Podcast appearances and mentions of Robert B Talisse

Polarization threatens American democracy, deeply pervading politics, schools, and everyday life. What sits at the root of this trend and how might we turn the tide? Philosopher Robert Talisse offers a compelling examination of these issues and offers a provocative solution—civic solitude. Join the Cato Institute and Sphere Education Initiatives on April 17th at 11 am EST, in person or online, for a discussion of Talisse's new book, Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance.About Civic SolitudeAn internet search of the phrase “this is what democracy looks like” returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics.The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees–a profoundly antidemocratic stance.Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Betsy Barre discusses the times when we are holding our breath while holding class on episode 548 of the Teaching in Higher Ed podcast. Quotes from the episode I think we could be more generous when we talk to people who disagree with us about pedagogy and recognize the complexity of the decisions that we're making. -Betsy Barre There's been a lot of really somewhat heated discourse about whether it's appropriate to share your views in class, or if that's a violation of your responsibilities. -Betsy Barre Institutions can't be fully neutral. -Betsy Barre Resources Holding Class While Holding Our Breath, by Betsy Barre Stop Treating Students Like Babies: They are citizens in a democracy, not infants in a nursery Teaching: What happened in classes in the days after the election We Asked for It: The politicization of research, hiring, and teaching made professors sitting ducks. I'm a College President, and I Hope My Campus Is Even More Political This Year by Michael Roth Protest and Civil Disobedience Are Two Different Things, by Keith E. Whittington 10 to 25: The Science of Motivating Young People, by David Yeager Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them, by Joshua Greene The Lies That Bind: Rethinking Identity, by Kwame Anthony Appiah Why We Argue (And How We Should): A Guide to Political Disagreement in an Age of Unreason, by Robert B. Talisse & Scott F. Aikin Teaching Religion and Upholding Academic Freedom (read what Betsy Barre had to share and she recommends Charles Mathewes essay, especially)

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/philosophy

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/law

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

An internet search of the phrase "this is what democracy looks like" returns thousands of images of people assembled in public for the purpose of collective action. But is group collaboration truly the defining feature of effective democracy? In Civic Solitude: Why Democracy Needs Distance (Oxford UP, 2024), Robert B. Talisse suggests that while group action is essential to democracy, action without reflection can present insidious challenges, as individuals' perspectives can be distorted by group dynamics. The culprit is a cognitive dynamic called belief polarization. As we interact with our political allies, we are exposed to forces that render us more radical in our beliefs and increasingly hostile to those who do not share them. What's more, the social environments we inhabit in our day-to-day lives are sorted along partisan lines. We are surrounded by triggers of political extremity and animosity. Thus, our ordinary activities encourage the attitude that democracy is possible only when everyone agrees--a profoundly antidemocratic stance. Drawing on extensive research about polarization and partisanship, Talisse argues that certain core democratic capacities can be cultivated only at a distance from the political fray. If we are to meet the responsibilities of democratic citizenship, we must occasionally step away from our allies and opponents alike. We can perform this self-work only in secluded settings where we can engage in civic reflection that is not prepackaged in the idiom of our political divides, allowing us to contemplate political circumstances that are not our own. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

From the US, to Brazil, to India, deepening political polarisation is used as a frame through which to see a lot of 21st century politics. But what can actually be done to depolarise deeply divided societies, particularly democracies? In this episode we speak to a political scientist and a philosopher trying to find answers to that question. Featuring Jennifer Lynn McCoy, professor of political science at Georgia State University in the US and Robert B. Talisse, professor of philosophy at Vanderbilt University in the US. This episode was produced by Mend Mariwany and Katie Flood. The executive producer is Gemma Ware. Eloise Stevens does our sound design and our theme music is by Neeta Sarl. Full credits for this episode are available here. A transcript will be available soon. Sign up here for a free daily newsletter from The Conversation.Further reading and listening:Democratic and Republican voters both love civility – but the bipartisan appeal is partly because nobody can agree on what civility isExtreme political polarization weakens democracy – can the US avoid that fate?Brazil election: what I saw on the streets made me cautiously optimistic Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Robert B. Talisse is a professor of philosophy at Vanderbilt University. His primary focus of study is political philosophy. During this conversation, we talk about the idea of belief polarization and how that is affecting politics today. This idea of belief polarization is covered in his book "Overdoing Democracy." --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Robert Talisse's new book, Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side (Oxford UP, 2021) is, in a certain sense, a continuation of his work from his previous book, Overdoing Democracy: Why We Must Put Politics in its Place (Oxford University Press, 2019). As we discuss during the podcast conversation, Sustaining Democracy explores the conundrum or tension that may well be inherent in democracy, the conflict between holding fast to our beliefs about what we think is just and appropriate for society, and giving our political opponents the respect they deserve even if we disagree with their beliefs about justice. This is tricky, especially in our polarized political world, but Talisse argues that it is the very polarization that we need to pay attention to, since there are two kinds of polarization, external and internal. We have become used to the external polarization within democracy, which does not solve the problem, but it has become regularized to cast our political opponents as an “enemy” who does not, in fact, support justice and equality—on whichever side of the aisle one sits. This is the warped perspective that is applied by many to those with whom they politically disagree. Sustaining Democracy also exposes the growing anti-democratic, hierarchical shifts that have transpired within political groups. As noted throughout the book, Talisse highlights the need for internal reflection, especially among those who are on the “same side,” so that the political dynamics among like-minded citizens don't devolve into opinion policing and echo chambers. Part of the concern here is the inclination within these political groupings towards homogeneity and conformity. This is belief polarization—and it pushes in undemocratic directions. Talisse, in a somewhat contrarian approach, wants to determine if the solution to democracy's problems is not, in fact, more democracy, as has often been suggested. The solution may be to move away from the political fray for a time, to reflect on ideas and issues on one's own, and to then re-enter the political community. This is a lively and frustrating thesis, and the conversation and the book reflect these overlapping tensions and considerations about democracy, deliberation, and political engagement. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

Robert Talisse's new book, Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side (Oxford UP, 2021) is, in a certain sense, a continuation of his work from his previous book, Overdoing Democracy: Why We Must Put Politics in its Place (Oxford University Press, 2019). As we discuss during the podcast conversation, Sustaining Democracy explores the conundrum or tension that may well be inherent in democracy, the conflict between holding fast to our beliefs about what we think is just and appropriate for society, and giving our political opponents the respect they deserve even if we disagree with their beliefs about justice. This is tricky, especially in our polarized political world, but Talisse argues that it is the very polarization that we need to pay attention to, since there are two kinds of polarization, external and internal. We have become used to the external polarization within democracy, which does not solve the problem, but it has become regularized to cast our political opponents as an “enemy” who does not, in fact, support justice and equality—on whichever side of the aisle one sits. This is the warped perspective that is applied by many to those with whom they politically disagree. Sustaining Democracy also exposes the growing anti-democratic, hierarchical shifts that have transpired within political groups. As noted throughout the book, Talisse highlights the need for internal reflection, especially among those who are on the “same side,” so that the political dynamics among like-minded citizens don't devolve into opinion policing and echo chambers. Part of the concern here is the inclination within these political groupings towards homogeneity and conformity. This is belief polarization—and it pushes in undemocratic directions. Talisse, in a somewhat contrarian approach, wants to determine if the solution to democracy's problems is not, in fact, more democracy, as has often been suggested. The solution may be to move away from the political fray for a time, to reflect on ideas and issues on one's own, and to then re-enter the political community. This is a lively and frustrating thesis, and the conversation and the book reflect these overlapping tensions and considerations about democracy, deliberation, and political engagement. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. 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

Robert Talisse's new book, Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side (Oxford UP, 2021) is, in a certain sense, a continuation of his work from his previous book, Overdoing Democracy: Why We Must Put Politics in its Place (Oxford University Press, 2019). As we discuss during the podcast conversation, Sustaining Democracy explores the conundrum or tension that may well be inherent in democracy, the conflict between holding fast to our beliefs about what we think is just and appropriate for society, and giving our political opponents the respect they deserve even if we disagree with their beliefs about justice. This is tricky, especially in our polarized political world, but Talisse argues that it is the very polarization that we need to pay attention to, since there are two kinds of polarization, external and internal. We have become used to the external polarization within democracy, which does not solve the problem, but it has become regularized to cast our political opponents as an “enemy” who does not, in fact, support justice and equality—on whichever side of the aisle one sits. This is the warped perspective that is applied by many to those with whom they politically disagree. Sustaining Democracy also exposes the growing anti-democratic, hierarchical shifts that have transpired within political groups. As noted throughout the book, Talisse highlights the need for internal reflection, especially among those who are on the “same side,” so that the political dynamics among like-minded citizens don't devolve into opinion policing and echo chambers. Part of the concern here is the inclination within these political groupings towards homogeneity and conformity. This is belief polarization—and it pushes in undemocratic directions. Talisse, in a somewhat contrarian approach, wants to determine if the solution to democracy's problems is not, in fact, more democracy, as has often been suggested. The solution may be to move away from the political fray for a time, to reflect on ideas and issues on one's own, and to then re-enter the political community. This is a lively and frustrating thesis, and the conversation and the book reflect these overlapping tensions and considerations about democracy, deliberation, and political engagement. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Robert Talisse's new book, Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side (Oxford UP, 2021) is, in a certain sense, a continuation of his work from his previous book, Overdoing Democracy: Why We Must Put Politics in its Place (Oxford University Press, 2019). As we discuss during the podcast conversation, Sustaining Democracy explores the conundrum or tension that may well be inherent in democracy, the conflict between holding fast to our beliefs about what we think is just and appropriate for society, and giving our political opponents the respect they deserve even if we disagree with their beliefs about justice. This is tricky, especially in our polarized political world, but Talisse argues that it is the very polarization that we need to pay attention to, since there are two kinds of polarization, external and internal. We have become used to the external polarization within democracy, which does not solve the problem, but it has become regularized to cast our political opponents as an “enemy” who does not, in fact, support justice and equality—on whichever side of the aisle one sits. This is the warped perspective that is applied by many to those with whom they politically disagree. Sustaining Democracy also exposes the growing anti-democratic, hierarchical shifts that have transpired within political groups. As noted throughout the book, Talisse highlights the need for internal reflection, especially among those who are on the “same side,” so that the political dynamics among like-minded citizens don't devolve into opinion policing and echo chambers. Part of the concern here is the inclination within these political groupings towards homogeneity and conformity. This is belief polarization—and it pushes in undemocratic directions. Talisse, in a somewhat contrarian approach, wants to determine if the solution to democracy's problems is not, in fact, more democracy, as has often been suggested. The solution may be to move away from the political fray for a time, to reflect on ideas and issues on one's own, and to then re-enter the political community. This is a lively and frustrating thesis, and the conversation and the book reflect these overlapping tensions and considerations about democracy, deliberation, and political engagement. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

Robert Talisse's new book, Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side (Oxford UP, 2021) is, in a certain sense, a continuation of his work from his previous book, Overdoing Democracy: Why We Must Put Politics in its Place (Oxford University Press, 2019). As we discuss during the podcast conversation, Sustaining Democracy explores the conundrum or tension that may well be inherent in democracy, the conflict between holding fast to our beliefs about what we think is just and appropriate for society, and giving our political opponents the respect they deserve even if we disagree with their beliefs about justice. This is tricky, especially in our polarized political world, but Talisse argues that it is the very polarization that we need to pay attention to, since there are two kinds of polarization, external and internal. We have become used to the external polarization within democracy, which does not solve the problem, but it has become regularized to cast our political opponents as an “enemy” who does not, in fact, support justice and equality—on whichever side of the aisle one sits. This is the warped perspective that is applied by many to those with whom they politically disagree. Sustaining Democracy also exposes the growing anti-democratic, hierarchical shifts that have transpired within political groups. As noted throughout the book, Talisse highlights the need for internal reflection, especially among those who are on the “same side,” so that the political dynamics among like-minded citizens don't devolve into opinion policing and echo chambers. Part of the concern here is the inclination within these political groupings towards homogeneity and conformity. This is belief polarization—and it pushes in undemocratic directions. Talisse, in a somewhat contrarian approach, wants to determine if the solution to democracy's problems is not, in fact, more democracy, as has often been suggested. The solution may be to move away from the political fray for a time, to reflect on ideas and issues on one's own, and to then re-enter the political community. This is a lively and frustrating thesis, and the conversation and the book reflect these overlapping tensions and considerations about democracy, deliberation, and political engagement. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj.

Robert Talisse's new book, Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side (Oxford UP, 2021) is, in a certain sense, a continuation of his work from his previous book, Overdoing Democracy: Why We Must Put Politics in its Place (Oxford University Press, 2019). As we discuss during the podcast conversation, Sustaining Democracy explores the conundrum or tension that may well be inherent in democracy, the conflict between holding fast to our beliefs about what we think is just and appropriate for society, and giving our political opponents the respect they deserve even if we disagree with their beliefs about justice. This is tricky, especially in our polarized political world, but Talisse argues that it is the very polarization that we need to pay attention to, since there are two kinds of polarization, external and internal. We have become used to the external polarization within democracy, which does not solve the problem, but it has become regularized to cast our political opponents as an “enemy” who does not, in fact, support justice and equality—on whichever side of the aisle one sits. This is the warped perspective that is applied by many to those with whom they politically disagree. Sustaining Democracy also exposes the growing anti-democratic, hierarchical shifts that have transpired within political groups. As noted throughout the book, Talisse highlights the need for internal reflection, especially among those who are on the “same side,” so that the political dynamics among like-minded citizens don't devolve into opinion policing and echo chambers. Part of the concern here is the inclination within these political groupings towards homogeneity and conformity. This is belief polarization—and it pushes in undemocratic directions. Talisse, in a somewhat contrarian approach, wants to determine if the solution to democracy's problems is not, in fact, more democracy, as has often been suggested. The solution may be to move away from the political fray for a time, to reflect on ideas and issues on one's own, and to then re-enter the political community. This is a lively and frustrating thesis, and the conversation and the book reflect these overlapping tensions and considerations about democracy, deliberation, and political engagement. Lilly J. Goren is professor of political science at Carroll University in Waukesha, WI. She is co-editor of the award winning book, Women and the White House: Gender, Popular Culture, and Presidential Politics (University Press of Kentucky, 2012), as well as co-editor of Mad Men and Politics: Nostalgia and the Remaking of Modern America (Bloomsbury Academic, 2015). Email her comments at lgoren@carrollu.edu or tweet to @gorenlj. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Robert B. Talisse is the W. Alton Jones Professor of Philosophy at Vanderbilt University and author of Sustaining Democracy: What We Owe to the Other Side (Oxford University Press, 2021). This conversation between NICD's Dr. Timothy Shaffer and Dr. Talisse highlights the challenge of what it means to wrestle with what Talisse calls the "democrat's dilemma:" the tension between the moral requirement to recognize the equality of political opponents and the moral directive to pursue and promote political justice. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

In episode twenty-one of Making Common Ground , Catherine Neilan talks with Robert B Talisse, Professor of Philosophy and Chair of the Philosophy Department at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, where he is also a Professor of Political Science.Some argue that the solution to our current crisis in democracy is more democracy. Not Rob. He believes that our politics have seeped into every corner of our lives, from the coffee shop we get our frappuccinos from to where we go on our holidays. But it's not just about signalling that we are progressives because we put our quinoa in a canvas tote bag. The problem, Rob argues, is that we become so divorced from the other side we start to find them repellant - and that's where democractic dialogue collapses. 

Robert's new book, Overdoing Democracy ... The revealing differences between Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts ... The diminishing importance of place in American culture ... How homogeneity distorts groups ... Partisan identity has become the core of our social selves ... Is this the inevitable product of late capitalism? ... What happens after Trumpism runs its course? ... Robert finds optimism in a Nashville bluegrass club ...

Robert's new book, Overdoing Democracy ... The revealing differences between Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts ... The diminishing importance of place in American culture ... How homogeneity distorts groups ... Partisan identity has become the core of our social selves ... Is this the inevitable product of late capitalism? ... What happens after Trumpism runs its course? ... Robert finds optimism in a Nashville bluegrass club ...

Robert's new book, Overdoing Democracy ... The revealing differences between Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts ... The diminishing importance of place in American culture ... How homogeneity distorts groups ... Partisan identity has become the core of our social selves ... Is this the inevitable product of late capitalism? ... What happens after Trumpism runs its course? ... Robert finds optimism in a Nashville bluegrass club ...

Robert's new book, Overdoing Democracy ... The revealing differences between Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts ... The diminishing importance of place in American culture ... How homogeneity distorts groups ... Partisan identity has become the core of our social selves ... Is this the inevitable product of late capitalism? ... What happens after Trumpism runs its course? ... Robert finds optimism in a Nashville bluegrass club ...

Robert's new book, Overdoing Democracy ... The revealing differences between Starbucks and Dunkin' Donuts ... The diminishing importance of place in American culture ... How homogeneity distorts groups ... Partisan identity has become the core of our social selves ... Is this the inevitable product of late capitalism? ... What happens after Trumpism runs its course? ... Robert finds optimism in a Nashville bluegrass club ...

You can overdo most things, but can you overdo democracy? Political philosopher Robert B. Talisse thinks you can. He explains why in this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast. We are very grateful for sponsorship from the Marc Sanders Foundation for this episode. 

In this episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast Robert B. Talisse in discussion with Nigel Warburton explains what the philosphical movement of Pragmatism was, and some of the differences between the ideas of its founders Pierce, Dewey and James.