The Thinkers' Club

(Please consider supporting our fundraiser by buying a t-shirt :) https://thethinkersclub.creator-spring.com/ )

“The patriarchy” refers to a social system in which men hold primary power, particularly in roles of political leadership, moral authority, and control over property and institutions. Historically, many societies have been patriarchal, with gender roles assigning men dominance in the public sphere and women to domestic roles. Feminist theory often critiques the patriarchy as a system that perpetuates gender inequality, limiting both women's rights and men's emotional expression. Supporters of this critique argue that patriarchal norms are still embedded in modern laws, workplace structures, and cultural expectations. However, critics argue that the concept oversimplifies social dynamics, ignores progress made in gender equality, or unfairly blames men as a group.

• How do you define "the patriarchy," and is it still a useful concept in understanding gender dynamics today?
• What are some examples—historical or current—that illustrate the presence or decline of patriarchal structures?
• To what extent do men benefit from the patriarchy, and are there ways in which they are also harmed by it?
• Can institutions (like the workplace, government, or family) be patriarchal even if individuals within them support gender equality?
• Is it possible to address gender inequality without using the concept of patriarchy?
• How have feminist movements evolved in their approach to challenging patriarchy—and have they been successful?

Jordan Peterson on Gender, Patriarchy, and the Slide Towards Tyranny https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QRQjrsFnR4

Where Did Patriarchy Come From? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LAqVPlS1Q-s

**********************************************************************************************
In addition to the main topic (above), we also provide breakout rooms at 8pm as follows:
“Applied Practical Philosophy” – philosophy and its applications
“Town Square” – politics and current events
“Conference Room” – open for anything
“The Lounge” – light social chat

(Please consider supporting our fundraiser by buying a t-shirt :) https://thethinkersclub.creator-spring.com/ )

Vulnerability is often misunderstood as weakness, but many contemporary thinkers and psychologists argue that it is, in fact, a profound strength. To be vulnerable means to be open—to risk emotional exposure, honesty, and authenticity in our relationships, work, and self-expression. Rather than signaling fragility, vulnerability can be a source of courage, allowing us to connect more deeply with others and live more fully. It plays a crucial role in trust-building, creativity, and resilience, as it requires letting go of control and embracing uncertainty. Far from being a liability, vulnerability is increasingly seen as a foundation for meaningful growth and genuine human connection.

• What does vulnerability mean to you personally? How has your understanding of it evolved?
• Why is vulnerability often seen as a weakness rather than a strength?
• Can you recall a moment when showing vulnerability helped you grow or connect with others?
• What fears or barriers keep people from being vulnerable in their relationships or workplaces?
• How can we create environments that truly encourage and support vulnerability?

The Power of Vulnerability
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCvmsMzlF7o&t

How To Become An Expert In Vulnerability
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i6LU_kUwySI

The Courage to Be Vulnerable
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgmJinwZDgw

**********************************************************************************************
In addition to the main topic (above), we also provide breakout rooms at 8pm as follows:
“Applied Practical Philosophy” – philosophy and its applications
“Town Square” – politics and current events
“Conference Room” – open for anything
“The Lounge” – light social chat

(Please consider supporting our fundraiser by buying a t-shirt :) https://thethinkersclub.creator-spring.com/ )

Spinoza’s concept of God, as laid out in his work Ethics, differs significantly from traditional theistic views. Rather than a personal, anthropomorphic deity who intervenes in the world, Spinoza equates God with nature itself—what he calls Deus sive Natura ("God or Nature"). In his view, God is not a being outside the universe but the infinite, eternal substance of which all things are modes or expressions. This leads to a pantheistic understanding, where everything that exists is a part of God, governed by deterministic natural laws. Spinoza rejected the idea of divine will or miracles, emphasizing reason, necessity, and the unity of all existence. His God does not judge, command, or love in the human sense, but is the totality of reality.

• What did Spinoza mean when he said “God or Nature” (Deus sive Natura)?
• Is Spinoza’s God truly a “God” at all, or is it just another way of describing the physical universe?
• In what ways does Spinoza’s conception of God differ from the theistic God of Abrahamic religions?
• How does Spinoza’s view challenge the idea of a personal God who answers prayers or intervenes in the world?
• Can Spinoza’s God offer a foundation for ethics and meaning, or does it risk moral relativism?

What is Spinoza's God?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gioaH2kFaIM&t

Spinoza’s God: The Mind-Blowing Philosophy That Inspired Einstein
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ElaxZnaBzPc

**********************************************************************************************
In addition to the main topic (above), we also provide breakout rooms at 8pm as follows:
“Applied Practical Philosophy” – philosophy and its applications
“Town Square” – politics and current events
“Conference Room” – open for anything
“The Lounge” – light social chat

(Please consider supporting our fundraiser by buying a t-shirt :) https://thethinkersclub.creator-spring.com/ )

Near-death experiences (NDEs) are reported by individuals who have come close to death, or were temporarily declared clinically dead and later revived. These experiences often include vivid sensations such as moving through a tunnel, encountering a bright light, feeling a sense of peace, or even meeting deceased loved ones. They have been documented across cultures, often shaped by the individual's beliefs and background, yet show many striking consistencies.

While some interpret NDEs as evidence of an afterlife, others argue they result from physiological or neurological processes in a stressed or oxygen-deprived brain. Either way, this phenomenon raises questions about consciousness, the mind-body relationship, and whether personal identity can exist beyond death.

• What common elements appear across NDEs, and how might we explain their consistency?
• Can science explain NDEs through neurological or physiological processes, or is there something that remains unexplained?
• Do you think consciousness can exist independently of the brain? How do NDEs support or challenge this view?
• Should near-death experiences influence how we think about death and what it means to be alive?
• If NDEs are only subjectively real, what value might they still hold for those who experience them or hear about them?

Evidence of the After Life from Astonishing NDEs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94DiIktpYV8
What Near-Death Experiences Reveal About the Brain https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-near-death-experiences-reveal-about-the-brain/
The New Science of Death: ‘There’s Something Happening in the Brain that Makes No Sense’ https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/apr/02/new-science-of-death-brain-activity-consciousness-near-death-experience
**********************************************************************************************
In addition to the main topic (above), we also provide breakout rooms at 8pm as follows:
“Applied Practical Philosophy” – philosophy and its applications
“Town Square” – politics and current events
“Conference Room” – open for anything
“The Lounge” – light social chat