Podcasts about David Hume

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay The Natural History Of Religion. It focuses specifically on sections 9-15, where Hume brings his work to a close by comparing polytheism and monotheism, as he understands them, against each other, not just in terms of their belief systems but their effects upon cultures and societies in which they play important roles. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Natural History Of Religion here - https://amzn.to/49oomNH

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay The Natural History Of Religion. It focuses specifically on sections 6-8, where he discusses the development of monotheism (which he calls "theism") out of polytheism, attempting to provide a naturalist perspective on the matters. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Natural History Of Religion here - https://amzn.to/49oomNH

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay The Natural History Of Religion. It focuses specifically on the development of what he classifies as "polytheism" (contrasting that with "theism", i.e. monotheism). Hume provides an account that views all of the ancient and contemporary polytheistic religions as derived from natural psychological processes of human beings, developed within their cultures. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Natural History Of Religion here - https://amzn.to/49oomNH

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay The Natural History Of Religion. It focuses specifically on the overall structure, arguments, and the assumptions of the work, as well as some of the distinctions Hume relies upon in his text. We also examine what Hume means by the term "natural history" and how it can be applied to religion, in his view. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Natural History Of Religion here - https://amzn.to/49oomNH

In this episode the Pugs engage some of the theological roots that gave rise and shape to Western empiricism, especially in the Scottish Tradition of David Hume. In particular, they engage how the pessimistic view of fallen human reason take on a distorted shape when severed from the rich theological setting of Augustine's theology, and then lead to secular reappropriations by secular thinkers like Hume and others. Support the Theology Pugcast on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thetheologypugcast?fbclid=IwAR17UHhfzjphO52C_kkZfursA_C784t0ldFix0wyB4fd-YOJpmOQ3dyqGf8 Learn more about WPC Battle Ground: https://www.solochristo.org/ Connect with WileyCraft Productions: https://wileycraftproductions.com/

In this episode the Pugs engage some of the theological roots that gave rise and shape to Western empiricism, especially in the Scottish Tradition of David Hume. In particular, they engage how the pessimistic view of fallen human reason take on a distorted shape when severed from the rich theological setting of Augustine's theology, and then lead to secular reappropriations by secular thinkers like Hume and others.Support the Theology Pugcast on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thetheologypugcast?fbclid=IwAR17UHhfzjphO52C_kkZfursA_C784t0ldFix0wyB4fd-YOJpmOQ3dyqGf8Learn more about WPC Battle Ground: https://www.solochristo.org/Connect with WileyCraft Productions: https://wileycraftproductions.com/

In this episode the Pugs engage some of the theological roots that gave rise and shape to Western empiricism, especially in the Scottish Tradition of David Hume. In particular, they engage how the pessimistic view of fallen human reason take on a distorted shape when severed from the rich theological setting of Augustine's theology, and then lead to secular reappropriations by secular thinkers like Hume and others. Support the Theology Pugcast on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thetheologypugcast?fbclid=IwAR17UHhfzjphO52C_kkZfursA_C784t0ldFix0wyB4fd-YOJpmOQ3dyqGf8 Learn more about WPC Battle Ground: https://www.solochristo.org/ Connect with WileyCraft Productions: https://wileycraftproductions.com/

In this episode the Pugs engage some of the theological roots that gave rise and shape to Western empiricism, especially in the Scottish Tradition of David Hume. In particular, they engage how the pessimistic view of fallen human reason take on a distorted shape when severed from the rich theological setting of Augustine's theology, and then lead to secular reappropriations by secular thinkers like Hume and others. Support the Theology Pugcast on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thetheologypugcast?fbclid=IwAR17UHhfzjphO52C_kkZfursA_C784t0ldFix0wyB4fd-YOJpmOQ3dyqGf8 Learn more about WPC Battle Ground: https://www.solochristo.org/ Connect with WileyCraft Productions: https://wileycraftproductions.com/

Our guest Ethan Everett is an investment analyst in the US and author of 'The Investment Philosophers'. We discuss the book, in which he connects philosophical ideas from thirteen thinkers, including Spinoza, Hume, and Kierkegaard, to modern investing practices. The conversation also touches on his grandfather's influence as a former student of Benjamin Graham and Ethan's future book projects, connecting law and martial arts to investing.—————————————Our conversation with Ethan Everett was recorded on 22 October 2025.—————————————For more info about the podcast, make sure to follow us on X/Twitter. We love to hear your thoughts, so please rate and review us. And feel free to tell us about great authors, books, and investors. Thank you. /Eddie with team—————————————Episode Chapters(00:00) Intro by Eddie(00:53) Welcoming Ethan Everett(02:23) Ethan's way to investing(06:48) Discovering philosophy(08:37) How “The Investment Philosophers” came about(10:45) Criteria for selecting the 13 philosophers in the book(12:42) Lessons from Baruch Spinoza(22:42) David Hume(28:28) Søren Kierkegaard(35:28) Ethan's evolution as an investor(39:31) Company example: Mattel (43:26) Ethan's role as an Investment Analyst at Galvin, Gaustad & Stein(46:10) Lessons from Ethan's grandfather, a student of Benjamin Graham(48:46) Ethan's AI start-up Collexity (53:05) Reading suggestions(57:23) Writing ideas(01:00:43) Concluding remarks—————————————Books MentionedThe Investment Philosophers – Ethan EverettThe Intelligent Investor - Benjamin GrahamThe Money Game - Adam Smith (George Goodman)Essays – Michel de MontaigneThe Gay Science – Friedrich NietzscheEthics – Baruch Spinoza—————————————Companies MentionedMattel—————————————More on Ethan Everett:LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ethan-everett-cfa-esq-404362156/Collexity: https://collexity.ai/—————————————About the PodcastIntro episode: https://www.redeye.se/podcast/investing-by-the-books/817383/0-intro-to-investing-by-the-books—————————————What is Investing by the Books?Investing by the Books was founded by Henrik Andersson, Bo Börtemark, Mats Larsson and Michael Persson. It has published hundreds of book reviews in the past 10 years and operates on a non-profit basis. Visit the website: http://www.investingbythebooks.com/Follow on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/Investbythebook—————————————What is Redeye?Redeye is a research-centered boutique investment bank from Stockholm. Founded in 1999, Redeye cultivates investors through timeless knowledge, a humble attitude, and a strong focus on quality. Visit the website: https://www.redeye.se/Follow on Twitter/X: https://twitter.com/Redeye_—————————————DisclaimerNotice that the content in this podcast is not, and shall not be construed as investment advice. This information is meant to be informative and for general purposes only. For full disclaimer, visit Redeye.se

Romanos 2:15“Mostrando la obra de la Ley escrita en sus corazones, dando testimonio su conciencia y acusándolos o defendiéndolos sus razonamientos...”Aquellos que se ocupan de las ciencias éticas y que creen en la evolución han intentado resolver una explicación evolucionista por la que las personas universalmente tienen un sentido del bien y del mal. Esta línea de estudio es tan nueva que aún no tiene un nombre, aunque algunos han sugerido “neuroética” o “neurociencia moral”.Mucho del desarrollo de este estudio se basó en las teorías de los filósofos John Stewart Mill y Emmanuel Kant. Mill enseñó que el bien moral se define por aquellas acciones que le hacen el mejor bien a la mayoría de las personas, aún si algunos individuos deben sufrir en el proceso. Kant dijo que el bien moral podía definirse por la pura razón. Luego añaden al filósofo David Hume que enseñó que las personas consideran que una acción es buena si les hace sentir bien. Sin embargo, los investigadores en esta área señalaron que incluso los monos, que no leen filosofía, tienen un sentido del juego limpio. En un experimento, monos que habían aceptado pepinillos como una recompensa empezaron a rechazarlos, luego de ver que otros monos recibían uvas más sabrosas. En este punto en esta nueva “ciencia”, algunos investigadores han concluido que el bien y el mal no son más que el encendido instintivo de las neuronas cerebrales.Las Escrituras, por otro lado, dicen que Dios ha escrito Su ley en nuestros corazones. Esta es una explicación mucho más lógica del sentido universal del hombre sobre el bien y el mal.Oración: Te agradezco, Padre, por Tu ley, y por el consuelo que encuentro en el Evangelio del perdón. Amén.Ref: Discover, Carl Zimmer, “Whose Life Would You Save? To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/1235/29?v=20251111

Exploring David Hume

In Part II of their SOTR wrap-up, Chris and Britt have an actually hopeful discussion

An award-winning astrophysicist looks at how the understanding of uncertainty and randomness has led to breakthroughs in our knowledge of the cosmos All of us understand the world around us by constructing models, comparing them to observations, and drawing conclusions. Scientists create, test, and replace these models by applying the twinned concepts of probability and randomness. Exploring how this process has refined our knowledge of quantum mechanics and the birth of the universe, In The Random Universe: How Models and Probability Help Us Make Sense of the Cosmos (Yale UP, 2025) Andrew H. Jaffe offers a unique synthesis of the philosophy of epistemology, the mathematics of probability, and the science of cosmology. As Jaffe puts Enlightenment thinkers like David Hume in conversation with contemporary philosophers such as Karl Popper and Imre Lakatos and engages with scientists ranging from Isaac Newton and Galileo to Albert Einstein and Arthur Eddington, he uses Thomas Bayes's seminal studies of statistics and probability to make sense of conflicting currents of thought. This is a deep look into how we have learned to account for uncertainty in our search for knowledge--and a reminder that science is not about facts and data as such but about creating models that correctly account for those facts and data. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

An award-winning astrophysicist looks at how the understanding of uncertainty and randomness has led to breakthroughs in our knowledge of the cosmos All of us understand the world around us by constructing models, comparing them to observations, and drawing conclusions. Scientists create, test, and replace these models by applying the twinned concepts of probability and randomness. Exploring how this process has refined our knowledge of quantum mechanics and the birth of the universe, In The Random Universe: How Models and Probability Help Us Make Sense of the Cosmos (Yale UP, 2025) Andrew H. Jaffe offers a unique synthesis of the philosophy of epistemology, the mathematics of probability, and the science of cosmology. As Jaffe puts Enlightenment thinkers like David Hume in conversation with contemporary philosophers such as Karl Popper and Imre Lakatos and engages with scientists ranging from Isaac Newton and Galileo to Albert Einstein and Arthur Eddington, he uses Thomas Bayes's seminal studies of statistics and probability to make sense of conflicting currents of thought. This is a deep look into how we have learned to account for uncertainty in our search for knowledge--and a reminder that science is not about facts and data as such but about creating models that correctly account for those facts and data. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

An award-winning astrophysicist looks at how the understanding of uncertainty and randomness has led to breakthroughs in our knowledge of the cosmos All of us understand the world around us by constructing models, comparing them to observations, and drawing conclusions. Scientists create, test, and replace these models by applying the twinned concepts of probability and randomness. Exploring how this process has refined our knowledge of quantum mechanics and the birth of the universe, In The Random Universe: How Models and Probability Help Us Make Sense of the Cosmos (Yale UP, 2025) Andrew H. Jaffe offers a unique synthesis of the philosophy of epistemology, the mathematics of probability, and the science of cosmology. As Jaffe puts Enlightenment thinkers like David Hume in conversation with contemporary philosophers such as Karl Popper and Imre Lakatos and engages with scientists ranging from Isaac Newton and Galileo to Albert Einstein and Arthur Eddington, he uses Thomas Bayes's seminal studies of statistics and probability to make sense of conflicting currents of thought. This is a deep look into how we have learned to account for uncertainty in our search for knowledge--and a reminder that science is not about facts and data as such but about creating models that correctly account for those facts and data. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this presentation, Professor Aijaz revisits David Hume's famous critique of miracles and argues that it has major — and often overlooked — implications for Muslim philosophy of religion. He explains why arguments for prophecy based on miracle reports fail under Hume's analysis and calls for Muslim philosophers to rethink the epistemological foundations of belief in prophecy and revelation.

In this episode, best-selling biographer Walter Isaacson joins to discuss his new book, The Greatest Sentence Ever Written, with Jeffrey Rosen, president and CEO of the National Constitution Center. As we approach the 250th anniversary of the country's founding, Isaacson explores the intellectual inspirations and drafting history of the Declaration's famous second sentence, which lays the foundation for the American dream and defines the common ground we share as a nation.  Resources Walter Isaacson, The Greatest Sentence Ever Written (2025)   Walter Isaacson, Benjamin Franklin: An American Life (2004)   David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature (1739)  Benjamin Franklin, “Apology for Printers,” The Pennsylvania Gazette (1731)  John Locke, Two Treatises of Government (1690) In our new podcast, Pursuit: The Founders' to Guide to Happiness Jeffrey Rosen explores the founders' lives with the historians who know them best. Plus, filmmaker Ken Burns shares his daily practice of self-reflection.  Listen to episodes of Pursuit on ⁠Apple Podcast⁠ and ⁠Spotify⁠.  Stay Connected and Learn More Questions or comments about the show? Email us at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠podcast@constitutioncenter.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Continue the conversation by following us on social media @ConstitutionCtr ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Explore the⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠America at 250 Civic Toolkit⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Sign up⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to receive Constitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate Follow, rate, and review wherever you listen Join us for an upcoming ⁠⁠⁠⁠live program⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or watch recordings on ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠YouTube⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Support our important work:  ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Donate⁠⁠⁠

Bienvenue dans “Journal de”, une série spéciale née à l'occasion de mon anniversaire.Dans quelque jours je soufflerai ma 27ème bougie. J'ai donc décidé que j'allais saisir cette occasion pour que vous appreniez à mieux me connaître et découvriez des facettes de ma personnalité que vous n'avez pas forcément le temps de déceler en quelques minutes d'épisodes.Plus que la simple volonté de parler des facettes qui façonnent la femme que je suis aujourd'hui, je voulais aussi prendre le temps de me poser, célébrer celle qui est aujourd'hui derrière un micro, et partager sur les expériences qui nous ont menés jusqu'à aujourd'hui.C'est comme ça qu'est né “Journal de…”, une série d'épisodes plus personnels, comme des pages audio de mon carnet intime, mais surtout une fenêtre sur mes apprentissages durant ces 27 ans de vie.Dans cette deuxième page de mon journal, je parle de ce que qu'implique le fait d'être une personne avec plusieurs passions, surtout dans les configurations de la société dans laquelle je vis : le manque de temps et d'énergie, l'équilibre en assouvir ses passions et s'ancrer dans ses réalités, cette impression d'avoir beaucoup de potentiel mais de ne pas assez les exploiter.Je te partage dans cette épisode mes réponses, mais surtout beaucoup de mes questionnements. Source mentionné :Les passions - Frédérique Rognon * ( et pas David Hume comme dit dans l'épisode mdrr)Si l'épisode te plait , n'hésite pas à laisser un commentaire, mettre 5 étoiles et le partager autour de toi, it means a lotPour plus de Kiki, rejoins nous sur insta : https://www.instagram.com/kikiwithnini_/Bonne écoute !*clin d'oeil clin d'oeil* Nini

Brent Billings, Reed Dent, and Josh Bossé talk about the capital vice known as sloth—or rather, acedia.David Hume's Moral Philosophy: The Natural Virtues — Stanford Encyclopedia of PhilosophyMaking All Things New by Henri NouwenInside Out 2 (2024 film)Glittering Vices by Rebecca Konyndyk DeYoungAcedia & Me by Kathleen NorrisThe Message in the Bottle by Walker PercyBEMA 2: Knowing When to Say “Enough”1 Corinthians 3 — Reed Dent, Campus Christian FellowshipBEMA 400: Talmudic Matthew — SaltBEMA 401: Talmudic Matthew — LightBEMA 402: Talmudic Matthew — Lightly SaltedMark 11 (aroma reference) — Reed Dent, Campus Christian FellowshipWhere the Wild Things Are by Maurice SendakBEMA 136: Each OneThe Book of Delights by Ross Gay“Patient Trust” by Pierre Teilhard de Chardin“Followers, Not Admirers” by Søren Kierkegaard in Bread and Wine: Readings for Lent and EasterPrayer of St. Teresa of Avila — Catholic Health Association of the United StatesLost in the Cosmos by Walker PercyThe Sabbath by Abraham Joshua HeschelThe Screwtape Letters by C. S. LewisCalorie — WikipediaCanada Geese and Diet Dr. Pepper — The Anthropocene Reviewed

Todo indivíduo se pergunta alguma vez pela origem do mal. Se Deus existe, como conciliar sua bondade com a existência do mal no mundo? Se Deus é o criador de todas as coisas, isso quer dizer que ele criou também o mal? Como seria possível um Deus bom criar o mal?

Zelf stelde hij dat zijn filosofische debuut ‘doodgeboren van de pers kwam', maar weinig werken hebben de moderne westerse filosofie zo beïnvloed als David Humes Traktaat over de menselijke natuur. Bert Keizer wekt Humes magnum opus opnieuw tot leven.Wanneer de ene biljartbal een tweede bal aantikt, gaat die tweede bal rollen. Een kwestie van oorzaak en gevolg? Nee, zegt David Hume (1711-1776). We zien slechts dat twee gebeurtenissen elkaar opvolgen, van de causaliteit zelf hebben we geen kennis.Alle menselijke kennis komt voor uit zintuiglijke waarnemingen. En daarmee is alle kennis voorlopig. Want tot nu toe opgedane indrukken, geven geen garanties voor de toekomst. Zo vestigde Hume zijn reputatie als rigoureuze scepticus en empiricus. Hume zou uitgroeien tot een van de belangrijkste denkers van de Verlichting, maar werd bij leven lang niet altijd begrepen. Vooral met zijn atheïsme joeg hij tijdgenoten schrik aan.Wat vertelt David Hume ons vandaag? Bert Keizer kroop in de huid van Hume voor een hervertelling van het Traktaat over de menselijke natuur. ‘Strikt redenerend blijkt er eigenlijk geen enkele bewering over de wereld te kloppen. Niet in de filosofie en niet in het dagelijks leven.' Genoteerd, maar waar brengt dat ons?In samenwerking met Uitgeverij Athenaeum en Filosofie Magazine.Programmamaker: Kees FoekemaZie het privacybeleid op https://art19.com/privacy en de privacyverklaring van Californië op https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

durée : 00:03:49 - Le Fil philo - Raconter des histoires peut être amusant… mais quand le récit devient complot, que se passe-t-il ? Qu'est ce que le complotisme ? Nassim El Kabli explore le phénomène avec David Hume. - réalisation : Françoise Le Floch

Professor Kozlowski tackles the French Enlightenment with excerpts from Montesquieu and Rousseau. The first is an orderly, encyclopedic thinker trying to categorize and classify every element of political philosophy; the second may well be a proto-Anarchist masquerading as an Enlightenment mainstay. Really, what were we expecting from the French?Readings today come from Montesquieu's The Spirit of the Laws, as well as The Social Contract and "Discourse on the Origin of Inequality" by Rousseau.Additional readings include Voltaire's Candide and Moliere's Don Juan, as well as a casual suggestion that you should read some David Hume, (here's an especially representative collection). And of course, today's video game recommendation is Europa Universalis. If you're interested in Professor Kozlowski's other online projects, check out his website: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠professorkozlowski.wordpress.com

22 July 2025This lecture explores the is-ought dichotomy, analyzing David Hume's assertion that moral imperatives cannot be directly derived from factual statements. The speaker critiques the selective use of this principle in secular morality and legal contexts, arguing that moral judgments often reflect subjective views rather than objective truths. The discussion emphasizes that engagements in debate carry intrinsic ethical standards, suggesting that while strict derivation may be problematic, a shared understanding of moral imperatives can emerge within secular discourse, enriching the conversation around ethics.FOLLOW ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneuxGET MY NEW BOOK 'PEACEFUL PARENTING', THE INTERACTIVE PEACEFUL PARENTING AI, AND THE FULL AUDIOBOOK!https://peacefulparenting.com/Join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!See you soon!https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2025

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay "The Skeptic", found in his Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, the first of his four essays that bear names of members of philosophical schools, about which he tells us: "The intention . . . is not so much to explain accurately the sentiments of the ancient sects of philosophy, as to deliver the sentiments of sects, that naturally form themselves in the world, and entertain different ideas of human life and of happiness. I have given each of them the name of the philosophical sect, to which it bears the greatest affinity." The Skeptic is the longest of the four essays, and can be taken as a short presentation of Hume's own ideas about philosophy and life. The perspective of this fourth essay calls into question the perspectives of the three previous essays, and focuses not only on the difference in viewpoints on important matters between human beings, but also on why this is the case. It turns out the ascriptions of values such as beautiful or ugly, worthy or contemptible are additions to judgements about the truth or falsity of matters, and these value-ascriptions derive from a number of particular circumstances. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Essays Moral, Political, and Literary here - https://amzn.to/45AmQqs

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay "The Platonist", found in his Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, the first of his four essays that bear names of members of philosophical schools, about which he tells us: "The intention . . . is not so much to explain accurately the sentiments of the ancient sects of philosophy, as to deliver the sentiments of sects, that naturally form themselves in the world, and entertain different ideas of human life and of happiness. I have given each of them the name of the philosophical sect, to which it bears the greatest affinity." He subtitles The Platonist "the man of contemplation, and philosophical devotion", and the essay both responds to the perspectives of the two previous essays and develops a perspective that transcends them, viewing contemplation of the beauty of the universe and the benevolence of God as most valuable. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Essays Moral, Political, and Literary here - https://amzn.to/45AmQqs

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay "The Stoic", found in his Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, the first of his four essays that bear names of members of philosophical schools, about which he tells us: "The intention . . . is not so much to explain accurately the sentiments of the ancient sects of philosophy, as to deliver the sentiments of sects, that naturally form themselves in the world, and entertain different ideas of human life and of happiness. I have given each of them the name of the philosophical sect, to which it bears the greatest affinity." He subtitles The Stoic " the man of action and virtue", and the essay both responds to the perspective of the previous essay and develops a perspective that transcends it, viewing the pursuit of virtue, the active life, and the enjoyment of glory as what is genuinely valuable To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Essays Moral, Political, and Literary here - https://amzn.to/45AmQqs

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher and essayist David Hume's essay "The Epicurean", found in his Essays Moral, Political, and Literary, the first of his four essays that bear names of members of philosophical schools, about which he tells us: "The intention . . . is not so much to explain accurately the sentiments of the ancient sects of philosophy, as to deliver the sentiments of sects, that naturally form themselves in the world, and entertain different ideas of human life and of happiness. I have given each of them the name of the philosophical sect, to which it bears the greatest affinity." He subtitles The Epicurean "the man of elegance and pleasure", and the essay elaborates a position that holds the point of life to be pleasure and enjoyment, which requires that one develop some level of virtue and select pleasures prudently. To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,500 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler You can get Hume's Essays Moral, Political, and Literary here - https://amzn.to/45AmQqs

SummaryIn this episode, Brian Auten and Chad Gross welcome back philosopher and author **Peter S. Williams** to discuss his book, *Behold the Man: Essays on the Historical Jesus*. This engaging conversation explores the intersection of worldview, epistemology, and historical scholarship in the search for the real Jesus.Topics Covered:The Structure and Purpose of Behold the Man
A collection of revised essays exploring various historical, philosophical, and theological dimensions of Jesus.Worldviews and Historical Inquiry
How modernism, postmodernism, and the emerging metamodern perspective affect approaches to the historical Jesus.Epistemology and Openness to Evidence
Why the worldview and theory of knowledge you bring impacts whether you can honestly assess historical claims about Jesus.An Early High Christology in James
Peter argues for early Christian belief in Jesus' divinity based on linguistic and contextual clues in the Epistle of James.Dating the Gospels – Especially John
Examination of internal and external evidence supporting the traditional dating of the Fourth Gospel and its authorship by the Apostle John.Miracles and the Resurrection
Responding to philosophical objections to miracles, with particular focus on David Hume and the resurrection as a historically reasonable belief.Minimal Facts vs. Maximal Data Approaches
Comparison between Gary Habermas's minimal facts method and broader evidential strategies in defending the resurrection.Responding to UFO and Ancient Alien Theories
Why Christian apologists should engage with these alternative explanations, and how to challenge them both philosophically and scientifically.Emotional Barriers to Belief
How personal experience and discomfort with change often block serious consideration of evidence—and how to engage that pastorally.The Role of Apologetics in Spiritual Formation
Why apologetics is a signpost, not a substitute, for commitment to Christ. Knowing *about* Jesus is not the same as *following* Him.================================We appreciate your feedback.If you're on TWITTER, you can follow Chad @TBapologetics.You can follow Brian @TheBrianAutenAnd of course, you can follow @Apologetics315If you have a question or comment for the podcast, record it and send it our way using www.speakpipe.com/Apologetics315 or you can email us at podcast@apologetics315.com

Send us a text(N.B.:  This episode is cross-posted at our partner site, Adam Smith Works. There are lots of resources and background material there, if you want to delve deeper)The Scottish Enlightenment emerged as a remarkable intellectual movement that shaped modern economics, philosophy, and social science, with Adam Smith at its center developing a dual theory of human nature through his two masterworks.• Scottish Presbyterian education fostered literacy and critical inquiry despite doctrinal rigidity• The 1707 Act of Union created unique conditions where Scots pursued intellectual achievement rather than political power• Scottish universities thrived through student-funded education while Oxford professors "gave up even the pretense of teaching"• Thinkers like David Hume, Francis Hutchison, and Thomas Reid established key intellectual foundations• Smith's concept of sympathy involves synchronizing sentiments with others, not just feeling pity• Justice protects "person, property and promise" as the foundation of social order• Beneficence is "the ornament" of society while justice is essential to its existence• Smith was strongly anti-slavery, describing enslaved Africans as "nations of heroes" superior to their captors• The Theory of Moral Sentiments and Wealth of Nations form a unified system, not contradictory works• Commercial society requires both moral foundations and economic understanding to function properlyFor the complete series on Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations and additional resources, you can also visit Liberty Fund's Adam Smith Works website.If you have questions or comments, or want to suggest a future topic, email the show at taitc.email@gmail.com ! You can follow Mike Munger on Twitter at @mungowitz

Part 2 of the Socratic Logic series. A continuation of the reading of Peter Kreeft's "Socratic Logic".Topics covered:17 reasons this book is different than other logic texts. Inductive and Deductive Reasoning. Epistemology. David Hume. Immanuel Kant. Utilitarianism. Moral Relativism. Objective vs. Subjective. Plus much, much more. Part 1:https://www.youtube.com/live/x4bJ4ypax9I?si=XuY3n7i3jF91CL_GBecome a supporter or member:https://buymeacoffee.com/jamescordinerPlease support the show:https://onegreatworknetwork.com/james-cordiner/donate/Buy a Shirt:https://voluntaryistacademy.creator-spring.com/AUTONOMY: https://getautonomy.info/?ref=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.universityofreason.com%2Fa%2F2147825829%2F8sRCwZLdMusical Artist: Brendan Danielhttps://www.instagram.com/brendandanielmusic/

How to sustain an international system of cooperation in the midst of geopolitical struggle? Can the international economic and legal system survive today's fractured geopolitics? Democracies are facing a drawn-out contest with authoritarian states that is entangling much of public policy with global security issues. In Global Discord: Values and Power in a Fractured World Order (Princeton University Press, 2024), Paul Tucker lays out principles for a sustainable system of international cooperation, showing how democracies can deal with China and other illiberal states without sacrificing their deepest political values. Drawing on three decades as a central banker and regulator, Tucker applies these principles to the international monetary order, including the role of the U.S. dollar, trade and investment regimes, and the financial system. Combining history, economics, and political and legal philosophy, Tucker offers a new account of international relations. Rejecting intellectual traditions that go back to Hobbes, Kant, and Grotius, and deploying instead ideas from David Hume, Bernard Williams, and modern mechanism-design economists, Tucker describes a new kind of political realism that emphasizes power and interests without sidelining morality. Incentives must be aligned with values if institutions are to endure. The connecting tissue for a system of international cooperation, he writes, should be legitimacy, creating a world of concentric circles in which we cooperate more with those with whom we share the most and whom we fear the least. Paul Tucker is a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of Unelected Power (Princeton). He is a former central banker and regulator at the Bank of England, and a former director at Basel's Bank for International Settlements, where he chaired some of the groups designing reforms of the international financial system after the Global Financial Crisis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

How to sustain an international system of cooperation in the midst of geopolitical struggle? Can the international economic and legal system survive today's fractured geopolitics? Democracies are facing a drawn-out contest with authoritarian states that is entangling much of public policy with global security issues. In Global Discord: Values and Power in a Fractured World Order (Princeton University Press, 2024), Paul Tucker lays out principles for a sustainable system of international cooperation, showing how democracies can deal with China and other illiberal states without sacrificing their deepest political values. Drawing on three decades as a central banker and regulator, Tucker applies these principles to the international monetary order, including the role of the U.S. dollar, trade and investment regimes, and the financial system. Combining history, economics, and political and legal philosophy, Tucker offers a new account of international relations. Rejecting intellectual traditions that go back to Hobbes, Kant, and Grotius, and deploying instead ideas from David Hume, Bernard Williams, and modern mechanism-design economists, Tucker describes a new kind of political realism that emphasizes power and interests without sidelining morality. Incentives must be aligned with values if institutions are to endure. The connecting tissue for a system of international cooperation, he writes, should be legitimacy, creating a world of concentric circles in which we cooperate more with those with whom we share the most and whom we fear the least. Paul Tucker is a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of Unelected Power (Princeton). He is a former central banker and regulator at the Bank of England, and a former director at Basel's Bank for International Settlements, where he chaired some of the groups designing reforms of the international financial system after the Global Financial Crisis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

How to sustain an international system of cooperation in the midst of geopolitical struggle? Can the international economic and legal system survive today's fractured geopolitics? Democracies are facing a drawn-out contest with authoritarian states that is entangling much of public policy with global security issues. In Global Discord: Values and Power in a Fractured World Order (Princeton University Press, 2024), Paul Tucker lays out principles for a sustainable system of international cooperation, showing how democracies can deal with China and other illiberal states without sacrificing their deepest political values. Drawing on three decades as a central banker and regulator, Tucker applies these principles to the international monetary order, including the role of the U.S. dollar, trade and investment regimes, and the financial system. Combining history, economics, and political and legal philosophy, Tucker offers a new account of international relations. Rejecting intellectual traditions that go back to Hobbes, Kant, and Grotius, and deploying instead ideas from David Hume, Bernard Williams, and modern mechanism-design economists, Tucker describes a new kind of political realism that emphasizes power and interests without sidelining morality. Incentives must be aligned with values if institutions are to endure. The connecting tissue for a system of international cooperation, he writes, should be legitimacy, creating a world of concentric circles in which we cooperate more with those with whom we share the most and whom we fear the least. Paul Tucker is a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of Unelected Power (Princeton). He is a former central banker and regulator at the Bank of England, and a former director at Basel's Bank for International Settlements, where he chaired some of the groups designing reforms of the international financial system after the Global Financial Crisis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

How to sustain an international system of cooperation in the midst of geopolitical struggle? Can the international economic and legal system survive today's fractured geopolitics? Democracies are facing a drawn-out contest with authoritarian states that is entangling much of public policy with global security issues. In Global Discord: Values and Power in a Fractured World Order (Princeton University Press, 2024), Paul Tucker lays out principles for a sustainable system of international cooperation, showing how democracies can deal with China and other illiberal states without sacrificing their deepest political values. Drawing on three decades as a central banker and regulator, Tucker applies these principles to the international monetary order, including the role of the U.S. dollar, trade and investment regimes, and the financial system. Combining history, economics, and political and legal philosophy, Tucker offers a new account of international relations. Rejecting intellectual traditions that go back to Hobbes, Kant, and Grotius, and deploying instead ideas from David Hume, Bernard Williams, and modern mechanism-design economists, Tucker describes a new kind of political realism that emphasizes power and interests without sidelining morality. Incentives must be aligned with values if institutions are to endure. The connecting tissue for a system of international cooperation, he writes, should be legitimacy, creating a world of concentric circles in which we cooperate more with those with whom we share the most and whom we fear the least. Paul Tucker is a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of Unelected Power (Princeton). He is a former central banker and regulator at the Bank of England, and a former director at Basel's Bank for International Settlements, where he chaired some of the groups designing reforms of the international financial system after the Global Financial Crisis.

How to sustain an international system of cooperation in the midst of geopolitical struggle? Can the international economic and legal system survive today's fractured geopolitics? Democracies are facing a drawn-out contest with authoritarian states that is entangling much of public policy with global security issues. In Global Discord: Values and Power in a Fractured World Order (Princeton University Press, 2024), Paul Tucker lays out principles for a sustainable system of international cooperation, showing how democracies can deal with China and other illiberal states without sacrificing their deepest political values. Drawing on three decades as a central banker and regulator, Tucker applies these principles to the international monetary order, including the role of the U.S. dollar, trade and investment regimes, and the financial system. Combining history, economics, and political and legal philosophy, Tucker offers a new account of international relations. Rejecting intellectual traditions that go back to Hobbes, Kant, and Grotius, and deploying instead ideas from David Hume, Bernard Williams, and modern mechanism-design economists, Tucker describes a new kind of political realism that emphasizes power and interests without sidelining morality. Incentives must be aligned with values if institutions are to endure. The connecting tissue for a system of international cooperation, he writes, should be legitimacy, creating a world of concentric circles in which we cooperate more with those with whom we share the most and whom we fear the least. Paul Tucker is a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and the author of Unelected Power (Princeton). He is a former central banker and regulator at the Bank of England, and a former director at Basel's Bank for International Settlements, where he chaired some of the groups designing reforms of the international financial system after the Global Financial Crisis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

David Hume, Essays Moral, Political, and Literary - The Epicurean by Lectures on classic and contemporary philosophical texts and thinkers by Gregory B. Sadler

If God exists and Jesus rose from the dead, then Christianity is true. Case closed! However, there are still those who offer alternative explanations for the empty tomb despite the evidence for the resurrection. What are these theories and do they withstand critical analysis?This week, Frank sits down with Dr. Gary Habermas, the world's leading resurrection scholar to discuss, 'On the Resurrection: Refutations', the second volume of his magnum opus--a massive 4-volume project nearly 40 years in the making. From second-century texts that seem to challenge the resurrection to modern skeptical scholars like Bart Ehrman, Gary will uncover why naturalistic explanations for the empty tomb simply don't hold up. Tune in as Frank and Gary answer questions like:Who was David Hume and why do so many modern atheists still lean on his centuries-old arguments?What was Hume's actual argument against miracles, and how did C.S. Lewis respond?Are there any good arguments for naturalism or materialism?Why did former skeptic Antony Flew become a theist before he died?What are the top 5 reasons naturalistic explanations for the resurrection fail?What are the 4 best arguments in favor of an afterlife?If you're looking for the most well-researched scholarship to refute common resurrection objections, you won't find a better resource than this! Be sure to pick up your own copies of Gary's amazing work and stay tuned for the next podcast where he'll return to discuss even more insights from his life's work on the resurrection!Resources mentioned during the episode:PODCAST: Did Jesus REALLY Rise From the Dead? - https://bit.ly/3VnrtiDOn the Resurrection: Evidences (Vol.1) - https://www.amazon.com/dp/1087778603On the Resurrection: Refutations (Vol.2) - https://a.co/d/48jozEvOn the Resurrection: Scholarly Perspectives (Vol.3) - https://www.amazon.com/dp/1087778646Gary's website - https://www.garyhabermas.com/There is a God by Antony Flew - https://a.co/d/eOhWkSTSignature in the Cell by Stephen C. Meyer - https://a.co/d/5XLmVhc

In this episode of Transfigured, I sit down with Dr. Jim to delve into a range of pressing intellectual and spiritual topics. We explore his recent writings on his Substack, "Around the Corner," his perspective on the "re-enchantment" narrative currently popular in some online spaces, and a critical engagement with modernism. Using Carlos Eire's book "They Flew" (about the levitating St. Joseph of Cupertino) as a springboard, we discuss the nature of evidence, the moral responsibilities tied to metaphysical claims, and the vital role of institutions (like those in science, medicine, and education) in fostering self-correction and upholding human values. Dr. Jim shares his thoughts on the "scientific image" versus the "manifest image," the limitations of evolutionary biology's common framing, and why he considers himself a "reactionary modern," wary of prematurely discarding the hard-won insights of the Enlightenment and classical liberalism. Join us for a deep and nuanced conversation! We mention Dr. Jim, Sam (Transfigured), David Bentley Hart, Paul Vander Klay, Jonathan Pageau, John Vervaeke, Carlos Eire ("They Flew"), St. Joseph of Cupertino, Ross Douthat, Bart Ehrman, David Hume, Sam Harris, Wilfrid Sellars (Scientific Image vs. Manifest Image), Richard Dawkins, Bach, Mozart, Galileo, Michael Servetus, John Calvin, Rod Dreher, Bethel McGrew, Benjamin Boyce, Jesus Christ, Hermes, Chad (the Alcoholic), Julian, Aristotle (Four Causes), and more.Dr. Jim's Substack "Around the Corner": https://substack.com/@aroundthecorner1Midwest Apologetics Conference (August 22-24, Chicago, IL): https://www.midwestuary.com/Email for scholarship inquiries: info@midwestuary.com

The 18th-century philosopher David Hume famously predicted that, as the world grew more rational and scientific, people would stop having supernatural encounters.But that's not what has played out.We might live in a secular age, but we continue to have seemingly divine experiences.Lots of people now describe themselves as “spiritual but not religious”, but taking that next step - that leap of faith - into a formal belief system might actually be more rational than not.(00:00) - - Intro (00:51) - - Modern miracles (05:56) - - Ross Douthat: Columnist and podcaster (07:10) - - The Decadent Society (12:11) - - Secular regrets (19:33) - - The Logos of creation (38:42) - - The Pathos of near-death experiences (45:08) - - Buff Dickson's near-death experience (50:35) - - More miracles (58:50) - - Join a religion - any religion! (01:10:04) - - The three problems with religion (01:17:19) - - Why believe in Jesus? CREDITSUndeceptions is hosted by John Dickson, produced by Kaley Payne and directed by Mark Hadley. Alasdair Belling is a writer-researcher.Siobhan McGuiness is our online librarian. Lyndie Leviston remains John's wonderful assistant.  Santino Dimarco is Chief Finance and Operations Consultant. Editing by Richard Hamwi.Our voice actors today was Yannick Lawry. Special thanks to our series sponsor Zondervan for making this Undeception possible. Undeceptions is the flagship podcast of Undeceptions.com - letting the truth out.

You've done the coaching and the therapy, you've read the books, you've listened to the podcasts - and finally, you can accept that you're just as worthy as the next person! You belong here! You can stand up, take up space, and be proud! You can stop carrying all that anxiety, fear, and shame! Except ... nobody told your anxiety, fear, and shame. You feel just as uncertain as you ever did. And, to make things worse, you now also feel like an irrational mess, because if all those insights you've made about yourself haven't made any difference, perhaps you're beyond help? Don't worry, friend. We've all been there. Your imperfect friend here is throwing you a lifeline in the shape of the 18th-century Scottish philosopher, David Hume. Weird image, but still: you're normal, you're still moving forward, and all you need is a primer on what's going on when what you believe clashes with what you feel.Reference:Hume, David. 1739: A Treatise of Human Nature, Book II, Section III.

In this episode, we delve into one of the most profound and contested questions in both philosophy and esotericism: What is the self in magical practice?Drawing on thinkers such as René Descartes, David Hume, and Carl Jung, we examine how the self has been variously conceived as a rational substance, a bundle of perceptions, or an archetypal totality. We then explore how these models intersect with key esoteric frameworks, from Aleister Crowley's doctrine of the True Will and the invocation of the Holy Guardian Angel, to the layered soul of Hermetic Qabalah, and the radically performative self of chaos magic.Is the magical self unified, fragmented, performative, or transcendent? And how do different traditions answer this question through their rituals, symbols, and spiritual technologies?Join me as we explore the shifting boundaries between self, soul, and sorcery.CONNECT & SUPPORT

We talk a bit more about David Hume's An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals (1751), and add some parts of A Treatise of Human Nature (1739): sec. 3 "Of the Influencing Motives of the Will" within the third part of Book II, "Of the Passions," and the first two sections of Book III, "Of Morals." Can reason by itself motivate moral action? Hume says no: All ethical reasons must point ultimately to sentiments, which we can generalize about, but which are epistemically basic. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion.

The Trump White House has enacted tariffs in the belief that other countries are “cheating” by enacting tariffs against US goods and “manipulating” their currencies. However, with the US dollar being the world's reserve currency, the US has engaged in dollar manipulation through inflation.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/mmt-and-us-history-redefining-chartalism

The Trump White House has enacted tariffs in the belief that other countries are “cheating” by enacting tariffs against US goods and “manipulating” their currencies. However, with the US dollar being the world's reserve currency, the US has engaged in dollar manipulation through inflation.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/mmt-and-us-history-redefining-chartalism

¿Es posible que las leyes de la naturaleza no sean necesarias? ¿Qué pasaría si todo lo que creemos estable pudiera cambiar de forma radical, sin ninguna razón? En este video exploramos en profundidad el capítulo "El problema de Hume" del libro Después de la finitud del filósofo francés Quentin Meillassoux. A partir de la crítica clásica de David Hume a la causalidad, Meillassoux propone una tesis filosófica radical: no hay necesidad alguna en el universo, y la única necesidad absoluta es la contingencia misma.

In this enlightening episode of Consider the Constitution, host Dr. Katie Crawford Lackey sits down with Dr. Dennis Rasmussen, professor of political science at Syracuse University's Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. Their conversation explores the philosophical underpinnings that influenced the creation of the U.S. Constitution, particularly focusing on Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith, and Montesquieu whose ideas shaped the framers' thinking.Dr. Rasmussen, author of "Fears of a Setting Sun," provides fascinating insights into how the founders – particularly Madison – navigated between theory and practical application when designing America's system of government. The discussion reveals surprising details about Madison's disappointment with certain aspects of the Constitution, the founders' evolving opinions about their creation, and the remarkable durability of America's founding document despite its imperfections. This episode offers listeners a deeper understanding of the intellectual foundations of American constitutional governance and reflects on what lessons we might draw from the founders' experiences as we face today's political challenges.

So what, exactly, was “The Enlightenment”? According to the Princeton historian David A. Bell, it was an intellectual movement roughly spanning the early 18th century through to the French Revolution. In his Spring 2025 Liberties Quarterly piece “The Enlightenment, Then and Now”, Bell charts the Enlightenment as a complex intellectual movement centered in Paris but with hubs across Europe and America. He highlights key figures like Montesquieu, Voltaire, Kant, and Franklin, discussing their contributions to concepts of religious tolerance, free speech, and rationality. In our conversation, Bell addresses criticisms of the Enlightenment, including its complicated relationship with colonialism and slavery, while arguing that its principles of freedom and reason remain relevant today. 5 Key Takeaways* The Enlightenment emerged in the early 18th century (around 1720s) and was characterized by intellectual inquiry, skepticism toward religion, and a growing sense among thinkers that they were living in an "enlightened century."* While Paris was the central hub, the Enlightenment had multiple centers including Scotland, Germany, and America, with thinkers like Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant, Hume, and Franklin contributing to its development.* The Enlightenment introduced the concept of "society" as a sphere of human existence separate from religion and politics, forming the basis of modern social sciences.* The movement had a complex relationship with colonialism and slavery - many Enlightenment thinkers criticized slavery, but some of their ideas about human progress were later used to justify imperialism.* According to Bell, rather than trying to "return to the Enlightenment," modern society should selectively adopt and adapt its valuable principles of free speech, religious tolerance, and education to create our "own Enlightenment."David Avrom Bell is a historian of early modern and modern Europe at Princeton University. His most recent book, published in 2020 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, is Men on Horseback: The Power of Charisma in the Age of Revolution. Described in the Journal of Modern History as an "instant classic," it is available in paperback from Picador, in French translation from Fayard, and in Italian translation from Viella. A study of how new forms of political charisma arose in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the book shows that charismatic authoritarianism is as modern a political form as liberal democracy, and shares many of the same origins. Based on exhaustive research in original sources, the book includes case studies of the careers of George Washington, Napoleon Bonaparte, Toussaint Louverture and Simon Bolivar. The book's Introduction can be read here. An online conversation about the book with Annette Gordon-Reed, hosted by the Cullman Center of the New York Public Library, can be viewed here. Links to material about the book, including reviews in The New York Review of Books, The Guardian, Harper's, The New Republic, The Nation, Le Monde, The Los Angeles Review of Books and other venues can be found here. Bell is also the author of six previous books. He has published academic articles in both English and French and contributes regularly to general interest publications on a variety of subjects, ranging from modern warfare, to contemporary French politics, to the impact of digital technology on learning and scholarship, and of course French history. A list of his publications from 2023 and 2024 can be found here. His Substack newsletter can be found here. His writings have been translated into French, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Hebrew, Swedish, Polish, Russian, German, Croatian, Italian, Turkish and Japanese. At the History Department at Princeton University, he holds the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus Chair in the Era of North Atlantic Revolutions, and offers courses on early modern Europe, on military history, and on the early modern French empire. Previously, he spent fourteen years at Johns Hopkins University, including three as Dean of Faculty in its School of Arts and Sciences. From 2020 to 2024 he served as Director of the Shelby Cullom Davis Center for Historical Studies at Princeton. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a corresponding fellow of the British Academy. Bell's new project is a history of the Enlightenment. A preliminary article from the project was published in early 2022 by Modern Intellectual History. Another is now out in French History.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. FULL TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello everybody, in these supposedly dark times, the E word comes up a lot, the Enlightenment. Are we at the end of the Enlightenment or the beginning? Was there even an Enlightenment? My guest today, David Bell, a professor of history, very distinguished professor of history at Princeton University, has an interesting piece in the spring issue of It is One of our, our favorite quarterlies here on Keen on America, Bell's piece is The Enlightenment Then and Now, and David is joining us from the home of the Enlightenment, perhaps Paris in France, where he's on sabbatical hard life. David being an academic these days, isn't it?David Bell: Very difficult. I'm having to suffer the Parisian bread and croissant. It's terrible.Andrew Keen: Yeah. Well, I won't keep you too long. Is Paris then, or France? Is it the home of the Enlightenment? I know there are many Enlightenments, the French, the Scottish, maybe even the English, perhaps even the American.David Bell: It's certainly one of the homes of the Enlightenment, and it's probably the closest that the Enlightened had to a center, absolutely. But as you say, there were Edinburgh, Glasgow, plenty of places in Germany, Philadelphia, all those places have good claims to being centers of the enlightenment as well.Andrew Keen: All the same David, is it like one of those sports games in California where everyone gets a medal?David Bell: Well, they're different metals, right, but I think certainly Paris is where everybody went. I mean, if you look at the figures from the German Enlightenment, from the Scottish Enlightenment from the American Enlightenment they all tended to congregate in Paris and the Parisians didn't tend to go anywhere else unless they were forced to. So that gives you a pretty good sense of where the most important center was.Andrew Keen: So David, before we get to specifics, map out for us, because everyone is perhaps as familiar or comfortable with the history of the Enlightenment, and certainly as you are. When did it happen? What years? And who are the leaders of this thing called the Enlightenment?David Bell: Well, that's a big question. And I'm afraid, of course, that if you ask 10 historians, you'll get 10 different answers.Andrew Keen: Well, I'm only asking you, so I only want one answer.David Bell: So I would say that the Enlightenment really gets going around the first couple of decades of the 18th century. And that's when people really start to think that they are actually living in what they start to call an Enlightenment century. There are a lot of reasons for this. They are seeing what we now call the scientific revolution. They're looking at the progress that has been made with that. They are experiencing the changes in the religious sphere, including the end of religious wars, coming with a great deal of skepticism about religion. They are living in a relative period of peace where they're able to speculate much more broadly and daringly than before. But it's really in those first couple of decades that they start thinking of themselves as living in an enlightened century. They start defining themselves as something that would later be called the enlightenment. So I would say that it's, really, really there between maybe the end of the 17th century and 1720s that it really gets started.Andrew Keen: So let's have some names, David, of philosophers, I guess. I mean, if those are the right words. I know that there was a term in French. There is a term called philosoph. Were they the founders, the leaders of the Enlightenment?David Bell: Well, there is a... Again, I don't want to descend into academic quibbling here, but there were lots of leaders. Let me give an example, though. So the year 1721 is a remarkable year. So in the year, 1721, two amazing events happened within a couple of months of each other. So in May, Montesquieu, one of the great philosophers by any definition, publishes his novel called Persian Letters. And this is an incredible novel. Still, I think one of greatest novels ever written, and it's very daring. It is the account, it is supposedly a an account written by two Persian travelers to Europe who are writing back to people in Isfahan about what they're seeing. And it is very critical of French society. It is very of religion. It is, as I said, very daring philosophically. It is a product in part of the increasing contact between Europe and the rest of the world that is also very central to the Enlightenment. So that novel comes out. So it's immediately, you know, the police try to suppress it. But they don't have much success because it's incredibly popular and Montesquieu doesn't suffer any particular problems because...Andrew Keen: And the French police have never been the most efficient police force in the world, have they?David Bell: Oh, they could be, but not in this case. And then two months later, after Montesquieu published this novel, there's a German philosopher much less well-known than Montesqiu, than Christian Bolz, who is a professor at the Universität Haller in Prussia, and he gives an oration in Latin, a very typical university oration for the time, about Chinese philosophy, in which he says that the Chinese have sort of proved to the world, particularly through the writings of Confucius and others, that you can have a virtuous society without religion. Obviously very controversial. Statement for the time it actually gets him fired from his job, he has to leave the Kingdom of Prussia within 48 hours on penalty of death, starts an enormous controversy. But here are two events, both of which involving non-European people, involving the way in which Europeans are starting to look out at the rest of the world and starting to imagine Europe as just one part of a larger humanity, and at the same time they are starting to speculate very daringly about whether you can have. You know, what it means to have a society, do you need to have religion in order to have morality in society? Do you need the proper, what kind of government do you need to to have virtuous conduct and a proper society? So all of these things get, you know, really crystallize, I think, around these two incidents as much as anything. So if I had to pick a single date for when the enlightenment starts, I'd probably pick that 1721.Andrew Keen: And when was, David, I thought you were going to tell me about the earthquake in Lisbon, when was that earthquake?David Bell: That earthquake comes quite a bit later. That comes, and now historians should be better with dates than I am. It's in the 1750s, I think it's the late 1750's. Again, this historian is proving he's getting a very bad grade for forgetting the exact date, but it's in 1750. So that's a different kind of event, which sparks off a great deal of commentary, because it's a terrible earthquake. It destroys most of the city of Lisbon, it destroys other cities throughout Portugal, and it leads a lot of the philosophy to philosophers at the time to be speculating very daringly again on whether there is any kind of real purpose to the universe and whether there's any kind divine purpose. Why would such a terrible thing happen? Why would God do such a thing to his followers? And certainly VoltaireAndrew Keen: Yeah, Votav, of course, comes to mind of questioning.David Bell: And Condit, Voltaire's novel Condit gives a very good description of the earthquake in Lisbon and uses that as a centerpiece. Voltair also read other things about the earthquake, a poem about Lisbon earthquake. But in Condit he gives a lasting, very scathing portrait of the Catholic Church in general and then of what happens in Portugal. And so the Lisbon Earthquake is certainly another one of the events, but it happens considerably later. Really in the middle of the end of life.Andrew Keen: So, David, you believe in this idea of the Enlightenment. I take your point that there are more than one Enlightenment in more than one center, but in broad historical terms, the 18th century could be defined at least in Western and Northern Europe as the period of the Enlightenment, would that be a fair generalization?David Bell: I think it's perfectly fair generalization. Of course, there are historians who say that it never happened. There's a conservative British historian, J.C.D. Clark, who published a book last summer, saying that the Enlightenment is a kind of myth, that there was a lot of intellectual activity in Europe, obviously, but that the idea that it formed a coherent Enlightenment was really invented in the 20th century by a bunch of progressive reformers who wanted to claim a kind of venerable and august pedigree for their own reform, liberal reform plans. I think that's an exaggeration. People in the 18th century defined very clearly what was going on, both people who were in favor of it and people who are against it. And while you can, if you look very closely at it, of course it gets a bit fuzzy. Of course it's gets, there's no single, you can't define a single enlightenment project or a single enlightened ideology. But then, I think people would be hard pressed to define any intellectual movement. You know, in perfect, incoherent terms. So the enlightenment is, you know by compared with almost any other intellectual movement certainly existed.Andrew Keen: In terms of a philosophy of the Enlightenment, the German thinker, Immanuel Kant, seems to be often, and when you describe him as the conscience or the brain or a mixture of the conscience and brain of the enlightenment, why is Kant and Kantian thinking so important in the development of the Enlightenment.David Bell: Well, that's a really interesting question. And one reason is because most of the Enlightenment was not very rigorously philosophical. A lot of the major figures of the enlightenment before Kant tended to be writing for a general public. And they often were writing with a very specific agenda. We look at Voltaire, Diderot, Rousseau. Now you look at Adam Smith in Scotland. We look David Hume or Adam Ferguson. You look at Benjamin Franklin in the United States. These people wrote in all sorts of different genres. They wrote in, they wrote all sorts of different kinds of books. They have many different purposes and very few of them did a lot of what we would call rigorous academic philosophy. And Kant was different. Kant was very much an academic philosopher. Kant was nothing if not rigorous. He came at the end of the enlightenment by most people's measure. He wrote these very, very difficult, very rigorous, very brilliant works, such as The Creek of Pure Reason. And so, it's certainly been the case that people who wanted to describe the Enlightenment as a philosophy have tended to look to Kant. So for example, there's a great German philosopher and intellectual historian of the early 20th century named Ernst Kassirer, who had to leave Germany because of the Nazis. And he wrote a great book called The Philosophy of the Enlightened. And that leads directly to Immanuel Kant. And of course, Casir himself was a Kantian, identified with Kant. And so he wanted to make Kant, in a sense, the telos, the end point, the culmination, the fulfillment of the Enlightenment. But so I think that's why Kant has such a particularly important position. You're defining it both ways.Andrew Keen: I've always struggled to understand what Kant was trying to say. I'm certainly not alone there. Might it be fair to say that he was trying to transform the universe and certainly traditional Christian notions into the Enlightenment, so the entire universe, the world, God, whatever that means, that they were all somehow according to Kant enlightened.David Bell: Well, I think that I'm certainly no expert on Immanuel Kant. And I would say that he is trying to, I mean, his major philosophical works are trying to put together a system of philosophical thinking which will justify why people have to act morally, why people act rationally, without the need for Christian revelation to bolster them. That's a very, very crude and reductionist way of putting it, but that's essentially at the heart of it. At the same time, Kant was very much aware of his own place in history. So Kant didn't simply write these very difficult, thick, dense philosophical works. He also wrote things that were more like journalism or like tablets. He wrote a famous essay called What is Enlightenment? And in that, he said that the 18th century was the period in which humankind was simply beginning to. Reach a period of enlightenment. And he said, he starts the essay by saying, this is the period when humankind is being released from its self-imposed tutelage. And we are still, and he said we do not yet live in the midst of a completely enlightened century, but we are getting there. We are living in a century that is enlightening.Andrew Keen: So the seeds, the seeds of Hegel and maybe even Marx are incant in that German thinking, that historical thinking.David Bell: In some ways, in some ways of course Hegel very much reacts against Kant and so and then Marx reacts against Hegel. So it's not exactly.Andrew Keen: Well, that's the dialectic, isn't it, David?David Bell: A simple easy path from one to the other, no, but Hegel is unimaginable without Kant of course and Marx is unimagineable without Hegel.Andrew Keen: You note that Kant represents a shift in some ways into the university and the walls of the universities were going up, and that some of the other figures associated with the the Enlightenment and Scottish Enlightenment, human and Smith and the French Enlightenment Voltaire and the others, they were more generalist writers. Should we be nostalgic for the pre-university period in the Enlightenment, or? Did things start getting serious once the heavyweights, the academic heavyweighs like Emmanuel Kant got into this thing?David Bell: I think it depends on where we're talking about. I mean, Adam Smith was a professor at Glasgow in Edinburgh, so Smith, the Scottish Enlightenment was definitely at least partly in the universities. The German Enlightenment took place very heavily in universities. Christian Vodafoy I just mentioned was the most important German philosopher of the 18th century before Kant, and he had positions in university. Even the French university system, for a while, what's interesting about the French University system, particularly the Sorbonne, which was the theology faculty, It was that. Throughout the first half of the 18th century, there were very vigorous, very interesting philosophical debates going on there, in which the people there, particularly even Jesuits there, were very open to a lot of the ideas we now call enlightenment. They were reading John Locke, they were reading Mel Pench, they were read Dekalb. What happened though in the French universities was that as more daring stuff was getting published elsewhere. Church, the Catholic Church, started to say, all right, these philosophers, these philosophies, these are our enemies, these are people we have to get at. And so at that point, anybody who was in the university, who was still in dialog with these people was basically purged. And the universities became much less interesting after that. But to come back to your question, I do think that I am very nostalgic for that period. I think that the Enlightenment was an extraordinary period, because if you look between. In the 17th century, not all, but a great deal of the most interesting intellectual work is happening in the so-called Republic of Letters. It's happening in Latin language. It is happening on a very small circle of RUD, of scholars. By the 19th century following Kant and Hegel and then the birth of the research university in Germany, which is copied everywhere, philosophy and the most advanced thinking goes back into the university. And the 18th century, particularly in France, I will say, is a time when the most advanced thought is being written for a general public. It is being in the form of novels, of dialogs, of stories, of reference works, and it is very, very accessible. The most profound thought of the West has never been as accessible overall as in the 18 century.Andrew Keen: Again, excuse this question, it might seem a bit naive, but there's a lot of pre-Enlightenment work, books, thinking that we read now that's very accessible from Erasmus and Thomas More to Machiavelli. Why weren't characters like, or are characters like Erasmuus, More's Utopia, Machiavell's prints and discourses, why aren't they considered part of the Enlightenment? What's the difference between? Enlightened thinkers or the supposedly enlightened thinkers of the 18th century and thinkers and writers of the 16th and 17th centuries.David Bell: That's a good question, you know, I think you have to, you, you know, again, one has to draw a line somewhere. That's not a very good answer, of course. All these people that you just mentioned are, in one way or another, predecessors to the Enlightenment. And of course, there were lots of people. I don't mean to say that nobody wrote in an accessible way before 1700. Obviously, lots of the people you mentioned did. Although a lot of them originally wrote in Latin, Erasmus, also Thomas More. But I think what makes the Enlightened different is that you have, again, you have a sense. These people have have a sense that they are themselves engaged in a collective project, that it is a collective project of enlightenment, of enlightening the world. They believe that they live in a century of progress. And there are certain principles. They don't agree on everything by any means. The philosophy of enlightenment is like nothing more than ripping each other to shreds, like any decent group of intellectuals. But that said, they generally did believe That people needed to have freedom of speech. They believed that you needed to have toleration of different religions. They believed in education and the need for a broadly educated public that could be as broad as possible. They generally believed in keeping religion out of the public sphere as much as possible, so all those principles came together into a program that we can consider at least a kind of... You know, not that everybody read it at every moment by any means, but there is an identifiable enlightenment program there, and in this case an identifiable enlightenment mindset. One other thing, I think, which is crucial to the Enlightenment, is that it was the attention they started to pay to something that we now take almost entirely for granted, which is the idea of society. The word society is so entirely ubiquitous, we assume it's always been there, and in one sense it has, because the word societas is a Latin word. But until... The 18th century, the word society generally had a much narrower meaning. It referred to, you know, particular institution most often, like when we talk about the society of, you know, the American philosophical society or something like that. And the idea that there exists something called society, which is the general sphere of human existence that is separate from religion and is separate from the political sphere, that's actually something which only really emerged at the end of the 1600s. And it became really the focus of you know, much, if not most, of enlightenment thinking. When you look at someone like Montesquieu and you look something, somebody like Rousseau or Voltaire or Adam Smith, probably above all, they were concerned with understanding how society works, not how government works only, but how society, what social interactions are like beginning of what we would now call social science. So that's yet another thing that distinguishes the enlightened from people like Machiavelli, often people like Thomas More, and people like bonuses.Andrew Keen: You noted earlier that the idea of progress is somehow baked in, in part, and certainly when it comes to Kant, certainly the French Enlightenment, although, of course, Rousseau challenged that. I'm not sure whether Rousseaut, as always, is both in and out of the Enlightenment and he seems to be in and out of everything. How did the Enlightement, though, make sense of itself in the context of antiquity, as it was, of Terms, it was the Renaissance that supposedly discovered or rediscovered antiquity. How did many of the leading Enlightenment thinkers, writers, how did they think of their own society in the context of not just antiquity, but even the idea of a European or Western society?David Bell: Well, there was a great book, one of the great histories of the Enlightenment was written about more than 50 years ago by the Yale professor named Peter Gay, and the first part of that book was called The Modern Paganism. So it was about the, you know, it was very much about the relationship between the Enlightenment and the ancient Greek synonyms. And certainly the writers of the enlightenment felt a great deal of kinship with the ancient Greek synonymous. They felt a common bond, particularly in the posing. Christianity and opposing what they believed the Christian Church had wrought on Europe in suppressing freedom and suppressing free thought and suppassing free inquiry. And so they felt that they were both recovering but also going beyond antiquity at the same time. And of course they were all, I mean everybody at the time, every single major figure of the Enlightenment, their education consisted in large part of what we would now call classics, right? I mean, there was an educational reformer in France in the 1760s who said, you know, our educational system is great if the purpose is to train Roman centurions, if it's to train modern people who are not doing both so well. And it's true. I mean they would spend, certainly, you know in Germany, in much of Europe, in the Netherlands, even in France, I mean people were trained not simply to read Latin, but to write in Latin. In Germany, university courses took part in the Latin language. So there's an enormous, you know, so they're certainly very, very conversant with the Greek and Roman classics, and they identify with them to a very great extent. Someone like Rousseau, I mean, and many others, and what's his first reading? How did he learn to read by reading Plutarch? In translation, but he learns to read reading Plutach. He sees from the beginning by this enormous admiration for the ancients that we get from Bhutan.Andrew Keen: Was Socrates relevant here? Was the Enlightenment somehow replacing Aristotle with Socrates and making him and his spirit of Enlightenment, of asking questions rather than answering questions, the symbol of a new way of thinking?David Bell: I would say to a certain extent, so I mean, much of the Enlightenment criticizes scholasticism, medieval scholastic, very, very sharply, and medieval scholasticism is founded philosophically very heavily upon Aristotle, so to that extent. And the spirit of skepticism that Socrates embodied, the idea of taking nothing for granted and asking questions about everything, including questions of oneself, yes, absolutely. That said, while the great figures of the Red Plato, you know, Socrates was generally I mean, it was not all that present as they come. But certainly have people with people with red play-doh in the entire virus.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Benjamin Franklin earlier, David. Most of the Enlightenment, of course, seems to be centered in France and Scotland, Germany, England. But America, many Europeans went to America then as a, what some people would call a settler colonial society, or certainly an offshoot of the European world. Was the settling of America and the American Revolution Was it the quintessential Enlightenment project?David Bell: Another very good question, and again, it depends a bit on who you talk to. I just mentioned this book by Peter Gay, and the last part of his book is called The Science of Freedom, and it's all about the American Revolution. So certainly a lot of interpreters of the Enlightenment have said that, yes, the American revolution represents in a sense the best possible outcome of the American Revolution, it was the best, possible outcome of the enlightened. Certainly there you look at the founding fathers of the United States and there's a great deal that they took from me like Certainly, they took a great great number of political ideas from Obviously Madison was very much inspired and drafting the edifice of the Constitution by Montesquieu to see himself Was happy to admit in addition most of the founding Fathers of the united states were you know had kind of you know We still had we were still definitely Christians, but we're also but we were also very much influenced by deism were very much against the idea of making the United States a kind of confessional country where Christianity was dominant. They wanted to believe in the enlightenment principles of free speech, religious toleration and so on and so forth. So in all those senses and very much the gun was probably more inspired than Franklin was somebody who was very conversant with the European Enlightenment. He spent a large part of his life in London. Where he was in contact with figures of the Enlightenment. He also, during the American Revolution, of course, he was mostly in France, where he is vetted by some of the surviving fellows and were very much in contact for them as well. So yes, I would say the American revolution is certainly... And then the American revolutionary scene, of course by the Europeans, very much as a kind of offshoot of the enlightenment. So one of the great books of the late Enlightenment is by Condor Say, which he wrote while he was hiding actually in the future evolution of the chariot. It's called a historical sketch of the progress of the human spirit, or the human mind, and you know he writes about the American Revolution as being, basically owing its existence to being like...Andrew Keen: Franklin is of course an example of your pre-academic enlightenment, a generalist, inventor, scientist, entrepreneur, political thinker. What about the role of science and indeed economics in the Enlightenment? David, we're going to talk of course about the Marxist interpretation, perhaps the Marxist interpretation which sees The Enlightenment is just a euphemism, perhaps, for exploitative capitalism. How central was the growth and development of the market, of economics, and innovation, and capitalism in your reading of The Enlightened?David Bell: Well, in my reading, it was very important, but not in the way that the Marxists used to say. So Friedrich Engels once said that the Enlightenment was basically the idealized kingdom of the bourgeoisie, and there was whole strain of Marxist thinking that followed the assumption that, and then Karl Marx himself argued that the documents like the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, which obviously were inspired by the Enlightment, were simply kind of the near, or kind of. Way that the bourgeoisie was able to advance itself ideologically, and I don't think that holds much water, which is very little indication that any particular economic class motivated the Enlightenment or was using the Enlightment in any way. That said, I think it's very difficult to imagine the Enlightement without the social and economic changes that come in with the 18th century. To begin with globalization. If you read the great works of the Enlightenment, it's remarkable just how open they are to talking about humanity in general. So one of Voltaire's largest works, one of his most important works, is something called Essay on Customs and the Spirit of Nations, which is actually History of the World, where he talks learnedly not simply about Europe, but about the Americas, about China, about Africa, about India. Montesquieu writes Persian letters. Christian Volpe writes about Chinese philosophy. You know, Rousseau writes about... You know, the earliest days of humankind talks about Africa. All the great figures of the Enlightenment are writing about the rest of the world, and this is a period in which contacts between Europe and the rest the world are exploding along with international trade. So by the end of the 18th century, there are 4,000 to 5,000 ships a year crossing the Atlantic. It's an enormous number. And that's one context in which the enlightenment takes place. Another is what we call the consumer revolution. So in the 18th century, certainly in the major cities of Western Europe, people of a wide range of social classes, including even artisans, sort of somewhat wealthy artisians, shopkeepers, are suddenly able to buy a much larger range of products than they were before. They're able to choose how to basically furnish their own lives, if you will, how they're gonna dress, what they're going to eat, what they gonna put on the walls of their apartments and so on and so forth. And so they become accustomed to exercising a great deal more personal choice than their ancestors have done. And the Enlightenment really develops in tandem with this. Most of the great works of the Enlightment, they're not really written to, they're treatises, they're like Kant, they're written to persuade you to think in a single way. Really written to make you ask questions yourself, to force you to ponder things. They're written in the form of puzzles and riddles. Voltaire had a great line there, he wrote that the best kind of books are the books that readers write half of themselves as they read, and that's sort of the quintessence of the Enlightenment as far as I'm concerned.Andrew Keen: Yeah, Voltaire might have been comfortable on YouTube or Facebook. David, you mentioned all those ships going from Europe across the Atlantic. Of course, many of those ships were filled with African slaves. You mentioned this in your piece. I mean, this is no secret, of course. You also mentioned a couple of times Montesquieu's Persian letters. To what extent is... The enlightenment then perhaps the birth of Western power, of Western colonialism, of going to Africa, seizing people, selling them in North America, the French, the English, Dutch colonization of the rest of the world. Of course, later more sophisticated Marxist thinkers from the Frankfurt School, you mentioned these in your essay, Odorno and Horkheimer in particular, See the Enlightenment as... A project, if you like, of Western domination. I remember reading many years ago when I was in graduate school, Edward Said, his analysis of books like The Persian Letters, which is a form of cultural Western power. How much of this is simply bound up in the profound, perhaps, injustice of the Western achievement? And of course, some of the justice as well. We haven't talked about Jefferson, but perhaps in Jefferson's life and his thinking and his enlightened principles and his... Life as a slave owner, these contradictions are most self-evident.David Bell: Well, there are certainly contradictions, and there's certainly... I think what's remarkable, if you think about it, is that if you read through works of the Enlightenment, you would be hard-pressed to find a justification for slavery. You do find a lot of critiques of slavery, and I think that's something very important to keep in mind. Obviously, the chattel slavery of Africans in the Americas began well before the Enlightment, it began in 1500. The Enlightenment doesn't have the credit for being the first movement to oppose slavery. That really goes back to various religious groups, especially the Fakers. But that said, you have in France, you had in Britain, in America even, you'd have a lot of figures associated with the Enlightenment who were pretty sure of becoming very forceful opponents of slavery very early. Now, when it comes to imperialism, that's a tricky issue. What I think you'd find in these light bulbs, you'd different sorts of tendencies and different sorts of writings. So there are certainly a lot of writers of the Enlightenment who are deeply opposed to European authorities. One of the most popular works of the late Enlightenment was a collective work edited by the man named the Abbe Rinal, which is called The History of the Two Indies. And that is a book which is deeply, deeply critical of European imperialism. At the same time, at the same of the enlightenment, a lot the works of history written during the Enlightment. Tended, such as Voltaire's essay on customs, which I just mentioned, tend to give a kind of very linear version of history. They suggest that all societies follow the same path, from sort of primitive savagery, hunter-gatherers, through early agriculture, feudal stages, and on into sort of modern commercial society and civilization. And so they're basically saying, okay, we, the Europeans, are the most advanced. People like the Africans and the Native Americans are the least advanced, and so perhaps we're justified in going and quote, bringing our civilization to them, what later generations would call the civilizing missions, or possibly just, you know, going over and exploiting them because we are stronger and we are more, and again, we are the best. And then there's another thing that the Enlightenment did. The Enlightenment tended to destroy an older Christian view of humankind, which in some ways militated against modern racism. Christians believed, of course, that everyone was the same from Adam and Eve, which meant that there was an essential similarity in the world. And the Enlightenment challenged this by challenging the biblical kind of creation. The Enlightenment challenges this. Voltaire, for instance, believed that there had actually been several different human species that had different origins, and that can very easily become a justification for racism. Buffon, one of the most Figures of the French Enlightenment, one of the early naturalists, was crucial for trying to show that in fact nature is not static, that nature is always changing, that species are changing, including human beings. And so again, that allowed people to think in terms of human beings at different stages of evolution, and perhaps this would be a justification for privileging the more advanced humans over the less advanced. In the 18th century itself, most of these things remain potential, rather than really being acted upon. But in the 19th century, figures of writers who would draw upon these things certainly went much further, and these became justifications for slavery, imperialism, and other things. So again, the Enlightenment is the source of a great deal of stuff here, and you can't simply put it into one box or more.Andrew Keen: You mentioned earlier, David, that Concorda wrote one of the later classics of the... Condorcet? Sorry, Condorcets, excuse my French. Condorcès wrote one the later Classics of the Enlightenment when he was hiding from the French Revolution. In your mind, was the revolution itself the natural conclusion, climax? Perhaps anti-climax of the Enlightenment. Certainly, it seems as if a lot of the critiques of the French Revolution, particularly the more conservative ones, Burke comes to mind, suggested that perhaps the principles of in the Enlightment inevitably led to the guillotine, or is that an unfair way of thinking of it?David Bell: Well, there are a lot of people who have thought like that. Edmund Burke already, writing in 1790, in his reflections on the revolution in France, he said that everything which was great in the old regime is being dissolved and, quoting, dissolved by this new conquering empire of light and reason. And then he said about the French that in the groves of their academy at the end of every vista, you see nothing but the gallows. Nothing but the Gallows. So there, in 1780, he already seemed to be predicting the reign of terror and blaming it. A certain extent from the Enlightenment. That said, I think, you know, again, the French Revolution is incredibly complicated event. I mean, you certainly have, you know, an explosion of what we could call Enlightenment thinking all over the place. In France, it happened in France. What happened there was that you had a, you know, the collapse of an extraordinarily inefficient government and a very, you know, in a very antiquated, paralyzed system of government kind of collapsed, created a kind of political vacuum. Into that vacuum stepped a lot of figures who were definitely readers of the Enlightenment. Oh so um but again the Enlightment had I said I don't think you can call the Enlightement a single thing so to say that the Enlightiment inspired the French Revolution rather than the There you go.Andrew Keen: Although your essay on liberties is the Enlightenment then and now you probably didn't write is always these lazy editors who come up with inaccurate and inaccurate titles. So for you, there is no such thing as the Enlighten.David Bell: No, there is. There is. But still, it's a complex thing. It contains multitudes.Andrew Keen: So it's the Enlightenment rather than the United States.David Bell: Conflicting tendencies, it has contradictions within it. There's enough unity to refer to it as a singular noun, but it doesn't mean that it all went in one single direction.Andrew Keen: But in historical terms, did the failure of the French Revolution, its descent into Robespierre and then Bonaparte, did it mark the end in historical terms a kind of bookend of history? You began in 1720 by 1820. Was the age of the Enlightenment pretty much over?David Bell: I would say yes. I think that, again, one of the things about the French Revolution is that people who are reading these books and they're reading these ideas and they are discussing things really start to act on them in a very different way from what it did before the French revolution. You have a lot of absolute monarchs who are trying to bring certain enlightenment principles to bear in their form of government, but they're not. But it's difficult to talk about a full-fledged attempt to enact a kind of enlightenment program. Certainly a lot of the people in the French Revolution saw themselves as doing that. But as they did it, they ran into reality, I would say. I mean, now Tocqueville, when he writes his old regime in the revolution, talks about how the French philosophes were full of these abstract ideas that were divorced from reality. And while that's an exaggeration, there was a certain truth to them. And as soon as you start having the age of revolutions, as soon you start people having to devise systems of government that will actually last, and as you have people, democratic representative systems that will last, and as they start revising these systems under the pressure of actual events, then you're not simply talking about an intellectual movement anymore, you're talking about something very different. And so I would say that, well, obviously the ideas of the Enlightenment continue to inspire people, the books continue to be read, debated. They lead on to figures like Kant, and as we talked about earlier, Kant leads to Hegel, Hegel leads to Marx in a certain sense. Nonetheless, by the time you're getting into the 19th century, what you have, you know, has connections to the Enlightenment, but can we really still call it the Enlightment? I would sayAndrew Keen: And Tocqueville, of course, found democracy in America. Is democracy itself? I know it's a big question. But is it? Bound up in the Enlightenment. You've written extensively, David, both for liberties and elsewhere on liberalism. Is the promise of democracy, democratic systems, the one born in the American Revolution, promised in the French Revolution, not realized? Are they products of the Enlightment, or is the 19th century and the democratic systems that in the 19th century, is that just a separate historical track?David Bell: Again, I would say there are certain things in the Enlightenment that do lead in that direction. Certainly, I think most figures in the enlightenment in one general sense or another accepted the idea of a kind of general notion of popular sovereignty. It didn't mean that they always felt that this was going to be something that could necessarily be acted upon or implemented in their own day. And they didn't necessarily associate generalized popular sovereignty with what we would now call democracy with people being able to actually govern themselves. Would be certain figures, certainly Diderot and some of his essays, what we saw very much in the social contract, you know, were sketching out, you knows, models for possible democratic system. Condorcet, who actually lived into the French Revolution, wrote one of the most draft constitutions for France, that's one of most democratic documents ever proposed. But of course there were lots of figures in the Enlightenment, Voltaire, and others who actually believed much more in absolute monarchy, who believed that you just, you know, you should have. Freedom of speech and freedom of discussion, out of which the best ideas would emerge, but then you had to give those ideas to the prince who imposed them by poor sicknesses.Andrew Keen: And of course, Rousseau himself, his social contract, some historians have seen that as the foundations of totalitarian, modern totalitarianism. Finally, David, your wonderful essay in Liberties in the spring quarterly 2025 is The Enlightenment, Then and Now. What about now? You work at Princeton, your president has very bravely stood up to the new presidential regime in the United States, in defense of academic intellectual freedom. Does the word and the movement, does it have any relevance in the 2020s, particularly in an age of neo-authoritarianism around the world?David Bell: I think it does. I think we have to be careful about it. I always get a little nervous when people say, well, we should simply go back to the Enlightenment, because the Enlightenments is history. We don't go back the 18th century. I think what we need to do is to recover certain principles, certain ideals from the 18 century, the ones that matter to us, the ones we think are right, and make our own Enlightenment better. I don't think we need be governed by the 18 century. Thomas Paine once said that no generation should necessarily rule over every generation to come, and I think that's probably right. Unfortunately in the United States, we have a constitution which is now essentially unamendable, so we're doomed to live by a constitution largely from the 18th century. But are there many things in the Enlightenment that we should look back to, absolutely?Andrew Keen: Well, David, I am going to free you for your own French Enlightenment. You can go and have some croissant now in your local cafe in Paris. Thank you so much for a very, I excuse the pun, enlightening conversation on the Enlightenment then and now, Essential Essay in Liberties. I'd love to get you back on the show. Talk more history. Thank you. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

******Support the channel******Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenterPayPal: paypal.me/thedissenterPayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuyPayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9lPayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpzPayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9mPayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on******Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoBFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Tristan Rogers is a philosopher, author, and teacher. He teaches Logic and Latin at Donum Dei Classical Academy in San Francisco. He completed his Ph.D. at the University of Arizona in 2017. He works in political philosophy, ethics, and ancient philosophy. He is the author of Conservatism, Past and Present: A Philosophical Introduction. In this episode, we focus on Conservatism, Past and Present. We start by discussing philosophical conservatism, and the virtues of gratitude, humility, and justice. We then go through the history of conservatism, and talk about thinkers such as Plato, Aristotle, Saint Augustine, David Hume, Edmund Burke, attitudes toward the American Revolution and the French Revolution, the 19th century and freedom through authority, the 20th century, Friedrich Hayek, Robert Nozick, Roger Scruton, and the present in Donald Trump and his supporters. We discuss issues surrounding immigration, the family, sexual ethics, responsibilities and rights, and religion. Finally, we talk about the future of conservatism.--A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, EDWARD HALL, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, MAURO JÚNIOR, 航 豊川, TONY BARRETT, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, STEVEN GANGESTAD, TED FARRIS, AND ROBINROSWELL!A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, NICK GOLDEN, CHRISTINE GLASS, IGOR NIKIFOROVSKI, PER KRAULIS, AND BENJAMIN GELBART!AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

This video covers David Hume's skeptical philosophy and its influence on the way people think in the modern world.