I’m back with Daniel Hulse, who reflects on life and love with the same depth he brings to guiding students. In this second part of our conversation, we zoom out: are humans truly unique, or just another animal with fancier tools?

Episode in a 🌰:We explore the biology and philosophy of what makes us human — from parental instincts and animal mourning rituals to birth control, AI, and whether dolphins might have us beat. Mr. Hulse challenges the assumption that humans are “more evolved,” and together we ask: what really separates us from the rest of the living world, if anything?

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with teachers, professors, and mentors. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human?

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:34] Family love, biology, and parental instincts

[00:06:43] Animal mourning and the raw instinct to protect

[00:09:05] Do humans love differently than animals?

[00:14:59] Love, marriage, and not having children

[00:18:41] Seahorses, survival instincts, and evolution

[00:19:46] Birth control and whether humans are becoming “obsolete”

[00:20:35] AI as a new species — creators vs. creations

[00:24:16] Animal emotions, pain, and human assumptions

🥜 🥜 Hypothetical Nuts of the Day

1. ​If humans aren’t the most evolved species, what actually makes us unique?
2. ​Could AI count as a new “species” in the story of evolution?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

I’m joined by Daniel Hulse, who until recently was Associate Director of College Counseling at Mercersburg Academy. Beyond guiding students, Mr. Hulse has spent years reflecting on what love, compromise, and authenticity really mean — in marriage, work, and family.

Episode in a 🌰:In this first part of our conversation, we put aside the central question and instead dive into love. In all its everyday messiness, love goes from tattoos and Shakespeare to farting in front your partner. Mr. Hulse shares what it means to build a relationship that is equal parts friendship and hard work, and why knowing your “non-compromisables” is just as important as compromise itself.

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with teachers, professors, and mentors. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human?

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:16] Mr. Hulse on Shakespeare and love beyond the surface

[00:04:40] Discovering a true “connection of the mind”

[00:07:05] Comfort in silence, farting, and being real

[00:09:49] Marriage as hard work and compromise

[00:13:29] Authentic disagreement vs. constant pleasing

[00:17:09] Compromise vs. self-betrayal at work and in life

[00:20:21] Family as a non-compromisable

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

If soulmates don’t exist, how do you know when you’ve found the right person?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

In part 2 of my conversation with Paul Galey, we shift from imagination to choice. If AI can think, adapt, and maybe even imagine, what’s left that makes us human?

Episode in a 🌰:

We dive into Viktor Frankl’s idea that our will to choose defines us, and test it against the rise of artificial intelligence. Can a machine ever claim humanity? What happens if technology evolves faster than our philosophies? From Star Trek court cases to nuclear buttons, we wrestle with the ethics of invention and the urgency of asking these questions now.

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with teachers, professors, and mentors. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human?

TIMESTAMPS

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

I meet with Paul Galey -- teacher, former school minister, and creator of Mercersburg Academy’s Nature and Meaning course -- during the summertime, the best time to talk philosophy.

Episode in a 🌰:
We focus on a magical concept: imagination. Is imagining uniquely human? We explore how it fuels both Einstein’s physics and Buddhist philosophy, and where it touches Descartes and dolphins. We wonder: can animals imagine realms beyond survival, and what happens if a human loses their ability to imagine?

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with teachers, professors, and mentors. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human?

TIMESTAMPS

00:00:00 — “I imagine, therefore I am"

🥜🥜 Hypothetical Nuts of the Day

1. If imagination is what makes us human, what happens when someone loses it?

2. Are humans the only species that can go against their own evolutionary drive to survive?

   
   

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

I’m joined by Judge Shawn Meyers, President Judge of Pennsylvania’s 39th Judicial District. Beyond the courtroom, Judge Meyers is a thoughtful mentor whose perspective bridges law, philosophy, and lived experience.

Episode in a 🌰:We talk about what makes a human human — from foresight and invention to unpredictability and the quest for objectivity. Along the way, we compare human reasoning to AI’s “hallucinations,” explore the role of law in shaping fairness, and wonder whether any other species strives for objectivity the way we do.

TIMESTAMPS

• ​[00:00:14] Many possible answers to the human question
• ​[00:02:00] Reasoning, memory, and the uniqueness of choice
• ​[00:05:15] Human foresight, invention, and unpredictability
• ​[00:07:26] AI vs. human unpredictability
• ​[00:10:39] Law, rules, and accuracy in reasoning
• ​[00:15:21] The challenge of striving for objectivity
• ​[00:18:23] Why humans need community and rules
• ​[00:21:24] The judge’s struggle with objectivity
• ​[00:25:34] Final reflections on the diversity of answers

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day

If other species could strive for objectivity the way humans do, how would their societies look different?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

I'm with Ari Goldman, professor emeritus of journalism at Columbia University and former New York Times reporter. He has spent decades teaching and writing about the intersection of storytelling, faith, and empathy.

Episode in a 🌰:

We explore the tension between objectivity and empathy in journalism, the purpose of telling other people’s stories, and how faith traditions can expand our perspective without erasing our own. Along the way, we reflect on obituaries, pluralism, and the “third eye” of wisdom.

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with teachers, professors, and mentors. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human? (The exceptions are episodes with special guests, where we might deviate from this topic.)

TIMESTAMPS:

[00:00:00] The conflict between empathy and objectivity
[00:04:24] Ari’s path into journalism — stories, obituaries, and religion reporting

[00:10:15] Why storytelling matters beyond just recounting events

[00:12:24] Faith, pluralism, and learning from other traditions
[00:15:18] Empathetic objectivity and its place in journalism
[00:17:08] Opening to other religions while staying rooted in your own

[00:19:01] Our mentor relationship

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

Part two of my conversation with Mike Conklin turns to education, art, and community. The common thread is the value of process.

Episode in a 🌰:

We discuss grades, art, social media, and Saturday Night Live, asking whether shortcuts are erasing the process that makes us most human. From Ship of Theseus to mortality keeping us grounded, we linger on creativity, collaboration, and the joy of being together.

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with teachers, professors, and mentors. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human? (The exceptions are episodes with special guests, where we might deviate from this topic.)

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:51] School as means vs. ends

[00:02:07] AI art and the irreplaceable value of process

[00:04:56] Survival vs. meaning: can you treasure the means if the world values ends?

[00:07:23] AI in creative industries and the threat to livelihoods

[00:08:27] Collaboration, comedy writing, and our humanity in process

[00:10:12] Ship of Theseus

[00:13:00] Biology, mortality, and the essence of humanness

[00:16:57] Can AI make mistakes or have moods?

[00:20:16] Nostalgia, cell phones, and rediscovering community

[00:23:30] The joy of thinking aloud with someone else

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

If an AI could perfectly imitate human conversation, would it be the same as talking to a person?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

In this first half of my conversation with Mike Conklin, we drift into fields related to the central question such as consciousness and AI.

Episode in a 🌰:

We start by diving into the reason behind asking the question, and then look at reasons vs passions, AI's "consciousness," the loss of human connections, and how these trends are reflected in the college process for students.

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with teachers, professors, and mentors. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human? (The exceptions are episodes with special guests, where we might deviate from this topic.)

TIMESTAMPS

[00:01:16] Why this question? dinner table debates on AI & consciousness
[00:04:19] : ANSWER TO THE Q: Manipulating our environment + empathy

[00:06:01] David Hume: reason is a slave to the passions
[00:08:56] Can AI generate something truly new?
[00:13:09] Motives, free will, and the horror movie version of AI

[00:17:02] AI as another “social media moment”
[00:21:45] Technology outpacing philosophy
[00:25:31] Shrinking attention spans and the loss of long-form narrative

[00:28:50] Neutral tools and human motives
[00:34:27] College counseling tends - outsourcing reasoning vs. doing the hard work ourselves

[00:35:47] Means vs. ends in school, AI, and life

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

If AI could act with its own free will, would it still be “just a tool,” or would it cross into being human?

Before diving into Season 2 of SQRL, join me for a cinematic recap of the questions that made up Season 1. From debating grades and success to wrestling with pain, privilege, God, authenticity, and music, each highlight brings back the voices of friends and classmates who wondered out loud together.

Season 1 ended not with answers, but with questions that we ask and discuss together.

Now, Season 2 takes a new direction: one-to-one conversations with teachers, mentors, and storytellers. We circle one guiding question: What makes a human, human?

Whether you’ve been here since Episode 1 or you’re just joining the conversation, this recap & launch episode is for you to catch up, reflect, and step into the next season.

[Featuring the new Season 2 theme music, Through the Crackling Air, created by Suno and Audrey Hua]

Welcome back to SQRL! Today I'm with longtime Mercersburg teacher David Bell.

In season 2, I highlight one-to-one chats with older folks. The primary question for this entire season will remain the same: What makes a human, human? (The exceptions are episodes with special guests, where we might deviate from this topic.)

TIMESTAMPS

• [00:01:20] MAPS, ambiguity, and asking better questions

  [00:07:00] Kant, empathy, and whether “good” acts need to be pure

  [00:13:20] Compromise, polarization, and politics today

  [00:19:40] Can empathy be taught? Nature, nurture, and practice

  [00:23:30] Does true altruism exist—or are we all selfish?

  [00:30:00] Lobsters, vacations, and empathy for animals

  [00:32:45] Love, responsibility, and final reflections

It's a cozy Monday night with Mr. Frank Betkowski and most of the crew: Lilly Killinger, Jessica Dang, Annie Mohr, and Cole Piraino. Let's see if we can make music philosophical.

Episode 9 in a 🌰:
How can two people who grow up together like different music? Can music be meaningful without being political? We look at milieu and the role of sadness and dopamine in what we listen to. It grows into an interesting talk on screen time, with Mr. B offering new insights as a non-GenZer.

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:27] When and how our music taste forms

[00:02:28] Performative taste, cultural influence, and parental impact

[00:04:04] Songs that grow on you vs. hit instantly

[00:06:26] Mood-congruent music and emotional resonance

[00:08:51] Are songs getting less meaningful?

[00:10:00] Cancel culture, fear, and music's political retreat

[00:11:55] Do young people value time differently?

[00:14:02] Phones, screen time, and generational comparison

[00:16:00] Phone policy backlash and digital detox

[00:17:32] What would you do with unlimited time?

[00:19:48] Do we have souls—and can you die from a broken spirit?

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day

If you had all the time in the world and didn’t have to work, what would you do?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

I'm back with Elie Shimaoka to explore mysterious aspects of life.

Episode 8B in a 🌰:
Human's capacity to be objective, the experience of joy vs. the feeling of joy, and the divine nature of nature: we talk a little more about life's surprises. Along the way, we look at some hypothetical and real situations (like AI).

TIMESTAMPS:

[00:00:19] Self-awareness through struggle

[00:04:12] Fight or flight?

[00:08:47] Objectivity, third-person thinking, and sensitivity

[00:13:32] The Experience Machine: Would you trade experience for emotional simulation?

[00:22:01] The process of art vs. the product of AI

[00:25:00] Mistakes, nature, and human wisdom

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

In this episode of SQRL, Audrey and Elie Shimaoka reflect on why it's so hard to be yourself — especially around other people.

Episode 8A in a 🌰:
From first impressions and self-conscious spirals to the rare magic of feeling fully seen, this conversation explores what authenticity really means. Audrey and Ellie open up about the masks we wear, the echo chambers we build in our minds, and the elusive feeling of chemistry that can’t be explained by language, culture, or even shared values.

TIMESTAMPS:

[00:00:33] First impressions and social overthinking
[00:03:18] Defining the “authentic self”
[00:07:21] Chemistry, connection, and soulmates
[00:11:34] On openness and attracting the right people

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

• Do you have to be authentic to meet your soulmate—or do soulmates make you authentic?

  
  

Hope you enjoyed the ep! Follow SQRL and share with a friend who replays every conversation in their head.

We're back in the Socratic forum with your familiar crew. I'm with Annie Mohr, Lilly Killinger, Yule Kwon, Cole Piraino, Jessica Dang and joined by Ryan Du Plessis and Arnav Rao. We talk burnout and competition, and the difference between winning and not losing.

Episode 7 in a 🌰:

We look at the fear of being a "try‑hard," genuine versus strategic compliments, and the line between healthy drive and harmful burnout. We swap race‑day stories, academic anxieties, and confessions about what really fuels our motivation. An honest, high‑energy exploration of success and self-worth.

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:00] Why “trying” is uncool – the rise of nonchalance

[00:04:40] Jealousy, compliments, and “glazing” culture

[00:10:23] Winning vs. not losing

[00:18:50] Academic pressure & the fear of disappointment

[00:25:35] Defining burnout and spotting it in yourself

[00:34:00] Process love, positivity, and team energy

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day

Do you strive to win…or simply to not lose—and how would your choices change if results were private?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

In this quiet episode, I ponder with An Yan on whether humans are inherently greedy, transitioning to progress in life.

Episode in a 🌰:
From genetically modified bananas to monkey economics, from gender inequality to the structure of societies, An and I wade through hard-hitting questions: Are humans naturally selfish? Can society function without leaders? Why strive for perfection if it’s unreachable? We talk morality, mortality, and meaning.

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:22] Are humans born greedy?

[00:02:39] Monkey economics and loss aversion

[00:04:38] Gender roles and historical power shifts

[00:08:08] Do humans need leaders?

[00:10:00] Why striving requires inequality

[00:11:45] Would perfection ruin everything?

[00:14:08] If death is inevitable, why live?

[00:15:51] Random stardust or divine purpose?

[00:17:01] Are we the universe experiencing itself?

[00:18:52] Is finding purpose even useful?

[00:21:02] If your meaning was assigned, would you feel trapped?

[00:23:25] Creating your own spark vs. having a moral compass

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day

If perfection guarantees stagnation, should we even try to improve?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

In part two of this outdoor conversation, me and the same curious crew look at morals, beliefs, and God.

Episode in a 🌰:
Do we all have the same morals? What’s the difference between a belief and a value? Why do bad things happen to good people? This episode turns personal and philosophical as the group reflects on religion, altruism, and whether doubt might actually make belief stronger. Chirp chirp.

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:31] Are we born with the same morals?

[00:03:35] Baseline morals vs. beliefs

[00:06:35] Do beliefs ever contradict morals?

[00:13:01] Are morals just evolution in disguise?

[00:21:44] Suffering, doubt, and belief in God

[00:27:18] Is purpose possible without religion?

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

We're in the first part of "In the Company of Birds and Doubt," a precious two-part discussion outdoors. I'm joined by the crew Annie Mohr, Cole Piraino, Lilly Killinger, Yule Kwon, plus one new member, Jessica Dang, to debate bias, morality, and how we make hard choices.

Episode in a 🌰:Should we live by reason or emotion? Is altruism real, or evolutionary self-preservation in disguise? Is “evil” a choice? From creepy vans to the trolley problem to a flying shoe, we wrestle with the deep stuff.

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:33] Bias

[00:08:30] Utilitarianism vs. Personal Relationships

[00:16:00] What is evil? Action vs. Intent vs. Consequence

[00:27:49] Should you be friends with people who have similar morals as you? Baseline Morals

🥜🥜 Hypothetical Nuts of the Day

1.Imagine a world where people don't have biases.

2.If you were stranded on an island with other humans and no source of food, would cannibalism be morally okay?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

I chat with my friend and 1W buddy Janie Miller to ask the question that plagues highschool students: is the straight-A, resume-builder grind really worth it if you’re miserable along the way?

Episode in a 🌰:

We start with means vs. ends and talk about genuine fulfillment, from skipping physics because it sparks zero joy to choosing low-paying but meaningful work like teaching. We try and find the line between “healthy discomfort” and burnout, whether true altruism exists, and why it’s okay to be selfish sometimes so you can keep helping others.

TIMESTAMPS

[00:00:29] College apps & “doing it for the resume”

[00:08:54] Job-offer thought experiment: money vs. love of the work

[00:17:05] Selfish, selfless, and finding a healthy line

[00:30:34] Are tiny kindnesses the only true acts of altruism?

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

You’re offered a high-paying job you don’t enjoy OR a lower-paying job you love. What do you choose?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

The deepening conversation closes with new members Katie Lee, Asami Puff, Kyle Hwang, and joining us at the end - Imangali Zhakan and Mr. Kerr (resident philosophy teacher). As before, I'm with the old crew: Annie, Yule, Cole, and Lilly. We take a raw, unfiltered dive into our school Mercersburg, an extended look into privilege, empathy, and whether good intentions are ever enough.

Episode in a 🌰:

How should we give back? Do we owe anything at all? From trust funds to trickle-down ethics, this episode questions the morality of wealth, the possibility of true empathy, and whether growth matters more than happiness. Along the way, the group unpacks why privilege is so hard to define.

TIMESTAMPS:

[00:00:23] When does failure stop being a blessing?

[00:03:54] Privilege and addiction: is “just try harder” a fair stance?

[00:08:22] Is private school a bubble?

[00:13:14] Giving back: what counts, and when does it matter?

[00:19:39] Can you make change without money?

[00:27:01] Money. Do we even have an ultimate goal, or do our desires evolve?

[00:36:24] Empathy vs sympathy. Moral weight of inheritance

[00:48:44] Are we intellectually evolved enough to be truly moral?

🥜 Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

Is it worse to be born with privilege and do nothing, or to be born without it and never have to face the guilt?

Hope you enjoyed the ep!

The movie room turns into a Socratic forum. I am again with Yule Kwon, Annie Mohr, Lilly Killinger, and Cole Piraino, focused on the central question: Are we morally responsible for the underprivileged?

Episode in a 🌰:

The group debates what being morally good is like in a world with inequality. From Peter Singer to Elon Musk, they explore whether caring is enough, or if true morality demands real sacrifice. Along the way, they unpack wealth guilt, responsibility, the usefulness of failure, and how empathy might be more learned than innate.

TIMESTAMPS:

[00:00:23] Can people change? On valleys, resilience, and spiritual metaphors

[00:04:50] What does it mean to “lose your soul”? Money, morality, and happiness

[00:08:26] Peter Singer, guilt, and the inertia of privilege

[00:15:32] Should you blame yourself for someone else's suffering?

[00:19:59] Elon Musk, selfishness, and whether genius excuses immorality

[00:26:35] Wrapping up (recall to 3A) - Pain as blessings

🥜 Not-so-Hypothetical Nut of the Day:

We discuss Elon Musk, and also take ourselves as case studies. [Please note that all opinions only reflect that of the speaker's, and are not intended to offend!]

Hope you enjoyed the ep!