Podcasts about descartes

Today we explored the question of the question, to conduct a study of the Caribbean, where must we begin? This episode is a summary of Lecture 3 which was a five-hour long lecture. This the condensed version of Conceptualizing the course, Caribbean Thought. We ask, when we study the Caribbean Thought, including diverse currents that have shaped its present that speaks to a future, how far must we go back? Where must we start? The answer is a complex one because we stated in class that the Caribbean is an invention of the past which must now reinvent itself in the future if we are to surpass the challenges of the present. We say the Caribbean is uncompetitive stemming from a violent past that continues today through neoliberal Globalization. We did not explore neoliberal globalization but provided an understanding of Neoliberalism, Neo-capitalism &Capitalism. We explain Neoliberalism as a form of liberalism used within economics by capitalists to liberalize economies so as to penetrate thereby ensuring profit. We said that we will explore Neoliberalism in more detail later in relation to its effects on the Caribbean when we watch "Life and Debt" by Stephanie Black based on a book "A Small Place by Jamaica Kincaid - a book about Antigua whose experience of structural adjustment and fight for prosperity resembles Jamaica's so that the film could take from the book and talk about Jamaica. This speaks to the symbiotic relation between the West Indies. We examined the processes of Colonization from the perspective of Fanon who defines colonization as involving a violence of depersonalization - stripping away the individual. We provided an academic answer/response to the question: Are "White-Collar in Jamaica a Crimes a result of Colonization"? And Why are crime rates so high in places like Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica? We suggested a Marxist materialist reply - "Relative Deprivation". What is Relative deprivation? We defined it as the correlation between high crime & high poverty and income inequality. Jamaica and the Caribbean suffers from high poverty and inequality correlated with the highest crime rates in the Caribbean. This is commensurate with what is happening is black and brown communities all over the world - hence supporting the conclusion/analysis of "relative deprivation". We pointed out that to study Caribbean Thought is to do philosophical inquiry which involves logic & Descartes phenomenology, who coined "cogito ergo sum" - I think therefore I am. He recognized the subjectivity of reality outside of objective verification. Further, we pushed the exploration of knowledge by discussing Kant who says that history is a result of human nature and circumstances, and questions Newtonian Physics which formed the basis of western civilization's understanding of reality. The Caribbean as part of a reality of western civilization is influenced by that bent. We reviewed the economic history of western society and capitalism stating that it is within a system that has impoverished or weakened the Caribbean States. We revisited Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations & Weber's Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism regarding the justification and economic principle behind Capitalism. However, we challenged the wealth of nations by invoking Karl Marx who critically re-examines Adam Smith's Accumulation of Capital idea, saying that it was not one in hard work but theft and violence. This then led us to consider the socio-economic/political interests of the Caribbean such as Michael Manley and Fidel Castro who were Nationalists influenced by Marxists critique of capitalism and his idea of Communism. Caribbean Political and literary thinkers were off-center and regarded as Democratic Socialists which had threatened American domination and penetration in the region to what they had believed had given way to socialist ideology. Read on at www.theneoliberal.com. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/support

Today we explored the question of the Caribbean in light of the conceptualization of the course, Caribbean Thought. We ask, when we study and reflect on Caribbean Thought, including diverse currents that have shaped its present that speaks to a future, how far must we go back? Where must we start? The answer is a complex one because we stated in class that the Caribbean is an invention of the past which must now reinvent itself in the future if we are to surpass the challenges of the present. We say the Caribbean is uncompetitive stemming from a violent past that continues today through neoliberal Globalization. We did not explore neoliberal globalization but provided an understanding of Neoliberalism, Neo-capitalism and Capitalism. We explain Neoliberalism as a form of liberalism used within economics by capitalists to liberalize economies so as to penetrate thereby ensuring profit. We said that we will explore Neoliberalism in more detail later in relation to its effects on the Caribbean when we watch "Life and Debt" by Stephanie Black based on a book "A Small Place by Jamaica Kincaid - a book about Antigua whose experience of structural adjustment and fight for prosperity resembles Jamaica's so that the film could take from the book and talk about Jamaica. This speaks to the symbiotic relation between the West Indies. We examined the processes of Colonization from the perspective of Fanon who defines colonization as involving a violence of depersonalization - stripping away the individual. We provided an academic answer/response to the question: Are "White-Collar in Jamaica a Crimes a result of Colonization"? And why are crime rates so high in places like Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica? We suggested a Marxist materialist reply - "Relative Deprivation". What is Relative deprivation? We defined it as the correlation between high crime and high poverty and income inequality. Jamaica/ the Caribbean suffers from high poverty and inequality correlated with the highest crime rates in the Caribbean. This is commensurate with what is happening is black and brown communities all over the world - hence supporting the conclusion/analysis of "relative deprivation". We pointed out that to study Caribbean Thought is to do philosophical inquiry which involves logic and reason and an understanding of Descartes phenomenology, who coined "cogito ergo sum - I think therefore I am. He recognized the subjectivity of reality outside of objective verification. Further, we pushed the exploration of knowledge by discussing Kant who says that history is a result of human nature and circumstances, and questions Newtonian Physics which formed the basis of western civilization's understanding of reality. The Caribbean as part of a reality of western civilization is influenced by that bent. We reviewed the economic history of western society and capitalism stating that it is within a system that has impoverished or weakened the Caribbean States. We revisited Adam Smith Wealth of Nations and Max Weber Protestant Ethic and Spirit of Capitalism regarding the justification and economic principle behind Capitalism. However, we challenged the wealth of nations by invoking Karl Marx who critically re-examines Adam Smith's Accumulation of Capital idea, saying that it was not one in hard work but theft and violence. This then led us to consider the socio-economic and political interests of the Caribbean such as Michael Manley and Fidel Castro who were Nationalists influenced by Marxists critique of capitalism and his idea of Communism. Caribbean Political and literary thinkers were off-center and regarded as Democratic Socialists which had threatened American domination/penetration in the region to what they had believed was given way to socialist ideology. This Lecture is given by Rev. Renaldo McKenzie, in Caribbean Thought, at the Jamaica Theological Seminary, January 27th, 2023. https://theneoliberal.com. --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/theneoliberal/support

Abordamos ya directamente el pensamiento del que puede ser considerado como primer filósofo moderno, y sin duda el padre del racionalismo. En este primer episodio presentamos su vida y obra y de los dos elementos fundamentales de su pensamiento compartidos por todos los filósofos modernos, tanto del bando racionalista como del empirista: el idealismo subjetivo y la emulación del método científico para la filosofía. Recordad que esta temporada los episodios regulares salen cada quince días, y que los martes que no haya publicación de episodio regular, ofreceremos para los subscriptores de pago mensual de iVoox y Ko-fi, pero el martes próximo será una excepción, puesto que el contenido extra estará disponible también para todos los que hayan hecho alguna aportación económica en ko-fi, donde podéis invitar a una cerveza a Diógenes, a través de este enlace: https://ko-fi.com/anaideiafm Anaideia.es Twitter: @anaideiafm Instagram: @anaideiafm Tiktok: @anaideiafm anaideiafm@gmail.com MUSIC: -Hall of the metal king, Metalicious, Frozen mountains, Solnedgang, Cocktail and lobster, by Alexander Nakarada (www.serpentsoundstudios.com) Licensed under Creative Commons BY Attribution 4.0 License.

Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Voir Acast.com/privacy pour les informations sur la vie privée et l'opt-out.

durée : 00:58:32 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann - En janvier 2022, se tenait un colloque en Sorbonne : "Après la déconstruction : reconstruire les sciences et la culture". Le titre du colloque semblait tenir la déconstruction pour responsable d'une mise en ruine des sciences et de la culture. D'où vient ce malentendu autour de la déconstruction ? - invités : Denis Kambouchner philosophe et professeur de philosophie à l'Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, spécialiste de Descartes; Anne-Emmanuelle Berger Professeure émérite de littérature française et d'études de genre à l'Université Paris 8 Vincennes Saint-Denis, essayiste et théoricienne. Elle a co-fondé en 2014 et longtemps dirigé l'UMR LEGS (CNRS/ Paris 8/ Paris Nanterre), premier laboratoire de recherche interdisciplinaire dédié aux études de genre et de sexualité en France.

In this episode, I explain what Descartes means by "I think, therefore I am." If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy

Weaving through the synchro-mystic mythology of Vulcan, tarot-correspondences, Descartes , and a wide variety of other fascinating topics, Slick Dissident shares a bountiful wealth of insights and mind-bending revelations that makes this conversation profoundly unique. Check out Gabe's work @ https://www.youtube.com/@slickdissident3553 In 2023, I am happy to offer my video-editing services to you! Podcasters, small-business owners, etc., please feel free to check out my work at https://www.instagram.com/locolistens Support the show! PAYPAL: https://paypal.me/locolistens VENMO: https://www.venmo.com/u/Jake-Locorotondo Buy me a coffee: https://www.Ko-fi.com/locolistens https://linktr.ee/locolistens Connect with Listeners @ https://www.t.me/locolisteners Share, Subscribe, and Stay Groovy! Love always, Jake --- Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/loco-listens--podast/support

Découvrez le bouquet philo, l'abonnement pour accéder à tous les cours passés et futurs :https://m.audiomeans.fr/s/cours-philo Contrairement à Spinoza, qui pensait que la liberté était une illusion, Descartes affirmait l'existence d'un libre arbitre chez l'homme, par lequel celui-ci se distinguerait de tous les autres êtres de la nature. L'occasion de confronter ces deux visions, afin de déterminer laquelle est la plus convaincante. Vous pouvez me soutenir : ★En devenant contributeur sur Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/leprecepteurpodcast Vous pourrez ainsi accéder au podcast sans pub et en avant-première et surtout à mon contenu inédit ! ★Ou en faisant un don ponctuel sur PayPal : http://paypal.me/leprecepteurpodcast Pensez à laisser une note et un avis sur la plateforme de podcast où vous m'écoutez. Cela prend quelques secondes, et c'est un geste très utile pour le référencement du podcast ! Et bien sûr, continuez à partager les émissions que vous préférez sur vos réseaux sociaux. Le Précepteur Podcast a été créé pour vous et continuera d'exister grâce à vous. (Pour toute demande : leprecepteurpodcast@gmail.com)

Extrait de l'épisode : DESCARTES - Sommes-nous vraiment libres ? Cet épisode sera publié sur YouTube et en podcast le vendredi 21 janvier 2023. Il est d'ores et déjà disponible en intégralité sur ma page Patreon : https://www.patreon.com/leprecepteurpodcast

What did the First Vatican Council teach about faith and reason? How do Thomists parse the act of faith? How does the Vatican Council's account of faith and reason fit well with Thomistic hylomorphic dualism over and against Descartes' view? Dr. Gaven Kerr joins the podcast again to discuss these issues. The Classical Theism Podcast aims to defend Catholic Christian ideas in conversation. With the help of various guests, I defend three pillars of the Catholic Christian worldview: (1) the God of classical theism exists, (2) Jesus is our Messiah and Lord, and (3) He founded the Catholic Church. We place a strong emphasis on the first pillar, defending classical theism, drawing upon the work of Thomistic philosopher Dr. Edward Feser and many others. John DeRosa www.classicaltheism.com/support Support the show: Check out my book One Less God Than You: How to Answer the Slogans, Cliches, and Fallacies that Atheists Use to Challenge Your Faith >> www.classicaltheism.com/newbook Support on Patreon to help keep the podcast going and to allow me to produce even more quality content: www.classicaltheism.com/support

Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: The writing style here is bad, published by Michał Zabłocki on January 15, 2023 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Epistemic status: around that of Descartes' (low) I am not a native English speaker. Despite that, I've had my English skills in high regard most of my life. It was the language of my studies at the university. Although I still make plenty of mistakes, I want to assure you I am capable of reading academic texts. That being said: a whole lot of posts and comments here do feel like academic texts. The most basic/heuristic check: I found a tool to measure linguistic complexity, here/ - so you can play with it yourself, if you'd like to. Now, I realize that AI Safety is a complicated, professional topic with a lot of jargon. Hence, let's take a discussion that, I believe, should be especially welcoming to non-professionals: I could make some Python project and analyse lingustic complexity of a whole range of posts, produce graphs and it sure would be fun and much better, but I am a lazy person and I just want to show you the idea. I mean to sound extremely simple when I say the following. There's a whole lot of syllables right there. Most of the comments here do feel like academic papers. Reading them is a really taxing exercise. In fact, I usually just stray from it. Whether it's my shit attention span or people on a global scale are not proficient English speakers, it is my firm belief that ideas should be communicated in an understandable matter when posssible. That is, most of people should be able to understand them. If you want to increase diveristy and be more inclusive, well, I think that's one really good way at attempting so. This is also the reason for the exact title of the post, rather than "Linguistic preferences of some effective altruists seem to be impacted by a tendency to overly intellectualize." Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org.

durée : 01:34:59 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - L'autre scène ou les vivants et les Dieux - Descartes et la crise de la raison : 1- Pourquoi lire Descartes aujourd'hui (1ère diffusion : 12/01/1981)

People don't really hate the Catholic Church. They hate what they've been taught is the Church, most of which is untrue. This quote from Fulton “the quote machine” Sheen sums it up:There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing. These millions can hardly be blamed for hating Catholics because Catholics “adore statues”; because they “put the Blessed Mother on the same level with God”; because they say “indulgence is a permission to commit sin”; because the Pope “is a Fascist”; because the “Church is the defender of Capitalism.” If the Church taught or believed any one of these things it should be hated, but the fact is that the Church does not believe nor teach any one of them. It follows then that the hatred of the millions is directed against error and not against truth. As a matter of fact, if we Catholics believed all of the untruths and lies which were said against the Church, we probably would hate the Church a thousand times more than they do. If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates… Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which, in seasons of bigotry, men say must be destroyed in the name of God as men crucified Christ and thought they had done a service to God. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because He called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which is rejected by the world as Our Lord was rejected by men… If then, the hatred of the Church is founded on erroneous beliefs, it follows that basic need of the day is instruction. Love depends on knowledge for we cannot aspire nor desire the unknown. (Fulton Sheen on Radio Replies)The Church that is rejected by men is a Church they rarely know or understand. The attackers have not read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, which is clear because most of the attacks don't even make sense once you crack the cover of that book. Thus, it's useless for me to feel offended by atheist attacks any more that it is to feel offended by Protestant attacks. Yet I do feel offended sometimes. Why? Because I fail to fully surrender to God and his Church, hence the need for daily conversion, to fight the spiritual fight, and to submit my will and intellect completely to the care of God's grace. His will, not mine, will be done. This blog is just a journal of my reasons for believing, and if I didn't feel such a need to express these words, I wouldn't do it. Jesus commanded us to tell the story of the Gospel, and that his sheep would hear his voice. Seems like a small task for me to at least tell of my reasons for faith, with the hopes that perhaps someone else will undo their own Herschel Walker trade. Now, Protestants did not make the full trade, abandoning God, but they did abandon the Mother Church, the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ, the barque of Peter (and any other pseudonyms you like). In Luther's defense, he was living in and around a period of time when frauds like the Donation of Constantine came to light, which called for questioning, correction, and improvement, and the Church was under heavy attack from all sides. It is also under attack today, from all sides. In Luther's time, the New World had been discovered, science was advancing, and there were three concurrent Popes at one time not long before. Add a few greedy clergy using “salvation for money” schemes that would make Bernie Madoff blush, and only a match it need to start a conflagration. It's just too bad Luther's exit ended up watering down the doctrines instead of shoring it up, because he really wanted to protect doctrine in the beginning - even the Eucharist. After all, he was an Augustinian monk, and the most “Catholic” Protestant there ever was, at least in the beginning, until Zwingli and the hoards came after him. I haven't come to bash Luther as much as I have come to bash Voltaire and Jefferson and the fruit of their legacy of unbelief. I routinely bash the 19th century German scholarship that tried to elevate Biblical scholarship and instead cut the trunk out from the tree. Even though things look bleak, I have to think of Joseph, Jacob's son, in Egypt. After getting tossed in a well, then sold into slavery, then living in prison after being falsely accused of seducing a powerful man's wife, Joseph had a winning streak. When he met his brothers again, many years later, he said, “As for you, you meant evil against me; but God meant it for good.” (Gen 50:20) All of this, all that has happened in the past 500 years is part of God's plan, even the awful parts. We just don't know how yet, but we do know that the name of the game is adhering to Christ, his words, his commandments, and imitating him, which means sticking to the doctrines and not affirming every sin that feels good or sounds good. It means saying, “No,” to the culture, to popular opinion. Slavery was once popular opinion thanks to sola scriptura. Why? Because you can make the Bible be whatever you want it to be with “scripture alone.” The Church put out anti-slavery documents and statements early on. Just like today, that doesn't mean every person adhered to the teaching. Consider how poorly the laity adhere to birth control and admonitions of greed. There were hardly any Catholics in America until the Irish came, which was around the Civil War, and guess what? They were hated, too. It's almost a guarantee. Catholicism is the punk rock of all ages, because it is always a counter-culture. But unlike punk rock, Catholicism has a shelf-life that lasts longer than a decade. All of the fad counter-cultures disappear like smoke, like figdet-spinners and rolled jeans and pet rocks, they are passing fashions that mean nothing to the next generation. But Mary and Joseph do not fade. The impact of the saints and martyrs carries on. The Gospel does not fade, even if the books and scrolls wear out over time. The printing press was not necessary for Christianity any more than the internet is now. Only Jesus and a community of believers was required: Jesus and the Mystical Body of Christ was needed. It's also quite nice that the Church has a way to settle disputes with the Bishops as time and history introduce new issues regarding faith and morals. No other Church has that capability but the one that Jesus founded on a rock named Peter, who happened to setup shop in Rome. Somehow the faith starts a new fire every few years. And the fire always irritates the culture, and oddly enough, what irritates American culture is not the same as what irritates African culture, where in America the Church is hated for it's sexual teaching on chastity, and in Africa it's appreciated for it's sexual teaching on chastity. Americans, in classic form, just assume Africans are childlike. This has not changed, folks. Progressives in America preach sermons that treat Africa as less advanced because they adhere to traditional marriage and family arrangements. The condescension toward Africa today is as bad, if not worse, than it was from the 1500s through the Enlightenment. So which nation is more lost? Is it Nigeria or Uganda? Is it America? The answer is: all of them. America is a sheep that's fallen into a gorge in need of being found. But it's not special in that sense; every nation has its sins, just like every person does. If anything feels good, it is to be counter-cultural. What teenager doesn't want to rebel? But what is odd is that obedience to God is the ultimate rebellion, but it's against sin and the world. Rebellion against God is easy, undemanding, cliche. Rebellion against the flesh and the devil? That's freedom. That is timeless. To remain fully alive, body and soul, and seek union with the Creator is a fad that never dies because at the root, we desire God like we desire food. Jesus and his Church have been the unlikely underdog from the beginning and these two still are today. God has set things up this way. Why? I don't know, but what a joy to be a part of the team that calls itself sinners, who eat and give thanks together, who receive the Eucharist, the Body of Christ. The Reformation, the Enlightenment, the German anti-Catholic culture war, French existentialism, Americanism, Marxist atheism, Postmodernism, and technocratic utopianism - these are all different versions, different ways, of rejecting God. Our desire to eat from the tree of knowledge manifests in many ways, with each generation in competition with the prior one. They are various sides of the same set of dice. In my own confused journey through the chaff of modern ideas, of all these, I find that the Enlightenment did more permanent damage than anything else. Why? Because that is what killed our idea of the soul and all things mysterious. It denies the supernatural. At the very least, the Reformation still held on to the soul and God, but the unbelievers told us there was no soul, and it's hard to argue with dead people and academic scholarship that preaches more than it teaches. The bias in academia becomes glaringly obvious as we shove off from the shore further from the 19th and 20th centuries. There is a laziness in academics now that assumes historical and textual criticism is unassailable, that tradition has nothing important to say. The Reformation's disgust with tradition led to the dumping of all capital-T “Tradition,” and if I learned anything at all from Fiddler on the Roof, it's that Tradition is valuable. The death of wonder and enchantment is the greatest tragedy of the last five hundred years of human history. Death of belief in the soul is tragic for atheists because even if you fell for the lie, you still have a soul and just need to get back in touch with God to have him pull the string and turn your light on again. You have to get your soul out of coat-check and write a bad review of the devil's bar service. Recall that the devil is allowed to tempt and test us, and it is on us to muster the courage to leave the casino. That is what God wants us to do: to ask for help, to fight for faith, goodness, and truth. If you haven't experienced soul death, or the perception of soul death (because your soul is there even if you don't believe it), consider yourself blessed. You are blessed with the gift of faith. Literally. You are in cooperation with God's grace, and he has chosen you, and you have answered. Faith is the greatest gift we can receive, but it requires surrender and action. The good news, really, the greatest news, is that soul death is not a real thing. Just as atheists mock God as a kind of Santa Claus, I mock atheists' unbelief in the soul, because the joke is actually on them. It's just not a funny joke, it's sad. You have a soul. You may not believe it. But that's because much time is spent in convincing you that God and the devil are not real. You may accept the idea of a soul, but reject God and the devil. But all three exist. Losing your sense of the soul is the greatest tragedy of a life. If you've already lost that connection, I'm sorry. Start today in earnest to get it back, beginning with the simple prayer of request: “God, help me be willing to be willing.” Or you can say, “God, I want to believe, help my unbelief.” In your de-programming from the modern cult of unbelief, that's the diet you have to start on in order to get you back on solid spiritual food. Because God has a sense of humor, if or when you reconnect with your soul, it will be the greatest awakening you can possibly have. With all spiritual physics, you have to do down to go up. You have to die to be reborn. This is how it works.The non-believers like Voltaire, Rousseau, Locke, Hume, Whitman, and Jefferson severed the soul from the body. For many years, they kind of pussy-footed around the issue, with people like Descartes still clinging to belief while he killed the soul. Then later Hume and others just came out and said, “There is no soul!” That's why we have bold atheists today just declaring it, like Yuval Harari and every middle schooler on TikTok. If there was ever a “spirit murder,” as anti-racists like to talk about today, it is not what happens in public school with white male teachers. But it did happen by white men. They are right about that. Truly, the modern scapegoat, a.k.a. White Males, performed the greatest spirit murder of all time. But I'm not talking about what modern atheists are talking about when they talk about “spirit.” I suspect that most modern people don't even know what a spirit is (to find out yourself, listen to this Lord of Spirits episode). No, the real “spirit murder” happened from the white guys of the Enlightenment. The “death of God” declarations from the 19th and 20th century all came from white Europeans and Americans and Russians, so as far as I'm concerned, a spiritual genocide happened that is still being felt across the West. But then there was a “body murder” as well, which happened in the Reformation. What do I mean by that? I'm talking about the idea of “faith alone.” When “faith alone” became the basis for salvation, the body was cut off from the soul. So we had one group deny the soul in the Enlightenment, and the Reformers kill the body with faith alone. How? What am I talking about?Because we no longer needed a body. God was all in our head and heart. We can be saved just by laying on the couch. A brain in a vat kept alive by electrodes can be saved by “faith alone.” A software program can emit a string of text that fulfills the requirements of “faith alone.” With “faith alone,” our soul doesn't have much need for this lump of fat, muscle, blood, bone and cartilage. With faith alone, religion moved out of the physical world and took up residence in the ether, the mystical mind. There is much I'd like to go into right here about the Eucharist, but briefly, let me just say that the reason Protestant churches are dying is quite different from the drop in attendance from Catholic churches. The reason Protestant churches are shrinking is because they have always just been “Four walls and a sermon,” and if there is one thing that the internet has shined a light on is that, “sermon alone” does not make a church. It makes for a show. It's just entertainment. Whereas physical Sacraments, like Confession and the Eucharist, require the body to come along. But faith alone requires no works, so why leave the house? Why bother, when you can watch the best preacher in America from your house? Literally, a brain hooked up to a computer can do all that is required of a Protestant. I'm sorry if it sounds cruel, but we're not that far away from brain-vats and wetware, so let that by my prophecy. See, a brain cannot consume the Eucharist, which is why Jesus is so amazing - no matter how we try to box him in, he always rises over us. However, let me back up from bashing the Protestants. The Reformation axe caused less damage than the Enlightenment. Again, I have not come to bury Luther, nor to praise him. To me, the loss of the soul was far more damaging, because as soon as the soul is gone, so is God, along with the devil, and so is the meaning of life. After I had moved on from Catholicism, I wandered about, but the situation felt precarious, as if I were living on a ridge, with infinitely steep sides. Along the ridge I saw a tiny table and a chair at a mysterious little two-dimensional restaurant. The menu had two options. The first option on the menu was simple. Atheism. It had some fancy garnishes, like agnosticism or positivism, but atheism was the entree. The second option was Faith Alone, but it came with a million options, none of which appealed. I could see other people at their little tables, trying to decide, and trying not to look into the Big Empty that was on both sides of the ridge. Many wanted to choose Faith Alone, but the description of it went on for miles. A scroll rolled out of the menu and dangled over the cliff edge. It wasn't clear what Faith Alone was. It seemed like it could be whatever you wanted it to be, and I never saw any food delivered to those who ordered it. Eventually, I realized that there was nothing to eat. It was a trick. There was no food. This was a two-dimensional restaurant. There was no bread at all. Everything on the Faith Alone menu was a symbol, not real food. Some people were pretending to eat from empty plates, laughing, and taking drinks from empty cups. Many ended up ordering Atheism because of the confusion, and then the waiter just came and dumped the people off their chair, over the cliff into the Big Empty. That, too, provided no food. At least falling into the abyss provided an initial thrill. But there was still no food, there was just waiting to hitting bottom and feeling lost. It took me a long time to realize that there was a second restaurant, one with art on the walls and music, even statues (again, not for worshipping!) and there was actual food, real food there. There were four walls and a sermon, but also a meal. It was three dimensional, too. Actually, it was four dimensions. Maybe five. Honestly, I don't even know how many dimensions there are yet. That's the exciting thing about it. There's just so much to discover, and it's timeless, endless, eternal. It's better than any drug. It's wholeness. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.whydidpetersink.com

Episode SummaryErin and Rachel explore the mess of gender and culture in Mulan (1998), Disney's adaptation of an ancient Chinese legend. The plucky heroine promotes the “Girl Power” feminism that has fueled the female protagonists of most Disney Renaissance films, but does so in a way that manages to completely misrepresent Chinese culture and values. Spoiler alert: Chinese audiences did not love this movie. Episode BibliographyAbbott, J. (1998, June 21). FLORIDA ANIMATION STUDIO COMES OF AGE WITH MULAN. The Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved December 1, 2022, from https://web.archive.org/web/20181119022905/https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1998-06-21-9806190194-story.htmlBancroft, T., & Cook, B. (Directors). (1998). Mulan [Film]. Walt Disney Pictures.Červinka, P. (2015, April 21). The Making of Mulan. YouTube. Retrieved December 6, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zHSJBwhuUkChen, R., Chen, Z., & Yang, Y. (2021). The creation and operation strategy of Disney's Mulan: Cultural appropriation and cultural discount. Sustainability, 13(5), doi: 10.3390/su13052751Davis, A. M. (2007). Good girls and wicked witches: Women in Disney's feature animation. John Libbey & Company.Davis, A. M. (2014). Handsome heroes and vile villains: Men in Disney's feature animation. John Libbey & Company.Dong, L. (2010). Mulan's legend and legacy in China and the United States. Temple University Press. Ebert, R. (1998, June 19). Mulan movie review & film summary (1998). Roger Ebert. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/mulan-1998Elise. (2019). Who made the Universal Studios theme music? Quora. Retrieved December 15, 2022, from https://www.quora.com/Who-made-the-Universal-Studios-theme-musicEller, C. (1998, June 12). Bridled Optimism. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-jun-12-fi-59077-story.htmlEngland, D. E., Descartes, L., & Collier-Meek, M. A. (2011). Gender role portrayal and the Disney princesses. Sex Roles, 64, 555-567. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-9930-7Failes, I. (2020, September 26). The CG side of the animated 'Mulan'. befores & afters. Retrieved December 16, 2022, from https://beforesandafters.com/2020/09/26/the-cg-side-of-the-animated-mulan/Fleeman, M. (1998, July 12). World Tibet Network News: Hollywood hopes more movies will follow Clinton to China. Canada Tibet Committee. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://web.archive.org/web/20110705114829/http://www.tibet.ca/en/newsroom/wtn/archive/old?y=1998&m=7&p=12_2Gleiberman, O. (1998, June 19). Mulan | EW.com. Entertainment Weekly. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://ew.com/article/1998/06/19/mulan-3/Grady, C. (2020, September 4). The history of Mulan, from a 6th-century ballad to the live-action Disney movie. Vox. https://www.vox.com/culture/21412785/mulan-history-original-chinese-ballad-disneyHaynes, S. (2020, September 4). The controversial origins of the story behind Mulan. TIME. https://time.com/5881064/mulan-real-history/Heritage Learning- Kallispell, MT. (2016, November 2). Fa Mulan. YouTube. Retrieved December 16, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsaE6CgW4UkHoffmann, E. S. (2019). Diversity dissected: Intersectional socialization in Disney's Aladdin, Mulan, and The Princess and the Frog. Leviathan: Interdisciplinary Journal in English, 5, 60-126.King, S. (1998, June 25). Fa, a Long Long Way to Come. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved December 1, 2022, from https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-jun-25-ca-63261-story.htmlKung, J. (2019). Disney's Mulan and unlocking queer Asian-American masculinity. sprinkle: An Undergraduate Journal of Feminist and Queer Studies, 12, 40-49. Kurtenbach, E. (1999, February 8). World Tibet Network News: China Allows Disney Film Screening. Canada Tibet Committee. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://web.archive.org/web/20110610074601/http://www.tibet.ca/en/newsroom/wtn/archive/old?y=1999&m=2&p=8_5Kurtti, J. (2020). The Art of Mulan: A Disney Editions Classic. Disney Editions.Labi, N. (1998, June 29). Girl Power. TIME. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://web.archive.org/web/20080415124047/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,988643-1,00.htmlLabi, N. (2001, June 24). Girl Power. TIME. Retrieved December 16, 2022, from https://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,139472,00.htmlLando, J. (1999, March 19). BBC News | ENTERTAINMENT | Chinese unimpressed with Disney's Mulan. BBC News Home. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/299618.stmLangfitt, F. (1999, May 3). Disney magic fails 'Mulan' in China. Baltimore Sun. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://web.archive.org/web/20140224180211/http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1999-05-03/features/9905030250_1_disney-s-mulan-sui-dynasty-chineseMartin, S. K. (2013, March 12). Tony Bancroft on 'Mulan': 'I Want to Bring Christian-Based Values to All My Work'. Christian Post. Retrieved November 27, 2022, from https://www.christianpost.com/news/tony-bancroft-on-mulan-i-want-to-bring-christian-based-values-to-all-my-work-90987/Maslin, J. (1998, June 19). FILM REVIEW; A Warrior, She Takes on Huns and Stereotypes (Published 1998). The New York Times. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/1998/06/19/movies/film-review-a-warrior-she-takes-on-huns-and-stereotypes.htmlMulan. (n.d.). Box Office Mojo. Retrieved December 15, 2022, from https://www.boxofficemojo.com/release/rl3664086529/weekend/Mulan (1998) - Full Cast & Crew. (n.d.). IMDb. Retrieved December 16, 2022, from https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120762/fullcredits?ref_=tt_ov_wr_smMulan (Jerry Goldsmith). (2007, July 7). Filmtracks. Retrieved November 21, 2022, from https://www.filmtracks.com/titles/mulan.htmlNess, M. (2016, March 31). Girl Power, A Cricket, and a Dragon: Disney's Mulan. Tor.com. Retrieved November 27, 2022, from https://www.tor.com/2016/03/31/girl-power-a-cricket-and-a-dragon-disneys-mulan/Noyer, J. (n.d.). Mulan (1998 film). Wikipedia. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulan_(1998_film)Noyer, J. (2008, August 14). Tony Bancroft balances the yin and the yang in directing Mulan – Animated Views. Animated Views. Retrieved December 1, 2022, from https://animatedviews.com/2008/tony-bancroft-balances-the-yin-and-the-yang-in-directing-mulan/Romano, A. (2017, October 10). McDonald's Szechuan Sauce inspired a Rick and Morty fan meltdown. Vox. Retrieved December 16, 2022, from https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/10/10/16448816/rick-and-morty-szechuan-sauce-backlashSiskel, G. (1998, June 18). MULDER, SCULLY MAKE A GOOD TEAM – Chicago Tribune. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1998-06-19-9806190112-story.htmlTuran, K. (1998, June 19). 'Mulan': Formula With a New Flavor. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved November 5, 2022, from https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1998-jun-19-ca-61328-story.htmlVHS BTS. (2019, March 22). From Legend to Life The Making of Mulan. YouTube. Retrieved December 6, 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUMh3si5lxsWang, Z. (2020, July 10). Cultural “Authenticity” as a Conflict-Ridden Hypotext: Mulan (1998), Mulan Joins the Army (1939), and a Millennium-Long Intertextual Metamorphosis. Arts, 9(3), 78. MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts9030078Wang, Z. (2021, December 6). From Mulan (1998) to Mulan (2020): Disney Conventions, Cross-Cultural Feminist Intervention, and a Compromised Progress. Arts, 11(1), 5. MDPI. https://doi.org/10.3390/arts11010005Ward, A.R. (2002). Mouse morality: The rhetoric of Disney animated film. University of Texas Press.Yin, J. (2011). Popular culture and public imaginary: Disney vs. Chinese stories of Mulan. Javnost – The Public, 18(1), 53-74.  Doi: 10.1080/13183222.2011.11009051 Zhao, X. J. (2020, October 24). Everything culturally right and wrong with Mulan 1998 [Video]. YouTube.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SHC7CnmErM

Quelle place pour l'Afrique dans l'œuvre des auteurs et interprètes gabonais ? C'est le thème d'un ouvrage collectif paru tout récemment aux éditions Descartes et Compagnie. Un livre supervisé par Flavien Enongoué, maître assistant de philosophie politique à l'Université Omar Bongo à Libreville et diplomate, puisqu'il est actuellement ambassadeur du Gabon à Rome, après avoir occupé ce poste à Paris. Cet ouvrage de plus de 300 pages, qu'il a supervisé, est intitulé L'Afrique dans la chanson gabonaise. RFI : Comment est née l'idée de cet ouvrage collectif ? Flavien Enongoué : En fait, quand j'étais à Paris, en mission, j'avais sollicité un certain nombre de spécialistes pour faire une compilation sur les auteurs musicaux gabonais qui ont chanté sur l'Afrique. Et cela n'a pas prospéré, mais comme je suis un auteur, je me suis dit autant s'orienter vers l'écriture. Et c'est comme ça que j'ai mobilisé un certain nombre d'universitaires pour finalement aboutir à cet ouvrage collectif L'Afrique dans la chanson gabonaise, qui est sorti deux ans plus tard. Les artistes gabonais se sont-ils montrés réceptifs très tôt à l'idée africaine ? Oui, à la différence des hommes politiques qui sont considérés comme portés vers le nationalisme, les auteurs musicaux gabonais se sont montrés très attentifs à l'idée africaine, et très tôt d'ailleurs puisque l'un des plus emblématiques d'entre eux, Pierre Claver Akendengué, a été considéré comme l'artiste africain par excellence. Justement Pierre Claver Akendengué, c'est l'un des deux grands artistes auquel est consacré ce livre, parce que finalement il est question dans cet ouvrage de deux artistes prénommés Pierre Claver tous les deux. La première partie porte effectivement sur Pierre Claver Akendengué, dont on connait des chansons emblématiques : « Awana W'Africa », « Africa obota », ainsi de suite. Et puis, il y a Pierre Claver Zeng qui a une chanson emblématique « Afrika », mais il y en a d'autres aussi parce que la troisième partie de l'ouvrage est consacrée à des auteurs comme Mackjoss, Annie Flore Batchiellilys, Aziz'Inanga, Alexandre Sambat. Puis, il y a des jeunes : par exemple, nous avons essayé d'avoir Lord Ekomy Ndong « Où sont les lions ». Et là, c'est le rap, le rythme vraiment nouveau. Qu'est-ce qui caractérise cette chanson gabonaise aujourd'hui ? Il est difficile d'avoir un marqueur identitaire qui puisse caractériser comme ça un peu la musique gabonaise. Il y a ce qu'on appelle la musique « tradi-moderne », qui s'appuie finalement sur des rythmes traditionnels, mais mélangés à des rythmes modernes comme la rumba, le makossa. C'est cette musique « tradi-moderne » qui est la marque de fabrique de la musique gabonaise. Est-ce que les auteurs et les interprètes gabonais, comme Annie Flore Batchiellilys, sont reconnus à leur juste valeur dans leur pays ? C'est un peu le problème qui est posé : la place de l'artiste, de la culture dans la société gabonaise. Quand on les entend, ce n'est pas évident parce qu'il y a les combats pour les droits d'auteur. Il faut être Pierre Claver Akendengué pour pouvoir sortir du lot. Il y en a d'autres, Patience Dabany, ainsi de suite. Mais, c'est un combat de longue haleine qui n'est pas simplement particulier au Gabon. Mais ces auteurs sont Africains non pas simplement parce qu'ils ont chanté africain, mais parce qu'une bonne partie d'entre eux ont été accueillis en Afrique. Le combat reste d'actualité, celui de (permettre aux) artistes de vivre de leur art, mais ils ne sont pas très nombreux (à pouvoir le faire) et c'est valable partout dans le monde.

Neste podcast: Clóvis de Barros Filho propõe a reflexão sobre o Eu e a imensidão do universo, passando por pensadores como Espinoza e Descartes.

I "Filosoferna: Vetenskaplig revolution och upplysning" får läsaren stifta bekantskap med portalfigurer som Descartes och Spinoza och hur de bröt med det förflutna. Professor Svante Nordin är en av Sveriges främsta idéhistoriker och har skrivit åtskilliga verk om filosofins historia. Han samtalar med Adam Cwejman om hur hela den moderna världens tänkande uppstod.

Hello Interactors,As winter solstice nears in the northern hemisphere, this week brings a close to my explorations of economics. Next up is human behavior. I decided to stitch together this season's economics posts into a single composite narrative. Upon reflection, I see a path my posts tend to take though it's never premeditated. At least to my knowledge! In keeping with the theme of this post, it seems the uncertain path my essays take is a form of emergence.As interactors, you're special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You're also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let's go…THE TREE OF MORAL SYMPATHY‘Tis the season to be jolly, and with it comes this decision to volley. Real tree or fake tree? Or no tree at all. Such is the dilemma many find themselves in, at least in those places dominated by Christian tradition or influenced by Christian culture. The ‘real or fake' Christmas tree analysis is how I was first introduced to ideas related to a circular economy.It came through a class called “Sustainable Transportation from a Systems Perspective” as part of my master's degree program. We were introduced to a 2009 study titled, “Comparative Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Artificial vs Natural Christmas Tree”. It came from a sustainable development consultancy in Montreal. Life Cycle Analysis looks at the environmental impact of the full lifecycle of a product or service from ‘cradle to grave.'While the United Nations' International Standardization Organization has determined a standard for how to conduct an LCA (ISO 14040), the interpretation of results can often include creative interpretations and conclusions.This is particularly true if the LCA is conducted by a corporation or industry that may benefit from favorable LCA results. And you probably won't be surprised to learn most LCAs are conducted or funded by private companies. LCA's started popping up in the 1960s, but now they're commonplace as companies jostle to present themselves as being environmentally sustainable and socially just through responsible and ethical governance – ESG. But measurements, evaluations, and analysis to determine an ESG score, like LCA's, are also open to interpretation and manipulation. Consequently, ESG has lost its luster.Sadly, the concept of a ‘circular economy' is following a similar path. Circular economies take limited raw materials used to make goods and loops them back into the economy instead of throwing them away. The idea is to reduce, reuse, and recycle the inputs of an LCA and then repair the outputs to extend their lifecycle. But the term and practice of ‘circular economy', like ESG, has also become diffuse and trendy.A group of Industrial Ecologists, people who track the physical resource flows of industrial and consumer systems at different spatial scales, wrote in 2021,“In seeking to maintain a growth-based economy, critics argue, the circular economy ‘tinkers with the current modus operandi' of “consumerism, extractivism and (liberal) capitalism, while bearing the unrealistic expectation that the individual consumer will be able to mobilize largescale change. The circular economy is considered to encourage a reboot for capitalism that requires no radical change to institutions, infrastructures, and markets.”Calls for radical change concerning capitalism are strewn throughout history. The naturalist and scientist Alexander von Humboldt warned in 1800 of human induced climate change. He observed widespread systemic negative ecological impacts originated with infectious colonialism fueled by European and American profit seeking capitalists and imperialists. Between the abduction and trade of human slaves from Africa and local Indigenous populations to the overworking of soils to grow monocultural crops, Humboldt would not have been handing out top ESG scores to those very institutions who funded his explorations around the world.Humboldt remained critical of colonialism and the brand of capitalism that came with it until the day he died. Ten years after Humboldt died another future critic of capitalistic colonialism was born, Mahatma Gandhi. By the time he was 76, in 1945, he called on his economist friend, Joseph Kumarappa, better known as J. C. Kumarappa, to further his ideas on Gandhian economics – a kind of circular economy.Like Humboldt and other naturalists, Kumarappa observed the cyclical patterns in nature and sought economic practices that echoed them. He advocated for maintaining an economy of continuity and circularity with nature. Using the bee as a metaphor, he wrote,“The bees etc. while gathering the nectar and pollen from these plants for their own good, fertilize the flowers and the grains, that are formed in consequence, again become the source of life of the next generation of plants.”Kumarappa studied at Columbia University under the progressive economist Edwin Seligman – a critic of exploitive forms of capitalism himself. Seligman encouraged Kumarappa to further his own ideas and critiques of traditional capitalistic economic orthodoxy. And he did. He wrote, “The Western plans are material centred. That is to say, they want to exploit all resources.”Kumarappa and Gandhi also observed Western plans are to exploit all human resources for labor as well. In this regard, Kumarappa found inspiration in elements of Marxism. Marxism also provided a sociological explanation for why some Indians, Kumarappa included, rose to higher social class more than others. Though I suspect the passivist Gandhi probably would not approve of Marxist calls for civil disobedience. Marx himself was hardly socially obedient.SHUN THE VICES OF PRODUCTIONSWEISEWhen Karl Marx was a freshman at a university in Bonn, Germany he was thrown in jail for drunken disorderly behavior. He joined a poetry club that was a front for a group of young radical's intent on overthrowing the local government. There was also class conflict. Marx, the son of a modestly wealthy Jewish father, was considered a ‘plebian' by the so-called ‘true Prussians and aristocrats.' It got personal and led to a dual resulting in a bullet glancing the forehead of Karl Marx.Marx went on to study law and philosophy in Berlin and was a prolific writer. After leaving college, Marx became a journalist exposing elements of power structures present in the Christian led Prussian government. He believed their oppression suppressed the individual's right to reason, engage, and speak with freedom of thought. His writing was radical enough to get him kicked out of the country.He fled to Paris but was soon kicked out of France as well. He settled in England writing as a European correspondent for the New York Daily Tribune. He immersed himself in the work of the Scottish moral philosopher Adam Smith in the reading room of the British Museum. He also witnessed the negative working conditions and poverty in burgeoning London factories that he attributed to Adam Smith's single publication on economics, The Wealth of Nations.Marx's primary critique was summed up in a single German word: Produktionsweise. This can be translated as "the distinctive way of producing" or what is commonly called the capitalist mode of production. Marx believed this system of capitalism distinctly exists for the production and accumulation of private capital through private wealth. Private wealth accumulation allows for the purchase of land, buildings, natural resources, or machines, to produce and sell goods and services. This creates a wealth asymmetry between those who accumulate the wealth and capital and those laborers needed to produce the goods. This asymmetry yields profits that contribute to more private wealth accumulation which allows for the purchase of more capital. The rich get richer, while the poor get poorer.But a closer reading on the moral philosophies of Adam Smith suggests Marx may have exaggerated the emphasis Smith had on the negative effects of industrial age economics. Reading the work of Adam Smith, and of his teacher and mentor Francis Hutcheson, reveals a good amount of the importance of sympathy for others who have suffered injustice. Smith writes, “All men, even the most stupid and unthinking, abhor fraud, perfidy, and injustice, and delight to see them punished.” He goes on to articulate the importance of justice for a society, and its economy, to be healthy and wealthy while recognizing few in power act to remedy injustices. He says, “But few men have reflected upon the necessity of justice to the existence of society, how obvious soever that necessity may appear to be.”Smith envisioned, as he wrote in Wealth of Nations, that “No society can surely be flourishing and happy of which by far the greater part of the numbers are poor and miserable.” A great deal of emphasis has been placed on two words that appear in a single instance in Smith's popular book – “invisible hand”. But they first appeared in his earlier book The Theory of Moral Sentiments where he describes a selfish landowner's moral decision to share a portion of his crop yield with the farmers who produced it. He writes, “They are led by an invisible hand to make nearly the same distribution of the necessaries of life…”Economics soon took a turn from Smith's more prosaic philosophical economic interpretations. Instead of Smithonian ruminations on the moral justice of the state, liberty of free markets constrained by government, and the benevolent necessity of a cooperative societal collective, attention turned to the quantitative measuring of economic growth amidst a growing global British political economy. In 1862 W. S. Jevons published an essay titled "Brief Account of a General Mathematical Theory of Political Economy" and declare in an 1872 essay on principles of economics that its study "must be mathematical simply because it deals with quantities". Soon economics reduced complex human behavior, like the subjectivity of the value of a good or service, to a simple variable in an algebraic expression.THE ONLY THING CERTAIN IS UNCERTAINTYThe atomization, classification, mechanization, and quantification of complex naturally occurring phenomena had long been popular with European Enlightenment thinkers. Isaac Newton believed in preformation – the idea that a Christian god had preformed every past, current, and future living being and packaged them up in miniature form into the male sperm. Every organ, limb, and joint were like components of a watch packed neatly in a microscopic vessel waiting to be released through the mystical act of intercourse.He, Rene Descartes, and others believed everything in the universe could be explained mathematically. The quest for certainty came both from these influential thinkers, but also religious authority. This came at a time of social revolutions, debates, and contestations over human rights, freedoms of religion, and ‘we the people.' Mechanists married the certainty of mathematics with the certainty of their Christian god to explain the world. If nature and society lacked the linear precession of clocks, compasses, and mathematical calculations, they feared such uncertainty would unravel societal order and unleash chaos.This video shows Richard Feynman lecturing on the importance of solving complex problems though a ‘Babylonian' approach. This is in contrast with pure mathematics, as derived by Descartes and Euclid, that yields universally consistent solutions within the context of an abstracted world.This love affair with mathematical algebraic abstraction and certitude seduced economists of the last three centuries. But one prominent British economist in the 1930s questioned this classical approach, John Maynard Keynes. Keynes was no stranger to mathematics; he was awarded a scholarship to study it at Cambridge. But he believed it was being dogmatized, misused, and misconstrued to bolster the legitimacy of economics by wrapping it in perceived certainty, logic, and accuracy. In his 1936 groundbreaking book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, he offers this criticism of traditional economics:“our criticism of the accepted classical theory of economics has consisted not so much in finding logical flaws in its analysis as in pointing out that its tacit assumptions are seldom or never satisfied, with the result that it cannot solve the economic problems of the actual world.”Instead he called for “at least a partial attempt to incorporate the fact of uncertainty into an economic theory.”He must have been on to something. Every capitalistic government in the world suffering from the 1930s depression instituted his policies until the 1950s. After World War II dominant economic theory shifted to the United States and the work of Milton Friedman and away from the recently deceased Keynes. Friedman erased the progress Keynes had made by embracing uncertainty in his economic models and returned to classical economic theory that deceptively models certainty. These theories assume humans act rationally and possesses perfect information that inform predictable decisions. These ‘new' or neo-classical economists reduced the complexity and uncertainty of life to satisfy their calculations.Economics cannot be explained with simple algebraic formulas. Complex economies call for an understanding of complexity. Enter complexity economics. Complexity economics is the application of complexity science to economics. Instead of assuming reductionist states of equilibria not found in the real world, complexity economics treats economics as a complex system of interdependent interactions. Out of these nested relationships emerge spontaneous uncertain outcomes that then loop back into the system in unpredictable ways.One of the pioneers in complexity economics, Brian Arthur, writes, “Complexity economics thus sees the economy as in motion, perpetually “computing” itself – perpetually construction itself anew.” This approach is reminiscent of John Maynard Keynes, but also of Alexander von Humboldt and other naturalists of the Enlightenment. It seems the history of the study and embrace of complex natural systems and spontaneous emergence of uncertain actions from an ‘invisible hand' also perpetually constructs itself anew. Perhaps the looping nature of complexity in economics over time should be the central focus of what we now call ‘circular' economy.Still, the attraction of certainty never escapes us. Nature always seeks efficiencies, and we humans are part of nature. Perhaps this explains why many people are attracted to fake Christmas trees. These take the essence of a complex natural organism and reduce it to atomized parts that can be predictably assembled on a yearly cycle. A neo-classical Christmas tree. But as it happens, at least according to that 2009 LCA, like neo-classical economics, the fake tree has the bigger negative environmental footprint. Not by a lot, and certainly not compared to a daily driving habit, but it seems when it comes to getting a Christmas tree, we're best to embrace the uncertainties and imperfections that come with finding that ‘perfect' tree. Our family chooses to be like the naturalists and marvel at the complexity of the branches of a real tree and embrace its imperfections and uncertainties. Perhaps it's time our economic models do the same. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

{REDIFFUSION} de l'épisode #182 du 22 mars 2021***Série Best-Of***Anne Ghesquière reçoit dans Métamorphose Bruno Giuliani, docteur en philosophie et maitre en biochimie. Il est un spécialiste du philosophe néerlandais Spinoza dont il a reformulé l'Ethique pour notre temps. Nous évoquerons entre autres l'éveil de la joie avec Spinoza ! - Épisode #182 Dans cet épisode avec Bruno Giuliani, j'aborderai les thèmes suivants :Spinoza a été un visionnaire,"le plus lumineux des lumières", dis-tu, et précurseur d'une révolution des consciences post-cartésianisme, quel est son héritage aujourd'hui ?Spinoza réfute l'idée que l'humain est l'union de deux substances : l'esprit et le corps sont une seule et même substance ?Comment comprendre l'essence de la nature humaine selon Spinoza à travers les désirs et passions et les vertus et sagesses ?Quelle est la définition de la joie chez Spinoza ?La philosophie pour toi n'a de sens que si on l'incarne ? Quelle est ton expérience à ce sujet ?Les sages que tu étudies arrivent à la même conclusion : ouvrir le cœur à travers une pratique corporelle. Quel est le rôle du corps pour accéder au bonheur ? Qui est mon invité de la semaine, Bruno Giuliani ?Bruno Giuliani est docteur en philosophie, maitre en biochimie et grand spécialiste de Baruch Spinoza. Il est auteur des livres «Le bonheur avec Spinoza, l'éthique reformulée pour notre temps» et «L'éveil de la joie, du plaisir à la béatitude», disponible aux Editions Almora. Retrouvez Bruno Giuliani sur son site : http://www.brunogiuliani.comQuelques citations du podcast avec Bruno Giuliani :“Spinoza est le philosophe de la liberté qui invite, après Descartes, à ne se fier qu'à sa propre intuition et ne plus obéir à aucun dogme extérieur""L'univers à tout moment réalise ce qu'il est mais sans tendre vers un but, c'est à dire que le but de la vie, c'est vivre""La matière et l'esprit sont deux manifestations d'une substance qui n'est ni matière ni esprit, qui est une source...Rejoignez-nous sur notre nouveau site Internet et abonnez-vous à notre Newsletter https://www.metamorphosepodcast.com/Soutenez notre podcast en rejoignant dès maintenant la Tribu Métamorphose : www.patreon.com/metamorphoseRetrouvez Métamorphose, le podcast qui éveille la conscience sur Apple Podcast / Spotify / Google Podcasts / Deezer / YouTube / SoundCloud / CastBox/ TuneIn.Suivez l'actualité des épisodes Métamorphose Podcast sur Instagram, découvrez l'invité de la semaine et gagnez des surprises ;-)InstagramFacebookBonne écoutePhoto DR Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

17th century philosopher, Baruch Spinoza, wrote, “nothing exists from whose nature some effect does not follow.”  Spinoza, a philosophical child of Descartes', sought to draw out the logical implications of Descartes' philosophical revolution.  Monism, pantheism, and Spinoza on this week's episode of Red Letter Philosophy.

Go subscribe to Theory Underground Audiobooks!Dave is releasing an audiobook chapter of Karl Jasper's The Idea of the University each day until Christmas! If you find this work interesting and would like to go deeper, then sign up for the course Dave, Bryan, and Ann are teaching at http://theory-underground.com/courses/tiotuThe course begins January 14th, 2023Credits:Songs made available by FMA:Audiorezout - Winter Morning Scott Holmes Music - Silent Night

Je dagelijkse portie muzikale verwondering. Welkom in mijn wonderkamer, vol muziek, verhalen en voorwerpen. Een muzikale reis door eeuwen, windstreken en genres. ‘Utrecht, 1636' Over Lawes, Descartes en Saenredam Meer zien? Klik hier (https://www.nporadio4.nl/klassiek/podcasts/9b75b58c-b59e-4742-ab29-39ff76d8f106/dit-hoor-je-deze-week-in-franks-klassieke-wonderkamer-week-50-12-t-m-16-december) William Lawes Consort Set A 5  Hesperion XXI (album: Lawes Consort Sets in Five & Six Parts) Franks Klassieke Wonderkamer is straks niet meer via de Bach van de Dag feed te beluisteren. Niks missen? Abonneer je dan op de podcast Franks Klassieke Wonderkamer.

durée : 00:40:00 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - Michelle Perrot aborde la place des femmes dans l'écriture à travers le cas de George Sand, illustrant les difficultés des femmes à franchir la barrière des lettres, ou à être peintres ou musiciennes dans un monde que les hommes veulent dominer. Première diffusion les 17 et 18 mars 2005Ainsi les femmes ont une âme ; mais ont-elles un esprit ? "Oui", dit François Poullain de La Barre, un des premiers à affirmer l'égalité des sexes au XVIIe siècle. "Oui, dit Descartes, l'esprit n'a pas de sexe". Mais les femmes sont-elles susceptibles de créer ? "Non", dit-on assez généralement. Les grecs font du "pneuma" - le souffle créateur - la seule propriété de l'homme. Auguste Comte voit les femmes seulement capables de reproduire, comme Freud qui leur confèrent néanmoins l'invention du tressage et du tissage. Certains donnent à cette déficience un fondement biologique : un cerveau plus petit, plus léger. On dote généralement les femmes d'autres qualités : intuition, générosité. Elles sont médiums, muses, copistes, interprètes... sans plus. Écrire, penser, peindre, sculpter, composer de la musique ; tout cela n'était pas pour ces "imitatrices".Épisode 14 : Femmes et création : écrireMais revenons à la plus classique des frontières : l'écriture. Écrire pour les femmes ne fut pas chose facile ; leur écriture restait cantonnée au domaine privé : le courrier familial ou la comptabilité de la petite entreprise. Dans le concert de ceux qui n'aiment pas les femmes qui écrivent ; les conservateurs comme Joseph de Maistre, les libéraux comme Tocqueville, les républicains comme Michelet ou Zola. À propos de George Sand, certains aimaient à dire qu'elle avait "un clitoris gros comme nos verges", cultivant la misogynie graveleuse. George Sand nous servira d'exemple de la position toujours frontalière - même dans son cas - d'une femme écrivain. D'abord, par sa détermination. Elle avait, au couvent, la rage d'écrire et elle réalisa son ambition, contre l'avis des siens et notamment de sa belle-mère. Ensuite, par son choix d'un pseudonyme masculin. Notez que "George" ne comporte pas de "s" : est-ce un signe de volonté d'androgynie ? Cela est difficile à dire. Elle endosse sa masculinité - du moins dans sa vie professionnelle - et, chose rare, fait de son pseudonyme son patronyme.Épisode 15 : La vie d'artistePeindre, sculpter, composer de la musique, créer de l'art fut encore plus difficile qu'écrire. À cela, des raisons de fond : l'image et la musique sont des formes de création du monde. La musique surtout, langage des dieux. Les femmes y sont impropres. Comment pourraient-elles participer à cette mise en musique du monde, elles peuvent tout juste interpréter, être cantatrices par exemple. Elles peuvent peindre pour les leurs, créer des bouquets de fleurs, jouer au piano. Mais cette initiation à un usage privé de l'art ne devait mener ni a une profession, ni à la création. Tout juste en cas de besoin, une femme pouvait-elle donner des leçons de dessins ou de piano, fabriquer des objets ou copier des chefs-d'ouvres dans les galeries ou musées. Ces musées dont Baudelaire disait qu'ils étaient les seuls endroits convenables pour une femme.Par Michelle Perrot - Réalisation Pierrette Perrono

Hello Interactors,Last week we explored the role naturalists brought to a more open, flexible, and pragmatic approach to the Enlightenment. Today we expand on how our dominant economic ideology remains beholden to dogmatic, sterile, and abstract mathematical models the naturalists were trying to shake. One of the more popular figures in popularizing and perpetuating this pernicious economic perspective was Britain's Prime Minister, Margaret Thatcher. As interactors, you're special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You're also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let's go…Thank you for reading Interplace. This post is public so feel free to share it.THE TINA SCHEMAAs British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was gaining traction with her hardline policies many of her conservative colleagues thought she was too harsh. In response she began calling them ‘wets' which in Britain meant ‘inept, ineffectual, and effete'. She was famously proud of her resolute, often binary, moral convictions. In response to the economic disarray Britain was facing as she came to power, she said these words in a speech at a conservative women's conference in 1980,“There's no easy popularity in what we are proposing but it is fundamentally sound. Yet I believe people accept there's no real alternative…What's the alternative? To go on as we were before? All that leads to is higher spending. And that means more taxes, more borrowing, higher interest rates more inflation, more unemployment."The phrase “there is no alternative” became a refrain for Thatcher. It was used so often it prompted one the ‘wets', Norman St John-Stevas, to abbreviate it forming a retaliatory derogatory name for Thatcher – TINA. He, and other ‘wets', took to calling her ‘Tina'. He later wrote in a book that Thatcher saw "everything in black and white [but] the universe I inhabit is made up of many shades of grey".I suspect Thatcher was confident in her resoluteness because the neoclassical economists she relied on, both in the UK and the US, were themselves certain there was no alternative. Their confidence was, and still is, buoyed by the certainty that can come with the mathematics behind their economic models. But that certainty can be an illusion that can lead to delusion.Education researcher, Don Ambrose, says it can start early in math education and over time this “dogmatic thinking can trap professionals, policymakers, and others into perceiving only the sterile certainty of the surface of mathematics while remaining oblivious to its messy, creative inner workings.”He continues, “While mathematics provides us with a considerable amount of analytic precision it still is at least somewhat susceptible to the vagaries of the human mind and open to impressive creativity.”  He quotes the prominent economist Thomas Piketty who in his 2014 book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, saying,“For far too long economists have sought to define themselves in terms of their supposedly scientific methods. In fact, those methods rely on an immoderate use of mathematical models, which are frequently no more than an excuse for occupying the terrain and masking the vacuity of the content.”He says it can create a ‘scientific illusion' that ignores the messy realities that, again, Adam Smith viewed as essential to a healthy economy; a shared cultural understanding, a socially just labor market, and a trustworthy government.But even some mathematicians agree mathematics can lead one astray. The mathematician William Byers, who researches dynamical systems and the philosophy of mathematics, writes,“What we usually call mathematics—results, proofs, and structure—is the unambiguous face of the subject…[But] looking at mathematics as a human activity, as mind-dependent, forces one to confront the ambiguous dimension of math.”These are the very ‘shades of grey' the ‘wet' set Tory's unsuccessfully settled with Margaret ‘Tina' Thatcher. And the man Thatcher liked to blame for the economic mess she inherited was someone who would have agreed with the uncertainty these ‘wets' were pointing to – Britain's most famous 20th century economist, John Maynard Keynes.Keynes made a name for himself in the 1930s devising economic policies that proved to ease the effects of the depression that had wracked the world. His ideas were counter to neoclassical ideas, and those later championed by Thatcher. He believed, like Adam Smith, that markets should include some governmental intervention to minimize the adverse effects of recessions and depressions.Every capitalistic government in the world had instituted his policies until the 1950s, soon after he passed away. From that point until now, the neoclassical ideology of America's most famous 20th century economist, Milton Friedman, reigns supreme. A philosophy that promotes free-wheeling, free-trade, and free markets that are free of government restraint, and are backed by rigid and sterile mathematical and statistical models.Keynes was no stranger to mathematics; he was awarded a scholarship to study it at Cambridge. But he did believe that it was being dogmatized, misused, and misconstrued to bolster the legitimacy of economics by wrapping it in perceived certainty, logic, and accuracy. So much so, it led people to believe there is no alternative.In Keynes's 1936 groundbreaking book The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, he asserts this as his criticism of neoclassical economics.“our criticism of the accepted classical theory of economics has consisted not so much in finding logical flaws in its analysis as in pointing out that its tacit assumptions are seldom or never satisfied, with the result that it cannot solve the economic problems of the actual world.THE NEWTONIAN BABYLONIANKeynes's General Theory was to generalize existing neoclassical theories and methods. In other words, marry the ‘shades of grey' of the real world with existing mathematical methods and analysis. He was particularly focused, as much economic work is, on being able to predict economic outcomes in the future. A future that is uncertain. And with that, Keynes called for “at least a partial attempt to incorporate the fact of uncertainty into an economic theory.”He believed this required an approach that embraced the uncertainties of the real world as clues or observed evidence that could then be scrutinized with analysis, reason, and mathematics. One person he believed personified this approach was a man he idled, Isaac Newton. His thoughts were captured in a lecture he wrote to celebrate the life of Isaac Newton in 1946 but was unable to deliver. He died three months before the event.He wrote, “Newton was not the first of the age of reason. He was the last of the magicians, the last of the Babylonians and Sumerians…Why do I call him a magician? Because he looked on the whole universe and all that is in it as a riddle, as a secret which could be read by applying pure thought to certain evidence, certain mystic clues which God had laid about the world to allow a sort of philosopher's treasure hunt...”Some scholars have latched onto Keynes use of the word ‘Babylonians'. This term is associated with an ongoing controversy in academia about two logical approaches to the social sciences. Finance, economics, and philosophy professor, Mark Stoh, characterizes it like this: “There are two basic approaches. The first, the Cartesian-Euclidian approach, is ‘the familiar axiomatic one in which the fundamental principles of a science are taken as axioms, from which the rest are derived as theorems.' Because it comes closest of all the social sciences to attaining this axiomatic ideal, economics has occasionally been considered to be the queen of the social sciences. The second approach is the Babylonian. According to it, there is no single logical chain from axioms to theorems; but there are several parallel, intertwined, and mutually reinforcing sets of chains, such that no particular axiom is logically basic.”In this context, Keynes views on uncertainty fall more in line with the Babylonians. Further, Keynes characterizes Newton as using methods of inquiry that date back to the ancient times of the Babylonians. Because the mathematics and economics of Babylonian times were captured in stone and since translated, we know a great deal about how they solved mundane and complex problems. Many scholars believe they used pragmatic problem solving that embraced uncertainty and holistic approaches of various mathematical constructs.Another famous great mind of the 20th century concurs, the renowned physicist Richard Feynman. In a 1965 lecture he talks about the distinction between what he called ‘Babylonian' and ‘Greek' approaches to mathematical problem solving. He asserts students learning math in these times were taught different techniques for calculating various mathematical problems. They were then given practical problems whereby they had to determine which techniques were to be linked in a chain to solve a particular problem.Feynman describes it as a constellation of techniques that could be linked together in a variety of ways to arrive at an answer. For example, the equivalent of the Pythagorean theorem could be linked to calculating the volume of a cube. It was a holistic approach to pragmatic problem solving given the context of the situation at hand, even if the situation were to change.What Descartes came along and did was reduce the common elements of these constellations to form a set of ordered axioms. Mathematics was then taught from the bottom up as ordered steps, each layer of the constellation building on itself to form theorems. Mathematical problem solving was then taught as ordered and deterministic with no regard for how one might leap from one technique to another should the conditions of the problem set change.Feynman says, “the method of starting from [the bottom] axioms is not efficient in obtaining the theorems…Working something out in geometry is not very efficient if you always have to start at the axioms, but if you had to remember a few things in [the constellation] of geometry you can always get somewhere else [in the constellation] which is much more efficient than if you do it the other way.”Feynman believed solving problems in physics requires a Babylonian approach due to the changing nature of the natural physical world. This is in contrast with pure mathematics, as derived by Descartes and Euclid, that yields universally consistent solutions within the context of an abstracted world.OPEN TO ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMSIn the context of economics, British economist Sheila Dow offers that in a constellation of economic mathematical tools “One chain of reasoning might rely on statistical analysis, while another might rely on historical research, for example.” Dow is a Post-Keynesian economist who expands on the work of Stoh and Feynman in her paper on the “Babylonian Mode of Thought”.Dow expresses ‘Mode of thought' as “the way in which arguments (or theories) are constructed and presented, how we attempt to convince others of the validity or truth of our arguments.” Her interpretation of Keynes reflection on Newton was that he “relied on intuition in order to arrive at explanations for natural phenomena, on the one hand, with the rational proofs he constructed after the fact, on the other.” This was his ‘mode of thought', she argues, that enabled him to make the discoveries he did. And like Feynman, she implores others to learn and apply this more ‘Babylonian' approach to solving complex problems. That is, a pragmatic and wholistic approach through the practical application of an array of mathematical methods which are traversed over time as situations, contexts, and variables change.Dow equates the Babylonian approach with an open system – a system of infinite unknown variables that change in relation and response to each other, and the environment in which they exist, over time. This is contrast to a closed system where all the variables, their interactions, and relationships are known and isolated in the environment in which they exist. Closed systems are divided into dual atomic parts, the internal, or endogenous, and the external, or exogenous.Dow believes, “Babylonian thought is neither dualistic nor atomistic. The categories used to account for social life in an evolving environment are not seen as readily falling into duals. Indeed vagueness of categories is seen to have the benefit of adaptability within a changing environment where institutions, understanding and behaviour undergo change. In a system of thought with a variety of incommensurate strands of argument, variables may be exogenous to one strand but endogenous to another. Knowledge is in general held with uncertainty (by economic agents and by economists), so the analysis points to degrees of uncertainty. Further, some strands of argument may refer to individuals, and others to the group level, since causal forces may act in either direction. Indeed individuals are not seen as independent, and their behaviour may change as the environment changes.”She continues, “Similarly, Babylonian thought provides a rationale for pluralism. It justifies both methodological pluralism (methodologists analysing a range of methodologies) and pluralism of method (economists using a range of methods).”Dow then warns that many who subscribe to conventional economic approaches, or Cartesian modes of thought, sometimes claim that ‘pluralism' is just an excuse for sloppiness leading to an ‘anything goes' approach and attitude. But she argues, as Feynman illustrates, that “Babylonian mode of thought requires some criteria by which to choose segmentations of the subject matter for analysis, the chains of reasoning to pursue, and the methods employed to pursue them.” In this regard, not only is there is a high degree of mastery of various methods required, but that their application is highly structured. This leads her to claim Babylonian modes of thought are not ‘pure pluralism', but ‘structured pluralism.' She adds, as did Feynman, this may require not only traversing within the domain of mathematics, economics, or in the case of Feynman, physics, but also into other domains of science and humanities.Sorry ‘Tina', in the pursuit of answers in complex, uncertain, and changing environments it seems alternatives are not only desirable, but necessary. Those alternatives, however, have yet to be pursued despite record income inequality. After Thatcher came John Major who, despite being responsible for a raft of immoral behavior known as ‘Tory sleaze', was part of Britain's longest running economic prosperity. He was replaced in 1997 by the opposition Labour Party candidate Tony Blair. Three years into his term Thatcher was asked what she thought her greatest accomplishment was. She replied, “Tony Blair and New Labour" because he, like U.S. Democratic President Bill Clinton, adopted most of her policies. She said she "forced [her] opponents to change their minds."The irony of the Iron Lady, and all those who cling to the belief there is no economic policy alternative, is that the illusion of certainty represented by neoclassical and Cartesian closed systems has created more social and environmental uncertainty than ever. We live in organic, ever changing open system in uncertain times, in an uncertain world. If ever there's a time for an alternative, it seems it would be now. It's time we change our ‘mode of thought' and convince others that the pragmatic and wholistic Babylonian approach is a viable alternative. Let's turn ‘TINA' into ‘TAMA' – There are many alternatives.   This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

What is ultimately real?  According to Descartes, reality is composed of two substances, mind and matter.  Why did Descartes think this?  More importantly, why should we care?  In this week's episode, we take up these questions.

Should we give up the dream of certainty? Looking for a link we mentioned? It's here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesWe look for certainty to know where we are, to feel safe. Descartes founded modern Western philosophy on the search for certainty. And in our daily lives we have institutions to create the illusion of certainty, marriage in the precarious world of relationships, schools and universities in the world of knowledge. For psychologists tell us that uncertainty is one of the strongest predictors of distress. Yet certainty is also the enemy of progress and change, and as Eric Fromm argued 'The quest for certainty blocks the search for meaning'. To be certain is to have ended enquiry, to have called a halt to the new and the original, to have in a sense already died.Should we recognise the pursuit of certainty in our personal lives, in our pursuit of knowledge, and in religion and philosophy is destined to fail? Should we instead welcome, even encourage, the uncertain and the unknown as a vehicle for growth and potential? Or without the safety of the known are we all lost?Distinguished philosophy professor Simon Blackburn, maverick post post-modern philosopher Hilary Lawson and ground-breaking philosopher of value Ruth Chang question whether we can be certain about anything. Maria Balaska hosts.There are thousands of big ideas to discover at IAI.tv – videos, articles, and courses waiting for you to explore. Find out more: https://iai.tv/podcast-offers?utm_source=podcast&utm_medium=shownotes&utm_campaign=the-search-for-certaintySee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Hello Interactors,Today is part one of a two-part exploration. I was curious as to why conventional economics continues to rely so heavily on deterministic mathematical models that assume perfect conditions even though they know such inert situations don't exist in nature. It may tie back to the Enlightenment and the popular beliefs of Newton and Descartes who merged Christian beliefs with mathematic certainty – despite viable alternative theories they helped squelch.  As interactors, you're special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You're also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let's go…THE SPERMISTSIsaac Newton and René Descartes were spermists. They believed they entered this world through preformation. This theory states every future organism is wrapped up in a seed or sperm as a preformed miniature version of itself. This was the dominant belief among Europe's most respected Enlightenment thinkers. They believed not only did a Christian god create all the plants and animals, including humans, but all the future ones too. Intercourse, they surmised, is a magical act that initiates the growth of microscopic animacules which then grow until they are fully formed. It's easy to brush this off as a point in time lack of knowledge and excuse these brilliant minds. We might say, “They just didn't know any better.” But it turns out there were other brilliant minds at the time who thought they were crazy.But powerful people are not easily persuaded. They, along with the church, continued to push the idea that preformation is as elementary to evolution as mathematical axioms are to theorems. A mathematical certainty that one day seduced many scientists, and later economists, into similar deterministic expressions.One of the early preformation influencers was the Dutch philosopher, mathematician, and theologian, Bernard Nieuwentyt (1654-1718). Three years before his death, he published a soon to be popular book, The Religious Philosopher: Or, The Right Use of Contemplating the Works of the Creator. In it he writes,“This however is sure enough…that all living Creatures whatever proceed from a Stamin or Principle, in which the Limbs and Members of the Body are folded and wound as it were in a Ball of Thread; which by the Operation of adventitious Matter and Humours are filled up and unfolded, till the Structure of all the Parts have the Magnitude of a full grown Body.”His book was translated into English in 1724 and its influence spread. In 1802, the English clergyman and philosopher, William Paley (1743-1805), expanded on the ‘Ball of Thread' analogy with his infamous watchmaker analogy. Using examples of mechanistic functions of the human body like joints and muscles, he expanded the popular notion that this is the work of a supreme designer – their Christian god. He writes, “Contemplating an animal body in its collective capacity, we cannot forget to notice, what a number of instruments are brought together, and often within how small a compass. It is a cluster of contrivances.”But Paley wasn't alone, nor was he the first. Both Descartes and Newton had already remarked as much. Newton once wrote, “like a watchmaker, God was forced to intervene in the universe and tinker with the mechanism from time to time to ensure that it continued operating in good working order."The confidence of spermists was buoyed when spermatozoa was discovered by the Dutch microscopist Antoine van Leeuwenhoek in 1677. But the seed of the idea dates all the way back to Pythagoras. He believed male semen is fluid that collects and stores different elements from the body like the bone and brain. He said, “semen is a drop of the brain.” The woman provided a host and nourishment so the male semen could unfold inside her body.Another Greek philosopher, Empedocles, refuted the Pythagorean claim 100 years later noting offspring often inherit characteristics of the mother. He proposed there was a blending of male and female root reproductive elements in plants and animals that has the potential to produce blended varieties as their offspring. Empedocles was on to something, but his theory was overshadowed by a more popular theory and powerful name, Aristotle.THE OVISTSAristotle believed both men and women provided different forms of reproductive purified blood in the form of semen and menstrual fluids. Because semen appeared more pure than menstrual fluids, he surmised it must have the advantage. Therefore, the male provided the instructions, design, or blueprint for formation and the woman provided the material. The ‘blood' metaphor is alive today despite our knowledge of genetics. J.K Rowling did her part in her Harry Potter series to perpetuate and popularize the blood metaphor with ‘pure-bloods' and ‘half-bloods' or the derogatory ‘mud-bloods'.Aristotle's ideas were brought to life in the 17th and 18th century by the spermists nemesis, the ovists. Ovists were rallying behind the discoveries of William Harvey (1578-1657) and Antonie van Leeuwenhoek (1632-1723) of female eggs in female bodies, the union of the sperm and egg, and the formation of an embryo which in turn unleashed the production of various parts of the body. Harvey called this cellular formation of individual parts in plants and animals epigenesis. An idea Aristotle also suggested.But one Dutch spermist, Jan Swammerdam (1637-1680), used this to further the preformation theory, but with a twist. Evidence of the union of egg and sperm, he suggested, must mean the future organism is embedded inside the head of the sperm in miniature form waiting to become whole with the help of the egg. A century later, this prompted a Swiss scientist, Charles Bonnet (1720-1793), to offer a counter ovist preformation theory. He suggested a Christian god planted future generations not inside the sperm, but inside the egg – like nested eggs within eggs.Meanwhile, a group of naturalist scientists opposed these Cartesian and Pythagorean, mechanistic preformation theories. The French naturalist, mathematician, and philosopher, Pierre Louise Maupertuis (1698-1759), further rejected theological explanations and believed both the male and female possess particles that come together to form unique characteristics in their offspring. He is credited with being the first to observe evolutionary hereditarian changes in organisms over time suggesting some characteristics are dominant while others are recessive.The German physiologist Caspar Friedrich Wolff (1733-1794) expanded on this work and revived Harvey's theory of epigenesis. By observing chick embryos, he discovered a supernatural action occurs once the sperm is implanted in the egg. This sparks what he called a vital action “vis essentialis” that culminates over the period of gestation creating a fully formed body. This is the origins of what we now call embryology.Those in the mechanistic and theological Cartesian camp weren't having it. They, like the church, rejected talk of indescribable, supernatural, and immaterial ‘vital actions.' It was not only heretical, but suggested science was going backwards to embrace medieval miracles of the occult. Either way, if there were forces at work on matter, the preformation mechanists believed it too would have been preordained by a Christian god. The co-inventor of differential calculus, German polymath and theologian, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716), reasoned like this, “But if in truth an intelligible explanation is to be sought in the nature of the thing it will come from what is clearly apprehended in the thing…for the success of the whole system is due to divine preformation.”THE NATURALISTSToward the middle of the 18th century the French naturalist and mathematician, Comte de Buffon (1707-1788), began publishing his work on natural history, Histoire Naturelle – an opus that amassed 36 volumes that continued to be amended even after his death. By looking at the history and evolution of the natural world, Buffon was the first to articulate patterns of ecological succession – the successive structural change of species over time. He rejected Christian Creationism and theories of the preordained mechanistic unfolding of nature and provided vivid and expertly rendered illustrations to the contrary.He took elements of Aristotle's blood theories, qualitative approaches to inquiry, and aspects of both spermists and ovists to merge them with empirical evidence and compelling writing to make convincing arguments for unexplainable actions vital to the creation and evolution of the natural world.As the late professor of history and Director of Seventeenth and Eighteenth Century Studies at UCLA, Peter Hanns Reill, wrote, Buffon “emphasized the primacy of living over inanimate matter, asserted the existence of inner, active forces as central agents in nature, envisioned a world of new creation and leaps in nature, and proclaimed the ineffable quality of individuality and the manifold variety of nature.”Through “comparison”, “resemblance”, “affinity”, and “analogical reasoning” he “revitalized and historicized nature without denying the existence of a comprehensible order.” This provided a path for science to embrace qualitative reasoning without foregoing the rigor, language, and quantitative aspects of mathematics embraced by mechanists like Newton and Descartes.It wasn't only ecological communities that could be explained this way. Society and politics could too. This admission further worried mechanists and theologians. They feared any acknowledgement that mysterious random events, be it at a particle or societal level, that could lead to a ‘vital action' creating unforeseen mutations accuses the Christian god of not understanding his own creations. It would reject both ‘divine preformation' and ‘God's will'.This came at a time of social revolutions, debates, and contestations over human rights, freedoms of religion, and ‘we the people.' Mechanists married the certainty of mathematics with the certainty of their Christian god to explain the world. If nature and society lacked the linear precession of clocks, compasses, and mathematical calculations, they feared such uncertainty would unravel societal order and unleash chaos.Naturalists continued to point to ‘internal' vital forces that created perceptible ‘external' microscopic and macroscopic evolutions that countered the dominant inert, deterministic, and mechanical philosophies and beliefs. But the seduction of certainty remains with us to this day, even when we know it not to be true.The Scottish philosopher and historian, Adam Ferguson (1723-1816), suggested as much writing, “Our notion of order in civil society is frequently false: it is taken from the analogy of subjects inanimate and dead; we consider commotion and action as contrary to its nature; we think it consistent only with obedience, secrecy, and the silent passing of affairs through the hands of a few.”Ferguson goes on to use a brick wall as an analogy. He continues,“The good order of stones in a wall, is their being properly fixed in places for which they are hewn; were they to stir the building must fall: but the order of men in society, is their being placed where they are properly qualified to act. The first is a fabric made of dead and inanimate parts, the second is made of living and active members. When we seek in society for the order of mere inaction and tranquility, we forget the nature of our subject, and find the order of slaves, not of free men.”  Buffon's new modes of inquiry transformed fields formally beholden to mechanistic dogma like medicine, physiology, and chemistry. But it seems economics remain seduced by the determinism of linear, mechanistic, mathematical approaches despite it being a branch of the social sciences. While it may have dropped religion, it has yet to fully embrace the “notion of order in civil society is frequently false.” It's time conventional economics acknowledge there are mysterious ‘vital forces' internal to nature and society resulting in external perturbations that propagate indeterminant permutations.  Tune in next week as I explore what that might look like.Thank you for reading Interplace. This post is public so feel free to share it. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

In this episode, we continue to contemplate Descartes' response to the challenge of nominalism, doubt, and radical skepticism.  In particular, we ponder a piece of wax.  Does a piece of wax hold the key to understanding knowledge, reality, and God?  Descartes and the meaning of it all, on this week's Red Letter Philosophy.

How is it that some modern churches deny the essentials taught in the Bible while other churches are sound doctrinally but have disconnected from the culture and have no impact on people outside the church? The answer is in how the churches view the Bible, and this session gives an overview of the thinkers who influenced the modern Christian religious leaders. We show how Descartes, Hume, Kant, Kierkegaard, and Darwin influenced the Graf-Wellhausen Documentary Hypothesis (JEPD theory), and how fundamental churches reacted to it.  The session also gives some hope of how several current movements are fixing the problem. Support the show

Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

From Gil's book: Three early modern philosophers - Spinoza, Leibniz and Hume - understood that minds necessarily involve ideas and patterns of thinking that are not conscious. Morejon shows that in this way they sharply distinguish themselves from other major early modern thinkers whose conceptions of the mind tended to identify thinking with consciousness, such as Descartes, Malebranche and Locke. This conception of the thinking mind as conscious remains popular even today. By contrast, Leibniz, Spinoza and Hume argue instead that thought is not, as such, a matter of consciousness.Morejon explores the significance of this insight for their conceptions of freedom and ethics. By systematically analyzing the major writings of these three thinkers and placing them in the context of the history of Western philosophy, he shows that together they provide us with a metaphysics of ideas that is uniquely helpful for thinking through important problems in contemporary political theory. In particular, it allows us to understand how it is possible for people to act against their own interests and in spite of their consciously knowing better.Readers will gain a sophisticated understanding of what Leibniz, Spinoza and Hume thought about the metaphysics of ideas, the nature of the human mind and the limits of individual freedom.Gil's work: https://gilmorejon.wordpress.com/writings/Support Zer0 Books on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/zerobooksSubscribe: http://bit.ly/SubZeroBooksFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/ZeroBooks/Twitter: https://twitter.com/zer0books-----Other links:Check out the projects of some of the new contributors to Zer0 Books:Acid HorizonPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcastYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/acidhorizonMerch: crit-drip.comThe Philosopher's Tarot from Repeater Books: https://repeaterbooks.com/product/the-philosophers-tarot/The Horror VanguardApple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/horror-vanguard/id1445594437Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/horrorvanguardBuddies Without OrgansApple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/buddies-without-organs/id1543289939Website: https://buddieswithout.org/Xenogothic: https://xenogothic.com/Support Daniel Tutt's work by visiting the Torsion Groups Patreon account: https://patreon.com/torsiongroups

On this episode of WHAT THE TRUCK?!?  Dooner and The Dude are live from day 3 at the biggest party in freight, F3. They're joined by David Bell at Lean Solutions; Chuck Toye at Leaf Logistics; Ayala Rudoy at Tomorrow.io; Dan Cicerchi at Descartes; Malcolm Harris at Steam Logistics; Mustafa Azizi at Zuum App; Krenar Komoni and Richie Daigle; Surge Transportations Chief Magic Officer; Brittany Traylor at TraylorTranspo; Tim Brownell and Hayden Allred at TruckBook; Benjamin Gordon at Cambridge Capital; Nicole Hayes at Platform Science; Blythe Brumleve at Digital Dispatch; Omar Singh at Surge; Graham Gonzalez at Reliance Partners; Back The Truck Up; Tenasie Courtright at SiLo and the FreightWavesTV team. Visit our sponsorWatch on YouTubeSubscribe to the WTT newsletterApple PodcastsSpotifyMore FreightWaves PodcastsDiscover an easier way of doing business with the J.B. Hunt 360°® platform. Manage the entire shipping process from start to finish, all in one place. See what the power of the J.B. Hunt 360 platform can do for you at jbhunt.com/power.

On this episode of WHAT THE TRUCK?!?  Dooner and The Dude are live from day 3 at the biggest party in freight, F3. They're joined by David Bell at Lean Solutions; Chuck Toye at Leaf Logistics; Ayala Rudoy at Tomorrow.io; Dan Cicerchi at Descartes; Malcolm Harris at Steam Logistics; Mustafa Azizi at Zuum App; Krenar Komoni and Richie Daigle; Surge Transportations Chief Magic Officer; Brittany Traylor at TraylorTranspo; Tim Brownell and Hayden Allred at TruckBook; Benjamin Gordon at Cambridge Capital; Nicole Hayes at Platform Science; Blythe Brumleve at Digital Dispatch; Omar Singh at Surge; Graham Gonzalez at Reliance Partners; Back The Truck Up; Tenasie Courtright at SiLo and the FreightWavesTV team. Visit our sponsorWatch on YouTubeSubscribe to the WTT newsletterApple PodcastsSpotifyMore FreightWaves Podcasts

“Mission and purpose is becoming crucial. We are living in a very anxious world. We see that climate change will be a big change for humanity”, says Tanguy. The self-proclaimed insurance industry veteran shares his intrapreneurial journey with Oliver Wyman and AXA to co-founding Descartes Underwriting. Headquartered in Paris and with 12 offices across Europe, North America and APAC, the climate risk insurtech operates in 40 countries around the globe – helping protect clients against hailstorms, bushfires, floods, cyclones, droughts and heatwaves. Having raised USD$120m in its Series B funding round, Tanguy highlights, “When you're a start-up and backed by VC or private equity, you have more time to think about how the company may look like in 3,5,7 or 10 years.”Tanguy clarifies how Descartes are competing with established industry incumbents and the benefits they provide to clients. “If we just look at the corporate segments in the USA it takes an average of 550 days between the declaration of loss and claim payments. It's a very long and painful process, full of litigation. In our case we use external data sources and we make sure the policy is transparent and that we stick to claim payments within five working days.”He discusses the challenges ahead for the industry and maintaining the firm's cultural values with high growth plans across the globe, as well as the value insurance industry knowledge brings to the team. Connect with Tanguy on LinkedIn or find out more about Descartes Underwriting The Insurance Coffee House Podcast is hosted by Nick Hoadley, CEO, Insurance Search, the Executive Search Consultancy for growing Insurance and Insurtech businesses across the globe.To discuss identifying & attracting the very best talent to your team or being a podcast guest, reach out to Nick via nick.hoadley@insurance-search.com or connect on LinkedInCopyright Insurance Search 2022 – All Rights Reserved.

This episode explores four understandings of the relationship between the soul and the body (from Descartes, Marx, Merleau-Ponty, and Fanon) and applies that thinking to readings of songs and videos by India.Arie, Jill Scott, Maxwell, D'Angelo, and Erykah Badu.

The Red Letter Express resumes its journey.  After their encounter with Ockham, our hosts are in search of answers.  They are offered Cartesian Delight - the philosophy of Rene Descartes.  Does Descartes have the cure for what ails our hosts?  Rationalism, Skepticism, and Descartes on this week's Red Letter Philosophy.

Neste podcast: Clóvis de Barros Filho fala sobre o individualismo, passando por Descartes e diferentes exemplos de situações cotidianas.

Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Hay una relación directa entre la glándula pineal y tu tercer ojo, como  lo habló Descartes: la glándula pineal es el asiento del alma, a través de ella el alma se comunica con el cuerpo.Todos poseemos una glándula pineal que se localiza en nuestro cerebro, ésta tiene una relación directa con tu ritmo circadiano y afecta en forma directa tu ciclo de sueño.Se cree que cuando estas glándulas funcionan correctamente, ayudan a mantener tus niveles de energía equilibrados y tu mente despejada.Lastimosamente, el estilo de vida que probablemente llevas ahora puede hacer que tu glándula pineal deje de funcionar.Cuando empiezas un camino de transformación es súper importante que tengas conciencia no solo de la parte espiritual si no también del espacio donde estas y el cuerpo que tienes, el cual es el vehículo para que todo se pueda desarrollar por eso en este episodio me voy a centrar en la glándula pineal.Escuchalo hasta el final porque te voy a hablar sobre algunas cosas que puedes hacer para ayudar a mantener esta glándula sana y funcionando correctamente.EN ESTE EPISODIOLa realidad que vemos no es la verdaderaQue es la glándula pineal El proceso de abrir la glándula pinealCómo despertar tu glándula pineal¿Sabías que estoy en YouTube? Sígueme aquí.

What does "the ghost in the machine" mean? From philosophy to artificial intelligence, we explore this idiom to understand what it means, how it's used and if the dream of strong AI is realistic.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Within 100 years, the Cartesians used impeccable logic derived from Descartes' I think there I am to reach two conclusions: there is no earthly agent of movement and there is no matter. There is only God and mind. Hume yanked God and mind out of these conclusions and the Cartesian Jenga tower came tumbling down.Show notes here

Taylor Culbert is a PhD candidate in Theatre and Performance at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York (CUNY). She is writing her dissertation on 17th century animal performances in Europe, looking specifically at how cultural narratives about animals shaped the ways that humans and animals responded to one another. When she isn't writing, Taylor works part-time training horses at a rescue in upstate NY. Taylor is enrolled in my on-line clinics so I've been getting to know her. I asked recently what her PhD dissertation is on and was so intrigued by her answer, I knew I wanted to learn more, so I invited her to join us for an afternoon's conversation. We began with stag hunts and some surprising revelations about animal intelligence. It's a conversation with interesting twists and turns. We enter a time warp between 17th century Europe and our current time which prompts Dominique to share stories about Cavalia, the theater company she co-founded that brought horses, acrobats, and other artists together in performance. Taylor mentions several references during our conversation. Below are the references: "Horse and Man in Early Modern England" by Peter Edwards "The Accommodated Animal" by Laurie Shannon (talks about "birds and beasts and fish" vs human/animal binary) "Birds and Other Creatures in Renaissance Literature" by Rebecca Ann Back (talks about animals having morality/emotions and the role that Descartes played - or didn't - in early modern understandings of animals) La Vénerie de Jacques Du Fouilloux This is a digital copy of an early edition of one of the hunting manuals that Taylor is writing about.

{REDIFFUSION} de l'épisode #263 du 31 janvier 2022***Série Best-Of***Anne Ghesquière reçoit dans Métamorphose Dr Juan David Nasio, médecin psychiatre et psychanalyste. Avec lui, nous allons voir en quoi nous pouvons dire « Je répète, donc je suis ! » et essayer de comprendre d'où viennent ces symptômes de répétition et surtout comment s'en départir ! Épisode #263 Dans cet épisode avec Dr Juan David Nasio, j'aborderai les thèmes suivants :Qu'est-ce que la répétition et d'où vient-elle ?Quelles lois président à tout processus répétitif ?Quelles sont les différentes formes de répétition ?Pouvons-nous assigner à la répétition un but à atteindre ce « Je répète, donc je suis » dont vous parlez ? Notre présent n'est-il que la répétition inconsciente du passé ?Avons-nous finalement une quelconque forme de “libre arbitre” ? Quelle est la différence entre un sujet apaisé avec son inconscient et un sujet qui se bat sans cesse contre lui ? Qui est mon invité de la semaine, Dr Juan David Nasio ?Le Dr Juan David Nasio, Professeur à l'université de Paris VII pendant trente ans, médecin psychiatre et psychanalyste proche de Jacques Lacan.Son ouvrage" Pourquoi répétons-nous toujours les mêmes erreurs ?" est (re)paru aux Éditions Payot & Rivages.Parmi ses autres livres retrouvez "Tout le monde peut-il tomber en dépression ?", "L'Enfant du miroir" (avec Françoise Dolto), "Enseignement de 7 concepts cruciaux de la psychanalyse" ou encore "L'Hystérie ou l'enfant magnifique de la psychanalyse" et "Cinq Leçons sur la théorie de Jacques Lacan", tous aux éditions Payot.Quelques citations du podcast avec Bruno Giuliani :“Spinoza est le philosophe de la liberté qui invite, après Descartes, à ne se fier qu'à sa propre intuition et ne plus obéir à aucun dogme extérieur""L'univers à tout moment réalise ce qu'il est mais sans tendre vers un but, c'est à dire que le but de la vie, c'est vivre""La matière et l'esprit sont deux manifestations d'une substance qui n'est ni matière ni esprit, qui est une source...Rejoignez-nous sur notre nouveau site Internet et abonnez-vous à notre Newsletter www.metamorphosepodcast.comSoutenez notre podcast en rejoignant dès maintenant la Tribu Métamorphose : www.patreon.com/metamorphoseRetrouvez Métamorphose, le podcast qui éveille la conscience sur Apple Podcast / Spotify / Google Podcasts / Deezer / YouTube / SoundCloud / CastBox/ TuneIn.Suivez l'actualité des épisodes Métamorphose Podcast sur Instagram, découvrez l'invité de la semaine et gagnez des surprises ;-)InstagramFacebookBonne écoutePhoto DR Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

PRÉCOMMANDEZ MA BANDE DESSINÉE "PHILORAMA" SUR ULULE : https://fr.ulule.com/philorama