Podcast appearances and mentions of Clifford Geertz

As AI continues to advance and integrate into our daily lives, can it truly be designed to align with our deepest human values and moral principles? If so, how can we ensure that AI not only understands but also respects and promotes our ethical frameworks, without compromising our privacy or hindering our personal growth and autonomy?  John Vervaeke, Christopher Mastropietro, and Jordan Hall embark on a nuanced exploration of the intricate relationship between AI and human flourishing. They explore the concept of "intimate AI," a personalized guardian that attunes to individual biometrics and psychometrics, offering a protective and challenging presence. The discussion underscores the critical importance of privacy, the perils of idolatry, and the urgent need for a new philosophical framework that addresses the meaning crisis. Jordan Hall is a technology entrepreneur with several years of experience building disruptive companies. He is interested in philosophy, artificial intelligence, and complex systems and has a background in law. Hall has worked for several technology companies and was the founder and CEO of DivX. He is currently involved in various think tanks and institutes and is focused on upgrading humanity's capacity for thought and action. Christopher Mastropietro is a philosophical writer who is fascinated by dialogue, symbols, and the concept of self. He actively contributes to the Vervaeke Foundation. Notes:  (0:00) Introduction to the Lectern (0:30) Overview of Today's Discussion: Can AI be in Alignment with Human Values? (1:00) The Three-Point Proposal - Individual Attunement, Decentralized and Distributed AI, Guardian AI (6:30) Individual AI Attunement  (8:30) Distributed AI and Collective Intelligence (8:45) Empowerment of Agency through AI (12:30) The Role of Intimacy in AI Alignment - Why Relationality Matters (22:00) Can AI Help Develop Human Integrity? - The Challenge of Self-Alignment (28:00) Cultural and Enculturation Challenges (31:30) AI, Culture, and the Reintegration of Human Rhythms (38:00) Addressing Cocooning and Cultural Integration (47:00) Domains of Enculturation - Psychological, Economic, and Intersubjective  (48:30)  ”We're not looking necessarily for a teacher as much as we were looking for the teacherly opportunity in the encounters we're having.” (51:00) The Sanctity of Privacy and Vulnerability (1:07:00) The Role of Intimacy in Privacy (1:13:00) Final Reflections    ---  Connect with a community dedicated to self-discovery and purpose, and gain deeper insights by joining our Patreon. The Vervaeke Foundation is committed to advancing the scientific pursuit of wisdom and creating a significant impact on the world. Become a part of our mission.   Join Awaken to Meaning to explore practices that enhance your virtues and foster deeper connections with reality and relationships.   John Vervaeke: Website | X | YouTube | Patreon   Jordan Hall: YouTube | Medium | X   Christopher Mastropietro: Vervaeke Foundation   Ideas, People, and Works Mentioned in this Episode Christopher Mastropietro Jordan Hall Jordan Peterson James Filler Spinoza Marshall McLuhan Plato Immanuel Kant The AI Alignment Problem Decentralized & Personal AI as a Solution The Role of Intimacy in AI Alignment Enculturation & AI's Role in Human Integrity Privacy as More Than Just Protection The Republic – by Plato Critique of Pure Reason – by Immanuel Kant The Idea of the Holy – by Rudolf Otto Interpretation of Cultures – by Clifford Geertz  

For access to premium episodes, upcoming installments of DEMON FORCES, live call-in specials, and the Grotto of Truth Discord, become a subscriber at patreon.com/subliminaljihad. In part 3 of their Metaparapolitics intervention, Dimitri and Khalid dive into two 20th century academic suslords who both wielded the term “parapolitics” in different but equally questionable ways: anthropologist Clifford Geertz and Michael Aquino's intellectual mentor, Raghavan Iyer. Topics include: Geertz invoking “parapolitics” to obscure the role of Certain Invisible American hands during the 1965 Indonesian genocide, parallels with bullshit “ancient hatred” historiographies about the fall of Yugoslavia, interlocks between Geertz and Obama's sus Ford Foundation anthropologist mother, diving into Raghavan Iyer's “Parapolitics: Toward The City of Man”, backhanded compliments of Marx and Lenin, Iyer's Theosophist essays about Gandhi, and his convenient reification of Ghandian “non-violent” political resistance as the ultimate virtue (contra the Bolsheviks who did a Violence and thus are bad)…

Dimitri and Khalid formally embark on their destabilization campaign against the term “parapolitics”, starting with the earliest known uses of the term from the late 19th to mid-20th century. Topics include: “Little Arthur's Guide to Humbug”, “Agnes Goodmaid”, sus satyr coming out of a cosmic egg, “Political Ideology: Why The Common Man Believes What He Does”, David Easton's “A Framework for Political Analysis”, Lawrence Litton's sus op-ed about parapolitics and the gubernatorial campaign of Tim Leary, sus anthropologist Clifford Geertz's “Interpretation of Cultures” (1973), Michael Aquino's Theosophist mentor Raghavan Iyer, and Joan Didion's “California Dreaming” essay about the Ford Foundation-backed Center for the Study of Democratic Institutions in Santa Barbara. For access to premium episodes, upcoming installments of DEMON FORCES, and the Grotto of Truth Discord, become a subscriber at patreon.com/subliminaljihad.

Dr. Nathan S. French A school field trip to Washington, D.C. is a formative rite of passage shared by many U.S. school students across the nation. Often, these are framed as “field trips.” Students may visit the White House, the U.S. Capitol Building, the Supreme Court, the Library of Congress, Declaration of Independence (housed in the National Archive), the National Museum of the American Indian, the National Museum of African American History and Culture, the Jefferson Memorial, Arlington National Cemetery, or the Smithsonian Museum – among others. For many students, this is the first time they will connect the histories of their textbooks to items, artifacts, and buildings that they can see and feel. For those arriving to Washington, D.C. by airplane or bus, the field trip might also seem like a road trip. Road trips, often involving movement across the U.S. from city-to-city and state-to-state are often framed as quintessential American experiences. Americans have taken road trips to follow their favorite bands, to move to universities and new jobs, to visit the hall of fame of their favorite professional or collegiate sport, or sites of family history. As Dr. Andrew Offenberger observes in our interview, road trips have helped American authors, like Kiowa poet N. Scott Momaday, make sense of their identities as Americans. What if, however, these field trips to Washington, D.C. and road trips across the country might amount to something else? What if we considered them to be pilgrimages? Would that change our understanding of them? For many Americans, the first word that comes to mind when they hear the word, “pilgrimage,” involves the pilgrims of Plymouth, a community of English Puritans who colonized territory in Massachusetts, at first through a treaty with the Wampanoag peoples, but eventually through their dispossession. For many American communities, the nature of pilgrimage remains a reminder of forced displacement, dispossession, and a loss of home and homeland. Pilgrimage, as a term, might also suggest a religious experience. There are multiple podcasts, blogs, and videos discussing the Camino de Santiago, a number of pilgrimage paths through northern Spain. Others might think of making a pilgrimage to the Christian, Jewish, or Muslim sacred spaces in Israel and Palestine often referred to as the “Holy Land” collectively – including the Temple Mount, the Dome of the Rock, and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre (among others). Mark Twain's Innocents Abroad, is a classic example of this experience. Some make pilgrimage to Salem, Massachusetts each October. Others even debate whether the Crusades were a holy war or pilgrimage. American experiences of pilgrimage have led to substantial transformations in our national history and to our constitutional rights. Pilgrimage, as a movement across state, national, or cultural boundaries, has often been used by Americans to help them make sense of who they are, where they came from, and what it means, to them, to be “an American.” The word, “pilgrimage,” traces its etymology from the French, pèlerinage and from the Latin, pelegrines, with a general meaning of going through the fields or across lands as a foreigner. As a category used by anthropologists and sociologists in the study of religion, “pilgrimage” is often used as a much broader term, studying anything ranging from visits to Japanese Shinto shrines, the Islamic pilgrimage of Hajj, “birthright” trips to Israel by American Jewish youth, and, yes, even trips to Graceland in Memphis, Tennessee – the home of Elvis Presley. Arnold van Gennep (1873-1957) defined pilgrimage as one of a number of rites of passage (i.e., a rite du passage) that involves pilgrims separating themselves from broader society, moving themselves into a place of transition, and then re-incorporating their transformed bodies and minds back into their home societies. That moment of transition, which van Gennep called “liminality,” was the moment when one would become something new – perhaps through initiation, ritual observation, or by pushing one's personal boundaries outside of one's ordinary experience. Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), a contemporary of Turner, argued that a pilgrimage helps us to provide a story within which we are able to orient ourselves in the world. Consider, for example, the role that a trip to Arlington National Cemetery or the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier plays in a visit by a high school class to Washington, D.C. If framed and studied as a pilgrimage, Geertz's theory would suggest that a visit to these sites can be formative to an American's understanding of national history and, perhaps just as importantly, the visit will reinforce for Americans the importance of national service and remembrance of those who died in service to the defense of the United States. When we return from those school field trips to Washington, D.C., then, we do so with a new sense of who we are and where we fit into our shared American history. Among the many examples that we could cite from American history, two pilgrimages in particular – those of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Malcolm X – provide instructive examples. Held three years after the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education, the 1957 “Prayer Pilgrimage for Freedom,” led by Dr. King brought together thousands in order to, as he described it, “call upon all who love justice and dignity and liberty, who love their country, and who love mankind …. [to] renew our strength, communicate our unity, and rededicate our efforts, firmly but peaceably, to the attainment of freedom.” Posters for the event promised that it would “arouse the conscience of the nation.” Drawing upon themes from the Christian New Testament, including those related to agape – a love of one's friends and enemies – King's speech at the “Prayer Pilgrimage” brought national attention to his civil rights movement and established an essential foundation for his return to Washington, D.C. and his “I Have a Dream Speech,” six years later. In April 1964, Malcolm X departed to observe the Muslim pilgrimage ritual of Hajj in the city of Mecca in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Hajj is an obligation upon all Muslims, across the globe, and involves rituals meant to remind them of their responsibilities to God, to their fellow Muslims, and of their relationship to Ibrahim and Ismail (i.e., Abraham and Ishamel) as found in the Qur'an. Before his trip, Malcolm X had expressed skepticism about building broader ties to American civil rights groups. His experience on Hajj, he wrote, was transformational. "The holy city of Mecca had been the first time I had ever stood before the creator of all and felt like a complete human being,” he wrote, “People were hugging, they were embracing, they were of all complexions …. The feeling hit me that there really wasn't what he called a color problem, a conflict between racial identities here." His experience on Hajj was transformative. The result? Upon return to the United States, Malcolm X pledged to work with anyone – regardless of faith and race – who would work to change civil rights in the United States. His experiences continue to resonate with Americans. These are but two stories that contribute to American pilgrimage experiences. Today, Americans go on pilgrimages to the Ganges in India, to Masada in Israel, to Mecca in Saudi Arabia, and to Bethlehem in Palestine, and to cities along the Trail of Tears and along the migration of the Latter-Day Saints church westward. Yet, they also go on pilgrimages and road trips to the Pro Football Hall of Fame, to the baseball hall of fame in Cooperstown, to the national parks, and to sites of family and community importance. In these travels, they step outside of the ordinary and, in encountering the diversities of the U.S., sometimes experience the extraordinary changing themselves, and the country, in the process. * * * Questions for Class Discussion What is a “pilgrimage”? What is a road trip? Are they similar? Different? Why? Must a pilgrimage only be religious or spiritual? Why or why not? How has movement – from city to city, or place to place, or around the world – changed U.S. history and the self-understanding of Americans? What if those movements had never occurred? How would the U.S. be different? Have you been on a pilgrimage? Have members of your family? How has it changed your sense of self? How did it change that of your family members? If you were to design a pilgrimage, what would it be? Where would it take place? Would it involve special rituals or types of dress? Why? What would the purpose of your pilgrimage be? How do other communities understand their pilgrimages? Do other cultures have “road trips” like the United States? Additional Sources: Ohio History and Pilgrimage Fort Ancient Earthworks & Nature Preserve, Ohio History Connection (link). National Geographic Society, “Intriguing Interactions [Hopewell],” Grades 9-12 (link) Documentary Podcasts & Films “In the Light of Reverence,” 2001 (link) An examination of Lakota, Hopi, and Wintu ties to and continued usages of their homelands and a question of how movement through land may be considered sacred by some and profane by others. Melvin Bragg, “Medieval Pilgrimage,” BBC: In our Time, February 2021 (link) Bruce Feiler: Sacred Journeys (Pilgrimage). PBS Films (link) along with educator resources (link). The American Pilgrimage Project. Berkley Center, Georgetown University (link). Arranged by StoryCorps, a collection of video and audio interviews with Americans of diverse backgrounds discussing their religious and spiritual identities and their intersections with American life. Dave Whitson, “The Camino Podcast,” (link) on Spotify (link), Apple (link) A collection of interviews with those of varying faiths and spiritualities discussing pilgrimage experiences. Popular Media & Websites “Dreamland: American Travelers to the Holy Land in the 19th Century,” Shapell (link) A curated digital museum gallery cataloguing American experiences of pilgrimage to Jerusalem, Israel, and Palestine. LaPier, Rosalyn R. “How Standing Rock Became a Site of Pilgrimage.” The Conversation, December 7, 2016 (link). Talamo, Lex. Pilgrimage for the Soul. South Dakota Magazine, May/June 2019. (link). Books Grades K-6 Murdoch, Catherine Gilbert. The Book of Boy. New York: Harper Collins, 2020 (link). Wolk, Lauren. Beyond the Bright Sea. New York: Puffin Books, 2018 (link). Grades 7-12 Chaucer, Geoffrey. The Canterbury Tales. New York: Penguin Books, 2003 (link). Malcolm X. The Autobiography of Malcolm X: As Told to Alex Haley. New York: Ballantine Books, 1992 (link). Melville, Herman. Clarel: A Poem and Pilgrimage in the Holy Land. New York: Library of America, n.d. (link). Murray, Pauli. Song in a Weary Throat: Memoir of an American Pilgrimage. New York: Liveright, 1987 (link). Reader, Ian. Pilgrimage: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015 (link). Twain, Mark. The Innocents Abroad. New York: Modern Library, 2003 (link). Scholarship Bell, Catherine. Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Bloechl, Jeffrey, and André Brouillette, eds. Pilgrimage as Spiritual Practice: A Handbook for Teachers, Wayfarers, and Guides. Minneapolis, MN: Fortress Press, 2022. Frey, Nancy Louise Louise. Pilgrim Stories: On and Off the Road to Santiago, Journeys Along an Ancient Way in Modern Spain. First Edition. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998. Lévi-Strauss, Claude Patterson, Sara M., “Traveling Zions: Pilgrimage in Modern Mormonism,” in Pioneers in the Attic: Place and Memory along the Mormon Trail. New York: Oxford University Press, 2020 (link). Pazos, Antón. Redefining Pilgrimage: New Perspectives on Historical and Contemporary Pilgrimages. London: Routledge, 2014 (link). Reader, Ian. Pilgrimage: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015 (link). Van Gennep, Arnold. The Rites of Passage. Translated by Monika B. Vizedom and Gabrielle L. Caffee. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1960 (link)

What is a church? How does a religious society really differentiate itself from any other kind of society? What does it take to become a priest of the Holy Watermelon?Some people join self-help groups without realizing they've been trapped in a cult. We'll be up front about it: this is a church.How can we be a church while also being secular and academic? Easy, the rules that define religion are extremely soft. Emile Durkheim and Clifford Geertz weigh in with their definitions, which are variably useless; James Martineaux is just wrong about what counts as religion when we look beyond the walls of the Abrahamic tradition;  Friedrich Schleiermacher makes some sense of the matter, but it's hard to agree with him, too, even to the point that we have to agree with Sigmund Freud in pointing out the obvious flaws in his reasoning....Church, worship, piety, and reverence each get a little bit of attention in this pursuit of useful definitions, too. Ultimately, the San Lanatus Fellowship stands for humanity, education, and critical curiosity, welcoming people of all spiritual inclinations under the banner of undefined agnosticism.All this and more.... Support us on Patreon or you can get our merch at Spreadshop.Join the Community on Discord.Learn more great religion factoids on Facebook and Instagram.

Simon is dog tired from baking too much bread, and Lee is in the midst of a work load that is barely sustainable: enter Grover from Sesame Street.Some other details from the episode: Enjoying making processes efficient; sourdough and allergens; Lee figuring out the rhythm of his job; being surrounded by kindness; a packet of crisps and a sandwich; cheese and Simon's LDLs; sheese (vegan cream cheese); everybody say tofu; tofurkey time; two-thirty and tooth-hurty; the life-cycle of bad jokes; Grover's near and far; the rule of three in comedy; Simon breathes differently when he is Duck Duck Going; public floggings for academics; finding the toddler; Clifford Geertz (anthropologist, died in 2006); Clifford the Big Red Dog; the difference between a twitch and a wink; Kevin Kelley (and other Kevins); The Girl from Ipanema; Kevin Keegan; Princess Leia; IDEO design laboratory; John Galliano; what Lee wears when he cooks; innovation; first past the post voting systems; Godwin's Law.--- Related links (and necessary corrections): Grover's near and far: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9IuXEwpU7UKevin Kelley "Excellent Advice For Living: Wisdom I Wish I'd Known Earlier": https://www.amazon.co.uk/Excellent-Advice-Living-Wisdom-Earlier/dp/0593654528IDEO: https://www.ideo.com/Godwin's Law: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_lawGet in touch with Lee and Simon at info@midlifing.net. ---The Midlifing logo is adapted from an original image by H.L.I.T: https://www.flickr.com/photos/29311691@N05/8571921679 (CC BY 2.0)

Philosophical concepts are influential in the theories and methods of studying world religions. Even though anthropology and religious studies now encompass communities and cultures worldwide, the theories and methods used to study world religions and cultures continue to be rooted in Western philosophies. For instance, one of the most widely used textbooks used in introductory courses on religious studies introduces major theoreticians such as Edward Burnett Tylor, James Frazer, Sigmund Freud, Emile Durkheim, Karl Marx, Max Weber, Mircea Eliade, William James, E. E. Evans-Pritchard, and Clifford Geertz. Their theories are based on Western philosophy. In contrast, in Indic philosophical systems, such as Buddhism, Hinduism, and Jainism, one of the common views on reality is that the world, both within oneself and outside, is a flow with nothing permanent, both the observer and the observed undergoing constant transformation. This volume is based on innovative ideas from different Indic philosophies and how they can enrich the theory and methods in religious studies. --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/pankaj-jain/message

James Evans' life is one resplendent with ideas. His trajectory into research and learning in areas as wide as network science, collective intelligence, computational social science, and even how knowledge is created, is as irreducible as it is exhilarating, and is a beacon in disorienting times marked by seemingly accelerating paces of change. Origins Podcast WebsiteFlourishing Commons NewsletterShow Notes:cultural and knowledge observatories (05:30)Mark Granovetter (09:15)Steve Barley (10:30)Woody Powell (10:30)Chris Summerfield (11:00)Some papers mentioned:Metaknowledge (17:10)Weaving the fabric of science: Dynamic network models of science's unfolding structure (18:30)Abduction (21:30)epistemic space (22:40)Claude Lévi-Strauss (24:20)Clifford Geertz (24:30)"Dissecting racial bias in an algorithm used to manage the health of populations" Obermeyer et al. (30:00)Scarcity Sendhil Mullainathan (35:00)The Knowledge Lab (36:00)"Quantifying the dynamics of failure across science, startups and security" Yin et al. (45:00)Charles Sanders Peirce (51:00)Pirkei Avot (56:00)Alison Gopnik on explore-exploit (01:02:30)Elise Boulding "the 200-year present" (01:03:00)Jo Guldi (01:06:00)Lightning Round (01:06:30):Book: The Enigma of ReasonPassion: physical exploration and spiritual callingHeart sing: 'social science fiction' and Hod LipsonScrewed up: management style at timesJames online:@profjamesevansThe Knowledge Lab'Five-Cut Fridays' five-song music playlist series  James' playlistLogo artwork Cristina GonzalezMusic by swelo

He's a poet, art critic, curator, translator, cultural theorist -- and someone who helps make sense of our world. Ranjit Hoskote joins Amit Varma in episode 363 of The Seen and the Unseen to talk about his life, his times and his work. (FOR FULL LINKED SHOW NOTES, GO TO SEENUNSEEN.IN.) Also check out: 1. Ranjit Hoskote on Twitter, Instagram and Amazon. 2. Jonahwhale -- Ranjit Hoskote. 3. Hunchprose -- Ranjit Hoskote. 4. I, Lalla: The Poems of Lal Dĕd -- Translated by Ranjit Hoskote. 5. Poet's nightmare -- Ranjit Hoskote. 6. State of enrichment -- Ranjit Hoskote. 7. Nissim Ezekiel, AK Ramanujan, Arun Kolatkar, Keki Daruwalla, Dom Moraes, Dilip Chitre, Gieve Patel, Vilas Sarang, Arvind Krishna Mehrotra, Agha Shahid Ali, Mani Rao, Mustansir Dalvi, Jerry Pinto, Sampurna Chattarji, Vivek Narayanan and Arundhathi Subramaniam. 8. Ted Hughes, Geoffrey Hill, Seamus Heaney, Sharon Olds, Louise Glück, Jorie Graham and Rita Dove. 9. The Life and Times of Shanta Gokhale — Episode 311 of The Seen and the Unseen. 10. The Life and Times of Jerry Pinto — Episode 314 of The Seen and the Unseen. 11. कुँवर नारायण, केदारनाथ सिंह, अशोक वाजपेयी and नागार्जुन. 12. Ravi Shankar, Ali Akbar Khan, Bismillah Khan, Igor Straviksky, Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky, Steve Reich and Terry Riley. 13. Palgrave's Golden Treasury: From Shakespeare to the Present. 14. The Rime of the Ancient Mariner -- Samuel Taylor Coleridge. 15. Sara Rai Inhales Literature — Episode 255 of The Seen and the Unseen. 16. The Art of Translation — Episode 168 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Arunava Sinha). 17. Arun Khopkar, Mani Kaul and Clement Greenberg. 18. Stalker -- Andrei Tarkovsky. 19. The Sacrifice -- Andrei Tarkovsky. 20. Ivan's Childhood -- Andrei Tarkovsky. 21. The Color of Pomegranates -- Sergei Parajanov. 22. Ranjit Hoskote's tribute on Instagram to Gieve Patel. 23. Father Returning Home -- Dilip Chitre. 24. Jejuri -- Arun Kolatkar. 25. Modern Poetry in Translation -- Magazine and publisher founded by Ted Hughes and Daniel Weissbort. 26. On Exactitude in Science — Jorge Luis Borges. 27. How Music Works — David Byrne. 28. CBGB. 29. New York -- Lou Reed. 30. How This Nobel Has Redefined Literature — Amit Varma on Dylan winning the Nobel Prize. 31. The Fire and the Rain -- Girish Karnad. 32. Vanraj Bhatia on Wikipedia and IMDb. 33. Amit Varma's tweet thread on Jonahwhale. 34. Magic Fruit: A Poetic Trip -- Vaishnav Vyas. 35. Glenn Gould on Spotify. 36. Danish Husain and the Multiverse of Culture -- Episode 359 of The Seen and the Unseen. 37. Steven Fowler. 38. Serious Noticing -- James Wood. 39. How Fiction Works -- James Wood. 40. The Spirit of Indian Painting -- BN Goswamy. 41. Conversations -- BN Goswamy. 42. BN Goswamy on Wikipedia and Amazon. 43. BN Goswamy (1933-2023): Sage and Sensitivity -- Ranjit Hoskote. 44. Joseph Fasano's thread on his writing exercises. 45. Narayan Surve on Wikipedia and Amazon. 46. Steven Van Zandt: Springsteen, the death of rock and Van Morrison on Covid — Richard Purden. 47. 1000 True Fans — Kevin Kelly. 48. 1000 True Fans? Try 100 — Li Jin. 49. Future Shock -- Alvin Toffler. 50. The Third Wave -- Alvin Toffler. 51. The Long Tail -- Chris Anderson. 52. Ranjit Hoskote's resignation letter from the panel of Documenta. 53. Liquid Modernity -- Zygmunt Bauman. 54. Rahul Matthan Seeks the Protocol -- Episode 360 of The Seen and the Unseen. 55. Panopticon. 56. Tron -- Steven Lisberger. 57. Gita Press and the Making of Hindu India — Akshaya Mukul. 58. The Gita Press and Hindu Nationalism — Episode 139 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Akshaya Mukul). 59. Ramchandra Gandhi on Wikipedia and Amazon. 60. Majma-ul-Bahrain (also known as Samudra Sangam Grantha) -- Dara Shikoh. 61. Early Indians — Tony Joseph. 62. Tony Joseph's episode on The Seen and the Unseen. 63. Who We Are and How We Got Here — David Reich. 64. पुराण स्थल. 65. The Indianness of Indian Food — Episode 95 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Vikram Doctor). 66. The Refreshing Audacity of Vinay Singhal — Episode 291 of The Seen and the Unseen. 67. The Speaking Tree: A Study of Indian Culture and Society -- Richard Lannoy. 68. Clifford Geertz, John Berger and Arthur C Danto. 69. The Ascent of Man (book) (series) -- Jacob Bronowski. 70. Civilization (book) (series) -- Kenneth Clark. 71. Cosmos (book) (series) -- Carl Sagan. 72. Richard Dawkins, Steven Pinker, Stephen Jay Gould and Oliver Sacks. 73. Raag Darbari (Hindi) (English) — Shrilal Shukla.. 74. Raag Darbari on Storytel. 75. Krishnamurti's Notebook -- J Krishnamurty. 76. Shame -- Salman Rushdie. 77. Marcovaldo -- Italo Calvino. 78. Metropolis -- Fritz Lang. 79. Mahanagar -- Satyajit Ray. 80. A Momentary Lapse of Reason -- Pink Floyd. 81. Learning to Fly -- Pink Floyd, 82. Collected poems -- Mark Strand. Amit Varma and Ajay Shah have launched a new video podcast. Check out Everything is Everything on YouTube. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. And subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! Episode art: ‘Dancing in Chains' by Simahina.

This third episode of How to be Good Ancestors on Indonesia will zoom into the architectural scale to look at another form of debt: the act of disseminating building knowledge as a form of epistemic imposition. We will be revisiting Indonesian colonial history with architectural historian David Hutama Setiadi focusing on design pedagogy. Together we will unpack the ways in which systems of knowledge were imposed through new ways of building generated by capitalist ideology, revealing the complicity of drawing methods and classification systems in marginalising the Metis, an unstructured type of knowledge learned through embodied experience. We will also be discussing the possibilities of reversing the logics of the episteme. How to be Good Ancestors means rereading our past to disentangle future possibilities from systems of oppression. In this podcast series, hosts and AA students Ferial Massoud, Maria Putri and Aude Tollo retrace the common histories of three nominally decolonised states – Burkina Faso, Egypt and Indonesia – through the systems of debt servitude to which they were condemned in the wake of their independence, and which they remain subject to today. We ask: what are the spatial and material consequences of these systems and how can we begin to undo them? Show Notes:- David Hutama Setiadi, Building Practice in the Dutch East Indies: Epistemic Imposition at the Beginning of the 20th Century, 2023- Summarised version of David's book: https://ar.fa.uni-lj.si/2020/re-drawing-javanese-building-practice- James C Scott, Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed, 2020- Richard Sennett, The Craftsmen, 2008- Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, ed, The Invention of Tradition, 2012- Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays by Clifford Geertz, 1973- Jean Couteau, Tubuh, Moral dan Jiwa Zaman, 2019 About A Line Traced:As our society continues to unveil fractures within its social and political systems, A Line Traced aims to examine topics that are immediate, prescient and impact the build environment in ways that require urgent architectural responses. An AirAA podcast recorded, mixed, edited and distributed from the Architectural Association School of Architecture, which is based in Bedford Square in London. Special thanks to Thomas Parkes for his contribution to the production of our episodes. Visit air.aaschool.ac.uk to find out more.

What do Gwen Stefani, Iggy Azalea, and Camille Monet have in common? They are all blonde women who are probably guilty of cultural appropriation. In episode 73 of Overthink, Ellie and David tackle cultural appropriation, starting with the kerfuffle over Claude Monet's painting La Japonaise at The Museum of Fine Arts in Boston. Pulling from their own experiences of cultural appropriation and from academic explorations of the topic, they consider whether individuals should even be called out for cultural appropriation. They talk about Nguyen and Strohl's concept of “group intimacy” and debate whether we can ever draw a clear line between insiders and outsiders in a particular cultural group.Works DiscussedHomi Bhabha, The Location of CultureJesa Marie Calaor, “Gwen Stefani: “I Said, ‘My God, I'm Japanese'”Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of CulturesErich Hatala Matthes, “Cultural Appropriation Without Cultural Essentialism?”C. Thi Nguyen and Matthew Strohl, “Cultural Appropriation and the Intimacy of Groups”Patreon | patreon.com/overthinkpodcast Website | overthinkpodcast.comInstagram & Twitter | @overthink_podEmail |  Dearoverthink@gmail.comYouTube | Overthink podcastSupport the show

In this episode, Daniela shares her experience as an insider/outsider archaeologist of Chachapoya mortuary landscape in Peru. Reflecting on our lives during the pandemic, she provides insight into navigating the everyday life of grad school, making ethical decisions for our research, families and communities. 03:15 - 07:23 Why Study Anthropology? 07:24 - 16:03 Research Overview 16:04 - 20:12 “If I wasn't an Archeologist…” 20:13 - 33:15 History of Archeology in the Americas 33:16 - 38:38 Community-Based Research 38:39 - 52:13 Positionality and the Impact of the Pandemic 52:14 - 57:07 Unfinished Projects 57:08 - 1:04:02 Methods and Perceptions 1:04:03 - 1:09:49 Public Humanities and Collaboration 1:09:49 - 1:29:50 Speed Round! To learn more about her work, visit her website and her project social media @MAPAchachapoya on Facebook and @mapa_sacha Instagram, or follow her project Tiktok account (@andes_archaeology).  Keywords:  archaeology, mortuary landscapes, community-based knowledge, aerial drone photogrammetry, public humanities, Peru, Leymebamba, Chachapoya References: Gene Savoy; Kuélap (the site mentioned in Peru); Deep Hanging Out (A term attributed to Clifford Geertz, first known to be used by Renato Rosaldo) --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/talkinganthropology/message

Familiar Stranger Emma sits down with Frank Pasquale from Brooklyn Law School. Frank is also currently co-editor-in-chief of the Journal of Cross-Disciplinary Research in Computational Law! Frank is one of the leaders in relation to AI Law and cross-disciplinary approaches, with his works of The Black Box Society The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information and New Laws of Robotics Defending Human Expertise in the Age of AI, incorporates a broad range of insight from an even broader range of disciplines. In this conversation, Emma and Frank touch on authority, Trust and the essays of Clifford Geertz. Briefly dive deep into America's Anti-Trust laws and eventually discuss ideas of where to next for AI technologies, and how disciplines can work more efficiently to drive new insights and findings.

Comincia il finale della quarta stagione di antropoché! Torna dopo due anni la Lega Pokémon, ci saranno 4 puntate, ognuna con un grande pensatore che, per l'occasione diventerà un allenatore di pokemon con annessa squadra, composta da 6 pokémon che andranno a spiegare il loro incredibile genio. Cominceremo un uno dei nomi più importanti della storia della nostra antropologia. Tenetevi forte gente, Clifford Geertz, vuole lottare

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. 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

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Ngaji Filsafat : Clifford Geertz - Agama Edisi : Perspektif tentang Agama Rabu, 10 November 2021 Ngaji FIlsafat bersama Dr. Fahruddin Faiz, M. Ag. Ngaji Filsafat berlangsung rutin setiap hari Rabu pukul 20.00 WIB Bertempat di Masjid Jendral Sudirman Kolombo, Jln. Rajawali No. 10 Kompleks Kolombo, Demangan Baru, Caturtunggal, Depok, Sleman, Yogyakarta 55281 --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/masjid-jendral-sudirman/message

In this Anthro to UX podcast episode,  Gigi Taylor speaks with Matt Artz about her UX journey, working in advertising, and the pivot to product. Gigi earned an MA in applied anthropology from the University of North Texas. She was a partner in the Practica Group and is currently a Qualitative UX Researcher at Indeed.com.About Gigi TaylorGigi Taylor is a cultural anthropologist working as a qualitative UX researcher with Indeed in Austin, Texas. As a research practitioner, she conducts cultural anthropology research for business. As a scholar, she conducts anthropology research of business.  What distinguishes her applied and academic research is that she uses a cultural anthropological lens to study business—advertising, consumers, brands, consumption, users, products, digital experiences, and organizations.She embraces the idea that consumer and user experience insights informed by a cultural analysis can serve as the muse and inspiration for all aspects of product and brand strategy.  The magic of cultural analysis is the theory of interpretive and symbolic cultural anthropology (Clifford Geertz and Victor Turner).She was a partner with Practica Group, a consumer anthropology research consultancy where she conducted ethnographies, focus groups, interviews, diary studies, and observations. She started her research strategy career as an Account Planner at Publics & Hal Riney Advertising in San Francisco and has owned Luminosity Research, a qualitative research consultancy, since 2006.She has a PhD and MA in Advertising from the University of Texas and an MA in Applied Anthropology from the University of North Texas. Her published academic research has appeared in both advertising and anthropological journals.Recommended LinksGigi Taylor's websiteGigi Taylor on LinkedInAbout Anthro to UXThe Anthro to UX podcast is for anthropologists looking to break into user experience (UX) research. Through conversations with leading anthropologists working in UX, you will learn firsthand how others made the transition, what they learned along the way, and what they would do differently. We will also discuss what it means to do UX research from a practical perspective and what you need to do to prepare a resume and portfolio. It is hosted by Matt Artz (https://mattartz.me), a business anthropologist specializing in design anthropology and working at the intersection of product management, user experience, and business strategy. To learn more about the podcast and career coaching services, please visit Anthro to UX (https://anthropologytoux.com).

In this Anthro to UX podcast episode, Gigi Taylor speaks with Matt Artz about her UX journey, working in advertising, and the pivot to product. Gigi earned an MA in applied anthropology from the University of North Texas. She was a partner in the Practica Group and is currently a Qualitative UX Researcher at Indeed.com. About Gigi Taylor Gigi Taylor is a cultural anthropologist working as a qualitative UX researcher with Indeed in Austin, Texas. As a research practitioner, she conducts cultural anthropology research for business. As a scholar, she conducts anthropology research of business.  What distinguishes her applied and academic research is that she uses a cultural anthropological lens to study business—advertising, consumers, brands, consumption, users, products, digital experiences, and organizations. She embraces the idea that consumer and user experience insights informed by a cultural analysis can serve as the muse and inspiration for all aspects of product and brand strategy.  The magic of cultural analysis is the theory of interpretive and symbolic cultural anthropology (Clifford Geertz and Victor Turner). She was a partner with Practica Group, a consumer anthropology research consultancy where she conducted ethnographies, focus groups, interviews, diary studies, and observations. She started her research strategy career as an Account Planner at Publics & Hal Riney Advertising in San Francisco and has owned Luminosity Research, a qualitative research consultancy, since 2006. She has a PhD and MA in Advertising from the University of Texas and an MA in Applied Anthropology from the University of North Texas. Her published academic research has appeared in both advertising and anthropological journals. Recommended Links Gigi Taylor's website Gigi Taylor on LinkedIn

In this episode, the boys discuss ritual in its myriad forms and ponder questions such as: What is ritual? What forms of ritual are there? Why should we bother with ritual? What actions deserve ritual? How can we incorporate rituals into our lives? What actions are indicative of ritual? What obscure academics can Adam introduce to the conversation? And more! Nic's sources: The Power of Ritual by Casper Ter Kuile Adam's sources: Emile Durkheim, Clifford Geertz, Victor Turner Oh, and as of upload, it really is Monday. It's wicked late (apologies, again), but it is Monday.

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/finance

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/economics

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  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

In this installment of our Recall this Buck series (check out our earlier conversations with Thomas Piketty, Peter Brown and Christine Desan), John and Elizabeth talk with Daniel Souleles, anthropologist at the Copenhagen Business School and author of Songs of Profit, Songs of Loss: Private Equity, Wealth, and Inequality (Lincoln : University of Nebraska Press 2019). Dan's work explores the world of private equity "guys" (who are indeed mostly guys) and the ways they are "suspended in webs of significance [they themselves have] spun" as Clifford Geertz puts it. Further, he explores the ways we are all suspended in these webs through the immense buying and managing power of private equity firms. Private equity investors buy out publicly traded companies, often through enormous debt (which is why these deals used to be called "leveraged buyouts" or LBOs), manage the companies and then sell them. They argue they are creating value by cutting fat in management; typically workers bear the brunt of the debt while executives--and the private equity firm and lawyers and others servicing the deal--receive hefty payments. Dan pulls off a tough feat in his book, helping us see the concerns and motivations of people he's working with as understandable and the people themselves as reasonable and even likeable, while also maintaining his own view of private equity as, generally speaking, a noxious force in society. We end with a discussion of the Occupy movement and how it helped to change public conversations about inequality and the power of finance (another angle on the themes we tackled in our earlier "Brahmin Left" conversations). Mentioned in this episode: Bryan Burrough and John Helyar, Barbarians at the Gates: The Fall of NJR Nabisco Karen Ho Liquidated; ethnography of Wall Street, and of "smartness" Edwin Lefèvre, Reminiscences of a Stock Operator, (John misremembered the title as Confessions of a Stockjobber) Bret Easton Ellis, American Psycho (1991) The transcript for this episode is here.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

In this episode, we continue our celebration of the 2021 edition of IDFA as I chat with the Senior Programmer of the festival, Laura van Halsema. We talk about how she got into docs, her nearly 20 years with IDFA, and take a deep dive into the unConscious Bias Focus program at the festival this year. The song for this episode is from the film Chelas Nha Kha which is part of the unConscious Bias strand and is entitled “Chelas City,” music by Bataclan 1950 and lyrics by Baguera, Islu, and Gohu. The film is a collaboration between Bagabaga Studios and Batalan 1950 is about the people and kids growing up in Chelas which is a neighborhood in Lisbon. During our conversation, we spoke about the anthropologist Clifford Geertz's concept of the “webs of influence.” Laura thought of this film and about the filmmakers who live in that area as they learn to define for themselves their own realities. The first love of Bataclan 1950 is making music which is prominently featured in the film. Here is our conversation which was recorded in November 2021.

Jonathan Zimmeramn is a Professor of History of Education at the University of Pennsylvania. During our conversation, Jonathan talks about his time in the peace corps in Nepal, the history of free speech jurisprudence in America, current attacks on freedom of speech in academia, and his new book, Free Speech: And Why You Should Give a Damn.------------Support this podcast via VenmoSupport this podcast via PayPalSupport this podcast on Patreon------------Show notesLeave a rating on SpotifyLeave a rating on Apple PodcastsFollow Keep Talking on Twitter, Instagram, and FacebookListen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and YouTube------------(00:51) Where does Jonathan's interest in history stem from?(03:25) What did Jonathan learn about US history that resonates with him to this day(12:36) Learnings from Clifford Geertz's essay on anti-relativism.(15:20) About Jonathan's book, Innocents Abroad.(22:34) Jonathan talks about the difference between the word judgment and discernment.(24:58) How did Jonathan's Nepal life influence his personal life?(31:04) Jonathan's ideas on communities.(42:29) Jonathan discusses the book, Passing on the Right: Conservative Professors in the Progressive University by Jon A. Shields and Joshua M. Dunn Sr.(57:14) About Jonathan's new book Free Speech: And Why You Should Give a Damn and what he strives to achieve with it.(01:07:11) What has caused the present panic or disregard for freedom of speech(01:09:03) Talking about micro-aggressions.

Dos sacerdotes não-binários e transexuais de Sulawesi ao extremismo islâmico de Aceh: a Indonésia é um país extremamente diverso em termos de profissão de fé. Analisamos o clássico da antropologia da religião "Islam Observed" (1967-1971) de Clifford Geertz para discutir Marrocos, Indonésia, secularismo em sociedades muçulmanas e a transformação do mundo islâmico após a Terceira Naksah. SASTRA - Grupo de Estudos do Sudeste Asiático (sastra.contato@gmail.com) Trilha sonora: Syamsudin. Sigumendar (Folk And Pop Sounds Of Sumatra Vol.2, 2004)

It's a great pleasure to welcome back Gillian Tett, who chairs the Editorial Board in the US for the Financial Times. She has a regular column at FT, writing about finance, business and the political economy. Gillian's work is all about looking at the world through different lenses, and moving from tunnel vision to lateral vision. It's about leveraging diversity, embracing the unknown, and learning from others in non-related fields, cultures, and geographies.  In this interview, we talk about her new book, "Anthro-Vision: A New Way to See in Business and Life," and we cover a lot of topics from an anthropological perspective. We also talk about controversial topics like Bitcoin and Trumpism, as well as more enduring issues like leadership, and what that looks like in this VUCA world that we live in. So whether you're a business leader, a policy maker, an investor, or even just a parent worrying about how your kids appear to be over-reliant on technology, I hope you will find this conversation as fascinating and inspirational as I did.  What Is Covered: - The three principles of the anthropology mindset and what being an anthropologist means in the corporate world - How the concept of barter and social silences plays out in the world of AgTech and “free” services - Why teenagers are glued to their cell phones and what kind of needs in physical space the cyberspace is fulfilling - The concept of fast and slow money, and people's behaviours around money  - Understanding Trumpism from an anthropological perspective - How Bitcoin and cryptocurrency tribes are changing the economy and the power structures   Key Takeaways and Learnings:  - Barter trade terms in the world of AgTech need to be reset to make it more equitable, giving a lot more transparency to consumers, giving consumers more control over the duration of the trade, and creating data portability. - The four skills that anthropology can offer to any leader are the ability to have empathy for difference, to flip the lens and look back at yourself with a sense of humility, the ability to look outside the model, and to recognize that we need to think about people's human behavior and how culture matters.  - Cultural phenomena like Balinese cockfighting rituals are a good way to make sense of Trumpism, and of what's happening with Elon Musk and Bitcoin in terms of defining tribal groups, the role of rituals and symbols, and the role the emotions play Links and Resources Mentioned in This Episode:  - “Anthro-Vision: A New Way to See in Business and Life” by Gillian Tett https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Anthro-Vision/Gillian-Tett/9781982140960  - Connect with Gillian Tett on LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/gillian-tett/  and Twitter https://twitter.com/gilliantett  - Data & Society https://datasociety.net/  - ReD Associates https://www.redassociates.com/  - “The Interpretation of Cultures” by Clifford Geertz https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0465097197/  - Why Anthropologists are More Interested in Bitcoin Than Economists, by Mick Morucci https://bitcoinmagazine.com/culture/anthropologists-are-interested-in-bitcoin  - “Who Can You Trust” by Rachel Botsman https://rachelbotsman.com/books/  - The Conversation https://theconversation.com/global  - Colliding with the Unexpected with Gillian Tett on OutsideVoices Podcast https://outsidelens.com/colliding-with-the-unexpected-with-gillian-tett/  Connect with Mark Bidwell: - LinkedIn https://www.linkedin.com/in/markbidwell/  - Twitter https://twitter.com/markehb 

Astăzi vom vorbi despre relativism, despre sofiști, despre accidentul Tesla AutoPilot din 2016, despre Protagoras, despre acea javelină aruncată în tribune, despre Clifford Geertz și Giovanni Becali. Dacă vă place acest podcast, puteți da un like paginii de Facebook (Podcastul de Filosofie) sau mă puteți susține pe https://www.patreon.com/octavpopa 

Hela Ammar (Artist) and Mohamed Kerrou (University of Tunis El Manar) give a talk for the Middle East Centre Friday Seminar Series. Chaired by Dr Michael Willis (St Antony's College, Oxford), the discussant was Professor Charles R H Tripp (SOAS). The overthrow of Ben Ali's dictatorship in 2011 was revolutionary both in its method and in its outcome, involving mass participation and opening the way for the establishment of democratic institutions. However, like all such events, it is part of a process that continues as Tunisians grapple with the challenge of bringing about significant change not simply in their governing institutions, but also in the other areas of political, social, cultural and economic life that shape the lives and the rights of citizens. This panel will explore some of the achievements of the past ten years, but also the unfinished business and unrealised hopes that have marked Tunisia's political trajectory. Speaker Biographies Dr Héla Ammar https://www.helaammar.com/index.php/about Héla Ammar is a Tunisia based visual artist. In addition to her training in visual art, she holds a Phd in Law. Author of Corridors (2014), a photo book on Tunisian prisons, and co-author of Siliana Syndrome (2013), a survey of death row in Tunisia, she recently developed a whole artwork around the prison environment. In 2011, immediately after the revolution, she was part of the Artocracy Inside Out project that sought, through art, to reclaim public spaces in Tunisia for the Tunisian public. She was also a member of the commission set up by the Tunisian government in 2011 to look into the conditions of prisons across the country. More generally, her photographs and installations address issues of memory and identity. A selection of her works now forms part of the British Museum (London) and the Institut du Monde Arabe (Paris) permanent collections. Her work has been showcased in various international biennials and exhibitions including the Biennial of Contemporary Arab World Photographers (Institut du Monde Arabe, Paris, 2017), Réenchantements Dak’art Biennial 2016 (Senegal), Fragments d’une Tunisie contemporaine, MuCem (Marseille,2015), Bamako Encounters (Mali, 2015 and 2017), Something Else, Off Biennial Cairo (Egypt 2015) International Photography Encounters of Fes (Morocco, 2015), Monochromes Dak’art Biennal, (Senegal 2014), the 27th Instants Vidéo (Festival numérique et poétique, Marseille 2014), World Nomads New York ( USA, 2013), Les rencontres photographiques d’Arles (France, 2013), Dream City (Tunisia, 2010, 2012 and 2017) Prof Mohamed Kerrou Mohamed Kerrou is Professor of Political Science at the Faculty of Law and Political Science at the University of Tunis El Manar. He is also a permanent member of the Tunisian Academy of Sciences, Arts and Letters Beit Al-Hikma, as well as a founding member of the Tunisian Observatory for Democratic Transition. He has published numerous articles and books, amongst which: L'autre révolution. Essai, Tunis, Cérès, 2018; L'homme des questions. Hommage à Abdelkader Zghal, Tunis, Cérès, 2017; Hijâb. Nouveaux voiles et espaces publics, Tunis, Cérès, 2010; D'islam et d'ailleurs. Hommage à Clifford Geertz, Tunis, Cérès, 2007. His forthcoming book, currently in press, is entitled: Jemna. L'oasis de la révolution, Tunis, Cérès, 2021.

Anthropologist Joe Webster discusses his research amongst Protestant groups in Scotland, from Brethren fishermen to the sometimes-controversial Orange Order. We talk about apocalypse and conspiracy, faith and fraternity, hate and masculinity – and why it's vital to listen to others, even if we don't always like what we find.  For fans of Louis Theroux and Clifford Geertz alike. A conversation on ethics and representation, listening, community and more.  Podcast listeners can get a year's subscription to New Humanist magazine for just £13.50. Head to newhumanist.org.uk/subscribe and enter the code WITHREASONPresenters: Alice Bloch & Samira Shackle Producer: Alice Bloch Further reading:Joseph Webster (2020) ‘The Religion of Orange Politics: Protestantism and Fraternity in Contemporary Scotland'Joseph Webster (2013) ‘The Anthropology of Protestantism: Faith and Crisis Among Scottish Fishermen' Clifford Geertz, "Distinguished Lecture: Anti Anti-Relativism." American Anthropologist, New Series, 86, no. 2 (1984): 263-78. James Laidlaw (2013) ‘The Subject of Virtue: An Anthropology of Ethics and Freedom'New Humanist magazine - Eleanor Gordon-Smith (2019) ‘The Sleep of Reason'Music: 'Lost in the Cinema' by Danosongs

Les traemos un clásico pa cualquier interesadx en la antropología pero también es posible que lo vean en materias como Comprensión de Textos o Sociología de la Cultura  Aquí los apartados I, II, III del capítulo 1. Descripción Densa: Hacia una teoría interpretativa de la cultura --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/anarkademia/message

REFLECTION QUOTES “Put God first.” ~Denzel Washington at the 2015 Dillard University commencement speech “…man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun…” ~Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), noted American anthropologist “There is…a remedy for all our fears. That remedy comes as a person, and the means through which He provides the comfort, along with the Holy Spirit, is through His Word. To fight our fears, we…look at God's sovereignty and love and watch our fears dissipate as we apply God's Word to our lives. The very thing we are holding on to (control) is, ironically, the thing we most need to let go of.” ~Trillia J. Newbell, Fear and Faith: Finding the Peace Your Heart Craves “True freedom consists in liberating one's essential nature into its best and proper end…. But the modern definition of freedom puts it emphasis more on the individual ability to choose regardless of the ends that he or she might choose.” ~David Bentley Hart, contemporary philosopher and cultural commentator “Every success is until further notice. Every achievement is a temporary one, and not a guarantee that it will last for ever, not a guarantee that in the future you will be as successful as you have been so far. You have to constantly brace yourself for a new kind of challenge, unexperienced so far, unfamiliar, and you have to forget old habits as quickly as you learned the new ones.” ~Zygmunt Bauman (1925-2017) Polish-born sociologist and philosopher, on the “the liquidity of modern times” “…God did not look past your faults, actually. He saw our faults, He saw that we were enemies of the cross, He saw that we rightly deserved His wrath because we turned from Him and we follow in the footsteps of our first father Adam, right? And so He saw our sins. He put our sins on Jesus. That's what it means for Him to become that sin offering. … Then [Jesus] rose bodily as a brown-skinned, Palestinian, God-man and is enthroned as that right now.” ~Ekemini Uwan, speaker and writer SERMO PASSAGE James 5:1-8 (ESV) James 4 13 Come now, you who say, “Today or tomorrow we will go into such and such a town and spend a year there and trade and make a profit”— 14 yet you do not know what tomorrow will bring. What is your life? For you are a mist that appears for a little time and then vanishes. 15 Instead you ought to say, “If the Lord wills, we will live and do this or that.” 16 As it is, you boast in your arrogance. All such boasting is evil. 17 So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin. James 5 1 Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you. 2 Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. 3 Your gold and silver have corroded, and their corrosion will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure in the last days. 4 Behold, the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, are crying out against you, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. 5 You have lived on the earth in luxury and in self-indulgence. You have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter. 6 You have condemned and murdered the righteous person. He does not resist you. 7 Be patient, therefore, brothers, until the coming of the Lord. See how the farmer waits for the precious fruit of the earth, being patient about it, until it receives the early and the late rains. 8 You also, be patient. Establish your hearts, for the coming of the Lord is at hand.

James 5:1-8 May 31, 2020 preached by Pastor Don Willeman Download Audio or Download Video Guide for Home Worship Time of Reflection Quotations “Put God first.” ~Denzel Washington at the 2015 Dillard University commencement speech “…man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun…” ~Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), noted American anthropologist “There […]

In questa puntata condivido qualche dritta, un paio di esempi e soprattutto una disavventura nel tentativo di rispondere in breve alla fatidica domanda: ma che cos'è l'antropologia culturale? Di che cosa si occupa? Cosa distingue questa disciplina da tutte le altre che si occupano dell'essere umano? Ma soprattutto: cosa diamine fa un antropologo? Lungi dal fornire risposte complete ed esaustive, provo a risalire alle origini della nascita ufficiale dell'antropologia e di quella culturale, in modo più specifico. Ricordando che, come affermava Clifford Geertz, non si tratta di una scienza sperimentale in cerca di leggi ma di una scienza interpretativa in cerca di significato. Illustrazione di Elisa Pavanello Sigla e sound design di Stefano Cassese | VCA Mastering Studio

In this episode, Natalia, Niki, and Neil discuss a cockfighting ban in Puerto Rico, Russia’s Olympic ban for doping its athletes, and the dawn of a new era in fonts. Support Past Present on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/pastpresentpodcast Here are some links and references mentioned during this week’s show:  The U.S. has enacted a ban on cockfighting in Puerto Rico. Neil cited anthropologist Clifford Geertz’s classic text on cockfighting in Bali. Due to doping violations, Russia has been banned from competing in the Olympics for the next four years. Natalia referred to this Smithsonian article on preventative measures against doping. Niki mentioned our previous segment on so-called “sex testing” and athletic competition in Episode 179. After a decade of minimalism, ornate fonts are making a comeback. Neil referred to this article about changes to the Helvetica font.   In our regular closing feature, What’s Making History: Natalia discussed Olga Khazan’s Atlantic article, “Is it Weird to Wear Leggings at Work?” Neil recommended this New York Times Magazine feature, “The Twenty-Five Rooms that Influence the Way We Design.” Niki shared Max Ufberg’s Medium article, “The Decade We Marched For Our Lives.”

REFLECTION QUOTES “Oh, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!” ~Sir Walter Scott (1771-1832), Scottish novelist and historian “…man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun…” ~Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), noted American anthropologist “The greatest danger for a child, where religion is concerned, is not that his father or teacher should be an unbeliever, not even his being a hypocrite. No, the danger lies in their being pious and God-fearing, and in the child being convinced thereof, but that he should nevertheless notice that deep within there lies hidden a terrible unrest. The danger is that the child is provoked to draw a conclusion about God, that God is not infinite love.” ~Søren Kierkegaard (1813-1835), Danish philosopher and theologian, in a journal entry “Our pride and desire to be seen a certain way prevent us from living the life God desires for us.” “There is, however, and thankfully, a remedy for all our fears. That remedy comes as a person, and the means through which He provides the comfort, along with the Holy Spirit, is through His Word. To fight our fears, we will look at God's sovereignty and love and watch our fears dissipate as we apply God's Word to our lives. The very thing we are holding on to (control) is, ironically, the thing we most need to let go of.” ~Trillia J. Newbell, Fear and Faith: Finding the Peace Your Heart Craves “Christianity, it turned out, looked nothing like the caricature I once held…. God wants broken people, not self-righteous ones. And salvation is not about us earning our way to some place in the clouds through good works. On the contrary; there is nothing we can do to reconcile ourselves to God. As a historian, this made profound sense to me. I was too aware of the cycles of poverty, violence and injustice in human history to think that some utopian design of our own, scientific or otherwise, might save us.” ~Dr. Sarah Irving-Stonebraker (PhD, Cambridge) Australian historian SERMON PASSAGE Selected passages from Genesis (ESV) Genesis 25 21 And Isaac prayed to the Lord for his wife, because she was barren. And the Lord granted his prayer, and Rebekah his wife conceived. 22 The children struggled together within her, and she said, “If it is thus, why is this happening to me?” So she went to inquire of the Lord. 23 And the Lord said to her, “Two nations are in your womb, and two peoples from within you shall be divided; the one shall be stronger than the other, the older shall serve the younger.” 24 When her days to give birth were completed, behold, there were twins in her womb. 25 The first came out red, all his body like a hairy cloak, so they called his name Esau. 26 Afterward his brother came out with his hand holding Esau's heel, so his name was called Jacob.Isaac was sixty years old when she bore them. 27 When the boys grew up, Esau was a skillful hunter, a man of the field, while Jacob was a quiet man, dwelling in tents. 28 Isaac loved Esau because he ate of his game, but Rebekah loved Jacob. Genesis 28 10 Jacob left Beersheba and went toward Haran. 11 And he came to a certain place and stayed there that night, because the sun had set. Taking one of the stones of the place, he put it under his head and lay down in that place to sleep. 12 And he dreamed, and behold, there was a ladder set up on the earth, and the top of it reached to heaven. And behold, the angels of God were ascending and descending on it! 13 And behold, the Lord stood above it and said, “I am the Lord, the God of Abraham your father and the God of Isaac. The land on which you lie I will give to you and to your offspring. 14 Your offspring shall be like the dust of the earth, and you shall spread abroad to the west and to the east and to the north and to the south, and in you and your offspring shall all the families of the earth be blessed. 15 Behold, I am with you and will keep you wherever you go, and will bring you back to this land. For I will not leave you until I have done what I have promised you.” Genesis 32 22 The same night [Jacob] arose and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23 He took them and sent them across the stream, and everything else that he had. 24 And Jacob was left alone. And a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the day. 25 When the man saw that he did not prevail against Jacob, he touched his hip socket, and Jacob's hip was put out of joint as he wrestled with him. 26 Then he said, “Let me go, for the day has broken.” But Jacob said, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” 27 And he said to him, “What is your name?” And he said, “Jacob.” 28 Then he said, “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob, but Israel,for you have striven with God and with men, and have prevailed.” 29 Then Jacob asked him, “Please tell me your name.” But he said, “Why is it that you ask my name?” And there he blessed him. 30 So Jacob called the name of the place Peniel, saying, “For I have seen God face to face, and yet my life has been delivered.” 31 The sun rose upon him as he passed Penuel, limping because of his hip.

THE CONVERSATION .mp3 is a text which focuses on the cultural construct The Children of Immigrants Vol.1 Narrated by William Anderson Gittens Author, Dip., Com., Arts. B.A. Media Arts Specialists’ Cinematographer, Cultural Practitioner, Publisher The Children of Immigrants Vol.1ISBN 978-976-95731-1-6Arguably there are multiple conversations that shaped the contoursconcerning the children of immigrants.This is a character study of human behavior that is fueled by thefulfilling innate of human needs that work together with the factors of economics, environmental, political, and social synergies.In light of the aforementioned admission the facts unearthed confirms that emigration/immigration has become a very explicable narrative. The magnitude of this conversation draws enormous attention to three legitimate immigration questions how many, from where, and what status newcomers should arrive as it continues carving out its niche in the global space.Emigration is the act of leaving one's resident country with the intent to settle elsewhere. Conversely, immigration describes the movement of persons into one country from another. Both are acts of migration across national boundaries. Immigration is the movement of people into a destination country to which they are not native or do not possess its citizenship in order to settle or reside there, especially as permanent residents or naturalized citizens, or to take-up employment as a migrant worker or temporarily as a foreign worker. “Children of Immigrants” have become an intellectualized conversation that examines human behaviour.Clifford Geertz’s thick description theory validates this conversation in context with the possible interpretations and meanings within the global space.It also created an evaluation that supports the analytical theoretical framework thorough the examination of the parts and the whole caricature of “the children of immigrants” as a conversation that becomes this thick description. Overall the testimonies of the children of immigrants’are authenticated in this conversation.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ImmigrationWikipediahttp://www.hoover.org/research/making-and-remaking-america-immigration-united-stateshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_Geertz https://www.embraceni.org/migration/the-pros-and-cons-of-migration/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Caribbean http://www.everyculture.com/multi/Ha-La/Jamaican-Americans.htmlSupport the show (http://www.buzzsprout.com/429292)

With so many religions in the world it can be hard to keep up with what everyone believes. Religiously Literate is here to help! Join Jay and Ryan on this episode as we introduce the podcast and make listeners reflect on their own understandings of "religion." In this episode, we discuss what led us to start this podcast, some of our favorite definitions of religion, what it means to be "religiously literate," and what we hope listeners will gain from listening. Connect with us on Facebook: www.facebook.com/ReigiousLitPod and Twitter: @ReligiousLitPod SHOW NOTES: AIHREA website: www.aihrea.org Jay’s definition: Human behavior associated with the intentional differentiation between the sacred and the profane. Bohanon, Jesse, “Rewriting the Written: An Analysis on Religious Studies,” December 14, 2009, 3. James: ...the feelings, acts, and experiences of individual men in their solitude. William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature, ed. Martin E. Marty, The Penguin American Library (Harmondsworth, Middlesex, England ; New York, N.Y: Penguin Books, 1982), 31. Durkheim: A religion is a unified system of beliefs and practices relative to sacred things, that is to say, things set apart and forbidden – beliefs and practices which unite into one single moral community called a Church, all those who adhere to them." (b) [Religion is] "the self-validation of a society by means of myth and ritual. Émile Durkheim, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, ed. Mark Sydney Cladis, trans. Carol Cosman, Oxford World’s Classics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008), 46. Geertz: (1) a system of symbols which acts to (2) establish powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations in men by (3) formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and (4) clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that (5) the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic. Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays (New York: Basic Books, 1973), 90. KU Religious Studies website: http://religiousstudies.ku.edu/ Prothero Talk at KU 2018: https://religiousstudies.ku.edu/2018-friends-department-religious-studies-speaker-stephen-prothero Prothero website: http://stephenprothero.com/ Prothero, Stephen. Religious Literacy What Every American Needs to Know, and Doesn’t. New York, N.Y: HarperOne, 2008. Robert Orsi: https://orsi.northwestern.edu/ Harvard RLP: https://rlp.hds.harvard.edu/ Music used in this episode is City of Jewels by Destiny & Time

Episode 65: l'Oasis de Jemna en Tunisie, entre dissidence et négociation Dans ce Podcast, Pr. Mohammed Kerrou,  professeur de sciences politiques à la Faculté de Droit et des Sciences Politiques de Tunis, Université de Tunis El-Manar et Professeur visiteur dans plusieurs universités étrangères (Aix-en-Provence, Tarragone, Rome La Sapienza, Yale University...) présente une de ses enquêtes sur l'Oasis de Jemna. Située au Sud-Ouest tunisien, cette oasis est devenue dans le sillage de « la révolution de la dignité », le lieu d’exercice d’une citoyenneté libre et conviviale, par le biais de la récupération d’un ancien domaine agricole colonial « Henchir el-mâamer ») devenu, au lendemain de l’indépendance nationale, domaine de l’Etat. Du coup, le conflit entre la légalité étatique et la légitimité de l’appropriation de la terre par les Oasiens offre l’opportunité d’un débat démocratique inédit. L’Association de protection des Oasis de Jemna, expression de la société civile locale, se trouve aujourd’hui en rapport de négociation avec les autorités en vue de la création d’une coopérative de production agricole. L’enjeu consiste dans la résistance en vue de réaliser l’objectif d’une économie sociale et solidaire, tout en maintenant la flamme de cette expérience innovante. Toutefois, une telle expérience court le risque, à l’instar de tous les mouvements de mobilisation collective, de l’étiolement progressif et de la banalisation par le système de reproduction inégalitaire, tant sur le plan social que régional, réduisant de la sorte l’expérience à un produit historique des marges, avec ce que cela implique comme processus de marginalisation et d’isolement des individus et des communautés périphériques.  Pr Mohamed Kerrou est l'auteur de plusieurs ouvrages parmi lesquels :  Tunisie, l’autre révolution. Essai, Tunis, Editions Cérès, 2018.   L’homme des questions. Hommage à Abdelkader Zghal (1930-2015), Tunis, Cérès Editions, 2016.   Hijâb. Nouveaux voiles et espaces publics, Tunis, Editions Cérès, 2010. Kairouan. Phare éternel de l’islam, Tunis, Editions Apollonia, 2009. 
 D’Islam et d’Ailleurs. Hommage à Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), Tunis, Cérès Editions, 2007.  Public et Privé en Islam. Espaces, autorités et libertés, Paris, Maisonneuve & Larose, 2002.  L'Autorité des Saints. Perspectives historiques et anthropologiques en Méditerranée Occidentale. Postface de Lucette Valensi, Paris, ERC, 1998.  La conférence de Pr. Mohammed Kerrou a été programmée dans le cadre du cycle des conférences « Espaces et territoires au Maghreb » co-organisé par le Centre d'Études Maghrébines en Algérie (CEMA) et le Centre de Recherche en Anthropologie sociale et culturelle (CRASC) . Elle a eu lieu le 24 avril 2019 au CRASC.  Pr. Abdelkrim Elaidi, sociologue à l'Université d’Oran 2 a modéré le débat.  Pour consulter les cartes associées à ce Podcast, veuillez visiter notre site web: www.themaghribpodcast.com Nous remercions Dr. Tamara Turner, Ethnomusicologue et chercheure à Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Center for the History of Emotions pour son interprétation de Sidna Boulal du répertoire Hausa du Diwan (Hausa Sug). Réalisation et montage: Hayet Lansari, Bibliothécaire / Chargée de la diffusion des activités scientifiques (CEMA). 

REFLECTION QUOTES “…man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun…” ~Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), noted American anthropologist “…humanity's problems stem from man's inability to sit quietly in a room alone.” ~Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), French mathematician and writer The Bible “presents its truth always in an existential manner. [That means] I cannot afford to sit back and consider it casually, in a detached manner. No, …you cannot afford to do that, because you are in an uncertain world, and your whole life in it is so uncertain…. [The Bible] is…a direct and personal address…. [God] is speaking to us about ourselves—where we are, why we are there, how we ever got there, how we can come from there.” ~Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1980), in a sermon on the book of Genesis “Whatever else it embraces, true Christian experience must always include a genuine encounter with God.” ~A.W. Tozer (1897-1963), pastor and author “What we have seen in the last four or five decades is the democratization of God…more deeply than ever before in our country's history.” ~T.M. Luhrmann, professor of psychological anthropology “And amid such uncertainty [about our self-identity], we typically turn to the wider world to settle the question of our significance. We seem beholden to affections of others to endure ourselves. Our ‘ego' or self-conception could be pictured as a leaking balloon, forever requiring the helium of external love to remain inflated, and ever vulnerable to the smallest pinpricks of neglect.” ~Alain de Botton, Swiss-born philosopher and writer “‘Is God trying to get my attention by making my life harder or something?' I said. Blowing out smoke between questions, said out loud but mainly meant for God to hear and relent. ‘I mean, does God want me that much?' As grace would have it, He did.” ~Jackie Hill-Perry, poet and writer SERMON PASSAGE Genesis 31:55-32:24 (ESV) Genesis 31 55 Early in the morning Laban arose and kissed his grandchildren and his daughters and blessed them. Then Laban departed and returned home. Genesis 32 1 Jacob went on his way, and the angels of God met him. 2 And when Jacob saw them he said, “This is God's camp!” So he called the name of that place Mahanaim. 3 And Jacob sent messengers before him to Esau his brother in the land of Seir, the country of Edom, 4 instructing them, “Thus you shall say to my lord Esau: Thus says your servant Jacob, ‘I have sojourned with Laban and stayed until now. 5 I have oxen, donkeys, flocks, male servants, and female servants. I have sent to tell my lord, in order that I may find favor in your sight.'” 6 And the messengers returned to Jacob, saying, “We came to your brother Esau, and he is coming to meet you, and there are four hundred men with him.” 7 Then Jacob was greatly afraid and distressed. He divided the people who were with him, and the flocks and herds and camels, into two camps, 8 thinking, “If Esau comes to the one camp and attacks it, then the camp that is left will escape.” 9 And Jacob said, “O God of my father Abraham and God of my father Isaac, O Lord who said to me, ‘Return to your country and to your kindred, that I may do you good,' 10 I am not worthy of the least of all the deeds of steadfast love and all the faithfulness that you have shown to your servant, for with only my staff I crossed this Jordan, and now I have become two camps. 11 Please deliver me from the hand of my brother, from the hand of Esau, for I fear him, that he may come and attack me, the mothers with the children. 12 But you said, ‘I will surely do you good, and make your offspring as the sand of the sea, which cannot be numbered for multitude.'” 13 So he stayed there that night, and from what he had with him he took a present for his brother Esau, 14 two hundred female goats and twenty male goats, two hundred ewes and twenty rams, 15 thirty milking camels and their calves, forty cows and ten bulls, twenty female donkeys and ten male donkeys. 16 These he handed over to his servants, every drove by itself, and said to his servants, “Pass on ahead of me and put a space between drove and drove.” 17 He instructed the first, “When Esau my brother meets you and asks you, ‘To whom do you belong? Where are you going? And whose are these ahead of you?' 18 then you shall say, ‘They belong to your servant Jacob. They are a present sent to my lord Esau. And moreover, he is behind us.'” 19 He likewise instructed the second and the third and all who followed the droves, “You shall say the same thing to Esau when you find him, 20 and you shall say, ‘Moreover, your servant Jacob is behind us.'” For he thought, “I may appease him with the present that goes ahead of me, and afterward I shall see his face. Perhaps he will accept me.” 21 So the present passed on ahead of him, and he himself stayed that night in the camp. 22 The same night he arose and took his two wives, his two female servants, and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23 He took them and sent them across the stream, and everything else that he had. 24 And Jacob was left alone. And a man wrestled with him until the breaking of the day.

Phil provides commentary on a bird fight he witnessed between crows, blue jays and little sparrows. Matt admits that he is a sinker who is afraid of zombies. Who knew? Matt’s Anthropology 101 (14:27) This episode is a succinct overview of anthropology, the study of human culture. Every anthropologist has their own definition of culture but these definitions change like culture itself. Matt reads the Clifford Geertz ‘Webs of Signification’ definition and then offers his own. The traditional division is between American and Continental (European) Anthropology; AA’s traditionally follow linguist C.S. Peirce (Pragmatic Semiotics) whereas CA’s follow Ferdinand de Saussure (relational binary model: signified-signifier). Phil and Matt have their first little debate. The early history of anthropology (1860-1920’s) is mired in racism and eugenics. Arm-chair ‘scholars’ would collect cultural artifacts sent to them by ‘field-agents’ and compose racial classification schemes that ranked groups of people around presumed moral-potential based on superficial physical differences. Notable early exceptions were Paul Radin and Edward Sapir. Phil and Matt close out the early history with a brief conversation about the Bureau of American Ethnology and how it both systematized the discipline while also being responsible for rampant cultural appropriation. Franz Boas and Bronislaw Malinowski are identified as the first modern anthropologists. Both engaged in fieldwork collecting data through participant observation, interviews and other methods like kinship charts, collecting mythologies and material culture. Boas and Malinowski revolutionized the discipline by taking account of cultural ‘difference’ in a non-judgmental ‘scientifically rigorous’ manner, which is called cultural relativism. Boas founded the Four-Field model of American Anthropology and Malinowski codified the ethnographic method of participant observation, cultural dislocation and semi-structured interviews along with the theoretical tradition of structural functionalism and british social anthropology. Malinowski, like many others, was influenced by Freudian thinking which can be seen in his use of comparative categories in Structural Functionalism. Ruth Benedict and Margaret Mead were Boas’ main protégées. Malinowski’s students were E.E. Evans-Pritchard who promoted structural functionalism and Talcott Parsons who both expanded SF and ‘founded’ the influential field of social action theory. Phil thinks we should stop going to ‘other places’ and messing around in people’s cultures is not needed anymore, Matt tries to answer this charge by talking about ‘manufacturing ethnographic distance’ in his concussion research. Third debate: Claude Levi-Strauss was a french anthropologist who founded the field of structuralism in the 1950’s. He was concerned with mythologies and linguistics (Saussure style) but he took a lot of criticism in the 1980’s over the ‘over-application’ of his theoretical model. Matt lists some of the classic text-book critiques of structuralism while Phil argues that structuralism uses an historical methodology. Matt argues that structuralism is more about relations (act and react for example) and reads a quote from Levi-Strauss’ obituary which was his ‘final word’ to all the critics. Next Matt speaks about Clifford Geertz. Geertz came from literary studies and as such he was interested in semiotics and linguistics. He helped initiate a ‘return to culture’ (theoretically), a renewed focus on our writing (ethnography) and using ‘thick descriptions’ to show cultural nuance. At the time Geertz was having influence (late 70’s, early 80’s) anthropologists started getting heavily criticized heavily by english and literature departments around how we ‘represent Others’. Writing Culture was the book that was meant to answer these critiques. Matt finishes off the conversation by name dropping three of his favorites as a way of explaining post-modern approaches in anthropology. Sherry Ortner (1974 and 1984) wrote two great theory papers and has just published a follow up “Theory Since the 1980’s”. Nancy Sheper-Hughes ‘returned to the field’ to account for herself and her ethnography, what we now call ‘ethnographic responsibility’. Renato Rosaldo illustrated the value of emotional-reflexivity as a research method. Phil asks about contemporary and applied anthropology. We finish off with our fourth and best debate about investing agency in non-human actors à la Bruno Latour. Recommendations (1:32:25) Matt recommends a podcast for the chronically ill, Sickboy. Sometimes you need to find humor in pain and this podcast certainly does that! Phil recommends Michael Paterniti’s The Telling Room (The Dial Press, 2013) which is a story about cheese, procrastination and Spanish culture. Concluding thought: Rather than building disciplinary walls, it’s better to jump over them to exchange ideas -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Follow Semi-Intellectual Musings on Twitter: @The_SIM_Pod Email Matt & Phil: semiintellectual@gmail.com Subscribe to the podcast: https://thesim.podbean.com/feed/ iTunes: https://goo.gl/gkAb6V Stitcher: https://goo.gl/PfiVWJ GooglePlay: https://goo.gl/uFszFq Corrections & Additions webpage: http://thesim.podbean.com/p/corrections-additional-stuff/ Please leave us a rating and a review, it really helps the show!   Music: Song "Soul Challenger" appearing on "Cullahnary School" by Cullah Available at: http://www.cullah.com Under CC BY SA license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

Se il calcio è oggetto di un’infatuazione pressoché universale, non è soltanto in virtù delle sue qualità drammatiche ed estetiche, ma anche perché rispecchia in modo coerente il mondo contemporaneo proponendone una brutale caricatura. Per giungere al successo, sul campo di calcio come nella vita, occorre infatti conciliare meriti individuali, solidarietà collettiva, fortuna, un minimo di furfanteria – saper trattenere un avversario per la maglia quando occorre – e il favore della giustizia, quella dell’arbitro. Inoltre questo sport di squadra supporta l’affermazione delle identità collettive, degli antagonismi locali, regionali e nazionali. Gettando un ponte fra il singolare e l’universale, questo “gioco profondo” (si riferisce a Deep play, titolo di un noto saggio di Clifford Geertz) incarna dunque i valori generali che plasmano la nostra epoca, ma anche le identità, reali e immaginarie, delle collettività che si affrontano. Traduzione Marina Astrologo.

REFLECTION QUOTES “…man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun…” ~Clifford Geertz (1926-2006), noted American anthropologist “The graveyards are filled with indispensable men.” ~Charles De Gaulle (1890-1970), president of France “I think the world today is upside down. Everybody seems to be in such a terrible rush, anxious for greater development and greater riches and so on.” ~Mother Teresa (1910-1997), missionary to India “But for this mystery [of original sin], the most incomprehensible of all, we remain incomprehensible to ourselves.” ~Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), French thinker and mathematician “If God incarnated himself in man, died and rose from the dead, all human endeavors deserve attention only to the degree that they depend on this, i.e., acquire meaning thanks to this event. We should think of this by day and by night…. And most of all about how human history is holy…. Because our kind was so much elevated, priesthood should be our calling, even if we do not wear liturgical garments.” ~Czesław Miłosz (1911-2004), Polish poet and thinker “He has mercifully convinced me that I labour under a complication of disorders, summed up in the word sin; he has graciously revealed himself to me as the infallible physician; and has enabled me, as such, to commit myself to him, and to expect my cure from his hand alone. It has cost me something to bring me to confess that he is wiser than I…” ~John Newton (1725-18047), English clergyman “And all man's Babylon's strive But to impart The grandeurs of His Babylonian heart.” ~Francis Thompson (1859-1907), English poet SERMON PASSAGE Genesis 10:1-11:9 (NASB) 1Now these are the records of the generations of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah; and sons were born to them after the flood. 2 The sons of Japheth were Gomer and Magog and Madai and Javan and Tubal and Meshech and Tiras. 3 The sons of Gomer were Ashkenaz and Riphath and Togarmah. 4 The sons of Javan were Elishah and Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim. 5 From these the coastlands of the nations were separated into their lands, every one according to his language, according to their families, into their nations. 6 The sons of Ham were Cush and Mizraim and Put and Canaan. 7 The sons of Cush were Seba and Havilah and Sabtah and Raamah and Sabteca; and the sons of Raamah were Sheba and Dedan. 8 Now Cush became the father of Nimrod; he became a mighty one on the earth. 9 He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; therefore it is said, “Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the Lord.” 10 The beginning of his kingdom was Babel and Erech and Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. 11 From that land he went forth into Assyria, and built Nineveh and Rehoboth-Ir and Calah, 12 and Resen between Nineveh and Calah; that is the great city. 13 Mizraim became the father of Ludim and Anamim and Lehabim and Naphtuhim 14 and Pathrusim and Casluhim (from which came the Philistines) and Caphtorim. 15 Canaan became the father of Sidon, his firstborn, and Heth 16 and the Jebusite and the Amorite and the Girgashite 17 and the Hivite and the Arkite and the Sinite 18 and the Arvadite and the Zemarite and the Hamathite; and afterward the families of the Canaanite were spread abroad. 19 The territory of the Canaanite extended from Sidon as you go toward Gerar, as far as Gaza; as you go toward Sodom and Gomorrah and Admah and Zeboiim, as far as Lasha. 20 These are the sons of Ham, according to their families, according to their languages, by their lands, by their nations. 21 Also to Shem, the father of all the children of Eber, and the older brother of Japheth, children were born. 22 The sons of Shem were Elam and Asshur and Arpachshad and Lud and Aram. 23 The sons of Aram were Uz and Hul and Gether and Mash. 24 Arpachshad became the father of Shelah; and Shelah became the father of Eber. 25 Two sons were born to Eber; the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided; and his brother's name was Joktan. 26 Joktan became the father of Almodad and Sheleph and Hazarmaveth and Jerah 27 and Hadoram and Uzal and Diklah 28 and Obal and Abimael and Sheba 29 and Ophir and Havilah and Jobab; all these were the sons of Joktan. 30 Now their settlement extended from Mesha as you go toward Sephar, the hill country of the east. 31 These are the sons of Shem, according to their families, according to their languages, by their lands, according to their nations. 32 These are the families of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, by their nations; and out of these the nations were separated on the earth after the flood. Chapter 11 1 Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. 2 It came about as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. 3 They said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly.” And they used brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar. 4 They said, “Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.” 5 The Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 The Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them. 7 Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech.” 8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city. 9 Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth.

L'antropologia di CLIFFORD GEERTZ raccontata da Stefano De Matteis

Clifford Geertz famously described law as a form of “local knowledge.” In this lecture Prof. Messick examines the Islamic Shari'a as it was manifested in a system of local texts. He refers to a corpus of written work produced by a particular community of Muslim jurists and practitioners. Yemen, mountainous and agrarian, provides the setting; the Zaydis, rooted there for over a thousand years, the juridical community. Although his research in highland Yemen has spanned the last several decades, the readings he discusses focus upon a slightly earlier point in time--the first half of the twentieth century. Prof. Messick concentrates on this recent historical period to study a formation of Shari'a texts in the era of a classically styled Islamic polity.

Claudia Bordin Rodrigues, minha colega de mestrado, apresentou um artigo no 7° P&D Design intitulado "Dimensões sociais e culturais no design de interação: algumas considerações para a teoria e prática do design". A Claudia fala da importância de perceber as ideologias e práticas que os artefatos interativos encerram em suas propriedades materiais e simbólicas. Para o designer, isso só seria possível fazer de forma satisfatória se o designer entrasse na cultura onde está imerso o artefato. Entretanto, ao contrário de abordagens reducionistas e estereotipadas como a comentada na minha análise da Wikipedia, a Claudia está procurando reconhecer o outro em suas particularidades através de Clifford Geertz. Ouça a apresentação e a discussão subsequente em cima do polêmico iPod: Dimensões sociais e culturais no design de interação: algumas considerações para a teoria e prática do design [MP3] 33 minutos Comente este post