Podcast appearances and mentions of tanner lectures

We're joined by Ian Morris, British historian, archaeologist, and author of Foragers, Farmers, and Fossil Fuels Ian's central argument is both simple and radical: our beliefs about fairness, justice, hierarchy, equality, and even democracy are not timeless moral truths floating above history. They are shaped, constrained, and repeatedly reorganised by the ways societies extract and use energy. Across tens of thousands of years, he argues, there is a pattern beneath the chaos.   We dive into: • Why hunter-gatherer societies tended to enforce radical egalitarianism • How agriculture made hierarchy, inheritance, patriarchy, and forced labor more functional • Why fossil fuel societies unexpectedly shifted back toward equality and democracy • How values evolve like adaptations to changing material conditions • Why the industrial age expanded the moral community • Why inequality has begun rising again in recent decades • Whether we are entering a fourth great shift in human values • What energy transitions, AI, and new technologies could mean for democracy and civilisation   Key Takeaways from the Episode: 1. Human Values Are Not Fixed — They Adapt to Energy Systems Morris argues that values are not random, but nor are they eternal. Over the long run, societies repeatedly develop moral systems that fit the material conditions created by how they capture energy from the world. This is not a metaphor. Morris means it in a nearly biological sense: values that match the prevailing energy regime help societies function, grow, and outcompete their neighbours — while mismatched values lead to stagnation, fragmentation, or collapse. The mechanism is cultural evolution, operating on a civilisational timescale. A foraging band that tried to enforce agrarian-style kingship would fall apart. An industrial economy run on feudal principles would be outproduced by its rivals. Morris draws on decades of archaeological and anthropological data — compiled in his earlier work Why the West Rules — for Now — to show that this pattern holds across every major region and epoch. The implication is unsettling: the values we consider timeless may be temporary artefacts of the energy system we happen to inhabit. 2. Hunter-Gatherer Life Favoured Equality In low-energy societies, people lived in small, mobile groups with little surplus and little material inheritance. Under those conditions, strong egalitarian norms were not idealistic luxuries — they were necessary for survival and cohesion. Morris draws on ethnographic evidence from groups like the Kung San of the Kalahari and the Hadza of Tanzania to show that foraging bands actively enforced equality through what Christopher Boehm calls “reverse dominance hierarchies” — systems in which the group collectively suppresses anyone who tries to accumulate too much power or prestige. The tools were social: ridicule, gossip, ostracism, and in extreme cases, targeted violence. This was not paradise. Per capita rates of violent death among foragers were far higher than in modern states. But it was a system that worked under the constraints of low energy capture. When you cannot store surplus, when anyone can walk away from the group, when survival depends on mutual cooperation, radical equality is not a philosophy — it is an engineering requirement. 3. Agriculture Made Inequality Functional Once farming emerged, people settled, accumulated land, inherited property, and built larger social structures. In that world, hierarchy, patriarchy, kingship, and coercive labour became easier to justify and more useful for organising society. Morris is careful to frame this not as moral decline but as adaptive reorganisation. Agrarian societies that developed clear lines of inheritance, centralised leadership, and mechanisms for extracting surplus labour — whether through serfdom, taxation, or slavery — were able to build irrigation systems, raise armies, and defend territory more effectively than those that did not. The Gini coefficients of agrarian civilisations, from ancient Rome to Qing Dynasty China, consistently clustered between 0.40 and 0.60 — far higher than anything observed in foraging societies. Patriarchy, too, became structurally embedded: when wealth flows through land and land flows through lineage, control of reproduction becomes an economic imperative. As Morris puts it, agrarian societies did not choose hierarchy because they were morally inferior. They chose it — or more precisely, it chose them — because it was the value system that worked at that scale of energy capture. 4. Industrialisation Reversed the Pattern The fossil fuel age created such a dramatic expansion in energy capture that it supported a return toward broader equality. Democracy, women's rights, religious tolerance, and mass political participation became more functional in industrial societies than they had been in agrarian ones. The scale of the shift is difficult to overstate. Drawing on the data compiled in his Social Development Index, Morris shows that Western economies went from capturing roughly 38,000 kilocalories per person per day in 1800 to 230,000 by the 1970s. This explosion of productive capacity required a workforce that was literate, mobile, and motivated — not coerced. Slavery became economically irrational when a free worker operating a power loom could outproduce a plantation of forced labourers. The franchise expanded because industrial states needed buy-in from the populations whose labour and consumption drove growth. The period between 1945 and 1975 — what economists call the Great Compression — saw inequality fall to historic lows across the industrialised world, a pattern Morris attributes directly to the structural demands of fossil-fuel economies rather than to moral awakening alone. 5. Moral Progress May Be Less Moral Than We Think One of the most provocative ideas in the conversation is that what we call moral progress may often be adaptation. Values spread not simply because they are truer or nobler, but because they work better under new productive conditions. Morris is not arguing that moral reasoning is meaningless — he acknowledges the role of philosophers, activists, and reformers in articulating new ethical frameworks. But he insists that these frameworks gain traction only when the material conditions are right. The abolition of slavery is his sharpest example: anti-slavery arguments had existed since antiquity, from Stoic philosophers to medieval theologians. They gained no lasting foothold until the fossil fuel revolution made free industrial labour more productive than coerced agricultural labour. In this reading, the abolitionists were morally right — but they succeeded because the energy regime had shifted in their favour. The danger in this insight, as Princeton philosopher Christine Korsgaard argues in her response to Morris's Tanner Lectures, is that it can erode our confidence in the permanence of our own moral achievements. If democracy rose with fossil fuels, what happens when fossil fuels decline? 6. The Last 40 Years May Mark the Start of a New Shift Morris suggests the egalitarian arc of the fossil fuel age may be weakening. Since the late 20th century, rising inequality and growing acceptance of concentrated power may signal the beginnings of a fourth great transformation in values. The data supports the concern. According to the World Inequality Database, the share of national income captured by the top one per cent in the United States roughly doubled between 1980 and 2020, returning to levels last seen before the Great Depression. Freedom House has documented eighteen consecutive years of global democratic decline. Morris interprets these trends not as policy failures to be corrected but as potential symptoms of a deeper structural shift: as economies move from mass industrial production toward automation, platform monopolies, and AI-driven services, the number of people whose active participation is economically essential may be shrinking. If the fossil fuel age favoured equality because it needed mass labour and mass consumption, an age of intelligent machines may not. The egalitarian values we assumed were permanent may have been contingent on a phase of industrial development that is now passing. 7. Energy Abundance Does Not Automatically Create Equality Cases like Qatar and other resource-rich states show that energy alone is not enough. The social context into which new energy arrives matters enormously; pre-existing structures can allow elites to monopolise wealth and preserve hierarchy. Qatar holds the fourth-highest GDP per capita in the world, yet ranks near the bottom of the V-Dem Electoral Democracy Index. Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, and Brunei tell similar stories: vast energy wealth, minimal democratic development. Morris argues this is not a contradiction of his thesis but a refinement. What matters is not merely how much energy a society captures, but how many people must participate in capturing it. In industrial economies, millions of workers were needed — creating structural pressure for education, wages, and political rights. In petrostates, a tiny elite controls extraction, distributes revenue as patronage, and faces no structural need to empower the broader population. The lesson is critical for understanding the current energy transition: if the next energy regime — whether solar, nuclear, or AI-driven — can be controlled by a narrow class of technologists and capital owners, the democratic dividend may not follow. 8. The Future May Be a Contest Between Democratic and Authoritarian Models As energy systems, technology, and AI evolve, Morris sees a real competitive struggle ahead between more egalitarian democratic societies and more centralised, authoritarian ones. The question is not only what kind of world we want — but which kind will prove more effective. Democracy's advantages are significant: distributed innovation, self-correcting institutions, the ability to attract global talent through individual freedom. But authoritarian systems have their own competitive strengths, particularly in an age of AI-enabled surveillance and rapid state-directed investment. China's ability to mobilise resources for infrastructure, energy, and technology development without electoral friction presents a genuine challenge to the democratic model. Morris draws on the framework laid out by Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson in Why Nations Fail — the contest between inclusive and extractive institutions — but adds an energy dimension: the outcome may depend less on which system we prefer and more on which system the next energy regime structurally favours. If renewable energy is distributed and requires broad participation, democracy may thrive. If AI and automation concentrate power, authoritarianism may prove more durable than we hope. Timestamps: (00:00) – Introduction to Ian Morris and the core thesis of Foragers, Farmers, and Fossil Fuels (01:00) – Why values are not random: the pattern across history (02:10) – Hunter-gatherers, equality, and the logic of low-energy societies (03:10) – Agriculture, hierarchy, kingship, and why inequality became moralized (06:00) – Energy capture as the hidden driver of value systems (09:10) – Why farming societies relied on inheritance, patriarchy, and force (15:20) – Rousseau, Hobbes, and why both misunderstood early humans (17:20) – Cultural evolution and how values adapt like biological traits (21:20) – Why fossil fuel societies moved back toward equality (28:20) – Factory labor, capitalism, and the widening of the moral community (34:20) – Are we now moving into a fourth great shift? (36:20) – Inequality, EROI, and the current energy transition (38:00) – Why Morris thinks we are still early in a new energy revolution (44:00) – Elon Musk, elite power, and why democracy is being questioned again (46:10) – Oil-rich states, Qatar, and why history still matters (54:40) – What readers should take from the book for navigating the future (56:00) – China, democracy, and the coming civilizational competition

Dans IDEES, Pierre-Edouard Deldique reçoit l'anthropologue de renom Philippe Descola pour un retour sur son travail de recherche à l'occasion de la parution aux éditions du Seuil de son ouvrage Politiques du faire‑monde, qui prolonge les grandes lignes de l'anthropologie de Philippe Descola. Issu des « Tanner Lectures » prononcées en 2023 à l'université de Berkeley aux États-Unis, l'ouvrage condense plus de cinquante ans de recherches, notamment auprès des Achuar d'Amazonie. Il propose une réflexion ambitieuse : comment repenser nos institutions, nos catégories et nos manières d'habiter la Terre à partir d'une anthropologie des ontologies ? Avec clarté et profondeur, Phillipe Descola revient, dans son livre et dans ce numéro d'IDEES, sur l'héritage problématique, selon lui du « siècle des Lumières », c'est-à-dire la séparation radicale entre nature et culture, véritable matrice de la modernité occidentale. Cette distinction, rappelle-t-il, n'est ni universelle ni nécessaire. Elle est un programme d'étude du monde qui a permis l'essor des sciences, mais qui a aussi rendu possible l'exploitation illimitée de la nature ou non-humains. L'un des apports majeurs de Descola est la typologie de quatre ontologies — ou filtres ontologiques — qui structurent les manières humaines de composer un monde. Elles ne sont pas des « visions du monde » abstraites : ce sont des manières de faire monde, c'est‑à‑dire de sélectionner certaines relations comme pertinentes pour composer un cosmos habitable. Il nous les détaille dans ce nouveau numéro du magazine qui interroge ceux qui pensent le monde. L'enjeu politique est clair : le naturalisme n'est qu'une ontologie parmi d'autres, et non l'horizon indépassable de l'humanité. Il s'agit de rompre avec l'idée que seuls les humains composent le politique. Les non-humains — animaux, plantes, lieux, esprits, objets techniques — doivent être reconnus comme acteurs de mondes. Philippe Descola plaide pour une diplomatie des ontologies, où les collectifs humains reconnaissent la légitimité d'autres manières d'habiter la Terre. C'est une autre façon de concevoir l'ONU du futur. Politiques du faire‑monde est un texte bref mais dense. Son ambition politique, au sens noble du terme, est affichée. Les propos clairs de Philippe Descola au micro en sont une preuve supplémentaire. Ce livre est indispensable. À lire aussiPhilippe Descola: «Par-delà nature et culture»   ► Les références musicales : Jean-Michel Jarre - Amazonia, Pt. 8  No Tongues - Tortue Géniale Pierre Bachelet - Des Cobras Et Des Gazelles Francesco Agnello - Hang 12

Dans IDEES, Pierre-Edouard Deldique reçoit l'anthropologue de renom Philippe Descola pour un retour sur son travail de recherche à l'occasion de la parution aux éditions du Seuil de son ouvrage Politiques du faire‑monde, qui prolonge les grandes lignes de l'anthropologie de Philippe Descola. Issu des « Tanner Lectures » prononcées en 2023 à l'université de Berkeley aux États-Unis, l'ouvrage condense plus de cinquante ans de recherches, notamment auprès des Achuar d'Amazonie. Il propose une réflexion ambitieuse : comment repenser nos institutions, nos catégories et nos manières d'habiter la Terre à partir d'une anthropologie des ontologies ? Avec clarté et profondeur, Phillipe Descola revient, dans son livre et dans ce numéro d'IDEES, sur l'héritage problématique, selon lui du « siècle des Lumières », c'est-à-dire la séparation radicale entre nature et culture, véritable matrice de la modernité occidentale. Cette distinction, rappelle-t-il, n'est ni universelle ni nécessaire. Elle est un programme d'étude du monde qui a permis l'essor des sciences, mais qui a aussi rendu possible l'exploitation illimitée de la nature ou non-humains. L'un des apports majeurs de Descola est la typologie de quatre ontologies — ou filtres ontologiques — qui structurent les manières humaines de composer un monde. Elles ne sont pas des « visions du monde » abstraites : ce sont des manières de faire monde, c'est‑à‑dire de sélectionner certaines relations comme pertinentes pour composer un cosmos habitable. Il nous les détaille dans ce nouveau numéro du magazine qui interroge ceux qui pensent le monde. L'enjeu politique est clair : le naturalisme n'est qu'une ontologie parmi d'autres, et non l'horizon indépassable de l'humanité. Il s'agit de rompre avec l'idée que seuls les humains composent le politique. Les non-humains — animaux, plantes, lieux, esprits, objets techniques — doivent être reconnus comme acteurs de mondes. Philippe Descola plaide pour une diplomatie des ontologies, où les collectifs humains reconnaissent la légitimité d'autres manières d'habiter la Terre. C'est une autre façon de concevoir l'ONU du futur. Politiques du faire‑monde est un texte bref mais dense. Son ambition politique, au sens noble du terme, est affichée. Les propos clairs de Philippe Descola au micro en sont une preuve supplémentaire. Ce livre est indispensable. À lire aussiPhilippe Descola: «Par-delà nature et culture»   ► Les références musicales : Jean-Michel Jarre - Amazonia, Pt. 8  No Tongues - Tortue Géniale Pierre Bachelet - Des Cobras Et Des Gazelles Francesco Agnello - Hang 12

It's a wonder democracy works at all -- a collection of people with potentially different interests have to agree to abide by majority vote even when it goes against their desires. But as we know, it doesn't always work, and racial and ethnic tensions are one of its biggest challenges. Hahrie Han studies the ground-up workings of democracy, how people can come together to successfully enact change. In her new book Undivided: The Quest for Racial Solidarity in an American Church, she investigates an example where democracy apparently has worked remarkably well, and asks what lessons we can draw from it.Support Mindscape on Patreon.Blog post with transcript: https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/podcast/2024/09/23/290-hahrie-han-on-making-multicultural-democracy-work/Hahrie Han recieved her Ph.D. in political science from Stanford University. She is currently the Director of the SNF Agora Institute, the Stavros Niarchos Foundation Professor of Political Science, and Faculty Director of the P3 Research Lab at Johns Hopkins University. She was named the Social Innovation Thought Leader of the Year by the World Economic Forum, is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and gave the 2024 Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Harvard University, among other awards.Web siteJohns Hopkins web pageGoogle Scholar publicationsAmazon author pageSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Dr. Rebecca Goldstein and J.J. communicate the story of Spinoza's herem and outline the radicalism of his Ethics. Our first mini-series!! Welcome to the first episode of our three-parter covering friend of the pod, Benedict "Barukh" Spinoza.Please send any complaints or compliments to podcasts@torahinmotion.orgFor more information visit torahinmotion.org/podcastsRebecca Newberger Goldstein graduated summa cum laude from Barnard College and immediately went on to graduate work at Princeton University, receiving her Ph.D. in philosophy. She then returned to her alma mater as an Assistant Professor of Philosophy, where she taught the philosophy of science, philosophy of mind, and philosophy of mathematics. She has also been a Professor or Fellow at Rutgers, Columbia, Trinity College, Yale, NYU, Dartmouth, the Radcliffe Institute, the Santa Fe Institute, and the New College of the Humanities in London.Goldstein is the author of six works of fiction, the latest of which was Thirty-Six Arguments for the Existence of God: A Work of Fiction, as well as three books of non-fiction: Incompleteness: The Proof and Paradox of Kurt Gödel; Betraying Spinoza: The Renegade Jew Who Gave Us Modernity; and Plato at the Googleplex: Why Philosophy Won't Go Away.In 1996 Goldstein became a MacArthur Fellow, receiving the prize which is popularly known as the “Genius Award.” In 2005 she was elected to The American Academy of Arts and Sciences.  In 2006 she received a Guggenheim Fellowship and a Radcliffe Fellowship. In 2008, she was designated a Humanist Laureate by the International Academy of Humanism. Goldstein has been designated Humanist of the Year 2011 by the American Humanist Association, and Freethought Heroine 2011 by the Freedom from Religion Foundation. In that year she also delivered the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Yale University, entitled "The Ancient Quarrel: Philosophy and Literature," which was published by University of Utah Press.In September, 2015, Goldstein was awarded the National Humanities Medal by President Obama in a ceremony at the White House. The citation reads: "For bringing philosophy into conversation with culture. In scholarship, Dr. Goldstein has elucidated the ideas of Spinoza and Gödel, while in fiction, she deploys wit and drama to help us understand the great human conflict between thought and feeling.”

On today's episode, Dorothy Roberts joins me and UVA Law 3Ls Darius Adel and Julia D'Rozario to discuss her work on race-based medicine and the child welfare system. Dorothy Roberts is the George A. Weiss University Professor of Law and Sociology and the Raymond Pace and Sadie Tanner Mossell Alexander Professor of Civil Rights at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law. Professor Roberts' work focuses on urgent social justice issues in policing, family regulation, science, medicine, and bioethics. Her major books include Torn Apart: How the Child Welfare System Destroys Black Families--and How Abolition Can Build a Safer World (Basic Books, 2022); Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-first Century (New Press, 2011); Shattered Bonds: The Color of Child Welfare (Basic Books, 2002), and Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (Pantheon, 1997). She is also the author of more than 100 scholarly articles and book chapters, as well as a co-editor of six books on such topics as constitutional law and women and the law. Her work has been supported by the American Council of Learned Societies, National Science Foundation, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Harvard Program on Ethics & the Professions, and Stanford Center for the Comparative Studies in Race & Ethnicity. Recent recognitions of her scholarship and public service include 2019 Rutgers University- Newark Honorary Doctor of Laws degree, 2017 election to the National Academy of Medicine, 2016 Society of Family Planning Lifetime Achievement Award, 2016 Tanner Lectures on Human Values, and the 2015 American Psychiatric Association Solomon Carter Fuller Award.  Show notes: Dorothy Roberts Full Bio, University of Pennsylvania https://www.law.upenn.edu/faculty/roberts1 Torn Apart: How the Child Welfare System Destroys Black Families--and How Abolition Can Build a Safer World (Basic Books, 2022)Fatal Invention: How Science, Politics, and Big Business Re-create Race in the Twenty-first Century (New Press, 2011)Shattered Bonds: The Color of Child Welfare (Basic Books, 2002)Killing the Black Body: Race, Reproduction, and the Meaning of Liberty (Pantheon, 1997).

Do doctors really know what they are talking about when they tell us vaccines are safe? Should we take climate experts at their word when they warn us about the perils of global warming? Why should we trust science when our own politicians don't? In this landmark book, Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength—and the greatest reason we can trust it. Tracing the history and philosophy of science from the late nineteenth century to today, Oreskes explains that, contrary to popular belief, there is no single scientific method. Rather, the trustworthiness of scientific claims derives from the social process by which they are rigorously vetted. This process is not perfect—nothing ever is when humans are involved—but she draws vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong. Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy. Based on the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Princeton University, Why Trust Science? (Princeton UP, 2021) features critical responses by climate experts Ottmar Edenhofer and Martin Kowarsch, political scientist Jon Krosnick, philosopher of science Marc Lange, and science historian Susan Lindee, as well as a foreword by political theorist Stephen Macedo. Marshall Poe is the founder and editor of the New Books Network. He can be reached at marshallpoe@newbooksnetwork.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Do doctors really know what they are talking about when they tell us vaccines are safe? Should we take climate experts at their word when they warn us about the perils of global warming? Why should we trust science when our own politicians don't? In this landmark book, Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength—and the greatest reason we can trust it. Tracing the history and philosophy of science from the late nineteenth century to today, Oreskes explains that, contrary to popular belief, there is no single scientific method. Rather, the trustworthiness of scientific claims derives from the social process by which they are rigorously vetted. This process is not perfect—nothing ever is when humans are involved—but she draws vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong. Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy. Based on the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Princeton University, Why Trust Science? (Princeton UP, 2021) features critical responses by climate experts Ottmar Edenhofer and Martin Kowarsch, political scientist Jon Krosnick, philosopher of science Marc Lange, and science historian Susan Lindee, as well as a foreword by political theorist Stephen Macedo. Marshall Poe is the founder and editor of the New Books Network. He can be reached at marshallpoe@newbooksnetwork.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Do doctors really know what they are talking about when they tell us vaccines are safe? Should we take climate experts at their word when they warn us about the perils of global warming? Why should we trust science when our own politicians don't? In this landmark book, Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength—and the greatest reason we can trust it. Tracing the history and philosophy of science from the late nineteenth century to today, Oreskes explains that, contrary to popular belief, there is no single scientific method. Rather, the trustworthiness of scientific claims derives from the social process by which they are rigorously vetted. This process is not perfect—nothing ever is when humans are involved—but she draws vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong. Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy. Based on the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Princeton University, Why Trust Science? (Princeton UP, 2021) features critical responses by climate experts Ottmar Edenhofer and Martin Kowarsch, political scientist Jon Krosnick, philosopher of science Marc Lange, and science historian Susan Lindee, as well as a foreword by political theorist Stephen Macedo. Marshall Poe is the founder and editor of the New Books Network. He can be reached at marshallpoe@newbooksnetwork.com. 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

Do doctors really know what they are talking about when they tell us vaccines are safe? Should we take climate experts at their word when they warn us about the perils of global warming? Why should we trust science when our own politicians don't? In this landmark book, Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength—and the greatest reason we can trust it. Tracing the history and philosophy of science from the late nineteenth century to today, Oreskes explains that, contrary to popular belief, there is no single scientific method. Rather, the trustworthiness of scientific claims derives from the social process by which they are rigorously vetted. This process is not perfect—nothing ever is when humans are involved—but she draws vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong. Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy. Based on the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Princeton University, Why Trust Science? (Princeton UP, 2021) features critical responses by climate experts Ottmar Edenhofer and Martin Kowarsch, political scientist Jon Krosnick, philosopher of science Marc Lange, and science historian Susan Lindee, as well as a foreword by political theorist Stephen Macedo. Marshall Poe is the founder and editor of the New Books Network. He can be reached at marshallpoe@newbooksnetwork.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science

Do doctors really know what they are talking about when they tell us vaccines are safe? Should we take climate experts at their word when they warn us about the perils of global warming? Why should we trust science when our own politicians don't? In this landmark book, Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength—and the greatest reason we can trust it. Tracing the history and philosophy of science from the late nineteenth century to today, Oreskes explains that, contrary to popular belief, there is no single scientific method. Rather, the trustworthiness of scientific claims derives from the social process by which they are rigorously vetted. This process is not perfect—nothing ever is when humans are involved—but she draws vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong. Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy. Based on the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Princeton University, Why Trust Science? (Princeton UP, 2021) features critical responses by climate experts Ottmar Edenhofer and Martin Kowarsch, political scientist Jon Krosnick, philosopher of science Marc Lange, and science historian Susan Lindee, as well as a foreword by political theorist Stephen Macedo. Marshall Poe is the founder and editor of the New Books Network. He can be reached at marshallpoe@newbooksnetwork.com.

Do doctors really know what they are talking about when they tell us vaccines are safe? Should we take climate experts at their word when they warn us about the perils of global warming? Why should we trust science when our own politicians don't? In this landmark book, Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength—and the greatest reason we can trust it. Tracing the history and philosophy of science from the late nineteenth century to today, Oreskes explains that, contrary to popular belief, there is no single scientific method. Rather, the trustworthiness of scientific claims derives from the social process by which they are rigorously vetted. This process is not perfect—nothing ever is when humans are involved—but she draws vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong. Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy. Based on the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Princeton University, Why Trust Science? (Princeton UP, 2021) features critical responses by climate experts Ottmar Edenhofer and Martin Kowarsch, political scientist Jon Krosnick, philosopher of science Marc Lange, and science historian Susan Lindee, as well as a foreword by political theorist Stephen Macedo. Marshall Poe is the founder and editor of the New Books Network. He can be reached at marshallpoe@newbooksnetwork.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/medicine

Do doctors really know what they are talking about when they tell us vaccines are safe? Should we take climate experts at their word when they warn us about the perils of global warming? Why should we trust science when our own politicians don't? In this landmark book, Naomi Oreskes offers a bold and compelling defense of science, revealing why the social character of scientific knowledge is its greatest strength—and the greatest reason we can trust it. Tracing the history and philosophy of science from the late nineteenth century to today, Oreskes explains that, contrary to popular belief, there is no single scientific method. Rather, the trustworthiness of scientific claims derives from the social process by which they are rigorously vetted. This process is not perfect—nothing ever is when humans are involved—but she draws vital lessons from cases where scientists got it wrong. Oreskes shows how consensus is a crucial indicator of when a scientific matter has been settled, and when the knowledge produced is likely to be trustworthy. Based on the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Princeton University, Why Trust Science? (Princeton UP, 2021) features critical responses by climate experts Ottmar Edenhofer and Martin Kowarsch, political scientist Jon Krosnick, philosopher of science Marc Lange, and science historian Susan Lindee, as well as a foreword by political theorist Stephen Macedo. Marshall Poe is the founder and editor of the New Books Network. He can be reached at marshallpoe@newbooksnetwork.com. 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

In this episode of the podcast, Sam Harris speaks with Michael Sandel about the problem with meritocracy. They discuss the dark side of the concept of merit, the pernicious myth of the self-made man, the moral significance of luck, the backlash against “elites” and expertise, how we value human excellence, the connection between wealth and value creation, the ethics of the tax code, higher education as a sorting mechanism for a caste system, alternatives to 4-year colleges, and other topics. Michael Sandel teaches political philosophy at Harvard University. His writings—on justice, democracy, ethics, and markets—have been translated into 27 languages. His course “Justice” was the first Harvard course to be made freely available online and on television and has been viewed by tens of millions of people around the world, including in China, where Sandel was recently named the “most influential foreign figure of the year.” Sandel has been a visiting professor at the Sorbonne, delivered the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Oxford, and is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. His BBC series “The Global Philosopher” explores the ethical issues lying behind the headlines with participants from over 30 countries. His latest book is titled The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good? Website: http://justiceharvard.org/ Episodes that have been re-released as part of the Best of Making Sense series may have been edited for relevance since their original airing.

For the 2019 Tanner Lectures at UC Berkeley, Arthur Ripstein, a professor of law and philosophy at the University of Toronto, argues that the very thing that makes war wrongful — the fact which side prevails does not depend on who is in the right — also provides the moral standard for evaluating the conduct of war, both the grounds for going to war and the ways in which wars are fought.In the last of three days of lectures and discussions, which took place on April 9-11, commentators Chris Kutz, a law professor at UC Berkeley who focuses on moral, political and legal philosophy; Oona Hathaway, a professor law at Yale Law School; and Jeff McMahan, a professor of moral philosophy at the University of Oxford, provide commentary on Ripstein’s previous two lectures.“What’s puzzling is that Arthur seems to want to link up this principle to the idea of a future peace and internally to the principle of action by the aggressor,” said Kutz in his commentary. “The peace imagined by the aggressor nation isn’t the peace of a just defender, it’s a peace based upon forcible change. Now, Arthur seemed to suggest that there’s no coherent alternative to the just defender’s limited aims in war, that any other conception of war makes war a matter of what he called extermination. Even for an aggressor’s state, that seems to me an exaggerated characterization.”The Tanner Lectures on Human Values is presented annually at nine universities: UC Berkeley, Harvard, Michigan, Princeton, Stanford, Utah, Yale, Cambridge and Oxford. This series was founded in 1978 by the American scholar, industrialist and philanthropist, Obert Clark Tanner, who was also a member of the faculty of philosophy at the University of Utah. He was also an Honorary Fellow of the British Academy. Tanner’s goal, in establishing the lectures through the Tanner philanthropies, was to promote the search for a better understanding of human behavior and human values. He hoped that the lectures would advance scholarly and scientific learning in the area of human values, and contribute to the intellectual and moral life of humankind.Learn more about the 2019 Tanner Lectures.Listen and read a transcript of this talk on Berkeley News. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

For the 2019 Tanner Lectures at UC Berkeley, Arthur Ripstein, a professor of law and philosophy at the University of Toronto, argues that the very thing that makes war wrongful — the fact which side prevails does not depend on who is in the right — also provides the moral standard for evaluating the conduct of war, both the grounds for going to war and the ways in which wars are fought.In the second of three days of lectures and discussions, which took place on April 9-11, Ripstein talks about why it's wrong to target civilians and makes a distinction between those who are and are not a part of war. Following the lecture, Oona Hathaway, a professor of international law at Yale Law School, and Jeff McMahan, a professor of moral philosophy at the University of Oxford, provide commentary.The Tanner Lectures on Human Values is presented annually at nine universities: UC Berkeley, Harvard, Michigan, Princeton, Stanford, Utah, Yale, Cambridge and Oxford. This series was founded in 1978 by the American scholar, industrialist and philanthropist, Obert Clark Tanner, who was also a member of the faculty of philosophy at the University of Utah. He was also an Honorary Fellow of the British Academy. Tanner’s goal, in establishing the lectures through the Tanner philanthropies, was to promote the search for a better understanding of human behavior and human values. He hoped that the lectures would advance scholarly and scientific learning in the area of human values, and contribute to the intellectual and moral life of humankind.Listen and read the transcript on Berkeley News.Learn more about the 2019 Tanner Lectures.Stay tuned for the third installment of the 2019 Tanner Lectures on Berkeley Talks. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

For the 2019 Tanner Lectures at UC Berkeley, Arthur Ripstein, a professor of law and philosophy at the University of Toronto, argues that the very thing that makes war wrongful — the fact which side prevails does not depend on who is in the right — also provides the moral standard for evaluating the conduct of war, both the grounds for going to war and the ways in which wars are fought.In the first of three days of lectures and discussions, which took place on April 9-11, Ripstein talks about the rules for wrongdoers. He says, "The thing that's wrong with war is war is the condition in which might makes right. Now, that doesn't mean that no one could every be justified in going to war, but it means that war is always morally problematic. It's morally problematic because who prevails in the war depends on strength and is entirely independent of the merits." Following the lecture, UC Berkeley law professor Christopher Kutz provided a commentary.The Tanner Lectures on Human Values is presented annually at nine universities: UC Berkeley, Harvard, Michigan, Princeton, Stanford, Utah, Yale, Cambridge and Oxford. This series was founded in 1978 by the American scholar, industrialist and philanthropist, Obert Clark Tanner, who was also a member of the faculty of philosophy at the University of Utah. He was also an Honorary Fellow of the British Academy. Tanner's goal, in establishing the lectures through the Tanner philanthropies, was to promote the search for a better understanding of human behavior and human values. He hoped that the lectures would advance scholarly and scientific learning in the area of human values, and contribute to the intellectual and moral life of humankind.Read more about the 2019 Tanner Lectures.Stay tuned for the second and third installments of the 2019 Tanner Lectures on Berkeley Talks.Listen and read a transcript on Berkeley News. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

As everybody knows, today the political landscape is sharply divided. This is especially true when it comes to economic redistribution. On the right, freedom means free markets. On the left, free markets produce inequality and oppression. This framing is of course hyperbole, but it does suggest how we take for granted the political alignment between certain economic principles. As something of a corrective to this over simplified divide, Pete and Luke talk about Elizabeth Anderson's Tanner Lectures in Human Values: "Liberty, Equality, and Private Government," which she gave at Princeton University in 2015. Anderson says we don't really understand the relationship between the “free market” and some of our most cherished political ideals, namely freedom and equality. This is a historical misunderstanding that has lead to overlook how the modern workplace has become politically authoritarian even as it is championed by free market ideologues.  The Public Sphere is a podcast from Contrivers Review.

The Clare Hall Tanner Lectures 2017 were given this year by Professor Jan-Werner Müller, Professor of Politics at Princeton University.

In this thirtieth episode of the Philosophy Bakes Bread radio show and podcast, co-hosts Dr. Eric Thomas Weber and Dr. Anthony Cashio interview Dr. Elizabeth Anderson about her new book, Private Government: How Employers Rule Our Lives (and Why We Don't Talk About It). She recently published a piece on the book on Vox.com. Dr. Anderson is the Arthur F. Thurnau Professor, and the John Dewey Distinguished University Professor of Philosophy and Women's Studies at the University of Michigan. Dr. Anderson’s research focuses on democratic theory, equality in political philosophy and American law, racial integration, and the ethical limits of markets. She writes about the philosophies of John Stuart Mill and John Dewey as well as the philosophy of science. She also designed and was the first Director of the Program in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at the University of Michigan. She published the 2011 book, The Imperative of Integration, which came up in our episode with Dr. Nussbaum a few weeks ago. Liz's new book, Private Government, is based on her Tanner Lectures delivered at Princeton University.  Listen for our “You Tell Me!” questions and for some jokes in one of our concluding segments, called “Philosophunnies.” Reach out to us on Facebook @PhilosophyBakesBread and on Twitter @PhilosophyBB; email us at philosophybakesbread@gmail.com; or call and record a voicemail that we play on the show, at 859.257.1849. Philosophy Bakes Bread is a production of the Society of Philosophers in America (SOPHIA). Check us out online at PhilosophyBakesBread.com and check out SOPHIA at PhilosophersInAmerica.com.

The third in the series of the Tanner Lectures which serve to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values

The third in the series of the Tanner Lectures which serve to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values

The third in the series of the Tanner Lectures which serve to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values

The third in the series of the Tanner Lectures which serve to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values

This podcast is an original episode on Gibberish: http://www.skepticsfieldguide.net/2012/12/gibberish.htmlOne example we use is from Yes Prime Minister - The Smoke Screen.The other examples are from Richard Dawkins' Tanner Lectures. (The gibberish comes in the form of questions asked to Richard Dawkins.)Richard Dawkins - The Religion of Science - Part 2 - at about 31 minutes into the audio if you want to hear the original.Richard Dawkins - The Science of Religion - Part 2 - at about 11 minutes.Direct download: https://archive.org/download/HH101/HH101e0015.mp3The Second (eBook) Edition of Humbug! is available for about US$3.99 from:Amazon (Kindle)Google Play Apple iBooksLULU (DRM free ePub)

This week’s guest: Ruth Reichl. Ruth Reichl is the author of Delicious! a novel published by Random House in May 2014. She was Editor in Chief of Gourmet Magazine from 1999 to 2009. Before that she was the restaurant critic of both The New York Times(1993-1999) and the Los Angeles Times (1984-1993), where she was also named food editor. As co-owner of The Swallow Restaurant from 1974 to 1977, she played a part in the culinary revolution that took place in Berkeley, California. In the years that followed, she served as restaurant critic for New West and California magazines. Ms. Reichl began writing about food in 1972, when she published Mmmmm: A Feastiary. Since then, she has authored the critically acclaimed, best-selling memoirs Tender at the Bone, Comfort Me with Apples, Garlic and Sapphires, and For You Mom, Finally, which have been translated into 18 languages. She is the editor of The Modern Library Food Series, which currently includes ten books. She has also written the introductions to Nancy Silverton’s Breads from the La Brea Bakery: Recipes for the Connoisseur (1996) and The Measure of Her Powers: An M.F.K. Fisher Reader (2000), and the forewords for Japanese Cooking: A Simple Art, by Shizuo Tsuji (2007), At Elizabeth David’s Table (2011) and . She is featured on the cover of Dining Out: Secrets from America’s Leading Critics, Chefs and Restaurants, by Andrew Dornenburg and Karen Page (1998). She is the editor of Endless Feasts: Sixty Years of Writing from Gourmet; Remembrance of Things Paris: Sixty Years of Writing from Gourmet; The Gourmet Cookbook, released September 2004; History in a Glass: Sixty Years of Wine Writing from Gourmet, 2006 and Gourmet Today, September 2009. Her lecture “Why Food Matters,” delivered in October 2005, was published in The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Volume 27, in 2006. In March 2007, she delivered the J. Edward Farnum Lecture at Princeton University. Ms. Reichl hosted Eating Out Loud, three specials on Food Network, covering New York (2002), San Francisco (2003), and Miami (2003). She is the executive producer of Gourmet’s Diary of a Foodie, public television’s 30-episode series, which debuted in October 2006 and Executive Producer and host of Gourmet’s Adventures with Ruth, a 10-episode public television series which began airing in October 2009. She is currently a judge on Top Chef Masters. Ms. Reichl has been honored with 6 James Beard Awards (one for magazine feature writing and one for multimedia food journalism in 2009; two for restaurant criticism, in 1996 and 1998; one for journalism, in 1994; and Who’s Who of Food and Beverage in America, 1984. In 2007, she was named Adweek’s Editor of the Year. She received the Missouri Honor Medal for Distinguished Service in Journalism, presented by the Missouri School of Journalism, in October 2007. Ms. Reichl received the 2008 Matrix Award for Magazines from New York Women in Communications, Inc., in April 2008. She holds a B.A. and an M.A. in the History of Art from the University of Michigan and lives in Upstate New York with her husband, Michael Singer, a television news producer. “I’m very big on using leftovers in useful ways.” [5:44] “If you’re going to be in food you really have to study your own appetites.” [8:42] –Ruth Reichl on Radio Cherry Bombe

Ms Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty and Chancellor of Oxford Brookes University delivers this lecture on Human Rights as part of the Tanner Lecture Series at the University Museum Oxford 15th May 2014 The purpose of the Tanner Lectures is to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values. This intention embraces the entire range of values pertinent to the human condition, interest, behaviour, and aspiration. Appointment as a Tanner lecturer is a recognition for uncommon achievement and outstanding abilities in the field of human values. The lecturers may be elicited from philosophy, religion, the humanities, the sciences, the creative arts, and learned professions, or from leadership in public or private affairs. The lectureships are international and intercultural and transcend ethnic, national, religious, and ideological distinctions.

Ms Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty and Chancellor of Oxford Brookes University delivers this lecture on Human Rights as part of the Tanner Lecture Series at the University Museum Oxford 15th May 2014 The purpose of the Tanner Lectures is to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values. This intention embraces the entire range of values pertinent to the human condition, interest, behaviour, and aspiration. Appointment as a Tanner lecturer is a recognition for uncommon achievement and outstanding abilities in the field of human values. The lecturers may be elicited from philosophy, religion, the humanities, the sciences, the creative arts, and learned professions, or from leadership in public or private affairs. The lectureships are international and intercultural and transcend ethnic, national, religious, and ideological distinctions.

Ms Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty and Chancellor of Oxford Brookes University delivers this lecture on Human Rights as part of the Tanner Lecture Series at the University Museum Oxford 15th May 2014 The purpose of the Tanner Lectures is to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values. This intention embraces the entire range of values pertinent to the human condition, interest, behaviour, and aspiration. Appointment as a Tanner lecturer is a recognition for uncommon achievement and outstanding abilities in the field of human values. The lecturers may be elicited from philosophy, religion, the humanities, the sciences, the creative arts, and learned professions, or from leadership in public or private affairs. The lectureships are international and intercultural and transcend ethnic, national, religious, and ideological distinctions.

Ms Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty and Chancellor of Oxford Brookes University delivers this lecture on Human Rights as part of the Tanner Lecture Series at the University Museum Oxford 15th May 2014 The purpose of the Tanner Lectures is to advance and reflect upon the scholarly and scientific learning relating to human values. This intention embraces the entire range of values pertinent to the human condition, interest, behaviour, and aspiration. Appointment as a Tanner lecturer is a recognition for uncommon achievement and outstanding abilities in the field of human values. The lecturers may be elicited from philosophy, religion, the humanities, the sciences, the creative arts, and learned professions, or from leadership in public or private affairs. The lectureships are international and intercultural and transcend ethnic, national, religious, and ideological distinctions.

Tanner Lectures 2013 Q&A

Tanner Lectures Respondents: Dr Steven Beller, Dr Irena Murray and Professor Peter Pulzer

Tanner Lectures Respondents: Dr Steven Beller, Dr Irena Murray and Professor Peter Pulzer

The Viennese Interior: Architecture & Inwardness; 'The Kiss' Vienna took its interiors seriously.  Between 1898 and 1938, many of this city’s greatest minds grappled with how to structure and appoint the inner spaces of everyday life.  The result—the modern home—would possess an interior that (according to its creators) fitted another, more impenetrable interior:  the subjective inwardness of the home’s inhabitants.  Built architecture and psychic sphere, the Viennese interior was a contested matrix of human values. The novelist Hermann Broch portrayed fin-de siècle Vienna as a 'value vacuum'. These lectures explore Viennese homemaking as attempts to fill that vacuum.

The Viennese Interior: Architecture & Inwardness; 'The Burning Child'

A series of Lectures : CLARE HALL TANNER LECTURE SERIES 2011 - AT ROBINSON COLLEGE AUDITORIUM DAY (01) 1:Ernst Fehr - THE LURE OF AUTHORITY MOTIVATION AND INCENTIVE EFFECTS OF POWER - DAY (01) DAY (02) 1:Uta Frith - UCL institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Aarus University MINDlab - THE POWER OF BELIEF AND THE POWER OF AUTHORITY 2:Professor William Brown - AUTHORITY AN DPOWER IN EMPLOYMENT 3:Ernst Fehr - THE LURE OF AUTHORITY MOTIVATION AND INCENTIVE EFFECTS OF POWER 4:Professor - Trevor Robbins - Neurobiological Cost and Benefits Of Authority " A Response of Ernst Fehr's Tanner Lectures" 5:Dr David Runicman 6:An open Panel discussion

A series of Lectures : CLARE HALL TANNER LECTURE SERIES 2011 - AT ROBINSON COLLEGE AUDITORIUM DAY (01) 1:Ernst Fehr - THE LURE OF AUTHORITY MOTIVATION AND INCENTIVE EFFECTS OF POWER - DAY (01) DAY (02) 1:Uta Frith - UCL institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Aarus University MINDlab - THE POWER OF BELIEF AND THE POWER OF AUTHORITY 2:Professor William Brown - AUTHORITY AN DPOWER IN EMPLOYMENT 3:Ernst Fehr - THE LURE OF AUTHORITY MOTIVATION AND INCENTIVE EFFECTS OF POWER 4:Professor - Trevor Robbins - Neurobiological Cost and Benefits Of Authority " A Response of Ernst Fehr's Tanner Lectures" 5:Dr David Runicman 6:An open Panel discussion

The 2010 Tanner Lectures are concerned with the compatibility, or otherwise, of market-dominated economies with an ethic of care. A key question is whether economic wrongs can be righted, and financial ills made good, not by arguing against markets, but by making a bid for them. Housing markets provide the touchstone for discussion. After all, the ‘noughties’ financial crisis stemmed from events in the housing economy; just as the sustainability of recovery depends on the effective management of home assets and mortgage debt.

Art and Religion in the Modern West – Some Perspectives

J. Zittrain was one of the respondents to the 2008 Lectures. On video from the Berkman Center for Internet and Society

'The Dream of Democratic Culture'