Podcasts about adorno

Tell me if this makes sense… We live in a world today characterized by a fetishized pornographic addiction to rape. If it were not so, Law & Order: SVU wouldn’t have made it past a single season – let alone, into SYNdication for nearly 30 years…! I loathe Adorno and the CULTural Marxists who SYNthesized (read: weaponized) Marx and Freud to the general detriment of mankind, beginning with the ‘West’. But, he raised some legit points, as often the baddies do. It’s their SOLUTIONS we all need be wary of. For nigh on 100 years, we’ve basked in the jaundiced glow of the Frankfurt School, as legions of university students continue having their minds and spirits poisoned in the name of ‘Progress’. See also the ancient Roman Collegium, a concept dating back to (at least) the days of Plato – who, incidentally, literally wrote the book on The Republic. I digress… In Adorno’s “Fetish-character” essay, he states, a fetish is a substitute object of desire.[1] I would submit that in the latent undercurrent of this Nietzschean ‘power-evolving universe’ of today’s America; men and women, by and large, secretly harbor a craven desire for rape. It sounds crazy! Until one considers the popularity of Law & Order: SVU for the last 27 years. America is Kung-Fu LARPing, with each new iteration of the ‘fetish substitute object of desire’ further blurring the lines between fantasy and reality (schizoaffective disorder) as we creep ever closer to the Chaos Magick of bringing these secret desires to life. But, beware; LARPing has consequences.[2] The Epstein Saga has been publicly ongoing for 2+ decades. More than a thousand witnesses have come forward – including dozens who’ve accused Trump (E. Jean Carroll) – and yet, only Epstein and Maxwell have been ‘brought to justice’. Speaking of ‘justice’, Thomas Massie probably said it best:[3] Congress created the Department of Justice, Congress funds the Department of Justice, and Congress is responsible for the oversight of the Department of Justice. When will we see justice? I’ll tell you what I’ve not seen. I’ve not seen any arrests from the revelations in the Epstein Files – over 3 million documents describing horrible things, describing unspeakable things, much of it redacted. Over two dozen people have resigned; CEOS, members of government, worldwide. But, I haven’t seen any arrests or investigations here in the United States, from this Department of Justice. Prince Andrew, Duke of York, who has since been stripped of his royalty, his royal titles, due to his affiliation with Jeffrey Epstein, has been arrested. Peter Mandelson, who previously served as UK’s Ambassador to the United States, resigned in disgrace from United Kingdom’s House of Lords and the Labor Party, and he’s been arrested. Former Prime Minister of Norway Thorbjorn Jagland has been charged. But, we don’t see any charges, arrests, or investigations in the United States. What do we see? We see our FBI Director celebrating in the locker room at the Olympics overseas. It’s fine to be proud of this country. But, we should be proud of this country because we have a system of justice that works. And yet we do not. … We need justice. We want the Department of Justice to get to work, and that’s what they need to do – now. The Trump (45/47) DOJ is unwilling to rat itself out – and so are the other 77+ million co-conspirators… And then there’s the 77 million co-conspirators who voted for Epstein’s best friend Trump as many as three times, knowing he’d been accused of sexual assault by dozens of women, and even after he was found liable for sexually assaulting E. Jean Carroll. For 77 million men and women it was not a dealbreaker! He rapes, but he saves. He saves more than he rapes … but he probably does rape.[4] Considering the aforementioned, what would be crazy is not acknowledging America’s fetishized pornographic addiction to rape – which is precisely what we’re doing. We are gaslighting ourselves at this point, as we turn a blind eye to our own culpability. After all – on the eve of America’s 250th Anniversary of Independence – wasn’t this always to be a government of, by, and for The People…? 18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; …21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified [him] not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, …24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: …26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.28 And even as they did not like to retain God in [their] knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them. — Romans 1:18, 21–22, 24, 26–32 KJV 4 Rejoice in the Lord alway: [and] again I say, Rejoice.5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord [is] at hand.6 Be careful for nothing; but in every thing by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God.7 And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, shall keep your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus. 8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things [are] honest, whatsoever things [are] just, whatsoever things [are] pure, whatsoever things [are] lovely, whatsoever things [are] of good report; if [there be] any virtue, and if [there be] any praise, think on these things. — Philippians 4:4–8 KJV #Links Clips [1:58] Etymology (the origins of words) was taken out of schools in the early 1900’s for a reason. (See also entry below) [5:39] Demons in the Headlines EXPOSED: The War for Power and Souls in D.C. | Strange Encounters | Ep 29 – YouTube (See also Blaze Media article below) [3:15] Rep. Massie Asks, “When Will We See Justice” Following Latest Epstein Files Revelations (See also C-SPAN Congressional Chronicle entry below[3:1]) Previous RWR broadcasts referenced 2026-02-25 2026-02-26 Proof of America’s fetishized pornographic addiction to rape Amanda Seyfried Wore A “Prosthetic [redacted]” For ‘Testament Of Ann Lee’ Amanda Seyfried will go to extreme lengths for a film role — especially when it comes to feeling comfortable during a nude scene. The actor wore what she described as a “prosthetic [redacted]” in her recent movie The Testament of Ann Lee, as she revealed in a Feb. 25 interview with BBC’s The Scott Mills Breakfast Show. “This movie, it needed to be graphic, so, like, I had a prosthetic [redacted],” she said in a clip posted to Instagram, which understandably perplexed Mills himself. When pressed for more details, she surprisingly had a rave review about the experience. “It was cool. It was exciting.” Seyfried plays the real-life Ann Lee, a Christian woman in 18th-century Great Britain who viewed herself as a representative of God and eventually founded a religious sect called Shakers, with the film capturing her group’s move across the pond to New York during the Colonial era. Son of megachurch pastor sentenced after horrific materials found at home ‘among worst investigators have seen’ An Indiana megachurch once known for preaching purity and sexual morality has found itself at the center of a scandal that has shaken a congregation, rattled political allies, and ended with a six-year prison sentence. Jonathan Peternel, 24, of Pendleton, was sentenced Friday after pleading guilty in January to one Level 4 felony count of child exploitation and three felony counts of possession of child sexual abuse material. The case drew intense public scrutiny not only because of the disturbing evidence uncovered by investigators, but because his father, Nathan Peternel, remains listed as lead pastor at Life Church and is a longtime mentor and close associate of Indiana Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith. Why Viewers Say You Should Watch ‘Nymphomaniac’ Alone Due to Its Graphic Scenes Both volumes of Lars von Trier’s Nymphomaniac are streaming on Netflix in the U.S., and its return to an easy, familiar platform has revived a warning that has followed the film since 2013: ‘Watch this one by yourself.‘ … So why does this movie come with a warning like that? The movie’s name actually answers that on its own. The term nymphomania is used to classify someone who has an uncontrollable compulsion toward sex, and that is exactly what the film follows across 2 volumes and 8 chapters. It opens with a woman named Joe, found beaten in an alley. A man named Seligman brings her home, and she begins telling him the story of her life from her earliest sexual memories through decades of escalating need. Von Trier was telling the story of a woman whose entire life is shaped by a compulsion she cannot control. … The discomfort the audience feels isn’t incidental. It’s the mechanism. Von Trier built the film so that watching it puts you closer to Joe’s experience than any non-explicit version ever could. The surface reading is addiction… What Joe is actually chasing is not sex but connection. Every encounter she describes to Seligman moves her further from other people rather than closer to them. Sex becomes the thing she reaches for because the thing she actually needs keeps slipping out of range. That distance between the act and the need behind it is where von Trier plants the real story. The compulsion is real, but the loneliness underneath it is what he keeps circling back to. He called this technique “Digressionism,” a term he coined to describe a storytelling style that deliberately wanders away from its own plot. He cited Marcel Proust as an influence. Nymphomaniac is the final film in what von Trier and critics call the Depression Trilogy. Following Antichrist in 2009 and Melancholia in 2011. After years infiltrating child exploitation rings, expert reveals an even DARKER American underworld | Blaze Media Demons in the Headlines EXPOSED: The War for Power and Souls in D.C. | Strange Encounters | Ep 29 – YouTube [31:30–33:26] Back to the politics piece; everybody within politics – even if they disagree with exploitation or whatever – they show partiality. And, I believe it’s, is it second Peter? … It says, ‘where partiality exists, exists every form of deceit and evil’. We can look it up … but I think that’s it. But, where partiality exists, exists all forms of evil. ***[Did he mean this passage?]For where envying and strife [is], there [is] confusion and every evil work. But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, [and] easy to be intreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. – James 3:16–17 KJV*** And, what is happening in our political world that I’ve that I’ve seen now is; you have career politicians – even if they claim to be Christians – they sell access. And, it might be access to conservative organizations. But, they sell access – and they’re partial to donors. … they’re unbelievably partial. And, they’re partial to their ‘club’, as opposed to the people they’re elected to represent. And, you have a bureaucracy that’s in place, and you have these elitists that are in place, that think that they can buy – because they have been able to buy your position – buy you, buy access to you, or buy access to somebody else, and ‘own’ – in this case, a US Senator, what I’m running for. But, it’s across the board for everything; Congressmen, even the President … Everything’s for sale. And, it’s ‘access’ that they’re selling, right? And, that’s the thing that stood out to me the most; partiality. More proof / Trump-Epstein Saga DOJ’s Epstein Files Screwups Get Worse With Unredacted Nudes and Images of Kids The Justice Department is under fire after newly released Jeffrey Epstein case materials reportedly included unredacted nude images and photos involving minors. Analysis by CNN uncovered nearly 100 explicit pictures of two naked young women on a beach, the news outlet reported. The materials also included photos showing a young girl kissing Epstein on the cheek. At least one unredacted image depicted Epstein alongside a nude female, and additional selfie-style nude photos of at least two other unidentified females were also published, with their ages unclear, according to CNN. Under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which Congress passed and President Trump signed in late November, the DOJ is obligated to omit sexually explicit imagery and anything that might identify victims. The images have now been redacted. DOJ Gives Shameless Reason for Hiding Photo of Howard Lutnick and Jeffrey Epstein Donald Trump’s White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles is ‘Shocked’ the FBI Dared to Come for Her ‘Uncle Jeff’ shifts focus on Erika Kirk grooming allegations post-Epstein file release – We Got This Covered Most Americans in new survey dispute Donald Trump’s economic boom claim CBS’s new hire appeared 1,700 times in Epstein’s files, and John Oliver just exposed his disturbing emails – We Got This Covered Epstein Had Close Ties to Prosecutor Behind Key Provision of Plea Deal | The New Republic Turns out ICE is just a bunch of scared widdle guys Fear as senator discovers staggering true amount Trump spent on arming ICE – Raw Story Congressional Chronicle – Members of Congress, Hearings and More | C-SPAN.org[3:2] [standalone clip] Rep. Massie Asks, "When Will We See Justice" Following Latest Epstein Files Revelations | Video | C-SPAN.org The Purpose Of the System Is What It Does (POSIWID) Millions at Risk as Android Mental Health Apps Expose Sensitive Data US defense secrets sold to Russians for millions in crypto – Newsweek Tucker Carlson pushes DNA tests for Jews, ‘Khazar’ theory | The Jerusalem Post The largely discredited theory states that Ashkenazi Jews are genetically descended from a Turkic minority that converted to Judaism in the Middle Ages rather than from the 12 tribes of Israel. During Tucker Carlson’s interview last week with Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, both men made considerable waves with their takes on history and theology. Anthropic says it will not accede to Pentagon demands as deadline looms | AP News Anthropic said it sought narrow assurances from the Pentagon that Claude won’t be used for mass surveillance of Americans or in fully autonomous weapons. But after months of private talks exploded into public debate, it said in a Thursday statement that new contract language “framed as compromise was paired with legalese that would allow those safeguards to be disregarded at will.” From the Wayback. Why – and why now – is Daily Mail breaking these stories out of the dust bin…? Secret mind-control techniques using TVs revealed in disturbing patent | Daily Mail Online Declassified CIA memo reveals plan to turn citizens into unwitting assassins | Daily Mail Online On the lighter / brighter side… Why age is an advantage for starting a business – Fast Company Sardonic levity, as Rome burns… Images That Might Indicate Society is in Decline | eBaum’s World Caller Dialogue David – WI Feminism dating back to early 1800s (CH: Owenism – Wikipedia) Valerie Solanas, SCUM Manifesto – Wikipedia Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil (1886)[5] Insanity in individuals is something rare–but in groups, parties, nations, and epochs it is the rule. Bitchute: Etymology (the origins of words) was taken out of schools in the early 1900’s for a reason. Also on YouTube: Etymology ~ The Origins Of Words Was Taken Out Of Schools In The Early 1900s For A Reason – YouTube James – Vancouver The Scribner-Bantam English dictionary : Williams, Edwin B. (Edwin Bucher), 1891-1975 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive #Footnotes Clowney, David W. “On the Fetish-Character in Music and the Regression of Listening” Reading Notes for the 1938 Essay by Theodor Adorno. 3 Nov. 2005, p. 6, users.rowan.edu/~clowney/aesthetics/ReadingGuides/Adorno.ppt. Accessed 26 Feb. 2026. More (e.g., “course guides” at Clowney’s aesthetics page: users.rowan.edu/~clowney/aesthetics/. ︎ Berenson, Alex. “On the Dangers of Cosplay.” Substack.com, Unreported Truths, 11 Jan. 2026, alexberenson.substack.com/p/on-the-dangers-of-cosplay. Accessed 26 Feb. 2026. ︎ C-SPAN. “Congressional Chronicle – Members of Congress, Hearings and More.” C-SPAN.org, C-SPAN, 24 Feb. 2026, www.c-span.org/congress/?chamber=house&date=2026-02-24. Accessed 26 Feb. 2026. Click on “Speakers” tab, select Thomas Massie in “Speakers” dropdown menu, and see timestamp (10:45:03 AM) and transcript of Massie’s remarks. ︎ ︎ ︎ [Massie:] Congress created the Department of Justice, Congress funds the Department of Justice, and Congress is responsible for the oversight of the Department of Justice. When will we see justice? I’ll tell you what I’ve not seen. I’ve not seen any arrests from the revelations in the Epstein Files – over 3 million documents describing horrible things, describing unspeakable things – much of it redacted. Over two dozen people have resigned; CEOs, members of government, worldwide. But, I haven’t seen any arrests or investigations here in the United States, from this Department of Justice. Prince Andrew, Duke of York, who has since been stripped of his royalty, his royal titles, due to his affiliation with Jeffrey Epstein, has been arrested. Peter Mandelson, Who previously served as UK’s Ambassador to the United States, resigned in disgrace from United Kingdom’S House of Lords and the Labor Party, and he’s been arrested. Former Prime Minister of Norway, Thorbjorn Jagland has been charged. But, we don’t see any charges, arrests, or investigations in the United States. What do we see? We see our FBI Director celebrating in the locker room at the Olympics overseas. It’s fine to be proud of this country. But, we should be proud of this country because we have a system of justice that works. And yet we do not. Who are the men that should be investigated? I’ll name them right here. Leon Black; you don’t even have to see past the redactions to see that this man needs to be investigated. Jess Staley; accused of terrible things, it’s right there in the files. Why is he not being investigated? And, Leslie Wexner; why did the FBI list him as a co-conspirator in their own documents in a child sex trafficking case, and then tell him, according to him, that they had no questions for him? Why is that? Well, the Epstein Files Transparency Act requires the DOJ and the FBI to disclose to us their internal memos and emails about how they made those decisions, whether to prosecute or not prosecute. Yet, they have not delivered those memos. And, we still don’t have the memos and documents and emails from 2008, to explain why Jeffrey Epstein was given such a light sentence in what would have been an open and shut case of child sex trafficking, which allowed him to go back and recommit these terrible crimes, create hundreds of more victims, and ensnare so many other people in his conspiracy. Where are those documents that describe those decisions? We need justice. We want the Department of Justice to get to work, and that’s what they need to do – now! Jones, Marcie. “Gee, Look at All These Co-Conspirators in the Epstein Files That Pam Bondi and Kash Patel Say Never Existed.” Wonkette.com, Wonkette, 25 Feb. 2026, www.wonkette.com/p/gee-look-at-all-these-co-conspirators. Accessed 26 Feb. 2026. ︎ Nietzsche, Friedrich. Beyond Good and Evil. 1886. Gutenberg.org, Chapter IV. Apophthegms And Interludes, ln. 156, 4 Feb. 2013, gutenberg.org/files/4363/4363-h/4363-h.htm. Accessed 28 Feb. 2026. from The Complete Works of Friedrich Nietzsche (1909-1913). ︎

Aus Anlaß von https://dietzberlin.de/produkt/marx-als-demokrat-oder-das-ende-der-politik/ ein Studiogespräch mit dem Autoren und Herausgeber Alex Demirović. Darin eine ausführliche Passage zum Begriff des Fortschritts unter aktuellen Militarisierungsprozessen. https://dn790006.ca.archive.org/0/items/adorno-1964-fortschritt/Adorno%20%281964%29%3A%20Fortschritt.pdf Anschlußempfehlung: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zcnhV1stds

Philosopher and religion scholar Tad DeLay (author of Future of Denial) drops a guest essay on us this week, and it's a barn-burner. Tad brings together Wilhelm Reich, Walter Benjamin, Lacan, Althusser, and Adorno — yeah, the whole squad — to lay out a series of theses on how reactionary consciousness actually works, from repressed sexuality to theological cover stories for raw materialism. He makes the case that white evangelicalism is basically a half-century-old improvisation around whiteness and anticommunism, and that Trumpism is its perfected form — an ecumenical fascism where confessing the dear leader functions like a sinner's prayer. Along the way he unpacks Frank Wilhoit's devastating one-line definition of conservatism, explains why charging evangelicals with hypocrisy is a category error (they simply don't care what they believe), and uses Lacanian psychoanalysis to show how shame, guilt, and anxiety keep the whole machine running. Fair warning: Tad doesn't let liberals off the hook either — the essay's conclusion forces all of us to sit with the moral compromises we've made and what it means to keep breathing in hell. Tad DeLay, PhD is a philosopher, religion scholar, and interdisciplinary critical theorist. He has written four books, including his latest, Future of Denial: The Ideologies of Climate Change. He is a philosophy professor and lives in Grand Rapids. ONLINE LENT CLASS: Jesus in Galilee w/ John Dominic Crossan⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ What can we actually know about Jesus of Nazareth? And, what difference does it make? ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠This Lenten class ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠begins where all of Dr. John Dominic Crossan's has work begins: with history. What was actually happening in Galilee in the 20s CE? What did Herod Antipas' transformation of the "Sea of Galilee" into the commercial "Sea of Tiberias" mean for peasant fishing communities? Why did Jesus emerge from John's baptism movement proclaiming God's Rule through parables—and what made that medium so perfectly suited to that message? Only by understanding what Jesus' parables meant then can we wrestle with what they might demand of us now. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The class is donation-based, including 0, so join, get info, and join up here.⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ This podcast is a ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Homebrewed Christianity ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠production. Follow ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠the Homebrewed Christianity⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Theology Nerd Throwdown⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, & ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠The Rise of Bonhoeffer⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ podcasts for more theological goodness for your earbuds. Join over 75,000 other people by joining our ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Substack - Process This!⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Get instant access to over 50 classes at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.TheologyClass.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Follow the podcast, drop a review⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠, send ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠feedback/questions⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ or become a ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠member of the HBC Community⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

En este episodio analizamos "Marty Supreme" de Josh Safdie con Timothy Chalamet, no desde la crítica cinematográfica convencional, sino desde una mirada sociológica, psicoanalítica y filosófica. Exploramos cómo la película reproduce la lógica de la mercancía, simula profundidad mediante fragmentos estilo TikTok, y nos presenta un personaje que encarna el "modo de tener" de Fromm sin interioridad real. Discutimos el concepto de "escucha regresiva" de Adorno aplicado al cine contemporáneo, y cómo la película termina celebrando valores conservadores disfrazados de arte independiente. #martysupreme #cinedearte #oscars

Att fördöma uppslutningen kring Reza Pahlavi bland demonstranterna i Iran är ett exempel på det Adorno och Horkheimer kallade ”smarthetens dumhet” – vilket riskerar att bana väg för diktatorn. Det skriver Shervin Mirzaeighazi, forskare i praktisk filosofi vid Lunds universitet, i en replik på Nahid Persson Sarvestanis artikel Iran behöver inte en ny diktator. Inläsare: Staffan Dopping

25. Oktober 2025 Jörg Später: Adornos Erben. Veranstaltungsmitschnitt aus dem roten Salon, Hamburg. Die Geschichte der Kritischen Theorie als große, vielstimmige Erzählung aus der alten Bundesrepublik. Als Theodor W. Adorno 1969 starb, waren das Institut für Sozialforschung und sein Direktor bundesweit bekannt. Die Frankfurter Schule war am Zenit ihrer Wirkung. Reicht diese bis heute? Anhand von Adornos Erben – wie Karl-Heinz Haag, Jürgen Habermas, Oskar Negt – legt Jörg Später Pfade frei, die bis in die Gegenwart reichen. Jörg Später, geboren 1966, ist promovierter Historiker und freier Autor. An der Universität Freiburg ist er mit der Forschungsgruppe Zeitgeschichte assoziiert. Jörg Später, »Adornos Erben. Eine Geschichte aus der Bundesrepublik« (Suhrkamp, 2024)

Package management sits at the foundation of modern software development, quietly powering nearly every software project in the world. Tools like npm and Yarn have long been the core of the JavaScript ecosystem, enabling developers to install, update, and share code with ease. But as projects grow larger and the ecosystem more complex, this older The post Next-Gen JavaScript Package Management with Ruy Adorno and Darcy Clarke appeared first on Software Engineering Daily.

Package management sits at the foundation of modern software development, quietly powering nearly every software project in the world. Tools like npm and Yarn have long been the core of the JavaScript ecosystem, enabling developers to install, update, and share code with ease. But as projects grow larger and the ecosystem more complex, this older The post Next-Gen JavaScript Package Management with Ruy Adorno and Darcy Clarke appeared first on Software Engineering Daily.

Mark Christian Thompson's book, Phenomenal Blackness: Black Power, Philosophy, and Theory (University of Chicago Press, 2022) examines the changing interdisciplinary investments of key mid-century African American writers and thinkers, showing how their investments in sociology and anthropology gave way to a growing interest in German philosophy and critical theory by the 1960s. Thompson analyzes this shift in intellectual focus across the post-war decades, pinpointing its clearest expression in Amiri Baraka's writings on jazz and blues, in which he insisted on philosophy as the critical means by which to grasp African American expressive culture. More sociologically oriented thinkers, such as W. E. B. Du Bois, had understood blackness as a singular set of socio-historical characteristics. In contrast, writers such as Baraka, James Baldwin, Angela Y. Davis, Eldridge Cleaver, and Malcolm X were variously drawn to notions of an African essence, an ontology of Black being. For them, the work of Adorno, Habermas, Marcuse, and German thinkers was a vital resource, allowing for continued cultural-materialist analysis while accommodating the hermeneutical aspects of African American religious thought. Mark Christian Thompson argues that these efforts to reimagine Black singularity led to a phenomenological understanding of blackness--a "Black aesthetic dimension" wherein aspirational models for Black liberation might emerge. Brittney Edmonds is an Assistant Professor of Afro-American Studies at UW-Madison. I specialize in 20th and 21st century African American Literature and Culture with a special interest in Black Humor Studies. Read more about my work at brittneymichelleedmonds.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

Mark Christian Thompson's book, Phenomenal Blackness: Black Power, Philosophy, and Theory (University of Chicago Press, 2022) examines the changing interdisciplinary investments of key mid-century African American writers and thinkers, showing how their investments in sociology and anthropology gave way to a growing interest in German philosophy and critical theory by the 1960s. Thompson analyzes this shift in intellectual focus across the post-war decades, pinpointing its clearest expression in Amiri Baraka's writings on jazz and blues, in which he insisted on philosophy as the critical means by which to grasp African American expressive culture. More sociologically oriented thinkers, such as W. E. B. Du Bois, had understood blackness as a singular set of socio-historical characteristics. In contrast, writers such as Baraka, James Baldwin, Angela Y. Davis, Eldridge Cleaver, and Malcolm X were variously drawn to notions of an African essence, an ontology of Black being. For them, the work of Adorno, Habermas, Marcuse, and German thinkers was a vital resource, allowing for continued cultural-materialist analysis while accommodating the hermeneutical aspects of African American religious thought. Mark Christian Thompson argues that these efforts to reimagine Black singularity led to a phenomenological understanding of blackness--a "Black aesthetic dimension" wherein aspirational models for Black liberation might emerge. Brittney Edmonds is an Assistant Professor of Afro-American Studies at UW-Madison. I specialize in 20th and 21st century African American Literature and Culture with a special interest in Black Humor Studies. Read more about my work at brittneymichelleedmonds.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Mark Christian Thompson's book, Phenomenal Blackness: Black Power, Philosophy, and Theory (University of Chicago Press, 2022) examines the changing interdisciplinary investments of key mid-century African American writers and thinkers, showing how their investments in sociology and anthropology gave way to a growing interest in German philosophy and critical theory by the 1960s. Thompson analyzes this shift in intellectual focus across the post-war decades, pinpointing its clearest expression in Amiri Baraka's writings on jazz and blues, in which he insisted on philosophy as the critical means by which to grasp African American expressive culture. More sociologically oriented thinkers, such as W. E. B. Du Bois, had understood blackness as a singular set of socio-historical characteristics. In contrast, writers such as Baraka, James Baldwin, Angela Y. Davis, Eldridge Cleaver, and Malcolm X were variously drawn to notions of an African essence, an ontology of Black being. For them, the work of Adorno, Habermas, Marcuse, and German thinkers was a vital resource, allowing for continued cultural-materialist analysis while accommodating the hermeneutical aspects of African American religious thought. Mark Christian Thompson argues that these efforts to reimagine Black singularity led to a phenomenological understanding of blackness--a "Black aesthetic dimension" wherein aspirational models for Black liberation might emerge. Brittney Edmonds is an Assistant Professor of Afro-American Studies at UW-Madison. I specialize in 20th and 21st century African American Literature and Culture with a special interest in Black Humor Studies. Read more about my work at brittneymichelleedmonds.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Mark Christian Thompson's book, Phenomenal Blackness: Black Power, Philosophy, and Theory (University of Chicago Press, 2022) examines the changing interdisciplinary investments of key mid-century African American writers and thinkers, showing how their investments in sociology and anthropology gave way to a growing interest in German philosophy and critical theory by the 1960s. Thompson analyzes this shift in intellectual focus across the post-war decades, pinpointing its clearest expression in Amiri Baraka's writings on jazz and blues, in which he insisted on philosophy as the critical means by which to grasp African American expressive culture. More sociologically oriented thinkers, such as W. E. B. Du Bois, had understood blackness as a singular set of socio-historical characteristics. In contrast, writers such as Baraka, James Baldwin, Angela Y. Davis, Eldridge Cleaver, and Malcolm X were variously drawn to notions of an African essence, an ontology of Black being. For them, the work of Adorno, Habermas, Marcuse, and German thinkers was a vital resource, allowing for continued cultural-materialist analysis while accommodating the hermeneutical aspects of African American religious thought. Mark Christian Thompson argues that these efforts to reimagine Black singularity led to a phenomenological understanding of blackness--a "Black aesthetic dimension" wherein aspirational models for Black liberation might emerge. Brittney Edmonds is an Assistant Professor of Afro-American Studies at UW-Madison. I specialize in 20th and 21st century African American Literature and Culture with a special interest in Black Humor Studies. Read more about my work at brittneymichelleedmonds.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Mark Christian Thompson's book, Phenomenal Blackness: Black Power, Philosophy, and Theory (University of Chicago Press, 2022) examines the changing interdisciplinary investments of key mid-century African American writers and thinkers, showing how their investments in sociology and anthropology gave way to a growing interest in German philosophy and critical theory by the 1960s. Thompson analyzes this shift in intellectual focus across the post-war decades, pinpointing its clearest expression in Amiri Baraka's writings on jazz and blues, in which he insisted on philosophy as the critical means by which to grasp African American expressive culture. More sociologically oriented thinkers, such as W. E. B. Du Bois, had understood blackness as a singular set of socio-historical characteristics. In contrast, writers such as Baraka, James Baldwin, Angela Y. Davis, Eldridge Cleaver, and Malcolm X were variously drawn to notions of an African essence, an ontology of Black being. For them, the work of Adorno, Habermas, Marcuse, and German thinkers was a vital resource, allowing for continued cultural-materialist analysis while accommodating the hermeneutical aspects of African American religious thought. Mark Christian Thompson argues that these efforts to reimagine Black singularity led to a phenomenological understanding of blackness--a "Black aesthetic dimension" wherein aspirational models for Black liberation might emerge. Brittney Edmonds is an Assistant Professor of Afro-American Studies at UW-Madison. I specialize in 20th and 21st century African American Literature and Culture with a special interest in Black Humor Studies. Read more about my work at brittneymichelleedmonds.com. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

“Sabiduría ante todo; adquiere sabiduría; Y sobre todas tus posesiones adquiere inteligencia. Engrandécela, y ella te engrandecerá; Ella te honrará, cuando tú la hayas abrazado. Adorno de gracia dará a tu cabeza; Corona de hermosura te entregará. Oye, hijo mío, y recibe mis razones, Y se te multiplicarán años de vida.”PROVERBIOS‬ ‭4‬:‭7‬-‭10‬ ‭RVR1960‬‬

„Kaube im Gespräch“ ist eine Reihe zu aktuellen Sachbüchern. Gastgeber und Kurator ist Jürgen Kaube. Der Publizist, Träger des ersten Deutschen Sachbuchpreises und Herausgeber der Frankfurter Allgemeinen Zeitung stellt aktuelle Titel, die ihm besonders aufgefallen sind, im Gespräch mit den Autorinnen und Autoren vor. In der neunten Folge ist der Philosoph Michael Hampe zu Gast. Dieser widmet sich in seinem aktuellen Buch der Aufklärung, einem Begriff, der zugleich eine historische Epoche und ein bis in die Gegenwart wirkmächtiges Emanzipationsprojekt bezeichnet. Die im Jahr 1784 von Kant formulierte Aufforderung, sich mündig des eigenen Verstandes zu bedienen, hat im Zuge des vermeintlich unaufhörlichen gesellschaftlichen Fortschritts keineswegs nur selbstbestimmte Bürgerinnen und Bürger hervorgebracht, sondern auch zahlreiche Verlierer und Verwerfungen, wie Horkheimer und Adorno 1944 in ihrer „Dialektik der Aufklärung“ zeigten. Aus heutiger Perspektive lässt sich die Aufklärung – etwa aus postkolonialistischer Sicht – als unvollendetes oder gescheitertes Unternehmen betrachten, mindestens jedoch als eines, dessen große Illusionen zerplatzt sind. Der Clou allerdings liegt darin, dass diese Einsicht selbst Ausdruck einer aufgeklärten Haltung ist. „Krise der Aufklärung. Über die Fortsetzbarkeit einer Lebensform“ (Suhrkamp) In Kooperation mit dem Kulturamt Frankfurt. Das Gespräch wurde am 10. Dezember 2025 aufgezeichnet.

Devocional Vendimia

Editorial | Cuando la ley es un simple adorno

This episode of The Common Reader podcast is a little different. I spoke to both Jeffrey Lawrence and Julianne Werlin about literature, politics, and the future of the academic humanities. Questions included: what do we mean when we talk about literature and markets? Can we leave politics out of literary discussion? Should we leave it out? If we can't leave it out, can we have nice friendly conversations about it? What is academic Marxism? We also talked about whether Stephen Greenblatt is too ideological and why universities are necessary to literary culture, academics on Substack. Julianne writes Life and Letters. Jeffrey writes Avenues of the Americas. Here is Julianne's interview in The Republic of Letters. Transcript (AI generated, will contain some errors)Henry Oliver (00:00)Today I am talking to Jeffrey Lawrence and Julianne Werlin.Jeffrey is a professor of English literature and comparative literature at Rutgers University. He specializes in the 20th and 21st century and he writes the sub stack, Avenues of America. Julianne probably needs no introduction to a sub stack audience. She writes Life and Letters, one of my favorite sub stacks. She's a professor of English at Duke University, where as well as specializing in early modern poetry, she is interested in sociological and demographic studies of literature.and we are going to have a big conversation about literature and markets, politics, what do we mean when we talk about literature and markets, can we leave politics out of literary discussion, should we leave it out, if we can't leave it out, can we have nice friendly conversations about it, and also maybe what is academic Marxism and what should it be and why is it so confusing? Jeffrey and Julianne, hello.Julianne (00:59)Hi.Jeffrey Lawrence (01:01)Hi, thanks for having us.Julianne (01:02)Yeah, thank you.Henry Oliver (01:04)I am going to start by referencing an interview that you did, Julianne, for Republic of Letters, which everyone has been reading. And you said, I've printed it out wrong, so I can't read the whole quote. But you said something like, you joined Substack because you wanted people to talk with and because you felt a lack of debate in your academic field. There are lots of good things about scholarship being slow and careful, but it also needs to be animated by debate and conversation.and a sense of the stakes of what we're doing, and that is eroding in the academy. So I want you both to talk about that. Why is that happening? How much of a problem is it? How much is Substack or the internet more generally the solution? What should we be doing? Why don't we go to Julianne first, because it's your quote.Julianne (01:54)Sure, I mean, won't go on too long ⁓ since I have already spoken about this, but my sense within English departments is, you know, they're becoming smaller, fewer people are taking our classes, we have much less of a role in public conversation and public debate, except as kind of a stalking horse for certain types of arguments. And certainly, if you are an early modernist, it's very hard to locate a kind of a...Henry Oliver (02:14)YouJulianne (02:25)discrete set of debates within early modern literature because there is so little public salience to literary fields. And I think this is happening in all literature. It's especially pronounced if you're working in the earlier periods. So my sense in joining SUBSTAC was that perhaps there will be debates by people who are not already so deep within the particular professional and disciplinary structures of a field that they canfind new points of connection between literature and public life along different ⁓ axes that we have maybe not explored adequately within English departments and are maybe becoming harder to explore as English departments contract and recede from public life.Henry Oliver (03:04)Mm-hmm.So we're bringing Milton back to the people and also finding out why they care about him at all. ⁓ What do you think about it, Geoff?Julianne (03:16)Well, hopefully. I mean, that's the goal.Jeffrey Lawrence (03:21)Great, ⁓ so I actually restacked that specific quote from Julianne because it resonated so much with me. Yeah, I mean, my sense is that as someone who works on 20th and 21st century literature, there is more crossover there, I would say, between sort of academic scholarship and public debate. But I really wanna just echo what Julianne said there, that ⁓ I have gotten the feeling that withinlet's call it like the legacy media. There are particular arguments that come from academia that are pushed forward and that become representative of the field of 20th and 21st century literature as a whole. And those kind of come to stand in for academic debate more generally. And I think it becomes very difficult. One of the things that I was noticing so much isthat the people who had access to those legacy journals, are places like the Atlantic, the New York Times, that those began to dominate the debates and people just aren't recognizing that in scholarships. So one of the things I particularly like about Substack is that I feel like although it has some of the same problems as social media more generally about kind of like who gets to participate and algorithmic culture and all of that sort of stuff.I did feel like the ideological diversity both left and right compared to the sort of a kind of monoculture, mono, you know, sort of academic argument that I found over and over in these legacy magazines, that Substack was the place where a lot of these debates are happening. And I only joined maybe four or five months ago, but for me,⁓ sort of just in terms of my relationship to the Academy, it's really changed my sense of what can be said and what's being said by academics.Henry Oliver (05:17)feels to me like in some way humanities academia needs deregulating because there's all sorts of things people can't feel like they can't say and can't do. But it's such a tangled mess that the easiest thing is for you all to just go to Substack and do it there and just try and avoid the bureaucracy because it's gone too far. But when you're on Substack...I feel like you're often faced with people saying, these English literature academics, it's all woke BS. They don't know anything. They've killed this, right? You're simultaneously in a kind of semi hostile environment. How do you, how does that seem to you?Julianne (05:56)Yeah, mean, that's certainly true. I think that we are avatars on Substack for a kind of authority that we feel in our own lives we do not possess in any way. So we're in this position where, you know, at least I feel this, I'm responding to comments that are, you know, very much, by people who very much feel that they're attacking authority figures. And I'm, you know, I'm just a person on the internet, you know, talking with them when I'm on Substack. What I like about it is precisely that it levels any kind of authority structures insofar as they exist, which is debatable at this phase. But that's not always the reality on Substack. I also feel there's an additional thing, again, as an early modernist, where you feel like, you you don't have...Henry Oliver (06:27)Yeah.Julianne (06:52)there's not a lot of interest by people who are kind of on the left in contemporary politics in the Renaissance. It's seen as kind of a conservative, canonical thing to study. And there's a lot of pushback. even within English departments, there's a lot of pushback ⁓ surrounding the idea that people should study Shakespeare or study Milton. It's seen as kind of old and fussy and conservative. And then at the same time, you go on the internet and you're the kind of ⁓ exemplar.Henry Oliver (06:59)Mmm. Yeah.Mmm.Julianne (07:22)of woke cultural discourse. So you feel like as a Renaissance scholar, you can't win. You're nobody's idea of what people should be doing intellectually or culturally.Henry Oliver (07:25)HahahaDo you think, someone asked me this the other day about why academics write in this funny way and why no one reads their books and all this. That was the way they phrased it. And I said, I think what you're saying is like, why is there no AC Bradley today? Because Shakespeare in tragedy, so I don't remember the number, of like quarter of a million copies or something that to us just feels like an insane number.Is there some legitimate criticism there that A.C. Bradley wrote in a way that, you know, your grandmother could understand? And a lot of what comes out of the Academy today is much more cut off from the ordinary reading experience.Julianne (08:18)Yeah, I mean, think that's not debatable. think there have been quantitative studies, ⁓ DH studies that have shown that academic prose has become more difficult. I think it's much more a consequence of how literary culture has become this sort of narrow and marginalized field that is preserved within academic debate and academic structures of argument and disciplinarity. Stephen Greenblatt certainly tries to benew A.C. Bradley and he does reach readers outside of academia but his audience is you know especially as a share of the population is not A.C. Bradley's audience and I don't think that's a fault of his prose. Well that's true.Henry Oliver (08:59)might be the fault of some of his ideas.Well, Jeff, I want to come to you on that. A.C. Bradley was not politically ideological. Maybe he's a crazy Hegelian and he's insane on that level. But is the problem that Stephen Greenblatt's just obviously kind of a bit cranky in some ideological way, is this a general problem of the modern humanities academia?Jeffrey Lawrence (09:24)Yeah, I mean, I tend to see the problem as it's kind of being a dual problem. One, I think, is the fact that we are facing in a lot of the academy a kind of scarcity politics. there are very, if you look at just academic hiring since the financial crisis in 2008, there's just much less of it that's happening. And so I think, I mean, part of what I see is this sense that there are certainI mean, we could say certain ideological lines that over the past 10 years, but even let's say over the past 15 years ⁓ have been the ones that have become dominant in the academy. And I think my problem is not that people connect politics to literature. I think that that's something that we all do to a certain degree. think the part of the problem is that we are now entering a situation in whichif you deviate from a particular political line, which I have sort of identified with the Democratic Party, because I think you can follow a foul of it to the right, you can also follow a foul of it to the left, then you are seen as someone who is saying something that is not in line with the contemporary academy. And I think it used to be that when there were many jobs and many different departments that you could go to,Henry Oliver (10:28)Mm, mm.Jeffrey Lawrence (10:48)there were fewer consequences for making those types of statements that were out of sync with the dominant. And now I think it's it's become very, very punitive. And this is also reinforced again by the fact that what public scholarship we do have tends to be in line with this because the institutions that are kind of the elite, I would say Ivy league.institutions are also the ones that are feeding people into ⁓ sort of that public legacy discourse.Henry Oliver (11:23)Let's talk about politics and literature because I don't like making literature political as such. But whenever I read, Julianne's probably read the Lisa Liebes substack. I don't know if you've got to that yet, Jeff. She's like, there should be no politics at all and it's all aesthetics, which I kind of sympathize with. But then it just makes me think like, well, what about Edmund Spenser?Like there's a certain extent to which a lot of poetry is political and we have to be political when we talk about it, otherwise we're just ignoring a big part of it. ⁓ So how do we solve that problem? Like are we like badly trained in thinking about politics in the humanities academy or is it like what's going on?have we got to a point where you can say there should be no politics about explicitly political writers?Julianne (12:19)Do you want to begin, Jeff?Jeffrey Lawrence (12:20)Yeah, I mean, I can just say briefly because I mean, I teach courses, a number of courses that are about politics and literature. I actually think, I mean, I started doing this in 2016, right after Trump's election. I taught Steve Bannon's film about the financial crisis alongside ⁓ the Big Short and a couple of kind of like trying to show kind of like the left and right responses. I mean, that's not literature, that's film, but many of thethe literary works that we look at in those courses. There are conservatives, there are more classic liberals, there are Marxists. I mean, my personal feeling is that we need to talk about politics and literature, that it is a fair, it is a reasonable object of study. The problem, I think, is partially when you act as if certain...certain political writers or certain topics are simply out of bounds for study. And so there was actually a post by Dan Silver today about why I teach conservative thinkers and a response from the points John Baskin saying, who would think that you wouldn't teach conservative thinkers in a sociology course? But I do think that it's become par for the course thatHenry Oliver (13:20)Mmm.Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.Jeffrey Lawrence (13:37)teaching someone, whether you're on the right and you're teaching someone who's a Marxist or you're a Marxist and you're teaching conservatives, that somehow this is kind an ethical failure. And I think that's a real problem of not assuming that what you're teaching is kind of necessarily what you believe in or talking about politics means necessarily taking an ideological stance.Julianne (14:04)Yeah, I think that's completely right. I think there's this very pervasive confusion between ⁓ talking about the politics of literature andarticulating an authoritative political perspective on that literature. Almost everybody who studies literature, especially in a historical context or in a contemporary context, honestly, is going to be talking about politics. Spencer, course, right? Milton. ⁓ How do you talk about somebody who was a literal revolutionary who wrote in favor of regicide and not talk about politics? You have to talk about politics.Henry Oliver (14:31)YouJulianne (14:37)⁓ But then there's become this confusion where people assume that if you are talking about the politics of literature, you have not just a political, but actually an ethical ⁓ teaching that you are imparting by way of that literature. And that if you're not doing that, you're somehow not talking about literature, you're not teaching the literature. That's the confusion that has been so devastating to us and I think so devastating to literary study.Henry Oliver (15:03)So what's the alternative? What should we be doing instead?Julianne (15:07)I I think that we should be talking about the politics of literature while acknowledging that literature raises political debates, not endless debates. know, there's not any given author is going to raise, you know, a certain salient set of questions that we can talk about, that we can debate and acknowledging that people historically have had different responses to these, that it has been used in different ways in different moments and that it is still used in different ways today. That doesn't mean that as intellectuals and scholars, we won't have our own positions that may inform our scholarshipin our writing and even our teaching, it just means that our positions do not shut down conversation and do not exhaust the range of possible positions.Henry Oliver (15:48)Yeah, and we should say, we're saying about, you you should teach conservative thought and stuff. I don't think either of you would identify as being on the right or conservative. So you're saying that from a, from that position. ⁓ How do we, how do we get out of this then? How do we leave politics at the door? Because when I read modern ⁓ literary scholarship, to me, it's either like very useful because it's not political.Julianne (16:01)Yeah.Henry Oliver (16:17)Or I just, as I did with that book that we all, or that Jeff and I, sort of disagreed about. I just find it almost unreadable because it's not scholarship anymore. It's just partisanship. How do we move past this? Like, what's the solution?Jeffrey Lawrence (16:33)I mean, if I can jump in just there, I mean, I would say one of the issues is having an ideological litmus test for scholars. And I think I see this in 20th and 21st century literature in a very strong way. And so what I would say is that, you know, allowing people to occupy different political positions, and I really meanJulianne (16:33)I mean, if I could jump in just there, I mean, I would say one of the issues is having an ideological litmus test for scholars. And I think I see this in 20th and 21st century literature in a very strong way. And so what I would say is that allowing people to occupy different political positions, and I really mean,Henry Oliver (16:36)Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (17:03)like people who I know on the left because they're not toeing a particular line are also not welcome or are also kind of meat pushback in contemporary humanities departments that I think we need to get rid of that. And my thought about the Adam Kelly book, ⁓ the New Sincerity book is that to me, I think that what he's trying to do in that bookHenry Oliver (17:10)Yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (17:31)is to understand neoliberalism as an economic and political philosophy that has effects on culture and to try to understand how authors themselves are dealing with that in their prose.To me, that is somewhat different from the way that neoliberalism is occasionally bandied about in the academy, where it doesn't just, it isn't just another word for saying, okay, this is the Chicago school or the Austrian school, and we're gonna kind of take it seriously as a mode of thought. if just saying like, neoliberalism is like our ontological condition in the 21st century, and therefore everything is.necessarily an expression of neoliberalism and we don't need to necessarily define it. So I mean, I think that may be where the disagreement extends is that I think that ⁓ Adam Kelly is trying to sort of be precise about that politics in order to understand how contemporary writers generally on the left are using it. Whereas I think that the kind of more wishy washy version of that isHenry Oliver (18:37)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (18:44)You know, just to say that neoliberalism is the air that we breathe. And there, I think I agree with you that it's just not super helpful.Henry Oliver (18:49)Mmm.Yeah, my problem with the book was that he would not tell you what did Hayek think or say. He would say Hayek was a cheerleader for the free market. Or he would not tell you what is the Gary Becker view of human capital. He would say human capital is an ideology that infuses itself into every aspect of your life so that you can no longer be separate from the market. And it's all this stuff, and it's like, well, that's nothing to do with Hayek and Gary Becker. ⁓Jeffrey Lawrence (19:19)Can I just,just one thing on that, is that, I mean, I did go back and I mean, he has these moments where he's talking specifically about Hayek and the road to serfdom and saying, I think that this is a worldview in which, he'll quote Hayek talking about the problem with representative democracy and say, the real moral choices are choices that are made in the market.To me, I think that that is to engage to a certain degree with the thought. It is true, I think, as often happens in scholarship that you have the people who are defining a phenomenon from the perspective that you may be interested in. So there are a number of people from the left who are criticizing neoliberalism. I see him as engaging a little bit more than you do.Henry Oliver (20:11)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (20:11)in that in that direct thought and particularly compared to other humanities scholars who do I think what you're saying which is to just do that. So that's where I think I see him as doing.Henry Oliver (20:18)sure, yeah.I guess you could summy critique up as being like, if this is the good version, things are worse than I thought. Yeah. Yeah. So from here, let's go to the question of what is academic Marxism?Jeffrey Lawrence (20:27)Okay, well.Henry Oliver (20:35)Because I think a lot of people think that there's a lot of Marxism in the academy and that if they're not woke, they're Marxists or maybe they're both, right? And ⁓ personally, I spend a lot of time trying to work out what these Marxists think and it's quite confusing. And there seem to be lots of, and Julianne, you and I have talked about this, all the different, some Marxists aren't Marxists, as it were. tell us, give us a quick overview of how Marxist things really are.Julianne (21:04)Yeah, I mean it's a very complicated question to answer.because Marxism is too, well, debatably a living tradition. ⁓ And there's a huge amount of disagreement about what constitutes Marxism, ⁓ what is a legitimate form of Marxism, what is not, where do the boundaries lie, what is reconcilable with other schools of thought, what is not. But I think the big picture is that beginning, even in the 60s, Marxism moved into academia. This is a story that is told very inflectionallyHenry Oliver (21:11)youJulianne (21:37)and Perry Anderson's considerations on Western Marxism, where he argues that in the West, Marxism becomes alienated from actual political, economic, and social movements. It moves into academia. And as a result, it becomes much more philosophical, much more abstruse, much less concerned with the traditional concerns of Marxism, labor and the politics of labor and the politics and economics of labor. And that this continues and is accelerated, in fact, in the Cold War. So what you get atthe same time, you have something called the cultural turn in history and in sociology, ⁓ the rise of what is, debatably called identity politics. so Marxism remains a current within that, but it's far less of an influential current as time goes by. ⁓ And I think that many, many people...use the word Marxism and would say that there are Marxist influences in their work, but they're not viewing it as a kind of systematic approach to economics or to economic history. And so at that point, I do think you have to ask, well, what does Marxism actually mean? There are certainly people that work with, you know, ideas that they refer to as Marxist, but that have implications that to my mind are entirely antithetical to Marxism. And so I kind of feelas somebody who does work within what I would call the historical materialist tradition.⁓ in a very sort of straightforwardly economic sense, know, are markets becoming more efficient in Renaissance England? Those kinds of questions. How much does bread cost? How much do books cost? Those kinds of questions. ⁓ If you're interested in that tradition within Marxist thought, you feel that it's actually really incredibly peripheral within academia in comparison to, say, the politics of gender ⁓ or other considerations of that kind. And there's just not always sensitivityHenry Oliver (23:16)Mm-hmm.Julianne (23:35)to whether these different schools of thought actually cohere in any meaningful or deep way. What would you say, Jeff?Jeffrey Lawrence (23:44)Yeah, that's, I mean, just to pick up on that, think that that's really helpful in that trajectory, which I also, know, the Perry Anderson, a lot of people who have talked about how Marxism.moves into the academy after the 1960s, I think it is just really important to say it becomes a different thing. And I think part of the confusion, Henry, may also be that it's like, so the Christopher Ruffo version of this is it's like, it's all Marxism, it's all everywhere. But then I think that becomes, it's so broad a definition of Marxism that what we're really talking about is aof progressive politics or sort of an amalgam of different ideas that may have some roots in Marxism of previous periods, but really don't, as Julianne is saying, really don't align with like Marxist thought or Marxian thought as such. And also as someone who does take that tradition very seriously, I think a lot about Silvia Federici, who's a feminist, know, a Marxist feminist. Like these are people who are absolutely steeped.in a Marxist political tradition. And in some ways, these are figures that may be very important to the contemporary tradition. But if you actually read what they're writing, it's like, it's an extremely watered down version that we get in the academy in part, and I'll just end with this, in part because to Julianne's point, I think it like when Marxism also becomesHenry Oliver (24:59)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (25:10)a kind of one discourse among many that you are using in what are often very bourgeois institutions, then it becomes a kind of intellectual tool and sometimes even an intellectual weapon, as many of these things are, where the question of how it relates to practical politics, working class politics,politics outside of the academy becomes sort of secondary. And so then really we're not talking about someone who's a Marxist as in they're like fighting for the working class. You're talking about someone who's just using Marx as a tool, which is fine, but that certainly shouldn't give them any sort of like, you know, moral high ground when speaking from the position of the left is my view.Henry Oliver (25:53)Is there some inherent aspect of literature that means it has been more amenable to Marxist study of any description than it has been to, you know, ⁓systems of thought that come more from a kind of Adam Smith, Friedrich Hayek tradition. Because it's very striking to me how few liberals and libertarians they're currently, publicly currently, I know a lot of them keep it to themselves, some of them have said as much to me. ⁓ But is there some good literary reason for this? Or is it just an institutional ⁓ problem?Julianne (26:33)That's an interesting question. ⁓ I mean, there are sort of traditional reasons for this in thatMarxism from, you know, in Marxist writing from very early on was interested in the relationship between culture and historical change. So there's a very, even by the time you get to the beginning of the 20th century, there's already a very well developed materialist tradition for thinking about cultural change and cultural transformation over the long run in a way that I don't think is true ⁓ of rival ideologies. Not that there isn't great literary work, but that there's not the sameHenry Oliver (27:09)Sure, sure, sure.Julianne (27:11)kind of sense of a methodological tradition. So there's a lot of momentum there.⁓ But in terms of more intrinsic reasons, I don't know. I mean, it doesn't seem obvious. Certainly at other times and places, we haven't had the situation that we have now. I often find myself thinking of, know, Piketty's arguments, which this does not pertain to Marxism, but this does pertain to the ⁓ difference between the political parties in the US, which is just that ⁓ education has become the means of differentiating between two rival elites, you know, not...Henry Oliver (27:27)Mm.Julianne (27:47)a difference between a working class and an elite, but two rival elites that are actually distinguished by the university itself. So as long as the university plays that structural role, it seems unlikely that its politics are going to drift to the other side, because that is actually precisely what the university has become. ⁓ I don't know, what do you think, Jeff?Jeffrey Lawrence (28:06)Yeah, I mean, it's a really good question. I mean, I share the sense that, I mean, I think that there is an extraordinary ⁓ Marxist literary tradition that goes back to, you know, sort of Lukacs and these debates, Adorno, Horkheimer. These are critics that are important to me, cultural studies with people like Stuart Hall and Raymond Williams. I mean, they very much, I think, were, though,Henry Oliver (28:20)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (28:30)That was a kind of insurgent force, we could say, within the academy that has now become, I would say, almost entirely dominant. I personally, mean, one of the things when I was writing my first book was on US and Latin American literature. I was very interested in a certain liberal tradition that comes from, you know, John Dewey. We would now say that, I mean, it's not the liberalism of, you know, Milton Friedman and von Hayek, but it is,Dewey, think, was for many people the most important philosopher, aesthetic philosopher of the early part of the 20th century. And he was a sort of radical liberal who thought a lot about the liberal tradition. I people like Lionel Trilling with the liberal imagination, these were, I think, writers who were very important.Henry Oliver (29:16)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (29:19)in a particular moment. And I guess, you this is, you may see this as a dodge, I, Henry, but I definitely feel like these are books that are really important to my formation and whether or not I associate with a certain particular strain of contemporary ⁓ liberalism, I don't tend to think of myself necessarily in those terms. And so,Henry Oliver (29:26)HahahaJeffrey Lawrence (29:43)I think we really should be reading those because those types of people, people like John Dewey, people like Lionel Trilling, know, Philip Rav, these kind of mid-century intellectuals, they were really engaging in major debates and they were foundational for the field, even if now I think there may be some desire to take distance from them.Henry Oliver (30:07)It's the bigger problem that we should just get back to more for literature as literature.And once we allow a kind of methodological approach from one tradition or another, we're just no longer really studying literature. We're using literature to, like I had a professor once and they said an essay about Anglo-Saxon poetry with some Harold Bloom quote saying, none of this is any good. It's like the great age before the flood, that kind of thing. And I basically wrote an essay saying, yes, that's correct. And she did not like that. And I said, look, I bet you don't actually love anyof this poetry. I bet you don't care about any of this. You know, I just sort of... And she said, that's not the point. The point is that we can use it to impose the... You we can use it as a way of dealing with the ideas we want to deal with and having methodological... And I was just like, I'm never coming back. You know, goodbye. And that to me is kind of... Is that the more foundational problem, right? Some people want to take a kind of...Northrop Frye, Christopher Ricks, literature as literature approach, and some people want to have an extra literary methodology. Be it Freudian, be it feminist, be it identity politics, be it whatever. And that is the bigger sort of division here, and is the solution to just say Shakespeare is Shakespeare and you can keep the other stuff for your other classes.Julianne (31:33)Well, I don't know because, I mean, in terms of what actually goes into the classroom, I think that's a different question. I don't teach very much theory in the classroom. ⁓ But I don't think that we can just say that because the ability to say, you know, these are great works, this is part of a canon, it came with its own set of ideological commitments that are now...Henry Oliver (31:40)Show. Show, show, show.Julianne (31:57)sort of vanishing, right? So we need some kind of framework for making sense of why we read literary history at all, what its coherence is, what its shape is, what its structure is. A lot of those frameworks were implicit. didn't, you know, they were articulated, they didn't need to be articulated every single time because they were so woven into the whole system of education. As that becomes increasingly untrue, I think we do find ourselves in a position where we need to explain why we care about this object literature at all.in the first place. And I don't think just saying, you know, literature for literature's sake without situating it within some kind of wider account of culture really works. I don't know that situating it within some wider account of culture really works either in terms of persuading anyone, but I don't think you can say to people, look, Shakespeare is Shakespeare, we have to read him because he's great. I think you need to...Jeffrey Lawrence (32:45)Mm-hmm.Henry Oliver (32:45)HahahaJulianne (32:53)have an argument about the place that Shakespeare has in culture ought to have ⁓ because that is increasingly not true.Henry Oliver (33:02)So I mostly agree, but it is very striking to me. I mean, I sort of half agree. It is very striking to me that the just read it because it's great argument is winning a lot of ⁓ admirers on the internet, while some version of what you've just said is sort of dying in the academy. And I'm not saying that therefore that's a decisive factor and we should just do this. But in terms of getting people interested,that does see something on the internet among the new humanities culture on Substack and other places, does just seem to be resistant to these methodologies and ideology, right? Do you see what I'm saying? ⁓Jeffrey Lawrence (33:43)Can I, I mean, yeah, Imean, I would say, and we may just disagree on this, but I agree with Julianne that, I mean, the ideological context of a work, the historical context of work seems incredibly important. I saw Henry, yeah, yeah. And so I think that there, yeah, yeah, but I think that's not, I mean, I think we can't totally gloss over that because all three of us have had long educational sort of,Henry Oliver (33:58)sure, yeah. We're all historicists, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (34:11)a long educational formation that has allowed us to even have this conversation, let alone read these works. I, you you, you, I think you had a post about this on, on Austin about like, you know, sort of there, there are certain things that are helpful for you to know in order, once you're going into work. I think that that's different from the thing that you're pointing to and where I think I would agree with you, which is that when, when methodology becomes the TrumpHenry Oliver (34:15)Yes.Yeah, yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (34:41)card over literature. think that that is that is an important cultural shift. And I think we are now at the point in which this is my formulation for it. It's like if you're just going to read literature for, you know, for a particular political thing, for Marxism, let's say, in order to understand, you know, sort of like a Marxist conception of society, why not just read Marxism?Henry Oliver (34:42)Hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (35:11)like Marxist theory. mean, so I do think that that is a real problem and the failure, and to be fair to humanities scholars, this is, has been a big debate over the past five or 10 years. I think it's just more contested in the academic space than it is on Substack, where I think Substack is kind of demonstrating to my mind also that some of the more frank, I, I sweat, some of the more BS, yeah.Henry Oliver (35:11)Yes.Say what you want.Jeffrey Lawrence (35:39)Some of the more b******t arguments that I see about like, ⁓ well, there aren't X people, like there aren't white men who are writing and reading, and then you just see the tremendous number of people who are reading, they may just feel alienated from certain ways of doing things. And that, I think, that's a wide range of people. And I think it's a wide range of people who are turned off by certain things in the academy.Henry Oliver (35:49)yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (36:07)I think a lot of that though has to do with a general problem that we need people in literary studies who deeply care about literature, regardless of what ideological thing, you know, where they're coming from. And if you are always just interested in the methodology that you're bringing to it, as opposed to literature, then this is going to be a long-term problem because people are going to start asking, why is it that we are reading literature?Henry Oliver (36:34)To what extent is that the basic problem that the universities have right now? To me that just seems to be it's that, right?Julianne (36:39)I think that's a huge problem. Yeah, I think it's a huge problem.Yeah, it's a huge problem. guess, you know, while sort of agreeing with you and definitely agreeing with Jeff, I guess what I would say to sort of refine what I was saying earlier is, no, I don't think you should study the methodologies instead of studying literature. Of course not.⁓ But the questions that the methodologies ask are really basic to the questions that we need to ask about the study of literature. So it's not that you should be studying Marxism or feminism or this or that instead of studying literature, but I don't think you can...totally do away with the questions of, what is this thing? What is its role in culture? What does it mean? Why do we study it over long, long periods of time? ⁓ It is, it has become very hard to make that, that case. And it's not that I think making that case explicitly is going to win converts as opposed to talking about the literature itself. In the end, it's going to be the literature itself, if it's going to be anything at all. But to have an account of the meaning of what we're doing, even for our own sakes, we do need to be thinking about questions like what is this thing?and why, right, which are supposed to be questions that methods help us ask.Jeffrey Lawrence (37:53)And can I just add to that kind of the, I mean, a word that we haven't used so far is specialization. And I think to a certain degree, like what may unite us in this conversation is a sense too, that like, that literature is not just like this particular corner that you're studying and that you're interested in because it's your field. And so,Henry Oliver (38:13)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (38:16)Those type of turf battles, I think, are also really important to this. The sense that your topic is the thing that you specifically focus on and the difficulty of communicating that is an issue. And also just the sense that, like, I mean, my sense is you can be interested in history and sociology. Julianne and I are both interested in that. And also literature, so that it doesn't, I mean, part of it is, I think, restoring the notion that a kind of broadHenry Oliver (38:19)Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (38:46)like intellectual training is not a liability, but is actually something that you need in order to understand literature and that heightens your appreciation.Henry Oliver (38:57)Somewhere in one of Iris Murdoch's interviews, she talks about the state of literary undergraduates today, because obviously she was married to John Bailey and had a lot of, and this is like in the 80s or something, ⁓ and she said, well, they're not interested in just reading the literature and understanding the history of it anymore. They want to have all these crazy theories.It's very striking when you see stuff like that from 50 years ago. Did the cannon wars ever end? Did we ever change the arguments? In some ways, is this not just the Harold Bloom thing? It's still going, right? And one route out that I think you've identified is just ⁓ be broader. Just read more outside your own area.The people who everyone loves on Twitter, like CS Lewis and Harold Bloom, are the ones who weren't in their public facing work. They weren't narrow specialists. CS Lewis would do everything from some random Latin medieval writer to Jane Austen. And in a way, is that what we need? We just need to have more of that appreciation of the long history of literature.Jeffrey Lawrence (40:10)I mean, just one thing, then Julianna, I'd be curious to like from like a ⁓ 20th and 21st century perspective. Like I agree with that, but I also think that like that was Toni Morrison as well. I mean, talking about the classics, mean, part of the problem I think is that we have these readings of figures that become then sort of symbolic or totemic of.Henry Oliver (40:23)Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (40:33)like a contemporary, you know, whatever that may be, an identity category or whatever it may be. Whereas if you actually read Toni Morrison, absolutely voracious, absolutely thinking about like, you know, the classics, you know, thinking through Greek drama, ⁓ know, Faulkner, you know, ⁓ master's thesis on the outsider in Faulkner and Virginia Woolf. I mean, I think some of this also has to dowith something that has happened very specifically in the past 10 years of also subjecting figures of the past who were interested in that more Catholic notion of culture to these kind of like very selective readings. I mean, it's true of James Baldwin. I thought about this a lot. Like a lot of these figures who just didn't want to be boxed in in a particular identity way get then taken up asHenry Oliver (41:11)Hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (41:26)kind of figures for that when actually, mean, in some ways they were, you know, I'm sure Toni Morrison and Harold Bloom wouldn't have agreed on everything, but there was actually, I mean, but really there is actually more alignment there than like the 2025 reading of them would give credit for.Henry Oliver (41:40)Yeah, yeah, yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (41:47)Yeah, don't know, Julianne, if yeah.Julianne (41:49)Yeah, no, mean, I obviously I agree so, so entirely with.everything you're saying, but especially with your comments about longer literary histories, more capacious reading, know, longer, wider. Obviously you read cross linguistically and do work cross linguistically. So both broader and longer literary histories, much more than kind of a focus on methodology. Part of the reason I'm defending methodology here is because methodology, if used well, forces you outside of disciplinary specialization or can, has that capacity. In my field, the problem is not thatpeople are adhering to big sweeping methodologies anymore. In my field, the problem is that the big questions have almost disappeared, replaced by, in many cases, extremely excellent, detailed, narrow, pointillist empiricist work. I think that work is...valuable and it's foundational, but you can't have a field that just has that. You have to have something that makes the field cohere. You have to have questions that the field coheres around. know, and increasingly, I'm a historicist. I got into this because I love this kind of like, ⁓ you know,tell me everything about this particular edition of the Fairy Queen. ⁓ I love that kind of thing. ⁓ And yet at the same time, there is part of me that is starting to wonder.Henry Oliver (43:09)YouJeffrey Lawrence (43:10)YouJulianne (43:17)is it actually more relevant even for being a Renaissance literary scholar to have read every single person writing in England in 1592 and then maybe instead of Dante or going the other way, right? Instead of...Richardson or Voltaire. Like maybe we should be reading more Voltaire instead of every non-entity. And I'm guilty of this because my whole project is every non-entity who published a book in 1592. So this is very much self-critique. But that more capacious sense, and that more capacious sense exactly as Jeff says, is very much aligned with how writers themselves, especially great writers, approach literature. I teach Toni Morrison in my Shakespeare class sometimes because she has a short play on Desdemona.Jeffrey Lawrence (43:47)If you ⁓Henry Oliver (44:06)So we're obviously all going to await your blog about the different editions of the Fairy Queen and your favorite things about each of them. Just give us some examples of what the big questions would be and what these empirical questions that people are. Just make it sort of concrete for us what you're talking about there.Julianne (44:11)Hawell i mean there are a lot of people who have big ideas ⁓that maybe make their way into their own work, that show up in the introduction of their own work, but that are not defining the field in a meaningful way. There are a few debates that think are actually happening within my field that are interesting, like the extent to which ⁓ Renaissance literature should be understood on national versus international lines. I think that's quite an active one that's very interesting. ⁓ But I think a lot of books written in the Renaissance, and I don't wantHenry Oliver (44:39)Mm-hmm.Julianne (45:03)topoint to any one book because these are all you know good books and books that I like but a lot of books will be have a very narrow date range a set there you know the typical organization of a book in literary studies is to have a sort of thematic topic not always thematics sometimes it'sbook historical or cultural, but ⁓ often it will be a thematic topic. Say a topic like ⁓ shame in Renaissance literature, right? So you'll take shame in Renaissance literature. This is fictional. This isn't anybody's book. If it is accidentally somebody's book, I apologize. Shame in Renaissance literature, okay? And then you'll have this ⁓ contextualizing introduction where you might bring in a bit of Foucault and you might bring in various other theorists.Henry Oliver (45:23)Mm-hmm.Sure, sure,Jeffrey Lawrence (45:39)YouJulianne (45:52)But you will also go very, very deeply into, say, sermons, right, the sermon literature. And then you'll have five chapters. you know, one will be like Shakespeare play, and then maybe one will be Spencer. And then maybe one will be somebody, you know, more marginal or be Ben Johnson or there'll be Webster, you know. ⁓ And then you will put them, you know, this is the method of New Hizorizis. You'll put them beside legal documents and you'll put them beside sermons and you'll put them beside other very, very contextualized and often very well contextualized.works from the period. But you won't write a book that is like, you know, literature and shame, you know, across three centuries ⁓ that would then maybe potentially think about, you know, is there a fundamentally different way that drama versus the novel represent shame? Does this help us understand long range debates about interiority? And again, it's not that nobody ever does this. It's that the feelI feel English literature used to be more aligned over around these kind of shared long-term questions and debates and they're much less aligned around them now because of specialization and because of the sort of dynamic of know decline and and narrowing of prospects that Jeff has mentioned.Henry Oliver (47:11)A lot of people complain about the administrators, the way funding is done, the way you can only get funding for certain types of work, career structures, all these structural factors that make life either difficult as an academic or just force you into certain decisions and activities. ⁓ To what extent is writing on Substack actually going to be a beneficial solution?to get around those problems and to what extent is it just going to be a sort of useful addition and is going to be very stimulating for you all but might not, you know, might not actually change things. What's your sense of that?Jeffrey Lawrence (47:54)This was something I've thought about this a lot because I wrote for the Chronicle of Higher Education. think Julianne and I have both write or have written for the Chronicle and something that was on the public humanities and I very specifically this is 2022 or 2023 said like, sub stack is not going to be the solution. Partially and my point there was something that I still believe to a certain extent which is thatas someone who has worked in different public humanities ⁓ programs, as someone who knows to a certain degree the publishing industry in the US and Latin America and has done work on that, I think that it's hard to ⁓ exaggerate the degree to which funding for this type of research, it's just really expensive and the existing funding models that exist for something like Substack or I mean any other sort of ⁓platform economy, even public humanities projects, it's just really hard to do. So I'm much more in favor. So I think Substack is really important as a venue. I think that as a potential model for, you know, a sustainable model for doing academic scholarship, I see a lot more limitations. And that's why I've said, I mean, I think in some ways, if the types of conversations that happen on Substack,could be then imported back into our fields. Like, I don't think we should just destroy the institutions and get rid of these departments. I think that there needs to be a sort of infusion of these types of debates that are happening on Substack in the university, because the universities have funding, you know, have funding. And I think it's partially about fighting for that, this kind of holistic thing that we've been talking about up to this point.Julianne (49:49)Yeah, I completely agree. That's my view as well. I don't think that Substack's funding model would actually be good for scholarship. I'm not saying that you couldn't get a few people making it viable, but for a scholarship as a whole, I think it would be terrible for scholarship as a whole. At the same time, for the reasons we've been discussing here, we need to be talking with other people and not just with people in our subfield of a subfield of a subfield. And Substack is great for that.Henry Oliver (50:18)I sometimes think that if you can draw a distinction between scholarship and criticism, the academy can keep the scholarship and the criticism needs to come outside. You can all still write it, right? But it needs to be done in a way that is free of all the institutional incentives and constraints and just all that problem and you can all just be free to say other things online.Jeffrey Lawrence (50:43)I mean, just very quickly on that, I mean, I do think that in my personal case, because I came to Substack partially because I had a very bad experience with a kind of ⁓ a piece that I had pitched to like a venue that was, you know, sort of like progressive venue where I felt like I was saying things about contemporary author that everyone else was saying, right? It was a kind of public secret, a kind of critique of this writer.And I felt like it was not going to be published in any of those venues and in the Academy itself, that would be a problem. And not because this was something that even, you know, sort of ⁓ departed so much from things that people would say, but just because of kind of like the power structures. And since I've been on Substack, I've had multiple people, particularly with the first Substack piece that I wrote, but with other ones as well.Henry Oliver (51:11)Mmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (51:35)people in academia telling me, thank you for saying this. And also I'm reading your sub stack as an academic right now. But I also, do think that there remains, I mean, it's changing, but I do think that there's speaking of shame, like there are people who they're just not sure as graduate students.what they can say and what they can't say. And I think that's a real issue. So I agree, criticism is important, but even for scholarships too, I think that there need to be taboos that are broken in order for scholarship, as Julianne said, to kind of like return to that more sort of vibrant feel that it once had.Julianne (52:20)Yeah, I think that's right. Obviously those taboos are less present in my field than in yours because the contemporary stakes are much less clear. ⁓ And sometimes I'm jealous of people who work in the contemporary field because there are stakes. And then I hear things like what you just said and I'm no longer so jealous. But yeah, no, do think that...Henry Oliver (52:35)YouJeffrey Lawrence (52:35)YouJulianne (52:46)People, even beyond what you would think that they would plausibly need to be, people are very cautious and graduate students especially are very cautious and even having the example of people saying things publicly is incredibly important and helpful.Henry Oliver (53:02)It's interesting how many PhD students there are on Substack. There are several English literature PhD students and I find it amazing actually that they're writing a Substack ⁓ rather than writing something academic. This to me is a very clear signal of something is changing, right? Something important is changing.Jeffrey Lawrence (53:28)I would say it's pragmatic too. I mean, I don't think that there's any reason people shouldn't graduate students. I don't think that they necessarily need to have a substack, but I also, I just think that there's a kind of recognition that, you know, especially at this moment, mean, frankly, with a lot of this does have to do with the Trump administration and kind of the way that it's been directed very specifically at, you know, sort of the humanities andHenry Oliver (53:47)Mm-hmm.Jeffrey Lawrence (53:53)So I do think that there's a kind of sense that the hiring isn't happening. And so it's like, well, why am I going to invest in this very small possibility of getting an, an academic job or even better yet, I'm going to build my own audience. I'm going to talk about these things because that's going to empower me at the moment in which I'm actually looking for jobs. So I, I, I'm like, I agree with you that I think it's just like, ⁓ it's a pretty astonishing thing.in the sense of the sort of initiative, but it also kind of makes sense given the world that exists.Julianne (54:30)Yeah, mean, you know, our graduate students are not.coming in, I'm sure yours are the same way, they're not coming in thinking they're going to get jobs ⁓ anymore. So they're coming in thinking, I have six years to build the kind of intellectual life to become the kind of writer and the kind of thinker that I want to be. And that's the priority, much more than anything sort of pragmatic about what they might do in terms of future career prospects, because most of them have absolutely no idea. It's much more about how can I find an intellectual community? How can I become the kindintellectual I want to be. And if academia is not going to be their home long term for that, it cannot be in academia. It has to be elsewhere. In addition, now that there are fewer conferences, journals, you know, are delayed by years. That was another thing that got me on Substack is I wrote a review.And I wrote the review as soon as I got the book. I wrote the review that I was asked to review. Then like, you know, six weeks, sent it back. ⁓ It took four years for the review to appear in that journal. And I was like, why, how can we possibly have a conversation when this journal has just been sitting on this copy edited review until they could find a slot for it in their, you know, in this day and age? How can that be the case? You know, so I think, you know, that's also part of what's going on.Henry Oliver (55:49)Yes.So are you running introduction to sub-stack classes for your graduate students? This is not yet, yes.Julianne (55:59)No, not yet, not yet.Jeffrey Lawrence (56:00)Yeah, yeah. I mean,interestingly, we had an event with Lincoln Michelle, who's a very popular at Rutgers, who's a very popular Substack writer. I mean, that was one of our, was a hugely well attended event. I mean, I do think, and it doesn't necessarily need to be just Substack, but I think public intellectual work, think graduate students and also undergraduates, they want to understand this because they know ⁓Henry Oliver (56:08)Mm-mm.Jeffrey Lawrence (56:29)precisely what Julianne said, that it's not gonna work for them to just stay in their lane and keep the blinders on and keep going. Even if they want a career in academia, they know that they need to be involved in these other things. so, I mean, to the extent that I think we can do that in our institutions and give them a sense of what's going on, I mean, definitely we're thinking about that at Rutgers.Henry Oliver (56:55)If the humanities goes into some sort of terminal decline and there are fewer departments and the student numbers never recover and all these blah blah blah, all these bad things, ⁓ does it matter?Julianne (57:08)Well, for what? mean...Jeffrey Lawrence (57:10)Ha ha.Henry Oliver (57:10)Well, because everyone talksabout it like, the humanities are dying, this is terrible. And I'm like, what's the problem? We had like English literature was the number one subject for undergraduates, and now it's not, right? What is the actual problem if the humanities are in this terminal decline? No, I get that it's all bad for you. Yeah, no, for all of you, of course, right? But like, what's the what's the actual problem here? Yeah.Jeffrey Lawrence (57:27)You mean besides the jobs of, mean, because part of that, right, right, Yeah, for us. But for society.Henry Oliver (57:38)Obviously when someone doesn't have a job or can't get a job, like of course, of course. But can you give us a succinct explanation of why people who are not involved in it should care about the decline of the humanities or should recognize that it's something that we don't want to happen in some way?Julianne (57:56)I mean, I think the sort of simplest thing is that we still do have, it's fading, but we still do have some shared cultural literary heritage ⁓ or basis. Yeah, I don't use the word heritage since it's a kind of nationally charged word, but some kind of shared basis that allows us to talk with each other about literature. ⁓ And most of this, think, is predicated not on the university, but on the high school canon.Henry Oliver (58:11)Sure.Julianne (58:25)is an extension of that. So I think our number one thing should be the high school curriculum. ⁓ But then our number two thing should be ⁓ ensuring that people have some kind of foundation in, you know, a...as wide a range as we can give them of literary texts that they get in university because that is the basis of a shared literary culture. I don't think you get, you know, I don't think you get a wider literary culture where people can talk about things, ⁓ you know, like 18th century books or, you know, 19th or 20th century books across the world ⁓ without having some kind of institutional basis, having some kind of shared institutional structure that people have passed through. Otherwise, what you will get is people, you know, picking up thingsyou know, a bit here, a bit there. Some of them will be so unfamiliar that they will be put off by it. Some of them maybe won't. ⁓ But you won't get anything like a common culture. And for me, that's sort of intrinsically good. But there is also this kind of idealistic ⁓ democratic aspect to this that you got in the mid-20th century in the post-war expansion of higher education and also the expansion of public education. This idea that you would have a citizenship thatbe participating in intellectual, philosophical, and political culture at a very high level. I don't see how you get that without having some kind of shared institutional basis for it.Jeffrey Lawrence (59:50)Yeah, mean, would just, yeah, I think everything and then maybe the only like word that I would use that you didn't use there is just kind of like literacy. mean, cultural literacy, but actual literacy, because I do think that beyond the culture wars, like the one thing that I think I'd like across the political spectrum is that there is this sense that a certain ability to read and to engage in civic life is declining.⁓ And so, yeah, I mean, I think that reading all sorts of texts is important and having cultural literacy is important to having an informed citizenry. So that to me seems like the reason for doing it. But as Julianne says, and maybe this doesn't totally answer the question, because I do think some of these are perhaps like for us at the college level, it's a little bit downstream of these sort of.broader issues, which is one more reason I think that making the case about why we should care about literature is also on us. It shouldn't just be assumed, as you're saying, Henry, that because we want jobs that this is good for everyone. I think we need to make that case.Henry Oliver (1:01:05)Will you be making that case on Substack?Jeffrey Lawrence (1:01:09)Yeah, mean, don't know, I mean, I think, you know, sort of more and more, I do think that, you know, that we need to be doing this. I mean, for me, everything that's happened over the past couple of years, I think the way my sense of kind of like the failure of a certain liberal project after the Trump election, you know, last year was really important to me in saying there is a way that we're going about the assumptions that we have aboutHenry Oliver (1:01:10)HahahaJulianne (1:01:11)ThankJeffrey Lawrence (1:01:38)literacy and what we should be doing and the role of academic scholarship. I mean, that I feel like was a turning point, at least personally for me. And I think engaging in places like Substack, but just generally in like public culture, to me, seems like it's just like it is the one avenue that we have. So yes, I guess.Henry Oliver (1:02:00)If your colleagues are listening and you both want to say something to them to encourage them onto Substack, what would you say?Julianne (1:02:10)Jeff, your colleagues, ⁓ do they subscribe to your Substack? Because one of the things that has happened is at first nobody, you know, I told a couple friends, but nobody else knew about this. But now more and more members of my department have subscribed to my Substack, which feels like, which does make it feel sort of high stakes in a different way. Has that happened to you?Henry Oliver (1:02:28)YouJeffrey Lawrence (1:02:32)I'm still pretty under the radar. ⁓ I have some colleagues, I know that there's some graduate students who also read it, ⁓ I mean, and colleague is a small thing. I'm more like, you my colleagues, have a great relationship with my department. I talk to them and sort of, but I think it's more like colleagues in general in terms of the academy that is important.Right? mean, and it again, I don't think it necessarily has to be sub-stacked, but it just shouldn't be Twitter. mean, I think that the long form writing that one finds in the debates for me, at least this is where it's happening right now. And so that would be my pitch is that I just think that the debates that are happening are better than they are anywhere else on the internet.Henry Oliver (1:03:18)Thank you both. I thought this was very interesting and I hope it encourages more of your peers to come and join us on Substack This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk

En esta conversación, se explora la vida y obra de Siegfried Kracauer, un autor poco conocido en el ámbito de la teoría crítica. Se discuten sus contribuciones a la escuela de Frankfurt, su relación con Adorno y Benjamin, y su análisis de la cultura de masas, especialmente a través de su ensayo 'El Ornamento de la Masa'. Kracauer es presentado como un pensador extraterritorial que critica la superficialidad de la cultura capitalista y la alienación de las masas, destacando la importancia de la desmitologización en la crítica cultural. En esta conversación, se exploran temas como la relación entre la razón y el ornamento en la condición humana, el ascenso de las masas y la categoría del empleado, así como la crítica al capitalismo y la razón enturbiada. Se discute el impacto de los espectáculos y las redes sociales en la salud mental y el pensamiento contemporáneo, así como la distinción entre mito y cuento de hadas. Finalmente, se reflexiona sobre el papel y la ética del intelectual en tiempos de masas, destacando la importancia de la crítica cultural y social.#teoríacritica #escueladefrankfurt #sociología Capítulos:00:00 Introducción a Siegfried Krakauer09:35 Biografía y contexto histórico19:26 Influencia en la teoría crítica y relación con Adorno29:53 Análisis del texto 'El ornamento de la masa'33:29 El Ornamento de la Masa36:09 Coordinación y Eficiencia en la Estética39:36 Alienación y Entretenimiento en el Capitalismo44:18 Reflejos Estéticos y la Racionalidad Dominante49:15 Desmitologización y Progreso Histórico55:11 La Influencia de la Cultura en la Sociedad59:48 Mito vs. Cuento de Hadas en la Crítica Cultural01:03:38 El Maratón Internacional de Danza Continua01:04:29 Obediencia y Conductismo en la Cultura del Espectáculo01:06:21 La Condición de los Empleados en la Sociedad Moderna01:07:45 Atomización y Conexiones Sociales en la Era Digital01:10:08 La Relevancia de los Autores Críticos01:11:07 Textos Fundamentales de Krakauer01:12:28 La Nueva Clase Media y su Conciencia Política01:14:22 El Cine como Reflejo de la Sociedad01:16:14 La Exigencia Mínima del Intelectual01:18:09 La Imagen del Intelectual y su Compromiso01:20:19 Masa vs. Comunidad en la Teoría Crítica01:22:32 Libertad y Manipulación en la Sociedad Contemporánea01:24:20 La Ética del Intelectual sin Blindaje Institucional01:25:42 La Resistencia a las Tendencias Destructivas01:29:18 La Obra Novelesca de Krakauer

The Frankfurt School's own legacy is best preserved by exercising an immanent critique of its premises and the conclusions to which they often led. By distinguishing between what is still and what is no longer alive in Critical Theory, Immanent Critiques: The Frankfurt School Under Pressure (Verso, 2023) seeks to demonstrate its continuing relevance in the 21st century. Fifty years after the appearance of The Dialectical Imagination, his pioneering history of the Frankfurt School, Martin Jay reflects on what may be living and dead in its legacy. Rather than treating it with filial piety as a fortress to be defended, he takes seriously its anti-systematic impulse and sensitivity to changing historical circumstances.  Honoring the Frankfurt School's practice of immanent critique, he puts critical pressure on a number of its own ideas by probing their contradictory impulses. Among them are the pathologization of political deviance through stigmatizing "authoritarian personalities," the undefended theological premises of Walter Benjamin's work, and the ambivalence of its members' analyses of anti-Semitism and Zionism. Additional questions are asked about other time-honored Marxist themes: the meaning of alienation, the alleged damages of abstraction, and the advocacy of a politics based on a singular notion of the truth. Rather, however, than allowing these questions to snowball into an unwarranted repudiation of the Frankfurt School legacy as a whole, the essay collection also acknowledges a number of its still potent arguments. They explore its neglected, but now timely analysis of "racket society," Adorno's dialectical reading of aesthetic sublimation, and the unexpected implications of Benjamin's focus on the corpse for political theory. Jay shows that it is a still evolving theoretical tradition which offers resources for the understanding of–and perhaps even practical betterment–of our increasingly troubled world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The Frankfurt School's own legacy is best preserved by exercising an immanent critique of its premises and the conclusions to which they often led. By distinguishing between what is still and what is no longer alive in Critical Theory, Immanent Critiques: The Frankfurt School Under Pressure (Verso, 2023) seeks to demonstrate its continuing relevance in the 21st century. Fifty years after the appearance of The Dialectical Imagination, his pioneering history of the Frankfurt School, Martin Jay reflects on what may be living and dead in its legacy. Rather than treating it with filial piety as a fortress to be defended, he takes seriously its anti-systematic impulse and sensitivity to changing historical circumstances.  Honoring the Frankfurt School's practice of immanent critique, he puts critical pressure on a number of its own ideas by probing their contradictory impulses. Among them are the pathologization of political deviance through stigmatizing "authoritarian personalities," the undefended theological premises of Walter Benjamin's work, and the ambivalence of its members' analyses of anti-Semitism and Zionism. Additional questions are asked about other time-honored Marxist themes: the meaning of alienation, the alleged damages of abstraction, and the advocacy of a politics based on a singular notion of the truth. Rather, however, than allowing these questions to snowball into an unwarranted repudiation of the Frankfurt School legacy as a whole, the essay collection also acknowledges a number of its still potent arguments. They explore its neglected, but now timely analysis of "racket society," Adorno's dialectical reading of aesthetic sublimation, and the unexpected implications of Benjamin's focus on the corpse for political theory. Jay shows that it is a still evolving theoretical tradition which offers resources for the understanding of–and perhaps even practical betterment–of our increasingly troubled world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

The Frankfurt School's own legacy is best preserved by exercising an immanent critique of its premises and the conclusions to which they often led. By distinguishing between what is still and what is no longer alive in Critical Theory, Immanent Critiques: The Frankfurt School Under Pressure (Verso, 2023) seeks to demonstrate its continuing relevance in the 21st century. Fifty years after the appearance of The Dialectical Imagination, his pioneering history of the Frankfurt School, Martin Jay reflects on what may be living and dead in its legacy. Rather than treating it with filial piety as a fortress to be defended, he takes seriously its anti-systematic impulse and sensitivity to changing historical circumstances.  Honoring the Frankfurt School's practice of immanent critique, he puts critical pressure on a number of its own ideas by probing their contradictory impulses. Among them are the pathologization of political deviance through stigmatizing "authoritarian personalities," the undefended theological premises of Walter Benjamin's work, and the ambivalence of its members' analyses of anti-Semitism and Zionism. Additional questions are asked about other time-honored Marxist themes: the meaning of alienation, the alleged damages of abstraction, and the advocacy of a politics based on a singular notion of the truth. Rather, however, than allowing these questions to snowball into an unwarranted repudiation of the Frankfurt School legacy as a whole, the essay collection also acknowledges a number of its still potent arguments. They explore its neglected, but now timely analysis of "racket society," Adorno's dialectical reading of aesthetic sublimation, and the unexpected implications of Benjamin's focus on the corpse for political theory. Jay shows that it is a still evolving theoretical tradition which offers resources for the understanding of–and perhaps even practical betterment–of our increasingly troubled world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

The Frankfurt School's own legacy is best preserved by exercising an immanent critique of its premises and the conclusions to which they often led. By distinguishing between what is still and what is no longer alive in Critical Theory, Immanent Critiques: The Frankfurt School Under Pressure (Verso, 2023) seeks to demonstrate its continuing relevance in the 21st century. Fifty years after the appearance of The Dialectical Imagination, his pioneering history of the Frankfurt School, Martin Jay reflects on what may be living and dead in its legacy. Rather than treating it with filial piety as a fortress to be defended, he takes seriously its anti-systematic impulse and sensitivity to changing historical circumstances.  Honoring the Frankfurt School's practice of immanent critique, he puts critical pressure on a number of its own ideas by probing their contradictory impulses. Among them are the pathologization of political deviance through stigmatizing "authoritarian personalities," the undefended theological premises of Walter Benjamin's work, and the ambivalence of its members' analyses of anti-Semitism and Zionism. Additional questions are asked about other time-honored Marxist themes: the meaning of alienation, the alleged damages of abstraction, and the advocacy of a politics based on a singular notion of the truth. Rather, however, than allowing these questions to snowball into an unwarranted repudiation of the Frankfurt School legacy as a whole, the essay collection also acknowledges a number of its still potent arguments. They explore its neglected, but now timely analysis of "racket society," Adorno's dialectical reading of aesthetic sublimation, and the unexpected implications of Benjamin's focus on the corpse for political theory. Jay shows that it is a still evolving theoretical tradition which offers resources for the understanding of–and perhaps even practical betterment–of our increasingly troubled world. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Bourgeois Coldness (Divided Publishing, 2025) refers to an affective strategy that offers an explanation for how self-preservation works. Bourgeois coldness is one of the most advanced affective and aesthetic forms of preserving the structure of the colonial status quo. It creates an affective shelter in the world, unencroached upon by the immediate consequences of its many catastrophes. It functions like air conditioning – a complex technology which reliably stabilises the climate until those inside consider it natural. Bourgeois spaces – institutional and affective – stay cool and pleasant. But outside it's burning.  Canonical critical theory by Adorno and Horkheimer enters a dialogue with Black studies through Hartman and Moten. Host: Michael L. Rosino, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Molloy University Recent Books: Democracy is Awkward: Grappling with Racism inside Grassroots Political Organizing (UNC Press) 30% off with code: 01UNCP30 Debating the Drug War: Race, Politics, and the Media (Routledge) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Bourgeois Coldness (Divided Publishing, 2025) refers to an affective strategy that offers an explanation for how self-preservation works. Bourgeois coldness is one of the most advanced affective and aesthetic forms of preserving the structure of the colonial status quo. It creates an affective shelter in the world, unencroached upon by the immediate consequences of its many catastrophes. It functions like air conditioning – a complex technology which reliably stabilises the climate until those inside consider it natural. Bourgeois spaces – institutional and affective – stay cool and pleasant. But outside it's burning.  Canonical critical theory by Adorno and Horkheimer enters a dialogue with Black studies through Hartman and Moten. Host: Michael L. Rosino, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Molloy University Recent Books: Democracy is Awkward: Grappling with Racism inside Grassroots Political Organizing (UNC Press) 30% off with code: 01UNCP30 Debating the Drug War: Race, Politics, and the Media (Routledge) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

Bourgeois Coldness (Divided Publishing, 2025) refers to an affective strategy that offers an explanation for how self-preservation works. Bourgeois coldness is one of the most advanced affective and aesthetic forms of preserving the structure of the colonial status quo. It creates an affective shelter in the world, unencroached upon by the immediate consequences of its many catastrophes. It functions like air conditioning – a complex technology which reliably stabilises the climate until those inside consider it natural. Bourgeois spaces – institutional and affective – stay cool and pleasant. But outside it's burning.  Canonical critical theory by Adorno and Horkheimer enters a dialogue with Black studies through Hartman and Moten. Host: Michael L. Rosino, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Molloy University Recent Books: Democracy is Awkward: Grappling with Racism inside Grassroots Political Organizing (UNC Press) 30% off with code: 01UNCP30 Debating the Drug War: Race, Politics, and the Media (Routledge) Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

Viele Horoskope raten: Sei hübsch und sei glücklich! Wieso haben Milliarden alte Sternhaufen im All uns gerade das zu sagen? Da schreiten sogar Philosophen wie Adorno ein. Wir fragen beim Universum nach. Und bei Adorno. Nach der Graphic Novel von Liv Strömquist www.deutschlandfunkkultur.de, Freispiel

In this episode of Chasing Leviathan, PJ and Dr. Lambert Zuidervaart discuss his book, Adorno, Heidegger, and the Politics of Truth, tracing how his decades of work on Adorno led to a deep exploration of truth, art, and society. Dr. Zuidervaart explains why Adorno believed art reveals forms of truth that science and philosophy often miss—and how these insights expose what is “untrue” in modern capitalist culture.They unpack Adorno's critique of Hegel's idea that “the true is the whole,” his early engagement with Kierkegaard, and his fierce opposition to Heidegger's language of authenticity. The conversation highlights how education, the culture industry, and advertising shape identity, conformity, and our sense of what is possible.PJ and Dr. Zuidervaart also explore the connections between Adorno and Foucault on truth and power, discuss Freud's influence on Adorno's views of repression and sublimation, and consider whether a more truthful, humane society is still possible. Dr. Zuidervaart closes with an invitation to reflect on what in our society is truly worthwhile—and what must change for human flourishing.Make sure to check out Dr. Zuidervaart's book: Adorno, Heidegger, and the Politics of Truth

Wolfgang Sandner hat mit seinem feinen Gespür für Klang und seinem kritischen Blick, die Musiklandschaft Deutschlands über viele Jahrzehnte geprägt. Als langjähriger FAZ-Redakteur und Biograf von Leonard Bernstein und Keith Jarrett hat er Generationen von Lesern das Abenteuer Musik nahegebracht.

Wolfgang Sandner hat mit seinem feinen Gespür für Klang und seinem kritischen Blick, die Musiklandschaft Deutschlands über viele Jahrzehnte geprägt. Als langjähriger FAZ-Redakteur und Biograf von Leonard Bernstein und Keith Jarrett hat er Generationen von Lesern das Abenteuer Musik nahegebracht.

Adorno and the Ban on Images (Bloomsbury, 2022) upends some of the myths that have come to surround the work of the philosopher Theodor W. Adorno – not least amongst them, his supposed fatalism. Sebastian Truskolaski argues that Adorno's writings allow us to address what is arguably the central challenge of modern philosophy: how to picture a world beyond suffering and injustice without, at the same time, betraying its vital impulse. By re-appraising Adorno's writings on politics, philosophy, and art, this book reconstructs this notoriously difficult author's overall project from a radically new perspective (Adorno's famous 'standpoint of redemption'), and brings his central concerns to bear on the problems of today. On the one hand, this means reading Adorno alongside his principal interlocutors (including Kant, Marx and Benjamin). On the other hand, it means asking how his secular brand of social criticism can serve to safeguard the image of a better world – above all, when the invocation of this image occurs alongside Adorno's recurrent reference to the Old Testament ban on making images of God. By reading Adorno in this iconoclastic way, Adorno and the Ban on Images contributes to current debates about Utopia that have come to define political visions across the political spectrum. Lukas Hoffman is a Doctoral Candidate at the Carolina-Duke Graduate Program in German Studies and is currently supported by a DAAD research grant as a Visiting Scholar at the Humboldt University in Berlin. He is currently working on a book manuscript that examines how the persistence of religious imagery in German modernist lyric reimagines the ways in which traditional, religious attitudes overlap with revolutionary political thought. Recently, he has published an article in Monatshefte, titled “Love of Things: Reconsidering Adorno's Criticism of Rilke” (Summer 2022) and has a forthcoming article in New German Critique, titled “Abject Eve: A Revolutionary Reading of Lasker-Schüler's ‘Erkenntnis.'” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Adorno and the Ban on Images (Bloomsbury, 2022) upends some of the myths that have come to surround the work of the philosopher Theodor W. Adorno – not least amongst them, his supposed fatalism. Sebastian Truskolaski argues that Adorno's writings allow us to address what is arguably the central challenge of modern philosophy: how to picture a world beyond suffering and injustice without, at the same time, betraying its vital impulse. By re-appraising Adorno's writings on politics, philosophy, and art, this book reconstructs this notoriously difficult author's overall project from a radically new perspective (Adorno's famous 'standpoint of redemption'), and brings his central concerns to bear on the problems of today. On the one hand, this means reading Adorno alongside his principal interlocutors (including Kant, Marx and Benjamin). On the other hand, it means asking how his secular brand of social criticism can serve to safeguard the image of a better world – above all, when the invocation of this image occurs alongside Adorno's recurrent reference to the Old Testament ban on making images of God. By reading Adorno in this iconoclastic way, Adorno and the Ban on Images contributes to current debates about Utopia that have come to define political visions across the political spectrum. Lukas Hoffman is a Doctoral Candidate at the Carolina-Duke Graduate Program in German Studies and is currently supported by a DAAD research grant as a Visiting Scholar at the Humboldt University in Berlin. He is currently working on a book manuscript that examines how the persistence of religious imagery in German modernist lyric reimagines the ways in which traditional, religious attitudes overlap with revolutionary political thought. Recently, he has published an article in Monatshefte, titled “Love of Things: Reconsidering Adorno's Criticism of Rilke” (Summer 2022) and has a forthcoming article in New German Critique, titled “Abject Eve: A Revolutionary Reading of Lasker-Schüler's ‘Erkenntnis.'” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Adorno and the Ban on Images (Bloomsbury, 2022) upends some of the myths that have come to surround the work of the philosopher Theodor W. Adorno – not least amongst them, his supposed fatalism. Sebastian Truskolaski argues that Adorno's writings allow us to address what is arguably the central challenge of modern philosophy: how to picture a world beyond suffering and injustice without, at the same time, betraying its vital impulse. By re-appraising Adorno's writings on politics, philosophy, and art, this book reconstructs this notoriously difficult author's overall project from a radically new perspective (Adorno's famous 'standpoint of redemption'), and brings his central concerns to bear on the problems of today. On the one hand, this means reading Adorno alongside his principal interlocutors (including Kant, Marx and Benjamin). On the other hand, it means asking how his secular brand of social criticism can serve to safeguard the image of a better world – above all, when the invocation of this image occurs alongside Adorno's recurrent reference to the Old Testament ban on making images of God. By reading Adorno in this iconoclastic way, Adorno and the Ban on Images contributes to current debates about Utopia that have come to define political visions across the political spectrum. Lukas Hoffman is a Doctoral Candidate at the Carolina-Duke Graduate Program in German Studies and is currently supported by a DAAD research grant as a Visiting Scholar at the Humboldt University in Berlin. He is currently working on a book manuscript that examines how the persistence of religious imagery in German modernist lyric reimagines the ways in which traditional, religious attitudes overlap with revolutionary political thought. Recently, he has published an article in Monatshefte, titled “Love of Things: Reconsidering Adorno's Criticism of Rilke” (Summer 2022) and has a forthcoming article in New German Critique, titled “Abject Eve: A Revolutionary Reading of Lasker-Schüler's ‘Erkenntnis.'” Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/art

In seinem 2003 erschienenen "Buch der von Neil Young Getöteten" dreht Navid Kermani Neil Young und Ibn-el-Arabi, islamischen Sufismus und Adorno, Lyrics und Koran durch den Fleischwolf seiner Intelligenz. Ein hinreißendes Buch. 17 Jahre sind seitdem vergangen. Die Tochter, von der das Buch auch handelt, ist groß geworden, Freunde sind gestorben. Neil Young spielt noch immer Konzerte mit Crazy Horse. Und Navid Kermani reist ihnen mit seiner Tochter hinterher. Und dann geschieht in Lucca, Italien, als die Band sich kurz nach Ende des Konzertes verbeugt, etwas sehr Seltsames … Von Navid Kermani SWR 2020

In this insightful episode of An Educated Guest, host Todd Zipper sits down with Katie Boody Adorno, Founder and CEO of LEANLAB Education. Katie shares her journey from the front lines of a middle school classroom to becoming a national voice for community-led innovation. She explains the genesis of LEANLAB, which was born from the frustrating realization that conventional reform efforts were failing to close the achievement and opportunity gaps for vulnerable student populations. The core of the conversation revolves around LEANLAB's signature co-creation model—the imperative of building EdTech solutions directly with students and teachers, rather than imposing them from the outside. Katie also provides a nuanced perspective on the AI revolution, discussing its immense potential for personalized learning and the critical need for constant accountability to ensure technology serves the mission of equity. This is a must-listen for investors, EdTech founders, and education leaders who want to build solutions that generate real, measurable impact.Key Takeaways from this Episode:The Mission of Equity: Why finding educational breakthroughs must be done within the students' lifetimes.The Power of Co-Creation: How involving families, students, and educators in design leads to highly capable and impactful tools.The Role of the Teacher: Why teachers are the most important experts and must drive the innovation agenda.Leadership in a Changing World: Katie's philosophy on maintaining purpose, checking assumptions, and fostering a culture of constant learning in the face of rapid change.About Our Guest:Katie Boody Adorno is the Founder and CEO of LEANLAB Education, a non-profit organization dedicated to accelerating educational innovation through community co-creation. She began her career as a middle school teacher in Kansas City and is a recognized thought leader on EdTech, equity, and student-centered design.

Simonetta Bisi"L'eclissi del pensiero critico"Elogio del dubbio nel tempo dell'algoritmoBordeaux Edizioniwww.bordeauxedizioni.itSiamo iperconnessi, ma disabituati al dubbio. Informati, ma incapaci di porre domande. Liberi, ma prigionieri di algoritmi che decidono per noi. “L'eclissi del pensiero critico” è un viaggio dissacrante nel cuore della nostra epoca: un tempo in cui la tecnologia promette emancipazione, ma genera omologazione emotiva e sorveglianza mascherata da libertà. Simonetta Bisi intreccia filosofia e sociologia in un racconto lucido e coraggioso, dialogando con Adorno, Faggin, Kurzweil, Byung-Chul Han e altri pensatori che aiutano a leggere il presente con occhi più attenti. Pagina dopo pagina, l'autrice scava nelle illusioni del conformismo digitale e ci invita a riattivare lo sguardo, a riscoprire il pensiero come atto di resistenza: oggi, più che mai, pensare è un gesto politico.Simonetta Bisi, professore associato di Sociologia gene­rale, insegna presso la Sapienza – Università di Roma. Ha scritto numerose monografie e articoli sugli aspetti quantitativi e qualitativi dei fenomeni contemporanei.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Quem hoje não se revolta da forma como essa geração tem sido tratada e como desenhos e a internet tem tentado roubar a inocência dessa geração? Se irritar não é suficiente, precisamos fazer algo como igreja para resultar uma geração cheia de Deus.

Chegamos ao último Degusta! do ano um pouco diferente... Andreia D' Oliveira e Gabi Idealli entregam, tendo como base notícias do mundinho Literário, discussões que parecem estar sempre presentes como "quem pode dizer o que é Literatura?" ou "qual o papel da crítica?". Então, pegue seu café, fique à vontade e, ao final, dê também sua opinião! Comentado no Episódio Felipe Neto encerra seu clube do livro depois de um ano e surpreende assinantes Itamar, Ernaux e Ferrante são interessantes, mas não literatura, diz Aurora Bernardini Veja os melhores livros brasileiros de literatura do século 21, segundo júri convidado pela Folha Livros em Cartaz 004 – Quem não está perdida? (A Filha Perdida) Curso de Linguística Geral, livro por Ferdinand de Saussure Mikhail Bakhtin, filósofo da linguagem Livros em Cartaz 074 – Pedro Páramo Walter Benjamin, filósofo Theodor W. Adorno, filósofo

Still Lives: Jewish Photography in Nazi Germany (U Pennsylvania Press, 2025) is a systematic study of the ways Jews used photographs to document their experiences in the face of National Socialism. In a time of intensifying anti-Jewish rhetoric and policies, German Jews documented their lives and their environment in tens of thousands of photographs. German Jews of considerably diverse backgrounds took and preserved these photographs: professional and amateurs, of different ages, gender, and classes. The book argues that their previously overlooked photographs convey otherwise unuttered views, emotions, and self-perceptions. Based on a database of more than fifteen thousand relevant images, it analyzes photographs within the historical contexts of their production, preservation, and intended viewing, and explores a plethora of Jews' reactions to the changing landscapes of post-1933 Germany. Ofer Ashkenazi is a Professor of History and the director of the Richard Koebner-Minerva Center for German History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. While on sabbatical, in 2025-2026 he is the Mosse Visiting Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is the co-author of the recently published monograph Still Lives: Jewish Photography in Nazi Germany (2025) , as well as Anti-Heimat Cinema (2020); Weimar Film and Jewish Identity (2012); and Reason and Subjectivity in Weimar Cinema (2010). He edited volumes and published articles on various topics in German and German-Jewish history including Jewish youth movements in Germany; the German interwar anti-war movement; Cold War memory culture; Jewish migration from and to Germany; and German-Jewish visual culture. Rebekka Grossmann is Assistant Professor of Migration History at Leiden University. In her research, she explores the connections of visual culture, migration and politics with a special focus on Jewish history. Her dissertation, which will be published in 2026, investigates the role of the camera as agent, chronicler and critic of Jewish nation-building. In her new project, she looks at the entangled stories of the legacies of Jewish forced migration, post-war memory culture and peace activism through the lens of different artistic projects. Shira Miron is a PhD candidate at the Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures at Yale University. Her research explores aesthetics as a mode of investigation for human experience and social formation and studies the particularities of different artforms alongside their conceptual and practical cross-pollination. She pursues theoretical questions as they relate to history and culture and vice versa. Her dissertation project, Composition and Community: The Extra-Musical Imagination of Polyphony 1800/1900/1950, explores the advent of western polyphony as a modern aesthetic, communicative, and ethical phenomenon that extends beyond the field of music. Shira published on the relationship between music and literature, German-Jewish literature and culture, visual studies, theories of dialogue and communication, and on a wide range of authors including Novalis, Adorno, Kleist, and Gertrud Kolmar. Shira holds B.Mus. and M.Mus. degrees in piano performance from the Jerusalem Academy of Music and Dance and studied German literature at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and at the Freie Universität Berlin. Currently, she is a DAAD research fellow at the Leibniz Center for Literary and Cultural Research (ZfL) in Berlin. Sarah Wobick-Segev is a research associate at the Institute for Jewish Studies at the University of Hamburg. Her research explores the multiple intersections of European-Jewish cultural and intellectual history with gender studies, everyday life history, and visual and religious studies. Her current project analyzes the religious writings of Jewish women in German-speaking Central Europe from the mid-19th to the mid-20th century. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Still Lives: Jewish Photography in Nazi Germany (U Pennsylvania Press, 2025) is a systematic study of the ways Jews used photographs to document their experiences in the face of National Socialism. In a time of intensifying anti-Jewish rhetoric and policies, German Jews documented their lives and their environment in tens of thousands of photographs. German Jews of considerably diverse backgrounds took and preserved these photographs: professional and amateurs, of different ages, gender, and classes. The book argues that their previously overlooked photographs convey otherwise unuttered views, emotions, and self-perceptions. Based on a database of more than fifteen thousand relevant images, it analyzes photographs within the historical contexts of their production, preservation, and intended viewing, and explores a plethora of Jews' reactions to the changing landscapes of post-1933 Germany. Ofer Ashkenazi is a Professor of History and the director of the Richard Koebner-Minerva Center for German History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. While on sabbatical, in 2025-2026 he is the Mosse Visiting Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is the co-author of the recently published monograph Still Lives: Jewish Photography in Nazi Germany (2025) , as well as Anti-Heimat Cinema (2020); Weimar Film and Jewish Identity (2012); and Reason and Subjectivity in Weimar Cinema (2010). He edited volumes and published articles on various topics in German and German-Jewish history including Jewish youth movements in Germany; the German interwar anti-war movement; Cold War memory culture; Jewish migration from and to Germany; and German-Jewish visual culture. Rebekka Grossmann is Assistant Professor of Migration History at Leiden University. In her research, she explores the connections of visual culture, migration and politics with a special focus on Jewish history. Her dissertation, which will be published in 2026, investigates the role of the camera as agent, chronicler and critic of Jewish nation-building. In her new project, she looks at the entangled stories of the legacies of Jewish forced migration, post-war memory culture and peace activism through the lens of different artistic projects. Shira Miron is a PhD candidate at the Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures at Yale University. Her research explores aesthetics as a mode of investigation for human experience and social formation and studies the particularities of different artforms alongside their conceptual and practical cross-pollination. She pursues theoretical questions as they relate to history and culture and vice versa. Her dissertation project, Composition and Community: The Extra-Musical Imagination of Polyphony 1800/1900/1950, explores the advent of western polyphony as a modern aesthetic, communicative, and ethical phenomenon that extends beyond the field of music. Shira published on the relationship between music and literature, German-Jewish literature and culture, visual studies, theories of dialogue and communication, and on a wide range of authors including Novalis, Adorno, Kleist, and Gertrud Kolmar. Shira holds B.Mus. and M.Mus. degrees in piano performance from the Jerusalem Academy of Music and Dance and studied German literature at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and at the Freie Universität Berlin. Currently, she is a DAAD research fellow at the Leibniz Center for Literary and Cultural Research (ZfL) in Berlin. Sarah Wobick-Segev is a research associate at the Institute for Jewish Studies at the University of Hamburg. Her research explores the multiple intersections of European-Jewish cultural and intellectual history with gender studies, everyday life history, and visual and religious studies. Her current project analyzes the religious writings of Jewish women in German-speaking Central Europe from the mid-19th to the mid-20th century. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Still Lives: Jewish Photography in Nazi Germany (U Pennsylvania Press, 2025) is a systematic study of the ways Jews used photographs to document their experiences in the face of National Socialism. In a time of intensifying anti-Jewish rhetoric and policies, German Jews documented their lives and their environment in tens of thousands of photographs. German Jews of considerably diverse backgrounds took and preserved these photographs: professional and amateurs, of different ages, gender, and classes. The book argues that their previously overlooked photographs convey otherwise unuttered views, emotions, and self-perceptions. Based on a database of more than fifteen thousand relevant images, it analyzes photographs within the historical contexts of their production, preservation, and intended viewing, and explores a plethora of Jews' reactions to the changing landscapes of post-1933 Germany. Ofer Ashkenazi is a Professor of History and the director of the Richard Koebner-Minerva Center for German History at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. While on sabbatical, in 2025-2026 he is the Mosse Visiting Professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He is the co-author of the recently published monograph Still Lives: Jewish Photography in Nazi Germany (2025) , as well as Anti-Heimat Cinema (2020); Weimar Film and Jewish Identity (2012); and Reason and Subjectivity in Weimar Cinema (2010). He edited volumes and published articles on various topics in German and German-Jewish history including Jewish youth movements in Germany; the German interwar anti-war movement; Cold War memory culture; Jewish migration from and to Germany; and German-Jewish visual culture. Rebekka Grossmann is Assistant Professor of Migration History at Leiden University. In her research, she explores the connections of visual culture, migration and politics with a special focus on Jewish history. Her dissertation, which will be published in 2026, investigates the role of the camera as agent, chronicler and critic of Jewish nation-building. In her new project, she looks at the entangled stories of the legacies of Jewish forced migration, post-war memory culture and peace activism through the lens of different artistic projects. Shira Miron is a PhD candidate at the Department of Germanic Languages and Literatures at Yale University. Her research explores aesthetics as a mode of investigation for human experience and social formation and studies the particularities of different artforms alongside their conceptual and practical cross-pollination. She pursues theoretical questions as they relate to history and culture and vice versa. Her dissertation project, Composition and Community: The Extra-Musical Imagination of Polyphony 1800/1900/1950, explores the advent of western polyphony as a modern aesthetic, communicative, and ethical phenomenon that extends beyond the field of music. Shira published on the relationship between music and literature, German-Jewish literature and culture, visual studies, theories of dialogue and communication, and on a wide range of authors including Novalis, Adorno, Kleist, and Gertrud Kolmar. Shira holds B.Mus. and M.Mus. degrees in piano performance from the Jerusalem Academy of Music and Dance and studied German literature at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem and at the Freie Universität Berlin. Currently, she is a DAAD research fellow at the Leibniz Center for Literary and Cultural Research (ZfL) in Berlin. Sarah Wobick-Segev is a research associate at the Institute for Jewish Studies at the University of Hamburg. Her research explores the multiple intersections of European-Jewish cultural and intellectual history with gender studies, everyday life history, and visual and religious studies. Her current project analyzes the religious writings of Jewish women in German-speaking Central Europe from the mid-19th to the mid-20th century. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/jewish-studies

On "The Concept of Enlightenment" (1944), the first essay in this Frankfurt School book of critical theory, The Dialectic of Enlightenment. Our authors lay out what they take The Enlightenment to consist of, including some quotes from Francis Bacon, and some ultimately fatal tensions within it that make it no longer serve the humanistic purposes it was created for. Read along with us on PDF p. 22. You can choose to watch this on video. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

durée : 00:57:38 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann, Nassim El Kabli - Adorno désapprouvait la conception de l'engagement, qui, selon Sartre, mettait la pensée et l'art au service de la diffusion d'un message politique. - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Michèle Cohen-Halimi Philosophe, professeure de philosophie à l'université Paris 8; Gilles Moutot Maître de conférences en philosophie au département de sciences humaines et sociales de la faculté de médecine de Montpellier-Nîmes, membre du centre d'études politiques et sociales : environnement, santé, territoire (université de Montpellier)

durée : 00:58:31 - Le Souffle de la pensée - par : Géraldine Mosna-Savoye - 153 aphorismes sur les détails d'une vie mutilée par la société, dominée par le social et l'industrie culturelle, composent les "Minima Moralia" de Theodor W. Adorno. Estelle Ferrarese revient sur ce journal d'exil du grand philosophe allemand. - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Estelle Ferrarese Professeure de philosophie morale et politique à l'Université de Picardie Jules Verne

Na série de conversas descontraídas com cientistas, chegou a vez do Sociólogo e Doutor em Sociologia, sumidade internacionalmente reconhecida das Ciências Sociais, Professor Sergio Adorno. Só vem!>> OUÇA (124min 26s)*Naruhodo! é o podcast pra quem tem fome de aprender. Ciência, senso comum, curiosidades, desafios e muito mais. Com o leigo curioso, Ken Fujioka, e o cientista PhD, Altay de Souza.Edição: Reginaldo Cursino.http://naruhodo.b9.com.br*Sergio Franca Adorno de Abreu é graduado em Ciências Sociais pela Universidade de São Paulo (1974), Doutorado em Sociologia pela Universidade de São Paulo (1984), Pós-Doutorado pelo Centre de Recherches Sociologiques sur le Droit et les Institutions Pénales, CESDIP, França (1994-1995).Atualmente é:- Professor Titular em Sociologia da FFLCH- Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas da Universidade de São Paulo- Coordenador Científico do Núcleo de Estudos da Violência - USP (1990-atual)- Presidente da ANDHEP- Associação Nacional de Direitos Humanos- Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação (2002-2008)- Representante de Área de Ciências Humanas / Sociologia e Membro do Conselho Técnico-Científico da CAPES- Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (2004-2009)- Consultor do CSP- Cadernos de Saúde Pública da Fundação Oswaldo Cruz - Fiocruz- Comendador da Ordem Nacional do Mérito Científico, pelo Ministério da Ciência e Tecnologia (2008)- Membro do Conselho Consultivo da Revista Análise Social, do Instituto de Ciências Sociais da Universidade de Lisboa- Presidente do Conselho Editorial da Revista USP (2010-2015)- Membro do Conselho Consultivo da Revista "Passagens: Revista Internacional de História Política e Cultura Jurídica", do Programa de Pós-Graduação em História da Universidade Federal Fluminense- Membro do Comitê Científico da Revista ANPG: Ciência, Tecnologia e Políticas Educacionais, periódico científico institucional da ANPG- Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduandos- Responsável pela Cátedra UNESCO de Educação para a Paz, Direitos Humanos, Democracia e Tolerância- Membro Titular da Academia Brasileira de Ciências, area de Humanidades, a partir de 01/01/23- Coordenador Científico do Projeto CEPID/FAPESP USP Building Democracy Daily: Human Righs, Violence and Institutional Trust (2013-2018).Tem larga experiência na área de Sociologia, com ênfase em Sociologia Política, atuando principalmente nos seguintes temas: violência, direitos humanos, criminalidade urbana, controle social e conflitos sociais.Lattes: http://lattes.cnpq.br/7184462150034623*APOIE O NARUHODO!O Altay e eu temos duas mensagens pra você.A primeira é: muito, muito obrigado pela sua audiência. Sem ela, o Naruhodo sequer teria sentido de existir. Você nos ajuda demais não só quando ouve, mas também quando espalha episódios para familiares, amigos - e, por que não?, inimigos.A segunda mensagem é: existe uma outra forma de apoiar o Naruhodo, a ciência e o pensamento científico - apoiando financeiramente o nosso projeto de podcast semanal independente, que só descansa no recesso do fim de ano.Manter o Naruhodo tem custos e despesas: servidores, domínio, pesquisa, produção, edição, atendimento, tempo... Enfim, muitas coisas para cobrir - e, algumas delas, em dólar.A gente sabe que nem todo mundo pode apoiar financeiramente. E tá tudo bem. Tente mandar um episódio para alguém que você conhece e acha que vai gostar.A gente sabe que alguns podem, mas não mensalmente. E tá tudo bem também. Você pode apoiar quando puder e cancelar quando quiser. O apoio mínimo é de 15 reais e pode ser feito pela plataforma ORELO ou pela plataforma APOIA-SE. Para quem está fora do Brasil, temos até a plataforma PATREON.É isso, gente. Estamos enfrentando um momento importante e você pode ajudar a combater o negacionismo e manter a chama da ciência acesa. Então, fica aqui o nosso convite: apóie o Naruhodo como puder.bit.ly/naruhodo-no-orelo

Why does critical theory matter today? In Critical Theory: The Basics (Routledge, 2024), Martin Shuster, a Professor of Philosophy and the Isaac Swift Distinguished Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, explores the history, thought and legacy of the Frankfurt School to demonstrate the urgency of critical theory for explaining the world. Beginning with the idea of needless suffering as a concept animating the theory and practice of thinkers such as Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse and Benjamin, the book ranges widely across topics including subjectivity, the social world, art, culture and religion. An accessible introduction to complex, but urgent, thought, the book is essential reading for arts, humanities and social science scholars, as well as for anyone who would like to change the world. Dave O'Brien is Professor of Cultural and Creative Industries, at the University of Manchester. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Why does critical theory matter today? In Critical Theory: The Basics (Routledge, 2024), Martin Shuster, a Professor of Philosophy and the Isaac Swift Distinguished Professor of Jewish Studies at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, explores the history, thought and legacy of the Frankfurt School to demonstrate the urgency of critical theory for explaining the world. Beginning with the idea of needless suffering as a concept animating the theory and practice of thinkers such as Adorno, Horkheimer, Marcuse and Benjamin, the book ranges widely across topics including subjectivity, the social world, art, culture and religion. An accessible introduction to complex, but urgent, thought, the book is essential reading for arts, humanities and social science scholars, as well as for anyone who would like to change the world. Dave O'Brien is Professor of Cultural and Creative Industries, at the University of Manchester. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Time to take in a breath of fresh air. In episode 133 of Overthink, Ellie and David close out their four-part series on the elements with air. They consider Anaximenes of Miletus's belief that all things are made of air, Luce Irigaray's belief that air is feminine, and the modern use of air as a weapon of battle. What can the TV series The Last of Us tell us about the inescapability of air Why have some philosophers thought the soul is made of air? And how does air allow itself to be forgotten? In the bonus, your hosts dive deeper into Irigaray, the plurality of air, and the idea of the ether.Works Discussed:Gaston Bachelard, Air in Dreams Steven Connor, The Matter of AirLuce Irigaray, The Forgetting of Air in Martin HeideggerElizabeth Povinelli, GeontologiesPeter Sloterdijk, Terror from the AirMax Horkheimer and Theodor W. Adorno, Dialectic of EnlightenmentThe Last of Us (2025)Support the showPatreon | patreon.com/overthinkpodcast Website | overthinkpodcast.comInstagram & Twitter | @overthink_podEmail | dearoverthink@gmail.comYouTube | Overthink podcast

Today we talk about Kafka's book The Castle and how the symbolism is interpreted by two powerhouse philosophers: Theodore Adorno and Hannah Arendt. Hope you love it! :) Sponsors: Incogni: https://www.Incogni.com/philothis Quince: https://www.QUINCE.com/pt ZocDoc: https://www.ZocDoc.com/PHILO Thank you so much for listening! Could never do this without your help.  Website: https://www.philosophizethis.org/ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/philosophizethis  Social: Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/philosophizethispodcast X: https://twitter.com/iamstephenwest Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/philosophizethisshow Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

The chat bot flashes its elipsis at the bottom of the screen. What is it thinking, what does it want from you, what do you want from it? Beneath those pixels lies a sea of mined data and lightning storms of electricity heating up servers in barren deserts. What will it find for you in the past labor of the generations? According to a stunning new article in Rolling Stone, it will find whatever the fuck makes you feel like a god—incuding all the NewAge pablum it has scarfed down—because oops, ChatGPT released a model that is just too sycophantic. But as we break down today, the AI nonsensient flattery machine is designed to hook you into the regurgitative process of self-seduction. Is this a new spiritual delusion, or more of the same? And what does that kind and agreeable bot conceal? Show Notes People Are Losing Loved Ones to AI-Fueled Spiritual Fantasies Chatgpt induced psychosis ChatGPT And Generative AI Innovations Are Creating Sustainability Havoc  LLM Can Be A Dangerous Persuader You'll Be Astonished How Much Power It Takes to Generate a Single AI Image  A bottle of water per email: the hidden environmental costs of using AI chatbots Intelligent Computing: The Latest Advances, Challenges, and Future  AI Data Centers Pose Regulatory Challenge, Jeopardizing Climate Goals AI, Climate, and Regulation: From Data Centers to the AI Act  AI could impact 40 per cent of jobs worldwide in the next decade, UN agency warns The Future of Jobs Report 2025 History's Magic Mirror: America's Economic Crisis and the Weimar Republic of Pre-Nazi Germany The Great Filter: A possible solution to the Fermi Paradox  Academic Publisher Sells Authors' Work to Microsoft for AI Training Address of the Holy Father to the College of Cardinals (10 May 2025) | LEO XIV  Capitalism's Fascistic Tendencies — McGowan  McGowan, Todd. 2016. Capitalism and Desire: The Psychic Cost of Free Markets. Columbia University Press. Adorno, Theodor W., and Max Horkheimer. 1997. Dialectic of Enlightenment. Verso. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices