Podcasts about Derrida

Gianluca Corrado"De Mente"Filosofia e follia nella disputa tra Michel Foucault e Jacques DerridaEdizioni Studiumwww.edizionistudium.it1961, esce in Francia "Storia della follia" nell'età classica di Michel Foucault. 1963, Jacques Derrida rivolge all'opera critiche affilate. 1972, in occasione della nuova edizione del libro, Foucault replica. 1992, ormai scomparso quest'ultimo, Derrida rivisita l'ambiguo rapporto tra la concezione foucaultiana della follia e la psicoanalisi freudiana.Su queste date si articola il dibattito tra la pionieristica indagine dell'altra faccia della mente – la follia –, svolta dalla "Storia", e i rilievi filosofici mossi da Derrida. Con Cartesio sullo sfondo, in gioco il dovere ma insieme la difficoltà della ragione di misurarsi, arrischiarsi e convalidarsi/invalidarsi con quell'altro da sé che può cercare di capire senza tuttavia poter evadere da se stessa. Un tentativo di dialogo, d'altra parte, quanto mai ineludibile appena ci ricordiamo che la follia non è un'astrazione, ma s'incarna in persone accanto a noi.È necessario riconoscere l'alterità del loro pensiero, senza però estremizzarla in una differenza coi tratti della distanza o, peggio ancora, coi tratti residuali di quelle emarginazioni, espulsioni, segregazioni, relegazioni medicaliste che i matti hanno subìto soprattutto tra il XVII e parte del XIX secolo, l'“età classica” considerata dall'autore.Nel centenario della nascita di Foucault, nato nel 1926 e morto nel 1984, un'occasione per rileggere la sua incisiva visione della "folie" nel confronto più importante che ha avuto.Gianluca Corrado ha pubblicato, tra gli altri, i saggi La follia in scena (2008), Il folle e la società. Il dibattito tra Foucault e Chomsky (2009), Oltre l'indifferenza. Barthes e Derrida (2025), il romanzo La Sapiente (2025), le raccolte di racconti In credito di sole (2022) e Strabismo perfetto e altri racconti (2023).Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

O que acontece quando uma sociedade desaprende a distinguir realidade de interpretação? Neste episódio, o Café Brasil parte de uma cena clássica de Tropa de Elite para mergulhar nas ideias de Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida e Gilles Deleuze, tentando entender como chegamos a um mundo onde tudo virou disputa de narrativa. O conceito de “rizoma”, as bolhas ideológicas, a perda de critérios e a dificuldade crescente de diálogo entram numa conversa provocadora sobre verdade, poder, interpretação e a necessidade urgente de desenvolver musculatura mental para sobreviver ao caos contemporâneo.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

***⁠⁠Complete our⁠ listener survey⁠ for a chance to win a $50 gift card!⁠ *** There is no Orthodoxy”: Professor Richard Burt teaches us about the paratext, un-reading Shakespeare, Derrida and Plato in under an hour! With a soothing reminder that writing is both the poison and the remedy... Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ao chamar Cuba de “Estado delinquente”, Donald Trump convida o mundo a desconstruir essa expressão – e a refletir também sobre a delinquência na própria ação dos Estados Unidos. Thomás Zicman de Barros, cientista político Na última quarta-feira, 20 de maio, as relações entre Cuba e os Estados Unidos voltaram aos holofotes. Donald Trump recorreu a uma expressão antiga, mas que continua funcionando como uma espécie de senha moral da política internacional: “Estado marginal”, “Estado bandido”, “Estado delinquente”. Em inglês, se diz rogue state. A fórmula sugere uma oposição binária: existiriam países civilizados, responsáveis, defensores da ordem mundial, e outros que viveriam fora dela, como criminosos internacionais. Cuba, segundo Trump, pertenceria ao segundo grupo. A expressão foi mobilizada pelo presidente americano para justificar o indiciamento, pela Justiça dos Estados Unidos, de Raúl Castro. O antigo revolucionário cubano, hoje nonagenário, governou a ilha socialista entre 2008 e 2018 e é irmão de Fidel Castro, líder histórico da revolução cubana. A acusação soa estranha por retomar o já esquecido caso de dois pequenos aviões de ativistas anticastristas abatidos no Caribe há quase trinta anos. O episódio torna-se mais preocupante por ocorrer em meio à mobilização de embarcações de guerra americanas na região. Cresce, assim, o temor de que Cuba possa se tornar alvo de uma escalada semelhante às intervenções recentes na Venezuela e aos bombardeios contra o Irã. “Os Estados Unidos não tolerarão que um Estado delinquente abrigue operações estrangeiras de caráter militar, de inteligência e terrorista a apenas 150 quilômetros do território americano”, declarou o presidente americano. Cuba volta, assim, ao velho repertório geopolítico dos “Estados delinquentes”. À primeira vista, a frase pode parecer banal. Afinal, regimes autoritários existem. Ditaduras existem. Estados repressivos existem. Mas a questão mais interessante talvez seja: quem possui o poder de decidir quem é um “Estado delinquente”? Foi exatamente essa a questão colocada pelo filósofo francês Jacques Derrida, conhecido sobretudo como o grande pensador da desconstrução. Em um livro menos conhecido do grande público, Voyous, publicado em 2003, logo após o 11 de Setembro e o início da “guerra ao terror”, Derrida interrogava justamente aquilo que a ideia de “Estado delinquente” apresenta como evidente. Ele desconfiava profundamente de expressões que reproduzem um simplismo moral. E poucas lhe pareciam tão suspeitas quanto rogue state. Segundo Derrida, o problema não era apenas a existência de Estados violentos ou autoritários. A questão era outra: quem tem o poder de nomear os outros como “delinquentes”? Ao observar a política internacional, Derrida percebia que as grandes potências tendiam a se colocar, ao mesmo tempo, dentro e acima da lei internacional. Por um lado, apresentavam-se como guardiãs da ordem global, com autoridade para denunciar adversários como “delinquentes”, como um policial que dá voz de prisão ou um juiz que pronuncia uma sentença. Por outro, reivindicavam para si o direito de suspender essa mesma ordem quando considerassem necessário. É justamente aí que Derrida identifica a lógica do “Estado delinquente”. Ele nos convida a reparar na delinquência precisamente daquele Estado que, pela força, se coloca no direito de nomear os outros como delinquentes. Após o 11 de Setembro, Derrida via os Estados Unidos como essa potência em delinquência. O filósofo morreu em 2004 e não viveu para ver Trump dar nova atualidade às suas análises. A captura de Nicolás Maduro em janeiro deste ano, sob a acusação bastante oca de comandar um esquema narcoterrorista, e os ataques recentes realizados em coordenação com Israel contra o Irã, à revelia das Nações Unidas e também a partir de acusações de terrorismo, ilustram como Trump e seus aliados transformam a linguagem da luta contra os “Estados delinquentes” em justificativa para contornar a própria ordem internacional que afirmam defender. No caso de Cuba, há pouca dúvida de que a ilha rebelde enfrenta uma série de desafios. Os avanços em direitos sociais como saúde e educação não apagam a existência de presos políticos, mesmo que coexista um sistema local de assembleias e conselhos que em algum grau oxigenam a gestão da ilha. A crise econômica também se arrasta. Ela decorre em parte das limitações do próprio modelo cubano e do governo de Miguel Díaz-Canel. Mas o peso de décadas de embargo americano tampouco pode ser ignorado. Trump resolveu apertar o torniquete, levando ao desabastecimento total de combustível da ilha – outra vez, contra o direito internacional. Derrida nunca afirmou que todos os Estados são equivalentes, nem que democracias e ditaduras funcionam da mesma forma. Ele perguntava o que acontece quando uma potência – e, no caso americano, podemos falar de uma potência em vias de autocratização – passa a ocupar ao mesmo tempo o papel de juiz, polícia e carrasco global. O sistema internacional foi moldado para acomodar os interesses das grandes potências, e dos Estados Unidos em particular. Ao longo do último século, a delinquência dessas potências nunca deixou de se manifestar. Mas, com o enfraquecimento dos fóruns multilaterais, vemos avançar cada vez mais uma lógica em que cada país proclama sua própria lei internacional – e decide sozinho quando ela deve deixar de valer.

Stefano Poggi"Il mito dell'istante"I filosofi davanti al tempo: da Schelling a DerridaAnders Solferinowww.solferinolibri.itLa riflessione sul problema del tempo è uno dei temi fondamentali della tradizione filosofica occidentale.Ma gli ultimi due secoli – l'Ottocento e il Novecento – ne hanno visto una profonda trasformazione. Gli sviluppi dell'indagine scientifica si sono intrecciati con la maturazione di una inedita concezione della soggettività e della coscienza. Sono state riprese e affrontate con nuovi occhi questioni antichissime, in primo luogo quella già posta da sant'Agostino («Cos'è davvero il tempo? Lo so, ma non lo so spiegare »). Ci si è interrogati sui modi in cui il tempo viene vissuto, misurato, narrato, condiviso. È così apparso con sempre maggior chiarezza che il tempo è la realtà dello stesso nostro esistere, che il tempo – come scrive Borges – «è la sostanza di cui sono fatto». Per questo, del tempo, parliamo sempre come di un divenire, di un fluire. Un divenire, un fluire apparso non di rado come una successione di istanti. Istanti in cui fermare il tempo, arrestarlo nell'attimo «così bello» del Faust, riuscire in un'impresa che però, di fronte ai nuovi saperi scientifici, appare destinata a ridursi in speranza, a rivelarsi un'illusione. L'istante non esiste. E, se esiste, forse altro non può essere che l'eternità.Partendo da Hegel e Schelling per arrivare a Bergson, Russell, Heidegger e senza dimenticare i grandi «narratori del tempo» come Proust e Joyce, Stefano Poggi racconta gli episodi di una storia che non ci è presente in tutta la sua decisiva importanza perché è spesso sotterranea, ma che ha inciso nel profondo sulla nostra stessa identità di uomini moderni.Stefano Poggi ha insegnato Storia della filosofia all'Università di Firenze, è stato presidente della Società Filosofica Italiana e ha diretto «Intersezioni. Rivista di storia delle idee». Tra i suoi numerosi libri ricordiamo: La logica, la mistica, il nulla (2006), La vera storia della Regina di Biancaneve (2007), I viaggi dei filosofi (2010), L'io dei filosofi e l'io dei narratori (2011), L'anima e il cristallo (2014), Il colore e l'ombra (2019), Individuo e destino (2025).Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Piše Marija Švajncer, bereta Maja Moll in Dejan Kaloper. Knjiga filozofa Milosava Gudovića Jež in polž, Hermenevtična basen skrivnosti je resno strokovno delo z vsem zahtevanim znanstvenim aparatom – od seznama literature do stvarnega in imenskega kazala ter povzetka v dveh jezikih. Recenzenta sta bila Brane Senegačnik in Luka Trebežnik, spremno besedo je napisal Alen Širca. Avtor interpretira stališča francoskega filozofa judovskega rodu Jacquesa Derridaja in nemškega filozofa Maxa Schelerja. Derrida se je v zgodovino filozofije zapisal kot pobudnik destruktivizma, Scheler pa je bil personalistični fenomenolog. Gudović z vidika hermenevtike natančno in zbrano bere nekatera njuna dela in temeljito razlaga pojmovanje poezije, se pravi Derridajevo sklicevanje na ježa in Schelerjevo na polža. V slikovitem, vendar vsebinsko in formalno doslednem pisanju je kar nekaj paradoksov, provokacij in obratov in opozoril, da ne vidimo prav – v resnici je drugače, kot se nekaj kaže navzven. Podobno pišejo slovenski lacanovci, pa tudi v filozofemih drugih strukturalistov, zlasti teoretskih psihoanalitikov, je bilo kar precej tovrstne svobode. Gudovićevo pozornost je vzbudil Derridajev kratki esej Kaj je poezija? iz leta 1988. V njem je dekonstruktivist zagotavljal, da se o pesništvu na področju filozofske razlage lahko govori le s šiframi in metaforičnostjo ter spodkopavanjem metafizične misli in njenega esencializma. Po temeljnem načelu dekonstrukcije je za vse igre pisanja značilna arbitrarnost, vsaka interpretacija je nova preizkušnja svobode. Arbitrarnost se izkazuje v samolastnosti odločitve. Odgovor na to Kaj je poezija? sledi logiki izvorne poíesis, ki presega meje jezikovne umetnosti. V teoretskem govoru o pesništvu izgine tisto, kar poezija je in kako se nam razkriva. Dekonstruktivno mišljenje, zgoščeno v sluteči odgovor, ne nadomešča literarne besede, ampak se prepoznava v zrcalu pesniškega. Derrida igro interpretacije enači z diktatom. Poezija govori sama, izgovarja samo sebe in odgovarja zase. Gudović poudarja, da se Derridajev nauk odpoveduje učenosti in védenju, izenačenim z znanjem. Dekonstruktivist je umetnik paradoksa, vseeno pa je poezija povezana z dolžnostjo sporočljivosti. Sporočanje brez naslovnika je nesmiselno. Poezija sama odgovarja na vprašanje o lastnem bistvu, in sicer tako, da pride v neskritost in kulturno orbito. Odgovarja zase in nase. /…/ Pesništvo je samo svoja privatna skrivnost. Milosav Gudović pomisli, da nas interpretacija Derridajeve negativne poetike pripelje do odločilne točke v njegovem zapletenem in metaforičnem odgovoru ter opuščanju institucionalnega pojmovanja poezije. Derridajev esej Kaj je poezija? je pravzaprav po naravi negativna in apofatična basen, v kateri je glavni junak jež, vržen na pot metaforizacije in apofatike. Apofatika pomeni zanikanje oziroma opisovanje tega, kar nekaj ni, namesto tega, kar je, in neposrednega opisovanja. Podoba ježa je vpeta v svobodno igro s filozofskim izročilom. Derrida z metaforo ogrožene živali skuša opisati lastno neprijetno razpoloženje in pokazati, da pravzaprav ne najde popolnega odgovora. Metafora po njegovem mnenju ni značilna samo za poezijo, temveč tudi za filozofijo kot metafiziko. Bivanje v metafori je podobno bivanju v svetu – v njem se vselej že nahajamo in ga razumemo. Prispodoba ježa je pisateljska domislica, ki namiguje na to, da je pesniška pisava vselej izvzeta iz vsakdanjega jezika. Običajna in vladajoča filozofska gramatika je ne moreta razvozlati. Gudović ugotavlja, da se Derrida bliža pesmi s tem, da se odreče interpretaciji. Njegova dekonstruktivna in negativna poetika je brez vednosti in onstran vednosti. Derrida nikoli ni skrival tega, da je bil pod močnim Heideggerjevim vplivom. Nenavadno pa je, da je pesem umestil v srce in svetoval, naj se je naučimo na pamet. Gudović se poglablja tudi v personalistično fenomenologijo Maxa Schelerja, zlasti v njegovo pojmovanje reda ljubezni, latinsko ordo amoris. Po Schelerjevem mnenju je največji dosežek, da človek stvari ljubi tako kot Bog. Zamisli se nad polžem in njegovo hišico. Polževa hišica je torej metafora počasnega gibanja celotne paradigme, na kateri temelji resnično samozrenje osebnosti. Človek nikoli ne zmore – naj se še tako trudi – odvreči vrednostnega bremena. Človek je v marsičem, zlasti v elementih skrivnostnosti, podoben polžu, seveda pa je tudi meta(ontološko) privilegiran in poklican k transcendiranju svetnih danosti. Gudović se na koncu vpraša, kaj naj bi pri vsem tem, kar je predstavil, počela interpret kot nemi opazovalec ali zapisovalec in tolmač. Morda ima v mislih samega sebe. Na hitro bi zapisal, kaj je videl in slišal, kar se mu je zazdelo, kajti takšen splet dogodkov in idej – o tem ne bi niti za hip podvomil – je poseben provokativen fenomen. /…/ Tolmač je ves čas v zadregi in nevarnosti, da tudi njegovo kratko delo o zgoščenem delu ostane zapleteno, nedokončano. Pisec spremne besede, literarni teoretik Alen Širca, se sprašuje, ali dobrega pisca in umetnika nasploh ne spoznamo prav po dobrih metaforah, primerjavah, alegorijah, simbolih, prilikah in parabolah. Na njegovo vprašanje je mogoče odgovoriti, da smo vse to lahko prebrali v knjigi Jež in polž Milosava Gudovića. Njegovo filozofiranje res zahteva precej zbranosti, vendar je tako izzivalno in poglobljeno, da ga tisti, ki še vedno ljubimo filozofijo, tako kot jež ali polž, pravzaprav kot njuni samici, z zanimanjem in veseljem vzamemo v roke in za nekaj časa pozabimo na razburkano dogajanje okrog sebe.

This is a 30 minute public lecture Peter gave at Murdoch University, Perth on Thursday 16th April, 2026. It explores:- who Derrida was, - why his deconstructive episteme can be helpful for community development;- some big ideas, such as the haunting of justice; - along with 5 key impasses - that of 'community', 'development', 'community development' itself, the 'cultural turn' and the 'empire of trauma/colonisation of therapeutics'.

There are two texts on Derrida, on Artaud.https://kdoutsiderart.com/tag/antonin-artaud/ - For Artaud the works are intended as weapons, not commodities, but they become commodified in any event. How then to restore, to protect, their existence as “gestures, a verb, a grammar, an arithmetic, a whole Kabbalah…that shits on the other,” to maintain their endurance as “a machine that has breath”? How to preserve the destructive essence (and we should be clear Artaud's intent was destructive, not merely critical) of Artaud's project against “the museographic management of its surplus value.” As Derrida puts it: “Will it be possible to do what I am trying to do, to say ‘Merde?' Will it be possible, either with or without blasphemy, to read and to cite ‘Shit,' ‘Shit to art,' to do it then as it must be done, in this great temple that is a great art museum and above all modern, thus in a museum that has the sense of history, the very great museum of one of the greatest metropolises in the new world?”‘The Theatre of Cruelty and the Closure of Representation': https://arts3047.wordpress.com/2017/05/08/the-theatre-of-cruelty-and-the-closure-of-representation/ - Whilst Derrida seems to be on the brink of declaring Artaud as a success story that can defy the unravelling of deconstructive theory, he ultimately finds an end to theatre of cruelty using dialectics. The very thing that would seem to make theatre succeed in a mission that texts fail is the thing that undoes theatre as an art form: its existence as transient, finite.

In this episode, I begin a loose new series exploring the philosophical influences behind Solution-Focused Therapy, especially the work of Steve de Shazer. Too often, Solution-Focused Therapy gets caricatured as simplistic, overly optimistic, or not serious enough about suffering. I argue that this misses something much deeper. Beneath its lightness of touch is a remarkably sophisticated way of thinking about language, change, and the construction of possibility.I offer a biographical sketch of de Shazer and then trace some of the major intellectual currents that help illuminate his work, including Wittgenstein, pragmatism, Derrida, and Paul de Man. Along the way, I reflect on why Solution-Focused Therapy may be less about uncovering the hidden truth of a problem and more about helping create new descriptions that make different futures imaginable.This is an episode about language, suffering, restraint, and the quiet radicalism of asking a different kind of question.

Giulia Sissa"Controcanto"Quando il pensiero maschile celebra le donneMondadori Editorewww.mondadori.itQuesto libro fa intendere un controcanto. Andremo ad ascoltare la voce di uomini straordinari che, nonostante il mondo in cui sono vissuti – o addirittura in risposta a quel mondo – hanno deciso di pensare in autonomia. Dimostrando che non esiste una vocazione esclusivamente femminile al femminismo.Questo saggio è un invito ad ascoltare le voci di coloro che hanno celebrato le donne, mettendo in discussione i dogmi patriarcali e difendendo la parità in epoche in cui sembrava impensabile. La riscoperta di questi alleati è un atto di onestà intellettuale e politica, perché ci ricorda che la vocazione al femminismo non è – e non può essere – solamente femminile. È ora di prendere sul serio questo controcanto, che non può più rimanere inascoltato.Volubili, incostanti, vittime delle passioni: le donne sono inadatte al potere e al pensiero. Non sono fatte per comandare, ma per curare e servire. Gli uomini, invece, sono risoluti e autorevoli, nati per governare. Questo pregiudizio permea da sempre la filosofia occidentale. Da Aristotele a Nietzsche, passando per i Padri della Chiesa, il nostro canone è tristemente ostile alle donne e ha nutrito negli anni una cultura incline alla misoginia e alla diseguaglianza. Ma ci sono pensatori che, nonostante il loro genere, sono usciti dal coro.Giulia Sissa ripercorre la storia della filosofia con attenzione, alla ricerca di questo controcanto. Incontra così tre filosofi, lucidi e lungimiranti, che hanno superato i binarismi di genere e coltivato la solidarietà intellettuale: Sofocle, Platone e Derrida. Sofocle, poeta teatrale e autore dell'Antigone, ha scritto una tragedia in cui una donna lotta eroicamente contro un potere ingiusto, diventando una vera e propria forza sovversiva. Platone immagina una città ideale in cui ragazze e ragazzi ricevono la stessa educazione e ridefinisce l'amore, trasformandolo da gesto di possesso in atto di generazione. Secoli dopo, la teoria della decostruzione di Derrida rivoluziona il clima culturale novecentesco e incrina il pensiero dicotomico, fondato su fratture e gerarchie.Giulia Sissa è professoressa di Scienze Politiche, Classici e Letterature comparate alla University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). Tra i suoi libri più recenti: La gelosia (Laterza, 2015), L'errore di Aristotele (Carocci, 2023), I generi e la storia (Il Mulino, 2024).Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Regresamos después de una pausa con dos temas que merecían esta conversación.En la primera parte abordamos los Premios Óscar: la hegemonía de Sinners y Una batalla tras otra como expresiones de una élite liberal hollywoodense que convierte la resistencia en ritual identitario sin tocar la estructura económica. ¿Qué significa que el título de la película ganadora normalice la repetición del conflicto en lugar de apuntar a una ruptura? También comentamos las declaraciones de Timothée Chalamet sobre el supuesto declive del ballet y la ópera, y por qué el medio que realmente está en crisis es el cine en sala.En la segunda parte —más extensa— tematizamos la muerte de Jürgen Habermas (1929–2025). Recorremos brevemente su biografía marcada por el nazismo y la posguerra, su relación con Adorno y la Escuela de Frankfurt, sus enfrentamientos con Heidegger, Luhmann, Derrida y Ratzinger, y su papel como intelectual público en Alemania. Discutimos tanto sus aportes —sobre todo su análisis histórico-dialéctico de la esfera pública— como sus límites: su apuesta por la democracia liberal como horizonte insuperable. Tres textos recomendados para quien quiera leerlo en serio:— Historia y crítica de la opinión pública (su tesis doctoral)— Ciencia y técnica como ideología— El discurso filosófico de la modernidad

Amy Klein (of AK and The Hallucinations and former guitarist of Titus Andronicus) joins me for an emotionally cathartic conversation about season 1 of Heated Rivalry and our personal soundtrack wishlists for season 2. Topics include love letters to fanfiction, the inherent grief and woundedness of desire, Carl Jung's theory of the shadow self, and engaging with the erotic as a deeply female and spiritual source through the writings of Anne Carson and Audre Lorde. ✨KEEP UP TO DATE WITH AMY KLEIN ✨Web: http://www.amykleinmusic.comInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/akandthehallucinations/Linktree: https://linktr.ee/amyrebeccakleinSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/artist/3eRMQoarXLl60uC8Bi6BJL?si=wg_KQD1RSpGbAwmUIcyv_w ✨ SEASON 2 SOUNDTRACK WISHLIST ✨ https://open.spotify.com/playlist/5rxyGRdaf22e7YCoBwg5qh✨ SOURCES & WORKS REFERENCED ✨Aya, Maxine. “two souls become one: analyzing heated rivalry's original soundtrack.” Maxine Aya Writes, 18 Jan. 2026, https://www.maxineayawrites.com/blog/two-souls-become-one.Berger, John. “Another Side of Desire.” Hold Everything Dear: Dispatches on Survival and Resistance, Verso Books, 2007, pp. 126, 2 Mar. 2026. Carson, Anne. “Finding The Edge.” Eros The Bittersweet, Princeton University Press, 1986, pp. 30, 2 Mar. 2026. Cultured Mag. “@connorstorrieofficial has a PSA for the Internet…” Instagram, 20 Feb. 2026, https://www.instagram.com/reel/DU_w0O_iRzk/.Derrida, Jacques. "Wears and Tears (Tableau of an ageless world).” Spectres of Marx, Éditions Galilée, 1993, pp. 51, 2 Mar. 2026. Fell, Erin. “‘Heated Rivalry' Composer Peter Peter on His Debut Scoring Effort: “Pretty Insane, Especially for a First Gig.” Variety, 6 Feb. 2026, https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-features/peter-peter-heated-rivalry-composer-interview-1236496036/. Gibson, Erin. “Heated Rivalry - Ep 2.” Attitudes, 29 Jan. 2026, https://www.patreon.com/posts/149341967?collection=1942480.Glitch Gestalt Girl. “Heated Rivalry's cinematography challenges how film language is allowed to look at men.” Instagram, 19 Feb. 2026, https://www.instagram.com/reel/DU8blSbjT6L/. Jung, Carl. Chapter. Man and His Symbols, Doubleday, 1964, 2 Mar. 2026. Jung, E. Alex. “Girls Who Love Boys Who Love Boys.” New York Magazine, 23 Feb. 2026, https://www.vulture.com/article/heated-rivalry-fujoshi-fan-fiction.html.King, Gayle.” Heated Rivalry" producers on show's popularity and what to know about its second season.” CBS Mornings, 26 Feb. 2026, https://youtu.be/2MAayneb5lw?si=jj84gv-67r9W2kaG. Lorde, Audre. “Uses of the Erotic.” Sister Outsider, Crossing Press, 1984, pp.54-56, 2 Mar. 2026. Machado, Carmen Maria. In the Dream House, Graywolf Press, 2019, pp. 68, 2 Mar. 2026. Mazza, Angelina. “Sorry, the “Heated Rivalry” gay Marvel fanfic origin story isn't true.” Salon, 6 Dec. 2025, https://www.salon.com/2025/12/06/heated-rivalry-gay-marvel-fanfic-rachel-reid/ Melchor, Traci. “Heated Rivalry' creator wants show to be synonymous with "horny joy" | Jacob Tierney Interview.” Etalk, 12 Dec. 2025, https://youtu.be/1Tec_LsHueY?si=hVGsO-MluOqNc627.Plato. The Symposium. Translated by Christopher Gill, Penguin Classics, 2003, 2 Mar. 2026. Princiotti, Nora. “The Perfect ‘O.C.' Soundtrack Made Indie Music Mainstream.” The Ringer, 3 Aug. 2023, https://www.theringer.com/2023/08/03/tv/20th-anniversary-of-the-oc-music-soundtrack-rooney-death-cab-for-cutie.Pullman, Philip. The Golden Compass, Knopf Books for Young Readers, 1996, 2 Mar. 2026. Reid, Rachel. Heated Rivalry, Harlequin Enterprises, 2019, 2 Mar. 2026. Saturday Night Live. “Stripper.” NBC, 1 Mar. 2026, https://youtu.be/uJAIEym5FvM?si=OVUAXpJrwinQ4MV1.Shaped by the Flow. “This isn't consent education.” Instagram, 8 Jan. 2026, https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTQOn39CAnA/. Sim, Bernardo. “Heated Rivalry: Hudson thought Connor would 'pin me down and f— me' in audition.” Out Magazine, 29, Nov. 2025. https://www.out.com/gay-tv-shows/heated-rivalry-connor-storrie-hudson-williams-interview.

Kniha Dar smrti Jacquese Derridy patří i do české filosofie. Derrida, který v roce 1981 přijel do Prahy přednášet o Patočkově pojetí odpovědnosti, zde navazuje právě na Kacířské eseje o filosofii dějin českého filosofa. Pojem odpovědnosti, živý v české filosofické tradici, se pro něj stává ústředním motivem. Francouzský myslitel – věrný své dekonstruktivní metodě – jej však rozvíjí radikálním směrem.Vycházeje z náboženského dilematu starozákonního Abraháma, kterého Bůh vyzývá, aby mu obětoval svého syna, ukazuje Derrida, že odpovědnost je vždy nezastupitelně individuální – a právě proto konečná i temná. Čím více chceme někomu dávat, být mu odpovědní, tím spíše se od někoho jiného, třeba i neméně milovaného, odvracíme. Abrahámova situace je v tomto smyslu situací nás všech. V zásadních otázkách svého života stojíme sami, bez opory – a musíme umět nevědět. Rozhodnutí být odpovědný jednomu totiž znamená zároveň omezit odpovědnost vůči jinému. A především: nikdy nemůžeme s jistotou vědět, zda jednáme správně. Zde se láme rozdíl mezi morálkou a etikou. Morálka představuje obecná pravidla; etika je naproti tomu život – odpovědnost žitá v konkrétní situaci, v níž zvažujeme různé, často protikladné ohledy.Toto hledisko má i překvapivou politickou dimenzi. Člověk je bytostí, která dokáže formulovat morálku – tedy obecné a závazné normy. Zároveň je však musí umět eticky překročit, protože normy se mohou dostat do vzájemného konfliktu a žádná situace není bezezbytku průhledná. Jednat odpovědně znamená vědět, že se mohu mýlit – anebo dokonce, že jsem vůči něčemu, možná i nevyhnutelně, nespravedlivý. Politika pak představuje ještě třetí rovinu. Zatímco v morálce a etice odpovídáme především konkrétním druhým, v politice zvažujeme širší pole vztahů a důsledků. Odpovědnost zde nesměřuje jen k jednotlivci, ale i k „třetím“ – k dalším, nepřítomným, anonymním druhým, k veřejnosti.Demokratické zřízení je prostorem, v němž se tato napětí musí nést veřejně – bez iluze, že lze odstranit konflikt mezi morálním požadavkem univerzality, etickou jedinečností konkrétního rozhodnutí a politickou odpovědností vůči voličům i institucím. Pointa Derridových úvah spočívá v tom, že podléháme iluzi, domníváme-li se, že lze rozhodovat „čistě“, bez zbytku a obětí. To však neznamená, že by politika byla „špinavá“ – ale pokud bychom takové slovo skutečně chtěli použít, museli bychom je vztáhnout i na samu etiku. Etická odpovědnost je totiž neslučitelná s univerzální spravedlností. Kdo chce být etický, nemůže zůstat bez viny; a kdo se chce uchovat bez viny, vzdává se odpovědnosti za konkrétní čin.KapitolyI. Mluví pravda – nebo se píše? [úvod až 23.40]II. Trapný šarlatán i geniální myslitel [23:40 až 42:10]III. Evropa mezi transparentností a tajemstvím [42:10 až 58:00]IV. Odpovědný je jen smrtelník [58:00 až 01:11:20]V. Člověk v průsečíku etiky, morálky a politiky [01:11:20 až konec]Bibliografie Dimitrije Curcic, Audiobook statistics, in: WordsRated, https://wordsrated.com/audiobook-statistics/?utm_source=chatgpt.comJacques Derrida, Dar smrti, přel. Tatiana Chavalková Badurová, Praha: Herrmann a synové, 2026.Jan Patočka, Kacířské eseje o filosofii dějin, Praha: OIKOYMENH, 2007.Amy Ziering Kofman – Kirby Dick, Derrida, Jane Doe Films; Zeitgeist Films, 2002.Platón, Faidros, přeložil František Novotný, Praha: OIKOYMENH, 1993.

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. 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

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/french-studies

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/book-of-the-day

Animal Rhetoric and Natural Science in Eighteenth-century Liberal Political Writing: Political Zoologies of the French Enlightenment (Routledge, 2024) shows how our tendency to read French Enlightenment political writing from a narrow disciplinary perspective has obscured the hybrid character of political philosophy, rhetoric, and natural science in the period. As Michèle Duchet and others have shown, French Enlightenment thinkers developed a philosophical anthropology to support new political norms and models. This book explores how five important eighteenth-century French political authors—Rousseau, Diderot, La Mettrie, Quesnay, and Rétif de La Bretonne—also constructed a "political zoology" in their philosophical and literary writings informed by animal references drawn from Enlightenment natural history, science, and physiology. Drawing on theoretical work by Derrida, Latour, de Fontenay, and others, it shows how these five authors signed on to the old rhetorical tradition of animal comparisons in political philosophy, which they renewed via the findings and speculations of contemporary science. Engaging with recent scholarship on Enlightenment political thought, it also explores the links between their political zoologies and their family resemblance as "liberal" political thinkers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/animal-studies

...we Tossed our way into oblivion with the exciting new show Pluribus in this one.Hello audient!The new show Pluribus comes at us with all the niceties, trappings and plot pitfalls  to be found in our rot-attacked brains. While the first Season leaves many more questions than answers, leaving large holes in the logic and the story, it makes for a perfect Tossers episode; a real conceptual skeet-shooting playground.Pluribus deals with an alien(?) hive mind that has taken over every person on Earth except for very few who had an "incompatible" genetic material. The fact that this hive speaks and behaves in an almost one-to-one parody on the "personality" of ChatGPT in our increasingly compartmentalized realities and interactions with one-another (like in Social Media) makes the connection to AI-related issues almost inescapable.We'll mention here just one particularly interesting toss we cam across, concerning the 'body' (the 'animal' part of Aristotle's famous definition of the "Human" as 'a talking animal'). It juts out of the narrative like a sore thumb, like an unmourned loss: what does it mean for the main protagonist to "fall in love" with a body from the hive mind? How does a hive mind approach real issues of attachment, like pain and discord, as they arise through the "affair" with the protagonist? What is the role - within our attachments - of the body's memories, its unique history, when it is "pluribussed" like that?This also connected to a recurring theme in the Tossers' arsenal, the ethical imperative we inherited from our Derrida(ddy), the one we express as "Never let the dead bury the dead." As the bodies of the entire world's population become an indistinct mass grave, a Frankenstein-monster-cum-Turing-machine, it becomes both overly relevant and no longer relevant: when the dead are recycled into food for the "hive-people" and yet you can fall in love with a person whose body is completely controlled by the "everyone" of the hive, including going and sleeping with another "survivor" (of the assimilation) while expressing love to our protagonist.Confused? We hope so. But it is a rather productive confusion, we believe, in our day and age. Rather appropriately, all Stars made an appearance here in one way or another.The rest will be told to our one, loyal (and virtual!) audient, and her flaming lips...

LISTEN to my December 30th, 2025 WIOX show (also a podcast!) featuring Canadian poets Margo LaPierre and Guy Elston. Margo and Guy will read from and discuss their respective poetry collections Ajar and The Character Actor Convention and talk about their lives in poetry. Margo LaPierre (she/her) is a writer and freelance literary editor. With multi-genre work published in The Ex-Puritan, CV2, Room, PRISM, and Arc, among others, she has won national awards for her poetry, fiction, and editing. She holds an MFA in Creative Writing from UBC. Ajar is her second poetry collection. She lives in Ottawa, Ontario. Visit: www.margolapierreeditor.com Guy Elston was born and raised in Oxford, UK.  Guy has an MA in History from the University of Amsterdam and since moving to Canada his poetry has been published by The Malahat Review, Canadian Literature, Event, The Literary Review of Canada, Vallum, The Antigonish Review and other journals. His chapbook Automatic Sleep Mode was published by Anstruther Press in 2023. His debut full-length collection, The Character Actor Convention, was published by The Porcupine's Quill in 2025. Visit: https://guyelston.com/home-page/ Praise for AjarAjar follows the time travel of a mind haunted by chemistries of violence and suicidality. LaPierre's keen lyrical voice creates a palimpsest of overlapping timelines and selves, and methodically crafts an expansive theory of Mad temporality and survival. These poems are rituals for haunting oneself into the future. —Rebecca Salazar, author of antibody Praise for The Character Actor Convention"What's certain is voice," quips one of the speakers in The Character Actor Convention, and voices certainly abound in this inventive, hilarious, and slyly wise collection… Guy Elston delves slantwise into the absurdities of our present and the disasters and solaces of our imagined futures. A lively and delightful debut!" –  Catriona Wright, author of Continuity Errors 

In this episode of Chasing Leviathan, PJ and Dr. Harris Bechtol discuss the death of the other—and why Western philosophy has largely failed to take it seriously. Drawing from Bechtol's book A Death of the World: Surviving the Death of the Other, the conversation explores how grief, mourning, and loss are not merely private emotions but world-altering events that rupture time, memory, and meaning itself.Together, they examine Martin Heidegger's famous claim that when someone dies we are “merely nearby,” asking whether that view can really account for the lived reality of grief. Engaging thinkers like Heidegger, Derrida, Augustine, and Nicholas Wolterstorff, Dr. Bechtol reframes death as an event—an interruption that transforms the world for those who remain. The episode explores concepts like interruption, disruption, presence-of-absence, transactive memory, and why the loss of a loved one is never confined to a single moment in time.This conversation is especially relevant for anyone wrestling with grief, sudden loss, terminal illness, or the long aftermath of mourning. Rather than offering platitudes or stages to “get over” loss, Dr. Bechtol proposes an ethic of workless mourning—a way of living on after death that remains open to sorrow, surprise, and transformation. Philosophical yet deeply human, this episode speaks to theology, continental philosophy, grief studies, and the existential realities of surviving the death of someone you love.Make sure to check out Dr. Bechtol's book: A Death of the World: Surviving the Death of the Other

In this THEORY HEAVY and CONFUSING ASS episode, Matt completes the great work of explaining Derrida on the nature of gifts by also explaining Kantian transcendental idealism. If he made any mistakes, please blame JOE. Happy Holidays, all!Purchase Hagglund's book here: https://www.sup.org/books/theory-and-philosophy/radical-atheism

Étienne Balibar, Luca Salza"La filosofia di fronte al genocidio"Conversazione su Gaza con Étienne BalibarEdizioni Cronopiowww.shopcronopio.it“Mi definisco ‘ebreo' perché sono sconvolto dall'idea che i significati morali e persino religiosi, e per via di conseguenza filosofici, portati nella storia dall'ebraismo – dalla parola dei Profeti di Israele fino al discorso di quei rinnegati o eretici che hanno alimentato la mia formazione intellettuale (Montaigne, Spinoza, Marx, Rosa Luxemburg, Freud, Kafka, Benjamin, Arendt, Simone Weil, Derrida, che è stato mio professore) – potrebbero d'ora in poi essere associati, per molto tempo e persino per sempre, non più alla resistenza alle persecuzioni e alla ricerca dell'autonomia intellettuale, all'imperativo della moralità e della giustizia e alla discussione sui suoi mezzi (tra cui la rivoluzione), ma all'oppressione e allo sterminio di un altro popolo sotto il patrocinio di questo ‘nome'. Penso che l'onore del ‘nome ebraico' debba essere difeso da questa infamia e che sia necessario esprimere una rivolta”.Étienne Balibar è tra i più importanti filosofi contemporanei della politica. Membro del Tribunale Russell sulla Palestina, è da anni un sostenitore della causa palestinese. Ha scritto numerose opere, tra cui disponibili in italiano: Crisi e fine dell'Europa? (2016); Razza, nazione, classe (con Immanuel Wallerstein, 2020); Spinoza e la politica (2024)Luca Salza insegna letteratura italiana e storia delle idee all'Università di Lille. Dirige, con Pierandrea Amato, la rivista K.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

durée : 00:10:31 - Les Midis de Culture - par : Antoine Leiris - Avec French Theory, François Cusset et Thomas Daquin explore la manière dont les idées des penseurs français comme Deleuze, Foucault ou Derrida, devenus incontournables aux États-Unis transforment nos vies encore aujourd'hui. La bande dessinée est adaptée de l'essai éponyme de François Cusset. - réalisation : Laurence Malonda - invités : Joseph Ghosn Directeur adjoint de la rédaction de Madame Figaro; Victor Macé de Lépinay Rédacteur en chef adjoint du Pèlerin

durée : 00:58:16 - Le Souffle de la pensée - par : Géraldine Mosna-Savoye - En 1967, le philosophe Jacques Derrida publie "L'écriture et la différence", un ouvrage majeur dans lequel ses concepts de “différance” et de déconstruction font leur apparition. Des concepts éblouissants pour l'écrivain et professeur, Benoît Peeters. Il vient lever le voile sur cette pensée. - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Benoît Peeters Écrivain, scénariste de bandes dessinées et éditeur, biographe d'Hergé

Este é o nosso episódio de número 239 e hoje recebemos o filósofo e editor Maikel da Silveira para uma conversa longa e extremamente rica sobre o pensador japonês Kōjin Karatani. No episódio de hoje do Filosofia Pop, Maikel (que frente da primeira tradução brasileira da obra principal de Karatani, A Estrutura da História Mundial, prevista para março de 2026 pela Editora Machado) nos apresenta a trajetória intelectual desse filósofo japonês ainda pouco conhecido no Brasil, mas já considerado um dos maiores pensadores vivos do Japão e ganhador, em 2022, do prestigioso Berggruen Prize, muitas vezes chamado de “Nobel da Filosofia”. Partindo de sua própria experiência acadêmica e política, Michael explica como chegou a Karatani a partir de uma crítica ao populismo de esquerda, mostra como o japonês reelabora Marx a partir de uma leitura transversal com Kant, expõe a famosa teoria dos modos de troca (A, B, C e o retorno do modo D), o nó borromeu capital–Estado–nação e a proposta política do associationism como alternativa real ao capitalismo-nação-Estado. Tudo isso atravessado por uma perspectiva única: a de alguém que viveu a modernização acelerada e forçada do Japão pós-guerra e que, a partir daí, consegue ver fissuras que muitos teóricos ocidentais simplesmente não enxergam. Resumo dos temas principais abordados na entrevista Quem é Kōjin Karatani Filósofo japonês nascido em 1941, um dos maiores pensadores vivos do Japão; Ganhador do Berggruen Prize 2022 (“Nobel da Filosofia”); Trajetória que vai da crítica literária (anos 60-70) ao marxismo japonês (influência de Kozo Uno), passando pelo estruturalismo, pós-estruturalismo e diálogo com Derrida, Jameson, De Man, etc. Como Michael Silveira chegou a Karatani Via crítica ao populismo de esquerda (mestrado com Laclau → conclusão de que populismo é sintoma e resposta precária à crise de representação); Doutorado orientado pela necessidade de pensar a articulação entre política nacional e economia mundial → Karatani como resposta. Ideias centrais de Karatani O nó borromeu da modernidade: Capital – Estado-nação – Nação (com dominância do capital); Teoria dos modos de troca (base de toda a sua filosofia da história): • Modo A: reciprocidade de dádiva (clã, comunidade primitiva) • Modo B: dominação e proteção (Estado imperial antigo) • Modo C: mercadoria (capital) • Modo D: retorno em nível superior da reciprocidade (associationism, redes de ajuda mútua transnacionais) História como repetição e recombinação desses modos, não como progresso linear; Conceito de “paralaxe” (depois popularizado por Žižek); Crítica ao nacionalismo e ao estatismo; proposta política do New Associationist Movement (NAM) e do “modo D” como alternativa real ao capitalismo. Posição “entre-lugares” Perspectiva privilegiada do Japão (modernização forçada pós-guerra) permite ver fissuras que teóricos ocidentais não enxergam; Comparação com a posição “marrana” de Spinoza: crítica simultânea à tradição própria e à ocidental, sem conciliação fácil, mantendo a tensão (stay with the trouble). Recepção e atualidade Ainda quase desconhecido no Brasil (nenhum livro traduzido até agora); Primeira tradução brasileira: A Estrutura da História Mundial (Editora Machado, março 2026, trad. Alain Ilane); Por que marxistas tradicionais rejeitam (abandona “modos de produção” por “modos de troca”); Indicações feitas por Michael Silveira no episódio Livros Kōjin Karatani – A Estrutura da História Mundial (Editora Machado, lançamento março 2026) André Castro – A Luta que Há nos Deuses: do bolsonarismo à extrema-direita evangélica (Editora Machado) Houria Bouteldja – Permanecer Bárbaros: não brancos contra o império (prefácio de Acauã Oliveira) Euclides Mance – Uma Economia da Libertação (4 volumes, em lançamento) Gabriel Tupinambá – O desejo da psicanálise Gabriel Tupinambá et al. – Atlas da Política Experimental (GLAC Editora, organizado com base nos modos de troca de Karatani) Investigar, Compor e Continuar (livro interno do Espaço Comum de Organizações, também baseado em Karatani) Música Marcelo D2 – Manual Prático do Novo Samba (disco mais recente) Audiovisual / Anime One Piece (muito recomendado no momento atual, inclusive por aparecer em protestos da geração Z) Leitura complementar já disponível em outras línguas Transcrítica (Transcritique) – já existe tradução em espanhol O Filosofia Pop é um podcast que aborda a filosofia como parte da cultura. A cada 15 dias, sempre às segundas-feiras, a gente vai estar aqui pra continuar essa conversa com vocês. Intercalando com nossos episódios normais de quando em quando vamos apresentar episódios de entrevistas temáticas especiais. O episódio de hoje que é uma parceria com o projeto de extensão Filosofia, Cultura popular e Ética, desenvolvido na Universidade Federal de Jataí. Lembrando que você pode encontrar o podcast filosofia popo no twitter, instagram, Facebook e outras redes sociais. Nosso email é contato@filosofiapop.com.br Alguns recados que também gostaríamos de compartilhar: Esta disponível para download gratuito o livro Tcholonadur: entrevistas sobre filosofia africana. Este é um projeto que reúne 34 entrevistas com pensadores que estão moldando a filosofia africana fora da lusofonia. Com prólogo de Filomeno Lopes; Prefácio de Severino Ngoenha e Ergimino Mucale, “Tcholonadur” oferece uma oportunidade imperdível de mergulhar nas ideias e pensamentos que estão moldando o futuro da filosofia africana. https://filosofiapop.com.br/texto/tcholonadur/livro-tcholonadur-entrevistas-sobre-filosofia-africana/ Twitter: @filosofia_popFacebook: Página do Filosofia PopYouTube: Canal do Filosofia Pope-mail: contato@filosofiapop.com.brSite: https://filosofiapop.com.brPodcast: Feed RSS Com vocês, mais um episódio do podcast Filosofia Pop! O post #239 – Kojin Karatani, com Maikel da Silveira apareceu primeiro em filosofia pop.

Silvano Petrosino"Tutto, subito, sempre. La tentazione magica della società del pieno"Torino Spiritualitàwww.torinospiritualita.orgwww.circololettori.itTutto, subito, sempre. La tentazione magica della società del pienodomenica 19 ottobre 2025 h 17 | Museo Nazionale del Risorgimento Italiano, aula della Cameracon Silvano Petrosino, filosofoLa nostra società, quella del cosiddetto “primo mondo”, vive immersa nel consumismo e nella tecnologia. Due fattori che hanno cambiato profondamente il nostro modo di guardare la realtà: tutto ci appare immediato, sempre disponibile, a portata di mano. Internet e il supermercato sono i luoghi simbolo di questa illusione del “tutto-subito-sempre”, che si impone come una verità indiscutibile. Eppure, dietro questa mentalità si nasconde qualcosa di spiazzante: una sorta di tentazione magica, una ammaliante chimera di pienezza. Ma come mai una società che ama definirsi razionalista e iper-tecnologica conserva un legame così forte con l'immaginario magico?Silvano Petrosino, filosofo, è professore di Filosofia della comunicazione e Antropologia religiosa e media all'Università Cattolica di Milano. Oggetto principale dei suoi studi sono il rapporto tra razionalità e moralità, l'analisi della struttura dell'esperienza e il rapporto tra la parola e l'immagine. Attraverso le sue traduzioni e monografie, ha introdotto in Italia il pensiero di Lévinas e Derrida. Tra le pubblicazioni più recenti, tutte per l'editrice Vita e Pensiero: Dove abita l'infinito (2020), Piccola metafisica della luce (2021), Le fiabe non raccontano favole (2023) Letture. La verità della finzione (2024), Potere e religione (2025).Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Today I'm joined by acclaimed novelist and critic Tom McCarthy to talk about his latest book, The Threshold and the Ledger, a fascinating exploration of Ingeborg Bachmann — one of the most important writers of postwar European literature.We discuss Bachmann's major works, including Malina and Salt and Bread, and the recurring themes of trauma, memory, history, and hospitality in her writing. Tom also shares the writers and books that shaped his own work, and we explore the connections between Bachmann, Derrida, and the wider world of modernist literature.If you're interested in literary history, feminist writing, or the politics of language, this episode is full of ideas and inspiration.Follow @litwithcharles for more author interviews, book conversations, and literary deep dives — and leave a review if you enjoy the show.

This week: the final chapter of Derrida's adventure, RErideING through time or what have you. Be sure to pay attention! You want to remember this episode really well so you can travel back and listen to it again! And remember: YOU ARE NOT A ROBOT

We're joined by Leif Weatherby, associate professor at NYU, founding director of the Digital Theory Lab, and author of the new Language Machines: Cultural AI and the End of Remainder Humanism, to think with us about AI, structure, and what happens when computation meets language on their own shared turf. Language Machines is easily the best book about AI written this year and is just a killer antidote to so much dreary doomer consensus, it really feels like one of the first truly constructive pieces of writing we've seen out of academia on this subject. This episode follows really well after two others — our talk with Catherine Malabou earlier this summer and the episode with M. Beatrice Fazi about a year ago (both faves). It feels like theory is opening back up again into simultaneously speculative and structural returns, powered in no small part by the challenges posed to conventional theories of language (from Derrida to Chomsky) by Large Language Models. This episode absolutely rips, literally required listening. Structuralism is so back (and we're here for it). Some important references among many from the episode:Roman Jakobson, “Linguistics and Poetics.”N. Katherine Hayles, Unthought: The Power of the Cognitive Nonconscious .Beatrice Fazi, Contingent Computation: Abstraction, Experience, and Indeterminacy in Computational Aesthetics.Steven Pinker, The Language Instinct (1994).e.g. Noam Chomsky, Ian Roberts & Jeffrey Watumull, “The False Promise of ChatGPT,” NYT (link) Anthropic, “Scaling Monosemanticity: Extracting Interpretable Features from Claude 3 Sonnet” (featuring the Golden Gate Bridge example - link)LAION-5B dataset paper and post-hoc analyses noting strong Shopify/e-commerce presence in training scrapes.Weatherby in the NYT

In der 24. Ausgabe der Speakeasy-Bar sprechen wir zunächst über den Vorschlag von Bodo Ramelow, dass Deutschland eine neue Nationalhymne brauche. Wir sehen das anders, wenngleich die Kinderhymne von Bertolt Brecht ihren Reiz hat. Ole erzählt außerdem von seinen Erfahrungen bei Lanz & Co. Weitere Fragen, die uns beschäftigen, drehen sich um das Thema Populismus. Gibt es den nur von rechts oder links? Kann man auch von einem Populismus der Mitte sprechen, wenn fortwährend von „wir“ die Rede ist? Danach beantworten wir Fragen zum Thema Aufklärung über ökonomische Verhältnisse: Sind Linke in Talkshows ein bisschen feige? Kann es eine linke Bild-Zeitung geben? Sind vulgäre linke Streamer aus den USA eine gute Antwort auf verlogene liberale Diskurse? Dabei geht es auch um Finanzierungsfragen: Was, wenn Linke für Krypto-Börsen Werbung machen würden? Dies und mehr gibt es in der neuen Speakeasy-Bar von „Wohlstand für Alle“ mit Ole Nymoen und Wolfgang M. Schmitt!Unsere Zusatzinhalte könnt ihr bei Apple Podcasts, Steady und Patreon hören. Vielen Dank!Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcast/wohlstand-f%C3%BCr-alle/id1476402723Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/oleundwolfgangSteady: https://steadyhq.com/de/oleundwolfgang/about

What does Romanticism have to do with communism, enclosure, and the commons today? In this episode we speak with Joseph Albernaz, author of Common Measures: Romanticism and the Groundlessness of Community, about the radical lineage running from Blake and Hölderlin to Marx and Bataille. We explore how Romantic literature conceived “groundless community”—a poetic and ecological alternative to enclosure and collective identity—and how those ideas reverberate through scene-shaping thinkers like Bataille, Derrida, Nancy, and Moten. Along the way we trace the Commons not as a nostalgic relic but as an ethics of excess and openness that surges beneath modern property and identity structures.Common Measures: Romanticism and the Groundlessness of Community: https://www.sup.org/books/literary-studies-and-literature/common-measuresFall 2025 at AHRC: https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/fall-2025Support the showSupport the podcast:https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/Linktree: https://linktr.ee/acidhorizonAcid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcast Boycott Watkins Media: https://xenogothic.com/2025/03/17/boycott-watkins-statement/ Join The Schizoanalysis Project: https://discord.gg/4WtaXG3QxnSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438Merch: http://www.crit-drip.comSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438 LEPHT HAND: https://www.patreon.com/LEPHTHANDHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.com​Revolting Bodies (Will's Blog): https://revoltingbodies.com​Split Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/​Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/ and https://thecominginsurrection.bandcamp.com/

durée : 00:46:32 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - En juin 1991, "Du jour au lendemain" accueillait Jacques Derrida pour la parution de deux livres : "L'autre cap", aux Éditions de Minuit et le "Jacques Derrida" écrit par Geoffrey Bennington, mais aussi par Derrida lui-même. - réalisation : Virginie Mourthé - invités : Jacques Derrida

Hello there audient,How's life?So, for this summer of lovely weather and lovelier news the Tossers bring you the first of a two-part series of pods dealing with A.I. It'll be fun and light, much like this summer!This one was just me and Jake, as Andy and Jack are (surely) having the time of their lives elsewhere.. and we discuss so, so much.What is AI? Sagi argues it's not deserving of its name, giving a bad rap to intelligence, assuming we can indeed create it, that intelligence is within our grasp to make. What we get with AI is a probablistic imitation of reason, minus all the pesky desires (except of course behind the AI scenes), which has its uses... not all of which are necessarily healthy or sustainable.Jake evokes the area of teaching and learning, writing and reading, as an area particularly vulnerable to AI exploitation, as more and more college students use ChatGPT to pass their courses (and more and more teachers use ChatGPT to grade their "students"). He sees this as what Derrida called absolute ash, the dead burying the dead...Ensuing is a debate we took through Stiegler and Kant, through Hegel (and Jesus), to Silicon Valley metaphysics (and its shoddy, responsibility-shirking nature). Far too much to recount. And there's more to come......let's just hope Jake doesn't make it all Marx GrudgeP.S.Pay no attention to the man behind the bleeps.Stars: Il vaut mieux Lyotard que jamais; Marx Grudge (see we already did it!..); WWJD; Beast & Sovereign.

We couldn't be more honored to have Catherine Malabou on the pod, a serious inspiration for all of us. This episode covers so much, moving from AI to education to anarchism to feminism, but all grounded within a focus on automony -- the autonomy of language from us, the autonomy of an anarchic subject or an anarchic collective, the autonomy of the clitoris from gender, the autonomy of the plastic being or form with respect to change.If you're unfamiliar with Malabou's work, this is actually a really great place to start. Her work includes all of the above topics, and it pushes further into language, neuroscience, and politics than most philosophers dare. We've been following her since the epic What Should We Do With Our Brains?, the legendary Plasticity at the Dusk of Writing (whose fleshing out of Malabou's reading of the plastic inspired so many theorists, arists, and researchers across endless fields and disciplines), and our personal favorite, the recent Stop Thief! Anarchism and Philosophy. We'd almost recommend working backwards from this episode (as an Anglophone, I'm thinking in terms of English translation), going into Stop Thief and Pleasure Erased: The Clitoris Unthought before taking on the works on Hegel, Derrida, and plasticity.We're so so inspired by the freshness of Catherine Malabou's perspective on AI -- as always, she dares to say and formalize things that many philosophers treat reflexively. We hope to have more conversations on the topic of AI and education soon, following from Malabou's hot takes. :) 

The poet, Alina Stefanescu, joins us for a freewheeling discussion of Jacques Derrida's classic work of politico-ethical deconstruction, The Politics of Friendship, and her new poetry collection, My Heresies. In The Politics of Friendship, Derrida ruminates on the interrelationship between our inherited concepts of friendship, fraternity, and democracy, and the distance we have yet to travel in order to work through the inadequacies of our conceptual vocabularies and the living content they embody. Derrida shows that our model of democracy and the future for a democracy to come depends in significant ways on the fate of friendship and its ability to expand the sphere of care, citizenry, and community. The history of friendship and democracy is haunted by the apocryphal citation of Aristotle: "O my friends, there is no friend," and the problematic of the performative contradiction it inaugurates. Is true friendship possible? Can the reach of the polis extend beyond an autochthonous community? Is a politics beyond the friend/enemy distinction imaginable? Can the poet and philosopher be friends?Purchase My Heresies here: https://open-books-a-poem-emporium.myshopify.com/products/04-29-2025-stefanescu-alina-my-heresiespos=1&sid=e14f5bb93&_ss=rPlease consider becoming a paying subscriber to our Patreon to get exclusive bonus episodes, early access releases, and bookish merch: https://www.patreon.com/MoralMinorityFollow us on Twitter(X).Devin: @DevinGoureCharles: @satireredactedEmail us at: moralminoritypod@gmail.com

Jordan B. Peterson ist seit Jahren ein mediales Phänomen. Seine Fans, die sich wohl vorher nie mit intellektuellen Inhalten auseinandergesetzt haben, verehren ihn als großen Denker unserer Zeit. Peterson verklärt immer wieder gesellschaftliche Hierarchien als biologisch bedingt und rechtfertigt damit soziale Ungleichheit. Seine Verteidigung des Kapitalismus stützt sich auf vereinfachte Marktlogik, vulgäre Marx-Kritik und ein stark deterministisches Weltbild, in dem Erfolg auf Intelligenz und individuelle Leistung zurückgeführt wird. Dabei ignoriert er systemische Ausbeutung, soziale Ursachen von Armut und reale Machtverhältnisse. Seine Aussagen zu Marx, Engels, Foucault oder Derrida zeigen wenig theoretisches Verständnis und dienen eher der Bestätigung eines ideologischen Feindbilds. Immer wieder will er anstatt über die Gesellschaft über die Biologie sprechen, weshalb er Männern rät, sich am Dominanzverhalten der Hummer zu orientieren. In der neuen Folge von „Wohlstand für Alle“ sprechen Ole Nymoen und Wolfgang M. Schmitt über Jordan Petersons irre Auffassungen über die Wirtschaft. Werbung: Die Homepage des Verlags „Neue Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher“: https://www.ndfj.de/ Louis Althusser „Marx in seinen Grenzen“: https://www.ndfj.de/about-5 „Neue Deutsch-Französische Jahrbücher“ auf Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/verlag_ndfj/ Termine: Wolfgang ist am 7.7. in Trier: https://www.instagram.com/p/DK8_tAjRd7X/ Wolfgang ist am 10.7. in Köln: https://www.asta.th-koeln.de/event/kriegstuechtig-zum-frieden-eine-kritische-betrachtung-der-zeitenwende-mit-wolfgang-m-schmitt/ Wolfgang ist am 11.7. in Ludwigshafen: https://www.instagram.com/p/DLXW6E3MGbk/?img_index=1 Ole ist am 12. 7. in Salzgitter: https://www.rosalux.de/veranstaltung/es_detail/JHXGV/den-frieden-gewinnen-nicht-den-krieg Unsere Zusatzinhalte könnt ihr bei Apple Podcasts, Steady und Patreon hören. Vielen Dank! Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcast/wohlstand-f%C3%BCr-alle/id1476402723 Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/oleundwolfgang Steady: https://steadyhq.com/de/oleundwolfgang/about

Michel Onfray "L'autre collaboration. Les origines françaises de l'islamo-gauchisme" (Plon)Au lendemain de la tragédie du 7 octobre, Michel Onfray s'est demandé pourquoi des millions de citoyens français avaient salué un grand jour pour le peuple palestinien. Son livre gravite autour de la question suivante : quel rôle ont joué les philosophes du XXe siècle dans la construction de cette effrayante passion triste qu'est le consentement au sadisme des bourreaux contre des victimes innocentes.Preuves à l'appui, Michel Onfray revient aux sources intellectuelles de l'antisémitisme de la gauche radicale avec Marx, Alain, Sartre, Beauvoir, Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, Genet, Jean-Luc Nancy, Roger Garaudy, Lacoue-Labarthe, Alain Badiou…Musique: Gérard Manset « Quand on perd un ami »Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

This week we're tackling the wonderfully niche concept of anti-rock. Or more specifically, we're trying to work out what the hell it actually is, why Google doesn't seem to know either, and how it connects to everything from Frank Zappa taking the piss out of The Beatles to bands who are so talented they deliberately make themselves sound rubbish. Chris has dragged poor Mark and our resident punk professor Ferro down a rabbit hole that starts with French composers banging bits of concrete in the 1940s and somehow ends up at US Maple, a band that sounds like they're actively trying to annoy you. Along the way we encounter Captain Beefheart's deliberately mental Trout Mask Replica, The Residents being mysterious weirdos in eyeball masks, and Suicide essentially inventing electronic music with what amounts to a homemade fuzz box. We get properly stuck into the prehistory of experimental music, from Pierre Schaeffer's musique concrète through to the New York art scene of the 1970s. Our main thesis is that anti-rock isn't just noise for the sake of it - it's what happens when genuinely skilled musicians decide to systematically tear apart rock conventions from the inside. Think of it as punk's more cerebral, art school cousin who's read too much Derrida. This is part one of three. Next week we'll tackle the No Wave explosion in late 70s New York, and part three will finally explain why US Maple exist and why anyone would voluntarily listen to them. We also touch on Glenn Branca's guitar symphonies, Pere Ubu's Cleveland weirdness, and try to work out why some of the most influential experimental music came from artists who could absolutely play it straight if they wanted to. Spoiler: they definitely didn't want to. Timestamps: Episode Highlights: 00:00 Introduction and Initial Banter 00:51 Meet the Guest: Ferro (Not Pharaoh) 01:47 Ferro's Musical Journey and PhD in Punk 04:16 What the Hell Is Anti-Rock? 09:37 French Blokes Banging Concrete: The Birth of Musique Concrète 22:01 When Classical Composers Lost Their Minds 27:48 Moondog: The Homeless Viking of Sixth Avenue 28:25 How American Music Got Properly Weird 29:15 Snake Time Rhythms and Native American Influences 30:04 From Experimental Composers to Rock Subversion 30:36 Captain Beefheart's Deliberately Mental Masterpiece 35:05 Red Crayola: Texan Psychedelic Deconstructionists 40:42 The Residents: Eyeball Masks and Musical Terrorism 47:09 Suicide: Two Blokes and a Homemade Fuzz Box 52:06 Pere Ubu: Cleveland's Contribution to Musical Chaos 55:38 Setting Up the No Wave Explosion

Hello audient! (Jake says we have one more but I know it's still, as always, just you...)So we did an episode about fracking. Missing Jack on this one...We had a lot to say. But it was all pretty depressing. Still, as someone else had probably already said (#nocuck), if you don't open your eyes in the dark they could never get used to it (and see the little light that's left).Fracking is a technology meant to extract oil and gas, not from underground repositories or "pockets," but from rock; to penetrate inside the rock, to take what the rock had locked away within. The process involves (ab)using a great deal of water, making it irrevocably toxic, and shooting it at high pressure, within the rock, so as to break its integrity; widening cracks, and keeping these cracks open for more pressure to break them down further. The toxin in the water serves to capture the released oils and gases in a way that is more effectively extracted. It also proceeds to seep into the ground, poisoning water supplies, plants, animals, causing cancer......and all with a certain impunity. It is this impunity that we are (angrily) tossing towards. Yes, in both meanings of the word. We wanted to look at fracking as the technological manifestation of a certain logic that... "inspires" let's say our political and ethical assumptions. This logic, once understood, can be seen everywhere (as well as its results): the ret-con of lovable stories and characters (until all the love is sucked out and all the fans feel betrayed); the abuse of language/discourse by/in Social media (punishing empathy with toxicity - this is deliberate and done by innumerable bots); austerity measures leading to social collapse (by way of undercutting/humiliating local values)...Blaise Pascal wrote a line in his 'Pensees' that Levinas liked to cite: "'That is my place under the sun' is how the usurpation of the world began." Thinking of other belief-structures, non- or pre-Monotheist, we offer a critique of this quote insofar as it assumes a Christian 'I'. It is this I's possession that usurps the world. And we do see fracking a doing just that. John Locke shows us the logic of this possession: claiming the land as 'private property' gives me absolute power over it. Just like with the industrial revolution's effect on the climate, and with the same impunity. This is a metaphysics, an understanding, that did not occur before, or outside of, Monotheism. And it is dangerous because it is only a totality - human, all too human - but armed with claims to infinity. Fracking doesn't wait for time. It has no time. It follows a logic of hunger, but a desperate hunger, the resentful hunger of the slave. This hunger will even suck the marrow from the bone. Fracking, not just literally, leaves no stone unturned.That is how the usurpation of the Earth began.This, pathetic, impunity has no honor. it is the impunity of the starved and desperate; the impunity of ressentiment, of the shit-eating grin. Even when it rules, as it does nowadays, it has no power to call its own, no pride or anchor. It sees no future (like a Bull seeing red..).There was so much more (and less) in the pod, if you have the mental fortitude. We had Derrida, Bataille, and even Israel made an appearance.. Too many Stars in this episode.

In Step 87 of LetUsThinkAboutIt, host Ryder Richards dives into Part II of Richard Rorty's Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity (1989), exploring the clash between ironists and metaphysicians. Fresh off recording Step 86, Ryder unpacks Rorty's seductive vision of the liberal ironist—a figure who privately doubts their beliefs while publicly fighting cruelty, as defined by Judith Shklar's maxim, “cruelty is the worst thing we do.” Rorty argues language, self, and community are contingent, not grounded in eternal truths, and pits ironists, who redescribe reality with new vocabularies, against metaphysicians, like Plato and Kant, who chase a “final vocabulary” to capture reality's essence. With direct quotes, Ryder showcases Rorty's witty jabs at philosophy's old guard, exposing their logical traps, like Kant's obsession with universal reason. From Proust's self-creation to Derrida's playful deconstruction, Rorty celebrates private irony but insists it stay separate from public hope. Ryder pushes back, questioning whether Rorty's neat private-public split undermines moral conviction and if his narrative-driven solidarity is too fragile against competing stories. Packed with insights and skepticism, this episode sets the stage for Part III's dive into cruelty and solidarity. Join Ryder to tinker with your mental toolbox and question your own vocabulary!

If you came expecting a neat keynote, you were in for something else entirely.What he gave us instead in fourteen minutes was part sermon, part therapy, and part existential gut check for anyone shaping the future.Here's what stuck:“This isn't a rehearsal.”Fred opened with vulnerability: standing in front of his peers, in a room that lives and breathes venture, ready to say the uncomfortable things.He asked us to zoom out—to consider the power we hold as people who don't just fund companies but shape the narratives that shape the future.“We sit in the cockpit alongside the founders. That's where creation happens now. That's our canvas.”But with that power comes disorientation. Because the world we're building into? It's fragmented. Conflicted. Loaded with moral confusion.On Truth, Power, and the Collapse of Shared NarrativesFred pulled no punches.“Historically, we had shared systems for truth. Religion. Philosophy. Math. But now? Everything's been deconstructed. Lived experience replaced truth. Everything's power.”Welcome to the legacy of critical theory. Foucault, Derrida—ideas that once helped explain systems of oppression have now left us with... nothing to agree on.“We're left in a nihilistic landscape. Everything is a power struggle. There's no shared center.”And it's not just academic. It unfolds in cycles of outrage, weaponized identities, and moral ambiguity. Tech doesn't escape this, it amplifies it.The Algorithm Doesn't Care About Truth“We thought more information meant more truth. It doesn't.”Truth, Fred reminded us, is costly. Outrage is cheap. And platforms optimize for what's fast, not what's real.“A four-second tweet can destroy someone's life. Investigative journalism takes months.”Now, enter AI. Beautiful, powerful—and deeply destabilizing.“We're staring at it like it's the sun or a cobra. We don't know what it is yet. But it's changing the rules faster than we can track.”The Danger of Playing Games We Don't Know We're InA warning:You may think you're being righteous. You may think you're being helpful.“But maybe you're playing a social game. Maybe you're being used. And maybe you don't even know it.”In a world where narratives shift daily, we often end up reinforcing the very dynamics we oppose.“You want to call out a Nazi salute online? Be careful. You might just normalize the thing you hate.”So Where Does That Leave Us?In a word: Stewardship.Fred closed with a challenge:“This is the most powerful tool mankind has ever created. What the fuck are we doing with it?”We're not just funding innovation. We're authoring meaning. In an anxious world, that's a profound responsibility.One Last Question (That Stuck With Us All)“What is the quality of the conversation we're having?”With ourselves. With each other. With our founders. With the world.Because if we don't ask that, the rest doesn't matter.

In this episode, Will reads Maurice Blanchot's essay Friendship, a haunting reflection on the impersonal and ineffable nature of true friendship. Blanchot challenges the idea of friendship as mutual understanding, revealing instead a relation marked by silence, distance, and exposure. This reading anticipates our upcoming "Philosophers and the Friend" reading group beginning May 18, featuring works by Blanchot, Foucault, Derrida, and more.Reading group syllabus: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1VF7IZDocnkoK-vgwFNRFEXCOseBvNQJA/viewSupport the showVintagia Pre-Launch: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/acidhorizon/vintagia-i-ching-oracle-for-psychogeographers-and-creatives Support the podcast:https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/Linktree: https://linktr.ee/acidhorizonAcid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcast Boycott Watkins Media: https://xenogothic.com/2025/03/17/boycott-watkins-statement/ Join The Schizoanalysis Project: https://discord.gg/4WtaXG3QxnSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438Merch: http://www.crit-drip.comSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438 LEPHT HAND: https://www.patreon.com/LEPHTHANDHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.com​Revolting Bodies (Will's Blog): https://revoltingbodies.com​Split Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/​Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/ and https://thecominginsurrection.bandcamp.com/

Craig's designs: https://www.etsy.com/shop/critdripThe Ordeal: https://splitinfinities.substack.com/p/crossing-the-line-the-repeater-booksPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/acidhorizonpodcastWe are joined by philosopher Nicolas de Warren to explore his concept of the anarchist imaginary, drawn from his essay "Anarchism, the Shock from Elsewhere: Glissant and Levinas". Together, we unpack how anarchism operates not merely as a political program, but as an ethical and temporal force—a heterotopia that resists monolingualism, sovereign authority, and the foreclosure of otherness. Nicholas discusses the right to opacity, indirect reciprocity, and an anarchist ethics of reading that dismantles institutional power while cultivating new forms of literacy and solidarity. Drawing on the work of Glissant, Levinas, Derrida, and others, this conversation maps a terrain where impossibility becomes the site of political and philosophical renewal. We also reflect on the prospects for anarchist institutions, public pedagogy, and the future of thought in an age of digital unthinking.Support the showSupport the podcast:https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/Linktree: https://linktr.ee/acidhorizonAcid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcast Boycott Watkins Media: https://xenogothic.com/2025/03/17/boycott-watkins-statement/ Join The Schizoanalysis Project: https://discord.gg/4WtaXG3QxnSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438Merch: http://www.crit-drip.comSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438 LEPHT HAND: https://www.patreon.com/LEPHTHANDHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.com​Revolting Bodies (Will's Blog): https://revoltingbodies.com​Split Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/​Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/ and https://thecominginsurrection.bandcamp.com/

In 1966, at Johns Hopkins University in the US, a little-known glamorous French philosopher called Jacques Derrida took to the stage and eviscerated the prevailing philosophy of the day, making him an overnight sensation.The following year, he published three hugely influential books making the case for his theory of “deconstruction”, which questioned the foundations of Western thought and knowledge.Deconstruction's influence can still be felt today: from calls to decolonise the curriculum, to experimental architecture, to feminist retellings of the classics. While the word “deconstruct” has become widely used. On his death in 2004, The Guardian newspaper wrote: "Derrida's name has probably been mentioned more frequently in books, journals, lectures, and common-room conversations during the last 30 years than that of any other living thinker.”Hélène Cixous is one of France's most influential writers and a lifelong friend of Derrida. She speaks to Ben Henderson.Eye-witness accounts brought to life by archive. Witness History is for those fascinated by the past. We take you to the events that have shaped our world through the eyes of the people who were there. For nine minutes every day, we take you back in time and all over the world, to examine wars, coups, scientific discoveries, cultural moments and much more. Recent episodes explore everything from football in Brazil, the history of the ‘Indian Titanic' and the invention of air fryers, to Public Enemy's Fight The Power, subway art and the political crisis in Georgia. We look at the lives of some of the most famous leaders, artists, scientists and personalities in history, including: visionary architect Antoni Gaudi and the design of the Sagrada Familia; Michael Jordan and his bespoke Nike trainers; Princess Diana at the Taj Mahal; and Görel Hanser, manager of legendary Swedish pop band Abba on the influence they've had on the music industry. You can learn all about fascinating and surprising stories, such as the time an Iraqi journalist hurled his shoes at the President of the United States in protest of America's occupation of Iraq; the creation of the Hollywood commercial that changed advertising forever; and the ascent of the first Aboriginal MP.

You might want to jot down some notes on this one! In episode 122, Ellie and David explore where writing began, the value of writing, and our reasons for writing. Is the widespread use of generative AI technologies, such as ChatGPT, a threat to creative and academic writing? How did writing originate in cuneiform, and how does Derrida's deconstruction of logocentrism encourage us to reconsider the privileging of speech over writing? Listen to it all write here, write now! Plus, in the bonus, they get into some of our most pernicious myths and misconceptions about writing. They talk about the tortured writer trope, the solitary nature of writing, and the connection of writing to class. Check out the episode's extended cut here!Works Discussed:David Abram, The Spell of the SensuousGeoffrey Bennington and Jacques Derrida, Jacques DerridaJacques Derrida, “Freud and the Scene of Writing”Jacques Derrida, Of GrammatologyJacques Derrida, “Signature Event Context”Jacques Derrida, Structure, Sign, and Play in the Discourse of the Human SciencesJoan Didion, “Why I write”Walter Ong, Orality and LiteracyGeorge Orwell, “Why I write”Plato, The PhaedrusAlva Noë, The Entanglement, How Art and Philosophy Make Us Who We ArePeter Salmon, An Event, Perhaps: A Biography of Jacques DerridaAndrew Robinson, The Story of WritingSupport the showPatreon | patreon.com/overthinkpodcast Website | overthinkpodcast.comInstagram & Twitter | @overthink_podEmail | dearoverthink@gmail.comYouTube | Overthink podcast