0:00

Hello, it is Ryan and I was on a

0:02

flight the other day playing one of my favorite

0:04

social spin slot games on Chumba casino.com I

0:07

looked over at the person sitting next to me and

0:09

you know what they were doing? They were also playing

0:11

Chumba Casino. Coincidence? I think not. Everybody's loving having fun

0:13

with it. Chumba Casino is home to hundreds of casino

0:15

style games that you can play for free

0:18

anytime, anywhere, even at 30,000 feet. So

0:21

sign up now at chumbacasino.com to claim

0:23

your free welcome bonus. That's chumbacasino.com and

0:25

live the Chumba life. No purchase necessary. VTW.

0:27

Revoid. We're prohibited by law. See terms and

0:29

conditions. Hello everybody! This marshall

0:31

poll on the editor, the New Books Network

0:34

and the like tell you that we have

0:36

a new and improved website. It has to

0:38

new features that we think your loved. One

0:40

of them is a vastly improved search engine

0:43

so that when you type in keywords you'll

0:45

get a bunch of episodes really quick. The

0:47

other is the. Ability to create a listener

0:49

account and in that was your account. you

0:51

can save episodes were later listening so and

0:53

create a kind of listening list. We think

0:55

these features are neat and we think you'll

0:57

enjoy them. Please visit the site today. Loving

1:01

this show. It's clear you value unique perspectives

1:03

on the issues. She can you a world

1:05

that's why you should check out the Intelligence

1:08

The free award winning daily news podcast from

1:10

the. And with a

1:12

subscription to Economist podcasts. plus you can

1:14

listen to a deep dive. Weekend edition

1:16

of the Intelligence Special limited run series.

1:18

And the Economists indepth. Weekly shows on

1:20

business, china, American politics, and tech all

1:23

for just a few dollars a month.

1:25

Search online for Economists podcasts plus to

1:27

start listening. Welcome

1:31

to the New Books Network! Oh

1:35

wow, welcome to the new books Know. I.

1:37

Am Euro Stephen sick at? My

1:39

next guest will be William Been

1:41

and we'll be discussing his book

1:43

Political Theology Of International Order that

1:45

was published by Oxford University Press

1:47

in Twenty Twenty. William. Being

1:49

is currently an Associate Professor of

1:52

International Relations at the National University

1:54

of Singapore or William Bain are

1:56

welcome to the new Bucks network

1:58

that do. So. There to be your.

2:01

Soil. Is like to begin our interviews. By asking

2:03

are just saw tell us a

2:05

little bit about yourself and what's

2:07

the back story behind writing the

2:09

book? Well I'm by my and

2:12

international political theorist at the National

2:14

University of Singapore and I had

2:16

been. To ralph my career.

2:18

Interested and questions of order,

2:21

pipe patterns of order ah,

2:23

a ten and international relations

2:25

for example my first book

2:28

and my early. Research.

2:30

Focused on ah. Deployed

2:34

will theory of empire and

2:36

specifically the idea of trusteeship.

2:38

the idea of a lot

2:40

of the project of civilization

2:42

and the like and and

2:44

that and drew me an

2:46

end to thinking about ordered

2:48

international relations. not least of

2:50

which because trusteeship ah.away from

2:52

this dominate image of a

2:54

world of independent sovereign states

2:56

and and so ah that

2:58

work jirga me and to

3:00

know the idea that there

3:02

something. Beyond a world of states

3:04

and and again. And know that.

3:07

You know topic of yo

3:09

central importance today and international

3:11

relations which is some player.

3:14

And that would that

3:17

work actually? Lead indirectly

3:19

and. Unintentionally.

3:22

Ah to. The

3:25

political theology work ah the of

3:27

I did. Not. But

3:29

I should say that I. I. Stumbled into

3:31

this project jar jar much

3:34

on an accidental way. When.

3:37

I was. Ah, I'm.

3:39

Writing. The conclusion out of

3:42

my first book on on

3:44

trusteeship. And and I do

3:46

you mean I don't mention writing it that

3:48

finalize a get the last couple of days

3:51

before are sending an oft of the process

3:53

that i have a the last sentence of

3:55

the but. Suggests. That

3:57

trusteeship is morally a guy

4:00

you while because it fans.

4:02

Are commonly are widely held

4:05

conceptions of freedom quality, And

4:08

various other aspects are my finished

4:10

by saying and com and and

4:13

are understandings of common humanity. And

4:16

I had a bit of a panic. ah

4:18

ah that there was up a couple

4:20

days away from sending this but to

4:22

the press and and I thought well.

4:25

What? Exactly do I mean by humanity? Care?

4:27

Of course or was time to

4:29

address Saddam and not book. And

4:32

so I. Thought that I would write

4:34

a book. About. The Idea

4:36

Of Humanity and and International Relations.

4:38

So I began reading ah, For.

4:42

That project Done and done. If

4:44

you're interested in humanity, before long,

4:46

you'll find yourself. Reading

4:48

about natural long. And

4:50

and if you read about natural law for a

4:53

very long, you'll find yourself Middle Ages. And

4:55

it was there that I had this

4:57

a pleasant he actually will. Not

5:00

my perception of middle ages

5:02

was was any sang. At

5:05

a. Bus what I what I'd been

5:07

told me I had this sort of idea.

5:09

And. Which are shared and the

5:12

popular imagination that that that middle ages

5:14

with said. Subsume. To

5:16

religion was backward at fair

5:18

bit of cruelty and the

5:20

like. an time job. And.

5:22

After the modern world and in

5:24

the context of international relations, I'm

5:27

a modern state System on approved

5:29

was a progression from illness, world.

5:32

Not what I was really shocked by. What

5:35

happens at. An effect

5:37

by I had it all wrong. And

5:40

and he I began reading

5:42

it. As historians of medieval

5:45

political thought, he and I learned

5:47

for example, The. Idea

5:49

is a natural Rights constitutions,

5:51

parliament's university in separate. All

5:54

of these are medieval years.

5:56

And what's more interesting than that? And

5:59

this is where. Ah, the penny

6:01

dropped if you go. On.

6:04

Is that these historians of medieval

6:06

weather will thought canada to work

6:08

on the different historical period as

6:10

nation. Most of his think in

6:12

terms of ancient medieval an otter

6:14

and that's it period as Asia

6:16

not dominates and. And. International

6:18

relations, but these historians of medieval

6:21

let it roll thought, see a

6:23

great deal of continuity between what

6:25

we conventionally understand as medieval and

6:27

modern. In other words, they would

6:29

see. The period running

6:32

from of that twelve or thirteen century

6:34

to the eighteenth century. As

6:36

a continuous. Period.

6:38

Of experience. I

6:41

hadn't. And and so

6:43

I began to wonder. What?

6:46

Would international relations a look

6:48

like. If. I took

6:51

their of historical period as

6:53

Asian seriously. Because. Again, I

6:55

are as very much wedded to

6:58

the sharp contrast between met evil

7:00

and modern. Of course that contrast.

7:03

Blocks outside of continuity

7:05

between the two. And.

7:08

And so I you know again

7:10

and taking that seriously, I set

7:12

out to. Recover

7:15

He. Knows. Continuity

7:17

isn't and along the way. Of

7:20

the. Are.

7:22

Neat. And. All along the

7:24

way, ah I came to realize.

7:28

That that. We.

7:30

Added Inherited. that is, we

7:32

and the modern world. Add

7:34

inherited a great deal from

7:36

the but in this middle

7:38

ages that were supposedly left

7:40

behind. Enough so that I

7:43

don't think it's inappropriate. To

7:45

sink in terms at least in some

7:47

respects. Of Living and on

7:49

Modern Middle Ages. Now. What are

7:52

some of the intellectual influences on

7:54

your work? God I know. Michael

7:56

Job Julep Season work of a

7:58

theological. Origin. The maternity

8:01

I was. Running.

8:03

Through my mind as I was reading.org

8:05

guy either any other influences out. On

8:08

your particular take on. Our

8:10

political theology and me up medieval period.

8:13

Yeah, well so it it took me

8:15

about seniors to write this book. candid

8:17

and when I was for reading around

8:19

about humanity at night, accidents are. Conducting.

8:22

Research even before then. The

8:25

single most important influence of my

8:27

thinking is the work of Francis

8:29

Oakley. Math. He was

8:31

the one of these historians of

8:33

medieval political thought. That

8:35

I was referring to earn a moment

8:37

ago. Oakley is is

8:39

known for ah. Two.

8:42

Or three. Major

8:44

contributions. One of those

8:46

contributions is. The

8:49

significance of theological

8:51

voluntourism. And and

8:54

how it shapes. Political.

8:56

Questions and the Oakley has

8:59

also have made a significant

9:01

contribution to what's called Console

9:03

Euro. Some conceal their as

9:06

I'm as his type of

9:08

constitutionalism. I in

9:10

in the church and then the third

9:12

major area that Oakley could target Sewers

9:14

the. Distinction between

9:17

gods and silly An ordinary

9:19

power. Know. What's am

9:21

an important in this regard as

9:23

that is that Oakley was that

9:25

was the again in most important

9:27

thing here. Who. Helped me.

9:30

Make. These connections between

9:32

medieval Latin and and

9:35

modern Adam. And

9:37

I and many ways built

9:40

on his work. For example,

9:42

ah, the distinction between a

9:44

minute and impose Reuters is

9:46

something that I have learned

9:48

from him. He of course

9:50

took it from a and

9:52

white cat. Ah ah and

9:54

and and so so it

9:57

in a very real sense.

9:59

Ah ah. Extend Oakley's work

10:01

and you going international relations contact.

10:03

But as I said a moment

10:05

ago. I. I.

10:08

You. Know who wrote this book over the period

10:10

of decade is of course any time you.

10:14

Not. Your work on something that

10:17

longer going to be influenced by

10:19

a range of people. One of

10:21

those you've already mentioned is Michael

10:23

Our Gillespie. And in fact,

10:26

it was reading. Gillespie is the

10:28

illogical origins of the dermody. Thought.

10:31

That first sort of drew

10:33

my attention to the importance

10:36

of of normalise. Ah

10:38

and it's impact on on the

10:40

modern world. And I was reading

10:42

ah the last The at the

10:44

same time I was reading Oakley

10:47

and so so oh, I've or

10:49

rather gillespie help me sort. Of. Sort.

10:52

Of make up at sort of. More.

10:55

Modern contemporary connections to some

10:57

of these historical scenes that

10:59

that Oakley was talking but

11:01

I gene else gain as

11:03

it is another figure in

11:05

that regard. Her Gifford lectures

11:07

on on Sovereignty talk about

11:09

these these themes. It.

11:11

It's important to note some of

11:14

these other medieval ah a kiss

11:16

or him from his eagle one

11:18

who thought though because you're these

11:20

These are really important thinkers here.

11:22

I think I deserve our a

11:24

wider hearing be on therapy the

11:26

field. Cuba, then you're

11:28

really ill for that. My thinking

11:31

beyond Oakley and and with the

11:33

that includes people like James Molten

11:35

and and and James Burns Anthony

11:37

Black Hiker own branded Bryant Brain

11:40

Charity. All. Of these

11:42

people and. again

11:44

at alerted the to

11:46

this idea. That. There

11:48

is meaningful punching you. it it.

11:51

Ah, Between

11:53

medieval and moderate. And

11:56

then thinking about sort of other people.

11:58

Ah, Your

12:01

as i work through various scenes and

12:03

he he will have noticed and but

12:05

that. Know. I have

12:07

standalone chapters on. People. Like

12:09

the Lutheran odds and it

12:12

can and so ah era

12:14

I'm certainly indebted to to

12:16

people like Joshua Mitchell. And.

12:19

An end sinking.looser and Hobbes.

12:21

And then of course of

12:24

my sort of. Broader

12:26

interest and international order

12:28

and especially the foundations

12:30

or presuppositions of. Of

12:33

International Order is very much

12:35

sort of inspired by the

12:37

work of David Armitage. Yeah,

12:39

it's Foundations of of International

12:41

Relations. And. Was

12:43

published and and a. Bully.

12:46

Those Twenty Twelve. And

12:49

and so while I had already

12:51

been well into working on this

12:53

but by this time but but

12:55

Armitage, his work was really important.

12:57

And helping me though guess.

13:00

What? Exactly what the you know

13:02

what it was I was doing.

13:04

because at at up to that

13:07

point I have been reading graciously

13:09

about the Middle Ages. And

13:11

but I wasn't always sure. How.

13:14

To presented how the packages

13:16

and found into David Armitage

13:18

was. Was. Important and and

13:20

and sort of to the pointing

13:23

me and I direction and and

13:25

inspiring me. And

13:27

and what might be possible Now

13:30

a major. Point of

13:32

this blog or framework of The

13:34

Spot and it's Women and Will

13:36

Title is this concept of political

13:38

reality. Now this is kind

13:40

of our a wide range of field,

13:43

but what's Well, maybe for some of

13:45

our listeners who. Are. Unfamiliar with

13:47

the confused on its or. What? Do

13:49

you mean by political be allergy and

13:51

term in terms of your research and

13:54

the book? While. You're right

13:56

to observe that political theology is

13:58

is is a for really broad

14:00

and and differentiated feel. Pleasure with

14:03

the allergy is no one signing

14:05

but rather. An it's

14:07

a field or an idea that

14:10

is. Defined. By a

14:12

think that it's. Raise.

14:14

Until you get different expressions of

14:16

political theology, one one expression is

14:19

the idea of a political Theology

14:21

is the idea that. That

14:24

ah ah politics is

14:26

predicated on revelation are

14:28

somehow derives it's authority.

14:31

From. Ah, revelation.

14:34

Another understanding: a political theology

14:36

is more historical an internet

14:39

orientation. Back here we might

14:41

think goes fab the influential

14:44

work out of Carl Schmitt.

14:46

you famously suggests that not.

14:50

All modern political concepts

14:53

are secularized the A

14:55

logical concepts and so

14:58

there's a historical project

15:01

and an understanding but

15:03

translation. It's interesting,

15:05

in my case, that I didn't set

15:08

out. To

15:10

write a book about political theology.

15:12

rather I was interested in Middle

15:15

Ages and our shape, the modern

15:17

world and self and and a

15:20

surprising why I suspect for or.

15:23

Readers. And and to be listeners.

15:25

Is. That I came to political

15:28

theology as it's conventionally understood

15:30

fairly late. For example, it

15:32

though I'm the introduction my

15:34

make references to smell quotes

15:36

net ad. And. In two

15:38

places. but again, I came to

15:41

snip really late. And

15:43

I guess supply and I want to stress care

15:45

who he. Is up

15:47

Political theology? Is. Not

15:49

exhausted by Schmidt or Leo

15:51

Strauss or other. People.

15:53

And and the twentieth century

15:56

but rather a political theology

15:58

is something that was ah

16:00

hello again as up there

16:02

as well as an insanity

16:04

of ideas most. Was. Sort

16:06

of commonplace and in the Middle

16:08

Ages seven so so lucky approach

16:11

I took her the idea that

16:13

guide it. In it's

16:15

a general idea is that political

16:17

theology. A hub. Is.

16:20

Is. Ah, That. You.

16:23

The use of of ah

16:25

the are rather using. Theological.

16:28

Concepts to comment on Politics:

16:31

My Ah Ha. No most

16:33

common example of this is

16:36

the analogy between God and

16:38

and political rulers for example.

16:41

Ah, so I can see a

16:43

logical concepts to get are used

16:45

to climb on politics or to

16:47

think about politics or and in

16:49

all the powers of a human

16:52

sovereign hundred described in terms of

16:54

the power of God on self

16:56

worth and and so that's that's

16:58

actually how I approached it from

17:00

the start and and. As.

17:03

I've already said i. I'd.

17:06

Sort of. But got. Engaged

17:09

I'm sort of twentieth century. Pull it off

17:11

the all it. Political. Theology

17:13

debates, And. Rather late.

17:15

And the fruit? Now, how?

17:18

Do. These ideas of political

17:20

be algae. how would they

17:22

relate to. Conceptions. Of

17:25

International order in. In.

17:27

The basics as because we're going again. The

17:29

more details me go through the through though.

17:32

He. Didn't or well, With

17:34

like a landslide you can get lucky.

17:36

Just about anywhere dearly beloved. We are

17:38

gathered here today to has anyone seen

17:41

the bride and groom. Sorry.

17:44

Were here we were getting lucky and will and

17:46

only last Aca. Time now, lucky man

17:48

to see now with cash prizes

17:50

that add up quicker than a

17:52

guess registry. In that case, I

17:54

pronounce you again for free at

17:56

like a Lancer to.com Daily bonuses

17:58

or rating no purchase necessary. Void

18:00

where prohibited by law it seems. I think it is

18:02

just. Was. One

18:05

of the or fundamental questions

18:08

when turnoff relations is about.

18:11

The nature of International order, in

18:14

fact, and the international relations as

18:16

field study, at least in it's

18:18

earliest incarnation, could be described as

18:21

being focus on the problem of

18:23

war and the conditions of peace,

18:25

order, and security. And.

18:28

And so the shape

18:30

nature of of international

18:32

order has been a

18:34

concern for. International.

18:36

Serious. From the very start we

18:38

have all sorts of of. And.

18:42

Or contributions and explanations

18:44

of of.order. Know and

18:46

so called political Real. It's

18:48

hard. Enough up the

18:50

particular understanding of a border,

18:53

as do a liberals and

18:55

constructivist and all sorts of

18:57

other different tradition. It's one

18:59

of the source. He

19:01

and while I think is

19:04

interesting and provocative claimants the

19:06

park. Adam is ah.

19:09

The. Way and which we. Tend.

19:11

To imagine international order or

19:13

rather, what I would describe

19:15

as the dominant understanding of

19:18

international order. Spreading. Some

19:20

springs from. The. Most

19:22

unlikely of source on that

19:24

is the creation story and

19:27

genesis. I. Admit, this is

19:29

really interesting because one of the

19:31

sort of staple teams. That.

19:33

That Students of International Relations

19:35

or Thought from the Earth

19:38

Starters.international Relations of Secular Donate.

19:40

And and not and that that's

19:43

a secular domain that left behind

19:45

the religious. A Middle

19:47

Ages. And. So I'm coming

19:49

on and several actually the the

19:51

creation story and genesis actually. Say.

19:54

Shapes are thinking about international order

19:56

in ways that I'm. That

19:58

yeah, We we don't. No A during

20:00

are unaware of what I'm getting at here.

20:03

Is that the way in which

20:05

the creation story. Ah. It

20:08

in Genesis interpret is interpreted

20:10

and forms our understanding of

20:12

the nature of God, the

20:15

extent of his power, his

20:17

relation to Ah, the universe,

20:19

and so forth. And and

20:21

this and turn. Entails.

20:25

Certain ontological in the past I'm

20:27

a logical committed so to give

20:29

you an example ah at the

20:31

or the to the to the

20:33

to understandings or interpretations of of

20:36

creation that. That. I follow

20:38

sort of the park as that

20:40

the creation story. It's where I

20:42

can be understood as a as

20:44

a rational act. It's

20:47

an app that is a

20:49

up that follows are rational

20:51

plan could t and then

20:53

the mind of God care

20:55

for the universe is rational

20:57

and tell which. Adam.

21:00

And and are certain

21:02

implications of of.interpretation for

21:04

how the coroner conversely

21:07

another understanding of of

21:09

or interpretation of the

21:11

creation story. Is.

21:13

Thought it is simply a little

21:15

a willful without reason. And.

21:18

That to. Ah has.

21:21

Important implications are.

21:24

Not. For how we think about what are in

21:26

this case. Up, the universe is

21:28

no longer rationally until which what

21:31

is it? Does he not come

21:33

into existence according to a rational

21:35

plan, but rather it simply an

21:38

act of of will with out

21:40

release And therefore the universe is

21:42

radically contingents and and because it's

21:44

rather pleased engine. Intent: Edit

21:47

it past the be understood. And

21:49

and a particular west. So

21:51

that sort of the the

21:53

basic sort of starting point

21:56

out of me. But.

21:58

A of. What I. Do when

22:00

the park and and you'll see that

22:02

this creation story. Howard's interpreted

22:05

and our informed. God

22:07

and his attributes of is

22:09

a recurring theme. Throughout.

22:12

The buck and then and then.

22:14

What's particularly interesting as that is

22:16

that you've then in get and

22:19

this you get analogies and this

22:21

can that. back to Bobby just

22:23

disgusting room and ago about political

22:25

theology she get analogies. On.

22:29

Whereby a human beings

22:31

for example, creating a

22:33

commonwealth. And. The same way

22:35

that God created the human are some

22:38

bad again. Ah has implications

22:40

for how we understand politics.

22:42

Yeah, that distinction between reason

22:45

and will. That's a role

22:47

important. Distinction between

22:49

of medieval school last answers on

22:51

which kind of builds on now.

22:54

Aristotle. Plato, and probably

22:56

most famously St Thomas Aquinas

22:58

a. Scene. Albert the Great. But

23:00

then we also got New Liberalism which focuses

23:02

on the will of God which is William

23:05

A Pocket and so forth with it. Would

23:07

you say that's an accurate. A

23:09

source? Yes, yes, that is sort of

23:11

the The Fates up. There

23:14

was a series of a contrast

23:16

are are are distinctions running through

23:18

the right. See creation as being

23:21

a. Rational

23:23

or a willful are. Not

23:26

and turn corresponds with eminent and

23:28

imposed order and then if you

23:30

want to put name means you

23:33

know to to these distinctions you

23:35

would find. Say. A

23:37

silo of Alexandria. Ah a

23:40

gusto Thomas Aquinas, and like

23:42

as on the side of

23:44

the rational and the. Internet.

23:47

Syria order and then you have

23:49

have on the other side William

23:51

Of Ofcom, ah, Thomas Hobbes and

23:53

and so forth. On the other

23:56

thought the letter Both bill voluntourism,

23:58

norm analyst. Will

24:00

for a account one one.

24:04

One. Quick point though about this

24:06

is not. These.

24:08

Distinctions don't get out that

24:10

the least in the medieval

24:12

contact between. They don't get

24:14

on. A contrast

24:17

between scholastic since I'm in something else.

24:19

In fact, William, a Lock Of was

24:21

a scholastic. And and so that the.

24:24

The. What's important to bear in

24:26

mind is not an there is

24:29

this tendency to see still ostracism

24:31

is one cent but rather than

24:33

there were that debates up within

24:35

skull asked the says i'm in

24:37

so in this case that aka

24:40

men and and his followers were

24:42

scholastic to challenge wished add. Up

24:45

the Skull Aspect method and

24:47

and an. Epistemological commitments

24:49

of say, people like Trump's Aquinas

24:51

yeah, no Zola. There was also

24:54

distinction between played on Aerosol can

24:56

see how does Acquaintance was more

24:58

famously. Arab. More ears the

25:00

Chilean orientated be at. St. Dot

25:03

don't scotus he was born fall plate

25:05

says that there was that and. And

25:08

address or that stay afloat. So

25:10

so Plato and Aristotle into a

25:12

figure in the story. Ah,

25:15

quite prominent like, but at

25:17

different times. Remember. Where

25:19

for Talking about a period of some.

25:22

Animals and years. and

25:24

Plato is particularly important.

25:26

Ah, No. Can

25:29

and Early Christianity. And.

25:33

Plato is often the site not

25:35

the only site but he's one

25:37

of the a really important sites.

25:40

About this question about the

25:42

relation between Greek philosophy and.

25:46

Christian Theology or or

25:48

Revelation. The. What's important about

25:51

Plato in this regard? Oh, it's not

25:53

a Plato on. The

25:55

you get an introduction the political

25:57

theory and modern University which of

25:59

course. There's no Republic, right? That's

26:03

read first. But the what

26:05

was really important to these

26:07

early christians acres I'm was

26:10

the dialogue to us. Which.

26:12

Is the cosmonauts making story?

26:15

On that that Plato offers an

26:17

and and so what happens here

26:19

is that is that to mayor's

26:22

or rather the story that that

26:24

is told and and two mayors.

26:27

Is. Not identical with the Christian

26:29

creation story and fact. it's

26:31

got a couple sort of clans

26:33

that are deeply problematic. But

26:35

what's important though is not.

26:38

The. Cosmos story costs was making

26:40

story and and Two Mayors

26:42

was close enough to the

26:44

christian story. Ah the

26:47

Judeo Christian story. ah that

26:49

sound And And Genesis Adam.

26:52

With. That attempts were made to

26:55

assimilate thought it least parts

26:57

of Plato's thought. That and

26:59

to Christian ideas that you

27:01

get you get ah ah.

27:03

Ah, Numerous attempts at

27:06

some the says and and

27:08

it's not a terribly com

27:10

plants how be how the

27:12

synthesis works out those parts

27:14

of Plato that could be

27:16

reconciled with revelation. Word. Were.

27:20

Assimilated are used as as necessary,

27:22

and those parts which could not

27:24

be reconciled with with revelation were

27:27

discarded as being an error. Hadn't.

27:30

Been. Fact It at erode you you

27:32

get early Christian thinkers who. Were

27:35

quite open and sign that

27:37

that plato a dead have

27:39

access and did know a

27:41

part of the truth. But.

27:44

He didn't ah outside of all

27:46

but the truth because of course

27:49

that he did not have the

27:51

benefit of a shot. At

27:53

the knowledge of the good news, so

27:56

of of the Christian religion. And.

27:58

So you you have. Early Christian

28:01

period and and and at

28:03

well and to the Middle

28:05

Ages. I'm. So

28:07

called Neil Plants in the sun

28:09

and up and a plant in

28:11

his influence Up that endures for

28:13

the or quite some time and

28:15

and I guess perhaps the iconic

28:17

example out of this that. Synthesis.

28:20

Of of Greek philosophy and

28:22

specifically Plato. Adam and

28:24

and Christian theology is is found

28:27

in Augusta. Ah me. Ah

28:29

me you. If you look at Augusta

28:31

his writings of Baloch for the Asian

28:33

and the Organization of World, it's it's

28:36

it's shot through with. With. Plot

28:38

as ideas. Aristotle.

28:40

Figures quite prominently rather later

28:42

on in in the story.

28:45

Ah, A he becomes

28:47

important and the eleventh twelfth,

28:49

and especially the thirteenth century.

28:54

When. Or

28:56

me. When and I'm

28:58

like is. A. Natural

29:01

philosophy is is weren't covered. Ah

29:03

and by way of Islamic centers

29:06

and and the like and soaps

29:08

you have especially in the period

29:10

of said the thirteenth century. And.

29:13

Where. There's a great deal of interest

29:15

Stone and Aristotle. In. The

29:18

universities. And. This

29:20

eventually wrote them leads to

29:22

a problem. And because again

29:24

there is this question of.

29:28

The relation of philosophy

29:30

and and revelation. There

29:33

are. Ah there

29:35

are claims in an

29:37

and ah: Aristotle's Natural

29:40

Philosophy. And at our be

29:42

you know. Manifestly. Opposed

29:44

to. A Christian doctrine

29:46

above all else would let. The

29:49

most important was Aristotle's idea of

29:51

the eternity of the universe and

29:53

Aristotle other have any idea that

29:56

bid universe was created in the

29:58

way the Genesis is. It's a

30:00

rather it was eternal and and. And.

30:03

It didn't help that Aristotle

30:05

or rather the recovery of

30:07

Aristotle and this period. Was

30:10

facilitated. By. The

30:13

Bears have a rival religion,

30:15

namely Islam. And and

30:17

so there was a certain amount owed. Suspicion

30:20

and indeed hostility to

30:23

Aristotle's ratings for that

30:25

reason. But but again

30:27

for a result, Spam.

30:30

Or the fruits of it

30:32

couldn't be reconciled with. Your

30:36

important tenets of Christian doctrine.

30:41

We. Would and and and also

30:43

a fan. Out

30:47

that. I'm sorry. The thoughts just

30:50

that a skate me so I'll just

30:52

I'll I'll I'll leave that, leave it

30:54

there. But to say that? ah. The

30:57

iraq Plato and Aristotle or

30:59

do you figure click prominently

31:01

in the story at at

31:03

different periods. Yeah, and. There's.

31:05

Also, be a condemnation of months

31:08

while seventy seven that's related to.

31:11

Aristotle? What was that? Will. Allow

31:13

Well yes, so I mean that

31:15

fan of what I was getting

31:18

not at is that. Is

31:20

that? Twelve Seventy

31:22

Seven. And. Was

31:25

a condemnation issue by the

31:27

bishop of Pelvis? Ah and

31:29

and. And. This

31:32

condemnation and all that. Two

31:34

hundred and two hundred odd.

31:36

A. Principles

31:39

or statements many of which

31:41

though not all of which

31:43

are related to Aristotle in

31:45

fact Thomas Aquinas as thought

31:47

gets.that drawn up and and

31:49

all of this and. It's.

31:52

Important to to. To.

31:54

Know that the Condemnation of Twelve

31:56

Seventy Seven. Isn't sort

31:59

of a a. Mama at which

32:01

the day after everything trying. And.

32:04

Rather tall seventy seven

32:06

symbolize is. A. Period

32:08

of uncertainty and change. There was

32:10

a pr a great deal. Love

32:13

of. Sir. Have to

32:15

pay dispute. At the

32:17

University of Paris and and in

32:19

this context. About

32:22

the curriculum. Ah, Related

32:26

for example, to the teaching

32:29

Aristotle what exactly was taught,

32:31

and crucially, who taught whether

32:34

whether theologians were teaching. Ah,

32:37

the various things or have a masters

32:39

of arts And so so I a

32:41

problem with tall seventy seven. And.

32:45

Isn't. Any. One

32:47

cent itself. It's a whole

32:49

lot stir. Up to

32:51

date his shoes and the like

32:54

a sec were elated to. Ah.power,

32:57

gods, freedom and the like.

33:00

Soap So you either one

33:02

group of theologians uber quite

33:05

hostile to to Aristotle and

33:07

were concerned that the metaphysical

33:09

nest necessity of of of

33:12

natural philosophy it. Might.

33:14

Actually, constrained got some way

33:16

and again. This poses a

33:18

theological problem because the Bible

33:20

tells us that God is

33:22

all powerful. God. Is A

33:25

is a god of our it

33:27

makes an offense the case then

33:29

he he can't be. And. Strained

33:31

by any rational necessity.

33:34

So. Again and at the top,

33:37

Seventy Seven symbolizes a period of

33:39

uncertainty and changed. on and and

33:41

and it really turns on. The.

33:44

Competence of of philosophy?

33:46

What could philosophy tell

33:48

us specifically? What could.

33:51

Philosophy. Tell us about. Truth.

33:54

About God Truths about the Christian

33:56

religion, right? And so no. So

33:58

the concern here. Was

34:01

that. Philosophy. Aristotelian

34:03

Natural Philosophy of know like.

34:06

Was. Intruding and areas in

34:08

which it didn't belong. Yeah,

34:10

areas that that were the

34:13

domain of. The. All it's

34:15

so so. what comes out of

34:17

is already knew that can. Not.

34:20

Answering theological questions with

34:22

theologically acceptable answer space

34:25

and and so. What?

34:28

What's? What's. Really

34:31

crucially important here to keep in

34:33

front of says that. There's.

34:35

A tendency to refer

34:37

to Christian doctrine as

34:39

if Christian doctrine. Is.

34:41

Sad, old and has always been.

34:43

so that's not the case. There's

34:45

always been. Debating. Disputes

34:48

about this and and twelve seventy

34:50

Seven some go lives is. a

34:52

period at which up. There

34:56

was a great deal of debate

34:58

about Ah Up A about these

35:00

doctrines. How we think about God,

35:02

God's relation to the universe and

35:04

what God can do. You know

35:06

whether God can move the universe?

35:08

You know he. I'm a straight

35:10

line or and or rectilinear emotion

35:12

and so forth. And so you

35:14

go through the the articles that

35:16

were condemned at All Seventy Seven.

35:18

You'll see all of it's sort

35:20

of things about.weaving the universe and

35:22

or rectilinear. Moshe Arc Arc Ah,

35:24

I'm. At you whether or not

35:26

the universe as a terminal one, n

35:28

and so forth. For. Me, my

35:30

purpose is what's what's important about ah

35:32

a tall somebody sudden is that it's

35:34

a catalyst for thought and the and

35:36

you get on a number of things

35:38

that come out of bullets up in

35:40

these up. But. What's important

35:42

for me? To. Died

35:45

make space. For.

35:47

Nominal Us to volunteer as the

35:49

O J rates of see. An

35:52

important sort of strand are important concern

35:55

of Tall Seventy Seven and. Is.

35:57

Again, vindicating gods

35:59

freedom. You. Know ensuring that

36:01

God is not. Snared.

36:04

By. Metaphysical. Necessity

36:06

And and this opens the door

36:08

if you will. Add. On. To.

36:11

this ball interest the all

36:13

a t associated with Ofcom

36:15

and and others that that

36:17

not only take root but

36:20

begins to more it. And

36:22

into the fourteenth century. And then

36:24

of course, as I argue. Ah,

36:27

Ah ah. This.

36:29

This did he get.

36:31

Ah, it's. See.

36:33

All a D or rather the

36:36

the ontological on pets module commitments

36:38

of this urology are gradually assimilated

36:41

into the modern world. Now what

36:43

were some of the implications of

36:45

these theological debate on the high

36:48

in late medieval. Period.

36:50

In terms of blood, political.

36:53

Discussions about the nature of the state

36:55

and also been a German world. Order

36:58

because also allow these theologians.

37:00

Most. Famous example: be in sync I was

37:02

acquainted. There. Are also talking

37:05

about the nature of God. but they're also

37:07

talking about the nature all the proper Christian

37:09

not. L Social. Swell.

37:12

Well that and. I'm

37:15

not. I'm not entirely sure I

37:17

understand the question. ah, in the

37:19

sense that that there wasn't sort

37:21

of a a direct. You.

37:24

Know. Implications.

37:26

For politics Again, these

37:28

theologians are interested and

37:31

see a logical question.

37:33

It's hub. And.

37:35

And whatever and impact the

37:37

really on on politics. Is.

37:40

In direct. So. So

37:43

sure what I'm what I'm I

37:45

guess pushing back gently on his

37:47

the idea that say Thomas Aquinas

37:49

or or or John of Para

37:52

Ser. No. Other feel

37:54

it in middle Ages, part political

37:56

theorists. They're not political thera there

37:59

there the allergens who are interested

38:01

in the East. These.

38:03

Theological questions that happens,

38:06

though, is that others.

38:09

Pick. Up these are you pick up

38:11

things I did her night put them.

38:14

To. The use

38:17

ah ah ah and and

38:19

politics and and and making

38:21

sense out of Politics by

38:23

the. But. If I could

38:26

give you one example of sort of

38:28

the in direct nature of this, it's

38:30

not an. If you

38:32

if you follow soon up the the

38:35

normal a small interest story. Which.

38:38

Emphasizes the primacy of the

38:40

will and god. Ah and

38:42

the like, You end up. With.

38:46

Notions. Of imposed order. Ah

38:48

are constructed. Order in order. That's

38:50

the product. Dogs will one artifice.

38:52

Well you you get out of

38:55

this the console. Your man. The.

38:57

Idea that the church. Is.

39:00

Properly understood as a

39:02

constitutional monarchy. Not. That

39:04

the Pope himself as is, is a

39:07

monarch. Who ah is

39:09

subject to certain restraints

39:11

and and. Up. On.

39:14

The sort of one of the cardinal

39:16

ideas comes out of consent theory is

39:18

hop. What's given can be taken back.

39:21

A and so so we

39:23

find this and and console

39:26

years sought an An An

39:28

Ecclesiastical Constitutions in the safe

39:30

fifteenth century, the and and

39:32

so forth. And this

39:34

of course is picked up by

39:37

others and is used to describe.

39:40

Ah, and constitutions. And and second,

39:42

our politics right? that? yeah, I

39:44

guess what up? One of the

39:47

things that we always have to.

39:51

Pinch ourselves to make sure we're sinking

39:53

in the right way. Is that?

39:57

The Church or Church in Hope for

39:59

the modern. Soon as a plate

40:01

you don't you want on that is

40:03

it it. It's acquaintance South Park where

40:05

you go worship but the church in

40:08

the middle aged. That

40:10

isn't quite the and as as. John.

40:12

Noble sagging stay mostly want so this.

40:15

Than the church was the state. To

40:17

be a christian was the service and

40:20

and so in this sense. That

40:23

church on this. You

40:25

know on on this you could

40:28

be considered as a political community

40:30

like other political communities. So the

40:32

question is what kind of monarch

40:35

was the Pope? Was the Pope

40:37

an absolute monarch? Or. Was

40:39

the Pope a constitutional. And

40:43

and so they can sell

40:45

your movement Gives this your

40:47

idea for pooping a constitutional

40:49

mark markets and again that.

40:52

Leads to sort of modern

40:54

constitution thought. what if if

40:56

you trace back. In

40:59

the search the really suck. the conceal your

41:01

movement. You. Will find that some of it,

41:03

not all, but some of it. As

41:06

roots and not nominal Us ball

41:08

and tourists soil. So. That

41:10

would be one example. Of

41:12

thugs. I'm. Of

41:15

us. How these

41:17

theological debate. About

41:20

God, the nature of his power,

41:22

and so forth. Yeah,

41:24

eventually through a circuitous

41:26

a manner. Ah, Can.

41:29

Shake Politics and how we imagine. So

41:32

now we know. From the late medieval

41:34

period to what's Connelly call. A

41:36

Renaissance and sold him. Unless

41:39

we see the rise of what's called

41:41

Renaissance era humanism by have a a

41:43

bit of a different. Twist.

41:46

To lot. Theological. Questions

41:48

than say the medieval scholastic the

41:50

we've been. Discussing. Both

41:52

like in terms of Aquinas but

41:54

also been movable As a what's

41:56

the significance of all Renaissance human

41:58

is on. The developmental math

42:01

be our Gdr during this period.

42:04

While. Self. But when we

42:06

when we think about breath Renaissance

42:08

Humanism. We. Have

42:10

to immediately. Notice

42:13

that.the modern imagination is

42:15

still very much. Be.

42:18

Home to add. A

42:20

caricature or or. Distorted.

42:24

Story. About the emergence

42:26

of the darn at the

42:28

standard story goes something like.

42:31

A The Middle Ages was

42:33

a static and backward world.

42:36

It was static and backward

42:38

because it was sam to

42:41

religion and the Catholic Church.

42:44

And that this stifle

42:46

individuality and Asia and

42:48

if was concerned with.

42:50

Otherworldly are issues and neglected

42:53

the world and so forth

42:55

and and and fortunately for

42:57

for us, moderates, The

43:00

ah. Forward. Looking

43:02

Humanists in are these intrepid

43:04

individuals who. Ah, Sir.

43:07

Off the yoke of ah

43:09

this a stultifying religion and

43:11

recovered classical learning, classical literature

43:13

and alike and open the

43:15

door to murder rate you

43:17

get. You get those really?

43:21

Distorted Story and of course the

43:23

other And their stories are at

43:25

least scholastic, right? It's the still

43:27

last six who are. Holding.

43:30

Everything back. Not.

43:34

Had this this story of

43:36

which which is interesting I

43:38

appreciated. Ah, I've exaggerated. bet

43:40

that the this sort of story

43:42

about the. Or. And looking

43:44

humanists in the like is actually

43:47

a product of humanists to stroke

43:49

historiography on. Itself right and

43:51

and and then not lends

43:53

itself to this secularists Asian

43:55

narratives that that we tell

43:58

our in in the modern

44:00

world where we we invite

44:02

her we gradually a skate.

44:04

Ah, This. Religious Middle Ages

44:06

and we. Have

44:09

this gradual sent to

44:11

a secular world and.

44:14

Not. That is as as I said

44:16

moment ago or a one sided. Narratives.

44:21

And and and most l

44:23

almost all but not every

44:25

single as the humanists where

44:27

where I'm. Very much.

44:30

Committed. Christian say didn't reject

44:33

Christianity. Humanism was not about.

44:36

Rejecting. Religion In

44:38

fact the human as made

44:40

important contributions to ah. Theology.

44:43

Religious learning for example,

44:45

I making translations of

44:48

the bible or or

44:50

recovering ah. Ah

44:53

religious tax ah that had bed

44:55

and for but you know on

44:57

their if you either corrupted or

45:00

misinterpreted by by the scholastic. so

45:02

so the southern. Know that

45:04

that the key point here is

45:06

not. The. Humanists movement

45:08

doesn't know what turn

45:10

away. From. Religion.

45:13

Case. All of that said,

45:15

there are important differences between the human

45:17

person. The skull aspects rate that they're

45:19

not the same thing and I'm not

45:21

trying to collapse with distinction. Her. The.

45:24

Human us are in fact

45:26

more concerned. With

45:28

world we problems and and of

45:30

course because they're concerned with role with

45:33

problems. They. They

45:35

are. Interested

45:37

in advancing a different correct.

45:42

Grammar. Oratory.

45:44

And so forth as opposed to what

45:46

the theologian are interested in. Their curriculum

45:48

is. It logic.

45:50

And and. Metaphysics:

45:53

And and at and so forth. And.

45:57

For. Me: What? What's important to know?

46:00

Is Not. The

46:02

humanists and these nominal us

46:04

to volunteer as theologians. Can.

46:07

Be seen as parallel movements. Again,

46:09

they're not the same thing. Eight,

46:12

But they do have some shared

46:15

idea, some shared of Santa days

46:17

when the lights on, and most

46:19

importantly. That. Shared of vanity.

46:23

Can be seen as an emphasis on the

46:25

primacy of the will. And. God

46:27

and and Mans Saudi him and as

46:29

had this idea. That. We

46:31

could. Improve. Our lot

46:34

in the world by our own

46:36

efforts. Again, Darcis. Emphasis on

46:38

the will. Of. Human Volition

46:40

and the Humanists that happened

46:43

to parallel of. The.

46:46

Emphasis. On

46:49

the will that the nominal

46:51

Us theologians subscribe to the

46:54

know like so. The

46:57

reason that I engage this. I'm

46:59

the chapter. It's it's all. a

47:01

part of mine new to deny.

47:04

The. Shark Break between.

47:06

Medieval. And mater again sort

47:08

of the the sort of a

47:11

traditional story is that the. The.

47:14

Renaissance Uranus crack but door open

47:16

to the darn it He and

47:18

then that the Reformation kicked the

47:20

door and and then off we

47:22

offer Running and to you the

47:24

modern world so I can. You

47:26

have this brave or I'm I'm

47:28

challenging this idea of of up

47:30

of a Brady can and. And.

47:34

Making sense of humanism as

47:36

as a parallel minuteman. On.

47:39

Ah helps recover of that

47:42

continuity between met evil admire

47:44

in other words the human

47:47

as help transmit idea. That.

47:51

Are Germane to. Imposed

47:53

order of medieval nominal was from

47:55

and like and then again that

47:58

makes it possible to under than

48:00

the Middle Ages and a science

48:02

and the reformation. As. One

48:05

continuous period of experience.

48:08

As. Opposed to. A

48:10

period of experience or runs through the

48:12

middle Ages then. Has a has

48:14

a or rock? Sure. That's.

48:17

Not rated by the Renaissance and

48:19

is completed by the Raf for

48:21

patients. yeah, you have a desert

48:23

chapter on the Reformation. More specifically,

48:26

Martin. Luther? So what is the

48:28

significance? on. Martin. Luther ran

48:30

up. The. Does that aspect

48:33

of the Reformation thought him? Then.

48:35

This story because in some ways this

48:38

is parallel to both the Renaissance humanism

48:40

but also late Medieval. A new as

48:42

Wells Yeah, almost like up. A.

48:44

Third, Like. Third, parents. Not

48:48

that's right and I guess maybe

48:50

this is an opportune timer or

48:52

to to explain. My. Approach

48:55

in and. The

48:57

book, right? So. I've

48:59

got chapters on. A looser

49:02

on bro just. One. False.

49:05

And. And I don't mean

49:07

to suggest that any of

49:09

these figures. And there are

49:11

sought. Caused. The world

49:13

in which we live in any

49:15

any way, shape or form but

49:17

rather look. We're dealing with as

49:19

large periods of history and that

49:22

are complex and balding. Lots of

49:24

different people and so so each

49:26

of these and individuals are present.

49:28

It as. Exemplars of

49:30

a particular way of

49:33

thinking. And.

49:36

Lose their ah that in this

49:38

regard isn't an exemplar. Up

49:40

for or a particular thread

49:43

in. The. Reformation right? The

49:45

Reformation is bigger than Sir.

49:47

I thought Luthor is incredibly

49:50

Florida and and again I

49:52

treat him as an exemplar

49:54

of of a sudden see

49:56

right? And so yeah, I

49:58

have been criticized. answer. A.

50:01

Or not a it. Or

50:03

not. But.

50:06

Engaging element, for example, And

50:09

that's a fair criticism. men, and and

50:11

and all I can do to plead

50:13

and and and differences. And.

50:16

I had to keep the materials under

50:18

control right? I mean, if I added a

50:20

a chapter on Calvin than Europe I might

50:22

lead to add all sorts of different

50:24

chapters. In fact, this book at one point.

50:27

Now. I kind of a dish and dead

50:29

have been something like forty or fifty chapter

50:31

some. then I realize it would take be

50:33

twenty years finish itself. So this is where

50:36

I settled in. this idea of using thinkers

50:38

as an exemplar. Of of a

50:40

way of thinking so that brings me

50:42

to lose rights. Lutheran really important. Because.

50:45

Loose or like the Norm and

50:47

was Theologians is preoccupied with dodge

50:49

freedom and top. Cat.

50:52

But it's important to it to

50:54

make clear that loose or is

50:56

not a normal by he is

50:58

is not a nominal Us. Follower.

51:01

Of arguments that it's i'm a

51:03

Loser as a complicated relationship. With

51:07

all come on the one hand he and

51:09

and some tax he says things that are

51:11

very favorable. To. Ofcom added to

51:13

normalise ideas on but at other

51:15

times he refers to them as

51:17

hog theologians right and and a

51:20

problem. The reason you can't describe

51:22

of these are as a as

51:24

A as a nominal Sd card

51:26

Carrying on this. Is

51:28

thought is such a loser.

51:31

Thought that the nominal synthesis

51:33

on on the will. Ah,

51:35

ran off our or or

51:37

smelled of plagiarism right? So

51:39

again I wanna make clear

51:41

that that Luther as nodded

51:43

non less. But. And

51:46

this is an important but. Loser

51:49

and Sherrod at a nominal as

51:51

men who told you know and

51:53

and and that universe provided him

51:56

with an intellectual. Orientation.

51:59

And and it's and. I'm not

52:01

a loser. A down

52:03

to dismantle the universe to

52:06

address the theological questions but

52:08

that interest come. On.

52:11

So. So you see, Losers.

52:14

Preoccupation of a with God's

52:16

freedom and and and God's

52:18

power and have an aunt

52:20

and his do that We

52:22

are to accept whatever a

52:24

god wills but cause God

52:26

wills it. For example we

52:28

accept that the economy of

52:30

salvation that god or day

52:32

for no other reason not

52:35

god. Ah well that the

52:37

fact that loser laser as

52:39

yeah he. He's an interesting

52:41

read. He's very caustic and

52:43

and vulgar. And at

52:45

times on. T

52:47

T P E Go. He. Admonishes

52:49

his readers. can we are not to

52:52

question Got when it comes to guides,

52:54

decisions, what he wills and and his

52:56

power And were not to question him

52:59

because and and at one point that.

53:03

Losers A.does a joke with us.

53:05

Rape were to take this seriously.

53:07

Ah, another example of

53:10

of this. A.

53:13

Nominal Mental The universe of providing

53:15

the intellectual orientation is is. Is.

53:20

This. Normal us idea or

53:22

insistence of direct experience of

53:24

the were right. We observe

53:26

the world. We experienced the

53:29

world directly as opposed to

53:31

having intellectual intermedia in all.

53:35

Forms. Essences and nature's

53:37

well in a practical sense.

53:39

This this. Manifests

53:42

itself in Luther saw as

53:44

as the principle of scripture,

53:46

all one race. We read

53:48

scripture alone. Without. Dinner,

53:51

any intermediary, The. Church

53:53

for example is not, is not

53:55

A and meter your oven and

53:57

an intermediary or of political thirty

53:59

derives from what God really or

54:02

date Eight A Not all we

54:04

need to know is that Goddard

54:06

Day in debt and therefore we

54:08

accept eight. So so what we

54:11

have here again. Is

54:13

a Lutheran. Carrots this nominal a

54:15

mental universe and and and and

54:17

he uses see advances that he

54:20

then says sort of. Sympathy.

54:22

To this way of thinking and he uses

54:24

this. To

54:27

address the theological question

54:30

supper important to. To.

54:32

Have. Fun! It's

54:35

important to note as well as

54:37

a looser doesn't theorized politics or

54:39

political order is not a political

54:41

theorists than and the same with

54:43

these other theologians I mentioned are

54:45

not political theorist. But.losers

54:48

role in the stories

54:50

of I Tell. Is

54:53

that looser and as thought? And it's

54:55

the all edgy? ah. And.

54:58

And through the reformation he

55:00

he transmit important parts. Of.

55:03

The norm and was mental

55:05

Buner are still others who

55:08

would use that to theorize

55:10

politics, Hobbes being the iconic

55:12

example. We i get

55:14

sued for me one of the one of

55:17

the interesting. Sort. Of aspects

55:19

of the store and is that you

55:21

will have a succession of people who.

55:24

To take.i d is.

55:26

An insight as normal as mental

55:28

universe and they they put these

55:31

ideas to all sorts of different

55:33

questions and and problem. And

55:36

it's and no sense that we might think of.

55:38

As of mental universe of the

55:40

Nautilus or it or any other,

55:42

as of rain work and which

55:44

thought. And. Action The happens.

55:48

But. That framework. Of

55:51

permits were accommodates

55:53

variation. So. So

55:55

in the case of looser, you

55:58

find looser his thought. Wow,

56:00

I'm. Sort. Of novelists the

56:02

our to very closely in some

56:04

respects but not the. On

56:07

and we see this. You. Know recurring

56:09

over and over over is

56:11

that he path a thinker

56:14

adapting and idea for a

56:16

type of arguments for their

56:18

own purposes. So then someone

56:20

else comes after than. An

56:23

avid doubts that that sort

56:25

of thinking to something else.

56:27

Ah, And so that's sort

56:29

of the story. I'm telling them that.

56:31

but is that is that the way

56:34

that these different people needs? theologians? And.

56:36

Of take these ideas to

56:38

address certain theological questions and

56:41

eventually. Of people are

56:43

interested in law and politics, take

56:45

up these ideas and and adopt

56:47

them to their own purposes. Now

56:49

another major figure or exemplar of

56:52

use your terminology. Big talk about

56:54

used to go out wrote a

56:56

rodeo saw. What is his

56:59

Zola? An impact on the story?

57:01

The you town on. Wealth.

57:04

So so proud Us South.

57:06

So. Structure of the Park:

57:08

Is it your? It begins with

57:10

my. Different. Ways of understanding,

57:14

Order. Theological. Disputes

57:16

that pertain. there are two and then

57:18

I tell a story that goes through.

57:21

The Reformation. Ah, you'll see the

57:23

chapter on on lease or and

57:25

that and ratings may. Have.

57:28

To sort of the gate some of

57:30

the modern world. I have to say

57:33

that I'm uncomfortable using that will a

57:35

language up of the gates of Modern

57:37

World as I spent a lot of

57:40

time talking about that distinction that historical

57:42

period as Asian is problematic. But yet,

57:44

and because it's so pervasive that we

57:47

are and away. At Trapped

57:49

Under obliged to use it. so I

57:51

guess what I'm doing is it's I'm

57:53

taking the standard. Narrative are

57:55

the standards? Historical period as nation

57:58

on it's own terms. And

58:02

then I'm. I'm. Critiquing. And

58:04

so in this case, Brodie, this

58:06

is my exam. Which Bar of

58:08

Eminent or. And. So

58:11

kind of the way the argument falls is

58:13

that we get to the sort of with.

58:16

The. Doorway of them are world

58:18

and that both of my ways

58:20

of thinking about order Both my

58:22

series of eminent new post. They.

58:24

Are present in the modern world

58:27

are present in different ways. And.

58:30

So I I illustrate.

58:32

Imminent order and the context of

58:35

of grow a kisses thought and

58:37

and again he had of there's

58:39

an interesting story to tell care

58:42

because because in an international relations

58:44

and especially in and law. Growth.

58:47

Years is. Is

58:49

portrayed as apply any or of

58:51

maternity right? He's he somebody who.

58:54

Charts. The way forward and

58:56

and the reason he's portrayed this

58:58

way is because. Of first

59:01

he's seen a secular eyes

59:03

and. Natural. Law Ah

59:05

been er den his sort of

59:08

a famous speculation on the rights

59:10

of world peace at all About.

59:13

Precepts of Natural Law would still be

59:16

ballot even if we were to concede

59:18

that God does not exist so that

59:20

part of his credentials as of as

59:22

a pioneer of read or the and

59:25

the other. Is that

59:27

growth? Yes are said to anticipate the

59:29

shape. Of modern the legal.

59:32

And. Ah, your Pc.

59:34

Keith is often described by

59:36

some. As. The

59:39

father of International law. Know.

59:42

I think that both of

59:44

these stories are characterizations are

59:46

are problematic. Proteus did not

59:49

secularized that natural law the

59:51

so called Mps hypothesis that

59:53

he poses and. And. Then

59:55

Paragraph Eleven of the public all

59:57

manner of the race of. And.

1:00:01

With a counterfactual that was

1:00:03

very common late so there

1:00:05

was nothing at all with

1:00:07

novel about a bell, not

1:00:09

a adult that speculation and

1:00:11

and moreover the Mps hypothesis

1:00:14

doesn't ah ha ha source

1:00:16

secularized natural law in the

1:00:18

way they suggested. An.

1:00:21

For. Me: ah, of grow

1:00:24

just isn't not. Starting.

1:00:26

Point. He's not a pioneer of

1:00:28

the darn of the someone ghetto

1:00:31

that we love. Got an antenna

1:00:33

look and see. Sort.

1:00:35

Of all things unfold in the future but

1:00:38

rather. Protesters. More

1:00:40

and. More. Of

1:00:42

an endpoint, right? he is. he

1:00:44

is at least and in international

1:00:46

relations contacts one notes that sort

1:00:48

of the last com anna. Faris.

1:00:51

Of eminent and so it's hear what

1:00:53

I, what what I what I am

1:00:55

to do. Is. To sort

1:00:58

of use political theology those

1:01:00

analogy is between theology and

1:01:02

politics of law and so

1:01:04

forth as a way of

1:01:06

recovering. The. Theological contents of

1:01:08

Approaches has thought growth years

1:01:10

after all was a lazy

1:01:13

allergen and and while the

1:01:15

rights of war and peace

1:01:17

as the tax that everybody

1:01:19

focuses on today. Is

1:01:22

most popular ah. His

1:01:26

most popular. But

1:01:28

in most influential book and

1:01:30

his day was the truth

1:01:32

with Christian religion and. So.

1:01:35

On so in recovering

1:01:37

his theological content. Of

1:01:40

I do what I do with

1:01:42

with that were really in all

1:01:44

of these thinkers syrup the puck

1:01:46

is that go I love get

1:01:49

not are but proteus as conception

1:01:51

of. And and and it's pretty

1:01:53

clear to me. That. Broke

1:01:55

his has died as a rational

1:01:57

god. And and this of

1:01:59

course. And. Points his

1:02:01

thinking about order.

1:02:04

How. So if you have

1:02:06

you read Proteus tax rate you're

1:02:08

You're you're fine you know. Repeated

1:02:10

the regularly. And. Grotesque

1:02:14

refers to dodge reason grant

1:02:16

Gods understand it as as

1:02:18

and the light. As

1:02:21

as the cause of funding

1:02:23

for this is sorta clearly.

1:02:26

The. Language of of eminent

1:02:28

orator. Men: So what? What

1:02:30

comes out of? That's what my sort of argument

1:02:33

is is it's not. That. Again, Proteus

1:02:35

is not this pioneer of modernity,

1:02:37

but he gives us wonder that.

1:02:40

No one knows that. One.

1:02:42

Of the last accounts of this way of

1:02:44

thinking. Of

1:02:46

the World bomb. As

1:02:49

as an interconnected whole. And

1:02:52

that rationally intelligible.

1:02:55

Dot is intelligible in their

1:02:57

investigation or both efficient and

1:03:00

and a final causes know.

1:03:02

I realize that not summer

1:03:05

this language you'll be paid

1:03:07

can and not very accessible

1:03:09

to listener so it's better

1:03:12

to give sort of a.

1:03:15

A couple of concrete examples

1:03:17

of of of how. Growth

1:03:21

uses understanding of God as a

1:03:23

rational cause. Leads to a

1:03:25

conception of order of along the

1:03:27

lines I describe I will one

1:03:29

in one example. Is

1:03:32

up in relation to the balance of

1:03:34

our. Guide. The Balance of

1:03:36

power and the of the fundamental

1:03:38

institution of international relations. And

1:03:40

and in the story about Proteus

1:03:43

Been pioneered. With. Interesting

1:03:45

to. To. To.

1:03:48

Consider Headley Bulls essay on on

1:03:50

grow just set as and Which

1:03:52

Bowl says at a certain point

1:03:55

on the. Groceries.

1:03:57

Anticipate the shape of the modern world

1:03:59

and so the fourth. But it's interesting

1:04:01

that ah back grow as does not

1:04:04

mention the balance of power. And the

1:04:06

fact though is correct and said you've

1:04:08

got you all of Proteus, his tax

1:04:10

you're you're not. Find a single reference.

1:04:13

To the balance of power. And

1:04:15

this is interesting for people because the balance

1:04:18

of power. as it was a

1:04:20

sort of are recognized idea for quite some

1:04:22

time by the dream. Grow. Just

1:04:24

was riding in the seventeenth century

1:04:26

and and all stages. This. By

1:04:29

saying. Ah, Cynthia,

1:04:32

This is an instance

1:04:35

of a theory lagging

1:04:37

behind practice. Guy. Know.

1:04:40

I think this is. I think this is wrong.

1:04:42

Guy. Might. My response to

1:04:44

this. Absence. Of the

1:04:47

bow want our and can

1:04:49

army. And. Grow just

1:04:51

as thought is due to his

1:04:53

particular conception of order as imminent

1:04:55

order which again is grounded and

1:04:58

is. The. All edgy. Okay. and

1:05:00

and in another words, what I'm getting

1:05:02

at is that there is no place

1:05:04

for. The. Balance of power get

1:05:06

if you have a pattern of

1:05:09

order where every same. As

1:05:11

unnecessary. Place. And

1:05:14

purpose. A. Necessary place

1:05:16

and purpose or that doesn't

1:05:18

accommodate. The idea of a

1:05:20

world of slayings are constantly

1:05:22

changing and a juice. Okay,

1:05:25

you can't have constant motion

1:05:27

and at the same time

1:05:29

have necessary place and purpose.

1:05:32

So. That's not would be one example.

1:05:34

Another nother: it's or is not

1:05:36

com. Proteus. Doesn't

1:05:38

have. An idea of an

1:05:41

outlaw state. And. I'm. A.

1:05:43

Kind of what we today referred to

1:05:45

as a as at the as a

1:05:47

rogue state are like by in up

1:05:50

North Korea is a rogue state in

1:05:52

up something that sort of outside it

1:05:54

at in the like produce doesn't have

1:05:56

any sense of that and then interconnect

1:05:58

that for. That. I'm

1:06:00

every every sin every community

1:06:03

is is within not pole

1:06:05

and so so what. We

1:06:07

would refer to as an

1:06:09

outlaw state today, a state

1:06:12

that is outside the law.

1:06:14

Is. Impossible or Proteus.

1:06:18

It doesn't mean that that at

1:06:20

growth you can accommodate.actors but rather

1:06:22

the North Korea's of the world

1:06:25

would be described as evidence of

1:06:27

disorder. Her. He. Though, and

1:06:29

in this interconnected hope. So.

1:06:32

I hadn't. So. Yeah missiles

1:06:35

this is he a what we get out

1:06:37

of out of grow to us as it

1:06:39

is. You. Know who won

1:06:41

idea of a survival

1:06:43

of this. Imminent.

1:06:45

syria up a of order which

1:06:48

which I also think is still

1:06:50

present today but it's present and

1:06:52

that to minish way. Now.

1:06:54

The other. Exemplar and

1:06:57

probably. On. The other extreme?

1:06:59

a rodeo suitors Tyler's. Obsolete.

1:07:02

Imagine for now, are there any

1:07:04

other up? Homage you want to

1:07:06

make about the. Influence of Thomas Hobbes

1:07:08

because especially he's kind of concern like the

1:07:10

father of. Political. Realism

1:07:12

alongside.machiavelli We don't get to

1:07:14

talk about a so far,

1:07:16

but Hobbes is very important,

1:07:19

especially because of. Eagles

1:07:21

are. Quite. A bit with

1:07:23

or politics ideology in. His.

1:07:25

Work especially will fire. Yes,

1:07:28

Yeah, so so you know I

1:07:30

do something quite similar up with

1:07:32

odds that Hobbs as the is

1:07:34

the opposite exemplar of grotesque. Ah,

1:07:37

but hops for the. Is.

1:07:39

The exemplar of imposed

1:07:41

order and for me,

1:07:43

impose order gradually become.

1:07:46

The dominant discourse and and international

1:07:48

relations. and the dominant way of

1:07:50

how we think about international order

1:07:53

and and and and and impose

1:07:55

order. of course, Is.

1:07:58

Rooted in this nominal

1:08:00

bomb interest. Theology well

1:08:02

and so many ways. Pods and

1:08:04

the opposite of approaches. Right week

1:08:06

we find it and Hobbes that

1:08:09

different conception of.and because we have

1:08:11

a different conception of God, we

1:08:13

have a different conception. Of

1:08:15

Order. The. Big idea.

1:08:18

Ah adam. And and

1:08:20

hard to spot when it

1:08:23

comes to corridor his will

1:08:25

and artifice, the idea that

1:08:27

human beings. Makes it

1:08:29

plain nate the Commonwealth by

1:08:31

putting a covenant t on

1:08:33

with our each other. Now.

1:08:36

What's what's important about this is

1:08:38

thought the. Hobbes

1:08:42

explains this. Bomb.

1:08:45

Is. Not. Human. Beings

1:08:47

make the Commonwealth and the same

1:08:50

way. God beat

1:08:52

the universe and and I

1:08:54

guess there is a certain

1:08:56

amount of frustration your up

1:08:58

on my part and and

1:09:00

dealing with salt because an

1:09:02

International Relations an. Engagement

1:09:04

with Hobbes. And

1:09:07

to began and and end. Up

1:09:09

with chapter Thirteen of The Leviathan.

1:09:11

That's the chapter on the state

1:09:14

of nature. And it is.

1:09:16

Up by reading this chapter and

1:09:19

really a I just a handful

1:09:21

of passengers are not going to

1:09:23

direct. That. Political

1:09:25

Real. His son gets up and

1:09:27

run it. Now. That the

1:09:29

the problem with that is ah. As

1:09:33

as an old now guns has

1:09:35

has as showrunner sort of a

1:09:37

devastating way. It. Is. Not

1:09:39

hum Those passages are. Misinterpreted.

1:09:43

They're taken out contacts than the like.

1:09:46

And so so so much of

1:09:49

what real us than international relations

1:09:51

attributed to to Hobbes is mistaken.

1:09:54

Okay, I'm but button I have

1:09:56

a sort of not only that

1:09:58

challenge but a further two. The

1:10:00

not is even with and hop studies are

1:10:02

so it. There's a debate. And

1:10:05

a dispute about. Ah, Of

1:10:07

the about pods and secular credentials how

1:10:10

seriously to take his theology and a

1:10:12

like? And of course I don't set

1:10:14

out to solve that to be or

1:10:17

even contribute. I I come down on

1:10:19

on a particular side. So.

1:10:21

So what is important in all of

1:10:24

the a small? As I said it,

1:10:26

it's this idea that that human beings

1:10:28

make the commonwealth this as as God

1:10:31

made the universe. By. Speech

1:10:33

or feel by accept will

1:10:35

and what's fascinating about as

1:10:37

soon as that. This is

1:10:39

all clearly stated on the

1:10:41

very first page of Leviathan.

1:10:43

The first sentence of the

1:10:45

Leviathan up says. Not

1:10:48

Nan can make up a commonwealth in

1:10:50

the same way that God made the

1:10:52

universe rights. So I thought kind of

1:10:54

lay it out. There is no I'm

1:10:56

from. From. The start.

1:10:58

Ah, unfortunately of.

1:11:01

Scholars. And I off and I are

1:11:03

just too to read beyond chapters or to

1:11:05

have a white wine is a snack. On.

1:11:08

Or. International while they

1:11:11

answered of me. Is.

1:11:13

That. The the

1:11:15

the world that that is

1:11:18

typically ascribed to fall for

1:11:20

this in world of. Perpetual.

1:11:23

Violence, paucity of cooperation and

1:11:25

self worth is mistaken Because

1:11:28

because if you follow. Through.

1:11:31

You know the theological analogies

1:11:33

to how the Commonwealth is

1:11:35

presented and then and into

1:11:38

an international relations contacts you

1:11:40

can find. that.com

1:11:42

and Wells can have

1:11:44

an aunt form leads

1:11:46

and international relations and

1:11:49

that there are genuine

1:11:51

obligations. And International relations.

1:11:53

That security. It's governance and

1:11:55

so what. this means. Is.

1:12:00

This this this picture of

1:12:02

a perpetually violent and the

1:12:04

auditorium realm of international relations.

1:12:07

Isn't. Ah, Is

1:12:11

up really accurate? rather? or to put

1:12:13

it differently And in the language of

1:12:15

international relations, And Pods

1:12:17

are theorists, not international

1:12:20

society of a certain

1:12:22

certain types. So.

1:12:27

I guess that the the claim

1:12:29

my naked as if we if

1:12:31

we take hogs and theology serious.

1:12:33

a. And work it's

1:12:35

through. Ah, That and

1:12:37

to as a political philosophy we

1:12:40

get all a very very different

1:12:42

understanding. Of of international

1:12:44

order than what is normally.

1:12:46

Attributed to Hobbes by international relations cause.

1:12:49

and that's especially true with the real

1:12:51

as because the real Us are usually

1:12:53

the ones one of. Your. Everyday

1:12:56

it's like back gladiatorial contests.

1:12:59

Mentioned that site. that precisely am

1:13:01

I. So we're here. We see

1:13:03

a cougar recover over again. Ah,

1:13:06

International relations is this? Describe along

1:13:08

the lines of what part says

1:13:10

and chapter thirty. It. Oh,

1:13:13

there's no justice. You know

1:13:15

it's perpetually violence. Ah,

1:13:17

and path and and so forth.

1:13:19

and so forth. And but that's

1:13:21

the problem of read in chapter

1:13:23

thirteen on it's own, out of

1:13:26

contact with the rest of. Of

1:13:28

of the tax and so I guess

1:13:30

what I'm offering is what I think

1:13:33

as a more comprehensive reading. Which

1:13:36

leads to. A.

1:13:38

Very different understanding of order and

1:13:40

this of course as you are

1:13:42

alluding to. This. Then

1:13:45

unsettles. The. Sea or

1:13:47

I've see a radical cartography.

1:13:50

In an international relations for

1:13:52

example, the distinction and contrast

1:13:54

between real us of liberalism.

1:13:56

Does. That make sense and in the

1:13:59

way. And. That it

1:14:01

is normally presented. So.

1:14:05

Again, it's important, not overstate. not

1:14:08

all versions a real isn't and

1:14:10

I are. Come

1:14:12

down to fall. But.

1:14:14

Hobbs is. Certainly. A

1:14:16

very significant. Job. You're

1:14:18

and lending authority. To

1:14:21

what real this plan and cry

1:14:23

want to suggest that kind of

1:14:26

that? What what typically attributed it

1:14:28

to heart is to simply mistake

1:14:30

that that his idea that the

1:14:33

sort of international order that comes

1:14:35

out of. Is

1:14:38

not this gladiatorial realm? But it

1:14:40

is. Sung. In it it's

1:14:42

a it's a genuine type of

1:14:44

interstate society gets interesting you put.

1:14:46

their combat also brings me back

1:14:48

to rodeos but he's approach it

1:14:50

from what you call but. The.

1:14:52

Theory of like imminent order were

1:14:55

almost everything has it's necessary place

1:14:57

but then observes talking about this

1:14:59

but everything is like imposed by.

1:15:02

Two and the by well ultimately divide

1:15:04

well but human well. so their is

1:15:06

that there is an interesting like new

1:15:09

ones contrast between the two between the

1:15:11

two. Guess what I'm saying

1:15:13

is is thought I think the world in

1:15:15

which we let his. His his,

1:15:18

you're using Hobbs as an exemplar.

1:15:20

It is. Hobbies yeah but it's

1:15:22

not a hobby you see on

1:15:24

world. The Ira. fearless. Ah

1:15:27

ah, been. A plane

1:15:29

than other words I'm thing I'm arguing that

1:15:31

sorts real us at this abuse and image

1:15:33

of the world and are ripe for the

1:15:35

wrong bees. I. Pod

1:15:38

Palms does provide. That.

1:15:40

Sort of a way of a

1:15:42

matching international border today. But

1:15:47

it doesn't look. Like. What

1:15:50

they claim. right? And

1:15:52

pauses world is one where

1:15:54

states conform league sport. Purposes.

1:15:57

Of trade or for ah.

1:16:00

For economic reasons. So here we might

1:16:02

think of the Hero or Nato. I.

1:16:05

Am. But. But Hobbes doesn't

1:16:07

have as those growth yes this

1:16:09

idea that the world forms. And.

1:16:12

Enter a girl whole ninety don't

1:16:14

get any and hop fight you

1:16:17

get again will and artifice, contractual

1:16:19

relations and like at that are

1:16:21

laid an A and this is

1:16:24

very much part of this nominal

1:16:26

us and long one tourist way

1:16:28

out of understanding the world. Eight

1:16:31

cents thing. we make things and

1:16:33

we can either make so. What?

1:16:35

Some of the implication the.

1:16:38

Implications of some of these Theological

1:16:40

law. Concepts. On.

1:16:42

Our. Own or contemporary

1:16:44

conceptions all. The. World

1:16:47

and how the international. Order.

1:16:49

Out works well. And

1:16:52

are are are you talking and sort

1:16:54

of a real rural practical sense or

1:16:56

are you referring to sort of theories

1:16:58

on loyal. Up Like

1:17:00

a Theories and I have Verizon. Well.

1:17:04

Let. Me: Give up? Wonder if are

1:17:06

two examples. What one example I'm particularly

1:17:08

fond of as. Is. Kind of

1:17:11

waltzes Neo realism. I'm fond of

1:17:13

this example because of the importance

1:17:15

of of waltz in the field

1:17:17

by kissing. Neo Realism is no.

1:17:20

Was. Go. For. Several decades

1:17:22

enormously influential. The It was a

1:17:24

reference point of so much of

1:17:27

what I are scholars dead and

1:17:29

it's still. Quite. Influential.

1:17:32

So. You're my argument

1:17:34

is that Waltzes theory is.

1:17:37

Is. A particular instantiation of

1:17:39

the theory of. Others

1:17:42

are. Imposed. Order

1:17:44

and it's sort of norm and was

1:17:46

postulates rights and so what? What's really

1:17:48

interesting but at what with what was

1:17:50

what I do with with Waltz in

1:17:52

the Or realism. Is.

1:17:55

Contrasted. And. Between.

1:17:58

the wave god's name sends and the way

1:18:01

human beings make friends, right? And

1:18:03

so kind of the story, the story

1:18:05

goes something like this, right? You know,

1:18:08

God composes an order or puts

1:18:10

things together. And at the

1:18:12

same time, God is the author

1:18:14

of the forces that move things

1:18:17

or put things in into

1:18:21

motion. To give

1:18:23

an example, so God

1:18:26

created the universe, he created

1:18:28

the heavenly bodies Mars,

1:18:30

Jupiter, Saturn, and the like.

1:18:32

And God is also simultaneously

1:18:34

the author of the

1:18:36

laws of nature that explain their

1:18:38

emotion. Okay. And

1:18:40

of course, I

1:18:43

trace that parallel, that

1:18:45

theological story into Newtonian

1:18:48

natural philosophy. You

1:18:52

know, Newton describes

1:18:56

his understanding of the

1:18:58

universe and exactly these

1:19:00

terms. Okay. In contrast,

1:19:02

by human artificer, human

1:19:04

craft composes things or

1:19:06

composes a system like

1:19:09

independently of the horses

1:19:13

that govern what is

1:19:15

made. Okay. So in other words,

1:19:17

human beings compose things, and

1:19:20

they work as they do by virtue

1:19:22

of the laws of nature, but human

1:19:24

beings don't legislate the laws of nature.

1:19:28

So what I do is I

1:19:31

sort of trace, you know, kind

1:19:33

of what Walt does, right? And

1:19:35

I argue that this is

1:19:38

sort of, you know, a reflection of

1:19:40

a theological way of

1:19:43

making sense of the

1:19:45

world. And so it's in this sense that Walt

1:19:48

defines a domain of

1:19:50

inquiry, the international system.

1:19:53

And what's important about the international system

1:19:55

or what interests Walt is that this

1:19:57

system discloses certain rules.

1:20:00

regularities like the

1:20:02

recurrence of war, recurrence of balances

1:20:04

of power, search for autonomy and

1:20:06

the like, right? So

1:20:08

he defines this domain of inquiry.

1:20:11

And then he constructs a

1:20:13

theory that explains these

1:20:16

regularities. Okay, however,

1:20:18

he's also, he's,

1:20:20

he also needs to account

1:20:23

for the force that

1:20:25

moves the system. Okay.

1:20:29

And it's at this point that

1:20:32

Waltz shifts from being a

1:20:34

craftsman, that is, somebody who

1:20:36

is constructing the theory, composing

1:20:38

the theory, defining a domain

1:20:41

to a creator being analogous

1:20:43

to God. In other words,

1:20:46

Waltz not only accounts for

1:20:48

an order of secondary causes, but he

1:20:51

also has to account for the first

1:20:53

cause. Okay? So it's

1:20:55

in this sense, that

1:20:58

well, what moves what moves Waltz's

1:21:01

system, okay, it's,

1:21:03

it's self interest formulated

1:21:05

as survival. Okay,

1:21:08

but this, I mean, so

1:21:10

Waltz composes his theory. And,

1:21:14

and, and the, and

1:21:18

the system works as it does, international

1:21:20

structure, as he said, shapes

1:21:23

and showed states in a

1:21:25

way that causes war, you

1:21:28

know, induces balances of power and the

1:21:30

like. But

1:21:33

Waltz, again, needs to sort

1:21:35

of account for what moves the system.

1:21:37

So he stipulates it, he

1:21:39

wills it and then wills and

1:21:42

willing it. So he shifts again

1:21:44

from craftsman to

1:21:46

creator. Waltz says that this is

1:21:49

this stipulation is, is

1:21:53

a matter

1:21:55

of utility, right? And, and

1:21:58

add it something that is useful. useful

1:22:00

and he upholds that system

1:22:03

at his pleasure, right? He

1:22:06

upholds it, accepts it, so

1:22:08

long as it's useful. And I

1:22:12

realize that this is a very

1:22:14

complex argument, right? And it's very

1:22:16

difficult to explain it orally. But

1:22:19

the parallel is exactly what

1:22:21

theologians attribute to God, right?

1:22:24

That God creates the universe and that

1:22:26

he upholds it at his

1:22:29

pleasure. And so

1:22:31

what I'm doing in that

1:22:33

discussion of neorealism

1:22:36

is drawing out the

1:22:39

parallels in the structure of

1:22:42

the argument, right? In other words,

1:22:45

kind of going back

1:22:47

to Newton, Newton

1:22:50

says that with natural

1:22:53

science or what he understood as natural

1:22:55

philosophy, I can explain the motion of

1:22:58

the heavenly bodies, right? These bodies

1:23:01

move by virtue of the law

1:23:04

of gravity. And

1:23:06

he says that he

1:23:08

doesn't need to account for

1:23:11

the law of gravity. It's

1:23:13

enough to know the

1:23:15

effect that it produces, okay?

1:23:18

And that's all contained within

1:23:20

natural philosophy or science. But

1:23:22

then he goes on to

1:23:25

say, but if you

1:23:27

want to have an account

1:23:30

of the law of gravity, that is the

1:23:32

force that moves the system, he says

1:23:35

that's a question for theology.

1:23:37

And he's clear in saying that God imposed

1:23:40

on the universe, God legislated these

1:23:43

laws that govern the motion, right?

1:23:45

Waltz does the same thing. He

1:23:49

has this system that works as

1:23:51

it does and

1:23:54

survival, self-interest understood

1:23:56

as survival, is

1:23:59

what views the system. And it's

1:24:01

enough for Walt initially to say,

1:24:04

it's enough to know the effects that this

1:24:06

produces. But if you want to know the

1:24:10

source of that principle, the source

1:24:12

of that force, right? Walt

1:24:14

has to step outside of his

1:24:16

theory to assume the

1:24:18

role of God and to

1:24:21

legislate or stipulate that force

1:24:23

himself. And he, again,

1:24:26

accepts it, he upholds it so

1:24:28

long as he deems it to be useful,

1:24:30

right? Just as God upholds

1:24:33

the universe so long as—at his pleasure.

1:24:35

Yeah, that reminds me very much of

1:24:37

some of the debates during the

1:24:40

medieval period on the scholastics of

1:24:42

the contrast between primary causes and secondary

1:24:44

causes. God being, of course, the first

1:24:47

cause of the universe and everything, but

1:24:50

of course, he works through secondary causes,

1:24:52

which would normally be kind of like

1:24:54

what we would study in the natural

1:24:57

sciences. So is it

1:24:59

kind of something similar to that, but

1:25:01

of course taken in from the more

1:25:03

numeralist legacy? It's not

1:25:05

kind of. It's exactly. That's

1:25:08

exactly what I'm claiming here, is

1:25:10

that you're

1:25:13

right in theology, right? We

1:25:17

have a—the universe is ordered

1:25:19

in terms of an

1:25:22

order of secondary causes, and

1:25:24

those secondary causes explain what

1:25:26

happens. However, God

1:25:28

can do directly or

1:25:30

can accomplish directly what

1:25:33

is otherwise accomplished

1:25:35

through an order of secondary

1:25:37

causes, right? And so

1:25:39

we find in the realism an arrow

1:25:42

along those lines, okay? Again,

1:25:46

counting for the force that moves

1:25:48

the system, laws of nature

1:25:50

and the like. And

1:25:53

so, again, I'm not

1:25:55

saying that Waltz is

1:25:57

self-conscious of this. he's

1:26:00

not. And I'm not

1:26:02

not suggesting that Walt is secretly

1:26:04

a Christian, or, or

1:26:06

if there is some sort of

1:26:08

nefarious sort of theological project lurking

1:26:11

in the background, but rather what I'm

1:26:13

saying is, is that is that Walt

1:26:15

operates within this nominalist

1:26:19

mental universe. And because

1:26:21

he does, he's committed

1:26:24

to certain things, certain ways

1:26:26

of understanding and explaining the

1:26:28

world. And I show, you

1:26:32

know, how those commitments

1:26:34

manifest themselves. Now, given

1:26:37

all this implication and theological origins

1:26:40

of much of our discourse, do

1:26:43

you think that the secular conception of

1:26:46

both IR as a field, international

1:26:48

relations, but also our conception of international

1:26:51

order, is that really kind of untenable

1:26:53

in, in light of

1:26:56

this research? Well,

1:26:59

you know, I don't want to go that

1:27:01

far, right? I don't want to suggest that

1:27:03

a secular conception of international order is

1:27:06

untenable. And because it's quite

1:27:08

possible that

1:27:11

we might live in a world,

1:27:13

it's often difficult for us to

1:27:15

imagine a

1:27:18

world that is radically different than

1:27:20

our own, because it's so familiar.

1:27:22

But yeah, one need to

1:27:24

only sort of remind ourselves

1:27:26

to give one trivial

1:27:28

example of the divine

1:27:30

right of kings, which was something that

1:27:33

ordinary women walking down the street, except

1:27:36

that it's perfectly normal.

1:27:39

And, and of course, we think in

1:27:41

very, very different ways. So I don't want

1:27:43

to suggest that the

1:27:45

implications of my research or this

1:27:47

book makes a

1:27:50

secular conception of international order.

1:27:53

And Tenable And in that respect, I'm not

1:27:55

selling faith, right? So There's not sort of

1:27:57

a secret project in this book. Necessarily

1:28:00

said that religion is the answer or

1:28:03

Christianity is the answer. Now now some

1:28:05

people will read the up and and

1:28:07

and come to that conclusion that that's

1:28:09

fine. that's not what I'm saying. I'm

1:28:12

saying something. Slightly. Different.

1:28:15

And that is We

1:28:17

have inherited a way

1:28:19

of understanding and explaining

1:28:21

the world. That. Has roots

1:28:23

and see all that you. Can't.

1:28:27

And. As I said and that

1:28:29

way of thanking until certain

1:28:31

commitments. However, We.

1:28:34

Also. Live in

1:28:36

a world in which God

1:28:38

is only one possibility of.

1:28:40

Money. And. So I guess

1:28:42

what I'm getting out what I want to

1:28:45

draw attention to. It

1:28:47

is work out. When.

1:28:49

You have us theologically grounded mode

1:28:51

of are either. But. Then

1:28:54

you put God out of the picture.

1:28:56

Why do you will laugh? And

1:28:58

ten And my concern is.

1:29:02

The that were left

1:29:04

with intelligence that not

1:29:06

are ways of understanding

1:29:09

supplanting or her began

1:29:11

to. Unravel. Okay

1:29:13

because if if if God

1:29:15

is the first principle. That.

1:29:18

Sold at all together.dot.gives coherence

1:29:20

to a system of thought.

1:29:22

Well, what happens when you

1:29:24

cut God out the cat?

1:29:27

It seems to me that

1:29:29

you might end up with.

1:29:32

A fragmented work that

1:29:34

are radically an indeterminate

1:29:36

were of i'm not

1:29:38

a Lapse is. Ultimately

1:29:41

and to power. Okay,

1:29:44

So. What does that mean? Well I

1:29:46

guess what our I guess what I

1:29:48

wanna say is that. Added.

1:29:52

That. Some people might not want

1:29:54

to. Yellow and

1:29:56

Therapists theological mode of

1:29:58

a Flint. And then

1:30:01

live in a world. That.

1:30:03

God has been cut away and fragments

1:30:05

content terminate suck. So one application and

1:30:07

and this is the implication I think

1:30:09

some people drop is if we need

1:30:11

to go back to some version of

1:30:13

thing. Going. Again, I'm fine with people

1:30:15

who want to take up position. I'm.

1:30:18

An intruder Implication is

1:30:20

we. Abandon this all

1:30:23

together and and and embrace

1:30:25

something entirely different. Matter.

1:30:27

Entirely different. I'm at May

1:30:29

Well com. With. Some.

1:30:32

Better Madison and and can and

1:30:34

and. Commitments. Are

1:30:36

people not on? So if I can

1:30:38

give an example I'm in part part

1:30:40

of the story of it. but isn't

1:30:43

not both of my series of order

1:30:45

as On and Water brought in our

1:30:47

contemporary world. But but that imposed order

1:30:49

is the dominant discourse. Or this

1:30:51

normal a volunteer as world but

1:30:54

cabinet for. This. Rationale:

1:30:56

Rationally intelligible. Survives.

1:30:58

As a as a diminished echo and what

1:31:01

I what it seems to me is hop

1:31:03

on a date of date. date it in

1:31:05

the day to day basis. We. Live

1:31:07

in the world of imposed or

1:31:09

or but at certain points we

1:31:11

want to grass or work the

1:31:14

world and the discourse of of.

1:31:16

Eminent Quarter and not manifests itself.

1:31:18

For example, in the context of

1:31:20

universal Human Rights. Or. Ideas

1:31:23

of a common humanity and

1:31:25

the like. And. This is a

1:31:27

problem I sent a cause. These two

1:31:29

ways of thinking. Or can commence.

1:31:34

Say. They don't. This. It out.

1:31:36

You can assimilate one or

1:31:38

two. the other. Ah, or

1:31:40

are you can't. You can't

1:31:42

sympathize these two ways of

1:31:44

thinking. About a

1:31:47

dell is international order. Because.

1:31:50

They they rest on categorically

1:31:52

different postulates, right? You? you?

1:31:55

You can't have. You. Can't

1:31:57

have an order or that's and

1:31:59

tell what you wanted. No internal

1:32:02

relations and at the very same

1:32:04

I'm top one that's in college

1:32:06

on terms of doctrine of Esther

1:32:08

relations case. So what I'm saying

1:32:10

here is that there any comments

1:32:12

are both logically and in in

1:32:14

philosophically speaking. However, Historically

1:32:16

speaking. They. Seem to

1:32:19

coexist, but but in an

1:32:21

incoherent an unstable way. So.

1:32:24

So. I guess I guess you're where

1:32:26

I where I end up with the

1:32:28

book is not. Is that the end

1:32:30

game? Of of Emily Post

1:32:32

order to day seems to be.

1:32:35

One. Of radical end determine F

1:32:37

C right? We don't have any.

1:32:41

Get a rational way to

1:32:43

settle disputes or to. To

1:32:45

ah. You. Advise

1:32:48

conduct and so what worries me about

1:32:50

this is that this seems to lead

1:32:52

the. The the door

1:32:55

ajar. To. Power as

1:32:57

the final. Adjudicator of

1:32:59

son. right? Because I

1:33:01

ask her. All that sort of

1:33:03

and up And a purely constructed

1:33:06

world's everything can be eight. And

1:33:08

everything can be only there's there's

1:33:11

There's nothing beyond human thought, nap

1:33:13

sudden which restrains it's. everything is

1:33:15

a choice. And. Choice.

1:33:18

Implies. Power. This has been a

1:33:21

very fascinating discussion. You have any other

1:33:23

final thoughts, maybe touch on anything and

1:33:25

book. But. We didn't get to

1:33:27

already think we covered everything. Know.

1:33:29

I think we we've covered. I

1:33:32

think we've covered a pretty well as Anc. Well.

1:33:35

We are always like that. I'd. Ask.

1:33:38

I guess at the end and

1:33:40

or interviews were asking are guess

1:33:42

what are you working on that

1:33:44

well I've I've got two cents

1:33:46

on the go ah which are

1:33:48

proceeding and sit and starts off.

1:33:52

And and the immediate term I'm work get both.

1:33:54

I should say both of these projects on of.

1:33:57

Low. Out cause I was

1:33:59

odd. Out of

1:34:01

this this research on on

1:34:03

political Theology of International Order.

1:34:06

I'm I'm currently working on a paper on

1:34:08

the idea of system. right? So

1:34:10

what so what I'm doing is

1:34:12

as I'm I'm gelding down deeper.

1:34:15

Into the material that appears a

1:34:17

joke for some and think about

1:34:19

the idea of the system and

1:34:22

what it entails. And

1:34:24

and in. It seems

1:34:26

to me that the idea of the system. Is.

1:34:29

Is a particular legitimation of

1:34:31

butternut. A. I'm which

1:34:33

again, Has roots and

1:34:36

sort of these medieval ways

1:34:38

of thinking and pen and.

1:34:41

What I'm doing in this paper

1:34:43

that really interesting I think is

1:34:45

that it's drawn me and to

1:34:47

exploring. The. Links between modern

1:34:50

natural science can see all

1:34:52

edge again these are these

1:34:54

are sort of up. Activities

1:34:57

or demands of knowledge sadder

1:34:59

normally seen as being. Fundamentally.

1:35:01

Supper and indeed often opposed

1:35:04

and antagonistic right. The problem

1:35:06

with state are theology. Is

1:35:09

irrational. I have yet

1:35:11

up at it it it rest

1:35:13

on your belief and that that

1:35:15

sciences director than that and so

1:35:17

forth and and and guess what

1:35:19

I've what I've discovered as the

1:35:21

relationship between theology of sciences rather

1:35:23

more. Complicated and rather more

1:35:26

intimate than this is often thought So

1:35:28

so so That's one project and and

1:35:30

I I I'm using that is sort

1:35:33

of up. As sort of

1:35:35

us our cetera, a way of getting

1:35:37

into a larger project on the genealogy

1:35:39

of the balance of power. Yeah.

1:35:43

Of again at In the course

1:35:45

of conducting this research I've I

1:35:48

came across. The. Material

1:35:50

that can some sort of

1:35:52

thirty fourteenth century. Where.

1:35:55

Where at a distinct

1:35:57

understanding of balance. Emerges.

1:36:00

In a minute period which seems on I'm

1:36:02

not entirely sure, but it seems to be.

1:36:04

Related. To. The

1:36:07

sir sort of Norman was the allergy

1:36:09

story that I'm tell him. And.

1:36:12

So what I wonder? Is. Whether

1:36:14

or not. What we

1:36:16

understand as the balance of power and

1:36:18

thus sort of. The. Dispute

1:36:21

Seven: The. Incoherence.

1:36:23

For some that it discloses. And.

1:36:26

I wonder if this is sort

1:36:28

of symptomatic. Of. Combining

1:36:30

to descend intellectual cultures

1:36:32

of balance in one

1:36:34

of which can be

1:36:36

traced to. The thirteenth

1:36:38

fourteenth century and and another on

1:36:41

which is much older which runs

1:36:43

into antiquity and so so I

1:36:45

guess what I'm what I'm trying

1:36:47

to do is under Rafol. Some.

1:36:49

Of the it out, the

1:36:52

presuppositions that intellectual cultures. That.

1:36:54

An alarm. The. Balance of

1:36:57

Power add. I've. Got

1:36:59

to say though, I am still very

1:37:01

early on on that project and cannot.

1:37:06

Grasp big my away you know through

1:37:08

the darkness since I'm trying to figure

1:37:10

out. Some. So. That's

1:37:13

what I'm up to at the moment. Well.

1:37:16

When used that sounds very family but you do

1:37:18

when they gets of that does work done now

1:37:20

we can I be back on the i'd guess.

1:37:23

I'd be. I'd be delighted. Are

1:37:25

William Bane. Ah thank you for joining us on

1:37:27

the new books. Not will. Still,

1:37:30

Going to spend a real pleasure, thank you very much. Perhaps.

1:37:38

Role.

1:37:44

Hello, it is Ryan and we could

1:37:46

all use an extra bright spot in

1:37:48

our day, couldn't we? Just to make

1:37:50

up for things like sitting in traffic,

1:37:52

doing the dishes, counting your steps, you

1:37:54

know, all the mundane stuff. That is

1:37:56

why I'm such a big fan of

1:37:58

Chumba Casino. Chumba Casino has all your

1:38:00

favorite social casino style games that you

1:38:02

can play for free anytime, anywhere, with

1:38:04

daily bonuses. That should brighten your day

1:38:06

a little, actually a lot. So sign

1:38:08

up now at chumbacasino.com. That's chumbacasino.com. No

1:38:10

purchase necessary. VTW. Avoid or prohibited by

1:38:12

law. See terms and conditions. by law. See terms and

1:38:14

conditions.