Podcast Summary:

Philosophy For Our Times – "Should we be transgressive? The limits and potential of transgressiveness"
Panelists: Catherine Liu, Rowan Williams, Josh Cohen
Date: January 6, 2026
Host: IAI (Philosophy for Our Times Podcast Team)
Duration: ~45 minutes of core discussion

Episode Overview

This episode interrogates the role of transgression—breaking with norms, rules, and conventions—in personal virtue and collective social health. The panel explores whether transgression is vital to flourishing societies or whether it risks descending into empty rebellion and destructive behavior. The discussion spans psychology, religion, politics, and the evolution of cultural norms, engaging with the tension between necessary dissent and the fetishization of rebellion.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. What Is Transgression? (04:13–06:18)

• Definition & Confusion:
  Rowan Williams emphasizes the need to distinguish between “transgression” and “sin,” and between breaking convention versus self-destruction:

  “Transgression, clearly there is being used in the sense of the unconventional rule breaking behavior that projects us from one frame of reference into another. … the confusion there is between transgression and sin, that is a real distortion of the integrity of an acting subject.” – Rowan Williams (04:13)

• Social Context: There’s debate over whether acts of transgression benefit society by unseating authoritarian norms or merely indulge self-destruction.

2. Transgression, Virtue, and Human Flourishing (06:18–11:27)

• The Role of Challenge:
  Rowan Williams contends that challenging conventions can be positive if it means escaping destructive patterns, but that the purpose and context are crucial:

  “Virtue in our complicated time… requires a bit of edge, a bit of provocation, and is arrived at through struggle…” – Rowan Williams (05:29)

• Transgression vs. Compliance:
  Josh Cohen warns against a false binary—suggesting that transgression and obedience are deeply intertwined, referencing Freud's notion that guilt can precede crime (06:35):

  “…transgression and obedience are in a kind of complicity with each other.” – Josh Cohen (07:56)

• Limits and Humility:
  Both panelists note that healthy transgression requires self-awareness and humility:

  “Can transgression be vitalizing and healthy? It can be if we recognize its limits.” – Josh Cohen (09:55)

3. Psychological, Political, Cultural Frames (11:45–17:43)

• Psychoanalytic Perspective:
  Catherine Liu explores Freud’s “Civilization and its Discontents,” noting both the necessity of limits (like the incest taboo) and the dangers of their fetishistic transgression. She critiques the elevation of norm-breaking in post-1968 liberal culture, using academia as an example:

  “There has been since 1968, an institutionalization or even sacralization of transgressing norms. … And this has been very, very hubristic…” – Catherine Liu (11:45)

• The Fetish of Transgression:
  Liu critiques the valorization of transgression in elite liberal spaces, arguing that it is divorced from mass politics and is now most “transgressively” embodied by figures like Trump (14:45):

  “The real transgressors of a liberal hegemon as we know it today is the far right. And Trump is transgressing every single norm…” – Catherine Liu (15:19)

• Cycles and Exhaustion:
  Liu expresses skepticism about “cycles of history,” arguing instead that the liberal focus on pluralism and individual experience undermines collective purpose (16:55).

4. Transgression’s Internal & External Dimensions (18:59–23:25)

• Superego and Ego Ideal:
  Cohen explains that the superego (internalized authority) is being replaced by an “ego ideal”—the demand for limitless self-betterment reinforced by neoliberal culture:

  “We live now more under the tyranny of … the ego ideal. … It says you can. You can overcome all your difficulties, all your anxieties.” – Josh Cohen (20:10)

• Freedom and Limits:
  Rowan Williams, drawing from religious thought, argues that genuine freedom is only possible with limits; law should harmonize, not constrain:

  “There is a way of living truthfully, and there's a way of living untruthfully. … Living truthfully is precisely living with an awareness of your limits in a complex world.” – Rowan Williams (23:41, 25:14)

5. Political Dimensions: Neoliberalism, Polarization, and Elites (27:49–31:16)

• Abandonment and Hubris:
  Liu links the rise of MAGA and far-right movements to abandonment by elite liberal institutions, noting the material deprivation and spiritual alienation of the working class:

  “There is no MAGA without, I think, a liberal hubris that we've all been talking about…” – Catherine Liu (27:49) “…every time a professor or left-leaning academic speaks, they think they're speaking to the entire world. … You're absolutely not able to actually speak to communities, constituencies, much less to the working class.” – Catherine Liu (29:08)

• Intellectuals and Leadership:
  She trenchantly critiques boomer/1968 radical academic culture and points to a lack of understanding of democratic vs. intellectual leadership (31:55).

6. Disruption, Dissent, and Constructive Transgression (33:53–36:57)

• Disruption vs. Transgression:
  Williams distinguishes “transgressive” from “disruptive,” using civil rights movements as positive examples of non-violent, purposeful dissent:

  “Look at the civil rights movement … various kinds of nonviolent protests that have actually taken us forward. Transgressive, the word doesn't sit very comfortably. Disruptive, sometimes denying the rule of law. No, because exposing yourself to the way the rule of law may clamp down on you…” – Rowan Williams (33:53)

• Performative Radicalism:
  He warns against taking “argument” as mere position-taking or heroic performance, echoing the problem of empty and narcissistic radical gestures.

7. Motivation: Rage and the Public Sphere (38:29–47:29)

• Rage as Motivation:
  The moderator and panelists explore anger as a motivating force for political transgression, suggesting that it is often a response to abandonment rather than pure virtue (38:29–39:27).
• Telemachus Complex:
  Cohen introduces the “Telemachus complex” (from Massimo Recalcati): the desire for adults (authorities) to restore order.

  “He calls it the Telemachus complex. … Not we stand against you … but … you've abandoned a kind of lawful, stabilizing space and we need you back to restore it for us.” – Josh Cohen (39:27)

• Critique of Romanticized Naturalness:
  Cohen argues against the Rousseauian fantasy that morality is alien to our ‘naturally good’ selves—limits and repression are internal and constructive.
• Blurred Public/Private Boundaries:
  Liu reflects on how social media encourages externalizing private emotions as public performances, producing a superficial, commodified “acting out” rather than genuine communal politics:

  “We have prized and fetishized the dissolution of the boundary between the private and the public, between the subjective and the objective. … We live in a culture of superficial confession and superficial action.” – Catherine Liu (44:53)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the fetishization of transgression:

  “There has been since 1968, an institutionalization or even sacralization of transgressing norms. … And this has been very, very hubristic…” – Catherine Liu (11:45)

• On healthy challenge vs. self-destruction:

  “To say that transgression in that sense was necessary … would be to say that at some point it's good for us to be self destructive. I think that's rubbish.” – Rowan Williams (04:13)

• On transgression’s limits:

  “…the barrier that seems to be transgressed is perilously close to the authoritarianism that it wants to be transgressing.” – Josh Cohen (00:19, 09:05)

• On ego ideal and neoliberal self-optimization:

  “It’s the sort of the attitude of the positive thinking guru, of the personal trainer who says, you know, you can do another 12 reps if you just try.” – Josh Cohen (20:10)

• On academic performativity:

  “…every time a professor … speaks, they think they're speaking to the entire world. … there's this heroics and you're always thinking you're transgressing with regard to a power and you're absolutely not able to actually speak to communities, constituencies, much less to the working class.” – Catherine Liu (29:08)

• On restoring boundaries:

  “The idea of making the space for a rational, communal, collective action means that we have to restore the public private boundary. … You don't need to say everything you're thinking.” – Catherine Liu (46:10)

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Defining Transgression & Its Confusions: 04:13–06:18
• Complicity of Obedience and Transgression (Freud): 06:35–10:42
• The Dangers of Fetishizing Transgression (Liu on Academia & Trump): 11:45–15:19
• Cycles of Rebellion & Liberal Exhaustion: 16:55–17:43
• Internal (Superego/Ego Ideal) vs. External Constraints: 18:59–25:14
• Neoliberalism, Elites, and the Working Class: 27:49–31:16
• Academic and Leadership Critique: 31:55–33:49
• Constructive vs. Destructive Dissent: 33:53–36:57
• Rage, Telemachus Complex, and Authority: 39:27–43:43
• Social Media, Public/Private Transgression: 44:53–47:29

Tone and Language

• The conversation is dense but clear, blending analytic reasoning with passionate critique. Panelists are occasionally humorous (Liu: “I blame hippies. Sorry. And just say, like, we’re at the vanguard. The vanguard of what?” – 33:40), incisive, and often skeptical of easy solutions.
• Disparate perspectives are encouraged, and speakers maintain a convivial but critical dialogue, with frequent references to classic philosophical, psychoanalytic, and sociological texts.

Conclusion: Core Takeaways

• Transgression for its own sake is empty; context, purpose, and community matter.
• Societal health isn’t predicated on constant rebellion, but on discernment, humility, and the willingness to challenge when necessary.
• Dissolving all boundaries—between public and private, virtue and vice, individual and collective—risks undermining both meaningful dissent and common purpose.
• The panel collectively warns against the commodification and performance of transgression, calling instead for an ethical, communal, and reflective approach to both breaking and remaking norms.