4.8 • 2.4K Ratings
🗓️ 18 December 2023
⏱️ 64 minutes
🧾️ Download transcript
Click on a timestamp to play from that location
0:00.0 | The Hey everybody this is James Lindsay and you are listening to the new Discourses Podcast |
0:25.0 | And I want to do something I mean it I don't like doing this I don't love doing this as a as a podcast but I do it a lot and what I want to do is I want to go through an essay I wrote on |
0:36.4 | new discourses recently that was extremely popular I got incredible feedback |
0:40.0 | some people got really mad which means it's really good which is titled the basis for |
0:44.3 | classical liberalism but I want to explore that idea a little further and draw out one of its |
0:48.5 | conclusions actually drawing it out back to the source where I originally got the idea and introduce you to |
0:55.3 | one of the most compelling books on classical liberalism and liberal thought that I've read in a long time, very long time, and that book is called |
1:06.8 | Kindly Inquisitors by Jonathan Rausch. |
1:10.0 | Jonathan Rausch unfortunately kind of didn't end up heating his own advice and got a nasty |
1:15.0 | case of TDS and critical care co-vidiously but so it goes that's beside the point the book was written in 1991 |
1:25.0 | kindly inquisitors and is shockingly prescient talking about what was coming in |
1:31.2 | terms of whether it's woke or political correctness or |
1:34.3 | whatever you want to call it. So having written this in 1991 which is you know |
1:38.7 | 32 years ago more 33 probably by the time he wrote it and have this much valuable stuff to say |
1:45.8 | is pretty remarkable when I read it a couple of years ago I was just shocked by |
1:51.1 | how overwhelmingly clear it is on what classical liberalism really is as a conflict |
1:58.5 | resolution system, as a, in particular the book is mostly about now what he refers to I think |
2:06.2 | awkwardly looking back on it now as liberal science I think that liberal science would be a |
2:12.3 | term especially we capitalize the L and the S, that at least |
2:15.7 | with its colloquial understanding would be something we look down on as the science, as a form of |
2:20.4 | scientism. That's not what he means by it. He's searching in the dark for a name |
2:25.3 | for the broadly fallibleist skepticism that drives Enlightenment liberal thinking in the domain of epistemology as opposed to how market economies arise in the domain of economics and |
... |
Please login to see the full transcript.
Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from New Discourses, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.
Generated transcripts are the property of New Discourses and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.
Copyright © Tapesearch 2025.