The Irony of Overlapping Consensus

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

Ally: What we need in order to sustain free speech is each person to come to a principled believe in free speech for their own reasons. There are great defences of free speech coming from both people on the right and people on the left. They're coming from people who are old fashioned, loccian or rolseyan liberals,. People who are utilitarians, like mill mills. And not all utilitaries and defenders of free speech, obviously, but some in that tradition of mill are aristoteliansLike myself, people of different religious backgrounds. That's interesting. Weird coalitions have formed. Yet i'm glad you mentioned rolls as overlapping consensus, because it reminds

Robert P. George is an American legal scholar and political philosopher. The McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, George is considered one of the foremost conservative intellectuals in America, and advocates a theory of natural law consistent with Catholic belief. With Cornel West, he authored a statement on “Truth Seeking, Democracy, and Freedom of Thought and Expression.”

In this week’s conversation, Yascha Mounk and Robert P. George discuss the political philosophy of John Rawls, why democratic republics can’t function without free speech, and what relevance the first principles of conservatism do or don't retain today.

This transcript has been condensed and lightly edited for clarity.

Please do listen and spread the word about The Good Fight.

If you have not yet signed up for our podcast, please do so now by following this link on your phone.

Email: podcast@persuasion.community

Website: http://www.persuasion.community

Podcast production by John Taylor Williams, and Brendan Ruberry

Connect with us!

Spotify | Apple | Google

Twitter: @Yascha_Mounk & @joinpersuasion

Youtube: Yascha Mounk

LinkedIn: Persuasion Community

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices