we really thank you a lot. >> we extend our gratitude to the educators, parents and participants who have supporte each of these have filmmakers other creative journey. congratulations to all the winners. don't miss out. the top 20 documentaries will be broadcast on c-span starting april 1, but you can catch each of the 150 award-winning studentcjoin us in celebrating e cynically-engaged and inspiring young minds as they sharant to t our world. next, the national constitution 's jeffrey rosen talking about the founding fathers in the virgin they followed influence the political philosophiesformation of americy was rooted in the pursuit of happiness. from the american enterprise institute, this is an hour and 20 minutes.

p÷>> thank you, everybody, for joining us thiaf conversation about a wonderful new book entitled "the pursuit of happiness, how classical■■mr ers on virtue inspired the lives of the founders and defined america." before we begin, i just want to say today's event is the latest in the series here at aei. this event and others provide a platform to host prominent authors to discuss their forthcoming or recently released

books on issues of international significance. we are very proud and grateful for their tremendous support and commitment to our mission. our guest today is my friend jeffrey rosen. jeff is one of the nations leading writers on the supreme court and constitution and the author of several books on the justices and their work, and for the last several years he's been constitution center. >> the only institution in america chartered by congress to increase awareness and understanding of the constitution among the american people on a nonpartisan basis. >> in addition to being the ceo of the constitution center, he continues to be the author of some of the most constitutional books today including the book we are discussing today. jeff, can we just start with the title of the book?

the pursuit of happiness, of course we know where that phrase comes from, the declaration of mean guide here in this book? what is the pursuit of happiness? >> from reading the philosophies that inspired jefferson, is it happiness for the founders meant not feeling good, but being good. not the pursuit of virtue -- or rather not the pursuit of pleasure, but the pursuit of virtue. they had something very particular in mind, which was self-government, self-mastery, character improvement, fulfilling your potential so that you could a the kind of tranquility that allows you to serve others. is the classical definition of happiness. it comm aristotle who famously defined happiness as an activity of the soul in conformity with excellence or virtue.

but those terms are not self defining so you have to dig into the moral philosophy to realize that for the founders, the activity of the soul is temperance, or balance, or tranquility of mind. and the ancients drawn reason ad passion that is very important. it comes from pythagoras, who talks about the three parts of the soul, reason in the head, passion in the heart, desire in the stomach. it talks about using a reason to temper or modeteesire so we cant temperance and harmony which is virtue, which is reason, which is happiness. the fact that it is completely unfamiliar to us today is remarkable, because this is the understanding of happiness that prevails in most of history. it was taught to the founders and a central part of their universe and has just been lost today. >>will return later to the

question how and when it was lost. and of course we will talk about how to recover it. just remind everybody at the outset, there will be a chance for everybody to ask questions, including those who are watching the livestream at home. if you'd like to submit a question online, you can submit it via email, you can get it on the events webpage, and you can also submit questions online where all of us pursue happiness, at#aei pursuit of happiness. how did this book come about? jf you've written over the years in your journalism at the new republic, the atlantic, and elsewhere. what brought, which i think is y

different from what you have been writing over the years? >> it was a very unusualect. it came about in this way. i was rereading franklin's famous attempt to achieve moral perfection. i'd seen this before, he's in his 20's and decides to achieve moral perfection by making a list of 13 virtues that he wants to practice every day. temperance, prudence, order, cleanliness, and he save the one he finds hardest for last, humility. he decides to make a chart and each week he will pick a different virtue to focus on and he will make an smart where he fell short. found it depressing but he thought he was a better person for having tried it. i knew about this because my friend and i had practiced franklin system a few years ago at the recommendation of our local rabbi here in d.c..

recommended a jewish system of character, which we didn't know at the time is the franklin system translated into hebrew. there was a hasidic rabbi who left franklin and put it into he view■■ép&aso we tried this for d we found it incredibly depressing and gave it up. but we thought we were better for having practiced it. during covid i noticed for the first time that franklin chose as a model for his system a book by cicero i had never heard of. the model was without ve, be. a few weeks later i was on the uva campus and saw that thomas jefferson had made a list of 12 virtues for his daughter to practice, and they are almost identical to franklin's. if angry count to 10, a very angry, count to 100.

the surprise there was at jefferson to pop, when he was of virtue and asked to define happiness, would give a passage from cicero from this book that says that he who has achieved the tranquility of mind was neither exalted by wanton exuberance or unduly despondent, he is the tranquil soul who has a happy man. so i figured up got to read this book, it was so important to franklin and jefferson. then i found this golden reading list that jefferson would send out to kids who were going to law school and people who asked him in later li_how should i be educated? it has a rigorous schedule where you have to wake up before dawn, read until sunrise, watch thea/r

sunrise, moral philosophy early in the morning, history in the late morning, lunch, then geography and astronomy and lighter subjects, and after dinner, some shakespeare and then to bed. 12 hours a day, day after day. at drew my eye was the section called ethics for natural religion. at the top of the list cicero's dissertation. marcus a really us, as well as some enlightenmenthume and fran. i thought i had to read these books, it's a gap in my education. superb features at wonderful universities, an i college, studied politics and philosophy and history and law, but i just missed these books of moral

philosophy that were so important to jefferson. so during covid, i developed an unusual practice. i was inspired by jefferson, so for the first time ever i would get up before sunrise, read for q[qan hour or test oh, watch the sunrise, and then i found myself writing these sonnets to sum up the wisdom that i'd learned. i realized very difficult to write sonnets. it was just the urgesum up the s so precious and harmonious and symmetrical. i discovered that all these people in the founding era wrote sonnets when they read the wisdom. john quincy adams, learned, would wake up in the white house, read cicero, watch the sunrise, and right sonnets. that was what the project

involved. it was completelyransformative because it both changed my understanding of the pursuit of happiness and help me see the founders understanding of personal self-govemet the most e away if i can share it right now was rediscovering the liberating , radically empowering practice of deep reading. i had gotten out of the practice of reading outside of my job or my immediate deadlines, and just taking the time to dig in deep, created wonders that i had forgotten, and i'm so grateful to have rediscovered this practice. >> you survey a wide range of founding figures and next-generation thinkers like lincoln and frederick douglass. lincoln, hamilton, washington, franklin, her, they span the

spectrum of backgrounds, upbringings, education. yeth this. how was it that they all were brought to this? given that they came from su bar educated in such different ways. jeffrey: it must be the shining power of the liberal idea, embodied in isn't it remarkable? think of phyllis wheatley, the first published great african-american poet who is literally brought over in chains, but she children, and she reads this classical will -- classical wisdom, and reads virtue, which talk about the importance of self-mastery. think of frederick toklas -- think of frederick douglass who has by reading lessons on the streethe pays boys to teach himo

read because his master has forbidden him from being taught how to read. at that moment, he felt he was more crushed than when his body liberty was taken away. he learned how to read and he finds this called "the colombian order" the fate -- which he pays for inbred which has experts of classical wisdom. it him to become the greatest freedom fighter and abolitionist of his time. you can get it in the great universities, you can get it from readers like the mcguffey reader, the self-taught taught lincoln and douglas got it from. it is a shining example of how this wisdom belongs to everyone, and it is an extraordinary affirmation of the potential of the individual, and the ability of the individual through self-mastery and self-improvement, to achieve a

moral perfection. it is they, as well as the opportunity and right, of each individual to liberate him or herself. adam: in the book, you dedicate each chapter to a different one of these 12 urges. a number of the figures you discuss along the way, franklin, jefferson, hamilton, madison otp throughout the book. the way you structure the book is to center each discussion, at least initially,you begin fitti, for embodying -- being the centerpiece of t c resolution, george washington's self command. justice, frederick douglass. may be my favorite is the counterexample, frugality, james wilson and george mason's death. how did you settle upon one founder versus another for each chapter? you could have easily dedicated,

say, hamilton or adams to the chapter on industry. you chose jefferson. why was -- how was it that you settled upon each one? jeffrey: absolutely. there is a kind of discretion in choosing who with which virtues. all the virtues are part of the family of the four classical virtues, which are prudence, temperance, courage, and justit is not a neat connectiont i thought it was helpful to focus on a founder. have to tell the story through people. it is all about biography. and then to try and show how they match the virtue or not. some are obviously more obvious than others. and had to be humility for john adams, because he struggled so mightily with it. most famously, self regarding of

all of the founders. called his rotunda d in wantin c majesty. constantly beating himself up for his own suppose it vanity, and then overcoming it so movingly in his reconciliations with thomas jefferson. that was how i made the choice. adam: let'f the most straightforward choices. resolution, your chapter on resolution centered around fort washington. washington famously in his upbringing, his education, self-education, in a way, may be rattled only by franklin, explicitly p of virtue in a stoic sense for the pursuit of happiness in virtue at the center ofis self comportment. can you tell that story? jeffrey: washington becomes even greater on close examination. he is the most respected, the

most revered leader of his time, because of his self-mastery. and he is so self-conscious in struggling throughout his life to master his temper and his emotions, so that he can achieve that column self-mastery that defined happj1ess. he read it not in the original, but in seneca, in the great translation. and in the spectator, the magazine. and popular moral philosophy. he has a very hot temper. theher of washington things it may have come from his hypercritical mom who was always nagging him to be better. he would bristle and try to control himself. it is at his moments of self-mastery that he is greatest. aniers are about to rebel because they have not been paid by congress, and they want their backpay, and there is a danger

of mutiny, he mounts this wooden stage called the temple of virtue" from his favorite play which talks about the olnsthe play he has performed fr the tricks. and then famously, he is going to read his speech and struggles to read it, and takes out his reading glasses and says "forgive me, gentlemen, i have grown old and your service and now i am almost growing blind." it is the first time they have seen him acknowledge his frailty, and people weep because waingtbut it is that combinatiof candor and self-mastery that makes him such a great leader. people almost never see him lose his temper in public. if you times he does. it is all the more notable. when he goes to congress and feels disrespected and storms out and says i will not come and

personally wait on you again. there is a great stin henry adams novel "democracy," where the protagonist is on the about the meaning of washington. what is at stake is nothing less than the meaning of america. and was he a paper saint, a cardbo figure who affected the virtues that had no substance? or was he as great as he was reputed to be? and it seems that he was as great. and in mastering his temper, and then of course abandoning the opportunity for a life term and returning to his farm, he embodied the classical virtues so well. adam: your account of washington and his contain his anger, his frustration, it reminded me of david brooks account of dwight eisenhower. a couple years ago, eisenhower

himself, having to struggle with anger and ways to channel it away from his work. other thing they have in common is that they were presidents, also generals, they were executives of a kind. it's interesting that washington, the fact that he was fueled by certain things, might have made him uniquely well suited to be president, a general, an executive. bu h■é certain ways. we will circle back to that. i want to talk about phyllis wheatley. surely the least well-known of the figures in your book. your book is bringing her back to public attention. could you tell the story of phyllis wheatley and i think it sincerity, her chapter? jeffrey: what an extraordinary story. phyllis wheatley comes over as a teenager, enslaved, in chains. she is given this improbable classical education and she begins to write these poems of

virtue. and they are recognized as extraordinary. they are so extraordinary, that the town of boston decides she has to prove she wrote her own poems. and in this remarkable trial of phyllis wheatley, as professor gates calls presided none other than john hancock, along with cotton mather and all of the where these of boston, they examine her remotely on her classical learning. and she passes the test, and they gravely assert that she has written her own poems. y. and she goes to london and she meets royalty, and professor gates calls for the opera -- the oprah winfrey of her day. she sends them to george washington, who acknowledges her genius, and s extremely grateful to be the beneficiary of them. she comes back voluntarily to

the u.s. on the promise that she will be freed, because the somerset of food -- decision would have allowed her to stay in britain and be free. but she comes back. she is freed. and she publishes a second volume, and then dies in freedom. but there is founder who receives her genius less hospitable he then george washington, and that is thomas jefferson. innotes on the state of virgini, he compares wheatley with roman poets who were enslaved, and says that wheatley's poetry is beneath contempt. essentially that no black people can write poetry because black people are intellectually inferior. he says, this is a suspicion only, he wants to be proved wrong. but the degree of his■!'s not sr franklin, who claimed her genius, or many of the other founders.

it reveals the fact that jefferson's hypocrisy on slavery was both rooted in racism that was unusual even by the standards of his time, and also in his avarice. it is really important to ask question, how was it that these founders who claim to be so devoted to virtue and self-mastery and virtues like industry and frugality, could rely on enslaved■!■÷ labor to me their lifestyles possible. and what is so striking to learn is they didn't even try. there is thi■sps amazing otation from patrick henry, where he gives the give me liberty or give me death speech, quoting from cato'sazing that i myself -- i will not justify it, i will not attempt to, it is simple avarice or greed. i can do it, the inconvenience

of living without them. that is just a moment of remarkable selawareness.he doest and say it is right. he says it is morally wrong, but he likes the lifestyle and does not want to vet jefferson and s moments of candor what -- what attacked south carolina and georgia for avarice or greed. and of course, he more than anyone else in his excess at monticello,onstructed at roman it'll, whose education of the life of reason is only made possible with enslaved labor,nsd people are his own children. the level of self-denial that was cessary to sustain this fantasy is striking. but it is striking and important to pair the genius of phyllis wheatley is an incredible achievement, inspired by this classical learning with the

hypocrisy of the founders who recognize the hypocrisy as a form of avarice in classical terms. adam: this past weekend, we are told, it was peak cherry blossom season. which means thousands of upon thousands of americans are wondering by the jefferson memorial. they passed through the memorial and and there is jefferson's statement. i tremble for my country when i remember god is just. ú,■0fferson himself was well awe of many of the moral compromises and hypocrisies of his generation, of himself. what should we learn from? what you learn from jefferson's self understanding? it was not so much that he was but he was very much aware of it. after thinking and writing about jefferson's self comportment, self constitution, self

understanding, what do you take away from that, how he saw ■ñhimself, and the question of slavery? jeffrey: he had a remarkable caelf justification and compartmentalization. a protean figurevided against what he felt in the beginning. is two justifications for the revolution are at war with each other. fit,liberty and the ancient mytf the saxon path -- past. and when that fails as a justification for revolution it, then he turns his gaze to the universal rights of all humankind. throughout history, both jefferson and his followers have sometimes invoked this exclusionary myths of liberty for white men, and others universal promise of liberty for all human beings. jefferson recognized the hypocrisy from the beginning.

he knew that slavery was at odds with the universalist's impulse. what is jarring about jefferson is the -- is he becomes less ovs lifetime and kind of doubles down on slavery. never justifying it but always insisting it has to end at some point in the distant future that is always receding and the horizon. the trumbull for my country quote comes as he sees the missouri compromise. and says, -- and he sees that civil war is nigh. and is always unwilling to take the steps for himself or for the nation that would actually end slavery. he becomes all the more hypocritical because it is his own unwillingness to give up the lifestyle that leads him not

even to free his own children until his death. he always incests that no generation -- insists no ■generation. he wants a constitutional convention every 19 years. almost suggests the bank is unconstitutional because any death can't be passed on from one generation to the next. yet he passes on crushing debts to his own daughrs and his enslaved population has to be sold on his debts with children separated from their parents because of his own avarice. i think it isgm important to grapple with jefferson, because jefferson articulated the american ideal. in the idea based on government by consent remains the american but his own inability to live up to those ideals during his

lifetime makes him our most conflicted founder. adam: this is peers speculation, but i'm curious. since he spent so much time studying jefferson's education, his self formation, do you suppose his particular education, his moral formation, his philosophy, made it easier for him to live with this hypocrisy or harder? jeffrey: his temperament was averse to conflict of any time -- of any kind. he had a horror of conflict, and a sensitivity to papering over differences with romantic abstractions. he had romantic dreams of the perfectibility of human reason, whereas actual political conflict was a horror to him. i wonder whether, where in his upbringing, it came. he was devoted to his dad who writes in his commonplace book

these excerpts from cicero's consultations to consoleû himself. it is incredible that jefferson's main source of happiness is cicero's manual on grief. he is trying to give himself consolion at the loss of his father. what was his relation with his mom? he almost never referred to her, except for a chillingly coldrefe died. he wrote to one of her relatives and said, my mother, you may have heard, died the other day. crops have been good recently. he papered it over. many have speculated he had an ambivalent relationship with one scholar says it was his misogynistic rage based on the ex milton, which seemed misogynistic. but milton was not knows

if it was that. but i think there was some aversion to conflict that led differences through romantic abstractions. and it was that bad allowed him to live adam: interesting. in this building here, a lot of us think a lot about madison and hamilton. of course, one of the chapters i gravitated towards when i opened the book was your chapter on hamilton and madison, in moderation. maybe one more example. what did we learn about moderation from hamilton and madison? jeffrey: first of all, he has an amazing book about the constitution, for which madison is a hero, and i can't wait to discuss his great book. he is absolutely right to moderation, in moderation is the touchstone of the constitution. you have written great stuff about madison and the federalist

papers as well. wh learned by applying this lens of moral psychology to the federalist papers and the constitution, was that for madison, the constitution was itself an application of the faculty psychology that he had learned at princeton from president witherspoon. suddenly, i understood the federalist papers in a new light as a manual for what matters -- what madison and hamilton called public happiness. what is the connection between personal self-government and political self-government? whading this moral philosophy. madison learns from witherspoon that just as then faculties or e reason in the head and passion or emotion in the heart, and desire in the stomach. so does the nstition of the state mirror these faculties with energy in the executive, tempering in the senate, and

desire in the house. for example. and madison brilliantly goal is to achieve the same harmony and balance and tranquility in the constitution of the state that we achieve in our own souls. that is why the whole system is designed to slow down deliberation. to prevent our immediate impulses so that we conserve our long-term interest. the definition of virtue for both, on the personal and political level, is essentially impulse control. resisting our immediate emotions so we conserve our true and tantial happiness. that is why it is so significant to realize that the definition of faction in the federalist papers is an argument about the importance of the primacy of a reasonable fatback -- passion.

fashion is any group, a majority oron devoted to self-interest rather than the public good. that is by madison says in all large assemblies of any character composed passion never fails to rest, even if every athenian had been socrates, athens would have been a mob. these are familiar quotations from the federalist papers. the antithesis between passion and region -- reason, which is ubiquitous in the papers, i came to understand is rooted in this moral psychology that also is applied to individuals. there is a seamless connection between the moral and political psychology of the ancients rooted in pythagoras, applied by aristotle and cicero. and it was just rediscovering the private happiness that helped you see it in a new light. this is why all of the

authorities say that the primary goal of this state is public happiness, which is the primary duty of leaders as well. and that is why the federalist papers are a manual for blick happiness. adam: the natural place to transition is what this means for self-government today. madison's system, the constitutional system, was one where he said, it is government fit for men who are not angels. the idea that ambition will counteract ambition. that is because we have the system of checks and balances, that is what is going to create moderation in government. it is not counting on individuals to be moderate, but it is a way to take a moderate politics and a channel it into something recei. what does your book or the lessons that you explain in your book, what does that tell us in

america today? jeffrey: it is both. you are so right to pick the famous ambition counteracting ambition. which is an application of the theory of what hamilton calls the counteracting passions. are these various unreasonable passions, and by clashing against each other by creating institutions that separate andensure no reasonabln too quickly prevail. although madison does not assume angels, if men were angels, no government would be necessary. but without some virtue, government would be impossible. th■be is asicitizens to devote o the pursuit of virtuous self-mastery. withouthat, then the whole premise of the federalist papers, which is to test the pop -- the proposition that it is possible to rule by reason and ■r■conviction, not by force or

violence, collapses that is why madison is struggling at the end of his life with how to achieve public happinessmz through the education of public opinion. and he is now reading condor say, which he gets from a trunk of a books that jefferson sends from paris. he is struck by the idea that a new class of enlightened journalists will come up by slowly diffusing reaso(?n throud other media -- and other media technologies, allow citizens to educate themselves to absorb complicated arguments, to deliberate with each other, and with their representatives, so that reason rather than passion can prevail. that poses some grave challenges for us today. because it is obvious that the republic!÷ of instagram or x, fr whatever it's called, or facebook, is the opposite of the republic of reason that madison envionalthough the system is ded

to ensure we don't put all of our hope in the individual virtual -- virtue without some degree of a willingness to resist an immediate impulse on the part of citizens, they will fall prey to demagogues. that is why the grave threat of the federalist papers is always that citizens will not find the virtuous self-mastery to resist the important nations of flattering demagogues. that they will surrender liberty for cheap luxury. and that the republic will fall. that is why the combination of media technologies that are sleeting up deliberation and amplifying the voices of anger and reason, along with the political polarization, which is leading leaders not to achieve moderation and compromise, but to play to their base and enrage to engage, is such a great threat.

adam: speaking of social media, we are still welcoming questions on twitter p thank you very much. same medicine has said, we need checks and balances because men are not angels. he is the same madison who wrote that republican government presupposes certain virtues more than any other form of government. i think your book is a contribution to relearning that part of government. as i have been thinking through similar themes, i tried to focus not just on virtue across the board, but on virtue and the particular parts of government. what makes a virtuous judge versus a legislator, versus president. i was so struck by your discussion of washington, and this ambition, this often frustration that really did mark him, it probably both made him a great executive and also, if he didn't get it under control, his undoing. he ultimately was a great

president because he was able to bring these things under control. how do you think about his virtues in conjunction with the particular parts of government? put it this way, since he spent so much time so -- time studying the supreme court, here, if you had to pick one for judges to think about, what would it be? not to put you on the spot. prudence is a fine virtue. it was striking that it said that only old men should serve as judges, especially in death penalty cases, because they alone have known the joys and challenges of raising children. and adams has that amazing passage where he is looking up at the portraits and says only sad men should be legislators. emily idea -- adam: legislators in this town

are pretty sad, actually. jeffrey: and many are pretty old. the idea -- and of course, the virtues are all part of a family soul. it's not like one can be exalted over another. the idea of moderation, or pressing a particular vision of the constitution over a others, rather than recognizing that as justice holmes said, the constitution is made for people with fundamentally different points of view, suddenly helps us understand why hol and the famous quotation from learned hand that liberty is the spirit which seems -- now that you mention it,

think of the epitome of a judged we now have a country where executives are old and judges are young. i amure what that means. one of the criticisms of our book is you are focused -- surly they were not stoics. >>urgently and weren't to

recognize that all of the traditions on which they rely, no contradiction between christian and stoic wisdom -- the criticism comes from theocrat's who insist we and the founders intended to embrace a vision of christianity and this is completelynthe beef comt from thomas jefferson's understanding of the pursuit of happiness.

it is very important to recognize that the greatest and most celebrated of their time all saw no contradiction between christian thought and reason.tht be achieved by reason and reflection, not your authority or religious dogma, and all of the founders -- some who became more practicing of christianity

-- all reject what jefferson called the monkish superstition that would takeas< founders all believed we have to be free to speak as we will. that is both unconstitutional and a violation of the freedom of conscious tohat truth on anyone else. that is the purpose of the establishment because. why is it unalienable? powers of reason are inherent in who we are and i can't surrender to you my power to control my thoughts and beliefs. it is important to stress that

the virtues are jumping off the four classical virtues and not the three of faith, hope and charity. this was not a coincidence because they believed everyone should be free to worship as they please. it is a complete misreading of the founding them understated the role of faith or overstated the role of stoics. that's why all of the christian to cicero. adam: to be fair, the founding generation was christian. i do wonder if it was needed to

swformtu there is this question. ■x, the structure of government. it will he, they did seem religious formation.some >> absolutely. without religion they said morality is impossible. it is important to recognize all of theseqm see the pursuit of happyness as a spiritual quest. the agents believed in a duty to align yourself with the divine.

it wasiw so for me to see the connections. adams was so excited when he learned pythagoras might have read the hindu and adam sees the connection between eastern and west and wisdom. they talk about the notion that only by abanning attachment to the external results of our action can read -- brandeis also recognizes the pursuit of happyness is a spiritual quest

and that the founders sawopportl quest. the question ofúá this is serious. itf/as definition of the action pursuit of happiness in order to s interests. he thought the main thing was the spirit of religion. the question of whether the decline is an important contribution to the abandonment of the traditional definition and substitution is a serious question. adam: to be fair, one can make the mistake and assume only

religion will implicate this. your study reminds us that it is more than just religion. focus on education. one of the things that deserves greater ati fact that they were formed by communities, they came up government at the local level. one other thing i thought of was how virtually all of the figures you study were practical. they hadgovernment, being profel philosophy. hamilton was a lawyer. adams, washington and jefferson

were planters. çy■q businessman. son might affect police practical -- i wonder how much the fact that they had practical lives in might have needed the formation. i sadie ette someone who runs a number off it. maybe there is something about practical careers outside of t have helped with the formation. what is so inspiring is it is a philosophy about how to live.

franklin encapsulated it. united all of the education was the take away of the pursuit of virtue is a daily practice that requires daily habits. they are assessed with schedules. they get]>■ up at the same time. they are mindful about what they eat. they are looking to thgrtnot foe meaning of life but for practical advice of how to live.

d ancients and you just want to get up earlier. adam: is this a guide for achieving greatness? all of the figures in your book are great men and women but most turn out to be great leaders. what is there to be learned for aspire to that kind of greatness? those who want to live their lives? is this for them?

it i us that are struggling to achieve happiness. the most liberating take away i got is the power of deep reading. a habit i took away from covid and it just blows my mind that i was able to write the whole book sitting on my couch atbecause ae world are now online. when a kid i went to the library of congress and i was so filled with wonder that all of the books were therenow they ar. all i needed to do is have the self-discipline to read them.

so it's about politics. disease. it's very liberating. it's a right and opportunity. constantly blaming others others in doing the things, just

looking inward, touching and growing is a very liberating act, especially now. it's meaningful to see people rediscovering the hats o reading, people were younger recognizing how this can help us. none of us will be founders. we all have the ability to get tterveryay. cox with regard to technology, you can read all this on our phones. once you shut off notifications,

i wonder if you are being too easy on technology. on the one hand you are right, shirley it's impossible. thank twitter did not exist when alexander hamilton was alive. for making it so much harder to what you describe in the book. what else has contributed to the decline of thist of happyness ad beyond? >> technology is making it so

much harder. when john adams wanted to make all offices hereditary. that is how concerned he was. it boggles the mind. technologies reward attention seeking and outra algorithms are designed to feed on those requires unusual level of reading projects to practice this. let's ask ourselves. the understanding of happiness to be transformed greed is good.

let it all hang out. why it happened, i don't have a clear answer. david freud and the substitution. i am struck byn the algorithm is

incentivizing us to be consumers. there won't be a single explanation for culture is crucial. go out and get angry. be angry. the rare self righteously you

can declare your lesions. the check to live up to. twitter is like that. your book, i want to say one last thing. your book is lovely and it reminded me that was by the judge and it's a book about solitude and the need to go out of your way and find solitude. self-government.ok

i want to open up the floor to questions. if you have a questi■, raise ha. >> i was just curious about the book you read, did you have a particular favorite? so widely cited. in terms of a practical how do i live, he was not central to the major founders. washington. for anyone looking for ramp.

>> for all of the books. was there one that surprise you? was it something you did not expect at all? you were surprised but as you got into the process, what caught you by surprise? >> it was surprising to learn that he relied on the second treatise but human understanding. and samuel johnson has two definitions.

desire rising to see francis hutcheson to find an unalienable right. i was always looking. move whelan eight or surrender certain rights in order to get greater security. property is valuable. jefferson leads property out of the trilogy. it was a substitute but what i learned is it's

inalienable right and that is why jefferson included the pursuit of happyness. at all just comes from the primary text and it is so exciting, you could find the phrase, it's so marvelous. >> maybe not? both the friends and critics tend to read the founding moment as a moment of discontinuity. your book seems to make the case

as an opposite. how would you sge might change the narrative in order to emphasize the dimension of continuity? jeffrey: that is such a great question. the discontinuity was the promise that it could be based on reason or reflection. that experiment had never been tried. the idea itself was not radical.

it was an affirmation of the shining power of the individual which all traced back to the ancients. it's important themselves did nt locate this in a single tradition or religion or philosophy and they saw the connections and they were deeply ecumenical. they saw a spiritual quest but the shining faith in the individual which was liberal and american articulated in the declaration and is still being made more perfect traces itself back to the most ancient of al>n

educator. how has the writing of this book shaped your understanding of what you are doing? >> that such a meaningful charge admission to have been created by congress to be the only center in america to bring together different points of view. washington says the republic will fall on less citizens can educate themselves in the principles of liberty liberatioo they can practice them, understanding how deeply the founders believe that the system would fail unless we can find

these virtues. itakt all the more meeting to try and model these habits through the podcasts and town for these wonderful classes we are so excited to offer and push out. in these polarized timebe a beas we can thoughtfullyly disagree n about the most serious matters, it is made me an evangelist for e powe of deep reading. we are putting many of these online and mostly to share the

excitement and film and that comes from deep reading and listening. >> let me continue without. your book is not abstract. your explaining this in light of specific people, their words and what they did. it seems to me today it's important to have examples. things to me as one of the best developments which is justice sotomayor and barre doing public speaking together. everyone reads the disagreements and we see them on the bench talking, disagreeing. agreeing. scalia and ginsburg did this. there that

exemplifies the best parts of civic life? who can we look to as good role models? who are the good role models? who embodies these lessons? >> absolutely. it is sol. the chairs of the national constitution center joined together for discussions and show the discussions our differencesphilosophy rather ths helped citizens understand what a clash of personalities but principle. that is w we are trying to teach methodologies for

constitutional interpretation in middle school. a radical idea that seems te working. when you can listen to the arguments on both sides and read the opinions before making up your mind, that is the model of the way things are supposed to be. >> and some of this, i wanted to go to's gail and happiness and how it's being preserved. are they keeping the rights for happiness and keeping it from

keeping it from any laws. you're supposed to be self-governing locally. eighbor. there was not one hour services. cal level as much as a national level. it gave, how should we understand this relationship?

>> my next book is about how the debate between hamilton and jefferson defines american history anessential debate is national power versus states rights. the antithesis support liberty. hamilton and jefferson disagree. hamilton is the opposite.

he thinks that we the people have made the constitution that is democracy should be checked and filtered and that is why he is a believer. the debate continues today but there is no that the habits of self governance are >>il take you live to remarks from defense secretary lloyd austin.