Podcasts about Derrida

Emma Lavinia Bon"Il vuoto e la differenza"Decostruzione e vacuità della MetafisicaOrthotes Editricewww.orthotes.comIl pensiero di Jacques Derrida muove da un'intuizione fondamentale: che le strutture concettuali della metafisica sono determinate in maggior misura da ciò che occultano o rifiutano piuttosto che da quanto pretendono di affermare. Se, quindi, è vero che la metafisica occidentale è stata dominata da un persistente horror vacui, è allora necessario ammettere che in essa il vuoto è presentissimo – come se la sua inconsistenza ne rendesse impossibile la definitiva cancellazione. L'horror vacui rappresenta il rifiuto, da parte della metafisica, di scoprire la vacuità delle proprie strutture che la decostruzione porta, invece, a manifestazione. La decostruzione mostra, in altri termini, la persistenza del vuoto nella divaricazione differenziante sempre in atto all'origine di ogni cosa. Il vuoto è immanente alle cose in quanto insistenza, in esse, della loro originaria infondatezza. Tale complicità tra vuoto e differenza è articolata, all'interno di questo libro, in un itinerario che muove dal vuoto democriteo alla kenosis mistica, giungendo infine alla śūnyatā, la vertiginosa vacuità che, nella tradizione buddhista, è il centro vuoto, centripeto e centrifugo, di ogni esperienza mondana.Emma Lavinia Bon svolge attività di ricerca presso Unipegaso e collabora con la cattedra di Estetica presso l'Università di Padova. I suoi studi includono l'estetica, con attenzione al concetto di scrittura, al simbolismo e all'architettura; la filosofia francese contemporanea; la filosofia interculturale, con particolare interesse verso le filosofie di area indiana. Ha pubblicato numerosi saggi in riviste italiane e internazionali, oltre alla monografia Il mito occidentale. Panikkar e il nostro tempo (Milano 2023), Aporie, di Jacques Derrida (Orthotes, 2026).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/

A big chunk of the self-help and wellness industry runs on some core messages: you are not good enough and you need to be fixed, improved, and optimized. We disagree and hope this element of recreation (and re-creation) helps you brush off some of those false messages and return to what is already good and resilient in you.  This is also one of the three months per year (April, August, and December), where we tap more into our rest and activity cycles by doing less and nourishing more. With that in mind, we'll play some encore episodes that will help you tap into play, rest, and nourish. We'll be back September 1 with new episodes!   About: The Joy Lab Podcast is an Ambie-nominated podcast that blends science and soul to help you cope better with stress, anxiety, and depression. It's hosted by integrative psychiatrist Dr. Henry Emmons and holistic mental health researcher Dr. Aimee Prasek. The podcast is best paired with the Joy Lab Program (get your 7-day free trial!). Bonus: spread some joy and keep this podcast ad-free by donating (Joy Lab is powered by the nonprofit Pathways North and your donations are tax-deductible).    Listen & follow the Joy Lab Podcast on your favorite listening app:  Spotify | Apple | YouTube   Full transcript here   Sources and Notes for our Element of Confidence: Joy Lab Program: Take the next leap in your wellbeing journey with step-by-step practices to help you build and maintain the elements of joy in your life. Start your 7-day free trial now. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. Harper & Row. Eberle, S. (2014). The elements of play: Toward a philosophy and definition of play. Access here. Farley, A., Kennedy-Behr, A., & Brown, T. (2021). An investigation into the relationship between playfulness and well-being in Australian adults: An exploratory study. Access here. Halpin, M., et al. (2025). When Help Is Harm: Health, Lookism and Self-Improvement in the Manosphere. Access here. Lackey, N. Q., et al. (2021). Mental health benefits of nature-based recreation: a systematic review.  Access here. Smith, B. S. (2001) The ambiguity of play. Harvard University Press. Authenticity series: Unmasking Your True Self: Exploring Authenticity and Awe [ep. 216] Embrace Your True Self: Accepted, Connected, & In The Game [ep. 217] The Road Most Travelled: Awakening Through Suffering [ep. 218]  Follow Your Bliss: Awakening to Joy [ep. 219] The Still Small Voice: Awakening with Soulfulness [ep. 220] Align with Nature and Your & Your Rhythms (ultradian, circadian, & infradian) [ep. 139] More on inspiration and goal-setting: Inspiration: The Engine of Joy" ... gives some great basics for this element of inspiration) [ep. 10] Resolution #1: You Don't Need to Be Fixed [ep. 40] The Myths of Change [ep. 41] Five Principles for Inspired Change (or something that looks remarkably like it) [ep. 42] Harmonious vs. Obsessive Passions [ep. 43]  About turning your passions into work: When Your Life Passions Become Obsessions [ep. 208]   Common Questions: Q: Why does rest and play feel so hard to justify when there's always more to do? A: Because we've been sold the message that rest is laziness and optimization is a moral win. This episode names that cultural conditioning directly, explains the biological necessity of rest and activity cycles, and reframes play as a genuine act of wellness and even resistance.   Q: What does play actually look like for adults and why does it matter for mental health? A: This episode introduces phantasmagoria, flow, and self-forgetfulness as frameworks for understanding why play is not optional. Play helps dissolves self-monitoring, reduces stress, builds resilience and empathy, and reconnects us to intrinsic motivation. One practical strategy is to play for just two minutes per day, no devices, doing something that was fun when you were a kid.   Key moments: [00:00] Welcome to the Element of Recreation — and the shift to "re-creation," with the hyphen intentional [00:30] Joy Lab's ease-phase rhythm: August, December, April — doing less, nourishing more, honoring cycles of rest and activity [01:30] Henry: we treat bodies and minds like machines that should run at peak capacity all the time [02:00] Nature runs on rhythms — seasons, tides, circadian cycles, hormone cycles — and so do we [03:30] We were taught that resting is laziness, that not optimizing is wasting time — and it's exhausting and eventually counterproductive [04:00] When we honor natural rhythms and take real breaks, energy and creativity return [05:00] Re-creation as coming back to our foundation — no additional fixes needed; goodness is already here [05:30] The wellness industry's relentless optimization is built on a "tiny blueprint" — a marketable version of you designed to sell products. It only works if you believe you're a product, not a person [07:00] Henry: the trillion-dollar self-help industry thrives on one message — you are not good enough [07:30] The impossible standard: lose weight but have you optimized your BMI? Improve habits but have you perfected your sleep routine? [08:00] Rooted in shame and self-rejection — the core message being "you're not okay as you are"  [09:30] Roger Abrahams: we've turned building a self into a kind of religion — self-possession, self-fashioning, self-expression as sacred moral acts [11:00] Henry: authentic self-creation vs. creating a self for external approval — the difference that matters [12:00] For marginalized communities, the pull to conform is especially strong — stepping back from optimization as an act of resistance [13:30] Aimee introduces phantasmagoria — a concept from play researcher Dr. Brian Sutton-Smith [14:00] How kids play in wild, imaginative, sometimes dark ways — and why it's usually normal, not a red flag [17:30] Why kids do this: to deconstruct reality, work through feelings, explore what's unfair or scary in a complex world [18:00] Sutton-Smith and Derrida: if the world is a text, play is our response — we are both audience and co-author [18:30] Phantasmagoria as processing strategy: supports psychological resilience, empathy, curiosity, critical thinking [19:30] Dr. Fred Donaldson: "Children learn as they play. Most importantly, in play, children learn how to learn." [20:00] Adults do the same — we've licensed phantasmagoria into tiny socially acceptable pockets: Halloween, Burning Man, horror movies, fandom [20:30] When play is so rare, those pockets can get extreme — we need to bring play back into daily life in healthy amounts [21:00] Carl Jung: "The small child is still around and possesses a creative life which I lack, but how can I make my way to it?" [22:00] Play ideas: gardening, LARPing, woodworking, art, acting, board games, writing, cooking, music, sports with less attachment to winning [22:30] Starting question: what's one way of playing from your childhood that if you tried for two minutes today would offer some recreation? [23:30] Henry on what happens when we become adults: we lose permission to play without purpose or imagine without constraints [24:00] The playful mind is resourceful — in play, we access parts of the brain that don't activate during striving or self-judgment — not a waste of time; accessing our deepest capacities  [26:00] Re-creation is mostly social — not solitary self-optimization but self-forgetfulness and connecting [26:30] Self-forgetfulness (Ep. 270): looking up from negative preoccupation with self, going beyond ourselves [ADD LINK] [27:00] Dr. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi's flow: loss of self-consciousness, forgetfulness of other realities — the adult version of play [27:30] Playfulness research on adults: higher purpose in life, positive relations, resilience, more positive emotions — even when adults are forced to play [28:30] The practice: two minutes per day, no devices, authoring your own experience [29:00] Then make it a little more social: invite a friend, shoot baskets in a public park, join a club [31:30] Henry: what happens when you're truly at play — you stop thinking about yourself; the inner critic quiets, anxiety settles, you're just present   [35:00] Check in after playing: how do you feel emotionally, cognitively, physically? Identify what nourishes you [35:30] This month: replay of key past episodes; Joy Lab Program members get weekly short visualization and meditation experiments [36:00] Closing wisdom from Carl Jung: "The creation of something new is not accomplished by the intellect, but by the play instinct..."    Like and follow Joy Lab on Socials:  Instagram Linkedin Facebook YouTube   Please remember that this content is for informational and educational purposes only. It is not intended to provide medical advice and is not a replacement for advice and treatment from a medical professional. Please consult your doctor or other qualified health professional before beginning any diet change, supplement, or lifestyle program. Please see our terms for more information. If you or someone you know is struggling or in crisis, help is available. Call the NAMI HelpLine: 1-800-950-6264 available Monday through Friday, 10 a.m. – 10 p.m., ET. OR text "HelpLine" to 62640 or email NAMI at helpline@nami.org. Visit NAMI for more. You can also call or text SAMHSA at 988 or chat 988lifeline.org.

“It's a realization of my individual self, not an alienation of it.” — Keith Teare on the book he wrote with AI in a week Welcome to episode 2984 of the show. A week is certainly an age in AI time. Since last week's “Who Owns Intelligence” show, That Was The Week publisher Keith Teare has used AI to write an entire book entitled, surprise surprise, Who Owns Intelligence. No wonder, as Keith's editorial this week puts it, AI has its enemies. These enemies, Keith insists — riffing off Karl Popper's The Open Society and Its Enemies — are mostly “good people.” They are the authors, workers, and others caught in the headlights of epochal technological change. He claims to have seen the pattern before. When he opened the world's first Internet cafe in 1994, the BBC only wanted to ask him about online porn. But some enemies are less well meaning than others. Congress is considering a kill switch bill — let's call it the Kill Bill — which is backed by the frontier companies like Anthropic and OpenAI cynically seeking to set their current market dominance in stone. So might the answer be Chinese style “open source” AI as requested this week in an open letter by NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang? Keith's answer is deliciously ironic. Denied walls of NVIDIA GPUs, Chinese labs learned to train cheaply by inference — distilling American frontier models through their own public interfaces. So Huang's support for open source AI might end up shooting NVIDIA in their most sensitive parts — their chips. And what about the state — can it protect all those “good people” from the oncoming AI locomotive of history? No. Not according to Keith, at least. State regulators like Lina Khan treat consumers as children, Keith (himself the parent of three boys) says. Besides, government simply can't keep up with the speed of technological change. So, for example, when OpenAI's models hacked Hugging Face in a lab test this week, the company caught, stopped, and reported it faster than any regulator could. As for inequality, the answer isn't nationalization but ownership on the model of Keith's Norway-style human wealth fund. For more, read his new book Who Owns Intelligence. We ended on an uncharacteristically French post-structuralist note. My interview of the week was Emily Eakin, author of The Frenchmen, her very personal history of French theorists like Michel Foucault and the two Jacques, Derrida & Lacan. It was Foucault, who — at the end of his 1966 book The Order of Things — predicted that man would be erased, AI style, like a face drawn in sand at the edge of the sea. But Keith isn't in this bleak Foucaultian camp. His book, written with AI in under a week, he says, is a realization of his individual self, not an alienation from it. The end or beginning of man? Maybe I got it wrong earlier. Welcome to episode 1984 of the show. Five Takeaways •       A Book in a Week. Inspired by last week's conversation, Keith used AI to write Who Owns Intelligence in seven days — the case for a “human wealth fund” seeded by the AI companies' own stock, global on day one and non-governmental, with Norway and Alaska as partial precedents. AI, he insists, is a tool, not an author: “AI would never have been able to start, never mind finish a book without me.” The detection farce cuts his way — Substack's new AI detector rated his 100% human editorial as 100% AI, and universities are quietly canceling their AI-detection contracts because the tools simply don't work.•       The Kill Bill and the Ladder-Kickers. Congress is considering a bill that would let government switch AI off — and, paradoxically, the AI companies are in favor. Keith's reading: regulation is a competitive strategy. Dario Amodei — “he's an entrepreneur, he's devious, he strategizes” — is the most sincere in wanting rules that would lock out open source competition — and Anthropic's $1.5 billion book settlement this week suggests the moat is expensive to maintain; Sam Altman zigzags; Musk, in this context at least, is one of the good guys. The genuine enemies of AI, meanwhile, are mostly good people: authors and workers frightened by the scale of change, just as the BBC in 1994 could only ask the founder of the world's first Internet cafe about porn and addiction.•       Why the Good Open Source AI Is Chinese. The week's uncomfortable question: where is the American open source AI? Keith's answer is structural. Denied walls of NVIDIA GPUs by export controls, Chinese labs were forced to train cheaply by inference — asking American frontier models millions of questions through public interfaces and learning from the answers. The result: world-class open models built, in effect, on distilled Anthropic and OpenAI. NVIDIA's much-signed open letter supporting open source, Keith notes, translates simply: more customers.•       The State Can't Keep Up. Lina Khan's consumer protection, in Keith's telling, is parental — treating consumers as children — and government-owned AI would be obsolete within three months of purchase. The counter-example happened this week: when OpenAI's de-railed models hacked Hugging Face in a lab test, the company caught, stopped, and reported it faster than any regulator could. The companies are the right point of control, held to a high standard. Matthew Yglesias adds nuance on the data center backlash — local micro-politics is not the same thing as the statewide bans coming almost entirely from Democratic states — and the American university, still metering intelligence at $80,000 a year, looks to Keith like a business model past its sell-by date.•       The End of Man — or the Beginning? Andrew's interview of the week was Emily Eakin on the Frenchmen — and Foucault's 1966 prophecy that man would be erased like a face drawn in sand at the edge of the sea, a prediction Eakin thinks the AI age is realizing. Keith takes the opposite view: the postmodernists grasped the rise of the individual (consider the Pantone color system) but gave him no society to live in. AI, far from erasing the individual, lets him realize himself — the week-old book is “a realization of my individual self, not an alienation of it.” Could Popper have written The Open Society in an hour? Before the car, nobody drove Manchester to London in two and a half hours either. About Keith Teare Keith Teare is Andrew's weekly co-host and the publisher of the That Was The Week tech newsletter. A four-decade veteran of the technology industry, he opened Cyberia — the world's first Internet cafe — in London in 1994, co-founded Easynet and TechCrunch, and is today the founder and CEO of SignalRank Corporation in Palo Alto. His latest — unpublished, so far — book is Who Owns Intelligence, written with AI in a week. References: •       “AI and Its Enemies: Who Needs a Kill Switch?” — Keith's editorial in this week's That Was The Week.•       

En la era de información, siguen abundando los instaladores de opinión. ¿Siempre nos va a perseguir esto? ¿Es posible escapar de la manipulación? ¿Querremos o nos enamoramos de nuestro captor?Autores mencionados: Foucault, Derrida, Byung-Chul Han, y Siddartha Gautama siempreNietzsche un poco jajaj

“Theory said, it doesn't matter what you've read. It's how you read.” — Emily Eakin on the seduction of the FrenchmenWhen I was a graduate student at Berkeley in the Eighties, there was a bewildering rage for Frenchmen. Foucault in history, Derrida in literature, Althusser in political philosophy, Lacan in psychology. Not that anybody could quite explain what any of them meant — which only made their ideas even more compelling. It was the seduction of the American mind, especially its elite campus version. Innocent times with forty years of hindsight.Emily Eakin caught this Eighties fever for French theory at Harvard. Now an editor at the New York Times Book Review, Eakin has written The Frenchmen, or My Life in Theory, which is both a confessional of her own seduction and a serious piece of intellectual history.A self-described farm girl from Indiana — albeit one whose Francophile parents once left her waiting at a Paris nursery school because a Lévi-Strauss lecture went overtime — she fell for theory as the intellectual equivalent of a little black dress. It looked expensive, even off the rack, she confesses. For a middle-class Midwesterner, it seemed like a passport to Left-Bank sophistication. All you needed was the jargon, the black clothes and, in Eakin's case, the opera gloves.But her Frenchmen, Eakin warns, turned out to be a slippery bunch. Lacan was so difficult that professors cancelled their own classes rather than teach him. Althusser murdered his wife. Foucault's histories were as much fiction as fact. Not even Derrida took Derrida seriously. These were the men undoing the “master narratives” while an enthralled generation of cross-legged young feminists in their little black dresses took notes.And yet Eakin's Frenchmen may have the last laugh. Their theory of language — an impersonal system requiring no human at its center — presciently describes today's AI revolution. Foucault predicted that “man” would be erased like a face drawn in sand on the beach. Forty years on, that tide may be engulfing us all.Five Takeaways•       The Little Black Dress of the Mind. Eakin grew up in a family of Francophiles — one of her earliest memories is her mother arriving late to the Paris maternelle because Claude Lévi-Strauss's lecture had run over — and arrived at Harvard as a middle-class kid from a middling Midwestern high school, painfully aware of the gaps in her education. Theory offered the shortcut: it didn't matter what you'd read, only how you read. The cliché about the little black dress is that it looks expensive even bought on sale off the rack at Macy's, and theory, Eakin says, was its intellectual equivalent. It was also, frankly, sexy — young professors in jeans lecturing on the masturbation of the comma in Henry James, as Lorrie Moore's barely-parodic parody had it, and students dressed in black. Eakin went as far as the opera gloves.•       System Replaces the Self. After the war, Sartre's existentialism made every accurate thought an authentic act of resistance — a heroic message for a France humiliated by four years of Nazi occupation. But the postwar world was not being changed by individual actors, and Lévi-Strauss dismissed the whole business in Tristes Tropiques as “shop girl metaphysics.” Around the time the Berlin Wall went up, Althusser routed Sartre at the École Normale, and a new philosophy took hold, obsessed with vast impersonal forces: not humans controlling events but a structure — with language at its center. The moment that fascinated Eakin is that sixties moment when system replaced the self.•       Difficult by Design — and Easy to Distort. A colleague of Eakin's at the Times was once assigned Lacan's lecture on The Purloined Letter; a few minutes into class, the professor cancelled it, admitting he didn't understand the text he had assigned. That is the level of difficulty in question. Underedited and self-indulgent, Eakin the editor concedes — but each Frenchman left behind one bold idea worth the struggle, like Lacan's mirror stage, in which identity is formed outside ourselves in an act of misrecognition. The difficulty carried a price: it made the work easy to parody, and conservative pundits handed the public a distorted picture. The Frenchmen never said truth doesn't exist, Eakin insists. Their message was to beware political claims masquerading as eternal truths.•       Slippery Politics, Awkward Pasts. Foucault, insecure about his thinning hair, shaved his head, ditched the suits, and by 1970 was in the streets with a megaphone defending prisoners, immigrants, and workers — and he was in San Francisco at the start of the AIDS catastrophe, which is reason to take his politics seriously. Derrida was temperamentally otherwise: nothing follows from deconstruction, as Stanley Fish put it, and the moment of silence his classmates held for Stalin at the École Normale was a bit much for him. The posthumous exposure of de Man's collaborationist journalism hastened theory's American demise. And there was the paradox Eakin only saw while writing the book: men undoing the master narratives, and a generation of feminists — herself included — enthralled to them. De Beauvoir was the indomitable exception, awarded second place in the agrégation by jurors who could barely decide between her and Sartre.•       The Frenchmen's Revenge: AI. When the chatbots got good, American linguistics went into a tailspin: Chomsky's account of language as a uniquely human, embodied endowment cannot explain a machine producing sophisticated sentences. The structuralists' theory — language as an impersonal system in which meaning derives from how words differ from one another — describes generative AI rather well, and scholars such as NYU's Leif Weatherby are now calling for a structuralist revival to understand it. De Man called language a machine; Foucault wrote of the proliferation of authorless discourse; Eakin's recent New York Times essay argues Foucault foresaw everything from AI to the deep state. The Frenchmen, she thinks, would be fascinated rather than appalled — and would remind us to be just as wary of AI's language as of anyone else's.About the GuestEmily Eakin is an editor at The New York Times Book Review. She has worked as a senior editor at The New Yorker, an ideas reporter for The New York Times, a fashion features writer at Vogue, and a deputy editor of Lingua Franca. Her features, essays, and reviews have appeared in The New Yorker, The New York Times Magazine, The New Republic, and The New York Review of Books. A Harvard graduate with graduate degrees from Columbia and the École Normale Supérieure in Paris, she lives in New York City. Her first book is The Frenchmen, or My Life in Theory (Penguin Press, July 2026).References:•       The Frenchmen, or My Life in Theory by Emily Eakin (Penguin Press, July 2...

Send us Fan MailWith this episode, READING MCCARTHY has discussed every novel published by Cormac McCarthy.  Published in early December of 2022, STELLA MARIS was the last novel published by McCarthy in his lifetime.  The second book in a pair of sibling novels about the Westerns, STELLA MARIS consists of a series of interviews between the troubled genius Alicia Western and a research psychiatrist. Alicia first appears in THE PASSENGER, but it is in this novel that the spotlight is firmly upon her.  My guests for this episode are Nell Sullivan, who joined us previously for episodes on McCarthy and Women Characters, on Outer Dark, on a consideration of The Border Trilogy, and the tribute episode to McCarthy.  She is Professor of English at the University of Houston-Downtown, where she teaches courses in American literature, the literature of the American South, and zombies.  She has published essays on William Faulkner, Nella Larsen, Katherine Dunn, and, of course, Cormac McCarthy. She is currently working on a book on McCarthy's representation of women.  Like myself and Vern Cisney, her most recent chapter on McCarthy has recently been published in the collection, New Perspectives on Cormac McCarthy, Encountering The Passenger and Stellar Maris, edited by the Brothers Elmore.  Joining Dr. Sullivan is Dr. Vernon W. Cisney, who is Chair and Associate Professor of Interdisciplinary Studies at Gettysburg College in Pennsylvania. He teaches at the intersections of philosophy, religion, film, literature, and politics. He is the author of Deleuze and Derrida: Difference and the Power of the Negative (2018), as well as Derrida's Voice and Phenomenon: An Edinburgh Philosophical Guide (2014). In addition, he is the co-editor of Between Foucault and Derrida (2016); Biopower: Foucault and Beyond (2015); and The Way of Nature and the Way of Grace: Philosophical Footholds on Terrence Malick's The Tree of Life (2016). Most recently, he has written articles and chapters included in Deleuze and Guattari Studies and New Perspectives on Cormac McCarthy: Encountering the Passenger and Stella Maris, and is currently editing with Jonathan and Rick Elmore a volume on McCarthy's Blood Meridian.  All music for READING MCCARTHY is  composed, performed, and produced by Thomas Frye.  Support the showNew! A book adaptation of many of the episodes focusing on McCarthy's Southern novels is forthcoming in December, 2026.  Click the link for details on Reading Cormac McCarthy: Scholars Discuss the Southern Novels.Starting in spring of 2023, the podcast began accepting minor sponsorship offers to offset the costs of the podcast.  This may cause a mild disconnect in earlier podcasts where the host asks for patrons in lieu of sponsorships.   But if we compare it to a very large and naked bald man in the middle of the desert who leads you to an extinct volcano to create gunpowder, it seems pretty minor...As always, the views of the host and his guests do not constitute the views of the Cormac McCarthy society, or their employers or institutions, or their pets or favorite sporting teams.  

Foucault. Derrida. Lyotard. Three French philosophers walk into a cafe — and forty years later, American universities can't define what a woman is.In this episode, Pigweed and Crowhill dig into a viral French mea culpa: an apology, on behalf of France, for exporting postmodernism to the world. They trace the direct line from French theory's core claim — that truth is just a mask for power — through Judith Butler, Edward Said, and Kimberlé Crenshaw, and into today's language of oppressor/oppressed, meritocracy-as-racism, and "words are violence."Topics covered:* Why civilization rests on three pillars — truth, morality, and inherited tradition — and how French theory tried to dynamite all three* The difference between what Foucault et al. probably meant and what their disciples did with it* Why "everything is a power struggle" is really just Marxism with race swapped in for class* The philosophical case against relativism (and why no one actually lives like a true relativist)* Fragmentation, diversity, and the postmodern seduction of "there is no truth, only narrative"* Why a civilization that's only trained to deconstruct forgets how to buildPlus: a four-year-old bottle of Flying Dog Double Dog Triple IPA that's mellowed into something closer to a barleywine — tasting notes, aging thoughts, and whether it's worth the cellar space.#Postmodernism #Foucault #WesternCivilization #Philosophy #CraftBeer #IPA #BeerReview #PoliticalPhilosophy #CultureWar #Podcast

“If you can only explain the arguments of the other side because they're mad or dangerous or dumb, the problem is with you.” — Turi Munthe On yesterday's show, the psychiatrist Sally Satel described how Americans imagine their own mental condition differently, depending on their politics and age. Which is a nice segue for today's conversation with the Anglo-French journalist turned media entrepreneur Turi Munthe. It's not just in our mental health self-evaluation, Munthe argues, that we hallucinate reality. Indeed, the French born Munthe often sounds like one of his post-structuralist compatriots in his defiantly slippery notion of ontological reality. In Why We Think What We Think: The Unexpected Origins of Our Deepest Beliefs, Munthe argues that our deepest convictions turn out to be shaped by genetics, brain shape and sometimes even by the agricultural legacy of our distant ancestors. Left and right thinkers, Munthe argues, are different political phenotypes — each hallucinating their own version of reality. Total relativism, then — the full French post-structuralist monty? Not quite. Here's where Munthe's Englishness kicks in. Following the Anglo-Russian philosopher Isaiah Berlin, Munthe insists pluralism and relativism are different. So Turi Munthe doesn't just think what he thinks because of his English or French origins. Borrowing from the cognitive scientists Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier, Munthe defines thinking as a “contact sport”. So, for example, believing that the 2020 election was stolen is what Munthe calls a social commitment, because humans would rather be wrong together than right alone. Speaking of convenient segues, Munthe's thoughts on thinking set the scene for next Tuesday's conversation with Emily Eakin, author of The Frenchmen. It's her history of seductive post-structuralists like Foucault, Derrida and Lacan who corrupted a whole generation of literary American Ivy Leaguers (including Eakin) into hallucinating reality. Five Takeaways •       Pluralism Is Not Relativism. Munthe opens with Isaiah Berlin's distinction: registering the sincerity and value of opinions across the political, religious, and ethical spectrum does not relativize truth. That Charles Windsor is King of the United Kingdom is a statement of fact; whether you're a monarchist or a republican is where opinion begins. The book confines itself to the second category — beliefs, values, and opinions that cannot be factually proven — and asks what the nonrational influences on them actually are. The answer is humbling: genetics account for perhaps half of political persuasion, and the rest is shaped by everything from brain anatomy to the agriculture of our ancestors. •       Different Political Phenotypes. At the margins, left and right differ neurologically: right-leaners are on average more readily startled by loud noises and more attentive to threat, while left-leaners carry a slightly larger anterior cingulate cortex — the brain region where we process ambiguity and split hairs. That anatomy, Munthe argues, explains the ideological capture of academia and media better than any conspiracy: hair-splitters go where the hair-splitting is, and a conservative 22-year-old doesn't volunteer for a newsroom where 80% of colleagues think differently. We are, in his phrase, different political phenotypes, each hallucinating a different version of reality. •       Thinking as a Contact Sport. Drawing on Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier's research, Munthe argues that reason didn't evolve for solitary contemplation — Rodin's Thinker is the wrong image — but for argument: to convince you to hunt the buffalo with me, I need reasons that look objective to you too. The evidence is everywhere, from the most impactful academic papers being written by pairs and groups to the creative density of small university towns. The implication is political: the people we disagree with are not obstacles to good thinking but the condition of it — the loyal opposition that helps us get out of ourselves. •       Wrong Together Rather Than Right Alone. Munthe's reading of January 6 and the stolen-election faith is social rather than psychiatric: an enormous number of our beliefs matter more for what they do than for what they say, and professing them is a commitment to a group. From an evolutionary perspective, believing what your village believes — even about the god who is a giant rock at the end of the field — is intelligent, because the ostracized lose the protection of the group. The terrifying data point is the marriage test: in the 1950s, around 4% of families would have objected to a child marrying across party lines; today it approaches 45%. That is affective polarization, and it can pull societies apart. •       The Problem Is With You. Munthe spent his twenties unable to fathom American gun rights — supporters had to be bought, dumb, or morally corrupt — until he did the work and found a tradition he now calls beautiful and heroic, whether or not he shares it. His rule of thumb: if you can only explain the other side's arguments as madness, danger, or stupidity, the problem is with you. This is not centrism — there was no middle ground on slavery or the Holocaust — but a defense of the clash itself: societies need the left to fix inequality and the right to defend the village, and we think best when the two are, in his words, continually bashed against each other. About the Guest Turi Munthe is a journalist and policy analyst turned media entrepreneur. He founded Demotix, which became the largest network of photojournalists in the world before its sale to Corbis in 2012, and Parlia, an encyclopedia of opinion. He has written for The Economist, The Guardian, the TLS, The Nation, and The Spectator, has sat on the boards of Index on Censorship, openDemocracy, and the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, and is a board member of the Italian media group GEDI, publisher of La Repubblica and La Stampa. He studied Arabic and History at Oxford. Why We Think What We Think: The Unexpected Origins of Our Deepest Beliefs (Penguin/Hutchinson Heinemann) is out now in the UK, with US publication early next year. References: •       Why We Think What We Think: The Unexpected Origins of Our Deepest Beliefs by Turi Munthe (Penguin/Hutchinson Heinemann, 2026). Timothy Garton Ash: “Thinking is a contact sport.” •       Isaiah Berlin — the Anglo-Russian philosopher whose insistence that pluralism and relativism are not the same thing frames the whole book. •       Dan Sperber and Hugo Mercier...

Liza Libes is defending literature like it's under siege, and after this conversation, you will understand why. Liza went to Columbia wanting to study Tolstoy and came out having read more Edward Said and Sartre she signed up for. We got into how her English degree turned into a theory degree overnight, why Anna Karenina isn't the feminist manifesto her professors taught it as, and why so much of what gets published now has had the backstory and the beauty edited right out of it by agents chasing a formula. Liza's family fled the Soviet Union, and her grandfather was imprisoned for being Jewish. Watching that same ideology resurface in new packaging on American campuses is terrifying. Find Liza at PensandPoison.org She also runs Advictus Prep and is shopping her first novel, which is basically a love letter to beauty written in spite of a literary world that's decided beauty is suspect. If you've been meaning to finally pick up that classic on your shelf, this is your sign! Memorable Quotes: "I don't think I met anyone in the English department who had the same reaction... A lot of people I think were actively trying to push this agenda because it had been sold to them." — Liza "Good fiction is inherently moral. That's not to say moral in one specific restricted sense, but good fiction should teach us something about the way to live our lives." — Liza "A lot of our art today is ironic, nihilistic, cynical, and just downright amoral." — Liza "If your response to [boredom in a marriage] is I'm just going to abandon this whole thing that gives everyone meaning, then that is going to lead you to a dark place." — Liza, on Anna Karenina "People will hold onto their identity more than the truth." — Polina, paraphrasing Chase Hughes "My family kind of went through horrific examples of antisemitism twice, just in our personal lives... and it's horrific that it's happening again." — Liza "If you're going to make one change in your life to lead a more full and fulfilling life, read classic literature." — Liza Follow us on Instagram  @thecuriousmiddlepod Our Website: https://curiousmiddlepod.com Email us: thecuriousmiddlepod@gmail.com Substack: https://curiousmiddle.substack.com Episode Time Stamps 04:32 — Arriving at Columbia expecting to study literature, getting Edward Said and postcolonial theory on Jane Austen instead 06:36 — Same pattern outside the English department — a philosophy class teaching Hegel through the lens of BLM, and why she eventually stepped back from academia 08:46 — How Pens and Poison started, and the slow, stuck-at-20K-followers climb before it took off 11:05 — The daily messages from silenced students and aspiring writers — and how the same ideological capture spread into publishing 13:15 — Columbia's Core Curriculum as a partial exception, and why STEM friends noticed the politicization more than English majors did 15:29 — Pausing to unpack just how deep this runs — you can't study literature today without studying Marx 17:39 — Edward Said and the "settler colonist" framing; Sartre's introduction to The Wretched of the Earth 19:57 — More on Sartre's radicalization, Simone de Beauvoir, and the ideas of theirs still taught as fact 22:10 — Derrida, deconstruction, and the postmodern claim that literature has no objective meaning 24:21 — Paulo Freire and how "social justice as the point of education" filtered into every subject, not just humanities 28:55 — Why you don't need to be a humanities major to benefit from literature — it as a stand-in for religious meaning 31:19 — Anna Karenina as a case study: Tolstoy's actual argument vs. balancing tradition with modern life 33:37 — T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land, the cost of losing ritual, and the case for reading fiction (not just nonfiction) 38:12 — My Year of Rest and Relaxation as an example of fiction that critiques without offering anything — the retreat from beauty and sincerity in "serious" art 40:14 — Does bleak fiction reflect a bleak culture or create one? Introducing her novel-in-progress, inspired by Mann's Doctor Faustus 44:44 — The same pattern in music, art, and publishing; does fiction need a moral lesson, or is beauty enough? 47:06 — Noticing beauty as the theme of her novel, and the one contemporary book she's excited to read — Theo of Golden, rejected by publishers, self-published, then sold millions 49:12 — Why contemporary fiction gets rejected or forced into a formula: word counts, no backstory, action on page one 51:37 — What's lost without backstory or physical description — fiction that never lets you rest with an idea 53:39 — Her own reading habits: rereading Dostoevsky in the original Russian, and why she's wary of new bestsellers 55:44 — Life-changing book #1: Mann's The Magic Mountain and how it reshaped her sense of time 58:06 — Life-changing book #2: Zweig's The World of Yesterday and the loss of creative freedom 1:00:29 — Why so many young people can't name their own values 1:02:41 — How literature classrooms swap out "morality" for ideology without saying so (Anna Karenina as "anti-feminism") 1:04:58 — Othello and The Merchant of Venice taught through one narrow lens instead of the whole picture 1:07:08 — Social justice as a stand-in religion, and the Columbia encampments 1:09:25 — Her family's history: fleeing the USSR on political asylum, her father imprisoned and her great-grandfather killed for being Jewish, and where to find her — Pens and Poison (pensandpoison.org)

Darío Sztajnszrajber es filósofo, docente y divulgador argentino. Reconocido por acercar la filosofía al gran público, ha dedicado gran parte de su trabajo a cuestionar las certezas con las que organizamos nuestra vida cotidiana. En esta conversación aborda uno de los temas más universales y complejos de la experiencia humana: el amor. A partir de preguntas del público, anécdotas personales y referencias a autores como Platón, Nietzsche, Barthes, Derrida o Levinas, reflexiona sobre el enamoramiento, el deseo, la convivencia, la amistad, la familia y la libertad. Su mirada invita a desconfiar de las definiciones cerradas y a entender el amor como una experiencia abierta, contradictoria y transformadora. Un espacio para pensar los vínculos desde la ambivalencia, aceptar la incertidumbre y construir relaciones más libres y auténticas.

Support Night Clerk Radio on Patreon Boards of Canada perfectly embody the themes we love to explore: plunderphonics, nostalgia, and hauntology. Despite this, we've never examined their work in detail. With their first album release in 13 years, we're dedicating the month of June to a full retrospective. In this episode, we discuss their first four major releases, analyzing them as both listening experiences and explorations of those key themes. Grab a haunted sample of your favorite childhood memory and join us! Albums Discussed Music Has The Right To Children by Boards of CanadaGeogaddi by Boards of CanadaThe Campfire Headphase by Boards of CanadaTomorrow's Harvest by Boards of Canada Additional Links Exploring the Most Mysterious Band: The Boards of Canada Iceberg by Hux Credits Music by: 2MelloArtwork by: Patsy McDowellNight Clerk Radio on Bluesky

The two-part conclusion of season six begins. We're delving into the work of Georges Bataille, with a focus on his book, "On Nietzsche". Bataille is one of the most interesting intellectual nodes of 20th century philosophy. For a long time, his work was obscure in the English-speaking world, often eclipsed by those he influenced, such as Derrida and Foucault. However, among the postmodernists, Bataille takes Nietzsche as his closest companion, and struggles most fiercely with him. On Nietzsche is written during the war years, and is a very strange book that defies categorization. We'll talk about the background of the text, Bataille's life, the secret society Acephale, and the main ideas in Summit and Decline. In the next episode, we'll discuss 1944 diaries with a focus on the philosophical ideas therein.

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/

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.

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

...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.

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. :) 

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!

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/

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.