Podcast appearances and mentions of Tom Chivers

In this powerful episode of The Reformed Brotherhood, Tony and Jesse return to their parable series with an in-depth examination of the Laborers in the Vineyard from Matthew 20:1-16. This often-misunderstood parable confronts our natural inclination toward merit-based thinking and exposes the scandal of God's grace. The hosts unpack the covenantal language embedded in the text, particularly the workers' "grumbling"—a loaded term echoing Israel's wilderness rebellion. Through careful exegesis and theological reflection, they demonstrate how this parable dismantles religious entitlement while celebrating God's sovereign freedom to bestow mercy according to His purposes, not our calculations. The discussion offers fresh insights into grace, election, and the radical generosity that defines God's kingdom economy. Key Takeaways The parable operates on covenant logic, not economic fairness: The landowner's dealings with his workers reflect covenantal promise-keeping rather than marketplace transactions, establishing that God's relationship with His people is fundamentally gracious. "Grumbling" carries profound theological weight: The Greek word used for the workers' complaint is the same term in the Septuagint for Israel's wilderness rebellion—not mere dissatisfaction, but a covenantal accusation against God's faithfulness. Two types of workers represent two approaches to God: The first-hired workers who contracted for specific wages represent those relating to God through legal obligation and merit, while later workers who trusted the owner's promise represent faith-based relationship. The reversal of payment order is narratively essential: By paying the last workers first, the landowner deliberately exposes the merit-based assumptions of the first workers, forcing them to confront their entitlement. Grace doesn't negate justice—it transcends it: The landowner fulfills every contractual obligation while simultaneously exercising sovereign generosity beyond what is owed, demonstrating that mercy and justice coexist in God's character. The parable addresses the present kingdom, not just heaven: Because it includes grumbling and complaint, this parable describes life in God's kingdom now—the "already but not yet"—rather than the consummated state. Divine sovereignty in salvation is the theological climax: The landowner's declaration "Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me?" directly addresses God's freedom in election and the scandal of unmerited grace. Key Ideas The Covenantal Nature of the Landowner's Dealings The parable's opening establishes a formal agreement between the landowner and the first workers: one denarius for a day's labor. This contractual arrangement is crucial for understanding what follows. Unlike marketplace haggling, this represents a covenant—the landowner binds himself to provide what he has promised. Tony emphasizes that even this initial contract is an act of condescension and grace, as the master had no obligation to employ anyone at all. As the day progresses, subsequent workers are hired with increasingly less formal agreements. By the third hour, the landowner promises only "whatever is right," and by the eleventh hour, no wage is even mentioned. These later workers enter the vineyard based entirely on the landowner's character and trustworthiness. This progression mirrors the movement from law to gospel—from contractual obligation to trusting promise. The theological implication is profound: those who relate to God based on His gracious word rather than calculated merit are actually in a more secure position than those who attempt to earn their standing through works. The Wilderness Echo: Grumbling as Covenant Violation The hosts make a critical exegetical observation about the Greek word for "grumbling" (γογγύζω) used in verse 11. This is not casual complaining but the identical term used throughout the Septuagint to describe Israel's covenant rebellion in the wilderness. When the workers grumble "upon receiving" their wages, they're not merely expressing disappointment about pay inequality—they're filing a covenant lawsuit against the master, accusing him of unfaithfulness. This connection to Numbers 16 and Exodus 16-17 is devastating. The Israelites' wilderness grumbling wasn't about logistics or comfort; it was fundamentally about doubting God's covenant fidelity. By employing this loaded terminology, Matthew signals that the first workers' complaint is nothing less than accusing God of covenant violation. The landowner's response ("Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius?") is a covenant defense—he has fulfilled his obligations precisely. The workers' real offense is not miscalculation but begrudging God's freedom to show mercy beyond what is contractually required. The "Evil Eye" and Begrudging God's Grace The final rhetorical question—"Or do you begrudge my generosity?"—contains another Jewish idiom often lost in translation. The Greek literally reads, "Is your eye evil because I am good?" This "evil eye" imagery appears throughout Scripture as a metaphor for envy, stinginess, and resentment toward another's blessing. The landowner's question cuts to the heart: are you cursing me for being generous? This directly parallels Jonah's response to Nineveh's salvation. Jonah had just experienced miraculous deliverance through the great fish, yet when God showed identical mercy to the Ninevites, Jonah's response was essentially, "I knew you were gracious—that's why I ran!" The parable exposes the same perverse logic: those who have received covenant mercy begrudging that same mercy extended to others. For the Pharisees listening to Jesus, this was an indictment of their resentment toward tax collectors and sinners receiving the kingdom. For Christians today, it challenges any sense of spiritual superiority based on how long we've been in the kingdom or how much we've sacrificed. Memorable Quotes Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you begrudge my generosity? That 'or' is a logical connector—either I'm not allowed to do what I want with my belongings, which is ridiculous, or if I am allowed, then you must be mad at me for being generous. Those are the only options. — Tony Arsenal The grumbling in the Old Testament in this context is a covenantal accusation. These workers aren't just complaining about not getting what they thought they would—they're questioning the veracity of the covenant that was made. — Tony Arsenal Most of us are this eleventh-hour call. It's much better to be in the place of that younger brother who comes in and repents than to be the older brother who is stubborn and finds some reason to come before God with self-righteous grievances. — Jesse Schwamb Full Episode Transcript [00:01:05] Jesse Schwamb: Welcome to episode 488 of the Reformer Brotherhood. I'm Jesse  [00:01:13] Tony Arsenal: and I am still Tony, and this is the podcast where Tony comes back. Hey brother.  [00:01:19] Jesse Schwamb: Hey brother. The band is back together again, man. It's reunited and boy, do you feel it? It feels good, doesn't  [00:01:26] Tony Arsenal: it? I do, I do. I'm excited to come back. It was nice to take a break. [00:01:29] Jesse Schwamb: Good.  [00:01:29] Tony Arsenal: I, uh, I've been, you know, texted with you a couple times. Just it was, I did my best to sort of not think about the podcast because that's sort of defeats the purpose of taking a break from something if you spend a lot of time thinking about it. Um, so I'm back. I'm refreshed. I'm ready to go.  [00:01:44] Break and Work Chaos [00:01:44] Tony Arsenal: I appreciate the listeners' patience. Uh, it's been sort of a weird, crazy busy time at work. Uh, there's a lot going on. I, I lost like. 60% of my staff in the course of like three weeks. And, um, I'm still kind of in the thick of it, but we're coming out of it. So took a little bit of time to just make sure that I was having a, an appropriate space to de-stress from that and take care of my family and attend to worship. And, um, it was really a, a blessing to have that. Uh, sort of sabbatical. Ironically, the sabbatical wars were going on at the same time on Twitter, and Jesse is blissfully unaware of that 'cause he's not involved in in the Twitter. That's true. Um, but yeah, just took a little break and it's kinda like overblown it, to call it a sabbatical. Like this is a podcast, it's a hobby, but, but it was nice to have, uh, a little bit of extra time, you know, couple hours extra week, uh, uh, each week of extra time to just decompress and, uh, play with the kids and spend time with my wife and clean the house a little bit, which was good.  [00:02:36] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, it is always good to have a clean house. You look great. You seem refreshed. The voice sounds good, and I'm like, I don't know, in year seven or eight of my Twitter sabbatical, it's going great so far. I feel like I haven't missed a whole lot. The world still seems wild and I'm sure, or X, right? We gotta go X on this. It's  [00:02:53] Tony Arsenal: always Twitter. It's always gonna be Twitter. I don't care what Elon Musk  says.  [00:02:56] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, I'm listen. I'm totally fine with that.  [00:02:58] Back to Parables [00:02:58] Jesse Schwamb: And I teased this in the last episode, but we can't be stopped. I mean, people should know this by now, we have an inexorable march through the parables of Jesus's true. That will not be stopped. We're always gonna come back until there are no more. And on this episode, we're gonna be hanging out in Matthew 20, talking about laborers in the Kingdom of Heaven.  [00:03:17] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. I'm stoked. I'm, I'm, I'm excited to get back into it. I'm excited to get back into the word together with everybody. I'm excited to clear whatever that was on in my throat out  [00:03:27] Jesse Schwamb: emotion,  [00:03:27] Tony Arsenal: live on the air. Uh, but yeah, it'll be good. I'm, I'm stoked. I mean, I love this stuff and it's good to be back.  [00:03:32] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, you had the rest. Now let's talk about labor. So speaking of labor, it's, it's time for you to work up here, Tony. Are you affirming with or denying against on this episode?  [00:03:42] Tony Arsenal: Uh, I'm affirming something and I'm hopeful, uh, that just a little behind the scenes activity here. Jesse recorded episode 487, like an hour and a half ago. I have not yet listened to it, so I don't know if you did an affirmation and I I did. If you did. I hope it's not the same one.  [00:03:58] Jesse Schwamb: I did not. You're  [00:03:59] Tony Arsenal: safe. Uh, good. So I'm safe.  [00:04:01] Artemis II Hype [00:04:01] Tony Arsenal: So, um, I'm affirming the Artemis two mission. Um, oh, nice. Have you been, I mean, I know you're not on Twitter, but I'm sure there's news elsewhere. Uh, this amazing mission around the moon, um, for astronaut, for astronauts, I think, um, the furthest man space travel, um, since the Apollo program. Um. Pretty intense, pretty amazing pictures, right? The camera technologies amazing. Increased exponentially, uh, since we were there last. Um, this is ostensibly in preparation for an actual moon landing, which who knows when that will be? Um, but as far as I've seen, the mission was a resounding success. There was no right. I think they had, they ran into a few little hiccups early on with some technical things, but nothing crazy. I have not heard. Um, I know they did touch down and they did reentry. Um, I've not heard anything one way or another, but I'm assuming since I have not heard terrible, tragic news that they made it through, did they do the reentry? I'm really, apparently I'm not actually paying as much attention to this as I thought I was. I saw a lot of information about reentry, but I guess, I don't know for sure when that happened or is happening.  [00:05:05] Jesse Schwamb: I mean, by this point, when people listen to it, it'll be old news anyway, right? So  [00:05:09] Tony Arsenal: For sure. Yeah. And either, either it went terribly wrong and I'm gonna feel awful, or it went fine and I'm gonna feel a little silly for. Throwing a caveat that it went terribly wrong out there. But, um, it's cool. It's, it's amazing. I mean, I, I commented to my wife the other day and she's kinda like, yeah, maybe we should like, spend that money on people who are on the planet. I was like, okay, I can, I can buy that wisdom. But, um, there's something very cool and very Genesis, uh, one, ask Genesis one and two, ask about flying out into space and taking dominion over Yeah, for sure. Over a, a little ball of rock, uh, you know, uh, 25,000 miles away or whatever it is. Um. And, you know, I'm like an engineering nerd. I, I don't know anything about engineering, but I love watching YouTube videos that explain stuff like this. And  [00:05:52] Jesse Schwamb: me  [00:05:52] Tony Arsenal: too, all of the videos that have cropped up now about free return and how, like they're able to basically like do minimal burn on the thrusters to get into the right trajectory and then just like meet the moon in the place it's gonna be. And then the, you know, the moon's gravity captures it and whips it back around and then shoots it back towards Earth. And for the most part, they're able to do all of that with relatively minor, um, relatively minor energy output because they're just utilizing physics and gravity and math, um, to fly to the moon and come back. Yes. It's pretty crazy amazing. So, yeah. Amazing. And the photos of like the, the sort of like new versions of the Earthrise photos are really, really phenomenal. Um, they're crisp, they're clean, they're obviously like the best, the best actual pho photographic images we've had of the lunar surface. Um. And the, the far side of the lunar surface, which we get all sorts of like telescopic photos and things of this side of the lunar surface because it's tightly locked and is facing us at all times. We don't get a ton of really great photography of the far side of the moon, which is a big part of what this mission was, so,  [00:06:56] Jesse Schwamb: right.  [00:06:56] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. If you haven't seen the photos, I mean, they're out there, they're amazing. There will be even more available once we get back. You know, they, they're transmitting only the most stellar, amazing ones. Um, and, but they're taking, I'm sure thousands and thousands of photos and, um, so yeah, it's pretty cool. I'm affirming the Artemis two mission. Um. It's just amazing what, what people can do with common grace, you know? That's right. In insight into nature. Um, I don't know anything about the astronauts. I don't know anything about their religious faith or their spiritual life or anything like that. But, um, the people who design this, the people who fly it, they're just tapping into the truth that's present in God's creation. So good on them. Uh, either I'm glad they got home, wish they have a safe home coming, or something along those lines, I guess. I don't know.  [00:07:40] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, you'll be happy to know that NASA is reporting that the four astronauts are an excellent condition after they landed in the Pacific Ocean. So  [00:07:47] Tony Arsenal: good.  [00:07:47] Jesse Schwamb: All, all appears to be well. And it says they have a giant SD card of pictures that's they've been taking. Yeah. And saving. I'm sure. They were just, they were just too big to send to over wifi.  [00:07:58] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Like massive wideness. Yeah. I mean, I'm sure they have a ton that they didn't send because you know Right. Data rates to the moon are pretty high. Yeah.  [00:08:05] Jesse Schwamb: Ex. Yeah.  [00:08:05] Tony Arsenal: This economy is crazy. So  [00:08:07] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly. In this economy. Really In this economy. Yeah, exactly.  [00:08:11] Cosmic Worship Reflections [00:08:11] Jesse Schwamb: I think you're right. This is good. I haven't talked about this at all. It's hard not to get just stoked, even in the amateur way about the science, the technology, the physics of all this stuff, and then even the astronauts just being overwhelmed by what they're seeing. [00:08:24] Tony Arsenal: Mm-hmm.  [00:08:25] Jesse Schwamb: It's hard not to get pulled into that and think about the universe that God has created and find that there is something transcendent just, uh, by observing all of these things. Yeah. Like even casually, which I think shows, again, this is literally the, the heavens and the earth crying out for God, showing his immeasurable power and, you know, immortal nature. It's incredible that we can even see and be a part of some of these things. Just wild.  [00:08:49] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, and I think it's crazy that they can get signals to the moon. I mean, I drive home from Dartmouth College and I go through half of the spot there, and I don't have a cell signal, but we can get images from the moon. Um, so yeah, it's great. It's great. Check it out if you haven't seen it. If you haven't heard about it, I don't know what you're doing. Uh, this is probably the largest major scientific advancement in our generation. Um, in terms of like big scale scientific enterprise projects. There's been a lot of really amazing technology that's been developed. But this is like the first big. Almost like risky kind of scientific,  [00:09:30] Jesse Schwamb: right?  [00:09:30] Tony Arsenal: I dunno. Gambit or I dunno, gamble that we've done in a long time. Big deal. I mean, big a lot. Deal of things. Deal. Nothing went wrong. Nothing ma major went wrong. Praise God that they all got back to the planet safely. Right. But, um, a lot of things could have gone wrong, uh, and they didn't. So check out the photos, check out the scientific data they're gonna get. I mean, I'm sure they've got all sorts of information about the way the, the, the space ship moved, all of that stuff. It's gonna be really interesting to see kind of how this all comes about.  [00:09:56] Jesse Schwamb: Get some worship on, right? Yeah. I mean this is what a one, a thing to be reminded about how big and how glorious God is. [00:10:01] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:10:01] Jesse Schwamb: And, and to realize, like you said, the risks of this exploration. And this is God again, creating all of this outta nothing. Why? Yeah. Just absolutely wild. Incredible.  [00:10:12] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah, for  [00:10:12] Jesse Schwamb: sure. Blown away.  [00:10:13] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. What about you, Jesse? What do you have for us?  [00:10:15] Bayes and Predictability [00:10:15] Jesse Schwamb: I got affirmation. It's equally nerdy, and actually this is as is always the case. This is why one of many reasons I miss you is it, it dovetails so nicely, so I'm affirming with a book. It's called Everything Is Predictable, how Esy and Statistics Explains the World. It's by a guy named Tom Chivers. I know this sounds super nerdy, but hear me out on this because Thomas Bayes, if you don't know this guy is first kind of like a wild and interesting guy, but this whole theory he put forward is super interesting. And this book is not like a mathematics book. It's like reads almost like a statistical thriller, which as it came outta my mouth, realized it was not maybe more ingratiating. I could have chosen better words than statistical thriller. But Thomas Bayes was alive in the 17 hundreds. And what's interesting to me at least about him, is he was an English statistician, who was a Presbyterian minister actually. He was a non-conformist and his, this whole theorem that he developed was actually published after his death. And the non-conformist part is super interesting. It's all in this book, even some of his different theological ideas. But because he was non-conformist, it basically meant like he couldn't learn. He was kicked out of all the English universities. He had to go to Scotland. Even all of that shaped how he came up with this particular theorem. But the gist of it is. Rather than treating like probabilities, as we think about it as this fixed frequency, you know, how many times does this thing occur? He argued and realized that it should represent a degree of belief and then you would update that belief rationally as new evidence comes in. And I know that sounds super quaint, but this is like what machine learning is based on medical diagnosis. A lot of like space travel is based on this in terms of understanding uncertainty and systems spam, all of that stuff. Here's an example, I think Tony, because we are, we have to carry forward with the top 50 medical podcast thing, right? We've got going on here. Lemme just give everybody an example of why you need this and why you automatically think this way. So. Statistics is really important, especially in medical testing. This was really prevalent in during COVID. So there's two ways that you can describe how a medical test performs you. You know this already, Tony, you're an expert. So one would be like sensitivity. So like how AIG  [00:12:19] Tony Arsenal: not an expert.  [00:12:20] Jesse Schwamb: Oh, you're definitely an expert in testing. Here we go. So one would be like sensitivity. How good is the test at catching people who are sick? So if you're sick, you, you want the test to identify that, that you're sick. That's sensitivity. So a test with a 99% sensitivity is gonna correctly identify 99 out of a hundred people who are truly sick. It always gonna miss one person. It's a false negative. The other half of that coin is something called specificity. So if sensitivity is all about catching the people who are sick, specificity is gonna say, how good is the test at clearing people who are not sick? And so a test with 99% specificity, you might have correctly guessed, is gonna identify or clear 99 out of a hundred healthy people. Now if you have a test. Both of those 99% sensitive and 99% specific, you might be thinking, that is the dream. That's exactly what I want. That that test is gonna be so precise and accurate. How could my intuition fail me? But this is the thing. It actually fails all the time, and here's why. Let's say that. You go out and you screen a group of people, a general population for a rare disease that affects one in a thousand people. One in a thousand people, rare disease. So if you screen 10,000 people from the general population, that means that truly only 10 of them are going to have the actual disease. I'm not gonna do all the math 'cause it'll, oh, this is already making for amazing podcasting. But here's the bottom line. That test, which sounds so good on the face, is going to identify 109 people as truly sick or truly having disease. But the problem is that only 10 of them actually have it. That means that only there's, it only has a success rate of 9%. There's only 9% chance you actually have the disease, but it's falsely identified. The short end of this is Bayes corrects that problem. He fixes it with his theorem so that we get to the right number of people. That's what's called like a base fallacy rate. It's not taking into account that really only 10 people should have this particular disease or this sickness. So I know that's sounds super nerdy, but so much of our lives are based on this. We have a prior belief or a prior set of things that we understand about the world. And then as evidence comes in, we refine that. That sounds so normal and normative, but it's revolutionary in this book actually. Bayes versus what's called like frequentist or frequent, um, probability is like hotly debated. People actually throw down over this theorem. So it's a really fun read. Go check out. Everything is predictable. Al Bayesian statistics explains our world. It really is for everybody. And then you can impress your friends with all the statistical pross you're gonna have when you're done reading it.  [00:14:56] Tony Arsenal: Like the medical administrator hat that I can't always take off is like, why would we screen 10,000 people? Are, are they all symptomatic? Are none of them symptomatic? But suppose it doesn't really  [00:15:08] Jesse Schwamb: matter for the example. That's a great, so generally what happens here is, let's say it's like some kind of rare form of cancer, unless you use Bayesian statistics, what you'll find is you'll get these false positive rates. So these tests do use Bayesian statistics. It corrects, in other words, for this problem. So there might be a lot of people that are gonna screen for this because if you, you wanna know if you have it, but you don't wanna get it wrong and say that you do. So this ensures his approach ensures that you get it. Right. It's wild. Fascinating stuff.  [00:15:34] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, and I would think actually, you know, there's probably, there's other mechanisms as well where they would, where they would sort of screen out. People that shouldn't be tested or help identify false negatives, false positives. Um, but yeah, that's, that's interesting. I probably won't read that book, but it sounds like an interesting read. I just don't have a lot of room on my A TBR shelf.  [00:15:55] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, listen. That, that's fair.  [00:15:57] Goodreads DNF Update [00:15:57] Jesse Schwamb: By the way, here's like a, a side affirmation. I think you and I both share speaking like books and cataloging books. If you use Good Reads, good Reads. Right. Finally adding a list of the Do Not Did Not Finish book. That's fantastic. This, this might be an example for some people, so pick it up and even if you don't have a place for it, guess where you can put it on the did not finish list. Yeah. Good Reads.  [00:16:16] Tony Arsenal: That's finally, that's one of those like, like why didn't they add that 15 years ago? Kind of an updates and you get the email and they're like, we're so excited to introduce the did Not Finish thing. And we're like, yeah. Like of course. Like, duh. It's likes, like, we're proud to introduce that. Your keypad now has a zero on it.  [00:16:36] Jesse Schwamb: Right. So  [00:16:37] Tony Arsenal: yeah. I'm, I'm excited about the DNR, um, the DNF, um, I'm so excited. I can't even remember what it's called. Yeah. The shelf. But, uh, very, very useful. The DNR list  [00:16:47] Jesse Schwamb: is a diff it is a different list. Speaking of medical things, it's a different  [00:16:50] Tony Arsenal: list. Yeah. Yeah, that's definitely a different thing. Usually it's not a list. It's a list of one in most cases.  [00:16:56] Jesse Schwamb: Exactly,  [00:16:57] Tony Arsenal: yeah. You can't put other people on your  [00:17:00] Jesse Schwamb: DNR  [00:17:00] Tony Arsenal: This,  [00:17:00] Jesse Schwamb: I suppose. Yeah, I should clarify that. You can really, you can only really put yourself, or I suppose somebody for whom you have that kind of authority over on that list, but I was thinking that more from like a medical perspective, that somewhere there would be a database in which there might be a list of DNR. I don't know.  [00:17:15] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, maybe. I don't know. I'm not sure. Probably there was at some point, but I think with medical chart technology now, that's probably like a. A moot point. Yeah. They don't need to be able to like cross reference a master list anymore. They just look in the patient's electronic record. We're really like in the weeds here. You can tell it's been a while since I've, I've podcasted. I don't really remember how to do this.  [00:17:35] Jesse Schwamb: This is great.  [00:17:36] Segue to Matthew 20 [00:17:36] Jesse Schwamb: I think at this point we try to make some kind of awkward segue that is mildly successful. Again, probably has statistically like a 20 to 27% chance of being successful and really hitting the mark. Yeah. So do you have anything that's gonna move us into this?  [00:17:49] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, I mean, I feel like you've been podcasting for the last several weeks without me and I've been working hard and now I'm kind of coming in as Johnny come lately and we're gonna get paid the same amount so. Even though you've worked harder for longer and I'm coming in late to the game here. [00:18:03] Jesse Schwamb: Oh man. Ple loved ones. Please tell me you got that. Please tell me you got all of that. That's, that's what you show up for here. Yeah, that was  [00:18:10] Tony Arsenal: a deep cut.  [00:18:11] Jesse Schwamb: That, that was beautiful. And I think leads us right into Matthew 20. So I think we've got at least 16 verses to get through here. Maybe again, if we're gonna keep a statistical theme here, something about engineering and math, all that stuff, we'll let everybody else pick the over under and whether or not we're gonna get through this and how many verses that's going to be. But at this point, we might as well begin.  [00:18:32] Tony Arsenal: Yes. Yeah.  [00:18:33] Read the Parable [00:18:33] Tony Arsenal: I'll start by reading. Uh, we're here in Matthew chapter 20, the first 16 versus this is the parable of the laborers in the vineyard and it reads. For the Kingdom of Heaven is like a master of a house who went out early in the morning to hire laborer laborers for his vineyard. After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into the vineyard and going out about the third hour, he saw others standing idle in the marketplace. He said to them, you go into the vineyard too, and whatever is right, I will give you. So they went, going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he did the same. And about the 11th hour, he went out and found others standing. And he said to them, why do you stand here idle all day? They said to him, because no one has hired us. And he said to them, you go into the vineyard too. And when the evening came, the owner of the vineyard said to his foreman, call the laborers and pay them with their wages, beginning with the last up to the first. And when those hired about the 11th hour came, each of them received a denarius. Now, when those hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius. And on receiving it, they grumbled at the master of the house saying, these last worked only one hour and you have made them equal to us who have borne the burden of the day and the scorching heat. And he replied to one of them, friend, I'm doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me? For a denarius, take what belongs to you and go, I choose to give the last worker as I give to you. Am I not allowed to do what I choose with what belongs to me? Or do you beg, do you begrudge my generosity? So the last will be first and the first will be last. Now I just wanna head this off. I did bite my tongue earlier and I probably am lisping and this is like a running gag. We thought that we'd resolved it. Uh, so if you hear me stumble over my words a little bit, it's just, it's just the struggle bus today.  [00:20:24] Jesse Schwamb: Listen, this is the, these are like the real things we have to deal with when the podcasting, like the real threats, the real injuries. I appreciate you like working through it. Like you just get back up and you walk it off with your tongue.  [00:20:35] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, my, my, uh, my podcasting hiatus was actually just a recovery of the last time I bit my tongue. I just needed a couple weeks to, no, I'm just kidding.  [00:20:43] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, we didn't wanna say.  [00:20:44] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:20:44] Kingdom Fairness and Grumbling [00:20:44] Tony Arsenal: So, Jesse, this is a, this is a parable that follows right on the heels, um, of kind of everything we've been talking about. And I think as we go through these parables and we look at them and we, we sort of pick them up and we look at the different facets of them, we sort of compare them to each other. We kind of, we kind of place them in their context really. They all have basically the same theme, right? Like they're all kind of circulating around these same topics. In this parable, it's circulating around this idea that, um, the, the owner of the vineyard, the master of the vineyard, is allowed to pay the people he employs whatever he wants. And as long as the payment that is due to an individual is received by that individual, then what other people receive and how they receive it and how hard they've worked and how hard they didn't work. That's really not germane to whether or not the, the laborer received a fair wage, uh, in the first place. Right. So we're, we're circling around themes of kind of fairness of, uh, of sort of resentment, I think for resentment at the master's generosity, which has been a big theme in previous ones. So this will be good for us to expand on. There's always little nuggets and kernels of things that are different from other parables, and then it's interesting to always see the ways that they kind of line up and, and tell us similar things.  [00:21:57] Jesse Schwamb: And this parable is unique to Matthew. Yeah. And it does function as this exposition or expansion of what Jesus says in chapter 19 where it says, but many who are first will be last. And the last first, which is repeated with this lovely like inverted emphasis in, at the end of this as you just read. So it belongs to this like interesting cluster of teacher teachings on discipleship and reward nature of the kingdom of God. And we've, we've spoken a lot about that. I think I was just reminded of this as you were, you were. Reading this, I feel like I remember this from some teaching, like this parable is kind of like a unique chiasm that's anchored on the landowner, sovereign generosity, which you brought up. And then there's the complaints of the first hired, which is mirrored by the late comers vulnerability. And then the landowners, two speeches which divide everything, kind of provide sandwich and the like, the theological climax. It does start in that really familiar way, which we've gotten accustomed to thinking about that introductory formula of the kingdom of heaven is like, and it signals of course that what follows is not gonna be a lesson in economics, but it's gonna use all this economic language as theological disclosure for how God's kingdom operates. And it starts again, like you said, with this master of the house, which to me seems. Pretty clearly like a, a God figure himself. Yeah. It's, that's kind of like a reoccurring mathian image. I think. So we've got this vineyard, which of course has all this symbolism, steeply rooted in Israel's covenant imagination and evokes God's people and his redemptive labor among them. So, man, now that I'm saying this all loud, is this thing like super pregnant with all kinds of like imagery and meaning?  [00:23:27] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And you know, it's, it's always good to remember, although parables have kind of some parables, most parables have sort of distinct discreet, symbolic elements where like, this represents that this represents that almost in an allegorical form. And, and in some cases, like purely in allegorical form, where it's like pilgrim's progress where each, each individual, each entity, each location each represents some sort of symbolic value. But we have to remember that when, when it says the parable of the kingdom of heaven is like the master of the house, it's not just like the master of the house. Yes. Right. It's like this whole scenario. Yes. It's, it's like. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. It's like everything that follows, it's like the entire, um, the entire paree here. That's what the Kingdom of Heaven is like. And one of the things that I think is striking about this is the kingdom of heaven is like some people complaining, like the people complaining about, some people are getting the same wage for less work. Um, that is part of what the Kingdom of Heaven is like. So I think we sometimes think of, of. The kingdom of heaven in, um, in the parables, we think of it as though God is just saying, this is what heaven is like. Right? Jesus Just saying like, this is what heaven is like, but the kingdom of heaven, that language is broader than what we normally would say, uh, is. We're thinking of heaven, like in the, the spiritual abode where God lives and the angels live. Um, where, where the departed saints are waiting for the resurrection, the kingdom of heaven is, is also inclusive of the, the sort of like. Time now between the victory of Christ on the cross and the consummation of the kingdom and the last day, the kingdom of heaven is inclusive of that time period too. And so this parable sort of situates us. I think it situates us in that pre consummated state where we're talking about what it's like to be a part of the kingdom of heaven here and now in our fallen state, but still solidly in the kingdom of heaven. 'cause there's not gonna be any complaining or grumbling about God's justice in God's fairness once we're in the final resurrected state. Right? Sure. Nobody's gonna be looking back and be like, yeah, you were way too gracious for that guy. Nobody's gonna be playing the Jonah part when we're all resurrected and we're worshiping for, for all time going forward. So this parable, because there are elements of. Dissatisfaction or elements of grumbling or complaining similar to like the, the parable of the prodigal son. There's this sun figure, the, the older sun figure who like is just a bonehead and doesn't get it. Well, that can't be talking about the people who are in the resurrection kingdom in the final kingdom. It's gotta be talking about people who are still awaiting the resurrection of the body and who are still not yet. Uh, and even in, in that parable, the, the older son doesn't even seem to be a figure who's, who's regener. Maybe he does become regener at some point in the future, but he doesn't seem to be. In, even in God's kingdom, he doesn't seem to be, even among God's people, he's consistently placed outside of the field. You don't even know he exists until Nick halfway through the parable. This is similar in that there are these workers, they're receiving their wages and some of them are, are outwardly dissatisfied and grumbling against the master of the house. Um, so I think if we think about parables as describing heaven rather than the kingdom of heaven, we can lose sight of, of what's actually being said in a lot of them. [00:26:50] Contracts Versus Grace [00:26:50] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that's really good stuff because it strikes me that there are like, strangely, two groups here mentioned, I, I find this really kind of fascinating. We, I think we should talk about this, like the first group has like the most formal agreement, it's almost a legal contract, right? Various was like a standard day laborers wage sufficient mostly for subsistence. And so that detail seems theologically loaded to me. These workers relate to the landowner on the basis of a contract and what is owed. And so their claim at the end of the day will be exactly that. They're owed something and they know it, and that sets up Then this contrast with a second group, which is mostly all about grace because by the time we get to that third hour, like. Approximately like 9:00 AM then we're beginning this pattern repeated at the sixth and the ninth hours. And crucially, for those workers who go out, go out and get recruited, there's no wage that's specified for them. Only the promise of like whatever is right. And so they enter the vineyard, not on the basis of a contract, but on the basis of like the owner's word and character. And that seems to be like more of a picture of trust and not, not calculation. Yeah. Separate than like the first group. And that marketplace, idleness, as I read this, doesn't imply like laziness because verse seven clarifies like they just had not been hired. Right? They were overworked, they were unemployed. They were marginalized. So it does set up, like you said, everything you just talked about, about the kind of this, I like that. Like the Jonah, the Jonah whiners or whatever, like yeah, they want to complain about this, right? There are, and there are two, two separate groups that have kind of been brought into the fold, not under different terms or pretenses, but differently. [00:28:17] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And I think too, bear's saying, um. Although there are elements of parables that are very, very directly applicable. Mm. We shouldn't read this as though every, every specific thing in the parable is not a parable. Right. Right. I think we can look at this and we can go, you know, you can read this in a way where, oh yeah, there's some people actually earn their, earn their wage, they earn ary. Right. It's a fair contract. And they work all day and he says, well, I'm gonna give you what's right, what you, what I owe you.  [00:28:45] God Owes Nothing [00:28:45] Tony Arsenal: The reality is God doesn't owe any of us anything. Right? Right. He owes us wrath and judgment and destruction. And so even, even the people who are the hard workers in the kingdom of God don't merit and never could merit, um, to, in a certain sense, in a strict sense and stick with me before you send your, your angry emails in a real strict sense. Even Adam couldn't merit. What was, well, it was guaranteed to him, according to the Covenant of Works, God had to condescend to make the covenant of works in order for Adam to have any sort of fruition of his blessedness. So there there's no natural obligation, strict obligation that God has to reward the work of his creatures because nothing they could do could ever be sufficient enough to obligate him. So the, the obligation of himself, and that's, this is where I do think this is strong, the fact that he obligates himself to these workers to give them their denarius after a hard day's work  [00:29:37] Jesse Schwamb: exactly  [00:29:37] Tony Arsenal: is itself. A covenantal, um, contractual, yes. But I actually read this as sort of a covenantal thing and the, the strange part is that the people don't recognize the sort of semi gracious covenantal nature of this. Yes.  [00:29:50] Grace In The Hiring [00:29:50] Tony Arsenal: I think, um, you know, there have been times when I, where I've been unemployed, um, not for very long. Now, I know some people face unemployment for a lot longer than I ever have, but I know there was times where I was, I was looking for work and someone would say to me like, Hey, you know, my, my, my lawn needs to be mowed. Could you come over and I'll, I'll give you 25 bucks to mow my lawn. It's a small lawn. Um. That's a gracious act in most cases. Right, right. Um, yes, I'm performing a task. Yes, they're paying me, but they didn't have to offer me that work. They didn't have to offer me that job, especially when it's something that like they could have accomplished themselves. They could have just done it themselves. Um, so I think there's an element of that here, that there's, there's a condescension of the master to these workers, to these laborers who are not part of his household. These are not, they're not slaves. These are not people who are part of his household, who are regular employees. These are people that he goes out into the market to, to find and to hire. And as we see some of, some of these mark, like the difference between the ones that are hired and the ones that are not hired until later in the day, the parable's not super clear about what it is. Just that they're not hired, it doesn't say the lazy ones were left there. The ones were exactly, that were ugly or had like limp legs or like just couldn't cut it. It just says like there was some that didn't get hired. Um, so there's a gracious element of this, and that makes the recognition at the end or the lack of recognition at the end by these full day laborers, the, the sort of like recognition, this, this entitled ness, um, that actually makes it all the worst. It's like the people who are outwardly attached to the covenant of grace. Um, I know all the Baptists in our, our group, their heads just exploded, but like are outwardly attached to the covenant of grace, um, who wanna somehow complain about like the graciousness of the covenant of grace that they're outwardly attached to it. It's just sort of like a form of, of theological and temporary insanity, I think. And that's what we see on full display here.  [00:31:40] Jesse Schwamb: It's definitely all grace. You're right that nobody's gonna get injustice right in this parable. And I think that's definitely exemplified the further out you go in this hiring order. [00:31:49] Eleventh Hour Mercy [00:31:49] Jesse Schwamb: So by the time you get to 5:00 PM which is pretty extraordinary, right? Only really like one hour remains before sense, right? It's the end of the working day.  [00:31:56] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:31:56] Jesse Schwamb: You can imagine like these guys who are being hired at the hour probably can contribute very little in the last hour of the day, right? But this owner goes out and hires them and no agreement is stated whatsoever. It's just pure grace. The landowner's question, why do you stand here idle all day? I think to your point, underlies their vulnerability. They were not idle by choice, presumably. And so I think we rightly here in this, like a foreshadowing of those who are called the late in redemptive history, Gentile sinners, the seemingly least qualified for kingdom membership. All of that I think is at play and it's all, it's getting this lovely setup of all these groups to help us understand what that kingdom is actually like.  [00:32:33] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah.  [00:32:35] Reverse Payroll Setup [00:32:35] Tony Arsenal: And then we have this, um, this is where the sort of dramatic tension turns, right? The end of the day comes and, uh, the master calls the, the people that he brought last, right? He calls the people who'd only been there for an hour and he starts to go down the list of the people who, the people who were last, and the people who came in next. And the people who came in next, right? And the workers who had contracted at the beginning of the day. Um, they're watching this happen and they're kind of going, oh, this is gonna be good. Like, that guy's only been here for an hour and he got a denarius. You know, the logic is probably like, I'm gonna get 12 denarius, like I'm gonna go 12 days worth of work. Um, because I think there's an assumption on their part, um, that the master's fair that he is, he's providing an equitable wage. Um, of course the master is fair, but he's providing an equitable wage that's commensurate with the work delivered. A delivered, delivered, right? And that, that's the key to this parable.  [00:33:26] Merit Mindset Exposed [00:33:26] Tony Arsenal: I think the expectation that God. Helps those who help themselves. Right? God rewards those who put in the hard work. God. God provides blessing or salvation according to the merit provided by the one who's being saved. That perspective is what's on full display here. Yes. By the people who are, uh, the ones who contracted for the full day. They're not thinking about the covenant that they have with this person or the contract they have with this person. They're not thinking about the fact that they agreed to work for the day in order to earn a day's wage. They're thinking about how this actually is gonna work out great in their favor. They're looking at this as a strictly merit-based kind of a, a thing. And you would think that like when the, the one hour people come in, they get a denarius, and then the three hour people come in and they get a denarius. You'd think they would pick up on it at some point, but then in the course of the payroll, it doesn't seem that they do. They still get to the bottom of the list and think they're gonna get more compared to the other people who all got the same.  [00:34:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that display piece is critical to this. It is like complete setup. Like you can imagine he, the landowner calling everybody together at the end of the day and they're all standing around. Some of them are exhausted because they've again born all their work in the heat of the day on their backs. They're tired, they're dirty, maybe they're exhausted. And he starts in this reverse order. And by the way, we should note that there is something here that's beautiful in that the law, the landowner is law abiding because right evening payment is mandated in the Torah. So we see all this taking place as to fulfill the law in some ways. But the reversal of the order that last of first is like such deliberative and good narrative storytelling and staging, isn't it? 'cause it ensures that the first hired workers are going to witness the payment of those who work the least. And if without that order, if you just did it the other way around, the more a crisis of the parable disc like completely goes away.  [00:35:10] Tony Arsenal: Yeah.  [00:35:10] Jesse Schwamb: So this execution of the payment at the owner's will, it just shows that he has. He's completely independent. His sovereignty belong. The sovereignty belongs to the master alone. And so this 11th hour workers receiving a full day's wage for one hour of work, that's like an act of sheer generosity. It's not proportional justice. And I think as reform, people, maybe all of us at some point have had this conversation about predestination and justice and mercy. And again, really I think putting a crowbar between this idea that nobody is receiving injustice, but some are receiving mercy and grace. And here these first hired workers seeing this form, like you said, this expectation that they're gonna receive more, like you said, where that came from. Yeah, it's just them, right? It's purely manufactured in their own reasoning. It's not anchored in the covenantal promise and certainly not witnessed in the grace that they should be receive, like perceiving as the payments get doled out, like sequentially moving in their reverse order toward those who have worked the longest. But their expectation reveals that they have fundamentally misread like the landowner's character. They're still operating in the register of a contract and not grace.  [00:36:16] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. And you know, I think to sort of lock this covenant covenantal frame and sort of like lack of recognition of the covenant into place too, when you look at the language of this parable, um, and especially kind of what it's following up on, it's coming on the heels of this interaction with this rich, rich young ruler who comes in and he thinks that he's gonna earn eternal life by keeping the commandments. Um, and, and he, he has this outward sense or this outward display of pty. He's calling Jesus good. He's saying he, you know, he keeps the commandments, Jesus doesn't even disagree with him actually, that he has connect. Yes. You know, I think it's implied that, well, of course you haven't, but he, he still is graciously trying to like, convince this guy, no, you actually need to abandon your self righteousness and, and pursue and follow me. Um. But this is a parable where like other people are listening, right? There's other witnesses. This isn't like the rich young ruler came to him in the middle of the night, like Nicodemus. This is something that's happened on PO on in the public. So we can anticipate that the Pharisees and the Sadducees and the scribes and the lawyers were all aware of this. They may have been there, but they were at least aware of this happening. And I think there's some language in here that is actually directed at those people.  [00:37:30] Grumbling As Accusation [00:37:30] Tony Arsenal: And, and here's where it comes in, is you get to verse, um, we'll start reading again at verse nine. It says, when those hired about the 11th hour came, each of them received a denarius. Now, when those hired first came, so we're referring to the people who are hired at the beginning of the day. Now, when those who were hired first came, they thought they would receive more, but each of them also received a denarius and on receiving it, right? So this is as, this is, um, uh, just unbelievable as they're receiving the denarius on receiving it, they grumbled at the master of the house. Now, just the way that I read that and said the word grumbled tells you that that word is really important here. Yes. If you look at this Greek word. And you compare it to the, the word, the usage of this word in the, the, um, Sept. Yes. Which of course is the Greek translation of the Old Testament. This word most commonly appears in the wilderness wandering accounts. [00:38:22] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.  [00:38:23] Tony Arsenal: Right. And the, the primary sin of the Israelites during the wilderness wandering was grumbling against the Lord. And this grumbling against the Lord in that context is not just a general complaining, right. It's not just like a, a sort of like a, a general dissatisfaction or like murmuring. This isn't like water cooler frustration about your boss. The grumbling in the Old Testament in this context is a covenantal accusation, right. So this is tied to the, the accounts where Moses first is told to strike the rock, and he does so when the water comes out, and then second is told to speak to the rock, but he strikes it. I won't go into all the details, but the scene that's being, being displayed there is the people come, they accuse the Lord of abandoning them into the wilderness. And this scene where Moses is set up on the rock and he strikes the rock, that scene is a judicial scene. The people have filed a covenant accusation against the Lord, and in reality, it's the people who have been unfaithful. But the Lord standing in the place of the rock is the one who is struck, right? Jesus was the rock in the wilderness from which the water came. Paul says that in First Corinthians, right? So this language of grumbling in this is not just, they're not just complaining about the fact that they didn't get what they thought they were going to, they're questioning the veracity of the covenant that was made. So they're, they're still locked into this merit-based. This merit-based idea even more than it seemed at first, right? There's a logic to the idea that like, oh, if the, the master is actually paying a wage of one denarius for per hour, like there's a logic to that. But it's not just that they're saying, and this is, this explains the response of the master. It's not just that they're saying like, Hey, wait a second, like the wage rate that you're paying is not right. They're saying you have violated the terms of our covenant in the way that you have paid us. 'cause it's upon receiving it that they complain or they grumble and the master says more or less like, Hey. You agreed with me for one Denarius, I'm giving you what you've earned. I'm giving you what you agreed on. Why don't you take it and go. So the answer is not to try to justify why he is free to pay these other people more, or why he's free to pay these people a perceived less. The answer is, again, they're complaining against the covenant. He is bringing it back to the covenant saying, well, here's what the covenant relationship was. You work for the day. I give you Denarius. We're square here, we're on the same page. We've fulfilled our covenant obligations, and you've received your reward for that. So I, I think that's another thing we have to lock in here is this is not just a general idea of like unfairness that's being presented. This is not just a general idea that people are saying the master of the house is unfair. They're saying he's covenantal. Unfaithful. Right? That's a pretty big accusation.  [00:41:09] Jesse Schwamb: Yeah, that is, thank you by the way, for completely stealing the whole tugen thing from me. Like I was just going hot to Tugen to find that reference. And now all I can do is add to it. So that is from at least one of those occasions, a number 16, and I just wanna read the verse. This is 16 six. So Moses and Aaron said to all the sons of Israel at evening, you will know that Yahweh has brought you outta the land of Egypt. And in the morning you will see the glory of Yahweh for he hears your grumblings against Yahweh. And what we are that you grumble against us. So I'm totally with you. This is not subtle. The workers first complaint here, the first workers' complaint is like theologically serious. Uh, I think that's what you're hitting us on. Like it charges the owner with injustice. Right. And as I read it, the grievance has like two layers or two parts, I would say. One is this comparative part, which is basically saying, you made us equal to them. Right? And the second be like a meritorious part, they have worked harder and in worse conditions. And that's why they say things like, it's, it's all inflammatory language, isn't it? Like the scorching heat emphasizes like the real bodily cost and their complaint. I think if we're honest, it's not irrational, but it's spiritually revealing at least because Right, they believe their greater effort, mayors greater reward and they resent that grace shown to others. So like you said, they're bringing forward a very serious grievance and it's, it's not just like, Hey, we think maybe could you give us a bonus? Right. But that is a matter of faithfulness. And in fact, like as I'm looking at this tugen here, shout out to logos Bible software. And I'm saying that that verb that we're talking about in Exodus 16 is in the imperfect tense. So this is, they kept on grumbling and it is like an an echo of Israel's murmuring in the wilderness, which I presume like Matthew certainly had intentionally used there or had that view in part casting these workers as the same types of those who relate to God through entitlement rather than gratitude. So it's like insults upon insult here, but it is to emphasize this fact that it's no small accusation, it's not subtle, it's meant to be in your face. They're coming in hot with this and they're making a big deal about it.  [00:43:16] Tony Arsenal: Yeah, and again, I think like underscoring the covenantal nature of this is so key. And I think, you know, when we look at this, we really have to land that this is not just saying. Your wage structure is not right. 'cause and, and we gotta remember, they weren't there when the master went and made this bargain, or, you know, brought these other workers into the vineyard. They weren't there to hear what covenant or contract he did or didn't make. And as we've commented, they didn't, he didn't even make a covenant with them. He basically just said, I'm gonna put you to work and I'll pay you what's fair. I'll pay you what's right. Um, and they went, okay, you need the work and thank you. Like, I think, I think that's kind of like the, the scene here is they're standing there. They recognize they're not gonna get a wage for the day, especially these ones that he's coming in at the 11th hour, they're not gonna get a wage for the day. And as you said, these are subsistence workers. Right. These are people that if you don't get a wage, and this is the, the grounding of the Old Testament, um, the Old Testament command of, of paying at the end of the day is that if they don't get their wage, they're not gonna eat. They're not gonna have food, they're not gonna have the money they need to survive. Um, so he comes in and he basically says like. You don't have a job that's not gonna be good for you. I'll take care of you. I'll, I'll give you a job and I'll take care of you. And the ones who are complaining and grumbling, they have no line of sight to that process. That, that's right. They make a lot of assumptions about the, and this is, goes back to, um. The parable of the talents, which we haven't really talked about yet. The, the, there's a lot of assumptions about the nature of this master that the, the contracted or covenanted day laborers are making that don't turn out to be accurate. Right. They, they assume that he's working, as you've said, that he's working on this one-to-one, you know, quid pro quo. You do this, I do that kind of a, a methodology and he's actually operating on a basis of a much more. Basic, uh, grace principle. Uh, and again, even, even the principle of hiring these original workers and covenanting with them is gracious in the sense that he didn't have to hire them. Right. So, so all along the way they're, they're, it's like the epitome of looking a gift horse in the mouth.  [00:45:24] Jesse Schwamb: Yes.  [00:45:24] Tony Arsenal: They've been hired, and so yes, it is right for them to expect their, um, to expect their wage, whatever that wage might be. But they, they are misinterpreting the idea of what the wages are and how the wages are to be delivered. They're, they're applying, this is actually a lot like job's, friends, right? Their, their logic is not actually all that bad, but they have, they have missing parts of the picture that makes the logic. Apply differently in this particular situation. They think that this, this master works on a strict merit-based. You do X amount of work, you receive X amount of money. And this master is actually more functioning on this covenantal principle of, I'm gonna pay you what's right, regardless of what, what work you've done, which, what work is actually owed to you. And the master makes these, this agreement with these other workers to just say, go into the vineyard and then when the evening comes, I'll pay you. Right. Well, he intended to pay them what they needed to survive, regardless of how much work they provided. Right? So they're all, even though there's a formal contract to say these, this group works for the whole day and this group, you know, and, and they receive one day's labor, at the end of the day, he's graciously providing another day of survival for all of these people, for the work that they're, they're putting forward regardless of how much they actually contribute to his bottom line. [00:46:41] Owner Defends The Covenant [00:46:41] Jesse Schwamb: And we see that in verse 13, where the landowner gives his defense, you know, it says. He and he replied, friends, I'm doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for Denarius? Now the address, because now I'm deep in the Greek Tony. Here we go. So the address I'm seeing in, uh, again, shout out to Locus Bible software, it, this use of friend is not like the warm fellows, but like a more formal or distance term of address. It's used elsewhere in Matthew. But I think the point here is that the owner's first line of defense is this contractual point, which you're saying. I have not wronged you. He's kept his agreement precisely. No injustice has been done. And that's crucial. The owner doesn't re appreciate justice. He actually fulfills it. He obligates himself and he fulfills that obligation. And what the worker receives is exactly what was promised and exactly what is due. And so by the time he gets to verse 14 where he says, take what belongs to you, and go, I choose to give to this last worker as I give to you here. I think this is like the theological beating hide of this whole bad boy. Yeah.  [00:47:37] Jesse Schwamb: The landowner explicitly invokes his will, his sovereign freedom to do and to give as he pleases, which is exactly how God behaves. It's not a negation of justice, but this declaration of something beyond justice, it is grace. He exercises his freedom and generosity to those who had no claim, and the command, take what belongs to you and go is, is kind of like a world dismissal, like, like you were saying. Yeah. We're in the courtroom. He's like, I, I've ruled on this already. Like, bring Brian, bring your grievance. Here's my ruling. Take what you have and go. Their grumbling has revealed that they're not celebrating the kingdom. They're actually grieving it. So yeah, you know, I think original invocation of like Jonah is right on the money. It's basically like, are are you mad enough? Yeah, I'm mad enough to die. Like, how dare you give me, give me this great shade and then take it away from me. Yeah. And in some ways this is even worse because what they have been given has been that were promised to them, was given to them, and they get to retain and God says, go, or the landowner as God says, go now and take what is yours. Take what I've given to you graciously. But your point that like what supersedes that, the antecedent to all of that is still God's covenant keeping, covenant making promise, making, right? That sets the whole thing up. But I love this idea that, you know, I will choose, it's my desire, it's language of divine volition. And of course the reform theology, this single verb resonates with the entire doctrine of election. It's God's free, sovereign, and gracious will to bestow blessing without reference to merit, like praise his name.  [00:49:00] Tony Arsenal: Yeah. Yeah. And then we come to kind of the close of this parable, right? And this is, this reall

Illuminated is Radio 4's home for powerful, original audio storytelling - and recently we've heard from listeners who were moved by a documentary called Functioning, about the effect of alcohol addiction on two women's lives. Andrea Catherwood talks to the programme's producer Jodie Taylor, and Radio 4 documentary commissioner Hugh Levinson, and hears a remarkable insight into how the programme came to be.Feedback's listeners are pretty clued up when it comes to giving their thoughts to the BBC, but we came across one last week who seemed to know more than most - as it turned out, he did a PhD on charter renewal. Andrea talks to Dr Tom Chivers, academic at Goldsmiths, University of London, about what the BBC can do to reach its audience during a consultation that could result in radical change.And following our discussion of news avoidance on last week's programme, we hear from a listener who has discovered his own method for avoiding news that feels excessive, or irrelevant.Presenter: Andrea Catherwood Producer: Pauline Moore Assistant Producer: Rebecca Guthrie Executive Producer: David PrestA Whistledown Scotland production for BBC Radio 4

Everything Is Predictable: How Bayes' Remarkable Theorem Explains the World is a book about an 18th century mathematical rule for working out probability, which shapes many aspects of our modern world. Written by science journalist Tom Chivers, the book has made it onto the shortlist for the Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize. In the lead up to the winner's announcement, New Scientist books editor Alison Flood meets all six of the shortlisted authors.In this conversation, Tom explores the life of Thomas Bayes, the man behind the theorem, and how he had no clue his discovery would have such sweeping implications for humanity. He explains the theorem's many uses, both in practical settings like disease diagnosis, as well as its ability to explain rational thought and the human brain. And he digs into some of the controversy and surprising conflict that has surrounded Bayes' theorem over the years.The winner of the Royal Society Trivedi Science Book Prize will be announced on the 24th October. You can view all of the shortlisted entries here:https://royalsociety.org/medals-and-prizes/science-book-prize/ To read about subjects like this and much more, visit https://www.newscientist.com/ Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Royal Society recently announced the shortlist for their annual Science Book Prize – and nominated is science writer and journalist Tom Chivers, author of the book Everything is Predictable. He tells us how statistics impact every aspect of our lives, and joins Marnie as a studio guest throughout the show.A drug – lecanemab – that can slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease has recently been approved for use in the UK, but the healthcare regulator NICE has said that it won't be available on the NHS. But what is behind this decision, and what makes creating an Alzheimer's drug so difficult? Professor Tara Spires-Jones from the University of Edinburgh talks us through the science.And could ‘smart paint' supersize our fruit and veg? Reporter Roland Pease heads over to the experimental greenhouses of Cranfield University's crop science unit to see if the technology works.Thee Paralympic Games are now underway in Paris, with athletes competing across 22 different events. But as competitors have a range of different impairments, how is it ensured that there's a level playing field? Professor Sean Tweedy from the University of Queensland calls in from Paris to explain how athletes are sorted into categories for competition.Presenter: Marnie Chesterton Producers: Sophie Ormiston and Ella Hubber Editor: Martin Smith Production Co-ordinator: Andrew Lewis

Tom Chivers is a journalist who writes a lot about science and applied statistics. We talk about his new book on Bayesian statistics, the biography of Thomas Bayes, the history of probability theory, how Bayes can help with the replication crisis, how Tom became a journalist, and much more.BJKS Podcast is a podcast about neuroscience, psychology, and anything vaguely related, hosted by Benjamin James Kuper-Smith.Support the show: https://geni.us/bjks-patreonTimestamps0:00:00: Tom's book about Bayes & Bayesian statistics relates to many of my previous episodes and much of my own research0:03:12: A brief biography of Thomas Bayes (about whom very little is known)0:11:00: The history of probability theory 0:36:23: Bayesian songs0:43:17: Bayes & the replication crisis0:57:27: How Tom got into science journalism1:08:32: A book or paper more people should read1:10:05: Something Tom wishes he'd learnt sooner1:14:36: Advice for PhD students/postdocs/people in a transition periodPodcast linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-podTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-pod-twtTom's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/chivers-webTwitter: https://geni.us/chivers-twtPodcast: https://geni.us/chivers-podBen's linksWebsite: https://geni.us/bjks-webGoogle Scholar: https://geni.us/bjks-scholarTwitter: https://geni.us/bjks-twtReferences and linksEpisode with Stuart Ritchie: https://geni.us/bjks-ritchieScott Alexander: https://www.astralcodexten.com/Bayes (1731). Divine benevolence, or an attempt to prove that the principal end of the divine providence and government is the happiness of his creatures. Being an answer to a pamphlet entitled Divine Rectitude or an inquiry concerning the moral perfections of the deity with a refutation of the notions therein advanced concerning beauty and order, the reason of punishment and the necessity of a state of trial antecedent to perfect happiness.Bayes (1763). An essay towards solving a problem in the doctrine of chances. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London.Bellhouse (2004). The Reverend Thomas Bayes, FRS: a biography to celebrate the tercentenary of his birth. Project Euclid.Bem (2011). Feeling the future: experimental evidence for anomalous retroactive influences on cognition and affect. Journal of personality and social psychology.Chivers (2024). Everything is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World.Chivers & Chivers (2021). How to read numbers: A guide to statistics in the news (and knowing when to trust them).Chivers (2019). The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy: Superintelligent AI and the Geeks Who Are Trying to Save Humanity's Future.Clarke [not Black, as Tom said] (2020). Piranesi.Goldacre (2009). Bad science.Goldacre (2014). Bad pharma: how drug companies mislead doctors and harm patients.Simmons, Nelson & Simonsohn (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science.

The future can be scary, but what if there was a way for us to understand it a little better? Tom Chivers believes there is. His new book Everything Is Predictable explains how Bayes Theorem, a statistical model, can explain the world around us and, in some cases, help us predict the future. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Back in the 1700s, in a spa town outside of London, Thomas Bayes, a Presbyterian minister and amateur mathematician, invented a formula that lets you figure out how likely something is to happen based on what you already know. It changed the world. Today, pollsters use it to forecast election results and bookies to predict Super Bowl scores. For neuroscientists, it explains how our brains work; for computer scientists, it's the principle behind artificial intelligence. In this episode, we explore the modern-day applications of this game-changing theorem with the help of Tom Chivers, author of the new book "Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World."

✍︎: The Curious Worldview Newsletter - the ultimate compliment to the podcast...Other episode of the podcast that suit this episode...Brian Klaas – Fluke & RandomnessRuss Roberts – EconTalkLuca Dellanna – Ergodicity All The Way DownScott Patterson – Chaos KingsNassim Taleb & Incerto PodcastFollow me on Instagram – @ryanfhoggEverything Is Predictable – Tom ChiversTom Chivers is a prolific science writer whose written for Buzzfeed, The Telegraph, Unherd, published books, written for loads of other publications as well and now writes for Semafor's daily flagship email (something I read everyday)… but here Tom is today to discuss his book about Bayes called… EVERYTHING IS PREDICTABLE: How Bayes' Remarkable Theorem Explains the World and, the lead is not buried in this case, it is a book about Bayes Throerom which to put it simply… is an equation to calculate probability.Now, my Talebian listeners will recognise a contradiction to our worldview in the title here… everything is predictable? how often has Taleb's quotes, how can we predict a future of infinite possibilities based off a finite experience of the past appeared on this podcast? We get into Chivers differences with that Talebian worldview, but as well, there is top to bottom what is Bayes theorem, why does it matter, the role of this theorem at the foundation of all of these LLM's and therefore much of AI. a neat little anecdote of Chivers family member, Sir John Maynard Keynes and plenty more as well!00:00 – Who Is Tom Chivers01:34 – Great Great Uncle John Maynard Keynes08:44 – What's The Point Of Bayes?19:14 – What Is Bayes Theorem?39:34 – Disagreeing With Nassim Taleb 52:24 – Counterintuitive Aspects Of Bayes56:28 – Bayes & LLM's & AI1:15:12 – Serendipity In Tom's Life

In this episode, Xavier Bonilla has a dialogue with Tom Chivers about Bayesian probability and the impact Bayesian priors have on ourselves. They define Bayesian priors, Thomas Bayes, subjective aspects of Bayes theorem, and the problematic elements of statistical figures such as Galton, Pearson, and Fisher. They talk about the replication crisis, p-hacking, where priors come from, AI, Friston's free energy principle, and Bayesian priors in our world today. Tom Chivers is a science writer. He does freelance science writing and also writes for Semafor.com's daily Flagship email. Before joining Semafor, he was a science editor at UnHerd, science writer for BuzzFeed UK, and features writer for the Telegraph. He is the author of several books including the most recent, Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World. Website: https://tomchivers.com/ Get full access to Converging Dialogues at convergingdialogues.substack.com/subscribe

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! Bienvenidos a otro Podcast sobre novelas de Warhammer 40k en TERRAESCRIBIENTE. Unete como FAN a Terraescribiente! apoya este proyecto, escucha todos los audios y participa en los Sorteos de cada mes! "GALAXIA DE HORRORES". Una antología de Warhammer 40.000 PARTE 2. El 41º Milenio es una era oscura y terrible en la que encontraréis poco consuelo o esperanza. Olvídese del poder de la tecnología y la ciencia. Olvídese de la promesa de progreso y avance. Olviden cualquier noción de humanidad o compasión común. No hay paz entre las estrellas, porque en la sombría oscuridad del futuro lejano sólo hay guerra. Con historias de algunos de los autores más queridos de Black Library, esta enorme colección de cuentos de Warhammer 40,000 es el compañero perfecto para cualquier cruzada justa (o ruinosa) entre las estrellas. LA HISTORIA La galaxia se une a la vida mientras especies incontables luchan, se esconden y huyen para sobrevivir. Desde repugnantes razas xenos hasta los propios engendros del Caos, el 41.º Milenio alberga innumerables horrores que se ganan a duras penas existencias sin sentido, y el dolor y el sufrimiento son cosas incalculables que billones de personas alguna vez conocerán. Pero hay puntos de esperanza entre las estrellas, bastiones de civilizaciones acosados ​​por todos lados, y luchan por la libertad, la gloria, la conquista o la hermandad. Estas historias de heroísmo y horror pintan un panorama oscuro del futuro lejano, en el que hay espacio para una cosa: la guerra. Esta antología contiene: DEFENSORES DEL IMPERIO: – El juicio de Lucille von Shard, de Denny Flowers. – Trasplantes, por Rob Young. – Puño del infierno, de Justin Woolley. – Arenas de sangre, de Victoria Hayward. – La suma de sus partes, de Rhuairidh James. – Menos que humano, por Steve Lyons. SEGUIDORES DEL CAOS: – La ruina del tonto, de Mike Brooks. – Una unión más perfecta, de Rich McCormick. – Odio Sagrado, de David Annandale. – Los mejores y más brillantes, de Mike Brooks. – Sangra, de David Guymer. – Un pequeño engranaje, de Mitchel Scanlon. LA ROSA SANGRIENTA: – Blasfemia de los caídos, de Danie Ware. – La Forja del Cráneo, de Danie Ware. – La naturaleza de la oración, por Danie Ware. GUERREROS DEL ADEPTUS ASTARTES: – Aria Arcana, de Peter Fehervari. – Confesión de dolor, de Jon Flindall. – La recompensa de la lealtad, de Tom Chivers. EL ENEMIGO MAS ALLA: – Las estrellas sangrantes, de Robert Rath. Por favor sigue las redes y grupos: Canal de Whatsapp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaCcO2s1NCrQqLpfFR3u Twitter: https://twitter.com/TerraEscriba Telegram: https://t.me/+62_TRJVg-3cxNDZh Instagram: www.instagram.com/terraescribiente/ Tik tok: www.tiktok.com/@terraescribiente Youtube: www.youtube.com/@Terraescribiente También subscríbete a TERRAESCRIBIENTE en IVOOX, ITUNES Y SPOTIFY! Dale me gusta a cada Podcast y coméntalos! Ayuda mucho! Gracias! Escucha este episodio completo y accede a todo el contenido exclusivo de TERRAESCRIBIENTE. Descubre antes que nadie los nuevos episodios, y participa en la comunidad exclusiva de oyentes en https://go.ivoox.com/sq/747547

Agradece a este podcast tantas horas de entretenimiento y disfruta de episodios exclusivos como éste. ¡Apóyale en iVoox! Bienvenidos a otro Podcast sobre novelas de Warhammer 40k en TERRAESCRIBIENTE. Unete como FAN a Terraescribiente! apoya este proyecto, escucha todos los audios y participa en los Sorteos de cada mes! "GALAXIA DE HORRORES". Una antología de Warhammer 40.000 PARTE 1. El 41º Milenio es una era oscura y terrible en la que encontraréis poco consuelo o esperanza. Olvídese del poder de la tecnología y la ciencia. Olvídese de la promesa de progreso y avance. Olviden cualquier noción de humanidad o compasión común. No hay paz entre las estrellas, porque en la sombría oscuridad del futuro lejano sólo hay guerra. Con historias de algunos de los autores más queridos de Black Library, esta enorme colección de cuentos de Warhammer 40,000 es el compañero perfecto para cualquier cruzada justa (o ruinosa) entre las estrellas. LA HISTORIA La galaxia se une a la vida mientras especies incontables luchan, se esconden y huyen para sobrevivir. Desde repugnantes razas xenos hasta los propios engendros del Caos, el 41.º Milenio alberga innumerables horrores que se ganan a duras penas existencias sin sentido, y el dolor y el sufrimiento son cosas incalculables que billones de personas alguna vez conocerán. Pero hay puntos de esperanza entre las estrellas, bastiones de civilizaciones acosados ​​por todos lados, y luchan por la libertad, la gloria, la conquista o la hermandad. Estas historias de heroísmo y horror pintan un panorama oscuro del futuro lejano, en el que hay espacio para una cosa: la guerra. Esta antología contiene: DEFENSORES DEL IMPERIO: – El juicio de Lucille von Shard, de Denny Flowers. – Trasplantes, por Rob Young. – Puño del infierno, de Justin Woolley. – Arenas de sangre, de Victoria Hayward. – La suma de sus partes, de Rhuairidh James. – Menos que humano, por Steve Lyons. SEGUIDORES DEL CAOS: – La ruina del tonto, de Mike Brooks. – Una unión más perfecta, de Rich McCormick. – Odio Sagrado, de David Annandale. – Los mejores y más brillantes, de Mike Brooks. – Sangra, de David Guymer. – Un pequeño engranaje, de Mitchel Scanlon. LA ROSA SANGRIENTA: – Blasfemia de los caídos, de Danie Ware. – La Forja del Cráneo, de Danie Ware. – La naturaleza de la oración, por Danie Ware. GUERREROS DEL ADEPTUS ASTARTES: – Aria Arcana, de Peter Fehervari. – Confesión de dolor, de Jon Flindall. – La recompensa de la lealtad, de Tom Chivers. EL ENEMIGO MAS ALLA: – Las estrellas sangrantes, de Robert Rath. Por favor sigue las redes y grupos: Canal de Whatsapp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaCcO2s1NCrQqLpfFR3u Twitter: https://twitter.com/TerraEscriba Telegram: https://t.me/+62_TRJVg-3cxNDZh Instagram: www.instagram.com/terraescribiente/ Tik tok: www.tiktok.com/@terraescribiente Youtube: www.youtube.com/@Terraescribiente También subscríbete a TERRAESCRIBIENTE en IVOOX, ITUNES Y SPOTIFY! Dale me gusta a cada Podcast y coméntalos! Ayuda mucho! Gracias! Escucha este episodio completo y accede a todo el contenido exclusivo de TERRAESCRIBIENTE. Descubre antes que nadie los nuevos episodios, y participa en la comunidad exclusiva de oyentes en https://go.ivoox.com/sq/747547

For the first ever episode of The Mater Podcast, Tom Chivers and Dr Claire Harris come together to speak about The Thames Foreshore. Hosted by Maddie Rose Hills. Tom Chivers is a writer, publisher and arts producer from South London. He has released two full collections of poetry, and his debut novel London Clay: Journeys in the Deep City, was published in 2021. The book journeys through personal, historical, mythic & geological tales of London beneath our feet. Tom writes that the book ‘is partial, subjective and incomplete; I am neither historian nor geographer, but write with a poet's compulsion for rumor and conjecture'.Tom is currently researching a phd entitled In the Flow of Things: Encounters with the Mudlarks of the Thames Foreshore.We also spoke with Dr Claire Harris, who is a palaeolithic and community archeologist. Currently in a position at the Museum of London Archeology as a member of the Thames Discovery Programme. Claire has previously worked as a curator and researcher at the British Museum, and is a research associate with the Pathways to Ancient Britain project. Previous collaborative projects have included ‘Neanderthals in Hackney: Exploring North London's stone age past'.We spoke about what is going on down on the Thames Foreshore in London. The materials down there - sand, mud, silt, clay, human detritus.. We spoke about mudlarking, and the history that is visible when you are on the foreshore. We spoke about deep time, and palaeolithic London.. Community Archeology and finding a sense of belonging through sites such as these in the busy cityFind Tom Chivers' Soundcloud with Thames sounds hereFollow Tom on InstagramFind more work by Claire hereClaire on LinkedInA few notes about mudlarking and the foreshore: Anyone searching the foreshore in any way for any reason requires permission from the Port of London Authorityhttps://pla.co.uk/thames-foreshore-permitsThere are plenty of safety precautions to consider when on the foreshore, so make sure to do research this before visiting.Follow Mater here: mater________ and mater.digital Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Book review: Everything Is Predictable, published by PeterMcCluskey on May 27, 2024 on LessWrong. Book review: Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World, by Tom Chivers. Many have attempted to persuade the world to embrace a Bayesian worldview, but none have succeeded in reaching a broad audience. E.T. Jaynes' book has been a leading example, but its appeal is limited to those who find calculus enjoyable, making it unsuitable for a wider readership. Other attempts to engage a broader audience often focus on a narrower understanding, such as Bayes' Theorem, rather than the complete worldview. Claude's most fitting recommendation was Rationality: From AI to Zombies, but at 1,813 pages, it's too long and unstructured for me to comfortably recommend to most readers. (GPT-4o's suggestions were less helpful, focusing only on resources for practical problem-solving). Aubrey Clayton's book, Bernoulli's Fallacy: Statistical Illogic and the Crisis of Modern Science, only came to my attention because Chivers mentioned it, offering mixed reviews that hint at why it remained unnoticed. Chivers has done his best to mitigate this gap. While his book won't reach as many readers as I'd hoped, I'm comfortable recommending it as the standard introduction to the Bayesian worldview for most readers. Basics Chivers guides readers through the fundamentals of Bayes' Theorem, offering little that's extraordinary in this regard. A fair portion of the book is dedicated to explaining why probability should be understood as a function of our ignorance, contrasting with the frequentist approach that attempts to treat probability as if it existed independently of our minds. The book has many explanations of how frequentists are wrong, yet concedes that the leading frequentists are not stupid. Frequentism's problems often stem from a misguided effort to achieve more objectivity in science than seems possible. The only exception to this mostly fair depiction of frequentists is a section titled "Are Frequentists Racist?". Chivers repeats Clayton's diatribe affirming this, treating the diatribe more seriously than it deserves, before dismissing it. (Frequentists were racist when racism was popular. I haven't seen any clear evidence of whether Bayesians behaved differently). The Replication Crisis Chivers explains frequentism's role in the replication crisis. A fundamental drawback of p-values is that they indicate the likelihood of the data given a hypothesis, which differs from the more important question of how likely the hypothesis is given the data. Here, Chivers (and many frequentists) overlook a point raised by Deborah Mayo: p-values can help determine if an experiment had a sufficiently large sample size. Deciding whether to conduct a larger experiment can be as ew: Everything Is Predictablecrucial as drawing the best inference from existing data. The perversity of common p-value usage is exemplified by Lindley's paradox: a p-value below 0.05 can sometimes provide Bayesian evidence against the tested hypothesis. A p-value of 0.04 indicates that the data are unlikely given the null hypothesis, but we can construct scenarios where the data are even less likely under the hypothesis you wish to support. A key factor in the replication crisis is the reward system for scientists and journals, which favors publishing surprising results. The emphasis on p-values allows journals to accept more surprising results compared to a Bayesian approach, creating a clear disincentive for individual scientists or journals to adopt Bayesian methods before others do. Minds Approximate Bayes The book concludes by describing how human minds employ heuristics that closely approximate the Bayesian approach. This includes a well-written summary of how predictive processing works, demonstrating ...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Book review: Everything Is Predictable, published by PeterMcCluskey on May 27, 2024 on LessWrong. Book review: Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World, by Tom Chivers. Many have attempted to persuade the world to embrace a Bayesian worldview, but none have succeeded in reaching a broad audience. E.T. Jaynes' book has been a leading example, but its appeal is limited to those who find calculus enjoyable, making it unsuitable for a wider readership. Other attempts to engage a broader audience often focus on a narrower understanding, such as Bayes' Theorem, rather than the complete worldview. Claude's most fitting recommendation was Rationality: From AI to Zombies, but at 1,813 pages, it's too long and unstructured for me to comfortably recommend to most readers. (GPT-4o's suggestions were less helpful, focusing only on resources for practical problem-solving). Aubrey Clayton's book, Bernoulli's Fallacy: Statistical Illogic and the Crisis of Modern Science, only came to my attention because Chivers mentioned it, offering mixed reviews that hint at why it remained unnoticed. Chivers has done his best to mitigate this gap. While his book won't reach as many readers as I'd hoped, I'm comfortable recommending it as the standard introduction to the Bayesian worldview for most readers. Basics Chivers guides readers through the fundamentals of Bayes' Theorem, offering little that's extraordinary in this regard. A fair portion of the book is dedicated to explaining why probability should be understood as a function of our ignorance, contrasting with the frequentist approach that attempts to treat probability as if it existed independently of our minds. The book has many explanations of how frequentists are wrong, yet concedes that the leading frequentists are not stupid. Frequentism's problems often stem from a misguided effort to achieve more objectivity in science than seems possible. The only exception to this mostly fair depiction of frequentists is a section titled "Are Frequentists Racist?". Chivers repeats Clayton's diatribe affirming this, treating the diatribe more seriously than it deserves, before dismissing it. (Frequentists were racist when racism was popular. I haven't seen any clear evidence of whether Bayesians behaved differently). The Replication Crisis Chivers explains frequentism's role in the replication crisis. A fundamental drawback of p-values is that they indicate the likelihood of the data given a hypothesis, which differs from the more important question of how likely the hypothesis is given the data. Here, Chivers (and many frequentists) overlook a point raised by Deborah Mayo: p-values can help determine if an experiment had a sufficiently large sample size. Deciding whether to conduct a larger experiment can be as ew: Everything Is Predictablecrucial as drawing the best inference from existing data. The perversity of common p-value usage is exemplified by Lindley's paradox: a p-value below 0.05 can sometimes provide Bayesian evidence against the tested hypothesis. A p-value of 0.04 indicates that the data are unlikely given the null hypothesis, but we can construct scenarios where the data are even less likely under the hypothesis you wish to support. A key factor in the replication crisis is the reward system for scientists and journals, which favors publishing surprising results. The emphasis on p-values allows journals to accept more surprising results compared to a Bayesian approach, creating a clear disincentive for individual scientists or journals to adopt Bayesian methods before others do. Minds Approximate Bayes The book concludes by describing how human minds employ heuristics that closely approximate the Bayesian approach. This includes a well-written summary of how predictive processing works, demonstrating ...

On episode 214, we welcome Tom Chivers to discuss Bayesian statistics, how their counterintuitive nature tends to turn people off, the philosophical disagreements between the Bayesians and the frequentists, why “priors” aren't purely subjective and why all theories should be considered as priors, the difficulty of quantifying emotional states in psychological research, how priors are used and misused to inform interpretations of new data, our innate tendency toward black and white thinking, the replication crisis, and why statistically significant research is often wrong. Tom Chivers is an author and the award-winning science writer for Semafor. His writing has appeared in The Times (London), The Guardian, New Scientist, Wired, CNN, and more. He is the co-host of The Studies Show podcast alongside Stuart Richie.His books include The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy, and How to Read Numbers. His newest book, available now, is called Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World. | Tom Chivers | ► Website | https://tomchivers.com ► Twitter | https://x.com/TomChivers ► Semafor  | https://www.semafor.com/author/tom-chivers ► Podcast | https://www.thestudiesshowpod.com ► Everything is Predictable Book | https://amzn.to/3UJTOxD Where you can find us: | Seize The Moment Podcast | ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/SeizeTheMoment ► Twitter | https://twitter.com/seize_podcast ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/seizethemoment ► TikTok | https://www.tiktok.com/@seizethemomentpodcast  

Dr. Arturo Casadevall from Johns Hopkins School of Public Health talks about a potential fungal epidemic in his new book, "What if Fungi Win?"Then, what if there was one overarching theory that could help explain much of our modern-day daily lives? Science journalist Tom Chivers explores the concept of the predictability of everything, based on a theorem developed by Thomas Bayes, an 18th-century Presbyterian minister and statistician.

Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World by Tom Chivers https://amzn.to/3wxZAKu A captivating and user-friendly tour of Bayes's theorem and its global impact on modern life from the acclaimed science writer and author of The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy. At its simplest, Bayes's theorem describes the probability of an event, based on prior knowledge of conditions that might be related to the event. But in Everything Is Predictable, Tom Chivers lays out how it affects every aspect of our lives. He explains why highly accurate screening tests can lead to false positives and how a failure to account for it in court has put innocent people in jail. A cornerstone of rational thought, many argue that Bayes's theorem is a description of almost everything. But who was the man who lent his name to this theorem? How did an 18th-century Presbyterian minister and amateur mathematician uncover a theorem that would affect fields as diverse as medicine, law, and artificial intelligence? Fusing biography, razor-sharp science writing, and intellectual history, Everything Is Predictable is an entertaining tour of Bayes's theorem and its impact on modern life, showing how a single compelling idea can have far reaching consequences.

At its simplest, Bayes's theorem describes the probability of an event, based on prior knowledge of conditions that might be related to the event. But in Everything Is Predictable, Tom Chivers lays out how it affects every aspect of our lives. He explains why highly accurate screening tests can lead to false positives and how a failure to account for it in court has put innocent people in jail. A cornerstone of rational thought, many argue that Bayes's theorem is a description of almost everything. But who was the man who lent his name to this theorem? How did an 18th-century Presbyterian minister and amateur mathematician uncover a theorem that would affect fields as diverse as medicine, law, and artificial intelligence? Fusing biography and intellectual history, Everything Is Predictable is an entertaining tour of Bayes's theorem and its impact on modern life, showing how a single compelling idea can have far reaching consequences. Tom Chivers is an author and the award-winning science writer for Semafor. Previously he was the science editor at UnHerd.com and BuzzFeed UK. His writing has appeared in The Times (London), The Guardian, New Scientist, Wired, CNN, and more. He was awarded the Royal Statistical Society's “Statistical Excellence in Journalism” awards in 2018 and 2020, and was declared the science writer of the year by the Association of British Science Writers in 2021. His books include The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy: Superintelligent AI and the Geeks Who Are Trying to Save Humanity's Future, and How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Stats in the News (and Knowing When to Trust Them). His new book is Everything Is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World. Shermer and Chivers discuss: Thomas Bayes, his equation, and the problem it solves • Bayesian decision theory vs. statistical decision theory • Popperian falsification vs. Bayesian estimation • Sagan's ECREE principle • Bayesian epistemology and family resemblance • paradox of the heap • Reality as controlled hallucination • human irrationality • superforecasting • mystical experiences and religious truths • Replication Crisis in science • Statistical Detection Theory and Signal Detection Theory • Medical diagnosis problem and why most people get it wrong.

SummaryTom Chivers discusses his book 'Everything is Predictable: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World' and the applications of Bayesian statistics in various fields. He explains how Bayesian reasoning can be used to make predictions and evaluate the likelihood of hypotheses. Chivers also touches on the intersection of AI and ethics, particularly in relation to AI-generated art. The conversation explores the history of Bayes' theorem and its role in science, law, and medicine. Overall, the discussion highlights the power and implications of Bayesian statistics in understanding and navigating the world. The conversation explores the role of AI in prediction and the importance of Bayesian thinking. It discusses the progress of AI in image classification and the challenges it still faces, such as accurately depicting fine details like hands. The conversation also delves into the topic of predictions going wrong, particularly in the context of conspiracy theories. It highlights the Bayesian nature of human beliefs and the influence of prior probabilities on updating beliefs with new evidence. The conversation concludes with a discussion on the relevance of Bayesian statistics in various fields and the need for beliefs to have probabilities and predictions attached to them. Takeaways Bayesian statistics can be used to make predictions and evaluate the likelihood of hypotheses. Bayes' theorem has applications in various fields, including science, law, and medicine. The intersection of AI and ethics raises complex questions about AI-generated art and the predictability of human behavior. Understanding Bayesian reasoning can enhance decision-making and critical thinking skills. AI has made significant progress in image classification, but still faces challenges in accurately depicting fine details. Predictions can go wrong due to the influence of prior beliefs and the interpretation of new evidence. Beliefs should have probabilities and predictions attached to them, allowing for updates with new information. Bayesian thinking is crucial in various fields, including AI, pharmaceuticals, and decision-making. The importance of defining predictions and probabilities when engaging in debates and discussions.

We're talking big moves and Big Oil as earnings season continues. At (00:21) Jason Hall and Deidre Woollard break down Peloton's CEO shift and Big Oil's big profits. At (16:40) Tom Chivers, author of Everything Is Predictable, explains how the Bayesian theorem underlies much of modern life and investing. Companies discussed: PTON, SHEL, XOM, COP Host: Deidre Woollard Guests: Jason Hall, Tom Chivers Producer: Ricky Mulvey, Chace Przylepa Engineers: Dan Boyd Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Summary: The episode discusses the 10,000 year dilemma, which is a thought experiment on how to deal with nuclear waste in the future. Today's episode is hosted by guest host David Gibson, who is the founder of the Ray Kitty Creation Workshop. (Find out more about the Ray Kitty Creation Workshop by clicking here). Gabriel and Autumn are out this week, but will be returning in short order with 3 separate interviews with authors of some fantastic popular science and math books including: The Gravity of Math: How Geometry Rules the Universe by Dr. Shing-Tung Yau and Steve Nadis. This book is all about the history of our understanding of gravity from the theories of Isaac Newton to Albert Einstein and beyond, including gravitational waves, black holes, as well as some of the current uncertainties regarding a precise definition of mass. On sale now! EVERYTHING IS PREDICTABLE: How Bayesian Statistics Explain Our World by Tom Chivers. Published by Simon and Schuster. This book explains the importance of Baye's Theorem in helping us to understand why highly accurate screening tests can lead to false positives, a phenomenon we saw during the Covid-19 pandemic; How a failure to account for Bayes' Theorem has put innocent people in jail; How military strategists using the theorem can predict where an enemy will strike next, and how Baye's Theorem is helping us to understang machine learning processes - a critical skillset to have in the 21st century. Available 05/07/2024 A CITY ON MARS: Can we settle space, should we settle space, and have we really thought this through? by authors Dr. Kelly and Zach Weinersmith. Zach Weinersmith is the artist and creator of the famous cartoon strip Saturday Morning Breaking Cereal! We've got a lot of great episodes coming up! Stay tuned.

Everything is Predictable: How Bayes' Remarkable Theorem Explains the World. That's the new book—out on April 25 in the UK and May 7 in the US—by our very own Tom Chivers!In this episode of The Studies Show, Tom and Stuart cover some of the historical sections of the book, and talk about where some of our basic ideas about probability come from (it turns out to be a weird combination of inveterate gamblers and Presbyterian ministers).The Studies Show is sponsored by Works in Progress Magazine - the best place online to find deep discussions of the ideas that have driven human progress, and that might drive it even further in future. The latest issue of Works in Progress is available right now, at worksinprogress.co. Show notes* The only citation that matters this week: Tom's new book, Everything is Predictable. It's available NOW for pre-order in the UK, and in the US. * And for those reading this on Substack, here's the rather lovely front cover:CreditsThe Studies Show is produced by Julian Mayers at Yada Yada Productions. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.thestudiesshowpod.com/subscribe

We speak to Abi Palmer, author and reader of Sanatorium, about how the book (and subsequent edition audiobook) came to be. She describes the 'piecing together' of the text as 'forensic', after the original research was done as video collection rather than as writing, a lot of the first narration being recorded verbally before it was ever on paper. She talks about her mentors in the process, including Tom Chivers of Penned in the Margins which is now on an indefinite hiatus.

Tom Chivers is a writer, publisher and Mudlark (someone who searches for objects on the banks of the River Thames). In 2021, Tom wrote ‘London Clay: Journeys in the Deep City', which was described by Becky Wragg Sykes as “an intoxicating voyage into urban time and place, revealing the city's geological skeleton...”. During the episode, Tom and I discuss ‘London Clay,' his passion for Mudlarking, and the significant role it plays in his life, and the lives of others. For more on Tom, visit: https://thisisyogic.com/ (Recorded June 2023)

With Covid cases on the rise in Britain, how worried should we be about its resurgence? Tom Chivers, science writer for the i, joins Ros Taylor to discuss the latest uptick in coronavirus cases, what we know about the new variants and the role Covid could play in our lives in the years ahead. “Vaccines are significant when protecting against severe disease, but not reinfection.” “The virus doesn't have to change very much to avoid your antibody immunity.” “We'll still get the virus periodically, but our body will become better at fighting it off.” “We've only had two winters of covid so far, by 2030 it may well become part of the normal cycle.” https://www.patreon.com/bunkercast Presented by Ros Taylor. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Lead Producer: Jacob Jarvis. Producers: Jacob Archbold, Jelena Sofronijevic and Alex Rees. Assistant Producer: Kasia Tomasiewicz. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Audio production by Alex Rees. The Bunker is a Podmasters Production. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

With Covid cases on the rise in Britain, how worried should we be about its resurgence? Tom Chivers, science writer for the i, joins Ros Taylor to discuss the latest uptick in coronavirus cases, what we know about the new variants and the role Covid could play in our lives in the years ahead.“Vaccines are significant when protecting against severe disease, but not reinfection.”“The virus doesn't have to change very much to avoid your antibody immunity.”“We'll still get the virus periodically, but our body will become better at fighting it off.”“We've only had two winters of covid so far, by 2030 it may well become part of the normal cycle.”https://www.patreon.com/bunkercastPresented by Ros Taylor. Group Editor: Andrew Harrison. Lead Producer: Jacob Jarvis. Producers: Jacob Archbold, Jelena Sofronijevic and Alex Rees. Assistant Producer: Kasia Tomasiewicz. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Audio production by Alex Rees. The Bunker is a Podmasters Production. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Should we take steps to guard our genetic security? Is wind power overpriced? And why are so many of us turning off the news? Olly Mann and The Week delve behind the headlines and debate what really matters from the past seven days. With Arion McNicoll, Tom Chivers and Kate Samuelson

https://www.metaculus.com/notebooks/9826/renewables-forecasting/ Published by RyanBeck on Feb 14, 2022. In a recent article about solar power, Tom Chivers described how growth in solar power has outpaced many forecasts, as well as the challenges involved in accurately forecasting trends in solar power. Making accurate forecasts about the future of solar is important for understanding what future CO₂ emissions may look like and what our chances of mitigating the effects of climate change are. In this essay I attempt to estimate the bounds of solar and wind growth. Pieces of the puzzle The first stage of putting together an energy forecast is to understand the relevant background information. What the different units mean, how different energy types can be compared directly, and what the previous trends look like are all essential if we want to understand the future of electricity generation. Power and energy When electricity generation is talked about it can be easy to confuse power and energy. Power is a measure of the rate at which work is being done. Power is commonly measured in watts when discussing electricity generation. Energy is how much work has been done, or the amount of power exerted over time. It is commonly measured in watt-hours, as it is the amount of power (watts) multiplied by the amount of time that power was exerted (hours). We can imagine power as the rate of water flowing out of a hose, while energy is the amount of water in the bucket that the hose is filling after a given period of time. These are important concepts when talking about electricity generation. When a new power plant is installed it's usually described in terms of either its power or its capacity. But discussions about what a power plant produces are in terms of energy–such as descriptions of how much energy the plant generated in a given year.

In this podcast episode, we sat down with Tom Chivers—author, journalist, and science writer for The i—to have a conversation on forecasting and the news media. We talked about his background in the media industry, his frustrations with mainstream news and its lack of nuance, his views on forecasting and prediction markets in media, and more. Tom previously wrote for BuzzFeed UK, served as the science editor for UnHerd, and has bylines with New York Times, Guardian, New Scientist, and The Telegraph. He often writes data-driven rebuttals to topics that are being primarily depicted in one way in the media, interjecting nuance into the conversations. In many ways, the same exercise as distinguishing signals from noise. Conducting journalism with a forecaster's mindset. He's also written two books, The AI Does Not Hate You in 2019 and How to Read Numbers in 2021, and writes about similar topics discussed in our communities, including effective altruism, rationality, and forecasting. To our knowledge, Tom is one of the most prominent journalists writing about and covering quantified forecasts. In June of last year, Tom assembled a panel of superforecasters for an article on whether China will invade Taiwan and has started to make his own predictions too! You can follow Tom on Twitter: @TomChivers.

EPISODE 6 Tom Chivers' book London Clay: Journeys in the Deep City is erudite and meticulously researched, but it's also funny, poetic and at times very moving. Tom digs down below the surface of the city to find its ancient, lost rivers, whilst also examining his own past. The book is part geological, part historical, and part reflective.  In this episode, Tom and Charlie explore an ancient, subterranean Roman temple, go mudlarking, and find treasure.    The Temple of Mithras (3 AD) 7 metres below ground level Mudlarking with Tom Chivers on the foreshore of the River Thames   Tom Chivers, London Clay: Journeys in the Deep City (Doubleday, 2021)   Produced, edited, written and presented by Charlie Lee-Potter

Read the full transcript here. What is a "wamb"? What are the differences between wambs and nerds? When is it appropriate (or not) to decouple concepts from their context? What are some common characteristics of miscommunications between journalists and writers / thinkers in the EA and Rationalist communities? What are "crony" beliefs? How can you approach discussions of controversial topics without immediately getting labelled as being on one team or another? What sorts of quirks do members of the EA and Rationalist communities typically exhibit in social contexts?Tom is a freelance science writer and the science editor at UnHerd.com. He has twice been awarded a Royal Statistical Society "statistical excellence in journalism" prize, in 2018 and 2020, and was declared the science writer of the year by the Association of British Science Writers in 2021. His first book, The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy: Superintelligent AI and the Geeks Who are Trying to Solve Humanity's Future (originally titled The AI Does Not Hate You), was declared one of the Times's science books of 2019. He worked for seven years at the Telegraph and three years at BuzzFeed before going freelance in 2018, and was once described by Sir Terry Pratchett as "far too nice to be a journalist". Find out more about Tom on Twitter, UnHerd, and tomchivers.com. [Read more]

Read the full transcriptWhat is a "wamb"? What are the differences between wambs and nerds? When is it appropriate (or not) to decouple concepts from their context? What are some common characteristics of miscommunications between journalists and writers / thinkers in the EA and Rationalist communities? What are "crony" beliefs? How can you approach discussions of controversial topics without immediately getting labelled as being on one team or another? What sorts of quirks do members of the EA and Rationalist communities typically exhibit in social contexts?Tom is a freelance science writer and the science editor at UnHerd.com. He has twice been awarded a Royal Statistical Society "statistical excellence in journalism" prize, in 2018 and 2020, and was declared the science writer of the year by the Association of British Science Writers in 2021. His first book, The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy: Superintelligent AI and the Geeks Who are Trying to Solve Humanity's Future (originally titled The AI Does Not Hate You), was declared one of the Times's science books of 2019. He worked for seven years at the Telegraph and three years at BuzzFeed before going freelance in 2018, and was once described by Sir Terry Pratchett as "far too nice to be a journalist". Find out more about Tom on Twitter, UnHerd, and tomchivers.com.

What is a "wamb"? What are the differences between wambs and nerds? When is it appropriate (or not) to decouple concepts from their context? What are some common characteristics of miscommunications between journalists and writers / thinkers in the EA and Rationalist communities? What are "crony" beliefs? How can you approach discussions of controversial topics without immediately getting labelled as being on one team or another? What sorts of quirks do members of the EA and Rationalist communities typically exhibit in social contexts? Tom is a freelance science writer and the science editor at UnHerd.com. He has twice been awarded a Royal Statistical Society "statistical excellence in journalism" prize, in 2018 and 2020, and was declared the science writer of the year by the Association of British Science Writers in 2021. His first book, The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy: Superintelligent AI and the Geeks Who are Trying to Solve Humanity's Future (originally titled The AI Does Not Hate You), was declared one of the Times's science books of 2019. He worked for seven years at the Telegraph and three years at BuzzFeed before going freelance in 2018, and was once described by Sir Terry Pratchett as "far too nice to be a journalist". Find out more about Tom on Twitter, UnHerd, and tomchivers.com.

In this episode we visit London in 62 AD, barely twenty years after it was first established by the Romans, to traverse its lost landscape and hidden waterways. When we think of London, we usually think of a sprawling urban metropolis: glass and steel, terraced houses, every imaginable form of transport and noise. We don't often think about the natural landscape that lies beneath it all. And yet, our guest today argues, it is London's geology that has been a crucial force in the shaping of the city over the last two thousand years.  Tom Chivers is a writer, publisher and arts producer from south London. He is also an award-winning poet who has published two pamphlets and two full collections of his poetry. London Clay: Journeys in the Deep City is his non-fiction debut and it's been described by critics as “entertaining, enlightening and deeply moving.” As ever, much, much more about this episode is to be found at our website tttpodcast.com. Click here to order London Clay: Journeys in the Deep City. Show Notes Scene One: 62 AD. The river Walbrook. Scene Two: 62 AD. The Westminster Delta. Scene Three: 62 AD. The Rockingham Anomaly, in Southwark, to meet Harper Road Woman. Memento: A shoe. “I like the idea of the wearer's footprint being retained in the soft leather, and also to imagine what kind of ground the sole has stood on/walked across.” People/Social Presenter: Artemis Irvine Guest: Tom Chivers Production: Maria Nolan Podcast partner: Unseen Histories Follow us on Twitter: @tttpodcast_ Or on Facebook See where 62 AD fits on our Timeline 

Tom is science editor for the digital news magazine UnHerd. His writing has featured in The Guardian, Telegraph, New Scientist and BuzzFeed. He covers an array of subjects, mostly science, but he also delves into politics, foreign affairs, sport, culture wars - pretty much anything that piques his interest. He's won two statistical excellence in journalism awards from the Royal Statistical Society, but he's not stopping there. He wants all journalists and consumers of news to share his appreciation for numbers and to learn how to use them. In this episode of Research Comms Tom Chivers talks about the media during the pandemic, about the pre-requisites for journalism and the tension between attracting a readership and writing serious news stories and he discusses his book How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News (and Knowing When to Trust Them) Presented by Peter Barker Produced by Orinoco Communications www.orinococomms.com --------- LINKS Tom's website Tom's work on UnHerd How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Stats in the News (and Knowing When to Trust Them)

Tom Chivers joins Neil to talk about walking the historical strata of London and it's hidden rivers, in his new book London Clay. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The machine journalist "BIS" interviews Tom Chivers, Author and Science Editor at UnHerd. His latest book: "How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News" https://www.amazon.com/-/pt/dp/1474619967 https://tomchivers.com/ Support the machine: https://www.patreon.com/carneesperta Subscribe so you don't miss new interviews: #carneesperta #smartmeat https://twitter.com/carneesperta https://www.instagram.com/carneesperta https://open.spotify.com/show/2H7YXepIPLgRGlam0SUkCY https://podcasts.apple.com/pt/podcast/carne-esperta/id1528942902 https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy8zMmM1YTk5MC9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw== To suggest a guest: https://bit.ly/carneespertaguests

Heat pumps, net zero, decarbonisation, the Paris agreement. With less than 2 weeks to go until Cop26, we're being deluged with detail and jargon. But how much do you actually understand about climate change? Do you even know what COP actually stands for? (It's Conference of the Parties if you don't). Katie Razzall asks what role the media has in educating us about climate change. Maybe you feel hectored rather than informed? Or maybe you think the media isn't going far enough; if we now face an existential crisis, should journalists dispense with the notion of objectivity and become activists in the fight to save the planet? Guests: Daniela Chiaretti, environment reporter at Brazil's biggest financial newspaper Valor Econômico, Natasha Clark, environment correspondent for The Sun, Tom Chivers, science editor for UnHerd, and Wolfgang Blau, co-founder of the Oxford Climate Journalism Network. Presenter: Katie Razzall Studio engineer: Tim Heffer Producer: Richard Hooper

This special episode draws on our conversation with Tom Chivers, author of ‘London Clay', examining the role of places and locations in literature and how they should be treated as characters in their own right. Here we display the importance of writing for all of the senses, we explore the interconnectedness of the past and the present, and we explain how memories and emotions influence the way we experience a place. We end with a 60 second soundscape to showcase how visceral the experience of location can be. If you'd like to take part in the Behind The Spine writing competition, you can find all the details on our website.

Beneath London, within its walls, down its secret passageways and ancient riverbeds is a rich and complex history. The city's past influences its present - even those parts which are long forgotten or out of sight. Our guest today is Tom Chivers, author of London Clay: Journeys in the Deep City. The book reads like a detective story, examining London through its geology, its hidden landscape and the ghosts of its past. In this episode we discuss the powerful role of senses in evoking your readers' emotions, we explore how intimately connected places and events can be, and we learn how to better appreciate the world around us. Behind The Spine is the audio accompaniment to The Writing Salon - you can sign up to the newsletter here.

Tom Chivers is a poet and publisher who has long been fascinated by London, the city he grew up in and continues to call home. His fascination is not with the landmarks and monuments that are easy to spot but with what lies underneath the city: the hidden and submerged past that is buried below its streets. He speaks to Georgina Godwin about his new book ‘London Clay'. Combining history, geology and memoir, it takes us on eight fascinating journeys in the depths of the city.

On this week's episode, Kate Andrews argues that the government's social care reform plans simply don't add up (00:55). Mary Wakefield makes the case for church doors to reopen (06:55) and Caroline Crampton reviews Tom Chivers's new book, London Clay (13:25).

Science writer Tom Chivers is the author of How To Read Numbers: A Guide To Statistics In The News (And Knowing When to Trust Them) which he co-wrote with his cousin, the economist David Chivers. He came to Meghan's attention recently because of an article he wrote for the British publication, UnHerd, where he serves as science editor. That article, entitled Twitter Trolls Mentally Ill?, was a response to a widely circulated statement by the author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, who wrote about defamation she'd experienced from a former student and about how the language of empathy and self-care is now often repurposed as a cudgel. Tom's piece expanded on some of these ideas, suggesting that mental health struggles and personality disorders have become engines of social media and that the kind of behavior that's rewarded on places like Twitter is sometimes the same behavior that's associated with diagnoses like Borderline Personality Disorder. Tom spoke with Meghan about this article and about related ideas in his book, including the ways misperceptions of harm can turn people into catastrophists. Relevant links: Are Twitter Trolls Mentally Ill? https://unherd.com/2021/06/are-twitter-trolls-mentally-ill/ It Is Obscene by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie https://www.chimamanda.com/news_items/it-is-obscene-a-true-reflection-in-three-parts/ Guest Bio: Tom Chivers is science editor at UnHerd and the co-author with David Chivers of How To Read Numbers: A Guide To Statistics In The News (And Knowing When to Trust Them). He is a two Tim winner of the Royal Statistical Society's “statistical excellence in journalism” award.

The ability to properly get to grips with numbers has never been more vital, not least in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. In this episode, Tim Bale is joined by Tom Chivers and Sonia Sodha to discuss the importance of understanding the numbers we're presented with in the news and in our own lives. They discuss what journalists - and the sources they rely on - get right and wrong, and what we can all do to ensure we better understand the data we're exposed to in media each and every day.

In this episode I talk to two guests about the risks of alcohol use and attempts to communicate these via the UK's recommended guidelines of 14 units a week. Firstly I talk to Tom Chivers,  science editor at UnHerd and author. We talk about how the risks of alcohol use can or should be evaluated and communicated. Tom recently co-authored a book How to read numbers which includes a Statistical Style Guide  for journalists. Next I speak to Colin Angus,  a Senior Research Fellow in the Sheffield Alcohol Research Group within ScHARR. We talk about the science and development of the UK's 14 units a week recommended guidelines. 

Unherd science editor Tom Chivers asks if we're ignoring the destruction wrought by personality disorders through our obsession with destigmatizing mental illness. Article discussed: https://unherd.com/2021/06/are-twitter-trolls-mentally-ill/ Media glamorize and glorify “facial feminization surgery”; a young British man gets his eyes contorted to match his “authentic Korean identity”. Democratic lawmakers in Ohio scream and pound their desks to drown out a Republic Representative trying to save women's sports from incursions by men who claim they're women. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The UK's Covid cases are still rising and Scotland is being hit particularly hard - so are we speeding up our vaccination programme in response? Will many of the UK's coastal towns, not to mention central London, be underwater in the next few years? Do the country's poorest households really pay more than half their income in tax? What are the top five places with the best vaccination rates in the world? The answers may surprise you. We speak to Tom Chivers, a science journalist who has written a book called “How to Read numbers” with his cousin the economist David Chivers.

 In episode thirteen of Making Common Ground, Alfred Landecker fellow Catherine Neilan speaks to science journalist Tom Chivers about  why it pays people to express views they don't necessarily hold, and how mainstream media interacts with social media.

In this week's episode of the Science Focus Podcast, editor Daniel Bennett speaks to Tom Chivers and David Chivers.Tom is a veteran science journalist and author and David is lecturer in economics at the University of Durham. As well as a surname, they share a passion for statistics, or more precisely for the way that numbers are used and presented in the media. Together they’ve written a new book: How to Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News and Knowing When to Trust Them.They talk to Daniel about how to understand the sometimes confusing stats surrounding health and risk, how to spot a suspicious claim when you see one, and how to think about the current concerns surrounding the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.Let us know what you think of the episode with a review or a comment wherever you listen to your podcasts.Subscribe to the Science Focus Podcast on these services: Acast, iTunes, Stitcher, RSS, OvercastRead the full transcription of this episode [this will open in a new window]Listen to more episodes of the Science Focus Podcast:Sir David Spiegelhalter: There's no such thing as Blue MondayMatt Parker: What happens when maths goes horribly, horribly wrong?Hannah Fry: How much of our lives is secretly underpinned by maths?Prof Linda Scott: Why is there still economic inequality between men and women?Hannah Fry: What's the deal with algorithms?Robert Elliott Smith: Are algorithms inherently biased? See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Is the human race on the verge of extinction? That's the jaw-dropping claim made in Professor Shanna Swan's new book ‘Count Down: How Our Modern World Is Threatening Sperm Counts, Altering Male and Female Reproductive Development, and Imperiling the Future of the Human Race'. According to the book, sperm counts have dropped almost 60% since 1973 and suggests that they could reach zero by 2045, which would mean no more reproduction and no more babies.This is a worrying discovery, particularly as one of the central drivers of this trend is modernity itself; Swann argues that chemicals, ranging from ATM receipts to Tupperware plastic, in the modern environment are altering —and endangering — human sexual development, and is getting worse by the year.Even if you find this argument a little too extreme (as UnHerd columnist Tom Chivers does), Prof Swan is certainly worth listening to. Having devoted over 20 years of her career to the study of sperm, the epidemiologist is about as well-credentialed as they come and has made a fascinating contribution to the debate. We thank Prof Swan for her time and hope you enjoy the discussion. Key quotes below:On plummeting sperm count:What we found was that sperm count had to climb dramatically over the preceding 40 years, and was at a point where nearly half of men would be entering that range of sperm count, which is associated with sub-fertility at least. We didn't see any indication that the slope of that line had levelled off, so that when we looked at the data restricting it to the past 30 years, 20 years, 10 years, you might hope that it would be flattening out. But we didn't see any indication of that, which is alarming, because if it were to continue on its present course — that's a difficult thing to project — but just mathematically, if you've extended the line, it does hit zero in 2045. So that's the median sperm count, that means half of men would have no sperm. On declining population figures:It is true that the being below replacement, the value of 2.1 children per couple is more common in Western countries. And in Asian countries, that's where it's most severe. The lowest point I believe, has been reached at 1.0 children in Korea, just recently. But, that's the rate of decline. Since 1960, of the most populous countries has been greatest, they are also declining, and declining faster. So it's going on everywhere and it's a problem. On phthalates (a group of chemicals):Phthalates are interesting because they have the ability to lower testosterone. They're called anti-androgens: they lower the androgens and testosterone is one of those. And so if the pregnant woman is exposed to phthalates in early pregnancy, these phthalates can reduce foetal testosterone at a critical time for male genital sexual development. This was first shown in rodents, and it was so striking that it was named the phthalate syndrome. On where these chemicals are found:These chemicals affect the body's hormones. Phthalates affect androgens, and bisphenols, which makes plastic hard and line tin cans — they are oestrogenic, which also affects reproductive function. There are other chemicals; for instance, we showed in our study that men with exposure higher levels of pesticides, in mid Missouri had much poor semen quality. Other chemicals set in flame retardants in your Teflon pan, in lots of things in your home, your wall coverings and floor coverings. And food is a really major source. On transitioning:It feels like there's an increase, but we don't have that data. So in the past it could have been there and completely unrecognised and un-talked about. What we do say is that disorders of sexual development, the actual alterations in the genitals — those are caused by environmental chemicals. And there's many examples of that in rodents, fish, and frogs. So many species have, for example, ovaries and testicles in the same organism, right? So there's no question that chemicals can change and make these developments atypical, but what the animals would prefer, what gender they would choose, if they could — how would we know that? On how to limit chemical exposure:You could choose products that are stored in glass. And I would recommend that you not store them in your home in plastics. And certainly you do not heat them in plastics. Heat and plastic is a really bad no, no. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Tom Chivers, The AI Does Not Hate You: Superintelligence, Rationality and the Race to Save the World (2019); alternative title The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy: Superintelligent AI and the Geeks Who Are Trying to Save Humanity’s Future Follow Tom on Twitter @TomChivers Nick Bostrom, Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies (2014) Toby Ord, The Precipice: Existential Risk and the Future of Humanity (2020) Eliezer Yudkowsky, Rationality: From AI to Zombies (2015) Fantasia(1940) - The Sorcerer's Apprentice, First Part - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VErKCq1IGIU Fantasia(1940) - The Sorcerer's Apprentice, Second Part - YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcesnqVF0us Ursula K. Le Guin, The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas (1973) Stuart J. Russell, Human Compatible: Artificial Intelligence and the Problem of Control (2019) LessWrong https://www.lesswrong.com/ Astral Codex Ten (substack.com) https://astralcodexten.substack.com/ Timestamps 05:23 Why the AI threat is more like the Sorcerer’s Apprentice than The Terminator 15:13 What does it mean to be intelligent? 18:57 “The map is not the territory.” 21:53 Judging veracity based on psychology not facts, the rationalists 28:51 Why the singularity would be so uniquely dangerous 41:41 Utilitarian approaches to suffering 53:50 What the rationalists are like in person

Science writer Tom Chivers joins Martin and Steve to talk about covering the scientific twists and turns of the pandemic and what impact it has had on how the media and wider society think about science. 

For more on Michael visit: https://michaelwstory.com/ Follow Michael on Twitter @MWStory Philip E. Tetlock and Dan Gardner, Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction (2015) Tom Chivers, The AI Does Not Hate You: Superintelligence, Rationality and the Race to Save the World (2019) Nate Silver, The Signal and the Noise: Why So Many Predictions Fail—but Some Don't (2012) James Surowiecki, The Wisdom of Crowds: Why the Many Are Smarter Than the Few (2005) Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (1974) Metaculus: https://www.metaculus.com/questions/ Timestamps 03:43 The process of superforecasting with the example of predicting how long it would take to develop a coronavirus vaccine 12:50 The wisdom of crowds 18:04 The inside vs. outside view, anchors and base rates 23:15 The foxes versus the hedgehogs 29:39 The conjunction fallacy 37:15 Accountability, falsifiability, Brier scores 46:54 Loss of institutional credibility: a problem or an opportunity? 01:02:05 The importance of A/B testing 01:06:36 Back of the envelope (Fermi) calculations 01:12:11 Psychological characteristics of superforecasters, caring about being wrong

At the weekend, the New York Times published a long awaited article about one of the world's most celebrated blogs, Slate Star Codex, a central node of the influential rationalist community. Called 'Silicon Valley's Safe Space', it was widely criticised as an inaccurate hit piece: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/13/te...​ This is an interview with Tom Chivers, the writer of 'The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy', on the backstory to the controversy. What does this say about the ongoing crisis of journalism, and tensions with the tech sector. The New Yorker wrote a more well-received piece on SSC here: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/ann...

This week we have a guest! Tom Chivers, the author of The Rationalist's Guide to the Galaxy. It's a really fantastic look at how a small AI-obsessed internet community has grown out into both a modern techno-fascist movement AND an extremely dense blog that everyone in Silicon Valley is obsessed with. Why are we talking about this? Because of a very controversial New York Times piece that dropped this week. It's all very confusing, but we promise it's interesting! Also, this week, Ryan and Luke talk about the Joker for a little while. 

Science writer Tom Chivers discusses with Ivan six things which he thinks should be better known. Science writer Tom Chivers discusses with Ivan six things which he thinks should be better known. Tom Chivers is science editor at UnHerd.com. His second book, How To Read Numbers: A Guide to Statistics in the News (and Knowing When to Trust Them), will be published by Weidenfeld & Nicolson in March 2021. He is a two-time winner of the Royal Statistical Society's Statistical Excellence in Journalism award, and was once told by Terry Pratchett that he was "far too nice to be a journalist". Goodhart’s Law https://unherd.com/2020/04/we-cant-put-too-much-faith-in-covid-19-statistics/ Kill Team https://www.goonhammer.com/getting-started-kill-team/ and https://unherd.com/2020/03/self-isolation-is-feeding-my-warhammer-addiction/ Selection bias https://unherd.com/2019/09/statistically-you-shouldnt-believe-the-news/ Red kite https://unherd.com/2019/11/let-loose-the-lynxes/ Coordination games https://unherd.com/2020/03/would-you-take-a-coronavirus-risk/ Naomi Novik’s Temeraire series https://www.npr.org/2016/06/14/481391755/temeraire-and-laurence-at-peace-at-last-in-league-of-dragons This podcast is powered by ZenCast.fm

Daniel Finkelstein - sitting in for Matt Chorley - speaks to authors Tom Chivers and Jamie Susskind about how data and algorithms are being used to shape politics and policy. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week The Turing Podcast welcomes our second external guest interviewee: Tom Chivers. Tom is a science writer and journalist who has previously worked for the Daily Telegraph and Buzzfeed UK, but now writes for the online publication UnHerd. His writing often focusses on topics such as rationalism and Artificial Intelligence and he has authored a popular science book titled: "The AI Does Not Hate You: Superintelligence, Rationality and the Race to Save the World". In this episode, the discussion revolves around the media coverage Covid19 pandemic, Tom's experience as data-savvy journalist and the challenges of accurately reporting on rapidly evolving science, at a time when public hunger for information is high and misinformation abounds! You can keep up with Tom’s writing here:  https://unherd.com/author/tom-chivers/ or follow him on twitter: @TomChivers

A reckoning is afoot, as Jesse finally confronts Katie over her abusive managerial style. After the hosts get that out of the way, they proceed into a discussion about The New York Times' decision to publish the famed rationalist blogger Scott Alexander's full name -- and the rather effective-seeming countermeasure Alexander pulled in response. Then they move onto a broader conversation about journalistic ethics with regard to naming subjects against their will, and Katie talks about the time she was publicly shamed for trying to defend someone against a public shaming. In the second segment, the hosts discuss a New York Times story about a Minneapolis neighborhood's difficulties living up to its stated values, and, by working through about their own views about when to call the police, establish the podcast's formal Cop Policy. Show notes/Links: Amazon: The AI Does Not Hate You: Superintelligence, Rationality and the Race to Save the World by Tom Chivers - https://www.amazon.com/Does-Not-Hate-You-Superintelligence-ebook/dp/B07K258VCV (https://www.amazon.com/Does-Not-Hate-You-Superintelligence-ebook/dp/B07K258VCV) Slate Star Codex: NYT Is Threatening My Safety By Revealing My Real Name, So I Am Deleting The Blog - https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/06/22/nyt-is-threatening-my-safety-by-revealing-my-real-name-so-i-am-deleting-the-blog/ (https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/06/22/nyt-is-threatening-my-safety-by-revealing-my-real-name-so-i-am-deleting-the-blog/) Slate Star Codex (archive): I Can Tolerate Anything Except For The Outgroup - http://archive.is/https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/ (http://archive.is/https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/) Slate Star Codex (archive): Sort by Controversial - http://archive.is/https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/ (http://archive.is/https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/) Twitter: @keikoinboston on Karlos Dillard's scam: https://twitter.com/keikoinboston/status/1276780086545592320 (https://twitter.com/keikoinboston/status/1276780086545592320) The New York Times: A Minneapolis Neighborhood Vowed to Check Its Privilege. It’s Already Being Tested. - https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/us/minneapolis-george-floyd-police.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/us/minneapolis-george-floyd-police.html) The Stranger: A Slur, a Suicide Attempt, and Guns Akimbo - https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2020/02/25/42967202/a-slur-a-suicide-attempt-and-guns-akimbo (https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2020/02/25/42967202/a-slur-a-suicide-attempt-and-guns-akimbo) Amazon: Self-Care: A Novel by Leigh Stein - https://www.amazon.com/Self-Care-Novel-Leigh-Stein/dp/0143135198/ref=tmmpapswatch0?encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= (https://www.amazon.com/Self-Care-Novel-Leigh-Stein/dp/0143135198/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=) Eventbrite: EXTREMELY ONLINE conversation for Self-Care - https://www.eventbrite.com/e/extremely-online-conversation-for-self-care-tickets-109886766276 (https://www.eventbrite.com/e/extremely-online-conversation-for-self-care-tickets-109886766276)

A reckoning is afoot, as Jesse finally confronts Katie over her abusive managerial style. After the hosts get that out of the way, they proceed into a discussion about The New York Times' decision to publish the famed rationalist blogger Scott Alexander's full name -- and the rather effective-seeming countermeasure Alexander pulled in response. Then they move onto a broader conversation about journalistic ethics with regard to naming subjects against their will, and Katie talks about the time she was publicly shamed for trying to defend someone against a public shaming. In the second segment, the hosts discuss a New York Times story about a Minneapolis neighborhood's difficulties living up to its stated values, and, by working through about their own views about when to call the police, establish the podcast's formal Cop Policy. Show notes/Links:Amazon: The AI Does Not Hate You: Superintelligence, Rationality and the Race to Save the World by Tom Chivers -  https://www.amazon.com/Does-Not-Hate-You-Superintelligence-ebook/dp/B07K258VCV Slate Star Codex: NYT Is Threatening My Safety By Revealing My Real Name, So I Am Deleting The Blog -  https://slatestarcodex.com/2020/06/22/nyt-is-threatening-my-safety-by-revealing-my-real-name-so-i-am-deleting-the-blog/ Slate Star Codex (archive): I Can Tolerate Anything Except For The Outgroup -  http://archive.is/https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/30/i-can-tolerate-anything-except-the-outgroup/ Twitter: @keikoinboston on Karlos Dillard's scam:  https://twitter.com/keikoinboston/status/1276780086545592320 The New York Times: A Minneapolis Neighborhood Vowed to Check Its Privilege. It’s Already Being Tested. -  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/us/minneapolis-george-floyd-police.html Slate Star Codex (archive): Sort by Controversial -  http://archive.is/https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/10/30/sort-by-controversial/ The Stranger: A Slur, a Suicide Attempt, and Guns Akimbo -  https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2020/02/25/42967202/a-slur-a-suicide-attempt-and-guns-akimbo Amazon: Self-Care: A Novel by Leigh Stein - https://www.amazon.com/Self-Care-Novel-Leigh-Stein/dp/0143135198/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= Eventbrite: EXTREMELY ONLINE conversation for SELF CARE -  https://www.eventbrite.com/e/extremely-online-conversation-for-self-care-tickets-109886766276  This is a public episode. Get access to private episodes at www.blockedandreported.org/subscribe

When football introduced the Video Assistant Referee, better known as VAR, fans thought it would cut out bad refereeing decisions but, as we limp toward some conclusion of this Covid-19 interrupted season, many now want to see the pitch referee back in charge. In 'Life, Uncertainty and VAR', the writer, blogger and journalist Tom Chivers argues that as in football, so in life and society; promises to eliminate uncertainty are liable to end in disappointment. Worse, the better we get at revealing truth, for example weather forecasts, the more furious we become about the sliver of unknown which remains. So, what to do about uncertainty - reject it or live with it? This programme began with a Twitter thread from a West Ham fan, Daisy Chistodoulou, at the London stadium where play was on hold waiting for the VAR to declare if a goal had been scored. Daisy Chistodoulou's day job is measuring attainment in education. In her experience the tools we use to measure progress can become ends in themselves. As with VAR, the question is when does measurement conflict with meaning - it was a great goal; what has a big toe, forensically snapped breaking a line a minute before, halfway up the pitch, got to do with it? And if you can't tell what just happened, how are we meant to cope with figuring out what might? How are we to act when, as with the Covid-19 crisis, we have a paucity of data that changes rapidly? In search of answers as to how we should cope with uncertainty, Tom speaks to a man whose life's work has being trying to help people understand the risks we face in everyday life , Professor David Spiegelhalter - author of the Art Of Statistics and to Jennifer Rodgers of the medical statistics consultancy Phastar, who interprets data from pharmaceutical trials. We hear from Michael Blastland, journalist and author of The Hidden Half: How The World Conceals Its Secrets, a book about how we don't know half of what we think we do but still manage to struggle on; and finally, Michael Story, a man so good at predicting the future he runs a consultancy called Maybe! Presenter Tom Chivers Producer Kevin Mousley

On this edition of the Sky News Daily podcast with Dermot Murnaghan, we examine the Government's apparent indecision during the pandemic as it drops plans for all primary school children to return to classrooms in England before the summer break.We are joined by our chief political correspondent Jon Craig and headteacher Jo Young from Leighton Academy and Nursery in Crewe. Plus, UnHerd's science columnist Tom Chivers discusses how scientific advice has also changed during the pandemic as we look at the 2-metre rule.Credits:Producer - Annie JoyceProduction support - Sabah ChoudhryInterviews guests - Oli Foster

As contact tracing apps roll out we ask if they will be a way out of coronavirus lockdown. A trial of the UK's contact tracing app is being carried out on the Isle of Wight, and we find out from residents there how they feel about it. Such apps have led some to express concerns about privacy, and we discuss the issue with Lilian Edwards, professor of law, innovation and society at Newcastle University in the UK, who sits on the ethics advisory board for NHSX, which is developing the UK's app. We get an alternative perspective on the issue from Tom Chivers of Pro Privacy. And we hear from Milo Hsieh, student at the American University in Taiwan, how in that country, which was a contact tracing app pioneer, opting into the service was not really optional. Also in the programme, as lockdowns start to ease in many countries, and a tentative return to work begins, many employees are worried about how safe offices will be. The BBC's Jane Wakefield takes us through some of the fears and discusses possible ways to mitigate them. Plus, we look at the economic costs to football clubs of the coronavirus pandemic, with Mark Palios, who owns Division 4 Tranmere Rovers in the UK.

On this edition of the Sky News Daily podcast with Dermot Murnaghan, we examine the Government's response to the coronavirus pandemic.We are joined by Sky's Katie Spencer and Isla Glaister along with science writer Tom Chivers - plus we speak to the Medical Detection Dogs charity and oncologist Prof Karol Sikora about dogs being trained to detect the virus in people.Check out @medicaldetectiondogs on Instagram to meet the special recruits. Image credit: Nigel Harper Photography.

After years of rubbishing expertise, politicians are now turning to science in humble desperation. Buzzfeed and Telegraph science writer TOM CHIVERS, author of The AI Does Not Hate You, talks to Ian Dunt about the uneasy alliance between science and politics… why immunity passports are probably a non-starter… and why we should have a sliver of sympathy for Matt Hancock and even Boris Johnson. “The hardest thing in writing about science? Explaining uncertainty.”Presented by Ian Dunt. Produced by Andrew Harrison. Assistant producer Jacob Archbold. Music by Kenny Dickinson. Audio production by Alex Rees. THE BUNKER is a Podmasters Production. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Science writer Tom Chivers joins the show to discuss ways of getting safe groups of the population out of the house. Meanwhile news.com.au's Samantha Maiden discusses the latest political moves around the outbreak. Get all the latest at heraldsun.com.au See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week on the Good Practice Podcast, Ross D is joined by Owen and Gent Ahmetaj to dig into the latest research report from Emerald Works — Back to the Future: Why Tomorrow's Workforce Needs a Learning Culture. We discuss:  the purpose of the Learning Health Check the top-line takeaways from the report the practical implications for L&D Show notes If you're interested in reading the report for yourself, you can download a copy at: https://emeraldworks.com/resources/research-and-reports/strategy/back-to-the-future The LinkedIn thread about the need for an L&D 'revolution' can be found at: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn%3Ali%3Aactivity%3A6636178119965454336/?actorCompanyId=468788 Tom Chivers' Twitter feed, including his thoughts on COVID-19, can be found at: https://twitter.com/TomChivers  Gent's book recommendation was Crystallizing Public Opinion by Edward Bernays, and it can be found at: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Crystallizing-Public-Opinion-Edward-Bernays/dp/1684113040/ref=sr_1_1?crid=3QA437F7TFVD1&keywords=crystallizing+public+opinion&qid=1583836784&sprefix=crystalizing+public+opinion%2Caps%2C234&sr=8-1 If you'd like to share your thoughts on this episode, connect with our speakers on Twitter: Ross Dickie @RossDickieEW Owen Ferguson @owenferguson Gent Ahmetaj @GentAhmetaj  

The boss of Ryanair has been criticised for saying that airport security checks should focus on Muslim men who are travelling alone, because they pose the biggest terror threat. The Muslim Council of Britain said Michael O'Leary's comments were "racist and discriminatory". Profiling is the practice of categorising people and predicting their behaviour on the basis of particular characteristics. We're profiled all the time by businesses and insurance companies with the help of computer algorithms. That same technology has been piloted by police and will now be used to identify low-level offenders who are deemed likely to go on to commit "high-harm" crimes, perhaps involving knives and guns. Is it right to target specific groups on the theory that they are statistically more likely to commit certain crimes? Civil liberty watchdogs argue that such ‘pre-crime’ profiling not only violates everyone’s civil rights, but fosters alienation and hostility in marginalised communities. Supporters of ‘data analytics’ believe that, on the contrary, it can eliminate all bias and human error from these judgments. There’s a wider debate about the balance between public safety and trust. Should we worry that these preventative measures are eroding our goodwill towards authority and each other? There are proposals to introduce airport-style security checks in ever more areas of our lives, from concert halls to places of worship. Security campaigners say it’s a necessary step towards making us all that little bit safer. Libertarians call it an over-reaction to a statistically-negligible threat. It is, they say, allowing the criminals to dictate how we live our lives. With Nick Aldworth, Tom Chivers, Dr Adam Elliott-Cooper and Tom McNeil. Producer: Dan Tierney.

On this week’s show Matt interviews 77diamonds.com‘s MD Tobias Kormind. Chris also talks about his latest read, Tom Chivers’ The AI Doesn’t Hate You.

How will Artificial Intelligence affect our lives? How should we respond?   In conjunction with Reform Scotland, the Futures Forum held a seminar with writer and journalist Tom Chivers to discuss how artificial intelligence is developing and changing our lives and the way we should approach it as citizens and how the Scottish Parliament can respond as a legislature.   Tom worked for the Daily Telegraph from 2007 to 2014, and was a science writer at BuzzFeed UK from 2015 to 2018. He has received several awards for his journalism, including the ‘Explaining the facts' category in the Royal Statistical Society's Statistical Excellence in Journalism awards, and he is the author of the recent book “The AI Does Not Hate You”.   Find out more on the Scotland's Futures Forum website.

Dominic Cummings: Is he, as some suggest, the disruptor's disruptor - a strategically single minded and ideologically iconoclastic man? Or is he an unelected foul mouthed liability who has no place at the heart of a conservative Downing Street? On this week's episode of TheJournal.ie, we look at Boris Johnson's special adviser and his career. To help make some sense of Cummings and his very important and strategic role, presenter Sinéad O'Carroll is joined in studio by our Brexit reporter Grainne Ni Aodha, and Dr Kevin Cunningham, TU Dublin politics lecturer. We also chat to Tom Chivers, science writer and journalist, to get his thoughts on what makes Cummings tick.

Mark Pack goes full on cheerleading for Remain. Stephen Tall responds with half a bucket of cold water. Show notes: Beatrice Wishart wins in Shetland. Reasons to doubt the Boris Johnson / Dominic Cummings strategy. The public doesn't like prorogation. Tom Chivers on Dominic Cummings and a game of chicken. Charles Moore's biography of Margaret Thatcher. The Led By Donkeys anti-Breixt campaigners. Come and watch us record a special episode: "Is Dominic Cummings a genius?".

We chat with Tom about whether psychology has a conflict-of-interest problem and how to best define such conflicts. Links and other stuff we cover... Tom's article (https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-02041-5) on conflicts of interest in psychology How can we define a conflict an interest without falling down a rabbit hole? Communication statistics to the layperson How science journalism focuses on single studies rather than the larger story Tom’s new book: The AI does not hate you (https://www.amazon.com/Does-Not-Hate-You-Superintelligence-ebook/dp/B07K258VCV) Win Tom’s book! Tweet your favourite Hertz episode and we’ll pick one at random, who'll get sent Tom's book How do journalists go about hearing from new voices for story comments? What has Tom changes his mind about? Tom’s book recommendation: Galileo's Middle Finger (https://www.amazon.com/Galileos-Middle-Finger-Heretics-Activists/dp/0143108115) Other links - Dan on twitter (www.twitter.com/dsquintana) - James on twitter (www.twitter.com/jamesheathers) - Everything Hertz on twitter (www.twitter.com/hertzpodcast) - Everything Hertz on Facebook (www.facebook.com/everythinghertzpodcast/) Music credits: Lee Rosevere (freemusicarchive.org/music/Lee_Rosevere/) Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/hertzpodcast) and get bonus stuff! $1 a month or more: Monthly newsletter + Access to behind-the-scenes photos & video via the Patreon app + the the warm feeling you're supporting the show $5 a month or more: All the stuff you get in the one dollar tier PLUS a bonus mini episode every month (extras + the bits we couldn't include in our regular episodes) Episode citation and permanent link Quintana, D.S., Heathers, J.A.J. (Hosts). (2019, August 5) "Conflicts of interest in psychology (with Tom Chivers)", Everything Hertz [Audio podcast], DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/F9WBM (https://osf.io/f9wbm/) Special Guest: Tom Chivers.

Last month, Oxford University was given £150m by a US billionaire, Stephen A. Schwarzman, to study the ethical implications of Artificial Intelligence. In the announcement, he warned that technology left unaffected would “trample over certain aspects of human behaviour and human opportunities”, before setting out the potential to “reaffirm western values” and “help the world adjust to changing times.” Which raises the question: whose values exactly would we be reaffirming? We commissioned this week's Artificial Intelligence special to explore this question, and others surrounding ethics and AI. In particular, we asked four writers to reflect on what the Bishop of Oxford has suggested is the deep question of our age: “What does it mean to be a human?” We also feature an extract from a new book by Tom Chivers, who spent months with some of those who have long worried about the existential threat posed by AI. In this podcast, Madeleine Davies talks to him about how worried we should be. Tom's book, The AI Does Not Hate You: Superintelligence, rationality and the race to save the world, is published by Weidenfeld & Nicolson at £16.99 (CT Bookshop £15.30).

All the best bits from the past week on Monocle 24 presented by Markus Hippi and Fernando Augusto Pacheco. This week: surf’s up! Big-wave rider Laird Hamilton shares some of the insights he’s learned on the waves. Plus: science journalist Tom Chivers talks us through his book ‘The AI Does Not Hate You: Superintelligence, Rationality and the Race to Save the World’; and we meet Felicia Pennant, editor in chief and founder of ‘Season’, a beautiful title dedicated to women’s football and fashion.

Click here to buy: https://adbl.co/2ElYNP7 'The AI does not hate you, nor does it love you, but you are made of atoms which it can use for something else' This is a book about AI and AI risk. But it's also more importantly about a community of people who are trying to think rationally about intelligence, and the places that these thoughts are taking them, and what insight they can and can't give us about the future of the human race over the next few years. It explains why these people are worried, why they might be right, and why they might be wrong. It isn't, on the other hand, a book about the future - it doesn't try to guess how many of us are going to be put out of work by AI, or what the operating system in your house might be able to do ten years hence. Instead, this is a book about the cutting edge of our thinking on intelligence and rationality right now by the people who stay up all night worrying about it. Along the way, we discover why we probably don't need to worry about a future AI resurrecting a perfect copy of our minds and torturing us for not inventing it sooner but we should be concerned about paperclips destroying life as we know it; how Mickey Mouse can teach us an important lesson about how to programme AI; and why Spock is not as logical as we think he is. (p) Orion Publishing Group Ltd 2019

In this week's podcast, Ayesha Hazarika is joined by science writer and author, Tom Chivers, and political journalist Jane Merrick, to discuss under-reported stories from across the week. Tom highlights the subject of his recent piece for UnHerd: the risk posed by AI becoming competent. Jane raises the issue of sugar and asks, are we worrying about it too much? The panel also discuss their hero of the week, Margret Hodge MP and their villain, Julian Smith MP.

Tom Chivers is a writer, who specialises in the intersection of science, philosophy and politics. He was a former staff writer at BuzzFeed UK and an assistant comment editor at the Telegraph. He's currently writing a book about Artificial Intelligence. In this episode, he talks about atheism, the value of truth and verification. He also talks about attaining truth through scientific methods, taking principles from both classical philosophy and computer science to interrogate the hard questions. Finally, he talks about the UK's media environment, and how best to handle an altercation on Twitter. The episode also features Nick Spencer, who talks about his upcoming conversation with Stephen Pinker, and his review of the writer John Gray's "Seven Types of Atheism", which is now available on the Theos website. You can follow Theos at @theosthinktank and you can follow Elizabeth at @theoselizabeth on Twitter.

In UnHerd's second Head to Head, Nigel Cameron and Tom Chivers debate the question "Is social media the new plague".

This week on the GoodPractice podcast: Owen, James and Ross discuss 'micro learning'. According to Donald Taylor's 2016 L&D Global Sentiment Survey, micro learning was set to be a hot topic over the past year. But has it had an impact on our industry or is it just another in a long line of fads? If you'd like to share your thoughts on the show, you can find us on Twitter @RossGarnerGP, @owenferguson and @jamesmcluckie.   You can also tweet @GoodPractice or @GoodpracticeAus.  You can find out more about GoodPractice by visiting our website: goodpractice.com.  This week, the following blogs and articles were referenced:   Tom Chivers, 'A Mindset "Revolution" Sweeping Britain's Classrooms May Be Based On Shaky Science' (14 January 2017). Available at: https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomchivers/what-is-your-mindset?utm_term=.xpD1GPpGAv#.oo6nXaoXqA   Donald Clarke, 'Micro-learning: trend, fad or retred?' (1 February 2016). Available at: http://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.co.uk/search?q=micro+learning   Donald Taylor, 'Micro learning: Advance or fantasy?' (6 January 2017). Available at: href="https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/micro-learning-advance-fantasy-donald-h-taylor?published=t   Will Thalheimer, 'Definition of MicroLearning' (13 January 2017). Available at: http://www.willatworklearning.com/2017/01/definition-of-microlearning.html With apologies to all the dietitians out there, who Owen referred to as 'nutritionists'.

Is Iceland the best football team in the world per capita? England suffered a 2-1 defeat to Iceland in the European Football Championship in France. This was embarrassing for England when you consider its population is 163 times bigger than Iceland’s. We take a look at whether Iceland is now the best performing football team in the world if you compare UEFA ranking to the size of each country’s population. Plus, we take a look at the chances of a young man in Iceland and in England getting to represent their country on the pitch. Old versus young Brexit voters Many media outlets have reported that it was predominantly the older generations in the UK who voted to ‘Leave’ the EU in a recent referendum, while those under 25 were keenest to ‘Remain’. It has prompted many listeners to ask whether a referendum on this topic might yield a different result if held in a few years’ time as the electorate changes. We attempt some back of the envelope calculations with Tom Chivers from Buzzfeed. But actually – how good is the data available? How do we know how people voted or how they would vote in the future?

In today’s What Next? podcast, journalist, producer and Spitalfields Music audience member Tom Chivers asks ‘What next for audiences and social media?’ Click play below to listen to Tom’s thoughts (or if you’re viewing this on email, head over to the blog to hear the podcast): We’ll be releasing podcasts each day throughout the Summer Festival available here, our website and on iTunes from 8.30am. The…

In this week's Telegram Lord Tebbit and Tom Chivers debate the moral and practical realities of allowing an individual to decide when their life should end. Lord Tebbit foresees an explosion of financially motivated "suicides", while Tom Chivers insists that with the right safeguards, people should be allowed to die with dignity. Also: Ed Miliband's euro gamble. Dan Hodges and John McTernan argue whether it's Labour or the Tories who are now confused about Europe.

Dirk Gently (TV series) From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: , Dirk Gently Titlescreen of series 1, based on Gently's painted whiteboard. Genre / Created by () Written by Howard Overman Jamie Mathieson Directed by Damon Thomas Starring Composer(s) Country of origin United Kingdom Language(s) English No. of series 1 No. of episodes 3 (+ pilot) () Production Executive producer(s) Howard Overman Saurabh Kakkar () Brian Minchin () Eleanor Moran (BBC - Pilot) Jamie Laurenson (BBC - Pilot) Producer(s) Chris Carey Editor(s) Matthew Tabern Cinematography Ole Bratt Birkeland Camera setup Running time 60 minutes Production company(s) The Welded Tandem Picture Company Distributor Broadcast Original channel (repeats) Picture format Audio format Original run 16 December 2010 – 19 March 2012 Chronology Related shows External links Dirk Gently is a comedy detective drama TV series based on characters from the Dirk Gently novels by . The series was created by and stars as detective and as his Richard MacDuff. Recurring actors include as MacDuff's girlfriend Susan Harmison, as Dirk's nemesis DI Gilks and as Dirk's receptionist Janice Pearce. Unlike most detective series Dirk Gently features broadly comic touches and even some themes such as and . Dirk Gently operates his Holistic Detective Agency based on the "fundamental interconnectedness of all things", which relies on methods to uncover connections between seemingly-unrelated cases. He claims that he follows the principles of , and although the majority of his clients suspect he may be a conman he often produces surprising results. With the help of his assistant, Richard MacDuff, Dirk investigates a number of seemingly unrelated but interconnected cases. An hour-long loosely based on plot elements from Adams' 1987 novel was broadcast on on 16 December 2010 and was watched by 1.1 million viewers. Critical reception was generally positive. A full series of three one-hour episodes was subsequently commissioned in March 2011 and was broadcast on BBC Four in March 2012. The series is the first continuing drama series produced for the digital channel. The series is produced by and The Welded Tandem Picture Company for and shot in . The pilot was written by Howard Overman and directed by Damon Thomas. The full series was written by Overman, and Jamie Mathieson and directed by . The series along with the pilot episode was released on DVD on 26 March 2012 by ITV Studios Home Entertainment. An original television soundtrack album featuring music from the series composed by was released by 1812 Recordings on 5 March 2012. Contents Production Background The novel Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency has its origins in the incomplete 1979 television serial , featuring as the . Location filming in Cambridge had been completed, but a studio technicians' dispute at the BBC meant that studio segments were not completed, and the serial was never transmitted. As a result of the serial's cancellation, Adams reused a number of ideas from this script and his other Doctor Who scripts as the basis for a new novel, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, published in 1987. Adams published another, in 1988 and at the time of his death in 2001 was working on a third installment to be titled , fragments of which were published posthumously. Each novel features new characters and scenarios, although Dirk (real name Svlad Cjelli), his "ex-secretary" Janice Pearce and Sergeant, later Inspector, Gilks recur in each. The first Gently novel had previously been adapted into a stage play, and a BBC Radio 4 series by which was first broadcast in October 2007 and featured comedian in the title role. According to James Donaghy, Douglas Adams was frustrated that his Dirk Gently novels were never adapted for the screen. Announcement During - a convention - Ed Victor, a literary agent who represents Adams's estate announced that a television adaptation of Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency was in production. was announced to be playing Gently, with as MacDuff and as Susan. It is the first television adaptation of Adams' Dirk Gently series, although characters from the books had appeared in a 1992 episode of . Shooting on the pilot commenced early in October 2010 in Bristol. The director was Damon Thomas and the producer was Chris Carey. Although it was commissioned by the BBC, it was produced by with The Welded Tandem Picture Company. The pilot was first broadcast on on 16 December 2010 and was repeated a number of times during the next month. The pilot gained a commission on 31 March 2011 for a three-part series of one hour-long episodes broadcast on BBC Four in March 2012. The series is the first continuing drama series commissioned by BBC Four. Adaptation The screenplay of the pilot by is not a direct adaptation of the novel, but uses certain characters and situations from the novel to form the basis of a new drama centred around Dirk. Speaking about his interpretation, Howard Overman stated in an interview with Benji Wilson "I'm not even going to try to adapt the book: you can't adapt this story. Especially not on a BBC Four budget. We made the deliberate decision not to do a straight translation of the books. If we'd done that the fans would have felt badly let down, because you can never portray that world on the screen as well as it's been done in people's own imaginations...If you just do a straight adaptation like , people are always going to be quite brutal about it because it's never going to live up to their expectations." Dirk drives an old brown in the production. Stephen Mangan, writing a BBC blog on the programme stated "In my opinion, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency and The Long Dark Tea-Time Of The Soul are unfilmable as written...too much happens, there are too many ideas". The pilot concentrates on two relatively minor plot strands in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency: the disappearance of a cat, and the simultaneous disappearance of millionaire Gordon Way. Although time travel is involved in the solution, the novel's entire St Cedd's College / Electric Monk / Coleridge strand is omitted, although key words relating to these elements do appear on Dirk's whiteboard when it is first seen, though they are never subsequently referred to. Other elements from the book, such as the trapped sofa, are also absent and the setting is updated to 2010, with and replacing the answering machine messages in the book. There are changes to the characters too, one notable one being that Susan is Gordon's ex-girlfriend rather than his sister. Several additional elements from Adams's novels, in particular St Cedd's College, were later to appear in the full series. Interviewed about the series, Stephen Mangan noted that "All three episodes are very different in tone and you get a different Dirk with each one...He's on the run from the police in one of them and in another there's a bit of romance in the air, which for Dirk is a surprise because he's probably the most asexual character on TV... There seems to be a vogue for dark, realistic, gritty detective series, apart from perhaps . Dirk has so much humour in it. How many other detectives mix detection with quantum mechanics or drive a 30-year-old brown ?" Each episode of series one was written by different writers, who are mostly known for their contributions to science fiction and fantasy programmes; series creator Howard Overman also created and has written for , has previously written the Doctor Who stories ""/"" and wrote the film and has written scripts for . Cast , best known for his role in the television series , and subsequently , was cast in the main role as holistic detective . Mangan already knew the novel and the author's works, stating in a press release "I've been a fan of Douglas Adams ever since the Hitchhiker's radio series which I used to record as a child and listen to over and over again in my bedroom. It's such a thrill to now be playing one of his brilliant characters. Dirk is a chaotic, anarchic force of nature with a totally unique take on the world. He is described as 'lazy, untidy, dismissive and unreliable'. I've absolutely no idea why they thought I'd be right for the role." Cast alongside him were and , both of whom had previously worked with Mangan in Green Wing and respectively. Darren Boyd and Helen Baxendale returned for the full series, with the character of Richard MacDuff becoming Dirk's "partner/assistant" for each of the episodes. Other regular cast members are as Detective Inspector Gilks and as Dirk's secretary Janice Pearce. The programme pilot featured appearances from , , , . Episode one saw guest appearances by , , Ken Collard, and . Episode two featured roles for , , , Andrew Leung, and Bethan Hanks. Episode three features and . Filming at the was used as the fictional . Although the series is set in the London boroughs of and , the series was shot entirely in . Areas and buildings featured in the programme included the Guildhall, the Bottle Yard, St Thomas Street and the Greenbank area. The second series episode also featured extensive filming around the , with doubling as the fictional Cambridge College . The production's location manager, Rob Champion, noted that each location had to be chosen carefully to avoid featured giveaway clues to Bristol, in particular any building made of the local building material, limestone. He noted that "Episode 2 was the greatest challenge as it included two days material in a Robotic Laboratory. Bristol has such a thing...a joint venture between the two universities, with a very helpful professor, but its landlord was an American corporation with the most unimaginably anal restrictions on access. They basically didn't want us there and took the best part of two weeks to say so...We eventually settled upon a brand new building at the Bristol-Bath Science Park where they could not have been more helpful. All this on a BBC4 budget." Music The series's soundtrack was composed by . In creating the distinctive sound for the main titles and incidental music, Pemberton made use of a , a which is a cross between a and a piano. These instruments were produced in America between 1927 to 1972. The soundtrack also mixes in a harpsichord, synth, bass guitar and drums. A soundtrack album featuring music from the series was released by 1812 Recordings on 5 March 2012. Plot Dirk Gently (real name Svlad Cjelli) operates a Detective Agency based on the "fundamental interconnectedness of all things". To solve cases, Dirk relies on methods for example " navigation" (following people or vehicles who look like they know where they are going, in the hope that they will lead somewhere you want to be) or throwing a dart at a board of words to select the direction of his detection. By following up on apparently random occurences and whims, Dirk discovers connections between seemingly unrelated cases and often produces surprising results. He claims that he follows the principles of (although it is implied when he speaks to an expert in these fields that he doesn't really understand them); most people suspect he is just a conman and he rarely gets paid by clients and is therefore in almost permanent financial difficulty. In the pilot episode, Dirk bumps into a former university friend, Richard MacDuff, who has been made redundant from a job at an electricity board, and takes on a case for him. During the course of his investigation, Dirk hypnotises MacDuff and persuades him into investing his £20,000 redundancy money in his failing detective agency. MacDuff therefore becomes Dirk's partner in the business and "assistant" on investigations. Richard MacDuff's girlfriend, Dr Susan Harmison, was also at university with the pair and is deeply sceptical about Dirk's abilities. Also present at the Agency is Dirk's receptionist Janice Pearce, whom Dirk has not paid for years and who therefore refuses to do any work. Episodes No.TitleDirectorWriterViewing figuresOriginal air date 0 "" Damon Thomas 943 000 16 December 2010 When sets out to solve an apparently simple and harmless disappearance of a cat from an old lady's house, he unwittingly uncovers a double murder which, in turn, leads to a host of even more extraordinary events.  1 "Episode 1" Howard Overman 844 000 5 March 2012 Dirk discovers the connection between two unrelated cases - a client who believes are trying to kill him and another whose horoscopes appear to be coming true.  2 "Episode 2" Tom Shankland 561 000 12 March 2012 Dirk is called back to his old university to protect a valuable robot but within 24 hours it has been stolen and a dead body discovered, with Dirk and MacDuff the prime suspects.  3 "Episode 3" Tom Shankland Jamie Mathieson 592 000 19 March 2012 Dirk's old clients are being randomly murdered with Dirk as the only link. Rather than talk to the police, Dirk elects to leave the country but is waylaid by a series of seemingly unconnected events.  Reception Pilot Stephen Mangan plays the titular holistic detective in the series. The pilot episode gained 1.1m viewers (3.9% share) on BBC Four, which was over three times the channel's slot average. Critical reception for the pilot was largely positive. Several mentioned that it was only a loose adaptation of the novel, although the general consensus was that the essence of the original was maintained. Sam Wollaston in stated "Coming to it fresh, it's a neat story about aforementioned missing cat and time travel, with a smattering of quantum physics and the fundamental connectedness of things. With a lovely performance from Doreen Mantle as the old lady/murderer. Stephen Mangan's good in the title role, too – a teeny bit irritating perhaps, but then Mangan is a teeny bit irritating. So is Dirk Gently, though – it's perfect. Funny too. Quite funny." James Donaghy, also writing in The Guardian stated "Personally I hope Dirk Gently gets made into a full series. The programme shows promising glimpses, has a strong cast and Misfits already proves Overman can write. And a BBC4 adaptation feels like a good fit – Gently being exactly the kind of playground-of-the-imagination curio the BBC made its name indulging." published two reviews. Alice-Azania Jarvis was extremely positive, writing "...there wasn't very much you could fault about the production at all. Right down to the quirky camerawork and youthful, poppy soundtrack (who would have thought the Hoosiers could be so right in any situation?), the director, Damon Thomas, got it pretty spot-on. The result was a pleasingly festive-feeling adventure; part , part , part . And the best thing? There wasn't a Christmas tree in sight. Douglas Adams once claimed that Gently would make a better film character than his more famous hero, . Based on last night's experience, he may well have been right." John Walsh's review for was cooler about the adaptation, although he praised Mangan's performance: "Given the talent and style on display, it should have been a scream. In fact it all seemed a little moth-eaten. Though set in the modern day, it was staggeringly old-fashioned...You could overlook these faults, however, for the joy of Stephen Mangan's performance as the titular gumshoe. With his alarmed-spaniel eyes and jutting-jawed stroppiness, his geography teacher elbow-patches and Medusan hair, he radiates mess...His ineptness as a sleuth provided some fine comic moments. Paul Whitelaw in was also positive, although he noted "At times it felt forced, with a sense of trying slightly too hard when a touch more subtlety would have brought out the essential Adamsian eccentricity." Dan Owen of Obsessed with Film noted that the adaptation played with the idea of inexplicable situations: "Purists may grumble this isn't the Dirk Gently they wanted to see, but it's more accessible and practicable. And while Dirk Gently is certainly another gimmicky detective series (yawn), its details are unique and engrossing enough to shrug off the genre's clichés. In some ways it's a pastiche of whodunits, taking the genre's often tenuous explanations to an outrageous extreme." Paul Whitelaw in noted that "Although Adams's more ambitious concepts are sidelined in favour of a more prosaic - if nonetheless enjoyable - sci-fi mystery, Overman captures at least some of the wit and whimsy of his distinctive comic voice" going on to suggest "This modestly-budgeted pilot suggests potential for a series, so the deviation from Adams's originals makes sense. It also adds yet another very British oddball to the pantheon currently occupied by and . Series One Critical opinion to the full series was mildly positive. The adaptation from the Adams' novels was the focus of several reviews. Jane Simon, writing in The Mirror stated "It's just a shame creator Douglas Adams isn't around to see how Howard Overman has ­transferred Dirk to the screen. He'd definitely approve. Mark Braxton in the Radio Times likewise agreed that "Overman has plucked the comic essence of Adams from his novel...and worked it into a digestible, enjoyably eccentric format." AA Gill writing in the Sunday Times March 11, 2012 wrote 'Who'd have guessed that this would ever get recommissioned?...It has to get a nomination as the greatest waste of the most talent for the least visible purpose or reward." Others complained that the series was not an exact adaptation of the novels. Nigel Farndale in The Telegraph stated "I struggled with Dirk Gently...It had nothing to do with Stephen Mangan's considerable comedic talents, still less with Darren Boyd who plays MacDuff, the Dr Watson to Dirk's Holmes. It is more to do with my devotion to Douglas Adams, upon whose comic novel this series is based...in Douglas Adams, 90 per cent of the pleasure is in the prose, the narration, the felicities of language." Tom Sutcliffe in The Independent felt that the programme's qualities were "spread a little too thinly over a nonsensical thriller plot' and that "laughs... were far too widely spaced in a script that could have done with a lot more editing." Several critics compared the production with the big-budget BBC One detective series Sherlock, the second series of which was broadcast in January 2012. Writing in Metro, Keith Watson said "There's no doubt Sherlock has raised the detecting duo bar on TV...it's more than a match for Sherlock on the dialogue front, neatly catching the surreal humour that was the Adams trademark...but there was no disguising the fact that Dirk Gently was a five-star script being filmed on a one-star budget, making it look like a designer label knockoff when set against the production values lavished on Sherlock. Stuart Jeffries in , meanwhile, found a comparison between the tone of the series and 1960s spy/detective ; "Never since has there been anything so unremittingly silly on British television as Dirk Gently...Dainty harpsichord music tells us we're back in an era of TV misrule, in whose glory days John Steed, Mrs Peel and played fast and loose with viewers' intelligences." The first episode had 737,000 viewers and a 3% audience share but this fell to 415,000 and 2% share for the second episode.[] Series one, including the pilot episode, was released on DVD on 26 March 2012 by ITV Studios Home Entertainment. References ^ James Donaghy "", The Guardian, 16 December 2010 ^ Helena Cole, , SFX, 17 February 2012 ^ "", BBC Press Release, 31 March 2011 ^ Jason Deans, "", The Guardian, 31 March 2011 ^ "", BBC Cult, accessed 19 March 2012 ^ Chris Harvey, "", Daily Telegraph, 16 December 2010 . Retrieved 14 August 2007. News and New Projects page July 2007 of radio version Rob Hastings, "", The Independent, 6 October 2010 at the listing . 6 October 2010. Retrieved 10 October 2010. ^ . Retrieved 10 October 2010. ^ Benji Wilson, , The Telegraph, 5 March 2012 Mangan, Stephen (16 December 2010). . . Retrieved 20 December 2010. ^ Tom Chivers, "", Daily Telegraph, 17 December 2010 ^ "Stephen Mangan speaks about the return to our screens of Dirk Gently", Northampton Chronicle & Echo, 8 March 2012 Helena Cole, "", SFX, 17 February 2012 ^ , British Comedy Guide , Bristol Film Office, accessed 18 March 2012 , Bristol Film Office, accessed 18 March 2012 ^ , thecallsheet.co.uk, accessed 19 March 2012 , Daniel Pemberton's Twitterfeed, accessed 22 March 2012 ^ Stuart Jeffries, "", The Guardian, 5 March 2012 , accessed 22 March 2012 ^ , BBC Four, accessed 19 March 2012 . BARB. Retrieved 4 April 2012. Sam Wollaston "", The Guardian, 16 December 2010 Alice-Azania Jarvis "", The Independent, 17 December 2010 John Walsh, "", The Independent, Sunday, 19 December 2010 Keith Watson, "", Metro, 16 December 2010 Dan Owen, "", Obsessed with Film, 17 December 2010 Paul Whitelaw, "", The Scotsman, 13 December 2010 Jane Simon, "", The Mirror 12 March 2012 Mark Braxton, Radio Times, 5 March 2012 Nigel Farndale, , Daily Telegraph, 9 March 2012 Tom Sutcliffe, " ", The Independent 6 March 2012 Keith Watson, , Metro' 6 March 2012 , Digital Spy, 7 March 2012 External links , at the at the British Comedy Guide