Author which is out this week. There be a link at the bottom of your screen and i know most if youve already to preorder the book, thank you so much. But if you want to purchase your copy, its right on the screen. He isnt off at columnist for the new york times. Hes currently a commentator on news hour and all Things Considered with the meet the press, hes the author of several books. Most recently the Second Mountain a quest for moral lif life. Both of which were near times bestsellers for going to hand it over to them in just a Second Period after a couple minutes were going to open this up to q a. So if you have a question you can go ahead and write in your question in the ask the question box which is of the bottom of your screen. So without further ado, rabbi jonathan and david brooks but thank you so much. Host david really didnt . I will do some questions in a backandforth conversation. I was like to start out with the most broad first question. And that is, you have written 30 books. This is a person called morality, what took you so long . [laughter] some sense morality is a subject of all of your books. But why, what subject in this broad topic grabs you right now . Guest what happened, david . What happened is for the first time i became aware of the extent to waste western liberal democracies, america especially had just lost the plot. It seemed to me that the kind of free societies that were primed and conceived by john milton and john locke on the 17h century and by washington and jefferson and the who wrote the federalist papers, the more like glee, they understood that you could not have a free society. That was not also a moral society. A society which people accepted collective responsibility for the common good. In which they say in effect we are all in this together. That was an absolute gift. And then i started looking at the weird things that were happening in britain and america. The loneliness, the isolation, the depression the economics the identity politics. The fake news in the post truth and they cancel culture and the socalled freedom and universities. All of really, really horrendous phenomenon. I was pretty sure these were not unique phenomenon. They were all symptoms of a single thing that has happened to us. What i call Cultural Climate change. Somehow or another, in the 60s, 80s, 90s we decided to outsource morality. To the market on the one hand, what shall i do . What can i buy . What can i afford . And the consequences of my choices i outsource those to the state. If i make bad choices, and the state will step in and cure me of my addiction or obesity or whatever it is. So i do not need to worry about personal responsibility. I dont need to worry that there may be certain things i can do, that i should not do. That means we have a society built on two arenas of competition. Competition for wealth, and competition for power. We have lost the arena of cooperation that used to be the moral bonds. Always i grew up in a moral britain in the 1960s, very moral britain. And all the sudden, i just noticed it had gone. Sue and i would say, Teach College sometimes. And i dose is not my students are bad people but they have not been given a moral vocabulary. Even the words and if you ask what the word sin means, you cannot get a straight answer from people they dont have any conception of how to use that word or even character. Im so comic is one explanation, i dont know if its yours, is of course avoid said markets markets in stateless were hundreds of years. But they were counterbalanced by the soft morals and culture. In the u. S. I guess the uk the cult mainline protestant is a period its a slow weathering of religious institutions and their influence that is not been replaced by anything. Is that your basic interpretation . Guest thats absolute correct. I know in the states have been conscious of the Fastest Growing religious affiliation is none. 30 of young people identify as of no faith. But even the states is far, far more religious than britain which is almost completely secular. Religion does not have a voice, it does not have a presence. And religion was the basis of that morality. That was so very british. Its an astonishing thing when you go back and read george in the 40s talks about britain as a gentle crowd. [laughter] , peoples manners. You know all those, who is a gentleman thief i cannot number what his name was. I was once in israel. There was someone who did not like the british very much. But it said to me with a little wistful smile,. [inaudible] i took it for granted that brits are gentlemen. Or they are ladies. And of course not always in the way in that jane austin portrayed them. But all of them had a very strong moral sense. George elliott had a strong moral sense. Dh lawrence did in so on. And so somehow or another, that was just part of the culture in which i grew up. It was based on the church. You know, if there was one thing people in britain did, it was that they sat around the table midday on sunday. And they had their sunday lunch. Today, only a small minority of people in britain actually have a dining table. You know, they take something out of the freezer, they stick it in the microwave they put on their lap and sit and watch television. So there is no sunday anymore. Oddly enough, it was all people it was Margaret Thatcher who deregulated sunday. I argued against it greatly. I said this is the one noncommercial day of the week. It is wholly time, it is very important. Its the one time that we all enter on equal terms. Rich and poor it doesnt matter. One sunday was deregulated, sunday at lunch got lost, send a service got lost, the church got lost, and morality got lost. Think it was the rabbi who called the sabbath the cathedral in time. Sanctuary. Host now i get asked this question all the time. Im just curious to know your answer. And the question is can you be good without god . And i doubt religion is coming back anytime soon. , and the way it used to be. But can a culture rebuild a secular morality that really has binding power . Guest yes it can. I dont know if you noticed but i hold religion very, very low profile in the book. Host i did notice. Guest quite deliberately. I did not want to imply the have to be religious to be moral. And didnt did not want to alienate every secular leader of the book. First of all we know that there is something very natural about being moral. Write a wonderful book called the social animal. So you know the whole story about how we have that capacity to form groups, all of which is based on altruism. Its based on working for the good of the group. Even fruit bats are altruistic. He finds in great showing with others because you expect others to share with them when the time comes. To number one its natural to be moral. Number two, it is very easy to get people to be moral. In the way to do so is to empower them. So for instance, you had a fantastic program, you probably still do call teach for america. High flyers who dedicated a couple of years to teaching in schools. That needed an extra lift. I had the privilege actually of persuading when he was Prime Minister to introduce the same project into britain. Now you spend two years of your life working for others and a self sacrificial mode. You are not just going to lift them, they are going to lift you. You are going to be a different person for the rest of your lif life. But weve not necessarily done is to find ways of empowering young people to serve others. In the book you make great emphasis on time which is fascinating to me. And also unjustly social see beds of moral behavior. When the things ive noticed is that there has been some sort of moral shift in the last few years, maybe ten, 1520 years ago, a sociologist named alan wolf published a book called moral freedom. He went on with the u. S. And ask people with their morality was. And basically found individualized morale too, make my own morality i do not judge others. He was describing easygoing relativism is criticized before, but wolf was craving it and easygoing morality. Now, when you go on campus, there is definitely a morality. It is not easy going and its not nonjudgmental, it is extremely judgmental. Somehow that moral freedom has given way to sort of moral, almost intolerance. Do you see that change . What kind of explains that . You talked about multiculturalism in the book, which seems to be a peace of it. Guest multiculturalism is a peace of it. Multiculturalism directly destroyed the conflict of the national culture. It automatically destroyed the concept of a national morality. But one of the things that happened, not just multiculturalism, but the relativism that came in all of the rest of it which was the philosophy of 1960s, is that we had lost any kind of vocabulary. It was a. J. Ayre who said this is good means i like this. And, you cannot argue over tast taste. The end result was that morality was rendered and articulate. Charles taylor wrote a book, a little book called the ethics and inarticulate sleep. So in the end, young people today will feel very passionately about certain things, having no capacity, no common sense to argue rationally and persuade others. What you can do is result of force. Now that i think is horrendous actually. That is the beginning of the end of freedom. Host they do have a very strong sense of idealism and morality is right and wrong. It is based on something. And obviously the orientation for justice is a very strong orientation. It has a real moral content. Yeah. I have occasionally looked at my nieces and nephews in israel. And you are the first thing an israeli child says, at age three, four,. [inaudible] its not fair. This is the first thing in the child anywhere says. Read just babies. Even very, very Young Children have a sense of fairness. And fairness is, the most basic of all moral emotions. Any society that is systemically unfair to any group within it, is going to generate the righteous indignation of virtually anyone who cares. And in that sense, i am completely with students. So its more of the method that you find troubling . Or the shutting down . Guest well morale t is about the exercise of freedom. Youve written about this beautifully. Its about choice its about responsibility. You cant actually make someone good by forcing them to be good. And that of course is what the woke movement is trying to do with trying to force them to be good without any choice in the matter. And of course a great many people have understandings of the issues feel completely inhibited. And we have had very serious reports. Just a month ago when british universities in which a great number of students, around 80 feel inhibited and not able to say what they really feel. And i know that is true in some campuses here in america. So, the way to engage people morally is, come let us reason together. That is what the prophets of israel did. They were quite angry. But they did not say listen to me or else, they said let us reason together. And do you feel like in the prophetic role these days, do you feel society is badly, morally off the rails . Or its not so much . I think it is searching for direction to be honest with you. I think we have failed society. We have not had enough people. Youve been quite brilliant on this. But we have not had enough people talking the talk, walking the walk. And it really can be done, you know. Any story. I used to set up these award schemes to young people to show our community what our young people could do. Too actually help people. Some of the things we did work totally in absolute extraordinary. A young girl brought up a deaf and dumb parents and kids who are going out and spending endless hours with the elderly and so on. It was a hero system. It was not just to make heroes of them but to educate our community as to what is a good life for what you would call the eulogy virtues. Trying to make those compelling. Host yes. Let me play the role of a 25 year old which is going to horrify all the 25 year old in the audience. Doing good work, doing teach for america, with the elderlys all noble. We live in societies that are systemically screwed up in very fundamental ways, both in the inequality and racial inequity they quality and foster. Therefore the task of morality these days is disruption. It is built around the phrase no justice, no peace which we have heard every rally youve ever been too. And therefore the presumption is we need to disrupt in order to build justice. And that is a morality of disruption. And then you wonder how much disorder do we really need in order to create justice . Or does that undermine justice . Were really having a debate on how much disruption is moral. Given the circumstances of widespread inequality and racial injustice. Guest thats a very, very, very good point. Absolutely no doubt we will not write the inequities right now. We are all expected there to be some reform of the banking system. Some reform of ceo pay after the financial collapse of 2008. It didnt happen. In a system is as corrupt today as it was then. Now, the real question you have to ask, as do we have a precedent for disruptive violence . Actually changing things politically. I think what actually change things politically, was a conscience of the leadership. I have no idea what it was like to be there during the great crash and 29. The Great Depression of the 1930s. I had no idea, i have no idea. For me personally, i switch on youtube. In a play that song from that time, buddy can you spare a dim dime. You know, it just tears you apart. And somehow, fdr comes along, and understands the conscience information and does what he does. I was very difficult for him to pull the nation out of a recession is actually very difficult. Ive had not been for the war, when he achieved it . I dont know. It does seem to me that politicians come along with a conscience. And they make a difference. You know, in many ways, lbj was a very difficult man. And heaven knows and all of the rest of it was a terrible stain on his time. But you read his inaugural on the 20th of january, 1965, this declaration of faith in is to be an american. Its about the american covenant that i find extraordinary prehes a politician that didnt happen. And to my mind the one that did not happen but i most regret, was robert f kennedy. I really thought these things through. Robert f kennedy was able to breach the color gap through his friendship with Martin Luther king they were both assassinated, in the same year. We need that kind of conscience back into politics. Its in greatest need right now because not sure violence always helps those people who instigated. Host it would be undiplomatic of me to it mention the American Revolution was a violent step is to establish my countrys founders thought were justice. Host they do awfully well. [laughter] we went let me go into a little of what is in the back you say you dont really make this a plea for religious faith. You dont find faith is necessary for goodness. Im always struck by people spend a lot of time talking about virtue and goodness. Youd think they would be a lot better than they are given how much they talk about it. They are not much better than the average. But you emerge, not reemerged from a jewish tradition. What features of that jewish tradition prepare you to think in this way . But there is a concept, lovingkindness, what are the moral for you personally are the animating moral principles or stories that really have formed the way you think about these . Guest read to the book of deuteronomy. And you will see moses saying one very simple thing. A society flourishes if it is a moral society. If it pursues justice. If it loves the stranger. If it feeds the poor. If it cares for the widowed, the orphaned and so on. All else, forget about. The countrys strength is not military, its not political its not demographic. It is not economic. It is moral. That message is taken up all the way through the literature. Elisha, amos, zack, jeremiah, the most impassioned moral literature in existence. Absolutely and totally extraordinary. I think it is judaisms great truth. And it emerge from the experience of being slaves in egypt. You know what it feels like to be a slave. So dont allow other people to be slaves. You know what the unleavened bread of affliction taste like so dont afflict others. You know the bitter herbs of slavery, so dont allow other people to eat bitterness. I saw this although through my childhood. My grandmother, who could not read or write came from russia , had a wine shop in the east end. In yes she sold some wine, you know, but twice year before the yearend and passover passover shoe give out free wine to everyone in the east end. When anyone came into by wine, she would never allow them to buy wine, she would sit them down, she would pour them out a little bit, should get them to drink and then she would find out. The economic circumstances with the police with the home office and she was quietly a fixer i think an awful lot of jews in their childhood, remember that sort of sense of moral responsibility of being there to help others. As definitive as being jewish was. Host you are a communitarian person and you certainly get that sense of peoplehood down to the centuries through judaism. The other thing you get, my favorite definition of the commitment is falling in love with something in the building a structural behavior around it when love falters. And that jews love god with their kosher rules to keep you in line. There are blessings that you say on almost any occasion. And so, i wonder if those guardrails, those habits, those norms, all of the rituals all of the lighting of candles is necessary to structure a moral life . Solve their rules. Without those structures and disciplines the influence of the market sort of take over. Take over the everyday life. So you say no jewish english philosopher, he was an atheist wrote a book called religion for atheists. And he says, the day of atonement is so good that it is a chain and only happens once a year. Which is a decidedly eccentric thing to say because it is a 25 hour fast and its quite arduous. Why does he say this . Because he says we all know that there are people we should apologize to. But without a date in the diary, we would never get around to it. So what i think is understudied, almost completely neglected and books on ethics is the connection between ethics and ritual. You know, making a habit of doing certain things. You are jewish and about to pray on a weekday, the first thing you do is you give some money to charity. The habit you do it six days a week. So ritual is really important. Weve a little loss appears back even something as small as on the doorpost it marks a transition from one room to another. the lifecycle moments. Become so much richer when they are accompanied by the secretion of thousands of years of ritual, when elaine and i got married all those years ago, marriages and somehow the way things were done in israel in the way that he did things kind of taken over in their spiritual and the result is you are not moving from one empty space to another empty space, Sandra Bullock and gravity or something or other. You are taking your own personal journey along a road with stages where the entire past of your people is accompanying you on the way. I was at a orthodox wedding back when we can do it in person and a former student of mine was with the very brilliant young man and the reception was tremendous, as you know a circle of men dancing over here in a circle women over here and she was in the circle of the men of the groom and they would call us into the circle to leap with him and then proceed and it was a joyous dual gathering and it was a little odd being unorthodox and the bride and the groom saw each other. It does lead to a serious question, one of the reasons people are nonreligious especially among the young in the u. S. And in the uk has to do with a sense that the institutionalized religion basically got the sexual revolution wrong and they have attitudes or did toward sexuality, toward equality with genders that were simply retrograde and lots hundre faitd participation in organized religion and do you think i dont know what its like in the states, i know what its like in britain, as soon as i became chief, it was very clear to me that the position of women within judaism and also to dimensions was really badly unfair, i took it on myself to change that as far as i could, to take it with me on that in a mostly conservative community was not easy but we did it, we really, really did it and everyone knew that i was leading this it was not being asked for, and very early on i was asked to have a meeting with the jewish gays and lesbians, then i was asked to have a meeting with the Orthodox Jewish gays and lesbians and i personally regard those meetings as amongst the most beautiful ive ever had. They said to me, both of them, chief rabbi, you cant make a blessing out of what we do, there are things you can do, you can make sure that your rabbis never say anything derogative from the culprit, you can make sure they are trained to be good counselors because a lot of our members have difficult problem psychologically and i thought they were absolutely correct and it was easiest thing we ever d did, they understood straightaway that we have to be compassionate and open to gays and lesbians and what made that possible was the way that they understood my position, of course the same is true about trans people and someone in whom i did not really know about when i was chief rabbi but i became aware of when i was living in the village when i was teaching at nyu in someone. A lot of these things are obvious, to stand up and to understand the humiliation that is not presentable. The other thing by and large is to be completely uncontroversial. Ive seen in britain who did not make confrontation with the gays and lesbians, the interrupted a sermon in the canterbury cathedral, they demonstrated westminster cathedral with catholics but we managed fine in judaism. I wanted to ask you about isaiah i dont know if you ever met him did you know that. No did not know that. Four days before he died, he asked me too officiate at his funeral. That is an honor. I mean very well. He had an argument that cultures are in commencement, they do not go together, there is certain moral truth that does not fit in so if you have agreed culture that celebrates heroism and glory, that culture is going to be different than a culture that celebrates charity and empathy, then he would say theres all these other moral cultures, its a series of tradeoffs and there is no answer because were always trained to balance competing truths, is that your understanding of morality or does it all fit together in a seamless whole. Totally and absolutely. I thought i was right, the first person really to see this was in his book either or, theyre fundamentally different normalitys, aristotles concept of the great man who is proud and super bf does not fit but more humbling than anyone else on the face of the earth, you cannot put him ill the as a virtue in ethics, it does not exist, there are multiple ethical systems, there are certain universal ethical trut truths, justice is pretty universal, there is not greek justice in hebrew justice, there is justice. But in terms of a human being in one of the characters, its clear that theyre completely different, we are different from aristotle, its a completely different view of the moral li life, the essence of what their value for which his covenant, a group of people to have a clear sense of what is important to them, come together in covenant together. So covenant is not predicated on some ultimate one moral truth that is revealed from on high and applies to everyone. Why would god not do that . Because god enjoys different thats what he makes everyone of us different and when a human being makes many coins in one week god loves diversity. One of the things i read about the book, if you are frame to think about morality in this way and a lot of us have big thoughts even me that if studied, it is nice to not just have it all, you have in more distinctiveness, now maybe we will question it. Now we can move on to questions, one of the first ones is a question i know that its always been a political publicly but what would be some ways to help guard against extreme political discourse to have this return to morality in the last people to fight over. I think the most important thing is to be a role model, to really be open to others, you know, we were talking about him and the first time he came to his house, he said she from my, dont talk to me about religion, when it comes to god i am tone deaf. So he would say im an atheist and i would say fine, lets ta talk, if you can be inclusive embracing serene, gentle, you actually model what you want other people to do and you can without being Party Political in any way say i think the most important quality in a candidate is who will best unite the nation, that the reasonable thing, you dont name names. That is excellent, sort of on the same thread, how divided like the u. S. Are how do we begin to find Common Ground with folks and i went to cotton and a breakfast in the people wont sit around the same table as us. And therefore you have to reach out across the divide. You know there is a writer a professor at nyu who jonathan hite wrote a book recently and his publisher in britain asked me too help write the book and so there was jonathan and myself and it was a very radical feminist and i was a professor of black studies from a British University and i kept saying that britain was irredeemably racist, colonialist and genocidal. So we had 1000 people in this whole and nobody was listening to this guy because nobody wants to be told i am racist, et cetera, et cetera. He was getting angry, use getting the audience angry, i put up with this for 30 minutes and said this is so boring and i turned to him and i said you know what, the law does not agree with you, i was born in another time and place from you, i think i might have came to exactly the same conclusions that you have done so now lets see if i walking together we can find a way forward. This went right through the audience and they suddenly realized what it happened that somebody had broken through this ridiculous divide by entering into the mine of a person that was dismissing the people on the other side and does not always work you cannot rake to the divide and is quite poor and to do so. They have to have certain things regardless of the way that they vote. Youve got baseball, what else have you got, you got you got football. Basketball. Basketball. Chicken wings. Cheeseburgers. Basketball, the agent of political transformation. The next one you said one way to get people to be moral is to empower them, however, many of our socalled leaders in politics finance business are not moral and they do feel empowered, how do we get this people in power to understand that it is only by doing good and being truthful that injustice will happen. We need people in america to hold people to account. It is really quite important and i do not know who those people are, at the moment we know perfectly well and david is not standing example that the people who do this are newspaper columnist, the trouble is the newspaper world has been very divided, i read to new york newspapers throughout this crisis, every single day and i could not tell that they were describing the same universe, is extraordinary but somehow or other, you need a few voices rising above, the trouble is those voices tend to be very engaged in virtue signaling, the oscar ceremony or grammys or whatever it is and virtual signaling kills itself, nobody can take that seriously, i hope nobody takes it seriously. Its just show business under another name or pr under another name, you know it is the real figures and i dont know where they are, i do not know where they are, you need to search for them. [laughter] go on and ask people, who are the wise people in america right now, and come out with a few names. You know. The next one is a question sense people are moved and shaped in the vocabulary, what are the shared stories that we have in the west to help us empower people from the distractive moral good, you addressed this but. Is very simple. It is very simple, i never go to the theater but for special birthday our daughter knowingly better than i knew myself both my wife and myself to tickets to go to the theater, knowing that would change my life, it was about two years ago, what i saw was hamilton, hamilton is a most brilliant retelling of a National Narrative in the last 100 years it is totally and absolutely stunning, so stunning that i cant wait for this pandemic to be over because ive arranged as soon as it is over i am flying to new york to have a cup of coffee with maranda as a political philosopher of our time. , just go on youtube and look at all the american stilt they give their own performance of hamilton, they are they taking the story and making their own, it is beautiful in a weird story to take but it is lovely, and britain we do not really have that but we did have a film director called daniel boyle who did a brilliant performance for the opening of the 2012 olympics which was a joke of an Important Institution in british life, danny boyle is a maranda, it is stunning. Please change the subject or all start singing bits. [laughter] hoanother question kisses for bh of you he wrote a book called the road to character how do you define character and should impact political life. It was based on the distinction between the resume virtue and they make you go to your job and what they say about when you are dead, and that book i thought it was the ability to confront and defeat your own weakness, that we have sins and herself them the ability to work on that sin Dwight Eisenhower had angered and he stayed up nice to make himself a less hateful and angry person and succeeding in creating a character of gentleness really. I think sense that book came out in my last book, its what about defeating sins and loving the right things, the problem with characters motivation, we all know what is right, are we motivated to do whats right, so cultivating the highest, we all love a lot of things and we all know some are higher than others, if we love a lower level above a higher love if we committed a sin and if you tell me a secret and i brag about it at a dinner party i put my popularity above a friendship and thats us and so its more about committing and loving and desiring the highest possible thing, that is what character is. To me what i do and characters about what i am, when i do the right things, i become a different kind of person, that is something that was given by aristotle and very interestingly, judaism borrowed it from aristotle and character which is all about virtue in the classic virtues of temperance, courage et cetera, et cetera, the thing about character, the day my book appeared in britain, there was another book written by the governor of the bank of england during the financial crash his name is melvin king is called writing uncertainty. And then half of the book because you dont rely on mathematical models because those realities are too complicated for the models and the other half of the book, its about a workout that is going on and you left out the really important thing which is character, if youre about to enter a position in in uncertainty you want to make sure your leader and you can deal with the uncertainty, pretty sure, he or she will do the right thing, what if they do the wrong thing, we will correct it fast, character was always important of radical uncertainty and there is simply no way that we can predict what is going to happen tomorrow they are courageous, have integrity and we can face the future without fear. How do we rethink the narrative of the exceptionalism of our nation founded in universe and the exceptionalism of the u. S. And as we strive for individuals, sectionalism, how can we write this framework and still and that we are proud of and things like that i asked the doctor what are you going to test, how fast i can go or how long i can go, i said when im testing, when you get off the treadmill that is when i understood the strength is the power to recover, i dont think the United States needs to say that we are the greatest country on earth, it can say that we were the greatest country on earth but it can say that we have been through really tough times what are we going to recover, recover individually and out of that we will emerge eventually but what you need right now is a narrative with a little bit of humility within it. Thank you both so much, this is so excellent, thanks again for everyone joining and asking questions, just a reminder again this will be recorded and Available Online after words and you can buy the book in thank you to the rabbi and congrats on your book morality. Thank you so much, it was great. Youre watching book tv ansi. Connell , television for serious readers, here are programs to look out for tonight, sarah, and expert on government corruption around the world and an advisor to the u. S. Military in afghanistan, focuses on corruption in the United States and the National Security official Michael Anton offers his thoughts on americas political divide, not Author Interview program after words, fox business host lou dobbs offers his thoughts on president trumps agenda and americas future, that is airing this evening on book tv, find a full Television Schedule at booktv. Org or consult your program guide. Recently on her program after words, he offered his thoughts on what he calls the new face of socialism. Identified and try to diagnose a new type of socialism, identity socialism which is a marriage of classic socialism and identity politics, think of classic socialism as a strategy of marxian division between the rich and the poor loosely speaking is the class divide, for the modern american socialist left the divided society is that but not just that, it is also black against white, its a gender divide, male against a female, to sexual orientation, straight against gay, transgender and also in immigration divide, legal against illegal, one may say while marxist is trying to carve up society into two groups, the left is trying to slice the American Society into different across many different lines, why are they doing this, they are doing it because they think if we divide society in the eight different ways, we can assemble a Majority Coalition of agreed Victim Groups that can come together and take on everybody else, they are trying to get to 51 in the firm belief that democracy itself will legitimize them looting and oppressing the other 49 . This is what they call democratic socialism, its a form of gangsterism. His new book is the United States of socialism, visit our website booktv. Org and click on the after words tab to view this and other episodes of after words