Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-20109House OversightEmail

Philosophical inquiry email from Moshe Hoffman to Jeffrey about social science questions

The passage contains no concrete leads, names of powerful actors, financial transactions, or allegations of misconduct. It is a personal email discussing abstract research questions, offering no inves Email from Moshe Hoffman to Jeffrey ([email protected]) dated May 3, 2016. Mentions introductions to individuals named Brockman and Ehud. Lists five broad philosophical questions about morality,

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #028974
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage contains no concrete leads, names of powerful actors, financial transactions, or allegations of misconduct. It is a personal email discussing abstract research questions, offering no inves Email from Moshe Hoffman to Jeffrey ([email protected]) dated May 3, 2016. Mentions introductions to individuals named Brockman and Ehud. Lists five broad philosophical questions about morality,

Persons Referenced (1)

Tags

personal-correspondencesocial-sciencehouse-oversightphilosophyemail

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: Moshe Hoffman (a | Sent: 5/3/2016 4:51:28 PM To: jeffrey E. [[email protected]] Subject: Greetings, Thanks, and Top Five Questions for the Social Sciences (which Martin thought may interest you) Importance: — High Hi Jeff, Thanks again for making the time for me last time you were in town. And for your introductions to Brockman and Ehud. I have enjoyed all the conversations and been learning a lot. Hopefully, a book or two will come out of it eventually as well. Means a lot to me. Martin mentioned that you are thinking about the top questions in various fields and suggested I might think of some of my own and pass them on to you. In case you are interested, I list below the five biggest questions that keep me up at night, motivate my life's work, and which I think ought to keep up every social scientist. Happy to discuss with you, if and when you are interested. -Moshe 1) Where do our moral and political views come from? The bull shit answers most people accept clearly don't fit the facts; we are not discovering moral truths through reason, and our political views are not motivated by a desire to achieve the best policy outcomes. So what does drive these beliefs? And what causes them to have the weird puzzling features they do (e.g., why is a lie of commission so much worse than a lie of omission)? And what causes them to change over time (e.g., slavery has been accepted as moral at many points in history)? And differ across cultures (e.g., ISIS versus the U.S.)? And across person and context (e.g., Trump vs. Bernie supporters)? More generally, we believe and argue all sorts of crap (your vote can make a difference, Jesus loves you, all men are created equal). How do these beliefs and arguments work? Are they just random ideas propagated by an amorphous culture, viruses taking advantage of our own psychology for their benefit, ideas that get us to do the bidding of their cynical designers? 2) Similarly, where do our tastes come from? Like the art we like? Or the music? Some tastes are kinda obvious. E.g., we evolved to like young curvy women because they are the most fertile. And maybe we like art that reminds us of this or of landscapes that are safe or what not. But there are many aspects of art and music (e.g. modern art, rap) that are not universally pleasing. So what makes people like these things? What properties do they need to succeed? What role does the artist or the history of the piece play in what we like? Of course, this question isn't just about art and music, but about all of our peculiar, culturally specific tastes. How does culture shape our tastes? Is it completely arbitrary or is there some logic to its influence? 3) Where do our political and economic institutions come from and what causes them to have the peculiar structure they have?

Technical Artifacts (1)

View in Artifacts Browser

Email addresses, URLs, phone numbers, and other technical indicators extracted from this document.

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Personal email discussing philosophical questions on morality and taste

The passage contains no actionable leads, names of powerful actors, financial flows, or allegations of misconduct. It is a casual academic discussion without investigative value. Email exchange between Jeffery E. and Moshe Hoffman Mentions introductions to Brockman and Ehud Lists five broad philosophical questions about morality, politics, and taste

1p
House OversightUnknown

Extensive manuscript on the evolution of evil and human behavior

Extensive manuscript on the evolution of evil and human behavior The text is a scholarly discussion of evolutionary psychology, neuroscience, and historical examples of violence. It does not present new, actionable information about current financial flows, undisclosed political actions, or novel misconduct by specific powerful individuals or institutions. It merely recounts known historical cases (e.g., Madoff, Nazi atrocities) and theoretical frameworks, offering no fresh leads for investigative follow‑up. Key insights: The manuscript links desire, denial, and brain chemistry to harmful behavior.; It references well‑documented cases (Madoff Ponzi scheme, Nazi war crimes, etc.) without new evidence.; Discusses genetic and neurobiological factors (MAOA, dopamine) influencing aggression.

1p
House OversightUnknown

Moshe Hoffman's email outlining five philosophical questions for social science

Moshe Hoffman's email outlining five philosophical questions for social science The document is a personal email containing broad, speculative questions about human behavior, culture, and academia. It does not mention any specific individuals, institutions, transactions, or alleged misconduct, nor does it provide actionable leads for investigation. Key insights: Email sent by Moshe Hoffman to Jeffery E. on May 3, 2016.; Lists five high‑level research questions about morality, taste, institutions, theory of societies, and academic incentives.; References informal contacts (Brockman, Ehud) but provides no substantive details.

1p
House OversightUnknown

Personal email discussing philosophical questions on morality and taste

Personal email discussing philosophical questions on morality and taste The passage contains no actionable leads, names of powerful actors, financial flows, or allegations of misconduct. It is a casual academic discussion without investigative value. Key insights: Email exchange between Jeffery E. and Moshe Hoffman; Mentions introductions to Brockman and Ehud; Lists five broad philosophical questions about morality, politics, and taste

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Deep Thinking – collection of essays by AI thought leaders

The document is a largely philosophical and historical overview of AI research, its thinkers, and societal implications. It contains no concrete allegations, financial transactions, or novel claims th Highlights concerns about AI risk and alignment voiced by prominent researchers (e.g., Stuart Russel Notes the growing corporate influence on AI development (e.g., references to Google, Microsoft, Am

283p
House OversightMar 3, 2017

Paul Krassner interview mixes satire, Trump anecdotes and historical claims

Paul Krassner interview mixes satire, Trump anecdotes and historical claims The passage is an informal interview that offers colorful opinions and unverified anecdotes about Donald Trump, past presidents, and media figures. While it mentions potential misconduct (e.g., alleged book‑sales manipulation, hired actors at rallies) it provides no concrete evidence, dates, or transaction details. The content is largely speculative, anecdotal, and already public, limiting investigative value. Key insights: Krassner alleges Trump bought 20,000 copies of his own book to secure a NYT bestseller.; Claims that Trump’s 2016 rally participants were hired actors (≈50).; Mentions possible Russian ‘useful idiot’ link and compares to J. Edgar Hoover blackmail tactics.

1p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.