Category: Books
My excellent Conversation with Ross Douthat on God and religion
Here is the audio, video, and transcript. I am very glad Ross flew down from Connecticut to do it, we ended up cutting about 2x the normal length. Here is part of the episode summary:
Ross joined Tyler to discuss what getting routed by Christopher Hitchens taught him about religious debate, why the simulation hypothesis resembles ancient Gnostic religion, what Mexican folk Catholicism reveals about spiritual intermediaries, his evolving views on papal authority in the Francis era, what UFO sightings might tell us about supernatural reality, why he’s less apocalyptic than Peter Thiel about the Antichrist, and why he’s publishing a fantasy novel on Substack before AI potentially transforms creative writing.
Here is one excerpt:
COWEN: In general, you weigh personal testimony higher than I do. Let me see if you can talk me into it a bit. Something is recorded in data sensors and confirmed across multiple sensors. Maybe I don’t know what it is, but I’ll believe there’s something there. But if people say X, Y, and Z — there’re all sorts of religions neither you nor I would sign onto, and plenty of humans who will assert, insist that there’s direct evidence for that particular religion.
The story of Joseph Smith, the plates from LDS would be one example, but there’re plenty of religions that don’t even exist anymore, where there’re very particular stories that people have attested to. We really do dismiss them in the numbers of the tens of millions or maybe even billions. So, if we’re willing to dismiss all those stories, isn’t David Hume right? We should not dismiss the stories, but they’re not going to budge us out of a more commonsensical worldview.
DOUTHAT: Yes. I don’t dismiss all of those stories. I guess that’s part of my strong departure from Humean assumptions. I think that certainly there are fakes and frauds and charlatans in religion, and there are people who are just sincerely mistaken, who think that they had a religious experience when really, they have a diagnosis or they should get a diagnosis of some form of mental illness or insanity.
At the same time, I think that the wide range of attested spiritual, just frankly bizarre experiences that human beings have — of which, UFO encounters are a subset — that, again, has familiar antecedents going back millennia — I think we should take those seriously and have a theory of what they are that is more complex than fraud meets insanity meets delusion.
Part of this is just knowing people who’ve had those kinds of experiences, reading a lot about those kinds of experiences — not just in my own tradition, but in other religious traditions. I think that they correspond to something real, even if the interpretation that people give to them is wrong or deluded or misguided. I don’t think that Joseph Smith was in fact chosen by God to restore the lost truths about Jesus Christ, polygamy, and the ancient civilizations of the New World. I don’t think that’s true.
Do I think that Joseph Smith didn’t have some weird supernatural encounter? I’m less confident about saying that. The same would go . . . I don’t think that Muhammad is the Seal of the Prophets. Do I think that Muhammad either hallucinated or made it all up? Again, I’m certainly much less confident than you would be in saying that. I do not —
COWEN: It’s almost an Islamic doctrine you’re holding. There are these various tiers of prophets, and they’re imperfectly right, but they’re getting at the divine.
DOUTHAT: Yes. I think any coherent theory of supernatural experience — given what you can encounter just by reading William James — has to say either there’re infinite realms of deception out there . . . This is something that some religious believers would say. There’s one subset of totally authentic, trustworthy religious experiences, and then there’s a vast realm where it’s all demonic deception.
Or you have to say that there’s just a range of ways in which people encounter God and the supernatural that do get filtered through cultural assumptions and through — I don’t want to say imperfect prophets — let’s just say imperfect human beings. And that helps yield the diversity of religions in the world today.
But you can also see patterns in those things like near-death experiences. The range — there is cross-cultural variation in near-death experiences. If you have a near-death experience as a Tibetan Buddhist, you are more likely to see the Buddha. If you have a near-death experience as a Catholic, you’re more likely to maybe see an archangel or a Catholic saint or something. But at the same time, there are some pretty clear commonalities to suggest that people in Tibet and people in Indiana are having the same kind of experience when they die and are resuscitated and report the lights, the tunnel, all the strange things associated with those experiences.
Yes, there’s a challenge here, obviously, for any kind of dogmatic religion. You do have to figure out, “Okay, why is there this consistency but also this variation?” But there’s also a challenge for the Humeans to say, “Well, we’re just writing off this fairly consistent cross-cultural realm of human experience because it’s all supposed to be myth and hallucination?” The people who have these experiences are not generally the kinds of people who you would describe as prone to hallucination and insanity. There are of course cases, but that’s not the norm.
On the Humean point — if you go back and read Hume, he doesn’t exactly say this, but you really have the strong impression that Hume thinks that once you get rid of established religious authorities and the universal teachings of antique stories from the Bible, that a big swath of supernatural stuff will just go away. Now, he says humans still —
Interesting throughout, definitely recommended. And again, I am happy to recommend Ross’s new book Believe: Why Everyone Should be Religious.
What should I ask Sheilagh Ogilvie?
She is a Canadian economic historian at Oxford, here is from her home page:
I am an economic historian. I explore the lives of ordinary people in the past and try to explain how poor economies get richer and improve human well-being. I’m interested in how social institutions – the formal and informal constraints on economic activity – shaped economic development between the Middle Ages and the present day.
And:
My current research focusses on serfdom, human capital, state capacity, and epidemic disease. Past projects analysed guilds, merchants, communities, the family, gender, consumption, finance, proto-industry, historical demography, childhood, and social capital. I have a particular interest in the economic and social history of Central and Eastern Europe.
Here is her Wikipedia page. Her book on guilds is well known, and her latest is Controlling Contagion: Epidemics and Institutions from the Black Death to Covid. Here are her main research papers.
So what should I ask her?
What I’ve been reading
Owen Hatherley, Militant Modernism. A very good short book, defending “left wing modernism,” a much maligned target on the right these days. Hatherley himself is a much underrated figure, a commie who came along at the wrong time but a very good writer and thinker about aesthetics.
Stuart A. Reid, The Lumumba Plot: The Secret History of the CIA and a Cold War Assassination. For whatever reason, there are more good books about the Congo than most other parts of Africa. This is one of them. From 2023, but good enough to make a “best of non-fiction” list for a typical year. Very cleanly written as well.
Charles Callan Tansill, The Purchase of the Danish West Indies. Who would have thought that this 1966 volume, and Tansill, would be making a comeback? The biggest lesson for me here was how much the purchase was a live issue as early as 1867. And as the final purchase approached in 1917, the other European powers were by no means happy.
Richard Overy, Rain of Ruin: Tokyo, Hiroshima, and the Surrender of Japan is a short but very good and substantive look at the non-nuclear and also nuclear bombing campaigns.
Michael Krielaars, The Sound of Utopia: Musicians in the Time of Stalin. A surprisingly fresh and substantive book, which also does a good job integrating the first-person perspective of the author. I’ve read the standard biographies of Shostokovich, Prokofiev, and the like, and still learned a lot from this one.
There is Gregor Craigie, Our Crumbling Foundation: How We Solve Canada’s Housing Crisis.
Molly Worthen, Spellbound: How Charisma Shaped American History From the Puritans to Donald Trump is a very good book on an underexplored topic. In some ways tech has mattered less than you might think.
Stephen Witt, The Thinking Machine: Jensen Huang, Nvidia, and the World’s Most Coveted Microchip. A fun and well-informed look at its subject matter. There should be more books on one of the world’s most valuable companies, and yes here supply is elastic.
Marc Hijink, Focus: The ASML Way, Inside the Power Struggle Over the Most Complex Machine on Earth. You have to already want to read a book about ASML, but this is in fact the relevant book about ASML. To call it boring is to miss the point, because the company itself is somewhat boring.
Jeanette zu Furstenberg, Wie gut wir sind, zeigt sich in Krisenzeiten: Ein Weckruf. Exactly the wake-up call Germany needs.
Rainer Zitelmann, The Origins of Poverty and Wealth: My World Tour and Insights from the Global Libertarian Movement is a kind of travel memoir from a man who has become one of our most prolific writers on behalf of liberty.
And I was reading my own short commentary on Atlas Shrugged, from a few years ago.
*The African Gaze: Photography, Cinema and Power*
By Amy Sall. I love this picture book, or should I say photo book? Most of it is reproductions of photographs from the “golden age” of African photography, with profiles of each major photographer, plus a section on cinema as well.
One very good way to find “a picture book for you” is to visit a good museum bookshop, in this case for me it was the Kimball Museum in Fort Worth. Look around at the books with images. Find one that intrigues you, and then buy it, take it home and read and look through it. Do note this might cost 2x a normal book, but on average it is more than 2x better. It will open up whole new worlds. And it is not something your GPT is able to do (yet), though of course you can follow up with queries.
You can order the book here.
Keynes on the Soviet Union
I had not known of this passage, which I am packaging with its introduction from Gavan Tredoux:
John Maynard Keynes has the undeserved reputation of a critic of the USSR. Few know that he reviewed Sidney and Beatrice Webb’s mendacious tome The Soviet Union: a New Civilization (1935/1937/1943) fawningly. Perhaps the most embarrassing thing Keynes ever wrote. From his Complete Works 28:
“One book there is … which every serious citizen will do well to look into—the extensive description of Soviet Communism by Mr and Mrs Sidney Webb. It is on much too large a scale to be called a popular book, but the reader should have no difficulty in comprehending the picture it conveys. Until recently events in Russia were moving too fast and the gap between paper professions and actual achievements was too wide for a proper account to be possible . But the new system is now sufficiently crystallised to be reviewed. The result is impressive. The Russian innovators have passed, not only from the revolutionary stage, but also from the doctrinaire stage. There is little or nothing left which bears any special relation to Marx and Marxism as distinguished from other systems of socialism. They are engaged in the vast administrative task of making a completely new set of social and economic institutions work smoothly and successfully over a territory so extensive that it covers one sixth of the land surface of the world. Methods are still changing rapidly in response to experience. The largest scale empiricism and experimentalism which has ever been attempted by disinterested administrators is in operation. Meanwhile the Webbs have enabled us to see the direction in which things appear to be moving and how far they have got. It is an enthralling work, because it contains a mass of extraordinarily important and interesting information concerning the evolution of the contemporary world. It leaves me with a strong desire and hope that we in this country may discover how to combine an unlimited readiness to experiment with changes in political and economic methods and institutions, whilst preserving traditionalism and a sort of careful conservatism, thrifty of everything which has human experience behind it, in every branch of feeling and of action.”
So no, sorry, Keynes cannot be GOAT.
The forward march of computer use, AI edition
I must admit, though, that the thing that scared me most about HudZah was that he seemed to be living in a different technological universe than I was. If the previous generation were digital natives, HudZah was an AI native.
HudZah enjoys reading the old-fashioned way, but he now finds that he gets more out of the experience by reading alongside an AI. He puts PDFs of books into Claude or ChatGPT and then queries the books as he moves through the text. He uses Granola to listen in on meetings so that he can query an AI after the chats as well. His friend built Globe Explorer, which can instantly break down, say, the history of rockets, as if you had a professional researcher at your disposal. And, of course, HudZah has all manner of AI tools for coding and interacting with his computer via voice.
It’s not that I don’t use these things. I do. It’s more that I was watching HudZah navigate his laptop with an AI fluency that felt alarming to me. He was using his computer in a much, much different way than I’d seen someone use their computer before, and it made me feel old and alarmed by the number of new tools at our disposal and how HudZah intuitively knew how to tame them.
It also excited me. Just spending a couple of hours with HudZah left me convinced that we’re on the verge of someone, somewhere creating a new type of computer with AI built into its core. I believe that laptops and PCs will give way to a more novel device rather soon.
That is from Ashlee Vance, the entire story is very interesting.
*On the Calculation of Volume, I and II*
Thoee two novels by Solvej Balle, a Danish author, are now available in English. Conceptually, they are close to time travel novels (I should not tell you the actual nature of the twist), but with more literary value than you might be expecting.
Every now and then a new book comes along that is conceptual, fascinating, fun to read, good on human psychology, and in literary terms very well done. The Balle books qualify there. Each is also quite short, though the second half of each volume is better than the first, so there is a return to patience (to be clear, the first halves, or maybe thirds, are fine, but the true points are revealed only with some time).
There are some implicit economic and even crypto themes in the work, though I doubt if the author is aware of them.
So I recommend these, and will not go near potential spoilers.
*In Praise of Floods*, James C. Scott does Uncle Boonmee?
That is the new James C. Scott book, from Yale University Press. It focuses on Burma [sic], and I found this to be the most typical and illustrative sentence:
Several of the commentators evaluating this book in manuscript noticed that the section of river spirits (nats) and the much larger section describing the eco zones, hydrology of the Ayeyarwady, and the mapping of major human interventions represent something of a rupture from the preceding narrative on rivers.
Also:
One central purpose of this book is not only to recognize the animated liveliness of the river and its tributaries, but also to give voice to all the flora and fauna whose lifeworld centers around the river.
One section of the book is narrated from the first-person perspective of a river dolphin.
This is an essential book for understanding Scott. And from the preface we read:
The book before you contains more disjunctions than I would have preferred.
Scott was a great man and scholar, and this book reminds you that many such people are really quite weird, in the good sense of course. You can pre-order it here.
*Abundance*, by Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson
The NIH’s own research indicates that Pioneer Award recipients seem to produce influential, highly cited research. But despite efforts to help younger scientists, the share of basic NIH funding going to scientists under thirty-five continues to decline. In the 2004 fiscal year, the High-Risk, High-Reward Research program allocated about $200 million to scientists, a moderate decline since 2019. The amount was an almost negligible fraction — less than half of 1 percent — of the NIH’s annual budget for that year.
Self-recommending, you can pre-order here.
*Superagency: What Could Possibly Go Right with Our AI Future*
By Reid Hoffman and Greg Beato. As you might expect, I am in synch with the basic message of this book.
I received a review copy which on the front says “Tyler Cowen edition.” There is a forward, made out to me personally and highly intelligent, relating the book to my own work. There is then a gallery of images of me, very well done by AI image generators.
This is all yet another way in which many books will change, I am all for the innovation.
Atlas Shrugged as Novel
The conversation between Henry Oliver and Hollis Robbins about Atlas Shrugged as a novel is excellent. I enjoyed especially the discussion of some of the minor characters and the meaning of their story arcs.
Hollis: There are some really wonderful minor characters. One of them is Cherryl Taggart, this shop girl that evil Jim Taggart meets one night in a rainstorm, and she’s like, “Oh, you’re so awesome,” and they get married. It’s like he’s got all this praise for marrying the shop girl. It’s a funny Eliza Doolittle situation because she is brought into this very wealthy society, which we have been told and we have been shown is corrupt, is evil, everybody’s lying all the time, it’s pretentious, Dagny hates it.
Cherryl Taggart is brought into this. In the beginning, she hates Dagny because she’s told by everybody, “Hate Dagny, she’s horrible.” Then she comes to her own mini understanding of the corruption that we understand because Dagny’s shown it in the novel, has shown it to us this entire time. She comes to it and she’s like, “Oh my God,” and she goes to Dagny. Dagny’s so wonderful to her like, “Yes. You had to come to this on your own, I wasn’t going to tell you, but you were 100% right.” That’s the end of her.
Henry: Right. When she meets Taggart, there’s this really interesting speech she has where she says, “I want to make something of myself and get somewhere.” He’s like, “What? What do you want to do?” Red flag. “What? Where?” She says, “I don’t know, but people do things in this world. I’ve seen pictures of New York,” and she’s pointing at like the skyscrapers, right? Whatever. “I know that someone’s built that. They didn’t sit around and whine, but like the kitchen was filthy and the roof was leaking.” She gets very emotional at this point. She says to him, “We were stinking poor and we didn’t give a damn. I’ve dragged myself here, and I’m going to do something.”
Her story is very sad because she then gets mired in the corruption of Taggart’s. He’s basically bit lazy and a bit of a thief, and he will throw anyone under the bus for his own self-advancement. He is revealed to be a really sinister guy. I was absolutely hissing about him most of the time. Then, let’s just do the plot spoiler and say what happens to Cherryl, right? Because it’s important. When she has this realization and Taggart turns on her and reveals himself as this snake, and he’s like, “Well, what did you expect, you idiot? This is the way the world is.”
Hollis: Oh, it’s a horrible fight. It’s the worst fight.
Henry: Right? This is where the melodrama is so good. She goes running out into the streets, and it’s the night and there are shadows. She’s in the alleyway. Rand, I don’t have the page marked, but it’s like a noir film. She’s so good at that atmosphere. Then it gets a little bit gothic as well. She’s running through the street, and she’s like, “I’ve got to go somewhere, anywhere. I’ll work. I’ll pick up trash. I’ll work in a shop. I’ll do anything. I’ve just got to get out of this.”
Hollis: Go work at the Panda Express.
Henry: Yes. She’s like, “I’ve got to get out of this system,” because she’s realized how morally corrupting it is. By this time, this is very late. Society is in a– it’s like Great Depression style economic collapse by this point. There really isn’t a lot that she could do. She literally runs into a social worker and the social– Rand makes this leering dramatic moment where the social worker reaches out to grab her and Cherryl thinks, “Oh, my God, I’m going to be taken prisoner in. I’m going back into the system,” so she jumps off the bridge.
This was the moment when I was like, I’ve had this lurking feeling about how Russian this novel is. At this point, I was like, “That could be a short story by Gogol,” right? The way she set that up. That is very often the trap that a Gogol character or maybe a Dostoevsky character finds themselves in, right? That you suddenly see that the world is against you. Maybe you’re crazy and paranoid. Maybe you’re not. Depends which story we’re reading. You run around trying to get out and you realize, “Oh, my God, I’m more trapped than I thought. Actually, maybe there is no way out.” Cherryl does not get a lot of pages. She is, as you say, quite a minor character, but she illustrates the whole story so, so well, so dramatically.
Hollis: Oh, wow.
Henry: When it happens, you just, “Oh, Cherryl, oh, my goodness.”
Hollis: Thank you for reading that. Yes, you could tell from the very beginning that the seeds of what could have been a really good person were there. Thank you for reading that.
Henry: When she died, I went back and I was like, “Oh, my God, I knew it.”
Hollis: How can you say Rand is a bad writer, right? That is careful, careful plotting, because she’s just a shop girl in the rain. You’ve got this, the gun on the wall in that act. You know she’s going to end up being good. Is she going to be rewarded for it? Let me just say, as an aside, I know we don’t have time to talk about it here. My field, as I said, is 19th century African American novels, primarily now.
This, usually, a woman, enslaved woman, the character who’s like, “I can’t deal with this,” and jumps off a bridge and drowns herself is a fairly common and character. That is the only thing to do. One also sees Rand heroes. Stowe’s Dred, for example, is very much, “I would rather live in the woods with a knife and then, be on the plantation and be a slave.” When you think about, even the sort of into the 20th century, the Malcolm X figure, that, “I’m going to throw out all of this and be on my own,” is very Randian, which I will also say very Byronic, too, Rand didn’t invent this figure, but she put it front and center in these novels, and so when you think about how Atlas Shrugged could be brought into a curriculum in a network of other novels, how many of we’ve discussed so far, she’s there, she’s influenced by and continues to influence.
Corin Wagen defends Leviticus (from my email)
In your recent conversation with Misha Saul, you and Misha discussed your joint dislike for Leviticus. I can’t say that I find Leviticus a page-turner, but the book that’s done the most to help me understand why it’s important and what role it plays in the movement of the narrative is L Michael Morales’s book Who Shall Ascend The Mountain Of The Lord? (Amazon). A number of folks I’ve talked to have found this book very helpful. (Disclaimer: Morales is a Protestant, as is D. A. Carson (the editor), so the biases are apparent.)
Briefly, his argument is that Leviticus serves to resolve the narrative tension introduced by the ending of Exodus. Exodus 40:34–35: “Then the cloud covered the tent of meeting, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle. And Moses was not able to enter the tent of meeting because the cloud settled on it, and the glory of the Lord filled the tabernacle.” The tension introduced by Genesis 3 is that God and man can no longer co-exist because of sin. Moses is able to ascend Sinai, speak with God, and bring the people his laws, but even after building the tabernacle and the ark, even Moses is unable to reside in the presence of God—let alone the people who cannot even touch Sinai!
The rules of Leviticus presents the conditions to resolve this tension and allow the people access to God—protected by the rules that God gives them. In particular the book has a chiastic structure centered around Leviticus 16 (Yom Kippur) where the high priest himself is able to enter the Holy of Holies. There’s other points about how the structure of the tabernacle and later the temple mirrors Eden, etc. “Interesting throughout,” as they say.
An Economic Approach to Homer’s Odyssey: Part I
I wrote this paper several years ago when preparing for my CWT with Emily Wilson. It is now being published by Liberty Fund, in parts. Here is part I. Here is an excerpt from the introduction:
In this series, I will use an economic approach to better understand the implicit politics and economics in The Odyssey. As a “naïve” reader with no training in ancient history, I find the comparative treatment of political regimes as one of the most striking features of the narrative, namely that Odysseus visits a considerable number of distinct polities, and experiences each in a different way. How does each regime operate, and how does it differ from the other regimes presented in the book? Economics forces us to boil down those descriptions and comparisons to a relatively small number of variables. Trying to model the polities in Homer’s Odyssey forces us to decide which are their essential, as opposed to accidental features, and what they might have in common, or which are the most important points of contrast.
And this:
In the world(s) of Homer’s Odyssey, in contrast [to standard economics], the assumptions about human behavior are different. In general terms I think of the core assumptions as looking more like the following:
-
- 1. Humans pursue quests rather than consumption as traditionally defined.
-
- 2. Humans are continually deceiving others and indeed often themselves. Gains from economic trade are scant, but the risk of death or imprisonment is high.
-
- 3. Humans seek out states of intoxication.
Under the economic approach I am proposing, you can think of Homer’s Odyssey as what happens when you inject assumptions along the above lines (with some qualifiers) into a variety of settings.
The piece has numerous points of interest, and I will be covering later installments as they appear.
*Open Socrates: The Case for a Philosophical Life*
That is the new Agnes Callard book, very good, self-recommending.
I would say my views on some of these issues are different. In my vision, Socrates is a weak interlocutor and Plato is the real genius. Plato also does not identify with Socrates per se, but rather is teaching us how to deal with a multiplicity of perspectives. In any case, this is the latest — and the best in a long time — case for leading a philosophic life, which to Callard means a life centered around philosophic dialogue with others. It also will start a whole new and much needed dialogue on what a philosophic life really means. You can buy it here, it is sure to be a big hit. Here is an NYT review.
What should I ask Theodore H. Schwartz?
Yes I will be doing a Conversation with him. He is a famous brain surgeon and author of the recent and excellent book Gray Matters: A Biography of Brain Surgery.
Here is his Wikipedia page, and an opening excerpt:
Theodore H. Schwartz (born May 13, 1965) is an American medical scientist, academic physician and neurosurgeon.
Schwartz specializes in surgery for brain tumors, pituitary tumors and epilepsy. He is particularly known for developing and expanding the field of minimally-invasive endonasal endoscopic skull base and pituitary surgery and for his research on neurovascular coupling and propagation of epilepsy.
Here is his home page. So what should I ask him?