Podcast appearances and mentions of Charles Murray

Today's podcast is titled “Real Education and Education Myths.” Recorded in 2008, Dennis McCuistion, former Clinical Professor of Corporate Governance and Executive Director of the Institute for Excellence in Corporate Governance at the University of Texas at Dallas, and Charles Murray, the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, discuss Mr. Murray's book, Real Education, and his critiques of the American educational system.  Listen now, and don't forget to subscribe to get updates each week for the Free To Choose Media Podcast.

Caleb O. Brown hosted the Cato Daily Podcast for nearly 18 years, producing well over 4000 episodes. He has gone on to head Kentucky's Bluegrass Institute. This is one among the best episodes produced in his tenure, selected by the host and listeners.Civil disobedience may be the only avenue left for millions of Americans who just want to go about their business undisturbed. Charles Murray explains his dangerous idea in the new book, By the People: Rebuilding Liberty without Permission. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Today's podcast is titled “Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence with Charles Murray.” Recorded in 2004, Dennis McCuistion, former Clinical Professor of Corporate Governance and Executive Director of the Institute for Excellence in Corporate Governance at the University of Texas at Dallas, and Charles Murray, the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, discuss Mr. Murray's views on government policy, culture, achievement, and human potential, with particular emphasis on his book, Human Accomplishment.  Listen now, and don't forget to subscribe to get updates each week for the Free To Choose Media Podcast. 

Send us a textRyan Streeter is the executive director of the Civitas Institute at the University of Texas at Austin. Today, he tells us about his time in the intersection of think tanks, government, and academic communities. We talk about cities, the importance of mobility and growth, how to foster those characteristics, skepticism of government, and living in and creating a community that fosters social cohesion and critical thinking. Want to explore more?Alain Bertaud on Urban Planning and Cities, a Great Antidote podcast.Raj Chetty on Economic Mobility, an EconTalk podcast.Scott Winship on Poverty and Welfare, a Great Antidote podcast.Charles Murray on Dignity and the American Dream, a Future of Liberty podcast.Jeremy Horpedahl, Americans are Still Thriving, at Econlib.Support the showNever miss another AdamSmithWorks update.Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.

In this episode of UEG Talks, host Egle and co-host Charles Murray sit down with Alexander Goldowsky, a gastroenterologist and gut microbiome expert, to explore the unique healthcare challenges faced by sexual and gender minority (SGM) groups. They discuss the stigma and discrimination that impact SGM patients, the broader implications for their health, and the urgent need for greater awareness, education, and advocacy in gastroenterology. Alexander also introduces Rainbows in Gastro, a pioneering initiative aimed at improving SGM healthcare within the field, and highlights the role of individual responsibility in driving meaningful change. https://rainbowsingastro.org/

  On this episode of Unsupervised Learning, friend of the podcast, Charles Murray returns to chat with Razib again. Murray has been a public intellectual and scholar since the 1970's. He is the author of Losing Ground, The Bell Curve, Human Accomplishment, Real Education, Coming Apart and What it means to be a libertarian and Human Diversity, among others. Born in 1943 in Newton, Iowa, Murray has a BA from Harvard, an MA and PhD from MIT, and did a 1960's stint in the Peace Corps in Thailand. He has held positions at the American Institutions for Research, the Manhattan Institute and the American Enterprise Institute. More than four years after their last conversation, and seven years after his official retirement, Murray reflects with Razib on where he sees America going in the next decade, and what has surprised him about the last 25 years. Razib asks what it is like to be a long-standing “Never Trump conservative” and a libertarian in Trump's populist America. They also discuss the end of the “awokening” that began in the mid-2010s, and whether Murray's long exile from notice and acknowledgement from mainstream opinion-leaders and tastemakers is at an end. Murray also addresses the ideological fractures he sees on the right, and how America will deal with the last generation of mass immigration that has altered the US' demographic balance. They also discuss how taboo it still is to talk about group differences in cognitive performance, and whether America will be able to face the reality of demographics and the social consequences thereof in the 21st century.

Relançamento de uma curta série de 2020 (re-editada). Inteligência: pode ser estreitamente definida? Pode ser objetivamente medida? O que pesa mais no desenvolver da capacidade cognitiva: genética ou ambiente? Veja bem. Mais. Contate-nos por email: vejabempodcast@outlook.com Encontre-nos também no: ⁠Instagram⁠, ⁠Facebook⁠ e ⁠YouTube⁠. Epis Citados  Playlist - VB Inteligência ⁠VBMais 51 – Complexidade (Bodas de ouro)⁠ ⁠VB 63 – Amor⁠ ⁠VB 54 – Por que peixes não existem?⁠ ⁠VB 53 – Pensando Rápido e Devagar⁠ ⁠VBMais 49 – Niilismo e Existencialismo⁠ ⁠VBMais 37 – Atenção⁠ ⁠VB 15 – Experimentos Socias/estudos científicos⁠ ⁠VB Padrinhos 02 – Inteligência Verbal⁠ ⁠VBMais 38 – Leis⁠ ⁠VBMais 29 – Guerra Justa pt2⁠ VB 64 – Nomes e Sobrenomes⁠ ⁠VBMais 11 – Inteligencia Artificial Referências: ⁠Intelligence: All That Matters ⁠ – Stuart Ritchie, livro https://www.amazon.com.br/Intelligence-All-That-Matters-English-ebook/ ⁠What Is Intelligence?⁠ – James Flynn, livro https://www.amazon.com.br/What-Intelligence-Beyond-Effect-English-ebook/ ⁠Waking Up With Sam Harris #73 – Forbidden Knowledge with Charles Murray ⁠– podcast https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dv0SFuArjGI ⁠Nothing but a “G” thing (intelligence pt 1) ⁠– Very Bad Wizards, podcast https://www.verybadwizards.com/122 ⁠Intelligence⁠ – BBC, In Our Time Podcast https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00545l3 ⁠Radiolab Presents: G – Radiolab⁠ (podcast, série com 6 episódios, incluindo o relato do processo racial na Califórnia) https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts/radiolab/projects/radiolab-presents-g ⁠None of the Above⁠ – artigo, The New Yorker https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2007/12/17/none-of-the-above

At the end of 2024, we mark the end of Laurie Patton's tenure as president of Middlebury by sharing her reflections on conflict transformation, protest, and higher education. In September, President Patton sat down with Eboo Patel, president of Interfaith America, as part of their programing on Teaching Interfaith Understanding.  Their conversation was posted to Interfaith America's podcast and we reshare the episode here with permission. Patel and Patton discuss how Middlebury's campus culture evolved in the years since 2017, when political scientist Charles Murray's visit was met with upheaval. Patton elaborates on Middlebury's conflict transformation efforts, including the successes of the Engaged Listening Project, the challenges of countering a national narrative, and the outcomes of building a resilient culture, evidenced by her community's constructive engagement of tensions surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the spring of 2024. To hear other episodes in Interfaith America's podcast, click here: https://www.interfaithamerica.org/podcast/  Many thanks to Teyonce Allison, Brett Simison, and the Conflict Transformation Collaborative staff for editing and production. Thank you also to Middlebury music professor Damascus Kafumbe for our music. 

IQ is, to say the least, a fraught concept. Psychologists have studied IQ—or g for “general cognitive ability”—maybe more than any other psychological construct. And they've learned some interesting things about it. That it's remarkably stable over the lifespan. That it really is general: people who ace one test of intellectual ability tend to ace others. And that IQs have risen markedly over the last century. At the same time, IQ seems to be met with increasing squeamishness, if not outright disdain, in many circles. It's often seen as crude, misguided, reductive—maybe a whole lot worse. There's no question, after all, that IQ has been misused—that it still gets misused—for all kinds of racist, classist, colonialist purposes. As if this wasn't all thorny enough, the study of IQ is also intimately bound up with the study of genetics. It's right there in the roiling center of debates about how genes and environment make us who we are. So, yeah, what to make of all this? How should we be thinking about IQ? My guest today is Dr. Eric Turkheimer. Eric is Professor of Psychology at the University of Virginia. He has studied intelligence and many other complex human traits for decades, and he's a major figure in the field of “behavior genetics.” Eric also has a new book out this fall—which I highly recommend—titled Understanding the Nature-Nurture Debate. In a field that has sometimes been accused of rampant optimism, Eric is—as you'll hear—a bit more measured. In this conversation, Eric and I focus on intelligence and its putatively genetic basis. We talk about why Eric doubts that we are anywhere close to an account of the biology of IQ. We discuss what makes intelligence such a formidable construct in psychology and why essentialist understandings of it are so intuitive. We talk about Francis Galton and the long shadow he's cast on the study of human behavior. We discuss the classic era of Twin Studies—an era in which researchers started to derive quantitative estimates of the heritability of complex traits. We talk about how the main takeaway from that era was that genes are quite important indeed, and about how more genetic techniques suggest that takeaway may have been a bit simplistic. Along the way, Eric and I touch on spelling ability, child prodigies, the chemical composition of money, the shared quirks of twins reared apart, the Flynn Effect, the Reverse Flynn Effect, birth order, the genetics of height, the problem of missing heritability, whether we should still be using IQ scores, and the role of behavior genetics in the broader social sciences.  Alright folks, lots in here—let's just get to it. On to my conversation with Dr. Eric Turkheimer. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode will be available soon.   Notes and links 3:30 – The 1994 book The Bell Curve, by Richard Herrnstein a Charles Murray, dealt largely with the putative social implications of IQ research. It was extremely controversial and widely discussed. For an overview of the book and controversy, see the Wikipedia article here. 6:00 – For discussion of the “all parents are environmentalists…” quip, see here. 12:00 – The notion of “multiple intelligences” was popularized by the psychologist Howard Gardner—see here for an overview. See here for an attempt to test the claims of the “multiple intelligences” framework using some of the methods of traditional IQ research. For work on EQ (or Emotional Intelligence) see here. 19:00 – Dr. Turkheimer has also laid out his spelling test analogy in a Substack post. 22:30 – Dr. Turkheimer's 1998 paper, “Heritability and Biological Explanation.” 24:30 – For an in-passing treatment of the processing efficiency idea, see p. 195 of Daniel Nettle's book Personality. See also Richard Haier's book, The Neuroscience of Intelligence. 26:00 – The original study on the relationship between pupil size and intelligence. A more recent study that fails to replicate those findings. 31:00 – For an argument that child prodigies constitute an argument for “nature,” see here. For a memorable narrative account of one child prodigy, see here. 32:00 – A meta-analysis of the Flynn effect. We have previously discussed the Flynn Effect in an episode with Michael Muthukrishna. 37:00 – James Flynn's book, What is Intelligence? On the reversal of the Flynn Effect, see here. 40:00 – The phrase “nature-nurture” originally comes from Shakespeare and was picked up by Francis Galton. In The Tempest, Prospero describes Caliban as “a born devil on whose nature/ Nurture can never stick.” 41:00 – For a biography of Galton, see here. For an article-length account of Galton's role in the birth of eugenics, see here. 50:00 – For an account of R.A. Fisher's 1918 paper and its continuing influence, see here. 55:00 – See Dr. Turkheimer's paper on the “nonshared environment”—E in the ACE model. 57:00 – A study coming out of the Minnesota Study of Twins reared apart. A New York Times article recounting some of the interesting anecdata in the Minnesota Study. 1:00:00 – See Dr. Turkheimer's 2000 paper on the “three laws of behavior genetics.” Note that this is not, in fact, Dr. Turkheimer's most cited paper (though it is very well cited). 1:03:00 – For another view of the state of behavior genetics in the postgenomic era, see here. 1:11:00 – For Dr. Turkheimer's work on poverty, heritability, and IQ, see here. 1:13:00 – A recent large-scale analysis of birth order effects on personality. 1:16:00 – For Dr. Turkheimer's take on the missing heritability problem, see here and here.    1:19:00 – A recent study on the missing heritability problem in the case of height. 1:30:00 – On the dark side of IQ, see Chapter 9 of Dr. Turkheimer's book. See also Radiolab's series on g. 1:31:00 – See Dr. Turkheimer's Substack, The Gloomy Prospect.   Recommendations The Genetic Lottery, Kathryn Paige Harden Intelligence, Stuart Ritchie Intelligence and How to Get It, Richard Nisbett ‘Why our IQ levels are higher than our grandparents'' (Ted talk), James Flynn   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala. Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

01:00 The Democrats coalition of the fringe has nothing in common but hatred of white men 04:00 Yoram Hazony decodes Biden foreign policy, https://x.com/yhazony/status/1840401343149682972 27:00 Oct. 9, 2023, Mike Benz on Iran's natural resources 30:00 Dooovid joins 38:00 Dooovid has shifted from non-Zionist to anti-Zionist 1:09:30 Dooovid thinking of getting a joint for Rosh Hashanah 1:14:00 Triggers, https://campushealth.unc.edu/health-topic/understanding-mental-health-triggers/ 1:17:00 Euphoric recall, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euphoric_recall 1:26:00 What's the best strategy for American and Israeli interests? https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/09/27/is-confronting-hezbollah-or-de-escalating-likelier-to-bring-peace/ 1:30:00 Howard Kurtz Media Buzz 1:33:00 NYT: Why the World's Biggest Powers Can't Stop a Middle East War, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/29/world/middleeast/middle-east-war-peace-nasrallah.html 1:47:00 How well can the Democrats control their anti-Israel activists? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-utPIR3vMg 1:52:00 Why Trump might win, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/25/opinion/trump-maga-sources-support.html 1:55:00 Ringmaster: Vince McMahon and the Unmaking of America, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=157551 1:58:00 Sam Harris on Darryl Cooper, Tucker Carlson, Jocko Willink, https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/darryl-cooper-nazi-apologetics-disturbances-in-the-discourse 2:32:00 Charles Murray, Sam Harris and The Bell Curve 2:59:30 Mickey Kaus on Kamala's annoying head bobs, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qothv1YsMRQ 3:07:40 Why Mickey Kaus does not like Kamala Harris 3:09:00 What are Kamala's most impressive accomplishments? 3:11:50 Kamala Harris was never thoroughly vetted 3:13:10 The best thing going for Kamala Harris is her affair with Willie Brown 3:20:30 Olivia Nuzzi and Ryan Lizza were engaged

Join Matt and Chris for a deep dive into the discourse created by Darryl Cooper's controversial interview with Tucker Carlson. The decoders tackle Cooper's revisionist takes on Winston Churchill, Hitler, and WWII, asking whether throwing in strategic disclaimers really makes it all okay.They also explore reactions from the wider comment-o-sphere, including the musings of libertarian firebrand/idiot Dave Smith, mainstream historians and history YouTubers, and the hosts of Triggernometry, Konstantin and Francis, as they try to unpack Niall Ferguson's sharp critique of Cooper. Along the way, Sam Harris enters the fray, on a search for grown-ups in the alternative media.But does Harris offer a mature critique, or is he engaging in his own cycle of grievance-mongering? Matt and Chris examine his response and consider if it rises above or contributes to the podcasting noise. Whether you are a staunch critic of Sam Harris or a devoted fan, we promise this episode has something to disappoint everyone!LinksTucker Carlson: Darryl Cooper: The True History of the Jonestown Cult, WWII, and How Winston Churchill Ruined EuropeThe History Underground: Was Churchill the Chief Villain of WWII??? A Response to Darryl Cooper & Tucker CarlsonCooper's follow up thread on X.Triggernometry: “Tucker Has Become an Enabler of Fascists” - Sir Niall FergusonDave Smith | Darryl Cooper | Part Of The Problem 1169Sam Harris: Episode 383 Where Are the Grown-Ups?Free Press: Sohrab Ahmari. Pseudo-Scholars and the Rise of the Barbarian RightSPLC: McInnes, Molyneux, and 4chan: Investigating pathways to the alt-rightVox: Ezra Klein. Sam Harris, Charles Murray, and the allure of race scienceVox. The Sam Harris Debate.Arthur Jensen Profile at SPLC. The researcher who contributed to the Neo-Nazi journal.The Churchill Project. Reply to Darryl Cooper: The Truth About World War II.The Bulwark: Robert Tracinski. The “Charlottesville Hoax” Hoax.Independent Article on the 'Cat' roasting video.

In a plenary session for the 2024 Teaching Interfaith Understanding Faculty Seminar, Eboo Patel and outgoing Middlebury College president, Laurie Patton, discuss how Middlebury's campus culture evolved in the years since 2017, when political scientist Charles Murray's visit was met with upheaval. Patton elaborates on Middlebury's conflict transformation efforts, including the successes of the Engaged Listening Project, the challenges of countering a national narrative, and the outcomes of building a resilient culture, evidenced by her community's constructive engagement of tensions surrounding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in the spring of 2024.Guest Bio: Dr. Laurie L. Patton is the 17th president of Middlebury College and the incoming president of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Patton is an authority on South Asian history, culture, and religion, and religion in the public square. She is the author and editor of ten scholarly books and three books of poems, and has translated the classical Sanskrit text, The Bhagavad Gita. She was president of the American Academy of Religion in 2019 and elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2018 in two categories, philosophy/religion and education.Visit Interfaith America to learn more about the organization and our podcast.Follow us on Twitter and Instagram to stay up to date with new episodes, interfaith stories, and our programs.

Charles Murray's most recent piece in the Wall Street Journal exposes DEI in college admissions and how it harms STEM development, plus more on illegal immigrant crimes. Visit the Howie Carr Radio Network website to access columns, podcasts, and other exclusive content.

My guests for this episode include science ‘influencer' Mr. @Evopsychgoogle, evolutionary biologist Kevin Bird @thebirdmaniac on Twitter and anthropologist Cathryn Townsend @cathryntownsend On this part of the panel we discuss the panelists' recent article in Stat News (linked below), on how this type of junk science continues to be legitimized to this day, despite glaring errors in the data. We discuss self-described ‘scientific racist' Richard Lynn as well as E.O. Wilson, Steven Pinker, Sam Harris, Charles Murray and their contributions to race ‘science'. We also talk more broadly about how the Intellectual Dark Web has played a major role in reviving it in recent years. Links: The Panelists' article that we discussed in the beginning of the episode: Journals that published Richard Lynn's racist ‘research' articles should retract them https://www.statnews.com/2024/06/20/richard-lynn-racist-research-articles-journals-retractions/ My previous episodes with Mr. @evopsychgoogle: Pt 1 - https://open.spotify.com/episode/4jSFhcmT6xNJ4JOwbEkscE?si=JnGZZ36GTNSVYKr0dYz4Fg Pt 2 - https://open.spotify.com/episode/5gvuP3xLyqKSpJgTjf43A3?si=AenT06jVTuGNc-pd6W4BtA My Miniseries on Sam Harris ‘Woking Up' https://open.spotify.com/playlist/1caIpbHnvDjKu0Ph4DA0Nb?si=DxI59yjtRjuDV7rQSv9cEw&pi=u-kmAFEyuTRNiJ If you'd like to support the show pls subscribe to the YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/@politeconversationspodcast —— Other Related articles: Quinn Slobodian article about the Pioneer Fund and The Bell Curve: https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-white-man-unburdened-slobodian-schrader The Tainted Sources of The Bell Curve: https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994/12/01/the-tainted-sources-of-the-bell-curve/ Free book by William Tucker on The Bell Curve: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-031-41614-9 Primary research articles debunking Lynn: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104160801000035X?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608009001071?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886909003675?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001470?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609000634?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886909002475?via%3Dihub https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/tzr8c https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/26vfb https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1041608024000141?via%3Dihub

Here's the first part of my 3-part discussion on race ‘science'. In this part I talk about my own observations of the slimy tactics and talking points the IDW/Heterodox race ‘science' fans tend to use. It's a journey through some of the wildest IDW race ‘science' clips I could find - From Molyneux and Rubin discussing brain size & race to Sam Harris platforming and defending Charles Murray. The next 2 parts will be a panel featuring various scientists/academics. Including returning guest, Mr. @Evopsychgoogle from Twitter. Consider this episode a primer for the panel discussion. All parts are available early via patreon.com/nicemangos If you enjoy the show please consider supporting via patreon and access all episodes before they are released.

Det andra New York Ripper-mordet sker, endast lite mer än en månad efter mordet på Leonore Cohn. I detta avsnitt berättar vi allt om mordet på 4-årige Charles Murray, och hur långt polisen kom med sin utredning.Manus, inläsning och klippning av David Oscarsson. Vill du att Olösta mord ska fortsätta att komma ut varje vecka? Du kan påverka genom att dela podden med alla du känner som kan tänkas vara intresserade och/eller sponsra via Patreon; https://www.patreon.com/olostamord Välj valfri summa du vill sponsra med per avsnitt på Patreon.Har du teorier om vad som hänt i fallen som vi tagit upp i podden? Skicka dem till: zimwaypodcast@gmail.com så kommer vi ta upp dem i kommande avsnitt. Vill du höra ett specifikt fall i podden? Önska dina fall i det här formuläret: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfDlQxf9SgZyeGS-qFPaB4BP-L59lQhs7BbZACfwk7xSs-AFw/viewform?fbclid=IwAR0astYAY_SJLcst89FwKaPIeHHV9zlfAxEz6Cmrh37bbMwvMHGc8z5cwg4Det här är en podd av Dan Hörning och David Oscarsson.Följ Dan Hörning här:Twitter: @danhorningInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/dan_horning/?hl=enYoutube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCV2Qb7SmL9mejE5RCv1chwgMail: zimwaypodcast@gmail.comFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/Olostamord/ Stöd oss med 20 kronor + moms i månaden och i gengäld slipper du all reklam i podden. Lyssna helt reklamfritt direkt! https://plus.acast.com/s/olostamord. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

At a time when campus conflict and protest is in the national spotlight, we revisit an important moment for Middlebury College - the March 2017 visit of Charles Murray - through the voices of ten Middlebury students. This episode was created in 2019 and hosted by Sarah Stroup. She interviewed a group of students with different experiences and perspectives. Each student agreed to be recorded and to have their first names used. Each student was asked four questions: (1) Where were you on March 2, 2017? (2) Which person or view frustrated you the most? (3) Under what conditions would you be willing to talk to that person or engage with that view today? (4) What is the biggest take away for you today? To Lily, Pete, Charles, Porter, Zorica, Adam, Mike, Trey, Charlotte, and Alex - thank you. For more student perspectives on Murray and campus protests and conflict, see our student newspaper, the Middlebury Campus: https://www.middleburycampus.com/  For a 2018 report from the Committee on Speech and Inclusion, see: https://www.middlebury.edu/announcements/news/2018/01/committee-speech-and-inclusion-issues-report-recommendations   

01:00 The Secret Service's Reckless Disregard For Donald Trump's Safety, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=156382 1:25:00 The case for forcing the mentally ill into treatment, https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/the-case-for-forcing-the-mentally-ill-into-treatment.html 1:36:00 Charles Murray. The collapse of the social sciences in the West, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaCA7j9iLrA 1:41:00 Trump ASSASSINATION Plot Details REVEALED 1:44:00 I Wish The News Media Had Given Joe Biden As Much Scrutiny As An NFL Coach, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=156302 1:51:00 Stephen J. James joins the show 1:55:00 Candor vs courtesy 2:05:00 Is Lizzo attractive? 2:26:10 Stephen J. James reflects on his recent visit to America 3:25:00 Secret Service protocol is to not fire on a shooter until he fires first

Jeremy Carl, author of The Unprotected Class: How Anti-White Racism Is Tearing America Apart, joins us to discuss the civil rights movement's betrayal of its vision of equal justice for all, and what must be done to course correct. - - -  Today's Sponsor: Beam - Get 40% off for a limited time! Use promo code KLAVAN at http://www.ShopBeam.com/KLAVAN 

GUEST OVERVIEW: Nick Holt is an Investigative Reporter and Editor at The Modern Enquirer.com and host of the Nick Holt Podcast where he's interviewed the likes of Kari Lake, George Papadopoulos, Kevin Sorbo, Adam Creighton, Dr Charles Murray and many others.

GUEST OVERVIEW: Nick Holt is an Investigative Reporter and Editor at The Modern Enquirer.com and host of the Nick Holt Podcast where he's interviewed the likes of Kari Lake, George Papadopoulos, Kevin Sorbo, Adam Creighton, Dr Charles Murray and many others. https://www.themodernenquirer.com/  

Sabine speaks with Jonathan Blanks about a buzzword that is not commonly used in classical liberal circles: Systemic Racism. Jonathan defends the notion that it does in fact exist, while providing nuance and context for what exactly systemic racism is.  Episode Notes: - An article by Jonathan on Cato defining systemic racism: https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-audio/jonathan-blanks-defining-systemic-racism  - Ghettoside: A True Story of Murder in America (2015) by Jill Leovy https://a.co/d/8f9JGqB  - A Commentary on Charles Murray's work on race and IQ: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/does-the-bell-curve-ring-true-a-closer-look-at-a-grim-portrait-of-american-society/  - Frantz Fanon on SEP https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frantz-fanon/https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/frantz-fanon/  - The Thirteenth trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6IXQbXPO3I 

Charles Murray continues the discussion of his favorite TV shows with Josh Olson and Joe Dante. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Outer Range showrunner Charles Murray discusses a few of his favorite TV shows with Josh Olson and Joe Dante. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

ORDER Glenn’s memoir, LATE ADMISSIONS: CONFESSIONS OF A BLACK CONSERVATIVE. Available here or wherever you get your books: https://wwnorton.com/books/9780393881349 0:00 A message from Glenn 1:14 Unsettling the “Settled Questions,” Glenn Loury & John McWhorter 2:59 The Race and IQ Question, Glenn Loury & John McWhorter 12:19 Facing Reality, Glenn Loury & Charles Murray 21:40 The […]

In this week's episode of Bingeworthy, our TV and streaming podcast, host Mike DeAngelo dives headfirst into “Outer Range.” The mysterious and compelling Prime Video series follows a rancher who discovers a mysterious hole in his pasture, leading to land wars, family drama, and time-jumping mysteries. The show stars Josh Brolin, Imogen Poots, Lili Taylor, Lewis Pullman, Tom Pelphrey, Will Patton, and more (read our review here). READ MORE: ‘Outer Range' Review: Time Is A River For Josh Brolin In Still Weird, Existentially Compelling Season 2 Joining Bingeworthy to discuss the second season of the metaphysical Western sci-fi drama are two stars of the series, Josh Brolin (“No Country for Old Men,” “Avengers: Endgame”) and Imogen Poots (“Green Room,” “Vivarium”), as well as new showrunner Charles Murray (“Luke Cage,” “Sons of Anarchy”). During the interviews, much was discussed about the showrunner change from creator Brian Watkins to Charles Murray. Some, including Imogen Poots, are close friends with Watkins, which could have potentially created an awkward situation, but it seems like Murray pulled the transition off with a great amount of class.  --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theplaylist/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theplaylist/support

Many people hate Charles Murray. They call him “dangerous” because he wrote about racial IQ differences. But angry protestors fail to recognize that Murray is not a white supremacist. He's a thoughtful researcher who has published more than a dozen scholarly books about things like the impact of welfare, the pursuit of happiness, and the meaning of libertarianism. Some of his work influenced presidents. One of his books influenced my way of thinking. Here is my full discussion with Murray.

Project Apollo was a feat of human achievement akin to, and arguably greater than, the discovery of the New World. From 1962 to 1972, NASA conducted 17 crewed missions, six of which placed men on the surface of the moon. Since the Nixon administration put an end to Project Apollo, our extraterrestrial ambitions seem to have stalled along with our sense of national optimism. But is the American spirit of adventure, heroism, and willingness to take extraordinary risk a thing of the pastToday on the podcast, I talk with Charles Murray about what made Apollo extraordinary and whether we in the 21st century have the will to do extraordinary things. Murray is the co-author with Catherine Bly Cox of Apollo: The Race to the Moon, first published in 1989 and republished in 2004. He is also my colleague here at AEI.In This Episode* Going to the moon (1:35)* Support for the program (7:40)* Gene Kranz (9:31)* An Apollo 12 story (12:06)* An Apollo 11 story (17:58)* Apollo in the media (21:36)* Perspectives on space flight (24:50)Below is a lightly edited transcript of our conversationGoing to the moon (1:35)Pethokoukis: When I look at the delays with the new NASA go-to-the-moon rocket, and even if you look at the history of SpaceX and their current Starship project, these are not easy machines for mankind to build. And it seems to me that, going back to the 1960s, Apollo must have been at absolutely the far frontier of what humanity was capable of back then, and sometimes I cannot almost believe it worked. Were the Apollo people—the engineers—were they surprised it worked?Murray: There were a lot of people who, they first heard the Kennedy speech saying, “We want to go to the moon and bring a man safely back by the end of the decade,” they were aghast. I mean, come on! In 1961, when Kennedy made that speech, we had a grand total of 15 minutes of manned space flight under our belt with a red stone rocket with 78,000 pounds of thrust. Eight years and eight weeks later, about the same amount of time since Donald Trump was elected to now, we had landed on the moon with a rocket that had 7.6 million pounds of thrust, compared to the 78,000, and using technology that had had to be invented essentially from scratch, all in eight years. All of Cape Canaveral, those huge buildings down there, all that goes up during that time.Well, I'm not going to go through the whole list of things, but if you want to realize how incredibly hard to believe it is now that we did it, consider the computer system that we used to go to the moon. Jerry Bostick, who was one of the flight dynamics officers, was telling me a few months ago about how excited they were just before the first landing when they got an upgrade to their computer system for the whole Houston Center. It had one megabyte of memory, and this was, to them, all the memory they could ever possibly want. One megabyte.We'll never use it all! We'll never use all this, it's a luxury!So Jim, I guess I'm saying a couple of things. One is, to the young'ins out there today, you have no idea what we used to be able to do. We used to be able to work miracles, and it was those guys who did it.Was the Kennedy speech, was it at Rice University?No, “go to the moon” was before Congress.He gave another speech at Rice where he was started to list all the things that they needed to do to get to the moon. And it wasn't just, “We have these rockets and we need to make a bigger one,” but there was so many technologies that needed to be developed over the course of the decade, I can't help but think a president today saying, “We're going to do this and we have a laundry list of things we don't know how to do, but we're going to figure them out…” It would've been called pie-in-the-sky, or something like that.By the way, in order to do this, we did things which today would be unthinkable. You would have contracts for important equipment; the whole cycle for the contract acquisition process would be a matter of weeks. The request for proposals would go out; six weeks later, they would've gotten the proposals in, they would've made a decision, and they'd be spending the money on what they were going to do. That kind of thing doesn't get done.But I'll tell you though, the ballsiest thing that happened in the program, among the people on the ground — I mean the ballsiest thing of all was getting on top of that rocket and being blasted into space — but on the ground it was called the “all up” decision. “All up” refers to the testing of the Saturn V, the launch vehicle, this monstrous thing, which basically is standing a Navy destroyer on end and blasting it into space. And usually, historically, when you test those things, you test Stage One, and if that works, then you add the second stage and then you add the third stage. And the man who was running the Apollo program at that time, a guy named Miller, made the decision they were going to do All Up on the first test. They were going to have all three stages, and they were going to go with it, and it worked, which nobody believed was possible. And then after only a few more launches, they put a man on that thing and it went. Decisions were made during that program that were like wartime decisions in terms of the risk that people were willing to take.One thing that surprises me is just how much that Kennedy timeline seemed to drive things. Apollo seven, I think it was October '68, and that was the first manned flight? And then like two months later, Apollo 8, we are whipping those guys around the moon! That seems like a rather accelerated timeline to me!The decision to go to the moon on Apollo 8 was very scary to the people who first heard about it. And, by the way, if they'd had the same problem on Apollo 8 that they'd had on Apollo 13, the astronauts would've died, because on Apollo 8 you did not have the lunar module with them, which is how they got back. So they pulled it off, but it was genuinely, authentically risky. But, on the other hand, if they wanted to get to the moon by the end of 1969, that's the kind of chance you had to take.Support for the Program (7:40)How enthusiastic was the public that the program could have withstood another accident? Another accident before 11 that would've cost lives, or even been as scary as Apollo 13 — would we have said, let's not do it, or we're rushing this too much? I think about that a lot now because we talk about this new space age, I'm wondering how people today would react.In January, 1967, three astronauts were killed on the pad at Cape Canaveral when the spacecraft burned up on the ground. And the support for the program continued. But what's astonishing there is that they were flying again with manned vehicles in September 1967. . . No, it was a year and 10 months, basically, between this fire, this devastating fire, a complete redesign of the spacecraft, and they got up again.I think that it's fair to say that, through Apollo 11, the public was enthusiastic about the program. It's amazingly how quickly the interest fell off after the successful landing; so that by the time Apollo 13 was launched, the news programs were no longer covering it very carefully, until the accident occurred. And by the time of Apollo 16, 17, everybody was bored with the program.Speaking of Apollo 13, to what extent did that play a role in Nixon's decision to basically end the Apollo program, to cut its budget, to treat it like it was another program, ultimately, which led to its end? Did that affect Nixon's decision making, that close call, do you think?No. The public support for the program had waned, political support had waned. The Apollo 13 story energized people for a while in terms of interest, but it didn't play a role. Gene Kranz (9:31)500 years after Columbus discovering the New World, we talk about Columbus. And I would think that 500 years from now, we'll talk about Neil Armstrong. But will we also talk about Gene Kranz? Who is Gene Kranz and why should we talk about him 500 years from now?Gene Kranz, also known as General Savage within NASA, was a flight director and he was the man who was on the flight director's console when the accident on 13 occurred, by the way. But his main claim to fame is that he was one of — well, he was also on the flight director's desk when we landed. And what you have to understand, Jim, is the astronauts did not run these missions. I'm not dissing the astronauts, but all of the decisions . . . they couldn't make those decisions because they didn't have the information to make the decisions. These life-and-death decisions had to be made on the ground, and the flight director was the autocrat of the mission control, and not just the autocrat in terms of his power, he was also the guy who was going to get stuck with all the responsibility if there was a mistake. If they made a mistake that killed the astronauts, that flight director could count on testifying before Congressional committees and going down in history as an idiot.Somebody like Gene Kranz, and the other flight director, Glynn Lunney during that era, who was also on the controls during the Apollo 13 problems, they were in their mid-thirties, and they were running the show for one of the historic events in human civilization. They deserve to be remembered, and they have a chance to be, because I have written one thing in my life that people will still be reading 500 years from now — not very many people, but some will — and that's the book about Apollo that Catherine, my wife, and I wrote. And the reason I'm absolutely confident that they're going to be reading about it is because — historians, anyway, historians will — because of what you just said. There are wars that get forgotten, there are all sorts of events that get forgotten, but we remember the Trojan War, we remember Hastings, we remember Columbus discovering America. . . We will remember for a thousand years to come, let alone 500, the century in which we first left Earth. An Apollo 12 story (12:06)If you just give me a story or two that you'd like to tell about Apollo that maybe the average person may have never heard of, but you find . . . I'm sure there's a hundred of these. Is there one or two that you think the audience might find interesting?The only thing is it gets a little bit nerdy, but a lot about Apollo gets nerdy. On Apollo 12, the second mission, the launch vehicle lifts off and into the launch phase, about a minute in, it gets hit by lightning — twice. Huge bolts of lightning run through the entire spacecraft. This is not something it was designed for. And so they get up to orbit. All of the alarms are going off at once inside the cabin of the spacecraft. Nobody has the least idea what's happened because they don't know that they got hit by lightning, all they know is nothing is working.A man named John Aaron is sitting in the control room at the EECOM's desk, which is the acronym for the systems guide who monitored all the systems, including electrical systems, and he's looking at his console and he's seeing a weird pattern of numbers that makes no sense at all, and then he remembers 15 months earlier, he'd just been watching the monitor during a test at Cape Canaveral, he wasn't even supposed to be following this launch test, he was just doing it to keep his hand in, and so forth, and something happened whereby there was a strange pattern of numbers that appeared on John Aaron's screen then. And so he called Cape Canaveral and said, what happened? Because I've never seen that before. And finally the Cape admitted that somebody had accidentally turned a switch called the SCE switch off.Okay, so here is John Aaron. Apollo 12 has gone completely haywire. The spacecraft is not under the control of the astronauts, they don't know what's happened. Everybody's trying to figure out what to do.John Aaron remembers . . . I'm starting to get choked up just because that he could do that at a moment of such incredible stress. And he just says to the flight director, “Try turning SCE to auxiliary.” And the flight director had never even heard of SCE, but he just . . . Trust made that whole system run. He passes that on to the crew. The crew turns that switch, and, all at once, they get interpretable data back again.That's the first part of the story. That was an absolutely heroic call of extraordinary ability for him to do that. The second thing that happens at that point is they have completely lost their guidance platform, so they have to get that backup from scratch, and they've also had this gigantic volts of electricity that's run through every system in the spacecraft and they have three orbits of the earth before they have to have what was called trans lunar injection: go onto the moon. That's a couple of hours' worth.Well, what is the safe thing to do? The safe thing to do is: “This is not the right time to go to the moon with a spacecraft that's been damaged this way.” These guys at mission control run through a whole series of checks that they're sort of making up on the fly because they've never encountered this situation before, and everything seems to check out. And so, at the end of a couple of orbits, they just say, “We're going to go to the moon.” And the flight director can make that decision. Catherine and I spent a lot of time trying to track down the anguished calls going back and forth from Washington to Houston, and by the higher ups, “Should we do this?” There were none. The flight director said, “We're going,” and they went. To me, that is an example of a kind of spirit of adventure, for lack of a better word, that was extraordinary. Decisions made by guys in their thirties that were just accepted as, “This is what we're going to do.”By the way, Gene Kranz, I was interviewing him for the book, and I was raising this story with him. (This will conclude my monologue.) I was raising this story with him and I was saying, “Just extraordinary that you could make that decision.” And he said, “No, not really. We checked it out. The spacecraft looked like it was good.” This was only a year or two after the Challenger disaster that I was conducting this interview. And I said to Gene, “Gene, if we had a similar kind of thing happen today, would NASA ever permit that decision to be made?” And Gene glared at me. And believe me, when Gene Kranz glares at you, you quail at your seat. And then he broke into laughter because there was not a chance in hell that the NASA of 1988 would do what the NASA of 1969 did.An Apollo 11 story (17:58)If all you know about Apollo 11 is what you learned in high school, or maybe you saw a documentary somewhere, and — just because I've heard you speak before, and I've heard Gene Kranz speak—what don't people know about Apollo 11? There were — I imagine with all these flights — a lot of decisions that needed to be made probably with not a lot of time, encountering new situations — after all, no one had done this before. Whereas, I think if you just watch a news report, you think that once the rocket's up in the air, the next thing that happens is Neil Armstrong lands it on the moon and everyone's just kind of on cruise control for the next couple of days, and boy, it certainly doesn't seem like that.For those of us who were listening to the landing, and I'm old enough to have done that, there was a little thing called—because you could listen to the last few minutes, you could listen to what was going on between the spacecraft and mission control, and you hear Buzz Aldrin say, “Program Alarm 1301 . . .  Program Alarm 1301 . . .” and you can't…   well, you can reconstruct it later, and there's about a seven-second delay between him saying that and a voice saying, “We're a go on that.” That seven seconds, you had a person in the back room that was supporting, who then informed this 26-year-old flight controller that they had looked at that possibility and they could still land despite it. The 26-year-old had to trust the guy in the back room because the 26-year-old didn't know, himself, that that was the case. He trusts him, he tells the flight director Gene Kranz, and they say, “Go.” Again: Decision made in seven seconds. Life and death. Taking a risk instead of taking the safe way out.Sometimes I think that that risk-taking ethos didn't end with Apollo, but maybe, in some ways, it hasn't been as strong since. Is there a scenario where we fly those canceled Apollo flights that we never flew, and then, I know there were other plans of what to do after Apollo, which we didn't do. Is there a scenario where the space race doesn't end, we keep racing? Even if we're only really racing against ourselves.I mean we've got . . . it's Artemis, right? That's the new launch vehicle that we're going to go back to the moon in, and there are these plans that somehow seem to never get done at the time they're supposed to get done, but I imagine we will have some similar kind of flights going on. It's very hard to see a sustained effort at this point. It's very hard to see grandiose effort at this point. The argument of, “Why are we spending all this money on manned space flight?” in one sense, I sympathize with because it is true that most of the things we do could be done by instruments, could be done by drones, we don't actually have to be there. On the other hand, unless we're willing to spread our wings and raise our aspirations again, we're just going to be stuck for a long time without making much more progress. So I guess what I'm edging around to is, in this era, in this ethos, I don't see much happening done by the government. The Elon Musks of the world may get us to places that the government wouldn't ever go. That's my most realistic hope.Apollo in the Media (21:36)If I could just give you a couple of films about the space program and you just… thought you liked it, you thought it captured something, or you thought it was way off, just let just shoot a couple at you. The obvious one is The Right Stuff—based on the Tom Wolfe book, of course.The Right Stuff was very accurate about the astronauts' mentality. It was very inaccurate about the relationship between the engineers and the astronauts. It presents the engineers as constantly getting the astronauts way, and being kind of doofuses. That was unfair. But if you want to understand how the astronauts worked, great movieApollo 13, perhaps the most well-known.Extremely accurate. Extremely accurate portrayal of the events. There are certain things I wish they could include, but it's just a movie, so they couldn't include everything. The only real inaccuracy that bothered me was it showed the consoles of the flight controllers with colored graphics on them. They didn't have colored graphics during Apollo! They had columns of white numbers on a black background that were just kind of scrolling through and changing all the time, and that's all. But apparently, when their technical advisor pointed that out to Ron Howard, Ron said, “There are some things that an audience just won't accept, but they would not accept.”That was the leap! First Man with Ryan Gosling portraying Neil Armstrong.I'll tell you: First place, good movie—Excellent, I think.Yeah, and the people who knew Armstrong say to me, it's pretty good at capturing Armstrong, who himself was a very impressive guy. This conceit in the movie that he has this little trinket he drops on the moon, that was completely made up and it's not true to life. But I'll tell you what they tell me was true to life that surprised me was how violently they were shaken up during the launch phase. And I said, “Is that the way it was, routinely?” And they said, yeah, it was a very rough ride that those guys had. And the movie does an excellent job of conveying something that somebody who'd spent a lot of time studying the Apollo program didn't know.I don't know if you've seen the Apple series For All Mankind by Ronald D. Moore, which is based on the premise I raised earlier that Apollo didn't end, we just kept up the Space Race and we kept advancing off to building moon colonies and off to Mars. Have you seen that? And what do you think about it if you have? I don't know that you have.I did not watch it. I have a problem with a lot of these things because I have my own image of the Apollo Program, and it drives me nuts if somebody does something that is egregiously wrong. I went to see Apollo 13 and I'm glad I did it because it was so accurate, but I probably should look at For All Mankind.Very reverential. A very pro-space show, to be sure. Have you seen the Apollo 11 documentary that's come out in the past five years? It was on the big screen, it was at theaters, it was a lot of footage they had people had not seen before, they found some old canisters somewhere of film. I don't know if you've seen this. I think it's just called Apollo 11.No, I haven't seen that. That sounds like something that I ought to look at.Perspectives on space flight (24:50)My listeners love when I read . . . Because you mentioned the idea of: Why do we go to space? If it's merely about exploration, I suppose we could just send robots and maybe eventually the robots will get better. So I want to just briefly read two different views of why we go to space.Why should human beings explore space? Because space offers transcendence from which only human beings can benefit. The James Webb Space Telescope cannot articulate awe. A robot cannot go into the deep and come back with soulful renewal. To fully appreciate space, we need people to go there and embrace it for what it fully is. Space is not merely for humans, nor is space merely for space. Space is for divine communion.That's one view.The second one is from Ayn Rand, who attended the Apollo 11 moon launch. This is what Ayn Rand wrote in 1969:The next four days were torn out of the world's usual context, like a breathing spell with a sweep of clean air piercing mankind's lethargic suffocation. For thirty years or longer, the newspapers had featured nothing but disasters, catastrophes, betrayals, the shrinking stature of man, the sordid mess of a collapsing civilization; their voice had become a long, sustained whine, the megaphone a failure, like the sound of the Oriental bazaar where leprous beggars, of spirit or matter, compete for attention by displaying their sores. Now, for once, the newspapers were announcing a human achievement, were reporting on a human triumph, were reminding us that man still exists and functions as a man. Those four days conveyed the sense that we were watching a magnificent work of art—a play dramatizing a single theme: the efficacy of man's mind.Is the answer for why we go to space, can it be found in either of those readings?They're going to be found in both. I am a sucker for heroism, whether it's in war or in any other arena, and space offers a kind of celebration of the human spirit that is only found in endeavors that involve both great effort and also great risk. And the other aspect of transcendence, I'm also a sucker for saying the world is not only more complicated than we know, but more complicated than we can imagine. The universe is more complicated than we can imagine. And I resonate to the sentiment in the first quote.Faster, Please! is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit fasterplease.substack.com/subscribe

For those starting out in their careers—and those who wish to advance more quickly—this is a delightfully fussy guide to the hidden rules of the road in the workplace and in life. As bestselling author and social historian Charles Murray explains, at senior levels of an organization there are curmudgeons everywhere, judging your every move. Yet it is their good opinion you need to win if you hope to get ahead. He joins Michael to discuss "The Curmudgeon's Guide to Getting Ahead: Dos and Don'ts of Right Behavior, Tough Thinking, Clear Writing, and Living a Good Life." Original air date 10 April 2014. The book was published on 8 April 2014.

THE MURRAY PRODUCTIONS FAMILY JOINS THE CONVERSATION

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: My Interview With Cade Metz on His Reporting About Slate Star Codex, published by Zack M Davis on March 26, 2024 on LessWrong. On 16 March 2024, I sat down to chat with New York Times technology reporter Cade Metz! In part of our conversation, transcribed below, we discussed his February 2021 article "Silicon Valley's Safe Space", covering Scott Alexander's Slate Star Codex blog and the surrounding community. The transcript has been significantly edited for clarity. (It turns out that real-time conversation transcribed completely verbatim is full of filler words, false starts, crosstalk, "uh huh"s, "yeah"s, pauses while one party picks up their coffee order, &c. that do not seem particularly substantive.) ZMD: I actually have some questions for you. CM: Great, let's start with that. ZMD: They're critical questions, but one of the secret-lore-of-rationality things is that a lot of people think criticism is bad, because if someone criticizes you, it hurts your reputation. But I think criticism is good, because if I write a bad blog post, and someone tells me it was bad, I can learn from that, and do better next time. So, when we met at the Pause AI protest on February 12th, I mentioned that people in my social circles would say, "Don't talk to journalists." Actually, I want to amend that, because when I later mentioned meeting you, some people were more specific: "No, talking to journalists makes sense; don't talk to Cade Metz specifically, who is unusually hostile and untrustworthy." CM: What's their rationale? ZMD: Looking at "Silicon Valley's Safe Space", I don't think it was a good article. Specifically, you wrote, In one post, [Alexander] aligned himself with Charles Murray, who proposed a link between race and I.Q. in "The Bell Curve." In another, he pointed out that Mr. Murray believes Black people "are genetically less intelligent than white people." End quote. So, the problem with this is that the specific post in which Alexander aligned himself with Murray was not talking about race. It was specifically talking about whether specific programs to alleviate poverty will actually work or not. This seems like a pretty sleazy guilt-by-association attempt. I'm wondering - as a writer, are you not familiar with the idea that it's possible to quote a writer about one thing without agreeing with all their other views? Did they not teach that at Duke? CM: That's definitely true. It's also true that what I wrote was true. There are different ways of interpreting it. You're welcome to interpret it however you want, but those areas are often discussed in the community. And often discussed by him. And that whole story is backed by a whole lot of reporting. It doesn't necessarily make it into the story. And you find this often that within the community, and with him, whether it's in print or not in print, there is this dancing around those areas. And you can interpret that many ways. You can say, we're just exploring these ideas and we should be able to. ZMD: And that's actually my position. CM: That's great. That's a valid position. There are other valid positions where people say, we need to not go so close to that, because it's dangerous and there's a slippery slope. The irony of this whole situation is that some people who feel that I should not have gone there, who think I should not explore the length and breadth of that situation, are the people who think you should always go there. ZMD: I do see the irony there. That's also why I'm frustrated with the people who are saying, "Don't talk to Cade Metz," because I have faith. I am so serious about the free speech thing that I'm willing to take the risk that if you have an honest conversation with someone, they might quote your words out of context on their blog. CM: But also, it's worth discussing. ZMD: It's worth tryin...

Dennis Prager talks to Charles Murray on His Book Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950  This is an encore show from our ACU archives. About the book: Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950   by Charles Murray–  2004   A sweeping cultural survey reminiscent of Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence. "At irregular times and in scattered settings, human beings have achieved great things. Human Accomplishment is about those great things, falling in the domains known as the arts and sciences, and the people who did them.' So begins Charles Murray's unique account of human excellence, from the age of Homer to our own time. Employing techniques that historians have developed over the last century but that have rarely been applied to books written for the general public, Murray compiles inventories of the people who have been essential to the stories of literature, music, art, philosophy, and the sciences—a total of 4,002 men and women from around the world, ranked according to their eminence. The heart of Human Accomplishment is a series of enthralling descriptive chapters: on the giants in the arts and what sets them apart from the merely great; on the differences between great achievement in the arts and in the sciences; on the meta-inventions, 14 crucial leaps in human capacity to create great art and science; and on the patterns and trajectories of accomplishment across time and geography. Straightforwardly and undogmatically, Charles Murray takes on some controversial questions. Why has accomplishment been so concentrated in Europe? Among men? Since 1400? He presents evidence that the rate of great accomplishment has been declining in the last century, asks what it means, and offers a rich framework for thinking about the conditions under which the human spirit has expressed itself most gloriously. Eye-opening and humbling, Human Accomplishment is a fascinating work that describes what humans at their best can achieve, provides tools for exploring its wellsprings, and celebrates the continuing common quest of humans everywhere to discover truths, create beauty, and apprehend the good.

Race and IQ, Government Welfare, and Crime. John Stossel Talks to Author Charles Murray John Stossel Talks to Charles Murray: Race and IQ, Government Welfare, and Crime Many people hate Charles Murray. They call him “dangerous” because he wrote about racial IQ differences. Angry protestors fail to recognize that Murray is not a white supremacist. He's a thoughtful researcher who has published more than a dozen scholarly books about things like the impact of welfare, the pursuit of happiness, and the meaning of libertarianism. Some of his work influenced presidents. One of his books influenced my way of thinking. The video is my full interview with Murray. https://youtu.be/5vBLFchXCGY?si=9e4pMmNE1Fe0WHfh John Stossel 916K subscribers 281,887 views Feb 27, 2024 ———— To get our new weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://www.johnstossel.com/#subscribe ————   Free Audiobook from Charles Murray: The Bell Curve Audiobook [Abridged] https://youtu.be/AqUhRYh7mSY?si=fFNfxSnfHCg05_wB Nombre 346 subscribers 10,839 views Jan 22, 2021 The controversial bestseller that has sparked a national debate: The Bell Curve By Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray Read by Charles Murray The ability to manipulate information has become the single most important element of success. High intelligence is an increasingly precious raw material. But despite decades of fashionable denial, the overriding and insistent truth about intellectual ability is that it is endowed unequally. In this audio presentation of THE BELL CURVE, author Charles Murray explores the ways that low intelligence, independent of social, economic, or ethnic background, lies at the root of many of our social problems. He also discusses another taboo subject: that intelligence levels differ among ethnic groups. According to the authors, only by facing up to these differences can we accurately assess the nation's problems and make realistic plans to address them. However, if we accept that there are intelligence differences among groups, we must learn to avoid prejudicial assumptions about any individual of a given group whose intelligence level may be anywhere under the bell curve. About the authors: Richard J. Herrnstein received his Ph.D. in psychology at Harvard where he had taught since 1958 and recently held the Edgar Pierce Chair in Psychology until he passed away shortly before the publication of THE BELL CURVE. Charles Murray, a graduate of Harvard who received his Ph.D. in Political Science from MIT, is the author of Losing Ground: American Social Policy 1950-1980. He is currently a Bradley Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. This title is also available in hardcover from The Free Press. If you liked the contents please support the authors by getting a copy. Transformation of America's Elite Colleges 13:45 Occupation 15:29 Poverty 25:05 Illegitimacy 27:29 Moral Considerations 32:59 Summary 35:14 The Black White Difference 39:54 Do Asians Have Higher Iqs than Whites 40:24   Transcript is available on YouTube   Check out another ACU Show with Charles Murray: Book- Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950 by Charles Murray https://acupodcast.podbean.com/e/charles-murray-96-of-human-accomplishment-came-from-christian-europeans/ This is an encore presentation from our ACU Archives.  About the book- A sweeping cultural survey reminiscent of Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence. "At irregular times and in scattered settings, human beings have achieved great things. Human Accomplishment is about those great things, falling in the domains known as the arts and sciences, and the people who did them.' So begins Charles Murray's unique account of human excellence, from the age of Homer to our own time. Employing techniques that historians have developed over the last century but that have rarely been applied to books written for the general public, Murray compiles inventories of the people who have been essential to the stories of literature, music, art, philosophy, and the sciences—a total of 4,002 men and women from around the world, ranked according to their eminence. The heart of Human Accomplishment is a series of enthralling descriptive chapters: on the giants in the arts and what sets them apart from the merely great; on the differences between great achievement in the arts and in the sciences; on the meta-inventions, 14 crucial leaps in human capacity to create great art and science; and on the patterns and trajectories of accomplishment across time and geography. Straightforwardly and undogmatically, Charles Murray takes on some controversial questions. Why has accomplishment been so concentrated in Europe? Among men? Since 1400? He presents evidence that the rate of great accomplishment has been declining in the last century, asks what it means, and offers a rich framework for thinking about the conditions under which the human spirit has expressed itself most gloriously. Eye-opening and humbling, Human Accomplishment is a fascinating work that describes what humans at their best can achieve, provides tools for exploring its wellsprings, and celebrates the continuing common quest of humans everywhere to discover truths, create beauty, and apprehend the good. Book Published November 9, 2004.

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: Agreeing With Stalin in Ways That Exhibit Generally Rationalist Principles, published by Zack M Davis on March 3, 2024 on LessWrong. It was not the sight of Mitchum that made him sit still in horror. It was the realization that there was no one he could call to expose this thing and stop it - no superior anywhere on the line, from Colorado to Omaha to New York. They were in on it, all of them, they were doing the same, they had given Mitchum the lead and the method. It was Dave Mitchum who now belonged on this railroad and he, Bill Brent, who did not. Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand Quickly recapping my Whole Dumb Story so far: ever since puberty, I've had this obsessive sexual fantasy about being magically transformed into a woman, which got contextualized by these life-changing Sequences of blog posts by Eliezer Yudkowsky that taught me (amongst many other things) how fundamentally disconnected from reality my fantasy was. So it came as a huge surprise when, around 2016, the "rationalist" community that had formed around the Sequences seemingly unanimously decided that guys like me might actually be women in some unspecified metaphysical sense. A couple years later, having strenuously argued against the popular misconception that the matter could be resolved by simply redefining the word woman (on the grounds that you can define the word any way you like), I flipped out when Yudkowsky prevaricated about how his own philosophy of language says that you can't define a word any way you like, prompting me to join with allies to persuade him to clarify. When that failed, my attempts to cope with the "rationalists" being fake led to a series of small misadventures culminating in Yudkowsky eventually clarifying the philosophy-of-language issue after I ran out of patience and yelled at him over email. Really, that should have been the end of the story - with a relatively happy ending, too: that it's possible to correct straightforward philosophical errors, at the cost of almost two years of desperate effort by someone with Something to Protect. That wasn't the end of the story, which does not have such a relatively happy ending. The New York Times's Other Shoe Drops (February 2021) On 13 February 2021, "Silicon Valley's Safe Space", the anticipated New York Times piece on Slate Star Codex, came out. It was ... pretty lame? (Just lame, not a masterfully vicious hit piece.) Cade Metz did a mediocre job of explaining what our robot cult is about, while pushing hard on the subtext to make us look racist and sexist, occasionally resorting to odd constructions that were surprising to read from someone who had been a professional writer for decades. ("It was nominally a blog", Metz wrote of Slate Star Codex. "Nominally"?) The article's claim that Alexander "wrote in a wordy, often roundabout way that left many wondering what he really believed" seemed more like a critique of the many's reading comprehension than of Alexander's writing. Although that poor reading comprehension may have served a protective function for Scott. A mob that attacks over things that look bad when quoted out of context can't attack you over the meaning of "wordy, often roundabout" text that they can't read. The Times article included this sleazy guilt-by-association attempt: In one post, [Alexander] aligned himself with Charles Murray, who proposed a link between race and I.Q. in "The Bell Curve." In another, he pointed out that Mr. Murray believes Black people "are genetically less intelligent than white people."[1] But Alexander only "aligned himself with Murray" in "Three Great Articles On Poverty, And Why I Disagree With All Of Them" in the context of a simplified taxonomy of views on the etiology of poverty. This doesn't imply agreement with Murray's views on heredity! (A couple of years earlier, Alexand...

Calls: Black women, anger, remarriage, the Bible. GUEST: Deep Left Jokl: Evil, morality, and Christian decline. The Hake Report, Wednesday, February 21, 2024 AD GUEST LINKS: @DLJokl on YT https://www.youtube.com/@dljokl and X https://twitter.com/dljokl | Deep Left Substack  TIME STAMPS * (0:00:00) Guest later: Jokl (Whites, families in decline) * (0:02:01) Hey, guys! (Nice shirt, said JLP) * (0:03:41) JEFF, LA: Celebrate them turning blacks R (Fani, Heynard, etc)* (0:10:03) DAVID, FL: Tiffany Heynard, Marilyn Mosby, Fani Willis, BHM * (0:17:00) DAVID: Anger brings action; Divorce and remarriage "second wife" * (0:29:38) DAVID: Story from 7yo, mother's second husband * (0:32:39) PETE, AK: Jesus, anger, mama; Epstein * (0:40:24) GUEST: Jokl (not Jocko)* (0:43:09) Jokl on CA, whites, Charles Murray, 2 societies, Christians* (0:48:09) Jokl: "Civil Rights," real estate, classes, education * (0:55:16) Desegregation, privilege; Jokl: Jews, white liberals * (1:02:28) Is everyone evil? Psychological state; Knowledge of good/evil * (1:08:30) Evil universal… ? Animals, no knowledge* (1:15:20) Intend what's right. Guilt vs shame, Jews, Christians * (1:21:52) Intuitive understanding right/wrong * (1:25:28) Good vs evil, Evil vs evil: Left vs Right, Religion, evil in us * (1:33:47) Women went too far. Evil in the right. * (1:39:01) Hyper-moralizing, Christianity in crisis (Elites), tolerance * (1:44:09) Last gasps of Christianity * (1:45:37) Changing culture: 8 gens, 200 years * (1:51:34) Follow DeepLeft Substack and DLJokl on X, YouTube * (1:53:48) Bullfrogs & Butterflies - "Good Morning" (1978, God Is My Friend) BLOG https://www.thehakereport.com/blog/2024/2/21/the-hake-report-wed-2-21-24 PODCAST / Substack  Also see Hake News from JLP  https://www.thehakereport.com/jlp-news/2024/2/21/cpac-straw-poll-lists-17-trump-vp-choices-hake-news-wed-2-21-24 Hake is live M-F 9-11a PT (11-1CT/12-2ET) Call-in 1-888-775-3773 https://www.thehakereport.com/show VIDEO  YouTube  |  Rumble*  |  Facebook  |  X  |  BitChute  |  Odysee*  PODCAST  Substack  |  Apple  |  Spotify  |  Castbox  |  Podcast Addict  *SUPER CHAT on platforms* above or  BuyMeACoffee, etc.  SHOP  Teespring  ||  All My Links  JLP Network:  JLP  |  Church  |  TFS  |  Nick  |  Joel   Get full access to HAKE at thehakereport.substack.com/subscribe

The Bell Curve by Charles Murray. Intro by John Stossel.   Controversial Ideas: Charles Murray Challenges the Mainstream Narrative Watch this video at- https://youtu.be/mORqK1cZggc?si=H_471ZlXtquyU4Ro John Stossel 899K subscribers 68,705 views Jan 23, 2024 Charles Murray is now canceled. He doesn't get invited to colleges anymore. Murray is racist and sexist, say activists, because he wrote the book, "The Bell Curve,” which says that IQs differ by race, and that blacks, on average, have a lower IQ than whites. “Do you believe that blacks are intellectually inferior?” I ask him. “If you give mental tests to a represented sample of whites and a representative sample of blacks, there will be about a one standard deviation difference,” Murray explains. "To then translate that into people being inferior and superior is idiotic.” "East asians, on average, have a higher IQ than whites. Ashkenazi Jews have higher IQs," Murray adds. It's just a fact. Many researchers say Murray is correct. Still, lots of people want no discussion about racial differences. Murray has been “cancelled.” But Murray has interesting ideas that deserve to be heard… NOT shouted down. You can listen to him here on STOSSEL TV.  ———— To get our new weekly video from Stossel TV, sign up here: https://www.johnstossel.com/#subscribe ————   The Bell Curve Audiobook [Abridged] https://youtu.be/AqUhRYh7mSY?si=fFNfxSnfHCg05_wB Nombre 346 subscribers 10,839 views Jan 22, 2021 The controversial bestseller that has sparked a national debate: The Bell Curve By Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray Read by Charles Murray The ability to manipulate information has become the single most important element of success. High intelligence is an increasingly precious raw material. But despite decades of fashionable denial, the overriding and insistent truth about intellectual ability is that it is endowed unequally. In this audio presentation of THE BELL CURVE, author Charles Murray explores the ways that low intelligence, independent of social, economic, or ethnic background, lies at the root of many of our social problems. He also discusses another taboo subject: that intelligence levels differ among ethnic groups. According to the authors, only by facing up to these differences can we accurately assess the nation's problems and make realistic plans to address them. However, if we accept that there are intelligence differences among groups, we must learn to avoid prejudicial assumptions about any individual of a given group whose intelligence level may be anywhere under the bell curve. About the authors: Richard J. Herrnstein received his Ph.D. in psychology at Harvard where he had taught since 1958 and recently held the Edgar Pierce Chair in Psychology until he passed away shortly before the publication of THE BELL CURVE. Charles Murray, a graduate of Harvard who received his Ph.D. in Political Science from MIT, is the author of Losing Ground: American Social Policy 1950-1980. He is currently a Bradley Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. This title is also available in hardcover from The Free Press. If you liked the contents please support the authors by getting a copy. Transformation of America's Elite Colleges 13:45 Occupation 15:29 Poverty 25:05 Illegitimacy 27:29 Moral Considerations 32:59 Summary 35:14 The Black White Difference 39:54 Do Asians Have Higher Iqs than Whites 40:24   Transcript is available on YouTube  

Dr. Andre Archie, author of The Virtue of Color-Blindness, joins us to discuss how the concept of race has been weaponized to demonize certain ethnicities while uplifting others in an ill-conceived effort to correct past discriminations, the evolution of racial ideology in America from slavery to the present day, and whether or not the notion of "systemic racism" is indeed pervasive throughout society. - - -  Today's Sponsor: Beam - Get 40% off for a limited time! Use promo code KLAVAN at http://www.ShopBeam.com/Klavan #TheVirtueOfColorBlindness #AndreArchie #DEI

This podcast is taken from Douglas Groothuis, Fire in the Streets (Salem, 2022). Even if we grant that the free-enterprise system has done a disservice to black people [which I do not], it does not follow that socialism would be any better for them—or for anyone else. Remember that a realistic view of politics is that of the constrained vision [of Thomas Sowell], which aligns with the Judeo-Christian account of our humanity, culture, and the state. Finding injustices in one system does not imply that these injustices will be eliminated or lessened by another system. Other injustices may replace and exceed the previous injustices. This is true for socialism. [Groothuis, Douglas R. Fire in the Streets: How You Can Confidently Respond to Incendiary Cultural Topics (p. 121). Salem Books. Kindle Edition.] Those benefiting from slavery or oppressed by it are long dead and so cannot be involved in any reparations. Reparations as demanded today are not supported by the Bible. It is difficult and often impossible to identify blacks today as descendants of slaves. Many in the US are not. Massive wealth transfers are not likely to be helpful for blacks overall or for society as a whole, as was seen in The War on Poverty in the 1960s and 1970s. On this see, Charles Murray, Losing Ground. Who, among blacks, would receive reparations? What of wealthy blacks, such as Oprah Winfrey and others? If so, this makes no sense. Conclusion If the free market were torched for the sake of ending or lessening racism and replaced by socialism, racism would not go away or even decrease. Rather, Americans of all colors would lose treasured freedoms and opportunities. Forcing “equity” economically through the state would spark strife and discontent. Whatever legacy remains of slavery, Jim Crow, or redlining is best treated by the possibilities and opportunities afforded through free enterprise, rather than by insisting on compensatory will-o'-the-wisps notions, such as affirmative action, minimum wage laws, tax increases on “the rich,” reparations, and other political dead ends. If any social system should be committed to the flames on the basis of evidence, principle, and history, it is socialism in all of its forms. Groothuis, Douglas R. Fire in the Streets: How You Can Confidently Respond to Incendiary Cultural Topics (p. 127). Salem Books. Kindle Edition. Discover more Christian podcasts at lifeaudio.com and inquire about advertising opportunities at lifeaudio.com/contact-us.

This is an abbreviated version of The Michael Medved Show. To get the full program, plus premium content, become a subscriber at MichaelMedved.com

In 1993, Charles Murray, an experienced hunter, went missing on the first day of bow hunting season. His family fears that something terrible had happened were quickly realized. But who was it that found Charles out in the middle of the woods? And why did this hunter become someone else's prey? Sponsors: Skims: Believe the hype - the collection has nearly 90,000 five star reviews for a reason The Fits Everybody collection and more perfect-fit essentials are available now at SKIMS.com Plus, get free shipping on orders over seventy five dollars! After you place your order, be sure to let them know we sent you! Select "podcast" in the survey and be sure to select our show in the dropdown menu that follows. Angi: Download the free Angi mobile app today or visit Angi.com

Keri Smith says she was in a cult for twenty years. It wasn't NXIVM, Peoples Temple, or Heaven's Gate, but something more widespread and insidious. Keri was a self-described Social Justice Warrior.Peter Boghossian talks to Keri about how Women's Studies classes at Duke University provided the gateway to her conversion through new words, new definitions, and exposure to oft-repeated axioms. Keri describes her former self as a “woke evangelist,” spreading newfound truths about the patriarchy and righteous censorship. She became a Wikipedia editor to “correct history” and limited her media consumption to news, books, and speakers approved by the ideology.Keri lost friends and job opportunities when she left the Social Justice tribe, but she emerged with valuable experience. She shares advice about how to help others obtain freedom from illiberal dogma. Spoiler Alert: Facts aren't enough to break the spell.Keri Smith is the host of Deprogrammed with Keri Smith where she interviews notable thinkers like Helen Pluckrose, James Lindsay, William Allen, Samuel Sey, Charles Murray, Barbara Kay, and Dr. Bret Weinstein You can find her writing in Human Events, Fee.org, and The Dissenters Project, a collection of essays on the price of dissent. Keri has been a guest on many podcasts, including Timcast, Nerdrotic, Triggernometry, and Real Talk with Zuby. She recently hosted Mindsfest 2023 in Austin, Texas.Watch this interview on YouTube!

Charles Murray. Over 90% of Human Accomplishment Came from Christian Europeans. Book- Human Accomplishment: The Pursuit of Excellence in the Arts and Sciences, 800 B.C. to 1950 by Charles Murray This is an encore presentation from our ACU Archives.   About the book- A sweeping cultural survey reminiscent of Barzun's From Dawn to Decadence. "At irregular times and in scattered settings, human beings have achieved great things. Human Accomplishment is about those great things, falling in the domains known as the arts and sciences, and the people who did them.' So begins Charles Murray's unique account of human excellence, from the age of Homer to our own time. Employing techniques that historians have developed over the last century but that have rarely been applied to books written for the general public, Murray compiles inventories of the people who have been essential to the stories of literature, music, art, philosophy, and the sciences—a total of 4,002 men and women from around the world, ranked according to their eminence. The heart of Human Accomplishment is a series of enthralling descriptive chapters: on the giants in the arts and what sets them apart from the merely great; on the differences between great achievement in the arts and in the sciences; on the meta-inventions, 14 crucial leaps in human capacity to create great art and science; and on the patterns and trajectories of accomplishment across time and geography. Straightforwardly and undogmatically, Charles Murray takes on some controversial questions. Why has accomplishment been so concentrated in Europe? Among men? Since 1400? He presents evidence that the rate of great accomplishment has been declining in the last century, asks what it means, and offers a rich framework for thinking about the conditions under which the human spirit has expressed itself most gloriously. Eye-opening and humbling, Human Accomplishment is a fascinating work that describes what humans at their best can achieve, provides tools for exploring its wellsprings, and celebrates the continuing common quest of humans everywhere to discover truths, create beauty, and apprehend the good. Book Published November 9, 2004. This is an encore presentation from our ACU Archives.  

I have to say that Douglas Murray reminds me in several ways of my late friend Christopher Hitchens. It is not merely that they are both English, eloquent and well-read. Douglas doesn't suffer fools gladly, and pulls no punches when necessary. But he is otherwise charming, thoughtful, and willing to enter into respectful intelligent conversations on many topics. Both Douglas and Christopher have been journalists covering dangerous parts of the world, which has helped shape some of their views. Douglas is more conservative, Christopher was in some ways more liberal, but their deep reserve of knowledge combining literature and current events makes listening to either one of them compelling. I first got to know Douglas through his marvelous book, The Madness of Crowds, a take-off on Charles Murray's 1841 classic Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds, which was “A distillation of some of the most humiliating, terrifying, and confusing things humans have done in collectivity”… treating things like alchemy, haunted houses, and the crusades. Douglas' book discusses modern craziness, cutting with surgeon-like skill to the heart of issues related to gender, race, identity politics, and of course free speech. The Madness of Crowds was followed more recently by The War on The West, which took up where the former book left off, dealing with issues ranging from postmodern attacks on the western Canon, attacks on modern science, and more recent ‘Critical Race Theory' related attacks on modern western society. I discussed all of these issues with Douglas, but was very pleased to be able to bookend the dialogue, front and back, with a discussion of poetry. He writes a weekly column for Free Press on the virtue and joy of committing great poems to memory, and while I have a limited appreciation and tolerance for poetry in general, there are a few poets, T.S. Eliot, and Rainer Maria Rilke in particular, who I greatly enjoy. It was a pleasure to listen to Douglas recite some favorite lines, and to discuss these sublime subjects with him before and after we dropped down into the muck that comprises the modern culture wars. I hope you enjoy this discussion as much as I did. As always, an ad-free video version of this podcast is also available to paid Critical Mass subscribers. Your subscriptions support the non-profit Origins Project Foundation, which produces the podcast. The audio version is available free on the Critical Mass site and on all podcast sites, and the video version will also be available on the Origins Project Youtube channel as well. Get full access to Critical Mass at lawrencekrauss.substack.com/subscribe

Subscribe on Patreon and hear this week's full patron-exclusive episode here: https://www.patreon.com/posts/83389515 Bea, Phil, and Abby speak with Gabe Winant about the faux class politics of Republican Senator J.D. Vance, how his 2016 book Hillbilly Elegy pathologizes the poor, and his adherence to the work of inveterate race scientist Charles Murray. Read Gabe's piece for n+1, "J.D. Vance Changes the Subject" here: https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-45/politics/j-d-vance-changes-the-subject-2/ Get Health Communism here: www.versobooks.com/books/4081-health-communism Runtime 1:20:15, 22 May 2023

What's wrong with cancelation? ... A defense of Charles Murray ... Cancelation and the closet ... Jonathan's book, The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth ... Jonathan: “The marketplace of ideas” is a necessary but insufficient metaphor ... Is Trump an agent of disinformation? ... What the woke and MAGA crowds have in common ... Why Jonathan is hopeful about the constitution of knowledge ...

What's wrong with cancelation? ... A defense of Charles Murray ... Cancelation and the closet ... Jonathan's book, The Constitution of Knowledge: A Defense of Truth ... Jonathan: “The marketplace of ideas” is a necessary but insufficient metaphor ... Is Trump an agent of disinformation? ... What the woke and MAGA crowds have in common ... Why Jonathan is hopeful about the constitution of knowledge ...

“There's an old adage ‘He who forgets history is condemned to repeat it.' But what's missing in that phrase is that there are the people who are in charge of keeping your history. And they can make you forget it. They can keep it from you. And then you're doomed to repeat something that they want you to repeat.” — Samuel JamesSamuel James is a musician and storyteller from Portland, Maine, who specializes in blues and roots music. Samuel has a deep knowledge of American musical history and recently wrote a column in the Mainer magazine about the origins of the phrase “stay woke,” first heard on a Lead Belly record about the Scottsboro Boys. He shows that when we see attacks on “wokeness” like Ron DeSantis' “Stop WOKE Act,” we should remember that it's “an old, Black phrase being weaponized against the very people who created it.”Today, Samuel joins to explain how listening to the words of early 20th century Black songs provides critical context for understanding America today. From commentary on the prison system in the words of “Midnight Special” to Mississippi John Hurt's unique twist on the “John Henry” legend, Samuel James offers a course in how to listen closely to appreciate both the rich diversity of the music lumped together as folk blues, and how to hear the warnings that the early singers passed down to Black Americans today. It's a very special hour featuring some of the greatest music ever written, played live by one of its most talented contemporary interpreters.Nathan's article on Charles Murray is here, and one on Joe Rogan is here. A Current Affairs article about John Henry songs is here. Beyond Mississippi John Hurt and Lead Belly, artists mentioned by Samuel James include Gus Cannon, the Mississippi Sheiks, Charley Patton, Skip James, and Furry Lewis. More information about the St. Louis chemical spraying is here. Follow Samuel James on Twitter here. His 99 Years podcast is here. Nathan mentions the “Voyager Golden Record” that went into space, which did in fact include a classic blues song.“This is the hammer that killed John HenryBut it won't kill me, but it won't kill me, but it won't kill me”— Mississippi John HurtNOTE: The n-word is heard several times in this episode, spoken by Samuel James, and in recordings by Lead Belly and Ice Cube.Subscribe to Current Affairs on Patreon to unlock all of our bonus episodes and get early access to new releases.

The pandemic was miserable for mothers, right? New research disputes that claim and shows moms were actually happier than childless women. But not ALL moms. What makes the difference? A survey shows both conservative and progressive Americans believe the absolute worst about each other. Is there any hope for healing the divide? What makes human leg muscles different from other primate species? Phil gets to the bottom of it. And Skye interviews Walter Kim, the president of the National Association of Evangelicals, about what's broken in the evangelical movement in America and how to repair it. Plus, drunk Santas crash a tank and hormonal Rwandan elephants. Patreon Bonus: Getting Schooled by Kaitlyn Schiess: Liberation Theology 101 - https://www.patreon.com/posts/76760813/ News Segment 0:00 - Intro 1:30 - Kaitlyn's trip 6:23 - Santas stuck in hedge 9:55 - News of the Butt 17:41 - “The Married-Mom Advantage” 35:14 - Partisan animosity Sponsors 48:50 - Sponsor: Abide Get 25% off your first year when you text HOLYPOST to 22433 49:55 - Sponsor: Faithful Counseling Get 10% off your first month at faithfulcounseling.com/holypost Interview with Walter Kim National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) - https://www.nae.org 51:05 - Walter Kim intro 52:57 - NAE's biggest challenges 55:02 - Evangelical label 1:06:15 - Public discipleship 1:20:27 - Evangelicals and pluralism 1:27:30 - Priorities for NAE in 2023 Links and resources mentioned: “Pub-crawling Santas get armoured vehicle stuck in Cornish hedge” (The Guardian) - https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2022/dec/24/pub-crawling-santas-get-armoured-vehicle-stuck-in-cornish-hedge “Why Do We Have Butts?” (Gizmodo) - https://gizmodo.com/why-do-we-have-butts-1826004199 “The Married-Mom Advantage” (The Atlantic) - https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/12/motherhood-marriage-pandemic-covid-children/672563/ “Activism and Apathy Are Poisoning American Politics” by David French (The Dispatch) - https://thedispatch.com/newsletter/frenchpress/activism-and-apathy-are-poisoning-american-politics/ Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010 by Charles Murray - https://amzn.to/3X4UNHY Why We're Polarized by Ezra Klein - https://amzn.to/3jOVQ0z Percent of Babies Born to Unmarried Mothers by State - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/unmarried/unmarried.htm Unmarried Childbearing (U.S.) - https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/unmarried-childbearing.htm “Presbyterian Church in America Leaves National Association of Evangelicals” (Christianity Today) - https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2022/june/presbyterian-church-leaves-nae.html Holy Post website: https://www.holypost.com/ Holy Post Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/holypost The Holy Post is supported by our listeners. We may earn affiliate commissions through links listed here. As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

I sit down with Charles Murray to discuss his new book "Facing Reality: Two Truths about Race in America." We dive into whether education disparities are caused by our environment or by our genetic structures. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

I sit down with Charles Murray to discuss his new book "Facing Reality: Two Truths about Race in America." We dive into whether education disparities are caused by our environment or by our genetic structures. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices