  • Thought experiments such as the "China brain"—millions acting as neurons—probe the boundaries between group behavior and genuine consciousness.

Timestamps:

• Panpsychism explained: 57:54–65:43
• Split brain and unity problems: 71:17–78:32
• Group consciousness and thought experiments: 77:25–80:08

5. Meta-Ethics & Emotivism

• Emotivist Meta-Ethics
  • Moral statements as emotional expressions, not statements of fact; right and wrong as “vibes” (sometimes literally: “Boo murder!”).
  • Alex:

    “Ethical emotivism is not a reporting of your emotional state. It is the expression of the emotion itself.” (84:07)

• Incest Taboo as Emotivist Evidence
  • The near-universal sense of disgust at incest, even absent negative consequences, is presented as strong evidence for an emotivist account of morality.
  • Chris:

    “Everybody's larping as an emotivist when it comes to the incest question.” (106:28)

• Objections & Social Constraints
  • The group notes that subjectivity in emotivism doesn’t equate to moral chaos, as evolutionary and cultural factors create strong constraints.
  • Joe:

    “It doesn't follow...that you can in fact find anything beautiful. You just try ... you'll find you can't." (89:53)

Timestamps:

• Emotivism explained: 84:07–87:45
• Incest question as proof: 100:59–106:28

6. Social Responsibility of Public Philosophers (and the Information Hazard)

• Ethics of Influence
  • Both Alex and Joe reflect on the duty of philosophical communicators, emphasizing the need for humility, transparency, and the willingness to admit fallibility.
  • Joe:

    “I think it's important to say that...this is just a smattering of the literature, etc. … front load the flaws if they're not obvious.” (110:39–112:50)

  • Alex:

    “It does come with a kind of a duty and a responsibility that it's easy to forget about… That’s not something to just sort of piss about with.” (113:52–115:39)

• Information Hazards
  • The idea that some philosophical ideas (e.g., nihilism) might themselves be information hazards is debated, with Alex skeptical:
  • Alex:

    “Information hazards are one example ... a lot of it is just sort of sensationalist and...doesn't have a very good grounding.” (116:00)

Timestamps:

• Philosophers as influencers: 109:03–117:55

Notable Quotes

• On Modern vs. Ancient Philosophy:
  “Philosophy is eminently practical. I also think maybe this is just my own bias showing. I think that today philosophy at its best is often very practical.” – Joe (01:07)
• On Nihilism:
  “But it doesn't mean you have to have a bad time doing so… try it on, see how it fits. That's what you've got to do with all philosophies.” – Alex (22:46)
• On Reading Philosophy:
  “Just literally read what you've heard of...if you've heard Nietzsche mentioned...you're probably going to find some use in him...” – Alex (28:15)
• On Aristotle & Friendship:
  “Aristotle thinks that having a group of friends ... is ... halfway to the good life, effectively is an insight that we could really use.” – Joe (19:06)
• On Incest & Emotivism:
  “It's just gross, man. It's just. Ugh. The emotivist says, yeah, that's what's going on. Right.” – Alex (103:07)
• On Philosophers' Duty:
  “My principal responsibility is trying to do so in a way that makes sense. Like, why am I talking to people about this? There must be some application for why I'm doing it.” – Alex (116:28)
• On Planting Flags:
  “If in order to be successful in any field...I would have to plant my feet firmly in the ground and say, this is what I believe, and I don’t think that I’m wrong about it...I’d probably give up and go home. ...There’s just no way that’s ever going to be true…” – Alex (117:16)

Memorable Moments

• “China Brain” Thought Experiment:
  Could billions of people acting as neurons simulate a real mind? (77:25)
• Split-Brain Studies:
  The story about a split-brain patient acting on one hemisphere’s command and then rationalizing the action just seconds later. (71:17–74:02)
• Aristotle’s Golden Mean:
  “Virtue lies between the poles of two vices...it sounds almost like common sense when you say it out loud, but actually attempting to think in these terms can be incredibly useful.” – Joe (15:52)
• Incest, the Ultimate Emotivist Challenge:
  “The emotivist says, yeah, that's what's going on. And so the, the wrongness of incest... it's just gross, man.” – Alex (103:07)
• Duty of Philosophical Communication:
  “You need to wag your own finger in the mirror every now and again and remember that … it does come with a kind of a duty and a responsibility...” – Alex (115:04)

Timestamps for Impactful Sections

• 00:07 — Ancient vs. Modern Philosophy, Practicality
• 06:04 — Is Modern Philosophy "Intellectual Masturbation"?
• 22:39 — Nihilism and its Impact
• 24:03 — Cioran & Dark Philosophers
• 33:41 — Anti-Natalism & David Benatar
• 57:54 — Panpsychism & Consciousness
• 84:07 — Emotivism in Ethics
• 100:59 — Incest Taboo & Meta-Ethics
• 109:03 — Moral Responsibility of Philosophers

Tone & Style

• The conversation is candid, often humorous, and colloquial.
• There are honest admissions of philosophical uncertainty, playfulness with ideas, and meta-reflection on both the value and limits of philosophizing.
• The hosts and guests consistently ground philosophical concepts with contemporary and personal examples, keeping the tone accessible.

Summary Verdict

This dense, entertaining discussion weaves together ever-relevant questions: Does philosophy make life better or more difficult? Is wisdom just the ability to live with risk and doubt? Or is it only the branding of sadness—and sometimes, the clever packaging of despair?

By exploring both the “highs” (insights into virtue, friendship, and mind) and the “lows” (nihilism, pessimism, information hazards), this episode provides a panoramic tour of the philosophical life—and why, despite all its dangers, it just might be worth living.