Podcasts about Bentham

Interview by Kris PetersAfter playing together in high school, guitarist Luke Bentham and drummer Kyle Fisher decided to take on the world by forming The Dirty Nil in 2006. The following year, they won the Juno Award for Breakthrough Group of the Year, kickstarting a career that would see the Canadian band rise to prominence over four albums and setting the band on a collision course with destiny.That meeting of superpowers seems set to transpire with the release of The Dirty Nil's fifth studio album, The Lash, on July 25. Recorded in just over two weeks, The Lash sees The Dirty Nil tap into an urgency of evolution that has been simmering quietly below the surface but has finally set itself free.Thematically, The Lash trades the band's usual romantic optimism for a cathartic scream, tackling everything from music industry burnout to heartbreak in a body of work that has been described as Luke's therapy record by Fisher. Stripping back the glitz and glam, The Dirty Nil go full-throttle on what matters most: no frills, just ferocity and good times in abundance.Bentham recently sat down with HEAVY to tell us more."We are gearing up to release our fifth studio album, The Lash, which unequivocally, in my opinion, is our best album," he began. "And I really do mean that sincerely. I know you probably get a lot of people on here saying that through perhaps gritted teeth, but this one, we do feel very strongly about it, and so we're extremely proud to present it to the world."We mention the more stripped back, raw sound promised on the album."The recording process was much faster and more stripped back than what we've pretty much ever done before," Bentham nodded. "We did it in two weeks with our friend down the street. Traditionally, we've worked with a producer from Seattle, who's an incredible producer with a huge resume of incredible albums, but this time we just did it with our friend down the street. So it was a very different process that way. During the album cycle for the last album, there wasn't a huge break or anything, and I think (with this one) we were just really feeling confident as a band, and the material came together very naturally and easily. I think that's part of the reason why I have such positive feelings about it, is because it wasn't a struggle."In the full interview, Luke highlighted the emotional depth of the album, expressing a connection to the darker aspects of human experience through music, and noted the introduction of strings as a new element in their sound. He shared an anecdote about a visit to the Vatican that inspired his songwriting, particularly a bronze relief that influenced the album's themes, although their attempt to use the artwork for the cover was halted by a cease and desist from the Vatican. He also reflected on the band's growth since their debut, emphasizing their increased musical competence and willingness to experiment, while remaining optimistic about future creative endeavours and more.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/heavy-music-interviews--2687660/support.

Tell Spencer your thoughts about this episode!Matthew Adelstein returns to Micro-Digressions to talk about the arguments for the existence of God at the top of his tier list. You can find his complete ranking of arguments for God's existence here:Arguments For God Tier-list - by Bentham's Bulldog

The boys drink and review Delicious IPA from Stone, then discuss prisons, and whether we're in a digital version of one. The "panopticon" is a prison design invented by the philosopher Jeremy Bentham. The idea is that if you make prisoners feel as if they're constantly under surveillance, the prisoners will regulate themselves and the guards won't have to bang them about so much. Modern prisons have adopted some of Bentham's ideas, but so have many other institutions. Foucault said this idea was the blueprint for all modern institutions. Schools, hospitals, and other organizations enforce conformity by defining what is "normal" and by constant surveillance. Stephen Cave added the concept of a "freedom quotient" by which we can determine how much freedom a person can exercise in any given situation. The boys tie it all together and ask whether the modern world is a digital prison. We know we're being surveilled. We know we're supposed to follow what the powerful have defined as "normal."

Merriam-Webster's Word of the Day for April 24, 2025 is: ostensible • ah-STEN-suh-bul • adjective Ostensible is used to describe something that seems or is said to be true or real, but is possibly not true or real. In other words, it is plausible rather than demonstrably true or real. // The ostensible purpose of a filibuster is to extend debate, but in reality it is used to delay or prevent action. See the entry > Examples: “No drums, no bass, no conventional song structures: Hosianna Mantra was a 40-minute contemplation of the cosmos and cosmic love, couched in words and sounds that explicitly linked it to humanity's grandest and most consistent way of considering meaning, religion. The ostensible polytheism conveyed by the name and the concept were only ways to realize how little we actually know, and how much we wager through mere survival.” — Grayson Haver Currin, Pitchfork, 19 Jan. 2025 Did you know? British philosopher and economist Jeremy Bentham once wrote to Indian religious leader Ram Mohan Roy asking him to “send me two letters—one confidential, another ostensible.” By ostensible he meant that, unlike the confidential letter, the latter was intended to be shown to people other than Bentham himself. This sense of ostensible shows clearly the influence of the word's Latin ancestor, the verb ostendere, meaning “to hold out for inspection,” “to show,” “to make clear by one's actions,” and “to demonstrate.” Ostensible is still used today as it is in Bentham's letter, but it is much more likely to suggest a discrepancy between a declared or implied aim or reason (i.e., the aim or reason that someone displays or “shows” to others) and the true one. For example, someone might give “seeing an old friend” as their ostensible reason for planning a trip when in reality they are planning on spending most of their time relaxing on the beach.

Part XVI - Jeremy Bentham, continued - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow For full shownotes visit: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Part XVI - Jeremy Bentham, continued - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow For full shownotes visit: https://monicaperezshow.com/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Part XV - Bentham - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Check out the book here: https://a.co/d/1qRii01 Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Part XV - Bentham - Join us for a reading and conversation about the 12 men who had the greatest influence on the way we think. Written in 1958, this work stands the test of time. There is no theory, conspiracy or otherwise, just the simple facts about these men, their thoughts and their influence--draw your own conclusions! Check out the book here: https://a.co/d/1qRii01 Support: True Hemp Science https://truehempscience.com/ PROMO CODE: MONICA Support me on substack for ad-free content, bonus material, personal chatting and more! https://substack.com/@monicaperezshow Become a PREMIUM SUBSCRIBER on Apple Podcasts for AD FREE episodes! all for the cost of one newspaper a month--i read the news so you dont have to! Find, Follow, Subscribe & Rate on your favorite podcasting platform AND for video and social & more... Rumble: https://rumble.com/user/monicaperezshow YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/MonicaPerez Twitter/X: @monicaperezshow Instagram: @monicaperezshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

One Piece pausiert. Der Bänder Talk geht in die 56. Runde. Unseren Helden gelingt die Flucht aus dem Impel Down. Ein Band voller Fan Service für Ruffy, Jimbei, Sir Crocodile aber auch Bentham. Wird es Ruffy gelingen seinen Bruder auf Marineford zu retten? Findet es in dieser Folge heraus!

00:00 34. Дженинз (Jenyns) 13:41 35. Галлер (Haller) 17:23 36. Кокки (Cocchi) 24:06 37. Руссо (Rousseau) 44:05 38. Линней (Linne) 50:28 39. Бюффон (Buffon) 1:00:58 40. Хоксуэрт (Hawkesworth) 1:06:27 41. Пэли (Paley) 1:25:50 42. Прессавен (Pressavin) 1:33:44 43. Бернарден де Сен-Пиерр (Bernardin de St. Pierre) 1:46:13 44. Франклин, Говард, Сведенборг, Веслей и Гиббон (Franklin, Howard, Swedenborg, Wesley, Gibbon) 1:56:48 45. Купер (Cowper) 2:04:11 46. Освальд (Oswald) 2:25:37 47. Шиллер (Shiller) 2:31:09 48. Бентам (Bentham) 2:40:40 49. Синклер (Sinclair) 2:45:56 50. Гуфеланд (Hufeland) 2:50:26 51. Ритсон (Ritson) 3:16:20 52. Никольсон (Nicolson) 3:45:53 53. Абернети (Abernethy) 3:56:31 54. Ламбе (Laambe) 4:29:05 55. Ньютон (Newton) 4:42:12 56. Глейзе (Gleizes) 5:25:30 57. Шелли (Shelley) 6:37:37 58. Байрон (Byron) 6:47:59 59. Филлипс (Phillips) 7:21:24 60. Ламартин (Lamartine) ▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

When the supernatural seeps into our world, it doesn't just leave behind fear—it can also leave sickness. From shadowy visitors to ominous dreams, some eerie paranormal encounters suggest that the price of witnessing the unknown may be paid in flesh and blood.IN THIS EPISODE: When the supernatural intrudes into our lives, it's not just our minds that are affected. We'll delve into a few bizarre cases where individuals fell gravely ill after brushes with the paranormal. Is it coincidence? Or something more sinister? And could these illnesses be due to the paranormal literally draining us of life? (Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned) *** Helen Duncan made a living from conducting séances—until her uncanny knowledge of classified World War II tragedies spooked British authorities. (Britain's Last Witch) *** Jeremy Bentham was a philosopher whose ideas about mortality and utility extended beyond death. Bentham's wish for his body to be preserved and displayed as an "auto-icon" – so it could be seen publicly by all. And while his wishes were granted, it came with a few hiccups along the way… mostly with his poor head. (The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse) *** Annie Dorman was discovered lifeless with a gunshot wound, sending shockwaves through her tight-knit community. Suicide seemed improbable, leaving detectives baffled and family perplexed. Was it a crime of passion, an accident, murder… or truly suicide? In a similar case, just a few years later, in the serene countryside of Greenwich, New York, the lifeless form of Maggie Hourigan is found, floating in a tranquil pool, speculation runs rampant. Were these cases suicide, as hastily concluded, horrible accidents… or sinister murders? (The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan) *** AND MORE!CHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Disclaimer and Lead-In00:02:28.923 = Show Open00:04:58.317 = Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned00:21:43.793 = The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan00:35:15.151 = Britain's Last Witch00:43:39.798 = The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse00:53:56.678 = Eccentric Habits of History's Elite01:03:57.830 = Show Close, Verse, and Final ThoughtSOURCES AND RESOURCES FROM THE EPISODE…“Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned” by Nick Redfern for Mysterious Universe:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/6bu93dju“The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan” by Robert Wilhelm for Murder By Gaslight:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/meu37k4m; https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/4y9mn9a4“The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse” by Melissa Sartore for Weird History: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/yt6uetju“Britain's Last Witch” by Parissa Djangi for National Geographic: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p8by87t“Eccentric Habits of History's Elite” by John Munoz for ListVerse: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/bdh2dw3x=====Darkness Syndicate members get the ad-free version. https://weirddarkness.com/syndicateInfo on the next LIVE SCREAM event. https://weirddarkness.com/LiveScreamInfo on the next WEIRDO WATCH PARTY event. https://weirddarkness.com/TV=====(Over time links seen above may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)= = = = ="I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness." — John 12:46= = = = =WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2025, Weird Darkness.=====Originally aired: April 17, 2024EPISODE PAGE at WeirdDarkness.com (includes list of sources): https://weirddarkness.com/SickenedByTheSupernatural

Tell Spencer your thoughts about this episode!Matthew Adelstein, the prolific young writer who posts at "Bentham's Bulldog" on Substack, has recently attracted attention for a tier ranking of philosophical arguments for the existence of God. Matthew and Spencer discuss the arguments at the bottom of his list, ascending from arguments that get an "F" to one in the C tier. 

When we built a calculator to help meat-eaters offset the animal welfare impact of their diet through donations (like carbon offsets), we didn't expect it to become one of our most effective tools for engaging new donors. In this post we explain how it works, why it seems particularly promising for increasing support for farmed animal charities, and what you can do to support this work if you think it's worthwhile. In the comments I'll also share our answers to some frequently asked questions and concerns some people have when thinking about the idea of an ‘animal welfare offset'. Background FarmKind is a donation platform whose mission is to support the animal movement by raising funds from the general public for some of the most effective charities working to fix factory farming. When we built our platform, we directionally estimated how much a donation to each of our [...] ---Outline:(00:50) Background(01:41) What it is and what it isn't(02:38) How it works(04:24) Why this is a promising way to encourage effective giving for animals(06:46) Case study: Bentham's Bulldog(07:30) How is this actionable for you?The original text contained 2 footnotes which were omitted from this narration. The original text contained 4 images which were described by AI. --- First published: February 11th, 2025 Source: https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/nGQRBWyCAbcEYSyLL/using-a-diet-offset-calculator-to-encourage-effective-giving --- Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO. ---Images from the article:Apple Podcasts and Spotify do not show images in the episode description. Try Pocket Casts, or another podcast app.

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit andrewsullivan.substack.comRoss is a writer and a dear old colleague, back when we were both bloggers at The Atlantic. Since then he's been a columnist at the New York Times — and, in my mind, he's the best columnist in the country. The author of many books, including Grand New Party and The Decadent Society, his new one is Believe: Why Everyone Should Be Religious (which you can pre-order now). So in this podcast, I play — literally — Devil's advocate. Forgive me for getting stuck on the meaning of the universe in the first 20 minutes or so. It picks up after that.For two clips of our convo — on the difference between proselytizing and evangelizing, and the “hallucinations of the sane” — see our YouTube page.Other topics: Creation; the improbable parameters of the Big Bang; the “fine-tuning” argument I cannot understand; extraterrestrial life; Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy; Hitch; the atheist/materialist view; the multiverse; quantum physics; consciousness; John von Neumann; Isaac Newton; human evolution; tribal survival; the exponential unity of global knowledge; Stephen Barr's Modern Physics and Ancient Faith; the substack Bentham's Bulldog; why humans wonder; miracles; Sebastian Junger and near-death experiences; the scientific method; William James; religious individualists; cults; Vatican II; Pope Francis; the sex-abuse crisis in the Church; suffering and theodicy; Lyme Disease; the AIDS crisis; Jesus and the Resurrection; Peter J Williams' Can We Trust the Gospels?; and the natural selection of religions.Browse the Dishcast archive for an episode you might enjoy (the first 102 are free in their entirety — subscribe to get everything else). Coming up: Jon Rauch on the tribalism of white evangelicals; Evan Wolfson on the history of marriage equality, Yoni Appelbaum on how America stopped building things, Chris Caldwell on the political shifts in Europe, Nick Denton on the evolution of new media, Francis Collins on faith and science, and Mike White of White Lotus fame. Please send any guest recs, dissents, and other comments to dish@andrewsullivan.com.

In this episode, I walk through my observations upon returning to the US from Japan and share what I witnessed after the outbreak of the LA fires, which have filled headlines worldwide.Commenting on current events is a bit out of the norm for the podcast. However, I offer a quick history of 13 years of life to help illustrate the personal perspective I have on the disaster. I also briefly mention Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue.For those of you who would like to get into the weeds with me about Alasdair MacIntyre's After Virtue, I wrote an all-to-short summary of his thesis below. He deserves to be studied deeply.In short, I will argue that we are indeed living in an age after virtue. A suffocating, growing, cold bureaucracy has filled that vacuum. But in the aftermath of the fires, I also witnessed the human spirit in the streets of Pasadena.The Enlightenment's MistakeAccording to MacIntyre, the Enlightenment thinkers (18th-century philosophers like Kant, Bentham) wanted to replace Aristotle's virtue ethics — which tied morality to shared human purpose (telos) — with “rational” systems like rights and utility. But by foregoing the idea that humans have a built-in moral purpose, they turned ethics into a free-for-all. Without a common “why” for morality, debates became clashes of personal preference, not mutual pursuits of truth through reason.The Death of VirtueAristotle's virtues (courage, justice, etc.) thrived in communities with shared goals. In the pursuit of maximizing individual freedom, the Enlightenment rejected Aristotelian virtue — throwing the baby out with the bathwater. People began treating ethics like a menu of opinions, prioritizing personal preference. This is why public discourse is so shrill in the modern era, according to MacIntyre. “Abortion is wrong” and “Gun ownership is wrong” are shallow arguments rooted in the speaker's likes and dislikes as opposed to a higher aim for human flourishing. This fractured the social fabric.MacIntry calls this emotivism. “X is wrong” just means “I dislike X.” Without a shared understanding of virtue, debates became manipulative power struggles. There's no common ground — just competing preferences.Bureaucracy's RiseInto this moral vacuum stepped bureaucrats. They claimed “neutral expertise” to manage society “scientifically.” But this is susceptible to human weakness and cowardice:* Managers pretend to be value-neutral but enforce their desires (profit, power, slacking off work, giving their friends a pass).* Institutions prioritize external goods (money, metrics) over internal goods (craftsmanship, care).In my opinion, this is one of many reasons why buildings are so ugly today. Craftsmanship is not valued today as it was in the old world. What is valued today is how quickly you can build something with efficiently priced labor and materials.Why Bureaucracy is a Moral Catastrophe* It Crowds Out Virtue: Bureaucracies reduce people to data points. Teachers “teach to tests,” universities chase quotas. Instead of mentoring students through childhood or accepting the most worthy applicant, for example, such moral judgment is replaced by compliance.* It Destroys Community: Bureaucracies fragment society into isolated individuals. In a virtuous society, communities cultivate trust through face-to-face relationships, reciprocal duties, and a common understanding of telos.This telos was perfectly illustrated in the generosity displayed after the outbreak of the LA fires. There was a shared story of “we're going to help each other out to rebuild”. Bureaucracies fragment these stories into isolated incidents to be "managed," divorcing actions from their moral context.To be honest, I deeply believe MacIntyre is right: We're in a moral dark age. But as I discuss in the episode, I saw decency in the aftermath of the fires. Fellow residents were lending a hand — no permits required. At the end of the day, Altadena and the Palisades will rebuild — not because a committee approved it, but because neighbors showed up.Books Mentioned In This Episode:When you purchase a book (or anything on Amazon) with the links below, you support me and the podcast at no extra cost to you:* After Virtue by Alasdair MacIntyreLinks to More Resources:* Americana at Brand* Rick Caruso* Hyatt Regency in Austin, TX* Buc-ee's* California, the most regulated state in the USA* Cafe Frosch in Kyoto* Yumeji Vintage Villa in Kyoto* Graduate Institute Geneva Maison de la Paix building* Picciotto Student Residence Building* Japan Tobacco International Building* WWOOF: World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms* Change.org Poll Demanding the Immediate Recall of LA Mayor Karen Bass* Learn Ikebana in Kobe (with me and a local expert!) on TripAdvisor* The Akiya Project on YouTube This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit akiyaproject.substack.com/subscribe

“Walking across some snowy fields with my dog, Toby, who joyfully runs up and bites the wind sock on my mic as he runs by.”

“My dog Toby joins in by digging in the earth next to me.”

Tyler and I spoke about view quakes from fiction, Proust, Bleak House, the uses of fiction for economists, the problems with historical fiction, about about drama in interviews, which classics are less read, why Jane Austen is so interesting today, Patrick Collison, Lord of the Rings… but mostly we talked about Shakespeare. We talked about Shakespeare as a thinker, how Romeo doesn't love Juliet, Girard, the development of individualism, the importance and interest of the seventeenth century, Trump and Shakespeare's fools, why Julius Cesar is over rated, the most under rated Shakespeare play, prejudice in The Merchant of Venice, Shakespeare as an economic thinker. We covered a lot of ground and it was interesting for me throughout. Here are some excerpts. Full transcript below.Henry Some of the people around Trump now, they're trying to do DOGE and deregulation and other things. Are there Shakespearean lessons that they should be bearing in mind? Should we send them to see the Henriad before they get started?Tyler Send them to read the Henriad before they get started. The complicated nature of power: that the king never has the power that he needs to claim he does is quite significant. The ways in which power cannot be delegated, Shakespeare is extremely wise on. And yes, the DOGE people absolutely need to learn those lessons.Henry The other thing I'd take from the Henriad is time moves way quicker than anyone thinks it does. Even the people who are trying to move quite quickly in the play, they get taken over very rapidly by just changing-Tyler Yes. Once things start, it's like, oh my goodness, they just keep on running and no one's really in control. And that's a Shakespearean point as well.And.Henry Let's say we read Shakespeare in a modern English version, how much are we getting?Tyler It'll be terrible. It'll be a negative. It will poison your brain. So this, to me, will be highly unfortunate. Better to learn German and read the Schlegel than to read someone turning Shakespeare into current English. The only people who could do it maybe would be like the Trinidadians, who still have a marvelous English, and it would be a completely different work. But at least it might be something you could be proud of.Transcript (prepared by AI)Henry Today, I am talking to Tyler Cowen, the economist, blogger, columnist, and author. Tyler works at George Mason University. He writes Marginal Revolution. He is a columnist at Bloomberg, and he has written books like In Praise of Commercial Culture and The Age of the Infovore. We are going to talk about literature and Shakespeare. Tyler, welcome.Tyler Good to chat with you, Henry.Henry So have you ever had a view quake from reading fiction?Tyler Reading fiction has an impact on you that accumulates over time. It's not the same as reading economics or philosophy, where there's a single, discrete idea that changes how you view the world. So I think reading the great classics in its entirety has been a view quake for me. But it's not that you wake up one morning and say, oh, I turned to page 74 in Thomas Mann's Magic Mountain, and now I realize that, dot, dot, dot. That's a yes and a no for an answer.Henry So you've never read Bleak House and thought, actually, I do see things slightly differently about Victorian London or the history of the –?Tyler Well, that's not a view quake. Certainly, that happens all the time, right? Slightly differently how you see Victorian London. But your overall vision of the world, maybe fiction is one of the three or four most important inputs. And again, I think it's more about the entirety of it and the diversity of perspectives. I think reading Proust maybe had the single biggest impact on me of any single work of fiction if I had to select one. And then when I was younger, science fiction had a quite significant impact on me. But I don't think it was the fictional side of science fiction that mattered, if that makes sense to you. Yeah, yeah, yeah. It was the models embodied in the stories, like, oh, the three laws of robotics. Well, I thought, well, what should those laws be like? I thought about that a good deal. So that would be another part of the qualified answer.Henry And what was it with Proust? The idea that people only care about what other people think or sexuality or consciousness?Tyler The richness of the internal life, the importance of both expectation and memory, the evanescence of actual events, a sense of humor.Henry It showed you just how significant these things are.Tyler And how deeply they can be felt and expressed. That's right. And there were specific pages early on in Swan's Way where it just hit me. So that's what I would say. Bleak House, I don't think, changed my views at all. It's one of my three or four favorite novels. I think it's one of the great, great, greats, as you have written yourself. But the notion that, well, the law is highly complex and reality is murky and there are all these deep mysteries, that all felt very familiar to me. And I had already read some number of newer sort of pseudo-Victorian novels that maybe do those themes in a more superficial way, but they introduce those themes to you. So you read Bleak House and you just say, well, I've imbibed this already, but here's the much better version of it.Henry One of the things I got from Bleak House, which it took me a couple of reads to get to, was how comfortable Dickens was with being quite a rational critic of the legal system and quite a credulous believer in spontaneous combustion and other things.Tyler Did Dickens actually believe in spontaneous combustion or is that a plot device? Like Gene Roddenberry doesn't actually believe in the transporter or didn't, as far as weHenry know. No, I think he believed. Yeah. Yeah. He defends it in the preface. Yeah.Tyler So it's not so confusing that there's not going to be a single behavioral model that captures deviations from rationality. So you end up thinking you ought to travel more, you ought to take in a lot of diverse different sources about our human beings behave, including from sociology, from anthropology. That makes it harder to be an economist, I would say it scatters your attention. You probably end up with a richer understanding of reality, but I'm not sure it's good for your research. It's probably bad for it.Henry It's not a good career move.Tyler It's not good for focus, but focus maybe can be a bit overrated.Henry Why are you more interested in fiction than other sort of people of a broadly rational disposition?Tyler Well, I might challenge the view that I'm of a broadly rational disposition. It's possible that all humans are roughly equally irrational, madmen aside, but if you mean the rationality community as one finds it in San Francisco, I think they're very mono in their approach to reasoning and that tends to limit the interests of many of them, not all, in fiction and travel. People are regional thinkers and in that region, San Francisco, there is incredible talent. It's maybe the most talented place in the world, but there's not the same kind of diversity of talents that you would find in London or New York and that somehow spreads to the broader ethos and it doesn't get people interested in fiction or for that matter, the visual arts very much.Henry But even in London, if I meet someone who's an economist or has an economics degree or whatever, the odds that they've read Bleak House or something are just so small.Tyler Bleak House is not that well read anymore, but I think an economist in London is likely to be much more well read than an economist in the Bay Area. That would be my prediction. You would know better than I would.Henry How important has imaginative literature been to you relative to other significant writers like philosophers or theoretical economists or something?Tyler Well, I'm not sure what you mean by imaginative literature. I think when I was 17, I read Olaf Stapleton, a great British author and Hegelian philosopher, and he was the first and first man and star maker, and that had a significant impact on me. Just how many visions you could put into a single book and have at least most of them cohere and make sense and inspire. That's one of the most imaginative works I've ever read, but people mean different things by that term.Henry How objectively can we talk about art?Tyler I think that becomes a discussion about words rather than about art. I would say I believe in the objective when it comes to aesthetics, but simply because we have no real choice not to. People actually, to some extent, trust their aesthetic judgments, so why not admit that you do and then fight about them? Trying to interject some form of extreme relativism, I think it's just playing a game. It's not really useful. Now, is art truly objective in the final metaphysical sense, in the final theory of the universe? I'm not sure that question has an answer or is even well-formulated, but I would just say let's just be objectivists when it comes to art. Why not?Henry What is wrong with historical fiction?Tyler Most of it bores me. For instance, I don't love Hilary Mantel and many very intelligent people think it's wonderful. I would just rather read the history. It feels like an in-between thing to me. It's not quite history. It's not quite fiction. I don't like biopics either when I go to the cinema. Yeah, I think you can build your own combination of extremes from history and fiction and get something better.Henry You don't have any historical fiction that you like, Penelope Fitzgerald, Tolstoy?Tyler Any is a strong word. I don't consider Tolstoy historical fiction. There's a historical element in it, as there is with say Vassily Grossman's Life and Fate or actually Dickens for that matter, but it's not driven by the history. I think it's driven by the characters and the story. Grossman comes somewhat closer to being historical fiction, but even there, I wouldn't say that it is.Henry It was written so close to the events though, right?Tyler Sure. It's about how people deal with things and what humanity means in extreme circumstances and the situations. I mean, while they're more than just a trapping, I never feel one is plodding through what happened in the Battle of Stalingrad when I read Grossman, say.Henry Yeah. Are there diminishing returns to reading fiction or what are the diminishing returns?Tyler It depends what you're doing in life. There's diminishing returns to most things in the sense that what you imbibe from your teen years through, say, your 30s will have a bigger impact on you than most of what you do later. I think that's very, very hard to avoid, unless you're an extreme late bloomer, to borrow a concept from you. As you get older, rereading gets better, I would say much better. You learn there are more things you want to read and you fill in the nooks and crannies of your understanding. That's highly rewarding in a way where what you read when you were 23 could not have been. I'm okay with that bargain. I wouldn't say it's diminishing returns. I would say it's altering returns. I think also when you're in very strange historical periods, reading fiction is more valuable. During the Obama years, it felt to me that reading fiction was somewhat less interesting. During what you might call the Trump years, and many other strange things are going on with AI, people trying to strive for immortality, reading fiction is much more valuable because it's more limited what nonfiction can tell you or teach you. I think right now we're in a time where the returns to reading more fiction are rapidly rising in a good way. I'm not saying it's good for the world, but it's good for reading fiction.Henry Do you cluster read your fiction?Tyler Sometimes, but not in general. If I'm cluster reading my fiction, it might be because I'm cluster reading my nonfiction and the fiction is an accompaniment to that. Say, Soviet Russia, I did some reading when I was prepping for Stephen Kotkin and for Russ Roberts and Vasili Grossman, but I don't, when it comes to fiction per se, cluster read it. No, I don't think you need to.Henry You're not going to do like, I'm reading Bleak House, so I'll do three other 1852 novels or three other Dickens novels or something like that.Tyler I don't do it, but I suspect it's counterproductive. The other Dickens novels will bore you more and they'll seem worse, is my intuition. I think the question is how you sequence works of very, very high quality. Say you just finished Bleak House, what do you pick up next? It should be a work of nonfiction, but I think you've got to wait a while or maybe something quite different, sort of in a way not different, like a detective story or something that won't challenge what has been cemented into your mind from Bleak House.Henry Has there been a decline of reading the classics?Tyler What I observe is a big superstar effect. I think a few authors, such as Jane Austen and Shakespeare, are more popular. I'm not completely sure they're more read, but they're more focal and more vivid. There are more adaptations of them. Maybe people ask GPT about them more. Really quite a few other works are much less read than would have been the case, say as recently as the 1970s or 1980s. My guess is, on the whole, the great works of fiction are much less read, but a few of them achieve this oversized reputation.Henry Why do you think that is?Tyler Attention is more scarce, perhaps, and social clustering effects are stronger through the internet. That would just be a guess.Henry It's not that we're all much more Jane Austen than we used to be?Tyler No, if anything, the contrary. Maybe because we're less Jane Austen, it's more interesting, because in, say, a Jane Austen novel, there will be sources of romantic tension not available to us through contemporary TV shows. The question, why don't they just sleep together, well, there's a potential answer in a Jane Austen story. In the Israeli TV show, Srugim, which is about modern Orthodox Jews, there's also an answer, but in most Hollywood TV, there's no answer. They're just going to sleep together, and it can become very boring quite rapidly.Henry Here's a reader question. Why is the market for classics so good, but nobody reads them? I think what they're saying is a lot of people aren't actually reading Shakespeare, but they still agree he's the best, so how can that be?Tyler A lot of that is just social conformity bias, but I see more and more people, and I mean intellectuals here, challenging the quality of Shakespeare. On the internet, every possible opinion will be expressed, is one way to put it. I think the market for classics is highly efficient in the following sense, that if you asked, say, GPT or Claude, which are the most important classics to read, that literally everything listed would be a great book. You could have it select 500 works, and every one of them would really be very good and interesting. If you look at Harold Bloom's list at the back of the Western canon, I think really just about every one of those is quite worthwhile, and that we got to that point is, to me, one of the great achievements of the contemporary world, and it's somewhat under-praised, because you go back in earlier points of time, and I think it's much less efficient, the market for criticism, if you would call it that.Henry Someone was WhatsAppping me the other day that GPT's list of 50 best English poets was just awful, and I said, well, you're using GPT4, o1 gives you the right list.Tyler Yeah, and o1 Pro may give you a slightly better list yet, or maybe the prompt has to be better, but it's interesting to me how many people, they love to attack literary criticism as the greatest of all villains, oh, they're all frustrated writers, they're all post-modernists, they're all extreme left-wingers. All those things might even be true to some extent, but the system as a whole, I would say completely has delivered, and especially people on the political and intellectual right, they often don't realize that. Just any work you want to read, if you put in a wee bit of time and go to a shelf of a good academic library, you can read fantastic criticism of it that will make your understanding of the work much better.Henry I used to believe, when I was young, I did sort of believe that the whole thing, oh, the Western canon's dying and everyone's given up on it, and I'm just so amazed now that the opposite has happened. It's very, very strong.Tyler I'm not sure how strong it is. I agree its force in discourse is strong, so something like, well, how often is it mentioned in my group chats? That's strongly rising, and that delights me, but that's a little different from it being strong, and I'm not sure how strong it is.Henry In an interview about your book Talent, you said this, “just get people talking about drama. I feel you learn a lot. It's not something they can prepare for. They can't really fake it. If they don't understand the topic, you can just switch to something else.”Tyler Yeah, that's great advice. You see how they think about how people relate to each other. It doesn't have to be fiction. I ask people a lot about Star Wars, Star Trek, whatever it is they might know that I have some familiarity with. Who makes the best decisions in Star Wars? Who gives the best advice? Yoda, Obi-Wan, Luke, Darth Vader, the Emperor?Henry It's a tough question.Tyler Yeah, yeah.Henry I don't know Star Wars, so I couldn't even answer that.Tyler You understand that you can't fake it. You can't prepare for it. It does show how the person thinks about advice and also drama.Henry Right. Now, you're a Shakespeare fan.Tyler Well, fan is maybe an understatement. He's better. He deserves better than fans.Henry How much of time, how much of your life have you spent reading and watching this work?Tyler I would say most of the plays from, say, like 1598 or 99 and after, I've read four to five times on average, some a bit more, some like maybe only three times. There's quite a few I've only read once and didn't like. Those typically are the earlier ones. When it comes to watching Shakespeare, I have to confess, I don't and can't understand it, so I'm really not able to watch it either on the stage or in a movie and profit from it. I think I partially have an auditory processing disorder that if I hear Shakespeare, you know, say at Folger in DC, I just literally cannot understand the words. It's like listening to Estonian, so I've gone some number of times. I cannot enjoy what you would call classic Shakespeare movies like Kenneth Branagh, Henry V, which gets great reviews, intelligent people love it. It doesn't click for me at all. I can't understand what's going on. The amount of time I've put into listening to it, watching it is very low and it will stay low. The only Shakespeare movies I like are the weird ones like Orson Welles' Chimes at Midnight or Baz Luhrmann's Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet. I think they're fantastic, but they're not obsessed with reciting the text.Henry So, you're reading with notes and you're piecing it together as you go.Tyler I feel the versions in my head are better than anything I see on the screen also, so that's another reason. I just think they're to be read. I fully understand that's not how Shakespeare seemed to view them, but that's a way in which we readers, in a funny way, can improve on Shakespeare's time.Henry No, I agree with you. The thing I get the most pushback about with Shakespeare is when I say that he was a great thinker.Tyler He's maybe the best thinker.Henry Right. But tell us what you mean by that.Tyler I don't feel I can articulate it. It's a bit like when o3 Pro gives you an answer so good you don't quite appreciate it yourself. Shakespeare is like o7 Pro or something. But the best of the plays seem to communicate the entirety of human existence in a way that I feel I can barely comprehend and I find in very, very little else. Even looking at other very great works such as Bleak House, I don't find it. Not all of the plays. There's very, very good plays that don't do that. Just say Macbeth and Othello. I don't feel do that at all. Not a complaint, but something like Hamlet or King Lear or Tempest or some of the comedies. It's just somehow all laid out there and all inside it at the same time. I don't know any other way of putting it.Henry A lot of people think that Shakespeare is overrated. We only read him because it's a status game. We've internalized these snobbish values. We see this stated a lot. What's your response to these people?Tyler Well, I feel sorry for them. But look, there's plenty of things I can't understand. I just told you if I go to see the plays, I'm completely lost. I know the fault is mine, so to speak. I don't blame Shakespeare or the production, at least not necessarily. Those are people who are in a similar position, but somehow don't have enough metarationality to realize the fault is on them. I think that's sad. But there's other great stuff they can do and probably they're doing it. That's fine.Henry Should everyone read Shakespeare at school?Tyler If you say everyone, I resist. But it certainly should be in the curriculum. But the real question is who can teach it? But yeah, it's better than not doing it. When I was in high school, we did Taming of the Shrew, which I actually don't like very much, and it put me off a bit. We did Macbeth, which is a much better play. But in a way, it's easy to teach. Macbeth, to me, is like a perfect two-minute punk rock song. It does something. It delivers. But it's not the Shakespeare that puts everything on the table, and the plot is easy to follow. You can imagine even a mediocre teacher leading students through it. It's to me still a little underwhelming if that's what we teach them. Then finally, my last year, we did Hamlet, and I'm like, whoa, okay, now I get it. Probably we do it wrong in a lot of cases, would be my guess. What's wrong with the Taming of the Shrew? It's a lot of yelling and screaming and ordinary. To me, it's not that witty. There's different views, like is it offensive to women, offensive to men? That's not my main worry. But those questions, I feel, also don't help the play, and I just don't think Shakespeare was fully mature when he wrote it. What was the year on that? Do you know offhand?Henry It's very early.Tyler It's very early. Very early, yeah. So if you look at the other plays that surround it, they're also not as top works. So why should we expect that one to be?Henry What can arts funding learn from the Elizabethan and Jacobean theatres?Tyler Current arts funding? I don't think that much. I think the situation right now is so different, and what we should do so depends on the country, the state, the province, the region. Elizabethan times do show that market support at art can be truly wonderful. We have plenty of that today. But if you're just, say, appointed to be chair of the NEA and you've got to make decisions, I'm not sure how knowing about Elizabethan theatre would help you in any direct way.Henry What do you think of the idea that the long history of arts funding is a move away from a small group, an individual patronage where taste was very important, towards a kind of institutional patronage, which became much more bureaucratic? And so one reason why we keep arguing about arts funding now is that a lot of it exhibits bad taste because the committee has to sort of agree on various things. And if we could reallocate somewhat towards individual patronage, we'd do better.Tyler I would agree with the latter two-thirds of that. How you describe earlier arts funding I think is more complicated than what you said. A lot of it is just people doing things voluntarily at zero pecuniary cost, like singing songs, songs around the campfire, or hymns in church, rather than it being part of a patronage model. But I think it's way overly bureaucratized. The early National Endowment for the Arts in the 1960s just let smart people make decisions with a minimum of fuss. And of course we should go back to that. Of course we won't. We send half the money to the state's arts agencies, which can be mediocre or just interested in economic development and a new arts center, as opposed to actually stimulating creativity per se. More over time is spent on staff. There are all these pressures from Congress, things you can't fund. It's just become far less effective, even though it spends somewhat more money. So that's a problem in many, many countries.Henry What Shakespeare critics do you like reading?Tyler For all his flaws, I still think Harold Bloom is worthwhile. I know he's gotten worse and worse as a critic and as a Shakespeare critic. Especially if you're younger, you need to put aside the Harold Bloom you might think you know and just go to some earlier Bloom. Those short little books he edited, where for a given Shakespeare play he'll collect maybe a dozen essays and write eight or ten pages at the front, those are wonderful. But Bradley, William Hazlitt, the two Goddard volumes, older works, I think are excellent. But again, if you just go, if you can, to a university library, go to the part on the shelf where there's criticism on a particular play and just pull down five to ten titles and don't even select for them and just bring those home. I think you'll learn a lot.Henry So you don't like The Invention of the Human by Bloom?Tyler Its peaks are very good, but there's a lot in it that's embarrassing. I definitely recommend it, but you need to recommend it with the caveat that a lot of it is over the top or bad. It doesn't bother me. But if someone professional or academic tells me they're totally put off by the book, I don't try to talk them out of that impression. I just figure they're a bit hopelessly stuck on judging works by their worst qualities.Henry In 2018, you wrote this, “Shakespeare, by the way, is Girard's most important precursor. Also throw in the New Testament, Hobbes, Tocqueville, and maybe Montaigne.” Tell us what you mean by that.Tyler That was pretty good for me to have written that. Well, in Shakespeare, you have rivalrous behavior. You have mimetic desire. You have the importance of twinning. There's ritual sacrifice in so many of the plays, including the political ones. Girard's title, Violence and the Sacred, also comes from Shakespeare. As you well know, the best Gerard book, Theater of Envy, is fully about Shakespeare. All of Girard is drenched with Shakespeare.Henry I actually only find Girard persuasive on Shakespeare. The further I get away from that, the more I'm like, this is super overstated. I just don't think this is how humans ... I think this is too mono-explanation of humans. When I read the Shakespeare book, I think, wow, I never understood Midsummer Night's Dream until I read Girard.Tyler I think it's a bit like Harold Bloom. There's plenty in Girard you can point to as over the top. I think also for understanding Christianity, he has something quite unique and special and mostly correct. Then on other topics, it's anthropologically very questionable, but still quite stimulating. I would defend it on that basis, as I would Harold Girard.Henry No, I like Gerard, but I feel like the Shakespeare book gets less attention than the others.Tyler That's right. It's the best one and it's also the soundest one. It's the truly essential one.Henry How important was Shakespeare in the development of individualism?Tyler Probably not at all, is my sense. Others know more about the history than I do, but if I think of 17th century England, where some strands of individualist thought come from, well, part of it is coming from the French Huguenots and not from Shakespeare. A lot of it is coming from the Bible and not from Shakespeare. The levelers, John Locke, some of that is coming from English common law and not from Shakespeare. Then there's the ancient world. I don't quite see a strong connection to Shakespeare, but I'd love it if you could talk me into one.Henry My feeling is that the 1570s are the time when diaries begin to become personal records rather than professional records. What you get is a kind of Puritan self-examination. They'll write down, I said this, I did this, and then in the margin they'll put, come back and look at this and make sure you don't do this again. This new process of overhearing yourself is a central part of what Shakespeare's doing in his drawing. I think this is the thing that Bloom gets right, is that as you go through the plays in order, you see the very strong development of the idea that a stock character or someone who's drawing on a tradition of stock characters will suddenly say, oh, I just heard myself say that I'm a villain. Am I a villain? I'm sort of a villain. Maybe I'm not a villain. He develops this great art of self-referential self-development. I think that's one of the reasons why Shakespeare became so important to being a well-educated English person, is that you couldn't really get that in imaginative literature.Tyler I agree with all that, but I'm not sure the 17th century would have been all that different without Shakespeare, in literary terms, yes, but it seemed to me the currents of individualism were well underway. Other forces sweeping down from Europe, from the further north, competition across nations requiring individualism as a way of getting more wealth, the beginnings of economic thought which became individualistic and gave people a different kind of individualistic way of viewing the world. It seems so over-determined. Causally, I wouldn't ascribe much of a role to Shakespeare, but I agree with every sentence you said and what you said.Henry Sure, but you don't think the role of imaginative literature is somehow a fundamental transmission mechanism for all of this?Tyler Well, the Bible, I think, was quite fundamental as literature, not just as theology. So I would claim that, but keep in mind the publication and folio history of Shakespeare, which you probably know better than I do, it's not always well-known at every point in time by everyone.Henry I think it's always well-known by the English.Tyler I don't know, but I don't think it's dominant in the way that, say, Pilgrim's Progress was dominant for a long time.Henry Sure, sure, sure. And you wouldn't then, what would you say about later on, that modern European liberalism is basically the culture of novel reading and that we live in a society that's shaped by that? Do you have the same thing, like it's not causal?Tyler I don't know. That's a tricky question. The true 19th century novel I think of as somewhat historicist, often nationalist, slightly collectivist, certainly not Marxist, but in some ways illiberal. And so many of the truly great novel writers were not so liberal. And the real liberal novels, like Mancini's The Betrothed, which I quite enjoy, but it's somewhat of a slight work, right? And it might be a slight work because it is happy and liberal and open-minded. There's something about the greatest of creators, they tend to be pessimistic or a bit nasty or there's some John Lennon in them, there's Jonathan Swift, Swift, it's complicated. In some ways he's illiberal, but he's considered a Tory and in many ways he's quite an extreme reactionary. And the great age of the novel I don't think of is so closely tied to liberalism.Henry One of the arguments that gets made is like, you only end up with modern European liberalism through a culture where people are just spending a lot of time reading novels and imagining what it is like to be someone else, seeing from multiple different perspectives. And therefore it's less about what is the quote unquote message of the story and more about the habitual practice of thinking pluralistically.Tyler I think I would be much more inclined to ascribe that to reading newspapers and pamphlets than novels. I think of novels as modestly reactionary in their net impact, at least in the 19th century. I think another case in point, not just Tolstoy, Thomas Mann, one of the great novelists, had bad politics, right, was through Germany in the first world war. So if you look at the very greatest novels, there's something a bit problematic about many of their creators. They're not Nazis, they're not Stalinists, but they're not where I'm at either.Henry Now in 2017, a lot of people were complaining about Donald Trump as Julius Caesar and there was some farce about a production, I think it was put on in New York or DC maybe. And you said, no, no, no, he's not Caesar. He's more like a Shakespearean fool because he's the truth teller. What do you think of that view now?Tyler That was a Bloomberg column I wrote, I think in 2017. And I think that's held up quite well. So there's many criticisms of Trump that he's some kind of fascist. I don't think those have held up very well. He is a remarkable orator, coiner of phrase, coiner of insults, teller of truths, combined with a lot of nonsense and just nonsense talk, like the Covfefe tweet or whatever it was. And there's something tragic about Trump that he may well fail even by his own standards. He has a phenomenal sense of humor. I think people have realized that more and more. The fact that his popularity has persisted has forced a lot of people to reexamine just Trump as an individual and to see what a truly unique talent he is, whether you like him as your president or not. And that, I think, is all Shakespearean.Henry Some of the people around Trump now, they're trying to do DOGE and deregulation and other things. Are there Shakespearean lessons that they should be bearing in mind? Should we send them to see the Henriad before they get started?Tyler Send them to read the Henriad before they get started. The complicated nature of power: that the king never has the power that he needs to claim he does is quite significant. The ways in which power cannot be delegated, Shakespeare is extremely wise on. And yes, the DOGE people absolutely need to learn those lessons.Henry The other thing I'd take from the Henriad is time moves way quicker than anyone thinks it does. Even the people who are trying to move quite quickly in the play, they get taken over very rapidly by just changing-Tyler Yes. Once things start, it's like, oh my goodness, they just keep on running and no one's really in control. And that's a Shakespearean point as well.Henry Yeah. Here's another quote from the Bloomberg column, “given Shakespeare's brilliance in dramatizing the irrational, one of my biggest fears is that Shakespeare is indeed still a thinker for our times.” Has that come more true in recent years?Tyler I think more true. So from my point of view, the world is getting weirder in some very good ways and in some very bad ways. The arbitrary exercise of power has become more thinkable. You see this from Putin. We may see it from China. In the Middle East, it's happened as well. So the notion also that rulers can be their own worst enemies or human beings can be their own worst enemies. I think we see more when the world is volatile than when the world is stable, almost definitionally.Henry You once said Julius Caesar was an overrated play. Tell us why.Tyler You know, I read it again after I wrote that and it went up in my eyes. But I suppose I still think it's a bit overrated by people who love it. It's one of these mono plays like Macbeth or Othello. It does one thing very, very well. I think the mystical elements in it I had underappreciated on earlier readings and the complexity of the characters I had underappreciated. So I feel I was a little harsh on it. But I just wouldn't put it in the underrated category. Julius Caesar is such a well-known historical figure. It's so easy for that play to become focal. And Brutus and, you know, the stabbing, the betrayal, it's a little too easy for it to become famous. And I guess that's why I think within the world of Shakespeare fans, it still might be a little overrated.Henry It's written at a similar time to Hamlet and Twelfth Night, and I think it gets caught up in the idea that this was a great pivotal moment for Shakespeare. But actually I agree, over the years I've come to think it's really just not the equal of the other plays it's surrounded by.Tyler Yeah, that's still my view. Absolutely. Not the equal of those two, certainly.Henry What is the most underrated play?Tyler I'm not sure how they're all rated. So I used to think Winter's Tale, clearly. But I've heard so many people say it's the most underrated, including you, I think. I don't know if I can believe that anymore. So I think I have to go with The Henriad, because to me that's the greatest thing Shakespeare ever did. And I don't think it's commonly recognized as such. I mean, Hamlet or King Lear would typically be nominated. And those are top, top, top, top. But I'll still go with The Henriad.Henry You are saying Henriad above Hamlet, above Lear, above Twelfth Night.Tyler Maybe it's not fair because you have multiple plays, right? What if, you know, there were three Hamlets? Maybe that would be better. But still, if I have to pick, no one of The Henriad comes close to Hamlet. But if you can consider it as a whole in the evolution of the story, for me it's a clear winner. And it's what I've learned the most from. And a problem with Hamlet, not Shakespeare's fault, but Hamlet became so popular you hear lesser versions of themes and ideas from Hamlet your whole life. It's a bit like seeing Mondrian on the shopping bag. That does not happen, really, with The Henriad. So that has hurt Hamlet, but without meaning it's, you know, a lesser play. King Lear, you have less of that. It's so bleak and tragic. It's harder to put on the shopping bag, so to speak. In that sense, King Lear has held up a bit better than Hamlet has.Henry Why do you admire The Winter's Tale so much? What do you like about it?Tyler There's some mysterious sense of beauty in it that even in other Shakespearean plays I don't feel. And a sense of miracle and wonder, also betrayal and how that is mixed in with the miracle and wonder. Somehow he makes it work. It's quite an unlikely play. And the jealousy and the charge of infidelity I take much more seriously than other readers of the play do. I don't think you can say there's a Straussian reading where she clearly fooled around on the king. But he's not just crazy, either. And there are plenty of hints that something might have happened. It's still probably better to infer it didn't happen. But it's a more ambiguous play than it is typically read as.Henry Yes, someone said to me, ask if he thinks Hermione has an affair. And you're saying maybe.Tyler Again, in a prediction market, I'll bet no, but we're supposed to wonder. We're not supposed to just think the king is crazy.Henry I know you don't like to see it, but my view is that because we believe in this sudden jealousy theory, it's often not staged very well. And that's one reason why it's less popular than it ought to be.Tyler I've only seen it once. I suspect that was true. I saw it, in fact, last year. And the second half of the play was just awful. The first half, you could question. But it was a painful experience. It was just offensively stupid. One of the great regrets of my life is I did not drive up to New York City to see Bergman present his version of Winter's Tale in Swedish. And I'm quite sure that would have been magnificent and that he would have understood it very deeply and very well. That was just stupid of me. This was, I think, in the early 90s. I forget exactly when.Henry I think that's right. And there's a theater library where if you want to go and sit in the archive, you can see it.Tyler I will do that at some point. Part of my worry is I don't believe their promise. I know you can read that promise on the internet, but when you actually try to find the person who can track it down for you and give you access, I have my doubts. If I knew I could do it, I would have done it by now.Henry I'll give you the email because I think I actually found that person. Does Romeo actually love Juliet?Tyler Of course not. It's a play about perversion and obsession and family obligation and rebellion. And there's no love between the two at all. And if you read it with that in mind, once you see that, you can't unsee it. So that's an underrated play. People think, oh, star-crossed teen romance, tragic ending, boo-hoo. That's a terrible reading. It's just a superficial work of art if that's what you think it is.Henry I agree with you, but there are eminent Shakespeare professors who take that opinion.Tyler Well maybe we're smarter than they are. Maybe we know more about other things. You shouldn't let yourself be intimidated by critics. They're highly useful. We shouldn't trash them. We shouldn't think they're all crummy left-wing post-modernists. But at the end of the day, I don't think you should defer to them that much either.Henry Sure. So you're saying Juliet doesn't love Romeo?Tyler Neither loves the other.Henry Okay. Because my reading is that Romeo has a very strong death drive or dark side or whatever.Tyler That's the strong motive in the play is the death drive, yeah.Henry And what that means is that it's not his tragedy, it's her tragedy. She actually is an innocent young girl. Okay, maybe she doesn't love him, it's a crush or it's whatever, but she actually is swept up in the idea of this handsome stranger. She can get out of her family. She's super rebellious. There's that wonderful scene where she plays all sweetness and light to her nurse and then she says, I'm just lying to you all and I'm going to get out of here. Whereas he actually is, he doesn't have any romantic feeling for her. He's really quite a sinister guy.Tyler Those are good points. I fully agree. I still would interpret that as she not loving him, but I think those are all good insights.Henry You've never seen it staged in this way? You've never seen any one?Tyler The best staging is that Baz Luhrmann movie I mentioned, which has an intense set of references to Haitian voodoo in Romeo and Juliet when you watch the movie. The death drive is quite clear. That's the best staging I know of, but I've never seen it on the stage ever. I've seen the Zeffirelli movie, I think another film instance of it, but no, it's the Haitian voodoo version that I like.Henry He makes it seem like they love each other, right?Tyler In a teenage way. I don't feel that he gets it right, but I feel he creates a convincing universe through which the play usefully can be viewed.Henry The Mercutio death, I think, is never going to be better than in that film. What do you like about Antonin Cleopatra?Tyler It's been a long time since I've read that. What a strong character she is. The sway people can exercise over each other. The lines are very good. It's not a top Shakespeare favorite of mine, but again, if anyone else had done it, you would just say this is one of the greatest plays ever, and it is.Henry I think it's going to be much more of a play for our times because many people in the Trump administration are going to have that. They're torn between Rome and Egypt, as it were, and the personal conflicts are going to start getting serious for them, if you like.Tyler There's no better writer or thinker on personal conflict than Shakespeare, right?Henry Yes. Now, you do like Measure for Measure, but you're less keen on All's Well That Ends Well. Is that right?Tyler I love Measure for Measure. To me, it's still somewhat underrated. I think it's risen in status. All's Well That Ends Well, I suspect you need to be good at listening to Shakespeare, which as I've already said, I'm not. It's probably much better than I realize it is for that reason. I'm not sure on the printed page it works all that well.Henry Yeah. That's right. I think it's one of the most important plays. Why? Because I think there are two or three basic factors about Shakespeare's drama, which is like the story could often branch off in different directions. You often get the sense that he could swerve into a different genre. The point Samuel Johnson made about whenever someone's running off to the tavern, someone else is being buried, right? And a lot of the time he comes again and again to the same types of situations, the same types of characters, the same types of family set up. And he ends the plays in different ways and he makes it fall out differently. And I think Helena is very representative of a lot of these facets. Everyone thinks she's dead, but she's not dead. Sometimes it looks like it's going badly for her when actually it's going well. No one in the play ever really has an honest insight into her motives. And there comes a point, I think, when just the overall message of Shakespeare's work collectively is things go very wrong very quickly. And if you can get to some sort of happy ending, you should take it. You should be pragmatic and say, OK, this isn't the perfect marriage. This isn't the perfect king. But you know what? We could be in a civil war. Everyone could be dead. All's well that ends well. That's good advice. Let's take it.Tyler I should reread it. Number one in my reread pile right now is Richard II, which I haven't read in a long time. And there's a new biography out about Richard II. And I'm going to read the play and the biography more or less in conjunction. And there's a filming of Richard II that I probably won't enjoy, but I'll try. And I'm just going to do that all together, probably sometime over this break. But I'll have all's well that ends well is next on my reread list. You should always have a Shakespeare to reread list, right?Henry Always. Oh, of course. Is Shakespeare a good economic thinker?Tyler Well, he's a great thinker. I would say he's better than a good economic thinker. He understands the motive of money, but it's never just the motive of money. And Shakespeare lowers the status of economic thinking, I would say, overall, in a good way. He's better than us.Henry What are your thoughts on The Merchant of Venice?Tyler Quite underrated. People have trouble with it because it is very plausibly anti-Semitic. And everyone has to preface any praise they give it with some kind of disavowal or whatever. The way I read the play, which could be wrong, but it's actually more anti-anti-Semitic than it is anti-Semitic. So the real cruel mean people are those who torment the Jew. I'm not saying Shakespeare was not in some ways prejudiced against Jews and maybe other groups, but actually reading it properly should make people more tolerant, not because they're reacting against Shakespeare's anti-Semitism, but because the proper message of the play understood at a deeper level is toleration.Henry You teach a law and literature class, I think.Tyler Well, I did for 20 years, but I don't anymore.Henry Did you teach Merchant of Venice?Tyler I taught it two or three times, yes.Henry How did your students react to it?Tyler Whenever I taught them Shakespeare, which was actually not that much, they always liked it, but they didn't love it. And there's some version of Shakespeare you see on the screen when it's a decent but not great filmed adaptation where there's the mechanics of the plot and you're held in suspense and then there's an ending. And I found many of them read Shakespeare in those terms and they quite enjoyed it, but somehow they didn't get it. And I think that was true for Merchant of Venice as well. I didn't feel people got hung up on the anti-Semitism point. They could put that aside and just treat it as a play, but still I didn't feel that people got it.Henry Should we read Shakespeare in translation?Tyler Well, many people have to. I've read some of the Schlegel translations. I think they're amazing. My wife, Natasha, who grew up in the Soviet Union, tells me there are very good Russian language translations, which I certainly believe her. The Schlegels are different works. They're more German romantic, as you might expect, but that's fine, especially if you know the original. My guess is there are some other very good translations. So in that qualified way, the translations, a few of them can be quite valuable. I worry that at some point we'll all need to read it in some sort of translation, as Chaucer is mostly already true for Chaucer. You probably don't have to read Chaucer in translation, but I do.Henry I feel like I shouldn't read it in translation, I think.Tyler But you do, right? Or you don't?Henry No, I read the original. I make myself do the original.Tyler I just can't understand the original well enough.Henry But I put the time in when I was young, and I think you retain a sense of it. Do you think, though, if we read, let's say we read Shakespeare in a modern English version, how much are we getting?Tyler It'll be terrible. It'll be a negative. It will poison your brain. So this, to me, will be highly unfortunate. Better to learn German and read the Schlegel than to read someone turning Shakespeare into current English. The only people who could do it maybe would be like the Trinidadians, who still have a marvelous English, and it would be a completely different work. But at least it might be something you could be proud of.Henry I'd like to read some of that. That would be quite an exciting project.Tyler Maybe it's been done. I don't know. But just an Americanized Hollywood version, like, no, that's just a negative. It's destructive.Henry Now, you're very interested in the 17th century, which I think is when we first get steady economic growth, East India Company, England is settling in America.Tyler Political parties. Some notion of the rule of law. A certain theory of property rights. Very explicit individualism. Social contract theories. You get Hobbes, Isaac Newton, calculus. We could go on. Some people would say, well, Westphalia, you get the modern nation state. That to me is a vaguer date to pin that on. But again, it's a claim you can make of a phenomenal century. People aren't that interested in it anymore, I think.Henry How does Shakespeare fit into this picture?Tyler Well, if you think of the years, if you think of the best ones, they start, like what, 1598, 1599. And then by 1600, they're almost all just wonderful. He's a herald. I don't think he's that causal. But he's a sign, the first totally clear sign that all the pieces have fallen into place. And we know the 17th century gave us our greatest thinker. And in terms of birth, not composition, it gave us our greatest composer, Bach.Henry So we can't have Shakespeare without all of this economic and philosophic and political activity. He's sort of, those things are necessary conditions for what he's doing.Tyler He needed the 16th century, and there's some very good recent books on how important the 16th century was for the 17th century. So I think more and more, as I read more, I'll come to see the roots of the 17th and the 16th century. And Shakespeare is reflecting that by bridging the two.Henry What are the recent books that you recommend about the 16th century?Tyler Oh, I forget the title, but there's this book about Elizabethan England, came out maybe three or four years ago, written by a woman. And it just talks about markets and commerce and creativity, surging during that time. In a way, obvious points, but she put them together better than anyone else had. And there's this other new German book about the 16th century. It's in my best of the year list that I put up on Marginal Revolution, and I forget the exact title, but I've been reading that slowly. And that's very good. So I expect to make further intellectual moves in that direction.Henry Was Shakespeare anti-woke?Tyler I don't know what that means in his context. He certainly understands the real truths are deeper, but to pin the word anti on him is to make him smaller. And like Harold Bloom, I will refuse to do that.Henry You don't see some sense in which ... A lot of people have compared wokeness to the Reformation, right? I mean, it's a kind of weak comparison.Tyler Yes, but only some strands of it. You wouldn't say Luther was woke, right?Henry But you don't see some way in which Shakespeare is, not in an anti way, in a complicated way, but like a reaction against some of these forces in the way that Swift would be a reaction against certain forces in his time.Tyler Well I'm not even sure what Shakespeare's religion was. Some people claim he was Catholic. To me that's plausible, but I don't know of any clear evidence. He does not strike me as very religious. He might be a lapsed Catholic if I had to say. I think he simply was always concerned with trying to view and present things in a deeper manner and there were so many forces he could have been reacting against with that one. I don't know exactly what it was in the England of his time that specifically he was reacting against. If someone says, oh, it was the strand of Protestant thought, I would say fine, it might have been that. A la Peter Thiel, couldn't you say it's over determined and name 47 other different things as well?Henry Now, if you were talking to rationalists, effective altruists, people from Silicon Valley, all these kinds of groups, would you say to them, you should read Shakespeare, you should read fiction, or would you just say, you're doing great, don't worry that you're missing out on this?Tyler Well, I'm a little reluctant to just tell people you should do X. I think what I've tried to do is to be an example of doing X and hope that example is somewhat contagious. Other people are contagious on me, as for instance, you have been. That's what I like to do. Now, it's a question, if someone needs a particular contagion, does that mean it's high marginal value or does it mean, in some sense, they're immue from the bug and you can't actually get them interested? It can go either way. Am I glad that Peter Singer has specialized in being Peter Singer, even though I disagree with much of it? I would say yes. Peter had his own homecoming. As far as I know, it was not Shakespearean, but when he wrote that book about the history of Vienna and his own family background, that was in a sense Peter doing his version of turning Shakespearean. It was a good book and it deepened his thought, but at the end of the day, I also see he's still Peter Singer, so I don't know. I think the Shakespearean perspective itself militates a bit against telling people they should read Shakespeare.Henry Sure. Patrick Collison today has tweeted about, I think, 10 of the great novels that he read this year. It's a big, long tweet with all of his novels.Tyler Yeah, it's wonderful.Henry Yeah, it's great. At the end, he basically says the reason to read them is just that they're great. Appreciation of excellence is a good thing for its own sake. You're not going to wrench a utilitarian benefit out of this stuff. Is that basically your view?Tyler I fully agree with that, but he might slightly be underrating the utilitarian benefits. If you read a particular thing, whatever it is, it's a good way of matching with other people who will deepen you. If it's Shakespeare, or if it's science fiction, or if it's economics, I think there's this big practical benefit from the better matching. I think, actually, Patrick himself, over time in his life, he will have a different set of friends, somewhat, because he wrote that post, and that will be good.Henry There's a utilitarian benefit that we both love Bleak House, therefore we can talk about it. This just opens up a lot of conversation and things for us that we wouldn't otherwise get.Tyler We're better friends, and we're more inclined to chat with each other, do this podcast, because we share that. That's clearly true in our case. I could name hundreds of similar cases, myself, people I know. That's important. So much of life is a matching problem, which includes matching to books, but also, most importantly, matching to people.Henry You're what? You're going to get better matching with better books, because Bleak House is such a great book. You're going to get better opportunities for matching.Tyler Of course, you'll understand other books better. There's something circular in that. I get it. A lot of value is circular, and the circle is how you cash in, not leaving the circle, so that's fine.Henry You don't think there's a ... I mean, some of the utilitarian benefits that are claimed like it gives you empathy, it improves your EQ or whatever, I think this is all complete rubbish.Tyler I'd love to see the RCTs, but in the prediction markets, I'll bet no. But again, I have an open mind. If someone had evidence, they could sway me, but I doubt it. I don't see it.Henry But I do think literature is underrated as a way of thinking.Tyler Yes, absolutely, especially by people we are likely to know.Henry Right. And that is quite a utilitarian benefit, right? If you can get yourself into that mindset, that is directly useful.Tyler I agree. The kind of career I've had, which is too complicated to describe for those of you who don't know it, but I feel I could not have had it without having read a lot of fiction.Henry Right. And I think that would be true for a lot of people, even if they don't recognize it directly in their own lives, right?Tyler Yes. In Silicon Valley, you see this huge influence of Lord of the Rings. Yes. And that's real, I think. It's not feigned, and that's also a great book.Henry One of the best of the 20th century, no doubt.Tyler Absolutely. And the impact it has had on people still has. It's an example of some classics get extremely elevated, like Shakespeare, Austen, and also Tolkien. It's one of them that just keeps on rising.Henry Ayn Rand is quite influential.Tyler Increasingly so. And that has held up better than I ever would have thought. Depends on the book. It's complicated, but yes, you have to say, held up better than one ever would have thought.Henry Are you going to go and do a reread?Tyler I don't think I can. I feel the newspaper is my reread of Atlas Shrugged, that suffices.Henry Is GPT good at Shakespeare, or LLMs generally?Tyler They're very useful for fiction, I've found. It was fantastic for reading Vassily Grossman's Life and Fate. I have never used them for Shakespeare, not once. That's an interesting challenge, because it's an earlier English. There's a depth in Shakespeare that might exceed current models. I'd love to see a project at some point in time to train AI for Shakespeare the way some people are doing it for Math Olympiads. But finding the human graders would be tough, though not impossible. You should be one of them. I would love that. I hope some philanthropist makes that happen.Henry Agreed. We're here, and we're ready.Tyler Yes, very ready.Henry What do you think about Shakespeare's women?Tyler The best women in all of fiction. They're marvelous, and they're attractive, and they're petulant, and they're romantic, and they're difficult, and they're stubborn, or whatever you want, it's in there. Just phenomenal. It's a way in which Shakespeare, again, I don't want to say anti-woke, but he just gives you a much deeper, better vision than the wokes would give you. Each one is such a distinctive voice. Yeah, fantastic. In a funny way, he embodies a lot of woke insights. The ways in which gender becomes malleable in different parts of stories is very advanced for his time.Henry It's believable also. The thing that puzzles me, so believable. What puzzles me is he's so polyphonic, and he represents that way of thinking so well, but I get the sense that John Stuart Mill, who wrote the Bentham essay and everything, just wasn't that interested in Shakespeare relative to the other things he was reading.Tyler He did write a little bit on Shakespeare, didn't he? But not much. But it wasn't wonderful. It was fine, but not like the Bentham Coleridge.Henry I think I've seen it in letters where he's like, oh, Shakespeare, pretty good. This, to me, is a really weird gap in the history of literature.Tyler But this does get to my point, where I don't think Shakespeare was that important for liberalism or individualism. The people who were obsessed with Shakespeare, as you know, were the German romantics, with variants, but were mostly illiberal or non-liberal. That also, to me, makes sense.Henry That's a good point. That's a good challenge. My last question is, you do a lot of talent spotting and talent assessing. How do you think about Shakespeare's career?Tyler I feel he is someone I would not have spotted very well. I feel bad about that. We don't know that much about him. As you well know, people still question if Shakespeare was Shakespeare. That's not my view. I'm pretty orthodox on the matter. But what the signs would have been in those early plays that he would have, say, by so far have exceeded Marlowe or even equaled Marlowe, I definitely feel I would have had a Zoom call with him and said, well, send me a draft, and read the early work, and concluded he would be like second-tier Marlowe, and maybe given him a grant for networking reasons, totally missed the boat. That's how I assess, how I would have assessed Shakespeare at the time, and that's humbling.Henry Would you have been good at assessing other writers of any period? Do you think there are other times when you would have?Tyler If I had met young Thomas Mann, I think there's a much greater chance I would have been thrilled. If I had met young Johann Sebastian Bach, I think there's a strong chance I would have been thrilled. Now, music is different. It's like chess. You can excel at quite a young age. But there's something about the development of Shakespeare where I think it is hard to see where it's headed early on. And it's the other question, how would I have perceived Shakespeare's work ethic? There's different ways you could interpret the biography here. But the biography of Bach, or like McCartney, clearly just obsessed with work ethic. You could not have missed it if you met young Bach, I strongly suspect. But Shakespeare, it's not clear to me you would see the work ethic early on or even later on.Henry No, no. I agree with that, actually.Tyler Same with Goethe. If I met early Goethe, my guess is I would have felt, well, here's the next Klopstock, which is fine, worthy of a grand. But Goethe was far more than that. And he always had these unfinished works. And you would, oh, come on, you're going to finish this one. Like you'd see Werther. OK, you made a big splash. But is your second novel just going to bomb? I think those would have been my hesitations. But I definitely would have funded Goethe as the next Klopstock, but been totally wrong and off base.Henry Right. And I think the thing I took away from the A.N. Wilson biography, which you also enjoyed recently, was I was amazed just how much time Goethe didn't spend working. Like I knew he wasn't always working, but there was so much wasted time in his life.Tyler Yes, but I do wonder with that or any biography, and I don't mean this as a criticism of Wilson, I think we know much less than we think we do about earlier times in general. So he could have been doing things that don't turn up in any paperwork. Sure, sure, sure. So I'm not sure how lazy he was, but I would just say, unlike Bach or say Paul McCartney, it's not evident that he was the world's hardest worker.Henry And Mozart, would you have? How do you feel about Mozart's early career?Tyler Well, Mozart is so exceptional, so young, it's just very easy to spot. I don't I don't even think there's a puzzle there unless you're blind. Now, I don't love Mozart before, I don't know, like the K-330s maybe, but still as a player, even just as a lower quality composer, I think you would bet the house on Mozart at any age where you could have met him and talked to him.Henry So you think K-100s, you can see the beginnings of the great symphonies, the great concertos?Tyler Well, I would just apply the Cowen test at how young in age was this person trying at all? And that would just dominate and I wouldn't worry too much about how good it was. And if I heard Piano Concerto No. 9, which is before K-330, I'm pretty sure that's phenomenal. But even if I hadn't heard that, it's like this guy's trying. He's going to be on this amazing curve. Bet the house on Mozart. It's a no-brainer. If you don't do that, you just shouldn't be doing talent at all. He's an easy case. He's one of the easiest cases you can think of.Henry Tyler Cowen, this was great. Thank you very much.Tyler Thank you very much, Henry. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk/subscribe

Professor Philip Schofield hosts Social Scientist Dr Jonathan Galton, to explore his research into the perceived political tension on the progressive left between queerness and Islam. Discussing the historical and cultural context surrounding queerness and Islam, they find surprising affinities between Bentham's writing on freedom of religion and sexual liberty, and the contemporary theological work reinterpreting Quranic verses on homosexuality today. Host: Professor Philip Schofield (Director of the Bentham Project, UCL) Guest: Dr Jonathan Galton (IOE - Social Research Institute, UCL) Commissioners: Professor David Docherty OBE & Dr Paul Ayris (Pro-Vice-Provost LCCOS: Library, Culture, Collections and Open Science, UCL) Director: Justin Hardy (IOE - Culture, Communication & Media, UCL) Producer: Stevie Doran Date: 21 October 2024 Duration: 26:35

Hello Interactors,We've entered fall here in the northern hemisphere, and you know what that means — pumpkin spice everything, cozy sweaters, and … economics! That's right, as the leaves change color (at least for those above 40°N latitude), it's the perfect time to explore how the changing seasons mirror shifts in human interaction, from the flow of resources to the balance of power and progress. This week, it's time to cozy up with Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham, and James Watt —three names you probably didn't expect to find together, but trust me, they make quite the trio. So grab your favorite fall beverage and join me on a journey through the Industrial Revolution, steam engines, and the forgotten role of moral feedback loops in economics. Let's find out why balancing wealth and well-being is harder than finding a public restroom in an old university. PURGING THE URGE FOR SYMPATHYI needed to pee. More specifically, the stretch receptors in the walls of my bladder, which monitor the volume of urine inside, became activated. That sent sensory signals to the spinal cord and brain through my pelvic nerves. The pons in the brainstem (which includes a dedicated urination control center) processed this information in coordination with my prefrontal cortex, which allowed for conscious control over my decision to urinate.It was a Sunday, and the campus was dead. Lucky for me a door was open, so I ducked in and began my search for a potty. The hallway was musty and narrow. The walls were old, but not as old as the 250-year-old structure surrounding it. There was no immediately visible sign for a restroom, but there were numerous potential doors and directions for me to attempt. As I approached one of them, the industrial grade door magically opened before I could even touch it. I cautiously inched forward half wondering if it would lock behind me.Now inside another chamber further in the interior, I was met with another set of mysterious doors. I stepped inside another narrower hallway that twisted suddenly to a sign above another door that read WC. Whatever Potter-esque ghosts had guided me here clearly had sympathy. And so did my parasympathetic nervous system. It simultaneously signaled the detrusor muscle of my bladder wall to contract and my urethral sphincter to relax. I stood there in relief wondering if I could find my way out.I was visiting the University of Glasgow, hoping to learn more about its famous figures, especially Adam Smith, whom I see as an important moral philosopher rather than just the “father of economics.” A few days later in Edinburgh, I tortured my family by leading them on a search for his gravestone. I was pleased to find it acknowledged his The Theory of Moral Sentiments, where sympathy balances self-interest, as well as his more popular The Wealth of Nations. Unsurprisingly, the nearby tourist plaque focused only on Wealth of Nations, reflecting the emphasis on economics over his broader moral philosophy.Adam Smith's moral philosophy was central to his life's work, with The Theory of Moral Sentiments being his enduring focus, while The Wealth of Nations but a brief but significant interlude. For Smith, economics was not just about market mechanics, but deeply intertwined with human nature, ethics, and the broader pursuit of communal well-being. He was more concerned with the motivations behind human actions than with the technical details of market forces, which came to dominate modern economics. Smith believed that the drive for self-betterment was not solely about personal wealth but was intrinsically linked to the well-being of communities, where self-interest was balanced by sympathy for others.In Smith's view, economic actions should be guided by moral virtues, such as prudence and justice, ensuring that individual efforts to improve one's own life would ultimately contribute to the greater good of society. His exploration of economics was always part of a larger moral framework, where community engagement and ethical behavior were essential for both individual and societal progress. Today, this broader moral context is often overlooked, but for Smith, economics was inseparable from philosophical inquiry into human behavior. He emphasized how the improvement of human life goes far beyond just the accumulation of material wealth.MORALS MEET MARKET MANIPULATIONMany conservatives today may brush this interpretation as being too ‘woke'. Well, some eventually did back then too. As the British economy was expanding in Smith's later years, he spoke in favor of capping interest rates with usury law. Usury is defined as the practice of making unethical or immoral loans that unfairly enrich the lender, often involving excessive or abusive interest rates. He believed exorbitant rates could lead to preying on the disadvantaged during a time of need resulting in growing disadvantages to the larger community.Historically, many societies including ancient Christian, Jewish, Islamic, and Buddhist communities considered charging interest of any kind as wrong or illegal. Smith was rooted in elements of Christian morals, but critics claimed he was being hypocritical. They pointed to examples in his publications, often out of context, of where he suggested government can't know better than individuals about their own risks, costs, and benefits and thus should not meddle.But even in The Wealth of Nations Smith was clear about three conditions necessary for an effective economy and with each he paired moral values also found in The Theory of Moral Sentiments:* State-Justice: Smith argued, “Commerce and manufacturers…can seldom flourish long in any state which does not enjoy a regular administration of justice,” emphasizing the need for laws that ensure security and regulate excessive accumulation of wealth.* Market-Liberty: He valued the “liberty of trade…notwithstanding some restraints,” while warning that monopolies “hurt…the general interest of the country.”* Community-Benevolence: Rooted in moral sentiments, Smith believed in a shared commitment to community, where “many reputable rules…must have been laid down and approved of by common consent.”Smith's main usury critic was the philosopher Jeremy Bentham, known for developing the philosophy of utilitarianism. A letter written to Smith in 1787 stated:“Should it be my fortune to gain any advantage over you, it must be with weapons which you have taught me to wield, and with which you yourself have furnished me…I can see scarce any other way of convicting you of any error or oversight, than by judging you out of your own mouth.”Bentham is most famous for the idea of “maximizing the greatest happiness for the greatest number” which helped promote legal reforms and social progress including welfare, equal rights for women, the separation of church and state, and the decriminalization of homosexual acts. But his ultimate focus of utilitarianism was on the practical outcomes of policies going so far as to develop mathematical formulas, called felicific calculus, to determine how much pleasure or pain must be inflicted in society to achieve the most happiness for the greatest number.He was also a staunch economic expansionist, believing, as verified in his calculus, that it would expand good for most. It would be his student, John Stuart Mill, who expanded on but also critiqued Bentham's utilitarianism later in the mid 1800s.“I conceive Mr. Bentham's writings to have done and to be doing very serious evil. It is by such things that the more enthusiastic and generous minds are prejudiced against all his other speculations, and against the very attempt to make ethics and politics a subject of precise and philosophical thinking.”Mill too was an expansionist, but acknowledged utilitarian reasoning could be used to defend exploitive and immoral colonial practices, including slavery. Mill believed slavery "effectually brutifies the intellect" of both slave and the enslaver and condemned the notion that certain races were inherently inferior and required subjugation.Nevertheless, early colonizers and imperialists, as well as modern day neo-liberals weaponized elements of utilitarianism much like they did with The Wealth of Nations. They used (and continue to use) select elements to justify laissez-faire economics, deregulation, and the exploitation of labor, often prioritizing economic efficiency over moral considerations such as fairness and social equity.For example, Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan both used utilitarian logic believing their policies would maximize overall economic growth and prosperity, benefiting society as a whole, even at the expense of rising inequality and social welfare. Their consequentialist approach justified market-driven reforms for a perceived greater good. Given today's historic wealth imbalances, the result of that calculus is less than convincing.Bentham also failed to convince Smith in that fateful letter, but to many it marked a notable shift in economic thinking and philosophy. Smith passed away three years after his exchange with Bentham and theoretical mathematical utilitarianism became the ultimate measure of right and wrong in governance and ethics in the UK and the US. Smith's morality, which emphasized moral virtues guiding economic actions, lost out to consequentialisms focus solely on outcomes, often justifying exploitation and suffering if it maximized societal gain and economic expansion for the expansionists — despite John Stuart Mill's, and countless others, objections.ECONOMIC ENGINES IN MORAL MACHINESDuring Adam Smith's lifetime, the Industrial Age rapidly emerged, transforming economies and wealth structures. Technological advancements, like the steam engine, fueled industrial capitalism, driving unprecedented economic growth and wealth accumulation. This focus on efficiency relied on maximizing productivity, whether through steam-powered machines, the exploitation of enslaved people, the working poor, or the displacement of Indigenous populations, prioritizing economic gain over human well-being.In 1783, while Smith and Bentham were debating economic philosophy, James Watt was at the University of Glasgow, focused on regulating unchecked power —specifically the excessive speed of steam engines which he helped to invent. To prevent mechanical failures from fluctuating steam pressure, Watt invented the centrifugal governor. This device used weighted iron balls that spun outward with centrifugal force as the engine's speed increased, raising a spindle that adjusted a valve to control steam flow. By automatically reducing steam when the engine ran too fast and increasing it when it slowed, the governor ensured safe and efficient operation. Watt's invention, introduced in 1788, was in full production by 1790, paving the way for innovations like the first steam locomotive in 1804.Watt's governor symbolized the need to impose limits on unchecked mechanical power, ensuring the engine operated within safe and efficient parameters. This technological innovation mirrored a broader theme of the Industrial Revolution — the balance between harnessing new, powerful technologies for economic growth while recognizing the risks of unregulated force, whether in machines or the rapid, unrestrained accumulation of wealth and resources in society. Watt's governor was an early acknowledgment that unchecked power, whether mechanical or economic, could lead to instability and disaster."I am never content until I have constructed a mechanical model of the subject I am studying. If I succeed in making one, I understand. Otherwise, I do not." – Lord KelvinOur brains also act as a kind of governor on the unchecked power of our kidneys, just as moral feedback loops serve as a governor on unchecked economic ambition. Like the stretch receptors in our bladder sensing when fluid volume builds, moral reasoning, as Smith envisioned, detects the social and ethical consequences of unfettered economic expansion. These signals, akin to the centrifugal force moving the governor's spindle, prompt individuals and society to regulate their actions, guiding decisions based not only on self-interest but on moral duty.In contrast, Bentham's utilitarian calculus, much like a theoretical mathematical model divorced from natural systems, ignores these ethical feedback loops. By relying solely on abstract calculations of happiness and efficiency, Bentham's approach, like a machine operating without awareness of its environment, risks distorting human and social behaviors. Where Smith's model calls for moral constraints on economic behavior, much like the body's signals to prevent overstretching, Bentham's framework lacks the necessary human safeguards, leading to potential exploitation and imbalance in pursuit of theoretical utility maximization.I do wonder what our economic systems would look like if, like our bodies, they were designed to self-regulate, ensuring that the pursuit of wealth doesn't come at the expense of human well-being? Just as our bodily functions rely on natural feedback loops to maintain equilibrium, why have we allowed our economies to run unchecked, often leading to exploitation and inequality? Adam Smith believed in moral constraints on ambition, yet today, much of our economic thinking prioritizes growth without those safeguards.As walked off campus that day, I reflected on Watt's governor regulating the steam engine and the moral feedback loops Smith envisioned. I wondered if Smith and Watt made the metaphoric connection in their encounters with one another, maybe even on their way to relieve themselves in the very building in which I found myself. Perhaps they each happened on this connection in their own thought experiments, which makes me wonder why more don't today? Surely there's a morally sound way to balance personal gain with the greater good — a bit like public restrooms. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

I. Bentham's Bulldog Blogger “Bentham's Bulldog” recently wrote Shut Up About Slave Morality. Nietzsche's concept of “slave morality” (he writes) is just a dysphemism for the usual morality where you're not bad and cruel. Right-wing edgelords use “rejection of slave morality” as a justification for badness and cruelty: When people object to slave morality, they are just objecting to morality. They are objecting to the notion that you should care about others and doing the right thing, even when doing so doesn't materially benefit you. Now, one can consistently object to those things, but it doesn't make them any sort of Nostradamus. It makes them morally deficient, and also generally philosophically confused. The tedious whinging about slave morality is just a way to pass off not caring about morality or taking moral arguments seriously as some sort of sophisticated and cynical myth-busting. But it's not that in the slightest. No one is duped by slave morality, no one buys into it because of some sort of deep-seated ignorance. Those who follow it do so because of a combination of social pressure and a genuine desire to help out others. That is, in fact, not in any way weak but a noble impulse from which all good actions spring. https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/matt-yglesias-considered-as-the-nietzschean 

Spurred by comments from a couple of episodes ago, we wanted to make sure we didn't misrepresent Matthew's position and he agreed to come lay it out for us on the show. Check out the links below to dive in … Continue reading →

Cremated, buried or donated to science? How much have you thought about what happens to you or your body after you die? Who owns your body after you die? And is having a legacy truly important? In this podcast, Nick, Peter and Fraser revisit the Hull funeral investigation, touch on how different cultures, religions and the animal kingdom deal with death and grief, and ask if what happens to us after we die really matters. A few things we mentioned in this podcast: - Legacy funeral pair were arrested at Heathrow - police https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-68631122 - Blackstone on Property https://oll.libertyfund.org/pages/blackstone-on-property-1753 - Law Regarding Who Has the Right to Deal with an Adult's Body after Death https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/english-legal-system/law-regarding-who-has-the-right-to-deal-with-an-adults-body-after-death-3419.php - R. v Bentham (2005) - A hand cannot be an imitation firearm https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/firearms#:~:text=Putting%20a%20hand%20inside%20a,Bentham%20%5B2005%5D%20UKHL%2018. - The Depths of Animal Grief https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/animal-grief/ For more information on Aleph Insights visit our website https://alephinsights.com or to get in touch about our podcast email podcast@alephinsights.com

Hey everyone! I'm bringing back my friend Ryan Bentham, who some of you may know from having appeared in three previous Detox episodes, and who others may know from the Life on the Swingset podcast. Ryan (AKA Prof) and I talk (somewhat loosely) about sexy stuff, but we also talk about his long road back from a major health setback and how going through the experience changed his life. We talk about almost being an empty nester and what it feels like having raised two successful adult men. What does communication mean to him these days? What does gratitude mean? All this and more during our conversation. Hope you enjoy!

IN THIS EPISODE: When the supernatural intrudes into our lives, it's not just our minds that are affected. We'll delve into a few bizarre cases where individuals fell gravely ill after brushes with the paranormal. Is it coincidence? Or something more sinister? And could these illnesses be due to the paranormal literally draining us of life? (Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned) *** Helen Duncan made a living from conducting séances—until her uncanny knowledge of classified World War II tragedies spooked British authorities. (Britain's Last Witch) *** Jeremy Bentham was a philosopher whose ideas about mortality and utility extended beyond death. Bentham's wish for his body to be preserved and displayed as an "auto-icon" – so it could be seen publicly by all. And while his wishes were granted, it came with a few hiccups along the way… mostly with his poor head. (The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse) *** Annie Dorman was discovered lifeless with a gunshot wound, sending shockwaves through her tight-knit community. Suicide seemed improbable, leaving detectives baffled and family perplexed. Was it a crime of passion, an accident, murder… or truly suicide? In a similar case, just a few years later, in the serene countryside of Greenwich, New York, the lifeless form of Maggie Hourigan is found, floating in a tranquil pool, speculation runs rampant. Were these cases suicide, as hastily concluded, horrible accidents… or sinister murders? (The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan) *** AND MORE!SOURCES AND REFERENCES FROM THE EPISODE…“Supernaturally Sick, Paranormally Poisoned” by Nick Redfern for Mysterious Universe: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/6bu93dju“The Mysterious Deaths of Annie Dorman and Maggie Hourigan” by Robert Wilhelm for Murder By Gaslight:https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/meu37k4m; https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/4y9mn9a4“The Strange Story of Mr. Bentham's Corpse” by Melissa Sartore for Weird History: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/yt6uetju“Britain's Last Witch” by Parissa Djangi for National Geographic: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/2p8by87t“Eccentric Habits of History's Elite” by John Munoz for ListVerse: https://weirddarkness.tiny.us/bdh2dw3xWeird Darkness theme by Alibi Music Library. = = = = =(Over time links seen above may become invalid, disappear, or have different content. I always make sure to give authors credit for the material I use whenever possible. If I somehow overlooked doing so for a story, or if a credit is incorrect, please let me know and I will rectify it in these show notes immediately. Some links included above may benefit me financially through qualifying purchases.)= = = = ="I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness." — John 12:46= = = = =WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2024, Weird Darkness.= = = = =Originally aired: April 17, 2024PARTIAL TRANSCRIPT: https://weirddarkness.com/can-the-paranormal-drain-life-from-us/

This week I wrap up a multi-part discussion of Foucault's theories of panoptic power, institutional knowledge, and discourses used to endorse awful ideas and beliefs about drugs and drug users. I also talk about Michel Foucault's car accident while high on opium, the notion of panoptic power, Jeremy Bentham's panoptic prison, discourse, stigma and stereotype. Foucault audio at intro and outro from Century of the Self lecture series. Support the show

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Stories from the origins of the animal welfare movement, published by Julia Wise on March 12, 2024 on The Effective Altruism Forum. This is a Draft Amnesty Week draft. It may not be polished, up to my usual standards, fully thought through, or fully fact-checked. This post is adapted from notes I made in 2015 while trying to figure out how EA compared to other movements. Society went from treating animals as objects to sometimes treating them as beings / moral patients, at least dogs and horses. A few lone voices (including Bentham) in the 1700s, then more interest in the 1800s, first bill introduced 1809, first bills passed in 1820s (Britain and Maine). Richard Martin "Humanity Dick" - Irish politician who got some success on the 1822 "Ill Treatment of Cattle Bill" after a series of failed anti-cruelty bills. His work was interrupted when he fled to France after losing his seat in Parliament, which meant he was no longer immune to being arrested for his gambling debts. First success with enforcement came from publicity stunt (in case about abuse of donkey, bringing the donkey into court) which caused coverage in media and popular song Animal welfare work was initially thought of as largely for the benefit of human morality (it's bad for your soul to beat your horse) or to prevent disgust caused by witnessing suffering, not necessarily for the animals themselves. British movement had several false starts; failed legislation and "societies" which died out. Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals took off in 1824 led by a minister and four members of parliament (including William Wilberforce, main leader of British abolition movement), but lost steam after an initial burst of fundraising. Office was closed and they met in coffee houses. Main staff member was jailed for the society's debts, another staff member continued working as a volunteer. Fortune turned when Princess Victoria (later Queen) and her mother decided they liked the organization, became the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. RSPCA. 1837 essay competition with equivalent of $1500 prize led to four essays being published as books. One man (Henry Bergh) imported the movement to NYC in the 1860s after hearing about it in London during his work as a diplomat. Pushed first animal abuse legislation through NY legislature and was its single-handed enforcer; got power to arrest and prosecute people despite not being an attorney. Founded the ASPCA (American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals), initially self-funded. Early on, a supporter died and left the society the equivalent of $2.8 million. Bergh did a lecture tour of the western US resulting in several offshoot societies. Got enough print coverage of his work that legislation spread to other states. Summary of his character based on interviews: "He was a cool, calm man. He did not love horses; he disliked dogs. Affection, then, was not the moving cause. He was a healthy, clean-living man, whose perfect self-control showed steady nerves that did not shrink sickeningly from sights of physical pain; therefore he was not moved by self-pity or hysterical sympathy….No warm, loving, tender, nervous nature could have borne to face it for an hour, and he faced and fought it for a lifetime. His coldness was his armor, and its protection was sorely needed." Widespread mockery of main figures as sentimental busybodies. Bergh was mocked as "the great meddler." Cartoon depicting him as overly caring about animals while there are people suffering - feels very parallel to some criticisms of EA. Welfare movements for children and animals were entwined both in Britain and US (American Humane was for both children and animals almost from the beginning). Early norm that both children and animals more or less belonged to their owners a...

A new episode of Off Center in which Scott and Mathias Klang, a lawyer and professor at Fordham University, talk about surveillance microcosms and how spying is shaping our lives.   In this episode, Scott and Jhave, a previous guest on Off Center, give the first 5-minute AI update. Sign up for ⁠⁠⁠the CDN newsletter⁠⁠⁠ here. References Rettberg, Jill Walker. 2024. Machine Vision: How Algorithms Are Changing the Way We See the World. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.  Bentham, Jeremy, 1748-1832. 1995. The Panopticon Writings. London; New York: Verso.  Orwell, George. 1949. 1984. England: Secker & Warburg.  Foucault, Michel. 1977. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon Books.  Suno Inc. 2024. Suno AI. https://www.suno.ai/.  Johnston, D. J. 2018. ReRites. Anteism Books. https://glia.ca/rerites/.  Forsgren, Seth & Hayk Martiros. 2022. Riffusion. https://www.riffusion.com/.   sp0n, Inc. 2017. Citizen. Android & iOS. 

 Piergiorgio Odifreddi sulla ricchezza: cos'è, chi ce l'ha e perché. Per misurare la ricchezza di un paese i governi e gli economisti occidentali si concentrano quasi esclusivamente sul PIL (Prodotto Interno Lordo), che costituisce però soltanto un indicatore molto grossolano, e tiene conto soltanto della produzione delle merci. In realtà gli individui e le popolazioni sono molto più interessati ad altri indicatori, in grado di esprimere da un lato la distribuzione della ricchezza, e dall'altro una serie di suoi aspetti non puramente mercantili: ad esempio, il tenore di vita, la disoccupazione, l'alfabetizzazione, la soddisfazione nel lavoro, e addirittura la felicità. Dal “calcolo felicitario” di Bentham al FIL (Felicità Interna Lorda) di Sen e Stiglitz, la matematica ha permesso nei secoli di rendere espliciti una serie di questi indicatori, ai quali accenneremo in questa conferenza. ***************************** Lei Festival - Cagliari (2/12/23), Teatro Doglio, via Logudoro 32. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/vito-rodolfo-albano7/message

On présente souvent l'utilitarisme comme une philosophie qui prône l'égoïsme. Mais est-ce réellement le cas ? Ne confondons-nous pas prôner l'égoïsme et reconnaître son existence ? Et surtout, que valent les systèmes moraux qui prétendent dénoncer l'égoïsme ? Telles sont les questions auxquelles nous allons tenter de répondre dans cet épisode. Vous pouvez me soutenir : ★En devenant contributeur sur Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/leprecepteurpodcast Vous pourrez ainsi accéder au podcast sans pub et en avant-première et surtout à mon contenu inédit ! ★Ou en faisant un don ponctuel sur PayPal : http://paypal.me/leprecepteurpodcast Pensez à laisser une note et un avis sur la plateforme de podcast où vous m'écoutez. Cela prend quelques secondes, et c'est un geste très utile pour le référencement du podcast ! Et bien sûr, continuez à partager les émissions que vous préférez sur vos réseaux sociaux. Le Précepteur Podcast a été créé pour vous et continuera d'exister grâce à vous. (Pour toute demande : leprecepteurpodcast@gmail.com)

Extrait de l'épisode BENTHAM - Sommes-nous tous égoïstes ? Cet épisode sera publié sur YouTube et en podcast vendredi prochain le Il est d'ores et déjà disponible en intégralité sur ma page Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/posts/avant-premiere-97693348

durée : 00:58:59 - Entendez-vous l'éco ? - par : Tiphaine de Rocquigny - Critique de Say, proche de Bentham, Stendhal se confronte aux théories économiques de son temps. De l'utilitarisme au malthusianisme en passant par la question de la division du travail, le célèbre écrivain était aussi économiste. - invités : Christophe Reffait Maître de conférences en littérature française, Université de Picardie Jules Verne

IntroAt the gracious invitation of AI Safety Twitter-fluencer Sarah Hastings-Woodhouse, I appeared on the very first episode of her new podcast “Consistently Candid” to debate moral realism (or something kinda like that, I guess; see below) with fellow philosophy nerd and EA Twitter aficionado Max Alexander, alongside Sarah as moderator and judge of sorts.What I believeIn spite of the name of the episode and the best of my knowledge/understanding a few days ago, it turns out my stance may not be ~genuine~ moral realism. Here's my basic meta-ethical take:* Descriptive statements that concern objective relative goodness or badness (e.g., "it is objectively for Sam to donate $20 than to buy an expensive meal that costs $20 more than a similar, less fancy meal”) can be and sometimes are true; but* Genuinely normative claims like “Sam should (!) donate $20 and should not buy that fancy meal” are never objectively true.Of course the label per se doesn't really matter. But for a bunch of reasons it still seems wise to figure out which label really does work best.Some definitionsStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Moral realists are those who think that, in these respects, things should be taken at face value—moral claims do purport to report facts and are true if they get the facts right. Moreover, they hold, at least some moral claims actually are true. That much is the common and more or less defining ground of moral realism (although some accounts of moral realism see it as involving additional commitments, say to the independence of the moral facts from human thought and practice, or to those facts being objective in some specified way).Wikipedia:The robust model of moral realism commits moral realists to three theses:* The semantic thesis: The primary semantic role of moral predicates (such as "right" and "wrong") is to refer to moral properties (such as rightness and wrongness), so that moral statements (such as "honesty is good" and "slavery is unjust") purport to represent moral facts, and express propositions that are true or false (or approximately true, largely false, and so on).* The alethic thesis: Some moral propositions are in fact true.* The metaphysical thesis: Moral propositions are true when actions and other objects of moral assessment have the relevant moral properties (so that the relevant moral facts obtain), where these facts and properties are robust: their metaphysical status, whatever it is, is not relevantly different from that of (certain types of) ordinary non-moral facts and properties.And to settle the matter, here's what some LLM have to say.My prompt:Suppose a person believes the following:1: Descriptive statements that concern objective relative goodness or badness (e.g., "it is objectively for Sam to donate $20 than to buy an expensive meal that costs $20 more than a similar, less fancy meal”) can be and sometimes are true; but 2: Genuinely normative claims like “Sam should donate $20 and should not buy that fancy meal” are never objectively true.Is this person best categorized as a moral realist?ChatGPTGiven these two beliefs, the person's stance doesn't align completely with traditional moral realism, which typically asserts that there are objective truths about both moral facts (like the goodness or badness of actions) and moral duties (what one should or should not do). However, it also doesn't fully align with moral anti-realism, since the person believes in some form of objective truth regarding moral value.One possible categorization for this stance could be a form of "value realism" combined with "normative anti-realism" or "normative subjectivism." This would mean that the person believes in objective truths about what is better or worse (value realism) but thinks that what one ought to do (normative claims) is not a matter of objective truth but perhaps of subjective judgment or societal conventions.This position is quite sophisticated and might be best understood as a hybrid or intermediate position in the landscape of moral philosophy, rather than fitting neatly into the category of moral realism or its standard alternatives.Great, so much for trying to fit things into nice little buckets.Claude, fortunately, is more definitive:No, the view described is not best categorized as moral realism. Here's why:Moral realism is the view that there are objective moral facts or truths. A moral realist believes that some moral claims, including normative claims about what one should or shouldn't do, can be objectively and mind-independently true.The view in the example accepts that there can be objective truths about relative degrees of goodness or badness (claim 1). However, it denies that there are objective normative truths about what one should or shouldn't do (claim 2). By rejecting that genuine normative 'should/shouldn't' claims can be objectively true, the view denies a key commitment of moral realism - namely that moral claims can state objective normative facts. At best it allows for objective evaluative facts about goodness/badness, not prescriptive facts about obligations.So this view would be more accurately categorized as a form of moral anti-realism like non-cognitivism or error theory. It does not qualify as moral realism because of its rejection of the existence of objective normative truths that could make strong normative claims justified or true. The commitment to objective evaluative facts alone does not sufficiently qualify the view as realist in the metaethical sense.In summary, the view accepts objective "good/bad" facts but denies objective "should/shouldn't" facts. This combination puts it at odds with core commitments of moral realism, so it is better seen as an anti-realist view.I'm gonna disagree with Claude here, at least in that the bolded claim above (objective normative facts are a key part of moral realism) just seems…wrong? Like all the definitions could replace the term “moral fact” or “moral claim” with “normative fact” and “normative claim” but they do not!So I really don't have a great answer to which label works best. One of two ~human level chatbots giving me a definitive-sounding “anti-realism” answer is too much evidence for me, whose only formal philosophy training is an undergrad minor, to rule that one out. There are also good arguments, I think, for the “realist label,” as well as for “neither” (i.e., ‘secret third thing'). In fact all of these seem pretty similar in terms of argument convincingness/correctness. So, in sum,

Episode 68 features Luke Bentham from the Dirty Nil back on the podcast for the second time to chat about their latest release. Hosted by Michael Crusty.All songs from The Dirty Nil's new album "Free Rein To Passions"1 - Celebration2 - Stupid Jobs3 - The Light, The Void and Everything4 - Nicer GuySee ya next time...

It's the end of the year again and time to rant! This year's collection of rants includes:Jarrod Blair on bad habits that crush the philosophical spiritMatthew Adelstein on the stupidity and depravity of Effective Altruism criticsMatt Lutz on possible world confusionsMark Oppenheimer on the Israel-Gaza warOliver Traldi on the university presidents' testimony to CongressJP Andrew on naturalism as a dogma in philosophySpencer Case on scientific dogmatismJason Werbeloff on moralizing vegetariansAlex Byrne on social constructionLinks:Virtue Vibes Podcast:https://www.virtuevibes.org/Bentham's Bulldog substack:https://benthams.substack.com/Brain in a Vat podcast:https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/brain-in-a-vat/id1509951964Humean Being Substack:https://humeanbeing.substack.com/

Way back in 1960, Leo Strauss wrote in the Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences that "Natural law, which was for many centuries the basis of the predominant Western political thought, is rejected in our time by almost all students of society who are not Roman Catholics." In the decades since then, however, natural law has enjoyed a revival of sorts, and is implicated today in the rise of constitutional originalism at the Supreme Court. But it is also a confusing subject, because many so-called "new natural law" theories seem to concede too much to modern philosophy, as if the great tradition of natural law begins with Bentham. To be sure, the classical authors such as Aristotle, Cicero, and Aquinas were not simple thinkers on the subject, but their work tends not bog down with specialized jargon or abstruse theory. One person stands out for rescuing the older tradition of natural law: Hadley Arkes, author of Mere Natural Law: Originalism and the Anchoring Truths of the Constitution. In this conversation, Steve Hayward draws out the basics of the argument from Prof. Arkes, and extends the line of reasoning to today's controversies about free speech and "cancel culture," which are more confused than ever with the sudden eruption of anti-Semitism on college campuses.

This week, Ira Sternberg spoke with John Bentham, founder of Ivory Star Productions. In this episode of “The Talk About Las Vegas Podcast” John talks about his early career as a performer before deciding to work behind the scenes; working with David Copperfield before starting his own production company; juggling several shows at one time (the secret is a good staff); working on the upcoming return of “Jersey Boys”; how he involves his whole family in producing the yearly “Glittering Lights”; and how he survives and prospers in a tough Las Vegas entertainment environment.

Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:• Central European University: CEU• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio Follow us on social media!• Central European University: @CEU• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @AHDCentre Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!  GlossaryPanopticon(11:53 or p.3 in the transcript)Jeremy Bentham, an English philosopher and social theorist in the mid-1700s, invented a social control mechanism that would become a comprehensive symbol for modern authority and discipline in the western world: a prison system called the Panopticon. The basic principle for the design, which Bentham first completed in 1785, was to monitor the maximum number of prisoners with the fewest possible guards and other security costs. The layout consists of a central tower for the guards, surrounded by a ring-shaped building of prison cells. The building with the prisoners is only one cell thick, and every cell has one open side facing the central tower. This open side has bars over it but is otherwise entirely exposed to the tower. The guards can thus see the entirety of any cell at any time, and the prisoners are always vulnerable and visible. Conversely, the tower is far enough from the cells and has sufficiently small windows that the prisoners cannot see the guards inside of it. The sociological effect is that the prisoners are aware of the presence of authority at all times, even though they never know exactly when they are being observed. The authority changes from being a limited physical entity to being an internalized omniscience- the prisoners discipline themselves simply because someone might be watching, eliminating the need for more physical power to accomplish the same task. Just a few guards are able to maintain a very large number of prisoners this way. Arguably, there wouldn't even need to be any guards in the tower at all. Michel Foucault, a French intellectual and critic, expanded the idea of the panopticon into a symbol of social control that extends into everyday life for all citizens, not just those in the prison system. He argues that social citizens always internalize authority, which is one source of power for prevailing norms and institutions. A driver, for example, might stop at a red light even when there are no other cars or police present. Even though there are not necessarily any repercussions, the police are an internalized authority- people tend to obey laws because those rules become self-imposed. source Conference on the Future of Europe(19:42 or p.5 in the transcript)The Conference on the future of Europe officially started on 9 May 2021. Over the next year this citizen led series of discussions and debates will allow citizens from all over the European Union to make their voices heard on key priorities. Through a myriad of Conference events and debates held all across the European Union, aided by an interactive multilingual digital platform, the conference will place European citizens at the centre of the debate. The Conference on the Future of Europe is jointly chaired by the Council, the European Parliament and the European Commission. During the plenary session of the European Parliament in Brussels (10 March 2021), António Costa, Prime Minister of Portugal and President of the rotating Presidency of the Council, David Sassoli, President of the European Parliament, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, participated in the signing ceremony of the joint declaration for the Conference of the Future of Europe. On 19 April 2021, the multilingual digital platform was launched to ensure that citizens can start contributing to the conference. During the closing event on 9 May 2022, the three Co-Chairs of the Conference's Executive Board did present the final report to the presidents of the EU institutions. President Metsola, President Macron, and President von der Leyen delivered speeches alongside contributions from citizens representing the European and National Panels, and by the Conference Co-Chairs. source

Join us on an exhilarating journey through the life and career of Dan Bentham, a multi-talented individual who has transformed from the world of music videos into a visionary entrepreneur. Dan's creative journey commenced in the captivating realm of music videos, where his innate talent for visual storytelling propelled him to new heights, crafting mesmerizing narratives for some of the industry's biggest stars. However, it was his entrepreneurial spirit that truly set him apart.Dan didn't shy away from failure; instead, he embraced it. He turned his entrepreneurial setbacks into valuable lessons, paving the way for his ultimate success. Today, he is the founder of a dynamic business solutions company that is reimagining social media. With an innovative approach, Dan and his team transform your ideas into groundbreaking campaigns that challenge conventions and breathe new life into your brand's online presence in a rapidly evolving social media landscape.Join us for an inspiring journey through Dan's life and career, where he showcases how turning adversity into triumph is the key to cash-flowing dreams, and we uncover the secrets behind his success. Don't miss out on this tale of passion, innovation, and the unwavering drive to turn dreams into reality.Want to watch instead of listen? Head to our YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqQcHdB6I1z7wG1jllbyR8g______________________Want to be coached by Cody on how to earn a consistent income? Book a strategy call with Cody at https://promo.codyyeh.com/?utm_source=youtubereferralLooking to learn stock investing in a group setting? Join Cody's Stock Option Investing Group with 4.4k+ members: https://www.facebook.com/groups/StockInvestingCanadaUs/Keep up with Cody's Weekly Research Newsletter at: https://codyyeh.com/newsletterUse This Sheet To Reverse Engineer When You Will Replace Your Full-Time Income In 5 Minutes https://codyyehchannel.activehosted.com/f/5Check out Cody Yeh Investing for more passive income knowledge at https://www.youtube.com/codyyehWant to keep up with your host Nada day to day? Follow her on Instagram at https://instagram.com/ab_nada?igshid=OGQ5ZDc2ODk2ZA== Would you like to revamp your business' social media? Apply at https://www.likewisecanada.ca for content creation business solutions. Keep an eye on everything Likewise Marketing Inc is getting up to by following their instagram at https://www.instagram.com/likewisecanada/?next=%2Fprojectlb52%2F______________________Connect with Dan Bentham! Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/capturedconnectionsinc/Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/danny.boy.710/Want to elevate your social media to the next level? View packages at https://www.capturedconnections.ca/Dan, the CEO of Captured Connections Inc, brings to the table a wealth of experience in sales, videography, business coaching, and more. His impressive journey towards success is a testament to his unique personality and unwavering drive to excel. Dan stands as an ideal mentor for a broad audience seeking guidance in strategy development and brand building. If you're looking to enhance your business strategies or bolster your brand, we highly recommend reaching out to him. 

Luke Bentham returns to PCH to talk all about The Dirty Nils new record Free Rein to Passions, his guitar rig, touring the U.K, how the best Nil songs are written (according to Luke) and much more!https://thedirtynil.comhttps://thedirtynil.bandcamp.comhttps://www.instagram.com/TheDirtyNilhttps://www.instagram.com/lukenukem90PCHInstagram - www.instagram.com/powerchordhourTwitter - www.twitter.com/powerchordhourFacebook - www.facebook.com/powerchordhourYoutube - www.youtube.com/channel/UC6jTfzjB3-mzmWM-51c8LggSpotify Episode Playlists - https://open.spotify.com/user/kzavhk5ghelpnthfby9o41gnr?si=4WvOdgAmSsKoswf_HTh_MgDonate to help show costs -https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/pchanthonyhttps://cash.app/$anthmerchpowerchordhour@gmail.comCheck out the Power Chord Hour radio show every Friday night at 8 to 11 est/Tuesday Midnight to 3 est on 107.9 WRFA in Jamestown, NY. Stream the station online at wrfalp.com/streaming/ or listen on the WRFA app.Special Thanks to my buddy Jay Vics for the behind the scenes help on this episode!https://www.meettheexpertspodcast.comhttps://www.jvimobile.com

Have you ever recorded in a studio and felt like time just slipped away? Or maybe you wished you'd felt more comfortable or like you were using the time better? If so, this episode is not to be missed because Isobel is joined by Brighton based producer and engineer, Phoebe Bentham, who's sharing her top tips on preparing like a pro for your next recording studio session. Inside, Phoebe also discusses her route into production and engineering, her love of microtonal music, how she went about recording a choir, live drums and guitar in just one day and her advice for any trans listeners wanting to work in recording studios. EPISODE HIGHLIGHTS{00:00} Intro{03:43} How Phoebe got started in sound engineering{15:43} Phoebe explains her love of microtonal music{20:40} Phoebe's advice on how to prepare for a studio session and how to effectively work with an engineer{26:31} Her definition of a producer vs an engineer{34:04} More tips on how to prepare for a studio session{43:20} How Phoebe engineered and mixed a live performance of Lambrini Girls' track Help Me I'm Gay{56:50} How Phoebe recorded an 18-person choir for Angel Maxine's track Be Yourself{01:09:58} Phoebe's advice for trans women forging careers in sound engineering{01:17:09} Episode SummaryConnect with Phoebe on Instagram >> Listen to EP#55 Are You a Music Producer? >> Boss it in the recording studio

Today we talk about Jeremy Bentham's concept of the Panopticon. Michel Foucault's comparison to society in 1975. The historical role of intelligence as a justification for dominance. The anatomy of free will, and how a digital world may systematically limit our free will without us knowing it.    Thank you to the sponsors of this episode:  LMNT - www.drinkLMNT.com/PHILO Better Help - www.betterhelp.com/PHILTHIS   Get more: Website: https://www.philosophizethis.org/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/philosophizethis Philosophize This! Clips: https://www.youtube.com/@philosophizethisclips   Be social: Twitter: https://twitter.com/iamstephenwest Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/philosophizethispodcast TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@philosophizethispodcast Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/philosophizethisshow   Thank you for making the show possible.

In this week's Scale Your Sales podcast episode, my guest is David Bentham, the Vice President in Global Sales Development at Cognism. He leads a team of 100 Inbound and Outbound SDRs across Europe and the US.  Cognism is the leading global contact data provider. They had a record-breaking First Quarter– signing its biggest ever deal in that time and has continued to see growth through 2022 and 2023 despite the economic climate. In this episode, David gave a lot of insight into his background in the early days starting off in sales and door to door sales and how the B2C experiences in the team now as VP of sales and managing a large team of SDRs. Welcome to Scale Your Sales podcasts, David Bentham.   Timestamps: 03:00 – Who is Cognism for? 08:51 – The shift in availability of online information affected the change in sales game today. 11:04 – SDRs are more than just entry level, but very highly qualified sales individuals. 13:58 – One of the biggest inefficiencies is decision making. 21:20 – Going into the job as a resilient person is NOT necessary. 27:19 – The mentality “Every no-leads you closer to yes”, can be incredibly dangerous. https://www.linkedin.com/in/davebentham/   Janice B Gordon is the award-winning Customer Growth Expert and Scale Your Sales Framework founder. She is by LinkedIn Sales 15 Innovating Sales Influencers to Follow 2021, the Top 50 Global Thought Leaders and Influencers on Customer Experience Nov 2020 and 150 Women B2B Thought Leaders You Should Follow in 2021. Janice helps companies worldwide to reimagine revenue growth through customer experience and sales.    Book Janice to speak virtually at your next event https://janicebgordon.com        LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/janice-b-...     Twitter: https://twitter.com/JaniceBGordon      Scale Your Sales Podcast: https://scaleyoursales.co.uk/podcast      More on the blog https://scaleyoursales.co.uk/blog     Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/janicebgordon     Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/ScaleYourSal... 

High school debate is considered an ideal extracurricular activity for aspiring lawyers, politicians, or anyone seeking to learn the tools of effective communication and persuasion. But a slew of recent reports argue that high school debate is being captured by political ideology, rendering certain arguments off-limits, some debate topics undebatable, and ad hominem attacks fair game. Debate judges disclose their judging paradigms by saying things like, “I will listen to conservative-leaning arguments, but be careful,” or, “Before anything else, including being a debate judge, I am a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. . . . I cannot check the revolutionary proletarian science at the door when I'm judging.” Some debates even devolve into personal attacks, spurred on by judges who say they “will consider indictments of an opponent on the basis that they have done [or] said something racist, gendered, [or] -phobic in their personal behavior.” On today's show, we're joined by two former high school debaters who are dismayed by these trends. James Fishback is the founder of Incubate Debate, which hosts free debate tournaments for students in Florida. Matthew Adelstein is a rising sophomore studying philosophy at the University of Michigan and publishes Bentham's Newsletter, a newsletter about utilitarianism. Show notes: Transcript of episode “Part I: At high school debates, debate is no longer allowed” by James Fishback “Part II: At high school debates, watch what you say” by James Fishback “How critical theory is radicalizing high school debate” by Maya Bodnick Nico's current reading list on critical theory: “Grand Hotel Abyss” by Stuart Jeffries and “America's Cultural Revolution” by Christopher F. Rufo www.sotospeakpodcast.com YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@freespeechtalk Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/freespeechtalk Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/sotospeakpodcast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/freespeechtalk/ Email us: sotospeak@thefire.org

Un saludo a todos. Esta semana vamos a aprender acerca del proyecto sociológico y moral de Mill. En sociología sigue los escritos de Comte bastante al pie de la letra y en Moral los de Bentham y Epicuro (no olvidemos que estos "científicos locos" del XIX y sus teóricos positivistas y utilitaristas son hedonistas, ponen el placer como regla suprema de la acción). No dejen de escuchar esta interesante lección y den su opinión al respecto en la zona habilitada de comentarios. ***** 🎼Música de la época: Obertura trágica de Dvorak, escrita en 1870, 3 años antes del fallecimiento de Mill. **** 🎨Imagen de John Stuart Mill. **** 👍Pulsen un Me Gusta y colaboren a partir de 2,99 €/mes si se lo pueden permitir para asegurar la permanencia del programa ¡Muchas gracias a todos!

We were very fortunate to have Luke Bentham from The Dirty Nil on the podcast to talk about their new album, "Free Rein to Passions". Enjoy! The Dirty Nil Socials: Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDirtyNil Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/TheDirtyNil/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedirtynil/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/TheDirtyNil Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/us/artist/the-dirty-nil/910995513 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/2mGENPk4M4jtaf5D7fDi98 Bandcamp: https://thedirtynil.bandcamp.com/ Website: https://thedirtynil.com/ Good Noise Podcast Socials: Twitter: https://twitter.com/good_noise_cast Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/goodnoisepodcast/ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/goodnoisepod Discord: https://discord.gg/nDAQKwT YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCFHKPdUxxe1MaGNWoFtjoJA Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/04IMtdIrCIvbIr7g6ttZHi All other streaming platforms: http://hyperurl.co/GoodNoisePodcast Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/goodnoisepodcast Bandcamp: https://goodnoiserecords.bandcamp.com/

Stephen Darwall is Andrew Downey Orrick Professor of Philosophy at Yale University and John Dewey Distinguished University Professor Emeritus at the University of Michigan. He is a world-renowned moral philosopher who has worked broadly across the ethical landscape, making important contributions to Kant scholarship, legal philosophy, deontology, and countless other areas. In this episode, Robinson and Steve talk about Steve's strabismus (a visual impairment) and how it affects the way he sees the world, violence and human dignity, second-personal ethics, and Steve's work on the relationship between philosophy and the heart. This is Steve's second appearance on Robinson's Podcast. In his first, episode #49, Steve and Robinson discussed the history of modern ethics, beginning with Hugo Grotius and traveling up through Hobbes, Hume, Kant, Bentham, and Smith before ending with Marx, Kierkegaard, and Nietzsche's attack on morality. Check out Steve's book on second-personal ethics, The Second-Person Standpoint: Morality, Respect, and Accountability (Harvard, 2009). Steve's Website: https://campuspress.yale.edu/stephendarwall/ OUTLINE: 00:00 In This Episode… 00:35 Introduction 3:57 Creative Pursuits and Strabismus 26:57 Violence and Human Dignity 56:42 Cognitive Science, Violence, and Dignity 1:05:55 What Is Second-Personal Ethics? 1:15:54 Moral Obligation, Recognition, and Second-Personal Ethics 1:27:57 Philosophy of the Heart 1:52:58 Chattel Slavery, Reparations, and the Heart 2:04:22 Steve and the Heart Robinson's Website: http://robinsonerhardt.com Robinson Erhardt researches symbolic logic and the foundations of mathematics at Stanford University. Join him in conversations with philosophers, scientists, weightlifters, artists, and everyone in-between.  --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support

The “panopticon” might be the best known prison concept in the world. In the original design, all the cells are built around a central guard tower, designed to maintain order just by making prisoners believe that they are constantly being watched.  Over time, the panopticon has turned into something way bigger than just a blueprint for penitentiaries. It's become the metaphor for the surveillance state. Philosopher Michel Foucault had probably the most popular take on the panopticon concept. He used it to warn society that what actually keeps all of us in check isn't necessarily that someone is watching you. It's just the feeling that someone might be watching you. But very few actual prisons were built around this idea. Breda Dome is one of them.The Panopticon Effect

What if there was a way to end poverty and solve climate change, that might actually work. Shouldn't we try it? Our guest Erik Angner thinks economics holds the solutions to some of the world's biggest problems but that economists have done a woeful job of PR! He's on a mission to change that. Erik Angner PhD is Professor of Practical Philosophy at Stockholm University. He holds, not one but two PhDs – in Economics and in History and Philosophy of Science – both from the University of Pittsburgh.  Erik joins us on Behavioral Grooves to discuss his new book How Economics Can Save the World. He is also the author of two other books, Hayek and Natural Law and A Course in Behavioral Economics as well as multiple journal articles and book chapters on behavioral and experimental economics; the science and philosophy of happiness; and the history, philosophy, and methodology of contemporary economics.  Please join us on Behavioral Grooves Twitter (@behavioralgroov) to take part in some poll questions around Erik's episode and discuss this conversation.   Topics  (3:34) Welcome and speed round questions. (7:12) What exactly is economics and how is it useful? (11:15) How can economics save the world? (13:10) How we can actually solve poverty. (17:14) Scarcity and how it influences our behavior. (21:08) The scarcity of healthcare. (24:35) Why trust is the critical factor in vaccination take-up. (28:55) What are the unintended consequences? (31:30) How can economics solve climate change? (36:36) How social norms influence our behavior. (41:29) Does money make us happy? (49:11) What music would Erik take on a desert island? (51:40) Grooving Session with Kurt and Tim on saving the world.   © 2023 Behavioral Grooves   Links  Erik Angner PhD: https://www.erikangner.com/ Erik's book “How Economics Can Save the World: Simple Ideas to Solve Our Biggest Problems”: https://amzn.to/3YU49qN  Episode 102, Christina Bicchieri, PhD: Social Norms are Bundles of Expectations: https://behavioralgrooves.com/episode/cristina-bicchieri-social-norms-are-bundles-of-expectations/  Friedrich Hayek: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friedrich_Hayek  Jeremy Bentham: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10902-010-9204-z#:~:text=Bentham%20defined%20happiness%20in%20terms,seen%20as%20contribution%20to%20happiness.  Musical Links  Tom Waits “Hold On”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0P5jV4lHHR0  PJ Harvey “This Is Love”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STxXS5lLunE