Very interesting conversation. I’m not sure whether a “new romanticism” exists or not, but it was a useful frame to guide the discussion. I feel like you all were really talking about two things: 1) the interest in manifestation, astrology, occult, etc. and 2) the medium in which cultural discourse is happening (substack, revival of small lit mags). One article that might be useful in this discussion is the essay that Sam Kriss wrote about tarot for Justin Smith Ruiu’s substack. It was my introduction to Kriss and at the time, I never would have given the time of day to an essay on tarot. But it had the JSR stamp of approval, so I gave it a shot, and it’s a fantastic essay. This is the piece:
I normally shy away from podcasts. I don't like hearing all the ums and ahs and people talking over each other. But damn, you gentlemen know how to speak. Great congenial conversation, a lot to think about. I'm left feeling optimistic, not a familiar feeling for me. I also like the refreshing tentativeness of the assertions made. No bloviation blues! Well done!
I think it's interesting what you guys were saying about there no longer being a new-atheist type movement that is a correction on current folk mythology like the Secret. Does this have anything to do with the rise of Critical Social Justice (i.e., wokeness) as a driving force behind current elite thought? Because back in the heyday of new-atheism, elites were more likely to be guided by some version of physicalism. If they incorporated values it was usually something like humanism, and usually with less emphasis anyway.
While academics like this still exist, of course, the new intellectuals (especially younger ones) may still be atheists, but their values are more likely to draw from Critical Social Justice (CSJ) - which I'd guess in many cases supervenes over any beliefs they have about atheism/physicalism.
In other words if their belief system includes questionable assumptions already that are often accepted with little or no argument (as is the case with CSJ) then that might make them less interested in being militant about targeting stuff like the Secret.
What's fascinating are the people who were once militant atheists and are now preaching CSJ, like PZ Meyers. Actually, you guys should do an episode on PZ...
Very interesting conversation. I’m not sure whether a “new romanticism” exists or not, but it was a useful frame to guide the discussion. I feel like you all were really talking about two things: 1) the interest in manifestation, astrology, occult, etc. and 2) the medium in which cultural discourse is happening (substack, revival of small lit mags). One article that might be useful in this discussion is the essay that Sam Kriss wrote about tarot for Justin Smith Ruiu’s substack. It was my introduction to Kriss and at the time, I never would have given the time of day to an essay on tarot. But it had the JSR stamp of approval, so I gave it a shot, and it’s a fantastic essay. This is the piece:
https://www.the-hinternet.com/p/the-roaring-of-things-a-guest-essay
I normally shy away from podcasts. I don't like hearing all the ums and ahs and people talking over each other. But damn, you gentlemen know how to speak. Great congenial conversation, a lot to think about. I'm left feeling optimistic, not a familiar feeling for me. I also like the refreshing tentativeness of the assertions made. No bloviation blues! Well done!
I think it's interesting what you guys were saying about there no longer being a new-atheist type movement that is a correction on current folk mythology like the Secret. Does this have anything to do with the rise of Critical Social Justice (i.e., wokeness) as a driving force behind current elite thought? Because back in the heyday of new-atheism, elites were more likely to be guided by some version of physicalism. If they incorporated values it was usually something like humanism, and usually with less emphasis anyway.
While academics like this still exist, of course, the new intellectuals (especially younger ones) may still be atheists, but their values are more likely to draw from Critical Social Justice (CSJ) - which I'd guess in many cases supervenes over any beliefs they have about atheism/physicalism.
In other words if their belief system includes questionable assumptions already that are often accepted with little or no argument (as is the case with CSJ) then that might make them less interested in being militant about targeting stuff like the Secret.
What's fascinating are the people who were once militant atheists and are now preaching CSJ, like PZ Meyers. Actually, you guys should do an episode on PZ...
Excellent conversation! My favourite part was John being mistaken for a Christian!