1
00:00:04,500 --> 00:00:06,000
You're listening to the 
reversing climate change, 

2
00:00:06,000 --> 00:00:09,100
podcast by the team at Nori. 
The carbon removal Marketplace. 

3
00:00:09,600 --> 00:00:11,700
This is a show about the 
innovators and entrepreneurs 

4
00:00:11,700 --> 00:00:13,700
developing solutions to climate 
change. 

5
00:00:15,800 --> 00:00:17,900
Hello and welcome to the 
reversing climate change 

6
00:00:17,900 --> 00:00:20,000
podcast. 
I'm Ross Kenyan I am the 

7
00:00:20,000 --> 00:00:23,200
creative editor at Nori. 
The carbon removal Marketplace 

8
00:00:23,600 --> 00:00:26,500
today, I have with me dr. 
Kevin Valley, a associate 

9
00:00:26,500 --> 00:00:29,200
professor of philosophy at 
Bowling Green State University 

10
00:00:29,200 --> 00:00:32,900
and author of Of the new book 
trust in a polarize age. 

11
00:00:32,900 --> 00:00:37,700
Hey, Kevin, I Ross has a gun is 
going well, I'm glad to have you

12
00:00:37,700 --> 00:00:40,800
here. 
It's a very well good timing, 

13
00:00:40,800 --> 00:00:43,200
because I think if we had spoken
a week earlier, you might have 

14
00:00:43,200 --> 00:00:45,500
had different thoughts. 
But the inauguration was 

15
00:00:45,500 --> 00:00:47,400
yesterday, you write about 
trust. 

16
00:00:47,400 --> 00:00:49,700
Why politics feels like war 
must? 

17
00:00:49,700 --> 00:00:51,300
It be War. 
As one of your previous books is

18
00:00:51,300 --> 00:00:53,700
called? 
Why is it like this, does it 

19
00:00:53,700 --> 00:00:56,500
have to be like this? 
Why, why is everyone so angry 

20
00:00:56,500 --> 00:00:59,300
all the time as it may be 
layperson way of asking it? 

21
00:01:00,300 --> 00:01:02,400
Yeah. 
So um I'll talk about the 

22
00:01:02,408 --> 00:01:04,900
particular circumstances and 
then the kind of broader 

23
00:01:04,900 --> 00:01:07,400
picture. 
So I work on the different 

24
00:01:07,400 --> 00:01:12,800
topics of trust and political 
polarization and I work on two 

25
00:01:12,800 --> 00:01:15,200
kinds of trusts one is, what's 
called social trust? 

26
00:01:15,200 --> 00:01:18,100
Your trust in most people in 
your Society usually trust in 

27
00:01:18,100 --> 00:01:21,800
strangers as a whole and 
political trust which is trust 

28
00:01:21,800 --> 00:01:24,900
in institutions particular 
institutions, like different 

29
00:01:24,900 --> 00:01:27,800
parts of government like 
Congress or the president or 

30
00:01:27,800 --> 00:01:31,000
particular people who occupy 
those Al's political 

31
00:01:31,000 --> 00:01:34,500
polarization is a term that is a
lot more familiar to most people

32
00:01:34,500 --> 00:01:38,500
than social and political trust.
And it's typically thought to be

33
00:01:38,500 --> 00:01:41,700
the idea that people are moving 
further apart from one another, 

34
00:01:41,700 --> 00:01:44,800
in terms of their political 
views but that actually isn't 

35
00:01:44,800 --> 00:01:47,100
the only thing we're talking 
about when we talk about 

36
00:01:47,100 --> 00:01:51,000
polarization, we sometimes talk 
about a thick base polarization 

37
00:01:51,000 --> 00:01:53,600
where people are coming to 
dislike people in the other 

38
00:01:53,600 --> 00:01:57,700
party or other group more. 
So polarization involves both 

39
00:01:57,700 --> 00:02:01,600
changes in issues and More 
negative affect. 

40
00:02:01,700 --> 00:02:04,300
We've got more effective 
polarization than we have 

41
00:02:04,300 --> 00:02:07,500
issue-based polarization. 
There's also the phenomenon of 

42
00:02:07,500 --> 00:02:10,699
sorting and sorting is you're 
not changing your views or 

43
00:02:10,699 --> 00:02:14,300
attitudes, but you're 
associating with like-minded and

44
00:02:14,300 --> 00:02:16,500
dissociated from the on 
like-minded. 

45
00:02:16,700 --> 00:02:21,000
So, really what I talk about is 
those those four different 

46
00:02:21,000 --> 00:02:23,900
phenomenon that are different 
things, me my polarization. 

47
00:02:24,000 --> 00:02:28,400
Okay, so hopefully we've given 
your listeners these Concepts. 

48
00:02:29,100 --> 00:02:31,000
I think their cost. 
Only connected. 

49
00:02:31,200 --> 00:02:34,400
So the idea is that the more 
polarized, we get the less 

50
00:02:34,400 --> 00:02:38,000
trusting, we get of other people
in our society that are on the 

51
00:02:38,000 --> 00:02:42,600
other team and the leaders of 
those people and then when they 

52
00:02:42,600 --> 00:02:46,400
run the institutions, we trust 
those less as well as so 

53
00:02:46,400 --> 00:02:49,800
polarizations driving distrust. 
And I think distrust is driving 

54
00:02:49,800 --> 00:02:52,400
polarization because I think 
they'll last, you trust people, 

55
00:02:52,400 --> 00:02:55,800
the more you're inclined to see 
their disagreements with you as 

56
00:02:55,800 --> 00:02:59,800
cause for disliking them because
you're more likely to attribute 

57
00:02:59,800 --> 00:03:02,300
their Differences with you to 
some sort of fault in them. 

58
00:03:02,300 --> 00:03:05,100
I call this the illusion of 
culpable dissent in the book. 

59
00:03:05,100 --> 00:03:07,400
So we think that their descent 
is their fault. 

60
00:03:07,700 --> 00:03:11,800
Because their Dom or evil, or 
both only a moron or a bad 

61
00:03:11,800 --> 00:03:17,300
person could think X, Y and Z. 
So, we're in a doom Loop between

62
00:03:17,300 --> 00:03:21,500
falling trust and polarization. 
Now, I thought until the last 

63
00:03:21,500 --> 00:03:27,100
two weeks that we were seeing a 
slow linear decline in trust and

64
00:03:27,100 --> 00:03:29,900
a slow linear increase in 
polarization. 

65
00:03:30,000 --> 00:03:32,200
Ation. 
But the thing about the last two

66
00:03:32,200 --> 00:03:35,300
weeks that my friend Ryan 
Muldoon points out is that 

67
00:03:35,300 --> 00:03:39,300
sometimes social indicators and 
social norms don't change in a 

68
00:03:39,308 --> 00:03:44,000
linear fashion, sometimes they 
change in an exponential fashion

69
00:03:44,700 --> 00:03:49,600
and I think that what has 
happened is that trust in 

70
00:03:49,600 --> 00:03:52,600
institutions particularly the 
Democratic process collapsed, 

71
00:03:52,600 --> 00:03:57,700
very, very fast on one side of 
the aisle and it led to revolt 

72
00:03:58,300 --> 00:04:01,600
and that Revolt has In some ways
exacerbated, political 

73
00:04:01,600 --> 00:04:03,200
polarization. 
Although I think it's also 

74
00:04:03,200 --> 00:04:05,800
highlighted, the cost of it, 
which is good at least. 

75
00:04:06,400 --> 00:04:10,500
So, going from the general bits 
of trust and polarization. 

76
00:04:10,500 --> 00:04:14,400
That's how I would analyze the 
current situation as a decline 

77
00:04:14,400 --> 00:04:18,100
in trust in the Democratic 
process leading to a Revolt that

78
00:04:18,100 --> 00:04:21,500
continues to crystallize and 
further deepen divisions. 

79
00:04:21,500 --> 00:04:24,600
In fact now that Biden and the 
inaugural talked about fighting 

80
00:04:24,600 --> 00:04:29,200
domestic terrorism, I'm a little
worried that we're going to have

81
00:04:29,200 --> 00:04:33,300
a politicized. 
Sized new institution a bit like

82
00:04:33,300 --> 00:04:36,400
the way we handled foreign 
terrorism which was, you know, 

83
00:04:36,400 --> 00:04:38,600
extremely poor, and oppressive 
and terrible. 

84
00:04:39,000 --> 00:04:42,500
So you know, that's where I kind
of think we are. 

85
00:04:42,500 --> 00:04:45,800
We have a lot of lower and lower
trust in institutions in each 

86
00:04:45,800 --> 00:04:49,700
other more and more polarization
of all these varieties and it 

87
00:04:49,700 --> 00:04:53,500
creates a flammable environment 
and indeed, Trump is better at 

88
00:04:53,500 --> 00:04:56,500
lighting that flame. 
That anyone does so deliberately

89
00:04:56,700 --> 00:04:59,900
and repeatedly and ingeniously 
in order to benefit. 

90
00:05:00,000 --> 00:05:02,900
Shelf. 
And it finally blew up in his 

91
00:05:02,900 --> 00:05:06,100
face and hopefully his 
permanently disgraced him. 

92
00:05:06,200 --> 00:05:07,900
I'm sorry. 
I've been very black pulled on 

93
00:05:07,900 --> 00:05:09,600
Trump over the last couple of 
weeks. 

94
00:05:09,600 --> 00:05:12,000
Usually, I kind of try to be 
more even-handed, but I'm like 

95
00:05:12,000 --> 00:05:14,800
not in the mood for that which 
is kind of weird for me like 

96
00:05:15,400 --> 00:05:17,800
kind of pride, myself on it, 
but, but trying to be 

97
00:05:17,800 --> 00:05:19,600
even-handed, but I'm not there 
right now. 

98
00:05:19,600 --> 00:05:23,500
I think this is just hideous 
Behavior, so I feel similarly, 

99
00:05:23,500 --> 00:05:26,200
if there's one criticism, 
someone listening could make of 

100
00:05:26,200 --> 00:05:30,500
this show and I would be like 
touche, it's that there's more 

101
00:05:30,500 --> 00:05:33,900
generosity to ideas that do not 
deserve them sometimes. 

102
00:05:34,500 --> 00:05:38,000
Yeah, being to charitable too 
much steel. 

103
00:05:38,000 --> 00:05:40,800
Manning is happening, and it's 
hard hard. 

104
00:05:40,800 --> 00:05:43,500
But necessary questions do not 
get asked and it might look like

105
00:05:43,500 --> 00:05:45,700
politeness but it could be 
cowardice as well. 

106
00:05:46,200 --> 00:05:51,000
Yeah, yeah, yeah. 
Is it actually worse than it has

107
00:05:51,000 --> 00:05:54,300
been historically? 
I don't know what the data show 

108
00:05:54,300 --> 00:05:59,300
about this, but are we actually 
more polarized and suspicious of

109
00:05:59,300 --> 00:06:01,400
each other? 
The Divide also splits between 

110
00:06:01,400 --> 00:06:04,800
Progressive and conservative, 
broadly, maybe you would frame 

111
00:06:04,800 --> 00:06:07,800
it differently but have these 
factions always been so strong? 

112
00:06:08,400 --> 00:06:11,500
No, I mean, what's interesting 
is we've really only been 

113
00:06:11,500 --> 00:06:16,900
measuring trust levels via 
surveys for the past, say about 

114
00:06:16,900 --> 00:06:19,900
60 years. 
The political distrust measures 

115
00:06:19,900 --> 00:06:24,000
are actually a bit older. 
Go back into the 50s. 

116
00:06:24,400 --> 00:06:28,400
So the survey data only goes 
back about 50, 60 years. 

117
00:06:29,100 --> 00:06:32,400
So, we don't really, Ali know if
there were periods of lower 

118
00:06:32,400 --> 00:06:35,700
trust, my suspicion, is that 
growing up in a world where two 

119
00:06:36,100 --> 00:06:39,300
or we work together to defeat, 
an obviously evil Foe and didn't

120
00:06:39,300 --> 00:06:42,300
see any real damage drone 
country or division over. 

121
00:06:42,300 --> 00:06:45,200
This was a big trust increasing 
event for us. 

122
00:06:45,500 --> 00:06:49,100
However, there's also been trust
declines in a lot of European 

123
00:06:49,100 --> 00:06:51,900
countries, but not very much. 
We were weird. 

124
00:06:51,900 --> 00:06:54,400
We're the only established 
democracy that seen this big 

125
00:06:54,400 --> 00:06:57,700
big, big decline in Social, 
trust for instance, but have 

126
00:06:57,700 --> 00:06:59,800
things been worse. 
So trust is hard to say. 

127
00:07:00,500 --> 00:07:04,100
It's the worst things have been 
since polling began but there's 

128
00:07:04,100 --> 00:07:08,300
been a Slowdown in the collapse 
over the last decade or two 

129
00:07:09,000 --> 00:07:11,800
political polarization however 
is something that we can measure

130
00:07:11,800 --> 00:07:15,300
a little bit better particular 
but primarily at the elite 

131
00:07:15,300 --> 00:07:18,300
level. 
So there's the nominate index 

132
00:07:18,500 --> 00:07:21,900
created by Nolan McCarty at 
Princeton that looks at 

133
00:07:21,900 --> 00:07:25,300
Congressional votes and measures
polarization based on that and 

134
00:07:25,300 --> 00:07:28,300
roll call votes. 
So we were this politically 

135
00:07:28,300 --> 00:07:31,700
polarized during the Civil War. 
Or and just before it. 

136
00:07:31,700 --> 00:07:35,100
But we haven't been this 
polarized since then. 

137
00:07:35,100 --> 00:07:39,900
So on the polarization index at 
the elite level, we haven't been

138
00:07:39,900 --> 00:07:42,100
this polarized. 
But then the question is, what 

139
00:07:42,100 --> 00:07:45,200
about most people? 
And it turns out that issue 

140
00:07:45,200 --> 00:07:48,700
based polarization decreases. 
I think as your education level 

141
00:07:48,700 --> 00:07:52,800
decreases, but the Highly 
Educated, highly connected are 

142
00:07:52,800 --> 00:07:55,500
very politically partisan and 
very politically engaged. 

143
00:07:55,500 --> 00:07:59,000
And from what I can tell the 
more that people get into 

144
00:07:59,000 --> 00:08:01,800
politics in the More educated. 
They are the more this 

145
00:08:01,800 --> 00:08:04,500
phenomenon, the more this 
phenomenon hits them. 

146
00:08:04,500 --> 00:08:09,000
So you know probably the 
maximally polarized people in 

147
00:08:09,200 --> 00:08:12,400
high political office with the 
decrease in moderates. 

148
00:08:12,400 --> 00:08:16,200
I mean it's I think McConnell 
May cooperate with the Democrats

149
00:08:16,200 --> 00:08:18,900
simply because dealing with 
Trump for four years was 

150
00:08:19,200 --> 00:08:22,700
psychologically traumatic and 
various respects for our 

151
00:08:22,700 --> 00:08:26,400
politician who'd been used to so
many such differences and he's 

152
00:08:26,400 --> 00:08:31,000
done buying a very long time. 
I think that helps but Generally

153
00:08:31,200 --> 00:08:35,200
I think at the elite level 
people in DC, politicians 

154
00:08:35,200 --> 00:08:39,100
peoples, and politicians 
offices, very wealthy people, 

155
00:08:39,100 --> 00:08:43,200
very and highly, you know, 
people in the academy people and

156
00:08:43,200 --> 00:08:46,600
Hollywood, you know, the high 
cultural Elites, those are the 

157
00:08:46,600 --> 00:08:49,600
most polarized. 
So what I would say is to the 

158
00:08:49,600 --> 00:08:53,600
extent that your Elite and 
high-level your polarized and 

159
00:08:53,600 --> 00:08:56,600
highly educated but that there 
isn't that much issue-based 

160
00:08:56,600 --> 00:09:01,400
polarization in the average 
American but Can be polarized 

161
00:09:01,400 --> 00:09:05,400
very easily. 
So I have thoughts as a lay 

162
00:09:05,400 --> 00:09:09,700
person on why polarization has 
increased and I want to say them

163
00:09:09,700 --> 00:09:12,600
and I want you to tell me why 
they're wrong or incomplete. 

164
00:09:12,700 --> 00:09:16,100
Will you do that for me? 
Yes I think I've said this 

165
00:09:16,100 --> 00:09:19,900
before on the show but tend to 
be pretty favorable towards 

166
00:09:19,900 --> 00:09:21,300
markets. 
I think they're important and 

167
00:09:21,300 --> 00:09:24,500
worth preserving in many in many
ways but I think the way that 

168
00:09:24,500 --> 00:09:28,600
media is monetized breaks this 
dynamic in a really dangerous 

169
00:09:28,600 --> 00:09:33,700
way where the best way to keep 
us engaged is oftentimes to get 

170
00:09:33,700 --> 00:09:37,300
us angry and you can look back 
to the origins of right-wing 

171
00:09:37,300 --> 00:09:40,600
talk radio and Rush Limbaugh and
I feel like that trend has gone 

172
00:09:40,600 --> 00:09:42,700
through Fox News and social 
media. 

173
00:09:42,800 --> 00:09:45,300
I look at something like a vise 
article and they're almost 

174
00:09:45,300 --> 00:09:48,900
scientifically designed to make 
everyone mad and the whole 

175
00:09:48,900 --> 00:09:51,700
comments are mobile meta 
comments about how mad everyone 

176
00:09:51,700 --> 00:09:54,900
is and watching this disaster. 
I think it's the only way to get

177
00:09:54,900 --> 00:09:58,900
attention is to piss everyone 
off and I think that is just 

178
00:09:58,900 --> 00:10:01,500
been bad. 
Capitalist feedback loop. 

179
00:10:01,500 --> 00:10:04,500
I think that's part of it. 
Am I onto something or no? 

180
00:10:05,400 --> 00:10:07,700
Well, I think you are. 
I mean the biggest regret I have

181
00:10:07,700 --> 00:10:10,600
in the book is that I couldn't 
get very much into media 

182
00:10:10,900 --> 00:10:13,800
distrust. 
I talk about it in the empirics 

183
00:10:14,000 --> 00:10:17,600
but I wanted to talk about ways 
of restoring Trust in Media with

184
00:10:17,600 --> 00:10:20,500
liberal institutions. 
And I don't know how to do it 

185
00:10:20,500 --> 00:10:22,400
without violating the First 
Amendment. 

186
00:10:22,400 --> 00:10:23,800
So I didn't have a chapter on 
it. 

187
00:10:24,700 --> 00:10:27,100
I talked about the liberal 
institutions that I thought 

188
00:10:27,100 --> 00:10:32,400
could be employed or What 
reformed or extended to increase

189
00:10:32,600 --> 00:10:36,500
trust and reduce polarization 
those include associations, 

190
00:10:36,600 --> 00:10:40,200
freedom of Association, markets,
some aspects of the welfare 

191
00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:43,300
state elections and 
parliamentary democracy, and the

192
00:10:43,300 --> 00:10:45,600
rule of law. 
I had to cut the federalism 

193
00:10:45,600 --> 00:10:47,700
chapter. 
I think it would help but there 

194
00:10:47,700 --> 00:10:50,700
wasn't enough data. 
But with media, it's just so 

195
00:10:50,700 --> 00:10:54,600
difficult to think about what 
you would need to solve the 

196
00:10:54,600 --> 00:10:58,800
problem because they do feed 
outrage, but the bigger issue 

197
00:10:58,800 --> 00:11:00,500
isn't so much that people are 
Outrage. 

198
00:11:00,500 --> 00:11:04,500
Now it's that they have 
manifestly false beliefs and I 

199
00:11:04,508 --> 00:11:06,500
think this is a much worse 
problem on the right than the 

200
00:11:06,500 --> 00:11:08,600
left. 
I've become very convinced of 

201
00:11:08,600 --> 00:11:10,800
this recently. 
I read this nice book Network 

202
00:11:10,800 --> 00:11:13,800
propaganda and it made the case 
that the right-wing media 

203
00:11:13,800 --> 00:11:16,300
circuit is a lot simpler. 
Like, there are far fewer 

204
00:11:16,300 --> 00:11:19,100
outlets and it's easier for them
to be a closed system. 

205
00:11:19,800 --> 00:11:23,800
So then it's much easier to 
propagate lies and false beliefs

206
00:11:23,800 --> 00:11:26,600
like that Saddam had weapons of 
mass destruction or well. 

207
00:11:27,300 --> 00:11:29,800
They did find a few radioactive 
holes out. 

208
00:11:29,900 --> 00:11:32,900
Out there but nonetheless 
believing just falsehoods like 

209
00:11:32,900 --> 00:11:35,000
that Saddam Hussein was involved
in 9/11. 

210
00:11:35,200 --> 00:11:37,900
So that was, that's when a lot 
of the really faults believe 

211
00:11:37,900 --> 00:11:43,000
started to take hold in the 
media, but trumpets, just on a 

212
00:11:43,000 --> 00:11:46,700
whole nother level promoting all
kinds of conspiracy theories and

213
00:11:46,700 --> 00:11:50,100
then punishing media that don't 
propagate it. 

214
00:11:50,100 --> 00:11:53,300
So if Fox News got critical of 
him, he started attacking Fox 

215
00:11:53,300 --> 00:11:56,200
News in their writings have gone
down quite a bit. 

216
00:11:56,200 --> 00:12:00,700
Actually since he started doing 
that I went to like Our American

217
00:12:00,700 --> 00:12:03,900
Network and YouTube and like 
yeah I want America. 

218
00:12:03,900 --> 00:12:06,100
And yeah, I mean, they're going 
to be who knows where they're 

219
00:12:06,100 --> 00:12:08,500
dispersing towards it's very 
disturbing. 

220
00:12:08,900 --> 00:12:12,300
This one of the reasons I hope 
that Trump is barred from future

221
00:12:12,300 --> 00:12:17,700
office by the Senate. 
Yeah. 

222
00:12:17,700 --> 00:12:20,500
No punches pulled. 
Sorry, I should pull some, maybe

223
00:12:20,500 --> 00:12:22,600
I should pull. 
So now I just speak, right? 

224
00:12:22,600 --> 00:12:25,400
It's fine. 
I well, I mean, I just think 

225
00:12:25,400 --> 00:12:29,000
that he's just such a master 
manipulator that he's able to 

226
00:12:29,000 --> 00:12:32,500
take advantage of Of the media. 
He's a because I don't think 

227
00:12:32,500 --> 00:12:35,100
anyone would dispute it. 
No no, no. 

228
00:12:35,100 --> 00:12:39,000
And it's his ability and 
willingness to punish reporters 

229
00:12:39,000 --> 00:12:42,200
in such a public way. 
I mean he destroyed Megyn Kelly 

230
00:12:42,200 --> 00:12:46,200
for instance and I suspect he'll
start to set his sights on 

231
00:12:46,200 --> 00:12:49,600
people like Chris Wallace here, 
not too long so who knows what's

232
00:12:49,600 --> 00:12:51,400
going to happen? 
You know, we took I don't think 

233
00:12:51,400 --> 00:12:53,600
I think he's too lazy to start 
his own party but he's been 

234
00:12:53,600 --> 00:12:56,400
talking about it. 
But yeah, so he's been a lot of 

235
00:12:56,400 --> 00:12:59,100
the problem now a lot of people 
say oh well the problems predate

236
00:12:59,100 --> 00:12:59,800
him. 
Yes. 

237
00:13:00,000 --> 00:13:04,100
Yes, they do. 
But he, he has made things per 

238
00:13:04,100 --> 00:13:08,300
personally has made things. 
Worse deliberately to benefit 

239
00:13:08,300 --> 00:13:11,200
himself. 
I just want to say that because 

240
00:13:11,200 --> 00:13:15,500
I think it's manifest, but it is
more important in general, to 

241
00:13:15,500 --> 00:13:17,500
pay more attention to 
institutions than two 

242
00:13:17,500 --> 00:13:21,200
individuals, because 
institutions Place enormous 

243
00:13:21,200 --> 00:13:23,100
limits on what individuals may 
do. 

244
00:13:23,400 --> 00:13:26,200
But so do social norms and if 
you have someone who I think 

245
00:13:26,200 --> 00:13:29,100
never feels guilt or shame, 
they'll flout norms. 

246
00:13:29,200 --> 00:13:31,800
And so, when people We'll try to
punish them, they don't feel 

247
00:13:31,800 --> 00:13:35,400
remorse and so they don't stop. 
But that makes Trump a bit of a 

248
00:13:35,400 --> 00:13:38,100
unicorn because the vast 
majority of humans feel guilt 

249
00:13:38,100 --> 00:13:40,700
and shame and so they can be 
reined in. 

250
00:13:41,800 --> 00:13:46,100
Wow well maybe we should talk 
about institutions then if yes 

251
00:13:46,100 --> 00:13:49,100
please Focus Less on an 
individual's we're even start to

252
00:13:49,100 --> 00:13:53,700
talk about institutions. 
Yeah so I mean there's two kinds

253
00:13:53,700 --> 00:13:56,900
of Institutions, I think matter 
formal and informal and formal 

254
00:13:56,900 --> 00:13:59,800
or things like laws 
constitutions. 

255
00:14:00,400 --> 00:14:03,900
Administrative rules and 
regulations stuff that you know 

256
00:14:03,900 --> 00:14:07,300
there's usually some kind of 
like written code that's 

257
00:14:07,300 --> 00:14:11,300
enforced by courts and police 
informal Norms or things more 

258
00:14:11,300 --> 00:14:15,200
like social social norms, where 
there are expectations that 

259
00:14:15,200 --> 00:14:17,800
people follow the norms. 
And there's some kind of usually

260
00:14:17,800 --> 00:14:20,700
social sanction or punishment 
when people don't follow them. 

261
00:14:21,000 --> 00:14:23,200
You know, we all think we ought 
to go along with them. 

262
00:14:23,200 --> 00:14:26,600
So you know there's a lot of 
well-known destructive social 

263
00:14:26,600 --> 00:14:29,300
norms, you know things like 
Chinese foot binding. 

264
00:14:29,900 --> 00:14:33,300
Or this is the most neutral way 
to use the term, but female 

265
00:14:33,300 --> 00:14:36,700
genital cutting, where a lot of 
people do it, but they don't 

266
00:14:36,700 --> 00:14:38,500
want to do it because they're 
worried about being punished if 

267
00:14:38,500 --> 00:14:41,300
they do it. 
We keep a lot of order with good

268
00:14:41,300 --> 00:14:44,700
social norms, even though we 
often have bad ones, we have 

269
00:14:44,700 --> 00:14:47,400
developed some new Norms. 
Like, punishing people who use 

270
00:14:47,400 --> 00:14:50,300
racial epithets that reinforce 
certain kinds of racial 

271
00:14:50,300 --> 00:14:53,900
statements, but they usually 
involve Society responding with 

272
00:14:53,900 --> 00:14:55,900
punishment. 
Now, I think social media has 

273
00:14:55,900 --> 00:14:59,800
made it easier to over punish 
which is why a lot of people do.

274
00:14:59,900 --> 00:15:02,400
The punishing don't understand 
canceled culture because they're

275
00:15:02,400 --> 00:15:05,300
like, I'm just like chastising 
people who deserve it, but 

276
00:15:05,300 --> 00:15:07,800
because it gets Amplified and 
coordinated it. 

277
00:15:07,800 --> 00:15:10,900
The person being attacked is 
just it's disproportionate but 

278
00:15:10,900 --> 00:15:13,300
it's a spontaneous, it's 
disproportionate by a 

279
00:15:13,300 --> 00:15:15,900
spontaneous order. 
He doesn't just want actor. 

280
00:15:16,300 --> 00:15:19,900
So formal and informal Norms 
that I think of them both as 

281
00:15:19,900 --> 00:15:23,100
kinds of Institutions, there's a
number of different things going

282
00:15:23,100 --> 00:15:27,500
on but a lot of the polarization
I think has to do with the way 

283
00:15:27,500 --> 00:15:30,900
that Congressional rules and the
way our voting and for officials

284
00:15:30,900 --> 00:15:33,600
and official voting. 
Like, when legislators vote is 

285
00:15:33,600 --> 00:15:36,200
structured, such that 
polarization creates a lot of 

286
00:15:36,200 --> 00:15:39,500
problems with with things like 
gridlock and a lot of really 

287
00:15:39,500 --> 00:15:43,000
basic stuff can be addressed. 
But then there's also just the 

288
00:15:43,000 --> 00:15:46,500
institutions that the media and 
their attempts to monetize 

289
00:15:46,500 --> 00:15:50,400
things and to violate social 
norms like against lying which 

290
00:15:50,400 --> 00:15:53,400
is decreased trusting media a 
lot, but they're still doing 

291
00:15:53,400 --> 00:15:56,700
just fine in terms of numbers, 
people think, once I can't be 

292
00:15:56,700 --> 00:15:59,700
trusted so they start trusting 
the other side which is Felicia.

293
00:15:59,900 --> 00:16:01,400
But nonetheless, it's what 
happens. 

294
00:16:01,800 --> 00:16:04,900
And then you have just a lot of 
informal Democratic Norms, that 

295
00:16:04,900 --> 00:16:08,300
are being violated. 
That Trump has been violating 

296
00:16:08,300 --> 00:16:12,100
about, you know, not trying to 
get another country to dig up 

297
00:16:12,100 --> 00:16:16,400
dirt on your political opponent 
or lying about the Integrity of 

298
00:16:16,400 --> 00:16:19,700
the election process and so on. 
And those aren't you know 

299
00:16:20,200 --> 00:16:23,700
necessarily illegal but they're 
in their violations of informal 

300
00:16:23,700 --> 00:16:25,700
Norms. 
There are things that we all 

301
00:16:25,700 --> 00:16:29,100
think no one should do and that 
no one actually does do until 

302
00:16:29,100 --> 00:16:30,100
trunk does them. 
Them. 

303
00:16:30,400 --> 00:16:32,700
So anyway, I'm just trying to 
give examples of, I don't want 

304
00:16:32,700 --> 00:16:34,600
to get back to cold close 
towards Trump. 

305
00:16:34,600 --> 00:16:38,000
But yeah, there are informal 
Norms, informal norms and I 

306
00:16:38,000 --> 00:16:41,200
think we're seeing decay in in 
both. 

307
00:16:41,500 --> 00:16:44,700
And I think the media outrage is
people are willing to violate 

308
00:16:44,700 --> 00:16:48,400
social norms to make money and 
then those Norms degrade. 

309
00:16:48,400 --> 00:16:50,700
And so, everyone feels like they
can be mean to each other, 

310
00:16:50,900 --> 00:16:53,100
because all the high status, 
people are being mean to each 

311
00:16:53,100 --> 00:16:55,700
other. 
And then, particularly Twitter 

312
00:16:55,700 --> 00:16:59,600
acts as a wild, amplifiers 
social punishment. 

313
00:16:59,900 --> 00:17:02,400
Such that it just builds and 
builds and builds and it can 

314
00:17:02,400 --> 00:17:05,300
ruin lives. 
Like I would rather go to jail 

315
00:17:05,300 --> 00:17:07,800
for a couple days. 
Then be the subject of a Twitter

316
00:17:07,800 --> 00:17:11,800
mob. 
Maybe longer brief tangent here,

317
00:17:11,800 --> 00:17:15,000
have you read Jon Ronson's? 
So, you've been publicly shamed?

318
00:17:15,400 --> 00:17:19,400
No, I haven't tell me about it. 
I think you would very much like

319
00:17:19,400 --> 00:17:22,000
it and it gives examples of both
the left and the right and the 

320
00:17:22,000 --> 00:17:26,500
sort of gallows culture of the 
public execution, and ways in 

321
00:17:26,500 --> 00:17:28,000
which it's been used 
inappropriately. 

322
00:17:28,000 --> 00:17:31,200
He also has some examples where 
maybe it was just defied to, but

323
00:17:31,200 --> 00:17:34,700
just sort of like the gleeful 
destruction of someone's life, 

324
00:17:34,700 --> 00:17:37,400
that people may be read like a 
single tweet. 

325
00:17:37,400 --> 00:17:39,400
I like cool. 
Well, we should cast this person

326
00:17:39,400 --> 00:17:42,700
into outer Darkness then. 
Yeah, you're like wow your way 

327
00:17:42,700 --> 00:17:46,500
your way too eager to do that. 
But he's a he's a journalist 

328
00:17:46,500 --> 00:17:49,800
actually that he's covered. 
A lot of like weird conspiracy 

329
00:17:49,800 --> 00:17:53,200
cultures Fringe subcultures. 
It's good book. 

330
00:17:53,200 --> 00:17:54,900
I think you'd like it but oh 
great. 

331
00:17:55,200 --> 00:17:56,500
Okay. 
Yeah, that's very interesting. 

332
00:17:56,900 --> 00:17:57,900
Yeah. 
Okay. 

333
00:17:58,000 --> 00:18:00,900
Actually, real question now 
though, I think now that our 

334
00:18:00,900 --> 00:18:03,400
listeners have an understanding 
of what you mean by institutions

335
00:18:03,400 --> 00:18:07,100
formal and informal. 
I think we should back up even 

336
00:18:07,100 --> 00:18:11,000
further and explain how you view
liberalism because a big part of

337
00:18:11,000 --> 00:18:13,700
this book is you sort of 
offering a vision of what 

338
00:18:13,700 --> 00:18:18,700
liberalism is / could be and why
it's important why we maybe take

339
00:18:18,700 --> 00:18:22,000
it for granted and how our 
institutional thoughts that you 

340
00:18:22,000 --> 00:18:24,500
just laid out might fit inside 
of that container. 

341
00:18:24,700 --> 00:18:29,700
So, what exactly is liberalism? 
Well, so all I'll start with the

342
00:18:29,800 --> 00:18:33,500
a very general account and then 
get more specific in stages. 

343
00:18:33,900 --> 00:18:40,000
So the very very most broad 
account of liberalism is that it

344
00:18:40,000 --> 00:18:43,200
is a political philosophy which 
says that persons are naturally 

345
00:18:43,200 --> 00:18:46,200
free and equal and should be 
treated as such by government. 

346
00:18:46,800 --> 00:18:49,300
And what that means is there's 
no natural hierarchies of 

347
00:18:49,300 --> 00:18:53,300
authority, meaning that 
everyone's in a sense, Born Free

348
00:18:53,900 --> 00:18:57,300
and not under the authority of 
anyone but say their parents, so

349
00:18:57,300 --> 00:19:00,000
they can make up their own minds
about how to live and To be 

350
00:19:00,000 --> 00:19:02,400
treated equally, right? 
So that people don't aren't 

351
00:19:02,400 --> 00:19:05,600
naturally ahead of each other. 
And so, those Notions of 

352
00:19:05,600 --> 00:19:07,800
Liberty, and equality don't 
actually conflict. 

353
00:19:07,800 --> 00:19:09,700
Because originally in 
liberalism, there wasn't a 

354
00:19:09,708 --> 00:19:13,400
liberty, equality conflict. 
So, they're very, very much 

355
00:19:13,400 --> 00:19:16,400
basic form is Natural Freedom 
and equality. 

356
00:19:16,900 --> 00:19:20,100
If persons. 
Now, it's a quality in the moral

357
00:19:20,100 --> 00:19:22,800
sense that everyone ought to be 
treated as equals or everyone 

358
00:19:22,800 --> 00:19:24,800
has equal dignity. 
Not that people are equal in 

359
00:19:24,800 --> 00:19:27,600
capacities or talents or 
anything like that. 

360
00:19:27,600 --> 00:19:30,100
So a lot of you know, 
Libertarians will Say, well, 

361
00:19:30,100 --> 00:19:33,200
people aren't equal but, you 
know, that's not what the people

362
00:19:33,200 --> 00:19:37,200
saying we're equals typically, 
the more like me, like, a 

363
00:19:37,200 --> 00:19:40,400
Christian equality before God, 
something like that. 

364
00:19:40,700 --> 00:19:43,900
Yeah, cuz he starts off that way
because liberalism, you know, 

365
00:19:43,900 --> 00:19:46,600
evolves out of out of 
Christianity, but it doesn't 

366
00:19:46,600 --> 00:19:49,400
have to be so you can be an 
atheist Global or Christian 

367
00:19:49,400 --> 00:19:51,800
liberal. 
But in terms of Origins, yeah I 

368
00:19:51,800 --> 00:19:56,200
think Christianity contributes 
greatly to the idea of equal 

369
00:19:56,200 --> 00:19:59,900
moral worth So that's the very 
broadest notion. 

370
00:19:59,900 --> 00:20:05,000
Now, there's a divide among 
liberals historically between 

371
00:20:05,000 --> 00:20:09,200
those who think that certain 
liberal values like freedom and 

372
00:20:09,200 --> 00:20:12,700
autonomy ought to be actively 
promoted by the state's. 

373
00:20:12,700 --> 00:20:15,100
You know, you find this, you 
know, the European continent 

374
00:20:15,100 --> 00:20:17,400
would like a lot of liberals 
want to suppress the Catholic 

375
00:20:17,400 --> 00:20:20,700
church or or suppress organized 
religion because they think it 

376
00:20:20,708 --> 00:20:23,200
undermines freedom. 
And this is more of what we 

377
00:20:23,200 --> 00:20:25,100
might call liberal 
perfectionism. 

378
00:20:25,200 --> 00:20:27,600
So on this view, people are free
and equal but the state 

379
00:20:27,800 --> 00:20:29,700
Shouldn't be neutral. 
The state should promote liberal

380
00:20:29,700 --> 00:20:33,700
values sometimes by force. 
But then there's another kind of

381
00:20:33,700 --> 00:20:37,800
liberalism that I call at the 
very most General way liberal 

382
00:20:37,800 --> 00:20:41,000
neutralism and liberal 
neutralism says, look if people 

383
00:20:41,000 --> 00:20:43,700
are actually free and equal, 
we're going to be fair to them. 

384
00:20:43,700 --> 00:20:46,700
We can't just decide that one 
view is correct and impose it on

385
00:20:46,700 --> 00:20:48,600
the rest. 
So this started off with 

386
00:20:48,600 --> 00:20:51,100
religion, where the thought was 
or released with variants of 

387
00:20:51,100 --> 00:20:54,600
protestantism where the thought 
was roughly that, you know, look

388
00:20:54,600 --> 00:20:58,600
you know, we can't agree on 
religion and And we seem to have

389
00:20:58,600 --> 00:21:00,600
different views that aren't 
going to go away. 

390
00:21:00,900 --> 00:21:04,100
And over time, they kind of 
start to look like different but

391
00:21:04,100 --> 00:21:07,300
reasonable views. 
And so the thought is that, you 

392
00:21:07,308 --> 00:21:09,800
know, look the state shouldn't 
take a side on religious 

393
00:21:09,800 --> 00:21:12,200
matters. 
And then, you know, became a 

394
00:21:12,200 --> 00:21:15,200
question about whether the state
should take the side of religion

395
00:21:15,200 --> 00:21:19,500
at all or probably be secular 
and then liberalism's and 

396
00:21:19,500 --> 00:21:22,500
liberals disagree about whether 
neutrality. 

397
00:21:22,500 --> 00:21:26,200
Implies robust forms of 
secularism like getting religion

398
00:21:26,200 --> 00:21:27,600
out of the Public Square like 
friendship. 

399
00:21:27,900 --> 00:21:32,100
France and lie CTA or a much 
more kind of open Public Square 

400
00:21:32,100 --> 00:21:34,300
where the state doesn't 
coercively establish religion, 

401
00:21:34,300 --> 00:21:38,400
but in allows all kinds of other
religious expressions, like, in 

402
00:21:38,400 --> 00:21:41,000
the United States. 
So, there's little neutralism 

403
00:21:41,700 --> 00:21:45,700
and perfectionist, liberalism, 
I'm a little neutralist, and 

404
00:21:45,800 --> 00:21:48,200
then you can get even more 
specific with kinds of liberal 

405
00:21:48,200 --> 00:21:50,300
neutralism. 
So that would be like a natural,

406
00:21:50,300 --> 00:21:53,800
right space liberalism that says
these natural rights and you 

407
00:21:53,900 --> 00:21:58,200
establishment violates those 
rights or you can go in In for 

408
00:21:58,200 --> 00:22:01,700
the Contemporary variants of 
social contract, liberalism try 

409
00:22:01,700 --> 00:22:04,200
to justify the state, based on 
the free, and equal agreement 

410
00:22:04,200 --> 00:22:08,000
between persons may be an actual
and maybe a hypothetical one, 

411
00:22:08,000 --> 00:22:10,600
but we're actually kind of 
beyond the consent analogy. 

412
00:22:10,600 --> 00:22:15,200
Now we're basically the thought 
is that you because people are 

413
00:22:15,200 --> 00:22:18,600
naturally free and equal, you 
can't coerce them if the 

414
00:22:18,600 --> 00:22:21,800
coercion isn't justifiable to 
them from their own perspective.

415
00:22:22,100 --> 00:22:25,000
So the thought is that all 
coercion State, coercion or 

416
00:22:25,008 --> 00:22:27,200
power needs to be publicly 
justify that. 

417
00:22:27,200 --> 00:22:30,200
It's a To be justified to each 
person by their own lights. 

418
00:22:30,600 --> 00:22:33,100
And so this is what's called 
public reason liberalism. 

419
00:22:33,100 --> 00:22:35,600
It's a variant of neutrals 
liberalism because it says, the 

420
00:22:35,600 --> 00:22:38,300
state shouldn't coerce a matters
of reasonable dispute. 

421
00:22:38,800 --> 00:22:41,800
Instead there has to be 
justifiability to multiple 

422
00:22:41,800 --> 00:22:44,400
perspectives. 
Rawls is an example of someone 

423
00:22:44,400 --> 00:22:47,600
who has this view my advisor. 
Jerry Gauss was had a version of

424
00:22:47,608 --> 00:22:51,500
this view is very different than
Rawls is, so we've got 

425
00:22:51,500 --> 00:22:55,400
liberalism neutralism and the 
perfectionism distinction, and 

426
00:22:55,400 --> 00:22:58,500
then we've got the more 
contemporary Version of liberal 

427
00:22:58,500 --> 00:23:00,500
neutrals and it's called public 
reason the Burleson. 

428
00:23:00,800 --> 00:23:02,000
And I'm a public reason 
liberals. 

429
00:23:02,000 --> 00:23:04,500
So there's your taxonomy. 
Hopefully that's helpful to 

430
00:23:04,500 --> 00:23:07,200
people to some degree. 
At least, I know what the Google

431
00:23:08,000 --> 00:23:10,200
infer that we have detailed show
notes. 

432
00:23:11,600 --> 00:23:14,300
Yeah, we actually know each 
other because I spent a year at 

433
00:23:14,300 --> 00:23:18,000
Arizona which is your alma mater
for your PhD. 

434
00:23:18,500 --> 00:23:21,300
Yeah. 
And I decided against continuing

435
00:23:21,300 --> 00:23:24,500
but was still very influenced by
the public reason thinkers there

436
00:23:24,500 --> 00:23:28,600
and post rawlsian is mm. 
I'm curious how Much I want to 

437
00:23:28,600 --> 00:23:31,600
give listeners but I imagine 
from the good place. 

438
00:23:31,600 --> 00:23:35,000
They at least know, some basic 
side this point but public 

439
00:23:35,000 --> 00:23:37,800
reason. 
Actually I want you to explain 

440
00:23:37,800 --> 00:23:41,300
in Greater detail what exactly 
is and the original position. 

441
00:23:41,400 --> 00:23:44,500
And so like the, you know, the 
101 of Rawls, and then I can 

442
00:23:44,500 --> 00:23:46,600
explain what hurt my brain about
it. 

443
00:23:46,600 --> 00:23:50,200
And one of the reasons why I 
left and then ways, your book 

444
00:23:50,200 --> 00:23:53,000
answers, some of my concerns. 
Would you be willing to do that 

445
00:23:53,000 --> 00:23:54,700
for us? 
Yeah, yeah. 

446
00:23:54,700 --> 00:23:57,600
Let me see how fast I can do it.
So, this is a gigantic. 

447
00:23:57,700 --> 00:24:00,900
A question, Kevin I'm saying it 
is, but but I think I can do a 

448
00:24:00,908 --> 00:24:06,300
sequence of explanations. 
So the sort of standard sort of 

449
00:24:06,300 --> 00:24:10,800
social contract, liberalism's of
like lat Rousseau and Kant fell 

450
00:24:10,800 --> 00:24:13,800
out of favor in the 19th century
and favor of, you know, more 

451
00:24:13,800 --> 00:24:17,200
like communitarian and 
nationalist views and England to

452
00:24:17,200 --> 00:24:22,600
utilitarian views, and to 
Marxism and socialism is of 

453
00:24:22,600 --> 00:24:27,600
various varieties, and this was 
even true to some degree. 

454
00:24:27,700 --> 00:24:31,600
Until the second world war, you 
did have kind of liberalism 

455
00:24:31,600 --> 00:24:36,200
socialism liberal Democratic, 
socialism that gained in power, 

456
00:24:36,300 --> 00:24:38,800
where it's libertarianism, 
Classical liberalism, contracted

457
00:24:38,800 --> 00:24:40,800
greatly. 
But one of the things that 

458
00:24:40,800 --> 00:24:43,900
happen in philosophy is that 
people had kind of moved away 

459
00:24:43,900 --> 00:24:47,000
from making moral claims at all.
Thinking that they were say, 

460
00:24:47,000 --> 00:24:50,500
just expressions of emotion, 
that any sensible philosophical 

461
00:24:50,500 --> 00:24:53,100
disputes were based on things 
that needed to be able to be, 

462
00:24:53,200 --> 00:24:54,700
you know, empirically 
verifiable. 

463
00:24:55,200 --> 00:24:57,500
So, political philosophy had 
fallen on Hard Times. 

464
00:24:57,700 --> 00:25:00,400
Even when did people did 
political philosophy, it was 

465
00:25:00,400 --> 00:25:02,800
done in a kind of British 
utilitarian vain. 

466
00:25:03,400 --> 00:25:08,000
So Along Comes John, Rawls 
starting and the 50s, he's 

467
00:25:08,000 --> 00:25:12,800
finishing up, his education, 
late 40s, and he wants to create

468
00:25:12,800 --> 00:25:16,700
a systematic alternative to 
utilitarianism for a variety of 

469
00:25:16,700 --> 00:25:18,500
reasons. 
But one of which is just the 

470
00:25:18,500 --> 00:25:22,200
thinks that very simply that 
utilitarianism does not respect 

471
00:25:22,200 --> 00:25:23,800
what he called the separateness 
of persons. 

472
00:25:24,600 --> 00:25:27,500
So, he wants to develop a kind 
of, he wants to develop a more 

473
00:25:27,600 --> 00:25:31,200
General theory of social 
contract theory, but getting it 

474
00:25:31,200 --> 00:25:33,200
what he thinks is really 
important about the idea. 

475
00:25:33,200 --> 00:25:36,400
And what's really important 
about the idea is that Justice 

476
00:25:36,400 --> 00:25:40,200
is a kind of fairness. 
And it's not just a fairness to 

477
00:25:40,200 --> 00:25:42,900
people of different races or 
nationalities. 

478
00:25:42,900 --> 00:25:45,100
It's also a matter of fairness 
to people who have different 

479
00:25:45,100 --> 00:25:47,900
faiths and what he called 
conceptions of the good in 

480
00:25:47,900 --> 00:25:50,900
general. 
And so, how would you figure out

481
00:25:50,900 --> 00:25:53,500
how to treat different 
perspectives, and different 

482
00:25:53,500 --> 00:25:57,400
people fairly? 
Well, one thing you could do is 

483
00:25:57,400 --> 00:25:59,900
you can ask what principles of 
Justice. 

484
00:25:59,900 --> 00:26:02,200
They would choose. 
If they didn't know those 

485
00:26:02,200 --> 00:26:05,300
divisive or potentially divisive
features of themselves. 

486
00:26:06,200 --> 00:26:09,700
And so Rawls construct, assists 
idea of the original position 

487
00:26:09,700 --> 00:26:14,300
and the veil of ignorance and 
the original position, you have 

488
00:26:14,300 --> 00:26:18,000
a whole bunch of abstract people
that are in some sense taken to 

489
00:26:18,008 --> 00:26:21,200
represent real people but in a 
much more complicated way than 

490
00:26:21,200 --> 00:26:23,400
people typically know. 
If they know anything about 

491
00:26:23,400 --> 00:26:28,200
roles and he says okay look 
we're going to make people Only 

492
00:26:28,300 --> 00:26:31,500
and more than that rational, and
choosing not just means, but 

493
00:26:31,500 --> 00:26:34,300
also to some degree choosing 
ends, but to make sure that 

494
00:26:34,300 --> 00:26:37,700
their choice is fair and 
reasonable, we're going to deny 

495
00:26:37,700 --> 00:26:39,600
them factors. 
That would bias them that are, 

496
00:26:39,600 --> 00:26:43,500
as he said irrelevant from a 
moral point of view and he 

497
00:26:43,500 --> 00:26:46,800
thought not just our race or 
nationality or whatever was 

498
00:26:46,800 --> 00:26:48,500
irrelevant from a moral point of
view. 

499
00:26:48,700 --> 00:26:50,700
But so is our conception of the 
good. 

500
00:26:50,700 --> 00:26:53,800
And so we shouldn't know those 
factors or the parties to the 

501
00:26:53,800 --> 00:26:55,800
original position. 
Shouldn't know those factors 

502
00:26:55,900 --> 00:26:57,500
when they're trying to figure 
out what Justice. 

503
00:26:57,600 --> 00:27:01,000
Is the result would be a theory 
of justice that comported with 

504
00:27:01,000 --> 00:27:04,000
our ordinary moral intuitions 
about Justice, it would be 

505
00:27:04,000 --> 00:27:08,800
non-utilitarian and character 
that ultimately would Justify 

506
00:27:09,100 --> 00:27:13,800
both extensive protection for 
basic Liberties, but also equal 

507
00:27:13,800 --> 00:27:20,000
opportunities and lots of 
respects and that all social and

508
00:27:20,000 --> 00:27:22,700
economic inequality should be 
organized to maximize, 

509
00:27:22,700 --> 00:27:25,900
additional least Advantage. 
So it's a very very left-leaning

510
00:27:25,900 --> 00:27:29,600
liberalism that says that? 
Very hard to justify inequality.

511
00:27:29,800 --> 00:27:32,400
You has to benefit everyone and 
the least advantage to the 

512
00:27:32,400 --> 00:27:34,600
maximum extent. 
Can I jump in here? 

513
00:27:34,600 --> 00:27:36,000
Kevin yep. 
Yep. 

514
00:27:36,000 --> 00:27:38,500
So that's that's rolls up to 
1971. 

515
00:27:38,700 --> 00:27:40,800
Oh yeah. 
That's the that's the bits that 

516
00:27:40,800 --> 00:27:43,800
we can start sort of start with.
Yeah I think that's a great 

517
00:27:43,800 --> 00:27:46,500
place to start to in my 
understanding of Rawls and 

518
00:27:46,500 --> 00:27:50,500
surely you know much much more 
than I do is that he was pretty 

519
00:27:50,900 --> 00:27:54,200
conservative with how he thought
people would choose within the 

520
00:27:54,200 --> 00:27:56,500
original position. 
He thought if you didn't know 

521
00:27:56,800 --> 00:27:59,700
which person you it'd be in 
society, you would choose 

522
00:27:59,800 --> 00:28:02,200
egalitarian distribution. 
You wouldn't want there to be a 

523
00:28:02,208 --> 00:28:04,100
lot of rich people, out of poor 
people because you could be one 

524
00:28:04,100 --> 00:28:06,500
of the poor ones. 
But a lot of what came out of 

525
00:28:06,508 --> 00:28:09,300
Arizona and sort of what is 
deemed post rawlsian. 

526
00:28:09,600 --> 00:28:14,000
Was that actually rational 
people in the original position 

527
00:28:14,200 --> 00:28:16,300
could choose less equal 
outcomes? 

528
00:28:16,300 --> 00:28:21,100
People can disagree about the 
like what the outcome should be 

529
00:28:21,100 --> 00:28:22,900
coming out of the original 
position. 

530
00:28:23,300 --> 00:28:26,200
And that idea really mess with 
my head because it meant that 

531
00:28:26,200 --> 00:28:29,400
there is multiple, right? 
Answers or maybe even no, right,

532
00:28:29,400 --> 00:28:32,600
answer to the original position 
in which case where do you go 

533
00:28:32,600 --> 00:28:34,500
from? 
There, is that as I understand 

534
00:28:34,500 --> 00:28:37,400
scrapped, yeah, actually, that's
a very nice way of putting it. 

535
00:28:37,400 --> 00:28:41,400
So, one of the points that Jerri
gasps made, it was my advisor. 

536
00:28:41,400 --> 00:28:44,200
And you took a course with. 
And I think you did take a 

537
00:28:44,208 --> 00:28:45,100
course with them. 
Right? 

538
00:28:45,200 --> 00:28:47,200
I did him and David Schmitz 
thought it together. 

539
00:28:47,700 --> 00:28:50,500
Yeah. 
And one of the themes that he 

540
00:28:50,500 --> 00:28:53,700
was stressing been and it's 
still, it's still a theme of his

541
00:28:53,700 --> 00:28:55,400
work. 
Has his last book will come out 

542
00:28:55,400 --> 00:28:57,500
in July, they were getting 
through. 

543
00:28:57,600 --> 00:28:59,300
Ooh. 
And one of the things that he 

544
00:28:59,308 --> 00:29:03,600
says, is that social contract 
reasoning and itself is 

545
00:29:03,600 --> 00:29:06,200
inherently indeterminate. 
And the same thing is true of 

546
00:29:06,200 --> 00:29:09,000
all contracts, here in theories 
of Justice, including roles has 

547
00:29:09,000 --> 00:29:12,200
and that Rawls actually 
understood this early on in his 

548
00:29:12,200 --> 00:29:15,000
papers in the 50s. 
But he tried to resist it. 

549
00:29:15,000 --> 00:29:17,900
In a theory of Justice, by 
building in a whole bunch of 

550
00:29:17,900 --> 00:29:20,300
controversial assumptions than, 
of the choice scenario. 

551
00:29:20,300 --> 00:29:23,100
Stuff that, you know, many of 
his critics not only disagree 

552
00:29:23,100 --> 00:29:28,500
with, but Mock and sometimes he 
would say stuff like, Now if we 

553
00:29:28,500 --> 00:29:30,900
get the wrong answer, that's 
counterintuitive out of the 

554
00:29:30,900 --> 00:29:33,200
original position, we should 
just change the original 

555
00:29:33,200 --> 00:29:35,400
position. 
So it's like he was trying to 

556
00:29:35,400 --> 00:29:39,400
arrive at his own particular 
answer by rigging the system, 

557
00:29:39,900 --> 00:29:42,900
such as being for critics. 
It's such a chastity. 

558
00:29:43,000 --> 00:29:44,000
It is bait. 
Yes. 

559
00:29:44,100 --> 00:29:46,600
And so one of the things Yuri 
said was well actually look 

560
00:29:46,600 --> 00:29:49,800
there's going to be reasonable 
disagreement, not just about 

561
00:29:49,800 --> 00:29:53,200
like you know, what's good? 
And so there's going to be 

562
00:29:53,200 --> 00:29:55,100
reasonable disagreement about 
Justice. 

563
00:29:55,600 --> 00:29:58,100
And so people are going to be 
able to Have different 

564
00:29:58,100 --> 00:30:01,200
conceptions of Justice rank 
conceptions of Justice 

565
00:30:01,200 --> 00:30:03,500
differently. 
And so the original position, 

566
00:30:03,500 --> 00:30:06,700
reasoning will be what Jerry 
called indeterminate and 

567
00:30:06,700 --> 00:30:10,900
determined Now Jerry still kind 
of like social contract theory 

568
00:30:11,300 --> 00:30:13,900
and so a big thing of his work 
was how do we resolve 

569
00:30:13,900 --> 00:30:18,500
indeterminacy after we realized 
that impartial moral reasoning, 

570
00:30:18,900 --> 00:30:23,100
you know isn't going to tell us 
what Justice requires and in his

571
00:30:23,100 --> 00:30:25,500
own work? 
What he does is he keeps this 

572
00:30:25,500 --> 00:30:29,700
idea conti and malls and idea. 
Of morality and Justice being 

573
00:30:29,700 --> 00:30:32,500
about some kind of impartial 
moral reasoning, reciprocal, 

574
00:30:32,500 --> 00:30:38,200
moral reasoning, but trying to 
find ways that real social 

575
00:30:38,200 --> 00:30:41,600
processes and social 
interactions could lead us to 

576
00:30:41,600 --> 00:30:44,500
coordinate on one of those 
options that would be 

577
00:30:44,500 --> 00:30:47,500
acceptable. 
So you try to delineate the set 

578
00:30:47,500 --> 00:30:51,500
of potential agreement points 
and then you say okay well how 

579
00:30:51,500 --> 00:30:54,300
do social institutions and 
social Evolution lead us to 

580
00:30:54,300 --> 00:30:57,300
arrive to actually practicing 
one of those agreements. 

581
00:30:57,500 --> 00:30:59,300
Eight points. 
And that's how I started to 

582
00:30:59,300 --> 00:31:03,200
introduce Hayek and Hume into 
the thought of Kant. 

583
00:31:03,200 --> 00:31:06,800
And Rawls by saying look, you 
know, a big part of justice is 

584
00:31:06,800 --> 00:31:10,300
how we conquer ties, the thing, 
how we bring it to Earth how we 

585
00:31:10,300 --> 00:31:14,100
institutionalize it, because the
original position will help us 

586
00:31:14,100 --> 00:31:17,600
something like it will help us 
to reason impartially, but it 

587
00:31:17,600 --> 00:31:21,400
doesn't get us to a real actual 
morality that can is Ross's 

588
00:31:21,400 --> 00:31:24,700
resolve are competing claims. 
So, yeah, that was one. 

589
00:31:24,700 --> 00:31:28,100
Way that in the later project of
political liberalism broke Noun.

590
00:31:28,400 --> 00:31:31,000
So, one of the things that rolls
realize is in the interim 

591
00:31:31,000 --> 00:31:34,200
between a theory of justice and 
then his other big book, 

592
00:31:34,400 --> 00:31:38,300
political liberalism is that he 
had assumed. 

593
00:31:38,400 --> 00:31:40,700
So one of the things we always 
wanted to argue is not just that

594
00:31:40,700 --> 00:31:44,200
you come up with Justice but 
that Justice should structure a 

595
00:31:44,200 --> 00:31:46,400
well or it's what he calls, a 
relative society. 

596
00:31:46,400 --> 00:31:49,800
And the reason he cared about 
this is because it wasn't enough

597
00:31:49,800 --> 00:31:53,900
for justice to just be Justice 
to be Justice, it had to also be

598
00:31:53,900 --> 00:31:57,000
able to organize Society in a 
way that would be compatible 

599
00:31:57,000 --> 00:31:59,300
with people. 
Good, good, their own personal 

600
00:31:59,300 --> 00:32:01,900
good. 
And, and he also wanted to show 

601
00:32:01,900 --> 00:32:04,300
that Justice would be 
self-stabilizing like that. 

602
00:32:04,300 --> 00:32:07,200
If you you established it, it 
would it would keep itself in 

603
00:32:07,200 --> 00:32:09,600
effect. 
Do you mean something like in 

604
00:32:09,600 --> 00:32:12,500
contradistinction to something 
like let Justice rain though? 

605
00:32:12,500 --> 00:32:15,500
The heavens fall, that's not a 
viable option for right? 

606
00:32:15,500 --> 00:32:18,300
No, so his con thien ism is 
consequence sensitive. 

607
00:32:18,900 --> 00:32:22,400
So Rawls developed this idea of 
a well-ordered society and the 

608
00:32:22,400 --> 00:32:25,700
last third of theory of Justice 
which people don't look at but 

609
00:32:25,700 --> 00:32:27,400
in it, he assumed that people 
would agree. 

610
00:32:27,500 --> 00:32:29,700
Really about a great deal of 
what was good. 

611
00:32:29,900 --> 00:32:32,100
And he later comes to be 
dissatisfied with that 

612
00:32:32,100 --> 00:32:35,200
assumption that he thinks that, 
even in that model, people are 

613
00:32:35,208 --> 00:32:37,200
going to come to disagree about 
what's good. 

614
00:32:37,500 --> 00:32:40,900
And so the whole Theory had to 
be recast because people would 

615
00:32:40,900 --> 00:32:42,800
have to agree to his theory of 
Justice. 

616
00:32:42,800 --> 00:32:45,700
What he called, Justice is 
fairness from different 

617
00:32:46,100 --> 00:32:50,200
perspectives, about the good and
so he said, okay, well look, I 

618
00:32:50,200 --> 00:32:52,100
mean, people are going to 
disagree about the good but 

619
00:32:52,100 --> 00:32:54,900
maybe they can still agree on on
Justice. 

620
00:32:55,700 --> 00:32:59,400
This creates this problem which 
is that if we agree on Justice 

621
00:32:59,400 --> 00:33:02,800
from different perspectives, 
it's not going to be obvious to 

622
00:33:02,800 --> 00:33:04,600
each other, whether we've all 
endorsed it. 

623
00:33:04,800 --> 00:33:07,100
And we're going to need some 
public way to communicate that 

624
00:33:07,100 --> 00:33:10,300
to each other. 
And so, in order to stabilize a 

625
00:33:10,308 --> 00:33:12,900
diverse Society with different 
perspectives, on the good 

626
00:33:12,900 --> 00:33:15,800
different religions and to 
coordinate people around Justice

627
00:33:15,800 --> 00:33:19,600
in the way roles wanted, you had
to be able and be willing and 

628
00:33:19,600 --> 00:33:23,300
prepared to exchange what he 
called public reasons. 

629
00:33:23,900 --> 00:33:27,300
And these are reasons that are 
Some sense accessible or shared 

630
00:33:27,400 --> 00:33:30,700
and that would exclude and 
ultimately a quite subtle way, 

631
00:33:31,200 --> 00:33:34,900
not a ham-fisted way, religious 
reasons, or private reasons, or 

632
00:33:34,900 --> 00:33:36,800
reasons, for what he called, 
comprehensive doctrines. 

633
00:33:37,600 --> 00:33:40,500
So from this, he developed this 
idea of public reason, which 

634
00:33:40,500 --> 00:33:42,600
their doctrines of public reason
earlier and political 

635
00:33:42,600 --> 00:33:46,100
philosophy, but he gave the term
sort of currency. 

636
00:33:46,400 --> 00:33:51,300
And so, the thought was that the
justifications for state power 

637
00:33:51,300 --> 00:33:54,300
and state action had to appeal 
to different perspectives and 

638
00:33:54,300 --> 00:33:56,900
that would only work. 
If you appeal to reasons that 

639
00:33:56,900 --> 00:33:59,500
were shared by those 
perspectives, in some sense. 

640
00:34:00,300 --> 00:34:03,500
So this is the way that public 
reason starts to impact the role

641
00:34:03,500 --> 00:34:05,900
of religion in the Public Square
because it says that we should 

642
00:34:05,900 --> 00:34:09,800
tend to keep religion out of it 
in various respects and that 

643
00:34:09,800 --> 00:34:12,199
created a gigantic controversy 
in the nadi's in this one 

644
00:34:12,199 --> 00:34:14,300
tonight and the 2000s and that's
what I ended up. 

645
00:34:14,300 --> 00:34:16,900
Writing my dissertation on. 
Yeah, keeps philosophers 

646
00:34:16,900 --> 00:34:19,800
employed, it's great. 
Yeah, well, you know, it not 

647
00:34:19,800 --> 00:34:22,300
only that but it keeps people in
religious studies political 

648
00:34:22,300 --> 00:34:24,000
Theory and constitutional law 
employed. 

649
00:34:24,000 --> 00:34:26,400
So it's a really big Kind of 
interdisciplinary. 

650
00:34:26,400 --> 00:34:29,600
Debates, pretty interesting. 
So the doctor of public reason 

651
00:34:29,600 --> 00:34:33,800
in Rawls kind of starts off that
way but what really matters I 

652
00:34:33,800 --> 00:34:37,600
think for roles in the end is 
that principles of justice and 

653
00:34:37,600 --> 00:34:39,800
principles for organizing 
Society or Justified, to 

654
00:34:39,808 --> 00:34:43,699
multiple Regional perspectives. 
Now, another thing that took off

655
00:34:43,699 --> 00:34:46,500
after you left, that really took
off after you left what was 

656
00:34:46,600 --> 00:34:47,699
still going on when you were 
there. 

657
00:34:47,699 --> 00:34:51,900
When I was there was the idea of
what we might call pluralism of 

658
00:34:51,900 --> 00:34:54,199
that Justice. 
Where, you know? 

659
00:34:54,199 --> 00:34:56,699
Yeah, people can I just disagree
about the good, they can 

660
00:34:56,699 --> 00:34:59,900
disagree about Justice and so 
they can reasonably reject Rawls

661
00:34:59,900 --> 00:35:03,000
has conception of justice. 
So if you want a society that 

662
00:35:03,000 --> 00:35:07,400
stable and will ordered you can 
no longer maintain that. 

663
00:35:07,400 --> 00:35:10,900
Rawls is theory of justice. 
Is the best way to do that. 

664
00:35:11,400 --> 00:35:14,400
Rawls admits this towards the 
end of his life and essentially,

665
00:35:14,400 --> 00:35:16,800
here he's picking up on that 
theme where look reasonable 

666
00:35:16,800 --> 00:35:18,400
people can disagree about 
justice. 

667
00:35:18,400 --> 00:35:23,300
So, you know, we can't just 
insist on a procedure for 

668
00:35:23,300 --> 00:35:24,800
determining. 
What that is? 

669
00:35:25,200 --> 00:35:27,800
And Rawls kind of basically 
admits this. 

670
00:35:28,000 --> 00:35:30,800
In fact, in his letter to his 
editor, before the last edition 

671
00:35:30,800 --> 00:35:34,200
of political liberalism, he said
that his theory of justice, 

672
00:35:34,200 --> 00:35:38,100
justice fairness now planes at 
best a small role and is his 

673
00:35:38,100 --> 00:35:40,000
broader. 
Thoughts on these topics, which 

674
00:35:40,000 --> 00:35:43,700
is a remarkable admission. 
So we get to a liberalism that 

675
00:35:43,700 --> 00:35:46,300
says, look, people aren't 
actually free and equals. 

676
00:35:46,300 --> 00:35:49,700
So we have to justify things to 
their diverse points of view, 

677
00:35:50,100 --> 00:35:52,900
and then there's and that it 
event says in a kind of 

678
00:35:52,900 --> 00:35:54,700
neutrality requirement. 
Cause you're not going to be 

679
00:35:54,700 --> 00:35:58,900
able to Fi I resume that takes a
course of sidon something 

680
00:35:58,900 --> 00:36:02,000
controversial to the people who 
don't accept it, right? 

681
00:36:02,100 --> 00:36:04,200
So you end up with something 
kind of neutral, but one of the 

682
00:36:04,207 --> 00:36:07,600
interesting questions is, what 
is the status of capitalism in 

683
00:36:07,600 --> 00:36:10,000
under a, an order in an order of
public reason. 

684
00:36:10,800 --> 00:36:14,100
So one place that Jerry Allison 
John Rawls disagreed about is 

685
00:36:14,100 --> 00:36:17,900
how large the state should be 
and how much should interfere 

686
00:36:17,900 --> 00:36:20,000
with markets? 
Where's Ross thought it should 

687
00:36:20,000 --> 00:36:23,300
interfere an enormous amount 
just a staggering amount and 

688
00:36:23,300 --> 00:36:26,800
watch more than the You know, 
people will make this obnoxious 

689
00:36:26,800 --> 00:36:29,200
remark that Rawls was trying to 
justify the Democratic party 

690
00:36:29,200 --> 00:36:31,700
platform of 1968. 
That's false. 

691
00:36:31,700 --> 00:36:33,500
He was much more left-wing than 
that. 

692
00:36:34,700 --> 00:36:38,300
Much more left wing. 
You know, but then Jerry's got a

693
00:36:38,308 --> 00:36:41,200
kind of classical liberal View. 
And so that's another 

694
00:36:41,200 --> 00:36:43,800
interesting dispute among public
reason, liberals, which is, you 

695
00:36:43,800 --> 00:36:45,700
know, how to regard markets, but
Jerry thought they were 

696
00:36:45,700 --> 00:36:50,600
essential to any any free equal 
and mutually justifiable order. 

697
00:36:51,800 --> 00:36:55,100
Okay, I think you've given us 
super helpful Baseline for 

698
00:36:55,100 --> 00:36:58,300
understanding the rest of your 
book trust very might have 

699
00:36:58,300 --> 00:37:01,400
difficult conversations about 
climate change and Beyond. 

700
00:37:01,900 --> 00:37:05,600
But yeah, how exactly does 
liberalism work where we it 

701
00:37:05,600 --> 00:37:08,500
takes for, granted that it is 
legitimate for reasonable people

702
00:37:08,500 --> 00:37:10,800
to disagree about things that 
are important to them? 

703
00:37:11,300 --> 00:37:12,700
How are we supposed to live 
together? 

704
00:37:12,700 --> 00:37:15,500
If we don't actually agree on a 
lot, I'm sure people feel that a

705
00:37:15,500 --> 00:37:19,600
lot listening right now and the 
in America, the way the books, 

706
00:37:19,600 --> 00:37:23,100
the two books, trust books. 
I've done got Started was kind 

707
00:37:23,100 --> 00:37:26,100
of reflecting on the public 
reason project and particularly 

708
00:37:26,100 --> 00:37:29,000
Jerry's version of it, because 
one of the things that Jerry 

709
00:37:29,000 --> 00:37:32,800
says that Rawls does not make so
clear, is that what one of the 

710
00:37:32,800 --> 00:37:36,800
things we really, really, really
care about and Society? 

711
00:37:36,800 --> 00:37:40,000
Broadly isn't just social 
cooperation bear, social 

712
00:37:40,000 --> 00:37:43,200
cooperation, but it being able 
to have what Jerry called moral 

713
00:37:43,200 --> 00:37:47,000
relations between persons. 
Those included things like love 

714
00:37:47,000 --> 00:37:51,400
and friendship and trust. 
And so the thought was that you 

715
00:37:51,500 --> 00:37:55,200
No, in a free Society on. 
That's governed by the Norms of 

716
00:37:55,200 --> 00:37:59,100
Javed justification. 
It is easier to form and sustain

717
00:37:59,100 --> 00:38:02,300
those moral relations. 
It's easier to have relations of

718
00:38:02,300 --> 00:38:04,300
love and friendship across 
differences. 

719
00:38:04,500 --> 00:38:06,600
A liberal Society, you can make 
it connect. 

720
00:38:06,600 --> 00:38:09,300
You know, make an Interfaith 
marriage work, right? 

721
00:38:09,400 --> 00:38:12,000
You can be friends with people 
who have wildly different views 

722
00:38:12,000 --> 00:38:13,900
than you do. 
I mean, Jerry, and I disagreed 

723
00:38:13,900 --> 00:38:17,500
in terms of metaphysics about 
everything, but we still work 

724
00:38:17,500 --> 00:38:19,000
very well together and we're 
friends. 

725
00:38:19,500 --> 00:38:23,300
So the thought is that Liberal 
Society, affords people, the 

726
00:38:23,300 --> 00:38:26,300
opportunity to form more 
relations in a stable way, with 

727
00:38:26,300 --> 00:38:29,500
a very wide range of people. 
And that one of the things that 

728
00:38:29,800 --> 00:38:32,300
just about anyone says really 
matters in life is close 

729
00:38:32,300 --> 00:38:34,100
successful personal 
relationships. 

730
00:38:34,900 --> 00:38:37,300
So I got to thinking, well, you 
know, love and friendship or 

731
00:38:37,300 --> 00:38:39,600
like incredibly important, but 
they're not going to be the 

732
00:38:39,600 --> 00:38:43,600
basis for an entire social order
because we can't sort of have 

733
00:38:43,600 --> 00:38:46,200
intimate relations of love and 
friendship with everybody. 

734
00:38:46,500 --> 00:38:50,000
Hey, have a Civic friendship but
Jerry, I kind of developed 

735
00:38:50,000 --> 00:38:52,800
theories of love and friendship 
and some His very early work, 

736
00:38:53,400 --> 00:38:56,600
but you have a theory of trust. 
And so, my kind of thought was, 

737
00:38:56,600 --> 00:39:00,400
well, you know, maybe if we 
disagree about Justice, when we 

738
00:39:00,400 --> 00:39:03,500
disagree about the good, the 
most intimate social relation, 

739
00:39:03,500 --> 00:39:06,400
we can expect to have with one. 
Another is just to be able to 

740
00:39:06,400 --> 00:39:10,400
trust each other to generally do
what we think to be the right 

741
00:39:10,400 --> 00:39:12,200
thing. 
So there's there's a core of 

742
00:39:12,200 --> 00:39:15,300
goodness and Justice that we can
agree to but almost everything 

743
00:39:15,300 --> 00:39:16,800
else is going to be 
controversial. 

744
00:39:16,900 --> 00:39:20,200
And so the question is, can we 
land on a system of norms that 

745
00:39:20,200 --> 00:39:22,900
allows a diverse people to? 
See each other when we follow 

746
00:39:22,900 --> 00:39:25,300
them. 
So my thought was well, look 

747
00:39:25,300 --> 00:39:27,600
Norms that can be justified to 
each person's perspective, 

748
00:39:27,600 --> 00:39:29,200
informal and formal 
institutions. 

749
00:39:29,200 --> 00:39:32,800
Are those that will all have 
reason from our own perspective 

750
00:39:32,800 --> 00:39:35,000
to follow. 
And so, when we see one another 

751
00:39:35,000 --> 00:39:38,600
does, knowing our differences 
following the same rules, we 

752
00:39:38,600 --> 00:39:40,200
think. 
Okay, now we can count on them, 

753
00:39:40,200 --> 00:39:41,700
we can trust them. 
And they're doing this out of 

754
00:39:41,707 --> 00:39:44,400
some, kind of concern or respect
for our well-being or something 

755
00:39:44,400 --> 00:39:47,400
like that. 
So I develop in the book must 

756
00:39:47,400 --> 00:39:49,200
politics be War. 
The purely philosophical 

757
00:39:49,200 --> 00:39:53,000
predecessor to this very 
empirical I'll book an account 

758
00:39:53,000 --> 00:39:57,100
or trust for the right reasons 
arguing that a liberal societies

759
00:39:57,100 --> 00:40:00,700
unique and being able to provide
a rational basis. 

760
00:40:00,800 --> 00:40:03,200
For trust, for people with 
diverse perspectives. 

761
00:40:03,900 --> 00:40:07,300
Any society, our state that 
takes sides was going to 

762
00:40:07,300 --> 00:40:10,800
engender reasonable distrust 
between those and control. 

763
00:40:10,800 --> 00:40:13,700
And those who are controlled 
between a hegemon in the 

764
00:40:13,707 --> 00:40:16,900
suppressed group because they 
don't accept each other's 

765
00:40:16,900 --> 00:40:19,100
values. 
So, the suppress group will 

766
00:40:19,100 --> 00:40:21,100
disagree, you know, would 
disagree with the hegemon. 

767
00:40:21,500 --> 00:40:25,100
Will be quote untrustworthy, 
with respect to those values 

768
00:40:25,100 --> 00:40:27,800
when they can get away with it. 
And the subverted group won't 

769
00:40:27,800 --> 00:40:29,900
trust the hegemon. 
Because again, there's just 

770
00:40:30,000 --> 00:40:33,400
you're not following the kind of
common Norms, freely from their 

771
00:40:33,400 --> 00:40:36,100
own perspective, they're 
imposing alien values. 

772
00:40:36,800 --> 00:40:40,400
So then I thought, okay, well 
It's really needs to be two 

773
00:40:40,400 --> 00:40:41,600
books because there's two 
questions. 

774
00:40:41,600 --> 00:40:47,300
One is can a liberal Society in 
general sustained trust in 

775
00:40:47,300 --> 00:40:51,900
principle so that you could even
have a stable level order, 

776
00:40:52,000 --> 00:40:53,400
right? 
But then there's like the 

777
00:40:53,400 --> 00:40:56,800
imminently practical question 
which is that can liberal 

778
00:40:56,800 --> 00:41:00,200
institutions create real trust 
in a reasonably. 

779
00:41:00,600 --> 00:41:05,800
Clearly just way from where we 
are and the aim of this book was

780
00:41:05,800 --> 00:41:10,700
to synthesize the empirical Just
literature's in political 

781
00:41:10,700 --> 00:41:14,000
science and economics with the 
public reason tradition. 

782
00:41:14,300 --> 00:41:17,500
So that we can actually bring 
social science to bear on trying

783
00:41:17,500 --> 00:41:19,800
to figure out when our 
institutions are Justified. 

784
00:41:19,800 --> 00:41:22,800
So a very kind of gaussian theme
of very kind of theme within the

785
00:41:22,800 --> 00:41:25,500
new movement, of philosophy, 
politics, economics, what I'm 

786
00:41:25,500 --> 00:41:28,100
trying to contribute as the 
integration of the study of 

787
00:41:28,100 --> 00:41:30,700
trust, into liberal, political 
thought. 

788
00:41:31,400 --> 00:41:34,300
And so what this book does, is 
it tries to argue that liberal 

789
00:41:34,300 --> 00:41:37,700
institutions can create real 
trust in the real world and in 

790
00:41:37,700 --> 00:41:41,300
fact, do and happen. 
So I run through a lot of the 

791
00:41:41,300 --> 00:41:44,300
trust literature and I look at 
the institutions that I think 

792
00:41:44,300 --> 00:41:47,400
can help to establish trust even
under highly polarized 

793
00:41:47,400 --> 00:41:50,700
conditions. 
So in essence, what I'm saying, 

794
00:41:50,700 --> 00:41:53,500
is the liberal order. 
If we rely on liberal 

795
00:41:53,500 --> 00:41:56,300
institutions in the policy tools
within liberal Democratic 

796
00:41:56,300 --> 00:42:01,400
capitalism that we can restore 
trust and we can reduce 

797
00:42:01,400 --> 00:42:04,800
polymerization. 
There are a lot of complications

798
00:42:04,800 --> 00:42:08,700
though when this comes to policy
making and I was just talking 

799
00:42:08,700 --> 00:42:10,600
with someone. 
Last night about whether a 

800
00:42:10,607 --> 00:42:14,300
public reason, how public reason
view would approach carbon tax 

801
00:42:14,300 --> 00:42:17,000
or carbon emission restrictions 
its complex. 

802
00:42:17,000 --> 00:42:20,700
I think you can publicly justify
them but it's sort of it's sort 

803
00:42:20,700 --> 00:42:24,000
of complicated because there's 
so much we don't know about. 

804
00:42:24,000 --> 00:42:26,600
I mean I can run through it for 
you because I know you'll be 

805
00:42:26,600 --> 00:42:28,800
interested obviously with the 
name of the podcast but 

806
00:42:28,800 --> 00:42:31,600
different people model the world
differently economically and 

807
00:42:31,600 --> 00:42:33,400
socially. 
And they so they develop 

808
00:42:33,400 --> 00:42:34,800
different models. 
And they have different 

809
00:42:34,800 --> 00:42:38,000
predictions for outcomes. 
And this makes it difficult to 

810
00:42:38,000 --> 00:42:40,700
publicly justify. 
Because people think the same 

811
00:42:40,700 --> 00:42:43,400
policy will have really 
different effects and they have 

812
00:42:43,400 --> 00:42:46,300
models of complex systems that 
are decent. 

813
00:42:46,300 --> 00:42:49,000
But that usually don't have a 
lot of predictive power because 

814
00:42:49,000 --> 00:42:51,400
we're dealing with macro-level 
complexity and it's just 

815
00:42:51,400 --> 00:42:53,700
extremely hard to model and 
predict such systems. 

816
00:42:54,000 --> 00:42:57,600
Sometimes it's impossible and in
climate change and you might 

817
00:42:57,600 --> 00:43:00,800
just say, well, you know, people
disagree about how bad, you 

818
00:43:00,800 --> 00:43:03,000
know, the warming is, and what 
the consequences will be. 

819
00:43:03,300 --> 00:43:06,500
But I think there's a pretty 
compelling argument that all 

820
00:43:06,500 --> 00:43:08,500
perspectives, should be worried 
about it, particularly 

821
00:43:08,500 --> 00:43:11,400
libertarian. 
Perspectives because a lot of 

822
00:43:11,400 --> 00:43:13,700
climate change is going to 
violate a lot of property rights

823
00:43:13,700 --> 00:43:16,300
or lead to a lot of property 
rights violations, like Wars and

824
00:43:16,300 --> 00:43:22,400
conflicts now, the reasonable 
libertarian position is, I think

825
00:43:22,400 --> 00:43:26,500
the kind of Matt Ridley, I think
Libertarians should basically be

826
00:43:26,500 --> 00:43:29,200
with a natural scientists are, 
but if you wanted to get on the 

827
00:43:29,200 --> 00:43:32,800
outer bounds, you'd be a mooc 
warmer like, Matt Ridley and 

828
00:43:32,800 --> 00:43:36,200
think that the we are causing 
some climate change through 

829
00:43:36,200 --> 00:43:39,200
human activity, but it's going 
to remain in a 2 degree Celsius.

830
00:43:39,600 --> 00:43:42,700
Here's the problem with that 
argument suppose there's an 80% 

831
00:43:42,700 --> 00:43:46,000
chance that it's true suppose 
there's a 10% chance. 

832
00:43:46,000 --> 00:43:48,100
We go over four degrees Celsius 
and warming. 

833
00:43:48,700 --> 00:43:50,200
That's going to be a 
catastrophe. 

834
00:43:50,200 --> 00:43:52,200
We have no idea how bad it's 
going to be. 

835
00:43:52,500 --> 00:43:55,300
Even if we see the clouds, we're
going to have massive ocean 

836
00:43:55,300 --> 00:43:58,800
acidification thinning of 
permafrost methane, you know, 

837
00:43:58,800 --> 00:44:03,400
explosions, massive extinctions 
of animals, people still put a 

838
00:44:03,400 --> 00:44:05,700
b. 
So the thought is that it's, 

839
00:44:05,700 --> 00:44:09,200
there's a massive risk aversion 
argument. 

840
00:44:09,400 --> 00:44:13,000
For restricting carbon plus 
Libertarians tend to be very 

841
00:44:13,000 --> 00:44:15,400
optimistic about Innovations on 
the market. 

842
00:44:15,700 --> 00:44:19,500
So they're anticipated costs for
carbon taxes. 

843
00:44:19,500 --> 00:44:22,300
And carbon emissions, take that 
into account, it might be the 

844
00:44:22,300 --> 00:44:24,300
case that we're able to innovate
around it. 

845
00:44:24,300 --> 00:44:27,500
Not unlike we did with CFCs, 
right? 

846
00:44:27,500 --> 00:44:29,800
So, you know, we were able to 
bring that problem under a lot 

847
00:44:29,800 --> 00:44:31,700
of control. 
Now reducing carbon emissions is

848
00:44:31,700 --> 00:44:35,900
going to be tough but you know, 
suppose we tell Exxon hey we're 

849
00:44:35,900 --> 00:44:39,100
going to replace, you know your 
corporate tax rate with a carbon

850
00:44:39,100 --> 00:44:41,100
tax. 
Acts and the less carbon you 

851
00:44:41,100 --> 00:44:44,700
omit the last actual pay and get
all your scientists on it. 

852
00:44:44,700 --> 00:44:47,600
Because, you know, if you figure
out how to get to zero carbon, 

853
00:44:47,600 --> 00:44:50,000
you'll never pay taxes again or 
something you won't pay taxes 

854
00:44:50,000 --> 00:44:51,700
for a generation or something 
like that. 

855
00:44:51,900 --> 00:44:54,200
Just give them the dang 
incentive to figure out how to 

856
00:44:54,200 --> 00:44:57,400
do it and I think that can 
clearly be publicly Justified 

857
00:44:57,400 --> 00:44:59,900
because carbon emissions are a 
negative externality. 

858
00:45:00,200 --> 00:45:02,000
Their threats to property 
rights, a Libertarian 

859
00:45:02,000 --> 00:45:04,000
perspective. 
Every other perspective is open 

860
00:45:04,000 --> 00:45:07,600
to carbon emission controls in 
principle, there may be some 

861
00:45:07,600 --> 00:45:11,100
cost of growth but the If we go 
over 4 degrees Celsius, they're 

862
00:45:11,100 --> 00:45:14,100
going to be big cost to growth 
because, you know, we could even

863
00:45:14,100 --> 00:45:19,000
have really, massive death, heat
waves more natural disasters. 

864
00:45:19,200 --> 00:45:22,400
The destruction of a lot of, you
know, being able to have viable 

865
00:45:22,400 --> 00:45:25,800
sea life that can survive in 
areas where people were too 

866
00:45:25,800 --> 00:45:29,500
reliant upon. 
So basically, you know, kind of 

867
00:45:29,700 --> 00:45:33,300
where I am is arguing that you 
can publicly justify 

868
00:45:33,300 --> 00:45:35,200
restrictions on carbon 
emissions, you can justify to 

869
00:45:35,200 --> 00:45:39,100
multiple perspectives on the 
ground of avoiding man. 

870
00:45:39,300 --> 00:45:43,300
Sieve risk. 
So even if it's low probability 

871
00:45:44,100 --> 00:45:48,600
so maybe the libertarian can say
well 10% chance we go over 4 °C 

872
00:45:49,100 --> 00:45:51,600
nightmarishly bad if we do that,
right? 

873
00:45:51,600 --> 00:45:55,600
So I think that's going to be 
sufficient reason to be able to 

874
00:45:55,600 --> 00:45:57,800
justify it even to libertarian 
perspective. 

875
00:45:57,800 --> 00:46:00,900
So there's my public reason 
argument for carbon emissions 

876
00:46:01,000 --> 00:46:03,900
restrictions. 
Well you back let a little bit 

877
00:46:03,900 --> 00:46:07,200
but I'm glad you did because I 
wasn't sure we were going to 

878
00:46:07,200 --> 00:46:10,000
make it to climate change and 
sometimes this No runs the risk 

879
00:46:10,000 --> 00:46:12,900
of not, sometimes I abused the 
name of the show a little bit. 

880
00:46:13,100 --> 00:46:16,900
But okay, I do want to talk 
about this climate stuff before 

881
00:46:16,900 --> 00:46:19,300
it gets too far away. 
I still want to ask foundational

882
00:46:19,300 --> 00:46:21,500
questions about liberalism. 
Yeah. 

883
00:46:21,800 --> 00:46:24,800
Is it actually neutral for 
instance? 

884
00:46:24,800 --> 00:46:28,000
I think of like marxian 
Scholars, making the claim that 

885
00:46:28,000 --> 00:46:31,100
liberalism presupposes 
neutrality but it's smuggles in 

886
00:46:31,100 --> 00:46:33,500
things like property rights that
are not actually neutral. 

887
00:46:33,900 --> 00:46:36,200
This is a way of protecting the 
bourgeoisie. 

888
00:46:36,200 --> 00:46:39,100
It's a society dominated by 
moneyed interests. 

889
00:46:39,300 --> 00:46:40,600
Isn't neutral. 
This Is A Lie. 

890
00:46:40,600 --> 00:46:43,400
This is sort of an anyone who 
doesn't believe it is a victim 

891
00:46:43,400 --> 00:46:45,900
of false consciousness. 
That's maybe a classical Mark, 

892
00:46:45,900 --> 00:46:47,700
seen interpretation of 
liberalism. 

893
00:46:48,000 --> 00:46:49,200
What do you say to something 
like that? 

894
00:46:49,600 --> 00:46:53,100
Well, I mean, the difficulty 
that marks have is the status of

895
00:46:53,100 --> 00:46:56,800
moral theory and their view. 
So if you're really classical 

896
00:46:56,800 --> 00:47:00,300
Marxist, you're going to have to
be a kind of moral relativist, 

897
00:47:00,300 --> 00:47:03,500
animal, constructivist and even 
maybe in the mall nihilist. 

898
00:47:03,800 --> 00:47:07,500
So when you push marxists to 
actually give more foundations 

899
00:47:07,500 --> 00:47:10,800
of their view, they Oftentimes, 
we'll go perfectionist. 

900
00:47:10,800 --> 00:47:13,400
So the effectively say, well, 
socialism is about promoting 

901
00:47:13,400 --> 00:47:16,000
human well-being, but then you 
can just ask the question. 

902
00:47:16,000 --> 00:47:17,700
Well, Marxist, you're all about 
equality. 

903
00:47:17,700 --> 00:47:20,300
So what do you do when people 
disagree about well-being? 

904
00:47:20,800 --> 00:47:23,400
And then, they could say one or 
two things if they say, well, 

905
00:47:24,100 --> 00:47:26,400
we're going to go ahead, then 
you can say, well, that's some 

906
00:47:26,400 --> 00:47:30,700
dominating others, even by your 
own lights, but if they say no, 

907
00:47:30,700 --> 00:47:34,200
then we got the liberal hook in 
them and can bring them over. 

908
00:47:34,600 --> 00:47:37,800
And so, then the question is, 
well, what about, you know, if 

909
00:47:37,800 --> 00:47:40,800
you decide that you're not just 
Going to take a sectarian stand 

910
00:47:40,800 --> 00:47:43,800
for one Doctrine. 
Can you be completely neutral 

911
00:47:43,800 --> 00:47:45,200
between views? 
No. 

912
00:47:45,200 --> 00:47:46,600
No. 
Liberals ever said, we can be 

913
00:47:46,600 --> 00:47:48,800
completely neutral. 
In fact, it's not even clearly 

914
00:47:48,800 --> 00:47:51,500
coherent and I know a lot of 
critics of liberalism says yeah 

915
00:47:51,500 --> 00:47:54,100
you came actually neutral so 
it's an incoherent ideal. 

916
00:47:54,500 --> 00:47:57,900
That is wrong Critics on the 
right, like to make this claim 

917
00:47:57,900 --> 00:48:01,500
to, it's not, that's correct. 
And it is an exaggeration of a 

918
00:48:01,508 --> 00:48:03,300
Liberal site. 
When I say that I'm a 

919
00:48:03,308 --> 00:48:06,100
neutralist, I see that. 
I'm a contextual neutralist. 

920
00:48:06,300 --> 00:48:09,600
So, what you do is you look at 
the series of view, Is that you 

921
00:48:09,600 --> 00:48:12,400
think a respectable exercises of
practical, theoretical, 

922
00:48:12,400 --> 00:48:14,600
rationality, right? 
People would kind of part of a 

923
00:48:14,600 --> 00:48:16,400
tradition of thought. 
They're thinking the spoon and 

924
00:48:16,400 --> 00:48:19,300
honest way, they're living by 
the norms and values of their 

925
00:48:19,300 --> 00:48:23,200
communities or groups. 
And the idea is you try to find 

926
00:48:23,200 --> 00:48:25,700
institutions that are neutral 
between those groups. 

927
00:48:26,100 --> 00:48:29,100
Not that are neutral in every 
sense of the term, but they can 

928
00:48:29,100 --> 00:48:31,800
be justified to each perspective
but that's going to vary based 

929
00:48:31,800 --> 00:48:34,400
on the society. 
So you know what public 

930
00:48:34,400 --> 00:48:36,600
justification is going to look 
like in a society, where 

931
00:48:36,600 --> 00:48:39,100
everyone's a socialist is one 
thing more. 

932
00:48:39,300 --> 00:48:41,100
Everyone's the Libertarians 
going to be the other. 

933
00:48:41,200 --> 00:48:43,900
However, people are not going to
agree about whether 

934
00:48:43,900 --> 00:48:45,900
libertarianism or socialism is 
true. 

935
00:48:45,900 --> 00:48:47,400
I'm sorry, Libertarians, 
listening. 

936
00:48:47,400 --> 00:48:50,100
I'm sorry, socialist listening, 
you're never going to convince 

937
00:48:50,100 --> 00:48:52,100
everybody. 
You will probably never convince

938
00:48:52,100 --> 00:48:57,200
a majority Marxist came to power
through a North Korean revolt 

939
00:48:57,200 --> 00:49:01,600
and Rule and for an oppression 
and Libertarians have never come

940
00:49:01,600 --> 00:49:05,300
to power at all in any 
significant way but in the 

941
00:49:05,300 --> 00:49:08,100
modern era, maybe Gladstone was 
like kind of libertarian or 

942
00:49:08,107 --> 00:49:09,900
something. 
So, So if we're never going to 

943
00:49:09,900 --> 00:49:14,300
agree about the good and we're 
about, you know, the Divinity of

944
00:49:14,300 --> 00:49:16,800
Christ, whom we're never going 
to disagree, about agree about 

945
00:49:16,800 --> 00:49:18,900
natural property rights. 
We're never going to agree 

946
00:49:18,900 --> 00:49:21,900
about, you know, this class 
based analysis is a society, 

947
00:49:21,900 --> 00:49:24,100
whether history is a history of 
class struggle or something like

948
00:49:24,100 --> 00:49:26,000
that. 
How do we resolve our 

949
00:49:26,000 --> 00:49:27,500
differences? 
Well, why do I to resolve? 

950
00:49:27,500 --> 00:49:31,200
Our differences is to have 
Democratic choice, we just get 

951
00:49:31,200 --> 00:49:35,300
together and we vote. 
But the problem here is that 

952
00:49:35,300 --> 00:49:39,100
it's pretty clear that sometimes
the votes go wrong and we do 

953
00:49:39,100 --> 00:49:41,700
have Some kind of standard for 
saying, when we got the vote 

954
00:49:41,700 --> 00:49:46,600
wrong, and the mother problem is
just incredibly difficult for 

955
00:49:46,600 --> 00:49:48,900
Democratic deliberation, to lead
to agreement. 

956
00:49:49,100 --> 00:49:53,600
And so, to find a way to kind of
govern our Collective lives so 

957
00:49:53,600 --> 00:49:56,800
that we are respecting, our 
freedom and equality, and the 

958
00:49:56,800 --> 00:49:58,500
concerns of public 
justification. 

959
00:49:59,000 --> 00:50:02,600
So, one of the arguments Jerry 
makes is that the way that we 

960
00:50:02,600 --> 00:50:06,100
actually resolve a lot of 
insuperable collective disputes 

961
00:50:06,100 --> 00:50:09,000
is to devolve disputes to the 
individual. 

962
00:50:09,200 --> 00:50:11,700
And group level to have way 
called jurisdictional rights. 

963
00:50:12,100 --> 00:50:15,600
So instead of, you know, 
collectively deciding on how 

964
00:50:15,600 --> 00:50:18,400
we're all going to live in our 
houses, you know, just having 

965
00:50:18,400 --> 00:50:22,100
one big government on housing 
complex right fighting over what

966
00:50:22,100 --> 00:50:24,500
the rules are whether we can 
smoke or not or what kind of 

967
00:50:24,508 --> 00:50:28,100
carpet we can have right? 
We decentralize those choices, 

968
00:50:28,300 --> 00:50:32,400
right? 
And the key to decentralization 

969
00:50:32,400 --> 00:50:35,400
and to people being able to 
reconcile with their different 

970
00:50:35,400 --> 00:50:39,500
uses of their partition of 
social space, is the Private 

971
00:50:39,500 --> 00:50:43,600
property and exchange. 
So the rationale for democracy 

972
00:50:43,600 --> 00:50:46,600
and the rationale for private 
property are basically the same,

973
00:50:46,800 --> 00:50:49,200
which is that there are ways of 
reconciling people with 

974
00:50:49,200 --> 00:50:51,400
different perspectives, 
sometimes we have to make 

975
00:50:51,400 --> 00:50:54,400
Collective decisions, sometimes 
we can make our own decisions 

976
00:50:54,900 --> 00:50:59,500
and so Democratic capitalism is 
actually kind of neutral because

977
00:50:59,500 --> 00:51:02,000
it's the way of resolving 
disputes between those who 

978
00:51:02,000 --> 00:51:04,500
disagree about the good, and who
disagree about Justice, it's on 

979
00:51:04,500 --> 00:51:08,300
maximally neutral, nothing is, 
but that's fine because that 

980
00:51:08,300 --> 00:51:10,900
wasn't the point. 
Aunt, what do we do when we do 

981
00:51:10,900 --> 00:51:13,600
disagree, though? 
I imagined idea that we should 

982
00:51:13,600 --> 00:51:17,900
decentralize and allow a group 
like white nationalist to have 

983
00:51:17,900 --> 00:51:20,800
their own private Idaho, just 
like the Gus Van Sant movie. 

984
00:51:21,100 --> 00:51:22,900
I guess that works. 
Is that allowed? 

985
00:51:22,900 --> 00:51:24,400
Should we allow something like 
that? 

986
00:51:24,400 --> 00:51:26,700
Or how should we disagree in a 
productive way? 

987
00:51:27,300 --> 00:51:30,500
Another thing that's important 
is that even if certain abstract

988
00:51:30,500 --> 00:51:34,200
rights are publicly Justified, 
like say freedom of speech, the 

989
00:51:34,200 --> 00:51:37,300
details of how those apply are 
going to be controversial. 

990
00:51:37,500 --> 00:51:41,800
And so that's why many We have 
to use democracy, you know, or 

991
00:51:41,800 --> 00:51:45,900
the Judiciary to resolve 
disputes about rights and that's

992
00:51:45,900 --> 00:51:49,000
how those institutions get 
publicly publicly Justified is 

993
00:51:49,000 --> 00:51:52,600
that we have reasonable 
conflicting interpretations of 

994
00:51:52,600 --> 00:51:55,600
our basic rights and so those 
have to be resolved through some

995
00:51:55,600 --> 00:51:57,600
kind of collective decision 
procedure. 

996
00:51:57,800 --> 00:52:01,100
There's also the option of using
federalism just to allow people 

997
00:52:01,200 --> 00:52:06,100
polities to very, although 
Federalism is very very very 

998
00:52:06,100 --> 00:52:08,200
under discussed in the public 
reason, literature. 

999
00:52:08,800 --> 00:52:11,600
Hell Even I had to cut that 
chapter out of my book, boy, 

1000
00:52:11,600 --> 00:52:13,900
that I'm going to talk about it.
I know you have a lot in there 

1001
00:52:13,900 --> 00:52:16,100
about how like, I wish I could, 
but there's just not enough 

1002
00:52:16,100 --> 00:52:17,600
data. 
It's something like this, right.

1003
00:52:17,600 --> 00:52:18,600
That's right. 
That's right. 

1004
00:52:18,600 --> 00:52:19,400
That's right. 
That's right. 

1005
00:52:19,900 --> 00:52:23,500
So that's kind of the story. 
I mean I know there's a number 

1006
00:52:23,500 --> 00:52:27,900
of different steps but I think 
they connect, we can publicly 

1007
00:52:27,900 --> 00:52:30,300
justify abstract rights when 
we're aware that we disagree 

1008
00:52:30,300 --> 00:52:32,300
about Justice in the good 
because we want to be able to 

1009
00:52:32,300 --> 00:52:34,700
trust each other anyway because 
the benefits of social trust are

1010
00:52:34,700 --> 00:52:40,500
staggering and the result is 
That some institutions that 

1011
00:52:40,500 --> 00:52:45,700
people don't think our ideal 
even ideally just but ones that 

1012
00:52:45,700 --> 00:52:48,600
they can live with ones that 
they can live with. 

1013
00:52:48,900 --> 00:52:50,400
That's what's key. 
I think. 

1014
00:52:50,900 --> 00:52:54,300
So you're thinking of that the 
type of federalism I described 

1015
00:52:54,300 --> 00:52:57,300
would not be publicly Justified 
and we shouldn't accept it. 

1016
00:52:57,900 --> 00:52:59,400
Yeah. 
I mean if we think that these 

1017
00:52:59,400 --> 00:53:03,500
centralization is going to lead 
to a majority violating the 

1018
00:53:03,508 --> 00:53:07,300
human rights, the basic human 
rights of the minority, then 

1019
00:53:07,300 --> 00:53:10,900
that's a reason against Ization.
So, like one of my views is 

1020
00:53:10,900 --> 00:53:12,600
this? 
Like we should have way more 

1021
00:53:12,600 --> 00:53:15,400
states rights, but racial policy
should be Federal. 

1022
00:53:16,100 --> 00:53:20,100
So the big worry in 
decentralisation is it a lot of 

1023
00:53:20,100 --> 00:53:21,400
the Southern States in 
particular? 

1024
00:53:21,400 --> 00:53:23,700
We'll just go back to racist 
Moore's very quickly. 

1025
00:53:24,200 --> 00:53:26,900
But that doesn't mean we can't 
decentralized drug policy, 

1026
00:53:27,200 --> 00:53:29,400
doesn't mean we can't be 
centralized health. 

1027
00:53:29,400 --> 00:53:33,000
Insurance policy doesn't mean we
can't decentralize education 

1028
00:53:33,000 --> 00:53:35,000
which we already do to a large 
extent. 

1029
00:53:35,300 --> 00:53:38,200
It just means that when it comes
to racial Equity, maybe the feds

1030
00:53:38,200 --> 00:53:41,300
have to step in. 
And, you know, securing voting 

1031
00:53:41,300 --> 00:53:42,800
rights and those kinds of 
things. 

1032
00:53:42,800 --> 00:53:46,100
So, you know, that's what I 
would say in the United States, 

1033
00:53:46,100 --> 00:53:48,000
you know, we do have a systemic 
racism problem. 

1034
00:53:48,000 --> 00:53:51,800
It is hard to know exactly how 
much it is because these are 

1035
00:53:51,800 --> 00:53:55,400
very difficult questions 
measures or controversial. 

1036
00:53:55,400 --> 00:53:59,400
But, you know, if we're worried 
about bigotry and a small part 

1037
00:53:59,400 --> 00:54:02,600
and we think that the big part 
can correct the bigotry in the 

1038
00:54:02,600 --> 00:54:05,100
small part. 
Then, you know, you can keep 

1039
00:54:05,100 --> 00:54:09,000
those things centralized. 
And I think in the way that the 

1040
00:54:09,000 --> 00:54:12,100
United Knighted states works is 
that the federal government 

1041
00:54:12,100 --> 00:54:14,500
tends to be less bigoted than 
the state governments? 

1042
00:54:15,200 --> 00:54:18,900
It might be the reverse, right? 
I mean, it potentially and then 

1043
00:54:18,900 --> 00:54:21,600
which case, then we would want a
decentralized to protect racial 

1044
00:54:21,600 --> 00:54:24,500
minorities, but the 
circumstances in the United 

1045
00:54:24,500 --> 00:54:27,600
States, who decides to wear that
just hasn't historically been 

1046
00:54:27,600 --> 00:54:30,800
the case. 
So, and indeed black Americans 

1047
00:54:30,800 --> 00:54:32,900
trust the federal government 
more than they trust. 

1048
00:54:33,000 --> 00:54:36,400
Most people 17 percent of black 
Americans say, most people can 

1049
00:54:36,400 --> 00:54:39,000
be trusted as opposed to 46 
percent of whites. 

1050
00:54:40,000 --> 00:54:42,100
Wow, that's that's quite a 
statistic. 

1051
00:54:42,500 --> 00:54:45,000
It's very, very sad and it's 
something I'm going to we're 

1052
00:54:45,000 --> 00:54:48,400
going to be studying empirically
because it's both to some extent

1053
00:54:48,400 --> 00:54:51,400
Justified. 
But it's also very very harmful 

1054
00:54:51,700 --> 00:54:54,900
because when you were low trust,
there's a lot of opportunities 

1055
00:54:54,900 --> 00:54:57,800
you miss. 
So, there's is a kind of what in

1056
00:54:57,800 --> 00:54:59,600
philosophy. 
We call epistemic Injustice, 

1057
00:54:59,600 --> 00:55:02,400
against the black community, 
because there are grounds for 

1058
00:55:02,400 --> 00:55:06,000
distrust, but the distrust harms
them in a way that's unjust. 

1059
00:55:06,600 --> 00:55:09,500
So, it's a double blind. 
Yeah. 

1060
00:55:09,800 --> 00:55:12,900
So for listeners, we've been 
pretty high falutin here. 

1061
00:55:13,200 --> 00:55:16,500
Talking, you know, 
graduate-level philosophy, 

1062
00:55:16,600 --> 00:55:18,700
Rawls. 
And in some degree of detail. 

1063
00:55:19,200 --> 00:55:23,200
If they care about rebuilding 
trust, what are some avenues 

1064
00:55:23,200 --> 00:55:24,500
that you think might be 
productive? 

1065
00:55:25,300 --> 00:55:29,600
Besides the generic stuff of 
trying to allow for more freedom

1066
00:55:29,600 --> 00:55:33,800
of Association to have stable 
protections for markets and lots

1067
00:55:33,800 --> 00:55:37,900
of areas of making sure that the
welfare state is efficient and 

1068
00:55:37,900 --> 00:55:41,900
as addressing very deep set. 
Need trying to preserve the 

1069
00:55:41,900 --> 00:55:45,600
Integrity of the election 
process, reducing corruption, 

1070
00:55:45,600 --> 00:55:47,300
the legal system particular in 
the police. 

1071
00:55:48,300 --> 00:55:51,500
So that's added, you know, a 
fairly High restricting kind of 

1072
00:55:51,500 --> 00:55:53,300
rent seeking and stuff at the 
federal level. 

1073
00:55:53,500 --> 00:55:56,500
But those are very high level. 
So maybe we could talk about. 

1074
00:55:56,500 --> 00:55:58,600
I'll talk about some more 
specific stuff. 

1075
00:55:59,000 --> 00:56:02,900
One of the things I'm banging on
about a lot is housing reform of

1076
00:56:02,900 --> 00:56:07,200
making housing cheaper to build 
primarily through markets, but 

1077
00:56:07,200 --> 00:56:09,200
there are some ways, maybe 
housing doctors could be used 

1078
00:56:09,200 --> 00:56:12,200
for that. 
Well, but really ending a lot of

1079
00:56:12,300 --> 00:56:15,800
the not in my backyard zoning. 
That makes them possible people 

1080
00:56:15,800 --> 00:56:18,500
to live in cities. 
Here's why a lot of trust in 

1081
00:56:18,500 --> 00:56:21,900
government is based on two 
different assessments, how much 

1082
00:56:21,900 --> 00:56:24,400
economic inequality there is 
because a lot of people on the 

1083
00:56:24,400 --> 00:56:27,200
left, think that's just an 
itself, a sign of unfairness. 

1084
00:56:27,200 --> 00:56:30,200
So do some on the right but also
economic growth, people think 

1085
00:56:30,200 --> 00:56:32,500
it's one of the functions of 
government to make sure that 

1086
00:56:32,500 --> 00:56:34,500
they're economically prosperous 
and increasingly. 

1087
00:56:34,500 --> 00:56:36,500
So so you want more broad-based 
growth. 

1088
00:56:36,900 --> 00:56:39,600
But housing restrictions are 
really, really bad. 

1089
00:56:39,800 --> 00:56:42,900
For growth in inequality one 
they for growth, they hold back 

1090
00:56:42,900 --> 00:56:46,100
the division of labor because 
workers can't move into cities 

1091
00:56:46,100 --> 00:56:48,900
and further extend the division 
of labor and cities, you know, a

1092
00:56:48,908 --> 00:56:52,700
lesson we've known since Adam 
Smith at least but it's also the

1093
00:56:52,700 --> 00:56:55,500
case, that it hurts economic 
equality because rich people, 

1094
00:56:55,500 --> 00:56:58,300
essentially redistribute upward 
by controlling land and who can 

1095
00:56:58,300 --> 00:57:02,100
build, we're probably, you know,
Matt broglie estimated in 

1096
00:57:02,100 --> 00:57:04,500
response the Pekingese top that 
about two-thirds of the 

1097
00:57:04,500 --> 00:57:06,800
increase, inequality in the 
United States which due to real 

1098
00:57:06,800 --> 00:57:11,100
estate, not due to income. 
So if If we lower the price of 

1099
00:57:11,100 --> 00:57:14,700
housing, we had zoning reform, 
real estate zoning reform. 

1100
00:57:14,800 --> 00:57:17,700
We can increase growth and 
increasing economic equality at 

1101
00:57:17,700 --> 00:57:20,900
the same time. 
That's very hard to do, but it's

1102
00:57:20,900 --> 00:57:23,900
something that I think would it.
Strengthen trust in institutions

1103
00:57:24,100 --> 00:57:27,100
from multiple perspectives, do 
people feel like they can't get 

1104
00:57:27,100 --> 00:57:28,800
a foot on the ladder because of 
this. 

1105
00:57:28,800 --> 00:57:31,500
And then there's, that's right 
support that their government is

1106
00:57:31,500 --> 00:57:35,200
not being responsible. 
And I even think that kids often

1107
00:57:35,200 --> 00:57:39,200
times at can't prove this yet 
that kids feel like their 

1108
00:57:39,200 --> 00:57:42,000
parents. 
Raishin hasn't done their job by

1109
00:57:42,000 --> 00:57:44,600
leaving them with huge amounts 
of debts and expenses. 

1110
00:57:45,000 --> 00:57:47,600
So I think one source of 
distrust is I think that 

1111
00:57:47,600 --> 00:57:50,500
Millennials distrust Boomers. 
Yeah, there's a lot of that 

1112
00:57:50,500 --> 00:57:52,000
going around. 
Yeah. 

1113
00:57:52,000 --> 00:57:54,100
Oh so many Express attacks in 
the culture. 

1114
00:57:54,100 --> 00:57:57,200
I mean it is from a place of 
resentment and mistrust in the 

1115
00:57:57,200 --> 00:57:59,900
sense that the Boomers lived it 
up and ate the seed corn. 

1116
00:58:02,200 --> 00:58:04,700
Yeah. 
Do you think the more basic 

1117
00:58:04,700 --> 00:58:08,500
quotidian, join the Elks Lodge, 
go to your neighborhood church, 

1118
00:58:08,600 --> 00:58:11,800
know your neighbors names and 
their kids names stuff like that

1119
00:58:11,800 --> 00:58:15,800
helps to yeah, I do particularly
passing on your children. 

1120
00:58:16,000 --> 00:58:19,700
So, you know, I like to think of
this analogy, you know, the 

1121
00:58:19,700 --> 00:58:24,300
image of someone, you know, 
coming to talk to a parent and 

1122
00:58:24,300 --> 00:58:27,500
the kids kind of hiding behind 
them because they're shy and not

1123
00:58:27,500 --> 00:58:30,200
sure how to react that happens 
in my think that sometimes. 

1124
00:58:30,200 --> 00:58:32,400
Yeah, yeah. 
So, you know, It happens to my 

1125
00:58:32,400 --> 00:58:34,900
three kids, you know, they, 
someone new comes in the house 

1126
00:58:34,900 --> 00:58:37,600
and they hide and, you know, 
until they see how we interact 

1127
00:58:37,600 --> 00:58:39,400
and they gradually come out and 
warm up. 

1128
00:58:39,400 --> 00:58:42,800
So kids learn to trust from how 
their parents interact with 

1129
00:58:42,800 --> 00:58:44,600
strangers. 
Is it going Theory? 

1130
00:58:44,600 --> 00:58:48,000
And if you're interacting with 
strangers, a lot and you're 

1131
00:58:48,000 --> 00:58:50,200
interacting with people, they 
don't necessarily know a lot 

1132
00:58:50,200 --> 00:58:53,100
like in an association like a 
church or a lodge or something 

1133
00:58:53,100 --> 00:58:57,100
like that, and you're 
particularly doing say service 

1134
00:58:57,100 --> 00:58:59,500
work through a church or you're 
interacting with the poor and 

1135
00:58:59,500 --> 00:59:01,700
things like that, that can be 
trust-building. 

1136
00:59:02,000 --> 00:59:04,500
Kids and that can over time race
trust. 

1137
00:59:04,500 --> 00:59:08,100
So the practice of freedom of 
Association, not just the bare 

1138
00:59:08,100 --> 00:59:11,600
having of it, but the exercise 
of that, right, particularly 

1139
00:59:11,600 --> 00:59:14,500
with institutions that are 
integrated and networked in the 

1140
00:59:14,500 --> 00:59:18,200
community can build social cost.
I think it also builds trust in 

1141
00:59:18,200 --> 00:59:20,800
government, does people learn to
interact with it and learn to 

1142
00:59:20,800 --> 00:59:24,100
affect it for the good? 
So, you know, I think that is 

1143
00:59:24,100 --> 00:59:26,700
very, very important. 
I think that probably has a 

1144
00:59:26,700 --> 00:59:29,300
pretty big effect on kids. 
It doesn't look like it has an 

1145
00:59:29,300 --> 00:59:32,800
effect on the adults, but Social
trust, doesn't seem to be that 

1146
00:59:32,800 --> 00:59:35,400
affected by anything among 
adults because social trust 

1147
00:59:35,400 --> 00:59:38,000
attitudes tend to be things that
seem to be fixed in early 

1148
00:59:38,000 --> 00:59:41,700
adulthood and childhood. 
I know you have to run here 

1149
00:59:41,700 --> 00:59:44,200
pretty soon. 
I'm wondering if you could take 

1150
00:59:44,200 --> 00:59:47,900
the temperature of the country. 
Do you think there's good 

1151
00:59:47,900 --> 00:59:51,000
reasons to hope for increase 
trust or you still pretty Grim? 

1152
00:59:52,000 --> 00:59:55,200
I'm grim and hopeful so I'm 
Graham in the sense that I think

1153
00:59:55,200 --> 00:59:57,000
trust is going to remain pretty 
low. 

1154
00:59:57,200 --> 01:00:00,200
I'm hopeful and then I think 
Biden is going to slow its 

1155
01:00:00,200 --> 01:00:01,000
decline. 
Bye. 

1156
01:00:01,500 --> 01:00:04,900
Or maybe pause it restoring. 
It's going to take a long time. 

1157
01:00:05,400 --> 01:00:07,200
Millennials are extremely 
distrusting. 

1158
01:00:07,200 --> 01:00:09,800
So we're going to have to build 
circumstances where the Next 

1159
01:00:09,800 --> 01:00:12,600
Generation can become more 
trusting because falling trust 

1160
01:00:12,600 --> 01:00:16,000
is like a cohort effect, like 
the you know the silent 

1161
01:00:16,000 --> 01:00:18,800
generation, you know, it's more 
trusting the Boomers she's more 

1162
01:00:18,800 --> 01:00:21,100
trusting than genetics, who's 
more trusting than Millennials 

1163
01:00:21,500 --> 01:00:23,900
and those attitudes from the 
lock-in and adulthood. 

1164
01:00:23,900 --> 01:00:27,300
So we have to create a more 
trusting younger generation and 

1165
01:00:27,300 --> 01:00:29,500
I'm not quite sure how we're 
going to do that, so that's 

1166
01:00:29,500 --> 01:00:32,900
difficult. 
Her, if there's less manifest 

1167
01:00:32,900 --> 01:00:35,800
corruption and people who are 
powerful getting away with a lot

1168
01:00:35,800 --> 01:00:38,700
of garbage that will help trust 
in the system. 

1169
01:00:39,000 --> 01:00:41,200
So, one of the things I'm hoping
will happen, is it? 

1170
01:00:41,200 --> 01:00:44,800
I think that even though people 
who were fans of trump, we need 

1171
01:00:44,800 --> 01:00:48,500
to punish powerful officials for
basic more violations. 

1172
01:00:48,800 --> 01:00:50,600
They have to punish your leads 
for violations. 

1173
01:00:51,500 --> 01:00:54,100
So that the sense is that 
everyone's following the basic 

1174
01:00:54,100 --> 01:00:56,500
Norms because I believe stop 
following the Norms. 

1175
01:00:56,500 --> 01:01:00,200
They rode the norms, and that 
makes trust harder, because then

1176
01:01:00,200 --> 01:01:02,600
it's well, People aren't 
following the Norms that exist. 

1177
01:01:02,600 --> 01:01:05,300
So why should I can't count on? 
So, one thing I think that's 

1178
01:01:05,300 --> 01:01:08,800
going to be important. 
In the immediate term is simply 

1179
01:01:08,800 --> 01:01:12,100
punishing. 
Those who violate basic Norms to

1180
01:01:12,100 --> 01:01:15,400
reinforce those Norms. 
So, those Norms are the basis 

1181
01:01:15,400 --> 01:01:18,200
for people learning to trust. 
Each other is the powerful can 

1182
01:01:18,200 --> 01:01:21,400
just do whatever they want. 
I think it's a problem for trust

1183
01:01:21,400 --> 01:01:24,600
because it arose, the basis of 
trust, which is norm compliance.

1184
01:01:25,500 --> 01:01:28,200
Okay. 
Tentative nuanced answer. 

1185
01:01:28,200 --> 01:01:33,800
But it really Justified if you 
wanted to steer someone to your 

1186
01:01:33,800 --> 01:01:36,700
work and to follow up. 
I think this this new book is 

1187
01:01:36,700 --> 01:01:39,300
where you would want them to go.
Yes, yes, that's right. 

1188
01:01:39,300 --> 01:01:41,800
That's right, I've written it so
that it can be read by non 

1189
01:01:41,800 --> 01:01:44,600
philosophers so the more 
philosophical stuff there's an 

1190
01:01:44,600 --> 01:01:48,900
asterisk next to those sections.
So I think a lot of people you 

1191
01:01:48,900 --> 01:01:52,600
know any I think anyone with a 
college degree can get through 

1192
01:01:52,600 --> 01:01:55,500
it pretty easily. 
If you're you know graduate I'm 

1193
01:01:55,500 --> 01:01:58,400
at it's not hard at all. 
So I think anyone can benefit 

1194
01:01:58,400 --> 01:02:00,900
from it. 
I would say everyone could 

1195
01:02:00,900 --> 01:02:03,500
benefit. 
I think a lot from I worked 

1196
01:02:03,500 --> 01:02:06,700
really hard on the second 
chapter, which is an overview of

1197
01:02:06,700 --> 01:02:09,000
thousands of papers in the trust
literature. 

1198
01:02:09,400 --> 01:02:12,300
Not all of which I've read, but 
I've read meta-analyses, and 

1199
01:02:12,300 --> 01:02:14,700
different areas. 
I'm very proud of that chapter. 

1200
01:02:14,700 --> 01:02:18,200
I think people would like to be 
able to just see that chapters 

1201
01:02:18,200 --> 01:02:20,400
just pretty big, but it's a 
great reference. 

1202
01:02:21,000 --> 01:02:23,000
The beginning of the book, I 
talk a lot about trust and 

1203
01:02:23,000 --> 01:02:25,100
polarization in the epilogue, I 
talk. 

1204
01:02:25,200 --> 01:02:28,200
About how to restore trust. 
There's discussions of trust in 

1205
01:02:28,207 --> 01:02:31,200
institutions throughout, so it's
not just a work of philosophy. 

1206
01:02:31,200 --> 01:02:33,500
It's also a work of political 
science and economics. 

1207
01:02:34,100 --> 01:02:35,800
So I think a lot of different 
perspectives could be 

1208
01:02:35,800 --> 01:02:38,100
interested. 
I think so too. 

1209
01:02:38,100 --> 01:02:41,100
It's amazing literature review. 
There's a, the bibliography 

1210
01:02:41,100 --> 01:02:43,800
here, the works cited, massive 
useful. 

1211
01:02:43,800 --> 01:02:46,300
If you care about this topic, if
you made it this far, you 

1212
01:02:46,300 --> 01:02:49,100
probably do it would help you, 
it would sit well in your 

1213
01:02:49,100 --> 01:02:51,700
library and thanks for being 
here. 

1214
01:02:51,700 --> 01:02:54,100
Kevin. 
Well, thanks so much for having 

1215
01:02:54,100 --> 01:02:55,400
me. 
It was, it was a lot of fun. 

1216
01:02:56,000 --> 01:02:58,900
We got a little bit of climate 
change and I'm really happy. 

1217
01:02:58,900 --> 01:03:02,100
You just went for it. 
And maybe we should talk more 

1218
01:03:02,100 --> 01:03:04,900
about it in the future. 
There's a lot more to do and if 

1219
01:03:04,908 --> 01:03:07,100
we don't have trust I don't 
think action on climate. 

1220
01:03:07,100 --> 01:03:08,800
Change is really going to work 
very well. 

1221
01:03:09,200 --> 01:03:16,300
That's right, that's right. 
But thank you so much for 

1222
01:03:16,300 --> 01:03:18,100
listening. 
If you like the show, please 

1223
01:03:18,100 --> 01:03:20,800
rate and review it in apple 
podcast and or Stitcher. 

1224
01:03:20,800 --> 01:03:22,500
It really helps us a lot to get 
this. 

1225
01:03:22,700 --> 01:03:25,200
Content to a wider audience. 
If you think what we're doing is

1226
01:03:25,200 --> 01:03:28,200
useful, interesting fun. 
Hopefully, all three, we 

1227
01:03:28,200 --> 01:03:29,800
certainly appreciate your rating
and review. 

1228
01:03:30,100 --> 01:03:32,600
You can keep up with Nori at nor
e.com where there is a 

1229
01:03:32,607 --> 01:03:35,000
newsletter that's Nori 
.com/srobiyt. 

1230
01:03:35,200 --> 01:03:37,900
There's podcast, there's a whole
bunch else or you can send us an

1231
01:03:37,900 --> 01:03:42,100
email at podcast at nor e.com. 
We are also now on patreon at 

1232
01:03:42,100 --> 01:03:45,600
patreon.com slash Nori podcasts,
if you'd like more content 

1233
01:03:45,600 --> 01:03:48,300
engagement and community and 
thank you so much for your 

1234
01:03:48,300 --> 01:03:49,000
support.