درباره این اپیزود
What determines which policies a person votes for? Is it their personality, their upbringing, blind loyalty to their political party? Or is it self-interest -- people voting for policies that will benefit themselves and the groups they belong to? This episode features psychologist Jason Weeden, arguing that self-interest is a much bigger determinant of voter behavior than most political scientists think it is. Jason and Julia talk about why researchers disagree over this question, and what "self-interest" even means.
انگلیسی
ایالات متحده آمریکا
رونوشت 🔗
Are you the producer of this podcast?
Add a podcast transcript
Need Audio-to-Text?
Transcribe with Listen411 in Just 60 Seconds
جستجوی اپیزودهای گذشته
اپیزودهای قبلی Rationally Speaking Podcast را جستجو کن.
قسمت های دیگر در این پادکست
Julia and guest Vitalik Buterin (creator of the open-source blockchain platform Ethereum) explore a wide range of topics, including: Vitalik's intellectually honest approach to leadership, why prediction markets appear to be biased in favor of Trump, whether it was rational to invest in Bitcoin ten…
How much do Uber and Lyft drivers really earn, after expenses? Are they getting a raw deal by being classified as 'independent contractors' instead of employees? I explore the debate over these questions with three guests: Louis Hyman (Cornell), Veena Dubal (UC Hastings College of the Law), and Har…
Matt Yglesias talks about One Billion Americans, his book arguing that it's in the United States' national interest to dramatically boost its population, by expanding immigration and having more babies.
Matt and Julia also discuss arguments for and against the "YIMBY" movement, which pushes for bu…
Julia and social psychologist Jonathan Haidt (The Righteous Mind) discuss his moral foundations theory and argue about whether liberals should "expand their moral horizons" by learning to think like conservatives. Julia solicits Jon's help in understanding her disagreement with philosopher Michael …
Is there any justification for seemingly unjust laws like "qualified immunity," which allows cops to get away with bad behavior? William Baude, a leading scholar of constitutional law, explores how these laws came to be and why they're so hard to change. Also, Baude makes the case for originalism, …
سلب مسئولیت: پادکست و آثار هنری تعبیه شده در این صفحه متعلق به New York City Skeptics است که متعلق به صاحب آن است و به Listen Notes، Inc وابسته یا تایید نشده است.
ویرایش
از کمک شما برای بروز نگهداشتن پایگاهدادههای پادکست سپاسگزاریم
