Discretion with Barry Lam

与巴里·蓝的谨慎之道

Overthink

2025-05-06

51 分钟
PDF

单集简介 ...

What value might there be in having fewer rules? In episode 129 of Overthink, Ellie and David talk to philosopher and host of Hi-Phi Nation Barry Lam about his book, Fewer Rules, Better People: The Case for Discretion. They discuss the problems with legalism and bureaucracy and the importance of discretion, as well as how the emergence of AI affects decision-making, and the negative impact of too many rules on our criminal justice system. Are we obliged to follow government rulings? Why is the ‘by the book bureaucrat’ the biggest villain of all? And how can we train people to make better discretionary decisions? In the bonus, your hosts consider the effects of decisions based on private morality and whether there are cultural differences in discretion. Works Discussed: Ronald Dworkin, Taking Rights Seriously Barry Lam,  Fewer Rules, Better People: The Case for Discretion Plato, Crito Support the show Patreon | patreon.com/overthinkpodcast Website | overthinkpodcast.com Instagram & Twitter | @overthink_pod Email | dearoverthink@gmail.com YouTube | Overthink podcast
更多

单集文稿 ...

  • Hello, and welcome to Overthink.

  • The podcast for two friends who are also professors talk about philosophy and everyday life.

  • I'm Ellie Anderson.

  • And I'm David Peña-Guzman.

  • David,

  • I'm so excited to be talking today about this topic because even

  • though the word discretion might not immediately call to mind fascinating stories of over-bureaucratization,

  • indeed, that is what we are talking about.

  • We're going to be speaking later in the episode with Barry Lamb,

  • who recently wrote a book about this.

  • And let me say, I really enjoyed reading this book, Ellie,

  • where Lamb essentially comes to the defense of the concept of discretion,

  • arguing that sometimes we need to give people in positions of power discretionary decision-making capabilities.

  • And this is a thought-provoking position to take in a world where we associate rule following and rule enforcement with justice,

  • right?

  • We tend to define in the West justice as applying rules sort of mechanically and equally to everybody.

  • And so the idea that there could be a philosophical defense for the exception or

  • for giving individuals the right not to enforce a rule.

  • Seems counterintuitive to the way many of us think about why we have laws and rules in the first place.

  • Yeah, though, at the same time,