Your point about “conservatism” today being used as a label for 18th century liberal ideology is spot on, and something I’ve been trying in vain to my fellow American conservatives.

These symposiums are the best thing on KZfaq. Keep it up Dr. Morello.

I have deep reservations about whether the power of necessity is the only power in Nature. If you've spent any time looking at the range of feathers on a bird or the chaotic order of how a tree grows, Nature looks more like a celebration or a dance than a mechanistic response.

Why the hell doesn't this channel have any more subs than it does and these videos have more views? Algorithm? A lot of ppl aren't aware of its existence? I don't know? Maybe pay for an ad or something? I for one absolutely love this channel and it's content!..this and vendée radio are two very highly underrated channels with wonderful and, more importantly, necessary content..LETS SPREAD THE WORD! Both about these channels, and about the truth of the faith..which these channels contribute immensely to..God bless Mary protect! +++

Great conversation Does anyone know which song is played at 1:58:30? Thank you!

Are we free? Is a serious question? Any analysis of rulers and the ruled answers this elementary enquiry.

Edmund was a 'good ' Irish man too 😁🍀

Yes, but what about the shirts . . .

Just one thing here: Whatever happened to the questioning of assumption?

A perfect example of "couch", decadent Christianity. A conversation about such things conducted by self-satisfied intellectuals over good wine and gourmet snacks in a nice restaurant is a perfect example of a performative contradiction (unnoticed by the discussants). And why are you surprised that today's world does not take seriously (in the sense of existential seriousness) the things these gentlemen are talking about?

Islam is there for you.

The conservative belief and intuition that the loss of belief in free will is dangerous is based on a well-thought out understanding of civilization, and the carelessness with regards to the loss of belief in free will, coming from many of those who implicitly (and sometimes explicitly) work for the erosion of free will's scope, is often naive in equal measure. Unfortunately, free will is in fact a logical non-starter. We can, however, exert a will, pursuant insights, and do such things as punish criminals, without reference to free will. The assertion that we cannot (that moral force depends on the agency of the punished) is utter caprice, and, what's more, is actually a recent arrival to the human consciousness, owing to the grafting of empathy onto the causal axioms of morality (it began with the survival of the group as the goal, which one can argue ultimately benefits the empathetic aim, but empathy was not sequestered or much respected, nor was it for many millennia granted, in the codices, a place in morality, explicitly or implicitly, for outgroup humans, as it has become today). But we are not in as much danger from the loss of belief in free will as it may seem. For one, empathy for victims will forever check whatever empathy for perpetrators may come from seeing them as without agency. By losing belief in free will we gain clarity. Compassionate leftists are still capable of being what they are, as are the more long-term thinking rightists. But discussion gains clarity with the loss of indignance (indignance makes no sense without free will), and the prospect of authoritarian dystopias takes a hit from the loss of the receptor site within us that is the pursuit of moral acceptance (we still will have pragmatic reasons for BEHAVING certain ways, but the notion of abstract, or transcendent, moral goodness, is lost), which is what fuels group madness (as abstract moral goodness is more contortable than pragmatic motives), that in-turn fuels arrivals to the uncanny valley of historical horrors.

What a cruel and stupid idea that renouncing a belief system is a crime.