TalkPOPc's Podcast

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions02:20: Power as it relates to art criticism. Kant, Wittgenstein, and the grounds of objectivity05:50: The crisis of criticism. Speculative investment in the art world. 11:00: Standards, economic interests, and changing the way we look at art13:00: The economic pressure to succeed14:00: The Art World and building thought together15:00: Culture vs Economics. The value of "frivolity"19:15: The resuscitation of "looking." Dedication to Art, despite the margins26:30: The fundamentals of creativity: Understanding the scope of the present and crafting difference29:00: False repetition as a consequence of derivative art. 33:00: The desire for novelty40:30: Perceiving the mind of the creator and yourself45:45: The faith in your own intuition. The ability to judge goes beyond ArtSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:45: Where there is power, there's abuse. 03:05: Imbalance of power is inevitable. If we don't share power, we hoard it04:05: Can power ever be positive? To take action, we need power. It has the capacity to create good, but without any checks and balances, it goes too far06:45: Institutional power as a result of individual power. We willingly give up power to the institution09:05: How do we get the power back? Only collectively, large scale efforts can shift the power balance12:00: January 6th as a display of power, even if it's misguided14:30: How can we utilize power to make positive strides of change?17:15: Power-seekers aren't those who should have it. Perverse incentives20:30: Randomization as a potential solution to power hoarding21:15: How do we account for lack of knowledge in the randomization scenario? Town halls, bureaucracy, and trial and error24:00: Advisors as the lynchpins of powerSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:35: Organizing people and how it relates to power02:05: How do we apply knowledge of Foucault to the real world?03:55: Are people hesitant or afraid to use their power? 05:10: There's something in the air, people are aware of power07:20: Personal, individualized power. Being an actor in the world10:00: Cynicism on the rise. When promises aren't kept, people burn out11:30: The pursuit of self-interest, computer science vs. building a new disruptive route14:30: One slip and you're done, losing purpose and stability. What is there to lose vs. cynical depression16:45: The state form of power. Capitalizing on people's fears20:00: The experiences of protesting, solidarity vs. winning22:30: MLK as good, Malcolm X as bad. The idolization of peaceful protest25:45: To change power structures, we organize and develop leadership, the only way to build something big is to start one-on-oneSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:40: Power is and has been based on violence02:15: How do we define violence as it relates to power? Is it purely physical?03:10: Power as better or worse, not necessarily good04:40: The Philosopher King in the structure of power06:00: Can power manifest in a non-violent form?08:30: January 6th and the role of violence to change power structures10:00: The maintenance of power utilizes violence12:20: Is it always bad to utilize the threat of violence to maintain power?16:00: Power structures give groups greater freedom. The capacity to act is tied to power21:10: Why do the little things matter for "big" people? When power scales, you can't take actions with impunity25:00: When violence goes away, are we bound to the structures of power? What are the checks to power?Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:30: What do we think about power? Power comes in many forms, but not everyone is interested in it02:40: Power plays a role in social dynamics. Cultivating a sense of power03:50: Power is situational. Perspective drives perceptions of power05:25: Power is a comfortable place to be. Work, family, and power dynamics07:00: Power on the macro scale. Lack of power on an individual level leads us to ignore it09:05: Where do the relations of power come from? A complex network of variables with microscopic influences11:45: Overwhelmed by powers we cannot control. What can we do in light of that?15:10: The minor things matter. How we treat people becomes practice and changes us17:00: The Romance/Desperation of rural Saskatchewan19:00: Being able to influence your surroundings and "being in the world.' The human thrill of the newSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps: 00:10 Introductions01:00 Thoughts on Philosophy, ethics as a branch of Philosophy02:05 Concern over monetary power, the world our children will inherit03:05 Meritocracy, intelligence, and kindness. The Republic and the philosopher kings and access to virtuous rearing04:15 Exploring old ideas, but leaving room for criticism. We don't live in Ancient Greece05:30 What happens to those without power? In an ideal society, we don't have folks without power06:15 Defining power, thinking about money and the physical world // UBI, housing as a basic right and the power to live freely08:25 Access to new technologies for a just society, but how do we enforce equity we write into law? A central court system?09:35 Suspicion of life-time appointments. Engaged citizenry requires the free-time and space to own our citizenship11:40 Strengthening power by taking it from others. Is power an infinite resource, or is it a zero-sum game?14:30 Elie Wiesel and refusal. We can refuse to grant power to others17:50 Willpower as an internally derived force vs social powerSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10 Introductions01:10 Philosophy and the Lives and Legacies of 20 Unsung Women Who Contributed to Philosophy02:30 What is the nature of power? How does it work in society? Power exists in every interaction03:45 How is power operating in marriage vs the workplace vs government? Consent and systemic control04:55 Leading and following, a natural start to power vs a social invention06:25 How should we think of power in the world? Idealistically, we have a say in it08:20 Have we consented to the constitution by being born into this country? Citizenship and consent, purely by existing here09:45 Institutional power gives us the freedom to fight against it, the right to rebel and its link to ego12:20 "I didn't ask to be born!" and the obligations to live up to your role in society14:30 If power pops up inevitably, should the goal be libertarian freedom?16:15 Retaining the feeling of freedom, ultimate freedom, the power to stop people19:45 What if everyone stopped jobs they didn't like? Waste management as an exploration of freedomSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10 Intros01:10 What do we think when we hear "Philosophy? // Interested bystanders02:00 The nature of power in society // The power of common connection 03:00 Power dynamics as an inevitability, how is power negotiated? Power can be taken away or moved around04:00 Should we want power to be a stationary concept, should it remain dynamic?05:05 What would count as the optimal form of power? How should power be distributed in society?06:35 Small scale: Figuring out how to balance power in individualistic relationships. Can we distribute power evenly?07:50 Family, can we make the power dynamics explicit? Leveraging power underneath the surface09:25 Do we explicitly name power in order to deal with it and navigate? 10:55 Explicit power structure, feeling empowered when power is tangible13:20 What kinds of structures do we want to make? We don't have to replicate what we already know15:30 The necessity of will and means for power16:45 Summoning forth the will to enact power over the world, or the right place, right time18:50 The will to fight all the time. Allowing yourself to play a role in the structure of power22:00 Changing society is changing our understanding of loving each otherSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10 intros01:20 setting the stage and outfit talk01:55 What is philosophy? The thought about thought // Power is ability, the ability to do things and influence03:15 Power and influence, the connection to trust. Influence is capital04:40 The power that worries us, the things out of our control. But is power control, or is it influence?05:55 Social power and raw radical power, the power of ideas08:00 Policy vs culture as they relate to power09:10 Dictatorial influence and cult of personality11:25 Tapping into conservative rage, the idea of America and change12:40 Confidence that shifts towards hatred as an example of power13:40 Positive power in the community, bodega comedy that brings Atlantic Avenue together15:15 How should we measure power? Is it based on the end effects?16:10 Negative power as a "what could happen?" vs Positive power and seeing the beauty17:00 Does everyone have access to power as influence? If you have a role in society, you have power18:20 The power of infants, powerful and tiny tyrants, intention is not 100% necessary19:20 Power vs Obligation. Do others have power over us, or are we obligated to care for someone?21:30 When power is deemed unworthy, we decide to fight against it22:45 Babies are the in-between of influence and nature, but is intention necessary?Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

1:00 They discuss how government censorship, particularly in banning books, restricts access to knowledge and different perspectives, questioning why the government has the authority to control what information people can access or contemplate.5:00 Noor reflects on her opinion about the situation in the Middle East, acknowledging that her views are largely shaped by her upbringing in a Muslim household. They emphasize the impact of one's upbringing and environment on their perspective.8:00 They express admiration for opinionated individuals, highlighting the unique aspect of freedom of speech that allows people to express opinions even if they are poorly informed.12:00 They reflect on the importance of approaching discussions with a rational yet empathetic mindset, suggesting that emotions can be channeled into empathy. 15:00 They discuss the importance of free speech in society, emphasizing how it allows for collective interpretation and the exploration of diverse ideas. They draw parallels to dystopian novels like "1984," where control over speech leads to control over truth.18:00 They discuss the issue of generalization and its impact on hate crimes and highlight how generalizations about certain groups lead to unfair blame and prejudice against entire communities.20:00 They emphasize the importance of courage in freely expressing ideas and opinions, even if they may be wrong, and encourage a willingness to change one's mind. Alex suggests that being wrong is acceptable and that the goal is to reach a consensus or understanding, echoing themes of philosophical inquiry into truth.Support the Show.Twitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

2:00 They reflect on the notion of free speech in their personal life, noting that as Americans, they feel relatively unrestricted in their ability to express themselves. While they believe in the importance of free speech, they emphasize the need for understanding the potential repercussions of one's words.5:00 They highlight the issue of entitlement regarding free speech, particularly noting that disenfranchised communities and working-class individuals, especially people of color, often understand the consequences of their speech.7:00 They discuss John Stuart Mill's perspective on free speech, highlighting its virtues as outlined in Professor Schaun-Kirk's book. Alex questions whether these virtues of free speech remain intact when negative consequences, whether legal or social, are imposed on individuals expressing their opinions.10:00 They discuss how anti-capitalist sentiments may face legal repercussions, citing historical examples like the Red Scare. While acknowledging the potential harm of hate speech, they differentiate between harmful speech aimed at individuals and discourse challenging societal systems.12:00 They the permanence of statements made on the internet, using Kanye West as an example of someone whose controversial remarks, particularly those deemed anti-Semitic, have lasting consequences on his reputation.15:00 They discuss the complexities of social consequences resulting from freedom of speech, particularly in political discourse. While acknowledging the straightforward cases where individuals may choose to leave relationships due to racist beliefs or behavior, they express interest in instances where political disagreements lead to exclusion or shunning.18:00 They discuss the disparity between individuals' abilities to express themselves freely based on their social context. They suggest that while legal consequences for hate speech may be minimal, social repercussions can be significant, raising questions about the balance between allowing free expression and preventing harm caused by bullying or hate speech.22:00 They discuss the limitations of physical spaces for exchanging ideas, noting that public places like libraries often have restrictions. Also, they emphasize how individuals' exposure to different viewpoints online is influenced by algorithms, leading to a skewed understanding of free speech.26:00 Alex introduces philosopher Miranda Fricker's concept of epistemic injustice, which focuses on instances where injustices occur in how individuals are perceived as credible knowers or sources of knowledge. They explain that biases, whether conscious or unconscious, can lead people to view others as not credible sources of information based on their opposing viewpoints.30:00 They discuss the impact of social media and the internet on the dynamics of free speech, particularly among younger people. They highlight the potential limitations of free speech in online environments, questioning whether it fosters the same virtues as face-to-face conversations.33:00 They express concern about the divisive nature of American society, where individuals are often pitted against each other rather than working together to solve common problems. They advocate for a shift in societal mindset towards collaboration and problem-solving as a team, rather than viewing others as adversaries.Support the Show.Twitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

1:00 The conversation begins with a focus on free speech and censorship, prompting them to share their thoughts on whether these concepts are prevalent in society.5:00 They discuss the potential social consequences of expressing differing political views, particularly in the context of the 2016 presidential election.8:00 They discuss the concept of echo chambers in politics and social media, where individuals tend to surround themselves with like-minded individuals, reinforcing their own beliefs and ignoring opposing viewpoints.12:00 They explore the multifaceted nature of the conversation surrounding free speech, suggesting that it extends beyond just legal and moral rights to encompass social dynamics as well.14:00 They discuss how differing opinions, regardless of political affiliation, can lead to further division among people, and how this can inhibit open communication of ideas.16:00 They raise questions about whether our conception of free speech should adapt to different social contexts, noting that discussions about free speech often yield varied conclusions depending on the specific examples and social contexts considered.20:00 They discuss the limitations of the Socratic method in addressing the persistence of falsehoods and misconceptions over time. Alex suggests that societal beliefs may evolve through ongoing discourse and debate, leading to collective agreement on certain truths over time.24:00 They discuss the consequences of censorship -- the phenomenon of cancel culture, noting its evolution from holding individuals accountable to resembling the Salem witch trials, where minor actions could lead to a disproportionate backlash on social media.28:00 They explore the peculiar phenomenon of cancel culture, highlighting its dual nature. Alex questions the ethical implications of cancel culture and reflects on its damaging effects despite its origins in free speech.30:00 They discuss the concept of cancel culture as a form of social censorship rather than a legal one. Alex argues that cancel culture often denies individuals the opportunity to defend themselves or redeem their actions, thus hindering their ability to speak freely and engage in meaningful dialogue.Support the Show.Twitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

2:00 They explore the uncertainty surrounding censorship and the understanding of the First Amendment.5:00 They acknowledge that artists often express political views through their work and note differences in how art is supported in different countries, such as Germany's grants for techno clubs. The conversation touches on the challenges faced by artists in discussing sensitive topics like Palestine and Israel within certain cultural contexts.8:00 They discuss the distinction between government actions that limit speech and actual censorship. The conversation contrasts the situation in the United States, where artists have more independence from state support, with that in Germany, where state support plays a larger role.12:00 They discuss the complexities surrounding free speech in private establishments, particularly in the context of DJs expressing political views regarding Palestine and Israel. The conversation raises questions about the boundaries of free speech in private spaces versus public areas, with a specific focus on where the First Amendment applies.15:00 They discuss the nuanced nature of free speech and the distinction between protected speech and speech that incites violence. While speech is generally considered a safe exchange of ideas, there are instances where speech can transition into action and potentially lead to violence, which is when it becomes criminalized.18:00 They discuss the level of respect for free speech and diverse viewpoints at Brooklyn College. While there's room for improvement in considering opposing viewpoints, they believe that people generally maintain politeness and refrain from being confrontational, though there's a call for a deeper understanding of the other side's perspectives.22:00 Dena emphasizes the importance of actively listening to opposing viewpoints, drawing on John Stuart Mill's perspective. Mill suggests that when engaging with the other side, three outcomes are possible: realizing one's own mistake, finding a compromise, or affirming one's own beliefs.25:00 They reflect on the changing nature of libraries, expressing nostalgia for the days when they were spaces of focused learning and discovery. They lament the shift towards digital devices, noting how people are now absorbed in their own worlds rather than engaging with the richness of books.28:00 The conversation reflects on the importance of understanding and engaging with people from different perspectives, even if they hold opposing political beliefs. They highlight the significance of focused listening and practicing conversations as essential skills for fostering understanding and unity in society.30:00 They suggest that engaging in conversations with others could be more beneficial than protesting or organizing, as it allows for meaningful dialogue rather than feeling like shouting into the void. And they express hope that their conversation may lead to further discussions and exchanges of ideas.Support the Show.Twitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

1:00 They discuss the significance of the arts in facilitating free speech and expression.5:00 They delve into the complexities of humor and artistic expression in navigating sensitive topics.8:00 They ponder the concept of censorship in theater, admitting uncertainty about its bounds as they haven't experienced it firsthand. However, they suggest that modern theater may offer more freedom for marginalized voices to share their stories.10:00 They discuss how individuals edit the information they consume, choosing which ideas to allow themselves to engage with. This selective intake of information, influenced by the online dialogue regarding the validity of certain facts and perspectives, is seen as a form of censorship in the modern era.13:00 Dena suggests that this lack of recognition of what it takes to acquire knowledge contributes to the difficulty in establishing facts. Despite these challenges, she finds value in engaging people in conversation to collate diverse opinions and perspectives on topics like censorship.16:00 They highlight the value of collective engagement in fostering a sense of unity and collaboration, whether in a theatrical performance or an educational setting.19:00 They draw parallels between engaging in conversation and sharing an experience in theater, both involving the idea of coming together to exchange viewpoints and connect on a deeper level.22:00 They explore the difference between being involved in an experience versus merely observing it, and highlight the freedom and lack of defense associated with being a viewer rather than an active participant.Support the Show.Twitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

1:00 They discuss a recent revisitation of a censorship project in light of challenges faced on American campuses. Malka encounters a family member who mentioned students leaving Brooklyn College due to feeling attacked during Palestinian demonstrations, highlighting the diversity of perspectives and experiences among students. 5:00 They discuss the lack of genuine listening and the prevalence of posturing and defensiveness in conversations, both among students and faculty. 10:00 They discuss the issue of feeling unsafe in discussions, particularly regarding tensions between different perspectives.14:00 They discuss the balance between academic freedom and maintaining a safe learning environment. There's a consideration of where the line is drawn between free expression and feeling unsafe on campus, concerning CUNY's Henderson Rules.16:00 They discuss the discomfort often associated with new ideas and the challenge of fostering open-mindedness in students. While acknowledging the importance of broadening perspectives and encouraging students to articulate diverse viewpoints, there's concern about the prevalence of self-censorship and entrenched beliefs. 19:00 There's recognition of the complexity of discussing sensitive topics, such as Israel and Gaza, in the classroom, which can trigger emotions and open discussions about other traumas, such as those experienced by black women. The conversation highlights the challenge of navigating discussions around various social issues and the need for sensitivity and inclusivity in classroom dialogue.Support the Show.Twitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions with Victoria01:50: What does Art do for people? What's the point? Opening a door to philosophy/psychology. Sharing experiences between nations perhaps. 03:55: Art starts in a place, in a culture and is a representation of that. Art spreading allows movement from culture to culture. A transference of knowledge. But now, Art is different than it used to be07:25: American Art, German Art. Do nationalistic identities of Art still exist? Globalization's impact on Art. Peacemaking might not make so much sense if the Art is all the same. 09:45: Western Art and the use of non-Western cultures. Is Art universally communicative but in a not-so-good way?12:45: Rootless individuals, if that's true, what function does Art still have? Where do we go from here? Should we pivot inwards toward traditions?16:00: Art as a marketplace. Perhaps that shouldn't be the goal. Humanist over mercantile goals. 17:00: Religion/Art, do humans have the capacity/responsibility to create in an analogous way to God?Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

00 - 6:55 Vincent and Levi debate whether there are kinds of speech that one should censor. Levi argued that censorship should be avoided in general, not just of government speech but of social speech. After all, people are too sensitive to censorship to ask questions. Vincent acknowledged that censorship is a hard topic these days, citing neo-Nazi rhetoric as an example.6:57 - 23:13 Vincent and Levi discuss the influence of social media. Vincent believes that social media is now international and even global, and everything happens very quickly. Levi agreed and believed that people in different social conditions would have different ideas, censorship cannot stop people from thinking but talking. He believes that what people need today is "the third space," a psychological term that means giving people space to change their minds and reject past ideas instead of always sticking to the ideas they had ten years ago. therefore, people need to slow down and focus, learn from real-life conversations rather than social media, and value feedback from real people rather than Twitter friends.23:15 - 32:05 Levi mentioned his favorite ship theory, which is to gradually replace parts of the old ship and combine the replaced parts of the old ship into a new ship, so the old ship and the new ship may be difficult to identify but are never the same. He compared people to ships, and thoughts are parts, "After traveling around the world, we are the original ship, but it does not mean that all parts are the same. The key is how to update your thoughts, and behavior gives people the opportunity to change ideas." He likes how old Disney movies are mentioned at the beginning as being "not representative of today's culture" because they respect the original and separate it from today's values.32:07 -61:40 Levi came up with the idea that people are reluctant to engage in conversation because it's unsafe to talk in some places, and humor is a great way to solve complex problems, just like Tom chasing Jerry can always make people laugh. Vincent agrees but thinks humor isn't the only way. Then they talked about why people like comedy characters, the possibility of the film Step Brothers remake, and why some comedy shows are so popular, all with unexpected parts and combinations in common.61: 45- 73:44 Vincent summarized the content of this conversation and expressed his personal reflections: Expanding into new conversations is difficult but always rewarding in the end, and personal conversations often turn into larger conversations.Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

00-2:08: Brandl speaks of the general topic of art as epistemology. He asks: What does this mean? It depends on how one defines epistemology; if epistemology is gaining knowledge, you can't interpret art as the study of gaining knowledge - it is not a simple predicate-identity sentence. But why not say that art is a tool for the study of cognition?2:10- 2:47: Shottenkirk laughs and states that he's gotten to the soft underbelly of the problem quite fast! She notes, "I stole that phrase so long ago I forgot a long time ago...I stole it from Nelson Goodman...and I disagree with much that he said although I agree with this." I think it's a kind of epistemology.2:50 - 4:00: Brandl notes that saying it is a kind of epistemology is quite different from his statement that art is a tool for epistemology. Shottenkirk says it is a kind of way of gaining knowledge of the world. But she admits that the phrase "a tool" is probably a more correct way. But then she rethinks that and says: if it is "a kind" that means it is one kind of species among many kinds of epistemologies. But if it is a tool then it is a way one gets to epistemology itself, right?4:01 - 4:42:  Brandl says, "No, a tool is an instrument that helps to achieve certain goals." So, what are the goals of epistemology? Ways of gaining knowledge. Then it is how art can be used to achieve the goals of epistemology.4:44 - 5:25: Shottenkirk interjects that art is a kind of prybar - a tool that one uses to pry ourselves open and make ourselves vulnerable to other ways of looking at the world. Increasing our sensitivities,5:26 - 7:35: Brandl says, yes, increasing our sensibility, giving us different interpretations. Shottenkirk agrees and discusses the role of low-level information. Peripheral vision sets the context for what we focus on, for example. Art is a sensory onslaught that allows us to practice the editing of perception.7:38 - 11:35: But Brandl notes that we can also define epistemology as a tool. But now we have a tool for a tool! Here's a proposal: every tool you can use in different ways - put it to good use or bad use, etc. Shottenkirk agrees. She notes, as a way of socializing us, art makes us understand other people and work in consort with others, particularly within nationalities. This is culture. A way to build knowledge structures.11:40 - 18: 20: Brandl says he is interested in the sociology aspects of epistemology, too. He  Shottenkirk why she picked out  (in the paintings in the exhibition) those four ways of accessing reality in the paintings (Hobbes (violence), Hildegaard von Bingen (transcendence), C.S. Peirce (analysis), Langer (the unconscious)) and then linked them to the philosophers. He asks, the way Susanne Langer picks out how art accesses reality is perhaps closest to you? He discusses other classifications by other writers. He and Shottenkirk discuss it.18:27 - 24:00: Brandl switches to discuss Hobbes and states that he views Hobbes as "philosophical optimist". Hobbes was thinking, "we can fix it - we just need good institutions".  But haven't we all lost confidence in that? Shottenkirk responds and refers to the Hobbes painting and the reference to violence and notes examples in all the arts that refer to danger/excitement. Brandl says what's the message here? He answers, "that's how we are and it won't go away and we are going to have to live with it." Shottenkirk agrees, and notes that art can't get us out of this (cruelty) but maybe it can expiate some of these tendencies.24:01 - 30:57:  Brandl notes that Shottenkirk had mentioned Brandl's paper "The Purposes of Descriptive Psychology", European Journal of PhilosophySupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

00- 1:30: Shottenkirk introduces the project. 1:30 - 3:05: König clarifies the definition of art to be broadly construed to mean culture at large, and Shottenkirk agrees. König then states that she doesn't really know why other people care about art though she personally cares for literature and for her specific gallery program. Art is like food: we need but we do not ask "do you care about food?" This is just part of our life.3:05 - 4:28: Shottenkirk notes that every species care about food but we are the only species that cares about art. König says, "Yes, I think so, too, animals don't care about art." But people consume art. We like it and we need it like food. Shottenkirk agrees that there is a need, and then wonders what it is that we get out of it. König states that before she goes to bed she reads literature. "I live everything behind and enter another universe."4:29 - 10:30: Shottenkirk says, "ok, let's go down that road". We are able to enter into someone else's perspective and that it is empathetic. She uses the example of a book by the Jamaican writer Claude McKay. König agrees that it is the goal of literature. And that brings us into others' worlds more than art. Shottenkirk asks why, and König says it's because it is something one does it alone, and that is something we need. 10:33 - 14:35: An audience member interjects and says, "Chekov says, 'art is the pain, not the doctor.' It means that Art doesn't have to bring solutions, it has to describe the problem." Other audience members add to this thought. Shottenkirk uses the example of McKay's description of having Trotsky say something racist and how that pain that McKay is, on a small scale, inside Shottenkirk's head now. But König disagrees, and says, "But maybe that not as pain but as knowledge." Shottenkirk agrees. And König says, "but it is a pleasure." 14:36 - 23:40: König notes that people do not read as much now. She notes an amazing book by Tolstoy "Aufverstehung". Shottenkirk then states that visual art does the same thing that you can get inside someone else's head. But König says, "I'm not so sure if you can compare them...you start reading...but you can start looking at the painting but you look at another painting, but with the book you must stay in the book for some time." She also notes that contemporary art requires prior knowledge of art. Shottenkirk agrees and asks if it true of literature. König says no. Shottenkirk says she has never heard anyone say that but it seems true, and sad. But König disagrees a bit stating that everything requires knowledge. 23:45 - : König shares a little about the origin of her daughter's name (whose birthday is today) and the literary origins of her names.  König notes that music is a bit like literature as it is easy to "open the door" and enter in to. Yet, still, it requires some knowledge. For music and opera, "you have to tell them the story" and Shottenkirk questions whether that is in art. But König notes that there is in fact a story as it is how the artist came to this point. Shottenkirk agrees, and König states that she always challenges young artists how they are "adding a little piece to art history". It is important that "they all know what has been before." Shottenkirk adds that it is because we are building "social knowledge".  This is why humans like art. We need to empathize in order to build knowledge. König agrees. Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

The podcast highlights the presence of numerous philosophical questions within the medical field. R.P. Brandl and participant Bruendl vegh emphasize their interest in this intersection, noting their journey from contemplating medicine-related philosophical inquiries to their current involvement with the Philosopher's Anthology in Salzburg.Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

1:00 The conversation touches on the connection between philosophy and aesthetics, particularly how philosophers discuss art and define what constitutes a work of art.4:00 They delve into the nuanced ways art and philosophy intersect and diverge in their approaches to reflection and understanding society.6:30 They reference the work of philosopher Thomas Hobbes, known for his exploration of conflicts in society, to prompt a discussion on the role of art in addressing societal tensions.8:00 Brandl suggests that while art can help some people overcome conflicts, others may find solace in different activities, such as sports. He provides background information on philosopher Thomas Hobbes, who believed that humans could find solutions to conflicts through societal arrangements but acknowledged that this optimistic view may not hold in contemporary society.9:20 The conversation shifts to the application of philosophical ideas to music and whether music serves as an exception in addressing conflicts and discomfort.11:30 They highlight the debate within musicology regarding the extent to which music reflects society but assert their belief that societal influences are present in all genres of music, including songs, symphonies, and chamber music.14:00 They discuss the role of art in expressing feelings, particularly feelings about the state of society. Brandl posits that expressing feelings is a key means through which art contributes to philosophy and our comprehension of the world.16:00 They discuss the subjectivity of interpreting artwork and the uniqueness of individual experiences. Ophia highlights Bingen's contribution to music, emphasizing her perspective as a woman, which brought a new dimension to the field.Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

00 -1:38: At the talkPOPc exhibition at the 5020 Gallery in Salzburg, Austria, August 2023, Shottenkirk asks Gauker about his theory of imagistic data and arguments against propositional content.1:40 - 3:30: Gauker begins by saying that he is interested in imagistic content. People's capacity to solve  problems by mental imagery has been neglected in philosophy. Philosophers have tended to think of cognition on the model of reasoning from propositions. But we often solves problems by means of mental imagery. He gives a example of this in solving a plumbing problem, and then the example of putting on one's jacket. But he's not sure if that fact can be used as a tool for understanding art.3:50 - 4:52: Shottenkirk notes that in the plumbing example, we don't need words for these things but we understand it in context. In art, so much of what we experience is of low-level features and we don't have to have words for those low-level features. We understand things things contextually; is that plausible?4:50 - 9:48: Gauker (who prefers the phrase “Gradable qualities” to low-level) gives several examples of how real-world and geometrical knowledge goes into understanding the data that is stimulating the retina, and we don't have words for many of those things. It may be that the appreciation of some kinds of arts that they induce this kind of mental activity and that we find this pleasurable. But he's still not sure if this kind of thinking introduces anything to understanding the visual arts. Often he is just finding interesting the geometrical shapes, etc. Or appreciating a battle scene, etc.9:50 - 11:30: Shottenkirk notes that Gauker has named three different ways one can process work: 1) low-level, 2) depiction or the reference function 3) the narrative. Gauker responds that many people are interested in having an emotional reaction elicited, but he is not in it for that. Shottenkirk refers to problems with the word "emotion".  11:33 - 14:38: Gauker makes the important point that emotion can't be the point to art as that would mean that "we are always interested in ourselves". Shottenkirk adamantly agrees and says that what art does is pull someone else into our world as art gives a first person perspective of the artist. Guaker worries that this commits the viewer to understanding the intention of the artist. Shottenkirk partially disagrees; the meaning of the artwork is only partially constituted by the artist's intentions.14:40 - 16:47: Gauker notes that much of meaning is today dependent on the larger artworld. There follows a back and forth debate about context and meaning and intention in art.16:50 - 45:00: Gauker takes the conversation back to the idea of emotion. Something is tragic because it represents a scene that is tragic; the viewer doesn't have to experience that emotion...just recognize the emotion. Shottenkirk asks him if he can put together that example with the former example of the plumbing problem.  He answer as follows: It's only because you've seen horses and horses move that allows you to understand what's going on in a battle scene picture. Shottenkirk then pushes again, and asks "to bring emotion into the plumbing  example", and then says, "yes, I was watching for that expression that says 'there's no emotion in plumbing'!" She notes that there is pleasure knowing how plumbing is put together - the tactile pleasure. Texture is an important part of peripheral vision. Gauker hesitates, and says that a plumber can do it quite dispassionately. Shottenkirk retorts that there are little micro seconds of good/bad - it is never completely neutral. The conversation continues with them trying to locate the role of emotion in art.Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions01:40: Does Art require cognitive processes? Can't do Art without cognition. Is it a trivial matter, or is it worth discussion?03:00: Cognition is an active process, it doesn't just happen to you. Why do we start to express something? Why is the observer separated from the creator?05:30: The artist vs perceiver. Sometimes they coincide, but can we create without actively perceiving?06:45: Do we think about what we want to communicate with art? Can we create and perceive only after rather than during?09:05: Is there an art "area" in the brain? Has our brain developed a sensitivity to art?12:00: Art in Nature? But that depends on your understanding of Art. Art vs Aesthetic experiences15:15: Do artful experiences need to be beautiful? Perhaps for institutional art, the answer is no. But art in nature might just need it. Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions with Alicia01:05: Art for Alicia, Art influences everywhere. In your soul, in your blood, it's a daily thing, it feeds us02:40: Cinema vs home-viewing during COVID. The atmosphere, the aura is different. The perspective differs.05:00: The majesty of a bigger than life experience. But what does the majesty do for us? Perhaps it's a spark. Transformation through the context of the presentation.08:00: The social experience as a part of consuming Art. Do we need that social exchange to understand what we perceive? The conversation can inform and change perspectives. 10:30: Is Art the product itself? Or is it the product and the institutional presentation of the product? There are lessons to be had. 12:00: A flower in the pot, perfectly ordinary. But in a different context, it's elevated and part of Art. 14:20: Nourishment through Art. Seeing more, feeling more, experiencing something higher. Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

1:00 R.P. Peluce and Miriam discuss the negative impact of censorship, particularly in the context of online conversations where remarks can be permanent and easily accessible. 2:30 Miriam notes the emergence of cancel culture in the age of YouTube and online permanence. Also, she reflects on the illiberal nature of censorship and the importance of liberal ideals in facilitating open dialogue and the exchange of ideas. 3:30 They talk about the struggle to navigate conversations within their social justice-oriented cohort, where dissenting views are often overpowered.4:20 They reflect on instances of self-censorship, acknowledging the tendency to refrain from certain questions or topics in specific social contexts as a means of self-protection.6:30 Miriam reflects on a conversation with a friend who dismissed her experiences living in Africa as cultural appropriation, citing a specific example involving the Masai people in Kenya. 8:20 Peluce ponders how to acknowledge and respect instances of cultural appropriation while still valuing cultural exchange and sharing. They express uncertainty about finding a balance between these concepts and acknowledge the complexity of the issue.Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

0:25 Philosopher Peluce asks participant Mia for her thoughts on censorship.2:24 They talk about the concept of self-censorship concerning government censorship. It suggests that even in the absence of explicit government censorship, individuals may still self-censor due to societal conditioning. The idea of therapy and psychoanalysis is mentioned as a means of "unself-censoring" oneself and discussing topics, such as familial issues, in a safe environment.7:45 Peluce suggests the importance of individuals being able to openly express, discuss, revise, and evolve their beliefs. 12;29 Peluce reflects on the process of socialization, comparing it to the development of a child's ability to express desires. The example of a baby learning to communicate its needs is used to illustrate this point, implying that as individuals grow, they also learn to express themselves more effectively and patiently.16:20 They discuss the concept of self-censorship in interpersonal dynamics versus broader contexts such as government intervention. Mia struggles to think of instances where the government would intervene due to self-censorship. 20:30 They talk about the balance between freedom of speech and setting boundaries on harmful or hateful speech and reflect on the liberal approach to freedom of speech in the United States.23: 20 Mia explores the difficulty of characterizing a category of speech that is harmful or derogatory, particularly concerning race, sex, or religious views.Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions with Hendrix00:50: Is it about the purpose of Art? Defining cognition to boot. 01:50: Art is cognition, especially for the Artist. It comes from cognition. Pollock would approach Art differently from Picasso, likely based on the stimuli in their respective lives. 03:45: Emotion also comes from cognition. How you feel comes from how you think. A dog or a cat person, depending on our judgments, our emotions change. We bring our prejudices everywhere. Except in this case, regarding pet preferences05:15: The way you capture the world depends on how you've seen it and how you've lived, even two close siblings can differ. Art functions as cognition for the Artist as a mix of judgment, emotion and other things. 06:30: For the viewer, Art & cognition stems from a stimulus you pick up from the Art. If a painting strikes you, brings complex emotions, it just might be cognition.  08:30: A Pollock piece brings the idea of being noticed. The chaos of the painting helps to bring out a personal feeling. It's not about noticing the chaos in the image, but instead noticing the chaos within. 10:30: If two individuals had the exact same events happen to them, would they become the same person? Are people intrinsically unique or are they purely formed through experience?Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

talkPOPc Resident Philosopher Dr. Dena Shottenkirk speaks with Danielle at the Center for Fiction in Downtown BrooklynTimestamps:00:10: Introductions01:00: What does Danielle think about Art? Defining cognition is step #102:10: Is Art cognition? Art allows people to process and express what happens inside their brain. It's a tool for the Artist. 04:05: Taking the inner experience and making it evident to outsiders. A 3rd person PoV of a 1st person experience05:30: Art as the nugget of fun for problem solving. Art is a non-stressful way of solving problems, but maybe fun is not part of this06:55: Does non-fiction count as Art? Writers think they're telling you a truth.08:55: Cognition is part of reading. Any new information needs cognitive processing. Non fiction changes your experiences of the world and how you process. Jennette McCurdy's memoir and her experiences as an actor and how it changes a viewer's perspective.13:10: Is Art a kind of cognition? Art adds to the picture. A year-long playlist, songs and connections to places/experiences/time periods. 15:05: Music and smell in particular make us recall time and place, but why? We edit visually, and perhaps auditory and smell don't operate exactly like visual editing.17:25: You don't realize your senses in the moment until they're taken away or significant change occurs18:35: Maybe music makes us remember where our bodies were at a specific time and place19:45: Music places you in ways because it's auxiliary instead of primary. It's a background element. 21:45: Art is inherently connected to cognition. It's how artists process what they're going through, like an external hard-drive. It triggers a process of connection. 23:10: A corny violin at MoMA. Now it makes every violin trigger a memory/idea of cornSupport the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Support the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions01:00: Initial thoughts on Art as Cognition, but what is Art? How do we define it? How do people make Art to show their perceptions to the world? Perceiving vs Thinking02:50: What makes perceiving in Art different from just perceiving? Is Art special? It's intentional to start. Art takes a creative mind04:00: The amount of sensory input from Art makes it different from conversation. There's an activation of the senses that makes the difference04:45: Dadaism and the Fountain. Where's the intention that bridges the gap with Art and cognition? Right moment, right context. Removing the "Fountain" from the restroom makes it different. 07:30: Does Art have to be impractical? Or perhaps not accomplish a specific goal? Art is not about optimization and use, process over end goal. 09:00: If Art is impractical, why do we do it? Why do we seek it out? It's a way of expression and feeling different about the sensations in the world. 10:10: Non-sensational Art. How strongly are specific sensations associated with specific Art pieces?13:30: Some things are done by the Artist and some by the Perceiver. A collaborative form. Almost a conversation between the artwork and the perceiver. 16:05: Reality is constructed, you need context. In a vacuum, things don't work.Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:50: Getting started, how do feel, what are we about, where are we from?02:40: Brainstorming on Art. What is Art for us? From the point of an Artist, we don't think about it and let the subconscious work, or we focus our intentions through Art. 05:00: An experience can stop us in our tracks. We absorb the forms and forget everything else for a moment. What happens in the relationship of Art vs Observer06:30: Art is a language, beyond our written/spoken. It's a language of world-building. We skip the process of translating and overdoing07:40: In the beginning, we think we're an observer, not an Artist, but perhaps there's no true differentiation between the two. Are we all Artists?08:55: The creation process is pivotal. Part of being a creator is deconstructing. It's a healing process of taking away the toxic things we've been taught. When you step into the observer's shoes, you're deconstructing. 12:00: When we process art and make it, we have analytical vs creative perspectives. How can we merge them? 13:45: Creative mothers and fathers. Portals to step through via Art. It's a beginning for others to make their own meaning. 17:20: Artist vs Observer is not a static position. The strongest Art comes from observation. Look within as an observer and create based on those inputs. 20:30: Where does Art come from? Do certain regions exist in the brain that constitute the thinking that drives Art? Genes modify behaviors as seen in other animals, but does this apply to us and our relationship with Art?25:20: Unbroken cultures, the Aborigines and their land. Art as a topographical map and representations of the land over years. Process of communal creation over years. 28:00: Religion and war tend to go together. We make art from ground zero. Beginning again as a regenerative process. Where we're at mentally changes us, does it change our bodies?31:30: The institution of religion is about power, especially in Europe. In other regions, religion is different as a tool to connect and not so much dominate. 34:30: Religious spirituality comes from within, does not relate to power but more so personal growth. It's a language to connect us. Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

In Episode 99, talkPOPc Particpant Estafania Soto Reyes speaks with Resident Philosopher Dr. Dena Shottenkirk about the Theatre of the Oppressed outside of the Center for Fiction and Theatre for a New Audience at Polonsky Shakespeare Center in Downtown Brooklyn.Timestamps:00:10: Introductions01:35: Theater of the Oppressed03:20: Perspectives shift. Certain topics don't work with certain societies. Different perspectives and quality of life. Some things are deep while others are shallow. 06:10: Certain concerns become trivial based on point of view. Does the same apply to Art? Is Art being good or bad influenced by classism?08:55: The culture that is validated is Western. Global Grammar. Regional communities used to produce region relevant Art. Money and Globalization have changed the name of the game.11:40: The movements against classism and xenophobia are starting to wake up. We've still a way to go13:30: How would we do an art story and grant legitimacy to regional dialect? Evaluate yourself and examine your PoV. Is your perspective classist?16:30: How do you make a film truthful and still pay the bills? 19:40: Assimilation and culture. Survival of culture means you cannot assimilate. "International style" forces differences to disappear. Support the show

2:00-4:20: Arliss states that art had two phases:  a hierarchical phase when it imitated music in structure. Like music has a tonic note to it, and art organized itself similarly with composition. But that "was shattered" at the early twentieth century with Kandinsky and Schoenberg who were doing work at the same time, and communicated.  "From Schoenberg came horror music - the kind of music you'd score a horror movie to."4:20-5:50:  Arliss further explains that Kandinsky, before he was famous, was a fan of Schoenberg's. "I kind of think of Schoenberg as being the devil of music, basically." And they had a long correspondence. 5:55-6:13:  Shottenkirk rephrases Arliss's position by saying that there was some kind of shattering of traditional structures, and that Arliss thinks it was a mistake.6:13- 7:23: Arliss states that it was "deliberately a mistake".  Schoenberg knew he was doing away with the structure he was taught. Was it a good thing? "I don't know" - it happened. And much of the art of the twentieth century is born of that shattering. "But it was a piece of a larger cultural movement away from traditional life; structuring your life around a belief in a God... it wasn't an accident that it followed on the heels of WWI."7:25-8:49:  Shottenkirk notes that when she wrote her book on censorship (Cover Up the Dirty Parts!) that this change in art was entirely the result of WWI, but Arliss is making the larger point that the demise of  expected order in art is a broader sociological fact.8:50-11:39:  Arliss gives some history of literature in WWI. On the German side, Franz Rosenzweig wrote the "Star of Redemption" (on Judaism) in the trenches, and at the same time and on the other side Tolkien wrote Lord of the Rings, which is a profoundly (Christian) religious book. It was about pre-Christian people, and about dying. "What Christianity and Judaism sought to do was to preserve a memory of yourself" and Lord of the Rings is about "primordial slush of dying peoples in pre-Christian people" and the "anxiety and angst before Christ visited them". 11:40-11:41: Shottenkirk states that it is not clear how this is a shattering of normality.11:42-12:25:  Arliss answers: This was the way life was organized until Schoenberg and Nietzsche, etc., disavowed God and the organizing principle of art and the hierarchy of things.12:26-13:53:  Shottenkirk summarizes Arliss's points. Before the 20th C: Hierarchy, natural law theory. After the 20th C: it is a horizontal world. 13:53-15:30 :  Arliss expands on the nihilism of the 20th century. 15:31-16:33:  Shottenkirk agrees that art doesn't make up the social world, but it articulates the social world. But asks Arliss about the role of art.16:34-19:03: Arliss argues that we today have this conceit that we are creative, but in truth we today are totally self-absorbed. But in former times, such as with Bach, who thought only God was creative, there was the most creative of all art.19:05-24:55: Shottenkirk disagrees and argues that the 20th C. was profoundly creative. Arliss agrees that wonderful art came out of it, "but doesn't know how to square it with my argument". Shottenkirk states that the way to square it is to say that it is nihilistic. Arliss ends by saying that art is not about gaining knowledge; the relation between art and cognition is that there isn't a connection.  The reason we do art is so that we don't have to think rationally about the world all the time. Support the show

Gallery Conversations: talkPOPc at galerie Jilská 14, PragueArtist and talkPOPc Founder Dr. Dena Shottenkirk speaks w/ Resident Philosopher Dr. Martin Nitsche on the Bridge between Continental and Analytic Philosophy0 - 2:09: Shottenkirk: introduction of talkPOPc's radical reforming of both art and philosophy in order to emphasize the communal role of conversation.2:10 - 3:39: Bridging Analytic and Continental philosophy3:40 - 5:49: the importance of conversation in making this bridge5:50 - 9:38: Shottenkirk asks Martin Nitsche about his book "Methodical Precedence of Intertwining: An Introduction to a Transitive-topological Phenomenology", where Nitsche writes on Husserl's refusal to have a clear divide between the subject and the object. Nitsche explains it is Husserl's argument against Brentano's reliance on Descartes.  Husserl wanted to do a philosophy of holistic experience. 9:39 -10:11: Shottenkirk asks if anyone connects Husserl to William James? Nitsche says Husserl himself did. Shottenkirk notes that the connection is obvious.10:12 - 12:00: Shottenkirk discusses gist perception which gives both objective and subjective information, arguing that the error of empiricism is a model of the object coming to the passive subject.12:05 -12:59: Nitsche talks about using the Merleau-Ponty notion of intertwining where there is no division of subject and object; even though we can speak of us being here and being separate from the world, it is secondary and not the root of perception.13:00 -13:48: Shottenkirk notes that perception has, at its root, the marriage of object and subject. The problem is how we explain experience and perception with these two married things at the beginning. There has to be a fluidity. That is also talkPOPc: a fluidity of things.13:50 -15:21: Nitsche discusses Husserl's notion of phenomenological reduction; it is not solipsistic. It is re-transiting the attention to a new domain, focusing on the intertwining of subject and object; refocusing on the gist. (Here we have a merging of the analytic philosophy notion of gist perception with the continental notion of topological intertwining)15:25 -19:40: The notion of reduction, with Nitsche introducing the notion of orientation - it is in favor of a more layered notion of experience, which is closer to the artist's experience.19:15 - 21:59: Nitsche, by using the example of touch, talks about avoiding the solipsism of orientation: when we touch our finger to our other hand we are not just subject/object. 22:00 - 24:00: Shottenkirk notes that "restriction" is not "elimination". In vision science, semantic/high-level features are strictly different from low-level features. But that view tracks the objects out there, which is a problem. If one doesn't completely divide low-level from high-level, then one can experience those low-level things as not part of a strict object/subject divide. So, when we have the experience of finger going into the hand, it is an experience even though it's not named. The range of things experienced are way larger than the things that are named. Nitsche agrees.24:01 - 28:00: Shottenkirk defines topology in general, with Nitsche then talking about topology in phenomenology. A picture of the world that is transforming. Philosophy is topology. Meaning is that thing that is always being constructed on the fly. 28:10 - 29:53:  Shottenkirk: Let's bring it back to art. Once function that art is the way we understand the world - it provides for those topological transitions: this thing can suddenly mean that thing. I'm doing the same thing, but I'm thinking about it in terms of low-level and high-level features, and the ontological construction of objects. Artists' re-structure reality.Support the show

In conversation with Resident Philosopher Dr. Shottenkirk, Chelsea, a documentary producer, talks about making space for people to be creativeTimestamps:00:10: Introductions01:05: Art and Philosophy, both are conversations02:35: Chelsea's perspective on Art. A facilitator, a documentary producer.04:30: The universal and the particular. Art needs to be true, if it's a lie, it won't ring true.06:00: Art retells universal truths. What are those universal truths? Desire for one08:15: The relationship between desire and integrity10:55: "The more honest it is, the more it moves us" Art can be a space for us to accept ourselves14:05: Antigone in Prison. We identify with each of these characters, be it good or bad people. Art has always been this way18:20: A low stakes playfulness. Art has a nugget of playfulness and fun. It gets us out of our own heads for a bit21:55: Why does playfulness live predominantly in younger years? 24:05: Curating voices that can tell a story. Who do we need to speak to get that authentic story? It's a work of Art that can bring out a lot of voices27:25: Documentaries also help us understand our place in the world. What side are we on?Support the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions with William01:50: Art is a representation of people sharing ideas. Getting knowledge from others and the self. Political, conversation starter, meditative process, it's a range04:10: Everyone gets meaning through different things. For William, it's a little bit from everywhere. More recently, it's been nature07:15: Aesthetics. Not all Art is on the pleasant side. Pinpointing the broader experience of a heightened appreciation for aesthetics. 09:45: Horror films and sky-diving for safe adrenaline, but depictions of tragedy are different. They're worth paying attention to and provide profound knowledge.13:45: Experiences about Art help us appreciate aesthetics more, but it's not purely about beauty, instead it heightens the experience. But how do we define Aesthetics? What does Aesthetics have to do with walking into a gallery and having an experience with a painting. 18:30: The "vibe" connects to the group energy. Paying attention to what's going on around you. Aesthetics as a similar sensory experience. Are you paying attention? Is a football game an aesthetic experience?22:15: As we have more experience of Art. We better understand the broader category of things around us. What Art might do is make us more aware of sensory experiences. 23:30: People starting off as a blank slate. More experiences fill the canvas. Camus and the value of multiple experiences to deal with/stave off suicidal thoughts. Support the showTwitter: @talkpopc Instagram: @talkpopc

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:50: We care so much about Art, but why do we do this? Art is contextual. Could be pure entertainment, or a medium for learning about other people03:45: Agency as a part of Art. Technique is a part of Art, but there's a nugget, an essence of entertainment that part of it. 06:40: Classical masters of Art. Telling stories through Art. Durable, catchy and getting us to think differently about ourselves and it promotes conversations08:35: Art is like dress up. Art is like someone else's outfit you put on. How have I changed? Or is this dress just not for you?10:50: Art linked to capitalism. It's impossible to get away and separate money from Art. After all, it doesn't grow on trees. 11:50: Pop music, gets you moving. Summer songs. Music has a way of pulling you back to a specific time and place. 14:00: Music as an embodied experience. You move and episodic memory kicks in. Songs are processed and become meaningful. 15:00: Compression of options. All in the middle, no peaks, no valleys. But there can be an element of playfulness. Music for consumption vs exploration17:30: Taylor Swift. Commercial success first, exploration after having little to prove. 19:30: Black churches and experiencing music out of your body. Mind goes on autopilot it's fun. Support the show

Resident Philosopher Dr. Martin Nitsche of the Institute of Philosophy at the Czech Academy of Sciences in Prague peaks with participant Edward about empathy, psychedelics, theater and how "Art is a Vitamin of Consciousness"Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:55: Background and experiences with Art, especially Fashion. Art classes, comic books02:35: Working class immigrant origins, and eventual exposure to theatre in NYC. Off-broadway shows and ephemeral aspects04:10: How do performances affect our cognition? Maybe it's not cognition, maybe it's empathy and being able to relate08:00: Art as a vitamin of consciousness. Psychedelics, the Sistine Chapel and being square. VR Ayahuasca trip12:10: Irony and humor as moving forces in comedy. We can't really fake laughter. Laughter can be a release for us as an acknowledgement.15:35: The pressure to use big words when it comes to art. This avoids actual expression. You have to experience the art17:40: Concluding thoughts.Support the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions00:45: Experiences with Art, Contemporary relationship with Art. Soothes our soul, but somehow not essential?? Akin to love04:45: Art makes us feel alive, makes life worthwhile. What about love? It moves us06:25: Art isn't necessary for survival, it never was. But at the same time, we've been doing art since the stone age. What fuels our desire to create, even though it's not essential10:05: Productivity and Art. Do schools help fuel Art education? But is that the purpose of schooling? What would Art inclusive education give us? Success?12:50: Art education in Europe and do we need education to appreciate Art? Perhaps so, it's not quite that simple to understand Art. 15:40: Is Art a luxury? Depends on your worldview.  Light and luxury18:30: Is love a luxury? Career over love,  but love doesn't necessarily mean a relationship. 23:40: Hazel as Socrates and closing thoughts.Support the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions01:05: Renaissance, the arts, and what it makes us feel. Like we're in heaven, a connection to divinity03:05: The aura of Art. Does the divine aura banish negative feelings/emotions?05:25: Mona Lisa, Mother Mary and the religious feeling. Is it the ambiguous smile that strikes us?07:40: Mona Lisa's new security detail. Tourists, cell phones and Mona Lisa's smile10:20: Walter Benjamin, the origin of art, and the aura stripped away from modern art11:45: Photographs are flat. Missing the 3rd dimension takes something away from the art experience. Yet paintings create space14:00: Watching, seeing, creating art. All help with creating a space for thinking. Religion and Art are connected16:30: Recent artists, Yoko Ono. Pretty good! 17:40: Street Art. Does it elicit the same intensity of the Mona Lisa? 80% says our guestSupport the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions, art preferences, entertainment and diversions vs enlightenment02:00: Difference between cognitive art vs entertainment art might be a matter of narcissism03:50: Do we experience art individually or in a community? On some levels it's individual, but other perspectives are part of it too. 05:40: Art as a method of philosophy and social sciences08:30: Art as a scientific method and the capacity in experimentation/laboratory environment. The ability to use different perspectives11:15: To what does art refer in today's age? Does it bring us closer to something else or is it merely self-referential?15:00: The meaning of representation and immediate experience in corporeality. Music as the closest in the corporeal arts17:30: General conclusions and performance. What makes one medium better than others in terms of understanding? Preferences for vision and something is lost if we overplay that hand. Support the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions, level setting01:40: Art preferences, visual art, architecture and an eye for design03:00: Importance of design and creation of spaces. With light comes energy 04:40: Music over television. Impacts on mood, evocative of time, place and people06:10: Does design impact thought and purpose?07:50: Visual and musical create environments. It's not just the living room that's full of art. The art creates the space09:45: The immersion factor between visual and musical and how they affect your position11:10: Stained glass, the play of light and color's impact on beauty. Paintings connected to light13:55: Concrete jungle of New York. More green than you'd imagine. Public works of art accessible to the people as opposed to the private skyscrapers16:10: Summer, light, community and immersion/engagement in the world18:20: Garden as cognition? Landscape, thought, design and the creation of rooms/spaces22:00: Conclusion and parting thoughtsSupport the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions, Consensus view of Art, and favorite forms01:20: Art as a subjective form. Based on the person perceiving it and stories like Harry Potter02:50: Not just narrative, but the experience as well. 5 readers and 5 vastly different experiences?04:15: Game of Thrones, the general objective consensus view. How does it happen if the experience is a subjective one? Rejection of consensus05:40: We get consensus on a superficial level. The layers of experience 06:35: Consensus on how "good" or "worth" something is. 09:00: Every new change is a new branching path to analyze. Nuances of our own thoughts aren't exactly neat and orderly. 12:00: Art as knowledge acquisition. When we experience anything, only we truly understand that experienced. We can't really share it. 14:40: How do we come to consensus and bring it out into the social world?16:00: Different approaches. Government makes all rules, letting the philosopher kings rule, or we each pay attention to the subjectivities of others17:40: Respecting the subjectivities too much. Maybe a bit dangerous to society. But perhaps we need to listen but not make it a rule. 19:45: Just because it happens to you, does not give you the final say on definition, but your PoV still matters21:35: The objective does exist, and through that we build claims of universal rules. Support the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions, philosophy and writing stories00:35: Fantasy as a different side of human nature. Exploring potential cultures and understanding that something else is possible01:20: Utopia and dystopia. Human causes and the hope of utopia02:30: Deviating from human nature. The tag of deviant. What we should do is create an environment to adapt, rather than destroy03:30: Daydreaming, writing and taking the childlike wonder into a useful object for society04:30: A different way of imagining the world and inclement weather. Building blocks of society to make the fictional world feel realistic. Support the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions, The Seven Husbands of Evelyn Hugo and the complexities of being driven/ambitious02:00: Non-continuous format as a part of the experience. 04:00: Getting lost in a fantasy world. Discovery of world-building. Imaginative and understanding aspects of fantasy05:30: The impact of music. Being able to shape how you feel. The shape of our emotions, particularly in music. 06:25: A good story will likely tell you something about yourself. Recreation of experiences in the mind and how you'd act/relate.08:45: Books don't just teach us about discovery. They can change who we are. 10:00: Evolution of story-telling. More accessibility and nuance in stories, both in format and contentSupport the show

Timestamps:00:10: Introductions, clothing as a form of expression and an art form00:45: Craft vs Art. It's okay to be both, negative perceptions as a product of the art industrial system02:15: Craft primarily done by women. Why do we view it as a lesser form?03:00: Art is about intention and spirituality. We can do it if we set our minds to it03:30: Culture as inspiration for art. It's a political performance and reclaiming heritage lost in a revolt against assimilation04:30: Love of being Nigerian. A mother's influence and the audacity to showcase her culture in a different world05:30: African fabrics as a living installation of art06:30: Wood carvings, sculpting and the importance of craftsmanship in manifestation. Birthing a visual into existence08:00: Political messaging and direct feelings in artistic expression. The foundation is self awareness.Support the show