Very Bad Wizards

Tamler Sommers is a philosopher. David Pizarro is a psychologist. Together, they spend about 90 minutes every two weeks arguing about morality, consciousness, free will, and whatever movie or book has recently gotten under their skin. The result is one of the most genuinely entertaining philosophy podcasts out there, with 331 episodes and a 4.8 star average from over 2,600 ratings on Apple. The format is loose and conversational in a way that feels earned rather than lazy. Sommers and Pizarro clearly prepare — they'll work through Plato's Euthyphro or William James's theories of consciousness with real rigor — but they also have the kind of chemistry where tangents become the best part of the episode. One moment they're debating the nature of shame from a cognitive science perspective, the next they're analyzing a Paul Thomas Anderson film. The show is marked explicit for a reason; they swear freely and aren't afraid to call an argument stupid when they think it is. What sets Very Bad Wizards apart from more buttoned-up philosophy shows is the genuine interplay between disciplines. Pizarro brings empirical research on moral psychology and neuroscience to the table, while Sommers pushes back with philosophical frameworks. Neither one just defers to the other's expertise. They disagree often and productively. Recent episodes have tackled Homer's Odyssey, Kafka and Freud, and Mircea Eliade's work on the sacred. If you've ever wished your philosophy class had more laughing and less lecturing, this is the podcast you've been missing.