Wiser Than Yesterday: Book club

The Confessions of Saint AugustineThe book starts off with his early childhood, where he reflects on the inherent violence of children, caused by original sin (chrisitan belief that man is sinful). There’s a parallel with other philosophies. Most philosophies/religions realize that on this basis, humans are flawed. These flaws seem to follow from how we evolved. And so a big part of what these philosophies try and solve is exactly how to overcome our basic urges. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Last Days of SocratesA Philosophy book by Plato that is divided between 4 partsEuthyphroTakes place just before Socrate's trial is about to beginThe ApologyPlato uses his dialogues to tell the story of the trial of Socrates as he energetically defends himself against the charges of heresy and corruption of youthCrito - Socrates friendCrito, has come to help him escape and Socrates counters crito's arguments choosing to stay in prison and accept his fatePhaedoPlato uses Socrates to espouse his belief of the immortality of the soul. Death should be welcome to the philosopher because it is then that he will attain true wisdom and get rid of the distraction of the body.The version we read consisted of The apology and the Phaedo.The ApologyThe Apology reads as essentially a monologue, Plato casts Socrates’ speech as an implied dialogue with his accusers, the assembly, and the larger community of the city. And because the charges call into question Socrates’ lifelong public career as a philosopher, The Apology is Plato’s most explicit defense of philosophical inquiry as essential to the well-being of society.First, Socrates explains why he does what he does. He was told by the oracle of delphi that he was the wisest of all men. He didn’t believe it, because he knew that he knew almost nothiing. So he made iit his mission to find someone wiser than him. ## The PhaedoNothing is written from the point of view of the author - PlatoIn a Platonic dialogue, no single character represents the author’s opinions. Instead, we encounter a series of conversations and speeches in which the characters affirm and deny one another’s statements while engaging in cross-examination. Every statement is subjected to ongoing inquiry; at its conclusion, a dialogue leaves the impression that more avenues for investigation have been opened than existed at the beginning. The character of Socrates, the most likely spokesman for Plato, is typically the sharpest questioner and often seems to have the upper hand. However, even when he presents fully formed theories, they are put forward only as hypotheses to be examined, not as doctrine. In fact, Socrates repeatedly insists that his only wisdom is in knowing what he does not know and in his willingness to join with others in the pursuit of truth. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

We are very grateful for the chance to read and discuss the books this season on the show.As a hot topic we also listened and read a lot of other content we didn't have time to do a full show on but felt it was worth discussing other sources of information and discussing our learnings from a step back.Racism and inequality in the modern world is a hard to understand topic and reading one book is not nearly enough. Hopefully hearing some of the things that helped us and ways of thinking will be helpful to you also. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nonviolent Communication is based on the assumption that all human beings have capacity for compassion and empathy and that people only resort to violence or behavior harmful to others when they do not recognize more effective strategies for meeting needs.The purpose of Nonviolent Communication is to help us connect to ourselves and others in a way that makes being compassionate natural. It is not about making people do what we want, but by creating connections with others so that everyone’s needs are met.Nonviolent Communication theory supposes that all human behavior stems from attempts to meet universal human needs, Connection, Physical Well-Being, Honesty, Play, Peace, Autonomy, Meaningand that these needs are never in conflict; rather, conflict arises when strategies for meeting needs clash. Nonviolent Communication proposes that people should identify shared needs, which are revealed by the thoughts and feelings surrounding these needs, and then they should collaborate to develop strategies and make requests of each other to meet each other's needs. The goal is interpersonal harmony and learning for future cooperation.Nonviolent Communication centers round 2 questions:What is alive in youWhat would make your life more wonderfulMost conflicts between individuals or groups arise from miscommunication about their human needs, due to coercive or manipulative language that aims to induce fear, guilt, shame, etc. These "violent" modes of communication, when used during a conflict, divert the attention of the participants away from clarifying their needs, their feelings, their perceptions, and their requests, thus perpetuating the conflictCertain ways of communicating tend to alienate people from the experience of compassion* Moralistic judgements implying wrongness or badness on the part of people who don't act in harmony with our values* Demands that implicitly or explicitly threaten listeners with blame or punishment if they fail to comply.* Denial of responsibility via language that obscures awareness of personal responsibility. ‘I had to’ because of others, my condition, group pressure, …* Making comparisons* A sense of ‘deserving’How to practice Nonviolent Communication?ObservationThe facts (what we are seeing, hearing, or touching) as distinct from our evaluation of meaning and significance. It is said that "When we combine observation with evaluation others are apt to hear criticism and resist what we are saying."FeelingsFeelings are said to reflect whether we are experiencing our needs as met or unmet. Identifying feelings is said to allow us to more easily connect with one another, and "Allowing ourselves to be vulnerable by expressing our feelings can help resolve conflicts."NeedsUniversal human needs, as distinct from particular strategies for meeting needs. It is posited that "Everything we do is in service of our needs. Connection, Physical Well-Being, Honesty, Play, Peace, Autonomy, MeaningRequestRequest for a specific action, free of demand. Requests are distinguished from demands in that one is open to hearing a response of "no" without this triggering an attempt to force the matter. If one makes a request and receives a "no" it is recommended not that one give up, but that one empathize with what is preventing the other person from saying "yes," before deciding how to continue the conversation. It is recommended that requests use clear, positive, concrete action languageThere are three primary modes of application of Nonviolent CommunicationSelf-empathyInvolves compassionately connecting with what is going on inside us. This may involve, without blame, noticing the thoughts and judgments we are having, noticing our feelings, and most critically, connecting to the needs that are affecting us.Receiving empathicallyIn Nonviolent Communication involves "connection with what's alive in the other person and what would make life wonderful for them...Nonviolent Communication suggests that however the other person expresses themselves, we focus on listening for the underlying observations, feelings, needs, and requests. It is suggested that it can be useful to reflect a paraphrase of what another person has said, highlighting the Nonviolent Communication components implicit in their message, such as the feelings and needs you guess they may be expressingExpressing honestlyIn Nonviolent Communication, is likely to involve expressing an observation, feeling, need, and request. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A searching re-examination of the assumptions, and the evidence for and against, current approaches to issues of economic and other disparitiesDiscrimination and Disparities challenges believers in such one-factor explanations of economic outcome differences as discrimination, exploitation or genetics. It is readable enough for people with no prior knowledge of economics. Yet the empirical evidence with which it backs up its analysis spans the globe and challenges beliefs across the ideological spectrum.The point of Discrimination and Disparities is not to recommend some particular policy "fix" at the end, but to clarify why so many policy fixes have turned out to be counterproductive, and to expose some seemingly invincible fallacies behind many counterproductive policies.The final chapter deals with social visions and their human consequences. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

How to Be an Antiracist is a 2019 non-fiction book by American author and historian Ibram X. Kendi. The book discusses concepts of racism and Kendi's proposals for anti-racist individual actions and systemic changes. AuthorAt the time of authorship, Ibram X. Kendi was an assistant professor of African-American History at the University of Florida. He previously worked at the American University, where he founded the Antiracist Research and Policy Center. He wrote a 2016 book titled Stamped from the Beginning, about the origins of racism in America.SynopsisKendi describes concepts of racism such as scientific racism, colorism and their intersection with demographics including gender, class and sexuality. He summarizes historical eras such as the scientific proposals of polygenism in Europe in the 1600s and racial segregation in the United States. The book also covers contemporary history such as the O. J. Simpson robbery case and 2000 United States presidential election. He also details experiences from his own life, including his change in beliefs over time, and observations from classes he has taught. Kendi comments on internalized racism and disputes the prejudice plus power model of racism. He suggests models for anti-racist individual actions and systemic changes Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

White Fragility: Why It's So Hard for White People to Talk About Racism A 2018 book written by Robin DiAngelo about race relations in the United States. An academic with experience in diversity training, DiAngelo coined the term "white fragility" in 2011 to describe any defensive instincts or reactions that a white person experiences when questioned about race or made to consider their own race. In White Fragility, DiAngelo views racism in the United States as systemic and often perpetuated unconsciously by individuals. She recommends against viewing racism as committed intentionally by "bad people".Published on June 26, 2018, the book entered the New York Times Bestseller List that month, remaining on the list for well over a year and experiencing a resurgence in demand during the George Floyd protests beginning in May 2020. As of the July 26, 2020 edition, the book is in its 97th week on the list in the Paperback Nonfiction category, where it is ranked number one. Critically, the book received generally positive reviews following its publication. It received more mixed reviews in the aftermath of the George Floyd protests two years later. Some reviewers lauded the book for being thoughtful and instructive, but characterized it as diagnostic rather than solution-oriented. Other reviewers criticized the book for making false claims about race and racism in America, for putting whites in a situation where anything they say is used against them, for infantilizing Black people, and for doing nothing to promote racial justice. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The moment you've all been waiting for.Two white guys read the most talked about book on race and attempt to understand our amazing foolishness in a humble manner. Yes we probably mess things up. But it's better to try, make mistakes, learn, and improve, than to just runaway from our own fragilities.About'Every voice raised against racism chips away at its power. We can't afford to stay silent. This book is an attempt to speak'The book that sparked a national conversation. Exploring everything from eradicated black history to the inextricable link between class and race, Why I'm No Longer Talking to White People About Race is the essential handbook for anyone who wants to understand race relations in Britain today.It won the 2018 British Book Awards Non-Fiction Narrative Book of the Year, the 2018 Jhalak Prize, was chosen as Foyles Non-Fiction Book of the Year and Blackwell's Non-Fiction Book of the Year, was longlisted for the Baillie Gifford Prize and the Orwell Prize and shortlisted for the Books Are My Bag Readers Award for Non-Fiction.Her original blog that sparked the book is a great readhttp://renieddolodge.co.uk/why-im-no-longer-talking-to-white-people-about-race/Equality seriesThis is the first in our series about equality and racial injustice. We are learning what is wrong in the world. How every human plays their part. What can be done about it at a societal and individual level.We invite you to join the journey and learn about the world and making it a fairer place. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hope in the Dark was written to counter the despair of radicals at a moment when they were focused on their losses and had turned their back to the victories behind them--and the unimaginable changes soon to come. In it, she makes a radical case for hope as a commitment to act in a world whose future remains uncertain and unknowable.Drawing on her decades of activism and a wide reading of environmental, cultural, and political history, Solnit argued that radicals have a long, neglected history of transformative victories, that the positive consequences of our acts are not always immediately seen, directly knowable, or even measurable, and that pessimism and despair rest on an unwarranted confidence about what is going to happen next.Writer, historian, and activist Rebecca Solnit is the author of eighteen or so books on feminism, western and indigenous history, popular power, social change and insurrection, wandering and walking, hope and disaster, including the book 'Men Explain Things to Me'Acclaim"One of the Best Books of the 21st Century." --The Guardian"No writer has better understood the mix of fear and possibility, peril and exuberance that's marked this new millennium." --Bill McKibben"An elegant reminder that activist victories are easily forgotten, and that they often come in extremely unexpected, roundabout ways." --The New YorkerOur reviewDespite amazing acclaim and learning a lot from the book. We feel that it isn't her best work and probably could have been a blog post. We did really enjoy the discussion we had about it and bring some great take homes to the episode. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Skin in the Game: Hidden Asymmetries in Daily Life, is a 2018 nonfiction book by Nassim Nicholas Taleb, a former options trader with a background in the mathematics of probability and statistics.Taleb's thesis is that skin in the game -- i.e., having a measurable risk when taking a major decision -- is necessary for fairness, commercial efficiency, and risk management, as well as being necessary to understand the world. The book is the last part of Taleb's multi-volume philosophical essay on uncertainty, titled the Incerto.SummaryAnother classic book from Taleb. He makes a sound argument for alignment of inscentives and why many problems in the world come from people not having skin in the game.Key IdeaIf an actor pockets some rewards from a policy they enact or support without accepting any of the risks, economists consider it to be a problem of "missing incentives". In contrast, to Taleb, the problem is more fundamentally one of asymmetry: one actor gets the rewards, the other is stuck with the risks.[1]Taleb argues that "For social justice, focus on symmetry and risk sharing. You cannot make profits and transfer the risks to others, as bankers and large corporations do... Forcing skin in the game corrects this asymmetry better than thousands of laws and regulations."The centrality of negative incentivesActors - per Taleb - must bear a cost when they fail the public. A fund manager that gets a percentage on wins, but no penalty for losing is incentivized to gamble with his clients funds. Bearing no downside for one's actions means that one has no "Skin In The Game", which is the source of many evils.An evolutionary process is an additional argument for SITG. Those who err and have SITG will not survive, hence evolutionary processes will eliminate (physically or figuratively by going bankrupt etc) those tending to do stupid things. Without SITG, this process cannot work.ExamplesRobert Rubin, a highly-paid director and senior advisor at Citigroup, paid no financial penalty when Citigroup had to be rescued by U.S. taxpayers due to overreach. Taleb calls this sort of a trade, with upside gain but no or limited downside risk, a "Bob Rubin trade."Intellectual Yet IdiotIntellectual Yet Idiot (IYI) is a term coined by Nassim Nicholas Taleb in his essay by the same name that refers to the semi-intelligent well-pedigreed "who are telling us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think… and 5) who to vote for".They represent a very small minority of people but have an overwhelming impact on the vast majority because they affect government policy. IYI are often policy makers, academics, journalists, and media pundits.Some favourite quotesThe knowledge we get by tinkering, via trial and error, experience, and the workings of time, in other words, contact with the earth, is vastly superior to that obtained through reasoning, something self-serving institutions have been very busy hiding from us.Bureaucracy is a construction by which a person is conveniently separated from the consequences of his or her actions.Avoid taking advice from someone who gives advice for a living, unless there is a penalty for their advice.Seeing the psychologist Steven Pinker making pronouncements about things intellectual has a similar effect to encountering a drive-in Burger King while hiking in the middle of a national park.Evidence of submission is displayed by the employee’s going through years depriving himself of his personal freedom for nine hours every day, his ritualistic and punctual arrival at an office, his denying himself his own schedule, and his not having beaten up anyone on the way back home after a bad day. He is an obedient, housebroken dog.What we saw worldwide from 2014 to 2018, from India to the U.K. to the U.S., was a rebellion against the inner circle of no-skin-in-the-game policymaking “clerks” and journalists-insiders, that class of paternalistic semi-intellectual experts with some Ivy League, Oxford-Cambridge or similar label-driven education who are telling the rest of us 1) what to do, 2) what to eat, 3) how to speak, 4) how to think, and… 5) whom to vote for.People who are bred, selected, and compensated to find complicated solutions do not have an incentive to implement simplified ones.If your private life conflicts with your intellectual opinion, it cancels your intellectual ideas, not your private life.Survival comes first, truth, understanding, and science later. Don't Forget to leave a comment on this episode See podvine.com/privacy-policy for podcast listener privacy info. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.