Episode

Philosophize This! Clips: / @philosophizethisclips
Get more:
Website: www.philosophizethis.org/
Patreon: / philosophizethis
Find the podcast:
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/2Shpxw7...
RSS: www.philosophizethis.libsyn.org/
Be social:
Twitter: / iamstephenwest
Instagram: / philosophizethispodcast
TikTok: / philosophizethispodcast
Facebook: / philosophizethisshow
Thank you for making the show possible. 🙂

[@asoulist4829]

It is important to point out that Rousseau had a very different ideas of what a Democracy, Aristocracy, and Monarchy was then what we do today

[@CancelledPhilosopher]

"Voring for president in today's world is like looking at two dating profiles written by their mothers." So great.

[@aswonn]

thank you a lot for the very informative and interesting lecture. I enjoy these episodes very much. I think you might be off in the opinion/conclusion about the free access to information (24:40). The way I see it problem isn't really about an abundant source of info, it's about lacking guidance to for selecting and processing/ understanding that information… (basic guidance/knowledge that should have been given to people during school). An abundance source of info is actually very positive, since it gives people the possibility to learn, being confuse about what to do with it is a quite ironic conundrum. Also referring to an "authoritarian" source of info, where a prefabricated worldview is spoon-feed to their audience, isn't really a defence mechanism for too much info, isn't it mostly a customary behaviour, a legacy from the newspaper and TV broadcasting era when that was basically the "only" source of "reliable" information ? It seems people "select" and trust a source of information that will shape their worldview; and by select I mean they will mostly inherit this source from their peers or their immediate environment. Also don't you think by definition a biased opinion is one that is uninformed/ignorant of other facets of the same issue; an obtuse view ? I do agree it is very difficult or impossible to be an expert in all topics… and one will most likely lack some information or have a blind spot in some facets; so if that is normal for everyone maybe the difference to be bias or not, does not lay on how complete the information is, but on the level of openness to acquire new info and be self-critical about not knowing or being mistaken.

[@Revex08]

Love all the content uploads! Thankyou!!

[@juliat1796]

thank you so much!

[@vtsirkinidis]

Aristocracy as expressed by the Greeks would be like a meritocracy.

[@projectmalus]

Most if not all of these political systems work well in a small group setting. Think about that and how technology can give the benefits of large groups (like cities) while maintaining a small group embedded in nature that helps out wildlife. The move to cities is outdated...it's like having a cupcake with one huge chunk of chocolate on top instead of chips distributed throughout. It's a problem of scale, or more accurately, the relations between the actors (proportions). The family unit worked very well until it became the target of marketers...the appeal to individualism, which is a weak economic stance that demands engagement with the current hierarchical oppressiveness. Choice becomes limited. Groups are marginalized. There's a dreamlike quality to it, the religious picture held up as a goal, the result regarded as more important than the process. The end justifies the means in a top down world. With the aristocracy/information problem touched on at the end, I think the real problem is not the understanding of the issues, but understanding the effect of whatever action is taken. With a small group, the effect is fairly obvious and corrective action can be more responsive ie more iterations leading to a better outcome. A template can be made and applied. At this point in time a central government is needed for security but it can be minimized. Controlling the size of government and corporations can be done by transferring economic power back to the small group. The posturing of states and tightening of borders can be avoided.

[@brianmaswanganye7039]

I have read your post twice and I agree with most of your view points. I am also interested to hear your views on the current state of affairs worldwide around democracy. Clearly it hasn't worked very well for most countries. And to Mr Stephen West, thank you for the podcasts. Top class content. From SA

[@rodrigodiazcasas384]

Did someone tell Rousseau that kings couldnt have advisers or councelors? haha

[@christinemartin63]

Ain't nothin' noble about a savage. (See Truffaut's "The Wild Child" to get a glimpse of the "natural" man.) Sure, civilization is not perfect, but Rousseau was a dreamer.

[@insiditious6203]

Idk about going on google to find 2 sets of beliefs.. maybe another search engine lol

[@andrewcreech8158]

Sick burn.