There are a bunch of things to say about this talk, some of which just concern the project being pursued (maybe this is explained by the fact this seems to be a recap of a book, wherein multiple projects are pursued). A basic consideration to think about is that the talk seems to vacillate between “state talk” and “act talk.” That is, the target explanandum sometimes seems to be the emotional state of “being offended” and other times appears to be the act of “taking offense” (or perhaps manifesting one’s offense). The speaker even talks about offense taking as a social “strategy.” What is going on should be clearer because downstream questions appear to open up in one case but not the other (e.g., it voluntary or subject to rational control). For that enjoy “counterexample” philosophy, it might be useful to think about cases of offense involving fictional entities (e.g., your offense at my statement about daenerys being unlikeable early on in a Song of Ice and Fire). Think through how the analysis would go, and how compelling those analyses would be in such cases. Also think about whether more dismissive responses are appropriate-it’s not really a case of taking offense, it’s parasitic of the main phenomenon and therefore we don’t have good independent intuitions of what is going on, etc.

Stacy Hawkins is disingenuous. This is why I’d rather have just a conversation. Moderators interrupt flow of conversation. No one on the panel is saying diversity is the problem. It’s about how it’s being implemented. Yet Hawkins continually attacks straw man that others on the panel are against diversity.

1:05:31 completely blind to chilling effects of sexual harassment training thats exactly the same as academic freedom... men and women completely avoid interacting in meaningful work relationships as much as students and teachers avoid engaging in education

First, may I ask why aren't there more comments here? I just found Professor Charles Taylor a few months back, and I am trying to get a few of his books he has written, especially the one on Hegel. Professor Charles Taylor is brilliant with the educational background of choices he made in his college years and educator in later years. With much gradititude and respect for being able to listen to the discussion, including the Q & A .

I refuse to be made into a 2nd class citizen in the nation of my ancestors, while blacks defame my people with blood libel accusing them of every crime on the earth.

The black woman thinks it's an unassailable public good to dispossess white Christians of their land.

"Promo SM" 🤭

Thanks for the interview and conversation.

Very helpful overview of Taylor's thought -- he's putting it in the simplest terms here, and now we can go back and reread him with greater understanding.

I'm pro abortion.. At least she's honest

"Pro-life” believers say it’s about saving a human life, but it is not. It is about the pregnancy. If they cared about human life, they would pour energy into robust development of adoption agencies, social support for needy families, education, and general welfare of all children so no child would be born with the risk of poverty and poor educational opportunities.Pro-life is all about forcing everyone to the same set of rules. Kind of like forcing women to wear a burka and only travel in the company of a male relative.If the anti-abortion people really cared about reducing abortions rather than forcing people to abide by their rules, they would work to make family planning and contraception free to all women in the United States (and vasectomies for men). If there are no unwanted pregnancies, the number of abortions would plummet.John Messmer, MD, Hummelstown, Pa.“Pro-life” is not about saving a life | PennLive letters share.newsbreak.com/21y2awlv

It's not pro life it's forced pregnancy forced birth, no one cares about anyone who's alive

Stop forced birth crazy ass meddling twits! No forced pregnancy, no forced birth! Women are not brood mares! women will have babies when they are ready! they finished college, have a good career and a nice husband

Reasons for abortion: 👋👋👋👋👋👋👋👋 What about young women who aren’t ready to have a child? What about women who’ve been raped? What about women whose pregnancy threatens their life? What about women who can’t afford to raise a child? What about women in abusive relationships? What about women too poor to raise another child? What about women who will still try to have a back-alley abortion that could end up killing them? What about women who would have to leave school to raise the child because they’re single mothers? What about women whose careers would be ruined because of how we’ve set up our capitalist society? What about women who know their child will be born with an incurable illness? What about women who believe that bringing another life into a world where born lives are treated worse than unborn lives is unfair? What about women who believe it’s their right to choose?

So, why demand women have children they do not want & cannot afford? Anti-abortion Zealots are all gooey-eyed about Fetuses. Insist all be born. Among the worst things that can happen to an infant is to be born into a home that does not want them; "doubly worse" if that home is one of poverty. Unwanted, underprivileged children do not often grow into solid, well educated, hard working, productive law-abiding citizens. Many become sullen, resentful, semi literate, non-productive and outright dangerous. The Far Right makes no sense in this double think. Let the people who don't WANT children, NOT have them!

"The unborn" are a convenient group of people to advocate for. They never make demands of you; unlike orphans, they don't need money, education, or childcare; they allow you to feel good about yourself without any work at creating or maintaining relationships; and when they are born, you can forget about them, because they cease to be unborn. It's almost as if, by being born, they have died to you. You can love the unborn and advocate for them without substantially challenging your own wealth, power, or privilege, without re-imagining social structures, apologizing, or making reparations to anyone. They are, in short, the perfect people to love if you want to claim you love Jesus but actually dislike people who breathe. Prisoners? Immigrants? The sick? The poor? Widows? Orphans? All the groups that are specifically mentioned in the Bible? They all get thrown under the bus for the unborn."

Goood job:)!! Do not waste your time > Promo-SM !!

BULLSHITTERS ARE DESPICABLE. Truly VERY DESPICABLE. How do bullshitting and bullying relate to one another? What percentage of bullies are bullshitters, and what percentage of bullshitters are bullies? Political life and corporate life are replete with bullies and bullshitters. If so agreed, who would argue that we are better of for it or worse of. Of course, to me, much worse of for it. BULLSHITTERS AND BULLIES LOWER THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN POLITICAL LIFE AND IN CORPORATE LIFE. I taught mathematics for over two years in middle school and in high school, and two of those students (the only ones who told me that they wanted to be lawyers) told me THAT THEY WANTED TO BE LAWYERS BECAUSE THEY WERE GOOD BULLSHITTERS. How representative is it among lawyers that they became lawyers because they believed that they were good bullshitters? Perhaps in disagreement with Harry Frankfurt, I contend that if you are a lawyer or a used car salesman, any time that you engage in bullshitting in pursuit of your ends, you (lawyer, used car salesman, or other) are being antisocial, immoral, and unethical; and at times unlawful. The space between PROFESSIONALISM and BULLSHITTING is a null space: PROFESSIONALISM AND BULLSHITTING ARE MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE: THEY ARE (I perceive) AS TOTALLY INCOMPATIBLE. Again: BULLSHITTERS AND BULLIES LOWER THE QUALITY OF LIFE IN POLITICAL LIFE AND IN CORPORATE LIFE, and civic minded people should deliberately make an effort to raise our social discourse and make bullies and bullshitters not welcome. Is bullshitting ever morally/ethically neutral, perhaps only in non-serious matters such as entertainment, comedy, and the like. Otherwise, I perceive it as always crapping the 'social slate' (the grand and universal social slate) that we all write on when we utter or write. It is not nice to polluted that important social slate that we all depend on for all the serious matters of life!! Ultimately, this is a reflection of our social immaturity referring to the percentage of humanity in a low level of emotional/psychological/ethical immaturity. AND SO WHAT TO DO? Harry G. Frankfurt said "Respect for the truth and a concern for the truth are among the foundations for civilization. I was for a long time disturbed by the lack of respect for the truth that I observed... bullshit is one of the deformities of these values." (On Bullshit Part 1 in KZbin - kzbin.info/www/bejne/jWK1gGxphLhjic0. Bullshit is an assault to civilized living. It is AN ASSAULT TO JUSTICE. JUSTICE IS BASED ON TRUTH. BRING IN BULLSHIT AND LIES TO THE JUSTICE PROCESS AND YOU ERODE JUSTICE. YOU ERODE IT SYSTEMICALLY AND SPECIFICALLY (in some specific, individual case.) BULLSHIT IS ANATHEMA TO CIVILIZED LIVING!

How many times has Simone Gubler had students physically attack each other in academic discourse? (not (merely)" get angry"...which is not nearly the same thing...) I'm curious and would appreciate a response...(I do speculate that that's a relatively irrational fear on her part...)

The mayor: guns are bad. I'm pro second amendment and only want to go after illegal guns after I make all guns illegal. Me: This is a mayor? Good lord.

The gun violence in Australia did not go down that much and now they can't defend themselves from their goverments

Thank you antonino. 😊

Clark does what all libertarians do when confronted by the left; he rolls over and shows his belly in submission. When confronted by the right, they go scorched earth because libertarians are just progs who want slightly lower corporate tax rates

Mayor Maria has no business in this conversation

Raped on a train. For more than 40 minutes, a woman was harassed by a stranger on a public transit train in Philadelphia and then raped while bystanders held up their cellphones, seemingly to record the assault, police said. Your fellow human beings folks. Not only did they fail to help this woman, they had such a lack of empathy for her, they could pull their phones out to record the attack for future social media postings! More than two dozen train stops passed as the man harassed, groped and eventually raped the woman, the police chief for the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority said at a news conference Monday. I'll say it again, unfortunately people are afraid to realize that the idea of being safe is an illusion in society. The reality is, to put it in the simplest terms, you're safe as long as the person standing next to you doesn't decide to kill you. That's not paranoia it's just an obvious fact. You know what would have empowered this poor woman to stop her stronger, bigger, male attacker??? A firearm, it would have made his choice to assault her because of his perceived power over her a bad choice. And hopefully he'd never be assaulting and raping any other women again! Just sayin...

1) By reflecting away 30% of ISR the albedo, which would not exist w/o the atmosphere/GHGs, makes the earth cooler than it would be without that atmosphere like that reflective panel set behind the windshield. Remove the atmosphere/GHGs and the earth would become much like the Moon and Mercury, a barren rock with a 0.1 albedo, 20% more kJ/h, hot^3 on the lit side, cold^3 on the dark. Nikolov, Kramm (U of AK) and UCLA Diviner mission all tacitly agree. 2) the GHG up/down welling, “trapping”/”back” radiating/delaying/intercepting, 100 % efficient, perpetual warming loop requires "extra" energy which according to RGHE theory comes from 3) the terrestrial surface radiating that "extra" energy as a LWIR ideal black body which 4) cannot happen because of the non-radiative heat transfer processes of the contiguous atmospheric molecules and as demonstrated by experiment, the gold standard of classical science: principia-scientific.org/debunking-the-greenhouse-gas-theory-with-a-boiling-water-pot/ 1+2+3+4 = 0 Greenhouse Effect + 0 Greenhouse gas warming + 0 man caused climate change. Version 1.0 041321

*Censored Climate Science Knowledge Test* Q Name all of the gases in our atmosphere that do not participate in convection cooling and *through mass mechanical energy transmission,* also known as the Newton’s Cradle Effect. A None. They all participate. Q What gases in our atmosphere block heat loss? A None. You cannot stop heat loss unless you build a glass or plastic wall surrounding the Earth to block convection cooling and the Newton’s Cradle Effect. No free flowing gas can trap heat and be used as insulation. Q What are the names of the four scientists who destroyed the greenhouse gas theory? A Dr. Michael Connolly and Dr. Ronan Connolly in Ireland, and Dr. Ned Nikolov and Dr. Karl Zeller in Colorado, USA. Q Why is this good climate news not reported by our media? A Because our media censors real climate science derived from the proper use of the scientific method. The scientific method demands hard certifiable, repeatable evidence, not speculation, wild computer models fed false assumptions, and the mindless repeating of unproven conjecture from past centuries. Hysteria, politics, group-think, and religious fervor are not part of the scientific method. All of those things are part of the totalitarian domination method. Q Is there a mathematical way to predict the average baseline surface temperature of rocky surfaced planets and moons in our solar system? A There is only one way. You need to find out two main facts: their distance from the Sun, which tells us how much solar energy they receive, and their average global atmospheric pressure. With that information you can accurately predict average baseline surface temperatures to within one degree Celsius. Q Do cow farts, SUVs, and overweight opera singers cause hurricanes and global warming? A No. Real air pollution, such as smoke, causes a minor cooling effect by blocking sunlight. To increase Earth’s temperature you would have to increase atmospheric pressure or block cloud formation. We do not have the technology to do either of those things. What keeps Earth warm is our global planetary atmospheric pressure. The FORCE of gravity on atmospheric mass creates a heating effect that keeps our oceans from freezing to the equator. That is why the bottom of Death Valley is always warmer than the top of Mount Everest. Higher air pressure causes higher temperatures. Lower air pressure causes lower temperatures. For the real climate science censored by our media, Google *The Renewable Energy Disaster + Christopher Calder + 50webs*

Harvard should organize a discussion between Sandel and Taylor