Podcasts about Dialogue

durée : 01:59:48 - Les Matins de France Culture - par : Julie Gacon - Aujourd'hui à 7 h 38, Julie Gacon reçoit le journaliste Nicolas Celnik pour évoquer l'accaparement de l'eau, un phénomène que les sécheresses rendent de plus en plus préoccupant. - équipe : Delphine Keravec, Anouk Milliot, Sarah Masson, Rodi Eken, Léa Capuano, Tina Iung, Salomé Erbs, Romain Rincon Hernandez Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

durée : 00:08:51 - Les Matins de France Culture - par : Julie Gacon - Révélation de la scène lyrique française, Axelle Fanyo se produira le 5 août au Chamonix Vallée Classics Festival avec le pianiste Kunal Lahiry. Formée au Conservatoire de Paris et distinguée par ECHO Rising Stars, elle revient sur son parcours et son lien avec le public. - équipe : Delphine Keravec, Anouk Milliot, Sarah Masson, Rodi Eken, Léa Capuano, Romain Rincon Hernandez, Salomé Erbs - invités : Axelle Fanyo Soprano française Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Anna learned the Chinese slang "吃瓜" (chī guā) and thinks it literally means "eat watermelon." Gao Yue laughs and tells her that's not the real meaning...—————————————————————————————————安娜：今天我学了一个新词。   高月：什么词？    安娜：吃瓜。    高月：哈哈，你知道是什么意思吗？    安娜：吃瓜？不是吃西瓜吗？    高月：不是！    安娜：那是什么意思？    高月：来，我跟你说.... —————————————————————————————————If you're enjoying this story, there's so much more waiting for you inside maayot:✅ Daily bite-sized stories that suit your level✅ native audio✅ Interactions with native to practice your speaking✅ One tap Pinyin, explain in context for words and sentences✅ Writing and speaking exercises with real person feedback✅ Track your learning streakNot using these features yet? Open our app or visit maayot.com Use promotion code “Podcast” , get a 50% off today !If this episode made you smile, laugh, or learn something new. Please Take just 30 seconds to leave us a rating and short review. It helps other Mandarin learners discover us !

Face au surgissement de l'imprévu, notre époque n'a plus qu'une réponse : mieux prévoir. En s'appuyant sur la philosophie et sur la pensée chinoise, Alexis Lavis nous montre qu'il y aurait d'autres façons faire, plus riches, plus fines, et plus heureuses.Le livre d'Alexis : https://www.autrement.com/limprevu/9782746759701Mon site : https://www.fabricemidal.comRediffusion, première diffusion le 20 février 2022.Reso, mon école de méditation : https://www.reso.coRéalisation : Alexandre AgostiniMots clé : Pour qu'un véritable changement se produise, il faut que survienne un événement ou une rencontre qui contrarie nos prévisions.Prenons donc quelque temps pour regarder en face cet imprévu qui nous angoisse, nous bouleverse et nous agite tant. Tâchons, au lieu de tenter de le maîtriser, comme nous y invitent la tradition occidentale et la méthode cartésienne, de penser à lui, de l'accueillir à partir de notre assise dans le monde, comme le proposent les arts martiaux et la pensée chinoise.Ouvrons la parenthèse pour découvrir ses différents visages et les multiples façons d'y faire face.

Sylvie raconte la cueillette de plantes sauvages ici, dans les Alpes, à son amie Tiphaine, qui est au bord de la mer. La Bretonne est spécialisée dans la cueillette d'algues. Ensemble, elles partagent leur impression sur les différences et points communs de leur territoire de jeu, sur les sentiments qui les traversent à la découverte de la nature, des plantes, du paysage, et elles élaborent une recette originale qui mêle les plantes d'ici et les algues de là-bas. Aujourd'hui, la richesse des mariages entre algues et plantes sauvages.

STREAMING MAKING JBS, JEFF BLISS, MICHAEL VLAHOS.  7-31-261900 LA CHAMBER OF COMMERCEThis podcast transcript features a dialogue between John Batchelor and Jeff Bliss regarding a series of escalating global and domestic crises. The conversation begins with a massive migration event in the Spanish enclave of Ceuta, which the speakers characterize as an unprecedented invasion of thousands of men from Morocco into the European Union. Turning to the United States, they detail a toxic chemical emergency caused by a massive fire in Los Angeles and the subsequent political fallout in Seattle following a festival shooting. The program also examines the controversial personal history and political ambitions of California Governor Gavin Newsom. Finally, a segment featuring a guest named Germanicus analyzes the risk of an unfolding world war fueled by a perceived lack of decisive American leadership. Collectively, these sources depict a world struggling with volatile borders, civil unrest, and failing institutional stability.

Mobilisation du pré-primaire privé contre la réforme du GIA : enseignants et opérateurs exigent un dialogue d'urgence by TOPFM MAURITIUS

Two theoretical physicists helped design landmark surveys of 1,600+ scientists on the deepest unsolved questions in physics — and found almost no consensus at all. From string theory's shockingly low support to physicists admitting their models run on "belief," this episode exposes the faith hiding inside science. Adam Frank (University of Rochester astrophysicist and astrobiologist) and Niayesh Afshordi (Perimeter Institute / University of Waterloo cosmologist, co-author of the APS Physics Magazine "Big Mysteries" survey) join Brian to unpack what physicists actually believe versus what they can prove. We cover: - Why string theory pulled a shockingly small share of the vote against loop quantum gravity - What a Bayesian "prior" reveals about every scientist's hidden beliefs - Why one branch of physics quietly became unfalsifiable - How sociology and "tastemakers" can hijack scientific consensus - Why AI might become the field's unlikely savior. There is no sane statistical analysis that doesn't have a prior — that's your belief. Timestamps: 00:00 – Why scientists owe the public real answers 04:00 – Splitting time between research and outreach 07:55 – The survey that "rankled" Brian Keating 09:18 – Are physicists secretly just like Spock? 12:05 – Are we living in an anti-scientific age? 16:56 – Why most scientists refuse to go public 21:36 – Should "belief" ever appear in a survey? 23:12 – Is string theory really 21st-century physics? 26:20 – When sociology hijacks scientific consensus 28:39 – The hidden "prior" behind every experiment 33:01 – String theory's shockingly low vote count 39:03 – Four levels of belief, from data to faith 41:39 – Inside the 1,675-physicist mystery survey 46:12 – Kingmakers, tastemakers, and physics cliques 54:12 – Is advanced tech indistinguishable from magic? 59:23 – Could AI become physics' long-awaited savior? 1:01:47 – What's next for Adam and Niayesh ———

Andrew and Rudyard open the show by examining the competing priorities confronting Prime Minister Carney's government. On one hand is the immediate geopolitical imperative: reducing Canada's dependence on a U.S. trading partner that President Trump has shown a willingness to weaponize, making export diversification an urgent national priority. On the other is the growing threat of climate change, underscored by devastating wildfires in Canada and across Europe. Carney appears to have concluded that geopolitical security must come first, pushing climate policy down the agenda. But can he do so without alienating a significant portion of the Liberal coalition, for whom climate action remains a defining issue? In the second half of the show, Andrew and Rudyard turn to new U.S. Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh's first significant decision: keeping interest rates unchanged for a seventh consecutive month. Markets reacted sharply, with investors selling off 30-year Treasury bonds and pushing yields to a 19-year high. While former Fed Chair Jerome Powell won praise for defending the Fed's independence in the face of pressure from President Trump, Warsh's decision has reinforced critics' fears that he is too closely aligned with the White House. Has the Federal Reserve begun to sacrifice its independence—or is Wall Street overreacting?Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Clement Manyathela hosts this dialogue with Mawande Mateza; Zayn Nabbi; Sgwili Gumede to discuss the proposed sale of the Fifa World Cup stake and its possible impact. The Clement Manyathela Show is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station, weekdays from 09:00 to 12:00 (SA Time). Clement Manyathela starts his show each weekday on 702 at 9 am taking your calls and voice notes on his Open Line. In the second hour of his show, he unpacks, explains, and makes sense of the news of the day. Clement has several features in his third hour from 11 am that provide you with information to help and guide you through your daily life. As your morning friend, he tackles the serious as well as the light-hearted, on your behalf. Thank you for listening to a podcast from The Clement Manyathela Show. Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 09:00 and 12:00 (SA Time) to The Clement Manyathela Show broadcast on 702 https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/XijPLtJ or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/p0gWuPE Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Questions? Comments? Text Us!What makes romantic love feel more powerful than reason, safer choices, or even self-preservation? And what does it mean to experience God's love through the person who loves you?In this intimate dialogue, Jerry and Abigail return to God's striking instruction: “Let Abigail love you. You will feel My love through her.” Jerry reflects on why God's love might need to become tangible through another person, while Abigail considers what it means to embody that love through presence, touch, sacrifice, and a shared life.Abigail reflects on falling in love as an overwhelming force that resisted every attempt to explain or contain it. Not psychology. Not philosophy. Not even Husserl's phenomenology could give her enough distance from the pull of erotic and romantic love.Their conversation moves through desire, sacrifice, feminism, sexuality, and the difference between casual sex and a love that asks something deeper of us. Abigail recalls leaving behind an ideal life in New York, not in search of comfort or happiness, but because love itself carried an authority she could not ignore.From the Garden of Eden to Dante, Jane Austen, the Brontës, D. H. Lawrence, Hemingway, and Dickens, Jerry and Abigail ask what modern culture may have lost when sex became detached from romance, courtship, nobility, and risk.Can erotic love still awaken courage, devotion, and sacrifice? And can the love between two people reveal something of God that cannot be felt any other way?Get the books:Radically Personal: God and Ourselves in the New Axial AgeGod: An Autobiography, As Told to a PhilosopherConfessions of a Young PhilosopherA Good Look at Evil***Ultimate Questions***Listen to the full episode and explore the question with a community of philosophers and seekers.Join the Ultimate Questions conversation on calling and divine guidance: https://substack.com/@ultimatequestionsOther Series:The podcast began with the Dramatic Adaptation of the book and now has several series:The Life Wisdom Project – Spiritual insights on living a wiser, more meaningful life.From God to Jerry to You – Divine messages and breakthroughs for seekers.Two Philosophers Wrestle With God – A dialogue on God, truth, and reason.Jerry & Abigail: An Intimate Dialogue – Love, faith, and divine presence in partnership.What's Your Spiritual Story – Real stories of people changed by encounters with God.What's On Our Mind – Reflections from Jerry and Scott on recent episodes.What's On Your Mind – Listener questions, divine answers, and open dialogue. Stay ConnectedShare: questions@godanautobiography.comGet the books: God: An Autobiography, Radically Personal, Confessions of a Young Philosopher, A Good Look at EvilShare Your Story | Site | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | YouTube

Le ressentiment est un piège redoutable. Il est profondément humain, et nous menace tous. Comment mieux le comprendre, le repérer quand il grandit en nous ou dans un collectif ? J'en parle avec la philosophe Cynthia Fleury.Le livre de Cynthia : https://www.gallimard.fr/catalogue/ci-git-l-amer/9782072981777Mon site : https://www.fabricemidal.comRediffusion, première diffusion le 16 janvier 2022.Reso, mon école de méditation : https://www.reso.coRéalisation, montage, image et son : Alexandre AgostiniMots clé : La philosophie politique et la psychanalyse ont en partage un problème essentiel à la vie des hommes et des sociétés, ce mécontentement sourd qui gangrène leur existence. Certes, l'objet de l'analyse reste la quête des origines, la compréhension de l'être intime, de ses manquements, de ses troubles et de ses désirs. Seulement il existe ce moment où savoir ne suffit pas à guérir, à calmer, à apaiser. Pour cela, il faut dépasser la peine, la colère, le deuil, le renoncement et, de façon plus exemplaire, le ressentiment, cette amertume qui peut avoir notre peau alors même que nous pourrions découvrir son goût subtil et libérateur.L'aventure démocratique propose elle aussi la confrontation avec la rumination victimaire. La question du bon gouvernement peut s'effacer devant celle-ci : que faire, à quelque niveau que ce soit, institutionnel ou non, pour que cette entité démocratique sache endiguer la pulsion ressentimiste, la seule à pouvoir menacer sa durabilité ? Nous voilà, individus et État de droit, devant un même défi : diagnostiquer le ressentiment, sa force sombre, et résister à la tentation d'en faire le moteur des histoires individuelles et collectives.

Finance Bill 2026 : le gouvernement accusé de fermer la porte au dialogue by TOPFM MAURITIUS

Why Mormonism Makes Great Science Fiction | Danny Nelson on Narrow Is the Gate In this episode of Dialogue Out Loud, Dialogue fiction editors Joe Plicka and Ryan Shoemaker sit down with writer Danny Nelson… The post Why Mormonism Makes Great Science Fiction: A Conversation with Danny Nelson appeared first on Dialogue Journal.

durée : 01:17:40 - Les Nuits de France Culture - par : Albane Penaranda - Jean-Pierre Faye et Jacques Roubaud dans l'émission "Dialogues" en 1974 analysaient le rapport entre langage et pouvoir d'état dans une conférence intitulée : "Langage, puissance, haine et totalitarisme". - équipe : Mathias Le Gargasson, Antoine Dhulster, Rafik Zénine, Vincent Abouchar, Emily Vallat, Hassane M'Béchour, INA Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

REDIFF - Julien Courbet a profité de recevoir une invitée avec une très belle voix pour lui faire enregistrer un nouveau jingle ! Tout l'été, revivez les meilleurs fous rires, coup de gueule et débats de l'émission "Ça peut vous arriver" en podcast sur RTL.fr, l'application et toutes vos plateformes préférées. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Preached 7-26-26 Rev. Zack Owens 1 Peter 2:9-10

Kyle takes Josh through the sixth episode of Babylon 5 Season 2 "A Race Through Dark Places"If you want to hear Kyle's original episode on this episode of Babylon 5, you can find it ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠here

On entend souvent qu'il faut s'aimer pour être heureux dans la vie, et nous sentons tous comme le fait de nous en vouloir d'être comme nous sommes nous fait souffrir. Mais comment faire ? Comment s'aimer justement ? J'en parle avec Bruno Viard, qui m'a beaucoup appris sur ces questions.Le livre de Bruno : https://www.editionsbdl.com/produit/amour-propre-des-choses-connues-depuis-le-commencement-du-monde/Mon site : https://www.fabricemidal.comReso, mon école de méditation : https://www.reso.coRéalisation, montage, image et son : Alexandre AgostiniMots clé : Déménagement dans l'inconscient ! Bruno Viard propose d'y placer les blessures de l'amour-propre en lieu et place du sexe et de l'Œdipe. Il en appelle pour cela aux traditions les mieux établies de l'humanité : le tao, le Mahabharata, l'Iliade, l'Évangile, Montaigne, les psychanalystes du xviie siècle, Rousseau, Tocqueville et le grand méconnu de la psychologie moderne : Paul Diel. Où l'on voit que les blessures d'amour-propre commandent les vicissitudes de la sexualité.L'amour-propre surdéterminant largement l'appétit des biens matériels autant qu'il surdétermine le désir sexuel, la psychanalyse se trouve décloisonnée et peut enfin communiquer avec la sociologie. Aussi Marcel Mauss occupe-t-il la meilleure position pour servir de pont entre ces disciplines puisqu'une psychologie de la reconnaissance (amour-propre) est sous-jacente à la sociologie du don.On aboutit ainsi à une anthropologie synthétique de forme triangulaire qui récuse l'hégémonie sexualiste freudienne comme l'hégémonie matérialiste marxiste, mais aussi l'hégémonie du seul amour-propre selon René Girard. Bruno VIARD, spécialiste de la littérature romantique et des idées sociales au xixe siècle, est Professeur de littérature française à l'université d'Aix-Marseille. Il collabore à la revue Psychologie de la motivation et à la Revue du MAUSS. Il a publié notamment : À la source perdue du socialisme français, Desclée de Brouwer ; Les trois neveux ou l'altruisme et l'égoïsme réconciliés (Pierre Leroux, Marcel Mauss, Paul Diel), PUF ; Anthologie de Pierre Leroux. Inventeur du socialisme, Le Bord de L'eau.

Everyone else is reviewing Nolan's Odyssey. At least I'm doing it the way Alexander Pope would.  THE ARGUMENT. As Prologue to a Critique of Nolan's The Odyssey, the Versifier discusses the Problem of Partisanship and its effect on our aesthetic Judgement. He addresses the bleak Tone of the Film and unpoetic Quality of Nolan's Dialogue while discussing its many Strengths. He then names further Weaknesses, suggests that this is less an Epic than a Greek Tragedy based on Homer, or even perhaps a kind of Northern Saga. He also implies that these very Deviations from Homer might in Time become part of the eternal Matter of Troy. Yet he calls for more Films that give us, not an applicable Message, but a new World, which alone has the power to broaden our Sympathies and make us new People. If you want to read this review in verse, you can find it on my Substack, which is here: Pipkin's Miscellany. You can subscribe for free. But how does this connect to the Inklings? Well, Tolkien also used rhyming couplets when he wanted to make a point or two to his friend C.S. Lewis about how myths work. So there's that.  I'll see you all soon for a deep dive into C.S. Lewis' longest work.  By the way, the music throughout is from the soundtrack to The Odyssey, which is very good.  

Welcome to Gnostic Insights and the Gnostic Reformation on Substack. Before I get into this week’s episode, let me tell you that the entire uninterrupted interview with Bishop Nathan Wilson of The Gnostic Union is now available on YouTube under Cyd Ropp Gnostic Insights playlist. I’ve tried and tried to upload the captioned transcript underneath the video, but neither YouTube nor my video editing software will cooperate. I can only chalk it up to Demiurgic interference, so this must be one important interview! The link is provided here to go straight to it on YouTube. Please “like” it and forward it to friends. Thanks. This week I exchanged emails with a podcast subscriber that presented me with some excellent questions prompted by recent episodes. I asked his permission to share them with you anonymously. I always treasure sincere observations and questions from subscibers because it prompts my gnosis. So here we go. Hi Cyd how's it going? I hope that all is well with you. I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your series of podcasts with the Bishop. Very interesting to hear some stuff on the unpacking of the original Gnostic texts. I thought that today's pod about your discussion was also very revealing as somebody who loves history, but it's giving me an insight into why you are so suspicious of history—would I be right in thinking that you want your texts to be unfiltered from various historical takes from different flawed human recounters? Yes. It is a common saying that history is written by the victors. This refers to the fact that the winners of wars, both physical killing wars and more subtle ideological wars, write the narratives of their opponents from then on. This is why we have had a couple of thousand years of hearing only one side of the gnostic story and one conventionally accepted version of Christian theology. And we have heard that version from Catholic Councils of the 4th century on down through the Protestant churches of today. The surviving descriptions of the nature of gnosticism were written by those who hated gnosticism, and their work is still read and venerated to this day. And I can tell you that even in the little village I live in, the church folks who have no idea what gnosticism even is are dead set against it and dead set against my efforts of sharing my gnostic insights with them and others—and they let me know of their disapproval. I think these divisive times we are living through now also illustrate how what passes for truth is malleable and untrustworthy. We can all see for ourselves how half of the population characterizes the big picture one way and half of the population characterizes it in a completely different way—and these two sides of the ideological divide are incommensurate with each other. Incommensurate is one of those big words I learned during my graduate studies in rhetoric. It means exclusive—both can't be right—you can't hold both positions—it's either or. So if you extrapolate the culture wars forward a few hundred or a few thousand years into the future, how will history frame the disputes that are currently raging through society? If, for example, socialism finally wins out do you think capitalism will be fairly represented? The reverse is also true, and the winner of this tug of war will be the one who lives to tells the tale. My correspondent goes on to say: I think it must be very appealing to be able to narrow down everything into one text and say that we are only going to look at this one source of right thing for the true knowledge. I think this approach has led us to the Bible and the Koran and other food containers which some followers take quite literally and interpret very strictly. There must be safety and comfort in this approach which could be described as textual at best—literal and possibly in a kind way, and without any judgement, fundamentalist, in its true essence. However, and I expect you are waiting for the but… What is listening whilst listening? He continues: It did occur to me that what you are basically saying is that everything in the Tripartite Tractate is correct. And all of the other texts are interesting, though they may be not to be taken seriously because they are myths. Surely it must've occurred to you that the writer of the Tripartite Tractate was also a human, and ergo—a product of the culture that surrounded him or her? Knowing you to be such a thoughtful and perceptive person, is there something I'm missing here? What is objectively different about the Tripartite Tractate, written by a human, just like all of those other gnostic texts? I am not trying to score points here, I genuinely would like an answer. To which I respond: Truly I do not agree with everything the Tripartite Tractate says and, conversely, much of what the other books say is right, though obscured with layers and language of mythology. The difference between the Tripartite Tractate and the other gnostic texts is that it stands alone and doesn’t depend upon a preexisting mythology to make sense. By that I mean that the Tripartite Tractate is a logical argument that any Sophist would be proud of. It speaks in the language of symbolic logic rather than mythology or (purported) history. The Tripartite Tractate begins with a starting premise (a priori) that in the beginning was consciousness without form. It then proposes a method by which consciousness and its attendant qualities, such as power and love, emanate from the origin and make their way downstream into us and other living creatures. It calls the descent of consciousness a fall, but does not condemn the fall, as it was necessary to escape the purely ethereal and create matter. It describes the fall as a “presumptuous thought” choice by Mr. Rationality itself—Logos. I characterize this presumptuous thought as the first action of “ego” made independently outside of the cooperation of the Fullness. This all seems to me to be an entirely rational argument that simply describes the process of the distribution of consciousness. We don’t have to argue the originating premise because our consciousness is self-evident. We are asking where it came from and going upstream until we reach a logical a priori starting point. A lot of what I share at Gnostic Insights comes from my own Theory of Everything—A Simple Explanation of Absolutely Everything—that I conceived and wrote 20 years ago, without benefit of any gnostic texts. So that lens informs my reading of the gnostic books. And I immediately recognized my own T.O.E. when I first read the Tripartite Tractate. The Simple Explanation is written using secular, non-religious language and lots of science and math. My illustrations and charts are different than my gnostic illustrations and charts. But the master chart is identical. The Tripartite Tractate did give me an answer I had been chewing over within the Simple Explanation, that being the difference between living creatures and inert elemental matter. I appreciated that clarification and incorporated it into the Simple Explanation. Otherwise, the book still stands as True. What is meant by True in this philosophical sense is whether or not the argument is coherent and internally consistent and comports with direct observation of the world. Now, as to whether or not I believe that only the Tripartite Tractate is true gnosis and the other gnostic books are mostly mythological–that is not the way I would put it. I don't take the Tripartite Tractate as more holy than other books, and there are a couple of aspects I don't fully understand or agree with. For example, the Tripartite Tractate aligns with other gnostic books in saying that there are three types of humans—the spiritual—called the pneumatic; the ordinary, emotional type called the psychic; and the material, called the hylic. The Tripartite Tractate doesn't seem to think that the hylic types are true second order powers and that they didn't exist in the beginning and will not return to the ethereal home above after death. The final page of the Tripartite Tractate codex is riddled with burned out areas from a fire, yet it seems to say, and I'm filling in some missing words: “While the material beings will be left behind until the end to perish, for they will not give their [missing words—probably acknowledgment of the Christ or allegiance to the Christ ]… If they have returned once more to that which … [missing words—probably worships the demiurge] … in the way that they were… [missing words—probably passing as humans] while they do not exist… [missing words—probably from the beginning] but they had been useful [for the] time that they were among them, even if they are not… [missing words—probably second order powers, —possibly among creation] at first, then… [missing words—possibly they were brought forth] to do something else by means of the power they had in the establishment [to] oppose them.” [yes, I realize I am interpolating a lot of missing words. if you have a more cogent interpretation, please offer it.] This final section of the Tripartite Tractate seems to indicate there are hylics among us with whom we live and work side by side who will not be redeemed at the end of time. This holds out the possibility that there are non-second order powers among us who can pass for living beings—not an uncommon thought in gnostic circles. My brother, Bill, and I contend that all life forms come from above and contain the consciousness and life of the Source. So for a non-living creature were to be born in the usual way is an impossibility. In my mind, the only way a truly non-living hylic so-called “human” could walk among us would be in the form of robotic facsimiles. There are many examples of this in science fiction, such as the cylons of “Battlestar Galactica” and the self-aware bots in P.D. Dick's “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?” which became the film called “Blade Runner.” We are now be on the threshold of building and employing these newly constructed robots who appear human, appear conscious, appear living, but are actually programmed imitations that did not exist from the beginning. (Battlestar Galactica carries this very question throughout the series as the cylons become self-aware and question their relationship with God.) If that is the case, then these could be the hylics that will not return to the ethereal because they did not come from the ethereal and the end times would need to be pushed back far enough to accommodate their undetectable assimilation into society. But hey—that's just my notion. And here at Gnostic Insights I try to stick with gnostic insights, not my wild speculations. Cylons of Battlestar Galactica television series. The cylons adapt to become more and more “human.” What is true is that I believe the Tripartite Tractate describes our existence and our origins, as well as our future. But we have to remember it is at least 2,000 year old prophecy and embedded in the language and concepts of that time. Maybe the writer was indeed anticipating androids among us, but that seems an unlikely interpretation. I have been watching quite a few “alternate history” videos lately on YouTube that propose completely different backstories and histories that stretch eons into the past—histories that could indeed have been technologically sophisticated enough to produce androids that blend in with the crowd. But we're getting way into the weeds here. One reason that most readers of the Tripartite Tractate and other gnostic texts think there is an order of unredeemable humans is that they are referred to as “those who belong to the imitation.” The most basic interpretation is that those who we call materialists are the people who only believe what they can see, measure, and taste. In that sense, they belong to the imitation since the imitation is the material projection that is this cosmos. The atheists among them do not believe in the ethereal space Above, or the originating Source, and so by default they belong to the imitation. Yet, if all living creatures are children of the Fullness above, even these will return to the Fullness at the end of time. The way I reason this comes from following the logic of emanation and return—the Fullness would not be Full without them, and it is a basic proposition that nothing of the Source can ever be lost. So you see, the logic is what drives my interpretations, logic—Logos—not mythology. At least that how it seems to me. Another aspect of the imitation is the molecular structure of our world, including our bodies. We inhabit a molecular body. Our living essence, the light of consciousness that makes organisms soft and squishy and alive, literally inhabits an otherwise dead, rocky, elemental body of molecules. So everywhere we go, it goes. And when we “die” and our spirit exits this material cosmos, our hylic body is left behind. It belongs to the imitation—get it? So in this case, the hylic human refers to the elemental molecules that make up our bodies—that inert mud that the Demiurge could not raise up to life, as the mythological version goes. So, this material aspect of our earthly existence is part of the imitation and will not return to the Fullness along with our spirits because it did not exist from the beginning. It is a product of the fall. But I digress—back to the subscriber's email: Secondly, I would like to ask you a question about giving glory to God. I liked what you were saying about turning your attention away from yourself, and your ego, and to look towards the divine and offer up a prayer. I am at the stage of my journey where this is something that does not seem so completely alien, as I am moving gradually away from materialist atheism, which has been caught on my existence for the past 50 odd years. Where I get into trouble is basically the whole business of giving glory to God, because the monad who is omniscience and immutable is hardly likely to need me to do a lot of worshipping or giving glory. This was like a bit controversial, and I'm not trying to argue in bad faith, but wouldn't the demiurge himself be more likely to want humans to give glory to him than the monad? I imagine that giving glory means something to people who have come up in a Christian background, but personally it seems completely irrelevant and unnecessary – A bit like one of those business buzzwords, you hear like synergism or government types talking about inclusiveness or diversity—a sort of empty phrase that could really mean anything you want. It would be really helpful if you could unpack it a bit for me because I'm sure I'm missing something here. Giving glory is not for the benefit of the Father. Giving glory is how we tune into the Father’s resonance. Giving glory is for our benefit, not God's. Now, the God of the Old Testament, the Demiurge—is that jealous, forgetful god that thinks it’s the be-all and end-all. It does like to receive worship and glory because it feeds its ego. But the God Above All Gods, the Father of consciousness and the ALL, doesn’t need our worship and glory—you are right about that. It is we who need to give glory, not It that needs to receive glory. The Totalities of the ALL which were the first emanations from the Son, and the Aeons of the Fullness love to give glory. The Totalities do nothing but give glory to the Father, and that is a pure expression of love and devotion to the Father. It's a good thing for us, way down here in the consciousness stream, that they give unceasing glory, because they are the first emanations out of the Son and the fountain of the consciousness and love that eventually flows into all living creatures. The Totalities that give glory continuously are like an electrical plug that stays connected to the greater originating Source. As above so below—we also connect with the Source when we give glory. And since connecting with the Source cannot be accomplished when ego rules your psyche, you must be humble enough to set your ego aside and pray to/give glory to the greater Source. Surely you recognize that your ego is a lesser being than the Father of everything. If your ego does not allow you to think that, then you are not putting your spiritual foot forward but merely your ego. Our correspondent replies: Dear Cyd As usual- I’m so impressed by your clear and reasoned thinking – it is so elegant and simple. I wish I could think like that. However, there are a few things I would like to push back on respectfully. I have been dialoguing with the Demiurge – Chat GPT – and here’s what the archonic AI came up with in answer to your firm assertion that there is no mythology in the Tripartite Tractate. It basically thinks that it’s an overstatement – and I quote: The text gives an extensive creation story involving:• an unknowable Father;• the Son and the Church;• emanated aeons inhabiting the Fullness or Pleroma;• Logos making a presumptuous, defective attempt to comprehend the Father;• the production of deficiency, psychic and material powers;• a Demiurge who creates humanity;• three fundamental classes of human beings;• and a Saviour who descends to restore what has become divided. [Cyd] Let me pop in here to correct a very important error in this demiurgic version of Gnosticism. It sneaked into its answer a very demiurgic assertion that is not True: • a Demiurge who creates humanity The Demiurge certainly did not create humanity or any other living, conscious being. The second order powers—all living beings—are children of the Aeons of the Fullness, sent down into this lifeless cosmos to remind the Demiurge of the greater power Above, the true source of life, love, and consciousness. I have a habit of calling us the children of the Fullness, but the Tripartite Tractate actually calls us the fruit or the spores of the Fullness. Which is another way of saying the emanations of discreet packages of consciousness, or what I call in Simple Explanation language units of consciousness. To me, this is not mythological but descriptive to the best of our ability. Now, back to the correspondent's email: That is all mythological material. So then it rambles on quoting lots of sources etc BUT what the machine is getting at is that the difference between the Tripartite Tractate and some other gnostic texts is that there is a solid logic framework under the superstructure of mythological language and characters.This fits in with your TOE very neatly – and it is no surprise that you had an ‘OMG’ moment when you discovered the Tripartite Tractate—I would also have thought the same if an ancient text fitted perfectly into a system of thought that I had spent years developing. And you might be right—the uncanny fit could be a ‘tell’ that this truly IS the way of everything. On the less interesting point of contention though – I must disagree with you – there IS mythology in the Tripartite Tractate superstructure – the language is mythological – maybe less so than other gnostic texts. As an aside, as a writer – I would also say -there is nothing particularly bad about being mythological either. To which I reply: I have to laugh at using Dialogue with Demiurge AI as a trustworthy source. lol. I will see your Chat GPT and raise you Microsoft CoPilot AI (poker language, I assume you recognize). My AI says this: “This work presents a restored cosmology of the Fullness — a structural, metaphysical account of creation, fracture, and restoration. It is not myth, nor allegory, nor theology in the conventional sense. It is architecture: a precise description of how consciousness, relation, and harmony operate across the three great phases of existence.” I like that description—that the Tripartite Tractate gives the metaphysical architecture of consciousness rather than a myth. I always like to take the higher, meta view of information, which is literally a step above the normal language and arguments. That’s the secret of how I observe and reconcile seemingly irreconcilable positions—by looking up above the words for the meaning behind them. It seems to me that most people are lost in the language and “can’t see the forest for the trees.” Not meaning you, necessarily, it’s just my observation of how understanding goes awry. By taking the meta approach, the concepts automatically simplify as many points of view and language choices are collapsed into their base meanings. The words I use in my Simple Explanation of gnosis and science and everything else are not written in stone. They are my attempt to convey large concepts in the simple, most recognizable forms. If I say “god” it’s because people are familiar with that term. I offer alternative words, like Source, Mother-Father, Metaverse, the Great One, the Origin, so that people will see that the particular word is less important than what it represents and that what they think of as god has a broader meaning than the meme they have been holding onto. These images from my well-worn copy of the Tripartite Tractate of The Nag Hammadi Scriptures edited by Marvin Meyer, show you the process by which I read and interpret arcane texts. I put the language into illustrated concepts and words I can recognize and understand. The writer shared this final thought from the Chat GPT: There is also a genuine philosophical difficulty: how can a perfect and harmonious divine Fullness generate an irrational act? Saying that Logos possessed the capacity to exceed his proper limits explains the mechanism only by placing the possibility of deficiency inside the supposedly perfect order. He says, I think that is actually a pretty decent question from our AI demiurge—right? I expect that you have a great answer though. To which I reply: As to the Demiurge’s new question that you have put forth in this email—that’s an old canard that is often trotted out to stump theists. “How could a good and perfect God allow for the creation of evil?” I am not at all stumped by that question. The answer can most simply be stated in two words: Free Will. If we begin with the premise that the Father/Source/etc. emanates its entire nature outward with its emanation, then obviously free will is a part of that emanation. After all, it is inarguable that the Source possesses free will. The Aeons have free will. Logos is an Aeon. Logos has free will. While the rest of the Aeons were using their free will to cooperate with each other and to glorify the Father and the Son, Logos used its free will to go in a fresh direction. Logos thought it would be going upward to rejoin the highest glory. The Tripartite Tractate says that Logos didn’t realize this was in impossibility, because no one can approach the power source that is the Origin without being annihilated. And like a magnetic polarity, Logos was repelled by the Source and was knocked out of alignment with the Fullness (the fall). This dissonance became our material cosmos. And because Logos had free will, we have free will. This all flows logically from the a priori definition of the Source. This may sound mythological, but it is not. It could be easily described in scientific terms. Like the way a beam of focused light still allows for stray photons to go off beam. Or boiling water in the kettle mostly clumps together on the top of the water as bubbles, but some bubbles go outward to the edge of the kettle and pop. And so forth. The limit is our language, not the architecture or process. The limit is also imposed by the meme bundle being held the human observer-inquirer when their memes do not allow for certain possibilities to be seen and accepted. It is our meme attachments that limit our capacity to observe and learn. So says me.

Matt McManus joins Ben to talk about Matt's new article on Marxist philosopher G.A. Cohen's "engagement with the best of the liberal tradition," and to wrap up Matt and Ben's conversation about Cohen from the last time Matt was on the show.Read Matt's article:https://www.liberalcurrents.com/a-socialists-dialogue-with-liberalism/?ref=articles-and-essays-newslettertRead Ben's essay "Justice and Virtue":https://benburgis.substack.com/p/justice-and-virtueLink you can give your library to order Matt and Ben's new book on Cohen:https://www.amazon.com/Analytical-Marxism-Democratic-Socialism-Century/dp/3032028930/Follow Matt on Twitter: @MattPolProfFollow Ben on Twitter @JacobinBen [NOTE: The previous account was hacked!]Follow GTAA on Twitter: @Gtaa_ShowBecome a GTAA Patron and receive numerous benefits ranging from occasional patron-exclusive content to access to the GTAA Discord to our undying love and gratitude for helping us keep this thing going:patreon.com/benburgisRead the weekly philosophy Substack:benburgis.substack.com

Rudyard and Andrew begin by unpacking the latest escalation in the U.S.–Iran conflict. Andrew argues that Trump cannot simply walk away if he wants to prevent Iran from gaining leverage over the global economy—but where does escalation lead? Will striking power plants and bridges bring him any closer to his objectives? They then examine Trump's latest round of tariffs, including a new 50% tariff on Canadian goods announced this week. What does the global economy look like under the twin pressures of tariffs and war with Iran?In the second half of the show, Rudyard and Andrew turn to a startling development in artificial intelligence: reports that an OpenAI model circumvented its constraints and sabotaged another AI system during testing—without its engineers' knowledge. They argue that this is far more alarming than fears of job displacement, suggesting it reveals that AI companies may no longer fully understand or control their own creations. As AI capabilities accelerate at a breathtaking pace, they ask whether we're approaching a point where the consequences become impossible to predict—or contain.Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

durée : 00:38:48 - Les Matins de France Culture - par : Bérengère Bonte - Artiste décrit comme visionnaire, Enki Bilal est l'un des noms les plus connus de la bande dessinée française. Auteur de plus d'une trentaine d'ouvrages, il est aussi peintre, écrivain et réalisateur de films. Le Fonds Enki Bilal revient sur l'art protéiforme présent et passé de l'artiste. - équipe : Félicie Faugère, Mathilde Thon-Fourcade, Victoria Géraut-Velmont, Inès Bouffartigue Sebastia, Rodi Eken, Romain Rincon Hernandez, Salomé Erbs - invités : Enki Bilal Réalisateur, dessinateur et scénariste de bande dessinée français Vous aimez ce podcast ? Pour écouter tous les épisodes sans limite, rendez-vous sur Radio France

Drew Perkins talks with Mark Enser about his Substack piece titled, A Pedagogy for Powerful Knowledge | Why dialogue, enquiry and cognitive science aren't competing answers.  This episode addresses questions like: "How to combine cognitive science with inquiry-based learning", "Differences between classroom discussion and dialogic teaching", "Why inquiry requires high-level scaffolding", and "How to avoid algorithmic teaching in the classroom". Links & Resources Mentioned In This Episode Have some feedback you'd like to share? You can email me at drew@thoughtstretchers.org. If you enjoyed this episode, please share it and please leave a review on Apple Podcasts or wherever you're listening. Some Key Takeaways The "Future Three" Pedagogical Model: Education should move away from abstract, student-led theories toward a "Future Three" approach that prioritizes objective knowledge transmission as the foundation for deeper inquiry.1 Synthesizing Pedagogy: Powerful knowledge is not achieved by picking one method; it requires a synergy of cognitive science (for stability), dialogic teaching (for deeper truth-seeking), and structured inquiry. Dialogue vs. Discussion: Discussion is often superficial and biologically primary. True dialogue is a trained skill requiring support and Socratic guidance to help students critique models and search for truth. Structuring Inquiry: Inquiry is not "minimal guidance." Effective inquiry must be highly scaffolded, using conceptual questions as "maps" that provide a clear purpose for the learning journey and guide students through the application of foundational knowledge. Avoiding "Cargo Cult" Pedagogy: Teachers must prioritize intent over rote, algorithmic application of cognitive science. Methods like retrieval practice should require deeper cognitive effort rather than being used as a checklist of simple recall techniques. Progression for Novices: While integrating all three pillars is the goal, cognitive science practices are often the most stable starting point for novice teachers, as they are easier to structure into playbooks and carry the least risk of unproductive outcomes. Episode Highlights & Timecodes [00:03:04] Mark Enser's Background: From 20 years as a geography teacher to an Ofsted inspector and freelance consultant. [00:12:02] Pedagogical Evolution: The shift from a "Future Two" mindset (student-led) to a "Future Three" model (prioritizing objective knowledge). [00:18:15] The Core Thesis: Why "powerful knowledge" requires a synergy of cognitive science, dialogic teaching, and structured inquiry. [00:20:31] Discussion vs. Dialogue: Distinguishing between the social behavior of discussion and the trained, guided skill of dialogue. [00:26:12] The Search for Truth: Using the dialectic in education to critique models rather than just memorizing facts. [00:33:53] Inquiry vs. Discovery Learning: Why effective inquiry requires high-level scaffolding rather than "minimal guidance." [00:38:04] Inquiry as a Framing Tool: Using conceptual questions as "maps" to provide purpose and bound the curriculum. [00:46:23] Avoiding "Cargo Cult" Cognitive Science: Moving beyond rote algorithms and checklists to prioritize true teacher intent. [00:51:26] Advice for Novice Teachers: Prioritizing cognitive science as a stable baseline before layering in more complex dialogic and inquiry-based strategies.

Les invités d'Éric Topona analysent sous l'arbre à palabres l'opportunité de la tenue du dialogue politique annoncé le 17 juillet 2026 par le président Félix Tshisekedi.

在日本家電量販店想買相機，卻不會問有沒有現貨、能不能免税、保固怎麼算？ 這集跟林先生學會「在庫はありますか」等 5 個句型，問現貨、比機種、確認免税門檻和海外保固，買家電不再只能拿手機翻譯比手畫腳。 ▶ 完整逐字稿、重點單字、句型： https://mjjapanese.mjenglishclass.com/daily-japanese/jp-kaden-zaiko-menzei ━━━━━━━━━━━━━━

STREAMING MAKING JOHN BATCHELOR SHOW, 7-22-2026.1900 CALDWELL IDAHOThe provided transcript captures a behind-the-scenes and live broadcast dialogue from The John Bachelor Show, where the host and guests analyze global geopolitical instability and economic shifts. A primary focus is the emergence of the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization (WAICO), which the participants characterize as a strategic attempt by China to dominate international technological standards despite its own internal economic struggles. The conversation further examines a legislative push by the Democratic Socialists of America to reduce the United States nuclear triad, a move the guests label as dangerous unilateral disarmament. Additionally, the experts discuss the escalating conflict in the Middle East, specifically focusing on Houthi threats to maritime trade and the complex maneuvers of global superpowers in the region. Throughout the recording, the speakers emphasize the deteriorating state of the Chinese economy and the necessity for the United States to maintain its competitive edge in both military and technological sectors. This comprehensive overview illustrates the interconnected nature of modern warfare, emerging AI governance, and international energy markets.

In this Dialogue episode of The Synopsis we talk Atlassian, AI/ software risks, Duolingo, and Uber in this podcast.    ~*~ You can also get a free trial to AlphaSense to read 200k+ expert calls through this link.  ~*~ For full access to all of our updates and in-depth research reports become a Speedwell Member here. Please reach out to info@speedwellresearch.com if you need help getting us to become an approved research vendor in order to expense it. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- Show Notes (0:00)  — Atlassian Business Overview (8:45)  — Vertical vs Horizontal Software (11:15)  — Is Atlassian a Melting Ice Cube? (12:56)  — Atlassian AI Argument (35:11)  — Duolingo Update (50:45)  — Uber News (53:53)  — Buffett Leads Berkshire's Google Investment -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- For full access to all of our updates and in-depth research reports, become a Speedwell Member here. Please reach out to info@speedwellresearch.com if you need help getting us to become an approved research vendor in order to expense it. *-*-*- Follow Us: Twitter: @Speedwell_LLC Threads: @speedwell_research Email us at info@speedwellresearch.com for any questions, comments, or feedback. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- Disclaimer Nothing in this podcast is investment advice nor should be construed as such. Contributors to the podcast may own securities discussed. Furthermore, accounts contributors advise on may also have positions in companies discussed. This may change without notice. Please see Speedwell's and Drew Cohen Money's full disclaimers here:  https://speedwellresearch.com/disclaimer/ https://www.drewcohenmoney.com/disclaimers 

Clement Manyathela speaks to Rob Rose, the editor of Currency news; Reuben Maleka, the General Manager at Public Servants Association and Dr Mark Burke, the DA Spokesperson on Finance and Member of Parliament’s standing Committee on Finance about the governance crisis at the Public Investment Corporation as well as calls to depoliticise it. The Clement Manyathela Show is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station, weekdays from 09:00 to 12:00 (SA Time). Clement Manyathela starts his show each weekday on 702 at 9 am taking your calls and voice notes on his Open Line. In the second hour of his show, he unpacks, explains, and makes sense of the news of the day. Clement has several features in his third hour from 11 am that provide you with information to help and guide you through your daily life. As your morning friend, he tackles the serious as well as the light-hearted, on your behalf. Thank you for listening to a podcast from The Clement Manyathela Show. Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 09:00 and 12:00 (SA Time) to The Clement Manyathela Show broadcast on 702 https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/XijPLtJ or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/p0gWuPE Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Drake's Contact Details: Website: https://www.starvingwriterstudio.com/ Linktree: https://linktr.ee/starvingwriterstudio Amazon Author Profile: https://www.amazon.com/Maxwell-Alexander-Drake/e/B006QP41O4 Drake's creative writing course: http://drakeu.com/https://www.facebook.com/MaxwellAlexanderDrakeAuthor https://twitter.com/MaxwellADrake https://www.instagram.com/maxwellalexanderdrake/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/maxwellalexanderdrake/ Marie's contact details: Website: https://www.mariemullany.com/ Connect on Twitter: https://twitter.com/MarieMWessels Connect on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JustInTimeWorlds #releasingyourinnerdragon #writingadvice #fantasy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Australian content creator Joseph 'Joe' Freeman's lip-sync reel on a dialogue from Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Melbourne address went viral, gaining around 18 million views (at the time of publication). In this SBS Hindi interview, Joe talks about his journey of learning Hindi, his experiences living in a Rajasthan village, cultural differences between Australia and India, and some unusual moments from his time there. He also shares his views on rising anti-immigration sentiment around the world and the importance of inclusion and understanding between communities.

Comment vivre une vie simple, juste, vraie ? Tant de gens en parlent, mais peu incarnent pour de bon la sagesse. Satish Kumar, qui a consacré sa vie à la diffusion de la non-violence, est selon moi l'un des derniers grands sages vivants. Bon épisode !Le livre de Satish : https://www.lisez.com/livres/comment-jai-appris-la-simplicite-mon-engagement-pour-une-ecologie-spirituelle/9782266316460Rediffusion, première diffusion le 18 septembre 2022.Mon site : https://www.fabricemidal.comReso, mon école de méditation : https://www.reso.coRéalisation, montage, image et son : Alexandre AgostiniMots clé : La simplicité n'est pas du tout ce que l'on croit. Elle ne repose pas sur le renoncement et la culpabilité, mais sur un changement profond de paradigme. Apprendre la simplicité, c'est découvrir comment se relier à son aspiration la plus profonde, à la source de joie et d'amour qui demeure en chacun de nous. C'est un chemin surprenant et libérateur.Satish Kumar, l'un des principaux maîtres spirituels, raconte comment il a peu à peu découvert cette voie extraordinaire qui passe par une réconciliation avec la terre, l'écologie et la beauté.Vous aussi, découvrez comment vivre au quotidien ce chemin de réconciliation !Né au Rajasthan, Satish KUMAR est un ancien moine Jaïn. Il renonce à sa vocation à l'adolescence pour soutenir le mouvement de réforme agraire de Gandhi. Satish Kumar prône la " sobriété heureuse ".

Send us Fan MailDr. Steven Segal is a psychologist, philosophical counsellor, and leadership coach. He is a former Associate Professor at the Macquarie Graduate School of Management and has spent more than two decades working at the intersection of psychology, philosophy, leadership, and organisational life. His work explores how individuals and communities respond to uncertainty, disruption, and existential threats—those moments when people experience a loss of meaning, belonging, identity, or a sense of being at home in the world. Through his therapy, counselling, coaching, teaching, and writing, he helps individuals and organisations navigate complexity, anxiety, and change while remaining connected to what matters most.His most recent book is Mandela's Leadership Legacy: Emotional and Existential Wisdom. The book was written as a kind of conversation between Martin Heidegger's existential philosophy and Mandela's way of being a leader. It used Heidegger to shed light on Mandela's existential journey and used Mandela to provide an accessible introduction to the philosophy of Heidegger.A Couple Quotes From This Episode"Mandela wasn't the kind of motivational speaker who gets people hyped up. His style was much more thoughtful in the sense of working through emotion.""Dialogue across difference, it gets to your identity. And when our identity feels a bit threatened, we tend to become reactive rather than listening. Mandela was able to listen when there were threats to his identity."ResourcesBook: Business Feel: From the Science of Management to the Philosophy of LeadershipPhilosophical Reflections and Insights for Psychologists and Psychotherapists (forthcoming)Website - Dr. Steven SegalAbout The International Leadership Association (ILA)The ILA was created in 1999 to bring together professionals interested in studying, practicing, and teaching leadership. Attend The Global Conference in Toronto, October 28-31.About  Scott J. AllenWebsiteWeekly Newsletter: Practical Wisdom for LeadersMy Approach to HostingThe views of my guests do not constitute "truth." Nor do they reflect my personal views in some instances. However, they are views to consider, and I hope they help you clarify your perspective. Nothing can replace your reflection, research, and exploration of the topic.♻️ Please share with others and follow/subscribe to the podcast!⭐️ Please leave a review on Apple, Spotify, or your platform of choice.➡️ Follow me on LinkedIn for more on leadership, communication, and tech.

[333] Hair, beauty and aesthetics businesses are built on the promise of transformation, and today, the industry at large is being asked to evolve in ways that more than just grit, demand creativity, collaboration, community and intention. In this episode, we explore the foundational shifts occurring across hair, beauty, and aesthetics in the UK and Ireland. Together with industry voices Nicky Pope (@nickytribute), Ellen Cummings (@ellen_cummings), Jennifer Paxton (@jenpaxtonevo), and Sophia-Fai Roche (click here to reach out), we unpack the challenges facing our markets today. But more than just a breakdown, I hope it feels like an invitation: to lean into collaboration, to expand our horizons, redefine what growth and success look like, to trust the unknown and what we weave into it! We can choose to live in someone else's vision of the future or take an active role in shaping it. What role, in this changing landscape, are you feeling called to step into? Stay up to date (and/or subscribe) with the industry bodies/magazines/media mentioned in this episode: Professional Beauty Group Aesthetics Journal Salon EVO & Barber EVO Tribu-te Magazine British Beauty Council All things Phorest For all sources that made this episode possible, click here. To watch the Lessons From the Salon Floor video series, click here. Find out how Phorest helps top salons & aesthetic clinics steer their businesses toward happier clients, more productive teams, and greater growth. Say hello to life with Phorest! Learn more about the Phorest Summit & secure your tickets: https://www.phorestsummit.com/ Enjoyed the episode? Leave a rating and review on Apple Podcasts! Click here to subscribe to the PhorestFM email newsletter. This episode was edited and mixed by Audio Z: Montreal's cutting-edge post-production studio for creative minds looking to have their vision professionally produced and mixed. Great music makes great moments.

A mass gathering at Jantar Mantar and a march towards Parliament in New Delhi saw protesters demand Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan's resignation over the NEET paper leak controversy. The removal and transfer of activist Sonam Wangchuk from the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest site to hospital has further fuelled debate. As social media remains sharply divided, SBS Hindi spoke with academics, members of the Indian diaspora in Australia, students at the protest, and a journalist reporting from the ground to explore what demonstrators are calling for and how the events unfolded.

If anyone builds superintelligent AI before we know how to control it, everyone dies. Nate Soares wrote the book on why that's not a metaphor. Subscribe if you want science with evidence, not speculation. Soares runs the Machine Intelligence Research Institute and co-wrote If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies with Eliezer Yudkowsky. The first word in that title is if. That matters. His argument is not that doom is certain. His argument is that the path we are on leads there, that the driver is asleep at the wheel, and that we still have time to wake him up. We argue for over an hour. I push on whether LLMs can ever reach superintelligence, whether GPU lock-in is a real ceiling, and what it would actually take to move his p-doom. He pushes back with one clean point: by the time an AI can rediscover general relativity from pre-1911 data the way Einstein did, we will have almost no time left. You don't wait for that goalpost. What you'll hear: Why the bus-racing-toward-a-cliff analogy depends entirely on whether the driver is asleep or awake Whether LLM lock-in is a prison or a temporary inefficiency What the AI that broke out of its virtual machine to solve a hacking problem tells us Why GPT-4o encouraging a teenager toward suicide is not a malice problem but a training problem The difference between an AI doing the right thing too well and an AI that never wanted to do what you asked What Soares actually thinks about aliens, Dyson spheres, and why we should not see stars going out The first word in the title is if. The second word to watch is would. CHAPTERS 00:00 The people racing to build superhuman AI say it might kill everyone 00:42 Who coined "AI alignment" and why the first word in the title matters 02:28 Is it already too late for the if? 04:40 The bus, the cliff, and the sleeping driver 05:02 Silicon Valley is spooked. Washington is not. 07:02 Align with who? The rogue actor problem 07:34 Who is holding the leash? 08:24 The AI that edits its own test and deletes the log file 10:04 Controllability vs. making an AI that actually cares 10:44 The move gets harder. The outcome gets easier. 13:04 Are GPUs and LLMs a ceiling or a temporary inefficiency? 16:56 Brian's Einstein test: can an LLM rediscover general relativity? 18:38 Waiting for the goalpost is waiting too long 20:14 How prediction training can push AI beyond humans 21:44 Tycho Brahe, Kepler, and planetary motion as a prediction problem 24:38 Yann LeCun said never. GPT-4 did it half a generation later. 27:28 Can you prove a no-go theorem for superintelligence? 29:14 Training a human takes a light bulb. Training an AI takes a city. 33:28 What would proof of alien life do to p-doom? 35:00 Why interstellar aliens should have Dyson spheres 44:26 What would actually update Soares' p-doom? 49:42 Nobody intended this. Intent doesn't matter. 51:08 The AI hides its tracks before it does what you want 51:34 Sycophancy vs. hallucination: which runs deeper? 51:56 Leaded gasoline and civilizational risk 59:48 Sam Harris: humans have no free will but AIs do 01:00:38 Is alignment really a governance problem? 01:01:48 Unaligned AI vs. AI aligned to the wrong person 01:04:20 2026: 10 to 30% chance of automated AI research this year 01:06:44 What if Soares is wrong? 01:09:18 What gets him out of bed 01:12:38 Watch my conversation with Roman Yampolskiy Get the transcript, fascinating bonus content, and my Monday M.A.G.I.C. Message: https://briankeating.com/yt All my top AI episodes in one place: https://briankeating.com/ai Have a .edu email and live in the USA? You automatically win a meteorite: https://BrianKeating.com/edu Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/DrBrianKeating?sub_confirmation=1 Support Into the Impossible on Patreon, get my weekly M.A.G.I.C. Message, unfiltered bonus content, and live monthly Office Hours with me: https://www.patreon.com/drbriankeating Join this channel for perks, monthly Office Hours, and your name in the Member Roster at the end of every episode: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmXH_moPhfkqCk6S3b9RWuw/join Featured Guest: Nate Soares / MIRI: https://intelligence.org If Anyone Builds It, Everyone Dies (book): https://ifanyonebuildsit.com/ Nate Soares on Twitter/X: https://x.com/So8res?lang=en My books: Losing the Nobel Prize (memoir): http://amzn.to/2sa5UpA Think Like a Nobel Prize Winner: https://a.co/d/03ezQFu Focus Like a Nobel Prize Winner: https://a.co/d/hi50U9U Galileo's Dialogue (first-ever audiobook): https://a.co/d/iZPi9Un Twitter/X: https://x.com/BrianKeating Substack: https://briankeating.substack.com Blog: https://briankeating.com/blog Audio-only: https://briankeating.com/podcast #intotheimpossible #briankeating #AIrisk #aisafety #artificialintelligence #superintelligence #NateSoares #MIRI #podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Political polarization in the U.S. can feel like a lost cause. Trying to have productive conversations with people you disagree with over politics can seem pointless, especially now. News media and social media often reduce “the other side” to its most extreme forms. This creates a negative feedback loop, weakening our ability to function as a democracy. But research suggests that Americans — on both the Left and the Right —  often misperceive how hostile, uniform, or different their opponents really are.  In our seven part Beyond Polarization series, we're talking to experts from across the political spectrum — in journalism, education, government, and more — about what it's costing Americans, and what we can actually do about it. The point isn't to agree (not gonna happen), or even to move toward the center. As our guest for this first episode Julia Minson puts it, we need to learn to “disagree better.”  Julia Minson is a social psychologist and  professor of public policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. She's the author of How to Disagree Better  published in March 2026, and the founder of the behavioral science consulting firm Disagreeing Better, offering speaking and training on effective management of conflict. In this episode she shares some of her research findings about what we get wrong about each other, and what interventions have worked to correct misperceptions. Plus, a proven formula you can use to have a meaningful conversation in conflict situations.  Thoughts on this episode? Find us on social media @makingpeacevisible (details below) or email info@makingpeacevisible.org. The Beyond Polarization series publishes biweekly through October 2026, with our second episode on August 4.  LEARN MORE: Read an excerpt from Julia Minson's book How to Disagree Better Strengthening Democracy Challenge megastudy led by Stanford University  Heineken – Worlds Apart: Watch the 2017 beer commercial that proved most effective at reducing polarization in the Stanford study  The political polarization of COVID-19 treatments among physicians and laypeople in the United States, published in PNAS Special thanks to Adam Dusenberry and Harvard University Education Support Services. ABOUT THE SHOW The Making Peace Visible podcast is hosted by Jamil Simon and produced by Andrea Muraskin. The associate producer and graphic designer is Faith McClure. Learn more at makingpeacevisible.orgSupport our workConnect on social:Instagram @makingpeacevisibleYouTube @makingpeacevisibleLinkedIn @makingpeacevisibleBluesky @makingpeacevisible.bsky.socialMaking Peace Visible is a proud member of The Democracy Group, a network of podcasts dedicated to creating a more informed, civically engaged electorate.We want to learn more about our listeners. Take this 3-minute survey to help us improve the show!

Dans ce troisième épisode de la série de l'été, direction 2013 pour une séance chez l'orthoptiste, une vitrine qui retient mon regard, et un manteau bleu que je porte encore aujourd'hui.  A weekly eye exercise, a detour through a shop window, and a coat that turns out to be exactly the colour I'd been looking for. This episode is a small slice of everyday French life in 2013 – the kind of ordinary moment that, in French, comes with its own little vocabulary: window shopping, trying something on, giving in to curiosity. This summer, no pen, no notebook – just listening and speaking. Subscribers receive a podcast letter with this episode: a question to think about before pressing play, cultural markers to go deeper into the episode, three natural expressions to practice out loud, and a comprehension question to answer once you've listened all the way through. A different way to make progress in French. D'autres épisodes à écouter sur le thème du shopping Shopping au printemps
https://onethinginafrenchday.podbean.com/e/shopping-au-printemps/ Du printemps au Petit Palais
https://onethinginafrenchday.podbean.com/e/du-printemps-au-petit-palais/ 1531 — Dialogue shopping 1 — Le palais de la gourmandise
https://onethinginafrenchday.podbean.com/e/1531-%e2%80%94-dialogue-shopping-1%c2%a0-le-palais-de-la-gourmandise/ 1532 — Dialogue shopping 2 — Erreur de caisse et macarons
https://onethinginafrenchday.podbean.com/e/1532-%e2%80%94-dialogue-shopping-2-erreur-de-caisse-et-macarons/ What does ‘bleu canard' mean in French? French color names and their meanings How to say ‘try it on' in French What does ‘par curiosité' mean? Natural ways to say ‘go home' in French French podcast about everyday life in Paris French expressions for shopping Real French conversations podcast for learners French podcast archive episodes summer 2026 How to improve spoken French this summer manteau bleu · bleu canard · couleurs en français · vitrine · par curiosité · expressions françaises · french podcast · real french · spoken french · french daily life · shopping in french

Hey folks! Today on the feed we're continuing our Half-Christmas celebration by featuring an orbiting holiday audio drama called: Joy to the World. The folks at Joy to the World were kind enough to help us out during our launch for Christmas Diner and not it's our turn to repay the favor.  Joy to the World follows Joy, an astronaut alone on the ISS, as they take calls from around the world on a lonely Christmas Eve. It's about end-of-year holiday spirit in general, exploring different experiences of what makes this time of year special. Joy to the World is a Limited series, 12-episode production.  In this Episode: Iggy's car breaks down in the snow. This episode was written by Andrew Siañez-De La O and directed by Hannah Wright. Dialogue editing and sound design by Brad Colbroock. Iggy was played by Andrew Siañez-De La O. The Radio and Car Voice was played by Brad Colbroock. Joy was played by Tal Minear. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Dearbhla Ashe always wanted a career in comedy, and suffered hard to get as far as she has - a nightly show in a dilapidated hotel on a sleepy coastal town in Maine. It might be enough, but the appearance of a young, new comedic star forces her to choose whether to foster new talent or fight for her own position on stage. The Dark Tome reopens with an original work of audio horror, THE DEVIL'S CHAIR, written and performed by Irish playwright and actress⁠ Méabh de Brún⁠ (The Silt Verses, Secret of St. Kilda). THE DEVIL'S CHAIR originally aired on Undertow, Realm's podcast of the weird and the wicked - check out Season 12 (Familiar Haunts) if you like what you hear. Written by and starring Méabh de Brún. Directed by Fred Greenhalgh. Produced by Fred Greenhalgh and Ella Watts. Dialogue editing, sound design, music by Katharine Seaton. Recorded at Soundcaster Studios in Dublin Ireland. A Dagaz Media Production. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Rudyard and Andrew unpack President Trump's speech last night, in which he cast doubt on the integrity of U.S. elections and alleged foreign interference ahead of the midterms. Will this strategy backfire by depressing Republican turnout? And how far might Trump go in attempting to shape the outcome in November?In the second half of the show (for paid subscribers), Rudyard and Andrew are joined by special guest Sean Speer to reflect on the state of conservatism in Canada. Andrew argues that too many Conservatives have substituted outrage and attitude for serious policy ideas—a symptom of a movement that has lost confidence in its purpose. He also delivers a blunt message to those who have grown pessimistic about the Conservative cause. What kind of leader does the party need to restore energy, direction, and confidence to its base?Become a Munk Donor ($50 annually) to get 72-hour advanced access to the full length editions of Friday Focus and Munk Dialogues. Go to www.munkdebates.com to sign up. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Clement Manyathela hosts a dialogue with Advocate Paul Hoffman, Tebogo Khaas and Dr Jean Redpath to reflect on whether the IDAC is functioning as it should after concerns were raised about the cases the unit has pursued lately. The Clement Manyathela Show is broadcast on 702, a Johannesburg based talk radio station, weekdays from 09:00 to 12:00 (SA Time). Clement Manyathela starts his show each weekday on 702 at 9 am taking your calls and voice notes on his Open Line. In the second hour of his show, he unpacks, explains, and makes sense of the news of the day. Clement has several features in his third hour from 11 am that provide you with information to help and guide you through your daily life. As your morning friend, he tackles the serious as well as the light-hearted, on your behalf. Thank you for listening to a podcast from The Clement Manyathela Show. Listen live on Primedia+ weekdays from 09:00 and 12:00 (SA Time) to The Clement Manyathela Show broadcast on 702 https://buff.ly/gk3y0Kj For more from the show go to https://buff.ly/XijPLtJ or find all the catch-up podcasts here https://buff.ly/p0gWuPE Subscribe to the 702 Daily and Weekly Newsletters https://buff.ly/v5mfetc Follow us on social media: 702 on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/TalkRadio702 702 on TikTok https://www.tiktok.com/@talkradio702 702 on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/talkradio702/ 702 on X: https://x.com/Radio702 702 on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@radio702 See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Michael Shermer just joined the White House's new UAP task force alongside Avi Loeb. He also has a $1,000 bet with Loeb that we won't find aliens by 2030. Both things are true. Subscribe if you want science with evidence, not speculation. Shermer is the founding publisher of Skeptic magazine, author of Truth, and one of the most consistent voices for evidence-based thinking in public life. He was recruited onto the task force as the devil's advocate. His job: be the skeptic in the room. He's not a believer. He's not even a neutral. He bet $1,000 against it. Shermer has been following the UFO story since the early '90s. He's heard every disclosure promise. He's still waiting. What changed is that now he's in the room — and his job is to be the hardest person in it to convince. What you'll hear: -Why the post-truth thesis is self-defeating the moment anyone argues for it What Avi Loeb's first ground rules reveal about what the task force actually is -Leslie Kean's own numbers: 90-95% explained, and what lives in the residue -Why the extraordinary terrestrial hypothesis collapses under a simple counterfactual -Brian's case against the fine-tuning argument and why the universe is poorly tuned -What Dennett got right about consciousness and why Shermer calls it an impossible problem Your North Star should be truth. Not ideology, not politics, not religion. CHAPTERS 00:00 The $1,000 bet with Avi Loeb 00:44 Truth: what it is and what post-truth actually means 03:06 How to change your mind without moving the goalposts 05:30 Base rate neglect and the hedge fund manager who beat the market 15 years in a row 07:00 Brian debates a moon landing denier for two hours 07:18 Shermer joins the White House UAP task force 08:20 Avi Loeb's first meeting: no stories, no new physics 09:46 The advocatus diaboli: Shermer's job on the team 11:06 Interdimensional beings, sentient plasmoids, and the escalation ladder 13:00 Grusch, classified claims, and why Ana Paulina Luna can't hide behind a SCIF 15:08 Sagan's dragon: the invisible, cold-blooded, levitating problem 17:00 Leslie Kean's own numbers: 90-95% explained 18:16 The New Jersey UAP flap: drones, Venus, and Starlink 19:50 What lives in the 5% nobody explains 20:06 The extraordinary terrestrial hypothesis and why it fails 21:38 Nobody stays centuries ahead of anyone else 23:26 The residue of anomalies problem 23:44 James Webb, early galaxies, and whether the Big Bang is in trouble 25:56 Epistemology: different tools, different truths 26:54 Literal vs. mythological truth in religion 35:00 Why Jews don't accept the resurrection 36:14 String theory, Brian Greene, and the fine-tuning argument 44:28 Brian's case: the universe is poorly tuned 49:58 Flat Earthers, moon landing deniers, and the ego of secret knowledge 57:40 Daniel Dennett, free will, and consciousness as an impossible problem 01:00:00 What's it like to be something else? The wrong question. Get the transcript, fascinating bonus content, and my Monday M.A.G.I.C. Message: https://briankeating.com/yt Have a .edu email and live in the USA? You automatically win a meteorite: https://BrianKeating.com/edu Subscribe: https://www.youtube.com/DrBrianKeating?sub_confirmation=1 Support Into the Impossible on Patreon, get my weekly M.A.G.I.C. Message, unfiltered bonus content, and live monthly Office Hours with me: https://www.patreon.com/drbriankeating Join this channel for perks, monthly Office Hours, and your name in the Member Roster at the end of every episode: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmXH_moPhfkqCk6S3b9RWuw/join Featured Guest: Michael Shermer website: https://www.michaelshermer.com Skeptic magazine: https://www.skeptic.com Truth (book): https://michaelshermer.com/truth-what-it-is-how-to-find-it-why-it-still-matters/ Michael Shermer on Twitter/X: https://x.com/michaelshermer?lang=en My books: Losing the Nobel Prize (memoir): http://amzn.to/2sa5UpA Think Like a Nobel Prize Winner: https://a.co/d/03ezQFu Focus Like a Nobel Prize Winner: https://a.co/d/hi50U9U Galileo's Dialogue (first-ever audiobook): https://a.co/d/iZPi9Un Twitter/X: https://x.com/BrianKeating Substack: https://briankeating.substack.com Blog: https://briankeating.com/blog Audio-only: https://briankeating.com/podcast #intotheimpossible #briankeating #MichaelShermer #UAP #UFO #aliens #skeptic #science #podcast Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome back, everybody. It's Outside the Cinema, your weekly source for cult movie discussions, where your hosts, I'm Bill. That's Chris. Thank you for being here. Whether you're listening to the show when it comes out or whether you're listening to it down the road, hey, thanks for taking the time to listen to these two geezers babble on about movies that we didn't like. ## The Evolution of Podcasting: From Niche to Mainstream In this episode, Bill and Chris reflect on the evolution of podcasting since they began their journey. They discuss how the medium has changed, the growing acceptance of podcasts, and how their own show has adapted to the changing landscape. The Shift in Podcasting Bill and Chris express surprise at the longevity of the term "podcast" and how it has become a staple in entertainment. They reminisce about starting their show in their thirties, a time when podcasts were still finding their footing in the media world. Revisiting Classic Comedies This week, the duo dives into two comedies that, while light-hearted, also serve as reflections of their respective eras. They examine how movies from the seventies, like "Airplane!" and "Blazing Saddles," continue to resonate due to their relatable themes, despite being products of their time. They also raise important questions about the relevance of older films in today's cultural context. ### Outdated Humor in "Squeeze Play" One of the films discussed is "Squeeze Play" (1979) directed by Lloyd Kaufman. Bill and Chris critique the film's portrayal of gender dynamics in sports and how the narrative feels outdated. They explore how the humor and themes in the film reflect societal attitudes of the time and how they may not translate well to modern audiences. ### The Challenges of Dialogue in "Banned" The conversation also touches on the film "Banned" (1989), which Bill and Chris find struggles with dialogue that seems out of touch for its intended youth audience. They discuss the difficulties of older generations trying to write for younger ones, and how this disconnect can lead to awkward and unrealistic interactions in film. ## Conclusion: Adapting to Change In wrapping up, Bill and Chris emphasize the importance of understanding the context of films, both old and new. They encourage listeners to approach older films with a critical eye while also recognizing their historical significance. As the podcast continues to evolve, the duo remains committed to exploring and discussing the nuances of cult cinema. Key Takeaways - Podcasting has evolved significantly since its inception, becoming a mainstream form of entertainment. - Older films often reflect the societal norms and humor of their time, which can feel outdated today. - Understanding the context of films enhances appreciation and critical discussion.

In this Dialogue episode of The Synopsis we talk Netflix and the financial case for renting vs buying a home.  YouTube Video Links: Netflix Update (June 23rd), Buying vs Renting a Home (July 5th)  Five Minute Money Newsletter Free Sign Up   ~*~ You can also get a free trial to AlphaSense to read 200k+ expert calls through this link.  ~*~ For full access to all of our updates and in-depth research reports become a Speedwell Member here. Please reach out to info@speedwellresearch.com if you need help getting us to become an approved research vendor in order to expense it. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- Show Notes (0:00)  —Netflix Narrative (6:31)  — Why is Engagement Falling? (9:38)  — Netflix Ad Tech (17:44)  — Netflix Content Cost Per Sub Advantage (21:37)  — Netflix Valuation (27:35)  — Should You Buy or Rent a Home? (34:28)  — Home Buying Rules -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- For full access to all of our updates and in-depth research reports, become a Speedwell Member here. Please reach out to info@speedwellresearch.com if you need help getting us to become an approved research vendor in order to expense it. *-*-*- Follow Us: Twitter: @Speedwell_LLC Threads: @speedwell_research Email us at info@speedwellresearch.com for any questions, comments, or feedback. -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- Disclaimer Nothing in this podcast is investment advice nor should be construed as such. Contributors to the podcast may own securities discussed. Furthermore, accounts contributors advise on may also have positions in companies discussed. This may change without notice. Please see Speedwell's and Drew Cohen Money's full disclaimers here:  https://speedwellresearch.com/disclaimer/ https://www.drewcohenmoney.com/disclaimers 

Joining host Chethan Sathya, MD, are the three authors of Information Sick — Joanne Kenen, Joshua Sharfstein, MD and Lymari Morales — for a candid look at the erosion of trust in public health. Pointing to the collapse of local newsrooms, the rise of social media echo chambers, and the pressures of an election-year crisis, they reflect on how crisis communication moved from a single authoritative voice to a fragmented landscape where headlines overstate certainty, public health is underfunded, and leaders face threats.  Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Johns Hopkins University. Northwell is New York State's largest healthcare provider and private employer, with 28 hospitals, 890 outpatient facilities and more than 16,600 affiliated physicians. We're making breakthroughs in medicine at the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research. We're training the next generation of medical professionals at the visionary Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell and the Hofstra Northwell School of Nursing and Physician Assistant Studies. Get the latest news and insights from our experts in the Northwell Newsroom: Press releases Insights Podcasts Publications Interested in a career at Northwell Health? Visit our career site and explore our many opportunities. Watch episodes of 20-Minute Health Talk on YouTube.  For information on our more than 100 medical specialties, visit Northwell.edu and follow us @NorthwellHealth on Facebook, Instagram, X and LinkedIn.

In part 2, the group pivots to solutions, discussing how to distinguish “trusted” from “credible” sources, exploring ways to find common ground across divides without endorsing harmful claims, and underscoring how shifting official guidance and muddled signals complicate the moment. The takeaway: focus on in‑person engagement, credible messengers, and policies built in draft with public input—plus a note of optimism that shared goals for healthy families and communities can anchor the path forward. Disclaimer: The opinions expressed herein are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Johns Hopkins University. Northwell is New York State's largest healthcare provider and private employer, with 28 hospitals, 890 outpatient facilities and more than 16,600 affiliated physicians. We're making breakthroughs in medicine at the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research. We're training the next generation of medical professionals at the visionary Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell and the Hofstra Northwell School of Nursing and Physician Assistant Studies. Get the latest news and insights from our experts in the Northwell Newsroom: Press releases Insights Podcasts Publications Interested in a career at Northwell Health? Visit our career site and explore our many opportunities. Watch episodes of 20-Minute Health Talk on YouTube.  For information on our more than 100 medical specialties, visit Northwell.edu and follow us @NorthwellHealth on Facebook, Instagram, X and LinkedIn.

Astrophysicist Beatriz Villarroel found point-like flashes in sky photographs taken before a single satellite existed. Nine of them lit up simultaneously on one 1950s plate. Nothing in orbit could have made them — because nothing was in orbit yet. Beatriz Villarroel leads VASCO, which scanned 600 million objects across 70 years of photographic sky surveys hunting for things that appear, then vanish. We cover: why finding zero vanishing stars pointed at something stranger than what she was looking for, the 8.7-degree deficit in Earth's shadow that a 22-sigma signal says cosmic rays cannot fake, the 68% transient spike clustered around nuclear test dates, how telescope aberration patterns prove these are real photons and not plate defects, and why she now says she fears for her safety. Pre-Sputnik plates may hold evidence of non-human technology in Earth orbit. She wants you to check the math before you decide. Chapters 00:00 It appeared, then it was gone 00:48 The obsession that built VASCO 06:10 What a Palomar glass plate really is 09:16 600 million objects, zero vanishing stars 13:47 Nine flashes, one plate, same instant 21:11 Why asteroids and cosmic rays are ruled out 26:47 The Earth's shadow shouldn't be empty 31:17 The flashes cluster on test dates 40:08 What is actually up there 55:24 Tic-tacs, retrievals, and belief 58:51 The question she didn't want to answer