What is Wrong With Our Culture [Alan Watts]
Thought-provoking 5 minutes on the state of the world from the late, great Alan Watts, a man far ahead of his time.
Speech: Alan Watts – What is Wrong With Our Culture (AKA: Sex The Pleasurable Punishment)
Alan Watts – Choice
Alan Watts discusses choice and the thoughts process behind it. Our choices are fundamentally what shape our character, and more importantly our life as a whole.
What Do You Desire? Thought Provoking Motivation: By Alan Watts
Alan Watts breaks down what’s wrong with the world – Part 1 (1970)
Published on Dec 22, 2013
UPDATE: Video now has full closed-caption (subtitles) in English. Allowing it to be viewed in many other languages through Google’s auto-translation captioning. Enjoy.
The very wise Alan Watts breaks down what’s wrong with the world at large, and does so back in 1970! His foreshadowing of the manipulation of the food supply through high yield crops is eery and so very true (i.e., Monsanto and their Ready Roundup crops).
He proposes a number of things we can do to change our attitudes towards life and the planet. I’m sorry to say he would be greatly disappointed if he were alive today, however we still have a chance to set things right and fulfill Watts’ dream of unity, peace, and love.
Alan Watts breaks down what’s wrong with the world – Part 2 (1970)
Read Full Post
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Alan Wilson Watts (6 January 1915 – 16 November 1973) was a British philosopher, writer, and speaker, best known as an interpreter and populariser of Eastern philosophy for a Western audience. Born in Chislehurst, England, he moved to the United States in 1938 and began Zen training in New York. Pursuing a career, he attended Seabury-Western Theological Seminary, where he received a master’s degree in theology. Watts became an Episcopal priest in 1945, then left the ministry in 1950 and moved to California, where he joined the faculty of the American Academy of Asian Studies.
Watts gained a large following in the San Francisco Bay Area while working as a volunteer programmer at KPFA, a Pacifica Radio station in Berkeley. Watts wrote more than 25 books and articles on subjects important to Eastern and Western religion, introducing the then-burgeoning youth culture to The Way of Zen (1957), one of the first bestselling books on Buddhism. In Psychotherapy East and West (1961), Watts proposed that Buddhism could be thought of as a form of psychotherapy and not a religion. He considered Nature, Man and Woman (1958) to be, “from a literary point of view — the best book I have ever written.” He also explored human consciousness, in the essay “The New Alchemy” (1958), and in the book The Joyous Cosmology (1962).
Towards the end of his life, he divided his time between a houseboat in Sausalito and a cabin on Mount Tamalpais. Many of his books are now available in digital format and many of his recorded talks and lectures are available on the Internet. According to the critic Erik Davis, his “writings and recorded talks still shimmer with a profound and galvanizing lucidity.”
Watts was born to middle class parents in the village of Chislehurst, Kent (now south-east London), in 1915, living at 3 (now 5) Holbrook Lane, which was subsequently lived in by author John Hemming-Clark in the early 2000s. Watts’ father, Laurence Wilson Watts, was a representative for the London office of the Michelin Tyre Company; his mother, Emily Mary Watts (née Buchan), was a housewife whose father had been a missionary. With modest financial means, they chose to live in pastoral surroundings and Alan, an only child, grew up playing at brookside, learning the names of wildflowers and butterflies. Probably because of the influence of his mother’s religious family the Buchans, an interest in “ultimate things” seeped in. But it mixed with Alan’s own interests in storybook fables and romantic tales of the mysterious Far East.
Watts also later wrote of a mystical dream he experienced while ill with a fever as a child. During this time he was influenced by Far Eastern landscape paintings and embroideries that had been given to his mother by missionaries returning from China. The few Chinese paintings Watts was able to see in England riveted him, and he wrote “I was aesthetically fascinated with a certain clarity, transparency, and spaciousness in Chinese and Japanese art. It seemed to float…”. These works of art emphasized the participatory relationship of man in nature, a theme that stood fast throughout his life, and one that he often writes about. See, for instance, the last chapter in The Way of Zen.
By his own assessment, Watts was imaginative, headstrong, and talkative. He was sent to boarding schools (which included both academic and religious training of the Muscular Christianity sort) from early years. Of this religious training, he remarked “Throughout my schooling my religious indoctrination was grim and maudlin…”
Watts spent several holidays in France in his teen years, accompanied by Francis Croshaw, a wealthy Epicurean with strong interests in both Buddhism and exotic little-known aspects of European culture. It was not long afterward that Watts felt forced to decide between the Anglican Christianity he had been exposed to and the Buddhism he had read about in various libraries, including Croshaw’s. He chose Buddhism, and sought membership in the London Buddhist Lodge, which had been established by Theosophists, and was now run by the barrister Christmas Humphreys. Watts became the organization’s secretary at 16 (1931). The young Watts explored several styles of meditation during these years.
Watts attended The King’s School, Canterbury next door to Canterbury Cathedral. Though he was frequently at the top of his classes scholastically and was given responsibilities at school, he botched an opportunity for a scholarship to Oxford by styling a crucial examination essay in a way that was read as presumptuous and capricious.
When he left secondary school, Watts worked in a printing house and later a bank. He spent his spare time involved with the Buddhist Lodge and also under the tutelage of a “rascal guru” named Dimitrije Mitrinović. (Mitrinović was himself influenced by Peter Demianovich Ouspensky, G. I. Gurdjieff, and the varied psychoanalytical schools of Freud, Jung and Adler.) Watts also read widely in philosophy, history, psychology, psychiatry and Eastern wisdom. By his own reckoning, and also by that of his biographer Monica Furlong, Watts was primarily an autodidact. His involvement with the Buddhist Lodge in London afforded Watts a considerable number of opportunities for personal growth. Through Humphreys, he contacted eminent spiritual authors (e.g. the artist, scholar, and mystic Nicholas Roerich, Sarvapalli Radhakrishnan, and prominent theosophists like Alice Bailey).
In 1936, aged 21, he attended the World Congress of Faiths at the University of London, heard D. T. Suzuki read a paper, and afterwards was able to meet this esteemed scholar of Zen Buddhism. Beyond these discussions and personal encounters, Watts absorbed, by studying the available scholarly literature, the fundamental concepts and terminology of the main philosophies of India and East Asia.
Influences and first publication
Watts’s fascination with the Zen (or Ch’an) tradition—beginning during the 1930s—developed because that tradition embodied the spiritual, interwoven with the practical, as exemplified in the subtitle of his Spirit of Zen: A Way of Life, Work, and Art in the Far East. “Work”, “life”, and “art” were not demoted due to a spiritual focus. In his writing, he referred to it as “the great Ch’an (or Zen) synthesis of Taoism, Confucianism and Buddhism after 700 CE in China.” Watts published his first book, The Spirit of Zen, in 1936. Two decades later, in The Way of Zen he disparaged The Spirit of Zen as a “popularisation of Suzuki‘s earlier works, and besides being very unscholarly it is in many respects out of date and misleading.”
Watts married Eleanor Everett, whose mother Ruth Fuller Everett was involved with a traditional Zen Buddhist circle in New York. Ruth Fuller later married the Zen master (or “roshi”), Sokei-an Sasaki, who served as a sort of model and mentor to Watts, though he chose not to enter into a formal Zen training relationship with Sasaki. During these years, according to his later writings, Watts had another mystical experience while on a walk with his wife. In 1938 Watts and his wife left England to live in the United States. Watts became a United States citizen in 1943.
Christian priest and after
||This section needs additional citations for verification. (November 2014)
Watts left formal Zen training in New York because the method of the teacher did not suit him. He was not ordained as a Zen monk, but he felt a need to find a vocational outlet for his philosophical inclinations. He entered Seabury-Western Theological Seminary, an Episcopal (Anglican) school in Evanston, Illinois, where he studied Christian scriptures, theology, and church history. He attempted to work out a blend of contemporary Christian worship, mystical Christianity, and Asian philosophy. Watts was awarded a master’s degree in theology in response to his thesis, which he published as a popular edition under the title Behold the Spirit: A Study in the Necessity of Mystical Religion. He later published Myth & Ritual in Christianity (1953), an eisegesis of traditional Roman Catholic doctrine and ritual in Buddhist terms. However, the pattern was set, in that Watts did not hide his dislike for religious outlooks that he decided were dour, guilt-ridden, or militantly proselytizing—no matter if they were found within Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, or Buddhism.
As recounted in his autobiography, Alan was ordained as an Episcopal priest in 1945 (aged 30) and resigned the ministry by 1950, partly as a result of an extramarital affair which resulted in his wife having their marriage annulled, but also because he could no longer reconcile his Buddhist beliefs with the formal doctrine of the church. He spent the New Year getting to know Joseph Campbell and Campbell’s wife, Jean Erdman; as well as John Cage, the notable composer.
In early 1951, Watts moved to California, where he joined the faculty of the American Academy of Asian Studies in San Francisco. Here he taught from 1951 to 1957 alongside Saburō Hasegawa (1906-1957), Frederic Spiegelberg, Haridas Chaudhuri, lama Tada Tōkan (1890-1967), and various visiting experts and professors. Hasegawa, in particular, served as a teacher to Watts in the areas of Japanese customs, arts, primitivism, and perceptions of nature. It was during this time he met the poet, Jean Burden whom he called an “important influence.” Alan placed a “cryptograph” crediting her in his book “Nature , Man and Woman” to which he alludes in his autobiography (P.297). Besides teaching, Watts served for several years as the Academy’s administrator. One notable student of his was Eugene Rose, who later went on to become a noted Orthodox Christian hieromonk and controversial theologian within the Orthodox Church in America under the jurisdiction of ROCOR. Rose’s own disciple, a fellow monastic priest published under the name Hieromonk Damascene, produced a book entitled Christ the Eternal Tao, in which the author draws parallels between the concept of the Tao in Chinese philosophy and the concept of the Logos in classical Greek philosophy and Eastern Christian theology.
Watts also studied written Chinese and practiced Chinese brush calligraphy with Hasegawa as well as with some of the Chinese students who enrolled at the academy. While Watts was noted for an interest in Zen Buddhism, his reading and discussions delved into Vedanta, “the new physics“, cybernetics, semantics, process philosophy, natural history, and the anthropology of sexuality.
After heading up the Academy for a few years, Watts left the faculty for a freelance career in the mid-1950s. In 1953, he began what became a long-running weekly radio program at Pacifica Radio station KPFA in Berkeley. Like other volunteer programmers at the listener-sponsored station, Watts was not paid for his broadcasts. These weekly broadcasts continued until 1962, by which time he had attracted a “legion of regular listeners”. Watts continued to give numerous talks and seminars, recordings of which were broadcast on KPFA and other radio stations during his life. These recordings are broadcast to this day. (For example, in 1970 Watts lectures were broadcast on Sunday mornings on San Francisco radio station KSAN; and in 2014 a number of radio stations continue to have an Alan Watts program in their weekly program schedules.) Original tapes of his broadcasts and talks are currently held by the Pacifica Radio Archives, based at KPFK in Los Angeles, and at the Electronic University archive founded by his son, Mark Watts.
In 1957 Watts, then 42, published one of his best known books, The Way of Zen, which focused on philosophical explication and history. Besides drawing on the lifestyle and philosophical background of Zen, in India and China, Watts introduced ideas drawn from general semantics (directly from the writings of Alfred Korzybski) and also from Norbert Wiener‘s early work on cybernetics, which had recently been published. Watts offered analogies from cybernetic principles possibly applicable to the Zen life. The book sold well, eventually becoming a modern classic, and helped widen his lecture circuit.
In 1958, Watts toured parts of Europe with his father, meeting the Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung and the German psychotherapist Karlfried Graf Dürckheim.
Upon returning to the United States, Watts recorded two seasons of a television series (1959–1960) for KQED public television in San Francisco, “Eastern Wisdom and Modern Life”.
In the 1960s, Watts became increasingly interested in how identifiable patterns in nature tend to repeat themselves from the smallest of scales to the most immense. This became one of his passions in his research and thought.
Some of Watts’ writings published in 1958 (e.g., his book Nature, Man and Woman and his essay “The New Alchemy”) mentioned some of his early views on the use of psychedelic drugs for mystical insight. Watts had begun to experiment with psychedelics, initially with mescaline given to him by Oscar Janiger. He tried LSD several times in 1958, with various research teams led by Keith S. Ditman, Sterling Bunnell, Jr., and Michael Agron. He also tried marijuana and concluded that it was a useful and interesting psychoactive drug that gave the impression of time slowing down. Watts’s books of the ’60s reveal the influence of these chemical adventures on his outlook. He later said about psychedelic drug use, “If you get the message, hang up the phone. For psychedelic drugs are simply instruments, like microscopes, telescopes, and telephones. The biologist does not sit with eye permanently glued to the microscope, he goes away and works on what he has seen.”
For a time, Watts came to prefer writing in the language of modern science and psychology (Psychotherapy East and West is a good example), finding a parallel between mystical experiences and the theories of the material universe proposed by 20th-century physicists. He later equated mystical experience with ecological awareness, and typically emphasized whichever approach seemed best suited to the audience he was addressing.
Supporters and critics
Watts’s explorations and teaching brought him into contact with many noted intellectuals, artists, and American teachers in the human potential movement. His friendship with poet Gary Snyder nurtured his sympathies with the budding environmental movement, to which Watts gave philosophical support. He also encountered Robert Anton Wilson, who credited Watts with being one of his “Light[s] along the Way” in the opening appreciation of Cosmic Trigger. Werner Erhard attended workshops given by Alan Watts and said of him, “He pointed me toward what I now call the distinction between Self and Mind. After my encounter with Alan, the context in which I was working shifted.”
Though never affiliated for long with any one academic institution, he was Professor of Comparative Philosophy at the California Institute of Integral Studies (as mentioned above), had a fellowship at Harvard University (1962–64), and was a Scholar at San Jose State University (1968). He also lectured to many college and university students as well as the general public. His lectures and books gave him far-reaching influence on the American intelligentsia of the 1950s–1970s, but he was often seen as an outsider in academia. When questioned sharply by students during his talk at University of California, Santa Cruz in 1970, Watts responded, as he had from the early sixties, that he was not an academic philosopher but rather “a philosophical entertainer.”
Watts has been criticized by Buddhists such as Philip Kapleau and D. T. Suzuki for allegedly misinterpreting several key Zen Buddhist concepts. In particular, he drew criticism from those who believe that zazen must entail a strict and specific means of sitting, as opposed to a cultivated state of mind available at any moment in any situation. Typical of these is Kapleau’s claim that Watts dismissed zazen on the basis of only half a koan. In regard to the aforementioned koan, Robert Baker Aitken reports that Suzuki told him, “I regret to say that Mr. Watts did not understand that story.” In his talks, Watts addressed the issue of defining zazen practice by saying, “A cat sits until it is tired of sitting, then gets up, stretches, and walks away.”
Watts’s biographers saw him, after his stint as an Anglican priest, as representative of no religion but as a lone-wolf thinker and social rascal. In David Stuart’s warts-and-all biography of the man, Watts is seen as an unusually gifted speaker and writer driven by his own interests, enthusiasms, and demons. Elsa Gidlow, whom Alan called “sister” refused to be interviewed for this work but later painted a kinder picture of Alan’s life in her own autobiography, “Elsa, I Come With My Songs.”
However, Watts did have his supporters in the Zen community, including Shunryu Suzuki, the founder of the San Francisco Zen Center. As David Chadwick recounted in his biography of Suzuki, Crooked Cucumber: the Life and Zen Teaching of Shunryu Suzuki, when a student of Suzuki’s disparaged Watts by saying “we used to think he was profound until we found the real thing”, Suzuki “fumed with a sudden intensity”, saying, “You completely miss the point about Alan Watts! You should notice what he has done. He is a great bodhisattva.”
Watts sometimes alluded to a group of neighbors in Druid Heights (near Mill Valley, California) who had endeavored to combine architecture, gardening, and carpentry skills to make a beautiful and comfortable life for themselves. These neighbors accomplished this by relying on their own talents and using their own hands, as they lived in what has been called “shared bohemian poverty”. Druid Heights was founded by the writer Elsa Gidlow, and Watts dedicated his book The Joyous Cosmology to the people of this neighborhood. He later dedicated his autobiography to Elsa Gidlow, for whom he held a great affection.
Regarding his intentions, Watts attempted to lessen the alienation that accompanies the experience of being human that he felt plagued the modern Westerner, and (like his fellow British expatriate and friend, Aldous Huxley) to lessen the ill will that was an unintentional by-product of alienation from the natural world. He felt such teaching could improve the world, at least to a degree. He also articulated the possibilities for greater incorporation of aesthetics (for example: better architecture, more art, more fine cuisine) in American life. In his autobiography he wrote, “… cultural renewal comes about when highly differentiated cultures mix”.
In his last novel, Island (1962), Aldous Huxley mentions the religious practice of maithuna as being something like what Roman Catholics call “coitus reservatus“. A few years before, Watts had discussed the theme in his own book, Nature, Man and Woman, in which he discusses the possibility of the practice being known to early Christians and of it being kept secretly by the Church.
In his writings of the 1950s, he conveyed his admiration for the practicality in the historical achievements of Chán (Zen) in the Far East, for it had fostered farmers, architects, builders, folk physicians, artists, and administrators among the monks who had lived in the monasteries of its lineages. In his mature work, he presents himself as “Zennist” in spirit as he wrote in his last book, Tao: The Watercourse Way. Child rearing, the arts, cuisine, education, law and freedom, architecture, sexuality, and the uses and abuses of technology were all of great interest to him. Though known for his Zen teachings, he was also influenced by ancient Hindu scriptures, especially Vedanta, and spoke extensively about the nature of the divine reality which Man misses: how the contradiction of opposites is the method of life and the means of cosmic and human evolution; how our fundamental Ignorance is rooted in the exclusive nature of mind and ego; how to come in touch with the Field of Consciousness and Light, and other cosmic principles. These are discussed in great detail in dozens of hours of audio that are in part captured in the ‘Out of Your Mind’ series.
Watts sought to resolve his feelings of alienation from the institutions of marriage and the values of American society, as revealed in his classic comments on love relationships in “Divine Madness” and on perception of the organism-environment in “The Philosophy of Nature”. In looking at social issues he was quite concerned with the necessity for international peace, for tolerance and understanding among disparate cultures. He also came to feel acutely conscious of a growing ecological predicament; writing, for example, in the early 1960s: “Can any melting or burning imaginable get rid of these ever-rising mountains of ruin—especially when the things we make and build are beginning to look more and more like rubbish even before they are thrown away?” These concerns were later expressed in a television pilot made for NET (National Educational Television) filmed at his mountain retreat in 1971 in which he noted that the single track of conscious attention was wholly inadequate for interactions with a multi-tracked world.
Watts disliked much in the conventional idea of “progress”. He hoped for change, but he preferred amiable, semi-isolated rural social enclaves, and also believed in tolerance for social misfits and eccentric artists. Watts decried the suburbanization of the countryside and the way of life that went with it. In one campus lecture tour, which Watts titled “The End to the Put-Down of Man”, Watts presented positive images for both nature and humanity, spoke in favor of the various stages of human development (including the teenage years), reproached excessive cynicism and rivalry, and extolled intelligent creativity, good architecture and food.
In regards to his ethical outlook, Watts felt that absolute morality had nothing to do with the fundamental realization of one’s deep spiritual identity. He advocated social rather than personal ethics. In his writings, Watts was increasingly concerned with ethics applied to relations between humanity and the natural environment and between governments and citizens. He wrote out of an appreciation of a racially and culturally diverse social landscape.
He often said that he wished to act as a bridge between the ancient and the modern, between East and West, and between culture and nature.
Watts led some tours for Westerners to the Buddhist temples of Japan. He also studied some movements from the traditional Chinese martial art taijiquan, with an Asian colleague, Al Chung-liang Huang.
In several of his later publications, especially Beyond Theology and The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are, Watts put forward a worldview, drawing on Hinduism, Chinese philosophy, pantheism or panentheism, and modern science, in which he maintains that the whole universe consists of a cosmic Self playing hide-and-seek (Lila); hiding from itself (Maya) by becoming all the living and non-living things in the universe and forgetting what it really is – the upshot being that we are all IT in disguise. In this worldview, Watts asserts that our conception of ourselves as an “ego in a bag of skin,” or “skin-encapsulated ego” is a myth; the entities we call the separate “things” are merely aspects or features of the whole.
Watts’ books frequently include discussions reflecting his keen interest in patterns that occur in nature and which are repeated in various ways and at a wide range of scales – including the patterns to be discerned in the history of civilizations.
In October 1973, Watts returned from a European lecture tour to his cabin in Druid Heights. Friends of Watts had been concerned about him for some time over what they considered his excessive drinking of alcohol. On 16 November 1973, he died in his sleep. He was reported to have been under treatment for a heart condition. His body was cremated shortly thereafter. His ashes were split with half buried near his library at Druid Heights and half at the Green Gulch Monastery.
A personal account of Watts’ last years and approach to death is given by Al Chung-liang Huang in Tao: The Watercourse Way.
Watts married three times and had seven children (five daughters and two sons). Watts met Eleanor Everett in 1936, when her mother, Ruth Fuller Everett, brought her to London to study piano. They met at the Buddhist Lodge, were engaged the following year and married in April 1938. A daughter, Joan, was born in November 1938 and another, Anne, was born in 1942. Their marriage ended in 1949, but Watts continued to correspond with his former mother-in-law.
Jean Burden, his lover and the inspiration for Nature, Man and Woman, remained in his thoughts to the end of his life.
In 1950, Watts married Dorothy DeWitt and moved to San Francisco in early 1951 to teach. They began a family that grew to include five children: Tia, Mark, Richard, Lila, and Diane. The couple separated in the early 1960s after Watts met Mary Jane Yates King while lecturing in New York. After a difficult divorce he married King in 1964. Watts lived with Mary Jane in Sausalito, California, in the mid-1960s. He divided his later years between a houseboat in Sausalito called the Vallejo,and a secluded cabin in Druid Heights, on the southwest flank of Mount Tamalpais north of San Francisco, California.
Watts’ eldest daughters, Joan Watts and Anne Watts, own and manage most of the copyrights to his books. His son, Mark Watts, serves as curator of his father’s audio, video and film and has published content of some of his spoken lectures in print format.
(ISBN’s for titles originally published prior to 1974 are for reprint editions)
- 1932 An Outline of Zen Buddhism, The Golden Vista Press (32 page pamphlet)
- 1936 The Spirit of Zen: A Way of Life, Work and Art in the Far East, E.P. Dutton ISBN 0-8021-3056-9
- 1937 The Legacy of Asia and Western Man, University of Chicago Press
- 1940 The Meaning of Happiness. (reprinted, Harper & Row, 1979, ISBN 0-06-080178-6)
- 1944 Theologia Mystica: Being the Treatise of Saint Dionysius, Pseudo-Areopagite, on Mystical Theology, Together with the First and Fifth Epistles, West Park, New York: Holy Cross Press
- 1947 Behold the Spirit: A Study in the Necessity of Mystical Religion, Pantheon Books, ISBN 0-394-71761-9
- 1950 Easter: Its Story and Meaning New York: Schuman
- 1950 The Supreme Identity: An Essay on Oriental Metaphysic and the Christian Religion, Noonday Press/Farrar, Straus & Giroux ISBN 0-394-71835-6
- 1951 The Wisdom of Insecurity: A Message for an Age of Anxiety. Pantheon Books. 1951. ISBN 0-394-70468-1.
- 1953 Myth and Ritual in Christianity, Thames and Hudson, ISBN 0-8070-1375-7, including essay “God and Satan”
- 1957 The Way of Zen. Pantheon Books. 1957. ISBN 0-375-70510-4.
- 1958 Nature, Man and Woman, Pantheon Books, ISBN 0-679-73233-0
- 1959 Beat Zen Square Zen and Zen, San Francisco: City Lights Books, ASIN B000F2RQL4
- 1960 This Is It and Other Essays on Zen and Spiritual Experience, Pantheon Books, ISBN 0-394-71904-2
- 1961 Psychotherapy East and West, Pantheon Books, ISBN 0-394-71609-4
- 1962 The Joyous Cosmology: Adventures in the Chemistry of Consciousness, Pantheon Books
- 1963 The Two Hands of God: The Myths of Polarity, George Braziller
- 1964 Beyond Theology: The Art of Godmanship, Pantheon Books, ISBN 0-394-71923-9
- 1966 The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are. Pantheon Books. 1966. ISBN 0-679-72300-5.
- 1967 Nonsense, illustrations by Greg Irons (a collection of literary nonsense), San Francisco: Stolen Paper Editions
- 1970 Does It Matter?: Essays on Man’s Relation to Materiality, Pantheon Books, ISBN 0-394-71665-5
- 1971 The Temple of Konarak: Erotic Spirituality, with photographs by Eliot Elisofon, London: Thames and Hudson. Also published as Erotic Spirituality: The Vision of Konarak, New York: Macmillan
- 1972 The Art of Contemplation: A Facsimile Manuscript with Doodles, Pantheon Books
- In My Own Way: An Autobiography 1915–1965. Pantheon Books. 1972. ISBN 9781577315841., Vintage Books pocket edition 1973, ISBN 0-394-71951-4, New World Library edition, 2007, ISBN 1-57731-584-7
- 1973 Cloud-hidden, Whereabouts Unknown: A Mountain Journal, Pantheon Books. Also published in Canada in 1974 by Jonathan Cape, ISBN 0224009729. ISBN 0-394-71999-9
- 1974 The Essence of Alan Watts, ed. Mary Jane Watts, Celestial Arts
- 1975 Tao: The Watercourse Way, with Chungliang Al Huang, Pantheon
- 1976 Essential Alan Watts, ed. Mark Watts,
- 1978 Uncarved Block, Unbleached Silk: The Mystery of Life
- 1979 Om: Creative Meditations, ed. Mark Watts
- 1982 Play to Live, ed. Mark Watts
- 1983 Way of Liberation: Essays and Lectures on the Transformation of the Self, ed. Mark Watts
- 1985 Out of the Trap, ed. Mark Watts
- 1986 Diamond Web, ed. Mark Watts
- 1987 The Early Writings of Alan Watts, ed. John Snelling, Dennis T. Sibley, and Mark Watts
- 1990 The Modern Mystic: A New Collection of the Early Writings of Alan Watts, ed. John Snelling and Mark Watts
- 1994 Talking Zen, ed. Mark Watts
- 1995 Become What You Are, Shambhala, expanded ed. 2003. ISBN 1-57062-940-4
- 1995 Buddhism: The Religion of No-Religion, ed. Mark Watts A preview from Google Books
- 1995 The Philosophies of Asia, ed. Mark Watts
- 1995 The Tao of Philosophy, ed. Mark Watts, edited transcripts, Tuttle Publishing, 1999. ISBN 0-8048-3204-8
- 1996 Myth and Religion, ed. Mark Watts
- 1997 Taoism: Way Beyond Seeking, ed. Mark Watts
- 1997 Zen and the Beat Way, ed. Mark Watts
- 1998 Culture of Counterculture, ed. Mark Watts
- 1999 Buddhism: The Religion of No-Religion, ed. Mark Watts, edited transcripts, Tuttle Publishing. ISBN 0-8048-3203-X
- 2000 What Is Zen?, ed. Mark Watts, New World Library. ISBN 0-394-71951-4 A preview from Google Books
- 2000 What Is Tao?, ed. Mark Watts, New World Library. ISBN 1-57731-168-X
- 2000 Still the Mind: An Introduction to Meditation, ed. Mark Watts, New World Library. ISBN 1-57731-214-7
- 2000 Eastern Wisdom, ed. Mark Watts, MJF Books. ISBN 1-56731-491-0, three books in one volume: What is Zen?, What is Tao?, and An Introduction to Meditation (Still the Mind). Assembled from transcriptions of audio tape recordings made by his son Mark, of lectures and seminars given by Alan Watts during the last decade of his life.
- 2002 Zen, the Supreme Experience: The Newly Discovered Scripts, ed. Mark Watts, Vega
- 2006 Eastern Wisdom, Modern Life: Collected Talks, 1960–1969, New World Library
Audio and video works, essays
Including recordings of lectures at major universities and multi-session seminars.
- 1960 Eastern Wisdom and Modern Life, television series, Season 1 (1959) and Season 2 (1960)
- 1960 Essential Lectures
- 1960 Nature of Consciousness (here)
- 1960 The Value of Psychotic Experience
- 1960 The World As Emptiness
- 1960 From Time to Eternity
- 1960 Lecture On Zen
- 1960 The Cross of Cards
- 1960 Taoism
- 1962 This Is It – Alan Watts and friends in a spontaneous musical happening (Long playing album – MEA LP 1007)
- 1968 Psychedelics & Religious Experience, in California Law Review (here)
- 1969 Why Not Now: The Art of Meditation
- 1971 A Conversation With Myself: Part 1 on YouTube, Part 2 on YouTube, Part 3 on YouTube, Part 4 on YouTube
- 1972 The Art of Contemplation, Village Press
- 1972 The Way of Liberation in Zen Buddhism, Alan Watts Journal, vol. 2, nr 1
- 1994 Zen: The Best of Alan Watts (VHS)
- 2004 Out of Your Mind: Essential Listening from the Alan Watts Audio Archives, Sounds True, Inc. Unabridged edition,
- 2005 Do You Do It, or Does It Do You?: How to let the universe meditate you (CD)
- 2007 Zen Meditations with Alan Watts, DVD (here)
- 2013 What If Money Was No Object? (3 minutes) on YouTube
- Furlong, Monica 1986 Genuine Fake: a Biography of Alan Watts. Heinemann. (or titled Zen Effects: The Life of Alan Watts as published by Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, ISBN 0-395-45392-5)
- Lhermite, Pierre 1983 Alan Watts, Taoïste d’Occident, éd. La Table Ronde.
- Stuart, David 1976 (pseudonym for Edwin Palmer Hoyt, Jr.) Alan Watts: The Rise and Decline of the Ordained Shaman of the Counterculture. Chilton Book Co, Pa.
In popular culture
||This section needs additional citations for verification. (November 2016)
- Watt’s appears in two books written by Jack Kerouac. Due to the objections of his publishers, Kerouac was not permitted to use the real names of the people featured in his books. Therefore, Watt’s appears as Arthur Whane in the book The Dharma Bums and Alex Aums in Desolation Angels.
- Watts’ talks inspired Van Morrison to write the song “Alan Watts Blues” for his 1987 album Poetic Champions Compose.
- Psytrance artist Mekkanikka features samples of Watts describing the Chinese conception of nature, as that which proceeds involuntarily and in essence uncontrollably, throughout the 2006 song “Let Go”.
- The math rock band Giraffes? Giraffes! sample Watts in their song “I Am S/H(im)e[r] As You Am S/H(im)e[r] As You Are Me And We Am I And I Are All Our Together: Our Collective Consciousness’ Psychogenic Fugue”, off of their 2007 album “More Skin With Milk-Mouth”.
- Samples from lectures by Alan Watts are featured in the intros or endings of several of STRFKR songs, including 2008’s “Florida”, “Isabella of Castile”; 2009’s “Medicine”; 2010’s “Pistol Pete”; 2011’s “Mystery Cloud”, “Hungry Ghost” and “Quality Time”, and in their 2016 album ‘Being No One, Going Nowhere‘ on the song “Interspace”.
- Ott features samples of Alan Watts lectures in his 2011 album Mir, on the first track, “One Day I Wish to Have This Kind of Time”.
- The artist Will Cady included samples of Watts’ lecture “The Dream of Life” in a 2013 single “What Fills The Gap”.
- Around 2013, many Chillstep producers began sampling Alan Watts’ recorded speeches in their music, resulting in what is called Philosophystep.
- Nothing More‘s 2014 self-titled album has passages from Watts’s lectures incorporated into the background of two songs. Both Gyre and Pyre consist of instrumentals with Watts’ quotes used over the music.
- The progressive metal band The Contortionist features a sample of Alan Watts at the end of their 2014 album Language.
- In 2015, Logic sampled the “What Do I Desire (What If Money Was No Object)” lecture on his 2015 album The Incredible True Story in the title song. Watt’s lecture concludes the album before it transitions to an audio cut-scene consistent with the rest of the album.
- A sample of Watt’s lecture “The Spectrum of Love” begins the song “Intro/Spectrum” by the band HÆLOS on their 2016 album Full Circle
- The metalcore band Architects released an album in 2016 entitled All Our Gods Have Abandoned Us, which includes Watts’ “The Mercy of Nature” quotes in the song Memento Mori.
- Sound Tribe Sector 9 features samples of Alan Watts in their live performances of the songs “World Go Round” and “Totem”.
- The 2013 film Her features Watts as an artificially intelligent operating system, portrayed by Brian Cox.
- The 2014 Red Bull Media House/Matchstick Productions skiing documentary Days Of My Youth uses Watts’ spoken word in a number of sequences through the film.
- In recent years
, portions of Watts’ lectures have been popularized by a series of animated internet videos.
- In the 2007-09 US-aired NBC TV series Life, Damian Lewis’ character often listens to Alan Watts’ recordings in his car and their significance as woven into the plot.
- Jump up^ James Craig Holte The Conversion Experience in America: A ‘Sourcebook on American Religious Conversion Autobiography page 199
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. (1973). In My Own Way: An Autobiography 1915–1965. New York: Pantheon Books. p. 280.
- Jump up^ David, Erik (2006). The Visionary State: A Journey through California’s Spiritual Landscape. Chronicle Books. ISBN 0-8118-4835-3.
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, Part 1
- Jump up^ Zen Effects: The Life of Alan Watts, by Monica Furlong, p. 12
- Jump up^ Zen Effects: The Life of Alan Watts, by Monica Furlong, p. 22
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, p. 322
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, pp. 71–72
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1957, Part 2, Chapter 4
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, p. 60
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, p. 102
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, pp. 78–82
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1947/1971 Behold the Spirit, revised edition. New York: Random House / Vintage. p. 32
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W., 1957, p.11
- Jump up^ “Alan Wilson Watts”. Encyclopedia of World Biography.
- Jump up^ KPFA Folio, Volume 13, no. 1, 9–22 April 1962, p. 14. Retrieved at archive.org on 26 November 2014.
- Jump up^ KPFA Folio, Volume 14, no. 1, 8–21 April 1963, p. 19. Retrieved at archive.org on 26 November 2014.
- Jump up^ Susan Krieger, Hip Capitalism, 1979, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, ISBN 0-8039-1263-3 pbk., p. 170.
- Jump up^ KKUP Program Schedule. Retrieved on 26 November 2014.
- Jump up^ KPFK Program Schedule. Retrieved on 26 November 2014.
- Jump up^ KGNU Program Schedule. Retrieved on 26 November 2014.
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, p. 321.
- Jump up^ Alan Watts, “Eastern Wisdom and Modern Life, Season 1 (1959)” and Season 2 (1960), KQED public television series, San Francisco
- Jump up^ Ropp, Robert S. de 1995, 2002 Warrior’s Way: a Twentieth Century Odyssey. Nevada City, CA: Gateways, pp. 333-334.
- Jump up^ The Joyous Cosmology: Adventures in the Chemistry of Consciousness (the quote is new to the 1965/1970 edition (page 26), and not contained in the original 1962 edition of the book).
- Jump up^ William Warren Bartley, Werner Erhard, The Transformation of a Man
- Jump up^ “Alan Watts – Life and Works”.
- Jump up^ “Deoxy Org: Alan Watts”.
- Jump up^ Weidenbaum, Jonathan. “Complaining about Alan Watts”.
- Jump up^ Kapleau 1967, pp. 21–22
- Jump up^ Aitken 1997, p. 30. 
- Jump up^ Stuart, David 1976 Alan Watts. Pennsylvania: Chilton.
- Jump up^ Chadwick, D: Crooked Cucumber: The Life and Zen Teaching of Shunryu Suzuki, Broadway Books,2000
- Jump up^ ^ Davis, Erik (May 2005). Druids and Ferries “Druids and Ferries”. Arthur (Brooklyn: Arthur Publishing Corp.) (16). http://www.techgnosis.com/index_druid.html Druids and Ferries.
- Jump up^ Davis, Erik (May 2005). “Druids and Ferries”. Arthur. Brooklyn: Arthur Publishing Corp. (16).
- Jump up^ The Joyous Cosmology, p. v
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1973, p. 247.
- Jump up^ The Joyous Cosmology, p. 63
- Jump up^ De Ropp, Robert S. 2002 Warrior’s Way. Nevada City, CA: Gateways, p. 334.
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan W. 1947/1971, pp. 25–28.
- Jump up^ Zen Effects: The Life of Alan Watts, by Monica Furlong
- Jump up^ “Alan Watts, Zen Philosopher, Writer and Teacher, 58, Dies”. The New York Times. 16 November 1973. Retrieved 6 March 2013.
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan (1975). Huang, Chungliang Al, ed. TAO: The Watercourse Way (Foreword). New York: Pantheon Books. pp. vii–xiii. ISBN 0-394-73311-8.
- Jump up^ Stirling 2006, pg. 27
- Jump up^ The Book on the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are (1966)
- Jump up^ Watts, Alan, 1973, pp. 300–304
- Jump up^ Theologia Mystica at WorldCat
- Jump up^ The Supreme Identity atWorldCat
- Jump up^ Nonsense at WorldCat
- Jump up^ Will Cady (2013-02-28), Will Cady – What Fills The Gap (feat. Alan Watts), retrieved 2016-08-07
- Jump up^ https://www.buzzfeed.com/theant/people-are-mixing-alan-watts-with-chillstep-music-o4ff
- Jump up^ “Her (2013)”. IMDb.com, Inc. Retrieved 31 December 2013.
- Jump up^ Flash Animated Philosophy From South Park Creators www.coldhardflash.com
- Aitken, Robert. Original Dwelling Place. Counterpoint. Washington, D.C. 1997. ISBN 1-887178-41-4 (paperback)
- Charters, Ann (ed.). The Portable Beat Reader. Penguin Books. New York. 1992. ISBN 0-670-83885-3 (hard cover); ISBN 0-14-015102-8 (paperback)
- Furlong, Monica, Zen Effects: The Life of Alan Watts Houghton Mifflin. New York. 1986 ISBN 0-395-45392-5, Skylight Paths 2001 edition of the biography, with new foreword by author: ISBN 1-893361-32-2
- Gidlow, Elsa, “Elsa:I Come With My Songs”. Bootlegger Press and Druid Heights Books, San Francisco. 1986.
- Kapleau, Philip. Three Pillars of Zen (1967) Beacon Press. ISBN 0-8070-5975-7
- Stirling, Isabel. Zen Pioneer: The Life & Works of Ruth Fuller Sasak, Shoemaker & Hoard. 2006. ISBN 978-1-59376-110-3
- Watts, Alan, In My Own Way. New York. Random House Pantheon. 1973 ISBN 0-394-46911-9 (his autobiography)
- Clark, David K. The Pantheism of Alan Watts. Downers Grove, Ill. Inter-Varsity Press. 1978. ISBN 0-87784-724-X
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
One flew over the cuckoo’s nest – Trailer – HQ
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest – Opening Scene – Full HD
One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest – Randle McMurphy’s Arrival – 1080p Full HD
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest – The First Confrontation
One flew over the cuckoos nest – ball game.mov
One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest 1975 Best scene
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest – I bet a dime
May I have my Cigarettes please, Nurse Ratched ?
One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest – After Party Full Scene – 1080p Full HD
Billy Bibbit Scene
One Flew Over the Cookoo’s Nest – Basketball Game
‘Strangle Scene’.. ‘Nurse Ratched’ gets what she had ‘coming’ to her.. lol 😉
One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest – Randal back in action scene
One Floor Over the Cuckoo’s Nest –Juicy Fruit Scene–
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest – Ending Scene – Full HD
Ken Kesey interview (“One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”) on Charlie Rose (1992)
Jack Nicholson Wins Best Actor: 1976 Oscars
Jack Nicholson on ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST
SISKEL & EBERT MOVIE REVIEW — “ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST” (1975)
Hidden Meaning in One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest – Earthling Cinema
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” by Ken Kesey [BOOK REVIEW]
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest Literary Analysis
Hillary Clinton is Evil! (REMIX)
Hillary Clinton / Nurse Ratched ???
Hillary Clinton is Nurse Ratched
10/05 Hillary Clinton – Nurse for a Day
Social Aspects of Ken Kesey’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
Cultural Dimension: me or we
Classical Liberalism: The Decline and Triumph of Classical Liberalism (Pt. 1) – Learn Liberty
Classical Liberalism: The Decline and Triumph of Classical Liberalism (Pt. 2) – Learn Liberty
Libertarianism Explained: Individualism vs. Collectivism – Learn Liberty
The Fountainhead – Howard Roark speech
G. Edward Griffin: The Collectivist Conspiracy (Full Length)
Ayn Rand on Collectivism
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is a 1975 American comedy-drama film directed by Miloš Forman, based on the 1962 novel One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey. The film stars Jack Nicholson and features a supporting cast of Louise Fletcher, William Redfield, Will Sampson, and Brad Dourif.
Considered to be one of the greatest films ever made, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is No. 33 on the American Film Institute‘s 100 Years… 100 Movies list. The film was the second to win all five major Academy Awards (Best Picture, Actor in Lead Role, Actress in Lead Role, Director, and Screenplay) following It Happened One Nightin 1934, an accomplishment not repeated until 1991 by The Silence of the Lambs. It also won numerous Golden Globe and BAFTA Awards.
In 1993, the film was deemed “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant” by the United States Library of Congress and selected for preservation in the National Film Registry.
In 1963, Oregon, recidivist criminal Randle McMurphy is moved to a mental institution after serving a short sentence on a prison farm after raping a teenager. Though not actually mentally ill, McMurphy hopes to avoid hard labour and serve the rest of his sentence in a relaxed environment. Upon arriving at the hospital, he finds the ward run by the steely, strict Nurse Ratched, who subtly suppresses the actions of her patients through a passive-aggressive routine, intimidating the patients.
The other patients include anxious, stuttering Billy Bibbit; Charlie Cheswick, who is prone to childish tantrums; delusional Martini; the well-educated, paranoid Dale Harding; belligerent Max Taber; epileptic Jim Sefelt; and “Chief” Bromden, a tall Native American believed to be deaf and mute. Ratched soon sees McMurphy’s lively, rebellious presence to be a threat to her authority, confiscating the patients’ cigarettes and rationing them. During his time in the ward, McMurphy gets into a battle of wits with Ratched. He steals a hospital bus, escaping with several patients to go on a fishing trip, encouraging his friends to become more self-confident.
McMurphy learns his sentence may become indefinite, and he makes plans to escape, exhorting Chief to throw a hydrotherapy cart through a window. He, Chief, and Cheswick get into a fight with the orderlies after the latter becomes agitated over his stolen cigarettes. Ratched sends them to the “shock shop”, and McMurphy discovers Chief can actually speak, feigning illness to avoid engaging with anyone. After being subjected to electroconvulsive therapy, McMurphy returns to the ward pretending to have brain damage, but reveals the treatment has charged him up even more. McMurphy and Chief make plans to escape, but decide to throw a secret Christmas party for their friends after Ratched leaves for the night.
McMurphy sneaks two women, Candy and Rose, into the ward and bribes the night guard. After a night of partying, McMurphy and Chief prepare to escape, inviting Billy to come with them. He refuses, not ready to leave the hospital. McMurphy instead convinces him to have sex with Candy. Ratched arrives in the morning to find the ward in disarray and most of the patients unconscious. She discovers Billy and Candy together, the former now free of his stutter, until Ratched threatens to inform his mother about his escapade. Billy is overwhelmed with fear and locks himself in the doctor’s office and commits suicide. The enraged McMurphy strangles Ratched, before being knocked out by an orderly.
Ratched comes back with a neck brace and a scratchy voice. Rumours spread that McMurphy escaped rather than be taken “upstairs”. Later that night, Chief sees McMurphy being returned to his bed. He discovers McMurphy has lobotomy scars on his forehead, and smothers his friend with a pillow. Chief finally throws the hydrotherapy cart through the window and escapes into the night, cheered on by the men.
Filming began in January 1975 and concluded approximately three months later, and was shot on location in Salem, Oregon and the surrounding area, as well as on the Oregon coast. It was also shot at Oregon State Hospital in Salem, Oregon, which was also the setting of the novel.
Haskell Wexler was fired as cinematographer and replaced by Bill Butler. Wexler believed his dismissal was due to his concurrent work on the documentary Underground, in which the radical terrorist group The Weather Underground were being interviewed while hiding from the law. However, Miloš Forman said he had terminated Wexler over mere artistic differences. Both Wexler and Butler received Academy Awardnominations for Best Cinematography for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, though Wexler said there was “only about a minute or two minutes in that film I didn’t shoot.”
According to Butler, Jack Nicholson refused to speak to Forman: “…[Jack] never talked to Milos at all, he only talked to me.”
The film was met with overwhelming critical acclaim; Roger Ebert said “Miloš Forman’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is a film so good in so many of its parts that there’s a temptation to forgive it when it goes wrong. But it does go wrong, insisting on making larger points than its story really should carry, so that at the end, the human qualities of the characters get lost in the significance of it all. And yet there are those moments of brilliance.” Ebert would later put the film on his “Great Movies” list. A.D. Murphy of Variety wrote a mixed review as well, as did Vincent Canby: writing in The New York Times, Canby called the film “a comedy that can’t quite support its tragic conclusion, which is too schematic to be honestly moving, but it is acted with such a sense of life that one responds to its demonstration of humanity if not to its programmed metaphors.”
The film opens with original music by composer Jack Nitzsche, featuring an eerie bowed saw (performed by Robert Armstrong) and wine glasses. Commenting on the score, reviewer Steven McDonald has said, “The edgy nature of the film extends into the score, giving it a profoundly disturbing feel at times — even when it appears to be relatively normal. The music has a tendency to always be a little off-kilter, and from time to time it tilts completely over into a strange little world of its own …”
The film went on to win the “Big Five” Academy Awards at the 48th Oscar ceremony. These include the Best Actor for Jack Nicholson, Best Actress for Louise Fletcher, Best Direction for Forman, Best Picture, andBest Adapted Screenplay for Laurence Hauben and Bo Goldman. The film currently has a 95% “Certified Fresh” rating at Rotten Tomatoes with an average rating of 8.9/10. Its consensus states “The onscreen battle between Jack Nicholson and Louise Fletcher serves as a personal microcosm of the culture wars of the 1970s — and testament to the director’s vision that the film retains its power more than three decades later.”
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest is considered to be one of the greatest American films. Ken Kesey participated in the early stages of script development, but withdrew after creative differences with the producers over casting and narrative point of view; ultimately he filed suit against the production and won a settlement. Kesey himself claimed never to have seen the movie, but said he disliked what he knew of it, a fact confirmed by Chuck Palahniuk who wrote, “The first time I heard this story, it was through the movie starring Jack Nicholson. A movie that Kesey once told me he disliked.”
In 1993, this film was deemed “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant” by the United States Library of Congress and selected for preservation in their National Film Registry.
Awards and honors
American Film Institute
- ^ Jump up to:a b Townsend, Sylvia (19 December 2014). “Haskell Wexler and the Making of ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest'”. Retrieved 13 April2015.
- Jump up^ Chew was listed as “supervising editor” in the film’s credits, but was included in the nomination for an editing Academy Award.
- ^ Jump up to:a b “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Box Office Information”.Box Office Mojo. Retrieved January 22, 2012.
- Jump up^ One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest at the American Film Institute
- Jump up^ Story Notes for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
- Jump up^ “Hollywood’s Love Affair with Oregon Coast Continues”. Retrieved15 June 2015.
- Jump up^ Oregon State Hospital – A documentary film (Mental Health Association of Portland)
- Jump up^ Anderson, John. “Haskell Wexler, Oscar-Winning Cinematographer, Dies at 93.” The New York Times, December 27, 2015.
- Jump up^ Suntimes.com – Roger Ebert review, Chicago Sun-Times, January 1, 1975
- Jump up^ Suntimes.com – Roger Ebert review, Chicago Sun-Times, February 2, 2003.
- Jump up^ Variety.com – A.D. Murphy, Variety, November 7, 1975
- Jump up^ Canby, Vincent (November 28, 1975). “Critic’s Pick: One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”. The New York Times.
- Jump up^ AllMusic: Review by Steven McDonald
- Jump up^ “One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest Movie Reviews, Pictures – Rotten Tomatoes”. Retrieved 2010-08-19.
- Jump up^ Carnes, Mark Christopher, Paul R. Betz, et al. (1999). American National Biography, Volume 26. New York: Oxford University Press USA. ISBN 0-19-522202-4. p. 312,
- Jump up^ Carnes, p. 312
- Jump up^ Foreword of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, Copyright 2007 by Chuck Palahniuk. Available in the 2007 Edition published by Penguin Books
- Jump up^ “U.S. National Film Registry — Titles”. Retrieved September 2,2016.
- Jump up^ AFI’s 100 Years…100 Heroes and Villains Nominees
Could Hillary’s smile cost her the election? Twitter mocks Clinton’s ‘creepy grandma’ grin as she smirks her way through presidential debate
With her opponent dogged by accusations of sexual assault, Hillary Clinton had strong odds as she entered the third presidential debate on Wednesday.
Only one thing seemed to threaten her chances of victory: her smile.
The Democratic candidate faced a flood of insults as she took to the stage at the University of Las Vegas, with many viewers confessing they were ‘creeped out’ by her stubborn grin.
Hundreds took to Twitter to describe her smile as ‘scary’ and ‘creepy’.
Hillary Clinton’s unrelenting smile at Wednesday’s presidential debate made for uncomfortable viewing for some voters
Social media mocks Hillary Clinton’s ‘creepy grandma’ grin
Others questioned why, when being slammed with insults from her opponent, her expression did not drop.
‘Hillary Clinton’s smile is the scariest thing I’ve ever seen in my life,’ said one observer.
‘When Hillary smiles she looks like an evil snake,’ another commented.
‘What to do when you don’t have a response? Smile like a chipmunk,’ remarked another.
‘Whoever told Hillary Clinton to smile less since the first debate gave great advice,’ mused a different viewer.
Others, ever-so-slightly more charmed by her cheerful demeanor, likened her to a happy grandmother.
Her glee remained written all over her face as Trump continued to slate her, much to viewers’ confusion
Twitter users were quick to mock her expression as they watched the debate on Wednesday
Clinton’s happy expression became a talking point at earlier debates. It continued to peak viewers’ interests at her final showdown with Trump on Wednesday (above)
‘Hillary Clinton is so cute it’s something about her I just want her to tuck me in and give me a kiss with her coffee breath,’ one commented.
It was not the first time her facial expression sparked interest among voters.
After the first presidential debate on September 26, political commentators shared some free advice with the candidate online.
‘Who told Hillary Clinton to keep smiling like she’s at her granddaughter’s birthday party?’ said David Frum, senior editor of The Atlantic, at the time.
The discussion had the same hallmarks of bizarre criticisms made earlier this month about Donald Trump’s incessant sniffing.
Viewers were distracted throughout the second presidential debate by the Republican candidate’s runny nose, complaining in their droves about it online.
Read Full Post
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
||Kenneth Elton Kesey
September 17, 1935
La Junta, Colorado, U.S.
||November 10, 2001 (aged 66)
Eugene, Oregon, U.S.
||Novelist, short story writer, essayist, poet
||One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1962)
Sometimes a Great Notion(1964)
Kenneth Elton “Ken” Kesey (; September 17, 1935 – November 10, 2001) was an American novelist, essayist, and countercultural figure. He considered himself a link between the Beat Generation of the 1950s and the hippies of the 1960s.
Kesey was born in La Junta, Colorado and grew up in Springfield, Oregon, graduating from the University of Oregon in 1957. He began writing One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest in 1960 following the completion of a graduate fellowship in creative writing at Stanford University; the novel was an immediate commercial and critical success when published two years later. Subsequently, he moved to nearby La Honda, California and began hosting happenings with former colleagues from Stanford, miscellaneous bohemian & literary figures (most notably Neal Cassady), and other friends under the imprimateur of the Merry Pranksters; these parties, known as Acid Tests, integrated the consumption of LSD with multimedia performances. He mentored the Grateful Dead (the de facto “house band” of the Acid Tests) throughout their incipience and continued to exert a profound influence upon the group throughout their long career. Sometimes a Great Notion—an epic account of the vicissitudes of an Oregon logging family that aspired to the modernist grandeur of William Faulkner‘s Yoknapatawpha saga—was a commercial success that polarized critics and readers upon its release in 1964, although Kesey regarded the novel as his magnum opus.
In 1965, following an arrest for marijuana possession and subsequent faked suicide, Kesey was imprisoned for five months. Shortly thereafter, he returned home to the Willamette Valley and settled in Pleasant Hill, Oregon, where he maintained a secluded, family-oriented lifestyle for the rest of his life. In addition to teaching at the University of Oregon—culminating in Caverns (1989), a collaborative novel written by Kesey and his graduate workshop students under the pseudonym of “O.U. Levon”—he continued to regularly contribute fiction and reportage to such publications as Esquire, Rolling Stone, Oui, Running, and The Whole Earth Catalog; various iterations of these pieces were collected in Kesey’s Garage Sale (1973) and Demon Box (1986).
Between 1974 and 1980, Kesey published six issues of Spit in the Ocean, a little magazine that featured excerpts from an unfinished novel (Seven Prayers by Grandma Whittier, an account of Kesey’s grandmother’s struggle with Alzheimer’s disease) and contributions from such luminaries as Margo St. James, Kate Millett, Stewart Brand, Saul-Paul Sirag, Jack Sarfatti, Paul Krassner, and William S. Burroughs. After a third novel (Sailor Song) was released to lukewarm reviews in 1992, he reunited with the Merry Pranksters and began publishing works on the Internet until ill health (including a stroke) curtailed his activities.
Ken Kesey was born in La Junta, Colorado, to dairy farmers Geneva (née Smith) and Frederick A. Kesey. In 1946, the family moved to Springfield, Oregon. Kesey was a champion wrestler in both high school and college in the 174-pound weight division, and he almost qualified to be on the Olympic team until a serious shoulder injury stopped his wrestling career. He graduated from Springfield High School in 1953. An avid reader and filmgoer, the young Kesey took John Wayne, Edgar Rice Burroughs, and Zane Grey as his role models (later naming a son Zane) and toyed with magic, ventriloquism, and hypnotism.
In 1956, while attending college at the University of Oregon School of Journalism and Communication in neighboring Eugene, Oregon, Kesey eloped with his high-school sweetheart, Norma “Faye” Haxby, whom he had met in seventh grade. According to Kesey, “Without Faye, I would have been swept overboard by notoriety and weird, dope-fueled ideas and flower-child girls with beamy eyes and bulbous breasts.” Married until his death at the age of 66, they had three children: Jed, Zane, and Shannon. Additionally, Kesey fathered a daughter with fellow Merry Prankster Carolyn “Mountain Girl” Adams and the approval of Faye Kesey; born in 1966, Sunshine Kesey was raised by Adams and Jerry Garcia.
Kesey had a football scholarship for his freshman year, but switched to University of Oregon wrestling team as a better fit to his build. After posting a .885 winning percentage in the 1956–57 season, he received the Fred Low Scholarship for outstanding Northwest wrestler. In 1957, Kesey was second in his weight class at the Pacific Coast intercollegiate competition. He remains “ranked in the top 10 of Oregon Wrestling’s all time winning percentage.”
A member of Beta Theta Pi throughout his studies, Kesey graduated from the University of Oregon with a Bachelor of Arts degree in speech and communication in 1957. Increasingly disengaged by the playwriting and screenwriting courses that comprised much of his major, he began to take literature classes in the second half of his collegiate career with James B. Hall, a cosmopolitan alumnus of the University of Iowa‘s renowned writing program who had previously taught at Cornell University and later served as provost of the University of California, Santa Cruz. Hall took on Kesey as his protege and cultivated his interest in literary fiction, introducing Kesey (whose interests were hitherto confined to Ray Bradbury‘s science fiction) to the works of Ernest Hemingway and other paragons of modernist fiction. After the last of several brief summer sojourns as a struggling actor in Los Angeles, he published his first short story (“First Sunday of September”) in the Northwest Review and successfully applied to the highly selective Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship for the 1958–59 academic year.
Unbeknownst to Kesey, who applied at Hall’s request, the maverick literary critic Leslie Fiedler successfully importuned the regional fellowship committee to select the “rough-hewn” Kesey alongside more traditional fellows from Reed College and other elite institutions. Because he lacked the prerequisites to work toward a traditional master’s degree in English as a communications major, Kesey elected to enroll in the non-degree program at Stanford University‘s Creative Writing Center that fall; while studying and working in the Stanford milieu over the next five years, most of them spent as a resident of Perry Lane (a historically bohemian enclave adjacent to the university golf course), he developed intimate lifelong friendships with fellow writers Ken Babbs, Larry McMurtry, Wendell Berry, Ed McClanahan, Gurney Norman, and Robert Stone.
During his initial fellowship year, Kesey frequently clashed with Center director Wallace Stegner, who regarded the young writer as “a sort of highly talented illiterate”; Stegner’s deputy Richard Scowcroft later recalled that “neither Wally nor I thought he had a particularly important talent.” Stegner rejected Kesey’s application for a departmental Stegner Fellowship before finally permitting his attendance as a Woodrow Wilson Fellow; according to Stone, Stegner “saw Kesey… as a threat to civilization and intellectualism and sobriety” and continued to reject Kesey’s Stegner Fellowship applications for the 1959–60 and 1960–61 terms.
Nevertheless, Kesey received the prestigious $2,000 Harper-Saxton Prize for his first novel in progress (the oft-rejected Zoo) and audited the graduate writing seminar—a courtesy nominally accorded to former Stegner Fellows, although Kesey only secured his place by falsely claiming to Scowcroft that his colleague (on sabbatical through 1960) “had said that he could attend classes for free”—through the 1960-61 term.The course was initially taught that year by Viking Press editorial consultant and Lost Generation eminence grise Malcolm Cowley, who was “always glad to see” Kesey and fellow auditor Tillie Olsen. Cowley was succeeded the following quarter by the Irish short story specialist Frank O’Connor; frequent spats between O’Connor and Kesey ultimately precipitated his departure from the class. While under the tutelage of Cowley, he began to draft and workshop the manuscript that would evolve into One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest.
Reflecting upon this period in a 1999 interview with Robert K. Elder, Kesey recalled, “I was too young to be a beatnik, and too old to be a hippie.”
Experimentation with psychoactive drugs
At the instigation of Perry Lane neighbor and Stanford psychology graduate student Vik Lovell, an acquaintance of Richard Alpert and Allen Ginsberg, Kesey volunteered to take part in what turned out to be a CIA-financed study under the aegis of Project MKULTRA, a highly secret military program, at the Menlo Park Veterans’ Hospital where he worked as a night aide. The project studied the effects of psychoactive drugs, particularly LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, cocaine, aMT, and DMT on people. Kesey wrote many detailed accounts of his experiences with these drugs, both during the study and in the years of private experimentation that followed.
Kesey’s role as a medical guinea pig, as well as his stint working at the Veterans’ Administration hospital, inspired him to write One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. The success of this book, as well as the demolition of the Perry Lane cabins in August 1963, allowed him to move to a log house at 7940 La Honda Road in La Honda, California, a rustic hamlet in the Santa Cruz Mountains fifteen miles to the west of the Stanford University campus. He frequently entertained friends and many others with parties he called “Acid Tests,” involving music (including the Stanford-educated Anonymous Artists of America and Kesey’s favorite band, the Grateful Dead), black lights, fluorescent paint, strobe lights, LSD, and other psychedelic effects. These parties were described in some of Ginsberg’s poems and served as the basis for Tom Wolfe‘s The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, an early exemplar of the nonfiction novel. Other firsthand accounts of the Acid Tests appear in Hell’s Angels: The Strange and Terrible Saga of the Outlaw Motorcycle Gangs by Hunter S. Thompson and the 1967 Hell’s Angels memoir Freewheelin Frank, Secretary of the Hell’s Angels (Frank Reynolds; ghostwritten by Michael McClure).
One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest
While still enrolled at the University of Oregon in 1957, Kesey wrote End of Autumn; according to Rick Dogson, the novel “focused on the exploitation of college athletes by telling the tale of a football lineman who was having second thoughts about the game.” Although Kesey came to regard the unpublished work as juvenilia, an excerpt served as his Stanford Creative Writing Center application sample.
During his Woodrow Wilson Fellowship year, Kesey wrote Zoo, a novel about the beatniks living in the North Beach community of San Francisco, but it was never published.
The inspiration for One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest came while working on the night shift with Gordon Lish at the Menlo Park Veterans’ Hospital. There, Kesey often spent time talking to the patients, sometimes under the influence of the hallucinogenic drugs with which he had volunteered to experiment. Kesey did not believe that these patients were insane, but rather that society had pushed them out because they did not fit the conventional ideas of how people were supposed to act and behave. Published under the guidance of Cowley in 1962, the novel was an immediate success; in 1963, it was adapted into a successful stage play by Dale Wasserman, and in 1975, Miloš Forman directed a screen adaptation, which won the “Big Five” Academy Awards: Best Picture, Best Actor (Jack Nicholson), Best Actress (Louise Fletcher), Best Director (Forman) and Best Adapted Screenplay (Lawrence Hauben, Bo Goldman).
Kesey originally was involved in creating the film, but left two weeks into production. He claimed never to have seen the movie because of a dispute over the $20,000 he was initially paid for the film rights. Kesey loathed the fact that, unlike the book, the film was not narrated by the Chief Bromden character, and he disagreed with Jack Nicholson’s being cast as Randle McMurphy (he wanted Gene Hackman). Despite this, Faye Kesey has stated that her husband was generally supportive of the film and pleased that it was made.
When the publication of his second novel, Sometimes a Great Notion in 1964, required his presence in New York, Kesey, Neal Cassady, and others in a group of friends they called the Merry Pranksters took a cross-country trip in a school bus nicknamed Further. This trip, described in The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test (and later in Kesey’s unproduced screenplay, The Further Inquiry) was the group’s attempt to create art out of everyday life, and to experience roadway America while high on LSD. In an interview after arriving in New York, Kesey is quoted as saying, “The sense of communication in this country has damn near atrophied. But we found as we went along it got easier to make contact with people. If people could just understand it is possible to be different without being a threat.” A huge amount of footage was filmed on 16mm cameras during the trip which remained largely unseen until the release of Alex Gibney‘s Magic Trip in 2011.
After the bus trip, the Pranksters threw parties they called Acid Tests around the San Francisco Bay Area from 1965 to 1966. Many of the Pranksters lived at Kesey’s residence in La Honda. In New York, Cassady introduced Kesey to Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg, who then turned them on to Timothy Leary. Sometimes a Great Notion inspired a 1970 film starring and directed by Paul Newman; it was nominated for two Academy Awards, and in 1972 was the first film shown by the new television network HBO, in Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania.
Kesey was arrested for possession of marijuana in 1965. In an attempt to mislead police, he faked suicide by having friends leave his truck on a cliffside road near Eureka, along with an elaborate suicide note, written by the Pranksters. Kesey fled to Mexico in the back of a friend’s car. When he returned to the United States eight months later, Kesey was arrested and sent to the San Mateo County jail in Redwood City, California, for five months where he was introduced to a highly recommended San Francisco lawyer, Richard Potack, who specialized in marijuana cultivation. On his release, he moved back to the family farm in Pleasant Hill, Oregon, in the Willamette Valley, where he spent the rest of his life. He wrote many articles, books (mostly collections of his articles), and short stories during that time.
Death of son
In 1984, Kesey’s 20-year-old son Jed, a wrestler for the University of Oregon, suffered severe head injuries in a vehicle accident on the way to a tournament; after he was declared brain-dead two days later his parents gave permission for his organs to be donated.
Jed’s death deeply affected Kesey, who later called Jed a victim of policies that had starved the team of funding. He wrote to Mark Hatfield, “And I began to get mad, Senator. I had finally found where the blame must be laid: that the money we are spending for national defense is not defending us from the villains real and near, the awful villains of ignorance, and cancer, and heart disease and highway death. How many school buses could be outfitted with seatbelts with the money spent for one of those 16-inch shells?” 
At a Grateful Dead concert soon after the death of promoter Bill Graham, Kesey delivered a eulogy, mentioning that Graham had donated $1,000 toward a memorial to Jed atop Mount Pisgah, near the Kesey home in Pleasant Hill. Ken Kesey donated $33,395 towards the purchase of a proper bus for the school’s wrestling team to replace the chicken van that fell off a cliff.
Kesey was diagnosed with diabetes in 1992. In 1994, he toured with members of the Merry Pranksters performing a musical play he wrote about the millennium called Twister: A Ritual Reality. Many old and new friends and family showed up to support the Pranksters on this tour that took them from Seattle’s Bumbershoot, all along the West Coast including a sold out two-night run at The Fillmore in San Francisco to Boulder, Colorado, where they coaxed (or pranked) the Beat Generation poet Allen Ginsberg into performing with them.
Kesey mainly kept to his home life in Pleasant Hill, preferring to make artistic contributions on the Internet or holding ritualistic revivals in the spirit of the Acid Test. In the official Grateful Dead DVD release The Closing of Winterland (2003) documenting the monumental New Year’s 1978/1979 concert at the Winterland Arena in San Francisco, Kesey is featured in a between-set interview.
On August 14, 1997, Kesey and his Pranksters attended a Phish concert in Darien Lake, New York. Kesey and the Pranksters appeared onstage with the band and performed a dance-trance-jam session involving several characters from The Wizard of Oz and Frankenstein.
In June 2001, Kesey was invited and accepted as the keynote speaker at the annual commencement of The Evergreen State College. His last major work was an essay for Rolling Stone magazine calling for peace in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks.
In 1998, health problems began to weaken him, starting with a stroke that year. On October 25, 2001 Kesey had surgery on his liver to remove a tumor. He did not recover from that operation and died of complications on November 10, 2001, age 66.
The film Gerry (2002) is dedicated to the memory of Ken Kesey.
Some of Kesey’s better-known works include:
- One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest (1962, novel)
- Genesis West: Volume Five (1963, magazine article)
- Sometimes a Great Notion (1964, novel)
- Kesey’s Garage Sale (1973, collection of essays)
- Demon Box (1986, collection of essays and short stories)
- Caverns (1989, novel)
- The Further Inquiry (1990, play)
- Sailor Song (1992, novel)
- Last Go Round (1994, novel, written with Ken Babbs)
- Twister (1994, play)
- Kesey’s Jail Journal (2003, collection of essays)
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d Lehmann-Haupt, Christopher. “Ken Kesey, Author of ‘Cuckoo’s Nest,’ Who Defined the Psychedelic Era, Dies at 66“, The New York Times (November 11, 2001). Retrieved February 21, 2008.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i Baker, Jeff (November 11, 2001). “All times a great artist, Ken Kesey is dead at age 66”. The Oregonian. pp. A1.
- Jump up^ https://alumni.stanford.edu/get/page/magazine/article/?article_id=38411
- Jump up^ http://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/1830/the-art-of-fiction-no-136-ken-kesey
- Jump up^ http://www.deaddisc.com/GDFD_Spit.htm
- Jump up^ Macdonald, Gina, and Andrew Macdonald. “Ken Kesey.” Magill’s Survey of American Literature, Revised Edition (2007): Literary Reference Center. EBSCO.
- Jump up^ “Ken Kesey Kisses No Ass”. Esquire Magazine (September 1992).
- Jump up^ “Ken Kesey, Author of ‘Cuckoo’s Nest,’ Who Defined the Psychedelic Era, Dies at 66”, The New York Times (November 11, 2001).
- Jump up^ Robins, Cynthia (2001-12-07). “Kesey’s friends gather in tribute”.
- Jump up^ Christensen, Mark (2010). Acid Christ : Ken Kesey, LSD, and the politics of ecstasy. Tucson, AZ: Schaffner Press. p. 40. ISBN 9781936182107. OCLC 701720769. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- ^ Jump up to:a b “Crash takes second life”. The Spokesman-Review. 101st Year (251). Spokane, WA: Cowles Publishing Company. 1984-01-29. p. A6. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
Writer’s son, Oregon wrestler Jed Kesey, dies of injuries
- Jump up^ “Top Wrestlers”. Eugene, OR: Save Oregon Wrestling Foundation. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- Jump up^ “2006–07 Stats, History, Opponent Info – University of Oregon Wrestling” (PDF). University of Oregon Athletic Department. 2007-12-03. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- Jump up^ “Hall, James B(yron)”, International Who’s Who in Poetry, 2004, p. 138.
- Jump up^ Jeff Baker, “James B. Hall: Writer, teacher”, The Oregonian/OregonLive, May 14, 2008.
- Jump up^ Too Good to Be True. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- ^ Jump up to:a b Philip L. Fradkin, Wallace Stegner and the American West
- Jump up^ Wallace Stegner. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- Jump up^ Cowley, M. (1976). “Ken Kesey at Stanford”, Northwest Review, 16(1), 1.
- Jump up^ “Down on the peacock farm”. Salon Magazine. 2001. Retrieved 2009-06-12.
- Jump up^ VA Palo Alto Health Care System. “Menlo Park Division – VA Palo Alto Health Care System”. va.gov. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- Jump up^ Reilly, Edward C. “Ken Kesey.” Critical Survey of Long Fiction, Second Revised Edition (2000): EBSCO. Web. Nov 10. 2010.
- Jump up^ “Perry Ave, West Menlo Park, CA 94025 to 7940 La Honda Rd, La Honda, CA 94020 – Google Maps”. google.com. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- ^ Jump up to:a b https://books.google.com/books?id=kaQVAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA66&dq=end+of+autumn+kesey&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CDoQ6AEwBmoVChMI-bOJ37iWyAIVjKKACh1Y_grf#v=onepage&q=end%20of%20autumn%20kesey&f=false
- Jump up^ “11 Authors Who Hated the Movie Versions of Their Books”. Mental Floss. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- Jump up^ “National Museum of American History Collections: Signboard, Pass the Acid Test”. americanhistory.si.edu. Retrieved 2015-04-08.
- Jump up^ Lehmann-Haupt, Christopher (November 11, 2001). “Ken Kesey, Author of ‘Cuckoo’s Nest,’ Who Defined the Psychedelic Era, Dies at 66”. The New York Times.
- Jump up^ “Letters of Note: What a world”. lettersofnote.com. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- Jump up^ Kesey, Jed (1984). “Remembering Jed Kesey”. Whole Earth Catalogue. Co-Evolutionary Quarterly. Retrieved March 14, 2016.
- Jump up^ “https://archive.org/details/gd91-10-31.sbd.gardner.2897.sbeok.shnf“. Track 13, starting at about :35.
- Jump up^ https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&dat=19880225&id=D7hPAAAAIBAJ&sjid=CQcEAAAAIBAJ&pg=2381,6211590&hl=en.
- Jump up^ Adams, Sam (September 19–25, 2002). “Try to Remember”. Philadelphia City Paper. Retrieved August 5,2015.
- Jump up^ Martin, Blank (2010-01-19). “Selected Bibliography for Ken Kesey”. Literary Kicks. Retrieved 2014-12-14.
- Ronald Gregg Billingsley, The Artistry of Ken Kesey. PhD dissertation. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, 1971.
- Dedria Bryfonski, Mental illness in Ken Kesey’s One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2010.
- Rick Dodgson, It’s All Kind of Magic: The Young Ken Kesey. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press, 2013.
- Robert Faggen, “Ken Kesey, The Art of Fiction No. 136,” The Paris Review, Spring 1994.
- Barry H. Leeds, Ken Kesey. New York: F. Ungar Publishing Co., 1981.
- Dennis McNally, A Long Strange Trip: the Inside History of the Grateful Dead. Broadway Books, 2002.
- Tim Owen, “Remembering Ken Kesey,” Cosmik Debris Magazine, November 10, 2001.
- M. Gilbert Porter, The Art of Grit: Ken Kesey’s Fiction. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press, 1982.
- Elaine B Safer, The contemporary American Comic Epic: The Novels of Barth, Pynchon, Gaddis, and Kesey. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press, 1988.
- Peter Swirski, “You’re Not in Canada until You Can Hear the Loons Crying; or, Voting, People’s Power and Ken Kesey’s One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest,” in Swirski, American Utopia and Social Engineering in Literature, Social Thought, and Political History. New York: Routledge, 2011.
- Stephen L. Tanner, Ken Kesey. Boston, MA: Twayne, 1983.
||Wikiquote has quotations related to: Ken Kesey
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Quentin Skinner – What is the State? The question that “will not go away”
A Genealogy of the State: Quentin Skinner
Hobbes and the Person of the State | Professor Quentin Skinner
Quentin Skinner. On the Liberty of Republics.
Quentin Skinner: “A Genealogy of Liberty”
Interview of Professor Quentin Skinner – part 1
Interview of Professor Quentin Skinner – part 2
Read Full Post
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quentin Robert Duthie Skinner (born 26 November 1940, Oldham, Lancashire) is the Barber Beaumont Professor of the Humanities at Queen Mary University of London and an intellectual historian.
Quentin Skinner was born the second son of Alexander Skinner, CBE (died 1979), and Winifred Rose Margaret, née Duthie (died 1982). Educated at Bedford School andGonville and Caius College, Cambridge, he was elected into a Fellowship there in 1962 upon obtaining a double-starred First in History, but immediately gained a teaching Fellowship at Christ’s College, Cambridge, where he remained until moving to the University of London in 2008. He is now an Honorary Fellow of both Christ’s College and Gonville and Caius College.
In the middle 1970s he spent four formative years at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton. It was there that he met Raymond Geuss, later a colleague at Cambridge. Together with John Dunn and J. G. A. Pocock, Skinner has been said to have founded the “Cambridge School” of the history of political thought. In 1978 he was appointed to the chair of Political Science at the University of Cambridge, and in 1996 he was appointed Regius Professor of History. He was pro-vice-chancellor of Cambridge in 1999. In 1979 he married Susan James, Professor of Philosophy at Birkbeck College London; they have a daughter and a son. He was previously married to Patricia Law Skinner, who was later married to Bernard Williams.
Skinner has delivered lectures at the Christian Gauss Seminars in Criticism at Princeton (1980), the Carlyle Lectures at Oxford (1980), the Messenger Lectures at Cornell (1983), the Tanner Lectures on Human Values at Harvard (1984), the T. S. Eliot Memorial Lectures at Kent (1995), the Ford Lectures at Oxford (2003), the Clarendon Lectures at Oxford (2011), the Clark Lectures at Cambridge (2012), the Academia Sinica Lectures in Taiwan (2013) and the Spinoza Lectures at University of Amsterdam (2014).
Skinner was Distinguished Visiting Professor at Queen Mary, University of London for the 2007–2008 academic year, and has been Barber Beaumont Professor of the Humanities at Queen Mary since October 2008. In 2014 he held the Spinoza Chair of Philosophy at the University of Amsterdam
Skinner is a fellow at the British Academy, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Academia Europaea, the American Philosophical Society and the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei. He has won the Wolfson History Prize (1979); the Sir Isaiah Berlin Prize of the British Political Studies Association (2006); the Benjamin Lippincott Award (2001) and the David Easton Award (2007) of the American Political Science Association; the Bielefelder Wissenschaftspreis (2008); and a Balzan Prize (2006). He holds honorary degrees from Aberdeen, Athens, Copenhagen, East Anglia, Chicago, Harvard, Helsinki, Leuven, Oslo, Oxford, Santiago and St Andrews. Since 2009 he has been a member of the Balzan Prize Committee.
Skinner’s historical writings have been characterised by an interest in recovering the ideas of Early Modern and previous political writers. This has been spread over Renaissance republican authors (see in Principal publications below, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought ), the ‘pre-Humanist’ dictatores of later medieval Italy, Niccolò Machiavelli, and more recently (in Liberty before Liberalism ) the English republicans of the mid-seventeenth century (including John Milton, James Harrington, and Algernon Sidney). The work of the 1970s and 1980s was in good part directed towards writing an account of the history of the modern idea of the state. In more recent publications he has preferred the more capacious term ‘neo-Roman’ to ‘republican’.
Skinner is influenced by historian J.G.A. Pocock’s The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (1957), the work of Peter Laslett, and by Laslett’s edition of John Locke‘s Two Treatises of Government (1960) which Skinner read as an undergraduate in his second year at Cambridge.
Skinner and J.G.A. Pocock are principal members of the ‘Cambridge School‘ of the study of the history of political thought, best known for its attention to the ‘languages’ of political thought and the contextual focus.Skinner’s contribution was to articulate a theory of interpretation which concentrated on recovering the ‘speech acts’ embedded in the ‘illocutionary’ statements of specific individuals in writing works of political theory, particularly in Machiavelli, Thomas More, and Thomas Hobbes. This work was based on Skinner’s study of the philosophical preoccupations of J. L. Austin and the later Wittgenstein. One of the consequences of this account of interpretation is an emphasis on the necessity of studying less well-known political writers as a means of shedding light on the classic authors—although it also consciously questions the extent to which it is possible to distinguish ‘classic’ texts from the contexts, and particularly the arguments, in which they originally occurred and as such it is an attack on the uncritical assumption that political classics are monolithic and free-standing. In its earlier versions this added up to what many have seen as a persuasive critique on the approach of an older generation, particularly on that of Leo Strauss. The methodology of Skinner is also applicable to various textual studies domains that are informed by the procedures of historiography and philology, including an approach to classical and medieval texts.
Skinner’s longstanding concern with the speech acts of political writing helps explain his turn at the beginning of the 1990s towards the role of neo-classical rhetoric in early modern political theory, which resulted in his study of Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (1996). Skinner has since returned to what has often been seen as an enduring interest to the Regius Professors of History at the University of Cambridge (not least Lord Acton), the history of liberty and particular developing what he has articulated as a ‘third form of liberty’. This can most effectively be described as a form of ‘negative’ liberty (or neo-Roman) which is characterised however by the active participation in government to remain free from interference and the slavery caused by succumbing to an arbitrary power. Recently (2008) he published an analysis of the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes as a polemical retort to those who, in the English civil war, espoused precisely such a ‘neo-Roman’ concept of human freedom. Currently he is working on a monograph on Shakespeare and Rhetorical Invention for Oxford University Press to be published in 2014 which develops his lectures of the same name presented at Oxford and Cambridge in 2011 and 2012.
In an interview with Professor Alan Macfarlane of King’s College, Skinner revealed that he was a member of the Cambridge Apostles, a secret society of Cambridge University. He also revealed that Amartya Sen was a fellow member at this time. He commented they were both ‘outed’ some time ago.
On 6 October 1995, Skinner’s two-volume The Foundations of Modern Political Thought (1978) appeared on The Times Literary Supplement “100 Most Influential Books Since World War II”.
- The Foundations of Modern Political Thought: Volume I: The Renaissance (Cambridge University Press, 1978) ISBN 978-0-521-29337-2
- The Foundations of Modern Political Thought: Volume II: The Age of Reformation (Cambridge University Press, 1978) ISBN 978-0-521-29435-5
- Machiavelli (Oxford University Press, 1981) ISBN 978-0-19-285407-0
- Reason and Rhetoric in the Philosophy of Hobbes (Cambridge University Press, 1996) ISBN 978-0-521-59645-9
- Liberty before Liberalism (Cambridge University Press, 1998) ISBN 978-1-107-68953-4
- Visions of Politics: Volume I: Regarding Method (Cambridge University Press, 2002) ISBN 978-0-521-58926-0
- Visions of Politics: Volume II: Renaissance Virtues (Cambridge University Press, 2002) ISBN 978-0-521-58925-3
- Visions of Politics: Volume III: Hobbes and Civil Science (Cambridge University Press, 2002) ISBN 978-0-521-89060-1
- L’artiste en philosophie politique (Editions du Seuil, Paris, 2003) ISBN 978-2-912107-15-2
- Hobbes and Republican Liberty (Cambridge University Press, 2008) ISBN 978-0-521-71416-7
- Vilkårlig makt; essays om politisk frihet (Forlaget Res Publica,Oslo, 2009) ISBN 978-82-8226-000-8
- Visionen des Politischen (Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, 2009) ISBN 978-3-518-29510-6
- Staten og friheten (Forlaget Res Publica, Oslo, 2011) ISBN 978-82-8226-025-1
- Uma Genealogia do Estado Moderno (Imprensa de Ciências Sociais, Lisbon, 2011) ISBN 978-972-671-289-3
- Die drei Körper des Staates (Wallstein, Göttingen, 2012) ISBN 978-3-8353-1157-2
- La vérité et l’historien (Editions EHESS, Paris, 2012) ISBN 978-2-7132-2368-6
- Forensic Shakespeare (Oxford University Press, 2014) ISBN 978-0-19-955824-7
- (Co-editor and contributor), Philosophy, Politics and Society: Fourth Series (Basil Blackwell, Oxford, 1972) ISBN 978-0-631-14410-6
- (Co-editor and contributor), Philosophy in History (Cambridge University Press, 1984) ISBN 978-0-521-27330-5
- (Editor and contributor), The Return of Grand Theory in the Human Sciences (Cambridge University Press, 1985) ISBN 978-0-521-39833-6
- (Co-editor and contributor), The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy (Cambridge University Press, 1988) ISBN 978-0-521-25104-4
- (Co-editor), Machiavelli, The Prince (trans. Russell Price) (Cambridge University Press, 1988) ISBN 978-0-521-34993-2
- (Co-editor and contributor), Machiavelli and Republicanism (Cambridge University Press, 1990) ISBN 978-0-521-43589-5
- (Co-editor and contributor), Political Discourse in Early-modern Britain (Cambridge University Press, 1993) ISBN 978-0-521-39242-6
- (Co-editor) Milton and Republicanism (Cambridge University Press, 1995) ISBN 978-0-521-64648-2
- (Co-editor and contributor), Republicanism: A Shared European Heritage, Volume I: Republicanism and Constitutionalism in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge University Press, 2002) ISBN 978-0-521-67235-1
- (Co-editor and contributor), Republicanism: A Shared European Heritage, Volume II: The Values of Republicanism in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge University Press, 2002) ISBN 978-0-521-67234-4
- (Co-editor and contributor), States and Citizens: History, Theory, Prospects (Cambridge University Press, 2003) ISBN 978-0-521-53926-5
- (Co-editor), Thomas Hobbes: Writings on Common Law and Hereditary Right (The Clarendon Edition of the Works of Thomas Hobbes, Volume XI) (The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 2005) ISBN 978-0-19-923623-7
- (Co-editor and contributor), Sovereignty in Fragments: The Past, Present and Future of a Contested Concept (Cambridge University Press, 2010) ISBN 978-1-107-00004-9
- (Editor) Families and States in Western Europe (Cambridge University Press, 2011) ISBN 978-0-521-12801-8
- (Co-editor and contributor), Freedom and the Construction of Europe, Volume I: Religious Freedom and Civil Liberty (Cambridge University Press, 2013) ISBN 978-1-107-03306-1
- (Co-editor and contributor), Freedom and the Construction of Europe, Volume II: Free Persons and Free States (Cambridge University Press, 2013) ISBN 978-1-107-03307-8
- 1997: Staff writer. “An interview with Quentin Skinner”. Cogito (Nefeli Publications) 11: 69–78. doi:10.5840/cogito19971122.
- 2000a: ‘Intervista a Quentin Skinner: Conseguire la libertà promuovere l’uguaglianza’, Il pensiero mazziniano 3, pp. 118–22
- 2000b: ‘Entrevista: Quentin Skinner’ in As muitas faces da história, ed. Maria Lúcia Pallares-Burke, Brazilia, pp. 307–39 ISBN 978-85-7139-307-3 [Trans. in The New History: Confessions and Conversations, ed. Maria Lúcia Pallares-Burke, Cambridge, 2003 ISBN 978-0-7456-3021-2]
- 2001: ‘Quentin Skinnerin haastattelu’, Niin & Näin 31, pp. 8–23
- 2002: ‘Encountering the Past: An Interview with Quentin Skinner’ Finnish Yearbook of Political Thought [Redesciptions Yearbook of Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory] 6, pp. 32–63
- 2003: ‘La Libertà Politica ed il Mestiere dello Storico: Intervista a Quentin Skinner’, Teoria Politica 19, pp. 177–85
- 2006: ‘Historia intellectual y acción política: Una entrevista con Quentin Skinner’, Historia y Política 16, pp. 237–58
- 2007a: ‘Neither text, nor context: An interview with Quentin Skinner’, Groniek: Historisch Tijdschrift 174, pp. 117–33 ISBN 978-90-72918-66-6
- 2007b: ‘La Historia de mi Historia: Una Entrevista con Quentin Skinner’, El giro contextual: Cinco ensayos de Quentin Skinner y seis comentarios, ed. Enrique Bocardo Crespo, Madrid, pp. 45–60.
- 2007c: Sebastián, Javier Fernández. “Intellectual history, liberty and Republicanism: an interview with Quentin Skinner”. Contributions to the History of Concepts (Springer) 3 (1): 102–123.
- 2008: ‘Concepts only have histories’, interview with Quentin Skinner by Emmanuelle Tricoire and Jacques Levy, EspacesTemps, document 3692
- 2009a: ‘Making History; The Discipline in Perspective: Interview with Professor Quentin Skinner’, Storia e Politica, 1, pp. 113–34.
- 2009b: ‘Wie frei sind wir wirklich?’ Fragen an Quentin Skinner’, Zeitschrift fűr Ideengeschichte 3, pp. 5–21.
- 2011 Prokhovnik, Raia. “An interview with Quentin Skinner”. Contemporary Political Theory (Palgrave Macmillan) 10 (2): 273–285. doi:10.1057/cpt.2010.26.
- 2012a: Prokhovnik, Raia, “Approaching political theory historically: an interview with Quentin Skinner”, in Browning, Gary; Dimova-Cookson, Maria; Prokhovnik, Raia, Dialogues with contemporary political theorists, Houndsmill, Basingstoke, Hampshire New York: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 181–196, ISBN 9780230303058.
- 2012b: Giannakopoulos, Georgios; Quijano, Francisco. “On politics and history: a discussion with Quentin Skinner” (PDF). Journal of Intellectual History and Political Thought (SAXO Institute) 1 (1): 7–31. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 September 2014.
- Giannakopoulos, Georgios; Quijano, Francisco (June 2013). “Historia y política en perspectiva: entrevista a Quentin Skinner”. Signos Filosóficos (in Spanish) 15 (29): 167–191. ISSN 1665-1324
- 2013: ‘An Interview with Professor Quentin Skinner’ conducted by Jeng-Guo Chen and Carl Shaw, Intellectual History 2, pp. 239–62
- Tully, James, ed. (1988). Meaning and context: Quentin Skinner and his critics. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press. ISBN 9780691023014.
- Edling, Max; Mörkenstam, Ulf (June 1995). “Quentin Skinner: from historian of ideas to political scientist”. Scandinavian Political Studies (Wiley) 18 (2): 119–132. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9477.1995.tb00158.x.
- Various (1996). “Dossier: Quentin Skinner”. Krisis (Stichting Krisis) 64: 5–42. Pdf of contents page.
- “Quentin Skinner og Intellektuel Historie”. Slagmark: tidsskrift for idéhistorie (Aarhus Universitet) 33. 2001. ISSN 1904-8602
- Palonen, Kari (2003a). Quentin Skinner: history, politics, rhetoric. Cambridge, UK Malden, Massachusetts: Polity Blackwell. ISBN 9780745628578.
- Palonen, Kari (2004). Die Entzauberung der Begriffe: das Umschreiben der politischen Begriffe bei Quentin Skinner und Reinhart Koselleck. Münster: Lit. ISBN 9783825872229.
- Brett, Annabel; Tully, James, eds. (2006). Rethinking The foundations of modern political thought. Cambridge, UK New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521615037.
- Bocardo Crespo, Enrique, ed. (2007). El Giro contextual: cinco ensayos de Quentin Skinner, y seis comentarios. Madrid, Spain: Tecnos. ISBN 9788430945504.
- Drolet, Michael (June 2007). “Quentin Skinner and Jacques Derrida on power and the state”. History of European Ideas (Taylor and Francis) 33 (2): 234–255. doi:10.1016/j.histeuroideas.2006.11.003.
- Perreau-Saussine, Emile (Winter 2007). “Quentin Skinner in context”. The Review of Politics (Cambridge Journals) 69 (1): 106–122. doi:10.1017/S0034670507000332.
- Walter, Ryan (August 2008). “Reconciling Foucault and Skinner on the state: the primacy of politics?”. History of the Human Sciences (Sage) 21 (3): 94–114. doi:10.1177/0952695108093955.
- Fisher, Richard (June 2009). “‘How to do things with books’: Quentin Skinner and the dissemination of ideas”. History of European Ideas (Taylor and Francis) 35 (2): 276–280.doi:10.1016/j.histeuroideas.2008.11.001.
- Skinner, Quentin (2009). Politik og historie: en tekstsamling. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag. ISBN 9788741252674. Details.
- Geuna, Marco (2009), “Quentin Skinner e Machiavelli”, in Arienzo, Alessandro; Borrelli, Gianfranco, Anglo-American faces of Machiavelli: Machiavelli e machiavellismi nella cultura anglo-americana (secoli XVI–XX), Monza, Italy: Polimetrica, pp. 577–622, ISBN 9788876991417.
- Muscolino, Salvatore (2012). Linguaggio, storia e politica: Ludwig Wittgenstein e Quentin Skinner. Palermo: Carlo Saladino editore. ISBN 9788895346175.
- Burke, Martin J. (January 2012). “Introduction”. Journal of the History of Ideas, special section: Symposium: On Quentin Skinner, from Method to Politics (University of Pennsylvania Press) 73 (1): 69.doi:10.1353/jhi.2012.0000. JSTOR 41337194.
- Erben, Marcus (2013). Begriffswandel als Sprachhandlung der Beitrag Quentin Skinners zur Methodologie und Funktionsbestimmung der pädagogischen Geschichtsschreibung. Frankfurt, Main, Germany: Lang-Ed. ISBN 9783631643556.
- On Encountering the Past – An interview with Quentin Skinner by Petri Koikkalainen and Sami Syrjämäki.
- Mastery and Liberty. A discussion with Quentin Skinner by Sami Syrjämäki.
- Quentin Skinner interviewed by Alan Macfarlane 10 January 2008 (film)
- “What is the State?” Wolfson 2007 Lecture (audio and video)
- “What is Freedom?” Lecture (audio)
- “Interview with Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge University” Full Interview Video, 2008, Part I of II.
- “Interview with Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge University” Full Interview Video, 2008, Part II of II.
- “The Paradoxes of Political Liberty”, The Tanner Lectures on Human Values, Harvard University, 1984
- “A Third Concept of Liberty”, Isaiah Berlin Lecture at the British Academy, 2002
- Prokhovnik, Raia (May 2011). “An interview with Quentin Skinner”. Contemporary Political Theory 10 (2): 273–285. doi:10.1057/cpt.2010.26.
- Sins of a Historian. An academic discussion on the problem of anachronism including a large exposition of Skinner’s methodological views by Sami Syrjämäki.
- “Quest for Freedom – A Conversation with Quentin Skinner”, Ideas Roadshow, 2014
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Classical Liberalism: The History of Classical Liberalism – Learn Liberty
Classical Liberalism: The Decline and Triumph of Classical Liberalism (Pt. 1) – Learn Liberty
Classical Liberalism: The Decline and Triumph of Classical Liberalism (Pt. 2) – Learn Liberty
Liberal Party: 10 Reasons You Might Be A Liberal – Learn Liberty
Dr Tibor Machan Ayn Rand and the Right to Liberty
Ayn Rand: A Leading Lady of the Classical Liberal Tradition
Libertarian Philosophy: Do you want to live in the world of Atlas Shrugged?
Classical Liberalism: A Primer – Economics, History, Law, Limited Government (2002)
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 1: Introduction
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 2: Milton Friedman and the Chicago School
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 3: Public Choice
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 4: The Austrian School
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 6: Anarcho-Capitalism
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 7: Conclusion: What’s Your View?
Milton Friedman on Classical Liberalism
Milton Friedman on the Role of Government
Milton Friedman on Limiting the Role of Government
Milton Friedman – Should Higher Education Be Subsidized?
Milton Friedman – The role of government in a free society
TAKE IT TO THE LIMITS: Milton Friedman on Libertarianism
Yaron Brook: Free Market Revolution
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Entrepreneurship, personal responsibility, and upward mobility: These traditions are at the heart of the free enterprise system, and have long been central to America’s exceptional culture. In recent years, however, policymakers have dramatically weakened these traditions—by exploding the size of government, propping up their corporate cronies, and trying to reorient our system from rewarding merit to redistributing wealth.
In The Road to Freedom, American Enterprise Institute President Arthur C. Brooks shows that this trend cannot be reversed through materialistic appeals about the economic efficiency of capitalism. Rather, free enterprise requires a moral defense rooted in the ideals of earned success, equality of opportunity, charity, and basic fairness. Brooks builds this defense and demonstrates how it is central to understanding the major policy issues facing America today.
The future of the free enterprise system has become a central issue in our national debate, and Brooks offers a practical manual for defending it over the coming years. Both a moral manifesto and a prescription for concrete policy changes, The Road to Freedom will help Americans in all walks of life translate the philosophy of free enterprise into action, to restore both our nation’s greatness and our own well-being in the process. …”
The Road To Freedom
“…The author presents his argument in two parts: “Making the Moral Case for Free Enterprise” and “Applying the Moral Case for Free Enterprise.” In the first, Brooks portrays America as “an opportunity society” and uses studies of mobility between income classes to show that neither the poor nor the rich must remain as they are. This allows him to argue that U.S. income inequality is actually beneficial because “the moral rejoinder about the fairness of rewarding merit through free enterprise will carry the day.” He also defends a “minimum safety net” not as a means to increase material equality but as a way to preserve “access to basic medical care, sufficient food and basic shelter.” Brooks writes that the safety net should still be available for American citizens most in need and would include food stamps, Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), Medicaid and Supplemental Security Income. In the second section, the author insists that the primary concern should be fixing the debt problem, which means dealing with “out of control entitlement spending.” …”
Ready to Fight: Defending the America We Love
Arthur Brooks on the Morality of Free Enterprise
Session on “Gross National Happiness: Why Happiness Matters and How We Can Get More of It
Arthur Brooks Discusses Big Government and the Free Market
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
What is classical liberalism?
Dr. Nigel Ashford explains the 10 core principles of the classical liberal & libertarian view of society and the proper role of government:
1) Liberty as the primary political value
3) Skepticism about power
4) Rule of Law
5) Civil Society
6) Spontaneous Order
7) Free Markets
10) Limited Government
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 1: Introduction
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 2: Milton Friedman and the Chicago School
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 3: Public Choice
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 4: The Austrian School
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 5: Natural Rights
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 6: Anarcho-Capitalism
Schools of Thought in Classical Liberalism, Part 7: Conclusion: What’s Your View?
Milton Friedman on Tides of Political Thought in Modern History
Ten Principles of Classical Liberalism
The History of Classical Liberalism
The Decline and Triumph of Classical Liberalism, Part 1
The Decline and Triumph of Classical Liberalism, Part 2
Political Philosophy and Classical Liberalism Roundtable 11-11-11
“…Classical liberalism is the philosophy committed to the ideal of limited government, constitutionalism, rule of law, due process, and liberty of individuals including freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and free markets.
Classical liberalism developed in the 19th century in Europe and the United States. Although classical liberalism built on ideas that had already developed by the end of the 18th century, it advocated a specific kind of society, government and public policy as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization. Notable individuals who have contributed to classical liberalism include Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus and David Ricardo. It drew on the economics of Adam Smith and on a belief in natural law, utilitarianism, and progress.
There was a revival of interest in classical liberalism in the 20th century led by Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman.
Some call the late 19th century development of classical liberalism “neo-classical liberalism,” which argued for government to be as small as possible in order to allow the exercise of individual freedom, while some refer to all liberalism before the 20th century as classical liberalism.
The term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism. Libertarianism has been used in modern times as a substitute for the phrase “neo-classical liberalism”, leading to some confusion. The identification of libertarianism with neo-classical liberalism primarily occurs in the United States, where some conservatives and right-libertarians use the term classical liberalism to describe their belief in the primacy of economic freedom and minimal government.
According to E. K. Hunt, classical liberals made four assumptions about human nature: People were “egoistic, coldly calculating, essentially inert and atomistic”. Being egoistic, people were motivated solely by pain and pleasure. Being calculating, they made decisions intended to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. If there were no opportunity to increase pleasure or reduce pain, they would become inert. Therefore, the only motivation for labor was either the possibility of great reward or fear of hunger. This belief led classical liberal politicians to pass the Poor Law Amendment Act 1834, which limited the provision of social assistance. On the other hand, classical liberals believed that men of higher rank were motivated by ambition. Seeing society as atomistic, they believed that society was no more than the sum of its individual members. These views departed from earlier views of society as a family and, therefore, greater than the sum of its members.
Classical liberals agreed with Thomas Hobbes that government had been created by individuals to protect themselves from one another. They thought that individuals should be free to pursue their self-interest without control or restraint by society. Individuals should be free to obtain work from the highest-paying employers, while the profit motive would ensure that products that people desired were produced at prices they would pay. In a free market, both labor and capital would receive the greatest possible reward, while production would be organized efficiently to meet consumer demand.
Adopting Thomas Malthus’s population theory, they saw poor urban conditions as inevitable, as they believed population growth would outstrip food production; and they considered that to be desirable, as starvation would help limit population growth. They opposed any income or wealth redistribution, which they believed would be dissipated by the lowest orders.
Government, as explained by Adam Smith, had only three functions: protection against foreign invaders, protection of citizens from wrongs committed against them by other citizens, and building and maintaining public institutions and public works that the private sector could not profitably provide. Classical liberals extended protection of the country to protection of overseas markets through armed intervention. Protection of individuals against wrongs normally meant protection of private property and enforcement of contracts and the suppression of trade unions and the Chartist movement. Public works included a stable currency, standard weights and measures, and support of roads, canals, harbors, railways, and postal and other communications services.
Classical liberalism places a particular emphasis on the sovereignty of the individual, with private property rights being seen as essential to individual liberty. This forms the philosophical basis for laissez-faire public policy. According to Alan Ryan, the ideology of the original classical liberals argued against direct democracy, where law is made by majority vote by citizens, “for there is nothing in the bare idea of majority rule to show that majorities will always respect the rights of property or maintain rule of law.” For example, James Madison argued for a constitutional republic with protections for individual liberty over a pure democracy, reasoning that, in a pure democracy, a “common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole…and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party….”
According to Anthony Quinton, classical liberals believe that “an unfettered market” is the most efficient mechanism to satisfy human needs and channel resources to their most productive uses: they “are more suspicious than conservatives of all but the most minimal government.” Anarcho-capitalist Walter Block claims, however, that, while Adam Smith was an advocate of economic freedom, he also allowed for government to intervene in many areas.
Classical liberalism holds that individual rights are natural, inherent, or inalienable, and exist independently of government. Thomas Jefferson called these inalienable rights: “…rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’, because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.” For classical liberalism, rights are of a negative nature—rights that require that other individuals (and governments) refrain from interfering with individual liberty, whereas social liberalism (also called modern liberalism or welfare liberalism) holds that individuals have a right to be provided with certain benefits or services by others. Unlike social liberals, classical liberals are “hostile to the welfare state.” They do not have an interest in material equality but only in “equality before the law”. Classical liberalism is critical of social liberalism and takes offense at group rights being pursued at the expense of individual rights.
Friedrich Hayek identified two different traditions within classical liberalism: the “British tradition” and the “French tradition”. Hayek saw the British philosophers David Hume, Adam Smith, Adam Ferguson, Josiah Tucker, Edmund Burke and William Paley as representative of a tradition that articulated beliefs in empiricism, the common law, and in traditions and institutions which had spontaneously evolved but were imperfectly understood. The French tradition included Rousseau, Condorcet, the Encyclopedists and the Physiocrats. This tradition believed in rationalism and the unlimited powers of reason and sometimes showed hostility to tradition and religion. Hayek conceded that the national labels did not exactly correspond to those belonging to each tradition: Hayek saw the Frenchmen Montesquieu, Constant and Tocqueville as belonging to the “British tradition” and the British Thomas Hobbes, Priestley, Richard Price and Thomas Paine as belonging to the “French tradition”. Hayek also rejected the label “laissez faire” as originating from the French tradition and alien to the beliefs of Hume, Smith and Burke.
Classical liberalism in the United Kingdom developed from Whiggery and radicalism, and represented a new political ideology. Whiggery had become a dominant ideology following the Glorious Revolution of 1688, and was associated with the defence of Parliament, upholding the rule of law and defending landed property. The origins of rights were seen as being in an ancient constitution, which had existed from time immemorial. These rights, which some Whigs considered to include freedom of the press and freedom of speech, were justified by custom rather than by natural rights. They believed that the power of the executive had to be constrained. While they supported limited suffrage, they saw voting as a privilege, rather than as a right. However there was no consistency in Whig ideology, and diverse writers including John Locke, David Hume, Adam Smith and Edmund Burke were all influential among Whigs, although none of them was universally accepted.
British radicals, from the 1790s to the 1820s, concentrated on parliamentary and electoral reform, emphasizing natural rights and popular sovereignty. Richard Price and Joseph Priestly adapted the language of Locke to the ideology of radicalism. The radicals saw parliamentary reform as a first step toward dealing with their many grievances, including the treatment of Protestant Dissenters, the slave trade, high prices and high taxes.
There was greater unity to classical liberalism ideology than there had been with Whiggery. Classical liberals were committed to individualism, liberty and equal rights. They believed that required a free economy with minimal government interference. Writers such as John Bright and Richard Cobden opposed both aristocratic privilege and property, which they saw as an impediment to the development of a class of yeoman farmers. Some elements of Whiggery opposed this new thinking, and were uncomfortable with the commercial nature of classical liberalism. These elements became associated with conservatism.
A meeting of the Anti-Corn Law League in Exeter Hall in 1846
Classical liberalism was the dominant political theory of the United Kingdom from the early 19th century until the First World War. Its notable victories were the Catholic Emancipation Act of 1829, the Reform Act of 1832, and the repeal of the Corn Laws in 1846. The Anti-Corn Law League brought together a coalition of liberal and radical groups in support of free trade under the leadership of Richard Cobden and John Bright, who opposed militarism and public expenditure. Their policies of low public expenditure and low taxation were adopted by William Ewart Gladstone when he became chancellor of the exchequer and later prime minister. Classical liberalism was often associated with religious dissent and nonconformism.
Although classical liberals aspired to a minimum of state activity, they accepted the principle of government intervention in the economy from the early 19th century with passage of the Factory Acts. From around 1840 to 1860, laissez-faire advocates of the Manchester School and writers in The Economist were confident that their early victories would lead to a period of expanding economic and personal liberty and world peace but would face reversals as government intervention and activity continued to expand from the 1850s. Jeremy Bentham and James Mill, although advocates of laissez-faire, non-intervention in foreign affairs, and individual liberty, believed that social institutions could be rationally redesigned through the principles of Utilitarianism. The Conservative prime minister, Benjamin Disraeli, rejected classical liberalism altogether and advocated Tory Democracy. By the 1870s, Herbert Spencer and other classical liberals concluded that historical development was turning against them. By the First World War, the Liberal Party had largely abandoned classical liberal principles.
The changing economic and social conditions of the 19th led to a division between neo-classical and social liberals who, while agreeing on the importance of individual liberty, differed on the role of the state. Neo-classical liberals, who called themselves “true liberals”, saw Locke’s Second Treatise as the best guide, and emphasized “limited government”, while social liberals supported government regulation and the welfare state. Herbert Spencer in the United Kingdom and William Graham Sumner were the leading neo-classical liberal theorists of the 19th century. Neo-classical liberalism has continued into the contemporary era, with writers such as Robert Nozick.
In the United States, liberalism took a strong root because it had little opposition to its ideals, whereas in Europe liberalism was opposed by many reactionary interests. In a nation of farmers, especially farmers whose workers were slaves, little attention was paid to the economic aspects of liberalism. But, as America grew, industry became a larger and larger part of American life; and, during the term of America’s first populist president, Andrew Jackson, economic questions came to the forefront. The economic ideas of the Jacksonian era were almost universally the ideas of classical liberalism. Freedom was maximized when the government took a “hands off” attitude toward industrial development and supported the value of the currency by freely exchanging paper money for gold. The ideas of classical liberalism remained essentially unchallenged until a series of depressions, thought to be impossible according to the tenets of classical economics, led to economic hardship from which the voters demanded relief. In the words of William Jennings Bryan, “You shall not crucify the American farmer on a cross of gold.” Despite the common recurrence of depressions, classical liberalism remained the orthodox belief among American businessmen until the Great Depression. The Great Depression saw a sea change in liberalism, leading to the development of modern liberalism. In the words of Arthur Schlesinger Jr.:
When the growing complexity of industrial conditions required increasing government intervention in order to assure more equal opportunities, the liberal tradition, faithful to the goal rather than to the dogma, altered its view of the state,” and “there emerged the conception of a social welfare state, in which the national government had the express obligation to maintain high levels of employment in the economy, to supervise standards of life and labor, to regulate the methods of business competition, and to establish comprehensive patterns of social security.
Central to classical liberal ideology was their interpretation of John Locke’s Second treatise of government and “A letter concerning toleration”, which had been written as a defence of the Glorious Revolution of 1688. Although these writings were considered too radical at the time for the United Kingdom’s new rulers, they later came to be cited by Whigs, radicals and supporters of the American Revolution. However, much of later liberal thought was absent in Locke’s writings or scarcely mentioned, and his writings have been subject to various interpretations. There is little mention, for example, of constitutionalism, the separation of powers, and limited government.
James L. Richardson identified five central themes in Locke’s writing: individualism, consent, the concepts of the rule of law and government as trustee, the significance of property, and religious toleration. Although Locke did not develop a theory of natural rights, he envisioned individuals in the state of nature as being free and equal. The individual, rather than the community or institutions, was the point of reference. Locke believed that individuals had given consent to government and therefore authority derived from the people rather than from above. This belief would influence later revolutionary movements.
As a trustee, Government was expected to serve the interests of the people, not the rulers, and rulers were expected to follow the laws enacted by legislatures. Locke also held that the main purpose of men uniting into commonwealths and governments was for the preservation of their property. Despite the ambiguity of Locke’s definition of property, which limited property to “as much land as a man tills, plants, improves, cultivates, and can use the product of”, this principle held great appeal to individuals possessed of great wealth.
Locke held that the individual had the right to follow his own religious beliefs and that the state should not impose a religion against Dissenters. But there were limitations. No tolerance should be shown for atheists, who were seen as amoral, or to Catholics, who were seen as owing allegiance to the Pope over their own national government.
Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations, published in 1776, was to provide most of the ideas of classical liberal economics, at least until the publication of J. S. Mill’s Principles in 1848. Smith addressed the motivation for economic activity, the causes of prices and the distribution of wealth, and the policies the state should follow in order to maximize wealth.
Smith saw self-interest, rather than altruism, as the motivation for the production of goods and services. An “invisible hand” directed the tradesman to work toward the public good. This provided a moral justification for the accumulation of wealth, which had previously been viewed as sinful. He assumed that workers could be paid as low as was necessary for their survival, which was later transformed by Ricardo and Malthus into the “Iron Law of Wages”. His main emphasis was on the benefit of free internal and international trade, which he thought could increase wealth through specialization in production. He also opposed restrictive trade preferences, state grants of monopolies, and employers’ organisations and trade unions. Government should be limited to defence, public works and the administration of justice, financed by taxes based on income.
Smith’s economics was carried into practice in the 19th century with the lowering of tariffs in the 1820s, the repeal of the Poor Relief Act, that had restricted the mobility of labour, in 1834, and the end of the rule of the East India Company over India in 1858.
Say, Malthus and Ricardo
In addition to Adam Smith’s legacy, Say’s law, Malthus theories of population and Ricardo’s iron law of wages became central doctrines of classical economics. The pessimistic nature of these theories led to Carlyle calling economics the dismal science and it provided a basis of criticism of capitalism by its opponents.
Jean Baptiste Say was a French economist who introduced Adam Smith’s economic theories into France and whose commentaries on Smith were read in both France and the United Kingdom. Say challenged Smith’s labour theory of value, believing that prices were determined by utility and also emphasized the criterical role of the entrepreneur in the economy. However neither of those observations became accepted by British economists at the time. His most important contribution to economic thinking was “Say’s law”, which was interpreted by classical economists that there could be no overproduction in a market, and that there would always be a balance between supply and demand. This general belief influenced government policies until the 1930s. Following this law, since the economic cycle was seen as self-correcting, government did not intervene during periods of economic hardship because it was seen as futile.
Thomas Malthus wrote two books, An essay on the principle of population, published in 1798, and Principles of political economy, published in 1820. The second book which was a rebuttal of Say’s law had little influence on contemporary economists. His first book however became a major influence on classical liberalism. In that book, Malthus claimed that population growth would outstrip food production, because population grew geometrically, while food production grew arithmetically. As people were provided with food, they would reproduce until their growth outstripped the food supply. Nature would then provide a check to growth in the forms of vice and misery. No gains in income could prevent this, and any welfare for the poor would be self-defeating. The poor were in fact responsible for their own problems which could have been avoided through self-restraint.
David Ricardo, who was an admirer of Adam Smith, covered many of the same topics but while Smith drew conclusions from broadly empirical observations, Ricardo used induction, drawing conclusions by reasoning from basic assumptions. While Ricardo accepted Smith’s labour theory of value, he acknowledged that utility could influence the price of some rare items. Rents on agricultural land were seen as the production that was surplus to the subsistence required by the tenants. Wages were seen as the amount required for workers’ subsistence and to maintain current population levels. According to his Iron Law of Wages, wages could never rise beyond subsistence levels. Ricardo explained profits as a return on capital, which itself was the product of labour. But a conclusion many drew from his theory was that profit was a surplus appropriated by capitalists to which they were not entitled.
Utilitarianism provided the political justification for implementation of economic liberalism by British governments, which was to dominate economic policy from the 1830s. Although utilitarianism prompted legislative and administrative reform and John Stuart Mill’s later writings on the subject foreshadowed the welfare state, it was mainly used as a justification for laissez-faire.
The central concept of utilitarianism, which was developed by Jeremy Bentham, was that that public policy should seek to provide “the greatest happiness of the greatest number”. While this could be interpreted as a justification for state action to reduce poverty, it was used by classical liberals to justify inaction with the argument that the net benefit to all individuals would be higher.
Classical liberals saw utility as the foundation for public policies. This broke both with conservative “tradition” and Lockean “natural rights”, which were seen as irrational. Utility, which emphasizes the happiness of individuals, became the central ethical value of all liberalism. Although utilitarianism inspired wide-ranging reforms, it became primarily a justification for laissez-faire economics. However, classical liberals rejected Adam Smith’s belief that the “invisible hand” would lead to general benefits and embraced Thomas Malthus’ view that population expansion would prevent any general benefit and David Ricardo’s view of the inevitability of class conflict. Laissez-faire was seen as the only possible economic approach, and any government intervention was seen as useless. The Poor Law Amendment Act 1834 was defended on “scientific or economic principals” while the authors of the Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601 were seen as not having had the benefit of reading Malthus.
Commitment to laissez-faire, however, was not uniform. Some economists advocated state support of public works and education. Classical liberals were also divided on free trade. Ricardo, for example, expressed doubt that the removal of grain tariffs advocated by Richard Cobden and the Anti-Corn Law League would have any general benefits. Most classical liberals also supported legislation to regulate the number of hours that children were allowed to work and usually did not oppose factory reform legislation.
Despite the pragmatism of classical economists, their views were expressed in dogmatic terms by such popular writers as Jane Marcet and Harriet Martineau. The strongest defender of laissez-faire was The Economist founded by James Wilson in 1843. The Economist criticized Ricardo for his lack of support for free trade and expressed hostility to welfare, believing that the lower orders were responsible for their economic circumstances. The Economist took the position that regulation of factory hours was harmful to workers and also strongly opposed state support for education, health, the provision of water, and granting of patents and copyrights. A rigid belief in laissez-faire also guided government response in 1846–1849 to the Great Famine in Ireland, during which an estimated 1.5 million people died. It was expected that private enterprise and free trade, rather than government intervention, would alleviate the famine.
Free trade and world peace
Several liberals, including Adam Smith and Richard Cobden, argued that the free exchange of goods between nations could lead to world peace, a view recognized by such modern American political scientists as Dahl, Doyle, Russet, and O’Neil. Dr. Gartzke, of Columbia University states, “Scholars like Montesquieu, Adam Smith, Richard Cobden, Norman Angell, and Richard Rosecrance have long speculated that free markets have the potential to free states from the looming prospect of recurrent warfare.” American political scientists John R. Oneal and Bruce M. Russett, well known for their work on the democratic peace theory, state:
The classical liberals advocated policies to increase liberty and prosperity. They sought to empower the commercial class politically and to abolish royal charters, monopolies, and the protectionist policies of mercantilism so as to encourage entrepreneurship and increase productive efficiency. They also expected democracy and laissez-faire economics to diminish the frequency of war.
Adam Smith argued in the Wealth of Nations that, as societies progressed from hunter gatherers to industrial societies, the spoils of war would rise but that the costs of war would rise further, making war difficult and costly for industrialized nations.
…the honours, the fame, the emoluments of war, belong not to [the middle and industrial classes]; the battle-plain is the harvest field of the aristocracy, watered with the blood of the people…Whilst our trade rested upon our foreign dependencies, as was the case in the middle of the last century…force and violence, were necessary to command our customers for our manufacturers…But war, although the greatest of consumers, not only produces nothing in return, but, by abstracting labour from productive employment and interrupting the course of trade, it impedes, in a variety of indirect ways, the creation of wealth; and, should hostilities be continued for a series of years, each successive war-loan will be felt in our commercial and manufacturing districts with an augmented pressure. Richard Cobden
When goods cannot cross borders, armies will. – Frédéric Bastiat
By virtue of their mutual interest does nature unite people against violence and war…the spirit of trade cannot coexist with war, and sooner or later this spirit dominates every people. For among all those powers…that belong to a nation, financial power may be the most reliable in forcing nations to pursue the noble cause of peace…and wherever in the world war threatens to break out, they will try to head it off through mediation, just as if they were permanently leagued for this purpose – Immanuel Kant, the Perpetual Peace.
Cobden believed that military expenditures worsened the welfare of the state and benefited a small but concentrated elite minority, summing up British imperialism, which he believed was the result of the economic restrictions of mercantilist policies. To Cobden, and many classical liberals, those who advocated peace must also advocate free markets.
Relationship to modern liberalism
Many modern scholars of liberalism argue that no particularly meaningful distinction between classical and modern liberalism exists. Alan Wolfe summarizes this viewpoint, which
reject(s) any such distinction and argue(s) instead for the existence of a continuous liberal understanding that includes both Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes… The idea that liberalism comes in two forms assumes that the most fundamental question facing mankind is how much government intervenes into the economy… When instead we discuss human purpose and the meaning of life, Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes are on the same side. Both of them possessed an expansive sense of what we are put on this earth to accomplish. Both were on the side of enlightenment. Both were optimists who believed in progress but were dubious about grand schemes that claimed to know all the answers. For Smith, mercantilism was the enemy of human liberty. For Keynes, monopolies were. It makes perfect sense for an eighteenth-century thinker to conclude that humanity would flourish under the market. For a twentieth century thinker committed to the same ideal, government was an essential tool to the same end… [M]odern liberalism is instead the logical and sociological outcome of classical liberalism.
According to William J. Novak, however, liberalism in the United States shifted, “between 1877 and 1937…from laissez-faire constitutionalism to New Deal statism, from classical liberalism to democratic social-welfarism”.
Hobhouse, in Liberalism (1911), attributed this purported shift, which included qualified acceptance of government intervention in the economy and the collective right to equality in dealings, to an increased desire for what Hobhouse called “just consent”. F. A. Hayek wrote that Hobhouse’s book would have been more accurately titled Socialism, and Hobhouse himself called his beliefs “liberal socialism”.
Joseph A. Schumpeter attributes this supposed shift in liberal philosophy to the 19th century expansion of the franchise to include the working class. Rising literacy rates and the spread of knowledge led to social activism in a variety of forms. Social liberals called for laws against child labor, laws requiring minimum standards of worker safety, laws establishing a minimum wage and old age pensions, and laws regulating banking with the goal of ending cyclic depressions, monopolies, and cartels. Laissez faire economic liberals considered such measures to be an unjust imposition upon liberty, as well as a hindrance to economic development, and, as the working class in the West became increasingly prosperous, they also became more conservative.
Another regularly asserted contrast between classical and modern liberals: classical liberals tend to see government power as the enemy of liberty, while modern liberals fear the concentration of wealth and the expansion of corporate power. Others such as Michael Johnston and Noam Chomsky assert that classical liberalism as such can no longer exist in a modern day context as its principles were only relevant at the time its founding thinkers conceptualized them; and that classical liberalism has grown into two divergent philosophies since the beginning of the twentieth century: social liberalism and market liberalism. …”
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Painting of the Week: The Death of Socrates
Plato – The Apology
2. Socratic Citizenship: Plato’s Apology
Introduction to Political Philosophy (PLSC 114)
The lecture begins with an explanation of why Plato’s Apology is the best introductory text to the study of political philosophy. The focus remains on the Apology as a symbol for the violation of free expression, with Socrates justifying his way of life as a philosopher and defending the utility of philosophy for political life.
00:00 – Chapter 1. Introduction: Plato, Apology 09:31 –
Chapter 2. Political Context of the Dialogue 19:19 –
Chapter 3. Accusations Leveled Against Socrates 27:51 –
Chapter 4. Clouds: Debunking Socrates’ New Model of Citizenship 33:31 –
Chapter 5. The Famous Socratic “Turn”; Socrates’ Second Sailing
Complete course materials are available at the Open Yale Courses website: http://open.yale.edu/courses
3. Socratic Citizenship: Plato’s Crito
Allan Bloom on Plato’s Apology of Socrates 1
Allan Bloom on Plato’s Apology of Socrates 2
Allan Bloom on Plato’s Apology of Socrates 3
Allan Bloom on Plato’s Apology of Socrates 4
Allan Bloom on Plato’s Apology of Socrates 5
11 (1 of 10)
11 (2 of 10)
11 (3 of 10)
11 (4 of 10)
11 (5 of 10)
11 (6 of 10)
11 (7 of 10)
11 (8 of 10)
11 (9 of 10)
11 (10 of 10)
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
“…The Apology is Plato’s version of the speech given by Socrates as he unsuccessfully defended himself in 399 BC against the charges of “corrupting the young, and by not believing in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel” (24b). “Apology” here has its earlier meaning (now usually expressed by the word “apologia”) of speaking in defense of a cause or of one’s beliefs or actions (from the Ancient Greek ἀπολογία).
Xenophon, who wrote his own Apology of Socrates, indicates that a number of writers had published accounts of Socrates’ defense. According to one prominent scholar, “Writing designed to clear Socrates’ name was doubtless a particular feature of the decade or so following 399 BC”. Many scholars guess that Plato’s Apology was one of the first, if not the very first, dialogues Plato wrote, though there is little if any hard evidence. Plato’s Apology is commonly regarded as the most reliable source of information about the historical Socrates.
Except for two brief exchanges with Meletus (at 24d-25d and 26b-27d), where the monologue becomes a dialogue, the text is written in the first person from Socrates’ point of view, as though it were Socrates’ actual speech at the trial. During the course of the speech, Socrates twice mentions Plato as being present (at 34a and 38b). There is, however, no real way of knowing how closely Socrates’ words in the Apology match those of Socrates at the actual trial, even if it was Plato’s intention to be accurate in this respect. One contemporary criticism of Plato’s Apology is perhaps implied by the opening paragraphs of Xenophon’s Apology, assuming that the former antedated the latter; Xenophon remarks that previous writers had failed to make clear the reason for Socrates’ boastful talk (megalēgoria) in the face of the death penalty. Xenophon’s account disagrees in some other respects with the details of Plato’s Apology, but he nowhere explicitly claims it to be inaccurate.
The Apology begins with Socrates saying he does not know if the men of Athens (his jury) have been persuaded by his accusers. This first sentence is crucial to the theme of the entire speech. Indeed, in the Apology Socrates will suggest that philosophy begins with a sincere admission of ignorance; he later clarifies this, dramatically stating that whatever wisdom he has, comes from his knowledge that he knows nothing (23b, 29b).
Socrates imitates, parodies and even corrects the Orators by asking the jury to judge him not by his oratorical skills, but by the truth (cf. Lysias XIX 1,2,3, Isaeus X 1, Isocrates XV 79, Aeschines II 24). Socrates says he will not use ornate words and phrases that are carefully arranged, but will speak using the expressions that come into his head. He says he will use the same way of speaking that he is heard using at the agora and the money tables. In spite of his disclaimers, Socrates proves to be a master orator who is not only eloquent and persuasive, but even wise. This is how he corrects the Orators, showing what they should have been doing all along, speaking the truth persuasively with wisdom. The speech does not succeed in winning him acquittal. Socrates is condemned to death.
The three men who brought the charges against Socrates were:
- Anytus, son of a prominent Athenian, Anthemion. Socrates says Anytus joined the prosecution because he was “vexed on behalf of the craftsmen and politicians” (23e-24a). Anytus makes an important cameo appearance in Meno. Anytus appears unexpectedly while Socrates and Meno (a visitor to Athens) are discussing the acquisition of virtue. Having taken the position that virtue cannot be taught, Socrates adduces as evidence for this that many prominent Athenians have produced sons inferior to themselves. Socrates says this, and then proceeds to name names, including Pericles and Thucydides. Anytus becomes very offended, and warns Socrates that running people down (“kakos legein”) could get him into trouble someday (Meno 94e-95a).
- Plutarch gives some information that might help us realize the real reason behind Anytus’ worries. He says that Anytus wanted to be friends with Alcibiades but he preferred to be with Socrates. And also we hear that Anytus’ son had a sexual relationship with Socrates, which was an accepted relationship between teacher and pupil in classical Athens.
- Meletus, the only accuser to speak during Socrates’ defense. Socrates says Meletus joined the prosecution because he was “vexed on behalf of the poets” (23e). He is mentioned in another dialog, the Euthyphro, but does not appear in person. Socrates says there that Meletus is a young unknown with hook-nose. In the Apology, Meletus allows himself to be cross-examined by Socrates and stumbles into a trap. Apparently not paying attention to the very charges he is bringing, he accuses Socrates both of atheism and of believing in demi-gods.
- Lycon, about whom, according to one scholar, “we know nothing except that he was the mouthpiece of the professional rhetoricians.” Socrates says Lycon joined the prosecution because he was “vexed on behalf of the rhetoricians” (24a). Some scholars, such as Debra Nails, identify Lycon as the father of Autolycus, who appears in Xenophon’s Symposium 2.4ff. Nails also identifies Socrates’ prosecutor with the Lycon who is the butt of jokes in Aristophanes and became a successful democratic politician after the fall of the Four Hundred; she suggests that he may have joined in the prosecution because he associated Socrates with the Thirty Tyrants, who had executed his son, Autolycus. Others, however, question the identification of Socrates’ prosecutor with the father of Autolycus; John Burnet, for instance, claims it “is most improbable”.
Socrates says that he has to refute two sets of accusations: Socrates was charged with disrespect toward the gods and corruption of the youth. He did believe in the gods, but questioned their abilities.
Socrates says that the old charges stemmed from years of gossip and prejudice against him and hence were difficult to address. These so called ‘informal charges’ Socrates puts into the style of a formal legal accusation: “Socrates is committing an injustice, in that he inquires into things below the earth and in the sky, and makes the weaker argument the stronger, and teaches others to follow his example” (19b-c). He says that these allegations are repeated in a certain comic poet, namely Aristophanes. In his play, The Clouds, Aristophanes lampooned Socrates by presenting him as the paradigm of atheistic, scientific sophistry. Yet it is unlikely that Aristophanes would have intended these charges to be taken seriously, since Plato depicts Aristophanes and Socrates as being on very good terms with each other in the Symposium.
Socrates says that he cannot possibly be mistaken for a sophist because they are wise (or at least thought to be) and highly paid. He says he lives in “ten-thousandfold poverty” (23c) and claims to know nothing noble and good.
The Apology can be divided into three parts. The first part is Socrates’ own defense of himself and includes the most famous parts of the text, namely his recounting of the Oracle at Delphi and his cross-examination of Meletus. The second part is the verdict, and the third part is the sentencing.
Socrates begins by telling the jury that their minds were poisoned by his enemies when they were young and impressionable. He says his reputation for sophistry comes from his enemies, all of whom are envious of him, and malicious. He says they must remain nameless, except for Aristophanes, the comic poet. He later answers the charge that he has corrupted the young by arguing that deliberate corruption is an incoherent idea. Socrates says that all these false accusations began with his obedience to the oracle at Delphi. He tells how Chaerephon went to the Oracle at Delphi, to ask if anyone was wiser than Socrates. When Chaerephon reported to Socrates that the god told him there is none wiser, Socrates took this as a riddle. He himself knew that he had no wisdom “great or small” but that he also knew that it is against the nature of the gods to lie.
Socrates then went on a “divine mission” to solve the paradox (that an ignorant man could also be the wisest of all men) and to clarify the meaning of the Oracles’ words. He systematically interrogated the politicians, poets and craftsmen. Socrates determined that the politicians were imposters, and the poets did not understand even their own poetry, like prophets and seers who do not understand what they say. Craftsmen proved to be pretentious too, and Socrates says that he saw himself as a spokesman for the oracle (23e). He asked himself whether he would rather be an impostor like the people he spoke to, or be himself. Socrates tells the jury that he would rather be himself than anyone else.
Socrates says that this questioning earned him the reputation of being an annoying busybody. Socrates interpreted his life’s mission as proof that true wisdom belongs to the gods and that human wisdom and achievements have little or no value. Having addressed the cause of the prejudice against him, Socrates then tackles the formal charges, corruption of the young and atheism.
Socrates’ first move is to accuse his accuser, Meletus (whose name means literally, “the person who cares,” or “caring”) of not caring about the things he professes to care about. He argues during his interrogation of Meletus that no one would intentionally corrupt another person (because they stand to be harmed by him at a later date). The issue of corruption is important for two reasons: first, it appears to be the heart of the charge against him, that he corrupted the young by teaching some version of atheism, and second, Socrates says that if he is convicted, it will be because Aristophanes corrupted the minds of his audience when they were young (with his slapstick mockery of Socrates in his play, “The Clouds”, produced some twenty-four years earlier).
Socrates then proceeds to deal with the second charge, that he is an atheist. He cross-examines Meletus, and extracts a contradiction. He gets Meletus to say that Socrates is an atheist who believes in spiritual agencies and demigods. Socrates announces that he has caught Meletus in a contradiction, and asks the court whether Meletus has designed an intelligence test for him to see if he can identify logical contradictions.
Socrates repeats his claim that it will not be the formal charges which will destroy him, but rather the prejudicial gossip and slander. He is not afraid of death, because he is more concerned about whether he is acting rightly or wrongly. Further, Socrates argues, those who fear death are showing their ignorance: death may be a great blessing, but many people fear it as an evil when they cannot possibly know it to be such. Again Socrates points out that his wisdom lies in the fact that he is aware that he does not know.
Socrates states clearly that a lawful superior, whether human or divine, should be obeyed. If there is a clash between the two, however, divine authority should take precedence. “Gentlemen, I am your grateful and devoted servant, but I owe a greater obedience to God than to you; and as long as I draw breath and have my faculties I shall never stop practicing philosophy”. Since Socrates has interpreted the Delphic Oracle as singling him out to spur his fellow Athenians to a greater awareness of moral goodness and truth, he will not stop questioning and arguing should the people forbid him to do so, even if they were to withdraw the charges. Nor will he stop questioning his fellow citizens. “Are you not ashamed that you give your attention to acquiring as much money as possible, and similarly with reputation and honor, and give no attention or thought to truth and understanding and the perfection of your soul?”
In a highly inflammatory section of the Apology, Socrates claims that no greater good has happened to Athens than his concern for his fellow citizens, that wealth is a consequence of goodness (and not the other way around), that God does not permit a better man to be harmed by a worse, and that, in the strongest statement he gives of his task, he is a stinging gadfly and the state a lazy horse, “and all day long I will never cease to settle here, there and everywhere, rousing, persuading and reproving every one of you.”
As further evidence of his task, Socrates reminds the court of his daimon which he sees as a supernatural experience. He recognizes this as partly behind the charge of believing in invented beings. Again Socrates makes no concession to his situation.
Socrates claims to never have been a teacher, in the sense of imparting knowledge to others. He cannot therefore be held responsible if any citizen turns bad. If he has corrupted anyone, why have they not come forward to be witnesses? Or if they do not realize that they have been corrupted, why have their relatives not stepped forward on their behalf? Many relatives of the young men associated with him, Socrates points out, are presently in the courtroom to support him.
Socrates concludes this part of the Apology by reminding the judges that he will not resort to the usual emotive tricks and arguments. He will not break down in tears, nor will he produce his three sons in the hope of swaying the judges. He does not fear death; nor will he act in a way contrary to his religious duty. He will rely solely on sound argument and the truth to present his case.
Socrates is voted guilty by a narrow margin (36a). Plato never gives the total number of Socrates’ judges nor the exact numbers of votes against him and for his acquittal, though Socrates does say that if only 30 more had voted in his favor then he would have been acquitted. Many scholars assume the number of judges was 281 to 220 and was sentenced to death by a vote of 361 to 140 .
It was the tradition that the prosecution and the defendant each propose a penalty, from which the court would choose. In this section, Socrates antagonises the court even further when considering his proposition.
He points out that the vote was comparatively close: he only needed 30 more votes for himself, and he would have been found innocent. He engages in some dark humour by suggesting that Meletus narrowly escaped a fine for not meeting the statutory one-fifth of the votes (in order to avoid frivolous cases coming to court, plaintiffs were fined heavily if the judges’ votes did not reach this number in a case where the defendant won). Assuming there were 501 or 500 jurymen, the prosecution had to gain at least 100 of the judges’ votes. Taken by itself however Meletus’ vote (as representing one-third of the prosecution case) would have numbered only 93 or 94 (assuming 501 or 500 total judges). Regardless of the number of plaintiffs, it was their case that had to reach the requisite one-fifth. Not only that, the prosecutors had won.
Instead of proposing a penalty, Socrates instead proposes a reward for himself: as benefactor to Athens, he should be given free meals in the Prytaneum, one of the important buildings which housed members of the Council. This was an honour reserved for athletes and other prominent citizens.
Finally Socrates considers imprisonment and banishment before settling on a fine of 100 drachmae, as he had little funds of his own with which he could pay the fine. This was a small sum when weighed against the punishment proposed by the prosecutors and encouraged the judges to vote for the death penalty. Socrates’ supporters immediately increased the amount to 3,000 drachmae, but in the eyes of the judges this was still not an alternative.
So the judges decided on the sentence of death.
Plato indicates that the majority of judges voted in favor of the death penalty (Apology 38c), but he does not indicate exactly how many did. Our only source for the actual numbers of these votes is Diogenes Laertius, who says that 80 more voted for the death sentence than had voted for Socrates’ guilt in the first place (2.42); but the details of this account have been disputed. Others have concluded from this that Socrates’ speech angered the jury.
Socrates now responds to the verdict. He first addresses those who voted for death.
He claims that it is not a lack of arguments that has resulted in his condemnation, but rather lack of time and his unwillingness to stoop to the usual emotive appeals expected of any defendant facing death. Again he insists that the prospect of death does not absolve one from following the path of goodness and truth.
Socrates prophesies that younger and harsher critics will follow him vexing them even more.(39d)
To those who voted for his acquittal, Socrates gives them encouragement: He says that his daimon did not stop him from conducting his defense in the way that he did, that this was a sign that it was the right thing to do.
In this way, his daimon was even telling him that death must be a blessing. For either it is an annihilation (thus bringing eternal peace from all worries, and therefore not something to be truly afraid of) or a migration to another place to meet souls of famous people such as Hesiod and Homer and heroes like Odysseus. With these, it will be a joy to continue the practice of Socratic dialogue.
Socrates concludes his Apology with the claim that he bears no grudge against those who accused and condemned him, and asks them to look after his three sons as they grow up, ensuring that they put goodness before selfish interests.
Modes of interpretation
Three different methods for interpreting the Apology have been commonly suggested. The first of these, that it was meant to be solely a piece of art, is not widely held.
A second possibility is that the Apology is a historical recounting of the actual defense made by Socrates in 399 BC. This seems to be the oldest opinion. Its proponents maintain that, as one of Plato’s earliest works, it would not have been fitting to embellish and fictionalise the memory of his mentor, especially while so many who remembered him were still living.
In 1741, Johann Jakob Brucker was the first to suggest that Plato was not to be trusted as a source about Socrates. Since that time, more evidence has been brought to light supporting the theory that the Apology is not a historical account but a philosophical work.
1 (1 of 12) Pierre Grimes presents: Philosophical Midwifery:
12 (1 of 10)
12 (2 of 10)
Plato-THE REPUBLIC Part 1
Plato-THE REPUBLIC Part 2
Plato-THE REPUBLIC Part 3
Plato-THE REPUBLIC Part 4
Plato THE REPUBLIC Part 5
Plato THE REPUBLIC Part 6
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Stop Spending Our Future – The Crisis
The Story of Spending
Smoke and Mirrors on Spending Cuts
Spending Restraint, Part I: Lessons from Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton
Deficits, Debts and Unfunded Liabilities: The Consequences of Excessive Government Spending
The National Debt Road Trip
How To Balance the Obama Budget
It’s Simple to Balance The Budget Without Higher Taxes
National Debt- How Much Is A Billion Dollars? Dave Walker
Obama: I’m Willing to Compromise
We Cannot Bind a Future Congress
GOP: We Need a Balanced Budget Amendment
Obama: We don’t need a balanced budget amendment
A Balanced Budget Amendment: The Path to Fiscal Sanity
The Time is NOW – Balanced Budget Amendment
Senator Lee Introduces Cut, Cap, Balance Act as a Sensible Solution for Raising the Debt Ceiling
Our Troubling Tax System
Barack Obama will raise Capital Gains Taxes…even if it means less tax revenue!!
Ron Paul & Judge Napolitano on FOX News 03/10/11
The FairTax: It’s Time
Lugar Cosponsors the FairTax
Herman Cain on Taxes
Flat Tax vs. National Sales Tax
Ron Paul – THE FAIRTAX REVOLUTION
Mike Huckabee – What is the “Fair Tax?”
Fair Tax Panel with Grover Norquist on FOX Business
Ron Paul Opposes Raising Debt Limit
Bachmann Stands Strong Against Raising Debt Ceiling
Milton Friedman on Libertarianism (Part 4 of 4)
How To Amend The U.S. Constitution
How To Amend the U.S. Constitution
Cut, Cap & Balance! Senators Paul, Lee and Vitter want a Constitutional Amendment
Cut, Cap and Balance…A Great Way To Keep Our Debt From Overtaking Our Future
Ron Paul Ad – Conviction Not Compromise
Ron Paul Will Beat Obama In 2012
I agree with Ron Paul and Michele Bachmann that the National Debt ceiling should not be increased.
I support and have signed the cut, cap, and balance pledge.
Only if both the balanced budget amendment and FairTax bills are passed with a provision repealing the income tax 16th Amendment would I support the raising of the National Debt ceiling by an amount not exceeding $2,000 billion.
This would require the Democratic Party in both the House of Representatives and Senate to vote for this and the President signing these bills.
Barring this, the President needs to start informing nonessential government employees that their jobs have been terminated.
The priorities for Federal Government outlays should be as follows:
1. Interest on the national debt
2. Social Security
3. Medicare and Medicaid
5. Department of Treasury
6. Department of Justice
7. Department of State
8. Department of Defense (60% of total budget outlays) with salaries of military personnel on active duty paid first.
The above is about 65% of total government expenditures or outlays.
The Federal government should start selling all of its real estate asset and gold to make up any shortfall in tax revenues.
The remaining Federal Departments need to be closed and only operations that are absolutely essential should continue operating.
It should take a minimum of two to five years to have the necessary 38 states ratify the Balanced Budget Amendment and an Amendment repealing the income tax 16th Amendment to the Consitution to the United States.
Until these amendments are ratified the U.S. Federal Government budget should be balanced and the income tax replaced by the consumption tax–The FairTax.
The Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 should not exceed $3,000 billion not the proposed $3,500 billion Republican budget which has a deficit of nearly $1,000 billion.
Congress should balance the budget starting in Fiscal Year 2013 at $ 3,000 billion or less.
Time for the House of Representatives to call President Obama’s bluff.
The American people want Federal Government spending to be drastically cut and all U.S. Federal Government budgets balanced starting no later than Fiscal year 2013.
The American people want all Federal Government taxes to be replaced with a national retail consumption sales tax on all new goods and services–the FairTax.
The FairTax should go into operation on January 1, 2013 at the latest and would replace all Federal Government taxes including income, payroll, gift and estate taxes.
The time has come to call the President’s bluff.
If the Democrats vote against this, then the American people will blame them for shutting down the Federal Government.
Background Articles and Videos
Legendary investor Jim Rogers- “Ron Paul is the only politician that has a clue”
|Summary of Outlays, Revenues (Receipts), Deficits, Surpluses Fiscal Years 1980-2010(Nominal Dollars in Millions)
||Deficits (-), Surpluses
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SERVICE
STAR – TREASURY FINANCIAL DATABASE
TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF RECEIPTS, OUTLAYS AND THE DEFICIT/SURPLUS BY MONTH OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT (IN MILLIONS)
ACCOUNTING DATE: 06/11
PERIOD RECEIPTS OUTLAYS DEFICIT/SURPLUS (-)
+ ____________________________________________________________ _____________________ _____________________ _____________________
OCTOBER 135,293 311,656 176,363
NOVEMBER 133,563 253,850 120,287
DECEMBER 218,919 310,329 91,410
JANUARY 205,239 247,873 42,634
FEBRUARY 107,520 328,429 220,909
MARCH 153,358 218,745 65,387
APRIL 245,260 327,950 82,689
MAY 146,794 282,721 135,927
JUNE 251,048 319,470 68,422
JULY 155,546 320,588 165,043
AUGUST 163,998 254,524 90,526
SEPTEMBER 245,207 279,813 34,607
YEAR-TO-DATE 2,161,746 3,455,949 1,294,204
OCTOBER 145,951 286,384 140,432
NOVEMBER 148,970 299,364 150,394
DECEMBER 236,875 315,009 78,134
JANUARY 226,550 276,346 49,796
FEBRUARY 110,656 333,163 222,507
MARCH 150,894 339,047 188,153
APRIL 289,543 329,929 40,387
MAY 174,936 232,577 57,641
JUNE 249,658 292,738 43,080
YEAR-TO-DATE 1,734,033 2,704,557 970,524
U.S. Federal Government Budget Receipts and Outlays
Totals Include On-Budget and Off-Budget Amounts
From Coolidge To Obama, In Billions of Dollars
||Percent of G.D.P.
|William J. Clinton
|William J. Clinton
Read Full Post
Prior to fiscal year 1977 the Federal fiscal years began on July 1 and ended on June 30. For example, John F. Kennedy assumed office on January 20, 1961, but the FY 1961 budget was prepared by the Eisenhower Administration.
In calendar year 1976 the July-September period was a separate accounting period (known as the transition quarter or TQ) to bridge the period required to shift to the new fiscal year.
The Fiscal Year begins on October 1 of the previous year. For example, Fiscal Year 2012 begins on October 1, 2011. For this reason, budget years appear to not correspond with a president’s administration. For example, Barack H. Obama took office in January 2009, but the FY 2009 budget was prepared by the Bush Administration.
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Atlas Shrugged Trailer
On the Set of Atlas Shrugged: 53 Years in the Making
Mr. Galt Goes to Washington: Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged Premiers Among DC’s Capitalist Elite
Atlas Shrugged The Movie Part 1 Review
Who Is John Galt?
Why Atlas Shrugged Changes Lives
Atlas Shrugged and the Tea Party Revolts
The Relevance of Atlas Shrugged in Today’s World – Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights
Ayn Rand Interview with Tom Snyder, (1 of 3)
Ayn Rand Interview with Tom Snyder, (2 of 3)
Ayn Rand Interview with Tom Snyder, (3 of 3)
AYN RAND’s message to AMERICA
Background Articles and Videos
Ayn Rand’s Ideas: An Introduction – Ayn Rand Center
Birth of Objectivism – John Hospers on Ayn Rand (excerpt)
Ayn Rand: A Sense of Life 01
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 02
Ayn Rand A Sense of Life 03
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 04
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 05
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 06
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 07
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 08
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 09
Ayn Rand – A Sense of Life 10
Atlas Shrugged Trailer
Ayn Rand & The World She Made: Q&A with Anne Heller
Anne Heller on Ayn Rand–SHORT VERSION on The Woman’s Connection®
Ayn Rand: Prophet or Scapegoat?
Nathaniel Branden on “My Years With Ayn Rand”
Barbara Branden on the Passion of Ayn Rand
‘Atlas Shrugged’ at Fifty | by Barbara Branden
Reason Foundation Co-Founder Tibor Machan on Ayn Rand
Reason Foundation Co-Founder Manny Klausner on Ayn Rand
Ayn Rand Grave
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Friedrich von Hayek: His Life and Thought
Axel Leijonhufvud interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part I)
Axel Leijonhufvud interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part II)
James Buchanan interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part I), October 28, 1978
James Buchanan interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part II), October 28, 1978
Robert Bork interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part I), November 4, 1978
Robert Bork interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part II), November 4, 1978
Robert Bork interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part III), November 4, 1978
Armen A. Alchian interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part II), November 11, 1978
Armen A. Alchian interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part I), November 11, 1978
Tom Hazlett interviews Friedrich A. Hayek, November 12, 1978
Earlene Craver interviews Friedrich A. Hayek
Leo Rosten interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part I), November 15, 1978
Leo Rosten interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part II), November 15, 1978
Leo Rosten interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part III), November 15, 1978
Bob Chitester interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part I)
Bob Chitester interviews Friedrich A. Hayek (Part II)
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Interview of Professor Quentin Skinner – part 1
Interview of Professor Quentin Skinner – part 2
Background Articles and Videos
Quentin Robert Duthie Skinner (born 26 November 1940) is the Barber Beaumont Professor of the Humanities at Queen Mary, University of London.
“…Quentin Skinner was born the second son of Alexander Skinner, CBE (died 1979), and Winifred Rose Margaret, née Duthie (died 1982). Educated at Bedford School and Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, he was elected into a Fellowship there in 1962 upon obtaining a double-starred first in History, but immediately gained a teaching Fellowship at Christ’s College, Cambridge, where he remained until moving to London University in 2008. He is now an Honorary Fellow of both Christ’s College and Gonville and Caius College.
In the middle 1970s he spent four formative years at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, initially as an historian and latterly in the School of Social Science. It was there that he met Raymond Geuss, later a colleague at Cambridge. Together with John Dunn and J. G. A. Pocock Skinner has been said to have founded the “Cambridge School” of the history of political thought. In 1978 he was appointed to the chair of Political Science at Cambridge University, and in 1996 he was appointed Regius Professor of Modern History. He was pro-vice-chancellor of Cambridge University in 1999. In 1979 he married Susan James, Professor of Philosophy at Birkbeck College London; they have a daughter and a son.
Skinner was Distinguished Visiting Professor at Queen Mary, University of London for the 2007-2008 academic year, and has been Barber Beaumont Professor of the Humanities at Queen Mary since October 2008.
Skinner is a Fellow of numerous scholarly associations, including the British Academy, the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the Academia Europaea and the Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, and his scholarship has won him many awards, including the Wolfson Prize for History (1979); the Sir Isaiah Berlin Prize of the British Political Studies Association (2006); the Benjamin Lippincott Award (2001) and the David Easton Award (2007) of the American Political Science Association; the Bielefelder Wissenschaftspreis (2008); and a Balzan Prize (2006). He holds honorary degrees from many Universities, including Aberdeen, Athens, East Anglia, Chicago, Harvard, Helsinki, Leuven, Oxford, Santiago and St Andrews. …”
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Thomas Sowell — Dismantling America
Background Articles and Videos
Point of No Return?
By Thomas Sowell
“…The voters will have had no experience with the actual, concrete effect of the government takeover of medical care at the time of either the 2010 congressional elections or the 2012 presidential elections. All they will have will be conflicting rhetoric — and you can depend on the mainstream media to go along with the rhetoric of those who passed this medical-care bill.
The ruthless and corrupt way this bill was forced through Congress on a party-line vote, and in defiance of public opinion, provides a roadmap for how other “historic” changes can be imposed by Obama, Pelosi, and Reid. What will it matter if Obama’s current approval rating is below 50 percent among the current voting public, if he can ram through new legislation to create millions of new voters by granting citizenship to illegal immigrants? That could be enough to make him a two-term president, in which case he could appoint enough Supreme Court justices to rubber-stamp further extensions of his power.
When all these newly minted citizens are rounded up on election night by ethnic-organization activists and labor-union supporters of the administration, that may be enough to salvage the Democrats’ control of Congress as well.
The last opportunity that current American citizens may have to determine who will control Congress may well be the election in November of this year. Off-year elections don’t usually bring out as many voters as presidential election years. But the 2010 election may be the last chance to halt the dismantling of America. It can be the point of no return.”
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 1
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 2
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 3
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 4
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 5
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 6
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 7
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 8
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 9
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 10
Pleasantville (film) 1998 Part 11
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( None so far )
F. A. Hayek Interviewed By John O’Sullivan
F.A. Hayek Interviewed By John O’Sullivan from FEE on Vimeo.
Bork and Hayek on so-called “Intellectuals”
Hayek on Keynes
Hayek on Milton Friedman and Monetary Policy
Hayek on Socialism
Hayek Warns of “Omnipotent Elected Assembly”
Background Articles and Videos
John Maynard Keynes of Bloomsbury: Craufurd Goodwin
John Maynard Keynes as Policy Advisor: E. Roy Weintraub
John Maynard Keynes and Economics: Kevin Hoover
John Maynard Keynes and Hayek: Bruce Caldwell
The Political Chances of Genuine Liberalism by Ludwig von Mises
“Friedrich August von Hayek CH (8 May 1899 – 23 March 1992) was an economist and philosopher known throughout the world for his defense of classical liberalism and free-market capitalism against socialist and collectivist thought. He is considered to be one of the most important economists and political philosophers of the twentieth century. One of the most influential members of the Austrian School of economics, he also made significant contributions in the fields of jurisprudence and cognitive science. He shared the 1974 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics with Gunnar Myrdal “for their pioneering work in the theory of money and economic fluctuations and for their penetrating analysis of the interdependence of economic, social and institutional phenomena.” He also received the U.S. Presidential Medal of Freedom in 1991.
Biography F. A. Hayek (1899-1992)
“…F. A. Hayek is undoubtedly the most eminent of the modern Austrian economists. Student of Friedrich von Wieser, protégé and colleague of Ludwig von Mises, and foremost representative of an outstanding generation of Austrian school theorists, Hayek was more successful than anyone else in spreading Austrian ideas throughout the English-speaking world. “When the definitive history of economic analysis during the 1930s comes to be written,” said John Hicks in 1967, “a leading character in the drama (it was quite a drama) will be Professor Hayek. . . . It is hardly remembered that there was a time when the new theories of Hayek were the principal rival of the new theories of Keynes” (Hicks, 1967, p. 203). Unfortunately, Hayek’s theory of the business cycle was eventually swept aside by the Keynesian revolution. Ultimately, however, this work was again recognized when Hayek received, along with the Swede Gunnar Myrdal, the 1974 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Science. Hayek was a prolific writer over nearly seven decades; his Collected Works, currently being published by the University of Chicago Press and Routledge, are projected at nineteen volumes. …”
Friedrich August von Hayek (1899 – 1992)
“…Friedrich August von Hayek was known all over the world. From the publication of his The Road to Serfdom in 1944, his name was a reference for passé thinking in the new world of Keynesian economics. By the time that Hayek received the Nobel Prize in Economic Science in 1974, he had become more and more associated with the solutions to the crises caused by Keynesian economics. Now, at his death almost two decades later, Hayek is not only associated with the successful repudiation of Keynes’ theories, but also with the solutions to the wider social and constitutional crises that are corollaries to Keynes’ economic model.
Hayek was won over from the general social democratic thinking of his university years by reading Ludwig von Mises’ Socialism (1922). He joined Mises’ famous seminar in Vienna, and became associated with Mises’ work on business cycles. Thus, when Hayek accepted a chair at the London School of Economics in 1931, he contributed to the debate on central economic planning which Mises had originally joined.
Hayek’s work on technical economics was and is highly acclaimed. Yet, he believed that the rational evidence disproving wrong economic thinking such as Keynes’, ultimately was shown to be insufficient. Scholars continued to accept wrong economics because there were deeper aspects which caused some to prefer the wrong to the right.
Expanding his horizons from his purely economic foundations, Hayek built on the science of economics, and was able with sure footing to explore much wider areas, especially political, legal, and constitutional philosophy. …”
Friedrich August Hayek
British economistalso called Friedrich A. Hayek, in full Friedrich August von Hayek
born May 8, 1899, Vienna, Austria died March 23, 1992, Freiburg, Germany
Economics and Knowledge
by Freidrich Hayek; Presidential address delivered before the London Economic Club; November 10 1936;
Reprinted from Economica IV (new ser., 1937), 33-54.
List of books by Friedrich Hayek
Online Library of Liberty
This Set Contains The Following Titles:
Plan of the Collected Works
of F. A. Hayek
Bruce Caldwell, General Editor
The Meaning of Hayek
By Gerald P. O’Driscoll Jr.
“…Hayek is best known for his most widely read work, The Road to Serfdom, which was written to explain to a literate, but nontechnical, readership how the road to political hell is paved with the best intentions. As he made clear, classical liberalism’s conflict with central planning was not over the shared goal of enhancing the well-being of the greatest possible number of people but over the way to achieve that goal.
Hayek’s thesis in The Road to Serfdom is that one intervention inevitably leads to another. The unintended consequences of each market intervention are economic distortions, which generate further interventions to correct them. That interventionist dynamic leads society down the road to serfdom.
In perhaps the best chapter of The Road to Serfdom, Hayek details “Why the Worst Get on Top” in totalitarian societies. The chapter begins with a quotation from Lord Acton: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Hayek then elaborates the Actonian insight.
There are strong reasons for believing that what to us appear the worst features of the existing totalitarian systems are not accidental by-products but phenomena which totalitarianism is certain sooner or later to produce. Just as the democratic statesman who sets out to plan economic life will soon be confronted with the alternative of either assuming dictatorial powers or abandoning his plans, so the totalitarian dictator would soon have to choose between disregard of ordinary morals and failure. It is for this reason that the unscrupulous and uninhibited are likely to be more successful in a society tending toward totalitarianism. Who does not see this has not yet grasped the full width of the gulf which separates totalitarianism from a liberal regime, the utter difference between the whole moral atmosphere under collectivism and the essentially individualist Western civilization. …”
The Road to Serfdom
“The Road to Serfdom is a book written by Friedrich Hayek (recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 1974) which has significantly shaped the political ideologies of Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan and the concepts of ‘Reagonomics’ and ‘Thatcherism’. The Road to Serfdom is among the most influential and popular expositions of classical liberalism and libertarianism.
The book was originally published by Routledge Press in March 1944 in the UK and then by the University of Chicago Press in September 1944. In April, 1945, Reader’s Digest published a slightly shortened version of the book (still in print from the Institute of Economic Affairs), which eventually reached more than 600,000 readers. Around 1950 a picture-book version was published in Look Magazine, later made into a pamphlet and distributed by General Motors. The book has been translated into approximately 20 languages and is dedicated to “The socialists of all parties”. The introduction to the 50th anniversary edition is written by Milton Friedman (another recipient of the Nobel Prize in Economics 1976). In 2007, the University of Chicago Press put out a “Definitive Edition”. …”
“Hayek’s central thesis is that all forms of collectivism lead logically and inevitably to tyranny, and he used the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany as examples of countries which had gone down “the road to serfdom” and reached tyranny. Hayek argued that within a centrally planned economic system, the distribution and allocation of all resources and goods would devolve onto a small group, which would be incapable of processing all the information pertinent to the appropriate distribution of the resources and goods at the central planners’ disposal. Disagreement about the practical implementation of any economic plan combined with the inadequacy of the central planners’ resource management would invariably necessitate coercion in order for anything to be achieved. Hayek further argued that the failure of central planning would be perceived by the public as an absence of sufficient power by the state to implement an otherwise good idea. Such a perception would lead the public to vote more power to the state, and would assist the rise to power of a “strong man” perceived to be capable of “getting the job done”. After these developments Hayek argued that a country would be ineluctably driven into outright totalitarianism. For Hayek “the road to serfdom” inadvertently set upon by central planning, with its dismantling of the free market system, ends in the destruction of all individual economic and personal freedom.
Hayek argued that countries such as the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany had already gone down the “road to serfdom“, and that various democratic nations are being led down the same road. In The Road to Serfdom he wrote: “The principle that the end justifies the means is in individualist ethics regarded as the denial of all morals. In collectivist ethics it becomes necessarily the supreme rule.” …”
The Road from Serfdom
Forseeing the Fall
Thomas W. Hazlett
Sometimes you have to live a long time just to be proved right. When Friedrich August von Hayek, born in 1899, died March 23 in Freiberg, Germany, he had outlived both Keynes and Marx. Happily for the human race, so have his ideas.
[Contributing Editor Thomas W. Hazlett interviewed Hayek in 1977, shortly before starting graduate school in economics at the University of California, Los Angeles.] …”
by Edwin J. Feulner, Ph.D.
“…Sixty years ago, master mapmaker Friedrich Hayek gave us his seminal work “The Road to Serfdom.” It was swiftly condensed by Reader’s Digest, and became an international best seller. Hayek’s insight would eventually earn him the 1974 Nobel Prize for economics (he’s probably the only Nobel-winning economist who’s also penned a bestseller), and because of him, we’ve been avoiding economic potholes ever since.
Hayek wrote the book at the height of World War II. At that time, virtually everyone in his adopted homeland of Britain was involved in the war movement in some way – and Hayek saw the danger in that. At that time of national crisis, government management of the economy made sense. With millions of people carrying arms and those at home busy making the weapons, only a central government could direct the overall economy.
But Hayek feared that citizens of the western democracies would draw the wrong conclusions – that, after the Nazis were defeated, too many people would call for continued state control of the economy. They would do so, he warned, in the mistaken belief that if they surrendered some measure of personal freedom to the government, the government would in return guarantee their personal and financial security.
Hayek correctly predicted that surrendering personal freedom to the government wouldn’t lead to greater security. It would lead merely to servitude – what Hayek called serfdom. …”
Taking Hayek Seriously
William Easterly: Hayek’s Economic Development Insights
The Road to Serfdom – 1
The Road to Serfdom – 2
The Future of Austrian Economics
Hayek Speaks to Europe (1/5)
Hayek Speaks to Europe (2/5)
Hayek Speaks to Europe (3/5)
Hayek Speaks to Europe (4/5)
Hayek Speaks to Europe (5/5)
The Road to Serfdom
by Friedrich A. Hayek
Related Posts On Pronk Palisades
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( 27 so far )
Roy Masters Sean Hannity “Hypnotic States Of Americans”
Roy Masters Strikes At The Root Core Of All Suffering
Roy Masters Adviceline – 9th May 2013 – Programs K7332 K7333
Bully And Appeaser – In The Same Hell – Sunday Conversations With Roy Masters
Roy Masters – Take Your Kids Out Of Public School!
Roy Masters – Your Part In Your Own Enslavement
How to Quit Smoking Effortlessly
A Prophetic Warning To America – Traitors Amongst Us
Marriage: Where Paradise is Lost Again – Sunday Conversations With Roy Masters
EdmondUTV5 – Roy Masters-The Path to Paradise Lost
Overcoming Self Doubt by Roy Masters
Men: Stupefied, But Not Stupid – Sunday Conversations With Roy Masters (Full Lecture)
Suffering With Grace – Sunday Conversations With Roy Masters
How I Survived – Sunday Conversations With Roy Masters
Vintage Radio Roy – Adviceline March 21st 1971
Roy Masters: How To Become Wise
Roy Masters: Being Upset
Roy Masters: “Watch Your Resentment”
Roy Masters: Patience
Roy Masters: Be Still and Know
Roy Masters: Distractions
Roy Masters: Quit Smoking
Roy Masters: Money
Roy Masters: Faith and Success
Roy Masters: Sex and the Illusion of Love
Roy Masters: No Free Moral Choice
Roy Masters: The Motive for Hypocrisy
Roy Masters: Giving and Getting Taken
Roy Masters: Playing God
Roy Masters: “It is all very simple.”
Roy Masters: Elvis Presley Analogy
Roy Masters: Who Has Control?
Roy Masters: Are you a good person?
Roy Masters: Love/Hate Relationship
Roy Masters: How to Deal With Women
Roy Masters doesn’t give a tittely toot about stupid feminists.
Roy Masters: Your Wife Will Test You
Roy Masters: Standing Up To Your Wife
Roy Masters: Being a Real Husband
Roy Masters: Discerning Is Righteous Judgement
Roy Masters: Lip Service To God
Roy Masters: The Right Woman
Roy Masters: The Demon of Doubt
Roy Masters: Little Einstein
Roy Masters – Jesus
Roy Masters – Not giving a damn
Roy Masters – Calm
Roy Masters: Hypnotizing People
Roy Masters: Hypnotizing People
Roy Masters: What Psychologists Don’t Understand
Roy Masters: Becoming Perfect
Legislation By Emotion
Roy Masters: Roy To Earth
Your Part In Your Own Enslavement
The Hypnotic States Of America
You Have Lost Your Country
Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac & The Stealing Of The Election
Obama, Government Duplicity and The Influence Of Rev Wright
Defamation And The Takeover Of America
ACORN Are Thugs
Take Your Kids out Of Public School !!
Background Articles and Videos
Roy Masters (commentator)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
||2 April 1928
London, United Kingdom
||Advice Line with Roy Masters
||Broadcast on 190 radio stations
||9–12 midnight PT Monday-Friday
Roy Masters (born 2 April 1928) is host of Advice Line, a talk radio show he started in 1961 and still hosts today. He is a prolific author and creator of a mindfulness meditation exercise, now used in the U.S. military. Masters is founder of the Oregon-based non-profit organization, the Foundation of Human Understanding. In his early twenties, he travelled across America lecturing as an expert diamond cutter.
Early life and education
Roy Masters was born in London in 1928 to a family of diamond cutters. His grandfather was a diamond cutter, as were several of his uncles. Masters’ father died when he was 15, and he was sent to Brighton, Englandto apprenticeship in diamond cutting in his uncle’s company, Monnickendam, Ltd. His family could only afford education for his older brother, so Masters could not attend college.
Following his apprenticeship in diamond cutting, Masters travelled to many places to pursue his trade, including Amsterdam; Brussels; Belgium; South Africa, where he spent two years in 1947; and later, America. All of this followed Masters’ military service duringWorld War II, serving in the Royal Sussex Regiment of the British Army. During his time in Brighton, Masters saw a vaudeville stage hypnosis presentation where the hypnotist easily induced volunteer subjects to do strange and outlandish things. Masters distinctly remembers pondering the question: “Why can’t hypnotism be used to make people act sensibly, rather than foolishly?”
In 1949, Masters emigrated to the United States where he made a name for himself travelling throughout the country lecturing on diamond cutting under the auspices of the Diamond Council of America. He was often invited to participate in radio and TV interviews on the subject, and he hosted a daily radio show called, “Story of Your Diamond”. Within a short time, Masters had visited 40 of the 48 states. He met and married his wife, Ann, in Birmingham, Alabama, and they eventually moved to Houston, Texas where they started a family.
In the 1950s, excitement around Bridey Murphy drove friends to consult with Masters about hypnosis. Masters understood hypnosis to be a “duplication of life’s errors” and immediately realized no good can ever come from hypnotherapy. Masters sold his diamond cutting business and founded the Institute of Hypnosis where, unbeknownst to his clients, instead of hypnotizing them he “unhypnotized them”. Masters saw as many as thirty people a day for consultation. About his leaving the diamond cutting profession, Masters said, “I had my own business, but I left that lucrative work because I had a calling for this kind of work. I’m more interested in what I’m doing now than anything else.”
In Houston, Masters was once charged with practicing medicine without a license, which was to be a test case to determine the legality of non-medical practice of hypnosis. His short time spent in jail received notoriety because of his counseling of fellow inmates.Masters immediately returned to work and continued on for two years, during which time he produced the mindfulness meditation record, How Your Mind Can Keep You Well. His meditation exercise has long been used by professional counselors. On why it is effective, Masters said, “it enables you to become objective, a little bit separate and disentangled from all your troublesome thoughts, emotions, heartaches, fears and traumatic memories – and that, all by itself, is extremely helpful, and actually healing.”
Masters bought a house trailer and relocated his family to Los Angeles where he founded the Foundation of Human Understanding in 1961. That same year, Masters began America’s first talk radio show; the show’s theme was about overcoming stress “spiritually, psychologically [and] emotionally”. Masters continues to host the show, called Advice Line, which has been on the air continuously since its start.
Never one to mince words, Roy Masters is a man who says what he feels no matter what the cost. Perhaps that’s why his program remains, in his opinion, unsponsorable. As a youngster growing up in England, his almost painful honesty, his perception, and his relentless questioning of the adult world’s sham standards cast a chilling silence to many a family gathering. Outspoken and guileless, he was called tactless by his elders and it was hoped he would outgrow this annoying trait. He never did.
— William Wolff, Healers, Gurus, and Spiritual Guides, Sherbourne Press
Currently, Masters’ radio show is nationally syndicated and available for streaming online. His mindfulness meditation record has been transposed over mediums and is now used to treat stress in the U.S. military.
Masters has appeared on CNN‘s Crossfire, Larry King Live, The Sally Jessy Raphael Show, The Sean Hannity Show, and The Drudge Report.
- 1964 The Secrets of Life and Death. :Devorss, 1964. ASIN B0007EPZIQ
- 1965 How To Be At Peace With Your Problems. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1965. ASIN B0007I59TM
- 1970 Sex, Sin & Solution. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1970. ASIN B0006CYIFU
- 1970 (Roy Masters Speaks On) Breaking Free of Psycho-therapy. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1970. ASIN B0006C2IRA
- 1972 The Secret of Life. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1972 ASIN B0006XQGMW and as Secret of Life. (pbk) 1977. [ASIN: B000KVIIQM]
- 1973 Your Mind Can Keep You Well, Fawcett Publications, 1973. (Mass Market paperback: ASIN B000B58D4O) (Essandess Special Edition, 1968. ASIN B0007F6DEK)
- 1974 (Roy Masters Speaks On) Understanding Meditation. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1974, ASIN B000710BE2
- 1975 How to Control Your Emotions. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1975. ASIN B0006CJDUA
- 1975 How to Conquer Negative Emotions (with Mel Tappan). Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1, 1975. ISBN 978-0-933900-01-1
- 1976 How to Conquer Suffering Without Doctors. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1976. ISBN 978-0-933900-04-2
- 1977 Sex, Sin & Salvation. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1977. ASIN B0006XSUVQ
- 1977 No One Has to Die! Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, 1977. ASIN B0006COJWM
- 1978 How Your Mind Can Keep You Well Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1, 1978. ISBN 978-0-933900-09-7 (Fawcett Crest Book, 1973, ASIN B000MFHWYA)
- 1979 The Satan Principle: Life Itself Is Hypnosis: Self-Defense Lessons to Help You Cope With Everyday Pressure. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1979. ISBN 978-0-933900-02-8 (Earlier version: Life Itself Is Hypnosis: The Satan Principle: Self-Defense Lessons to Help You Cope With Everyday Pressure, Foundation Books, 1978. ASIN B000NDXFO)
- 1982 How to Survive Your Parents: And Not Do to Your Children What Your Parents Did to You. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1, 1982. (pbk) ISBN 978-0-933900-10-3
- 1987 Eat No Evil (with Dorothy Baker). Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1987. (pbk) ISBN 978-0-933900-12-7
- 1988 Understanding Sexuality: The Mystery of Our Lost Identities (with Dorothy Baker). Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, rev. ed., Feb. 1988. ISBN 978-0-933900-13-4
- 1988 Beyond the Known (with Dorothy Baker). Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, Rev. Ed., June 1, 1988. ISBN 978-0-933900-03-5
- 1988 The Hypnosis of Life: Self-Defense Lessons to Help You Cope with Every Day Pressure. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1988. ISBN 978-0-933900-05-9
- 1988 The Secret Power of Words: Why Words Affect You So Deeply. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1, 1988. (pbk) ISBN 978-0-933900-14-1
- 1991 Surviving the Comfort Zone (with Dorothy Baker). Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, Aug. 1, 1991. ISBN 978-0-933900-15-8
- 1992 Secrets of a Parallel Universe: Why Our Deepest Problems Hold the Key to Ultimate Personal Success and Happiness. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, June 1992. ISBN 978-0-933900-17-2
- 1997 Finding God in Physics: Einstein’s Missing Relative (with Bob Just and Dorothy Baker). Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, ISBN 978-0-933900-19-6
- 2001 The Adam and Eve Sindrome. Oregon: Foundation of Human Understanding, Jan. 2001. ISBN 978-0-933900-11-0
- 2010 How Your Mind Will Make You Well (an updated version of How Your Mind Can Keep You Well). Oregon: CreateSpace, Dec 1, 2010 ISBN 1456353330
- 2011 Hypnotic States of Americans: A spiritual survival manual for every American family in a perilous world. Oregon: CreateSpace, May 11, 2011. ISBN 978-1-4609-3902-4
- 2012 Cure Stress: How Your Mind Will Make You Well. Oregon: CreateSpace, Dec 11, 2012 ISBN 1481221043
- ^ Jump up to:a b “Introduction to Roy Masters”. Foundation of Human Understanding. Retrieved 14 April 2014.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d “Diamond Cutting art comes to Birmingham”. The Birmingham News. 7 September 1952. Retrieved 19 May 2014.
- ^ Jump up to:a b “British Diamond Cutter Shows Skills of His Trade”. Retrieved 19 May 2014.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g William Wolf, Healers, Gurus and Spiritual Guides (pdf), © 1969, 1975, 2005, published by the Foundation of Human Understanding (Originally published by Sherbourne Press, 1969)
- ^ Jump up to:a b “Untitled”. Action (Savannah, Georgia). Junior Chamber of Commerce. 1950’s. Retrieved 19 May 2014.
- Jump up^ Amazon.com. “Roy Masters Biography”. Retrieved 15 April 2014.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c Metlova, Maria (1 September 1963). “Between You & Me”. Valley News. Retrieved 19 May 2014.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d Kupelian, David (19 July 2014). “Military praises ‘fantastic’ new stress therapy”. WND. Retrieved 15 April 2014.
- Jump up^ “Call Roy Masters on “Advice Line””. Retrieved 2012-10-26.
Millions have seen or heard Roy Masters on such popular shows as Sean Hannity’s WABC Show, CNN’s “Larry King Live,” “Sally Jesse Raphael,” “Crossfire,” and “The Drudge Report.”
Roy Masters (commentator)
“Roy Masters (born April 2, 1928) is a radio commentator and author based in southern Oregon, United States. He discusses Christianity, psychology, and philosophy. His commentary is distributed through his Foundation for Human Understanding (FHU), which includes a radio program, books, audio and video recordings, web site, church services, and meetings.
Masters advocates decision-making principles for issues involving relationships, marriage, family life, and upsetting or traumatic experiences. Other topics he discusses include medicine, politics and science. …”
The Foundation of Human Understanding
“…The Foundation of Human Understanding was founded by Roy Masters in 1963. This worldwide foundation is dedicated to assisting anyone who is interested in perfecting their spiritual natures through the principles of Judeo Christianity. …”
Roy Masters is Not a Cult Leader! (is he?)
Roy Masters Calls Steve Hassan a Parasite!
Roy Masters as a guest on The Joe Franklin Show 1/2
Roy Masters as a guest on The Joe Franklin Show 1/2
Be Still & Know Meditation Pt. 1 of 3
Be Still & Know Meditation Pt. 2 of 3
Be Still & Know Meditation Pt. 3 of 3
Read Full Post
| Make a Comment ( 6 so far )