This is an unlocked clip from the extended cut of our podcast with David Polansky. To gain access to the extended cut of future podcasts (and more), subscribe today. On a recent podcast, political theorist David Polansky argues that while he personally values individual freedom and dislikes Aristotle's attribution of moral significance to democracy, he recognizes the importance of democratic symbols for state legitimacy. Shadi agrees with David but underscores how democracy allows the pursuit of philosophy and friendships without authoritarian restrictions. Damir questions David's detachment from politics, suggesting that Shadi's moral case for democracy still holds. David acknowledges the benefits of liberal democracy but criticizes its own distinct forms of control along with the lack of a societal case for “the good”. A partial transcript of this conversation is below.
I'd just like to push back a little bit on what David said about whether society gets to define higher goods now or not. I'm not so sure that's the case, for example, if a guy spends his time masturbating and playing video games there are a variety of societal mechanisms that define that as a 'waste of time'. For instance, that man is seen as less likely to have a partner, they are oftentimes made fun of by others, they are a stereotype for a type of failing of the self. So, whilst we may not actively coerce people to stop doing those things, we certainly have, I think, quite high levels of judgement which at the very least ostracise those who are doing those acts.
I was reading a piece today in a paper about how we need to stop portraying every act as brave and living our best life. Yet, underneath that is the context that modern western societies have moved towards value maximisation as a way to live. We have seen this not just through 'life hacks' but increasing exposure for ways of living that are deemed superior, whether that is in the gross accumulation of material goods, dating multiple conventionally attractive women, or going out all the time and spending almost all our time with friends doing activities.
So, I think despite our pretensions, or even attempts to manufacture a 'you do you' society guiding our politics, i believe we are long way away from that in reality.
I'd just like to push back a little bit on what David said about whether society gets to define higher goods now or not. I'm not so sure that's the case, for example, if a guy spends his time masturbating and playing video games there are a variety of societal mechanisms that define that as a 'waste of time'. For instance, that man is seen as less likely to have a partner, they are oftentimes made fun of by others, they are a stereotype for a type of failing of the self. So, whilst we may not actively coerce people to stop doing those things, we certainly have, I think, quite high levels of judgement which at the very least ostracise those who are doing those acts.
I was reading a piece today in a paper about how we need to stop portraying every act as brave and living our best life. Yet, underneath that is the context that modern western societies have moved towards value maximisation as a way to live. We have seen this not just through 'life hacks' but increasing exposure for ways of living that are deemed superior, whether that is in the gross accumulation of material goods, dating multiple conventionally attractive women, or going out all the time and spending almost all our time with friends doing activities.
So, I think despite our pretensions, or even attempts to manufacture a 'you do you' society guiding our politics, i believe we are long way away from that in reality.