Prussian philosopher
POPULARITY
Categories
151 episodes with kant
90 episodes with kant
56 episodes with kant
100 episodes with kant
37 episodes with kant
37 episodes with kant
32 episodes with kant
30 episodes with kant
9 episodes with kant
21 episodes with kant
22 episodes with kant
11 episodes with kant
20 episodes with kant
23 episodes with kant
16 episodes with kant
14 episodes with kant
10 episodes with kant
27 episodes with kant
11 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
10 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
15 episodes with kant
11 episodes with kant
22 episodes with kant
9 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
9 episodes with kant
9 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
18 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
10 episodes with kant
9 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
8 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
19 episodes with kant
8 episodes with kant
9 episodes with kant
8 episodes with kant
8 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
11 episodes with kant
11 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
11 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
10 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
2 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
8 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
2 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
5 episodes with kant
8 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
2 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
4 episodes with kant
6 episodes with kant
7 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
2 episodes with kant
8 episodes with kant
3 episodes with kant
This week on Crack the Book, we move from Rousseau's Social Contract to his Confessions, and let's just say my opinion hasn't improved. Before we get to the books, I share some strategies for getting through a book you don't like (because I needed to take my own advice this week). Then we move on to our two books for the week.In Confession's Book One, Rousseau recounts his early life with all the self-importance of a man convinced he's unlike anyone else who's ever lived. Between tragic beginnings, cruel masters, and an overshare about his youthful “discipline” preferences, I found little humility and even less personal growth. Rousseau insists his passions still rule him—no maturity, not even irony, just Rousseau being Rousseau.Thank goodness we had Voltaire's Candide, a complete tonal shift. This whirlwind satire—part travelogue, part absurdist adventure—follows Candide and his companions through war, earthquakes, El Dorado, and endless misfortune. Yet beneath the chaos lies a sharp moral insight: life's purpose isn't in grand philosophies or endless striving, but in the quiet wisdom to “cultivate our own garden.” The cinematic pacing (that Italo Calvino helpfully points out) is an interesting development, too.Preachy Rousseau and playful Voltaire were a great combination, and Candide was the clear winner of the two. Candide's brisk storytelling and biting humor still feel modern, even cinematic. One book made me roll my eyes; the other made me laugh out loud. Next week: Descartes, Spinoza, and Kant—wish me luck.LINKTed Gioia/The Honest Broker's 12-Month Immersive Humanities Course (paywalled!)My Amazon Book List (NOT an affiliate link)CONNECTThe complete list of Crack the Book Episodes: https://cheryldrury.substack.com/p/crack-the-book-start-here?r=u3t2rTo read more of my writing, visit my Substack - https://www.cheryldrury.substack.com.Follow me on Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/cldrury/ LISTENSpotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/5GpySInw1e8IqNQvXow7Lv?si=9ebd5508daa245bdApple Podcasts - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/crack-the-book/id1749793321 Captivate - https://crackthebook.captivate.fm
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCConcludiamo i ragionamenti attorno all'idea di bellezza in Kant, e introduciamo il concetto di sublime.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
Aos versos que tantos bolçam por aí, elevando-os a mantras e slogans de campanha, repetidos numa aleivosia alegre e acrítica, até deles só restar esse tinir irritante, essa sanha das frases motivacionais na sua correspondência mais cretina com a existência, perante esses pedaços mastigados, nauseantes, como esse que nos diz que “o poema ensina a cair”, temos vontade de responder: mas e se deixa de haver chão? E se ninguém tem sequer a oportunidade de se estatelar propriamente, e, por isso, também já ninguém se levanta? E se a queda se tornou um estado constante, gerando uma resposta nervosa, uma coreografia patética, uma indiferença em que tudo vale o mesmo? Com a morte de toda a mediação, para quê insistir em categorias como a de poesia? Face a um enredo que tudo dilui, em que se rejeita todo o crivo crítico pelo risco de que este possa melindrar uns quantos, deixar alguns desamparados, desfazendo-lhes as ilusões, muitos preferem esta meia-cultura com as suas suposições ociosas, a sua função piedosa, o seu constante logro. A todo o momento, cada ser suplica aos demais que não ofendam a sua precária composição espasmódica, esse carrinho de supermercado onde recolhe quinquilharia, restos, tudo o que sirva à fancaria literária, acatando esse impulso de uma mentira alargada às dimensões de uma cultura inteira. E, no fim, o que soma isto? Não será a tal cultura que, no entender Adorno, serve apenas para dar “a ilusão de uma sociedade que seria digna do homem, mas que não existe; ela dissimula as condições materiais na base das quais se edifica toda a vida dos homens; e com as consolações e os apaziguamentos que dispensa, serve para conservar a nossa existência nas más condições económicas que a determinam”. Prisioneiros de um inescapável teatro de imposturas, vivemos subjugados a esse estado de tutela (Kant), que se reflecte na incapacidade de cada um se servir do seu próprio discernimento sem a condução de um outro. Seres que abdicam da sua volição, incapazes de arriscar um juízo, de fazer sair o pensamento em si mesmo, esquivando-se a esse estado que o precede e oprime. A cultura não reflecte valores, é incapaz de manifestar um desejo autêntico, pulsões desaustinadas, de nutrir novas e ousadas linguagens simbólicas, aquela impulsividade e tensão do imaginário, elaborando constelações de fantasia. Pelo contrário, tornou-se ela mesma uma forma de bloqueio, um modo de coerção, por isso ninguém exige dos poetas essa capacidade de assaltar o leitor pela obscenidade, de o sobressaltar pelo choque do imprevisto e do irrepresentável, de o precipitar na ambivalência da repulsa e do gozo. Todos pedem simplesmente que continuem a dar-lhes corda, a produzir ritmos e imagens de acordo com as prescrições gerais. Tudo se presume, à medida que uma forma de narração superficial toma conta de todos os temas e assuntos, vulgarizando as experiências, e, assim, se gera uma cumplicidade desoladora, enquanto os discursos de ordem psicologizante adquirem uma tonalidade cada vez mais ligeira, adequando-se aos padrões de informação e programação computacional, alisando o terreno, uma vez que o desenvolvimento capitalista da inteligência artificial requer toda uma disponibilidade para adquirir novas habilitações, conduzindo também a um remodelamento das subjectividades. A tudo isto ajuda a compreensão dos nossos corpos essencialmente como discursivos, dessas personalidades e identidades performativas, adaptadas um regime de transferência de planos, a troca da realidade pelo simulacro, ignorando como as funções essenciais da crítica estão ligadas às capacidades, necessidades e desejos do corpo humano, esses limites mas também impulsos, essa força radical do que remonta sempre a uma raiz, sendo tudo isso o efeito de um longo processo de co-evolução com o nosso ambiente natural. Ora, o que se tornou imperativo é cortar essa ligação, produzir que, arrancado pela raiz, e transplantado, seja infinitamente adaptável, manipulável, dócil. Como nos lembra Silvia Federici, a verdade é que “mesmo sem a edição genética, já somos mutantes, capazes, por exemplo, de prosseguir com o nosso quotidiano mesmo sabendo que acontecimentos catastróficos ocorrem à nossa volta, incluindo a destruição do nosso ambiente ecológico e a morte lenta das muitas pessoas que hoje vivem nas nossas ruas, por quem passamos diariamente sem pensarmos muito nem demonstrarmos algum tipo de emoção”. “O que nos ameaça não é apenas que as máquinas estejam a assumir o controlo, mas também que nos estejamos a tornar como elas.” Neste episódio, de forma a abordarmos algumas das transformações que se têm operado numa dinâmica em que se procura “optimizar” os corpos e os ciclos biológicos no sentido de retirar destes toda a força de trabalho e os efeitos que aumentam a acumulação capitalista, contámos com a orientação de Patrícia Câmara, psicoterapeuta e psicanalista, alguém que tem aprofundado o impacto em termos de saúde mental de todo o contexto coercivo a que estamos sujeitos não apenas no mundo laboral como na engenharia que tem levado a uma precarização das nossas vidas, deixando-nos tenrinhos e à mercê das lógicas repressivas dos novos aparelhos totalitários.
Une application de protection et d'alerte en cas d'usurpation d'identité. Mention légales : Vos données de connexion, dont votre adresse IP, sont traités par Radio Classique, responsable de traitement, sur la base de son intérêt légitime, par l'intermédiaire de son sous-traitant Ausha, à des fins de réalisation de statistiques agréées et de lutte contre la fraude. Ces données sont supprimées en temps réel pour la finalité statistique et sous cinq mois à compter de la collecte à des fins de lutte contre la fraude. Pour plus d'informations sur les traitements réalisés par Radio Classique et exercer vos droits, consultez notre Politique de confidentialité.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.
Kortgeleden stonden we in de RB Podcast stil bij de fiscale aspecten rondom de bedrijfsmatige energievoorziening als gevolg van de tegenwoordige net-congestie. Met tal van tips aan fiscalisten om hun MKB-klanten daarbij te ondersteunen. In die aflevering kondigden we al aan dat er ook een aflevering zouden maken over het privédomein: het afschaffen van de salderingsregeling en de snelle opkomst van de thuisbatterijen. Met ook hier natuurlijk de nadruk op de fiscale aspecten en wat RB leden hun klanten kunnen adviseren. Luister dus ook in deze RB Podcast naar Groene Fiscalist Norbert Buiter, expert in duurzame energie-oplossingen en de daaraan verbonden financiering. Over de voors en tegens van thuisbatterijen, de terugverdientijd, de energiebelasting en andere fiscale aspecten. In gesprek met Sylvester Schenk, directeur fiscale zaken van het RB en de vaste host van de RB Podcast.Regelmatige luisteraar van de RB Podcast? Laat ons weten wat je er van vindt én stuur ons suggesties voor nieuwe afleveringen
Ich sag immer Messe, aber die Polaris ist ja eher eine Convention als eine Messe. Hier ist die Geschichte, wie wir mit Russell Brown halbwegs spontan ein Fotostudio aufgebaut haben, und kontinuierlich wunderbare Menschen glücklich machen ist einfach toll!
In deze aflevering bespreken Yannick en KJ de verloren uitwedstrijd in Kortrijk en de gewonnen thuiswedstrijd tegen Rotterdam. Veel luisterplezier!
Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCAnalizziamo le definizioni di bello che ci ha dato Kant, per capire cosa il filosofo intende realmente dire.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
Send us a textWith the appointment of Sarah Mullally as Archbishop of Canterbury, debates around “liberal Christianity” have reignited—but most people misunderstand what the term actually means. In this video, I trace the roots of liberal Christianity back to nineteenth-century thinkers like Schleiermacher, who, inspired by Kant, reimagined faith as an inner moral and spiritual experience rather than a set of metaphysical claims. I then contrast this historical movement with the modern political label often used in today's culture wars, showing why many arguments about “liberal” versus “conservative” Christianity miss the deeper theological questions at stake.Support the show--------------------------If you would want to support the channel and what I am doing, please follow me on Patreon: www.patreon.com/christianityforall Where else to find Josh Yen: Philosophy YT: https://bit.ly/philforallEducation: https://bit.ly/joshyenBuisness: https://bit.ly/logoseduMy Website: https://joshuajwyen.com/
Guillermo del Toro estrena su adaptación de 'Frankenstein', de Mary Shelley, que la editorial Arpa también ha revisado. Luna Miguel nos invita a dejarnos controlar por Nabokov y a releer 'Lolita'. Victoria Szpunberg parte del imperativo categórico de Kant y de 'El proceso' de Kafka para reflexionar sobre la vivienda y la precariedad
Send us a textHow to get women to chase you by being more mysterious: what makes women fantasize over guys, and tips for increasing your spirit of mystique.WHAT YOU'LL LEARN:- The inner workings of a woman's mind and what makes her obsess over a man - How to make her dream about you – not through tactics – but as something beneficent (how to actually give her the gift of dreaming about you) - Books to read to make you more mysterious TIMESTAMPS:00:00 Intro03:55 Be a man that women dream about09:50 Women experience of fantasy 12:05 A man's obsession with mission breeds female obsession with him17:10 Books that'll make you more mysterious23:15 Two practical questions to help you explore this topic more deeplyHave you ever met somebody who made you dream in a massive way? Think about it, and share your answer in the comments below. As you come to understand what makes you dream, you understand how to make a woman dream.ABOUT THIS VIDEO:You work so hard to be the guy you think she wants, but in the end, she says “let's just be friends.” Again, you try to be the ideal man, and she tells you you're sweet, but you don't get what you want.You may or may not recognize it, but deep down, what you really want is for a woman to dream about you.Nothing can replace the attraction force that is a woman's natural longing for a man's presence out of her own volition. So, how can you be someone that a woman genuinely dreams about? In today's episode, Jordan and Zan continue their exploration from last week on the themes of masculine energy and mystique, and share practical insights that will 1. help you understand what makes women fantasize over you, and 2. guide you to start increasing your sense of mystery and desirability in the world, today. ____________________________________________________Come join us! Sign up today and enjoy all the perks of the Amorati Membership, including live calls with Zan and his team. Go here: https://www.Amorati.net/____________________________________Need a gunslinger? Someone who rides into town, completely solves your problem, then rides off into the sunset. Contact Zan Perrion personally to inquire about his incredibly effective one-on-one Laser Coaching. Find him here: https://arsamorata.com/gunslinger/____________________________________Get a gifted copy of The Alabaster Girl, personally signed by Zan Perrion. Go to https://alabastergirl.com____________________________________Get instant access to our 4 part mini-course with Zan Perrion
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCChe cos'è il bello, secondo Kant? Cosa ha a che vedere con l'a-priori? Proviamo a rispondere a queste domande.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
In this thought-provoking episode of Thinking Out Loud, Nathan and Cameron dive deep into what it means to be Christian "people of the Book" in a society rapidly drifting into post-literacy. Drawing from James Marriott's article The Dawn of the Post-Literate Society, they explore the cultural, spiritual, and intellectual consequences of our screen-saturated age — and what it means for Christians committed to truth, Scripture, and careful thinking. From the decline in reading comprehension to the passive consumption of endless digital content, they examine how smartphones, edutainment, and modern distractions are shaping our minds and our theology. With references to thinkers like Neil Postman, Kant, and Matthew Arnold, this episode is for Christians who crave rich theological discussion, cultural critique, and a challenge to reclaim deep literacy in a distracted world. Subscribe for more Christian commentary on current events, media, and philosophy.LINK TO ARTICLE: https://jmarriott.substack.com/p/the-dawn-of-the-post-literate-society-aa1DONATE LINK: https://toltogether.com/donate BOOK A SPEAKER: https://toltogether.com/book-a-speakerJOIN TOL CONNECT: https://toltogether.com/tol-connect TOL Connect is an online forum where TOL listeners can continue the conversation begun on the podcast.
Review các phim ra rạp từ ngày 17/10/2025, trừ Cục vàng của ngoại vì đã có review riêng.CỤC VÀNG CỦA NGOẠI – T13Đạo diễn: Khương NgọcDiễn viên: Việt Hương, Hồng Đào, Lê Khánh, Băng Di, Lâm Thanh Mỹ, Hữu Châu, Tuấn Khải, Thư Đan, PandaThể loại: Gia đình, Tâm LýLấy cảm hứng từ những ký ức tuổi thơ ngọt ngào, “Cục Vàng Của Ngoại” mang đến câu chuyện ấm áp về tình bà cháu trong một xóm nhỏ chan chứa nghĩa tình. Bà Hậu – người phụ nữ cả đời tần tảo, nay trở thành chỗ dựa duy nhất của cháu ngoại khi con gái bỏ đi. Dẫu cuộc sống còn nhiều nhọc nhằn, tình thương bà dành cho cháu vẫn luôn trọn vẹn. Với bà, cháu là “cục vàng” – niềm vui, niềm an ủi và cũng là lẽ sống của đời mình. Bộ phim nhẹ nhàng dẫn khán giả trở lại những khoảnh khắc quen thuộc nơi xóm nhỏ: nụ cười hồn nhiên của cháu, vòng tay chở che của bà và sự đùm bọc từ hàng xóm láng giềng. Tất cả cùng hòa thành một bức tranh đời thường ấm áp, gợi nhắc về tuổi thơ bình yên và tình người mộc mạc, chân thành.NĂM CỦA ANH, NGÀY CỦA EM – T13Đạo diễn: Kung Siu PingDiễn viên: Hsu Kuang Han; Angela YuenThể loại: Thần thoại, Tình cảmKhi thế giới bị chia cắt thành 2 chiều không gian song song, tình yêu nảy nở giữa Hứa Quang Hán và Viên Lễ Lâm bị cuốn trôi theo hai nhịp sống khác biệt. Họ vẫn níu giữ sợi dây mong manh của định mệnh, cố tìm đến điểm giao nhau giữa hai thế giới để viết tiếp chuyện tình còn dang dở. Một bản tình ca lặng lẽ và day dứt, nơi Hứa Quang Hán nhẹ nhàng mang đến những nốt lặng bồi hồi, liệu tình yêu có đủ để vượt qua giới hạn của không gian và thời gian?VẬN MAY – T16Đạo diễn: Aziz AnsariDiễn viên: Keanu Reeves, Seth Rogen, Keke Palmer, ...Thể loại: Hài, Hành ĐộngGabriel, một thiên thần thừa lòng tốt nhưng thiếu kỹ năng, tự dưng đi can thiệp vào cuộc sống của một anh nhân viên thời vụ lương ba cọc ba đồng và một đại gia chuyên đầu tư mạo hiểm, rồi làm rối tung rối mù hết cả lên.GIÓ VẪN THỔIĐạo diễn: Hayao MiyazakiThể loại: Hoạt HìnhLấy bối cảnh Nhật Bản trong thời kỳ Taishō và Shōwa, The Wind Rises kể về Jirō Horikoshi – chàng trai mang ước mơ bay lượn giữa bầu trời, dù đôi mắt cận không cho phép. Trong những giấc mơ, anh được nhà thiết kế máy bay Caproni truyền cảm hứng, và ngoài đời, Jirō trở thành kỹ sư hàng không tài năng. Sau trận đại động đất Kantō, anh gặp Nahoko – cô gái dịu dàng và lạc quan. Tình yêu chớm nở giữa khung cảnh bình yên của Karuizawa, rồi kết trái bằng một cuộc hôn nhân đầy hy vọng. Nhưng bệnh lao phổi của Nahoko ngày cảng trở nặng ... Trong khi đất nước dấn sâu vào chiến tranh, Jirō lao vào thiết kế mẫu tiêm kích thử nghiệm với tất cả đam mê – giằng xé giữa lý tưởng bay cao và hiện thực cay nghiệt của thời đại.TỔ QUỐC TRONG TIM: THE CONCERT FILMĐạo diễn: Nguyễn Mạnh Tuấn - Vũ LiêmThể loại: Phim tài liệuSau thành công rực rỡ của Concert Quốc gia – Tổ Quốc Trong Tim tổ chức ngày 10/8 tại SVĐ Quốc gia Mỹ Đình, cùng sự mong đợi và yêu cầu từ đông đảo công chúng, Báo Nhân Dân quyết định mang đến Tổ Quốc Trong Tim: The Concert Film. Bộ phim không chỉ tái hiện lại một sự kiện văn hóa – nghệ thuật lịch sử, mà còn là cách để lan tỏa sâu sắc tình yêu Tổ quốc và niềm tự hào dân tộc.BTS 2021 MUSTER SOWOOZOO REMASTEREDĐạo diễn: Jo HyeongseokThể loại: Hòa nhạc, Phim tài liệu “FESTA” có 1-0-2, vượt qua mọi ranh giới về thời gian và không gian, gắn kết BTS và ARMY thành một — . Một sân khấu ngoài trời ngoạn mục, tái hiện trọn vẹn tinh thần của một lễ hội đích thực. Hơi ấm và niềm vui trong dịp kỷ niệm 8 năm của BTS nay trở lại trên màn ảnh, rực rỡ và khó quên như thuở ban đầu.--------------------------------------------------------#8saigon #namcuaanhngaycuaem #huaquanghan #vanmay #bts2021mustersowoozoo #giovanthoi
What is the universe without human consciousness? Strangely, not much! Or so I argue!
Send us a textWhy being mysterious is so attractive to women, and the body language and texting that keeps women interested. ____________________________________________________Episode 40 — What Makes a Man Mysterious — And Why Women Melt in His Presence____________________________________________________80% of communication between men and women is nonverbal. “It's not what you say, but how you say it”. Most of the time, you're just ‘another guy' to her. And you have opportunities to show her that you aren't, but what do you do… say… in those situations? Being mysterious is a fine art that's far too daunting for most men to practice, and those who do attempt it often end up in some extreme caricature of themselves, out of alignment and frustrated. In today's episode, Jordan and Zan explore what a truly mysterious presence looks like in a man. With live demonstrations on ways to stand and gesture to women in person, to how to text them later on, watch and see how you, too, can start moving through the world with more mystique and intrigue. What thoughts come up for you after watching? Let us know in the comments below.____________________________________________________Come join us! Sign up today and enjoy all the perks of the Amorati Membership, including live calls with Zan and his team. Go here: https://www.Amorati.net/____________________________________Need a gunslinger? Someone who rides into town, completely solves your problem, then rides off into the sunset. Contact Zan Perrion personally to inquire about his incredibly effective one-on-one Laser Coaching. Find him here: https://arsamorata.com/gunslinger/____________________________________Get a gifted copy of The Alabaster Girl, personally signed by Zan Perrion. Go to https://alabastergirl.com____________________________________Get instant access to our 4 part mini-course with Zan Perrion
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCIniziamo a parlare della terza grande critica kantiana, dedicata al bello e all'estetica.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
Episode 2.48Is the very idea of God enough to prove that God exists?In this episode, Zach and Michael unpack one of the most famous—and most misunderstood—arguments in philosophy: the Ontological Argument. From Anselm's “that than which nothing greater can be conceived,” to Descartes, Leibniz, Kant, and Alvin Plantinga's modern modal version, they trace how the debate evolved over nearly a thousand years.Covered in this episode:– Why some concepts logically entail others (valley–mountain, shadow–light)– Anselm's original argument and the “greatest conceivable being”– Kant's critique that “existence is not a predicate”– Plantinga's modal argument: if God is possible, God is actual– Atheist counterarguments and why they must deny God's possibility itself– Modern developments from Pruss & RasmussenThe Ontological Argument remains as bold as ever—an exercise in pure reason that asks whether logic itself points to God.Find our videocast here: https://youtu.be/IXCAEns1uKwMerch here: https://take-2-podcast.printify.me/Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!):https://uppbeat.io/t/reakt-music/deep-stoneLicense code: 2QZOZ2YHZ5UTE7C8Find more Take 2 Theology content at http://www.take2theology.com
In this episode, we talk about Alfred Sohn-Rethel's audacious and influential text Intellectual and Manual Labor. A fellow traveler of the Frankfurt School, Sohn-Rethel argued that the social activity of commodity exchange involves a set of real abstractions that actually precede and give rise to the structure of human consciousness and its capacity for mental abstraction. This really puts Kant in his place: the supposedly pure reason of the transcendental subject is historically conditioned by the fact that at some point people started trading stuff with each other. It also means that after the communist revolution succeeds we'll have a totally new set of a priori categories with which to synthesize experience. That's worth looking forward to!leftofphilosophy.comReferences:Alfred Sohn-Rethel, Intellectual and Manual Labor: A Critique of Epistemology, trans. Martin Sohn-Rethel (Chicago: Haymarket, 2021).Jacob McNulty, “Frankfurt School Critical Theory as Transcendental Philosophy: Alfred Sohn-Rethel's Synthesis of Kant and Marx,” Journal of the History of Philosophy 60:3 (2022): 475-501.Mladen Dolar, “‘Who baptized Marx, Hegel or Kant?' On Alfred Sohn-Rethel and Beyond,” Problemi International 5 (2022): 109-133.Music:“Vintage Memories” by Schematist | schematist.bandcamp.com“My Space” by Overu | https://get.slip.stream/KqmvAN
Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.
Amy's Back! Robert & Amy celebrate Columbus, Jefferson, DaVinci, Einstein, and more. Freethought Day, Columbus Day, Robert Nasir Day & Hallowe'en; kicking off the holiday season. The joy of Unrequited Romance ... who's your Crush? And Robert plays the Devil's Advocate ... in more ways than one!
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCConcludiamo la Critica della Ragion Pratica ragionando sui tre postulati, ovvero su Dio, anima e libertà.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
Aristotle and Kant argue for two very different ethical outlooks. I definitely prefer one to the other!
What happens when Deleuze and Hegel are set in violent philosophical encounter over the ruins of Kantian representation? In this episode, we explore how both thinkers attempt to move beyond the categories of judgment and identity to recover the genesis of sense itself. Henry Somers-Hall joins us to trace Deleuze's path through Kant, Sartre, and Bergson toward a field of pre-individual difference and immanent synthesis. What emerges is a portrait of thought that no longer begins with the subject, but with the forces that make thinking possible.Extended Conversation (Patrons Only) In the extended discussion, we turn to the politics of the practical in Kant, Fichte, and Hegel—and ask whether Deleuze's constructivism truly escapes the metaphysical State. Henry also reflects on what it means to make oneself a body without organs and where he sees the next frontier for Deleuzian thought.Hegel, Deleuze, and the Critique of Representation: Dialectics of Negation and Difference: https://sunypress.edu/Books/H/Hegel-Deleuze-and-the-Critique-of-RepresentationAlso: https://archive.org/details/hegeldeleuzecrit0000someSupport the showSupport the podcast:Current classes at Acid Horizon Research Commons (AHRC): https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/ahrc-mainWebsite: https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/Linktree: https://linktr.ee/acidhorizonAcid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcast Boycott Watkins Media: https://xenogothic.com/2025/03/17/boycott-watkins-statement/ Join The Schizoanalysis Project: https://discord.gg/4WtaXG3QxnSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438Merch: http://www.crit-drip.comSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast platform: https://pod.link/1512615438 LEPHT HAND: https://www.patreon.com/LEPHTHANDHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.comSplit Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/ and https://thecominginsurrection.bandcamp.com/
This week, Brandon and AJ dive a little more deeply into the question of what we "ought" to do. Do our choices matter? Are they free or fated? How are we supposed to choose?
What does Gulliver's Travels have to do with the development of the modern education system? Why does classical scholarship see renewed interests in periods of philosophical interest? Why spend 70 pages on one chapter detailing various components of philosophic history before getting to your point on education? Find out as we continue discussing Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind!Follow us on X!Give us your opinions here!
In this episode, I talk about Rainer Werner Fassbinder's 1972 film, "The Bitter Tears of Petra von Kant." The film tells the story of Petra, a successful fashion designer in a complicated and obsessive relationship with a younger woman named Karin. Set almost entirely in Petra's apartment, the film unravels the entanglements of power, desire, and emotional dependency.This episode is one of my most personal. I reflect on the ways the film mirrors an experience I had with unrequited love—an experience that consumed me for over two years. I talk about the madness and chaos of desire, the pain of not being chosen, and the way obsession can distort how we see ourselves and others.Note: This episode was recorded before my mother's death. That is why I talk about her in the present tense.You can follow me on Instagram, Letterboxd, and Tumblr. My email is herheadinfilms@gmail.com.My Sources:Mise en Scène as Power Struggle by Jonathan RosenbaumMelodrama and the Remake: The Cinematic Influence of Douglas Sirk on FassbinderHanna Schygulla on working with FassbinderWhat is New German Cinema?New German Cinema
Hey guys, what you are about to listen to is basically a “what if” Japan performed Hokushin-ron instead of Nanshin-ron, ie: What if Japan invaded the USSR during WW2? Before I jump into it I just want to thank all of you that signed up for the patreon, you guys are awesome. Please leave a comment on this episode to let me know what more you want to hear about in the future. With all of that said and done lets jump right into it. Part 1 The Geopolitical context Ok so, one of the questions I get the most is, what if Japan invaded the USSR. I've actually already tackled this subject, albeit lightly with Cody from AlternatehistoryHub and once with my friend Eric. Its too complicated to give a real answer, a lot of this is guess work, though I really will try to provide hard numbers. I think off the bat something needs to be made clear since we are dealing with alternate history. I am not doing a “what if Japan developed completely different, or what if the IJA got their way in the early 1930's” no no, this is going to be as realistic as possible…even though this is batshit crazy. Japan faced the decision of whether to go to war with the USSR in 1941 during Operation Barbarossa. They held meetings, made plans, and ultimately it was decided they would not engage the Soviets. Our scenario will follow exactly what they did to a T, but when the made the decision not to go to war, we will see them go to war. Now before I jump into our this timeline, I think its very important to explain the actual situation Japan faced in 1941. There were two major strategies that emerged during the 1930's within the Japanese military. Many junior officers in the IJA favored the Hokushin-ron “northern strike” strategy against the USSR. Many officers in the IJN with some in the IJA favored the Nanshin-ron “southern strike” strategy, to seize the resource rich dutch east indies by invading Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The idea of Hokushin-ron was to perform an invasion into Southern Siberia and outer mongolia ending around Lake Baikal where they would set up defenses. They had already tried to establish this during the Russian civil war as part of the Siberian Intervention, but failed to create a buffer state. From 1935-1939 there were 108 border clashes between the USSR and Japan. In 1938 one of these border clashes turned into quite a catastrophe, it was called the battle of Lake Khasan. The Soviets suffered nearly 800 deaths, more than 3000 wounded, perhaps nearly 50 tanks were destroyed with another 100 damaged. The Japanese suffered about 600 deaths with 2500 wounded. The result ultimately was a ceasefire, but for the Kwantung army it seemed to them like a victory. In May of 1939 they had a much larger and more famous battle known as the battle of Khalkhin Gol. During the early part of the battle the IJA sent 80 tanks crossing over Khalkhin Gol, driving the Soviets back towards Baintsagan Hill. Zhukov was waiting for the attack and sent 450 tanks and armored cars unsupported by infantry to attack the IJA from three sides. The IJA were practically encircled and lost half their armored units as they struggled to fight back as it withdrew. The two armies spared for the next 2 weeks along the east bank of the Khalkhin Gol. Problem was the Japanese were having issues getting their supplies to the area as they lacked motor transport while Zhukov whose army was over 460 miles away from its base of supply had 2600 trucks supplying them. On july 23rd the Japanese launched attacks supported by artillery and within two days they had consumed half their ammunition stores. The situation was terrible, they suffered 5000 casualties and made little progress breaking the Soviet lines. Zhukov then unleashed an offensive on august 20th using over 4000 trucks to transport supplies from Chita base. He assembled around 500 tanks, 550 fighters and bombers and his 50,000 infantry supported by armored cars. This mechanized force attacked the Japanese first using artillery and the aircraft as his armor and infantry crossed the river. The IJA were quickly flanked by the fast moving Soviet armor and encircled by August 25th. The IJA made attempts to break out of the encirclement but failed. They refused to surrender despite overwhelming artillery and aerial bombardment; by the 31st the Japanese forces on the Mongolian side of the border were destroyed. The Japanese suffered nearly 20,000 casualties, the lost 162 aircraft, 29 tanks, 7 tankettes, 72 artillery pieces a large number of vehicles. The Soviets took a heavy hit also suffering almost 25,000 casualties, 250 aircraft, 250 tanks, 133 armored cars, almost 100 artillery pieces, hundreds of vehicles. While these numbers make it seem the Japanese did a great job, you need to consider what each party was bringing to this fight. The Japanese brought roughly 30,000 men, 80 tanks and tankettes, 400 aircraft, 300 artillery pieces, 1000 trucks. The Soviets brought nearly 75,000 men, 550 tanks, 900 aircraft, 634 artillery pieces, 4000 trucks. There are some sources that indicate the IJA brought as many artillery rounds as they could muster from Japan, Manchuria and Korea, roughly 100,000 rounds for the operation. The Soviets fired 100,000 rounds per day. A quick look at wikipedia numbers, yes I know its a no no, but sometimes its good for quick perspectives show: USSR: Bomber sorties 2,015, fighter sorties 18,509; 7.62 mm machine gun rounds fired 1,065,323; 20 mm (0.80 in) cannon rounds expended 57,979; bombs dropped 78,360 (1,200 tons). Japan: Fighter/bomber sorties 10,000 (estimated); 7.7 mm (0.30 in) machine gun rounds fired 1.6 million; bombs dropped 970 tons. What I am trying to say is there was an enormous disparity in military production. And this is not just limited to numbers but quality. After the battle the Japanese made significant reforms. They increased tank production from 500 annually to 1200. The Japanese funded research into new anti-tank guns, such as the Type 1 47 mm. They mounted this gun to their Type 97 Chi-Ha tanks, the new standard medium tank of the IJA. Because of the tremendous defeat to Soviet armor they send General Yamashita to Germany to learn everything he could about tank tactics. But they simply could not produce enough tanks to ever hope to match 10% of the USSR. The Soviets had mostly been using T-26's, BT-5's and BT-7's who were crudely made, but made en masse. The Japanese would find most of their tank models with less effective range, less armor and some with less penetration power. It took the Japanese a hell of a lot more time to produce tanks, they were simply not on par with the Soviets in quantity or quality. Their tank tactics, albeit improved via Yamashita after 1939, were still nothing compared to the Soviets. The major outcome of the battle of Lake Khasan and Khalkhin Gol was the abandonment of the hokushin-ron strategy and adoption of the nanshin-ron strategy. But, that didnt mean Japan did not have a plan in case they had to go to war with the USSR. Part 2 Kantōgun Tokushu Enshū Kantōgun Tokushu Enshū or the Kwantung Army Special Maneuvers was an operational plan created by the General Staff of the IJA for an invasion of the Russian Far East to capitalize on Operation Barbarossa. Here our story truly begin. Between 1938-1939 the IJA General Staff and Kwantung Army formed two “Hachi-Go” plans. Variants A and B examined the possibility of an all out war with the USSR beginning in 1943. In both plans they expected to be facing 60 Soviet divisions, while they could deliver 50 divisions, delivered incrementally from China and Japan. Plan A called for attacks across the eastern and northern borders of Manchuria while maintaining a defensive stance in the west. Plan B, much more ambitious, called for striking into the vast steppe between the Great Khingan Mountains and Lake Baikal, hoping to cut off the trans-siberian railway. If this was done successfully it was believed the whole of European Russia would be doomed to be defeated in detail. Defeated in detail means to divide and conquer. This battle would take place over 5000 kilometers with Japan's final objective being to advance 1200 km into the USSR. That dwarves Operation Barbarossa in distance, let that sink in. Both plans faced impossible odds. First of all the railway networks in Manchuria were not sufficiently expanded for such far reaching offensives, especially for plan B. Furthermore the 50 divisions required for them would be impossible to come by, since 1937 Japan was bogged down in a war with China. When Japan went to war with the west in 1941 she had 51 divisions. She left the base minimum in China, 35 divisions and tossed nearly 20 into southeast asia and the pacific. On top of not having the men, the IJA estimated a fleet of 200,000 vehicles would be necessary to sustain an offensive to Lake Baikal. That was twice the number of military vehicles Japan had at any given time. After the battle of Khalkhin Gol, plan B was completely abandoned. Planning henceforth focused solely on the northern and eastern fronts with any western advance being limited in scope. Now Japan formed a neutrality pact with the USSR because of her defeat at Khalkhin Gol and Molotov Ribbentrop pact between Germany and the USSR. The Molotov Ribbentrop Pact came as a bitter and complete surprise to Japan. It pushed Japan to fully adopt the Nanshin-ron strategy and this began with her invasion of French IndoChina, which led the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and United States to embargo her. The Netherlands Dutch East Indies refused to sell oil to Japan, the UK refused to sell oil from Burma and the US gradually cut off selling oil to Japan, with her oil exports alone being 80% of Japans supply, the rest from the Dutch east indies. The United States also placed an embargo on scrap-metal shipments to Japan and closed the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. 74.1% of Japan's scrap iron came from the United States in 1938, and 93% of Japan's copper in 1939. Other things like Rubber and tin were also off the table, as this was mostly acquired from British held Malaya and the Dutch East Indies. Now the crux of everything is the China War. Japan was stuck, she needed to win, in order to win she needed the resources she was being denied. The only logical decision was to attack the places with these resources. Thus until 1941, Japan prepared to do just that, investing in the Navy primarily. Then in June of 1941, Hitler suddenly informs the Japanese that he is going to invade the USSR. The Japanese were shocked and extremely angry, they nearly left the Tripartite Pact over the issue. This unprecedented situation that ushered in the question, what should Japan do? There were those like Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka who argued they must abandon the neutrality pact and launch a simultaneous offensive with the Germans against the USSR. The IJA favored this idea….because obviously it would see them receiving more funding as the IJN was currently taking more and more of it for the Nanshin-ron plans. But this is not a game of hearts of Iron IV, the Japanese government had to discuss and plan if they would invade the USSR….and boy it took awhile. I think a lot of you will be very disappointed going forward, but there is no grand unleashing of a million Japanese across the borders into the Soviet Far East, in the real world there is something called logistics and politics. The Japanese military abided by a flexible response policy, like many nations do today. Theres was specifically called the Junbi Jin Taisei or “preparatory formation setup”. Japan would only go to war with the USSR if favorable conditions were met. So in our timeline the Junbi Jin encountered its first test on June 24th when the IJA/IJN helped a conference in the wake of operation barbarossa. A compromise was made allowing the IJA to prepare an invasion plan if it did not impede on the nanshin-ron plans. There was those in the IJA who argued they should invade the USSR whether conditions were favorable or not, there were those who only wanted to invade if it looked like the USSR was on the verge of collapse. One thing agreed upon was if Japan unleashed a war with the USSR, the hostilities needed to be over by mid-October because the Siberian climate would hit winter and it would simply be impossible to continue. The IJA needed 60-7 days to complete operational preparations and 6-8 weeks to defeat the Soviets within the first phase of the offensive. Here is a breakdown of what they were thinking: 28 June: Decide on mobilization 5 July: Issue mobilization orders 20 July: Begin troop concentration 10 August: Decide on hostilities 24 August: Complete readiness stance 29 August: Concentrate two divisions from North China in Manchuria, bringing the total to 16 5 September: Concentrate four further divisions from the homeland, bringing the total to 22; complete combat stance 10 September (at latest): Commence combat operations 15 October: Complete first phase of war The plan called for 22 divisions (might I add my own calculations of 20 divisions were pretty spot on), with roughly 850,000 men, including Manchukuo allies, supported by 800,000 tons of shipping. The Japanese hoped the Soviets would toss at least half their forces in the Far East, perhaps 2/3rd of their armor and aircraft against the Germans giving them a 2-1 superiority. Even the 22 divisions was questionable, many in the war ministry thought only 16 divisions could be spared for such a venture, something only suitable for mop up operations in the aftermath of a German victory along the eastern front. It was clear to all, Japan needed perfect conditions to even think about performing such a thing. The War hawks who still sought to perform Hokushin-ron tried to persaude Hideki Tojo on july 5th to go through with a new plan using a total of 25 divisions. This plan designated “Kantogun Tokushu Enshu or Kantokuen” would involve 2 phases, a buildup and readiness phase and an offensive phase. On July 7th they went to Hirohito for his official sanction for the build up. Hirohito questioned everything, but gradually relented to it. The plan was nearly identical to the former plans, banking on the Soviets being unable to reinforce the Far East because of Germany's progress. The level of commitment was scaled down somewhat, but still enormous. Again a major looming issue was the Manchurian railways that would need to be expanded to accomodate the movement of men and supplies. This meant the construction of port facilities, military barracks, hospitals and such. Kantokuen would begin with a initial blow against the Ussuri front, targeting Primorye and would be followed up by a northern attack against Blagoveshchensk and Kuibyshevka. The 1st area army, 3rd and 20 armies with the 19th division of the Korean army would penetrade the border south of Lake Khanka to breach the main soviet defensive lines, thus threatening Vladivostok. The 5th army would strike south of Dalnerechensk to complete the isolation of the maritime province, sever the trans-sierian railway and block Soviet reinforcements. The 4th army would attack along the Amur river before helping out against Blagoveshchensk. Two reinofrced divisions would invade Sakhalin from land and sea. The second phase would see the capture of Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, and Nikolayevsk. Additionally, amphibious operations against Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula were contemplated. It was agreed the operation could only afford 24 divisions, with 1,200,000 men, 35,000 vehicles, 500 tanks, 400,000 horses and 300,000 coolies. The deployment of thse forces would mean the western front facing Mongolia and the Trans-baikal region would be pretty much open, so delaying actions would have to be fought if the soviets performed a counter offensive there. Air forces were critical to the plan. They sought to dispatch up to roughly 2000 aircraft cooperating with 350 naval aircraft to launch a sudden strike against the Soviet Far East Air Force to knock them out early. The Soviet Far East had two prominent weaknesses to be exploited. Number 1 was Mongolia's 4500 km long horeshoe shaped border. Number 2 was its 100% dependency on European Russia to deliver men, food and war materials via the trans-siberian railway. Any disruption of the trans-siberian railway would prove fatal to the Soviet Far East. Now as for the Soviets. The 1930's and early 1940's saw the USSR take up a defensive policy, but retained offensive elecments as well. Even with the German invasion and well into 1942, the Soviets held a strategy of tossing back the IJA into Manchuria if attacked. The primary forces defending the Far east in 1941 were the Far Eastern and Trans-Baikal Fronts, under the command of Generals Iosif Apanasenko and Mikhail Kovalyov. The Trans-Baikal front held 9 divisions, including 2 armored, a mechanized brigade and a heavily fortified region west of the Oldoy River near Skovorodino had a garrison. The Far Eastern Front had 23 divisions including 3 armored, 4 brigades and 11 heavily fortified regions with garrisons including Vladivostok. Altogether they had 650,000 men, 5400 tanks, 3000 aircraft, 57,000 vehicles, 15,000 artillery pieces and nearly 100,000 horses. By 1942 the Vladivostok sector had 150 artillery pieces with 75 -356 mm calibers organized into 50 batteries. As you can imagine after Operation Barbarrosa was unleashed, things changed. From June to December, roughly 160,000 men, 3000 tanks, 2670 artillery pieces, 12,000 vehicles and perhaps 1800 aircraft were sent to deal with the Germans. Despite this, the Soviets also greatly expanded a buildup to match the apparent Japanese buildup in Manchuria. By July 22nd 1941 the Far Eastern and Trans-Baikal Fronts were to be raised by 1 million men for august. By December it was nearly 1.2 million. Even the Soviet Far East Navy saw an increase from 100,000 men to 170,000 led by Admiral Yumashev. The Soviet Mongolian allies were capable of manning about 80,000, though they lacked heavy equipment. Thus if this war broke out in September the Soviets and Mongolians would have just over a million men, with 2/3rds of them manning the Amur-Ussuri-Sakhalin front, the rest would defend Mongolia and the Trans-Baikal region. Even though the war against the Germans was dire, the Soviets never really gave up their prewar planning for how to deal with the Japanese. There would be an all-out defense over the border to prevent any breach of Soviet territory. The main effort would see the 1st and 25th armies holding a north-south axis between the Pacific ocean and Lake Khanka; the 35th army would defend Iman; the 15th and 2nd Red Banner armies would repel the Japanese over the Amur River; and other forces would try to hold out on Sakhalin, Kamchatka and the Pacific coast. The Soviets had constructed hundreds of fortified positions known as Tochkas along the border. Most of these were hexagonal concrete bunkers contained machine gun nests and 76 mm guns. The fortified regions I mentioned were strategically placed forcing the Japanese to overcome them via frontal attacks. This would require heavy artillery to overcome. Despite the great defensive lines, the Soviets did not intend to be passive and would launch counteroffensives. The Soviet air force and Navy would play an active role in defeating a Japanese invasion as well. The air force's objetice would be to destroy the Japanese air force in the air and on the ground, requiring tactical ground attack mission. They would also destroy key railways, bridges and airfields within Manchuria and Korea alongside intercepting IJN shipping. Strategic bombing against the home islands would be limited to under 30 DB-3's who could attack Tokyo, Yokosuka, Maizuru and Ominato. The Soviet Navy would help around the mouth of the Amur River, mine the Tatar Strait and try to hit any IJN ships landing men or materials across the Pacific Coasts. Japan would not be able to continue a land war with the USSR for very long. According to Japanese military records, in 1942 while at war they were required to produce 50 Kaisenbun. A Kaisenbun is a unit of measurement for ammunition needed for a single division to operate for 4 months. Annual production never surpassed 25 kaisenbun with 100 in reserve. General Shinichi Tanaka estimated for an operation against the USSR 3 Kaisenbun would be needed per divisions, thus a total of 72 would be assigned to 24 divisions. This effectively meant 2/3rds of Japans ammunition stockpile would be used on the initial strike against the USSR. Japan would have been extremely hard pressed to survive such a war cost for 2 years. Now in terms of equipment Japan had a lot of problems. During the border battles, Japanese artillery often found itself outranged and grossly under supplied compared to the Soviet heavier guns. Despite moving a lot of men and equipment to face the Germans, the Red Army maintained a gross superiority in armor. The best tank the Kwantung Army had in late 1941 was the Type 97 Chi-Ha, holding 33mm armor with a low velocity 57 mm gun. There was also Ha-Go and Te-Ke's with 37 mm guns but they had an effective range less than 1 km. The Soviet T-26, BT-5 and BT-7's had 45 mm guns more than capable of taking out the Japanese armor and the insult to injury was they were crudely made and very expendable. Every Japanese tank knocked out was far greater a loss, as Japan's production simply could not remotely match the USSR. For aircraft the Japanese were a lot better off. The Polikarpov I-16 was the best Soviet fighter in the Far East and performed alright against the Nakajima Ki-27 at Khalkhin Gol. The rest of the Soviet air arsenal were much older and would struggle. The Soviets would have no answer to the IJN's Zero fighter or the IJA's high speed KI-21 bomber that outraced the Soviet SB-2. Japanese pilots were battle hardened by China and vastly experienced. Another thing the Japanese would have going for them was quality of troops. The Soviets drained their best men to fight the Germans, so the combat effectiveness in the far east would be less. Without the Pacific War breaking out, some of Japan's best Generals would be brought into this war, of course the first one that comes to mind for me is General Yamashita, probably the most armor competent Japanese general of ww2. Come August of 1941 those who still sought the invasion of the USSR were facing major crunch time. The IJA planners had assumed the Soviets would transfer 50% or more of their power west to face the Germans, but this was not the case. By August 9th of 1941, facing impossible odds and with the western embargos in full motion, in our timeline the Japanese Hokushin-Ron backers gave up. But for the sake of our story, for some batshit insane reason, the Japanese military leadership and Hirohito give the greenlight for an invasion on August 10th. Part 3 the catastrophe So to reiterate the actual world plan had 10 August: Decide on hostilities 24 August: Complete readiness stance 29 August: Concentrate two divisions from North China in Manchuria, bringing the total to 16 5 September: Concentrate four further divisions from the homeland, bringing the total to 22; complete combat stance 10 September (at latest): Commence combat operations 15 October: Complete first phase of war So what is key to think about here is the events of September. The Battle for Moscow is at the forefront, how does a Japanese invasion in the first week or two of September change things? This is going to probably piss off some of you, but Operation Typhoon would still fail for Germany. In our time line the legendary spy Richard Sorge sent back information on Japan's decision to invade the USSR between August 25th to September 14th. On the 25th he informed Stalin the Japanese high command were still discussing whether to go to war or not with the USSR. On September 6th Stalin was informed the Japanese were beginning preparations for a war against the west. Then on September 14th, the most important message was relayed to Stalin "In the careful judgment of all of us here... the possibility of [Japan] launching an attack, which existed until recently, has disappeared...."[15] With this information on hand from 23 June to 31 December 1941, Stalin transferred a total of 28 divisions west. This included 18 rifle divisions, 1 mountain rifle division, 3 tank divisions, 3 mechanized divisions and 3 mountain cavalry divisions. The transfers occurred mainly in June (11 divisions) and October (9 divisions). Here we come to a crossroads and I am going to have to do some blunt predictions. Let's go from the most optimistic to the most pessimistic. Scenario 1) for some insane reason, Stalin abandons Moscow and moves his industry further east, something the Soviets were actively preparing during Operation Typhoon. This is not a defeat of the USSR, it certainly would prolong the war, but not a defeat. Now that seems rather silly. Scenario 2) Stalin attempts transferring half of what he did in our time line back to Moscow and the Germans fail to take it. The repercussions of course is a limited counteroffensive, it wont be as grand as in our timeline, but Moscow is saved. Scenario 3) and the most likely in my opinion, why would Stalin risk moscow for the Far East? Stalin might not transfer as many troops, but certainly he would have rather placed his chips in Moscow rather than an enemy literally 6000 km's away who have to cross a frozen desert to get to anything he cares about. Even stating these scenarios, the idea the German army would have taken Moscow if some of the very first units from the far east arrived, because remember a lot of these units did not make it in time to defend moscow, rather they contributed to the grand counteroffensive after the Germans stalled. The German armies in front of Moscow were depleted, exhausted, unsupplied and freezing. Yes many of the Soviet armies at Moscow were hastily thrown together, inexperienced, poorly led and still struggling to regain their balance from the German onslaught. Yet from most sources, and by sources I mean armchair historian types argue, the Germans taking Moscow is pretty unlikely. And moscow was not even that important. What a real impact might have been was the loss of the Caucasus oil fields in early 1942, now that could have brought the USSR down, Moscow, not so much, again the Soviets had already pulled their industry further east, they could do it again. So within the context of this Second Russo-Japanese War, figure the German's still grind to a halt, they don't take Moscow, perhaps Soviets dont push them back as hard, but the USSR is not collapsing by any means. Ok now before we talk about Japans invasion we actually need to look at some external players. The UK/US/Netherlands already began massive embargoes against Japan for oil, iron, rubber, tin, everything she needed to continue her war, not just against the USSR, but with over 35 divisions fighting in China. President Roosevelt was looking for any excuse to enter WW2 and was gradually increasing ways to aid Britain and the Soviets. Now American's lend-lease program seriously aided the USSR during WW2, particularly the initial stages of the war. The delivery of lend-lease to the USSR came through three major routes: the Arctic Convoys, the Persian Corridor, and the Pacific Route. The Arctic route was the shortest and most direct route for lend-lease aid to the USSR, though it was also the most dangerous as it involved sailing past German-occupied Norway. Some 3,964,000 tons of goods were shipped by the Arctic route; 7% was lost, while 93% arrived safely. The Persian Corridor was the longest route, and was not fully operational until mid-1942. Thereafter it saw the passage of 4,160,000 tons of goods, 27% of the total. The most important was the Pacific Route which opened up in August of 1941, but became affected when Japan went to war with America. The major port was Vladivostok, where only Soviet ships could transport non-military goods some 8,244,000 tons of goods went by this route, 50% of the total. Vladivostok would almost certainly be captured by the Japanese in our scenario so it won't be viable after its capture. Here is the sticky part, Japan is not at war with the US, so the US is pretty much free to find different Pacific paths to get lend-lease to the Soviets, and to be honest there's always the Arctic or Persian corridors. Hell in this scenario America will be able to get supplies easily into China as there will be no war in Burma, hong kong, Malaya and such. America alone is going to really ruin Japans day by increasing lend-lease to the UK, China and the USSR. America wont be joining the war in 1941, but I would strongly wager by hook or by crook, FDR would pull them into a war against Germany, probably using the same tactic Woodrow Wilson did with WW1. This would only worsen things for Japan. Another player of course is China. Late 1941, China was absolutely battered by Japan. With Japan pulling perhaps even more troops than she did for the Pacific war to fight the USSR, Chiang Kai-Shek would do everything possible to aid his new found close ally Stalin. How this would work out is anyone's guess, but it would be significant as I believe America would be providing a lot more goodies. Ok you've all been patient, what happens with the war? Japan has to deliver a decisive knock out blow in under 4-6 months, anything after this is simply comical as Japan's production has no resources. The oil in siberia is not even remotely on the table. The Japanese can't find it, would not be able to exploit it, let alone quick enough to use it for the war. Hell the Italians were sitting on oil in Libya and they never figured that out during WW2. So Kantokuen is unleashed with an initial blow against the Primorye in the Ussuri Front followed by an assault against Blagoveshchensk and Kiubyshevka. The main soviet lines south of Lake Khanka are attacked by the Japanese 1st area army, 3rd and 20th armies and the 19th Korean division. This inturn threatens Vladivostok who is also being bombarded by IJA/IJN aircraft. The 5th Ija army attacks south of Dalnerechensk in an attempt to sever the trans-siberian railway, to block Soviet reinforcements and supplies. The 4th IJA army fords the Amur river to help with the assault of Blagoveshchensk. Meanwhile Sakhalin is being attacked from land and sea by two IJA divisions. Despite the Soviets being undermanned the western front facing Mongolia and the Trans-Baikal region is wide up to an attack as its only defended by the 23rd IJA division, so a limited counteroffensive begins there. The Japanese quickly win air superiority, however the heavily fortified Tochkas are not being swept aside as the Japanese might have hoped. A major problem the Japanese are facing is Soviet artillery. The Japanese artillery already placed along the borders, initially performed well, crushing Tochkas in range, but when the Japanese begin advancing and deploying their artillery units they are outgunned perhaps 3-1, much of the Soviet artillery outranges them and the Soviets have a much larger stockpile of shells. Airpower is failing to knock out soviet artillery which is placed within Tochkas and other fortified positions with anti-aircraft guns. Without achieving proper neutralization or counter battery fire, the Japanese advance against the fortified Soviet positions. The Soviets respond shockingly with counterattacks. The 15th and 35th Soviet armies with the Amur Red Banner Military Flotilla toss limited counterattacks against both sides of the Sungari River, harassing the Japanese. While much of the soviet armor had been sent west, their light tanks which would be useless against the Germans have been retained in the far east and prove capable of countering the IJA tanks. The Soviets inflict tremendous casualties, however General Yamashita, obsessed with blitzkrieg style warfare he saw first hand in the west, eventually exploits a weak area in the line.Gradually a blitzkrieg punches through and begins to circle around hitting Soviet fortified positions from the rear. The Soviets knew this would be the outcome and had prepared to fight a defense in depth, somewhat managing the onslaught. The trans-siberian railway has been severed in multiple locations close to the border area, however this is not as effective as it could be, the Japanese need to hook deeper to cut the line further away. In the course of weeks the Soviets are gradually dislodged from their fortified positions, fighting a defense in depth over great stretches of land. Vladivostok holds out surprisingly long until the IJN/IJA seize the city. Alongside this Sakhalin is taken with relative ease. The Soviet surface fleet is annihilated, but their large submarine force takes a heavy toll of the IJN who are attempting Pacific landings. Kantokuen phase 1 is meeting its objectives, but far later than expected with much more casualties than expected. The Japanese are shocked by the fuel consumption as they advance further inland. Each truck bearing fuel is using 50% of said fuel to get to the troops, something reminiscent of the north african campaign situation for Rommel. The terrain is terrible for their vehicles full of valleys, hills, forests and mountains. Infrastructure in the region is extremely underdeveloped and the Soviets are burning and destroying everything before the Japanese arrive. All key roads and cities are defended until the Japanese can encircle the Soviets, upon which they depart, similar to situations the Japanese face in China. It is tremendously slow progress. The IJA are finding it difficult to encircle and capture Soviet forces who have prepared a series of rear lines to keep falling back to while performing counterattacks against Japanese columns. As the Japanese advance further into the interior, the IJN are unable to continue supporting them with aircraft and much of the IJA aircraft are limited in operations because of the range. The second phase of Kantokuen calls for the capture of Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, and Nikolayevsk. Additionally, amphibious operations against Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula are on standby as the IJN fears risking shipping as a result of Soviet submarine operations. The sheer scope of the operation was seeing the tide sides stretching their forces over a front nearly 5000 km in length. At some points the Japanese were attempting to advance more than 1000 km's inland, wasting ungodly amounts of fuel and losing vehicles from wear and tear. So what does Japan gain? Within the span of 4 months, max 6 months Japan could perhaps seized: Sakhalin, the Primorsye krai including Vladivostok, segments of the trans siberian railway, Blagoveshchensk, Kuibyshevka. If they are really lucky Khabarovsk, Komsomolsk, Skovorodino, Sovetskaya Gavan, Nikolayevsk. Additionally, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and other parts of the Kamchatka Peninsula. What does this mean? Really nothing. Pull out a map of manchuria during WW2, take a pencil and expand the manchurian border perhaps 1000 km if you really want to be generous, that's the new extent of the empire of the rising sun. The real purpose of attacking the USSR is not to perform some ludicrous dash across 6000 km's of frozen wasteland to whittle down and defeat the Soviets alongside the rest of the Axis. It was only to break them, in late 1941 at Moscow there was perhaps a fools chance, but it was a fool's chance for Japan. Japan has run out of its stockpiles of Kaisenbun, oil, iron, rubber, tin, all types of resources necessary for making war. Unlike in our timeline where Japan began exporting resources from its conquests in southeast asia and the pacific, here Japan spent everything and now is relying on the trickles it has within its empire. The China war will be much more difficult to manage. The lend-lease will increase every day to China. The US/UK/Netherlands will only increase pressure upon Japan to stop being a nuisance, Japan can't do anything about this as the US Pacific Fleet is operating around the Philippines always a looming threat. The Japanese are holding for a lack of better words, useless ground in the far east. They will build a buffer area to defend against what can only be described as a Soviet Invasion of Manchuria x1000. The Allies will be directing all of their effort against Germany and Italy, providing a interesting alternate history concept in its own right. After Germany has been dealt with, Japan would face a existential threat against a very angry Stalin. Cody from Alternate History Hub actually made an episode on this scenario, he believed the Soviets would conquer most of Japan occupied Asia and even invade the home islands. It would certainly be something on the table, taking many years, but the US/UK would most likely interfere in some way. The outcome would be so much worse for Japan. Perhaps she is occupied and a communist government is installed. Perhaps like in our timeline the Americans come in to bolster Japan up for the looming coldwar. But the question I sought to answer here was, Japan invading the USSR was a dumb idea. The few Japanese commanders who pushed it all the way until August 9th of 1941 simply had to give up because of how illogical it was. I honestly should not have even talked about military matters, this all came down to logistics and resources. You want to know how Japan could have secured itself a better deal in WW2? 1941, the China War is the number one problem Japan can't solve so they look north or south to acquire the means to solve the China problem? Negotiate a peace with China. That is the lackluster best deal right there. Sorry if this episode did not match your wildest dreams. But if you want me to do some batshit crazy alternate history stuff, I am more than happy to jump into it and have fun. Again thank all of you guys who joined the patreon, you guys are awesome. Until next time this is the Pacific War channel over and out.
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCDopo aver visto la legge morale di Kant, si tratta di capire se essa può portarci al sommo bene, cioè all'unione di virtù e felicità.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
Introduction – When People Don't Approve of You Rainey began her message with a story from her college years — a painful and funny one about rejection. She told how she dated a grad student named Noah who was brilliant, popular, and part of an elite, intellectual friend group. When she went to dinner to meet his friends, she knew she was being evaluated — an “audition dinner.” When asked about Kant's Critique of Judgment, all she could say was, “I think Kant is really good. Art also, very good. So to sum up, I am pro.” It didn't go well. Shortly after, Noah broke up with her, saying she “wasn't smart enough” and that she'd be more comfortable with someone “her speed.” It was humiliating. She had been evaluated and found lacking. Rainey then drew the connection: this kind of rejection happens to all of us. We don't always fit in. Sometimes we're not chosen, we're overlooked, or we're compared unfavorably to others — the sibling the parents brag about, the colleague the students prefer, the church that people leave for. She said, “There's no use pretending everyone will love you. That's not true. The Gospel has to be good news even when people don't like us.” If our sense of worth depends on impressing others, we become weak, reactive, and easily crushed. To show how dangerous this is, Rainey turned to Scripture. ⸻ 1. The Danger of Insecurity (Matthew 14:1–11) She read the story of Herod and John the Baptist: “Herod was greatly distressed, but because of his oath and his dinner guests, he ordered that John be beheaded…” (Matthew 14:9) Rainey highlighted that Herod didn't kill John out of hatred. He killed him out of insecurity. He wanted to look strong in front of his guests. He cared more about their approval than what was right. She said, “If Herod hadn't been so desperate for them to think he was strong, he'd have been free to ask, ‘What is right?' Instead, he asked, ‘What do they want to see?'” That's what insecurity does. When we tie our worth to others' opinions, we become unable to do what's right. We can only do what others want to see. It's a position of terrible weakness. Then she brought it home: “If I link my worth to your approval, I can't be a person who obeys God. I can only be a person who performs for you.” That's why we need good news for the insecure heart. ⸻ 2. Imago Dei – You Are Made in the Image of God Rainey's first idea for finding freedom from insecurity is the biblical truth of the Imago Dei — that every person is made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27). She described how all beauty and goodness in creation point to God: “The heavens declare the glory of God; day after day they pour forth speech.” – Psalm 19:1–2 Mountains, oceans, sunsets — they all reflect something of His glory. But humans are unique because we don't just reflect His glory — we resemble Him. She said, “God used His own fingers to carve the lines of your face. He held your cheeks and said, ‘Yes, that's just right.'” We are designed to show the world something of what God is like — each of us in a slightly different way. To despise yourself or wish to be someone else is to insult the Artist who made you. “The one who carved your bones is not wishing you were more like your sister.” It's beneath your dignity, Rainey said, to let your worth swing back and forth with every opinion. Your worth is not determined by the crowd — it's anchored in the Creator. Then she turned to the Third Commandment, often translated “Do not take the Lord's name in vain.” She explained that the Hebrew verb nasa means “to carry.” So the command really says: “Do not carry the name of the Lord your God in vain.” (Exodus 20:7) In other words: “You carry My name. Represent Me well.” If we treat people as though they don't matter, we misrepresent the God who made them. When we devalue others, we carry His name badly — we show the world a false picture of Him. So, what are we called to show the world? Rainey told the story of Hagar in Genesis 16 — an abused, pregnant, runaway slave who meets God in the desert. God sees her, comforts her, and promises a future. In response, she names Him: “You are El Roi — the God Who Sees Me.” And Rainey said, “That's who He still is. To people no one else sees, He is the God who sees.” That's our calling as image bearers: not to impress others, but to see others as He does. The highest calling is not to be admired — it's to notice the forgotten, to look into someone's eyes and say with our presence, ‘God has not forgotten you.' When we do that — whether as a doctor, teacher, parent, or neighbor — we reveal the God who sees. That's the stable foundation of our worth: not impressing people, but bearing His image. ⸻ 3. The Gospel According to You Rainey's second major idea was that God isn't wishing you were more like anyone else — because He designed you to tell the story of His goodness in a unique way. She illustrated this through the four Gospels: • Matthew, the tax collector, wrote to show that Jesus fulfilled every prophecy — the precise, orderly Gospel for those who care about facts and fulfillment. • Mark, reflecting Peter's voice, wrote fast and action-packed — the soldier's Gospel for people who value power and results. • Luke, the doctor, wrote a polished, reasoned account — the intellectual's Gospel, highlighting compassion, reason, and human dignity. • John, the emotional “son of thunder,” wrote the love letter Gospel — passionate, personal, and poetic. Each one tells the same story of Jesus, but from a different angle. None could replace the others. Together, they give us a fuller picture of who Jesus is. Then Rainey made her point: “To celebrate Him fully, we need all four voices. And to celebrate Him even more fully, we need yours too.” She said, “The Gospel according to Coleton is that God can save anyone, even the people no one expects. The Gospel according to Rainey is that He's the reason nature is beautiful and ethics matter. And yours will sound different still — and that's exactly the point.” Each of us is meant to tell the world how Jesus has been good news to us. “Let the redeemed of the Lord say so.” – Psalm 107:2 God doesn't need more copies of the same person. He needs each of us to reveal a facet of His beauty that no one else can. ⸻ 4. Loaves and Fishes – You Are Enough for God to Use Finally, Rainey turned to her last idea: You are not enough — but you are enough when given to Jesus. She said, “Please don't hear me saying, ‘Believe in yourself because you are enough.' You aren't. I'm not either.” We cannot heal trauma, fix the world, or even make our loved ones wise or successful. We feel inadequate because we are inadequate. But, she said, “You are enough the way loaves and fishes were enough.” When a boy handed Jesus his meager lunch, Jesus made it feed thousands. The bread and fish weren't enough — until they were surrendered. In the same way, when we offer our homes, our talents, our dinners, our time — however small — Jesus multiplies it into something eternal. Rainey shared that she often prays before people come to her home for dinner: “Lord, take this lasagna and somehow receive glory from it.” That's how our lives work. Not because we're impressive, but because when we hand what we have to Him, He uses it to show His goodness. ⸻ 5. Closing Blessing and Prayer Rainey ended with this charge and blessing: “In an ocean of opinions, you do not have to audition for your worth. And don't make anyone else audition for theirs.” Walk in the dignity of an image bearer. Tell the Gospel according to you. And when you feel your not-enoughness, hand it to Jesus like loaves and fish — He will make it enough. She closed by praying that the Spirit would free us from comparison and insecurity, and send us out to be people who see others as God sees them. “Lord Jesus, thank You that You were unmoved by the crowd's opinion. Set our faces toward You. Free us from the tyranny of competition, and send us to the lonely, the overlooked, and the left-out — not to compete but to bless.” ⸻ Discussion Questions 1. Where are you most tempted to “audition” for approval? What does it look like to find your worth in how others see you? 2. How does the truth of being made in the Imago Dei change how you see yourself — and how you treat others? 3. Which “Gospel voice” do you most relate to — Matthew's precision, Mark's action, Luke's compassion, or John's love? What might “the gospel according to you” sound like? 4. What “loaves and fishes” could you offer to Jesus this week? (Something small you can surrender for His glory.) 5. Who around you might need to be “seen”? How could you bear God's image to them by communicating, “God sees you”?
Cette semaine, dans le magazine IDÉES, Pierre-Édouard Deldique reçoit Sophie Nordmann. Philosophe et professeure agrégée de philosophie. Elle vient de publier un essai intitulé : « La vocation de philosophe, puissance de la mise en question » (Calmann-Lévy) dans les pages duquel elle explique que, selon elle, cet amour de la sagesse n'a pas pour vocation de produire des savoirs, mais de les bousculer. Elle en parle avec passion et précision dans l'émission. « Comment ne pas suffoquer quand l'air est irrespirable ? Où reprendre son souffle quand l'atmosphère est saturée ? La pensée, elle aussi, a besoin de respirer pour se maintenir vivante », écrit Sophie Nordmann, alors elle propose une conception audacieuse du rôle de la philosophie dans notre monde contemporain. Loin d'être une simple discipline académique, la philosophie y est présentée comme une pratique vivante de la mise en question, un geste qui libère la pensée des carcans idéologiques et des dogmatismes du moment. Professeure à l'École pratique des Hautes Études, à Paris, référence dans sa spécialité, l'auteure qui nous parle au micro avec une grande clarté ne cherche pas à transmettre des doctrines ou des concepts figés. Elle invite plutôt à éprouver la capacité de la philosophie à créer un «appel d'air» dans les discours qui saturent nos sociétés. Dans un monde plein de certitudes, le philosophe devient un empêcheur de penser en rond, à l'image de Socrate, Descartes, Kant ou Nietzsche, figures centrales du livre et précieux compagnons de vie. L'ouvrage ne se veut pas une histoire de la philosophie, mais en effet une exploration du geste philosophique de quatre penseurs : - Socrate : la maïeutique, ou l'art d'accoucher les esprits - Descartes : le doute méthodique comme outil de discernement - Kant : la critique comme fondement de la liberté - Nietzsche : la pensée comme transgression et création Spécialiste de la philosophie juive contemporaine, Sophie Nordmann insiste sur le courage qu'exige la pensée philosophique : celui de se déprendre de soi, de ses certitudes, pour ouvrir un espace critique et respirable. Elle distingue clairement la philosophie de la science : là où la science cherche des réponses dans un champ donné, la philosophie n'a pas de champ, elle est quête de mise en question. Non pas pour nous déséquilibrer, mais pour voir la vie autrement. Programmation musicale : Naïssam Jalal, Robinson Khoury - Souffle #8.
Cette semaine, dans le magazine IDÉES, Pierre-Édouard Deldique reçoit Sophie Nordmann. Philosophe et professeure agrégée de philosophie. Elle vient de publier un essai intitulé : « La vocation de philosophe, puissance de la mise en question » (Calmann-Lévy) dans les pages duquel elle explique que, selon elle, cet amour de la sagesse n'a pas pour vocation de produire des savoirs, mais de les bousculer. Elle en parle avec passion et précision dans l'émission. « Comment ne pas suffoquer quand l'air est irrespirable ? Où reprendre son souffle quand l'atmosphère est saturée ? La pensée, elle aussi, a besoin de respirer pour se maintenir vivante », écrit Sophie Nordmann, alors elle propose une conception audacieuse du rôle de la philosophie dans notre monde contemporain. Loin d'être une simple discipline académique, la philosophie y est présentée comme une pratique vivante de la mise en question, un geste qui libère la pensée des carcans idéologiques et des dogmatismes du moment. Professeure à l'École pratique des Hautes Études, à Paris, référence dans sa spécialité, l'auteure qui nous parle au micro avec une grande clarté ne cherche pas à transmettre des doctrines ou des concepts figés. Elle invite plutôt à éprouver la capacité de la philosophie à créer un «appel d'air» dans les discours qui saturent nos sociétés. Dans un monde plein de certitudes, le philosophe devient un empêcheur de penser en rond, à l'image de Socrate, Descartes, Kant ou Nietzsche, figures centrales du livre et précieux compagnons de vie. L'ouvrage ne se veut pas une histoire de la philosophie, mais en effet une exploration du geste philosophique de quatre penseurs : - Socrate : la maïeutique, ou l'art d'accoucher les esprits - Descartes : le doute méthodique comme outil de discernement - Kant : la critique comme fondement de la liberté - Nietzsche : la pensée comme transgression et création Spécialiste de la philosophie juive contemporaine, Sophie Nordmann insiste sur le courage qu'exige la pensée philosophique : celui de se déprendre de soi, de ses certitudes, pour ouvrir un espace critique et respirable. Elle distingue clairement la philosophie de la science : là où la science cherche des réponses dans un champ donné, la philosophie n'a pas de champ, elle est quête de mise en question. Non pas pour nous déséquilibrer, mais pour voir la vie autrement. Programmation musicale : Naïssam Jalal, Robinson Khoury - Souffle #8.
A qui la faute ?Tu viens d'incendier la Bibliothèque ?- Oui.J'ai mis le feu là.- Mais c'est un crime inouï !Crime commis par toi contre toi-même, infâme !Mais tu viens de tuer le rayon de ton âme !C'est ton propre flambeau que tu viens de souffler !Ce que ta rage impie et folle ose brûler,C'est ton bien, ton trésor, ta dot, ton héritageLe livre, hostile au maître, est à ton avantage.Le livre a toujours pris fait et cause pour toi.Une bibliothèque est un acte de foiDes générations ténébreuses encoreQui rendent dans la nuit témoignage à l'aurore.Quoi! dans ce vénérable amas des vérités,Dans ces chefs-d'oeuvre pleins de foudre et de clartés,Dans ce tombeau des temps devenu répertoire,Dans les siècles, dans l'homme antique, dans l'histoire,Dans le passé, leçon qu'épelle l'avenir,Dans ce qui commença pour ne jamais finir,Dans les poètes! quoi, dans ce gouffre des bibles,Dans le divin monceau des Eschyles terribles,Des Homères, des jobs, debout sur l'horizon,Dans Molière, Voltaire et Kant, dans la raison,Tu jettes, misérable, une torche enflammée !De tout l'esprit humain tu fais de la fumée !As-tu donc oublié que ton libérateur,C'est le livre ? Le livre est là sur la hauteur;Il luit; parce qu'il brille et qu'il les illumine,Il détruit l'échafaud, la guerre, la famineIl parle, plus d'esclave et plus de paria.Ouvre un livre. Platon, Milton, Beccaria.Lis ces prophètes, Dante, ou Shakespeare, ou CorneilleL'âme immense qu'ils ont en eux, en toi s'éveille ;Ébloui, tu te sens le même homme qu'eux tous ;Tu deviens en lisant grave, pensif et doux ;Tu sens dans ton esprit tous ces grands hommes croître,Ils t'enseignent ainsi que l'aube éclaire un cloîtreÀ mesure qu'il plonge en ton coeur plus avant,Leur chaud rayon t'apaise et te fait plus vivant ;Ton âme interrogée est prête à leur répondre ;Tu te reconnais bon, puis meilleur; tu sens fondre,Comme la neige au feu, ton orgueil, tes fureurs,Le mal, les préjugés, les rois, les empereurs !Car la science en l'homme arrive la première.Puis vient la liberté. Toute cette lumière,C'est à toi comprends donc, et c'est toi qui l'éteins !Les buts rêvés par toi sont par le livre atteints.Le livre en ta pensée entre, il défait en elleLes liens que l'erreur à la vérité mêle,Car toute conscience est un noeud gordien.Il est ton médecin, ton guide, ton gardien.Ta haine, il la guérit ; ta démence, il te l'ôte.Voilà ce que tu perds, hélas, et par ta faute !Le livre est ta richesse à toi ! c'est le savoir,Le droit, la vérité, la vertu, le devoir,Le progrès, la raison dissipant tout délire.Et tu détruis cela, toi !
This two-part video series provides a deep historical analysis of Moralistic Therapeutic Deism (MTD), tracing its ingredients from 19th-century New England intellectual and social revolutions to its status as America's de facto civic religion. We argue that MTD collapsed when the sexual and moral revolutions forced a devastating fracture between its Christian heritage and its core principles of self-actualization and benevolence, leading to the polarized political landscape of today.Moralist Therapeutic Deism Part 1 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eHYMzanOvs&t=4679s @triggerpod @InterestingTimesNYT @JonathanPageau @PaulVanderKlay 00:00:00 - Introduction and Recap00:10:07 - MTD, Chicago, and Obama00:13:00 - Cornell as Microcosm00:25:15 - Tim Keller on programatic secularism00:35:55 - Mainline Christianity00:37:45 - Wokeness and MTD00:47:05 - MTD and Partisanship00:49:20 - Arena vs Agent00:51:00 - Donald Trump 00:56:15 - Nationalism vs Globalism01:03:40 - Who killed MTD?01:05:55 - Competing Arenas01:08:25 - The future of Christian NationalismIn this video I mention:Aaron Renn, Abraham Lincoln, Albert Baker, Alfred, Allen C. Guelzo, Amos, Andrew Jackson Davis, Ann Lee, Anagarika Dharmapala, Arthur Conan Doyle, Athanasius, Barack Obama, Benjamin Franklin, Billy Graham, Black Lives Matter, Bud, Buddha, Calvin, Cathleen Falsani, Catherine Fox, Charles B. Rosna, Charles Carroll Bonney, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, Charlie Kirk, Christian Smith, Christopher Pearse Cranch, Clement of Alexandria, Conrad Grebel, Constantine, David Bentley Hart, Deepak Chopra, Donahoe, Donald Trump, Eddie Lincoln, Eleanor Roosevelt, Elijah Muhammad, Eliott, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Elizabeth Keckley, Ellen Todd, Emilie Todd Helm, Emanuel Swedenborg, Epictetus, Erica Kirk, Ernst Troeltsch, Ezra Klein, Fanny Hayes Platt, Faustus Socinus, Finney, Fox Sisters, Franz Anton Mesmer, Fred Shuttlesworth, Frederick the Wise, Friedrich Nietzsche, Galen, George Barna, George Fox, George W. Bush, Gregory of Nyssa, Henry Clay, Henry David Thoreau, Henry James, H. P. Blavatsky, H. Richard Niebuhr, Harriet Beecher Stowe, Harold Ockenga, Harry Emerson Fosdick, Helen Schucman, Hosea Ballou, J. Gresham Machen, Jacob Blake, James, James Comey, James Lindsay, James Russell Lowell, Jared Sparks, Jean H. Baker, Jenkin Lloyd Jones, Jesus Christ, Jim Lindsay, John, John Adams, John Bunyan, John D. Rockefeller, John Henry Barrows, John Locke, John Milton, John Murray, John Stott, Jonathan Edwards, Jordan Peterson, Joseph Priestly, Joseph Smith, Judith Skutch, Julius Dresser, Kant, Karl Menninger, Karlstadt, Kate Fox, Kenneth Minkema, Koot Hoomi, Kyle Rittenhouse, Lelio Socinus, Leonard Zusne, Lou Malnatis, Luke Thompson ( @WhiteStoneName ), Lyman Beecher, Madame Blavatsky, Margaretta Fox, Marianne Williamson, Mark Parker ( @MarkDParker ) , Mark Twain, Mary Baker Eddy, Mary Todd Lincoln, Matt Herman, Meister Eckhart, Melinda Lundquist Denton, Mesmer, Micah, Michael Bronky, Michael Servetus, Monophysite, Morya, Moses, Nancy Pelosi, Napoleon Bonaparte, Nettie Colburn Maynard, Newton, Niccolò Machiavelli, Nicholas of Cusa, Norman Vincent Peale, Oprah, Origen, Paul, Paul Tillich, Paul Vanderlay, Phineas Parkhurst Quimby, Plotinus, Proclus, Ralph Waldo Emerson, Ramakrishna, Rick Warren, Robert Schuller, Robin D'Angelo, Rod Dreher, Ronald Reagan, Ross Douthat, Rowan Williams, Rudolf Steiner, Samuel Johnson, Septimus J. Hanna, Shailer Mathews, Shakers, Shadrach, Socrates, Soyen Shaku, Swami Vivekananda, Tad Lincoln, Tertullian, Thomas Aquinas, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Starr King, Tracy Herman, Virchand Gandhi, Victoria Woodhull, Warren Felt Evans, William Ellery Channing, William James, William Lloyd Garrison, William Newton Clarke, Willie Lincoln, Winthrop, Zwingli.
Le Club 1906 avec Céric Kanté : Le débrief de la victoire à Bratislava Retour à la Meinau ce dimanche face à Angers !
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCUltime riflessioni sull'imperativo categorico kantiano e sulla natura della sua morale.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
The Enlightenment has faced a lot of criticism in recent years - its defenders and detractors often come head to head, scrambling to articulate its ultimate value or lack thereof to contemporary society. This podcast contributes to this wider debate and question facing all those interested in philosophy and politics: Are Enlightenment ideas salvageable? Or are they too intrinsically tainted with the racism of their times? If so, what do we do next?Join Birmingham City University Professor Kehinde Andrews in this exclusive interview as he lays out his provocative claims on the limited utility of Enlightenment thought.What do you think? Do you agree with Kehinde? Who is your philosophical reference? Email us at podcast@iai.tv with your thoughts or questions on the episode!To witness such topics discussed live in London, buy tickets and join the conversation: https://howthelightgetsin.org/festivals/And visit our website for many more articles, videos, and podcasts like this one: https://iai.tv/You can find everything we referenced here: https://linktr.ee/philosophyforourtimesSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
Send us a textEpisode 37 — Is There an 80/20 Approach to Seduction?Note: Part 1 of this series called "Return to the Land of Women" premiered here: https://youtu.be/dqMT7HdqioM____________________________________________________Come join us! Sign up today and enjoy all the perks of the Amorati Membership, including live calls with Zan and his team. Go here: https://www.Amorati.net/____________________________________Need a gunslinger? Someone who rides into town, completely solves your problem, then rides off into the sunset. Contact Zan Perrion personally to inquire about his incredibly effective one-on-one Laser Coaching. Find him here: https://arsamorata.com/gunslinger/____________________________________Get a gifted copy of The Alabaster Girl, personally signed by Zan Perrion. Go to https://alabastergirl.com____________________________________Get instant access to our 4 part mini-course with Zan Perrion
In this segment from the 28 September 2025 Sunday Morning Live Donors stream, Stefan explores the complexities of toddler behavior and effective parenting strategies through the lens of a parent's experience with their three-year-old son asserting autonomy in choosing the order of sock-wearing. He discusses the natural power struggle that arises as children test boundaries, suggesting that parents can foster reasoning skills by engaging in open dialogue rather than giving in to demands. Key concepts include negotiating desires, recognizing the universality of rules through Kant's categorical imperative, and understanding the importance of trade-offs in social interactions. Ultimately, Stefan advocates for parents to expose their children to discussions around preferences and boundaries to promote empathy and critical thinking as they mature.Preview the full show here: https://premium.freedomain.com/19ec9b33/sunday-morning-live-subscribers-stream-28Subscribers can get the full show here:X: https://x.com/StefanMolyneux/status/1972385183857848822Locals: https://freedomain.locals.com/post/7322380/sunday-morning-live-subscribers-stream-28-september-2025Subscribestar: https://www.subscribestar.com/posts/2097674Freedomain Members: https://freedomain.com/sunday-morning-live-subscribers-stream-28-september-2025/SUBSCRIBE TO ME ON X! https://x.com/StefanMolyneuxFollow me on Youtube! https://www.youtube.com/@freedomain1Not yet a subscriber? You can join the PREMIUM philosophy community on the web for free!Subscribers get 12 HOURS on the "Truth About the French Revolution," multiple interactive multi-lingual philosophy AIs trained on thousands of hours of my material - as well as AIs for Real-Time Relationships, Bitcoin, Peaceful Parenting, and Call-In Shows!You also receive private livestreams, HUNDREDS of exclusive premium shows, early release podcasts, the 22 Part History of Philosophers series and much more!See you soon!https://freedomain.locals.com/support/promo/UPB2025
Philosophy Is Sexy n'est pas qu'un podcast, c'est une parenthèse intime, un pas de côté, pour oser la philosophie, la désacraliser, la remettre au cœur de notre vie et se laisser inspirer. Marie Robert, auteure du best-seller traduit en quinze langues, "Kant tu ne sais plus quoi faire", de "Descartes pour les jours de doute" et"Le Voyage de Pénélope" (Flammarion-Versilio) nous interpelle de son ton complice et entrainant. La prof qu'on aurait aimé avoir, celle surtout qui va faire des philosophes nos précieux alliés.https://www.susannalea.com/sla-title/penelopes-voyage/Directrice Pédagogique des écoles Montessori Esclaibes. @PhilosophyIsSexyProduction: Les podcasteursMusique Originale: Laurent Aknin Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.
Acquista il mio nuovo libro, “Anche Socrate qualche dubbio ce l'aveva”: https://amzn.to/3wPZfmCSottolineiamo alcune importanti conseguenze che derivano dall'imperativo categorico: l'importanza dell'intenzione, il dovere-per-il-dovere e il tema della libertà.Diventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/dentro-alla-filosofia--4778244/support.
POUR COMMANDER MON LIVRE : Sur Amazon : https://amzn.to/3ZMm4CY Sur Fnac.com : https://tidd.ly/4dWJZ8OVivre sa vie comme si on devait la revivre à l'infini : c'est ainsi qu'est souvent résumé l'éternel retour de Nietzsche. Mais s'agit-il bien de cela ? C'est ce que nous allons voir dans cet épisode.---Envie d'aller plus loin ? Rejoignez-moi sur Patreon pour accéder à tout mon contenu supplémentaire.
How do we get from today's AI copilots to true human-level intelligence? In this episode of Eye on AI, Craig Smith sits down with Eiso Kant, Co-Founder of Poolside, to explore why reinforcement learning + software development might be the fastest path to human-level AI. Eiso shares Poolside's mission to build AI that doesn't just autocomplete code — but learns like a real developer. You'll hear how Poolside uses reinforcement learning from code execution (RLCF), why software development is the perfect training ground for intelligence, and how agentic AI systems are about to transform the way we build and ship software. If you want to understand the future of AI, software engineering, and AGI, this conversation is packed with insights you won't want to miss. Stay Updated: Craig Smith on X:https://x.com/craigss Eye on A.I. on X: https://x.com/EyeOn_AI (00:00) The Missing Ingredient for Human-Level AI(01:02) Eiso Kant's Journey(05:30) Using Software Development to Reach AGI(07:48) Why Coding Is the Perfect Training Ground for Intelligence(10:11) Reinforcement Learning from Code Execution (RLCF) Explained(13:14) How Poolside Builds and Trains Its Foundation Models(17:35) The Rise of Agentic AI(21:08) Making Software Creation Accessible to Everyone(26:03) Overcoming Model Limitations(32:08) Training Models to Think(37:24) Building the Future of AI Agents(42:11) Poolside's Full-Stack Approach to AI Deployment(46:28) Enterprise Partnerships, Security & Customization Behind the Firewall(50:48) Giving Enterprises Transparency to Drive Adoption
Jon Harris and Hussein Abubakar Mansour discuss the historical and intellectual origins of anti-Semitism, focusing on its emergence as a modern ideology in 19th-century Europe. They explore how Enlightenment thinkers like Kant and Hegel framed Judaism as a barrier to universalist ideals, with Kant viewing it as heteronomous and Hegel associating it with societal division. This perspective culminated in Marx's On the Jewish Question, where he equates Judaism with capitalism, advocating for humanity's liberation from both. They analyze how these ideas shaped intellectual anti-Semitism, influencing Marxist critical theory and nationalist movements. Hussein shares his journey from growing up in 1990s Egypt amid rising Islamism, his involvement with the Muslim Brotherhood, and his eventual conversion to Orthodox Coptic Christianity, which led him to study anti-Semitism's roots. They connect these historical insights to contemporary issues, noting parallels between 19th-century ideologies and modern left-wing anti-Zionism and right-wing conspiracies. They discuss the oversimplification of blaming Jewish influence for societal issues, emphasizing the need for nuanced analysis and the role of diverse radical groups. Solutions include combating misinformation, building alternative institutions, and returning to transcendent values to counter ideological extremism.Order Against the Waves: Againstthewavesbook.comCheck out Jon's Music: jonharristunes.comTo Support the Podcast: https://www.worldviewconversation.com/support/Become a Patronhttps://www.patreon.com/jonharrispodcastFollow Jon on Twitter: https://twitter.com/jonharris1989Follow Jon on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/jonharris1989/The American Churchman: The American Churchman exists to encourage men to fulfill their God-given duties with gentleness and courage. Go to https://theamericanchurchman.com for more. Our Sponsors:* Check out TruDiagnostic and use my code HARRIS for a great deal: https://www.trudiagnostic.comSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/conversations-that-matter8971/donationsAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
Episode 8 - The Smell of ThinkingEnd of Book300:30 - 4:00 section 213 cause and effects - cause is added later as an intervention; 4:00 - 18:15Reading the short maxims vs. reading aphorisms; teaching. Section 192 on good natured people, Section 193 on Kant, section 195 - distilled. Like kafka short stories; section 152 on different colors; diagnosing styles of life; changing questions - ontology is still a style question; reality-making intervention; ethics v ontology: N solves the Heidegger/Levinas conundrum18:20 -34:50Learning to hear religion differently (not as dishonest); transcendence sounds like life-hating; interpretation of the world as bad is what makes the world bad; John believes that nothing is necessarily anything; BooBoo's resentment is to blame for this podcast; the smell of thinking; education as movement without a telos (not growth but transformation); intelligence is really about the capacity to learn/change, not about knowing; is this just a new learning outcome? Critical thinking; 34:55 - 53:05Nietzsche's perspectivalism; 159-160; a non-human sense of agency/context; 177 laughter as a means of education and 200; this is a book on pedagogy; learning environments are all seriousness: “fuck those fuckers”; BooBoo's joy; camel, lion, and child from Zarathustra; 324 en media vita; thinking is itself an activity, an experiment; Nietzsche as the teacher of laughter53:10-endAsymptotic relations - without any failure/truth; specificity is not on the way to truth but creating more points of contact; “truth” can serve to increase exposure; cutting vs. clarity; “suffering” fools; Cogito, the outside as an intrusion - discovering something other than endurance; sovereignty as promising to make the future; promise as object of affirmation (rather than obligation); compliments as dismissal?; teaching evals;
Today's episode is the first in a three-part conversation with philosopher and writer Lea Ypi about the idea of dignity and its role in the history of ideas and in the story of our lives. What is the difference between dignity and dignitas? How does our conception of dignity shape the ways that we think about death? And why is Kant so important for showing what the idea of dignity is capable of? Out tomorrow on PPF+: Part 2 of this conversation, in which David and Lea explore the role of dignity in human rights and in identity politics and ask how much it matters that our politics has become so undignified. To get this and all our bonus episodes plus ad-free listening sign up now to PPF+ https://www.ppfideas.com/join-ppf-plus Lea Ypi's new book is Indignity: A Life Reimagined – get it wherever you get your books. https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/458930/indignity-by-ypi-lea/9780241661925 Tickets are available now for a special recording of PPF Live at the Cheltenham Literature Festival on Wednesday 15th October: Who Rules The World? Trump, Tech and the Fight for the Future. David will be talking to writer, philosopher and ex-politician Bruno Macaes plus a special guest to be announced about where the power really lies. Get your tickets now https://www.cheltenhamfestivals.org/events/who-rules-the-world-trump-tech-and-the-fight-for-the-future Next time: Lea Ypi talks about her remarkable new book Indignity: A Life Reimagined Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
