Podcast appearances and mentions of George Lakoff

Oscar Trimboli has spent his life helping people hear what's not being said. As a listening expert and advisor to some of the world's largest companies, he's discovered a surprising truth: most of us only catch a fraction of what's being communicated. We hear the words, but miss the silences, emotion, and meaning beneath them. In this episode, Dart and Oscar explore the five levels of listening, what it takes to make someone feel truly seen, and how listening can be taught, measured, and embedded into teams.Oscar Trimboli is a speaker, leadership coach, and the author of How to Listen. He hosts the Apple award-winning podcast Deep Listening and has worked with clients such as Microsoft, AstraZeneca, and Cisco to improve communication and collaboration through listening.In this episode, Dart and Oscar discuss:- The five levels of listening- What it takes to make someone feel truly seen at work- Why most of us only hear 14% of what someone really means- The link between listening and action- How listening can reduce meetings and increase effectiveness- Why silence is the most powerful listening tool- What metaphors reveal about how people see the world- How to teach listening as a core leadership skill- And other topics…Oscar Trimboli is a speaker, author, and host of the Deep Listening podcast. His mission is to create 100 million deep listeners in the workplace. He's advised organizations including Microsoft, AstraZeneca, and HSBC on how to listen beyond the words and build cultures of understanding. His latest book, How to Listen, explores the science and practice of listening well—and why most of us do far less of it than we think.Resources Mentioned:How to Listen, by Oscar Trimboli: https://www.amazon.com/How-Listen-Discover-Hidden-Communication/dp/1774581914The Deep Listening Podcast: https://www.oscartrimboli.com/podcast/Listening Quiz (Discover your listening barriers): https://www.listeningquiz.comUnreasonable Hospitality, by Will Guidara: https://www.amazon.com/Unreasonable-Hospitality-author/dp/1529146828Don't Think of an Elephant! by George Lakoff, Howard Dean, & Don Hazen: https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Think-Elephant-Values-Politics/dp/1931498717Connect with Oscar:Website: https://www.oscartrimboli.comLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/oscartrimboli Work with Dart:Dart is the CEO and co-founder of the work design firm 11fold. Build work that makes employees feel alive, connected to their work, and focused on what's most important to the business. Book a call at 11fold.com.

Peter Brown's fascinating Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD (Princeton UP, 2014) chronicles the changing conceptions of wealth and treasure in late antiquity and the first centuries of Christianity. For our 2020 series in the rise of money (we also spoke to Thomas Piketty and Christine Desan) Brown related the emergence, in the 3rd and 4th century AD, of striking new ideas about charity and how to include the poor inside a religious community. Brown explains the importance of civic euergetism in the Greek and Roman worldview–i.e. benefaction and charity strictly confined to the good of the city. In early Christianity, this was replaced by compensatory almsgiving by the rich to benefit the lowly poor, or beggars. That notion of the rich being “less likely to enter heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle”–that, says Brown, “was Jesus at its wildest.” Augustine even preached about almsgiving as “like a traveller's check” that let the rich bank up credit in heaven. But most crucial of all to Brown's argument about changed ideas of wealth is that Christianity initiated the world-transformational notion of corporate identity. Before Oxford, before the East India Company, before IBM, the “managerial Bishop” (Brown's brilliant coinage) is not wealthy in his own right, but is an agent of “impersonal continuity.”.Brown thinks Foucault got this kind of “pastoralism” in Church leaders partially right. But Foucault–“an old fashioned Catholic in many ways” Brown remarks slyly–underestimated the desire of the Christian community to designate a “consumer-driven” church hierarchy in which they can invest. Pressed on the question of resonance to our own day, Brown (as a “good semi-Durkheimian of the Mary Douglas variety”) stresses that “these are almost incommensurable societies.” And he does note an ominous Roman parallel in present-day “personalization of power”–understanding the odious Putin by reading Seneca. Nonetheless, Brown makes clear his enduring admiration for Late Antiquity–compared to classical Greece and perhaps to our own day–because of its “remarkable tolerance for anomaly.” Brown has that too, more power to him! Mentioned in the Episode Peter Brown, Body and Society (1968) Peter Brown,. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (1968) Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints (1981) Peter Brown, The Ransom of the Soul (2015) Evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siè (Economic Poverty and Social Poverty) Augustine, Confessions (c. 400 AD and many other works available here ) Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (on priests and the importance of the pastoral or shepherding metaphor) George Lakoff and Michael Johnson, Metaphors We Live By Seneca, Letters from a Stoic Listen and Read Here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Peter Brown's fascinating Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD (Princeton UP, 2014) chronicles the changing conceptions of wealth and treasure in late antiquity and the first centuries of Christianity. For our 2020 series in the rise of money (we also spoke to Thomas Piketty and Christine Desan) Brown related the emergence, in the 3rd and 4th century AD, of striking new ideas about charity and how to include the poor inside a religious community. Brown explains the importance of civic euergetism in the Greek and Roman worldview–i.e. benefaction and charity strictly confined to the good of the city. In early Christianity, this was replaced by compensatory almsgiving by the rich to benefit the lowly poor, or beggars. That notion of the rich being “less likely to enter heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle”–that, says Brown, “was Jesus at its wildest.” Augustine even preached about almsgiving as “like a traveller's check” that let the rich bank up credit in heaven. But most crucial of all to Brown's argument about changed ideas of wealth is that Christianity initiated the world-transformational notion of corporate identity. Before Oxford, before the East India Company, before IBM, the “managerial Bishop” (Brown's brilliant coinage) is not wealthy in his own right, but is an agent of “impersonal continuity.”.Brown thinks Foucault got this kind of “pastoralism” in Church leaders partially right. But Foucault–“an old fashioned Catholic in many ways” Brown remarks slyly–underestimated the desire of the Christian community to designate a “consumer-driven” church hierarchy in which they can invest. Pressed on the question of resonance to our own day, Brown (as a “good semi-Durkheimian of the Mary Douglas variety”) stresses that “these are almost incommensurable societies.” And he does note an ominous Roman parallel in present-day “personalization of power”–understanding the odious Putin by reading Seneca. Nonetheless, Brown makes clear his enduring admiration for Late Antiquity–compared to classical Greece and perhaps to our own day–because of its “remarkable tolerance for anomaly.” Brown has that too, more power to him! Mentioned in the Episode Peter Brown, Body and Society (1968) Peter Brown,. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (1968) Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints (1981) Peter Brown, The Ransom of the Soul (2015) Evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siè (Economic Poverty and Social Poverty) Augustine, Confessions (c. 400 AD and many other works available here ) Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (on priests and the importance of the pastoral or shepherding metaphor) George Lakoff and Michael Johnson, Metaphors We Live By Seneca, Letters from a Stoic Listen and Read Here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Peter Brown's fascinating Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD (Princeton UP, 2014) chronicles the changing conceptions of wealth and treasure in late antiquity and the first centuries of Christianity. For our 2020 series in the rise of money (we also spoke to Thomas Piketty and Christine Desan) Brown related the emergence, in the 3rd and 4th century AD, of striking new ideas about charity and how to include the poor inside a religious community. Brown explains the importance of civic euergetism in the Greek and Roman worldview–i.e. benefaction and charity strictly confined to the good of the city. In early Christianity, this was replaced by compensatory almsgiving by the rich to benefit the lowly poor, or beggars. That notion of the rich being “less likely to enter heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle”–that, says Brown, “was Jesus at its wildest.” Augustine even preached about almsgiving as “like a traveller's check” that let the rich bank up credit in heaven. But most crucial of all to Brown's argument about changed ideas of wealth is that Christianity initiated the world-transformational notion of corporate identity. Before Oxford, before the East India Company, before IBM, the “managerial Bishop” (Brown's brilliant coinage) is not wealthy in his own right, but is an agent of “impersonal continuity.”.Brown thinks Foucault got this kind of “pastoralism” in Church leaders partially right. But Foucault–“an old fashioned Catholic in many ways” Brown remarks slyly–underestimated the desire of the Christian community to designate a “consumer-driven” church hierarchy in which they can invest. Pressed on the question of resonance to our own day, Brown (as a “good semi-Durkheimian of the Mary Douglas variety”) stresses that “these are almost incommensurable societies.” And he does note an ominous Roman parallel in present-day “personalization of power”–understanding the odious Putin by reading Seneca. Nonetheless, Brown makes clear his enduring admiration for Late Antiquity–compared to classical Greece and perhaps to our own day–because of its “remarkable tolerance for anomaly.” Brown has that too, more power to him! Mentioned in the Episode Peter Brown, Body and Society (1968) Peter Brown,. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (1968) Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints (1981) Peter Brown, The Ransom of the Soul (2015) Evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siè (Economic Poverty and Social Poverty) Augustine, Confessions (c. 400 AD and many other works available here ) Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (on priests and the importance of the pastoral or shepherding metaphor) George Lakoff and Michael Johnson, Metaphors We Live By Seneca, Letters from a Stoic Listen and Read Here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Peter Brown's fascinating Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD (Princeton UP, 2014) chronicles the changing conceptions of wealth and treasure in late antiquity and the first centuries of Christianity. For our 2020 series in the rise of money (we also spoke to Thomas Piketty and Christine Desan) Brown related the emergence, in the 3rd and 4th century AD, of striking new ideas about charity and how to include the poor inside a religious community. Brown explains the importance of civic euergetism in the Greek and Roman worldview–i.e. benefaction and charity strictly confined to the good of the city. In early Christianity, this was replaced by compensatory almsgiving by the rich to benefit the lowly poor, or beggars. That notion of the rich being “less likely to enter heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle”–that, says Brown, “was Jesus at its wildest.” Augustine even preached about almsgiving as “like a traveller's check” that let the rich bank up credit in heaven. But most crucial of all to Brown's argument about changed ideas of wealth is that Christianity initiated the world-transformational notion of corporate identity. Before Oxford, before the East India Company, before IBM, the “managerial Bishop” (Brown's brilliant coinage) is not wealthy in his own right, but is an agent of “impersonal continuity.”.Brown thinks Foucault got this kind of “pastoralism” in Church leaders partially right. But Foucault–“an old fashioned Catholic in many ways” Brown remarks slyly–underestimated the desire of the Christian community to designate a “consumer-driven” church hierarchy in which they can invest. Pressed on the question of resonance to our own day, Brown (as a “good semi-Durkheimian of the Mary Douglas variety”) stresses that “these are almost incommensurable societies.” And he does note an ominous Roman parallel in present-day “personalization of power”–understanding the odious Putin by reading Seneca. Nonetheless, Brown makes clear his enduring admiration for Late Antiquity–compared to classical Greece and perhaps to our own day–because of its “remarkable tolerance for anomaly.” Brown has that too, more power to him! Mentioned in the Episode Peter Brown, Body and Society (1968) Peter Brown,. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (1968) Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints (1981) Peter Brown, The Ransom of the Soul (2015) Evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siè (Economic Poverty and Social Poverty) Augustine, Confessions (c. 400 AD and many other works available here ) Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (on priests and the importance of the pastoral or shepherding metaphor) George Lakoff and Michael Johnson, Metaphors We Live By Seneca, Letters from a Stoic Listen and Read Here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Peter Brown's fascinating Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD (Princeton UP, 2014) chronicles the changing conceptions of wealth and treasure in late antiquity and the first centuries of Christianity. For our 2020 series in the rise of money (we also spoke to Thomas Piketty and Christine Desan) Brown related the emergence, in the 3rd and 4th century AD, of striking new ideas about charity and how to include the poor inside a religious community. Brown explains the importance of civic euergetism in the Greek and Roman worldview–i.e. benefaction and charity strictly confined to the good of the city. In early Christianity, this was replaced by compensatory almsgiving by the rich to benefit the lowly poor, or beggars. That notion of the rich being “less likely to enter heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle”–that, says Brown, “was Jesus at its wildest.” Augustine even preached about almsgiving as “like a traveller's check” that let the rich bank up credit in heaven. But most crucial of all to Brown's argument about changed ideas of wealth is that Christianity initiated the world-transformational notion of corporate identity. Before Oxford, before the East India Company, before IBM, the “managerial Bishop” (Brown's brilliant coinage) is not wealthy in his own right, but is an agent of “impersonal continuity.”.Brown thinks Foucault got this kind of “pastoralism” in Church leaders partially right. But Foucault–“an old fashioned Catholic in many ways” Brown remarks slyly–underestimated the desire of the Christian community to designate a “consumer-driven” church hierarchy in which they can invest. Pressed on the question of resonance to our own day, Brown (as a “good semi-Durkheimian of the Mary Douglas variety”) stresses that “these are almost incommensurable societies.” And he does note an ominous Roman parallel in present-day “personalization of power”–understanding the odious Putin by reading Seneca. Nonetheless, Brown makes clear his enduring admiration for Late Antiquity–compared to classical Greece and perhaps to our own day–because of its “remarkable tolerance for anomaly.” Brown has that too, more power to him! Mentioned in the Episode Peter Brown, Body and Society (1968) Peter Brown,. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (1968) Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints (1981) Peter Brown, The Ransom of the Soul (2015) Evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siè (Economic Poverty and Social Poverty) Augustine, Confessions (c. 400 AD and many other works available here ) Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (on priests and the importance of the pastoral or shepherding metaphor) George Lakoff and Michael Johnson, Metaphors We Live By Seneca, Letters from a Stoic Listen and Read Here.

Peter Brown's fascinating Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD (Princeton UP, 2014) chronicles the changing conceptions of wealth and treasure in late antiquity and the first centuries of Christianity. For our 2020 series in the rise of money (we also spoke to Thomas Piketty and Christine Desan) Brown related the emergence, in the 3rd and 4th century AD, of striking new ideas about charity and how to include the poor inside a religious community. Brown explains the importance of civic euergetism in the Greek and Roman worldview–i.e. benefaction and charity strictly confined to the good of the city. In early Christianity, this was replaced by compensatory almsgiving by the rich to benefit the lowly poor, or beggars. That notion of the rich being “less likely to enter heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle”–that, says Brown, “was Jesus at its wildest.” Augustine even preached about almsgiving as “like a traveller's check” that let the rich bank up credit in heaven. But most crucial of all to Brown's argument about changed ideas of wealth is that Christianity initiated the world-transformational notion of corporate identity. Before Oxford, before the East India Company, before IBM, the “managerial Bishop” (Brown's brilliant coinage) is not wealthy in his own right, but is an agent of “impersonal continuity.”.Brown thinks Foucault got this kind of “pastoralism” in Church leaders partially right. But Foucault–“an old fashioned Catholic in many ways” Brown remarks slyly–underestimated the desire of the Christian community to designate a “consumer-driven” church hierarchy in which they can invest. Pressed on the question of resonance to our own day, Brown (as a “good semi-Durkheimian of the Mary Douglas variety”) stresses that “these are almost incommensurable societies.” And he does note an ominous Roman parallel in present-day “personalization of power”–understanding the odious Putin by reading Seneca. Nonetheless, Brown makes clear his enduring admiration for Late Antiquity–compared to classical Greece and perhaps to our own day–because of its “remarkable tolerance for anomaly.” Brown has that too, more power to him! Mentioned in the Episode Peter Brown, Body and Society (1968) Peter Brown,. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (1968) Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints (1981) Peter Brown, The Ransom of the Soul (2015) Evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siè (Economic Poverty and Social Poverty) Augustine, Confessions (c. 400 AD and many other works available here ) Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (on priests and the importance of the pastoral or shepherding metaphor) George Lakoff and Michael Johnson, Metaphors We Live By Seneca, Letters from a Stoic Listen and Read Here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Peter Brown's fascinating Through the Eye of a Needle: Wealth, the Fall of Rome, and the Making of Christianity in the West, 350-550 AD (Princeton UP, 2014) chronicles the changing conceptions of wealth and treasure in late antiquity and the first centuries of Christianity. For our 2020 series in the rise of money (we also spoke to Thomas Piketty and Christine Desan) Brown related the emergence, in the 3rd and 4th century AD, of striking new ideas about charity and how to include the poor inside a religious community. Brown explains the importance of civic euergetism in the Greek and Roman worldview–i.e. benefaction and charity strictly confined to the good of the city. In early Christianity, this was replaced by compensatory almsgiving by the rich to benefit the lowly poor, or beggars. That notion of the rich being “less likely to enter heaven than a camel going through the eye of a needle”–that, says Brown, “was Jesus at its wildest.” Augustine even preached about almsgiving as “like a traveller's check” that let the rich bank up credit in heaven. But most crucial of all to Brown's argument about changed ideas of wealth is that Christianity initiated the world-transformational notion of corporate identity. Before Oxford, before the East India Company, before IBM, the “managerial Bishop” (Brown's brilliant coinage) is not wealthy in his own right, but is an agent of “impersonal continuity.”.Brown thinks Foucault got this kind of “pastoralism” in Church leaders partially right. But Foucault–“an old fashioned Catholic in many ways” Brown remarks slyly–underestimated the desire of the Christian community to designate a “consumer-driven” church hierarchy in which they can invest. Pressed on the question of resonance to our own day, Brown (as a “good semi-Durkheimian of the Mary Douglas variety”) stresses that “these are almost incommensurable societies.” And he does note an ominous Roman parallel in present-day “personalization of power”–understanding the odious Putin by reading Seneca. Nonetheless, Brown makes clear his enduring admiration for Late Antiquity–compared to classical Greece and perhaps to our own day–because of its “remarkable tolerance for anomaly.” Brown has that too, more power to him! Mentioned in the Episode Peter Brown, Body and Society (1968) Peter Brown,. Augustine of Hippo: A Biography (1968) Peter Brown, The Cult of the Saints (1981) Peter Brown, The Ransom of the Soul (2015) Evelyne Patlagean, Pauvreté économique et pauvreté sociale à Byzance, 4e-7e siè (Economic Poverty and Social Poverty) Augustine, Confessions (c. 400 AD and many other works available here ) Michel Foucault, Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977–1978 (on priests and the importance of the pastoral or shepherding metaphor) George Lakoff and Michael Johnson, Metaphors We Live By Seneca, Letters from a Stoic Listen and Read Here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/christian-studies

How do we fight back against the broligarchs? Journalist Gil Durán, of the must-read newsletters Nerd Reich and FrameLab, shows the way, in this week's Gaslit Nation.    Jean-Paul Sartre's famous line, “Hell is other people,” from his play No Exit, written in Nazi-occupied France, captured a grievance that mirrored the era's ideological clashes—fascism, communism, and isolationism, often overlapping and competing, fueling Stalin's genocides, the Holocaust, and World War II. The solution to sharing society with others, it seemed, was elimination: kill them.    This is why democracies rely on tolerance—you don't have to like my existence, but you must let me exist in peace. Yet today's tech oligarchs, having amassed unimaginable wealth, would rather invest billions in creating tech colonies and new religions to justify mass murder, enslavement, and C.E.O. king fiefdoms than address world hunger, provide free education, and strengthen social safety nets. Their vision isn't coexistence—they're building an anti-empathy billionaire bunker cult.    Gil Durán, a San Francisco journalist and former editorial page editor of The Sacramento Bee and The San Francisco Examiner, has a front-row view of the rise of the broligarchs, analyzing their fascist justifications for cruelty in his popular newsletter, Nerd Reich. Durán spent over a decade in California politics, serving as chief communications strategist for Governor Jerry Brown, Senator Dianne Feinstein, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and Attorney General Kamala Harris. His work has appeared in The New Republic, Esquire, and PBS. He co-founded Framelab, a newsletter on politics, language, and the brain, with Dr. George Lakoff. Most importantly we discuss: how do we defeat the Nerd Reich and the Vichy Democrats?    This week's bonus for our Patreon subscribers at the Truth-teller level and higher continues with Gil Durán of Nerd Reich, examining Democratic leaders as controlled opposition—public allies secretly serving the oligarchs. Want to enjoy Gaslit Nation ad-free? Join our community of listeners for bonus shows, ad-free episodes, exclusive Q&A sessions, our group chat, invites to live events like our Monday political salons at 4pm ET over Zoom, and more! Sign up at Patreon.com/Gaslit!   Show Notes:   The Nerd Reich by Gil Durán https://www.thenerdreich.com/   FrameLab https://www.theframelab.org/   Trump on Charter Cities: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/agenda47/agenda47-a-new-quantum-leap-to-revolutionize-the-american-standard-of-living   One of Peter Thiel's favorite book: The Sovereign Individual: How to Survive and Thrive During the Collapse of the Welfare State https://www.publishersweekly.com/9780684810072 Find a Tesla Takedown Protest near you: https://www.teslatakedown.com/   Download/print fliers made by Rise and Resist: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NsdVaglj2-qbaUxPL-aXlPSSMbnjAPV-/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rCUHIzHfJunm2fnZzdm2sMUWlRYeUtGg/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1MfkQlear-zAGgpkth6j_r85sSoXihilr/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fXKCdNCrkPOL8nYI8I9WU7-DGIAGHSXb/view?usp=sharing   https://drive.google.com/file/d/14oYKLO_vzVzEU1sxXSaH1kd_lZ1ylaOG/view?usp=sharing   Clip: Elon Musk realizes he might lose his empire: https://bsky.app/profile/internetceleb.bsky.social/post/3lk2rd73f422n   Robert Reich on Twitter: “When Trump was sworn in, Elon Musk's corporations were under more than 32 investigations conducted by at least 11 federal agencies. Most of the cases are now closed or likely to be closed soon, and the federal agencies are being defanged by DOGE. Funny how that works, huh?” https://x.com/RBReich/status/1898780869092884808   Andrea on Bluesky: “Start building a case for Trump and Musk to be arrested by the International Criminal Court” https://bsky.app/profile/andreachalupa.bsky.social/post/3lk47dkixgs2k   EVENTS AT GASLIT NATION: March 17 4pm ET – Dr. Lisa Corrigan joins our Gaslit Nation Salon to discuss America's private prison crisis in an age of fascist scapegoating  March 31 4pm ET – Gaslit Nation Book Club: From Dictatorship to Democracy: A Conceptual Framework for Liberation, which informed revolts in Ukraine, the Arab Spring, Hong Kong, and beyond  NEW! April 7 4pm ET – Security Committee Presents at the Gaslit Nation Salon. Don't miss it!  Indiana-based listeners launched a Signal group for others in the state to join, available on Patreon. Florida-based listeners are going strong meeting in person. Be sure to join their Signal group, available on Patreon. Have you taken Gaslit Nation's HyperNormalization Survey Yet? Gaslit Nation Salons take place Mondays 4pm ET over Zoom and the first ~40 minutes are recorded and shared on Patreon.com/Gaslit for our community 

Today we hear two scholars reading their recent work on artificial intelligence. Steph Ceraso studies the technology of “voice donation,” which provides AI-created custom voices for people with vocal disabilities. Hussein Boon contemplates the future of AI in music via some very short and thought-provoking fiction tales. And we start off the show with Mack reflecting on how hard the post-shutdown adjustment has been for many of us and how that might be feeding into the current AI hype.   For our Patreon members we have “What's Good” recommendations from Steph and Hussein on what to read, listen to, and do. Join at Patreon.com/phantompower.  About our guests: Steph Ceraso is Associate Professor of Digital Writing & Rhetoric in the English Department at the University of Virginia. She's one of Mack's go-to folks when trying to figure out how to use audio production in the classroom as a form of student composition. Steph's research and teaching interests include multimodal composition, sound studies, pedagogy, digital rhetoric, disability studies, sensory rhetorics, music, and pop culture.  Hussein Boon is Principal Lecturer at the University of Westminster. He's a multi-instrumentalist, session musician, composer, modular synth researcher, and AI researcher. He also has a vibrant YouTube presence with tutorials on things like Ableton Live production.  Pieces featured in this episode:  “Voice as Ecology: Voice Donation, Materiality, Identity” by Steph Ceraso in Sounding Out (2022).  “In the Future” by Hussein Boon in Riffs (2022).  Mack also mentioned in his rant:  “Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language” by Jerome Feldman and Srinivas Narayanan (2003).  “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor” by George Lakoff (1992).  Today's show was produced and edited by Ravi Krishnaswami Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Today we hear two scholars reading their recent work on artificial intelligence. Steph Ceraso studies the technology of “voice donation,” which provides AI-created custom voices for people with vocal disabilities. Hussein Boon contemplates the future of AI in music via some very short and thought-provoking fiction tales. And we start off the show with Mack reflecting on how hard the post-shutdown adjustment has been for many of us and how that might be feeding into the current AI hype.   For our Patreon members we have “What's Good” recommendations from Steph and Hussein on what to read, listen to, and do. Join at Patreon.com/phantompower.  About our guests: Steph Ceraso is Associate Professor of Digital Writing & Rhetoric in the English Department at the University of Virginia. She's one of Mack's go-to folks when trying to figure out how to use audio production in the classroom as a form of student composition. Steph's research and teaching interests include multimodal composition, sound studies, pedagogy, digital rhetoric, disability studies, sensory rhetorics, music, and pop culture.  Hussein Boon is Principal Lecturer at the University of Westminster. He's a multi-instrumentalist, session musician, composer, modular synth researcher, and AI researcher. He also has a vibrant YouTube presence with tutorials on things like Ableton Live production.  Pieces featured in this episode:  “Voice as Ecology: Voice Donation, Materiality, Identity” by Steph Ceraso in Sounding Out (2022).  “In the Future” by Hussein Boon in Riffs (2022).  Mack also mentioned in his rant:  “Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language” by Jerome Feldman and Srinivas Narayanan (2003).  “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor” by George Lakoff (1992).  Today's show was produced and edited by Ravi Krishnaswami Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/music

Today we hear two scholars reading their recent work on artificial intelligence. Steph Ceraso studies the technology of “voice donation,” which provides AI-created custom voices for people with vocal disabilities. Hussein Boon contemplates the future of AI in music via some very short and thought-provoking fiction tales. And we start off the show with Mack reflecting on how hard the post-shutdown adjustment has been for many of us and how that might be feeding into the current AI hype.   For our Patreon members we have “What's Good” recommendations from Steph and Hussein on what to read, listen to, and do. Join at Patreon.com/phantompower.  About our guests: Steph Ceraso is Associate Professor of Digital Writing & Rhetoric in the English Department at the University of Virginia. She's one of Mack's go-to folks when trying to figure out how to use audio production in the classroom as a form of student composition. Steph's research and teaching interests include multimodal composition, sound studies, pedagogy, digital rhetoric, disability studies, sensory rhetorics, music, and pop culture.  Hussein Boon is Principal Lecturer at the University of Westminster. He's a multi-instrumentalist, session musician, composer, modular synth researcher, and AI researcher. He also has a vibrant YouTube presence with tutorials on things like Ableton Live production.  Pieces featured in this episode:  “Voice as Ecology: Voice Donation, Materiality, Identity” by Steph Ceraso in Sounding Out (2022).  “In the Future” by Hussein Boon in Riffs (2022).  Mack also mentioned in his rant:  “Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language” by Jerome Feldman and Srinivas Narayanan (2003).  “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor” by George Lakoff (1992).  Today's show was produced and edited by Ravi Krishnaswami Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

Today we hear two scholars reading their recent work on artificial intelligence. Steph Ceraso studies the technology of “voice donation,” which provides AI-created custom voices for people with vocal disabilities. Hussein Boon contemplates the future of AI in music via some very short and thought-provoking fiction tales. And we start off the show with Mack reflecting on how hard the post-shutdown adjustment has been for many of us and how that might be feeding into the current AI hype.   For our Patreon members we have “What's Good” recommendations from Steph and Hussein on what to read, listen to, and do. Join at Patreon.com/phantompower.  About our guests: Steph Ceraso is Associate Professor of Digital Writing & Rhetoric in the English Department at the University of Virginia. She's one of Mack's go-to folks when trying to figure out how to use audio production in the classroom as a form of student composition. Steph's research and teaching interests include multimodal composition, sound studies, pedagogy, digital rhetoric, disability studies, sensory rhetorics, music, and pop culture.  Hussein Boon is Principal Lecturer at the University of Westminster. He's a multi-instrumentalist, session musician, composer, modular synth researcher, and AI researcher. He also has a vibrant YouTube presence with tutorials on things like Ableton Live production.  Pieces featured in this episode:  “Voice as Ecology: Voice Donation, Materiality, Identity” by Steph Ceraso in Sounding Out (2022).  “In the Future” by Hussein Boon in Riffs (2022).  Mack also mentioned in his rant:  “Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language” by Jerome Feldman and Srinivas Narayanan (2003).  “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor” by George Lakoff (1992).  Today's show was produced and edited by Ravi Krishnaswami Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sound-studies

Today we hear two scholars reading their recent work on artificial intelligence. Steph Ceraso studies the technology of “voice donation,” which provides AI-created custom voices for people with vocal disabilities. Hussein Boon contemplates the future of AI in music via some very short and thought-provoking fiction tales. And we start off the show with Mack reflecting on how hard the post-shutdown adjustment has been for many of us and how that might be feeding into the current AI hype.   For our Patreon members we have “What's Good” recommendations from Steph and Hussein on what to read, listen to, and do. Join at Patreon.com/phantompower.  About our guests: Steph Ceraso is Associate Professor of Digital Writing & Rhetoric in the English Department at the University of Virginia. She's one of Mack's go-to folks when trying to figure out how to use audio production in the classroom as a form of student composition. Steph's research and teaching interests include multimodal composition, sound studies, pedagogy, digital rhetoric, disability studies, sensory rhetorics, music, and pop culture.  Hussein Boon is Principal Lecturer at the University of Westminster. He's a multi-instrumentalist, session musician, composer, modular synth researcher, and AI researcher. He also has a vibrant YouTube presence with tutorials on things like Ableton Live production.  Pieces featured in this episode:  “Voice as Ecology: Voice Donation, Materiality, Identity” by Steph Ceraso in Sounding Out (2022).  “In the Future” by Hussein Boon in Riffs (2022).  Mack also mentioned in his rant:  “Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language” by Jerome Feldman and Srinivas Narayanan (2003).  “The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor” by George Lakoff (1992).  Today's show was produced and edited by Ravi Krishnaswami Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/technology

En samtale med Loa Brix, der arbejder som digital rådgiver med et stærkt ben ind i kreativitet og AI. Loa er founder af kommunikationsbureauet Trooper. Værten er Petra-Sofie Kempf.   I samtalen undersøger vi følgende spørgsmål:   Hvad er kreativitet for en størrelse - kreativitet med stort K og med lille k Kan AI give et boost til vores kreativitet eller sløver den og gør os mere dovne? Hvordan kan AI og kreativitet bidrage til ledelses-og organisationsudvikling? Hvordan er sammenhængen mellem: krop, sanser, kreativitet og AI? Hvilke udfordringer må vi være opmærksomme på, for at AI kan give kreativiteten et boost og hvilken funktion har kroppen, hvis nogen?  Lyttergave til dig fra Loa.   Læs mere om Loa Brix og Trooper Læs mere om Petra-Sofie Kempf´s arbejde med bevidst brug af kroppens potentiale i lederskab, arbejdsliv og læringsprocesser.  OBS! Find ordforklaring og henvisninger længere nede.    Samtalen er del 2 af 2 i en miniserie om teknologi, krop og menneske.  I del 1 bevægede vi os på et mere overordnet plan i forhold til det - At være menneske med en krop i en teknologisk tidsalder. I del 1 er gæsten teknologisk vidensformidler og ledelsesrådgiver fra HumTech. Grith Okholm Skaarup.   Ordforklaring - for dig der ikke er velbevandret i de teknologiske begreber ·  AI (Artificial Intelligence): Teknologi, der gør det muligt for maskiner at udføre opgaver, som normalt kræver menneskelig intelligens, såsom læring, problemløsning og beslutningstagning. AI bruges blandt andet inden for automatisering, dataanalyse og kreativ skabelse. ·  Kreativitet med stort K: Henviser til radikal og banebrydende kreativitet, der fører til store forandringer i verden. Eksempler inkluderer opfindelsen af internettet, kubismen i kunst eller skabelsen af nye teknologiske paradigmer. ·  Kreativitet med lille k: Henviser til dagligdags kreativitet, som vi bruger til at løse små problemer eller finde nye måder at organisere vores arbejde på. Det kan fx være at improvisere en ny opskrift eller finde en smartere måde at strukturere en præsentation på. ·  Embodied Creativity: Begrebet, der beskriver, hvordan kreativitet er forankret i vores kropslige oplevelser og sanser. ·  GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer): En avanceret AI-model, der bruges til at generere tekst baseret på input. GPT-modeller anvendes i chatbots, tekstgenerering, kodning, oversættelse og kreativ skrivning. ·  Sprogmodeller: AI-modeller, der er trænet til at forstå og generere menneskeligt sprog. De bruges i chatbots, automatiserede kundeserviceværktøjer, oversættelse, talegenkendelse og kreativ skabelse. ·  AI-assisteret kreativitet: Brug af AI til at understøtte og forbedre menneskelig kreativitet ved at generere idéer, inspirere og hjælpe med at realisere kreative projekter. Eksempler inkluderer AI-genererede kunstværker, musikproduktion og assistenter, der hjælper forfattere med tekstudvikling. ·  Custom GPT: En specialtilpasset version af en GPT-model, der er trænet eller konfigureret til et specifikt formål eller en bestemt målgruppe. Custom GPT'er kan finjusteres med ekstra data, særlige instruktioner eller skræddersyet viden, så de fx kan fungere som ekspertsystemer inden for bestemte fagområder, personlige assistenter eller brand-specifikke chatbots.   Henvisninger: Læs mere om Loa Brix og Trooper: www.trooper.dk Find bogen Metaphors We Live By af George Lakoff og Mark Johnson her: www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/M/bo3637992.html Læs mere om kreativitet med stort K og lille k hos James Kaufman og Ronald Beghetto: https://asu.elsevierpure.com/en/publications/beyond-big-and-little-the-four-c-model-of-creativity Læs mere om AI's betydning for den menneskelige kreativitet:www.videnskab.dk/teknologi/kommer-ai-til-at-slaa-menneskelig-kreativitet-ihjel/ Læs mere om sammenhænge mellem nervesystem, sanser og kreativitet: www.scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Berkovich-Ohana-et-al.-in-press-Mindfulness-and-Creativity.pdf Læs mere om Embodied Creativity: www.sussex.figshare.com/articles/thesis/Embodied_creativity_a_process_continuum_from_artistic_creation_to_creative_participation/23316611?file=41104322    

In this episode of The Brainy Business podcast, Melina Palmer dives into the topic of negative reviews and how to approach them with insights from behavioral economics. Melina shares personal anecdotes and expert insights, including a fascinating tidbit from her friend Kurt Nelson and Dr. Robert Cialdini about the ideal star rating sweet spot for conversions. She explores why negative reviews stick with us more than positive ones, touching on psychological concepts like herding instincts, social proof, the focusing illusion, and cognitive dissonance. With practical advice on responding to reviews and understanding your brand's core values, this episode is a must-listen for anyone looking to turn negative feedback into a positive learning experience. In this episode: Learn why negative reviews can be beneficial and how to reframe your perception of them. Understand the psychological reasons behind why negative reviews affect us more than positive ones. Discover strategies for responding to negative reviews that align with your brand's values. Explore the importance of knowing your customer and focusing on those who resonate with your brand. Gain insights into how to handle reviews without apologizing unnecessarily. Show Notes: 00:00:00 - Introduction Melina Palmer introduces the episode's focus on negative reviews and behavioral economics. 00:02:30 - The Sweet Spot for Reviews Melina shares insights from Kurt Nelson and Dr. Cialdini about the ideal star rating for conversions. 00:11:00 - Why Negative Reviews Stick Discussion on psychological factors like herding instincts and the focusing illusion. 00:20:15 - Responding to Reviews Tips on how to respond to reviews thoughtfully and align with your brand's values. 00:30:00 - Knowing Your Customer The importance of focusing on customers who resonate with your brand. 00:40:00 - Apologizing and Acknowledging How to acknowledge feedback without unnecessary apologies. 00:48:47 - Conclusion What stuck with you while listening to the episode? What are you going to try? Come share it with Melina on social media -- you'll find her as @thebrainybiz everywhere and as Melina Palmer on LinkedIn. Thanks for listening. Don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Android. If you like what you heard, please leave a review on iTunes and share what you liked about the show.  I hope you love everything recommended via The Brainy Business! Everything was independently reviewed and selected by me, Melina Palmer. So you know, as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. That means if you decide to shop from the links on this page (via Amazon or others), The Brainy Business may collect a share of sales or other compensation. Let's connect: Melina@TheBrainyBusiness.com The Brainy Business® on Facebook The Brainy Business on Twitter The Brainy Business on Instagram The Brainy Business on LinkedIn Melina on LinkedIn The Brainy Business on Youtube Learn and Support The Brainy Business: Check out and get your copies of Melina's Books.  Get the Books Mentioned on (or related to) this Episode: What Your Customer Wants and Can't Tell You, by Melina Palmer Influence, by Robert Cialdini Alchemy, by Rory Sutherland Nudge, by Richard Thaler & Cass Sunstein Metaphors We Live By, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson Top Recommended Next Episode: Surprise & Delight (ep 276) Already Heard That One? Try These:  Framing (ep 296) Priming (ep 252) The Most Important Step In Applying Behavioral Economics: Understanding the Problem (ep 126) Anchoring & Adjustment (ep 394) How To Create a Brainy Brand (Refreshed Episode) (ep 230) Other Important Links:  Brainy Bites - Melina's LinkedIn Newsletter

In dieser speziellen Spezialfolge haben wir eine Spezialistin als Gästin im digitalen Raum: Lena Völkening ist Sprachwissenschaftlerin an der Uni Oldenburg und hat sich für uns durch den linguistischen Forschungsdschungel geschlagen und wir durften ihr auf Schritt und Tritt folgen. Sie zeigt trickreich auf, was Gendern in unseren Köpfen macht, und stößt uns dabei beinahe spielerisch auf unsere eigenen internalisierten Stereotype. Es stellt sich dabei heraus, dass Gendern nicht gleich Gendern ist, sondern sich der gewünschte Effekt in unseren Köpfen nur bei manchen Formen einstellt. Lena erklärt uns auch, warum Gendern eigentlich auch gar nicht gendergerecht ist, aber wieso es sich trotzdem lohnen kann. Eine faktenbasierte Streiftour durch die kognitive Genderlinguistik und die (vorläufige) Antwort auf die Frage: Was sagt die Sprachwissenschaft eigentlich zum Gendern? Direkt von Sprachwissenschaftler*innen zu euch. Ein Podcast von Anton und Jakob. - https://www.instagram.com/sprachpfade Mit Lena Völkening. Danke für deine wunderbare Vorbereitung und das tolle Gespräch!Lenas Buch ist unten in der Literatur angegeben.___ Von Lena erwähnte Experimente:Elke Heise (2000): Sind Frauen mitgemeint? Eine empirische Untersuchung zum Verständnis des generischen Maskulinums und seiner Alternativen, in: Sprache und Kognition 19 (1-2), 3–13. --> Versuchspersonen sollten Geschichten schreiben und den Protagonist*innen Namen geben.Lisa Irmen (2007): “What's in a (Role) Name? Formal and Conceptual Aspects of Comprehending Personal Nouns, in: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 36 (6), 431–456. --> Eye Tracking-Studie mit Satzpaaren.Andreas Klein (2022): „Wohin mit Epikoina? – Überlegungen zur Grammatik und Pragmatik geschlechtsindefiniter Personenbezeichnungen“, in: Gabriele Diewald & Damaris Nübling (Hgg.), Genus – Sexus – Gender, Berlin & Boston, 135–189. --> Mehr männliche Vornamen für Menschen als für Personen.Karin Kusterle (2011): Die Macht von Sprachformen. Der Zusammenhang von Sprache, Denken und Genderwahrnehmung, Frankfurt. --> Versuchspersonen sollten sich Vornamen für Hilfskräfte, Studierende, Jugendliche usw. ausdenken.Heiko Motschenbacher (2010): „Female-as-Norm (FAN). A typology of females and feminines”, in: Markus Bieswanger, Heiko Motschenbacher & Susanne Mühleisen (Hgg.), Language in its socio-cultural context, Bern, 35–67. --> Als wie „weiblich“ und „männlich“ bewerten Versuchspersonen Neutralformen wie Sträfling, Flüchtling und Bedienung?___Weitere erwähnte Literatur:Fabian Bross (2023): „Von biertrinkenden Studierenden, schlafenden Lachenden und gendersensibler Sprache. Zur Interpretation der Gleichzeitigkeit nominalisierter Partizipien“, in: Sprachreport 39 (3), 40-44.Helga Kotthoff & Damaris Nübling (2024): Genderlinguistik. Eine Einführung in Sprache, Gespräch und Geschlecht. 2., überarbeitete und erweiterte Auflage. Unter Mitarbeit von Claudia Schmidt. Tübingen. George Lakoff & Elisabeth Wehling (2008): Auf leisen Sohlen ins Gehirn. Politische Sprache und ihre heimliche Macht, 3. Auflage, Heidelberg.Luise Pusch (1988): „Die Kätzin, die Rättin und die Feminismaus“, in: Women in German Yearbook 4, 15-16.Lena Völkening (2022): Gendern. Warum wir die Flexibilität des Sprachsystems nutzen sollten, Münster.Alle Bücher ausleihbar in deiner nächsten Bibliothek! ___ Gegenüber Themenvorschlägen für die kommenden Ausflüge in die Sprachwissenschaft und Anregungen jeder Art sind wir stets offen. Wir freuen uns auf euer Feedback! Schreibt uns dazu einfach an oder in die DMs: anton.sprachpfade@protonmail.com oder jakob.sprachpfade@protonmail.com ___ Titelgrafik und Musik von Elias Kündiger https://on.soundcloud.com/ySNQ6

Subscribe, Rate, & Review on YouTube • Spotify • Apple Podcasts✨ About This Episode“The best academic lecture/slam poetry/sermon/magical invocation/attunement and invitation to engage I've experienced in a long while.”– Daniel LindenbargerNext week, after nearly nine years of development, this show grows up to become Humans On The Loop, a transdisciplinary exploration of agency in the age of automation. For long-time listeners of Future Fossils, not much will really change — philosophical investigations in the key of psychedelic futurism, voyages into the edges of what is and can be known, and boldly curious riffs on the immeasurable value of storytelling and imagination have always characterized this show. Many of the episodes I've shared in this last year especially were, effectively, preparations for this latest chapter and play as large a part in my ongoing journey to synthesize and translate everything I've learned from years of independent scholarship and institutional work in esteemed tech, science, and culture orgs…But we are no longer waiting for a weird future to arrive. We're living in it, and shaping it with every act and utterance. So in this “final” episode of Future Fossils before I we bring all of these investigations into the domain of practical applied inquiry, it felt right to ramp from FF to HOTL by sharing my talk and discussion for Stephen Reid's recent online course on Technological Metamodernism. This was a talk that left me feeling very full of hope for what's to come, in which I trace the constellations that connect some of my biggest inspirations, and outline the social transformations I see underway.This is a rapid and dynamic condensation of the big patterns I've noticed in the course of over 500 hours of recorded public dialogue and a lively primer on why I'm focusing on the attention and imagination as the two big forces that will continue to shape our lives in the worlds that come after modernity.It is also just the beginning.Thank you for being part of this adventure.✨ Support & Participate• Become a patron on Substack (my preference) or Patreon(15% off annual memberships until 12/21/24 with the code 15OFF12)• Make a tax-deductible donation to Humans On The Loop• Original paintings available as thank-you gifts for large donors• Hire me as an hourly consultant or advisor on retainer• Buy (most of) the books we discuss from Bookshop.org• Join the Future Fossils Facebook group• Join the Holistic Technology & Wise Innovation and Future Fossils Discord servers• Buy the show's music on Bandcamp — intro “Olympus Mons” from the Martian Arts EP and outro “Sonnet A” from the Double-Edged Sword EP• Read “An Oral History of The End of ‘Reality'”, my story mentioned in this episode.✨ ChaptersChapter 1: Reflections & Announcements (0:00:00)Chapter 2: Co-Evolution with AI and the Limits of Control (0:12:49)Chapter 3: Poetry as the Beginning and End of Scientific Knowledge (0:18:06)Chapter 4: The American Replacement of Nature and the Power of Narrative (0:24:05)Chapter 5: The End of “Reality” & The Beginning of Metamodern Nuance (28:58)Chapter 6: Q&A: Myths, Egregores, and Metamodern Technology vs. Wetiko & Moloch (0:34:52)Chapter 7: Q&A: Chaos Magic & Other Strategies for Navigating Complexity (45:59)Chapter 8: Q&A: Musings on Symbiogenesis & Selfhood (0:50:18)Chapter 9: Q&A: How Do We Legitimize These Approaches? (0:55:42)Chapter 10: Q&A: Why Am I Devoting Myself to Wise Innovation Inquiry? (0:61:01)Chapter 11: Thanks & Closing (0:63:22)✨ Mentioned IndividualsA mostly-complete list generated by Notebook LM and edited by Michael Garfield.* William Irwin Thompson - Historian, poet, and author of The American Replacement of Nature, which argues that American culture is future-oriented. (See Future Fossils 42 & 43.)* Evan “Skytree” Snyder - Electronic music producer, roboticist, and co-founder of Future Fossils who departed after ten episodes. (See Future Fossils 1-10, 53, 174, and 207.)* Stephen Reid - Founder of the Dandelion online learning program and The Psychedelic Society; host of a course on “Technological Metamodernism” in which Garfield presented this talk. (See Future Fossils 226.)* Ken Wilber - Author of numerous books on “AQAL” Integral Theory. (See Michael's 2008 interview with him on Integral Art.)* Friedrich Hölderlin - German poet who famously said, "Poetry is the beginning and the end of all scientific knowledge.”* George Lakoff and Mark Johnson - Authors of Metaphors We Live By, which explores the role of embodied metaphor in shaping thought.* John Vervaeke - Philosopher who, along with others, uses the term “transjective” to describe the interconnected nature of subject and object.* Sean Esbjörn-Hargens - Integral theorist who taught Garfield at JFK University. (See Future Fossils 60, 113, and 150.)* Nathalie Depraz, Francisco Varela, and Pierre Vermersch - Embodied mind theorists and authors of On Becoming Aware, a book about phenomenology.* Kevin Kelly - Techno-optimist Silicon Valley futurist and author on “the expansion of ignorance” in relation to scientific discovery. (See Future Fossils 128, 165, and 203.)* Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, and David Bohm - Paradigm-challenging physicists mentioned who, by science to its limits, developed mystical insights.* Timothy Morton - Philosopher who coined the term “hyperobjects” to refer to entities so vast and complex they defy traditional understanding. (See Future Fossils 223.)* Caleb Scharf - Astrobiologist, author of The Ascent of Information, in which he coins the term “The Dataome” to refer to the planet-scale body of information that constrains human behavior.* Iain McGilchrist - Psychiatrist and author of The Master and His Emissary, known for his work on the divided brain and the importance of right-brained thinking.* Eric Wargo - Anthropologist and science writer who suggests that dreams are precognitive and the brain binds time as a four-dimensional object. (See Future Fossils 117, 171, and 231.)* Regina Rini - Philosopher at York University who coined the term “epistemic backstop of consensus” to describe what photography gave society and what, later, deepfakes have eroded.* Friedrich Nietzsche and Fyodor Dostoevsky - Philosophers and authors who explored the implications of the loss of a universal moral order grounded in religion.* Duncan Barford - An author and figure associated with chaos magic.* Lynn Margulis - Evolutionary biologist known for her work on symbiogenesis and the importance of cooperation in evolution.* Primavera De Filippi - Co-author of Blockchain and the Law: The Rule of Code with Aaron Wright and technology theorist who theorized the "Collaboration Monster."* Joshua Schrei - Ritualist and host of The Emerald Podcast who produced episodes on Guardians and Protectors and on the role of The Seer. (See Future Fossils 219.)* Hunter S. Thompson - American journalist and author known for his gonzo journalism and the quote, "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro.”* Tim Adalin - Host of the VoiceCraft podcast, on which Garfield discussed complex systems perspectives on pathologies in organizational development. (See Future Fossils 227.) This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelgarfield.substack.com/subscribe

In episode 436 of The Brainy Business podcast, Melina Palmer dives into the fascinating biases our brains have toward novelty and stories. This episode, originally aired in 2019, is part of an eight-part series on biases and offers a rapid-fire overview of how our brains respond to new and intriguing stimuli. Melina explains concepts like the bizarreness effect, humor effect, pareidolia, and more, illustrating how these biases impact our decisions and interactions in both personal and professional settings. Melina also touches on the importance of storytelling in building trust and engagement, setting the stage for her upcoming interview with Dr. Paul Zak, a pioneer in the study of oxytocin and its role in storytelling. This episode is packed with insights on how to leverage our natural inclinations toward novelty and stories to enhance marketing strategies, improve customer interactions, and create compelling presentations. In this episode: Understand the bizarreness effect and how novelty impacts memory. Learn how humor and bizarreness can be effectively used in marketing. Explore the role of pareidolia in capturing attention. Discover the power of storytelling in building trust and engagement. Gain insights into biases like the empathy gap, optimism bias, and authority bias. Show Notes: 00:00:00 - Introduction Melina introduces the topic of biases toward novelty and stories and sets the stage for a rapid-fire overview of related concepts. 00:01:45 - Bizarreness Effect Explanation of the bizarreness effect and how our brains remember unusual items better than common ones. 00:03:30 - Humor Effect Discussion on the humor effect and how humorous content is more likely to be remembered. 00:05:15 - Pareidolia Exploration of pareidolia and how our brains are primed to see faces in random objects. 00:07:00 - Identifiable Victim Effect Examination of the identifiable victim effect and how personal stories are more impactful than statistics. 00:08:45 - Survivorship Bias Discussion on survivorship bias and the importance of considering all data, not just the successful cases. 00:10:30 - Just World Hypothesis Explanation of the just world hypothesis and how it affects our perception of fairness and morality. 00:12:15 - Authority Bias Exploration of authority bias and why we trust opinions from perceived authorities more than others. 00:14:00 - Reciprocity and Ben Franklin Effect Discussion on reciprocity and the Ben Franklin effect, and how favors influence future behavior. 00:15:45 - Social Desirability Bias Examination of social desirability bias and how it impacts the way we report our behaviors and characteristics. 00:17:30 - Omission Bias Explanation of omission bias and how we judge actions more harshly than inactions. 00:19:15 - Licensing Effect Discussion on the licensing effect and how doing something good can lead to justifying bad behavior. 23:12-  Conclusion What stuck with you while listening to the episode? What are you going to try? Come share it with Melina on social media -- you'll find her as @thebrainybiz everywhere and as Melina Palmer on LinkedIn. Thanks for listening. Don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Android. If you like what you heard, please leave a review on iTunes and share what you liked about the show.  I hope you love everything recommended via The Brainy Business! Everything was independently reviewed and selected by me, Melina Palmer. So you know, as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. That means if you decide to shop from the links on this page (via Amazon or others), The Brainy Business may collect a share of sales or other compensation. Let's connect: Melina@TheBrainyBusiness.com The Brainy Business® on Facebook The Brainy Business on Twitter The Brainy Business on Instagram The Brainy Business on LinkedIn Melina on LinkedIn The Brainy Business on Youtube Learn and Support The Brainy Business: Check out and get your copies of Melina's Books.  Get the Books Mentioned on (or related to) this Episode: What Your Customer Wants and Can't Tell You, by Melina Palmer The Life Saving Skill of Story, by Michelle Auerbach Magic Words, by Jonah Berger Metaphors We Live By, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson Bridges and Barriers, by Troy Andrews Top Recommended Next Episode: Prince Ghuman Interview (ep 344) Already Heard That One? Try These:  Michelle Auerbach Interview (ep 288) Jonah Berger Interview (ep 301) David Paull Interview (ep 289) Biases Toward Novelty and Stories (ep 54) Sarah Thompson Interview (ep 259) Other Important Links:  Brainy Bites - Melina's LinkedIn Newsletter

1.     What is important about stories, and metaphors in communication?  When someone studies the great communicators, past and present, they all use metaphors and analogies to illustrate their points. Metaphors compare things that are less understandable to familiar things. They create new meanings, make complex ideas understandable, motivate interest, and influence ideas. They create images that people can understand rather than literal words2.     What is the difference between a story, metaphor, and an analogy? A simple story conveys a description of something. A metaphor communicates two or more levels of meaning. Using metaphors can deliver directly to the unconscious.3.     How do individual words represent our experience as metaphors?  George Lakoff and Mark Johnson in their book, Metaphors We Live By state, that metaphor is pervasive in everyday life not just in language by also by thought and action. This is the concept system. It is metaphorical in nature. Our concepts structure how we perceive the world around us. Much of our language is metaphors. So we cannot get along by language alone. How we experience our everyday life is metaphorical. Communication is war. Communication is dance. Love is a journey, time is money, love is madness4.     As one of the most important and overlooked skills in communication, how can we get better at using them in everyday interactions as well as speeches?      Listen to how you use words to describe things in your world. Listen to how others use words to describe their world. Look at situations – what are they like in unrelated areas?  Be more intentional about listening to others. Deeper insight into people. Linking abstract ideas to concreteSupport the show

In this episode, we focus on how our imaginations are essential to moral decision-making and help us evaluate the possible outcomes of our actions. As part of this, we also discuss the shortcomings of rigid moral systems and the necessity of maintaining humility. Our guest scholar in this episode is Dr. Mark Johnson, Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Philip H. Knight Professor of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Emeritus at the University of Oregon. --- Dr. Mark L. Johnson is currently Professor Emeritus of Philosophy and Philip H. Knight Professor of Liberal Arts and Sciences, Emeritus. Johnson has authored numerous articles and book chapters on a broad range of topics including philosophy of language, metaphor theory, aesthetics, recent moral theory, ethical naturalism, philosophy and cognitive science, embodied cognition, philosophical psychology, and American pragmatist philosophy. Some of his notable publications include Mind in Nature: John Dewey, Cognitive Science, and a Naturalistic Philosophy for Living (MIT Press, 2023) and, with George Lakoff, of Metaphors We Live By (University of Chicago Press, [1980] 2003). Notably for our study of imagination are his books Moral Imagination: Implications of Cognitive Science for Ethics (1993), and The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason (1987). --- While his full catalog of articles and books is far too long to list here, the publications below provide a useful introduction to his scholarship addressing the topic of imagination: Johnson, M. (1993). Moral imagination : implications of cognitive science for ethics. University of Chicago Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press.  Johnson, M. (2015). Morality for Humans: Ethical Understanding from the Perspective of Cognitive Science. The University of Chicago Press. Copy citation to clipboard --- The Social Science for Public Good Podcast is a project of the ⁠Virginia Tech Institute for Policy and Governance⁠ and ⁠VT Publishing⁠ intended to make social science theories accessible and available to individuals and organizations seeking to promote social change. Music: purple-planet.com

O Visual+mente apresenta o Grupo de Estudos: Políticas, Retóricas e Histórias da Visualidade. Neste segundo encontro, Ricardo Cunha Lima (UFPE) debateu "metáforas políticas, como elas nos dividem"​.Tivemos como base um texto que introduziu o grupo à teoria das metáforas cognitivas, proposta por George Lakoff e Mark Johnson em "Metáforas da Vida Cotidiana", considerando sua aplicabilidade em questões políticas. O texto, cuja teoria e linguagem são bastante acessíveis, foi retirado do livro "Don't think of an elephant" de Lakoff. É uma abordagen voltada à práxis, com a intenção de provocar um engajamento político consciente do seu leitor. Durante a conversa debatemos muito o papel da ilustração e cartum como metáfora, procurando entender como a comunicação visual metafórica dialoga com o seu público leitor.O encontro foi mediado por Rafael Efrem (IFPB), com a participação de Marcos Beccari (UFPR), Daniel Bueno (EBAC), Alex Torres, Hana Luiza e muitos outros membros do grupo.O evento foi fechado e participaram apenas os inscritos no grupo de estudos. Acredecemos o comparecimentos e participação dos membros do grupo. Os encontros ocorrem às quintas-feiras,14hs, via Meet, e encerram em outubro de 2024.As inscrições no grupo devem ser feitas pelo preenchimento de formulário do google forms. Encontre o formulário, o texto da bibliografia e muito mais no link abaixo:https://www.visualmente.com.br/grupoObs: Por uma restição de tempo, o programa foi editado e não incluímos tudo que foi debatido durante o encontro.

In this episode of The Brainy Business podcast, host Melina Palmer welcomes Jordan Bridger, a behavioral scientist, social psychologist, comedian, and speaker who has graced four TEDx stages. Jordan dives into the fascinating world of linguistic neuroscience, exploring how our word choices and the symbols we use shape our experiences and behaviors. He shares his insights on the power of storytelling, the importance of understanding context, and how seemingly small changes in language can create significant impacts. Jordan discusses his diverse career, from working with global organizations like the United Nations and the city of Vancouver to his experiences in stand-up comedy and rock climbing. He also emphasizes the importance of humanizing communication and the role of behavioral science in driving positive changes within organizations. Through engaging stories and practical examples, Jordan illustrates how to navigate and implement change effectively, even in challenging environments like a hospital system during the height of COVID-19. In this episode: Understand the impact of linguistic neuroscience on behavior and decision-making. Learn how to use storytelling and word choice to influence and engage your audience. Explore the role of behavioral science in driving positive organizational change. Discover practical strategies for humanizing communication and fostering connection. Gain insights into the intersection of technology and behavioral science. Show Notes: 00:00:00 - Introduction Melina introduces Jordan Bridger and highlights his diverse background in behavioral science, social psychology, and comedy. 00:05:30 - Jordan's Background and Work Jordan shares his journey from working with global organizations to his passion for stand-up comedy and rock climbing. 00:09:45 - Linguistic Neuroscience and Semiotics Jordan delves into linguistic neuroscience, discussing how symbols and language shape our experiences and behaviors. 00:15:20 - The Power of Storytelling The conversation explores the importance of storytelling in communication and how it can influence decision-making and engagement. 00:20:15 - Behavioral Science in Organizations Jordan shares his experiences working with organizations to implement positive changes, including a case study with a hospital system during COVID-19. 00:30:45 - Humanizing Communication The discussion emphasizes the need to humanize communication and build connections through relatable language and storytelling. 00:35:10 - Technology and Behavioral Science Jordan and Melina discuss the intersection of technology and behavioral science, highlighting the importance of humanizing technology and using it as a tool for connection. 00:45:00 - Practical Tips for Using AI Jordan offers practical advice for using AI in content creation and communication, emphasizing the importance of personalization and relatability. 00:50:30 - Conclusion Melina and Jordan wrap up the conversation, reflecting on the key insights and takeaways from the episode. What stuck with you while listening to the episode? What are you going to try? Come share it with Melina on social media -- you'll find her as @thebrainybiz everywhere and as Melina Palmer on LinkedIn. Thanks for listening. Don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Android. If you like what you heard, please leave a review on iTunes and share what you liked about the show.  I hope you love everything recommended via The Brainy Business! Everything was independently reviewed and selected by me, Melina Palmer. So you know, as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. That means if you decide to shop from the links on this page (via Amazon or others), The Brainy Business may collect a share of sales or other compensation. Let's connect: Melina@TheBrainyBusiness.com The Brainy Business® on Facebook The Brainy Business on Twitter The Brainy Business on Instagram The Brainy Business on LinkedIn Melina on LinkedIn The Brainy Business on Youtube Connect with Jordan: Wondr Mporium X LinkedIn Learn and Support The Brainy Business: Check out and get your copies of Melina's Books.  Get the Books Mentioned on (or related to) this Episode: Semiotics In Retail, by Rachel Lawes The Truth About Pricing, by Melina Palmer Nudge, by Richard Thaler & Cass Sunstein The Power of Us, by Jay Van Bavel & Dominic Packer Metaphors We Live By, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson Top Recommended Next Episode: Sarah Thompson Interview (ep 259) Already Heard That One? Try These:  Mirror Neurons (ep 31) Priming (ep 252) Confirmation Bias (ep 260) Framing (ep 296) Haley Swafford Interview (ep 409) Other Important Links:  Brainy Bites - Melina's LinkedIn Newsletter Of Other Spaces, by Michel Foucault

Murray Shanahan is a professor of Cognitive Robotics at Imperial College London and a senior research scientist at DeepMind. He challenges our assumptions about AI consciousness and urges us to rethink how we talk about machine intelligence. We explore the dangers of anthropomorphizing AI, the limitations of current language in describing AI capabilities, and the fascinating intersection of philosophy and artificial intelligence. Show notes and full references: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ICtBI574W-xGi8Z2ZtUNeKWiOiGZ_DRsp9EnyYAISws/edit?usp=sharing Prof Murray Shanahan: https://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~mpsha/ (look at his selected publications) https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?user=00bnGpAAAAAJ&hl=en https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Shanahan https://x.com/mpshanahan Interviewer: Dr. Tim Scarfe Refs (links in the Google doc linked above): Role play with large language models Waluigi effect "Conscious Exotica" - Paper by Murray Shanahan (2016) "Simulators" - Article by Janis from LessWrong "Embodiment and the Inner Life" - Book by Murray Shanahan (2010) "The Technological Singularity" - Book by Murray Shanahan (2015) "Simulacra as Conscious Exotica" - Paper by Murray Shanahan (newer paper of the original focussed on LLMs) A recent paper by Anthropic on using autoencoders to find features in language models (referring to the "Scaling Monosemanticity" paper) Work by Peter Godfrey-Smith on octopus consciousness "Metaphors We Live By" - Book by George Lakoff (1980s) Work by Aaron Sloman on the concept of "space of possible minds" (1984 article mentioned) Wittgenstein's "Philosophical Investigations" (posthumously published) Daniel Dennett's work on the "intentional stance" Alan Turing's original paper on the Turing Test (1950) Thomas Nagel's paper "What is it like to be a bat?" (1974) John Searle's Chinese Room Argument (mentioned but not detailed) Work by Richard Evans on tackling reasoning problems Claude Shannon's quote on knowledge and control "Are We Bodies or Souls?" - Book by Richard Swinburne Reference to work by Ethan Perez and others at Anthropic on potential deceptive behavior in language models Reference to a paper by Murray Shanahan and Antonia Creswell on the "selection inference framework" Mention of work by Francois Chollet, particularly the ARC (Abstraction and Reasoning Corpus) challenge Reference to Elizabeth Spelke's work on core knowledge in infants Mention of Karl Friston's work on planning as inference (active inference) The film "Ex Machina" - Murray Shanahan was the scientific advisor "The Waluigi Effect" Anthropic's constitutional AI approach Loom system by Lara Reynolds and Kyle McDonald for visualizing conversation trees DeepMind's AlphaGo (mentioned multiple times as an example) Mention of the "Golden Gate Claude" experiment Reference to an interview Tim Scarfe conducted with University of Toronto students about self-attention controllability theorem Mention of an interview with Irina Rish Reference to an interview Tim Scarfe conducted with Daniel Dennett Reference to an interview with Maria Santa Caterina Mention of an interview with Philip Goff Nick Chater and Martin Christianson's book ("The Language Game: How Improvisation Created Language and Changed the World") Peter Singer's work from 1975 on ascribing moral status to conscious beings Demis Hassabis' discussion on the "ladder of creativity" Reference to B.F. Skinner and behaviorism

Good riddance to George Lakoff's Moral Politics! In this season finale, we discuss the last section of Lakoff's book, in which he lays out his reasons for being a liberal. His reasons are of course based on his book-long characterization of conservatives as being stupid, crazy, and evil, so his stance is not exactly one we agree with. We also discuss what pieces of value we gained from reading this book and lessons for the future as we move on to Season 9!Follow us on Twitter, and send us some book suggestions for Season 9! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinionsGive us your opinions here!

This guy doesn't even know about federalism! Join us as we discuss George Lakoff's magnificent discussion on how he is confused by the concept of federalism, and how he divides up other varieties of liberals and conservatives. We also discuss how Lakoff fundamentally refutes his entire book, insinuates that conservatives are one step away from being violent extremists, and doesn't seem to know much of anything at all. We also diss libertarians and talk about all of the problems with the modern Classics field! Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinionsGive us your opinions here!

Is this our angriest episode yet? Possibly! Join us as we discuss George Lakoff's thoughts on some of the most controversial topics: affirmative action, gay rights, education, the environment, and much more! As always, we point out the issues with an overly simplistic description of the conservative point of view and try to describe the much deeper ideals behind conservative thought. By this point, we're pretty fed up with George Lakoff and are committing to a new goal: MLGA - Make Linguistics Great Again!Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinionsGive us your opinions here!

As we all know, conservatives simply view the legal system in a very simple formula: more punishment = more good. Conservatives are certainly not concerned with a millenia-old theological, philosophical, legal, and moral tradition that argues for the responsibility of an individual's free will or anything like that. Join us as we discuss George Lakoff's theories on how conservatives and liberals view crime, covering topics such as the death penalty, societal factors, and nature vs. nurture.Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinionsGive us your opinions here!

Memes: Tired AF Chihuahua in Unicorn Costume Meme - "Okay, well, the first one I sent it has a picture of an angry disgruntled chihuahua type dog in a costume. It's a unicorn costume with a bright purple horn and across the top of the Instagram photo it says when you're a magical majestic creature with secret powers but you're... tired af but, yeah, that one appeared multiple times."Pick Your Battles Meme - "It's like a conversation between two accounts or like a reply to an initial post from one account. The initial poster is @thequeerwithoutfear is the handle and it says 'Pick your battles, pick... pick fewer battles than that. Put some battles back. That's too many.' And then Miss Voltairine, which going back to philosophy, replied and said, 'Me, frantically trying to hold on to my armload of battles, battles falling out of my pockets: NO I need ALL these battles.'"Join our Facebook group to be part of the conversation and view the meme for this episode or you can follow us on Instagram @memesmetaphorsandmagic. Learn more about your personal year number with this free resource!Metaphors:PROVIDING FEEDBACK IS A PROCESS OF PUTTING THINGS ON A TABLE AND LOOKING AT THEM.LIFE IS A STRUGGLE. / ARGUMENT IS COMBAT/WAR/STRUGGLE.REGULATING ANGER IS REGULATING AIR IN AN INFLATED TIRE.LIFE IS THEATER. / LIFE IS DRAG. / HUMANS ARE ACTORS IN THE THEATER OF LIFE.LIFE IS BOTH/AND. / ALL OF LIFE IS INTERCONNECTED AND MAKES SENSE WITHIN THE WHOLE. Underlying, or primary, metaphors:KNOWING/UNDERSTANDING IS SEEING.CONSIDERING IS LOOKING AT.UNDERSTANDING IS GRASPING.CONSIDERING IS WEIGHING.ALTERNATIVE UNDERSTANDINGS OF AN ENTITY ARE SIDES OF AN OBJECT.DIFFICULTIES ARE OPPONENTS.OBJECTING IS ATTACKING.INTENSITY OF EMOTION IS HEAT.BEING IN CONTROL IS BEING ABOVE.SOCIAL STATUS IS VERTICAL ELEVATION.MORE IS UP.LESS IS DOWN.EXISTENCE IS VISIBILITY.(LOGICAL) ORGANIZATION IS PHYSICAL STRUCTURE.INTERRELATEDNESS IS PHYSICAL INTERCONNECTEDNESS. SIMILARITY IS ALIGNMENT.Magic:7 Lifepath Number (Numerology)8 Expression Number (Numerology)Connectedness® (Gallup CliftonStrengths®)Ideation® (Gallup CliftonStrengths®)Harmony® (Gallup CliftonStrengths®)Woo® (Gallup CliftonStrengths®)Relator® (Gallup CliftonStrengths®)Sun in Scorpio (Astrology)Moon in Aquarius (Astrology)Support Katie's Work!Support the nonprofit groups in your local area that are doing the work, whether that's to support survivors of domestic and sexual violence or other causes. In Katie's words, "Think about your local community and where you can plug in."Pop Culture:Meet the ParentsMeet the FockersResources:Purple Leash Project (a collaboration between Purina and Red Rover to keep beloved pets with their owners escaping and surviving domestic abuse situations)Metaphors We Live By by George Lakoff & Mark JohnsonFoundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes by Joseph Grady

Ignoring his horrible takes on conservatism, George Lakoff actually does a decent job of explaining the liberal worldview on social programs and taxes. Maybe this shouldn't be surprising - he definitely agrees with the liberals on everything. Join us as we discuss his analysis of liberal and conservative approaches to economic and social problems, ranging from immigration to military spending to charitable organizations!Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinionsGive us your opinions here!

George Lakoff is right about one thing: conservatives do not like Hillary Clinton. In this episode, we look at Lakoff's descriptions of how liberals and conservatives categorize the ideal and worst citizens. Do conservatives really just care about upholding the current authority? Are liberals the only ones who believe in virtues? Lakoff seems to think so, and we criticize him heavily! Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinionsGive us your opinions here!

Which came first? Foundational moral thinking or metaphors that we use to express those foundations? George Lakoff seems to think the language came first! Join us as we try to figure out Lakoff's chicken-or-the-egg moral system as he outlines the metaphor of accounting and how morality is viewed as a system of transactions. Are we all really just trying to reach net zero in our moral obligations, or is there something much deeper to morality?Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinions

Our very first episode with a live studio audience! Join us as we discuss what linguist George Lakoff views as the worldviews of liberals and conservatives. In this episode, we examine what Lakoff thinks confuses liberals about conservative views (while also just attempting to refute the conservative opinion), the different words that people on the right and left use, and what he sees as the goal for studying these worldviews. Despite his accurate assessment of what each worldview is, we find a lot to criticize in this chapter, and go on many, many tangents!Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinions

In this episode, we discuss George Lakoff's completely analytical, opinion-free, 100% objective explanation of what he views as the role of cognitive linguists in examining liberal and conservative worldviews. We discuss whether or not unconscious thoughts truly exist, the importance of categories, and Lakoff's ever-present idea of conservatives being a mysterious "gorilla in the mist!" We also discuss what he gets severely wrong about the relation of political opinions to moral philosophy, and why your moral beliefs truly matter in political conversation.Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinions

In this first episode of Season 8, we look at the preface to our new book: George Lakoff's Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think, which examines the different linguistic metaphors that liberals and conservatives use to shape their worldview. We discuss Lakoff's plan for the book, how he draws his conclusions, and the immense amount of biases that he presents just in the introduction. We also go on many rants, including one about an Easter egg hunt that is spurred by the acknowledgements!Follow us on Twitter! https://twitter.com/UlmtdOpinions

In episode two, Reverend Bill leads a discussion about how your image of God can affect how you view your role as a parent, drawing from George Lakoff's ideas of the Strict Father vs Nurturing Parent. Are you taking your understanding of parenting and projecting that onto God, or are you taking your understanding of God and applying that to your parenting?

On this topical show, Crystal welcomes Andrew Villeneuve, founder of the Northwest Progressive Institute! Crystal learns about the Northwest Progressive Institute's (NPI) work to advance progressive policies through their focuses on research and advocacy, what's covered in NPI's long form blog The Cascadia Advocate, and the importance of reframing in progressive politics. Andrew then describes how six initiatives bankrolled by a disgruntled wealthy Republican are designed to cause a lot of damage to Washington, how NPI's careful approach to polling has led to successful results, and why NPI is advocating for even-year elections to improve voter engagement and participation. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find Andrew Villeneuve and the Northwest Progressive Institute at @nwprogressive and https://www.nwprogressive.org/   Resources Northwest Progressive Institute   The Cascadia Advocate | Northwest Progressive Institute   Stop Greed   “Initiative 2113 (allowing dangerous police pursuits to resume) gets certified” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   “Reject Initiative 2113 to keep reasonable safeguards on police pursuits in place” by Sonia Joseph and Martina Morris for The Cascadia Advocate   “Initiative 2117 (repealing Washington's Climate Commitment Act) gets certified” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   “Initiative 2081 (jeopardizing student privacy) gets certified” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   “Initiative 2109 (repealing billions of dollars in education funding) gets certified” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   “Initiative 2111 (prohibiting fair taxation based on ability to pay) gets certified” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   “Initiative 2124 (sabotaging the Washington Cares Fund) gets certified” by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   Coalition for Even-Year Elections   SB 5723 - Giving cities and towns the freedom to switch their general elections to even-numbered years.   HB 1932 - Shifting general elections for local governments to even-numbered years to increase voter participation.   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review show and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Well, today I'm thrilled to be welcoming Andrew Villeneuve from Northwest Progressive Institute to the show. Welcome! [00:01:00] Andrew Villeneuve: Thanks, Crystal. [00:01:01] Crystal Fincher: Happy to have you here. For those who may not be aware, Andrew is the founder of the Northwest Progressive Institute and its sibling, the Northwest Progressive Foundation. He's worked to advance progressive causes for over two decades as a strategist, speaker, author, and organizer. A recent focus of his research and advocacy work has been electoral reform. With Senator Patty Kuderer, Andrew and the NPI team developed the legislation that successfully removed Tim Eyman's push polls from Washington ballots - I'm a huge fan of that legislation. And with Councilmember Claudia Balducci, Andrew and the NPI team developed the charter amendment that 69% of King County voters approved in 2022 to move elections for the Executive, Assessor, Elections Director, and Council to even-numbered years - here's to also doing that statewide for municipalities - when voter turnout is much higher in even-numbered years and more diverse. Andrew is also a cybersecurity expert, a veteran facilitator, a delegate to the Washington State Democratic Central Committee, and a member of the Climate Reality Leadership Corps. Welcome - really excited to have you on and talk about everything that you're doing. [00:02:15] Andrew Villeneuve: Well, thank you. I'm thrilled to be here and can't wait to dive into the conversation. [00:02:19] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. So starting off, what is the Northwest Progressive Institute and what do you do? [00:02:25] Andrew Villeneuve: Well, the Northwest Progressive Institute is a 501(c)(4) strategy center that works to lift up everybody. We try our hardest every day to advance progressive policies that will enable people to lead happier, healthier, more prosperous lives. We just celebrated our 20th anniversary last August, and we have had a lot of success moving policy over the last two decades. We're particularly adept at using research to show people why we need a particular policy - so that could be health care, it could be environmental protection, it could be more education funding. We're not confined to just one issue - we think across issues. But that does mean, of course, that we see all of the places where we're held back. So we look for areas where we can move issues forward simultaneously and that has led us to do a lot of work on tax reform, election reform, and media reform - because those three issues are connected to every other issue. So that's why you'll see us doing a lot of work on fair revenue. on trying to address media concentration, and trying to make sure that elections are fair. Because ultimately, those things do have results, impacts for environmental protection, healthcare, education, foreign policy, every other issue that we care about. I think we're all frustrated by sometimes the slow pace of progress, and so any area where we can link up with another area and make progress at the same time - that's a real opportunity for us. And there's actually a term for this - it's called "strategic initiatives" - comes from George Lakoff. We're big fans of his work. We also do a lot of efforts on reframing. We try to help people understand what frames are and how to use successful arguments so that you don't fall into the trap of debating the other side on their terms. Because we all know when that happens, the best you can do is lose an argument gracefully - you're not going to win the argument. Reframing is key, and we believe that everybody who works in progressive politics needs to understand how to do reframing. So we're always trying to help people figure out - okay, how do we use words that evoke our values and our policy directions and not the other sides'? So that's sort of a taste of what we do. Of course, we could talk for hours about all the specific projects we've worked on, but that is an overall view of what NPI does. [00:04:42] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Also under the NPI umbrella is The Cascadia Advocate, a publication that I recommend everyone listening follow - very informative. What has been your approach with The Cascadia Advocate and what do you cover? [00:04:55] Andrew Villeneuve: The Cascadia Advocate is a long form blog. It was founded in 2004 in March, and so that means it's going to be celebrating its 20th anniversary itself this spring. And what it is - is it's a place where you can find progressive commentary, sometimes even breaking news, on a daily basis. So if you want to find out why we should pass a particular bill in the legislature, or you want to find out what's happening with Bob Ferguson's latest lawsuit - for example, he just sued Kroger and Albertsons because they're trying to merge and create a giant grocery store chain - we cover those things on The Cascadia Advocate. We publish guest essays. We cover a lot of things that the mass media cover - so we'll sometimes critique how they're covering things, but we'll also provide our own original commentary in addition to just critiquing others' coverage. There's a whole mix there. So you're going to find research findings, media criticism, you're going to find book reviews, you're going to find documentary reviews. You're going to find Last Week in Congress, which is our almost weekly recap - weekly when Congress is in session - of how our delegation voted. So this is a place where you can see Washington, Oregon, and Idaho's Congressional delegations' votes. And that's really helpful. If you're too busy to watch C-SPAN every day - I know I don't have that kind of time because I'm trying to move the ball forward on progressive policy - but I do want to know how our lawmakers voted, I want to be informed. And I imagine a lot of other people listening to Hacks & Wonks would also like to be informed about what our delegation is doing. And so Last Week in Congress is something you can read on Sunday morning - takes a few minutes of your time to skim it. And at the end of that skim, you're going to learn a lot more about how our delegation voted that week. So those are some of the things you're going to find on the Cascadia Advocate. I think it's a great publication. It's well-established and we have a superb code of ethics and style guide and commenting guidelines to make sure that we're putting out a professional product. So we're very proud of that. And the name is right there - Advocate, right? So we're not hiding what we're about. You're not going to have to worry - Well, what's their agenda? How will I know what it is? Because we're going to tell you what our agenda is. We're going to be very upfront about that. But we're also going to be fair, even to those that we criticize. So whether that's Tim Eyman - quoting his emails, letting people know what he said - we're going to tell people what the other side is saying. We're not just going to say what we're saying. But we're also going to be very clear - this is what we believe and this is what we're fighting for. And it's not going to be a mystery to any reader what that is. [00:07:11] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely - I appreciate it. And as many have seen, have shared links in our episode notes many times - recommend that as part of a healthy local media diet. Now, I want to talk about some issues that you've been engaged with since their inception. One of the big ones that we're going to be hearing about, voting on later on this year are the six statewide initiatives coming in 2024 in Washington state. Can you tell us about these and why they're so important to pay attention to? [00:07:42] Andrew Villeneuve: Definitely. So very early this year, a group called Let's Go Washington, which is funded by a hedge fund manager and millionaire named Brian Heywood - he lives not far from me out here on the Eastside in Redmond - east side of King County, that is. He decided that he was going to go all-in on trying to get the right wing back into the initiative business. For those who have been in Washington for a while, the name Tim Eyman is probably familiar to you - Tim Eyman, for years, has been running initiatives to cut taxes and wreck government in Washington state. His agenda is to drown government in a bathtub, so it's basically Grover Norquist at the state level. And Brian Heywood has come along here after several years of Tim Eyman being out of the initiative business. Eyman's last initiative qualified for the ballot in 2018, and it appeared on the ballot in 2019. And despite our best efforts - it had a really dishonest ballot title that it was hard to educate voters what that was, so even though we raised a lot of money and ran the best No campaign that we could - when I say we, I mean the coalition Keep Washington Rolling that formed - we weren't able to defeat that last Eyman initiative. But we were able to go to court after the election was over and get it struck down. So it never went into effect, - which averted a massive transit and transportation catastrophe, I might add. So fast forward a few years, Eyman has been in trouble with the law because he just blatantly disregards public disclosure law, doesn't care about following it. And he also was double-crossing his own supporters - they just weren't getting the truth from him. And so that's why his initiative factory fell apart - when you're lying and cheating all the time, eventually that's going to catch up with you, and that's what happened to Tim Eyman. So he had to declare bankruptcy. The state won a big judgment against him, and he's been out of the initiative business. But Brian Heywood has come in - and Brian Heywood, unlike Tim Eyman, has a lot of money. And he doesn't need to turn to anyone else unless he feels that he has to, but he hasn't done that yet - he's mainly relied on his own money. So he decided that not only was he going to try to qualify a tax-cutting initiative, but he was going to take aim at all these other laws that the Democratic majorities have passed that he doesn't like. So there's six initiatives that he wanted to get on the ballot this last year, so 2023, that are now we're going to be on the ballot in 2024. And that's because these are initiatives to the legislature, so they go to the House and the Senate first. That's something you can do in Washington - you can either submit initiatives directly to the people, or you can submit them to the legislature. And for those who don't know, an initiative is just a proposed law. So it's like a bill of the people - it goes before the legislature. If the legislature doesn't adopt it, then it goes to the people by default. So an initiative - again, just like a bill, but the people get to vote on it, and it comes from a citizen petition. So these initiatives - last year there was going to be 11, but they pared them down to 6. It's kind of like making up for lost time - We weren't on the ballot for several years, so now we're just going to do a whole bunch of initiatives. The first one that they're doing would repeal the Climate Commitment Act. The second one would repeal our capital gains tax on the wealthy, which is funding education and childcare. The third one would repeal the WA Cares Fund, partly by letting people opt out. Then they have one that would roll back our reasonable safeguards on police pursuits. They have one that would establish a parental notification scheme, which is intended, I think, to jeopardize the health of trans youth in part - which I don't like that at all. And then they have one to ban income taxes. And their definition of income tax is anything that falls under this really broad, adjusted gross income umbrella, which could potentially jeopardize the capital gains tax and other sources of funding for things that are really important in our state. So these six initiatives collectively would cause a lot of damage to Washington. We're talking about billions of dollars in lost revenue. We're talking about good policies being repealed. We're talking about a lot of destruction. And so we're working very hard to defeat these initiatives. We've created a PAC that will oppose all of them. And that joint effort is called Stop Greed - to oppose all six initiatives. We have a website - stopgreed.org - and the operation is already up and running. You can donate, you can sign up for the mailing list. If you want to get involved in stopping the six initiatives, we are ready to have your help because this is going to be a year-long effort. We're going to be working with a lot of other allies, organizations that also share our values to protect Washington. But these six initiatives - the legislature can't reject them and then just have them disappear, they're going to go to the ballots. So we have to be ready for that big fight in November. And they're going to appear at the top - so ahead of president, ahead of governor, ahead of everything else that we're thinking about as activists and civic leaders and whatnot. This is going to be the very first thing that people see underneath those instructions - is these six initiatives. So we're getting ready. And again, we invite others to join us in taking on this challenge so we can protect Washington. [00:12:31] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And this is going to be one of the biggest battles that we've seen in quite some time in Washington state. Those six initiatives that you covered - for those who may not be familiar with Washington Cares, it's basically long-term care insurance that's state provided - trying to meet a need that is massive. Many studies have showed more than half of people over age 60 are going to need long-term care insurance at some point in time for the remainder of their lives. This often is not covered by health insurance, and it is something that has bankrupted people, has left people just in very precarious positions. As we age, as our parents age, this is something that is top of mind for a lot of people. And although no one loves an extra thing to worry about, having the confidence that when you or your family member or friend is in need of care, that they will have access to it is a very, very important thing. In addition to all these other ones - this is our landmark climate legislation, which I've definitely had some criticisms of, but do not support a repeal. I support fixing the areas that need to be fixed. And I think we can't ignore these things. These are some of the biggest pieces of legislation that we have passed that will equip us to deal with the challenges that we face today and that we're going to be facing tomorrow. So really appreciate the effort, the coordinated effort, to make sure that there is a vigorous defense against these. Now, looking at what's going to be involved to beat these - looking at what these ballot initiatives may serve, even beyond their individual goals, is that a lot of times people look to ballot initiatives to motivate a base and to turn out a base. And certainly in Washington state - statewide, Republicans have been not having a good time, have been reaping the consequences of being out-of-touch policy-wise - whether it's on abortion rights to privacy rights, to their views on taxation and things that serve to defund and dismantle our government. What do you see as threats beyond these initiatives individually, but the threat of a motivated conservative voting base here in Washington state in November 2024? [00:14:52] Andrew Villeneuve: Well, I think they're tired of Democratic rule. So they're going to be motivated to turnout because they probably will have Dave Reichert as their gubernatorial candidate - we can't really say nominee because Washington doesn't have a real primary, so we don't nominate people for the general election ballot like they would in other states. But they probably will have Reichert as their candidate, their standard bearer. And that is their best chance to get the governor's mansion since 2012 when Rob McKenna was their candidate in the general election - so I think they're going to be motivated for that reason. I also think the six initiatives are designed to turnout right-wing voters as much as possible - people who are disenchanted with Washington's direction, not happy that we're going a different way than Texas and Florida and Idaho and other states that are Republican-controlled. And so I think that that's an opportunity for them, but it's also an opportunity for us. There can be a backlash to a backlash. And I'm not sure if Brian Heywood and Jim Walsh, who's - by the way, Jim Walsh, the state Republican Party Chair, is the sponsor of all six initiatives. So you've got Heywood and Walsh together - Heywood's the funder, Walsh is the sponsor. I'm not sure if they realize that backlashes can have backlashes. We saw this after Trump came in - there was a backlash to Democratic rule, but then there was a backlash to Trump's electoral college victory. And we saw that play out over the course of four years. It was really, really strong. What happened? You had this mammoth effort to correct what was going on, to have Democrats respond, to say - Okay, well, we're no longer just going to sort of lay down, right? We're going to actually work to turn out people. So we had this huge effort to flip the Washington State Senate in 2017. Then we had this big effort to win the midterms, which saw Democrats get control of the House. And then there was the effort to get the White House back, which also allowed us to get the U.S. Senate back, too, with that runoff in Georgia. So you think about all those sequence of events - how much had to align in order for all those goals to be realized? Because in 2017, Republicans had complete control of the federal government - they had it all - they had the White House, they had the House, they had the Senate, they had the Supreme Court. Democrats had nothing. All we had was some resistance in the states, basically. And we went from that - in the span of three years, we were able to take back the two legislative houses and the White House. We don't have the Supreme Court, but we were able to get the others. And the majorities were narrow, but they were majorities, which meant that we could actually work on progressive policy again. So we were able to pass the American Rescue Plan, CHIPS and Science, we were able to do the infrastructure law. We were able to do a whole bunch of other policies as well - bipartisan postal reform. We did electoral reform to deal with election certification so that we wouldn't have another January 6th. We got marriage equality put in. I mean, there are so many things that happened - I don't know if people remember all those accomplishments. So you think about what we've done federally. And in Washington State, we've been doing the same thing - marching forward - all these laws that Heywood and Walsh want to repeal. So I think they're looking at this as an opportunity to say - It's time to roll back the clock. And that is an opportunity for them. But the opportunity for us is to say - Nope, we're not going to roll back the clock. We're going to keep moving forward. I think doing six initiatives is risky for them. Because one initiative, maybe people aren't going to - they're just not going to rouse themselves as much to care. But six seems like a four-alarm fire for those who are watching from our side. And so it's been really easy for me to - when I explain what's going on, when I make the pitch that we need to stop the initiatives, people are receptive right away. It's not difficult to get people roused and ready to go because they understand six initiatives targeting six progressive accomplishments, whether it's comprehensive sex ed or the climate law or the capital gains tax that's funding education - these are things that we've worked hard on that we're proud of. We don't want them all to be wiped away in the span of one election. So it's an organizing opportunity for us as much as it is for them. And that's the downside of deciding to do so much at one time - is that you're presenting your opponents with an opportunity to do organizing as well, that's sort of a banner opportunity. And they just have to live with that decision - that's the strategy they chose, and so we get to make the most of it from our side. [00:18:55] Crystal Fincher: We've been seeing a number of polls - certainly a lot of discourse and reaction - to whether it's the conflict between Israel and Palestine, whether it is the failure to address climate change, healthcare kind of globally, nationally, to a degree that seems is necessary to actually make a dent in these issues. Do you see motivation in the base, especially the younger progressive voters, as being an issue that may be problematic come November? Or do you think that there are things that can be done to mitigate that, or that it won't be an issue? [00:19:33] Andrew Villeneuve: Well, it's hard to know the future. I always tell people I don't do predictions because predictions are fraught with danger. It's just - you can easily be wrong, and people are convinced that they know what's going on. I take the view that it's hard to know what's going on and that's why we have to do research, so that we can try to understand it better. And I also warn people against the danger of drawing too many conclusions based on what you've seen on Twitter, which Elon Musk now calls X, or Facebook or TikTok or any of those platforms. Those are not representative of public opinion, not even young people's opinions. There are many people who just aren't there. So you can obviously follow some vocal voices and you can see what they're saying - there's nothing wrong with that, checking in - but don't sweep to conclusions about what those folks are saying and say - Oh, well, all Gen Zers are upset about what's happening here or there, because that's the prevailing sentiment on TikTok, right - that's a mistake. That can give you clues as to what people are thinking and feeling, but it's not where you want to draw your conclusions. And polling helps to get a little broader perspective, but it's still a sample. So we do a ton of polling at NPI. One of the things we're known for is our research. And I caution people - you can do enormous amounts of research and still only see a fraction of what you want to see. There's so much you could look at in terms of public opinion, like this issue, that issue, this race, that race - so many detailed, specific follow-up questions you could ask. And in a given survey, there's going to be limitations - you can only ask about so much. We try to do a lot of insightful research, but I'm mindful of the limitations of public opinion research. In the end, you come into every election somewhat unprepared because you don't exactly know what's out there, right? So that's why what I call big organizing, which is a term that comes out of the Sanders campaign and other efforts - big organizing is this idea that we're going to talk to everybody as often as we can, which is hard because how do you have all those conversations? Well, it involves canvassing, it involves actually going out there and doing neighborhood meetings and doing that organizing - having those discussions with people. It turns out even people who are unhappy with politics want to talk politics when they get the right settings - you got a canvasser, who's very understanding, going to somebody's door, having a half an hour long conversation. People actually feel better after they've had that conversation - they're very appreciative that somebody wants to hear from them. So as a movement, I think we need to go out there and have those conversations with folks. And we need to make sure that if people live in areas that are hard to doorbell, that we're finding other ways to reach them. But that all requires investment - primarily time. Money, too, but primarily time because someone's got to go do that organizing, that outreach work. And they've got to be able to go to the door or go to that other setting where they're going to have that conversation. So in terms of getting young people plugged in and engaged, I think it's going to be tough. I think there's a lot of distractions in our culture now, it's very hard to get people to decide - yes, I'm going to vote, I'm going to take the time to do that - especially if you live in a state where they've made voting hard, like Georgia. Washington - we're blessed, because voting is easier here than anywhere else in the country. But we see in odd years, it's still hard to get people to vote. That's why we're so big on even-year elections for local governments, because those even-numbered years, more young people come out. But we've just got to have a strategy for mobilizing people. It doesn't just happen on its own. You can't just sit back and go - Oh, well, we'll just hope that it works out. Nope. You don't let events shape you. You go out there and shape the events with a strategy. And so it's very important that as progressives, we don't just let the Biden campaign do the work. We don't just let the Democratic Party do the work and say - Well, they'll figure it out. We all have to be working together to figure out what the strategy is and then implement that strategy, to the extent that we can agree on what that strategy is going to be. So for those who are not involved in some kind of direct action organization, I would find one - I think that's worth doing. This is a year when democracy is on the line. So getting involved in some way - no matter what the outcome is in November, you're going to feel good that you invested some time in trying to mobilize and turn out young voters and get them to save democracy along with everybody else who's going to be voting. So that's my advice for folks who are listening - find an organization to plug into that's going to do something to help young voters get engaged in this election, turnout and vote, save democracy. Because there's only one way to do that - and that is to reelect President Biden and Vice President Harris, in my view - there's no other outcome that will allow us to make any progress on issues we care about, including trying to bring an end to the violence in the Middle East. What's happening in Gaza is terrible, but that's not going to get better if Donald Trump gets back in. [00:23:58] Crystal Fincher: Now, I want to talk about research - your polling. Local polling is hard - you hear that from a variety of polling organizations, we see it in results that have been really wonky in the past several years with surprising outcomes in several individual states. Polling on a smaller scale - smaller geographies, smaller communities - is a challenging thing. However, you've managed to do quite well at it. We've seen in your polling in the Seattle City Council elections, which looked straight on. You polled previously the Housing Levy, King County Conservation Futures Levy, Senate races, House races - were right on. And so I just want to talk a little bit about your approach and how you put those together, and why you feel like you're seeing better results locally than some other organizations. [00:24:54] Andrew Villeneuve: Well, thank you for that. It starts with a rigorous commitment to the scientific method. One of the things that I think people don't understand about public opinion research is anyone can do it. You don't have to be an objective organization to do objective research. You can be subjective - and we are - but your research has to follow the scientific method if it's going to have any value. And what that basically comes down to is neutral questions asked of representative samples - that's the key. And actually, it's very hard to ask neutral questions of representative samples. The question writing part is particularly fraught with difficulty because there are so many ways to write a question that is loaded or biased and to use language that favors the agenda of the asker. Basically, writing a push poll is easy, writing a neutral poll is hard. And we've seen that over and over again, especially when I look at the work of our Republican friends across the aisle - Moore Information, Trafalgar - these firms are just, I can see their work product and I have deep questions about especially what they're not releasing because I know that what they are releasing is only a fraction of what they're actually asking. But when you ask a question - and you look at a group that does put out all of their work, like Future 42, which uses Echelon Insights, you read through their questionnaire and it's - okay, after the first four questions, which are so simple it's hard to get them wrong. After that, you start going to the rest of the questionnaire and it's biased. It's loaded. The questions are favoring conservative frames. So you're not going to find out what people think if you tell them what to think first - that's one of the cardinal rules that I tell my team all the time - Whatever the topic is, we have to get this question right because we're not going to learn what people think if we don't. You don't want to have worthless data come back. And that really means that you've got to think about - Okay, well, how are we presenting the issue? What are we going to say in the question? And a lot of the times what we'll do is, we'll say - Proponents are saying this and opponents are saying that. So that's one way you can do it. And you have to really go out there and you have to find their words, their frames - so you have to be fair to their perspective. Even if you don't like it, it doesn't matter. As a question writer, you want that perspective represented to the best of its ability, right? So if Rob McKenna has said that the capital gains tax is an income tax - it's an illegal, unconstitutional income tax that will kill jobs and wreck the economy. We're putting that whole thing into our question, because we want people to hear what it is that they're saying. And then we're going to put that up against our best arguments and see what wins. So we've done that and we found that our frames, our arguments beat their arguments. And that's good news. But we only learned that because we actually did a fair question. If we had just said - Oh, well, this is why the capital gains tax is great. What do you think about the capital gains tax? People are going to say it's great. And so we haven't really learned anything other than - yes, people respond to our question prompts in the way that we would want them to. But that doesn't really tell us what people have brought to the table in terms of their own opinions. So that's part of how we've been successful is - when we do polling, we're not trying to gin up some numbers for a particular cause or a candidate. We're not looking to get numbers that just reinforce the conclusion that we already reached. And I think a lot of consultants jump to conclusions, like at the beginning of a race, they'll say - Well, let me tell you how it's going to be. And our approach is we don't know how it's going to be - let's go out and get some data and see what people are thinking and feeling. And of course, we understand that whatever that data is, it's a snapshot in time and that the race could change. So like with the governor's race, we've been polling that and we're seeing some changes - Bob Ferguson is consolidating support, he's not as well known as people who are on the inside of politics might think he is. Nor is Dave Reichart, for that matter. People know who Jay Inslee is. They know who Joe Biden is. They know the top names in politics, but the attorney general is not the governor, and people don't know the attorney general as well as they know the governor. And they don't know Dave Reichert, as well as they know Jay Inslee either. So we're seeing in our polling, the candidates have an opportunity to introduce themselves to voters. And we know that if we ask a neutral question about anything, again, whether it's the governor's race or another race, then we're going to have hopefully an opportunity to find out where people are. And then presenting that data in a way that's responsible, not just dumping the numbers out there and letting people jump to their own conclusions about what do the numbers mean. Even if they were responsibly collected, I think responsible publication includes context for those numbers. What do the numbers mean? Why are the numbers the way they are? What's the explanation for that? So when we release a poll finding, we never just put the numbers out there, we never just dump a poll file out there for people to read. We always provide analysis - this is what we think the numbers mean. And you can read the analysis on The Cascadia Advocate - that's the vehicle for all the poll findings to be released. People, when they want to see our polling, we're going to give them an opportunity to really understand what we're thinking when we saw the numbers - Okay, this is our take. And we always tell people in those analyses - We don't know the future, this is suggestive, it's not predictive. And you should expect that there's a possibility that the poll is off. But, I will say in the 10 years we've been doing research polling, we've yet to have our results be contradicted by an election result. And that's just because we write the neutral questions. And then our pollsters, who I haven't talked about yet, but we work with three different pollsters. And they've all got a strong commitment to responsible fielding - building samples that actually look like the electorate. That's how you get results, too. It's not just the questions are good, but the fielding is appropriate - you're building those representative samples. And then you can hopefully get data that reflects the actual dynamic that's out there. And so when the election then occurs - if the polling has correctly captured the public sentiment that's out there, you should expect to see a correlation. It won't line up exactly. I've had people tell me - Well, your poll was off. The margin was this and your poll said it would be that. I'm like - Polls don't predict, so you shouldn't expect the margins to line up one-to-one or anything like that. But if a poll says such-and-such is ahead of their rival and they then go on to win the election, that's an indication that the poll did understand something about what's going on out there. So that's basically validation in my book. You're never going to get perfect alignment, like the poll has 54% and the candidate gets 54%, and it's off by maybe just a fraction of a decimal or something - that's not going to happen in polling, you don't expect that alignment. So I think that's why we've been successful is that commitment to the scientific method. And we're not going to deviate from that - we're just full steam ahead with that same commitment to excellence. [00:31:12] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I really appreciate you explaining that. I do think that is a big reason for why your polls have seemed to accurately capture public sentiment. And I appreciate you talking about - you can be a partisan organization and still poll accurately. In fact, it's really critical that the accuracy is there. I think there's this assumption that - Oh, it's a partisan organization - they just want something to confirm what they already believe, to tell them that what they want to happen is popular. And that is a recipe for disaster in the medium and long-term - that sets you up for thinking you're in a different situation than is realistic. And then you don't win campaigns, you don't win ballot initiatives - you have to accurately understand where the public is in order to do anything with that from a campaign perspective, which is really important. And I do see polls from the Chamber where reading through the poll - and I highly recommend every time there is a poll, especially from news organizations, I will say Cascadia Advocate does excellent poll analysis - but most articles and most publications that I see, I always find different things than are encapsulated in their poll write-up when I read the actual poll. Reading the actual poll is a really illuminating thing - and you can see questions asked in very leading ways, you can see one side's argument is presented and another isn't, or one is misrepresented. And those are really problematic things for a poll. Sometimes people do use polls - if they aren't really looking to get information - just as a marketing tactic. But that becomes pretty apparent when you're reading the poll, when you're seeing - they aren't really asking these questions to get informative answers about what the public believes and why. So I think that's been really illuminating. Looking forward, what do you plan on tracking? Are you going to be tracking the six initiatives? Are you going to be polling the statewide races? What is your plan for research? [00:33:13] Andrew Villeneuve: Yes, we're going to be doing all that. The governor's race - we have a commitment to the public that we're going to poll on the governor's race - and no matter what the data is, we're going to release it, that's our commitment. We've polled on the governor's race three times already this cycle. And we're going to do it three to four times again this year. At the end of the cycle, you're going to have gotten six to seven different findings from us - different seasons of data - which will tell the story of the governor's race. How did it start out and where does it kind of end up? When I say end up, I say "kind of" because - of course, the election happens after that last poll. So we're going to have election data soon after that final poll comes out in October and that data will tell us who wins the governor's race. And that's the final word. But until we have that election results, then polling will help us understand what could be happening out there - I say "could," because again, we don't know what is happening until people vote and the election data comes in and then tells us - Okay, this candidate's ahead of that candidate, this is the voices of millions of people. Polls can only give you a peek into what might be happening at the time - that's the best we can do because there's no real way - sometimes people will ask me about sample sizes. This is a fun inside bit of polling. So a lot of people are convinced that the larger a sample size, the better the poll is. Not so. A poll can be perfectly representative if the sample is just 300 or 400 voters - it's not the size of the sample that matters, it's how representative it is. If it reflects the electorate, then it's a good sample. If it is not representative of the electorate, you've got a problem. So you could have 10,000 voters in your sample, which would be huge, right? Nobody has samples that big. But if they're all progressive voters in Seattle, or if they're all Trump voters from somewhere in rural Washington - it's not representative of the electorate and the data's worthless. It can't tell you what's happening in a statewide race. So we'll be polling the governor's race. We'll be looking at Attorney General, we're going to look at U.S. President, we're going to look at U.S. Senate. We're going to look at basically all the competitive statewide races. In October, I expect that we'll have a poll result for every single statewide race. And there are so many that that's probably going to be the entire poll. We're not even going to be able to ask any policy questions because we're going to have six initiatives, possibly a few State Supreme Court races. We're going to have U.S. President. We're going to have U.S. Senate. We're going to have nine statewide executive department positions. Plus, we're going to have a generic question for Congress and legislature. So that's our poll - the whole poll is already written. I already know what's going to be in the poll because there's so much on the ballot this cycle that there's no room to ask about anything else. That's a lot of poll results to have to release. And it will take us some time to ship them all. We're not going to do it all in one day, that's for sure. Because I think what's responsible is to provide that analysis, as I said. So we're not going to do - Okay, here's the entire poll. Goodbye. Enjoy it. No, we're going to take the time to look at each of the results. And so that probably means it'll take us a whole week to talk about all the different poll results. And people are going to say - Why don't you release everything at once? I want to see it all. Well, because we want to give you the context. We want to give you our view on what's happening so that you understand the background, especially if you're not from here - if you're from another state, you're reading this polling, you want to know who are these people, what are the dynamics in this race, why is such-and-such ahead, what's the theory behind that. That context is going to be really helpful to you as a reader, so we're committed to providing it. [00:36:27] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And what polling firms do you work with? [00:36:30] Andrew Villeneuve: So there are three we work with. Public Policy Polling out of North Carolina is the one we started working with first - our relationship goes back over 10 years, and they've done excellent work for us. I'm particularly proud of our 2020 and 2022 polling because those are the two most recent even-year cycles. But in 2020, this was the first time that we went up and down the entire statewide ballot, including State Supreme Court races. And we're the only ones polling on State Supreme Court races. Nobody else does that, I'm especially proud that we do that. Probably this year we're going to poll on them - any that are contested, we'll do at least two rounds of polling - probably May and October. And you mentioned earlier that polling can be tough, especially at the state and local level. And one of the reasons it can be tough is because a lot of people will tell you they're not sure who they're voting for. If the race isn't partisan, then you can have an enormous number of people who say they're not sure - sometimes over 80%. And that can make it very difficult. But you still learn something when you ask people about their opinions - because you'll find out people's familiarity with the candidates, and you will also discover if there's been a change. So like in 2020, we said - Okay, we've learned that no one else polls State Supreme Court races, so let's poll them repeatedly because then at least we'll have data of our own to compare to from different seasons. So in May, we polled them and then we polled them again in October. And that was really valuable to have that comparison and to see just little small changes. What we saw was the incumbent justices like Raquel Montoya-Lewis - they picked up a little bit of support, so that suggested they were actually getting some awareness of their candidacies before the voters. And that was illuminating - so there weren't many people who really knew much about these candidates, but still there were a small number who had heard something and had decided how they were going to vote. And that was an indicator. And that indicator proved to be accurate. It accurately foreshadowed what really did happen in the election. So we're committed to doing that again. And we believe that it's crucially important that people have some data in those races. If you're an observer, data that gives you some inkling of what's going to happen in a race that's so far down-ballot that nobody else is really, frankly, writing about it - I mean, that's gold. These are the things that I wanted back in the day when we weren't doing all this polling. So I've always been of the mind that if it doesn't exist and you really want it, you should create it if you think it's really needed. The other companies we work with - Change Research does a lot of our local polling. They've been working with us in Seattle and Spokane, and they've worked with us in Snohomish County and Pierce County. We've polled all the major counties with them, and we just love working with them. They're great. And then our third pollster is Civiqs. They are more recent on the scene. They're not as well-established as Public Policy Polling - they're a newer company, but they do great work. Their polling in the Senate race last cycle with Patty Murray and Tiffany Smiley - they were the ones who had Murray really way out there ahead and Smiley well behind. When I saw that work - they were dedicated to putting out this really great polling, said - Well, we need to add them to our group of trusted pollsters because they've proved they can do great work. So we've got those three now, and I'm not averse to working with other pollsters that have proved themselves as well. But every pollster we work with has to be committed to the scientific method. We will not accept any work that is done contrary to that method because that will yield worthless data. We don't want to pay for data that doesn't have any value, that isn't collected transparently and with integrity. We love working with all of our pollsters and we're excited to do good work with them this cycle. [00:39:50] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I appreciate that breakdown. I appreciate something you said earlier, particularly as a political consultant. There are several consultants - lots industry-wide, it's an issue - where they have preconceived notions of what's going on and they are looking for confirmation, or they decide that they know what the dimensions of a race are and why people are aligned on certain sides and sometimes stick hard and fast to that. There's a different approach. You can wait and see what the information is. Certainly, we have our theories and ideas, but we learn so much more by actually looking at the data, waiting on the data, not being so devoted or tied to a specific theory or something that must happen. If you leave yourself open to say - I think this might be happening, I'm seeing something happen, I think these could be reasons why - test that, understand the data and research, and see how it turns out. And one thing you mentioned - I think it's particularly illuminating for people who do that - any race, most races, especially if it's not someone at the top of the ticket, is going to have a lot of people who are unfamiliar with the people involved. There are going to be a lot of people who are undecided - just not familiar with an issue, not familiar with a candidate. But when you do poll over time like you do, and when you do see how those people who were initially undecided then wind up making a decision, how they align on those - that can tell you a lot about why people are favoring something or another, who messages are landing with, what is effective and what's not effective. So even if you aren't getting specific data of someone saying - I don't know - polling over time and then once they do figure that out, or sometimes they just end up not voting, right? All of that information is valuable in putting together a picture for why people believe the things that they believe, why people are favoring certain candidates or policies, and how that might translate to other issues or races. So appreciate the repeated polling. Now, I do want to ask you - as someone who does work with polling organizations and hearing a number of nonprofits, other 501(c)(4)s, be interested in that space - what advice would you give to organizations who are potentially interested in working with a pollster to field polls of their own? [00:42:04] Andrew Villeneuve: Well, I guess the top advice I'd give is go seek out people who do it regularly. NPI is always happy to help people find out how we can answer our research objectives. Maybe you're trying to pass a bill in the legislature, maybe you'd like to get a ballot measure passed, maybe you're working on a policy that you think will come to fruition in 10 years and you want to get some initial data - we're happy to help. And of course, you can just go approach a pollster. But in our experience, most pollsters - their goal is to do the fielding and their goal is to get the project turned around and back to you. And then they move on to their next project because that's the polling business. Pollsters specialize in fielding and they do polls every week. They can't really linger on a project for six months and be - Well, we'll help you analyze that data. Their job is to give you the data, not necessarily to help you make sense of the data. Of course, they will try, in a basic sense, to help you make sense of it. If you are like - Well, I don't understand this crosstab, or I don't understand this results, or can you help me with this? - they'll do that. They'll answer all your questions to the best they can. But what is, I think, missing there is the guide. The pollster is going to do the fielding to the best of their ability. But can they actually guide you through all steps of the process? Some pollsters do specialize in providing more of that guidance, but they also charge a lot more. If you want that guidance, if you want that expert hand to assist you at all stages - not just writing the survey, but also deciphering what comes back - you're going to pay more. Lake Research Partners, FM3, other pollsters I can think of - that's their model. They do excellent work. I love them. We don't work with those pollsters as much because we're able to bring a lot of our own expertise to the table. So we work with pollsters that primarily do a really good job of fielding, but they're going to let us design the questionnaire because we want to do that. Of course, we'll take their input and counsel, but we'd like to write our own questionnaires. And so we work with pollsters that are comfortable with that arrangement. But if you're a nonprofit who needs help writing the questionnaire, then going with a firm like Lake Research Partners is going to be a great idea. But you are going to pay a minimum probably of $25,000 for that project. And you can expect to pay as much as $50,000 or more for that assistance and that data. Research - it's something that can be really expensive to collect. So for those who love our research, we do accept donations to keep it going. You can donate at NPI's website. We do put the money that people donate right into our polling, so people do have that ability to support our research budget directly. And we actually use a donation processing platform that has no credit card fees, so the processing platform eats the fees. And the reason they can do that is because people can leave tips for the processor. So regardless of whether you leave a tip or not, though, we get 100%. So it's not quite the same as - well, click here to pay the nonprofit's credit card fees. You can actually just donate. And whether or not you tip or not, we're going to get 100%. And that's very innovative - that's the kind of thing that NPI does. We look for ways to make sure that we're running the most fiscally responsible nonprofit that we can. We try to be very cost-conscious. So when we do an event, it's usually in a public space. We usually source the food ourselves - we find a restaurant that will do a really great job for us, a local restaurant that we want to do business with, and then we bring them in to do the food in a public space. And that allows us to keep the costs under control of that event. When we do a fundraiser, a lot of that money can then go right into our research polling. So if you come to our spring fundraising gala - you buy a ticket - most of your ticket's actually going to go into research and advocacy. It's not going to go into event costs. And that's not something that every nonprofit can say. So for those nonprofits that want to learn - how do we do it? How do we keep the costs in check? How do we practice research responsibly? We're happy to talk and provide advice and guidance. And whether or not you want to take advantage of what our expertise is and work with us on a project, or whether you want to do something yourself - we can help. We can provide you at least with the leads that you need to get started and do your work. But if you are going to be doing research and you haven't done it before, and you're going to work with a pollster and you're expecting them to provide a complete package for you - just be prepared to pay well out of the five figures. [00:46:04] Crystal Fincher: Right. That expertise is valuable. And that is reflected in some of those costs, as you mentioned. Now, I do want to talk about your work this legislative session. The session recently started and there's a lot on deck. I want to start off talking about the even-year elections bill. What is that and why does it matter? [00:46:27] Andrew Villeneuve: So this is a bill that would let localities switch their elections to even years when turnout is higher and more diverse. There's two versions of the bill - one that NPI wrote is in the Senate, and it just covers cities and towns. And the other one, which is based on the one we wrote and is sponsored by our friend Mia Gregerson - which we also support, we support them both - covers a lot more local government. So it's cities and towns, but then it's also ports and school boards and so on. And basically what we're trying to do is we're trying to liberate these important local elections from the curse of super low, not diverse turnout. So we know that in odd years, turnout's been declining - in fact, last year, 2023, we set a record for the worst voter turnout in Washington state history, around 36%. We're getting into special election territory with our odd year turnouts. So that means that in a special election, the turnout's going to be somewhere between like 25% and 35%. Well, regular election turnout in odd years is now approaching that special election average, which is not good. And so to liberate localities from that problem of having their leaders chosen by the few instead of the many, we want to let localities switch into even years - at their option. We're not making them. So we could propose a bill that would make it mandatory. And New York State is actually switching a lot of their localities to even years and it's not an option, as I understand their legislation. But our legislation makes it optional. So that way we could do some pilots to see how it would work here in Washington state. Because there's a lot of folks in the election community who are real skittish about this. Because we've had a system in place for 50 years where local governments go in odd-numbered years for the most part - there's some exceptions, which I'll mention in a second - and then the state and federal is in even years. And they're comfortable with this arrangement. It provides continuity and consistency - every year there's going to be work for our election staff to do. And people should get into the habit of voting every year - I think the auditors are in love with this bifurcated system. And the problem is the voters are not. And so the old saying is, You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Well, we can schedule the election in the odd-numbered year, but that doesn't mean people are going to vote then. And I think it's wrong to have - in my city, I look at Redmond's turnout percentages, and it's true for other cities too, like Seattle - you can look at the turnout and say, Well, 37% of the voters are picking who's the mayor of our city? I don't like that. I want the mayor being chosen by like 60% to 80% of the voters. And that's what would happen if that election was being held one year later or earlier. It just doesn't make sense that we're having these elections at times when most people aren't voting. We know that if we move them to an even-numbered year, people will vote in them. There are some folks who say - Well, they're down-ballot, so no one's going to vote in them. Not true. When you look at data from other states, or when you look at data from here - because sometimes we have a special election. One of the things you were talking about earlier is the governor's race. But Seattle's actually going to have a special city council election this year - it's an even-numbered year, and there's going to be a city council election right there on the ballot. And that election - you and I can go over the data after it comes back, but I'm willing to say right now, even though I told you I don't like predictions, but I'm willing to tell you, I think the turnout in that city council election is going to blow the doors off of the regular turnout for that same position three years ago. It's going to be like twice as much or something in that territory. And that's because it's a special election in an even-numbered year. And it will be way down the ballot. People will vote for it. So what that shows is that people are still going to keep voting, even after they get past president and governor and these higher-profile positions - they're going to keep going. They're going to keep voting. And that's the benefit of local elections moving over - is they get to ride the coattails of those state and federal offices. And we will hear, of course - people say, Well, you're going to kill local issues. You're going to bury local issues because you're having these elections at the same time as state and federal. So they're going to get drowned or swamped out. And actually, I love paradoxes. And one of the things that's a real paradox in politics is - you might think local issues just can't compete with state and federal. Oh, no. Local issues do very well when they're in the mix. Why is that? Because first of all - if people are not paying attention to begin with, it takes an enormous amount of energy just to get them to care about anything. So if you're a canvasser in Kent and nobody knows there's an election, nobody knows. So you're going door-to-door and you're like - Well, have you voted in the election? What election? What are you talking about? Okay. It's a lot harder to get people to care about the election when they don't know about it and they're not interested and they think it's an off-year. And I hate that term "off-year," by the way. Don't use it, but it's out there. It's used all the time, so people think - Oh, it doesn't matter. My vote doesn't matter. It's an off-year. Well, it's not. Every year is an on-year - but people hear that it's an off-year, so they think it doesn't matter. So they don't vote. And then they're told at the door maybe - if somebody comes to their door, which may or may not happen - but if someone does, they get told, Well, it does matter - but does that conversation actually move them to care? Whereas in an even year, that same person comes to their door - they already know there's going to be an election, they're already primed to vote. So now you're just trying to get them to take action in a race where they're already going to vote - they just need to make sure that when they get to that bottom of the ballot, they're going to check for a particular candidate. So as a canvasser, that makes your life so much easier. And people can still do - we've heard all about, Well, TV ads are going to cost more and radio is going to cost more. Well, that might be true. But local candidates need to be doorbelling anyway. So doorbelling is not going to cost more in an even-numbered year - it's going to be the same price. You're not going to have to worry about that. It might cost a little more to print your literature because you'll be competing with more campaigns. But there are trade-offs, which is if you're a local candidate, you're running for Teresa Mosqueda's council seat that she's given up because she went to the County Council - well, you can go out and campaign with other endorsed candidates, like your legislative candidates. You'll be able to doorbell with them if you want, because they're going to have to doorbell too. So there's opportunities to do joint campaigning that haven't existed before. And you mentioned earlier that King County is moving to even years as a result of our charter amendment. So even if our legislation doesn't pass at the state level for cities and towns and other local governments, we're still going to get data back from the county starting in 2026, because voters have signed off on that already. And I'm convinced that what we're going to see is that folks like Claudia Balducci are going to be running for a four-year term in 2026, and they're going to find all these opportunities to go out and campaign with people. And the turnout in their districts and countywide is going to be much bigger than what they've seen in the past. And this is an opportunity to get people connected to King County government who don't even know that it really is there. So it's very exciting - that's what our bill does is it gives localities the option. They can either do it through ballot measure or they can do it councilmanically if they want. If they do it councilmanically, they have to hold several hearings spaced 30 days apart so that people know that it's happening. So we don't want anybody being surprised by such a change. The way I see it - if this bill passes, let's say Seattle wanted to do it - if they were prepared, they could turn around a charter amendment to the people of Seattle in time for the November general election. Because they have to change their charter - they can't just pass an ordinance in Seattle, because that's a first-class city. So if we pass our bill, it gets signed into law in March or April, then by June it's in effect. And then the City of Seattle can use that law - they could propose a charter amendment and then submit it by August, turn it around. The vote happens in November. By 2025 - by this time next year - Seattle could, in a best case scenario, if they wanted, they could be starting their transition to even-year elections. But first, our bill would have to pass - either the Senate version or the House version, doesn't matter. One of them has to pass. And that has to get signed into law.

In this episode, I share how I got into podcasting, what I'm about, and what I mean by memes, metaphors, and magic. We cover the key things before getting into the good stuff - discussing the memes that matter to our amazing guests. Here's where you can get the free resource that I mentioned that helps you calculate your personal year number!Follow us on our Instagram account @memesmetaphorsandmagicResources discussed on this episode:The Cathy Heller Podcast: A Podcast for Soulful EntrepreneursThe Learning Paradigm College by John TaggLearning as Transformation by Jack Mezirow and Associates (the Laurent Parks Daloz chapter I reference is in this anthology)I Is An Other: The Secret Life of Metaphor and How It Shapes the Way We See the World by James GearyGallup CliftonStrengths Myers-Briggs Type IndicatorResources I didn't mention but informed this episode:Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes by Joseph GradyMetaphor: A Practical Introduction, 2nd ed. by Zoltan KovecsesMetaphors in the Mind: Sources of Variation in Embodied Metaphor by Jeannette LittlemoreMetaphors We Live By by George Lakoff and Mark JohnsonSensory Templates and Manager Cognition: Art, Cognitive Science, and Spiritual Practices in Management Education by Claus SpringborgPop culture references:Bridesmaids

Chapter 1 What's Metaphors We Live By Book by George Lakoff, Mark Johnsen"Metaphors We Live By" is a book written by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. The book explores the significant role that metaphors play in shaping our everyday thoughts, actions, and perceptions of the world. Lakoff and Johnson argue that metaphors are not just stylistic devices or literary flourishes, but rather fundamental cognitive mechanisms that structure our understanding of reality. They propose that metaphors are pervasive and unconscious, influencing our language, thinking, and behavior in profound ways.The authors examine various aspects of human experience and delve into the ways in which metaphors structure our concepts and reasoning. They illustrate how metaphors shape our understanding of time, morality, love, politics, and many other areas of life. Through numerous examples and analyses, Lakoff and Johnson demonstrate that metaphors are not mere rhetorical embellishments, but integral to our everyday cognition."Metaphors We Live By" challenges the traditional view of metaphor as a figure of speech and highlights the role of metaphor in shaping our thought processes. It has had a significant impact on cognitive science, linguistics, philosophy, and other fields, as it offers a fresh perspective on the intricacies of human reasoning and language use.Chapter 2 Is Metaphors We Live By Book A Good BookYes, "Metaphors We Live By" by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson is widely regarded as a good book. It revolutionizes the understanding of metaphors and their impact on our everyday thinking and communication. The book explores how metaphors shape our understanding of various concepts, from time and love to politics and philosophy. It presents insightful arguments and examples, making it a thought-provoking and valuable read for anyone interested in language, cognition, and communication.Chapter 3 Metaphors We Live By Book by George Lakoff, Mark Johnsen Summary"Metaphors We Live By" by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson is a book that explores the pervasive role of metaphor in our everyday lives. The authors argue that metaphors not only shape our thoughts and language but also influence the way we understand the world.The book begins by introducing the concept of "metaphorical thought," which suggests that our thinking is fundamentally structured by metaphors. Lakoff and Johnson contend that these metaphors are not merely linguistic devices but instead deeply rooted in our embodied experiences.The authors delve into various domains of metaphor, including time, causation, and morality, to demonstrate how metaphors shape our understanding of these concepts. They examine the metaphors we use to talk about time, such as "time is money," and how these metaphors influence our perception of time as a limited resource.Throughout the book, Lakoff and Johnson argue that metaphors are not just figures of speech, but actually convey cognitive frameworks that determine how we interpret the world. They also emphasize the influence of cultural and social factors in shaping metaphors.In addition to exploring the cognitive aspect of metaphors, the authors also address the ethical implications of metaphoric thinking. They argue that metaphors perpetuate certain cultural values and ideologies, and challenge readers to critically examine the metaphors they use and encounter in order to recognize and challenge oppressive ideologies.Overall, "Metaphors We Live By" provides a compelling argument for the pervasive influence of metaphors in shaping our thoughts, language, and understanding of the world. It invites readers to rethink the role of metaphor and encourages a deeper reflection on the cultural and political...

In this episode of The Brainy Business podcast, you'll dive into a fascinating discussion with host Melina Palmer about books that have the power to change the way you think. As an avid reader herself, Melina shares her personal experiences with impactful books and how they have shaped her understanding of the mind. She presents a diverse list of nine books that have had a profound impact on her thinking, covering topics such as combinatorial thinking, binary thinking, innovation inspired by nature, the influence of metaphors, and more.  With each book recommendation, Melina provides key insights and takeaways, highlighting the importance of these books in improving our understanding of behavioral science, decision-making, and communication. Whether you're a book lover or someone looking to expand your thinking, this episode is packed with valuable recommendations that will inspire and transform your mindset. So grab your favorite reading spot, get ready to discover new perspectives, and let these books change the way you think. In this episode, you will: Enhance your thinking and broaden your perspective by exploring impactful books that have the power to change the way you think. Unlock the power of combinatorial thinking and discover how asking great questions can lead to innovative ideas and fresh insights. Expand your options and make better decisions by challenging binary thinking and embracing a both/and mindset that embraces paradoxes. Draw inspiration from nature's ingenious problem-solving solutions and apply them to your own challenges for simple and effective problem-solving and innovation. Understand the influential role of metaphors in communication and decision-making, and learn how to harness their power to effectively convey ideas and align them with business objectives. Show Notes: 00:00:00 - Introduction, Melina introduces the episode and shares her love for reading books. She discusses how books have influenced her thinking and announces that she will be sharing a list of books that have changed the way she thinks. 00:02:04 - The Power of Questions - A More Beautiful Question, Melina discusses the book A More Beautiful Question by Warren Berger. She explains how the concept of combinatorial thinking and asking great questions can lead to innovation and a better understanding of how the mind works. 00:06:37 - Embracing Both And Thinking, Melina introduces the book Both and Thinking by Wendy Smith and Marianne Lewis. She discusses how the book explores the idea of embracing paradoxes and avoiding binary thinking. This can lead to better decision-making and a broader perspective. 00:09:58 - Solving Problems with Nature - Evolutionary Ideas, Melina talks about the book Evolutionary Ideas by Sam Tatum. She explains how the book demonstrates how nature can inspire creative and practical solutions to human problems. She shares examples from the book, including the bullet train inspired by a kingfisher. 00:15:23 - Introduction to Semiotics in Retail and Marketing, Rachel Laws has written two books on semiotics: Using Semiotics in Retail and Using Semiotics in Marketing. These books provide real-world examples of how semiotics can be used to understand and leverage symbols and metaphors in business. The example of the Jam of Death Fruit spread company shows how the wrong symbols can make a store unappealing to customers. 00:18:02 - How Minds Change by David McRaney, How Minds Change by David McRaney is a mind-blowing book that explores how people's minds can change in drastic ways. McRaney shares insights from experts and his own experiences to understand why some people change their minds while others remain stuck. The book offers fundamental insights into how the brain is wired and how we can change our own minds and influence others. 00:20:50 - The Similarities Between How Minds Change and Look, Although How Minds Change and Look are 100% different books, they are inherently similar at their core. Both books offer fascinating insights into how our brains make sense of the world and how we can observe and reflect on our surroundings. Look provides examples for nonprofit fundraising and how observation can lead to solutions. 00:23:35 - The Power of US by Dominic Packer and Jay Van Beavel, The Power of US explores how individuals shift through various identities throughout the day and how this impacts their actions and interactions. 00:30:31 - Finding Happiness in Small Moments, Melina discusses the importance of finding time for oneself and engaging in activities that bring happiness. She highlights the book Happier Hour by Cassie Holmes, which provides tasks and insights to help create a happier life. 00:31:19 - Recap of Books on Changing Thinking, A recap of the books mentioned in the episode, including A More Beautiful Question by Warren Berger, How to Think by Wendy Smith and Marianne Lewis, and Metaphors We Live By by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. Melina emphasizes the value of these books in changing one's thinking. 00:32:39 - Conclusion, Melina's top insights from the conversation. What stuck with you while listening to the episode? What are you going to try? Come share it with Melina on social media -- you'll find her as @thebrainybiz everywhere and as Melina Palmer on LinkedIn. Thanks for listening. Don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Android. If you like what you heard, please leave a review on iTunes and share what you liked about the show.  I hope you love everything recommended via The Brainy Business! Everything was independently reviewed and selected by me, Melina Palmer. So you know, as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. That means if you decide to shop from the links on this page (via Amazon or others), The Brainy Business may collect a share of sales or other compensation. Let's connect: Melina@TheBrainyBusiness.com The Brainy Business® on Facebook The Brainy Business on Twitter The Brainy Business on Instagram The Brainy Business on LinkedIn Melina on LinkedIn The Brainy Business on Youtube Learn and Support The Brainy Business: Check out and get your copies of Melina's Books.  Get the Books Mentioned on (or related to) this Episode: Metaphors We Live By, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson Evolutionary Ideas, by Sam Tatam Both/And Thinking, by Wendy Smith and Marianne Lewis How Minds Change, by David McRaney Look, by Christian Madsbjerg Top Recommended Next Episode: Melina's go to brainy books (ep 342) Already Heard That One? Try These:  A More Beautiful Question, with Warren Berger (ep 340) Evolutionary Ideas, with Sam Tatam (ep 204) Both/And Thinking, with Wendy Smith (ep 261) What is cognitive semiotics? With Sarah Thompson (ep 259) Using Semiotics in Marketing and Retail, with Rachel Lawes (ep 191) How Minds Change, with David McRaney (ep 336) Look, with Christian Madsbjerg (ep 325) The Power of Us, with Dominic Packer (ep 304) Selfless, with Brian Lowery (ep 331) Happier Hour, with Cassie Holmes (ep 257) Time discounting (ep 328) The Power of Metaphor, with Olson Zaltman (ep 181) Other Important Links:  Brainy Bites - Melina's LinkedIn Newsletter All The Books – 2022 Edition The Best Books To Have More Influence At Work (via Shepherd) 12 Behavioral Science Books Every Consumer Insights Professional Must Read (via Greenbook)

Today's Notes come from Don't Think of an Elephant!: Know Your Values and Frame the Debate--The Essential Guide for Progressives Paperback – September 1, 2004 by George Lakoff

Easily listen to Social Skills Coaching in your podcast app of choice at https://bit.ly/social-skills-home00:01:10 In 1974, business professor Chris Argyris created a handy tool00:06:22 How to Use the Ladder in Your Own Life00:16:02 Consider the following speech made by Barack Obama at the 2004 Democratic National Convention00:18:23 George Lakoff is an author and professor of cognitive science and linguistics.Hear it Here - https://adbl.co/3N9lsjI • Poor communication arises as a result of a mismatch of perspectives, approach, or conversational skill. People process information differently, but to avoid misunderstandings, communicate consciously and use the “ladder of inference.” It shows the unique way that people use their experiences to make meaning: observations > selected data > meanings > assumptions > conclusions > beliefs > actions. • Conflict can occur when people are on different rungs. To improve communication, see where people are and how their ladder of inference is working for them, then speak to that, in sequence, and without blame or shame. • Good communicators deliberately create their own frames during conversations and position their line of thinking by using specially chosen words, expressions, and images. Change frames and you change meaning. • Deliberately engineer your conversational frame and invite the other person in using pre-existing concepts they're familiar with to improve the chances they'll be receptive. Remember that reality is fixed, but the meaning of reality is dynamic and subject to change. #ACTIONS #ACTIONSBELIEFSCONCLUSIONSASSUMPTIONSMEANINGSSELECTEDDATAOBSERVATIONS #Argyris #ASSUMPTIONS #BELIEFS #Birkin #ChrisArgyris #CONCLUSIONS #GeorgeLakoff #Hermes #MEANING #POOLOFOBSERVATIONS #SELECTEDDATA #RussellNewton #NewtonMG #SocialSkillsCoaching #PatrickKindConsulting #PatrickKing

Sektodrei Headline Sammlung (Danke nochmal!), bluesky, https://bsky.app/profile/sektordrei.bsky.social/post/3kagxmwhf5w2i Christoph Cöln, "Warum der Satz des CDU-Chefs so gefährlich ist", t-online, https://www.t-online.de/nachrichten/deutschland/innenpolitik/id_100250698/cdu-chef-friedrich-merz-empoert-mit-aussage-putin-wird-es-gerne-hoeren.html “Trumps Lügen gehören ins Klapp-Butterbrot der Wahrheit”, Übermedienkolumne von Samira über das “Truth-Sandwich” nach George Lakoff (trifft auch alles auf die Berichterstattung über Merz zu), frei lesbar, https://uebermedien.de/54515/trumps-luegen-und-das-klapp-butterbrot-der-wahrheit/ Herausgegeben von Verfassungsblog-Redakteur Rechtsforscher Maxim Bönnemann: “Kleben und Haften - Ziviler Ungehorsam in der Klimakrise”, 23 Aufsätze, https://verfassungsblog.de/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Haften_und_Kleben-4.pdf "Im Gefängnis der Erwartungen", Jürgen Kaube, FAZ, https://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/debatten/letzte-generation-und-brandenburger-tor-demokratischer-diskurs-infrage-gestellt-19202110.html “Die Verfassung muss interpretiert werden”, Gespräch der Uni Frankfurt mit Rechtswissenschaftlerin Samira Akbarian über ihre ihre Dissertation “Ziviler Ungehorsam als Verfassungsinterpretation” für welche sie den Werner Pünder-Preis 2023 bekommen hat, https://aktuelles.uni-frankfurt.de/unireport/die-verfassung-muss-interpretiert-werden/ (Im frei verfügbaren und oben verlinkten “Kleben und Haften” ist auch ein super lesenswerter Aufsatz von Samira Akbarian drinnen - ihre Dissertation kommt bald als Ebook, aber leider mit 80 Euro ultra teuer, aber definitiv über Bibliotheken ausleihbar) Dieter Thomä, "Puer robustus: Eine Philosophie des Störenfrieds", Suhrkamp, https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/dieter-thomae-puer-robustus-t-9783518586907 “Verträgt unsere Demokratie Störenfriede wie die Klimakleber?”, Sternenstunde Philosophie, Barbara Bleisch im Gespräch mit Dieter Thomä, hier auf Youtube (aber auch bei allen Podcastanbietern zu finden), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rj72FS8t1IM&t=369s Grace und James Lee Boggs, "REVOLUTION AND EVOLUTION", das erste Kapitel auf Englisch: https://social-ecology.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Revolution-and-Evolution-by-The-Boggs.pdf Steffen Mau, Thomas Lux, Linus Westheuser: “Triggerpunkte - Konsens und Konflikt in der Gegenwartsgesellschaft”, Suhrkamp, https://www.suhrkamp.de/buch/triggerpunkte-t-9783518029848?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=post&utm_campaign=9783518029848 Pandemie und Polarisierung – (Wechselseitige) Wahrnehmungen von Befürworter*innen und Gegner*innen der Corona-Maßnahmen Juni 2021 https://refubium.fu-berlin.de/bitstream/handle/fub188/31000/RAPID-COVID_2021_Pandemie_und_Polarisierung.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Cihan Sinanoğlu, @nareksisiX: https://twitter.com/nareksisiX https://x.com/nareksisiX/status/1705674225585991853?s=20 Toni Morrison, “Sehr blaue Augen”, mit einem Nachwort von Alice Hasters, https://www.rowohlt.de/buch/toni-morrison-sehr-blaue-augen-9783498003678 Moshtari Hilal, "Hässlichkeit", Hanser Literatur, https://www.hanser-literaturverlage.de/buch/haesslichkeit/978-3-446-27682-6/

In this episode Richard has a conversation with Karen Swallow Prior, Ph.D. She is a reader, writer and professor. She talks with Richard about her latest book, The Evangelical Imagination: How Stories, Images, and Metaphors Created a Culture in Crisis. Another one of her books mentioned on the podcast is On Reading Well: Finding the Good Life through Great Books. She has authored and contributed to numerous other books. She has a monthly column for Religion News Service. Her writing has appeared at Christianity Today, New York Times, The Atlantic, The Washington Post, First Things, Vox, Think Christian, The Gospel Coalition, and various other places. She hosted the podcast Jane and Jesus. She is a Contributing Editor for Comment, a founding member of The Pelican Project, a Senior Fellow at the Trinity Forum, and a Senior Fellow at the L. Russ Bush Center for Faith and Culture. She and her husband live on a 100-year-old homestead in central Virginia with dogs, chickens, and lots of books. Connect with Karen on her website: www.karenswallowprior.com DONATE: If you have enjoyed this podcast and want to support what we do, click here. RESOURCES: Find out more about our upcoming Spiritual Leadership Coaching Workshops here. Metaphors We Live By by George Lakoff, Mark Johnson. Find it here. CONNECT: Follow Richard on Twitter. Follow Richard on Facebook. Read Richard's latest blog posts at www.richardblackaby.com.

What can music teach us about human behaviour? What impact is remote and hybrid working having on employee conduct? How might we misjudge the risks posed by AI?If these seem like a broad range of topics that have little in common, then you're right and wrong. You're right that they're broad, but you're wrong that they have little in common. My guest, Dr. Roger Miles, is a friend of the show — he's been on it before (links to those episodes below) — and they're all relevant to his work and interests.Since I was recording at the world-famous Abbey Road studios in London, I thought having music fan and musician Roger in the studio would be a good idea. Not just to hear from him about music but also to catch up on what he's been doing and hear his insights on current affairs and recent trends.For more about Roger, visit his website: https://www.drrmiles.com/aboutHis books: https://www.koganpage.com/authors/roger-milesTo hear the previous times Roger has been on the show: Roger on Conduct Risk: https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/dr-roger-miles-on-conduct/Roger on Conduct Risk under COVID: https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/human-risk-webinar-recording-conduct/During the show, we talk about:The Barclays Bank ‘OccupEye' tracking software: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-08-18/barclays-puts-in-sensors-to-see-which-bankers-are-at-their-desksHannah Arendt: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannah_Arendt Professor Barry Rider: https://www.jesus.cam.ac.uk/people/barry-rider-obe-phd-lld The Center for Human Technology: https://www.humanetech.com/ The famous train accident in Paris where the train literally left the station; https://www.midnight-trains.com/post/the-railway-disaster-at-the-gare-montparnasse The VIP killed by the train he was there to launch: https://www.theguardian.com/theguardian/from-the-archive-blog/2011/may/06/newspapers-national-newspapers2? The FInancial Markets Standards Board Behavioural Cluster Analysis: https://fmsb.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/BCA_v32_1.pdf ‘Metaphors We Live By' by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphors_We_Live_By Diane Vaughan's book on the Challenger disaster ‘The Challenger Launch Decision' - https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo22781921.html The review of conduct in London's Metropolitan Police Force: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cw9d1pgzlyvt The corporate violation tracker: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cw9d1pgzlyvt The British Post Office Scandal: https://www.postofficescandal.uk/ You can hear Nick Wallis talk about his book on the scandal on this show: https://www.humanriskpodcast.com/nick-wallis-on-the-great-post-office-scandal/ ‘The Blunders of Our Governments' by Anthony King and Ivor Crewe: https://www.simonandschuster.co.uk/books/The-Blunders-of-Our-Governments/Anthony-King/9781780746180

Maggie Appleton is a product designer at Ought, an AI research lab that's working on ways to scale open-ended thinking with machine learning. She's also an advocate of sharing personal knowledge online. She publishes one of the best digital gardens I've seen, located at maggieappleton.com. In this conversation, we discuss the what, why, and how of digital gardening.Show notesMaggie AppletonMaggie Appleton on TwitterOught[Metaphors We Live](https://amzn.to/43q0eEj) By by George Lakoff and Mark JohnsonThe Expanding Dark Forest and Generative AI by Maggie AppletonGoffman's Theory of Performance of the SelfErving Goffman: The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life by Adam D. BarnhartClifford Geertz - BritannicaSubstackWork with the garage door up by Andy MatuschakNiklas Luhmann - WikipediaChatGPTNicole van der Hoeven on Obsidian – The Informed LifeObsidianHacker NewsShow notes include Amazon affiliate links. We get a small commission for purchases made through these links.If you're enjoying the show, please rate or review us in Apple's podcast directory:https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-informed-life/id1450117117?itsct=podcast_box&itscg=30200

“Poetry is the attempt to understand fully what is real, what is present, what is imaginable, what is feelable, and how can I loosen the grip of what I already know to find some new, changed relationship,” the poet Jane Hirshfield tells me. Through poetry, she says, “I know something new and I have been changed.”Hirshfield is the award-winning author of nine books of poetry and two illuminating essay collections about what poetry does to us and in the world: “Nine Gates: Entering the Mind of Poetry” and “Ten Windows: How Great Poems Transform the World.” Her book “Ledger” is one I gift to people most often. Hirshfield's true talent as a poet is her singular ability to imbue the ordinary, the invisible, the forgotten with a sense of majesty and wonder. Her work is littered with lines that force you to stop, to slow down, to notice what you might have missed or overlooked.Hirshfield's work also raises some profound questions: What does it mean to grapple with our complicity in the climate crisis? Where does the self end and the rest of the world begin? How do we learn to desire what we previously dreaded or despised?This is one of those conversations that is hard to describe in words. But it was truly a delight for me to be a part of. And I think you'll enjoy it too.Mentioned:The Iliad by HomerThe Odyssey by HomerGilgameshThe Beauty by Jane HirshfieldHow Emotions Are Made by Lisa Feldman BarrettFlow by Mihaly CsikszentmihalyiLiving with a Wild God by Barbara EhrenreichThe Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution by C.P. SnowBook recommendations:Metaphors We Live By by George Lakoff and Mark JohnsonLess Than One by Joseph BrodskyThe Fire Next Time by James BaldwinThoughts? Guest suggestions? Email us at ezrakleinshow@nytimes.com.You can find transcripts (posted midday) and more episodes of “The Ezra Klein Show” at nytimes.com/ezra-klein-podcast, and you can find Ezra on Twitter @ezraklein. Book recommendations from all our guests are listed at https://www.nytimes.com/article/ezra-klein-show-book-recs.“The Ezra Klein Show” is produced by Emefa Agawu, Annie Galvin, Jeff Geld, Rogé Karma and Kristin Lin. Fact-checking by Kate Sinclair. Mixing by Sonia Herrero. Original music by Isaac Jones. Audience strategy by Shannon Busta. The executive producer of New York Times Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser. Special thanks to Carol Sabouraud and Kristina Samulewski.

In today's conversation, I am joined by Sarah Thompson, a behavioral designer at Live Neuron Labs, who has a master's in cognitive semiotics. Don't worry, we are going to have lots of conversation today about what cognitive semiotics is and why it matters. The first thing I want to set the stage on is to get you thinking about metaphor. Now, this isn't the first time we are talking about metaphors (or semiotics) on the show, but today we are talking about how important metaphor really is when it comes to understanding the brain, thought, and decision-making. Metaphor matters because research is starting to show that we don't just use them as colorful language, but we actually think in metaphors. It's how our cognitive system is structured. Sarah will talk about a lot of great resources including a book called Metaphors We Live By, which was written by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson. If, like me, you are ready to go all in on cognitive semiotics and metaphor, this is a book to add to your library immediately. Cognitive semiotics is an emerging field, so we all need to stick together and know who else is researching and working in this space. Get ready to have your mind blown (metaphor) as you listen today! Show Notes: [00:43] In today's conversation, I am joined by Sarah Thompson, a behavioral designer at Live Neuron Labs, who has a master's in cognitive semiotics. [02:08] Cognitive semiotics is an emerging field, so we all need to stick together and know who else is researching and working in this space. [04:29] Sarah shares about herself, her background, and the work she does. She is a behavioral designer. Her job is to apply behavioral science through design to help people make better decisions.  [06:10] Cognitive semiotics is how the mind makes meaning.  [07:43] One of the biggest insights from cognitive semiotics is that metaphors are incredibly powerful at shaping how we talk, how we think, and how we make decisions.  [08:21] Metaphors are something we don't go out of our way to use. It is just something that naturally flows out of us.  [10:55] We have this myth that metaphors are just a part of language but metaphors are actually in all other types of communication including gestures.  [12:35] Melina talks about metaphor usage in songs, including what happens when something is unexpected. [14:21] In a metaphor we talk about one concept as if it is another concept.  [16:50] A lot of studies show that the earlier you can get a metaphor in your conceptualization of an idea the more ability it has to influence how somebody thinks about it. It is not as effective if you add the metaphor at the end.  [18:01] You are using metaphors constantly even when you are not thinking about them.  [18:24] Sarah shares a study from Stanford University about two researchers who wanted to know if using a metaphor could affect how somebody thought about a complex social issue like crime.  [20:07] A single word changed how people thought about a very complex social issue. The metaphor was more powerful at determining people's response than their political affiliation.  [23:03] We have primary metaphors which are ones that are deeply rooted and embodied metaphors. We acquire them from interactions with the world at a very young age.  [25:36] The war metaphor was a mismatched metaphor for the pandemic.  [26:56] Metaphors are a part of our everyday communication. They have the ability to influence us and they structure our thoughts.  [29:20] The first key thing in using metaphors is identifying your user's metaphors.  [31:44] Once you know what your users are saying you can figure out those higher level conceptual metaphors they have.   [33:04] Once you have their metaphors you need to evaluate them and figure out which of their metaphors align with the behavioral outcome we want them to do.  [35:44] We have lots of ways where you can go and find what people are actually saying.  [37:57] Some metaphors can be empowering, but others can be potentially harmful.  [39:19] The next critical piece is that whatever metaphor you use to describe your user's problem you need to use the same metaphor to describe the solution.  [40:54] It is important to really think through all the ripples and steps of what a metaphor might mean and the effects it may have.  [43:27] With metaphors, it is particularly important to test because metaphors trigger associations or experiences that your users already have. You take a best guess, put it out there, and get feedback.  [44:44] Tests are always best!  [47:12] There can be so many mixed metaphors in a piece of communication.   [48:02] Mixed metaphors are like mixed messages. They increase cognitive load and make it more difficult for someone to make a decision. [49:18] Once you decide what your core metaphor is going to be you take it and try to carry it through the entire communication.  [51:01] Go and try and find all the metaphors around you first. Then jot down all the associations you have for it.  [53:42] Melina's closing thoughts [55:02] Cognitive semiotics, understanding how the mind makes meaning, is so key to understanding behavior. And I can't wait to keep learning and researching more and more in this space in the years to come. Thanks for listening. Don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Android. If you like what you heard, please leave a review on iTunes and share what you liked about the show.  I hope you love everything recommended via The Brainy Business! Everything was independently reviewed and selected by me, Melina Palmer. So you know, as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. That means if you decide to shop from the links on this page (via Amazon or others), The Brainy Business may collect a share of sales or other compensation. Let's connect: Melina@TheBrainyBusiness.com The Brainy Business® on Facebook The Brainy Business on Twitter The Brainy Business on Instagram The Brainy Business on LinkedIn Melina on LinkedIn The Brainy Business on Youtube Join the BE Thoughtful Revolution – our free behavioral economics community, and keep the conversation going! Learn and Support The Brainy Business: Check out and get your copies of Melina's Books.  Get the Books Mentioned on (or related to) this Episode: Using Semiotics in Retail, by Rachel Lawes Using Semiotics in Marketing, by Rachel Lawes Metaphors We Live, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson Philosophy in the Flesh, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson How Customers Think, by Gerald Zaltman Connect with Sarah:  Sarah on LinkedIn Live Neuron Labs Top Recommended Next Episode: The Power of Metaphors for Brands with Olson Zaltman (ep 181) Already Heard That One? Try These:  Using Semiotics in Retail with Rachel Lawes (ep 191) The Philosophical Side of BE, an interview with Dr. Nick Hobson (ep 161) Priming (episode 18) Framing (ep 16) The Sense of Sight (ep 24) The Sense of Taste (ep 26) Sense of Touch (ep 28) Sense of Sound (ep 27) Sense of Smell (ep 25) Focusing Illusion (ep 89) Confirmation Bias (ep 102) Time Discounting (ep 51) Other Important Links:  Brainy Bites - Melina's LinkedIn Newsletter  How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives Metaphors We Think With: The Role of Metaphor in Reasoning Database of Conceptual Metaphors Embodied metaphor and abstract problem solving: Testing a metaphoric fit hypothesis in the health domain Do metaphors in health messages work? Exploring emotional and cognitive factors The #ReframeCovid initiative: From Twitter to society via metaphor The Case Against Waging ‘War' on the Coronavirus

Today's episode is all about making concepts tangible (what that means and why it matters in life and business). I am so excited to refresh this episode for you today because it shows how I was excited about something I didn't have a word for several years ago, but was already searching for. Now I know this was at the root of my interest in cognitive semiotics, something we are digging into on this coming Friday's episode with Sarah Thompson.  Cognitive semiotics may sound super technical, but it is essentially about how the mind makes meaning, and we talk a lot about metaphor in that conversation. These brain associations and the concepts like a blue square or yellow triangle, which I introduce in this episode are from George Lakoff (I read about in his book The Political Mind, which was part of the reading in my master's program. I wish they would have included Metaphors We Live By as that would have changed my entire life if I had encountered it all these years ago, but I think things turned out ok so I'm not too mad about it.) While I didn't realize it at the time, this episode from 2019 was my first real dive into cognitive semiotics and metaphor elicitation. This episode is all about what it means to make a concept “tangible” or a physical manifestation or physical representation of a concept, and why that is important for all kinds of businesses. Listen in for tips on making things more tangible (and making it easier for people to buy from you).  Show Notes: [00:38] Today's episode is all about making concepts tangible. [02:43] This isn't really a topic you can look up. There aren't really papers or extensive research on this naming. It is more of an acceptable premise. (As noted in the refreshed intro, the field of cognitive semiotics is a place to start.) [03:21] The brain works on associations.  [05:30] The physical shapes and colors of road signs bring a physical presence that can be recalled easier. [07:04] The physical manifestation of the brand makes the business more real in your mind because there is a logo to relate to.  [08:18] Physical representation can do two big things for a business. It can make an abstract concept more real and impactful. And, it can tie back to an emotion or memory or other association you want to remember. Abstract concepts are everywhere in business.  [10:12] Businesses will say things that are more conceptual but feel tangible. That makes the point more impactful for the customer.  [12:50] The physical, tangible representation can be tied to our emotional center and trigger loss aversion. A personal example from DVDs. [13:35] In your business, where could you reverse the process and find a spot to inject a physical form where only a concept exists today to make your business more tangible and sticky for your customers? [16:24] When you take something from conceptual to tangible it makes it easier for the brain to categorize, relate, and remember.   [17:04] The second way that physical representation is helpful is that it can help remind you of associations you have made previously or of what is important to you.  [19:45] A strong brand is able to live through the lack of words and evoke feelings. They leave an impression even without their name.  [21:14] What could your business do to be a constant association and reminder in the brains of your customers? [21:22] One important reminder is to note where the association is taking place and what that says for and about your overall brand.  [23:07] You (typically) don't want to be associated with the physical manifestation of a negative concept.  [24:47] You can strategically create visuals around what you are wanting to do to help you achieve your goals. What you surround yourself with has a huge impact on your approach to life, business, and success.  [25:16] Melina's closing thoughts [25:33] The words and images we use and how we can be more impactful when we are consistent in our metaphor usage, it's just so so important in life and business. Thanks for listening. Don't forget to subscribe on Apple Podcasts or Android. If you like what you heard, please leave a review on iTunes and share what you liked about the show.  I hope you love everything recommended via The Brainy Business! Everything was independently reviewed and selected by me, Melina Palmer. So you know, as an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. That means if you decide to shop from the links on this page (via Amazon or others), The Brainy Business may collect a share of sales or other compensation. Let's connect: Melina@TheBrainyBusiness.com The Brainy Business® on Facebook The Brainy Business on Twitter The Brainy Business on Instagram The Brainy Business on LinkedIn Melina on LinkedIn The Brainy Business on Youtube Join the BE Thoughtful Revolution – our free behavioral economics community, and keep the conversation going! Learn and Support The Brainy Business: Check out and get your copies of Melina's Books.  Get the Books Mentioned on (or related to) this Episode: What Your Customer Wants and Can't Tell You, by Melina Palmer How Customers Think, by Gerald Zaltman Alchemy, by Rory Sutherland Using Semiotics in Marketing, by Rachel Lawes Metaphors We Live, by George Lakoff and Mark Johnson Top Recommended Next Episode: Can behavioral economics increase savings? (65) Already Heard That One? Try These:  Framing (ep 16) Priming (episode 18) Color Theory (61) Loss Aversion (9) Time Discounting (51) Sense of Touch (28) Endowment Effect (139) Other Important Links:  Brainy Bites - Melina's LinkedIn Newsletter  Getting to the Top of Mind: How Reminders Increase Saving Progressive TV Commercial For Name Your Price Tool Progressive TV Commercial ‘The Box' Jogger Commercial | Allstate Mayhem

We often think of metaphors as poetic flourishes, a nice way to punctuate your ideas and make them more relatable. But what if metaphors aren't simply tools of language but part of thought itself? David and Tamler “dive into” George Lakoff's theory of metaphors and “explore” the implications of his view that metaphors shape and constrain the ways we conceptualize our experience of the world. Plus if we're really living in cancel culture, we might as well do some cancelling. Say goodbye to "Singing in the Rain," Latinx, and punny academic titles among other things. Oh and it's our 250th episode! It's been quite a journey. Have we come a long way or are we just spinning our wheels? And for a fun detour, check out our bonus podcast series “The Ambulators” on the great TV series Deadwood.