Podcast appearances and mentions of john buridan

Click To JOIN! Just Keep Learning Newsletter I WILL HELP YOU GET CLARITY, BUILD YOUR GROWTH MINDSET AND OWN YOUR BIG DREAMSA couple weeks ago we were sitting on the couch, my wife and I trying to pick something on Netflix, or Prime, or Disney…But there's just so much to choose from. It's almost stressful because you can feel your watching time slipping away. With so many choices we add stress to a relaxing activity.Instead of choosing one and getting started, we scroll, debate and then it feels like we sort of “give up” and decide. I love when real life stories like this connect to things I wanna talk about. I was drifting off in thought about the fact that here we are sitting here. Scrolling through streaming services looking for something to watch, it reminded me of the classic Parable Buridan's Donkey named after the 1300's philosopher John Buridan.A donkey is standing between two equally enticing nourishments. A pile of hay, or a bowl of water.But, they lack reason and are overwhelmed by the decision.The donkey, unsure of which to go for, ends up dehydrated and starving to death because they couldn't make up their mind. The moral is that overthinking can lead to inaction, which is far worse than making either choice, even the “wrong one”. Paralyzed By DecisionThis tale is a simple but powerful metaphor for how overthinking can paralyze us.I try to remember it when it comes time to choose something. But it's not as important as what we can do about it to make decisions more likely.In our case with the movies let's say sometimes there are very strong reasons to choose.For example I really wanna see Jelly Roll's documentary, when Lewis Capaldi dropped his my wife and I both wanted to check it out and I loved the first Joker movie so when the second one is released I will be naturally motivated to check it out asap.But where I get caught up in this phenomenon that actually matters (way more than trying to pick a movie) is deciding what to work on.Just yesterday, I was talking with a creator friend of mine, Amanda Northcutt, founder of Level Up Creators. And she was asking about some of my ideas, wondering why I haven't acted on them yet. Honestly, I didn't have a great answer. Trying to explain our thoughts out loud to others like this can help us realize how silly our excuses, or overthinking really is.What was holding me back?While driving home, I started questioning whether I was just making excuses, or if something was getting in the way.And I realized I had allowed shiny objects to creep back into my workflow because I had way too many choices.I was working on live video, writing a book, long form blog posts, tweet threads, visual illustrations for social media, short videos, solo podcast episodes and interviews. Damn, it's crazy just writing it out like this. Wild thing is there were like three other business ideas in the works.Everything felt “equal”.And so when I would sit down to tackle some work I would waste a lot of time.Hick's LawStates that having plenty of choices affect the decision-making time of an individual. Too little choice and they feel restricted. But a lot of choice and they actually feel worse.Until a certain point, offering options is good. It provides freedom to choose. But there comes a point at which the availability of too many options makes it harder for a person to make up their mind. They grow confused, stressed and don't make a decision at all.I see this all the time with peopl e I coach as well.The goal of giving people freedom and joy because they get to choose can actually rob them of feeling happy at all because they're overwhelmed.They get trapped in overthinking.Almost like staring at a computer with a hundred tabs open, or a restaurant menu with every option in the world—it's overwhelming and chaotic.Goldilocks Freedom Of ChoiceThere's a lot of advice out there about decluttering your home and living more minimally.And the same principles apply to decluttering your mind. Simplifying your thoughts and getting started is the key to breaking free from overthinking.But there is a  Goldilocks sweet spot for everyone when it comes to choice.And it evolves.Some people need to be told “write a story” some need a genre, a specific prompt, or fill in the blanks.Either way it's important to set your priorities, and then the next step is simply to get started, with any of them.Prioritization Once you know the most important things to work on, then you can decide to focus on those.So in my case right now it's this podcast and the book. I would love to work on all the other things and in some way, someday I will but for right now it's the podcast and the book. That's step one, pick your priority.But these are still huge projects.So, how do I make up my mind about what to work on within those two priorities?When we don't have a strong reason to choose, that's where we get stuck.We feel like we're damned if we do, damned if we don't. But here's the secret. It can be the opposite.We can thrive with any of the choices. As long as we decide.And this is why randomness can go a long way to declutter our minds.RandomnessWhen we're kids we just randomly choose what we want to do.But as adults a lot of our rules and feedback lead us to “weigh our options”.Sometimes this makes sense. A list of pros, or cons, but then you gotta pull the trigger.Randomness to make a decision removes some reason and logic, but that's exactly what we need sometimes.If two options are compelling we can not use reasoning skills to decide. Sometimes the best solution to a problem is to turn to chance.For example, my book will have sixty some chapters. I can't think too long about which one to work on. I just need to pick.Within a chapter I have many ideas, I just need to pick one and write.The podcast is similar. I have a document with episode ideas which is over four hundred! If I question which topic to tackle I run out of time (and motivation) to take on any of them. So I just need to pick one and go. Sometimes it's as easy as flipping a coin. Actually related to movies (as well as restaurants) this is one of the tactics in our home. Pull a name from a jar of movies you wanna watch, or restaurants you want to try, and what you get you get.The moral here is all the same.Overthinking results in wasted time and missing out.Simply choosing a direction and taking any action is far more effective.List out your options, put ‘em all in a jar, shake it up, pull one out and get started.FOLLOW JustinInstagram – @JustKeepLearning.CaYouTube –@justkeeplearningpodcastTwitter – @JustinNolan_JKLTiktok – @justkeeplearning.caPinterest – JustKeepLearningcaFacebook – JustKeepLearningLinkedIn – Justin I'm so happy you found this podcast. I am here to serve you, the creative solopreneur & aspiring content creator to get clarity on how to create content, teaching, build a business and design the life of your dreams without burning out in the online learning, creator economy.Want to get every single secret, tip, or idea I learn about channelling our emotions into success in this new creator economy, be sure to subscribe to the newsletter: https://newsletter.justkeeplearning.ca/main

[This is an entry to the Adversarial Collaboration Contest by John Buridan and Christian Flanery.] Matter: To what extent does liberalism and democracy obtain in Islamic countries. Whether Islam consistently poses political opposition to liberalism and democracy. Two simple narratives have split the western world’s perspective on Islam. These two narratives do not exhaust the spectrum of opinion, but they do function well enough to establish the basic controversy around Islamic countries and Liberal Democracy. The first narrative opines that Islam is an ideology inimical to “western values,” such as classical liberalism and liberal egalitarianism, and a rival to the Judeo-Christian social mores. It constitutes an ideological rival, inherently aggressive, both unable and unwilling to sustain non-partisan legal systems, democratic norms, fair treatment for opposition parties, protection of dissidents, or the basic rights and freedoms which Western European and Anglophone countries enjoy. And that Islam sustains this undesirable state of affairs. The second is that Islam is not qualitatively different from any other religion. Islam has contributed to civilization in a significant way, and ordinary Muslims share our own values of family, peace, and justice. In contrast to the first narrative which stresses Islam as an ideology, the second narrative emphasizes that Muslims are normal people.There is no problem with Islam eo ipso; the perceived “problems” of Islam are actually some combination of the fairly normal problems of traditional societies, poor socio-economic conditions, and legacy problems from colonialism. In order to avoid a point-scoring debate between these two narratives, our approach is to provide a descriptive examination of the performance of liberal democracy within Islamic environments. We take as granted for this paper that one cannot look at a religion on paper and predict what it will look like in a polity. Religious practice and theological doctrine inform every aspect of the pious person’s outlook and life, but the way in which it informs that outlook is not deterministic and cannot be gleaned merely by looking at the source texts, nor by the impossible task of a quantitative comparison of which religion has produced more violence across regions and millenia. Although we believe original texts are not deterministic, that does not mean Islam is totally amorphous. Religious culture is a powerful force within society. It unifies people, allows them to feel part of something bigger and better, it provides solace in their troubles, and can mobilize political action. How that mobilization of power occurs remains largely up to the needs of the moment, but it’s that mobilization of power which we are interested in.

This week I’ll be presenting entries from the adversarial collaboration contest. Remember, an adversarial collaboration is where two people with opposite views on a controversial issue work together to present a unified summary of the evidence and its implications. In theory it’s a good way to make sure you hear the strongest arguments and counterarguments for both sides – like hearing a debate between experts, except all the debate and rhetoric and disagreement have already been done by the time you start reading, so you’re just left with the end result. A few months ago, I asked readers to write adversarial collaborations and submit them to me. After the inevitable flakeouts and disappearances, I got four entries: 1. Does the current US education system adequately serve advanced students? (by Michael Pershan and TracingWoodgrains) 2. Is Islam compatible with liberal democracy? (by John Buridan and Christian Flanery) 3. Should childhood vaccination be mandatory? (by Mark Davis and Mark Webb) 4. Should children who identify as transgender start transitioning? (by a_reader and flame7926) I’m going to post one of these per day. Over the weekend, I’ll post a link to a poll where readers can vote for their favorite. I’m also going to vote for my favorite, and my vote will be worth 5% of the total number of reader votes. Whoever gets the most votes wins. The prize is $1000; thanks to everyone who donates to the Patreon for making this possible. Please put any comments about the contest itself here, not on the individual entries.

The debate between Nicholas of Autrecourt and John Buridan on whether it is possible to achieve certain knowledge.

Peter speaks to Jack Zupko about John Buridan's secular and parsimonious approach to philosophy.

The hipster’s choice for favorite scholastic, John Buridan, sets out a nominalist theory of knowledge and language, and explains the workings of free will.