English philosopher and political theorist
POPULARITY
Hosted by Herbert Spencer
19 episodes with Herbert Spencer
5 episodes with Herbert Spencer
3 episodes with Herbert Spencer
2 episodes with Herbert Spencer
3 episodes with Herbert Spencer
2 episodes with Herbert Spencer
3 episodes with Herbert Spencer
2 episodes with Herbert Spencer
"Is it in sitting ecstatic over Shelley, Shakespeare, or Herbert Spencer, solitary in my room of a night, that I am 'improving myself' and learning to live?"The Human Machine by Arnold Bennett
A l'occasion de la Journée mondiale de Darwin, le 12 février, BSG rediffuse une série consacrée au père de la théorie de l'Évolution.En 1859, Darwin publie L'origine des espèces, qui fonde la théorie moderne de l'évolution et introduit l'idée de sélection naturelle. Certains de ses partisans, trop pressés d'appliquer ces notions à l'homme, se lancent dans des interprétations dangereuses… Le darwinisme social (terme inventé en 1880) désigne la doctrine de Herbert Spencer, en partie inspirée des idées Malthus (qui pourraient se résumer à "laissons crever les pauvres en surnombre"). Elle justifie en tous cas l'élimination des moins aptes. Cette doctrine recommande de ne prendre aucune mesure pour protéger socialement les faibles. Darwin a défendu publiquement le contraire. Darwin a par ailleurs combattu le racisme. Il constate que le contact culturel (pour ne pas dire la colonisation) se traduisait parfois par l'extinction des peuples dominés, à cause de la barbarie dite civilisatrice des colonisateurs. La notion d'eugénisme viendra de Francis Galton, à la suite des idées de Spencer. Il prétend que la "civilisation", protectrice des faibles, a anéanti le pouvoir améliorateur de la sélection naturelle . Seule la sélection artificielle peut s'opposer à la dégénérescence. En 1871, Darwin rejette cette interprétation, au nom même de la civilisation, qu'il définit en termes d'extension indéfinie de la "sympathie". Mais c'est trop tard… Dès 1905, les États-Unis sont les précurseurs de mesures eugéniques: stérilisation de malades et de pauvres, chasse aux épileptiques, euthanasies etc. L'un des laboratoires de l'eugénisme nazi (celui du psychiatre Ernst Rüdin) est subventionné par la Fondation Rockefeller. L'Europe connaît avec le nazisme un des plus monstrueux avatars de ce darwinisme social…_______Pour réécouter le premier épisode:https://bit.ly/darwin_1_BSG _______
In this newsletter we discuss two main things, the parenting moment is about saying no and the training thought is about entering an event. The quote we share this week is from an Herbert Spencer. _____________________ Want strength coaching? Check out my coaching services by clicking here. _____________________ Enjoyed the audio version of the email and want to sign up to the Stronger Dads Newsletter? You can sign up at www.strongerdads.co.nz
Co-Host Paul Minhas sits down with parents Lyndsay Cotterall and Tony Gilligan for an exclusive interview to discuss the issue of intersection safety. The focus is on 2nd Street and 6th Avenue - adjacent to the Herbert Spencer elementary. Tony and Lyndsay represent over 500 parents who have signed an online petition calling upon City Hall to take action to invest in safety upgrades for this intersection. A motion that came before Council on January 8th to set aside $500K for improvements to the intersection was defeated 3-3 (tie vote is a lost vote). However, both Lindsay and Tony think Council may have a change of heart and be willing to reconsider their previous decision. Listen to this inciteful interview about some of the challenges the parents face in turning advocacy into action. If you want to sign the online petition, click here.
Barbara Spencer Taylor, 86, of Henrico, Virginia was called home on September 25, 2024 She was preceded in death by her Parents, Herbert Spencer, Sr. and Minie Ford Spencer, Brother Herbert Spencer, Jr., Sister Annie Spencer Poates, Nephew James Edward Poates and Niece Jacquelyn Elieen Lee. Barbara is survived by her husband of 63 years James M. Taylor, Jr., her children Jeffery M. Taylor and his wife Sandra L. Taylor, Cheryl Lynn Taylor, Michael S. Taylor and his wife Kellee K. Taylor, Dawn T. Bahen and her husband J. Michael Bahen and W. David Taylor and his wife Lauren A....Article LinkSupport the show
Merhaba! Geri geldik (her zamanki gibi). Bu bölümde sinir liflerinin kendi geliştirdikleri makinelerle keşfini ve Joseph Erlanger ile Herbert Spencer Gasser'in hayatını konuştuk.
In this episode I look at the late 19th Century Darwinian Conservatism of Herbert Spencer, William Graham Sumner, and reactions by William James and others as described in Richard Hofstadter's Social Darwinism in American Thought.
En este último episodio de Filosofía Simplemente analizamos el pensamiento de Spencer, filósofo británico de gran influencia en su época pero hoy muy olvidado, y máximo representante del llamado "positivismo evolucionista". Si quieres acceder a la versión extendida de este episodio resolver dudas u obtener material exclusivo, visítanos en Patreon https://www.patreon.com/laTravesia Este podcast acaba aquí, si quieres acceder a contenido gratuito adicional https://www.youtube.com/c/LaTravesía donde encontrarás autores más actuales y continúa publicándose contenido nuevo.
“Ya no discutas más.” Estas son palabras que he escuchado a lo largo de mi vida en momentos de altercados y diferencias que suelen ser algo desagradables. Las discusiones tienen el poder de desafiar nuestra naturaleza, tanto de manera positiva como negativa. Por lo general, son una prueba de nuestro carácter. La clave está en la paciencia que ejercemos al enfrentarlas. Herbert Spencer nos recordó: “Conserva la calma en las discusiones, porque el apasionamiento puede convertir el error en falta y la verdad en descortesía.” Las discusiones nos ponen a prueba en el control de nuestras emociones. Habitualmente, surgen por la falta de dominio emocional. Entonces, ¿cómo deberíamos actuar durante una discusión? Debemos pensar antes de actuar. No debemos reaccionar con ira ni actuar por impulso. Es crucial no dar rienda suelta a nuestras emociones ni a nuestras palabras. A veces, el silencio es la mejor respuesta. Debemos calmarnos antes de tomar cualquier acción y orar a Dios para encontrar la mejor forma de responder. Si la situación amenaza con salirse de control, es prudente alejarnos de la persona o del lugar. En conclusión: “No demos rienda suelta ni a nuestras emociones ni a nuestras palabras.” Así, evitaremos muchas de las discusiones que enfrentamos en la vida. La Biblia dice en Proverbios 15:1, “La respuesta amable calma el enojo, pero la agresiva echa leña al fuego” (NVI)
Ya no discutas más.” Estas son palabras que he escuchado a lo largo de mi vida en momentos de altercados y diferencias que suelen ser algo desagradables. Las discusiones tienen el poder de desafiar nuestra naturaleza, tanto de manera positiva como negativa. Por lo general, son una prueba de nuestro carácter. La clave está en la paciencia que ejercemos al enfrentarlas. Herbert Spencer nos recordó: “Conserva la calma en las discusiones, porque el apasionamiento puede convertir el error en falta y la verdad en descortesía.” Las discusiones nos ponen a prueba en el control de nuestras emociones. Habitualmente, surgen por la falta de dominio emocional. Entonces, ¿cómo deberíamos actuar durante una discusión? Debemos pensar antes de actuar. No debemos reaccionar con ira ni actuar por impulso. Es crucial no dar rienda suelta a nuestras emociones ni a nuestras palabras. A veces, el silencio es la mejor respuesta. Debemos calmarnos antes de tomar cualquier acción y orar a Dios para encontrar la mejor forma de responder. Si la situación amenaza con salirse de control, es prudente alejarnos de la persona o del lugar. En conclusión: “No demos rienda suelta ni a nuestras emociones ni a nuestras palabras.” Así, evitaremos muchas de las discusiones que enfrentamos en la vida. La Biblia dice en Proverbios 15:1, “La respuesta amable calma el enojo, pero la agresiva echa leña al fuego” (NVI)
The phrase “to play billiards well is a sign of a misspent youth,” is often credited to the philosopher Herbert Spencer, who meant it as an insult upon losing a game of English Billiards at his Club to a young man who, indeed, had grown up in a pool hall.The phrase stuck, as did the connotation of pool parlours being a dodgy dive.However, when Craig Bouwer returned to SA after decades of social and professional billiards playing, touring five continents, he set out to change the offering, ditch the stereotype and open the sport to a new generation of athletes. Hence Sessions Billiards Club in Tyger Valley, Cape Town was formed. An upmarket, internationally recognised, (the first in Africa), billiards club that provides a safe, clean, accessible and family friendly environment. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). 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
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/performing-arts
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/music
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu). Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/british-studies
What did historical evolutionists such as Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer have to say about music? What role did music play in their evolutionary theories? What were the values and limits of these evolutionist turns of thought, and in what ways have they endured in present-day music research? Theorizing Music Evolution: Darwin, Spencer, and the Limits of the Human (Oxford UP, 2024) is a critical examination of ideas about musical origins, emphasizing nineteenth-century theories of music in the evolutionist writings of Darwin and Spencer. Author Miriam Piilonen argues for the significance of this Victorian music-evolutionism in light of its ties to a recently revitalized subfield of evolutionary musicology. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to music theorizing, Piilonen explores how historical thinkers constructed music in evolutionist terms and argues for an updated understanding of music as an especially fraught area of evolutionary thought. In this book, Piilonen delves into how historical evolutionists, in particular Darwin and Spencer, developed and applied a concept of music that served as a boundary-drawing device, used to trace or obscure the conceptual borders between human and animal. She takes as primary texts the early evolutionary treatises that double as theoretical accounts of music's origins. For Darwin, music served as a kind of proto-language common to humans and animals alike; he heard the songs of birds and the chirps of mice as musical, as articulated in texts such as The Descent of Man (1871) and The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals (1872). Spencer, on the other hand, viewed music as a specifically human stage of evolutionary advance, beyond language acquisition, as outlined in his essay, "The Origin and Function of Music" (1857). These competing views established radically different perspectives on the origin and function of music in human cultural expression, while at the same time being mutually constitutive of one another. A ground-breaking contribution to music theory and histories of science, Theorizing Music Evolution turns to music evolution with an eye toward disrupting and intervening in these questions as they recur in the present.” Nathan Smith is a PhD candidate in Music Theory at Yale University (nathan.smith@yale.edu).
Sociologist Herbert Spencer was "light years" ahead of his contemporaries in grappling with some very modern problems of political economy. Libertarianism.org's Paul Meany explains. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
Herbert Spencer once loomed large in social science. Is he receiving his due in the modern era? Paul Meany discusses how a major thinker was celebrated, forgotten, and remembered again. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
This week, Ian Dunt and Dorian Lynskey get started on the history of eugenics, the idea of finding biological solutions to social problems. Say the word now and it calls to mind skull-measuring cranks or Nazi death camps but for decades it was a mainstream project in many parts of the world, attracting not just white supremacists and elitist snobs but liberals, socialists and feminists. Winston Churchill, HG Wells, Nikola Tesla and John Maynard Keynes all expressed an interest. How did bad science and dangerous politics become so popular? Dorian and Ian explore how Francis Galton and Herbert Spencer's fascination with inherited characteristics was supercharged by Victorian science, from Darwin's theory of evolution to early breakthroughs in genetics. They talk about how Galton's voluntary “positive eugenics” led to the authoritarian “negative eugenics” of compulsory sterilisation, and how hardcore American eugenicists drew up a blueprint for Hitler. Also: the birth of scientific racism, the sinister history of IQ tests, how GK Chesterton helped save Britain from eugenics laws, and, yes, the people who thought you could identify criminals by the shape of their skulls. It's a disturbing and complicated story which mangles your political preconceptions. Support Origin Story on Patreon for exclusive benefits. Reading list Alison Bashford and Philippa Levine (eds) - The Oxford Handbook of the History of Eugenics (2010) Edwin Black — War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race (2003) Elof Axel Carlson — The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea (2001) GK Chesterton — Eugenics and Other Evils (1922) Charles Darwin — The Descent of Man (1871) Lyndsay Andrew Farrall — The Origins and Growth of the English Eugenics Movement 1865-1925 (1969) Francis Galton – Hereditary Genius (1869) Henry H Goddard – The Kallikak Family (1912) Stephen Jay Gould — The Mismeasure of Man (1981/1996) Madison Grant – The Passing of the Great Race (1916) Philippa Levine — Eugenics: A Very Short Introduction (2017) Gina Maranto — Quest for Perfection: The Drive to Breed Better Human Beings (1996) Adam Rutherford — Control: The Dark History and Troubling Present of Eugenics (2022) Lothrop Stoddard – The Rising Tide of Color Against White World Supremacy (1920) HG Wells – Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress upon Human Life and Thought (1901) Online: Quinn Slobodian — ‘The rise of the new tech right', The New Statesman (2023) Written and presented by Dorian Lynskey and Ian Dunt. Audio production by Simon Williams. Music by Jade Bailey. Logo art by Mischa Welsh. Lead Producer is Anne-Marie Luff. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Origin Story is a Podmasters production. Follow Origin Story on X Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
A New York Times bestseller! “Beautifully crafted and fun to read.” —Louis Galambos, The Wall Street Journal “Nasaw's research is extraordinary.” —San Francisco Chronicle “Make no mistake: David Nasaw has produced the most thorough, accurate and authoritative biography of Carnegie to date.” —Salon.com The definitive account of the life of Andrew Carnegie Celebrated historian David Nasaw, whom The New York Times Book Review has called "a meticulous researcher and a cool analyst," brings new life to the story of one of America's most famous and successful businessmen and philanthropists—in what will prove to be the biography of the season. Born of modest origins in Scotland in 1835, Andrew Carnegie is best known as the founder of Carnegie Steel. His rags to riches story has never been told as dramatically and vividly as in Nasaw's new biography. Carnegie, the son of an impoverished linen weaver, moved to Pittsburgh at the age of thirteen. The embodiment of the American dream, he pulled himself up from bobbin boy in a cotton factory to become the richest man in the world. He spent the rest of his life giving away the fortune he had accumulated and crusading for international peace. For all that he accomplished and came to represent to the American public—a wildly successful businessman and capitalist, a self-educated writer, peace activist, philanthropist, man of letters, lover of culture, and unabashed enthusiast for American democracy and capitalism—Carnegie has remained, to this day, an enigma. Nasaw explains how Carnegie made his early fortune and what prompted him to give it all away, how he was drawn into the campaign first against American involvement in the Spanish-American War and then for international peace, and how he used his friendships with presidents and prime ministers to try to pull the world back from the brink of disaster. With a trove of new material—unpublished chapters of Carnegie's Autobiography; personal letters between Carnegie and his future wife, Louise, and other family members; his prenuptial agreement; diaries of family and close friends; his applications for citizenship; his extensive correspondence with Henry Clay Frick; and dozens of private letters to and from presidents Grant, Cleveland, McKinley, Roosevelt, and British prime ministers Gladstone and Balfour, as well as friends Herbert Spencer, Matthew Arnold, and Mark Twain—Nasaw brilliantly plumbs the core of this facinating and complex man, deftly placing his life in cultural and political context as only a master storyteller can.
On this ID the Future from the vault, Nancy Pearcey, professor and scholar in residence at Houston Baptist University, tells some of the political history of Darwinism, and explains how the same troubling issues persist today. Darwin was one of the first to say, if it isn't purely naturalistic, it isn't science. Others, then and now, have suggested that we can keep Darwinian evolution and just trust that God is at work behind the scenes. Pearcey, co-author of The Soul of Science: Christian Faith and Natural Philosophy, says that the problem with this tactic of wedding Darwinism and theism is that ultimately it turns one's understanding of God into something that is largely private and subjective. Source
On today's ID the Future historian Richard Weikart (Cal State Stanislaus) dissects a recent Cambridge University Press book on social Darwinism by Jeffrey O'Connell and Michael Ruse. Weikart, author of Hitler's Ethic, From Darwin to Hitler, Hitler's Religion, and The Death of Humanity, says a major shortcoming of the Cambridge UP book is the authors' attempt to put as much distance as possible between Darwin and eugenics thinking, and between Darwin and Hitler. The new book paints Darwin follower Herbert Spencer as the eugenics-championing bad guy and contends that Darwin and Darwinism had little or no influence on Hitler's warped master-race ethic. Weikart patiently highlights some key evidence to the contrary, including statements front and center in Hitler's writing. Did Darwin cause Hitler? No. Would Darwin have approved Read More › Source
Notas del episodio: https://elrincondeaquiles.com/podcast/ganar-amigos/ Únete a la comunidad en Telegram: https://t.me/elrincondeaquiles Las personas que ganan más dinero no son las que más saben. Con esta idea inicial, nos sumergimos en el libro Cómo ganar amigos e influenciar en las personas, de Dale Carnegie. Dijo John G. Hibben que “la educación es la capacidad para afrontar las situaciones que plantea la vida”. En la misma línea Herbert Spencer escribió: “el gran objetivo de la educación no es el conocimiento, sino la acción”. En el podcast de hoy recurrimos a uno de los clásicos para aprender el arte de cultivar y mejorar las relaciones humanas. En este episodio que estás escuchando conocerás las ideas más importantes del libro Cómo ganar amigos e influenciar en las personas, de Dale Carnegie. El hilo conductor de todo el episodio lo marcan las frases que han abierto el episodio: hay que poner el conocimientos en práctica. Por eso trataremos de acompañar el episodio con ejemplos y accionables claros. -Las 3 técnicas fundamentales para tratar con los demás. -Las 6 formas de agradar a los demás. -Cómo los demás pueden pensar lo mismo que tú mediante el arte de la influencia. -Cómo ser un líder cambiando a los demás sin ofensas ni resentimientos. Nuestra web: https://elrincondeaquiles.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/elrincondeaquiles.es Twitter: https://twitter.com/RinconDeAquiles
Notas del episodio: https://elrincondeaquiles.com/podcast/ganar-amigos/ Únete a la comunidad en Telegram: https://t.me/elrincondeaquiles Las personas que ganan más dinero no son las que más saben. Con esta idea inicial, nos sumergimos en el libro Cómo ganar amigos e influenciar en las personas, de Dale Carnegie. Dijo John G. Hibben que “la educación es la capacidad para afrontar las situaciones que plantea la vida”. En la misma línea Herbert Spencer escribió: “el gran objetivo de la educación no es el conocimiento, sino la acción”. En el podcast de hoy recurrimos a uno de los clásicos para aprender el arte de cultivar y mejorar las relaciones humanas. En este episodio que estás escuchando conocerás las ideas más importantes del libro Cómo ganar amigos e influenciar en las personas, de Dale Carnegie. El hilo conductor de todo el episodio lo marcan las frases que han abierto el episodio: hay que poner el conocimientos en práctica. Por eso trataremos de acompañar el episodio con ejemplos y accionables claros. -Las 3 técnicas fundamentales para tratar con los demás. -Las 6 formas de agradar a los demás. -Cómo los demás pueden pensar lo mismo que tú mediante el arte de la influencia. -Cómo ser un líder cambiando a los demás sin ofensas ni resentimientos. Nuestra web: https://elrincondeaquiles.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/elrincondeaquiles.es Twitter: https://twitter.com/RinconDeAquiles
The first part of Jojo's Bizzare Adventure (Phantom Blood) is best described as Dracula starring Jean Claude Van Damme with costume design by Jean Paul Gaultier, and you know something? It is a good read! Blending Shonen anime spectacle with the influence of classical literature. We see if the manga has stood the test of time since its 80's debut. Skip synopsis @ 6:32 Email: WeAppreciateManga@Gmail.com 103: JoJo's Bizarre Adventure vol. 1 Chapters 1 to 8, ‘Prologue' and ‘The Stone Mask part 1' By Hirohiko Araki Translation by Evan Galloway Lettering by Mark Mcmurray Phantom Blood is the first part of the epic Jojo's Bizarre Adventure and tells the tale of two young men, Johnathan “Jojo” Joestar and Dio Brando. It starts in south America during the reign of the Aztecs, where a king has used a magical death mask like object to gain supernatural power, then we are taken to the 80's, the 1880's to be precise. where Dio arrives at the home of the Joestars after the death of his father, Dario. Jojo's father, George Joestar, becomes Godfather to Dio and so they welcome the young man under their roof, all whilst Dio plans to rob Jojo of his status and make him suffer. Dio does this whilst maintaining the guise of a step brother but when he discovers Jojo has a girlfriend, he torments him further by forcing a kiss on the poor girl. Dio sadistically claiming, “You wanted Jojo to be your first kiss, but it was I, Dio”. So, Jojo attempts to kick his ass and in doing so spills blood on the mask that hangs in their home. That same magical mask used by the Aztecs now activated by the touch of blood and designed to penetrate the wearer's brain upon doing so. Years pass by but Dio takes it further when Jojo infers that Dio had poisoned his father, Dario Brando and has been doing the same to George Joestar. Jojo sets up new care for his father and sets out on a journey to discover the origin of the poison and get evidence, or at least a cure for his father. Meanwhile Dio investigates the mask to use as a potential murder weapon against Jojo only to discover that it can turn its wearer into a vampire. As Dio returns to the Joestar residence he is ambushed by Jojo who has gained new allies on his journey, meanwhile Dio, with mask in hand, has a plan. · The theme of Jojo is one of becoming a “peon to humanity”, Jojo aspires to become a true gentleman. Meanwhile Dio himself aspires for greatness albeit through horrific ways, and at the cost of his own humanity. · Phantom Blood was first published on January 1987 in Shuesha's weekly Shonen. Alongside the original run of Dragonball (not Z), Ultimate Muscle and Saint Seiya. Like Saint Seiya, Phantom Blood is a very fashion-conscious manga, as we'll see in later episodes. This was to appeal to the readers at the time. · At the time the manga was published Arnold Schwarzenneger, Slyvester Stallone and Jean Claude Van Damme were dominating Hollywood. Their action movies were a response to feminism at the time, with men being celebrated for their physical strength and stamina. So naturally Araki has his hero be the same way, which makes more sense knowing that Jojo needs to be exaggerated physically in order to fight the supernaturally powerfully Dio. · Physically masculine heroes aren't an action movie ideal either, Jojo takes more influence from ancient styles of stories, where mythological characters show further supernatural feats of masculinity, such as the greek Demi-god Hercules, the Olympics itself being a demonstration of competitive power and indiviualism. · One of the manga's most iconic scenes is Dio's “kick the dog” moment. A now popular trope for villains, the oldest examples being seen in Anne Brontë's novel, ‘Agnes Grey ‘(1847) where upon Mr. Hatfield kicks not just a dog but also a cat, Anne's sister, Emily went one step further by having Heathcliff hang a puppy in Wuthering Heights, which was published within that same month and year. In Stephen King's novel, ‘The Dead Zone' (1979), the villain of that story also kicks a dog. It is important to note that the trope isn't about kicking dogs but instead is a shorthand way to tell the audience immediately that a character is despicable. Other references: · The manga opens during the reign of the Aztec Empire, the empire itself was taken over by Spanish conquistadors and their allies in 1521. The Aztecs, also known as the ancient Mexica were the ancestors of the Nahua people of Mexico. · A nod to Charles Darwin is mentioned, Jojo having a passion for archeology compares his studies to Darwin's and wishes to make breakthroughs like himself. Darwin himself changed academia with his ‘Origin of Species' published in 1859. Although incredibly abstract for its time, Darwin's theories still have a lot of credit to them in contemporary times. The phrase “survival of the fittest” is sometimes mistaken as Darwin's words but comes from Herbert Spencer, responding to Darwin. For Jojo to speak of Darwin, is no different than millennials speaking of Carl Sagan or Jordan Peterson, of which the latter's academic legacy has arguably not reached apotheosis as of writing this article. But who knows what the future will bring? · Dario Brando actions resemble that of the character Thénardier in Victor Hugo's Les Miserables, they both inadvertently save a man whilst trying to rob them. · Speedwagon looks suspiciously like Australian actor and film director Mel Gibson, especially in his mullet wearing Lethal Weapon days. · The mysterious mask in Phantom Blood resembles the mask seen in the Italian horror movie ‘Demons' (1985), that mask has the power to turn someone into a ghoulish demon. Although it may be coincidence, it could also have been a possible inspiration for Araki. Facebook Instagram Twitter Official Website Email
Photo: No known restrictions on publication. @Batchelorshow 1883 Caption: "The Society for the Suppression of Blasphemous Literature proposes to get up cases against Professors Huxley and Tyndall, Herbert Spencer, and others who, by their writings have sown widespread unbelief, and in some cases rank atheism" 1/2: #Bestof2022: The First Amendment in question. 1/2: #SCOTUS: Freedom of speech by Justice Robert Jackson, 1943. Richard A Epstein, @RichardAEpstein, @HooverInst, Tisch Professor of Law NYU Bedford Senior Fellow; Hoover Institution. https://www.hoover.org/research/can-artistic-freedom-survive-state-coercion
The English philosopher, Herbert Spencer, once wrote that "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.” today we look at contempt prior to investigation as it relates to the Reactionary right and the Chinese spy balloon. I hope you listen.
A brief history of secular thought from the Enlightenment to the present, looking at how it has been shaped by culture and events. We start in the Enlightenment with Voltaire, Edward Gibbon, David Hume, and Thomas Paine. Moving into the nineteenth century we look at literary influences like Percy Bysshe Shelley and Thomas Carlyle, then social critics like Ludwig Feuerbach and Karl Marx. Charles Darwin takes a central position in the nineteenth century, followed by expositors like Thomas Huxley and Herbert Spencer. And we conclude the nineteenth century with Friedrich Nietzsche and the death of God. We start the twentieth century with Sigmund Freud and Bertrand Russell and look at satirical writers at the turn of the century like like Mark Twain and H.L. Mencken. We conclude the twentieth century with Stephen Hawking and Carl Sagan and start off the twenty-first century with the New Atheists.
Herbert Spencer was an extremely influential 19th century thinker but his ideas exist in relative obscurity today. He coined the phrase 'survival of the fittest' and wrote extensively on a variety of topics within evolutionary theory, political thought, sociology, psychology, and ethics. Tune in to learn more about Spencer's ideas and how they are still plenty relevant today. Send you thoughts, questions, and ideas for future episodes to eggtimerphilosophy@gmail.com Image Attribution: By Engraved by Geo. E. Perine, New York. - http://ihm.nlm.nih.gov/images/B24017, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=18913026
Welcome to Episode One Hundred Forty-Seven of Lucretius Today. This is a podcast dedicated to the poet Lucretius, who wrote "On The Nature of Things," the only complete presentation of Epicurean philosophy left to us from the ancient world. Each week we'll walk you through the ancient Epicurean texts, and we'll discuss how Epicurean philosophy can apply to you today. If you find the Epicurean worldview attractive, we invite you to join us in the study of Epicurus at EpicureanFriends.com, where you will find a discussion thread for each of our podcast episodes and many other topics. We're now in the process of a series of podcasts intended to provide a general overview of Epicurean philosophy based on the organizational structure employed by Norman DeWitt in his book "Epicurus and His Philosophy."This week we discuss a series of Points and Counterpoints which Norman DeWitt describes as "True Opinions / False Opinions" about Epicurus:True Opinions - False OpinionsEpicurus' Place In Greek Philosophy:True: Epicurus came immediately after Plato (idealism; absolutism) and Pyrrho (the skeptic). Platonism and Skepticism were among Epicurus' chief abominations.False: Epicurus taught in response to Stoicism. (False because Epicurean philosophy was fully developed before Zeno began teaching Stoicism.)Epicurus' Attitude Toward Learning:True: Epicurus was well educated and a trained thinker.False: Epicurus was an ignoramus and an enemy of all culture.Epicurus' Goal For Himself And His Work:True: Epicurus was not only a philosopher but a moral reformer rebelling against his teachers.False: Epicurus was nothing more than a copycat who was ungrateful to his teachers.Epicurus' Place in Greek Scientific Thought:True: Epicurus was returning to the Ionian tradition of thought which had been interrupted by Socrates and Plato. Epicurus was an Anti-Platonist and a penetrating critic of Platonism.False: Epicurean scientific thought simply copied Democritus.Epicurus' Role As a Systematizer:True: As with Herbert Spencer or Auguste Comte, Epicurus was attempting a synthesis and critique of all prior philosophical thought.False: Epicurus was a sloppy and unorganized thinker whose system-building is not worth attention.Epicurus' Dogmatism:True: Epicurus' strength was that he promulgated a dogmatic philosophy, actuated by a passion for inquiry to find certainty, and a detestation of skepticism, which he imputed even to Plato.False: Epicurus' demerit was that he promulgated a dogmatic philosophy, because he renounced inquiry.Epicurus' View of Truth:True: Epicurus exalted Nature as the norm of truth, revolting against Plato, who had preached “reason” as the norm and considered “Reason” to have a divine existence of its own. Epicurus studied and taught the nature and use of sensations, and the role in determining that which we consider to be true.False: Epicurus was an empiricist in the modern sense, declaring sensation to be the only source of knowledge and all sensations to be “true.”Epicurus' Method For Determining Truth:True: Epicurus taught reasoning chiefly by deduction. For example, atoms cannot be observed directly; their existence and properties must be determined by deduction, and the principles thereby deduced serve as standards for assessing truth. In this Epicurus was adopting the procedures of Euclid and partying company with both Plato and the Ionian scientists.False: Epicurus was a strict empiricist and taught reasoning mainly by induction.Epicurus' As A Man of ActionTrue: Epicurus was the first missionary philosophy. Epicurus was by disposition combative and he was by natural gifts a leader, organizer, and campaigner.False: Epicurus was effeminate and a moral invalid; a passivist who taught retirement from and non-engagement with the world.Epicurus' View of Self-InterestTrue: Epicureanism was the first world philosophy, acceptable to both Greek and barbarian. Epicurus taught that we should make friends wherever possible.False: Epicurus was a totally egoistic hedonist ruled solely by a narrow view of his own self-interest.Epicurus Is Of Little Relevance to the Development of ChristianityTrue: Epicurus reoriented emphasis from political virtues to social virtues, and developed a wider viewpoint applicable to all humanity.False: Epicurus was an enemy of all religion and there is no trace of his influence in the “New Testament.”
On this ID the Future from the vault, Nancy Pearcey, author of numerous books, including The Soul of Science (co-authored with Charles Thaxton) and Love Thy Body: Answering Hard Questions about Life and Sexuality, challenges the common belief that Darwin's leading early supporters were convinced of the main pillars of his theory. Many in the nineteenth century were already primed to accept a theory of evolution, but not necessarily by natural selection. As Pearcey explains, some of Darwin's chief supporters had grave doubts about natural selection's role, and some of them believed that God or a “vital force” guided evolution. But Darwin would have none of it. And what do evolutionary scientists think today? The disagreements persist and, if anything, have Read More › Source
What is the purpose of education? Our society has always struggled to agree on the purpose of education. Some say the purpose is for students to acquire factual knowledge of subjects. Others argue that the real purpose should be to motivate action. In that sense the debate really comes down to a definition of what it means to be an informed citizen, and whether citizenship goes beyond just acquiring knowledge into what obligations we have to act on that understanding. Join Steve and Dan Fouts – founders of Teach Different and twin brothers with over 50 years of teaching experience – along with guest State Senator Laura Murphy for a compelling conversation about education, enriched by the Teach Different Method. Whether you are a teacher, school leader, or simply someone interested in experiencing the joy and fulfillment of challenging kids with big ideas, join our worldwide Community of Educators FREE for 30 days. Membership includes access to our robust library of resources, conversation plans, and lively discussions among teachers and faculty. Image source: Wikimedia Commons
SINS OF THE FATHER PART 1 OCTOBER 02, 2022 AARON SMITH SEASON 1 EPISODE 36 SHOW NOTES:Today, in Episode 36, we begin looking into the history of early eugenics and refresh our deductive reasoning. Herbert Spencer, Charles Darwin, Thomas Robert Malthus, and Francis J. Galton are introduced in Part 1. As we progress through the topic, we will examine the historical manifestations of eugenics and investigate whether there are modern day examples of this ideology in practice under a new set of circumstances and terminology. Here's a hint, there appears to be a whole lot of lipstick on this particular pig...NIH National Genome Research Institute:https://www.genome.gov/about-genomics/fact-sheets/Eugenics-and-Scientific-RacismPositive and Negative Eugenics- eugenicsarchive.ca:https://eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/tree/5233c3ac5c2ec50000000086War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race:http://www.waragainsttheweak.comFeel free to email me at subtlecain@protonmail.com with any questions or suggestions. Your support is always appreciated!Substack Discussion Board:https://subtlecain404.substack.com/p/podcast-discussion-board/comments?s=rYou can support the show in these ways:Venmo: https://venmo.com/u/subtlecainSupport the show
Episode air date: June 30th, 2022 We finish our series on Herbert Spencer's chapter in The Anarchist Handbook by Michael Malice @FundiesPodcast on Instagram and Twitter Available now on Spotify, Amazon, and Apple Podcasts
Episode air date: June 18th, 2022 We start our series on Herbert Spencer's chapter in The Anarchist Handbook by Michael Malice @FundiesPodcast on Instagram and Twitter Available now on Spotify, Amazon, and Apple Podcasts
Givers, Doers, & Thinkers—A Podcast on Philanthropy and Civil Society
This week on Givers, Doers, & Thinkers, Jeremy talks to historian and journalist Christine Rosen about how American religious leaders, in partnership with philanthropy, helped grow the American eugenics movement in the first part of the 20th century.Christine Rosen is a senior writer at Commentary Magazine, a fellow of the Institute for Advanced Studies in Culture at the University of Virginia, and senior editor at the New Atlantis. Christine holds a Ph.D. in history from Emory University. Her writing has appeared in our most prestigious periodicals, from the New York Times Magazine to the Washington Post, the MIT Technology Review to the New England Journal of Medicine, often covering the science/bioethics/technology beat. Her books include Preaching Eugenics: Religious Leaders and the American Eugenics Movement, My Fundamentalist Education, and the forthcoming book, The Extinction of Experience.Jeremy and Christine kick off this conversation with a bang, diving right into the eugenics movements in America. Christine shares the key figures involved, like Charles Davenport, Herbert Spencer, Francis Galton, and Margaret Sanger, along with religious leaders, and the influence of eugenics on charity versus philanthropy, the rhetorical uses and misuses to which science is often put, and the dark side of American progressivism. Christine highlights some of the evil bargains made in the name of "charity" by eugenicists, like financial support in exchange for sterilization. This fascinating yet deeply troubling history is well worth your time and was very likely never part of your American history lessons. What is a feasibility study, and why do you need it? American Philanthropic's Dan Folta shares the key deliverables that offer insurance against failure in any sort of capital campaign. If you are about to embark on a campaign or already have started, you'll want to listen to this practicalities segment.You can find Givers, Doers, & Thinkers here at Philanthropy Daily, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, Google Podcasts, Buzzsprout, and wherever you listen to podcasts.We'd love to hear your thoughts, ideas, questions, and recommendations for the podcast! You can shoot Katie Janus, GDT's producer, an email anytime!
En 1859, Darwin publie L'origine des espèces, qui fonde la théorie moderne de l'évolution et introduit l'idée de sélection naturelle. Certains de ses partisans, trop pressés d'appliquer ces notions à l'homme, se lancent dans des interprétations dangereuses… Le darwinisme social (terme inventé en 1880) désigne la doctrine de Herbert Spencer, en partie inspirée des idées Malthus (qui pourraient se résumer à "laissons crever les pauvres en surnombre"). Elle justifie en tous cas l'élimination des moins aptes. Cette doctrine recommande de ne prendre aucune mesure pour protéger socialement les faibles. Darwin a défendu publiquement le contraire. Darwin a par ailleurs combattu le racisme. Il constate que le contact culturel (pour ne pas dire la colonisation) se traduisait parfois par l'extinction des peuples dominés, à cause de la barbarie dite civilisatrice des colonisateurs. La notion d'eugénisme viendra de Francis Galton, à la suite des idées de Spencer. Il prétend que la «civilisation», protectrice des faibles, a anéanti le pouvoir améliorateur de la sélection naturelle . Seule la sélection artificielle peut s'opposer à la dégénérescence. En 1871, Darwin rejette cette interprétation, au nom même de la civilisation, qu'il définit en termes d'extension indéfinie de la «sympathie». Mais c'est trop tard… Dès 1905, les États-Unis sont les précurseurs de mesures eugéniques: stérilisation de malades et de pauvres, chasse aux épileptiques, euthanasies etc. L'un des laboratoires de l'eugénisme nazi (celui du psychiatre Ernst Rüdin) est subventionné par la Fondation Rockefeller. L'Europe connaît avec le nazisme un des plus monstrueux avatars de ce darwinisme social… _______ Pour réécouter les 4 premiers épisodes: https://bit.ly/darwin_1_BSG https://bit.ly/darwin2_BSG https://bit.ly/darwin3_BSG https://bit.ly/darwin4_BSG _______
In this episode we take a look at how narratives and story telling shape our view of the world. How seeing people as being either good or bad is dangerously oversimplified, especially when we ignore the mechanisms that allow people to do so much harm even with the best of intentions. This episode touches on a few topics that have been discussed in episode 006, but I believe that they are worth revisiting. Sources: Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org) Out of Frame YouTube series: https://www.youtube.com/c/FEEonline The Man Versus the State by Herbert Spencer: http://files.libertyfund.org/files/330/0020_Bk.pdf No Treason, the constitution of no authority by Lysander Spooner: https://oll-resources.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/oll3/store/titles/2194/Spooner_1485_Bk.pdf If you would like to contact me directly, please write me an email to thecuriouscaseoffreedom@gmail.com Presentation and production - Orí Harmelin Bumper music - The tallest of Orders by Simon MacHale Check out Simon's music on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/71OkM6qFs6Xmc1hlOjXgIl?si=bFReoX_LSKS5EHXo4AJPlg On Bandcamp: https://simonmachale.bandcamp.com And on Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVi-A_N20DbM-GIdw50THPQ
Bàn Về Văn Minh được coi là một trong những tác phẩm quan trọng nhất của Fukuzawa Yukichi - nhà tư tưởng, nhà giáo dục nổi tiếng của Nhật Bản. Cuốn sách đặt ra hàng loạt vấn đề xã hội, văn hoá, chính trị, kinh tế, đạo đức,... và mở ra con đường để Nhật Bản, với tư cách một nước đang phát triển, kết nối với thế giới văn minh, tiến bộ. Phản hồi lại các tư tưởng của những nhà trí thức phương Tây đương thời như John Stuart Mill, Herbert Spencer, Thomas Buckle, Francois Guizot, cũng như phân tích thấu đáo hình thái tù đọng, đơn điệu của xã hội châu Á, Fukuzawa đã khích lệ cả tinh thần quốc gia lẫn tinh thần cá nhân, ngợi ca xu hướng tự do của khu vực tư nhân. Đọc vị một cách sâu sắc các hình thái xã hội chậm tiến khác nhau đang vật lộn trên con đường phát triển, Fukuzawa Yukichi sáng suốt dự báo và khẳng định mô hình văn minh phương Tây như một con đường bắt buộc phải theo cho mọi quốc gia muốn tiến tới văn minh, tiến bộ; đồng thời, giúp độc giả nhận chân những giá trị tốt đẹp nhất, những giá trị vĩnh cửu, mà một quốc gia, một thể chế có thể đem đến cho mỗi con người. --Về Fonos:Fonos là ứng dụng sách nói có bản quyền. Trên ứng dụng Fonos, bạn có thể nghe định dạng sách nói của những cuốn sách nổi tiếng nhất từ các tác giả trong nước và quốc tế. Ngoài ra, bạn được sử dụng miễn phí nội dung Premium khi đăng ký trở thành Hội viên của Fonos: Truyện ngủ, Nhạc thư giãn, Thiền định, Tóm tắt sách.--Tải ứng dụng Fonos tại: https://fonos.app.link/tai-fonosTìm hiểu về Fonos: https://fonos.vn/Theo dõi Facebook Fonos: https://www.facebook.com/fonosvietnam/Theo dõi Instagram Fonos: https://www.instagram.com/fonosvietnam/Đọc các bài viết thú vị về sách, tác giả sách, những thông tin hữu ích để phát triển bản thân: http://blog.fonos.vn/
Hunting Caribou in Nova Scotia Cobequid Mountains, Near Westchester, Nova Scotia September 8th, 1873. Dear Editor Forest and Stream: — Thanks to some instructions given by you to me, as to time and locality, while in your city in June last, I have had the satisfaction of killing my first caribou. As I had informed you, when last I had the pleasure of seeing you, I was not unfamiliar with hunting this animal, having killed three caribou in 1871, and two last year in New Brunswick. My traps I had sent to a friend in Halifax about the middle of August, and I found them in good order on arrival. At Halifax I stayed a day, and bought a Hudson Bay frieze coat, an admirable protection for bad weather. This with two rubber blankets, a bag or so of buck shot, and a special kind of camp hatchet, made for me deftly by a clever Irish blacksmith, completed my list of purchases. Early next morning after an admirable breakfast at the Halifax House, I took the Inter-Colonial railway to Truro, stopping there at the Prince of Wales Hotel, kept by the most jovial of hosts and Scots, Mr. McKenzie. Truro is a charming little village at the head of an arm of the Bay of Fundy, and is much visited, being the best place to see the wonderful tidal action of the water, known as the Bore. Every fine day hundreds of people drawn from all parts of the world assemble on the bridge which spans the Salmon River, awaiting the coming of the huge tidal wave. Sometimes when wind and tide favor, it rises like a wall, ten feet high, and sweeps on up the Sound. I know of no phenomenon which impresses one more vividly with the idea of the grand, rhythmic power of nature, and I fancy if Herbert Spencer had ever seen it, he would have used it as an illustration. I took some pains to measure accurately the absolute rise of the tide. Taking my sea tackle and sinker, and letting it fall until it touched the bottom, at low water, landing the sinker fast in the mud, and marking the length of the line afterwards, where it was just on the top of the water, the difference I found to be sixty-four feet, eleven inches. Its approach is heralded by a deep, sullen roar. At Truro I remained all day, having to make arrangements for the hiring of horse and buggy for a week or so, not only to carry me and my traps to Purdy's, some thirty-five miles distant, but to facilitate any movements I might desire to make. Next morning, with a very good horse, and a rough but strong vehicle, furnished me by McKenzie, I started on my way, my road having been quite thoroughly explained to me. The country I passed through was magnificent. Dark, umbrageous spruce woods, sombre in character, were relieved occasionally by the brighter colored maples. Sometimes gloomy gorges, hardly wide enough for the buggy to pass through, were almost sepulchral from the heavy shadows of the mountains. In one place the road led along a mere shelf of rock, the Londonderry, a noble stream, rushing along below me. It was a rough road, so that it was almost nightfall before I reached Purdy's. There I found myself in admirable quarters. To the kindness of the host, Mr. Purdy, was added the more delicate attentions of the Misses Purdy, three very handsome and highly educated women. As Purdy's was to be my base of operations, I immediately commenced getting together my supplies, and the question of guides was paramount. I had the choice of several excellent men. Following the advice of my host, I chose George Beesewanger, a native of the place, and secured his services, agreeing to pay him $1.50 a day and to find him. My second guide I was instructed to find later. At Purdy's I laid in the heavy rations, such as pork, tea, coffee, flour, Indian meal, etc...T here never was such a glorious view as I had from my window when I rose next morning. Far, far below me were interminable forests of spruce, huge billows of green leaves, surging to and fro with the breeze, and away beyond lay placidly the dark blue waters of the Bay of Fundy. I tarried here fully three days — days of delightful laziness, pure days of sensuous enjoyment pretending, it is true, to perfect my arrangements, just breathing in the fragrance of the glorious woods, perhaps a little indifferent as to caribou. At last Beese (the final "wanger" to his name I shall drop in the future as quite superfluous) said to me at dinner that "he thought matters were now in good trim, and that he felt it was caribou weather, and that it was time to go to Castlereagh. " In Castlereagh dwelt John Gamble, a famous moose and caribou hunter, who tilled a farm there. Taking horse and buggy, well laden down with provisions, we left Purdy's, and reached Castlereagh, a sparsely peopled settlement, at about dusk. Gamble I found at prayers. There was something inexpressibly solemn in the picture I saw there. In the small rough house were assembled the family, and by the flickering fire Gamble was reading to them the prayers, in deep, sonorous language. I hesitated almost to tell my errand. The last amen was pronounced with unction, when I told him the purpose of my coming. "I was for caribou, and would he join me for ten days or so." He quickly assented, and seemed pleased to go. A more wild place than Castlereagh, as to topography, I never saw. It is the ideal of a spot where civilization ends and a wilderness begins. The people who live here, some forty souls all told, are scattered over an area of about fifty miles. They are all Scotch-Irish, were among the early settlers of the island, and are strictly religious and trustworthy. Their honesty may be shown by the fact that a lock on a door is unknown. Their ideas are primitive, and their language Scotch-English, with a dialect of their own. With but few wants, ignorant of the world or its surroundings, many of them, perhaps, have never, save when hunting, gone out of the shadows of their woods. Everything was arranged for an early start. My party had now an addition George Gamble, a highly intelligent lad of sixteen, with the pseudonym of "Dandy," going with us. Gamble had located a lodge for moose and caribou some six miles from the settlement, which was our objective point. Next morning, before dawn, we started, dividing the buggy-load between us, the horse and vehicle remaining at Castlereagh. My battery consisted of a Remington, a Ballard, and a smooth bore No. 10. My guides told me that it would be a long and tedious tramp, uphill all the way, and so it proved to be. Bass river, quite a brawling stream, waist deep, was forded; no easy task for me, "heavily accoutred" as I was, and, after a scramble up its steep, rocky banks, at last we struck the woodlands. Here we visited what Dandy called Porcupine Den, when Dandy soon ousted a porcupine, which he slew. Here we halted, took a bite, and started again after some ten minutes' rest, and, skirting the woods, a half hour before sundown reached Gamble's lodge, just on the edge of the caribou barren. The lodge was well built; three of the walls were of logs, the other made of piled stones. The floor had been well rammed down, and it was sweet and clean. Near it gurgled a limpid spring. What struck me most about these Nova Scotia woods was the intense, almost painful stillness. Nature must take her kief here, to awaken later, when, in a paroxysm of passion, with icy blasts she lays low the majestic trees. Beese, Gamble, and Dandy in a trice had everything in military order. Of cooking paraphernalia, a kettle and a frying pan made up the catalogue. Of fragile china or stronger delf had we none. In a half hour, with pliant birch bark and threads of withewood, cups, dishes, and plates were improvised, quite as useful and more durable than those made by the potter's wheel. Fresh spruce boughs of aromatic fragrance, so excellent for consumptives, were spread on the floor. Dandy had killed four grouse as we left Castlereagh, and a good supper was assured us. Gamble was desirous of having variety in the menu, and on his assuring me that there was a stream positively not more than forty yards off, I thought I would try for a trout, though I was terribly tired out. With line in hand, cutting a pole as I went, baiting my hook with some white grub picked from a dead tree, in ten minutes I had some dozen trout. They were small ones, scarcely half pound fish, but gamey and pleasant to catch. With Gamble as chef de cuisine, I watched the way he cooked them. The fish were cleaned, not scaled; heads and tails and fins were all left on. Each one was dipped into a birch bark dish, filled with meal, inside a piece of fat bacon was inserted, a place was made for it in the hot coals, and in ten minutes the fish was withdrawn, done to a turn. The grouse were stuffed with wild cranberries, hung from the ceiling with a bit of twine, put before the fire, and Dandy was set to basting them. How good a pottage de Porcupine is I do not know, but I must confess that maple sugar as a condiment to a porcupine, though original, is not to be despised. A famous pot of tea was then brewed, and we had bread from the settlement. Hardly was tea swallowed, our pipes smoked, and the least nip of rum taken, than I got drowsy, and think I must have tumbled on the spruce bough covered floor just as I was, for in the morning, between the last word I had spoken or heard, and the song Dandy was singing (some quaint old stave) outside the lodge at daybreak, there seemed to have been but the interval of a second. Looking at Beese, who was still sleeping, I noticed he held his pipe tightly clutched between his teeth. I ran to my trout stream, took a single refreshing dip, and strolled about some little, and arrived just in time for a glorious breakfast. Our first day was one simply of prospecting and finding out the lay of the land. A caribou barren (we were on the verge of one) may be described as a plateau, covered with a thick grey moss two or three inches thick, on which grows the cranberry. Here and there it is dotted over with huge quartz boulders, covered at their bases with that most succulent of mosses, the lichen, on which the caribou principally feeds. A barren is most always intersected by a running stream, and there are occasional clumps of spruce. This tree always looks dark and sombre, and long trails of funereal-like moss hang like weepers from the limbs. On this moss, too, the caribou feeds. The trees are mostly stunted. This is not owing to the winds, for the barrens are generally encircled by the thick woods, which would keep off the blast, but their low growth is an effect of the soil. Dig where you may in the ground, when you have passed through the cushion of moss there is a morass below. To tread on this carpet of moss may be the poetry of motion as far as softness of footfall goes, but until one is accustomed to its yielding nature it makes walking quite fatiguing. There are no rambles on a barren nothing but the cranberry and whortleberry. The particular barren we were to reconnoiter had an area of some 800 acres and was completely enclosed. The caribou being the most sensitive and observant of the deer species, the utmost silence is necessary when hunting them, so when skirting the barren, save by some mute signs interchanged as to direction, hunters never speak. We all kept together for a mile from the camp, when we divided, Gamble going with me in a southeasterly direction, and Beese and Dandy striking northwest. The woods on our route soon opened, and the walking became easy Gamble pointed out a tree of black spruce, a perfect giant which he made a sign I should climb. It was not difficult to scale, and when fairly on top, with my race-glass I scanned the barren we were skirting. I had a beautiful view of our barren, and of several barrens beyond, fully ten miles distant. On our barren I saw no sign of an animal, but on a barren I should have judged five miles off with my glass I plainly made out two caribou. Gamble on my descending and announcing the fact, expressed some doubt, but on ascending himself verified the statement. Sometime about mid-day we found Beese and Dandy, and after lunching we proceeded homewards by a different route. Dandy was the first to find caribou tracks, which he did cleverly in the afternoon. How he saw it I cannot understand, and it was some time before I could see it, but caribou foot it was, and a little further on the spot where one had laid down was pointed out to me by Gamble. It was determined not to follow up their track, but to still keep up the study of the country, so that in case one of the party got astray, which would probably have been myself, we might have a better chance of finding our quarters. That night, around the camp-fire, Beese told me a hunting story about killing and landing moose, which I at first was inclined to doubt, until Gamble asserted its truthfulness. Some seven years before, Beese said that hunting with two Indians in a rather small canoe, on the headwaters of the River Philip, they had shot a bull and a cow moose. Moose meat was scarce at the settlement, and it was a question how to get their carcasses home, as the canoe was too small to hold even 100 pounds of additional weight, and the two moose would gross 1,800 pounds. One of the Indians suggested making a boat of the bull moose and using it for transporting the cow. The bull was opened and disemboweled, the head was cut off, the neck sewed up, he was split carefully, ribs of wood were built into him, and he was launched into the stream, and so, loaded with the cow, was safely towed to the settlement, twenty miles distant. Next morning it rained heavily, and our camp was thoroughly cleaned and guns overhauled. In the afternoon, the rain having changed to a drizzle, Gamble proposed our going to Rock Lake, some three miles distant. After rather a wet walk of an hour we reached the lake, and Gamble built a raft. One peculiarity of the lake was that it was always bubbling, abounding probably with springs. I had taken a light fly rod, and with a coachman hackle and Blue Professor made a cast or two without success. Later I tried a yellow Dun with no better luck, when choosing a Miller and a bug the trout rose rapidly. In a half hour I had secured eighteen fish, of about two pounds each. A flock of black duck on the upper edge of the lake attracted our attention, and I killed five. Of course, this shooting was done at some distance from the barren, as a single gun fired in its immediate proximity would have cleaned the ground of the caribou for a week. Fresh food now becoming scarce, as we had determined not to shoot any more, we smoked our ducks for the future, hanging them in the smoke of the chimney. Next day we started just at daybreak. The sun rose clear, dispelling the mist, and Gamble said it was "a fine hunting morn, and that it would fetch caribou. " Dandy was left in camp, and Gamble, Beese, and myself made the party. It was our intention not to return without a caribou. We made directly for the barren, but saw no sign. We now boldly crossed it, plunged into the deep forest beyond, skirted the second barren, and found here moose tracks three weeks old, but no sign of caribou. Here we came across an old Indian camp, which, being in good order, we took possession of, studying its bearings in case we should have to retrace our steps and spend the night there. We kept on through the second barren, going round a pretty lake, where Gamble set some otter traps. Still no trace of our game. The sun was now but an hour high. As the forests become dark at five o'clock, when it is light on the barrens until eight, we determined to push on through the third barren as far as we could and camp there, so as to be near the fourth barren early next morning. After our supper of bread and pork, without tea, we wrapped ourselves up in our blankets and slept soundly. We were now fully twenty miles from camp, as the bird flies, and fully thirty-five by the route we had taken, Economy Lake being south of us, and we had some two miles yet to make before we could reach the fourth barren. It was dark when Gamble quietly awakened me. We ate our breakfast quickly, and walked fully two hours before dawn cleared the sky. As soon as it was light Gamble climbed a tree. The country he said had changed somewhat, as it had been seven years since he had been at this barren. As he slid down the tree, by the expression of his face and the glitter of his eye I felt sure he had seen caribou. "Five of them in the barren, not more nor a mile off, a feeding, sir." That was all. Now, with the utmost precaution we traced our steps. Just on the south side of the barren we found a distinct trail, which the caribou had made through the woods. Their tracks resembled these made by cattle, only a little more elongated, for the caribou has rather long, low hoofs. The dung was even fresh, and not much larger than that voided by sheep. They had evidently laid down during the night at this very spot, as little bits of hair were visible. We followed the track in Indian file, Gamble leading, I in the middle, and Beese in the rear. The gait was a slow one, and our feet were cautiously placed on the ground, fearful that even a twig should crack. Not a word was spoken. With one hand on his gun, the other behind him, Gamble would signal with his outstretched fingers which way we should go, or whether we should halt. The track was almost 400 yards long, and a small stream had to be crossed. Silently as otters we went through it. Just then the barren opened on us. We rested for a few moments, then got to the last screen of trees, and saw for the first time our caribou. They were hidden by a slight fringe of spruce boughs, and were not more than 600 yards off. About 400 yards distant in the barren there stood a huge boulder, of a greyish white, glistening in the bright morning sun, and throwing off sparkles of light from the quartz crystals in it. Could we reach it ? If able to do that there would be the chance of a shot. We all dropped to the ground, and crawled slowly on the moss, worming our way round smaller boulders until we reached it. Looking stealthfully over the top of it, I was now sure that the caribou were just within long rifle shot. We waited fully five minutes (it seemed to me five hours), hoping the caribou would come nearer. When we saw them first the herd — made up of two old bucks, two male yearlings, and a doe — were playing together; now they were feeding. Thinking Gamble the better shot, I had given him my Ballard, reserving the Remington for myself. Every moment I expected the caribou would move further off. Though they could not wind us, every now and then the nearest buck would pause, slowly raise his head, and look around him, as if on his guard. Gamble looked inquiringly at me, as if asking what to do. I made the motion of firing. Indicating the buck I wanted to shoot at, I left Gamble to pick out any one he chose. I carefully took a resting shot on a sharp edge of the boulder. Presently the furthest buck came a trifle quartering towards me, and taking the most careful of shots, with a fine bead, aiming at the brisket, I let him have it. Almost instantly afterwards Gamble fired. My buck fell dead in his tracks. Gamble's caribou gave one single, short leap, and fell dead not ten yards from mine. One long, exulting shout sounded through the barren as we screamed with excitement. The next moment Gamble was down into the barren with gleaming knife in hand, and the throats of two noble caribou were cut. The buck I had killed was the finest of the two, and would have weighed 300 pounds. Gamble's buck was a trifle lighter. The horns on mine were only fair as to size, while Gamble's were the most magnificent ones as to size and spread I had ever seen. My eight hundred miles of travel were amply repaid. "If my grandsire drew a long bow at Hastings," I must plead it as an excuse for entering somewhat into the exact distance we fired at these animals. Pacing it off, I found that my buck was killed at a trifle under 186 yards, and Gamble's at 170. We rested for a while, and, seated on our animals, ate and drank as only hungry and excited men can. Now came the question of how to get, them to the lodge, some forty miles distant. Gamble's and Beese's woodcraft then came into play. In a half hour, with their axes they had fashioned a sledge of hackmatack, on which the caribou were placed. Long withewood traces were made, and, like horses, we went in double harness. Awful hard work it was. There was a little stream some three miles off which emptied into Economy Lake, and here was where our hauling would end and water transportation begin. Seven mortal hours did it take us before we accomplished those three miles. At sundown we reached the stream. A fire was built, our last bit of pork was devoured, a cup of coffee, was made, and we all soon went to sleep, thoroughly used up men. Next morning was again fine and clear, a trifle cold, but every particle of fatigue had left us. There is some peculiarity in this rare mountain air, which makes a breath of it send the blood through the lungs with renewed and freshened vigor. Gamble proposed making a straight line for camp, and finding Dandy, who would walk to Castlereagh, and from thence take the horse and buggy to Economy Lake and meet us. It was no sooner proposed than off he started, going off with that splendid swinging gait which only one who treads these native wilds can acquire. Beese now built a raft; it was but the matter of an hour. The game was loaded on, and we were just about pushing off into the stream which emptied into the lake, not more than half a mile beyond, when a pleasant morning breeze sprung up. Here I must confess that what nautical knowledge I may have had now came to me as if by inspiration. From a large birch tree we took some sheets of bark. Under my direction Beese sawed them, a mast and a spar were rigged up, a pennon of birch, bark was hoisted to the fore, and with a regular latine sail we went spinning down the lake, much to Beese's amusement. At the foot of the lake Ave found a settler's cabin, and here we moored our raft, From the settler we hired a span of oxen and a cart, and, loading our caribou, leisurely reached Economy. There, sure enough, was Dandy, waiting for us. I am writing this at Purdy's, in delightful quarters once more. In a week or so I will go for moose, just as soon as Gamble has made his crop. I shall take Gamble with me, of course, and Beese and Dandy, for better hunters or more trustworthy people I never came across. Gamble says we may safely call the moose on the next full moon. T. F. 0. T.
En este décimocuarto episodio hablan Lorenzo Bernaldo de Quirós (Adjunct Scholar del Cato Institute) y Alberto Benegas Lynch (h) (Profesor emérito de ESEADE) acerca del principio de igual libertad, la polémica por el "darwinismo social" y la preocupación por la deriva del liberalismo en el marco de la vida y obra de Herbert Spencer.
On the podcast this week, Enlightenment's Wake: Politics and Culture at the Close of the Modern Age by John Gray. Next time: Postjournalism and the death of newspapers. The media after Trump: manufacturing anger and polarization by Andrey Mir. Normally Jerry writes an ideological Turing test summary for the book we discuss, but it's impossible with this one as you'll hear us say. So here are some of Jerry's highlights from the book itself: If the Enlightenment myth of progress in ethics and politics continues to have a powerful hold, it is more from fear of the consequences of giving it up than from genuine conviction. the collapse of communism was a world-historic defeat for the Enlightenment project. Communism was not a type of oriental despotism, as generations of Western scholars maintained. It was an authentic continuation of a Western revolutionary tradition, and its downfall – after tens of millions of deaths were inflicted in the pursuit of its utopian goals – signalled the start of a process of de-Westernization. It is an inquiry into the right whose agenda is justice and whose content is given, not by any investigation of human beings as we find them in the world, with their diverse histories and communities, but by an abstract conception of the person that has been voided of any definite cultural identity or specific historical inheritance. Consider, in this regard, the central category of the intellectual tradition spawned by Rawls's work – the category of the person. In Rawls's work, as in that of his followers, this is a cipher, without history or ethnicity, denuded of the special attachments that in the real human world give us the particular identities we have. Emptied of the contingencies that in truth are essential to our identities, this cipher has in the Rawlsian schema only one concern – a concern for its own good, which is not the good of any actual human being, but the good we are all supposed to have in common, which it pursues subject to constraints of justice that are conceived to be those of impartiality. In this conception, the principles of justice are bound to be the same for all. The appearance of a plurality of ciphers in the Rawlsian original position must be delusive, since, having all of them the same beliefs and motives, they are indistinguishable. The subject matter of justice cannot, except indirectly, be found in the histories of peoples, and their often tragically conflicting claims; it must be always a matter of individual rights. It is obvious that this liberal position cannot address, save as an inconvenient datum of human psychology, the sense of injustice arising from belonging to an oppressed community that, in the shape of nationalism, is the strongest political force of our century. The task of political philosophy is conceived as one of deriving the ideal constitution – assumed, at least in principle, to be everywhere the same. This is so, whether its upshot be Rawls's basic liberties, Nozick's side-constraints, or Dworkin's rights-as-trumps. The presupposition is always that the bottom line in political morality is the claims of individuals, and that these are to be spelt out in terms of the demands of justice or rights. The consequence is that the diverse claims of historic communities, if they are ever admitted, are always overwhelmed by the supposed rights of individuals. The notion that different communities might legitimately have different legal regimes for abortion or pornography, for example, is hardly considered. If the theoretical goal of the new liberalism is the supplanting of politics by law, its practical result – especially in the United States, where rights discourse is already the only public discourse that retains any legitimacy – has been the emptying of political life of substantive argument and the political corruption of law. Issues, such as abortion, that in many other countries have been resolved by a legislative settlement that involves compromises and which is known to be politically renegotiable, are in the legalist culture of the United States matters of fundamental rights that are intractably contested and which threaten to become enemies of civil peace. Communitarian thought still harbours the aspiration expressed in those forms of the Enlightenment project, such as Marxism, that are most critical of liberalism – that of creating a form of communal life from which are absent the practices of exclusion and subordination that are constitutive of every community human beings have ever lived in. Old-fashioned toleration – the toleration defended by Milton, and by the older liberals, such as Locke – sprang from an acceptance of the imperfectibility of human beings, and from a belief in the importance of freedom in the constitution of the good life. Since we cannot be perfect, and since virtue cannot be forced on people but is rather a habit of life they must themselves strive to acquire, we were enjoined to tolerate the shortcomings of others, even as we struggled with our own. On this older view, toleration is a precondition of any stable modus vivendi among incorrigibly imperfect beings. If it has become unfashionable in our time, the reason is in part to be found in the resistance of a post-Christian age to the thought that we are flawed creatures whose lives will always contain evils. This is a thought subversive of the shallow optimistic creeds of our age, humanist or Pelagian, for which human evils are problems to be solved rather than sorrows to be coped with or endured. Toleration is unfashionable for another, more topical reason. It is unavoidably and inherently judgemental. The objects of toleration are what we judge to be evils. When we tolerate a practice, a belief or a character trait, we let something be that we judge to be undesirable, false or at least inferior; our toleration expresses the conviction that, despite its badness, the object of toleration should be left alone. we tolerate ersatz religions, such as Scientology, not because we think they may after all contain a grain of truth, but because the great good of freedom of belief necessarily encompasses the freedom to believe absurdities. Toleration is not, then, an expression of scepticism, of doubt about our ability to tell the good from the bad; it is evidence of our confidence that we have that ability. The idea of toleration goes against the grain of the age because the practice of toleration is grounded in strong moral convictions. Such judgements are alien to the dominant conventional wisdom according to which standards of belief and conduct are entirely subjective or relative in character, and one view of things is as good as any other. Indeed, when a society is tolerant, its tolerance expresses the conception of the good life that it has in common. In so far as a society comes to lack any such common conception – as is at least partly the case in Britain today – it ceases to be capable of toleration as it was traditionally understood. What the neutrality of radical equality mandates is nothing less than the legal disestablishment of morality. As a result, morality becomes in theory a private habit of behaviour rather than a common way of life. What a policy of toleration would not mandate is the wholesale reconstruction of institutional arrangements in Britain such that homosexuals acquire collective rights or are in every context treated precisely as heterosexuals. This is not to say that the current law of marriage is fixed for all time, any more than the rest of family law, such as the law on adoption, is so fixed. Further, it is to say that such extension of legal recognition would not be to homosexuals as a group but to individuals regardless of their sexual orientation. To make a political issue that is deeply morally contested a matter of basic rights is to make it non-negotiable, since rights – at least as they are understood in the dominant contemporary schools of Anglo-American jurisprudence – are unconditional entitlements, not susceptible to moderation In modern Western pluralist societies, policies which result in the creation of group rights are inevitably infected with arbitrariness and consequent inequity, since the groups selected for privileging are arbitrary, as is the determination of who belongs to which group. a stable liberal civil society cannot be radically multicultural but depends for its successful renewal across the generations on an undergirding culture that is held in common. This common culture need not encompass a shared religion and it certainly need not presuppose ethnic homogeneity, but it does demand widespread acceptance of certain norms and conventions of behaviour and, in our times, it typically expresses a shared sense of nationality. The example of the United States, which at least since the mid-1960s has been founded on the Enlightenment conviction that a common culture is not a necessary precondition of a liberal civil society, shows that the view that civil peace can be secured solely by adherence to abstract rules is merely an illusion. In so far as policy has been animated by it, the result has been further social division, including what amounts to low-intensity civil war between the races. As things stand, the likelihood in the United States is of a slow slide into ungovernability, as the remaining patrimony of a common cultural inheritance is frittered away by the fragmenting forces of multiculturalism. The kind of diversity that is incompatible with civil society in Britain is that which rejects the constitutive practices that give it its identity. Central among these are freedom of expression and its precondition, the rule of law. Cultural traditions that repudiate these practices cannot be objects of toleration for liberal civil society in Britain or anywhere else. The radical tolerance of indifference has application wherever there are conceptions of the good that are incommensurable. the claim that there may be, and are present among us, conceptions of the good that are rationally incommensurable is not one that supports any of the fashionable varieties of relativism and subjectivism, since it allows, and indeed presupposes, that some conceptions of the good are defective, and some forms of life simply bad. the radical tolerance of indifference is virtually the opposite of old-fashioned toleration in that its objects are not judged to be evils and may indeed be incommensurable goods. Woodrow Wilson's project of imposing a rationalist order conceived in the New World on the intractably quarrelsome nations of Europe. Like Marxism, this rationalist conception had its origins in the French Enlightenment's vision of a universal human civilization in which the claims of ethnicity and religion came long after those of common humanity. In the wake of Soviet communism, we find, not Homo Sovieticus or any other rationalist abstraction, but men and women whose identities are constituted by particular attachments and histories – Balts, Ukrainians, Uzbeks, Russians and so on. Western opinion-formers and policy-makers are virtually unanimous in modelling the transition process of the post-communist states in terms which imply their reconstruction on Western models and their integration into a coherent international order based on Western power and institutions. Underlying this virtually universal model are assumptions that are anachronistic and radically flawed. It assumes that the system of Western-led institutions which assured global peace and world trade in the post-war period can survive, substantially unchanged or even strengthened, the world-wide reverberations of the Soviet collapse; the only issue is how the fledgling post-communist states are to gain admission into these institutions. This assumption neglects the dependency of these institutions on the strategic environment of the Cold War and their unravelling, before our eyes, as the post-war settlement disintegrates. The strategic consequence of the end of the Cold War has been the return to a pre-1914 world – with this difference, that the pre-1914 world was dominated by a single hegemonic power, Great Britain, whereas the return to nineteenth-century policies and modes of thinking in the United States leaves the world without any hegemonic power. the Soviet collapse has triggered a meltdown in the post-war world order, and in the domestic institutions of the major Western powers, which has yet to run its course. the crisis of Western transnational institutions is complemented by an ongoing meltdown of the various Western models of the nature and limits of market institutions in advanced industrial societies. The alienation of democratic electorates from established political elites is pervasive in Western societies, including the United States. Contrary to Hayek, who generalizes from the English experience to put forward a grandiose theory of the spontaneous emergence of market institutions that is reminiscent in its unhistorical generality of Herbert Spencer and Karl Marx at their most incautious, the English example is a singularity, not an exemplar of any long-run historical trend. The English experience is sui generis, not a paradigm for the development of market institutions, because the unique combination of circumstances which permitted it to occur as it did – immemorial individualism and parliamentary absolutism, for example – were replicated nowhere else. Where market institutions did develop elsewhere on English lines, as in North America and Australasia, it was in virtue of the fact that English cultural traditions and legal practice had been exported there more or less wholesale. Market institutions of the English variety failed to take root where, as in India, their legal and cultural matrix was not successfully transplanted. It is noteworthy that, until its collapse in 1991, the Swedish model performed well in respect of what was, perhaps, its principal achievement, an active labour policy that kept long-term unemployment very low, and so effectively prevented the growth of an estranged underclass of the multi-generationally unemployed. The German or Rhine model of market institutions, as it developed in the post-war period up to reunification, was not the result of the application of any consistent theory, but rather of a contingent political compromise between a diversity of theoretical frameworks, of which the most important were the Ordoliberalismus of the Eucken or Frankfurt School and Catholic social theology. It represented a political settlement, also, between the principal interest groups in post-war Germany, including the newly constituted trade unions. It would be false to imagine that China lacks ethnic conflict, or separatist movements. As a portent for the future, there appears to be an Islamic separatist movement in the far-western ‘autonomous region' of Xinjiang, which has borders with the new republics of Kyrgystan, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan, and with Afghanistan and Pakistan; and there are undoubtedly strong separatist movements in neighbouring Tibet and Mongolia. it would not be entirely surprising, but would in fact rather accord with long-term patterns in Chinese history, if the Chinese state were to fragment in the coming years, perhaps after the death of Deng Xiaoping; market institutions have as their matrices particular cultural traditions, without whose undergirding support the frameworks of law by which they are defined are powerless or empty. Scottish thinkers, such as Adam Smith and Adam Ferguson, who not unreasonably generalized from their own historical experience to such a connection, this result of their inquiries evoked anxiety as to the eventual fate of market institutions, since – like later thinkers such as Joseph Schumpeter – they feared that individualism would consume the cultural capital on which market institutions relied for their renewal across the generations. Our experience suggests that such fears as to the ultimately self-defeating effects of market institutions that are animated by individualist cultural traditions are far from groundless. The growth of lawlessness in Russia, the threat posed to social and business life by organized criminality, and the apparent powerlessness thus far of the Yeltsin government in the face of this threat, suggest that an authoritarian turn in Russian political life, whether by the Yeltsin government or by a successor, and whether or not the army has a decisive role in any subsequent authoritarian regime, would be in accord both with the exigencies of current circumstances and with Russian historical precedent. Authoritarian government is likely to emerge in Russia both in response to the dangers of fragmentation of the state and ensuing civil strife and as a response to growing criminal violence in everyday and business life. The Soviet collapse, far from enhancing the stability of Western institutions, has destabilized them by knocking away the strategic props on which they stood. The prospect of the orderly integration of the post-communist states into the economic and security arrangements of the Western world is a mirage, not only because of the unprecedentedly formidable difficulties each of them confronts in its domestic development, but also because the major Western transnational institutions and organizations are themselves in a flux, amounting sometimes to dissolution. The world-historical failure of the Enlightenment project – in political terms, the collapse and ruin, in the late twentieth century, of the secular, rationalist and universalist political movements, liberal as well as Marxist, that that project spawned, and the dominance in political life of ethnic, nationalist and fundamentalist forces – suggests the falsity of the philosophical anthropology upon which the Enlightenment project rested. On the alternative view that I shall develop, the propensity to cultural difference is a primordial attribute of the human species; human identities are plural and diverse in their very natures, as natural languages are plural and diverse, and they are always variations on particular forms of common life, never exemplars of universal humanity. The task for liberal theory, as I see it, is not vainly to resist the historical falsification of the universalist anthropology that sustained the Enlightenment philosophy of history, but to attempt to reconcile the demands of a liberal form of life with the particularistic character of human identities and allegiances – to retheorize liberalism as itself a particular form of common life. Agonistic liberalism is that species of liberalism that is grounded, not in rational choice, but in the limits of rational choice – limits imposed by the radical choices we are often constrained to make among goods that are both inherently rivalrous, and often constitutively uncombinable, and sometimes incommensurable, or rationally incomparable. Agonistic liberalism is an application in political philosophy of the moral theory of value-pluralism – the theory that there is an irreducible diversity of ultimate values (goods, excellences, options, reasons for action and so forth) and that when these values come into conflict or competition with one another there is no overarching standard or principle, no common currency or measure, whereby such conflicts can be arbitrated or resolved. Value-pluralism imposes limits on rational choice that are subversive of most standard moral theories, not merely of utilitarianism, and it has deeply subversive implications for all the traditional varieties of liberal theory. The thesis of the incommensurability of values is then not a version of relativism, of subjectivism or of moral scepticism, though it will infallibly be confused with one or other of these doctrines: it is a species of moral realism, which we shall call objective pluralism. Its distinguishing features are that it limits the scope of rational choice among goods, affirming that they are often constitutively uncombinable and sometimes rationally incommensurable. It is a fundamental contribution of Raz's political philosophy to have shown that a rights-based political morality is an impossibility. rights claims are never primordial or foundational but always conclusionary, provisional results of long chains of reasoning which unavoidably invoke contested judgements about human interests and well-being. If the truth of value-pluralism is assumed, such that there are no right answers in hard cases about the restraint of liberty, then it seems natural to treat questions of the restraint of liberty as political, and not as theoretical or jurisprudential questions. Despite its self-description as political liberalism, then, Rawls's is a liberalism that has been politically emasculated, in which nothing of importance is left to political decision, and in which political life itself has been substantially evacuated of content. The hollowing out of the political realm in Rawlsian liberalism is fatal to its self-description as a form of political liberalism and discloses its true character as a species of liberal legalism. The liberal legalism of Rawls and his followers is, perhaps, only an especially unambiguous example of the older liberal project, or illusion, of abolishing politics, or of so constraining it by legal and constitutional formulae that it no longer matters what are the outcomes of political deliberation. In Rawlsian liberal legalism, the anti-political nature of at least one of the dominant traditions of liberalism is fully realized. In historical practice, the effect of attempting to abolish or to marginalize political life has been – especially in the United States, where legalism is strongest – the politicization of law, as judicial institutions have become arenas of political struggle. The end-result of this process is not, however, the simple transposition of political life into legal contexts, but rather the corrosion of political life itself. The treatment of all important issues of restraint of liberty as questions of constitutional rights has the consequence that they cease to be issues that are politically negotiable and that can be resolved provisionally in a political settlement that encompasses a compromise among conflicting interests and ideals. In conflicts about basic constitutional rights, there can be no compromise solutions, only judgements which yield unconditional victory for one side and complete defeat for the other. Allegiance to a liberal state is, on this view, never primarily to principles which it may be thought to embody, and which are supposed to be compelling for all human beings; it is always to specific institutions, having a specific history, and to the common culture that animates them, which itself is a creature of historical contingency. On the view being developed here, allegiance to a liberal state is always allegiance to the common culture it embodies or expresses, and, in the late modern context in which we live, such a common culture is typically a national culture. the only things, on the account here defended, that can command allegiance. In our world they are nations, or the common forms of life which national cultures encompass and shelter. The point may be put in another, and perhaps a simpler way: there can be no form of allegiance that is purely political; political allegiance – at least when it is comparatively stable – presupposes a common cultural identity, which is reflected in the polity to which allegiance is given; political order, including that of a liberal state, rests upon a pre-political order of common culture. As Berlin has put his position: The fact that the values of one culture may be incompatible with those of another, or that they are in conflict within one culture or group or in a single human being at different times – or, for that matter, at one and the same time – does not entail relativism of values, only the notion of a plurality of values not structured hierarchically; which, of course, entails the permanent possibility of inescapable conflict between values, as well as incompatibility between the outlooks of different civilisations or of stages of the same civilisation. He sums up his view: ‘Relativism is not the only alternative to universalism … nor does incommensurability entail relativism'. Berlin's point, which is surely correct, is that there may be a specifiable minimum universal content to morality, and some forms of life may be condemned by it; but the items which make up the minimum content may, and sometimes do, come into conflict with one another, there being no rational procedure for resolving such conflicts. because the universal minimum in all of its variations underdetermines any liberal form of life, many of the regimes that meet the test of the universal minimum – probably the vast majority of such regimes to be found in human history – will not be liberal regimes. The likely prospect, on all current trends, is not only of the East Asian societies overtaking Western liberal individualist societies in the economic terms of growth, investment, savings and living standards; it is also of their doing so while preserving and enhancing common cultural forms which assure to their subjects personal security in their everyday lives and a public environment that is rich in choiceworthy options. By contrast, the prospect for the Western individualist societies is one of economic development that is weak and feeble in a context of cultural impoverishment in which the remnants of a common culture are hollowed out by individualism and legalism. The prospect for the Western liberal societies, and particularly for those in which individualism and legalism have by now virtually delegitimized the very idea of a common culture, is that of a steep and rapid decline in which civil peace is fractured and the remnants of a common culture on which liberal forms of life themselves depend are finally dissipated. The self-undermining of liberal individualism, which Joseph Schumpeter anticipated in the mid-1940s, is likely to proceed apace, now that the Soviet collapse has removed the legitimacy borrowed by Western institutions from the enmity of a ruinous alternative, and the East Asian societies are released from the constraints of the post-war settlement to pursue paths of development that owe ever less to the West. When our institutional inheritance – that precious and irreplaceable patrimony of mediating structures and autonomous professions – is thrown away in the pursuit of a managerialist Cultural Revolution seeking to refashion the entire national life on the impoverished model of contract and market exchange, it is clear that the task of conserving and renewing a culture is no longer understood by contemporary conservatives. In the context of such a Maoism of the Right, it is the permanent revolution of unfettered market processes, not the conservation of traditional institutions and professions, having each of them a distinctive ethos, that has become the ruling project of contemporary conservatism. At the same time, neo-liberalism itself can now be seen as a self-undermining political project. Its political success depended upon cultural traditions, and constellations of interests, that neo-liberal policy was bound to dissipate. liberal civilization itself may be imperilled, in so far as its legitimacy has been linked with the utopia of perpetual growth powered by unregulated market processes, and the inevitable failure of this utopia spawns illiberal political movements. Indeed, unconstrained market institutions are bound to undermine social and political stability, particularly as they impose on the population unprecedented levels of economic insecurity with all the resultant dislocations of life in families and communities. A central test of the readiness to think fresh thoughts is the way we think about market institutions. On the view defended here they are not ends in themselves but means or tools whose end is human well-being. Indeed, among us, market liberalism is in its workings ineluctably subversive of tradition and community. This may not have been the case in Edmund Burke's day, in which the maintenance of the traditions of whig England could coexist with a policy of economic individualism, but in our age a belief in any such harmony is a snare and a delusion. Among us, unlike the men and women of Burke's day, markets are global, and also, in the case of capital markets, nearly instantaneous; free trade, if it too is global, operates among communities that are vastly more uneven in development than any that traded with one another in Burke's time; and our lives are pervaded by mass media that transform tastes, and revolutionize daily habits, in ways that could be only dimly glimpsed by the Scottish political economists whom Burke so revered. The social and cultural effects of market liberalism are, virtually without exception, inimical to the values that traditional conservatives hold dear. Communities are scattered to the winds by the gale of creative destruction. Endless ‘downsizing' and ‘flattening' of enterprises fosters ubiquitous insecurity and makes loyalty to the company a cruel joke. The celebration of consumer choice, as the only undisputed value in market societies, devalues commitment and stability in personal relationships and encourages the view of marriage and the family as vehicles of self-realization. The dynamism of market processes dissolves social hierarchies and overturns established expectations. Status is ephemeral, trust frail and contract sovereign. The dissolution of communities promoted by market-driven labour mobility weakens, where it does not entirely destroy, the informal social monitoring of behaviour which is the most effective preventive measure against crime. Classical liberalism, or what I have termed market fundamentalism, is, like Marxism, a variation on the Enlightenment project, which is the project of transcending the contingencies of history and cultural difference and founding a universal civilization that is qualitatively different from any that has ever before existed. In this paleo-liberal or libertarian view, the erosion of distinctive cultures by market processes is, if anything, to be welcomed as a sign of progress toward a universal rational civilization. Here paleo-liberalism shows its affinities not with European conservatism but with the Old Left project of doing away with, or marginalizing politically, the human inheritance of cultural difference. That this perspective is a hallucinatory and utopian one is clear if we consider its neglect of the sources not only of political allegiance but also of social order in common cultural forms. Market liberalism, like other Enlightenment ideologies, treats cultural difference as a politically marginal phenomenon whose appropriate sphere is in private life. It does not comprehend, or repudiates as irrationality, the role of a common culture in sustaining political order and in legitimizing market institutions. Market liberalism is at its most utopian, however, in its conception of a global market society, in which goods, and perhaps people, move freely between economies having radically different stages of development and harbouring very different cultures. Human beings need, more than they need the freedom of consumer choice, a cultural and economic environment that offers them an acceptable level of security and in which they feel at home. The conservative idea of the primacy of cultural forms is meant to displace not only standard liberal conceptions of the autonomous human subject but also ideas of the autonomy of market institutions that liberal thought has been applied – or misapplied – to support. It is not meant to support nostalgist and reactionary conceptions of organic or integral community which have no application in our historical circumstances and which, if they were implemented politically, could end only in tragedy or – more likely in Britain – black comedy. The idea of a seamless community – the noumenal community, as we may call it, of communitarianism – is as much of a fiction as the autonomous subject of liberal theory. We all of us belong to many communities, we mostly inherit diverse ethnicities, and our world-views are fractured and provisional whether or not we know it or admit it. We harbour a deep diversity of views and values as to sexuality and the worth of human life, our relations with the natural environment and the special place, if any, of the human species in the scheme of things. The reactionary project of rolling back this diversity of values and world-views in the pursuit of a lost cultural unity overlooks the character of our cultural inheritance as a palimpsest, having ever deeper layers of complexity. It is clear only that, for us at any rate, a common culture cannot mean a common world-view, religious or secular. It is an implication of all that I have said, however, that we have no option but to struggle to make our inheritance of liberal traditions work. At present, the principal obstacle we face in the struggle to renew our inheritance of liberal practice is the burden on thought and policy of market liberal dogma. The central difficulty is that the enlargement of leisure that Mill, by contrast with the gloomier classical economists, expected to come from stability in population and output against a background of improvement in the industrial arts is occurring in the form of ever higher levels of involuntary unemployment. It may be that proposals for a basic or citizen's income, where that is to be distinguished from the neo-liberal idea of a negative income tax, and for a better distribution of capital among the citizenry, need reconsideration – despite all their difficulties – as elements in a policy aiming to reconcile the human need for economic security with the destabilizing dynamism of market institutions. Almost as significant in disclosing the Americocentric character of the new liberalism was its anaemic and impoverished conception of pluralism and cultural diversity. The incommensurability of values affirmed in doctrines of objective ethical pluralism was understood as arising in the formulation of personal plans of life rather than in conflicts among whole ways of life. And cultural diversity was conceived in the denatured form of a cornucopia of chosen lifestyles, each with its elective identity, rather than in the form in which it is found in the longer and larger experience of humankind – as the exfoliation of exclusionary forms of life, spanning the generations, membership of which is typically unchosen, and which tend to individuate themselves by their conflicts and by their historical memories of enmity. The core project of the Enlightenment was the displacement of local, customary or traditional moralities, and of all forms of transcendental faith, by a critical or rational morality, which was projected as the basis of a universal civilization. This is the project that animated Marxism and liberalism in all their varieties, which underpins both the new liberalism and neo-conservatism, and to which every significant body of opinion in the United States continues to subscribe. That liberal individuality is, in practice, invariably a prescription for abject conformity to prevailing bien-pensant opinion is, on the view being presented here, not the chief objection to it. The most disabling feature of these and other constitutive elements of the new liberalism is what they all betoken – namely, a rejection of the political enterprise itself, and of its animating value of peace. For the pluralist, the practice of politics is a noble engagement, precisely on account of the almost desperate humility of its purposes – which are to moderate the enmity of agonistic identities, and to generate conventions of peace among warring communities. The pluralist embrace of politics is, for these reasons, merely a recognition of the reality of political life, itself conceived as an abatement of war. from the truth of a plurality of incommensurable values the priority of one of them – liberty, autonomy or choice-making, say – cannot follow. Value-pluralism cannot entail, or ground, liberalism in any general, still less universal way. Pluralists reject this Old Right project for the same reason that they reject the Enlightenment project. Both seek to roll back the reality of cultural diversity for the sake of an imaginary condition of cultural unity – whether that be found in a lost past or in a supposed future condition of the species in which cultural difference has been marginalized in a universal civilization. Both perspectives are alien to that of the pluralist, which takes the reality of cultural difference as a datum of political order. A pluralist political order may nevertheless deviate from the central institutions of a liberal civil society at crucial points. It need not, and often will not possess an individualist legal order in which persons are the primary rights-bearers. The principal bearers of rights (and duties) in a pluralist political order will be communities, or ways of life, not individuals. The pluralist standard of assessment of any regime is whether it enables its subjects to coexist in a Hobbesian peace while renewing their distinctive forms of common life. … By this standard, the current regime in China might well be criticized for its policies in Tibet; but such a criticism would invoke the intrinsic value of the communities and cultural forms now being destroyed in Tibet, not universalist conceptions of human rights or democracy. Here I think Raz has grasped a point of fundamental importance, perceived by Mill but not by Rawls – that a liberal state cannot be neutral with regard to illiberal forms of life coming within its jurisdiction. Or, to put the matter still more shortly, Raz is entirely correct in seeing liberalism itself as a whole way of life, and not merely a set of political principles or institutions. The trouble is that, if value-pluralism is true at the level of whole ways of life, then the liberal form of life can have no special or universal claim on reason. In the late modern period in which we live, the Enlightenment project is affirmed chiefly for fear of the consequences of abandoning it. (The United States is, as ever, an exception in this regard, since in it both fundamentalist religion and fundamentalist affirmations of the Enlightenment project remain strong. The collapse of these fundamentalisms in the United States, however, were it to occur, would likely be accompanied by an outbreak of nihilism of a violence and intensity unknown in other Western countries; such an outcome is prefigured in much contemporary North American art, literature and popular entertainment.) There can, in my view, be no rolling back the central project of modernity, which is the Enlightenment project, with all its consequences in terms of disenchantment and ultimate groundlessness. … the thought of Nietzsche, especially but not exclusively his thinking about morality, is unavoidably and rightly the starting-point of serious reflection for us, at the close of the modern age which the Enlightenment project, in all its diversity, inaugurated. the political forms which may arise in truly post-Enlightenment cultures will be those that shelter and express diversity – that enable different cultures, some but by no means all or even most of which are dominated by liberal forms of life, different world-views and ways of life, to coexist in peace and harmony. For this development to be a real historical possibility, however, certain conceptions and commitments that have been constitutive, not merely of the Enlightenment and so of modernity, but also, and more fundamentally, of the central traditions of Western civilization, must be amended, or abandoned. Certain conceptions, not only of morality but also of science, that are central elements in Enlightenment cultures must be given up. Certain understandings of religion, long established in Western traditions, not as a vessel for a particular way of life but rather as the bearer of truths possessing universal authority, must be relinquished. The most fundamental Western commitment, the humanist conception of humankind as a privileged site of truth, which is expressed in Socratic inquiry and in Christian revelation, and which re-emerges in secular and naturalistic form in the Enlightenment project of human self-emancipation through the growth of knowledge, must be given up. Further, and perhaps decisively, once liberal practice is released from the hallucinatory perspective of liberal theory, it will be seen for what it always was – not a seamless garment, but a patchwork quilt, stitched together and restitched in response to the flux of circumstance. … If, as I believe, liberal practice is best conceived as a miscellany of ad-hoc improvisations, made over the generations in the pursuit of a modus vivendi, then no part of it can be regarded as sacrosanct; it can, and should, be rewoven, or unravelled, as circumstances and changing human needs dictate. The conception of the natural world as an object of human exploitation, and of humankind as the master of nature, which informs Bacon's writings, is one of the most vital and enduring elements of the modern world-view, and the one which Westernization has most lastingly and destructively transmitted to non-Western cultures. In this last period of modernity, Western instrumental reason becomes globalized at just the historic moment when its groundlessness is manifest. The embodiment of instrumental reason in modern technology acquires a planetary reach precisely when the animating humanist project which guided it is overthrown. Nothing remains of this project but the expansion of human productive powers through the technological domination of the earth. It is this conjunction of the global spread of the Western humanist project with the self-undermining of its most powerful modern embodiment in the Enlightenment that warrants the claim that we find ourselves now at the close of the modern age. In truth, the likelihood is that, now that the imperatives of the Cold War period are over, the European countries and the United States will increasingly decouple, not only strategically and economically, but also culturally, so that their cultural and political differences will become more, not less, decisive. It is difficult to believe that the forms of liberal culture will not diverge greatly, as a result of this likely decoupling, between the United States and the various European nations. Indeed, even as things stand now, Rorty's post-modern liberalism is an expression of American hopes, which are far from being shared by other liberal cultures, such as those in Europe. For liberalism to become merely one form of life among others would involve as profound a cultural metamorphosis as Christianity's ceasing to make any claim to unique and universal truth. The surrender of the will to power has its most important application in our relations with other forms of life, and with the earth. The project of subjecting the earth and its other life-forms to human will through technological domination is Western humanism in its final form.
Listen, support, and interact: https://linktr.ee/theentrylevelleft 00:20: Former CIA Director admits U.S meddles in foreign elections. https://bit.ly/2XzoqTe 01:23: What is Imperialism? 05:58: Why is Imperialism still a relevant topic for leftist discussion? 08:03: Elliott Abrams, imperialist chore boy extraordinaire. https://bit.ly/2DCo5ry 09:46: Kant's racism influenced Western academia for centuries. https://bit.ly/2GqU8Ll 11:39: Herbert Spencer's Social Darwinism: A culture of race realism. https://bit.ly/2IOtq23 13:25: What are some historical examples of imperialism? 16:54: How is imperialism different from colonialism in concept? 20:22: Edward Said: Orientalism https://bit.ly/2XFI401 21:11: What are contemporary examples of imperialism? 22:43: Soft power and hard power. https://bit.ly/2UzbPgW 23:15: The U.S has hundreds of foreign military bases. https://bit.ly/2VW2LUY 28:40: Rubio tweets about Gaddafi's brutalization to provoke Maduro. https://hrld.us/2UMrNcq 30:45: Gassing Kurds? U.S sleeps. Saddam invades Kuwait: Real shit? https://bit.ly/2JYBf23 31:33: Observers confirm legitimacy of elections in Venezuela. https://bit.ly/2Vnzgy4 33:15: Max Blumenthal debunks imperialist propaganda in Venezuela. https://bit.ly/2Tdlk8S 35:01: Pro-capitalist opposition protestors in support of Guaido burn aid. https://bit.ly/2Hbymhy 36:26: U.S doing the same to Venezuela as done to Mosaddegh in Iran. https://bit.ly/1snDH2Q 36:32: U.S did the same thing in El Salvador with Allende. https://bit.ly/23R15Lk 37:00: Confessions of an Economic Hitman by John Perkins. https://bit.ly/2IC31VT 37:45: General Smedley Butler, actual economic hitman.https://bit.ly/1QLdBbl 38:28: Coca Cola hired hired death squads in Columbia. https://bit.ly/2IRjPYn 39:00: How does capitalism ultimately produce neo-imperial regimes? 40:05: Recession of the 1890's. https://bit.ly/2StkIra Music produced by @southpointe__ on Instagram.
In Ep. 7, The Life of Fritz Kreisler, Part III finishes the story of the great Fritz Kreisler, from the end of the First World War, through his retirement in 1950, and all the way to the twilight of his life. ---------------- For all things GCP Please rate, review, and subscribe on iTunes! The App! https://apps.apple.com/us/app/the-great-composers-the-gcp/id1465809545?fbclid=IwAR0tQTElluT8I3jn6SYFcQst70IY0Ym52LjEz1Z3DR11oq5ZGDLV_URNyHk&ls=1 Like our Facebook page! https://www.facebook.com/thegreatcomposerspodcast/ A complete bibliography for all episodes can be found on my website: www.kevinnordstrom.com The introductory quotation is from the close of Joseph Szigeti's autobiography of 1947, 'With Strings Attached' - it is telling how Szigeti ends his own autobiography with a story about Kreisler... Thank you to archive.org for all the Kreisler recordings! All works are performed by Kreisler unless otherwise noted. 1. The World is Waiting for Sunrise - by Ernst Seitz arr. Kreisler (1928) 2. Beethoven Violin Concerto in D major op. 61 (cadenza) - by Fritz Kreisler 3. String Quartet in A minor mvt. 2 'Scherzo' - by Fritz Kreisler (1935) - Fritz Kreisler and Thomas Petrie violins, William Primrose viola, Lauri Kennedy cello 4. Sicilliene et Rigaudon (in the style of Francoeur)- by Fritz Kreisler, Jascha Heifetz violin 5. Stars in My Eyes from 'Sissy" - by Fritz Kreisler (1946) 6. Songs My Mother Taught Me op. 55 no. 4 - by Antonin Dvorak arr. Kreisler (1928) 7. Beautiful Ohio Waltz - by Mary Earl (1919) 8. Recitative and Scherzo Caprice - by Fritz Kreisler, Jascha Heifetz violin 9. Violin Concerto in E minor mvt. 1 - by Felix Mendelssohn 10. Underneath the Stars - by Herbert Spencer (1917) 11. La Gitana - by Fritz Kreisler (1946)
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
