The Auron MacIntyre Show - How Social Justice Killed Individual Virtue ｜ Guest： Athenian Stranger ｜ 10⧸2⧸24

00:00:00.000 We hope you're enjoying your Air Canada flight.

00:00:02.320 Rocky's Vacation, here we come.

00:00:05.060 Whoa, is this economy?

00:00:07.180 Free beer, wine, and snacks.

00:00:09.620 Sweet! 0.95

00:00:10.720 Fast-free Wi-Fi means I can make dinner reservations before we land.

00:00:14.760 And with live TV, I'm not missing the game.

00:00:17.800 It's kind of like, I'm already on vacation.

00:00:20.980 Nice! 0.94

00:00:22.240 On behalf of Air Canada, nice travels.

00:00:25.260 Wi-Fi available to Airplane members on Equipped Flight.

00:00:27.200 Sponsored by Bell. Conditions apply.

00:00:28.720 CRCanada.com.

00:00:30.320 Hey everybody, how's it going?

00:00:32.280 Thanks for joining me this afternoon.

00:00:34.160 I've got a great stream with a great guest that I think you're really going to enjoy.

00:00:38.440 So I was reading one of my favorite thinkers, Bertrand de Juvenal, his book on sovereignty.

00:00:44.120 And he brought up an issue that I found really fascinating.

00:00:47.500 Something that I never thought very deeply about, but something that is very important for our modern lives.

00:00:53.220 He pointed out that the ancients understood justice as an individual trait, a virtue to be cultivated, the way that a man understood and interacted properly with the people in his community.

00:01:06.780 But in the modern conception, justice is something very different.

00:01:10.800 It's something, it's a system that we implement.

00:01:13.000 It's an aspect that a society takes on once it's properly configured itself.

00:01:17.960 And I think this has lent itself to an understanding of social justice that now comes to dominate pretty much every part of the Western world.

00:01:27.580 So I wanted to dive deeper into this concept and get a better grasp of what the ancients would have had to say about it and why it has changed so radically over time.

00:01:37.760 And I decided to bring on Athenian Stranger.

00:01:40.900 He's a great writer, sub-stacker, often is addressing philosophical topics on places like Twitter.

00:01:47.100 So glad to have him to talk about this.

00:01:49.040 Thanks for coming on, man.

00:01:50.500 And thanks so much for having me on because this is a particular topic that is something that I have essentially been obsessed with for nothing less than like a decade.

00:02:02.420 So I think the danger you're going to have with having me on about this is trying to shut me up so that you can get a word in here and there.

00:02:13.540 Well, that's exactly the right kind of problem to have.

00:02:16.500 And I didn't know that that is something that you had dove deep on.

00:02:21.080 But it seems like I've chosen exactly the right person to have the conversation with.

00:02:25.040 So I want to get into all that, guys.

00:02:26.760 But before I do, let me tell you about a few things going on over at The Blaze.

00:02:30.300 As many of you know, of course, we have great Blaze merchandise.

00:02:34.560 If you want to go ahead and support my channel, you want to support what's happening over at The Blaze, you can do that by going to shopblazemedia.com.

00:02:43.040 When you go there, you're going to find The Blaze Heritage Collection, The Blaze Media Collection.

00:02:47.820 You'll find things for some of your favorite shows like Aqua Donkeys and some of the Trump Vance merch for 2024.

00:02:54.480 And I've heard that there is an Orn McIntyre merch in production.

00:02:58.660 We're looking at designs right now.

00:03:00.360 So hopefully I'll be able to bring that to you soon as well.

00:03:03.560 But if you want to go ahead and get some of The Blaze merch now, you can go to shopblazemedia.com and use the code blaze10 to get 10% off.

00:03:12.420 Also at The Blaze, there is now a new tier of membership.

00:03:16.740 You know, nobody reads anymore.

00:03:18.740 And one of the things that The Blaze wanted to do was put something beautiful into the world, put out a very nice, you know, quarterly periodical that people could hold in your hand.

00:03:29.620 You know, you used to walk in to houses, you know, nice houses.

00:03:33.380 Your friends had had a, you know, a higher social standing.

00:03:36.720 They have great magazines.

00:03:37.920 They've had a high quality production sitting on the coffee table, drawing your eye, having interesting articles and commentary in them.

00:03:45.320 But you just don't see this very much, especially in the conservative world anymore.

00:03:48.780 And so The Blaze wanted to go through the effort of making a publication like this.

00:03:53.120 And so they have the new magazine called Frontier.

00:03:56.460 Frontier is a fantastic publication that has many of your favorite writers.

00:04:01.780 Of course, it's guys like Glenn Beck and Matt Taibbi, Chris Ruffo.

00:04:05.980 It's also got an article from me and one of your favorite frogs on this channel, The Prudentialist.

00:04:11.120 So a wide swath of established names and up-and-coming people bringing some of you the best thought in the right-wing sphere.

00:04:19.340 You also, if you join this Blaze Unlimited membership, you get a lot of other benefits beyond just the magazine.

00:04:25.640 You get a founding members card.

00:04:27.940 You get access to additional behind-the-scenes content, VIP event access,

00:04:32.880 and all kinds of other things like your ability to have your voice heard when it comes to the direction that the Blaze is going.

00:04:40.620 So if you want to get involved in that, you want to get the first issue of this magazine along with all the other benefits of Blaze Unlimited,

00:04:48.120 you can go to blazeunlimited.com slash Oren.

00:04:51.720 And that way you can get your first issue and get started with the entire Blaze Unlimited family.

00:04:59.000 All right, so let's get down to the topic itself.

00:05:02.160 I'm going to open this up by just reading the passage because, one, I find DeJuvenal to be an excellent writer,

00:05:09.120 and, two, I'm just not going to be able to go ahead and cut this down in any other way, distill it in any better way.

00:05:17.840 So I'm just going to read what DeJuvenal has written here.

00:05:21.700 Again, this is from his book Sovereignty.

00:05:24.240 I recommend On Power all the time.

00:05:27.520 It's one of the most fascinating books on political theory I've ever read and can't recommend it highly enough.

00:05:34.480 But I'm about halfway through Sovereignty, and it's very good.

00:05:38.760 Maybe not quite as revolutionary in its totality as On Power, but a book that is well worth your time.

00:05:45.380 And in his chapter on justice, he has a passage here where he says,

00:06:20.100 He links up with Aristotle, for whom,

00:06:23.740 Thus justice is conceived as a human attitude of mind, which habit strengthens, a virtue.

00:06:42.840 When people talk about justice today, they no longer mean this virtue of the soul, but a state of things.

00:06:49.440 The word no longer conveys to mind a certain human attribute, but a certain configuration of society.

00:06:57.280 It is no longer applied to certain personal attributes of mind, but envisages certain collective arrangements.

00:07:03.960 Whereas it used to be thought that social relationships are improved by justice in men,

00:07:09.880 it is now thought, contrary-wise, that the installation in institutions of a stage of things called just promotes the improvement of men.

00:07:19.620 This reversal is in the fashion of thought today, which makes morality the creature of circumstance.

00:07:26.080 We see then that justice today is not a habit of mind, which each of us can acquire in proportion to his virtue,

00:07:33.060 and should acquire in proportion to his power.

00:07:35.400 Rather, it is an organization of arrangement of things.

00:07:38.300 For this reason, the first part of the classical definition, which links justice with human beings,

00:07:43.420 is no longer found a place in modern preoccupations, which links justice with society.

00:07:50.180 People no longer say with Aristotle that justice is the moral attitude of just men,

00:07:56.620 or that the jurist that is a certain exercise of the will,

00:08:01.620 but for these talk of an intimate quality of the soul.

00:08:06.240 Justice now recommended is a quality not of a man and of a man's actions,

00:08:11.820 but of a certain configuration of things in social geometry, no matter what means it is brought about.

00:08:18.480 Justice is now something which exists independently of just men.

00:08:23.400 So, Stranger, this is something that, like I said, really struck me.

00:08:28.480 It's, you know, you have this intuition, but until you see something like this fleshed out,

00:08:33.220 you may not completely look at the totality of that problem.

00:08:38.020 And I just want, you know, obviously we're going to go deep into this,

00:08:40.720 but I would just want to get your kind of surface level thoughts on that passage,

00:08:44.940 on the shift he describes between the understanding of justice as a individual virtue cultivated

00:08:51.220 by men who are improving themselves,

00:08:53.680 as opposed to something that is basically socially engineered by creating the proper institutions.

00:09:00.420 Yeah, so for your listeners, what was just said was a lot.

00:09:08.900 Yeah, for sure.

00:09:09.900 And what I would suggest for everyone's consideration is that what he's pointing to there

00:09:16.440 is a distinction between pre-moderns and modernity,

00:09:24.860 which is to say the radical transformation that takes place at the level of politics

00:09:31.360 that subsequently is, well, not subsequently,

00:09:36.060 it's really predicated upon a new understanding of science itself, right?

00:09:41.280 Modern science.

00:09:42.460 So modernity, modern science, the enlightenment,

00:09:45.020 all of these things are different sides to the same coin.

00:09:53.420 The issue is also, last time you had me on, we talked about Strauss and Machiavelli.

00:09:59.660 This is something that, this is a theme that Strauss himself makes very prominent.

00:10:06.900 And I've seen critiques, for instance, of where people say so-called Straussians

00:10:11.240 challenge you not to talk about ancients and moderns, impossible.

00:10:15.900 But this is, I would simply say that that's not a theme of Strauss.

00:10:20.540 That's a product of the enlightenment itself.

00:10:23.740 In the 18th century, there was the so-called quarrel between the,

00:10:26.880 off as a literary issue and unfolds into the philosophical issue that we understand it is today.

00:10:36.240 But ultimately, what you have,

00:10:39.860 the classical statement of what justice is and what he's talking about there,

00:10:46.160 is what we find in Aristotle's Nicomachean ethics.

00:10:49.900 And for your listeners who don't know,

00:10:53.580 the Nicomachean ethics is usually what everyone means when they say Aristotle's ethics.

00:11:00.580 And what he does there is he provides an account of moral virtues and then also an account of intellectual virtues

00:11:11.440 and then has a long discussion about friendship and then how all of this comes together with relationship to law

00:11:18.980 and what law is supposed to accomplish.

00:11:20.820 Now, what he means when he says virtue,

00:11:27.680 erite, it's the Greek word, it just means excellence.

00:11:30.760 It can also mean virtue for the same reason.

00:11:34.480 What he means by that is he,

00:11:37.540 I like to call it Aristotle's logos of happiness because he's,

00:11:40.860 he's positing the fact that we do things,

00:11:44.900 all of us do things with the belief that there's some good involved for us.

00:11:51.600 And so he says,

00:11:52.580 most people agree it's happiness.

00:11:54.680 He said,

00:11:55.260 so if that's the case,

00:11:56.780 then let's contemplate the word he uses is theorize.

00:12:00.840 Let's let's theoria what virtue is,

00:12:04.760 because it would seem to be the case that happiness and virtue go hand to hand.

00:12:07.660 And in his account of the various virtues,

00:12:12.160 the most important of which is going to be justice,

00:12:18.320 just it.

00:12:19.040 And the reason it is the most important is B is because what he's going to claim

00:12:25.400 is that to have the virtue of justice of necessity means that you have all of the other virtues.

00:12:33.960 And another sort of classical statement of this is coming from Plato's Republic where Plato's era.

00:12:42.980 I'm sorry,

00:12:43.280 Plato's Socrates finally comes out and gives a sort of definition of justice is saying that it's minding one's own business,

00:12:50.540 whatever that is.

00:12:52.800 And then of course,

00:12:54.020 the philosopher King is the only person who's allowed to mind everyone's business while everyone else is minding their own business.

00:13:01.180 But Aristotle gives this account of what justice is and what we need to understand about justice

00:13:06.900 and why it's also so important is because when you think about the nature of our soul,

00:13:12.140 I don't mean any kind of metaphysical sense or something like that.

00:13:15.660 It's just the Greek word psuche for soul just means the source of life.

00:13:19.940 In other words,

00:13:20.340 what gives us motion,

00:13:21.640 how we move and whatever,

00:13:23.860 and the source of cognition,

00:13:25.400 thought,

00:13:26.380 deliberation.

00:13:27.180 The reason it's so important to us is it would seem to be the case that we as human beings have just a very few basic elementary reactions,

00:13:38.800 passions.

00:13:40.740 And one of those is what he refers to as thumos.

00:13:43.560 And a good way to translate that is righteous indignation.

00:13:47.040 It's going to turn out that this passion of the soul is in many ways,

00:13:53.880 the passion of politics and friendship,

00:13:56.200 because in order to have good citizens,

00:13:59.160 you need to have people who have a sense of righteous indignation at what is not thought to be good.

00:14:06.280 And so that's,

00:14:08.760 that's sort of the,

00:14:09.560 the aspect of it there.

00:14:11.200 So we're already in the realm of the soul when we're talking about justice with the pre-moderns and especially,

00:14:17.860 like I said,

00:14:18.260 with Aristotle.

00:14:19.400 And so the whole point of contemplating the virtues,

00:14:23.800 erite,

00:14:24.440 that Aristotle is getting at is that in some way,

00:14:28.500 it's going to turn out that if we know what they,

00:14:31.700 if we have a better way of articulating them,

00:14:34.920 knowing what they are,

00:14:36.080 that knowledge,

00:14:37.900 if it's true knowledge is going to be bound up with action.

00:14:42.400 So it's not this kind of theorist cell sort of thing where people just have book knowledge and then they're degenerates.

00:14:49.500 Because when you,

00:14:51.460 when you truly know something,

00:14:52.840 it's going to issue an action.

00:14:54.740 And the reason it's going to issue an action is because to truly know something means you found a,

00:15:00.520 an access to pleasure that is more beautiful.

00:15:04.980 And that's what Aristotle is going to say.

00:15:07.040 The telos,

00:15:07.760 the purpose of moral virtue is,

00:15:09.640 is for itself.

00:15:11.600 And he,

00:15:12.020 what he,

00:15:12.340 what he says that is for the sake of the beautiful.

00:15:15.680 And it's going to turn out the argument there is that knowledge of these things is more beautiful,

00:15:22.140 which is to say more pleasant than the other pleasures we receive from the passion of the soul that don't distinguish us from the animals,

00:15:29.860 which is to say what other people would think of as hedonism.

00:15:32.820 So that's going to be sort of the framework there.

00:15:36.760 Now,

00:15:37.940 the question is,

00:15:38.940 well,

00:15:39.780 get away from that.

00:15:42.300 I mean,

00:15:42.660 I mean,

00:15:43.060 because we all sort of,

00:15:44.500 I mean,

00:15:44.680 that's plausible,

00:15:45.560 right?

00:15:45.740 I mean,

00:15:45.880 it's like,

00:15:46.140 well,

00:15:46.280 yeah,

00:15:46.500 I mean,

00:15:46.700 I,

00:15:46.880 I like the way that sounds,

00:15:48.700 you know,

00:15:48.880 let's,

00:15:49.260 let's,

00:15:49.560 you know,

00:15:50.060 that's what I have in mind.

00:15:51.140 When does fast grocery delivery through Instacart matter most?

00:15:57.000 When your famous grainy mustard potato salad isn't so famous without the grainy mustard.

00:16:01.840 When the barbecue's lit,

00:16:03.120 but there's nothing to grill.

00:16:04.520 When the in-laws decide that,

00:16:06.120 actually,

00:16:06.700 they will stay for dinner.

00:16:08.240 Instacart has all your groceries covered this summer.

00:16:10.800 So download the app and get delivery in as fast as 60 minutes.

00:16:14.120 Plus enjoy $0 delivery fees on your first three orders.

00:16:18.160 Service fees exclusions and terms apply.

00:16:20.000 Then you have to understand that this has changed so radically now because that was the purpose of law for the pre-moderns, 0.89

00:16:33.100 was that law itself was to be the yoke of educating one's passions towards these virtues.

00:16:42.160 With the rise of populations,

00:16:45.240 I mean,

00:16:45.480 it's just,

00:16:45.760 just having,

00:16:46.860 remember,

00:16:47.360 Greek city-states were small.

00:16:48.760 The polis was tiny.

00:16:50.000 With the rise of civilization or nations,

00:16:53.340 it turns out that it's very difficult to legislate morality.

00:16:58.760 So that's when we get to this new understanding of law

00:17:02.460 as,

00:17:03.700 as being like positive and negative,

00:17:06.120 which people might understand that or something.

00:17:08.500 It's in other words,

00:17:09.460 with the rise of what we know of as classical liberalism,

00:17:12.960 we're allowed a privacy of conscience.

00:17:14.560 That's new.

00:17:15.240 But ultimately what this is going to come to with the enlightenment is that it's all predicated on the fact of the so-called social contract theorists like Hobbes,

00:17:28.000 Locke,

00:17:29.040 Rousseau.

00:17:29.540 And what they say is that no one can agree on what is the greatest good,

00:17:35.380 but we can at least all agree.

00:17:36.980 And in other words,

00:17:37.460 so let's lower the bar and we can all at least agree on what is bad.

00:17:41.440 And what is bad is to suffer gruesome death,

00:17:45.560 painful,

00:17:46.480 gruesome death at the hands of other people.

00:17:48.160 And it's from there that we build up classical liberalism in the sense of allowing for that privacy of conscious,

00:17:57.880 conscience,

00:17:58.640 sorry,

00:17:59.360 but,

00:17:59.600 but that's,

00:18:00.320 that's going to be that.

00:18:01.880 And so that's going to have a profound effect on the definition of what justice is,

00:18:06.860 because at the end of the day,

00:18:09.140 what justice is and has always been,

00:18:11.600 regardless of,

00:18:12.340 you know,

00:18:12.540 the changing of its definitions or something is this understanding of what is fair or what is right.

00:18:19.280 And in Greek justice,

00:18:22.420 DK also means right.

00:18:25.460 And so another way to think of the transition that's,

00:18:28.360 that takes place as we move from a tradition of natural law to a tradition of just natural right.

00:18:36.780 And then we had sort of Pandora's boxes opened.

00:18:40.100 And this is not to say natural right in the sense of the classics,

00:18:43.980 but a new understanding of natural right in the moderns of what you were allowed to do,

00:18:48.440 what you were not allowed to do.

00:18:49.680 It's the sort of rights based theories of justice.

00:18:55.960 But you open that box.

00:18:57.300 And next thing you know,

00:18:58.280 we're at the point where we are now,

00:19:00.100 where people are saying that basically anything is a right.

00:19:03.760 Health care is a right.

00:19:07.220 Whatever your sexual deviances are,

00:19:10.540 that's a right.

00:19:11.780 I mean,

00:19:12.160 everything is a right.

00:19:13.620 In fact,

00:19:14.240 humanitarianism itself is nothing but granting rights to being simply by virtue of a human.

00:19:20.220 So all the things that come along with that.

00:19:23.080 So that was sort of,

00:19:24.140 yeah,

00:19:24.340 so that's my first stab at that.

00:19:25.960 And then there's a lot more to say,

00:19:27.040 but I know that's a lot I've already said.

00:19:28.800 So I'll shut up here for a second.

00:19:29.940 No,

00:19:30.620 for sure.

00:19:31.080 There's a lot to get to,

00:19:31.940 but we do have to break it into bite-sized chunks so that we can help people move along with us.

00:19:37.960 So it is a huge shift.

00:19:39.940 You know,

00:19:40.100 the process you describe,

00:19:42.380 you know,

00:19:42.560 this individual understanding,

00:19:44.980 this pursuit of excellence,

00:19:46.880 that,

00:19:47.120 you know,

00:19:47.260 the way that you understand,

00:19:48.940 you know,

00:19:49.860 the subdual of your own passions towards this good.

00:19:54.460 These are all things that I think a lot of people,

00:19:56.440 at least those that,

00:19:57.880 you know,

00:19:58.440 receive some level of probably moral education through religious or other means would recognize even in the modern era.

00:20:05.880 But I think they would understand these as the domain of,

00:20:09.460 you know,

00:20:09.860 good and bad or moral action.

00:20:12.340 And then they understand justice as something different,

00:20:15.920 something specific to the state and something that is involved in the structures of the state.

00:20:21.260 And so that shift in mentality,

00:20:23.260 I think,

00:20:24.300 you know,

00:20:24.860 really is important.

00:20:26.400 And I want to dive deeper into the way that not is that just a shift in the individual mentality,

00:20:31.680 but the way that society approaches it.

00:20:33.960 As you say,

00:20:34.460 this is something that is now,

00:20:35.780 you know,

00:20:36.420 the society can engineer certain aspects of this.

00:20:39.680 This is something that can be shaped and created.

00:20:42.740 The society needs to make sure to protect individual rights while also creating systems that will promote certain rights that we find new and more rights all the time.

00:20:51.980 So I want to dive deeper into that aspect as well.

00:20:54.560 But before we do,

00:20:55.340 let me tell you guys a little bit about the dangers facing the Supreme Court.

00:20:59.040 Don't kid yourself.

00:20:59.860 The future of the Supreme Court is on the ballot.

00:21:01.880 The radical left want to eliminate the court's conservative majority by packing the Supreme Court with their own handpicked justices to get the outcome that they want.

00:21:09.040 Even President Biden has gotten into the act by making reforming the court one of his final priorities before he leaves office.

00:21:15.760 But don't be fooled.

00:21:16.700 Their end game really is to pack the court.

00:21:19.340 At First Liberty,

00:21:20.100 they call this assault on the court what it really is,

00:21:22.600 a Supreme Court coup.

00:21:24.100 The frightening thing is that come January,

00:21:26.120 their plan could become our nation's reality.

00:21:28.880 Simple majority votes in the House and the Senate combined with the president's signature could turn their plan to pack the court into law.

00:21:35.780 That's why First Liberty is sounding the alarm and they need you to join them.

00:21:40.720 If we take action together,

00:21:42.020 if we unite our voices,

00:21:43.940 we can put a stop to the radical left's plan to take control of the Supreme Court.

00:21:48.100 As the 2024 election approaches,

00:21:50.320 we need to do three things.

00:21:52.060 Find out where each of your candidates stand on the radical issues of packing and purging the court.

00:21:56.940 Share what you learn with everyone.

00:21:58.840 And do your civic duty by voting.

00:22:00.300 The future of the court or preserving it as an independent judiciary is literally in your hands.

00:22:05.980 If we lose the court,

00:22:07.040 then we lose the country.

00:22:08.600 That's why First Liberty is taking action and they need all of us to join them.

00:22:13.120 With patriots like you standing for the Supreme Court,

00:22:15.740 we can safeguard the independence of the judiciary,

00:22:18.400 just as the founding fathers intended.

00:22:20.140 And by saying no to the left's Supreme Court coup,

00:22:22.600 we can secure the blessings of liberty

00:22:24.280 and protect the future of our constitutional rights for our children and grandchildren.

00:22:28.540 Please go to SupremeCoup.com slash Oren.

00:22:32.120 That's SupremeCoup.com slash Oren to learn how you can help stop the radical left's takeover of the Supreme Court.

00:22:39.340 So, as you were saying, Athenia, there's a big shift as we move into modernity,

00:22:46.880 as we see the rise of what a lot of people call classical liberalism,

00:22:50.500 the social contract fears that you were talking about there.

00:22:54.180 There's an understanding that,

00:22:57.320 and I'm glad you brought the issue of scale into this,

00:22:59.940 because, again, this is my hobby horse.

00:23:01.800 I don't think it gets brought up enough.

00:23:03.200 It's really critical.

00:23:04.700 In a Greek city-state, your society is small enough. 0.98

00:23:08.100 Your polity coheres properly.

00:23:11.360 There's an understanding of what the good is,

00:23:15.560 what justice is,

00:23:16.720 because you have a society that is so closely knit,

00:23:20.180 so organic in a way that you simply lose as you continue to add a large amount of people.

00:23:27.040 And so there's a lot of reasons that we reach kind of this turning point

00:23:31.640 in kind of the rise of liberalism.

00:23:34.040 But one of the reasons is that you have multiple peoples that have to regularly interact,

00:23:40.480 oftentimes now under the auspices of one state.

00:23:44.300 And so they have different traditions, different heritages,

00:23:47.360 in some cases even different religions,

00:23:48.940 but they need to find a way to work together.

00:23:52.140 And so rather than trying to hash out all of the existential questions

00:23:56.360 that are hiding inside, you know, addressing that issue of what is the good,

00:24:01.860 what is the highest value, how should hierarchies be ordered.

00:24:05.020 Instead, you can go to this common denominator of what is the bad.

00:24:08.920 You know, what do we want to avoid?

00:24:10.120 What are the worst things?

00:24:11.480 What is the minimum operative morality that will allow us to kind of work together?

00:24:18.100 And so we see this very radical shift from a well-defined and understood

00:24:24.560 and more organic understanding of justice to something that has to scale.

00:24:30.020 And because it has to scale, it has to be radically homogenized.

00:24:33.200 And that means we get kind of a lowest common denominator

00:24:36.080 and a shift in the idea of rights, you know, into the idea of rights.

00:24:41.560 And this being kind of the central organizing principle or duty of government in many ways.

00:24:46.840 Right. So, so another way to say this is that our word cosmopolitanism

00:24:54.180 is just a kind of fancy way of, it's a euphemism to speak of a kind of universal relativism,

00:25:02.520 if not an outright nihilism.

00:25:06.260 But the, the problem of scale or size is so important that in, in why people don't understand it

00:25:16.880 is because when you're talking about tradition and returning to the tradition that people feel

00:25:24.200 we have deviated from, the issue of scale has to be taken into consideration.

00:25:29.460 Because if the conditions that allowed for that tradition to even be possible are no longer there,

00:25:34.860 how can you possibly expect to return to it?

00:25:37.560 So, so that's going to be one of the issues.

00:25:39.200 Now, the, the turn that we're speaking of to this larger thing,

00:25:44.420 just for me to sort of break it down into a kind of soundbite for the, for the listeners to follow

00:25:49.500 is where things stand today with regard to justice.

00:25:56.080 There was an American philosopher.

00:25:57.720 I think he's passed away.

00:25:59.220 I don't know if he's still around, but he, he was the most influential in at least arguing this point

00:26:04.540 because he tended to be the most eloquent.

00:26:06.320 Richard Rorty is sort of the American philosopher of nihilism, and he's going to make the claim 0.95

00:26:15.580 that mind itself, in other words, that part of the soul and premodernity that, that issues in logos

00:26:24.980 as opposed to the passions is itself a construction.

00:26:29.900 It's just, it's just made up.

00:26:31.260 I mean, we've, we've, we construct it, uh, and that's that, that word there construction

00:26:37.700 is really the key word to understanding, uh, so very, very much of all of this, uh, because

00:26:44.380 it's so bound up with, uh, the significance of what we think of as modern science for the

00:26:50.500 course of modernity into post-modernity.

00:26:54.000 Now, uh, at this issue of scale.

00:26:58.140 So that's where things stand now is that, you know, everything's just a construction,

00:27:02.840 right?

00:27:03.000 So we can just redefine it or whatever.

00:27:04.860 That's another way to say that is we're in the realm of modern or post-modern nominalism.

00:27:09.720 Now where it arises, there's a number of ways.

00:27:12.800 Could you stop there and design, uh, define nominalism real quickly for people who may not

00:27:16.820 know?

00:27:17.460 Right, right, right.

00:27:18.300 Uh, so nominalism means that things exist in name only, right?

00:27:23.540 And so we just kind of give names to things, uh, and then define them.

00:27:30.180 And the definitions are as arbitrary as the fact that we've given them names.

00:27:35.240 Uh, so it's sort of captured well with, uh, Alistair McIntyre's title of his very popular

00:27:42.720 book, whose justice, which rationality, right?

00:27:46.460 In other words, uh, what, what, what, whose justice are we talking about?

00:27:49.940 Because it's right.

00:27:50.840 No one agrees, or how can we find a way back to agreeing or something like that?

00:27:54.880 Uh, and there's a number of ways to, to consider how we've gotten here.

00:28:00.420 But I think that Rousseau is probably the one who does the best job of at least explaining

00:28:05.240 it in a way that is more understandable than someone like Hobbes or Locke.

00:28:11.000 Uh, and it all, what Rousseau says is that the basis, the founding act of any society, uh,

00:28:18.880 is that it comes to an agreement.

00:28:21.060 Uh, and this is what we refer to as the social contract, the social compact.

00:28:26.000 Now with Rousseau, I'm going to be very, I'm going to generalize this very quickly and it's

00:28:31.280 going to be provocative, but I want it to be because that tends to be what gets people

00:28:35.300 to want to look into these things.

00:28:38.380 Rousseau is going to say, he's going to define this social compact in a way that invokes what

00:28:43.780 he calls the general will and what he says that the general will is, uh, and just, it's

00:28:52.160 easy enough just to sort of read the definition.

00:28:53.920 He says, he says, each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme

00:29:01.800 direction of the general will.

00:29:03.600 And in a body, in other words, as a unity, we receive each member as an indivisible part

00:29:10.880 of the whole.

00:29:12.140 So there we've moved from the kind of individuality, I guess we could say of the pre-moderns of the

00:29:18.220 individual cultivation of the soul, uh, to these unities of large collections of people.

00:29:24.520 Now, the most important thing there is that what he's talking about is that there, the, the

00:29:31.160 structuring of the soul itself, which is this virtue we call justice towards excellence,

00:29:37.020 uh, is it, it does it.

00:29:39.820 It's like, it's dependent upon this sort of just general will.

00:29:44.840 I mean, that's what he says.

00:29:45.620 It's just, we can think of this, the climate of ideas.

00:29:49.020 Now, what's going to happen is that that's going to be such a powerful critique of the

00:29:54.540 enlightenment itself.

00:29:55.900 The fact that that general will is not grounded in something like what, what is it grounded

00:30:00.660 in?

00:30:01.160 Uh, that it's going to be caught who's really going to respond to this.

00:30:06.960 And the way he does that is with the categorical imperative, uh, which is to say, only do that,

00:30:12.920 which you would do under every circumstance, right?

00:30:16.220 And that's a fast way of saying it.

00:30:18.020 Now, I know this sounds like a lot of philosophy, but the reason this is important is what we

00:30:22.560 have going on here in this transition that changes the whole notion of justice and how it

00:30:28.760 can become so corrupted is that we go from this notion of the general will to Kant's notion

00:30:34.560 of the categorical imperative.

00:30:35.960 And what comes from that is nothing less than Nietzsche's will to power, uh, at issue in

00:30:44.420 all of this, this radical transformation is this notion of what we refer to as the will.

00:30:49.540 Uh, and it slowly begins to unfold, uh, from anything that's principled, uh, into this nihilism

00:30:59.140 that is might makes right basically.

00:31:02.540 Uh, and this is where one ends, one could say, I'm not necessarily making the case, but it gets

00:31:09.600 made by a lot of people incorrectly.

00:31:11.200 I think that this is why it is that someone like Martin Heidegger, uh, can have this notion

00:31:17.060 of resolve.

00:31:17.840 In other words, you just, you have to, you simply choose, uh, what you're going to do

00:31:22.500 at any given moment in time, uh, radical decisionism and just go with it.

00:31:28.220 Right.

00:31:29.220 Uh, and that's in many respects, that's, that's, again, that's where we are.

00:31:35.140 The notion of justice today, the concept of justice today, uh, as much as you always hear

00:31:41.500 people shouting down Nietzsche, it really is a kind of just will to power.

00:31:44.900 Uh, that's what all these various claims of rights are.

00:31:48.500 So when politicians say it is a right, uh, that you can do, you know, this, and then they

00:31:53.860 attach like this insane thing that you're like, that's what, how is that a right?

00:31:58.200 Uh, but it's just an, it just is an issue of power.

00:32:01.900 Right.

00:32:02.240 And that's, I think that goes back to originally what you had mentioned with, uh, with the author

00:32:07.940 on this issue of power and sovereignty.

00:32:10.980 Right.

00:32:11.440 So that's how justice and power end up, uh, showing itself most extremely in our condition

00:32:19.420 today.

00:32:20.020 Uh, and why it's so very important for people to take it very seriously, uh, to understand

00:32:25.640 these things, uh, because how are you going to reign these things in if you don't even

00:32:29.120 know what their, uh, ultimate consequences are, or at least can be right underneath the

00:32:33.780 surface.

00:32:34.780 So in, in, I think it's interesting to explore the way that this develops along two lines,

00:32:41.100 because of course you, you know, you, as you said, you brought a lot of philosophy there,

00:32:44.720 and that's great.

00:32:45.340 Because that's exactly what I brought you on to do.

00:32:47.540 And I think that's, uh, critical, you know, to understand the, you know, the, uh, line

00:32:52.200 of succession there that is bringing us to this moment where you have, in many ways, simply

00:32:56.880 a will, uh, to power that is enforcing, uh, these understandings, uh, kind of detached from

00:33:04.160 any idea of a transcendent, uh, good that would, or, or an idea that even, uh, a particular

00:33:10.860 understanding of communal good would, would be informing these things.

00:33:14.860 I think it's interesting that you have two, you have, again, kind of two simultaneous tracks

00:33:19.720 here that, that are, uh, that are interacting with this.

00:33:24.420 One is again, that massification, right?

00:33:26.860 You, you need, uh, control of a, of a large body of people.

00:33:31.960 You need to create a level of uniformity across them.

00:33:35.440 Maybe that's because of just the, you know, needs of material production.

00:33:40.020 Maybe that's because, uh, you know, the, the unification of at least a base level of,

00:33:45.340 uh, of moral understanding is necessary for sovereignty to cohere.

00:33:49.860 But on top of this, you know, since you brought up Alistair McIntyre in after virtue, he discusses,

00:33:56.720 uh, you know, he takes a lot, a bit, a lot of swipes at Max Weber, uh, and points to the

00:34:02.960 fact that kind of this Weberian understanding of the world created a scenario where again, we

00:34:09.420 kind of just pushed aside all of these, uh, irreconcilable existential questions about the

00:34:17.100 meaning of the good and, and the ultimate truth and created this cult of utility and this cult of

00:34:23.580 utility is, is really focused on the institutions, which are also a, a critical part of scaling society.

00:34:30.540 Uh, so as society needs to, to scale, we start inventing these, uh, you know, uh, basically

00:34:36.780 ideological and philosophical, uh, reasons for why it's okay or necessary even, or morally, uh, demanded

00:34:44.380 to scale in this particular manner.

00:34:46.060 And so Weber believes in the, in the vesting of power inside these institutions.

00:34:50.920 And this is where we get the rise of managerialism, you know, mass bureaucracies create this.

00:34:56.400 And so you have the simultaneous need, uh, to scale society and to invest in this morality

00:35:03.120 that is manipulatable and, you know, creatable by, uh, by these institutions.

00:35:08.640 And that's why I think it's great about the, the, the juvenile, uh, passage there as it talks about

00:35:13.440 the implementation, implementation of social geometry, justice, again, no longer being something that

00:35:19.440 the individual culture cultivates in a Aristotelian understanding, but instead is something that

00:35:25.360 society engineers through, uh, the creation of the institutions that had already needed to scale

00:35:30.960 and operate when it comes to economics and these other things.

00:35:33.600 So these institutions are no longer just economically necessary, materially necessary.

00:35:38.080 They're also morally necessary because they are the source of justice.

00:35:41.520 They are the way in which justice is manufactured by society.

00:35:49.200 Right.

00:35:49.600 Now, um, something that's very important there that's going on that, uh, McIntyre is well aware

00:35:54.640 of is that, and this is something that most people don't realize.

00:35:59.280 Uh, so, so Weber is essentially the founder, we could say of modern sociology.

00:36:06.240 Now there's other people such as Durkheim and such, but still Weber has the, the,

00:36:10.800 he ends up being the most influential.

00:36:13.280 Weber was himself extremely influenced by Nietzsche.

00:36:16.720 Weber is going to be the one who introduces the word value instead of virtue, uh, because it's easier

00:36:25.760 to speak of values if it turns out that there's no grounding to this other thing that we call us

00:36:32.560 virtue.

00:36:33.680 In other words, what Weber is doing is he is institutionalizing.

00:36:37.040 He's a, to make, uh, possible analysis of society, uh, in terms of things that always

00:36:46.400 change, uh, this kind of radical flux of things.

00:36:50.880 Uh, and if justice, of course, is what defines the political community and it's changing, uh,

00:36:56.320 then we have to speak of, and if justice is a virtue, then we should no longer speak of justice

00:37:00.240 as a virtue.

00:37:00.720 We speak of justice as a value.

00:37:02.560 And so that's why you always hear politicians say, that's not my value.

00:37:05.840 That might be their value, not mine.

00:37:07.600 It's like, well, wait a minute.

00:37:08.640 Are we talking about values?

00:37:09.680 Are we going to be serious and talk about virtue here?

00:37:11.360 Uh, but, but that's, that's something that's very crucial.

00:37:15.440 And one thing that I would add there too, is that Nietzsche himself was aware of this, uh,

00:37:21.440 and Nietzsche, it's, it's with Nietzsche that so very much of this issue of justice becomes

00:37:30.080 something that people just don't want to talk about anymore, uh, because Nietzsche does such

00:37:34.720 a good job of just blowing it out of the water.

00:37:37.120 Uh, he says, it's not justice.

00:37:39.920 And again, this goes back to the title of, uh, one of the, of one of the more important

00:37:44.480 titles of the author you're mentioning in human all to human.

00:37:48.560 He flatly has an entire aphorism devoted to this is that, uh, it's a question of power,

00:37:54.000 not justice.

00:37:54.800 Uh, he says, he says, whenever justice shows its head, uh, it turns out that it's nothing

00:38:01.040 more than this status of equilibrium.

00:38:03.520 Uh, and he says, and we recognize this ugly thing, uh, as mercy, uh, in other words, what 0.86

00:38:11.600 Nietzsche is saying is that justice understood that way shows itself as fairness, right?

00:38:17.120 Everyone has the same thing.

00:38:19.440 And so that's why Nietzsche himself of all of the things that Nietzsche criticizes, the

00:38:25.200 one that he has the most contempt and hatred for a few people realize this is socialism.

00:38:30.800 Uh, Nietzsche hated socialism so much.

00:38:34.160 I mean, you just have to, sometimes you just have to sit down and read what he has to say

00:38:37.680 about socialism.

00:38:38.560 Cause it is hilarious.

00:38:39.920 It is so hilarious.

00:38:42.080 Where's the best place to find that, by the way, for people who might be looking for it.

00:38:45.040 Oh my gosh.

00:38:45.920 Um, I would say probably there's a number of places, but in particular, so, so just to give

00:38:52.080 your, your readers an account here, uh, it's going to be human all to human, uh, and roughly look around

00:39:00.960 uh, aphorism 446.

00:39:04.240 Uh, and then you'll also want to take a look, uh, at what's appended to that text, at least

00:39:10.160 in the Cambridge version of it, of the wanderer and his shadow and take a look at aphorism 22,

00:39:16.960 uh, where you talk, it's entitled the principle of equilibrium.

00:39:20.480 Uh, and going back to the first one, it's called a question of power, not justice.

00:39:24.000 And he is just railing against socialism, uh, because he said, he said what he's claiming

00:39:30.720 there is that the, the creation of the so-called last man, uh, which is the man who doesn't

00:39:37.120 understand greatness whatsoever.

00:39:38.720 And if you don't understand greatness, how can you possibly understand virtue?

00:39:42.320 The creation of the last or the, the, the political manifestation of the last man, the 0.60

00:39:46.800 person who doesn't recognize greatness and refuses to, uh, is exactly the political issue

00:39:52.640 of socialism, the, the sharing equally of things, uh, and it's just hilarious.

00:39:59.920 But that's going to, and they now also take a look at, uh, genealogy and morality.

00:40:05.200 Uh, it's going to be the second part of genealogy and morality.

00:40:08.640 It's composed of three essays, uh, the second essay, uh, and take a look at section eight.

00:40:14.880 Uh, and, uh, let's see section eight.

00:40:17.840 And I think roughly section 10 as well.

00:40:21.200 Uh, yeah, let me just started.

00:40:24.720 Yeah.

00:40:24.960 Yeah.

00:40:25.120 And this is, and, and just, yeah.

00:40:26.480 So it's eight and 10 now in section 10, this is where he, he says just, just the amazing

00:40:30.880 thing.

00:40:31.760 Uh, what he says is, uh, the justice that began with, uh, every, everything can be paid off.

00:40:37.920 Everything must be paid off.

00:40:39.760 He says ends by looking the other way and letting the one unable to pay go free.

00:40:46.160 He says, and it ends like every good thing on earth by canceling itself.

00:40:50.960 He says this self cancellation of justice.

00:40:54.080 We know what pretty name it gives itself.

00:40:56.880 It's mercy.

00:40:57.680 Uh, so think about that whenever you hear about this canceling of student loans and things like

00:41:03.040 that, uh, but that, that's sort of what's going on there.

00:41:06.320 Uh, it's only with John Rawls, uh, that we begin to see so-called respectable community

00:41:12.800 talking about justice again.

00:41:14.080 Uh, it's, it, it has turned into this unfortunate discussion of, uh, fairness and rights and things

00:41:21.520 like that, uh, as opposed to this very, very powerful virtue of the soul and the soul's longing,

00:41:28.960 uh, that we find in Aristotle.

00:41:32.640 Um, but anyway, I've talked too much, uh, shut me up and bring some stuff.

00:41:36.720 No, I think that's an interesting turn actually, because Rawls in many ways, you know, the,

00:41:42.800 the thing I heard in university was, uh, a modern philosophy is a footnote to Rawls in the same way that,

00:41:47.840 uh, you know, other philosophy was a footnote to Plato.

00:41:50.880 I, I, you know, a lot of people disagree with that understandably, but you know, a lot of people assume

00:41:56.160 that they, they go into that, uh, that understanding that everyone is just kind of, uh, responding to

00:42:01.760 Rawls.

00:42:02.160 So it's probably worth, if we're going to talk about justice, talk about the, the most significant,

00:42:06.560 uh, tome probably referenced in it and kind of the modern academy.

00:42:10.080 So what, what is the shift in the Rawlsian understanding of justice?

00:42:14.400 How does that fit into our, our understanding of this, uh, you know, the possibly the institutionalization

00:42:20.560 of justice or, or this modern shift in understanding?

00:42:26.080 Right.

00:42:26.400 So, um, so full disclosure is I, I have such distaste for Rawls

00:42:34.160 that, that you just don't want to ask me about him because I go off into a rant about how he has,

00:42:40.160 sort of, it is, it, it, it, Rawls represents America's

00:42:44.720 great attempt to just truly destroy an understanding of justice. Uh, and the reason

00:42:50.560 that you heard that professor say that about Rawls is because the argument that Rawls makes effectively,

00:42:56.880 uh, is the motto under which the political left has been marching forever. Uh, is that a kind of

00:43:04.080 fairness for everyone, right? No one getting ahead, uh, keeping everyone at the same sort of

00:43:10.320 really just a kind of tapioca, uh, understanding of mass society or something like that. Uh, but,

00:43:17.280 but I mean, look, to be fair, uh, because there are, I mean, I mean, what I always like to tell

00:43:22.800 people is that you have to earn the right to blow up someone else's thought. And the way you earn the

00:43:27.840 right to do that is by reading it and understanding it and trying to take it seriously. Uh, unfortunately,

00:43:32.560 I'm just not the person that you want to ask about that because I just can't stand Rawls so much.

00:43:38.000 Uh, but, but that's going along the lines to think of it this way. Another way to think of it is this

00:43:43.280 way. The way that Aristotle defines justice is he brings mathematics into it, which is, which is in

00:43:49.760 itself noteworthy. And there's a kind of arithmetical versus geometrical, uh, allotting of justice. Uh,

00:43:59.280 the kind of the, the arithmetical one is, is that you give back exactly equally what has been taken

00:44:06.240 away. Uh, and then there's the, the distributive, uh, aspect of justice, which is to say more should

00:44:13.440 be given to people who by their own excellence simply deserve more. Uh, in other words, what

00:44:20.240 Aristotle has his finger on the pulse of there is the natural hierarchies, natural hierarchies of men.

00:44:28.480 Some people are just more virtuous than others. Uh, now this is going to be something that Rawls

00:44:34.400 just cannot abide. Uh, and many people cannot abide this. They just don't want to believe,

00:44:39.520 right? In other words, they, and, and, and they'll always use euphemisms and say, look,

00:44:44.240 I'm not saying that, you know, we can't have this. I'm just saying everyone should be allowed an equal

00:44:48.400 opportunity at it. Uh, well, that's all. And so, so that's the always noticed that when, when you hear

00:44:55.200 that, when you hear a politician say that, or someone say that no right away that they were about to be

00:45:00.560 doing some lexicological gymnastics, uh, to try to convince you that they're, uh, either communism

00:45:07.120 or socialism is actually a good thing. It's funny how equal, funny how equal equality of opportunity

00:45:13.600 always seems to turn into equality of outcome, even though the conservative movement in the United

00:45:19.200 States, the political right, uh, at least in the mainstream is dedicated to this, uh, you know,

00:45:24.400 delineation between those two as if they're drastically unconnected. Um, you know, no,

00:45:29.840 we're for the, uh, the opportunity, but not the outcome. And yet somehow, every time someone mentions

00:45:34.880 the opportunity, we seem to inevitably drift towards the equality of outcome.

00:45:39.680 Yeah. I mean, look, it is the exact same thing, uh, that we see with the discussion of abortion.

00:45:47.120 Abortion started off as, I mean, people should remember if they still can, uh, rare and in very

00:45:53.600 extreme circumstances. Well, that's gone overboard now because now, uh, it's the single litmus test

00:46:00.480 for who should be elected president, uh, is if they allow for the rights of something like this.

00:46:06.320 So that's how these things change and they change very quickly. Right. But they'll always

00:46:10.800 want to use these sort of extreme cases to really, uh,

00:46:16.720 pick at people's passions, uh, to get them motivated when what they have in mind generally

00:46:21.920 is something much, much broader and something that most people would not really want to agree

00:46:26.800 with. Uh, so there's always that, that lowering of the bar of standards or something.

00:46:31.760 So, you know, we talked about this, this crisis of scale and the shift in modernity, uh, many critics

00:46:41.120 of liberalism McIntyre, as we pointed out, uh, repeatedly included have, have said that basically

00:46:47.520 liberalism abandoned this question of justice. Ultimately, uh, that it is, it has given up on,

00:46:53.760 on truly, uh, trying to rationally understand, uh, the good, uh, and instead has just invested itself

00:47:01.840 in efficiency and managerialism and these other options. But there are those that had, that have

00:47:07.280 attempted to repair this, uh, uh, obviously this is a huge question and the answer might just simply

00:47:12.480 be, we, we don't know, or, you know, not there, haven't figured it out, but do you see any promising,

00:47:18.640 uh, avenues, uh, for kind of, uh, modern philosophy of pointing towards the ability to, uh, recapture or,

00:47:27.760 or re-understand this, this, uh, concept of the, of justice in a way that is, uh, important and

00:47:34.160 meaningful and, and grounded in something or, you know, that, that, uh, can, can bind us together.

00:47:39.040 If maybe, maybe even not in the larger communities, but once again, and perhaps smaller ones.

00:47:44.160 Yeah. I mean, I, on, on this point, I don't like to be a so-called black pillar because, um,

00:47:51.360 the thing about us as human beings is the longings in our souls are always going to be there.

00:47:56.320 It's just that very often because of, for whatever historical circumstances or such,

00:48:01.360 uh, they just get redirected towards other things. And so for instance, when, when people no longer

00:48:07.360 believe in God, uh, but they still want to do good in the world and they turn, most of these people

00:48:12.480 become zealous, uh, politicians or something like that. Right. Uh, so it always is going to redirect

00:48:17.520 itself. So what I would say is that the, the most promising answer of how to solve this, uh, involves

00:48:24.240 education, uh, in particularly, uh, elementary and secondary education, because that's where you form

00:48:32.080 the souls of young men the most. Um, and that's, that's going to be one part of it. Uh, and then the

00:48:39.440 other part of it, which is extremely important, which we're, which really constitutes about the largest

00:48:44.800 issue. I would hope, uh, for everyone going into this political, uh, election, this presidential election.

00:48:51.600 Now is the question of citizenship, uh, citizenship used to be something that one strived for. Uh,

00:48:59.040 you, you, you wanted to earn it, uh, but we've abandoned any concept, any, any serious concept

00:49:04.480 of citizenship. And the thing to understand about citizenship is it represents that you are on the

00:49:10.480 same page with everyone else in the country on this topic of what is just right. What, what,

00:49:18.160 what is our way, right? In other words, this is what we do. Uh, we don't really necessarily give a

00:49:23.840 argument or a logos. We could say for it is what we believe, uh, that's, what's going to unite. That's

00:49:29.520 what separates us from other people. Uh, and that's why people want to be a part of that people. Uh,

00:49:35.520 so, so that's what I would say is that a, a serious attempt at education reform with that

00:49:41.600 understanding of the consequences. When you don't address these things, uh, could possibly

00:49:48.480 write the ship or the ship of state, uh, something to that effect.

00:49:52.960 Yeah. I think that's a really critical point when it comes to the, the need to re-inject a moral and

00:49:59.200 spiritual dimension to citizenship. You know, today, uh, yeah, everything, it's, it's just illegal.

00:50:05.360 It's a piece of paper. It's a process that you go through. It's a procedure, you know, in, in our,

00:50:10.240 in our very modern and technocratic managerial understanding. Uh, but this is nothing like, uh,

00:50:16.960 what, what citizenship was throughout history where that, that understanding of belonging is something

00:50:22.400 that is, is absolutely critical. And especially when you're, you're trying to use the democratic

00:50:27.360 mechanism, which we've, you know, could go on for a very long time. And I have about the problems

00:50:32.240 of that, but when you, we, you know, the, the very idea of that is founded on the value of,

00:50:38.240 of citizenship and it's, it's, it's moral and spiritual dimensions and it not simply being

00:50:43.680 a process or a piece of paper. So I think that that's a really important thing to hit on, especially

00:50:48.240 as you point out that, uh, you know, elections going on in places like the United States

00:50:52.480 are all, but going to, uh, define, uh, what's left of citizenship at this point, uh, the debate over it

00:50:58.480 and mass immigration and vote, you know, voting and the, you know, the legitimacy of elections,

00:51:04.160 all, all of this is, is deeply connected and very important for, for people to recognize.

00:51:08.960 Uh, we're coming up in an hour. Oh, sorry. Go ahead.

00:51:11.280 Oh, no, I was just going to say, let me add just one last thing to really tie sort of the beginning

00:51:15.520 and the ending of this, uh, together. Uh, the issue of citizenship is so crucial with regard to the

00:51:21.120 point of justice, uh, for Aristotle, for instance, that Aristotle flatly says, uh, the man without a city,

00:51:28.480 is either a beast or a God. That's how important citizenship was. This is going to be something

00:51:34.800 that Nietzsche himself agrees with Aristotle on because Nietzsche is going to say, uh, Aristotle left

00:51:41.920 out the only other alternative, which is to say, he's a man without a city is a beast or a God, or as he

00:51:48.400 says, a philosopher. So fundamentally he's in agreement there. He's just making room for philosophers.

00:51:53.920 So even the nihilist of today, uh, understood that citizenship was absolutely crucial. Uh, and that

00:52:01.520 comes back around to this issue of, of justice as a virtue and what all that entails. Uh, so anyway.

00:52:07.280 Well, I know that we probably didn't come even close to touching everything you prepared. Is there

00:52:12.640 any other critical points that you think we should, we should make sure we get in before we move over to the

00:52:17.600 questions of the people? No, I, I, I wrote out notes that are, we didn't touch on it because it would

00:52:28.720 have your audience, their eyes would have glossed over and been like, oh my God, this guy's a nerd.

00:52:33.440 Uh, but, but suffi, suffice it to say it all involves this issue of the role of construction,

00:52:39.440 uh, in modern science that is so deeply connected with, uh, the modern political project of liberalism

00:52:49.280 as such. Uh, and, and so it relates the issue of what is science itself and technology, uh, to this

00:52:57.120 question of justice, but I'll, I'll spare everyone that, uh, that's probably something I'll, I'll do on my

00:53:01.680 own. Uh, but, uh, but I'll send you to the notes so you can take a look at it. You'll, you'll enjoy them.

00:53:06.640 Yeah. Maybe we'll be able to turn that into another, uh, another episode here, uh, for people to enjoy.

00:53:13.280 All right. Well, we're going to move over to the questions of the people, but before we do,

00:53:17.120 Athene Stranger, where should people find all of your great work?

00:53:21.600 Yes. So, so the, the place, if, if people enjoy sort of listening to me ramble on about philosophy,

00:53:27.200 uh, the best place to go is, uh, on my website, AthensCorner.com. Uh, and it's where I just have,

00:53:34.000 I'm putting together many, many, uh, lectures basically, uh, on philosophy and stuff. Uh,

00:53:40.000 other than that, uh, you can find me on Twitter. Uh, and I always record the spaces that I do on

00:53:45.760 Twitter. So you can just sort of search my timeline and see the various things I've talked about. It's

00:53:49.840 always with regard to the great books, uh, and how it is that those are still relevant and indeed

00:53:55.680 invaluable, uh, for us today. So. Evan M. Uh, says, uh, do you agree with Yarvin's thesis that the idea

00:54:04.960 of social justice arrived from the Puritans 400 years ago? Uh, so a couple of people have, you know,

00:54:11.280 made this, this kind of genealogy of, uh, of social justice or of progressive, uh, wokeness. Uh, and,

00:54:19.840 you know, Steve Saylor, I think has agreed with this a few others. I'll say this. Uh, I think that

00:54:25.280 there is most certainly a line of thought that you can follow here, that there, there's a strain of

00:54:31.680 this. That is true. However, a lot of people look at this and then say, oh, well then the problem

00:54:37.760 is Protestantism or the problem is Christianity. And there, the problem is, you know, whatever.

00:54:42.480 And, and if we had just gotten rid of that, if we just didn't have that,

00:54:45.760 then we wouldn't have ended up in this place. And I'm a big believer, uh, that, that Oswald

00:54:50.640 Spangler was right. And that at the end of every civilization, you see kind of an atheistic mirror

00:54:56.400 of the animating metaphysical spirit that, that drove a civilization. And so, yes, the, you know,

00:55:03.040 what we're seeing now is a Christian heresy. It is specifically, uh, related to a strain of

00:55:08.720 Protestantism. That's true, but only because that is the, yeah. And that was the animating spirit of the

00:55:14.720 civilization that we're in now. If there was a different animating spirit, we would have pursued

00:55:20.240 a different version, a different type of this. And so there is a particular flavor tied to the

00:55:25.200 history, uh, and roots of the culture that is kind of spread this globally. And so you can see that kind

00:55:32.080 of causal linkage there, but I don't think this is due to any particular weakness in Christianity or

00:55:37.600 Protestantism, that these are some, uh, specifically guilty parties in here, uniquely guilty parties.

00:55:43.680 But instead that this is part of an overall process in which, you know, that civilizations

00:55:49.120 go through. And so the fact that it's marked in this particular character by its Christian roots

00:55:54.560 is really only indicative of the fact that it, you know, that that is the dominant

00:55:59.200 civilizational paradigm that is across the globe in many ways.

00:56:04.800 Yeah. Can I just add something real quick to that?

00:56:06.320 By all means. Yeah.

00:56:07.120 Yeah. Yeah. So I'm, I'm familiar with these arguments. Um, and I will just simply, and I've

00:56:13.920 done entire recordings on these because I, I, I disagree with the, the, the thesis so much.

00:56:20.160 Uh, but I mean, in a very specific way though, is that it doesn't understand the, the genuine root

00:56:27.760 of the issue. Uh, what people are effectively saying is that the reformation, uh, is what has brought

00:56:35.840 about, uh, this world that we live in today of this liberalism and such, uh, the problem there.

00:56:43.040 And it is so fundamental that it, I would argue refutes the thesis itself is that they wholly

00:56:50.880 dismiss the role of the Renaissance. It's anyone who's been, anyone who studied history,

00:56:58.240 even at the undergraduate level knows that courses in history on the Renaissance or the Reformation,

00:57:04.000 that they call them the Ren Ref because Renaissance first, then Reformation.

00:57:09.520 The Renaissance is what led to this. And so then you have to ask yourself, well, all right,

00:57:13.040 then what was the Renaissance and what is its relationship to Christianity? And that's where

00:57:17.280 things become far more interesting, uh, much more interesting than trying to, uh, attach wrongly.

00:57:24.080 Uh, I would argue Christianity to this phenomena of wokeness and such like that. So what's the, 0.98

00:57:30.320 what's like the title of the talk or one that you would point people to if they wanted to

00:57:35.280 better understand your explanation? Yeah, I, I, uh, I feel so strongly about this that I, I put on

00:57:42.800 Apple podcast and Spotify, uh, under just go to Athens corner on, on those apps. Uh, and the episode

00:57:50.320 you'll want to listen to, I put the whole thing on there for free is called, uh, something to the

00:57:55.200 effect of Christianity and philosophy, uh, or modernity Christianity and philosophy. Part one,

00:58:01.600 I haven't gotten around to part two yet, but that's, that's the real issue. There is the,

00:58:06.400 this is how it is that on the one hand you have Christianity and how it is on the other hand,

00:58:11.520 you have philosophy and how these things have come together. And most especially how that leads to

00:58:18.400 this thing that we call modernity, right? What is modernity? And there are a number of various theories,

00:58:24.560 schools of thought about how modernity arose. Uh, and I address all of those, uh, and I weigh the

00:58:31.760 pros and the cons of them, but I go specifically into the primary texts to look at, uh, and understand

00:58:37.920 these things, uh, beginning with, for instance, Augustine, uh, and then how it is that the Bible

00:58:43.760 itself is supposed to be, uh, interpreted, uh, within the realm of philosophy, uh, according to Augustine

00:58:50.160 himself, uh, and it addresses very much of these in part two, that's coming out is going to be with,

00:58:55.120 uh, Thomas, uh, but I've had to go back and it's taken so long. Cause I forgot to,

00:58:59.120 you also have to address the issue of natural law, uh, which means you have to talk about Cicero,

00:59:03.760 uh, and some stuff on Plato and Aristotle. So that's subsequent.

00:59:07.280 Excellent. I'll definitely make sure to check that one out. Uh, tiny stupid demon says, 1.00

00:59:12.000 I'm just here to give a big shout out to Nelson, the philosophy dog, please give 1.00

00:59:16.080 treats, uh, scritches and pats as appropriate. Yeah. I need some kind of, uh, companion,

00:59:21.600 some kind of mascot for our philosophy work here. He also says, uh, now please explain to Oren that

00:59:26.640 his favorite heavy metal bands need to be banned by the state because their music is neither Frigian 1.00

00:59:31.840 nor Dorian in mode and violating all of the best, uh, restrictions on, uh, on, uh, music there.

00:59:40.000 Now, let me point out why that's so funny because he's, he's one of my favorite, uh,

00:59:44.720 mutuals and kind of reply guys, the Frigian and the Dorian modes of music are very, very important

00:59:51.440 to Plato, uh, in the platonic dialogues because they're what shaped citizenship, the kind of the,

00:59:59.360 the, the education in music. So he's making a, he's making a very high brow and hilarious joke.

01:00:04.800 Right. Is it, is it Aristotle or Plato that talks about the flute versus the, the horn and like the,

01:00:12.080 the flute is the, is the elevated instrument of the, of the Spartans because they need to,

01:00:18.640 you know, the margin kind of this stoic, uh, manner as where, you know, the, some,

01:00:23.360 some of the less disciplined forces will rely on, on the brass instruments.

01:00:28.640 Uh, you, you, you, you've stumped me on that one. I know more about the flute. Uh, not so,

01:00:33.680 I'm not so sure about the horn. Uh, the, the flute is also especially associated with

01:00:38.240 Alcibiades because he refused to learn it because he didn't think it was manly.

01:00:43.920 I'm relatively sure it's Aristotle and I'm going to hold onto the fact that I knew an

01:00:47.760 Aristotle passage that you didn't. That's, that's going to be my win for today.

01:00:51.760 There you go, man. There you go.

01:00:56.080 Uh, glow in the dark says, uh, morality without conviction or power will be broken down.

01:01:01.040 Power without morality does not last long. Virtue blesses society. Vice curses society.

01:01:08.240 Uh, he also says a talk, uh, on the end of history and the last man.

01:01:16.720 And finally we have, uh, justice is to get what you deserve, whether to be good or bad.

01:01:23.360 Many want to argue the semantics of who deserves what, but this veto means nothing. Yeah. It's a

01:01:29.440 sentiment that, uh, was that good? I think in, in many ways by a lot of the references that were

01:01:34.400 brought up here and then, yeah, that's ultimately the question of justice. And the question of

01:01:39.600 justice ultimately is, uh, you know, on the one hand who gets what they deserve. And then on the

01:01:46.000 second hand, what does it mean to say what they deserve? Uh, that's why all this talk today of

01:01:50.880 pay their fair share, right. It's nonsense. It's just empty nonsense. Uh, but whatever. Sorry.

01:01:57.840 And then finally, uh, finally, tiny Rick says, if reality is subjective to the individual,

01:02:04.480 then countless individual realities become the underlying objective reality. Relatism defeats itself.

01:02:13.760 Any thoughts on that one before we go?

01:02:15.200 Well, I mean, uh, essentially what the claim comes down to and it's correct as far as logic goes, uh,

01:02:22.400 because, uh, the claim that there is no truth is itself a claim that requires a truth value.

01:02:29.200 Right. Uh, and so if there's no truth, then it's sort of like the Cretan paradox, right? Uh,

01:02:35.600 the following statement is a lie, right? So something like that. Right. So it produces a logical

01:02:42.240 problem. Uh, I'm always cautious though. I always like to be, uh, very blunt about this with people.

01:02:48.480 Um, don't expect too much of logic or reason in politics because to do so would be to expect too

01:02:55.920 much. I mean, that, that itself is unreasonable, uh, because man believes most of his beliefs,

01:03:02.320 not out of reason. Man is mostly not logical. Uh, we act on our passions and that's why, for instance,

01:03:08.400 what I'd mentioned about Aristotle and the importance of his understanding of virtue,

01:03:12.960 is that the soul, uh, the authoritative elements of the soul, uh, is to be fused with the longings and

01:03:20.400 the passions of, of the soul. Uh, and so that's, that, that will get you much further than trying

01:03:25.360 to do this kind of hyper logical, uh, uh, discussions about the way the world should be.

01:03:30.240 Yeah. I also would encourage people to be careful when it comes to relativism. Um, while total relativism

01:03:38.400 is, I agree, uh, a failure. Um, sometimes people, uh, then take this to mean that there are no cultural

01:03:48.080 distinctions, no particularities that are, uh, are relative or, or, or that are, um, uh, valid.

01:03:56.400 And that ultimately, you know, there, there's just the, you know, that any deviation from in any minor

01:04:02.400 way from, uh, their strict and universal understanding, uh, is therefore an implication

01:04:08.000 of relativism.

01:04:09.120 I think that is, uh, also a failure of logic in the other direction.

01:04:14.800 All right, guys, we're going to go ahead and wrap this one up, but as always,

01:04:19.120 it is great talking to you. Appreciate everybody stopping by. You should of course be checking out,

01:04:24.720 uh, Athenian strangers work. I'm going to go listen to, uh, the podcast he was just talking

01:04:29.760 about when I'm done here, uh, because I'd like to hear his arguments. If it's your first time on this

01:04:34.800 YouTube channel, make sure that you subscribe, you click the bell, turn on the notifications

01:04:38.960 so you can catch these videos when they go live. If you would like to go ahead and catch these as

01:04:45.520 broadcasts instead of, uh, or these, if you would rather listen to these as podcasts instead of live

01:04:51.680 broadcasts, you can also subscribe to the Ora McIntyre show on your favorite podcast platform.

01:04:56.800 Thank you everybody for watching. And as always, I will talk to you next time.

01:05:04.800 Thank you.

The Auron MacIntyre Show - October 02, 2024

How Social Justice Killed Individual Virtue ｜ Guest： Athenian Stranger ｜ 10⧸2⧸24

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript