Search Results

Our instructors hail from world-renowned institutions like Princeton, Oxford, and MIT, bringing unmatched expertise and passion to every session. Reason & Rationality Videos Instructors Debate Whether We Have Souls In this live debate, universe-renowned eminent philosophers debate whether we have souls. Who wins: dualism or physicalism? (1:09:54) Most Epic Instructor Debate of All Time Watch our instructors debate: Does God exist? (1:17:11) How To Publish Academic YouTube Videos Head of Instruction Joe Schmid, Princeton University PhD student, talks about how he publishes academic YouTube videos for his 32,000 subscribers. (36:03) What Reason & Rationality is All About Noah McKay explains what Reason & Rationality is all about. (0:54) Sophia Wyatt on Forgiveness Hear what Reason & Rationality Teaching Fellow Sophia Wyatt has to say on the concept of forgiveness. (1:02) Civil Discourse Dean of Academics, Peter Bach-y-Rita, explains why philosophical rigor is the key to civil discourse. (1:27) Student Project Ep. 1 Student Claire Ziebart produced her own podcast after attendiong RNR. Here she leads a discussion about what we value the most: Would you give up your life for a perfect but fake one? (23:45) Student Project Ep. 2 Student Claire Ziebart produced her own podcast after attendiong RNR. Here Claire leads a discussion about whether some kinds of happiness can only be experienced if you have suffered. (22:54) Questions About Reason & Rationality's Vision for Conversation-Based Education? Check out the frequently asked questions on our website or reach out to Reason & Rationality at info@reasonandrationality.com . Ready to jump into critical thinking and conversation? Apply Now

Terms and Conditions The Reason & Rationality Summer Program is independent of the college and university campuses on which summer sessions are based. All names are trademarks of their respective owners. Reason & Rationality is a trademark of Reason & Rationality LLC. This program does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion, national or ethnic origin, or disability. Admission to the program is limited and shall be granted or denied at the sole discretion of the program administrators.

We are pleased to introduce the Reason & Rationality 2026 Convivium summer program at Princeton Theological Seminary (June 7-19) and (June 21 - July 2). Reason & Rationality 2025 Student Essay Opportunity [Scroll down for published student essays] We are pleased to announce the Reason & Rationality 2025 Essay Opportunity. Students who want to keep thinking and exploring are invited to submit their short, original work (no AI assistance) for possible publication on the Reason & Rationality website. Here are the rules: Students who attended Reason & Rationality 2025 are invited to submit one philosophical essay of no more than 2,000 words (but note that shorter is better here), based on any one of the following prompts: What, if anything, do we owe to future generations? What is the difference between bullshit and lying? If you were forced to choose, would you save the life of one 13 year-old human or 10^10 mice? Is it morally permissible for a blogger to befriend a corporate executive with the intention of learning and publicly exposing the corporation's financial malfeasance (e.g., illegal tax evasion)? Topic of your choice -- Note: requires advance approval of the topic by Reason & Rationality prior to August 18, 2025. Instead of, or in addition to, a philosophical essay, students may submit a philosophical creative writing piece of no more than 3,500 words (this is an upper limit, submissions can be much shorter), that explores an ethical dilemma. Additional criteria for publication. Works must be philosophical in nature, original works by the author, and consistent with Reason & Rationality's values of intellectual virtue. Deadlines: Submit intention to participate by August 22, 2025, by emailing info@reasonandrationality.com . Final submission deadline is September 12. Submit final draft to info@reasonandrationality.com Decisions on publication will be made by October 18. A portion of the essays will be selected for publication on the Reason & Rationality website. No assistance or feedback will be provided with the writing process by Reason & Rationality Instructors. Published Student Essays What We Owe Future Generations , by Grace Glukhov The Cube Factory Paradox , by Michael Reiff Human and Animal Value , by Harry Moss Wisdom of the Seraph , by Harry Moss (a short story) Questions About the Reason & Rationality Vision for Conversation-Based Education? Check out the frequently asked questions on our website or reach out to Reason & Rationality at info@reasonandrationality.com .

Reason & Rationality Teacher Recommendation Form Reason & Rationality equips high school students with the tools to think rigorously about complex questions, separate fact from ideology, and engage in lively intellectual discussion. Our classes are filled with humor, and rooted in relatable discussions. Students sharpen their critical thinking and communication skills and leave with a grasp of the intellectual frameworks that empower them to become confident independent thinkers. At Reason & Rationality, we welcome honest, intellectually rigorous conversations on topics that are often avoided in traditional high school settings, including politics, religion, ethics, personal values, and more. These discussions can be deeply rewarding but also require maturity, self-awareness, and respect. Everyone involved, students and instructors, shares responsibility for creating an open, thoughtful, and inclusive environment. We are committed to fostering dialogue, not debate. The goal is to understand and explore different perspectives, not to win arguments or persuade others of a particular ideology. Our aim is to create not only a “safe space,” but a brave space. where intellectual courage and emotional maturity go hand in hand. The 2-week Foundation Program focuses on 20 Big Ideas in Philosophy, Economics and Ethics. Classes are rigorous, fast-paced and full of humor. Reason & Rationality classes and small group convivial conversations are led by PhD candidates and young professors from top universities including Princeton, Harvard, Oxford, MIT and others. Teacher Recommendations are helpful in determining whether the applicant is well suited to engage in deep intellectual conversation in a convivial manner. Please complete this Teacher Recommendation form below. Hitting "send" automatically emails your recommendation to Reason & Rationality Dean of Academics, Peter Bach-y-Rita. You may also copy the content of this form into an email and send it to Dr. Bach-y-Rita at info@reasonandrationality.com . Either way, your recommendation will remain confidential and will not be shared with the student. Teacher Recommendation Student Name Student Last Name Student's School Name Student Grade Level Classes Taken With The Recommender: Teacher First Name Teacher Last Name Email Subjects Taught In what ways has the student shown a genuine interest in exploring big complex questions and ideas? In what ways has the student demonstrated the ability to engage in dialogue in a civil, open, and inclusive manner? Send Thanks for submitting!

Reason & Rationality offers educational programs for high school students. Dedicated to empowering high school students to think rigorously & critically. Princeton Session 2025 kicks off! Reason & Rationality 2025 SUMMER PROGRAM AT PRINCETON & SWARTHMORE Reason & Rationality begins with a question: What are the foundational ideas that shape policies, drive decision-making, and unlock a deeper understanding of the world—yet are rarely introduced to high school students? Seeking the answer led us to 20 Big Ideas from Philosophy, Politics, and Economics (PPE), a framework that provides the conceptual scaffolding for understanding the forces that shape our society and the critical thinking tools to navigate them. Reason & Rationality equips high school students with the tools to think rigorously about complex questions, separate fact from ideology, and engage in lively intellectual exchange. Our classes are filled with humor, and rooted in relatable discussions. Students sharpen their critical thinking and communication skills and leave with a grasp of the intellectual frameworks that empower them to become confident independent thinkers. Reason & Rationality’s 5:1 student-teacher ratio ensures an intimate, engaging learning environment. Our instructors are not only accomplished academics from Harvard, Princeton, Oxford, and other great universities, but also charismatic young voices actively publishing and leading debate and dialogue on online media. They don’t just teach PPE; they embody how young people can develop and share their ideas with the world. Five hours of interactive discussions and problem solving per day plus discussions over meals and dorm activities give each student lots of opportunities to practice and reinforce their newly acquired skills and knowledge. Learn More Apply Now About Reason & Rationality Meet the Team Peter Bach-y-Rita Dean of Academics Peter Bach-y-Rita: Ph.D., MIT (Philosophy), J.D. Stanford Law School, A.B. Princeton University (highest honors). Dr. Bach-y-Rita's dissertation at MIT was at the intersection of ethics, biology and technology. He has published work on intellectual property, bankruptcy law, and the nature of legal causation. He co- founded Reason & Rationality in 2023. Head of Instruction Joe is a Philosophy PhD student at Princeton University. He has published 16 articles on topics in metaphysics, philosophy of religion, and ethics in leading peer-reviewed philosophy journals. On the popular level, he creates lecture videos and hosts discussions with philosophers on his YouTube channel Majesty of Reason. His videos have attracted nearly 1.5 million views in total. Joseph Schmid CMO & Instructor James ("JB") Estes is a Harvard University student. He is the co-author, with Mitch Presnick, of "4 Key Strengths of China’s Economy — and What They Mean for Multinational Companies" (2024 Harvard Business Review ) James Estes 2025 Guest Expert Lecturers Benjamin Morison DEPARTMENT CHAIR OF PHILOSOPHY, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY BPhil in Philosophy, Balliol College, Oxford (British Academy Major Award) Peter Baumann DEPARTMENT CHAIR OF PHILOSOPHY, SWARTHMORE COLLEGE Ph.D., University of Göttingen Christy Wampole PROFESSOR OF FRENCH, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Ph.D. Stanford University CIVIL DISCOURSE Schools today are facing a crisis in the breakdown of civil discourse. The solution lies less in enforcing politeness and “ground rules” than in cultivating the intellectual foundations of a reflective and philosophical worldview. The Reason & Rationality curriculum fosters civil discourse through the habits of thought that lead to deeper understanding, humility, and respect for opposing views.

We are pleased to introduce the Reason & Rationality 2026 Convivium summer program at Princeton Theological Seminary (June 7-19) and (June 21 - July 2). Reason & Rationality Foundation Program - Princeton 2026 Reason & Rationality's Foundation Program immerses high school students in lively, small-group discussions around twenty core topics in philosophy, economics, politics, and decision-making. Taught by Ph.D. students and young professors from Princeton, Harvard and other leading philosophy graduate programs, the two-week program emphasizes serious but playful intellectual conversation — testing ideas in real time, revising views with humility, and continuing discussions beyond the classroom, sometimes late into the evening. Some of our students go on to create their own student podcasts and projects that you can explore on this website. Sample Topics : Foundation Program topics include free will and determinism; probabilistic arguments for the existence of God; the legitimacy of democratic political institutions; and and how economists and philosophers think about cost-benefit analysis, utility maximization, and their limits. Location : Both sessions of the Foundation Program are held at Princeton Theological Seminary in Princeton, NJ. Apply Now Program Details: Students who, as of Summer 2026, are entering 9th grade through those who have just graduated from high school are eligible to apply. While preference will be given to those applying to the full 2-week session, you will also find an option to apply for a single week. Session 1 - June 7 - 20, 2026 Session 2 - June 21 - July 2, 2026 Oral Exam Contest: Students who attend the full 2-week program are eligible to participate in an Oral Exam Contest on the second to last day of classes. The Oral Exam Contest follows the same oral examination methods used in Princeton undergraduate courses. We are excited to announce that Benjamin Morison, the Chair of the Princeton University Philosophy Department, will join the judging panel for the 2026 competition. Participation in the Oral Exam Contest involves a small additional tuition charge. Link. Use the button below to set up a Zoom Call with Dean of Academics Peter Bach-y-Rita and learn more: Zoom Calendly Hear Student Reflections: Hear Instructor Reflections: Foundation Program 2026 Sample Schedule Week One Week Two Program Schedule Tuition and Pricing The program fee of $7,600 covers all classes, activities, housing, and meals for the full two-week program ($5,000 for a single week). A $1,000 deposit is due at the time of application and will be promptly refunded if the application is not accepted; the remaining balance is due by March 15, 2026. Reason & Rationality will refund the full deposit and any tuition payments if a withdrawal request is made prior to March 15, 2026. Program fees will increase on March 15, 2026; however, applications submitted with deposit before March 15 will be honored at the current rate, even if supporting materials (such as teacher recommendations) are received afterward. If your student requires financial aid, please contact us at info@reasonandrationality.com . Questions About Reason & Rationality's Vision for Conversation-Based Education? Check out the frequently asked questions on our website or reach out to Reason & Rationality at info@reasonandrationality.com .

What We Owe Future Generations By Grace Glukhov In this paper, I will argue we must consider the interests of future generations in any major decision that may significantly impact their lives, as we owe future generations the assurance that we will neither shape their future for the worse nor predetermine them to lives they feel are not worth living. I will demonstrate this through showing we have some moral obligation to future people, in the same way we have moral obligations to those in the present. If one accepts the premise that we should avoid making others feel like their lives are not worth living in the present, it follows that this should extend to our duties to future generations. In the second formulation of the Categorical Imperative, Kant says that individuals should not be treated as a means to an end, suggesting that lives have inherent value. I argue that the second formulation extends to the lives of future people. Any lives brought into existence will come to possess the same value as the lives of existing people, meaning we should try to respect future lives in similar ways that we respect present lives. In What We Owe the Future , William MacAskill introduces the idea of longtermism, which says that “positively influencing the long-term future is a key moral priority of our time.” (William MacAskill, "The Case for Longtermism," excerpt from, in What We Owe the Future ) MacAskill claims that future people are a “silent majority” whose lives are shaped by our actions. In support of his argument, he turns to positive trends of the past (e.g. women receiving the right to vote) and examples of what we could prevent (e.g., “engineered viruses [and] A.I.-enabled totalitarianism”). Critics of longtermism might say that this framework places the lives of those who are not yet alive above those who are. They might also say that it is too hard to predict the future. However, I believe we live in an era where we have enough understanding of future threats for us to be able to act in ways we know we can help: for example, climate change. Not only does fighting climate change help those in the present, but it is a topic we understand will detract from future generations’ lives should it be allowed to continue. This is not to say longtermism is the only ideology we should live by. However, it is clear that there is a pattern of social change and improvement when people are motivated by a desire to forge a better world for their children. In the way that previous generations have fought for rights for themselves and for their children—observed through movements like the suffragettes or Civil Rights—by fighting for ourselves and for our descendants, we can create a better world for people in the present and future. In upholding institutions that will continue to harm humanity, we increase the likelihood that future generations will feel that their life is not worth living due to predetermined circumstances. By virtue of challenging institutions that will detract from human life in the present or future, we help not only future generations, but ourselves. Arguments about distance and lack of personal gain should not affect our view of moral action towards future generations. In his 2003 essay We Don’t Owe Them A Thing! A Tough-Minded But Soft-Hearted View of Aid to the Faraway Needy , Jan Narveson argues that while people have a moral responsibility to not harm others, they are not morally obligated to help those they have not harmed. He claims “distance [from future generations] makes a difference only because and therefore if greater distance increases the cost of our doing things at that distance.” He adds “the higher the cost to the agent, other things being equal, the less stringent is that duty. Distance is normally a cost factor.” (Jan Narveson, "We Don't Owe Them a Thing! A Tough-minded but Soft-hearted View of Aid to the Faraway Needy," The Monist 86, no. 3) Under Narveson’s paradigm, we are not morally obligated to help future generations unless we know our actions cause direct harm—something harder to be sure of due to how far away in time they exist from us. In fact, Narveson’s view of distance as a “cost factor” means that helping future generations is burdensome for us. However, I find Narveson’s argument about distance unconvincing for two reasons. Firstly, I believe that non-action is a choice that can still contribute to making things worse for future generations. For example, while someone may not be one of the worlds’ biggest fossil fuel emitters, it is hard to live a normal life without contributing to pollution or harming the environment. If one does not attempt to compensate for some of their emissions, they will most certainly have a role (even if it is a small one) in making the climate crisis worse for future generations. Secondly, though increased distance comes with the potential for more intervening factors and a lessened chain of causation, this does not absolve us of all fault. For example, we (Generation A) may plant the seeds for Generation B to take actions that will impose negative effects on the lives of Generation C. In both this scenario and the scenario of inaction, it is hard to argue that we do not bear any responsibility for suffering. The chain of causation will ultimately lead back to our actions—regardless of our intent. If our actions provide for the potential of future suffering, our distance from that suffering (and any factors in between) does not take away the negative implications of our role. Thus, since we will almost certainly have an impact on future generations, we should feel a moral obligation to mitigate the negative effects our actions would bestow onto future lives. In his paper, Narveson also argues that “very distant people are unlikely ever to be in a strictly reciprocal relation to us,” which means that we do not owe help to future people, as we gain very little (or nothing) from them. (Narveson, "We Don't Owe Them a Thing!") I find this claim to be unconvincing, as we owe things to beings in the present that cannot reciprocate. For example, many would argue we owe newborn babies protection and care. However, our relationships to newborn babies are not reciprocal in the traditional sense. In fact, the love between a parent and a child is often described as unconditional. While we can argue that caring for babies provides us with happiness and fulfillment, there is a strong case to be made that knowing our descendants will be protected and provided the conditions to lead fulfilling lives can also offer fulfillment to us. Thus, just because future generations cannot reciprocate in the traditional sense, that does not lessen our obligations to them. Since each of our actions will have an impact on the future, when faced with multiple choices, we should choose the one that is most moral in that situation. Reasons and Persons by Derek Parfit introduces the non-identity problem, which suggests we cannot be blamed for the suffering of future generations since our actions that caused that suffering have also led to their existence. Parfit argues that an existence with suffering is likely to be better than nonexistence. However, any action leads to a certain future set of people. Though taking the more moral action will lead to a different group of people than picking the less moral action, any action will mean that certain people will exist and certain people will not come into existence. Thus, we should focus on our actions being well intentioned, as to avoid causing suffering to anyone. It is plausible to suggest that trying to center our actions around helping lives that do not yet exist can take away from helping current people. However, as I have argued, we live in a day and age where we have a fairly concrete understanding of both the problems future generations are likely to face and ways in which we can help mitigate these problems. As I discussed, taking action that considers the lives of future generations rarely comes at a personal expense to us. Therefore, we owe it to future generations to make good intentioned decisions about future conditions that will impact them. Bibliography Kant, Immanuel. Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals . MacAskill, William. "The Case for Longtermism." In What We Owe the Future . Excerpt from In What We Owe the Future. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/opinion/the-case-for-longtermism.html Narveson, Jan. "We Don't Owe Them a Thing! A Tough-minded but Soft-hearted View of Aid to the Faraway Needy." The Monist 86, no. 3. Parfit, Derek. Reasons and Persons . Clarendon Press, 1987.

We are pleased to introduce the Reason & Rationality 2026 Convivium summer program at Princeton Theological Seminary (June 7-19) and (June 21 - July 2). Reason & Rationality Foundation Program Princeton 2026 Reason & Rationality's Foundation Program immerses high school students in lively, small-group discussions around twenty core topics in philosophy, economics, politics, and decision-making. Apply Now Both sessions of the Foundation Program are held at Princeton Theological Seminary in Princeton, NJ. Taught by Ph.D. students and young professors from Princeton, Harvard and other leading philosophy graduate programs, the two-week program emphasizes serious but playful intellectual conversation — testing ideas in real time, revising views with humility, and continuing discussions beyond the classroom, sometimes late into the evening. Some of our students go on to participate in Reason & Rationality podcasts and related projects, which you can explore on this website. Hear Student Reflections: Hear Instructor Reflections: Program Details Students who, as of Summer 2026, are entering 9th grade through those who have just graduated from high school are eligible to apply. While preference will be given to those applying to the full 2-week session, you will also find an option to apply for a single week. Session 1 - Week 1: June 7 - 13, 2026 (waitlist only) Session 1 - Week 2: June 14 - 20, 2026 Session 1 - Both Weeks Session 2 - Week 1: June 21 - 27, 2026 (waitlist only) Session 2 - Week 2: June 27 - July 2, 2026 (waitlist only) Session 2 - Both Weeks (13 spots left - 1/30) Families interested in joining a waitlist should email: info@reasonandrationality.com Oral Exam Contest: Students who attend the full 2-week program are eligible to participate in an Oral Exam Contest on the second to last day of classes. Led by members of our Princeton-based teaching team, the Oral Exam Contest follows the same oral examination methods used in Princeton undergraduate courses. Participation involves a small additional tuition charge. Apply Now Foundation Program 2026 Sample Schedule Week One Week Two Tuition and Pricing The program fee of $7,600 covers all classes, activities, housing, and meals for the full two-week program ($5,000 for a single week). A $1,000 deposit is due at the time of application, which promptly will be refunded if the application is not accepted, with the remaining balance being due within seven (7) days of acceptance. Reason & Rationality will refund the full deposit and any tuition payments if request is made prior to April 22, 2026. Program fees will increase in Spring 2026. If your student needs financial aid, please contact us at: info@reasonandrationality.com. Questions About Reason & Rationality's Vision for Conversation-Based Education? Check out the frequently asked questions on our website or reach out to Reason & Rationality at info@reasonandrationality.com .

Reason & Rationality Foundation & Advanced Programs at Princeton Session 1: June 7 - June 19, 2026 Session 2: June 21 - July 2, 2026 Apply Now What is Reason & Rationality? Reason & Rationality equips high school students with the tools to think rigorously about complex questions, separate fact from ideology, and participate in lively intellectual discussion. The 2-week Foundation Program focuses on 20 Big Ideas in Philosophy, Economics and Ethics. Classes are rigorous, fast-paced and full of humor. Students sharpen their critical thinking and communication skills and leave with a grasp of the intellectual frameworks that empower them to become confident independent thinkers. Peter Bach-y-Rita DEAN OF ACADEMICS Peter Bach-y-Rita: Ph.D., MIT (Philosophy), J.D. Stanford Law School, A.B. Princeton University (highest honors). Dr. Bach-y-Rita's dissertation at MIT was at the intersection of ethics, biology and technology. He has published work on intellectual property, bankruptcy law, and the nature of legal causation. He co-founded Reason & Rationality in 2023. Hear Student Reflections: Hear Instructor Reflections: See What Our Students Have To Say "We learned how we would like to be as people, how we would like to converse with each other and think about the world." - Anne, Princeton 2025 Watch "When I came here, I really noticed that my perspective was broadened because I was first of all surrounded by a bunch of amazing students." - Harry, Princeton 2025 Watch "I can count four distinct moments in the last three days where I had a physical reaction to a philosophical concept that was explained to me" - Harrison, Princeton 2025 Watch See What Parents Are Saying About Reason & Rationality's Princeton 2025 Program Watch James' research on the famous Trolley Problem Immediate Impact James B Estes attended the original Reason & Rationality discussion series in 2023 as a participant and TA, later joining the team to co-found the Reason & Rationality Summer Program. Inspired by the class session on the Trolley Problem, James conducted empirical research into survey respondents’ intuitions about an important Trolley Problem variant. He then authored and published a peer reviewed article entitled Empirical Evidence Reveals the Motivation of Subjects Who Switch Tracks in the Trolley Loop Case. Apply Now!

Oops, looks like this is the wrong path. Check the URL, or go back to the homepage and try again. Back to Homepage

We can’t find the page you’re looking for This page doesn’t exist. Go to Home and keep exploring. Go to Home