Podcasts about Ludwig Wittgenstein

*cricket noises* In episode 75 of Overthink, Ellie and David discuss silence and its connection with awe, ecstasy, and the experience of the divine. They talk about David's experience staying silent during a collegiate debate and Ellie's practice of meditation as it relates to silence. How does being silent reveal the inner and outer noise that so often surrounds us? They talk about Christian mysticism, Dauenhauer's deep silence, and Heidegger's call of conscience and explore the various forms of silence that shape our everyday lives.Works Discussed St. Thomas Aquinas, The Summa TheologicaJohn Cage, 4'33” Bernard Dauenhauer, Silence: The Phenomenon and its Ontological SignificanceRupert Gethin, The Foundations of BuddhismMartin Heidegger, Being and TimeRichard Kostelanetz, Conversing with John Cage Louis Pelletier, “Silence please! A brief history of silence at the theater”Ludwig Wittgenstein, The Tractatus Logico-PhilosophicusDōgen Zenji, ShōbōgenzōPatreon | patreon.com/overthinkpodcast Website | overthinkpodcast.comInstagram & Twitter | @overthink_podEmail |  Dearoverthink@gmail.comYouTube | Overthink podcastSupport the show

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Wittgenstein and ML — parameters vs architecture, published by Cleo Nardo on March 24, 2023 on The AI Alignment Forum. Status: a brief distillation of Wittgenstein's book On Certainty, using examples from deep learning and GOFAI, plus discussion of AI alignment and interpretability. "That is to say, the questions that we raise and our doubts depend on the fact that some propositions are exempt from doubt, are as it were like hinges on which those turn." Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty 1. Deep Learning Suppose we want a neural network to detect whether two children are siblings based on photographs of their face. The network will received two n-dimensional vectors v1 and v2representing the pixels in each image, and will return a value y(v1,v2)∈R which we interpret as the log-odds that the children are siblings. So the model has type-signature Rn+nR. There are two ways we can do this. We could use an architecture yA(v1,v2)=σ(vT1Av2+b), where σ is the sigmoid function A is an n×n matrix of learned parameters, b∈R is a learned bias. This model has n2+1 free parameters. Alternatively, we could use an architecture yU(v1,v2)=σ(vT1(U+UT2)v2+b), where σ is the sigmoid function U is an n×n upper-triangular matrix of learned parameters b∈R is a learned bias This model has n2/2+n/2+1 free parameters. Each model has a vector of free parameters θ∈Θ. If we train the model via SGD on a dataset (or via some other method) we will end up with a trained models yθ:Rn+nR, where y_:Θ(Rn+nR) is the architecture. Anyway, we now have two different NN models, and we want to ascribe beliefs to each of them. Consider the proposition ϕ that siblingness is symmetric, i.e. every person is the sibling of their siblings. What does it mean to say that a model knows or belives that ϕ. Let's start with a black-box definition of knowledge or belief: when we say that a model knows or believes that ϕ, we mean that yθ(v1,v2)=yθ(v2,v1) for all v1,v2∈Rn which look sufficiently like faces. According to this black-box definition, both trained models believe ϕ. But if we peer inside the black box, we can see that NN Model 1 believes ϕ in a very different way than how NN Model 2 believes ϕ. For NN Model 1, the belief is encoded in the learned parameters θ∈Θ. For NN Model 2, the belief is encoded in the architecture itself y_. These are two different kinds of belief. 2. Symbolic Logic Suppose we use GOFAI/symbolic logic to determine whether two children are siblings. Our model consists of three things A language L consisting of names and binary familial relations. A knowledge-base Γ consisting of L-formulae. A deductive system ⊢ which takes a set of L-formulae (premises) to a larger set of L-formulae (conclusions). There are two ways we can do this. We could use a system (L,Γ,⊢) , where The language L has names for every character and familial relations parent,child,sibling,grandparent,grandchild,cousin The knowledge-base Γ has axioms {sibling(Jack,Jill),sibling(x,y)sibling(y,x)} The deductive system ⊢ corresponds to first-order predicate logic. Alternatively, we could use a system (L,Γ,⊢), where The language L has names for every character and familial relations parent,child,sibling,grandparent,grandchild,cousin The knowledge-base Γ has axioms {sibling(Jack,Jill)} The deductive system ⊢ corresponds to first-order predicate logic with an additional logical rule sibling(x,y)⊢sibling(y,x). In this situation, we have two different SL models, and we want to ascribe beliefs to each of them. Consider the proposition ϕ that siblingness is symmetric, i.e. every person is the sibling of their siblings. Let's start with a black-box definition of knowledge or belief: when we say that a model knows or believes that ϕ, we mean that Γ⊢sibling(τ1,τ2)sibling(τ2,τ1) for every pair of closed L-terms τ1,τ2. According to this black...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Wittgenstein and ML — parameters vs architecture, published by Cleo Nardo on March 24, 2023 on LessWrong. Status: a brief distillation of Wittgenstein's book On Certainty, using examples from deep learning and GOFAI, plus discussion of AI alignment and interpretability. "That is to say, the questions that we raise and our doubts depend on the fact that some propositions are exempt from doubt, are as it were like hinges on which those turn." Ludwig Wittgenstein, On Certainty 1. Deep Learning Suppose we want a neural network to detect whether two children are siblings based on photographs of their face. The network will received two n-dimensional vectors v1 and v2representing the pixels in each image, and will return a value y(v1,v2)∈R which we interpret as the log-odds that the children are siblings. So the model has type-signature Rn+nR. There are two ways we can do this. We could use an architecture yA(v1,v2)=σ(vT1Av2+b), where σ is the sigmoid function A is an n×n matrix of learned parameters, b∈R is a learned bias. This model has n2+1 free parameters. Alternatively, we could use an architecture yU(v1,v2)=σ(vT1(U+UT2)v2+b), where σ is the sigmoid function U is an n×n upper-triangular matrix of learned parameters b∈R is a learned bias This model has n2/2+n/2+1 free parameters. Each model has a vector of free parameters θ∈Θ. If we train the model via SGD on a dataset (or via some other method) we will end up with a trained models yθ:Rn+nR, where y_:Θ(Rn+nR) is the architecture. Anyway, we now have two different NN models, and we want to ascribe beliefs to each of them. Consider the proposition ϕ that siblingness is symmetric, i.e. every person is the sibling of their siblings. What does it mean to say that a model knows or belives that ϕ. Let's start with a black-box definition of knowledge or belief: when we say that a model knows or believes that ϕ, we mean that yθ(v1,v2)=yθ(v2,v1) for all v1,v2∈Rn which look sufficiently like faces. According to this black-box definition, both trained models believe ϕ. But if we peer inside the black box, we can see that NN Model 1 believes ϕ in a very different way than how NN Model 2 believes ϕ. For NN Model 1, the belief is encoded in the learned parameters θ∈Θ. For NN Model 2, the belief is encoded in the architecture itself y_. These are two different kinds of belief. 2. Symbolic Logic Suppose we use GOFAI/symbolic logic to determine whether two children are siblings. Our model consists of three things A language L consisting of names and binary familial relations. A knowledge-base Γ consisting of L-formulae. A deductive system ⊢ which takes a set of L-formulae (premises) to a larger set of L-formulae (conclusions). There are two ways we can do this. We could use a system (L,Γ,⊢) , where The language L has names for every character and familial relations parent,child,sibling,grandparent,grandchild,cousin The knowledge-base Γ has axioms {sibling(Jack,Jill),sibling(x,y)sibling(y,x)} The deductive system ⊢ corresponds to first-order predicate logic. Alternatively, we could use a system (L,Γ,⊢), where The language L has names for every character and familial relations parent,child,sibling,grandparent,grandchild,cousin The knowledge-base Γ has axioms {sibling(Jack,Jill)} The deductive system ⊢ corresponds to first-order predicate logic with an additional logical rule sibling(x,y)⊢sibling(y,x). In this situation, we have two different SL models, and we want to ascribe beliefs to each of them. Consider the proposition ϕ that siblingness is symmetric, i.e. every person is the sibling of their siblings. Let's start with a black-box definition of knowledge or belief: when we say that a model knows or believes that ϕ, we mean that Γ⊢sibling(τ1,τ2)sibling(τ2,τ1) for every pair of closed L-terms τ1,τ2. According to this black-box definiti...

Peg O'Connor, Ph.D., is a Professor of Philosophy at Gustavus Adolphus College in St. Peter, Minnesota. Her training is in moral philosophy, feminist philosophy, addiction studies, and the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. She believes that philosophy helped her to get and remain sober. Avoiding Alcoholics Anonymous for the first 20 years of her sobriety because of the concept of a “higher power,” she is focused on using some of the great canonical thinkers in western philosophy to illuminate dimensions of addiction. She further shares this in her new book, Higher and Friendly Powers: Transforming Addiction and Suffering (Wildhouse Publications, August 2022).Reco12 is an organization with the mission of learning and sharing the similarities of addiction of all kinds and the similarities of recovery from all afflictions and addictions, and gaining and sharing tools and hope from others who are trudging this road. We are an open meeting for ALL, no matter your life experiences, faith traditions, nationality, or background.  Reco12 is a self-supporting service and we appreciate your help in keeping us working our Step 12 in this manner.  We gratefully accept one-time contributions through PayPal and Venmo through the links in the chat and show notes.  We have also started a new monthly subscription program called Reco12 Spearheads.  To join in and help support these cool projects, please consider donating at www.reco12.com/support, or click on the link in the chat of the live meeting or the show notes of the podcast. Resources from this meeting:Higher and Friendly Powers: Transforming Addiction and SufferingSoren KierkegaardWilliam James Varieties of Religious ExperiencesHenry David ThoreauAristotle To record a Reco12 Shares … share or prayer, please link to https://www.speakpipe.com/reco12shares and leave a share or your favorite recovery prayer. To find Reco12 Shares on virtually any podcast platform and follow and listen, go here:  https://reco12shares.buzzsprout.com/share  Outro music is “Standing Still” by Cory Ellsworth and Randy Kartchner, performed by Mike Eldred and Elizabeth Wolfe.  This song, and/or the entire soundtrack for the future Broadway musical, “Crosses:  A Musical of Hope”, can be purchased here:  https://amzn.to/3RIjKXs This song is used with the express permission of Cory Ellsworth. The Eating Disorder Diaries PodcastIf you have an eating disorder, you are not alone. Host Amy Goeckel shares her experience.Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the showPrivate Facebook GroupInstagram PageBecome a Reco12 Spearhead (Monthly Supporter)PatreonPayPalVenmo: @Reco-TwelveYouTube ChannelReco12 WebsiteEmail: reco12pod@gmail.com to join WhatsApp Group

“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.” — Ludwig Wittgenstein.我语言的局限意味着我的世界的局限。Phil：Thank you very much everyone for listening to this podcast and to my sweet voice. All the questions I've been answering on this one are questions that you actually could answer to yourself and share with friends. They're all about personal development, and I think everyone deserves to talk about this together. I mean, it helps you grow as a person as well. 非常感谢大家收听这个播客和我甜美的声音。我一直在回答的所有问题都是你实际上可以自己回答并与朋友分享的问题。它们都是关于个人发展的，我认为每个人都应该一起讨论这个问题。我的意思是，这个方式可以帮助你成长为一个人。The language right now being in a Latin American country, of course the main language is Spanish. I learned Spanish a few years ago, actually, it was in 2020. I've been privileged because I'm French, it's easier for me. So I learned it in three months and a half, then practised a lot with friends, girlfriend and whatever. 我们现在在拉丁美洲国家，当然主要语言是西班牙语。我几年前学了西班牙语，实际上是在 2020 年。我很幸运，因为我说法语，这对我来说更容易。所以我在三个月半的时间里学会了它，然后和朋友、女朋友和一起练习了很多。So to me, learning a new language when you travel, learning the local language is extremely important because it helps you to connect on a deeper level with the people that are in the place. This will lead you to get adventure that you wouldn't have lived otherwise. It'll help you to communicate better with the people, and as I said, just to connect in a deeper level and to have a better understanding of who they are and how they live.所以对我来说，旅行是学习一门新语言，学习当地语言非常重要，因为它可以帮助你与当地人进行更深层次的联系。这将带你去冒险，否则你 将无法生活。它会帮助你更好地与人们沟通，正如我所说，只是为了更深层次的联系，并更好地了解他们是谁，他们的生活方式。So now you heard a couple of lines of my personal story. Of course, if some of you wanted to get in touch with me, it's more than possible. So as a Western person, I have Instagram. So my Instagram is Phil Marshall, so P H I L, double underscore. Marshall, so m a r s h a l;. And if you do not have Instagram that's completely fine, and I will give you my email address. Are you ready? Because it's gonna be tough. p h i l dot m a r s h dot 97 at gmail.com. I created this email address about 10 years ago, thinking that it would be a trash email address and not on purpose. It became my primary email address. So I was like, oops. So now I have to spell it every time like this. I'm sorry for the pain, but that's my email address. If you go on to get in touch with me, I'm more than happy to speak with you. Thank you for listening to me, and I hope you have a good day, life, night, whatever. Wish you all the best. Thank you. 所以现在你听到了几行我的个人故事。当然，如果你们中的一些人想与我取得联系，那是也是可能的。所以作为一个西方人，我有 Instagram。所以我的 Instagram 是 Phil Marshall，所以 P H I L，两个下划线 Marshall，so m-a-r-s-h-a-l-l。如果你没有 Instagram 也没关系，我会给你我的电子邮件地址。你准备好了吗？因为它有点难喔， phil.marsh.97@gmail.com。我在大约 10 年前创建了这个电子邮件地址，认为它是一个垃圾电子邮件地址，而不是故意的。它成为我的主要电子邮件地址。所以我当时想，哎呀！现在我每次都得这样拼。我很抱歉造成麻烦。那是我的电子邮件地址。如果你继续与我联系，我非常乐意与您交谈。谢谢你听我说，我希望你有一个美好的一天，生活，或夜晚，无论如何。祝你一切顺利。谢谢。Phil 的IG是https://www.instagram.com/phil_msh/他的Email是 phil.marsh.97@gmail.com

In this episode, we discuss:How philosophy supports sobrietyThe importance of friendshipHigher and friendlier powersThe influence of William James on AAReligion versus spirituality Spiritual impulsesAccessing joy in difficult momentsThe problem with a rock-bottom approachBuilding recovery capital Peg O'Connor, Ph.D., is a Professor of Philosophy at Gustavus Adolphus College in St. Peter, Minnesota. Her training is in moral philosophy, feminist philosophy, addiction studies, and the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. She believes that philosophy helped her to get and remain sober. Avoiding Alcoholics Anonymous for the first 20 years of her sobriety because of the concept of a “higher power,” she is focused on using some of the great canonical thinkers in western philosophy to illuminate dimensions of addiction.  She further shares this in her latest book, Higher and Friendly Powers: Transforming Addiction and Suffering (Wildhouse Publications, 2022).  Dr. O'Connor is regularly published in trade journals and writes a column, “Philosophy Stirred, Not Shaken,” for Psychology Today, which has nearly 2.3 million total views online and select columns have appeared in the print publication.  Her expertise has been featured on BBC's Free Thinking and Canadian Public Radio's On Drugs podcast, as well as in print and online publications ranging from The New York Times, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Cosmo and Marie Claire to Vice and Salon. She has been invited to present on addiction and recovery at some of the country's most prestige universities, in addition to workshops and talks in church basements, classrooms, community centers, and treatment centers. To learn more about Dr. O'Connor, visit her website:  https://pegoconnorauthor.com/__Join the new Sun & Moon Community Membership: https://sunandmoonsoberliving.com/membership/Follow @sunandmoon.soberliving on InstagramDisclaimer: The content of this podcast is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. 

What's actually going on in a cell–or on the spiky outside of an invading virus? Gael McGill, Director of Molecular Visualization at the Center for Molecular and Cellular Dynamics at Harvard Medical School is founder and CEO of Digizyme and has spent his career exploring and developing different modes for visualizing evidence. For this scientific conversation taped back in 2021, Recall this Book host John is joined once again by Brandeis neuroscientist Gina Turrigiano (think ep 4 Madeline Miller; think ep 2 Addiction!). You may want to check out Digizyme‘s images of the spike protein attaching the SARS-CoV2 virus to a hapless cell and fusing their membranes. Or click through to watch a gorgeous video Gael and his team have created. Mentioned in the Episode: Gael praised Galileo's revolutionary images (drawings? diagrams?) of Jupiter's moons: Leonardo's stunning anatomical drawings: The DNA Double-Helix: We all knew that Watson and Crick‘s revelation came with this model: But it's easy to forget this indispensable antecedent: the enigmatic yet foundational x-ray crystallography of Rosalind Franklin: “All models are wrong; some are useful.”smiley statistician George Box “A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably.” Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, 115 And what sort of deceptive picture did Wittgenstein have in mind? well, how about the 1904 “Plum-pudding model” of what the atom might look like? Wrong, and productive of all sorts of mistaken hypotheses. Gina credited the beautiful drawings of Santiago Ramón y Cajal with inspiring and illuminating generations of neuroscientists. John credits Science in the Marketplace, an edited collection reminding us that even in crowded lecture-halls, to display science may also mean doing science….. Gael ended his historical tour by praising David Goodsell, cell-painter extraordinaire: John also raved (as he is wont to do) about cave paintings as the first animation in the world (e.g. these horses from Peche-Merle). Listen and Read Here: 47 Glimpsing COVID: Gael McGill on Data Visualization Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

What's actually going on in a cell–or on the spiky outside of an invading virus? Gael McGill, Director of Molecular Visualization at the Center for Molecular and Cellular Dynamics at Harvard Medical School is founder and CEO of Digizyme and has spent his career exploring and developing different modes for visualizing evidence. For this scientific conversation taped back in 2021, Recall this Book host John is joined once again by Brandeis neuroscientist Gina Turrigiano (think ep 4 Madeline Miller; think ep 2 Addiction!). You may want to check out Digizyme‘s images of the spike protein attaching the SARS-CoV2 virus to a hapless cell and fusing their membranes. Or click through to watch a gorgeous video Gael and his team have created. Mentioned in the Episode: Gael praised Galileo's revolutionary images (drawings? diagrams?) of Jupiter's moons: Leonardo's stunning anatomical drawings: The DNA Double-Helix: We all knew that Watson and Crick‘s revelation came with this model: But it's easy to forget this indispensable antecedent: the enigmatic yet foundational x-ray crystallography of Rosalind Franklin: “All models are wrong; some are useful.”smiley statistician George Box “A picture held us captive. And we could not get outside it, for it lay in our language and language seemed to repeat it to us inexorably.” Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations, 115 And what sort of deceptive picture did Wittgenstein have in mind? well, how about the 1904 “Plum-pudding model” of what the atom might look like? Wrong, and productive of all sorts of mistaken hypotheses. Gina credited the beautiful drawings of Santiago Ramón y Cajal with inspiring and illuminating generations of neuroscientists. John credits Science in the Marketplace, an edited collection reminding us that even in crowded lecture-halls, to display science may also mean doing science….. Gael ended his historical tour by praising David Goodsell, cell-painter extraordinaire: John also raved (as he is wont to do) about cave paintings as the first animation in the world (e.g. these horses from Peche-Merle). Listen and Read Here: 47 Glimpsing COVID: Gael McGill on Data Visualization Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We continue with Ludwig Wittgenstein's On Certainty (written 1951), with guest Christopher Heath. What is Wittgenstein's philosophy of science as it's reflected in this book? We talk about Weltbilds (world pictures) and how these relate to language games, relativism, verification, paradigms, testimony, and more. Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. Try the History That Doesn't Suck podcast. Attend our live show in NYC on April 15.

The Ramayana is not one book, but a living text with countless versions across languages, each reflecting the values of its time and place. Arshia Sattar joins Amit Varma to share her insights from decades of study. Also discussed: the art of translation -- and our search for dharma. (FOR FULL LINKED SHOW NOTES, GO TO SEENUNSEEN.IN.) Also check out 1. Arshia Sattar on Amazon, Open and Wikipedia. 2. Valmiki's Ramayana -- Translated by Arshia Sattar. 3. Maryada: Searching for Dharma in the Ramayana -- Arshia Sattar. 4. Lost Loves: Exploring Rama's Anguish -- Arshia Sattar. 5. AK Ramanujan on Amazon and Wikipedia. 6. Wendy Doniger on Amazon and Wikipedia. 7. Alf Hiltebeitel on Amazon and Wikipedia. 8. 300 Ramayanas — AK Ramanujan. 9. On Hinduism and The Hindus — Wendy Doniger. 10. Yuganta — Irawati Karve. 11. The Loneliness of the Indian Woman — Episode 259 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Shrayana Bhattacharya). 12. The Loneliness of the Indian Man — Episode 303 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Nikhil Taneja). 13. 'I Have a Dream' (video) (transcript) -- Martin Luther King. 14. Whatever happened To Ehsan Jafri on February 28, 2002? — Harsh Mander. 15. The Gita Press and Hindu Nationalism — Episode 139 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Akshaya Mukul). 14. Gita Press and the Making of Hindu India — Akshaya Mukul. 15. The Shah Bano case, the Sati at Deorala and the banning of Satanic Verses. 16. 1968: The Year that Rocked the World -- Mark Kurlanksy. 17. The Rooted Cosmopolitanism of Sugata Srinivasaraju — Episode 277 of The Seen and the Unseen. 18. Girish Karnad on Amazon and Wikipedia. 19. Understanding India Through Its Languages — Episode 232 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Peggy Mohan). 20. Wanderers, Kings, Merchants: The Story of India through Its Languages — Peggy Mohan. 21. Early Indians — Episode 112 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Tony Joseph). 22. Early Indians — Tony Joseph. 23. Who We Are and How We Got Here — David Reich. 24. Nissim Ezekiel on Amazon, Wikipedia and All Poetry. 25. The Seven Basic Plots — Christopher Booker. 26. The Long Road From Neeyat to Neeti -- Episode 313 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Pranay Kotasthane and Raghu S Jaitley). 27. Sansar Se Bhage Phirte Ho — Song from Chitralekha with lyrics by Sahir Ludhianvi. 28. Episodes of the Seen and the Unseen on Mughal history with Ira Mukhoty, Parvati Sharma, Rana Safvi and Manimugdha Sharma. 29. Tales from the Kathasaritsagara -- Somadeva (translated by Arshia Sattar). 30. The Second Game of Dice -- Amit Varma. 31. Range Rover -- The archives of Amit Varma's column on poker for the Economic Times. 32. Critical Theory and Structuralism. 33. The Missing Queen -- Samhita Arni. 34. Ramcharitmanas (Hindi) (English) (Wikipedia) -- Tulsidas. 35. Krittivasi Ramayan (Bengali) (Wikipedia) -- Krittibas Ojha. 36. The Kamba Ramayana -- Translated by PS Sundaram. 37. The Odyssey and The Iliad by Homer. 38. David Shulman on Amazon and Wikipedia. 39. Narendra Modi takes a Great Leap Backwards — Amit Varma (on demonetisation). 40. Bimal Krishna Matilal on Amazon and Wikipedia. 41. Dharma: Dimensions of Asian Spirituality -- Alf Hiltebeitel. 42. Understanding Gandhi. Part 1: Mohandas — Episode 104 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Ram Guha). 43. Understanding Gandhi. Part 2: Mahatma — Episode 105 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Ram Guha). 44. The Origins of Evil in Hindu Mythology -- Wendy Doniger. 45. Raja Ravi Varma. 46. Shoodhra Tapasvi -- Kuvempu. 47. Ludwig Wittgenstein on Amazon, Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 48. The Art of Translation — Episode 168 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Arunava Sinha). 49. The Life and Times of Shanta Gokhale — Episode 311 of The Seen and the Unseen. 50. The Life and Times of Jerry Pinto -- Episode 314 of The Seen and the Unseen. 51. RRR -- SS Rajamouli. 52. The Girish Karnad Podcasts: The Rover Has No Fear of Memories -- An oral history enabled by Arshia Sattar and Anmol Tikoo. 53. This Life At Play: Memoirs -- Girish Karnad. 54. Kind of Blue -- Miles Davis. 55. Elena Ferrante on Amazon. 56. The Door -- Magda Szabó. 57. The Mahabaharata -- Peter Brook. 58. The Discreet Charm of the Bourgeoisie, The Phantom of Liberty, That Obscure Object of Desire — Luis Buñuel. 59. The Unbearable Lightness of Being — Philip Kaufman. 60. The Line -- An Apple Original podcast. This episode is sponsored by CTQ Compounds. Check out The Daily Reader and FutureStack. Use the code UNSEEN for Rs 2500 off. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. And subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! Episode art: ‘Searching for Dharma' by Simahina.

  Viv, aka Sober iThrive interviews Dr Peg O'Connor on her book "Higher and Friendly Powers" This is an amazing interview and we graciously thank Dr O'Connor for coming on the Sobertown Podcast and sharing her amazing insights and wisdom!!   Interview with Peg O'Connor, Professor of Philosophy, Specializing in Feminist, Social, Political Philosophy and Addiction Studies, and Author of: “HIGHER AND FRIENDLY POWERS TRANSFORMING ADDICTION AND SUFFERING HIGHER” An expansive alternative for those who have AND FRIENDiv struggled with the "higher power" of AA's 12-step POWERS program, Higher and Friendly Powers (Wildhouse Publications / August 24, 2022) offers a sense of human decency, moral ideals, and even a better version of oneself. In Higher and Friendly Powers, Peg O'Connor, PEG O CONNOR PhD, addresses an audience much like herself: those in recovery who have struggled with the Christian-centric God at the heart of Alcoholics Anonymous. She brings our attention to a little-known fact: the term "higher power," a touchstone in the twelve steps of Alcoholics Anonymous, was coined by William James, philosopher, psychologist, and intellectual giant of the early 20 century. By acting as our personal field guide through the world of William James, Peg shows that "higher power" as James conceived it is far more expansive than we might imagine. The book, which combines Peg's deep personal wisdom with James's adventurous intellect, has the power to transform the way we live.   ABOUT THE AUTHOR: 1 Peg O'Connor, Ph.D., is a Professor of Philosophy at Gustavus Adolphus College in St. Peter, Minnesota. • Her training is in moral philosophy, feminist philosophy, addiction studies, and the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. She believes that philosophy helped her to get and remain sober. Avoiding Alcoholics Anonymous for the first 20 years of her sobriety because of the concept of a "higher power," she is focused on using some of the great canonical thinkers in western philosophy to illuminate dimensions of addiction. She further shares this in her new book, Higher and Friendly Powers: Transforming Addiction and Suffering (Wildhouse Publications, August 2022). Dr. O'Connor is also the author of Life on the Rocks: Finding Meaning in Addiction and Recovery (Central Recovery Press, 2016), Morality and Our Complicated Form of Life: Feminist Wittgensteinian Metaethics (Penn State, 2008), and Oppression and Responsibility: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Social Practices and Moral Theory (Penn State, 2002). A co-editor to multiple other titles, she is regularly published in trade journals and writes a column, Philosophy Stirred, Not Shaken, for Psychology Today, which has nearly two million total views online and select columns have appeared in the print publication. Dr. O'Connor's expertise has been featured on BBC's Free Thinking and Canadian Public Radio's On Drugs podcast, as well as in print and online publications ranging from The New York Times, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Cosmo and Marie Claire to Vice and Kinfolk. She has been invited to present on addiction and recovery at some of the country's most prestige universities, in addition to workshops and talks in church basements, classrooms, community centers, and treatment centers. Dr. Peg O'Connor is a recovering alcoholic who maintains that philosophy got and helped her to stay sober. For the last twelve years, she has shifted the focus of her work to using some of the great canonical thinkers in western philosophy to illuminate dimensions of addiction. She understands addiction as a meaning of life problem and no discipline is as well suited as philosophy to address meaning of life questions.   Peg O'Conner's Website: https://pegoconnorauthor.com/ Amazon: Higher and Friendly Powers   Viv, aka Sober_iThrive, is a Certified Addictions Recovery Coach  https://www.soberithrive.org My communities are:   • Sobertownpodcast.com   • I Am Sober Community (IAS) - @Sober_iThrive  • Sobertown Facebook Group   • “Valiants We Thrive” – Sober Women Telegram Group  • Instagram: @Sober_i_Thrive    No Sippy No Slippy. Not Another Drop No matter What.   Remember to Pour The Poison Down The Sink!!      Sobertownpodcast.com    

By now you've probably heard about the new chatbot called ChatGPT. There's no question it's something of a marvel. It distills complex information into clear prose; it offers instructions and suggestions; it reasons its way through problems. With the right prompting, it can even mimic famous writers. And it does all this with an air of cool competence, of intelligence. But, if you're like me, you've probably also been wondering: What's really going on here? What are ChatGPT—and other large language models like it—actually doing? How much of their apparent competence is just smoke and mirrors? In what sense, if any, do they have human-like capacities? My guest today is Dr. Murray Shanahan. Murray is Professor of Cognitive Robotics at Imperial College London and Senior Research Scientist at DeepMind. He's the author of numerous articles and several books at the lively intersections of artificial intelligence, neuroscience, and philosophy. Very recently, Murray put out a paper titled 'Talking about Large Language Models', and it's the focus of our conversation today. In the paper, Murray argues that—tempting as may be—it's not appropriate to talk about large language models in anthropomorphic terms. Not yet, anyway. Here, we chat about the rapid rise of large language models and the basics of how they work. We discuss how a model that—at its base—simply does “next-word prediction" can be engineered into a savvy chatbot like ChatGPT. We talk about why ChatGPT lacks genuine “knowledge” and “understanding”—at least as we currently use those terms. And we discuss what it might take for these models to eventually possess richer, more human-like capacities. Along the way, we touch on: emergence, prompt engineering, embodiment and grounding, image generation models, Wittgenstein, the intentional stance, soft robots, and "exotic mind-like entities." Before we get to it, just a friendly reminder: applications are now open for the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (or DISI). DISI will be held this June/July in St Andrews Scotland—the program consists of three weeks of intense interdisciplinary engagement with exactly the kinds of ideas and questions we like to wrestle with here on this show. If you're intrigued—and I hope you are!—check out disi.org for more info. Alright friends, on to my decidedly human chat, with Dr. Murray Shanahan. Enjoy!   The paper we discuss is here. A transcript of this episode will be available soon.   Notes and links 6:30 – The 2017 “breakthrough” article by Vaswani and colleagues. 8:00 – A popular article about GPT-3. 10:00 – A popular article about some of the impressive—and not so impressive—behaviors of ChatGPT. For more discussion of ChatGPT and other large language models, see another interview with Dr. Shanahan, as well as interviews with Emily Bender and Margaret Mitchell, with Gary Marcus, and with Sam Altman (CEO of OpenAI, which created ChatGPT). 14:00 – A widely discussed paper by Emily Bender and colleagues on the “dangers of stochastic parrots.” 19:00 – A blog post about “prompt engineering”. Another blog post about the concept of Reinforcement Learning through Human Feedback, in the context of ChatGPT. 30:00 – One of Dr. Shanahan's books is titled, Embodiment and the Inner Life. 39:00 – An example of a robotic agent, SayCan, which is connected to a language model. 40:30 – On the notion of embodiment in the cognitive sciences, see the classic book by Francisco Varela and colleagues, The Embodied Mind. 44:00 – For a detailed primer on the philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein, see here. 45:00 – See Dr. Shanahan's general audience essay on “conscious exotica" and the space of possible minds. 49:00 – See Dennett's book, The Intentional Stance.   Dr. Shanahan recommends: Artificial Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans, by Melanie Mitchell (see also our earlier episode with Dr. Mitchell) ‘Abstraction for Deep Reinforcement Learning', by M. Shanahan and M. Mitchell   You can read more about Murray's work on his website and follow him on Twitter.   Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute (DISI) (https://disi.org), which is made possible by a generous grant from the Templeton World Charity Foundation to UCLA. It is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd (https://www.mayhilldesigns.co.uk/). Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala (https://sarahdopierala.wordpress.com/). You can subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you like to listen to podcasts. **You can now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here!** We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com. For updates about the show, visit our website (https://disi.org/manyminds/), or follow us on Twitter: @ManyMindsPod.

Discussing the notes Ludwig Wittgenstein made at the end of his life in 1951 that were published as On Certainty in 1969. Can we coherently doubt propositions like "physical objects exist," "the world is more than 50 years old," and "this is my hand"? Wittgenstein looks at these questions via his framework of language games. Is doubting one of these a legitimate move in a game? Get more at partiallyexaminedlife.com. Visit partiallyexaminedlife.com/support to get ad-free episodes and tons of bonus discussion. Check out the Overthink podcast and Conversations with Coleman. Attend our live show in NYC on April 15.

Ludwig Wittgenstein: Vida e obra; O homem: De inventor a filósofo --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/pedro-mendes-ju00fanior/message

durée : 00:58:06 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann - Et si Ludwig Wittgenstein réapparaissait 70 ans après sa mort pour tout engloutir sur son passage ? Et si Walter Benjamin se trouvait au cœur d'une enquête sur un manuscrit introuvable ? Tel est le destin de ces philosophes lorsqu'ils deviennent des personnages de fiction. - invités : Aurélien Bellanger Écrivain; Théo Bourgeron sociologue; Emmanuelle Collas directrice des éditions Emmanuelle Collas

Hello Interactors,Happy 2023! Today we launch into a season on topics related to human behavior. So much of how we interact with people and place comes down to language. It shapes how we communicate with one another, but how much does language shape our behavior? And if one language dominates, how much does that domination shape our global society?  As interactors, you're special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You're also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let's go…DO YOU SPEAK ENGLISH?Last week I caught up with a friend of mine who left Microsoft soon after I did. He was a technology executive and is now pursuing a degree at Cambridge on ethics in artificial intelligence (AI). His coursework is very different from his engineering past and Taiwanese education. Fewer numbers, more words. He is reading multiple philosophy papers a week, sometimes 30 pages long. He must then write his own analytical essays. Predictably, these papers he is reading are written in English – his second language.It can be challenging enough to read philosophy in a native language. When he encounters a word, he doesn't understand, he often consults his Chinese dictionary to better understand the concept. But then when he compares that definition to the English dictionary definition, the meaning is sometimes different. The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein once wrote, “Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language.”For my bi-lingual friend for whom English is his second language, it seems the language is the battle against intelligence by means of the bewitchment of philosophy.This is an increasingly common phenomenon around the world as English is the dominant language of higher education. An estimated one in six people on this planet speak some form of English. While seemingly small, it is the largest population to speak a common language in the history of our species. Still, with over 7000 different languages spoken around the world language diversity dominates.In the United States 80% of households speak English only at home. Those homes are likely to remain monolinguistic. But as immigrant populations in America grow and Indigenous languages resurface the number of bilingual or multilingual households is expected to increase. When the first wave of immigrants came to America in the late 1800s, many children were encouraged to drop their native language in favor of English. My American born Italian father-in-law was discouraged to speak Italian and thus never learned it. Meanwhile, the cost of learning English was too great for his mother, so she was discouraged to learn English. They never shared a richly common language.Even though the United States has never declared English the official language, it is often assumed. As a result, there exists not only a monolingual bias, but an English bias. Given the last two global trotting colonizing superpowers have English as the dominant language, it follows the English language dominates. As a result, schools, including higher education replete with international bilingual diversity, is also dominated by the English language and all that comes with it. That includes the branches of the field of cognitive science intent on understanding how language affects how the brain works.It was my father-in-law's strict dad that insisted he speak English only. His attitude was ‘you're an American, so you're speaking English.' It was common for immigrant parents during these times to attempt to erase their past in hopes of appearing more ‘American'. But this attitude may have been buoyed by a long-held belief there exists a cognitive cost of switching between two or more languages. A belief that was surely substantiated by the high cost of learning a second language proficiently. It seems advantageous to just pick one and stick with it. And for many of those early immigrant children in America, that choice would have been English.But I'm reminded of another friend who grew up in Malaysia learning English and Malay while speaking her native cultural language and English at home. Malaysia's population is a blend of Malay, Chinese, and Indian descendants, and the informal language, Manglish, blends words from English, Chinese, and Tamil. She is so comfortable jumping between these languages that when she and her sister talk, they sometimes use words from multiple languages in a single sentence. For her, there is no cognitive cost in switching. In fact, she may even benefit from using many languages at once.YES, UH-HA, I AGREESome research in cognitive science points to a ‘bilingual advantage'. Multi-lingual speakers showed a greater “ability to plan, focus, and execute a wide array of tasks' compared to single language speakers and the effect was pronounced among older adults. As a result, replicated studies show performance varies greatly depending on the task, age, language experience, and frequency of switching languages. Still, as cognitive research increases in parts of the world where bilingualism is more common, more is sure to be learned.The bulk of knowledge in cognitive science comes from studying WEIRD people. They are predominantly White, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic. The ‘E' could just as well stand for ‘English-speaking'. The discipline is dominated by English-speaking researchers, studying a sliver of the English-speaking population, writing papers in English, and in countries that that are culturally Anglocentric. This flaw has been recognized for nearly a decade. But increasingly more research uses diverse sample populations, in more diverse locations, and is conducted by less Anglocentric researchers who use English as a second language.In 2022, a group of scholars published a paper investigating how over-reliance on English may hinder cognitive science. It included a chart that illustrates a sampling of differences emerging from these more diverse studies. It shows how aspects of the written and spoken English language differ culturally, linguistically, and cognitively from certain other languages. For example, English speakers tend to frequently rely on words of gratitude to maintain healthy social relations. One study revealed English speakers were four times more likely to say ‘thank you' than other languages. A language in Ecuador, Cha'palaa, doesn't even have a word for ‘thank you'. Even ‘please' is avoided without conflict. Thirsty? ‘Give me water' is sufficient and considered polite.Conversely, languages other than English tend to use words more frequently that promote and sustain social cohesion. One of the more extreme versions of this is Japanese where attention to social behavior is more closely monitored by all members of society. During conversation, the person whose ‘turn' it is to speak is listening and looking for short affirmative confirmation, like ‘yes', ‘uh-huh', or head nods without losing their ‘turn'. Meanwhile the listener is listening and watching for breaks in phrasing to offer forms of affirmative confirmation. Linguists call this ‘back-channeling' and can be found in cultures rich in social cohesion. Perhaps the English language and the American egocentric culture isn't helping to heal our societal divisions.The ordering of words in Japanese versus English has cognitive implications too. All languages have a linguistic ‘head' that determines certain properties of a phrase. The Japanese language puts the head at the end of a phrase while English puts it at the beginning. This has implications for differences in working memory between Japanese and English speakers. When recalling a sequence of figures, like numbers, objects, plants, or animals, Japanese speakers have higher precision on the last item in the list and English speakers the first.Cognitive differences in ordering arrangements can extend beyond listed figures to spatial reasoning. For example, English speakers use their own relational viewpoint as a frame of reference when describing spatial locations, like ‘left' or ‘right'. In contrast, certain native languages in Australia and Namibia use cardinal directions like ‘west' or ‘east'. These differences in linguistic encoding are shown to influence learning of spatial configurations, search and find tasks, and tracking moving objects. Again, the apparent egocentrism of English speakers is seemingly creeping into even how we see ourselves in the world.  ADVERSITY TO DIVERSITYThe 'left-right' bias shows up not only in space, but also time. English speakers typically think of a timeline as going from left to right. This ‘left-to-right' bias can be attributed to many factors, including the ordering of words in a sentence or a math equation. Solving a math problem or writing a sentence in English involves ‘starting' on the left and over time ‘ending' up on the right. Those taught to read and write or do math in English or similar languages thus have a linguistic coding in the brain that associates the past with the ‘left' and the future with the ‘right'. But those who have not been exposed to these encodings have no such associations. And given there are 7000 languages spoken in the world, that accounts for a lot of humans. As more humans gain access to the internet, more and more of these languages and cultures will be exposed to the 1.2 billion internet users speaking English. The fastest growing languages online are Chinese (0.9 billion), Spanish (0.4 billion), and Arabic (0.2 billion). More people in America speak Spanish than all of Spain.Given this growing linguistic diversity, these researchers conclude cognitive science is not doing nearly enough “to live up to its original mission of developing an interdisciplinary exploration of ‘the mind'”. They say English language dominance may be the field's “original sin” and call for a commitment “to research that seeks to systematically explore, generalize, and falsify our models of human cognition by exploring non-English-speaking peoples and societies.”As we enter a new year, English speaking students, like my continuing adult education friend, will be returning to classes and campuses dominated by the English language. Others will be drawing that timeline planning the next quarter. Many spent this holiday season exchanging in culturally supported niceties perpetuated by language. Santa only delivered the presents if the child had been saying ‘please' and ‘thank you' all year. We will spend the next year looking to do the same as we all struggle to keep those new year's resolutions.The words ‘spent' and ‘spend' bring up another peculiarity of English – tenses. It turns out those living in countries using languages that don't have an obligatory future tense like English may be better at keeping their resolutions. They tend to smoke less, practice safer sex, and are less obese. And, hey, tax time is also just around the corner in the United States. It turns out those not obliged to use future tense in their language also save more.But these researchers admit these studies deserve scrutiny. There is much debate about how culture and history shape language and how language shapes culture and history. Teasing out language from cognition and culture will continue to confound scholars, researchers, and practitioners. However, advances in neuroscience and brain imaging together with increased diversity of research subjects, locations, and researchers are sure to yield more practicable results. These tools didn't exist at the onset of the study of language.In 1863, the linguist Wilhelm von Humboldt, and brother of the more famous naturalist Alexander von Humboldt, wrote three volumes on comparative linguistics after studying the Kawi language of Java. He noted then there “resides in every language a characteristic worldview.” One day we may be able to discern just what elements of worldview cognition are common to all human brains – and the brains of other animals – regardless of language and culture.Until then, this is all that is left to write for today. In English. While my sentences have flowed from left to right, the beginning is at the top and the end is here at the bottom. I wish to ‘thank you' for reading or listening and invite you to ‘please' click ‘like' or leave a nice comment. If you feel so obliged. It's been my ‘turn' to speak, now it's yours. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

The power of words, right? The language that we use affects our reality. Ludwig Wittgenstein worded it perfectly when he said “The limits of my language means the limits of my world.” In what ways are you holding yourself back by the language you are speaking into existence?" Email: LivingInTheQuestionPodcast@gmail.com Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/livinginthequestionpod/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC6fykBbf9CuGeFIuHM6hQcQ Intro/Outro Music: Burning In My Soul by Luke Bergs

Peg O'Connor, Ph.D., is a Professor of Philosophy at Gustavus Adolphus College in St. Peter, Minnesota. Her training is in moral philosophy, feminist philosophy, addiction studies, and the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. She believes that philosophy helped her to get and remain sober. Avoiding Alcoholics Anonymous (AA) for the first 20 years of her sobriety because of the concept of a “higher power,” she is focused on using some of the great canonical thinkers in western philosophy to illuminate dimensions of addiction.  She further shares this in her new book, Higher and Friendly Powers: Transforming Addiction and Suffering. Dr. Peg O'Connor is a recovering alcoholic who maintains that Philosophy got and helped her to stay sober. For the last twelve years, she has shifted the focus of her work to using some of the great canonical thinkers in western Philosophy to illuminate dimensions of addiction. She understands addiction as a meaning of life problem and no discipline is as well suited as Philosophy to address meaning of life questions. In Higher and Friendly Powers, Dr. O'Connor addresses an audience much like herself: those in recovery who have struggled with the Christian-centric God at the heart of AA. She brings our attention to a little-known fact: the term “higher power,” a touchstone in the twelve steps of AA, was coined by William James, philosopher, psychologist, and intellectual giant of the early 20th century. Find Dr. O'Conner at http://pegoconnorauthor.com Video Clips of this episode: https://www.youtube.com/c/unlatchedmind

You have a story. And, your story holds power. Once you unlock the truth written in your story, you could unlock yourself from cycles of bad habits, bad relationships, and more. If this idea feels overwhelming, listen in as we take the process one line at a time, one chapter at a time. So, what is your story? Grab a pen and paper. Take a deep breath.And, let's begin.Highlights:“One of the bravest things we can do is tell our stories, own our stories and love ourselves through it.” - Brené BrownEmotionally, spiritually, it's really unhealthy for us to be living disconnected from what's true and real about our past and our present.One of the beautiful things that happens in those places that God reveals to us is they become strengths.  When God gets involved with what wounded us and hurt us, He begins to heal us. He also makes it a strength that we can pay forward and impart to others.  That's such a beautiful thing He does.“The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.” – Ludwig Wittgenstein, PhilosopherWhen you consider spiritual coaching,  journaling, or a conversation with a friend, your words feel limited; what a gift to be able to sit with somebody who might have another word to offer you to add to your story, or to build on it or unpack it a little bit more. And to ask good questions. Questions that give you freedom to answer with more than just yes or no, that encourage you to be curious and encourage you to feel safe being curious.When you get in touch with loving that younger self, you have a current, present love for yourself too.Powerful Principle: What we fill our minds with creates our thoughts, our thoughts create our feelings and our feelings determine our behavior. Story Work Ideas for You:Ask God to be with you as you reflect on things that you believe about your story.What are some things that you might believe that are not true about yourself?Think back on being a little child, things that happened that you might have adapted a belief about.You might even believe you have a bad story or no story.You might believe that you're not acceptable if you don't always get things right or that you're not lovable if you don't please people all the time.Just ask God,“What am I believing?”“God, what is true?”Take some deep breaths and listen.Take time to write down a couple of things that God wants you to know are true.Work with a small, close circle of friends in this exercise.Begin to write out what feels logical, significant seasons of your life by age? By schoolRemember Key events, memories, peopleThen tell your friends and listen to their stories. Use the microphone in your Notes app and record yourself telling a story or memory. Play it back and listen for what you needed, for what you believe to be true about yourself because of that reflection.Help the showSupport the showAsk a question by emailing usLeave a reviewSubscribe wherever you get your podcastsFollow us on YouTube for behind the scenes and more

Dr. Peg O'Connor, Professor of Philosophy and Gender, Women, and Sexuality Studies at Gustavus, talks about teaching amid the COVID-19 pandemic, her background and fascination with the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein and his thought, what it means to be a philosopher, her alcoholism and sobriety, bringing philosophy to bear on addiction and recovery, William James and the history of Alcoholics Anonymous, and why the liberal arts education offered at Gustavus matters.

Paolo Pagani"Citofonare Hegel"I filosofi del passato rispondono alle grandi domande del presenteRizzoli Editorehttps://www.rizzolilibri.it/La filosofia, secondo Ludwig Wittgenstein, serve a «far uscire la mosca dalla bottiglia». Ovvero a risolvere problemi e a liberare la mente dagli errori. Non è, quindi, una dottrina astratta, ma piuttosto un'attività pratica che getta chiarezza in ogni ambito della vita, privata e pubblica.Partendo da questa idea, Paolo Pagani, filosofo di formazione da sempre appassionato alla materia, ci propone in questo libro un esperimento originale: rivolge a 19 grandi filosofi del passato, da Socrate a Heidegger, le domande più scottanti del nostro tempo. Dalla guerra al gender, dai vaccini alle fake news alla dignità del lavoro, il pensiero scaturito da menti come Hegel, Spinoza, Husserl o Nietzsche può illuminarci anche oggi o, per lo meno, nutrire il ragionamento e sollevare dubbi fecondi. Perché le loro riflessioni universali – quali sono i limiti della ragione? la Natura è “buona”? ci si può fidare dei sensi?... – si adattano perfettamente all'epoca che stiamo vivendo, e a contesti solo in apparenza diversi.Guest stars del volume sono 1 scrittore (Tolstoj) e 7 personaggi letterari, ciascuno emblematico di un tema, come Gulliver che rappresenta la diversità, Fantozzi il lavoro offeso, o Don Chisciotte la vita inautentica. Citofonare Hegel accompagna il lettore in quell'esercizio pratico che è la filosofia, capace di aprire mondi e ribaltare l'ovvio, mentre stiamo comodamente seduti in poltrona, sorseggiando una tazza di tè. Un'attività entusiasmante, provare per credere.A questo libro si affianca il podcast originale Spotify, una produzione Spotify Studios in collaborazione con Chora Media.Paolo Pagani, boomer nato a Milano, ha studiato filosofia con Mario Dal Pra all'Università degli Studi di Milano nei primi anni '80 del Novecento. Giornalista professionista, ha lavorato per qualche decennio nei periodici, nei quotidiani e in televisione come inviato e, da caporedattore, ha lanciato startup digitali e ha guidato redazioni web. Con Neri Pozza ha pubblicato I luoghi del pensiero (2019) e Nietzsche on the road (2021).IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEAscoltare fa Pensarehttps://ilpostodelleparole.it/

Sean Illing talks with Jonathan Lear, a psychoanalyst and philosopher, about his new book Imagining the End: Mourning and Ethical Life. How can we continue to live a good life in a world beset by catastrophe, crisis, and chaos? Sean and Jonathan discuss the role of imagination and culture in the ways we make meaning in the world, the idea of mourning as a confrontation with our uniquely human ability to love, and how to turn away from the path of despair, towards hope — and to what Lear calls "committed living towards the future." Host: Sean Illing (@seanilling), host, The Gray Area Guest: Jonathan Lear, author; professor, Committee on Social Thought & Dept. of Philosophy, University of Chicago References:  Imagining the End: Mourning and Ethical Life by Jonathan Lear (Harvard; Nov. 15, 2022) Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics Søren Kierkegaard, The Sickness unto Death (1849; published under the pseudonym Anti-Climacus) Sigmund Freud, Mourning and Melancholia (1917) "The Difficulty of Reality and the Difficulty of Philosophy" by Cora Diamond (2003) Radical Hope: Ethics in the Face of Cultural Devastation by Jonathan Lear (Harvard; 2008) "Envy and Gratitude" by Melanie Klein (1957; published in The Writings of Melanie Klein, Volume III, Hogarth Press; 1975) "A Lecture on Ethics" by Ludwig Wittgenstein (lecture notes from 1929-1930, published in The Philosophical Review v. 74 no. 1, 1965)   Enjoyed this episode? Rate The Gray Area ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ and leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Subscribe for free. Be the first to hear the next episode of The Gray Area. Subscribe in your favorite podcast app. Support Vox Conversations by making a financial contribution to Vox! bit.ly/givepodcasts This episode was made by:  Producer: Erikk Geannikis Editor: Amy Drozdowska Engineer: Patrick Boyd Editorial Director, Vox Talk: A.M. Hall Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Our selves are nebulous, the world is complex and the times they are a-changin'. Pratap Bhanu Mehta joins Amit Varma in episode 300 of The Seen and the Unseen for a freewheeling chat about how to make sense of all of this.  (For full linked show notes, go to SeenUnseen.in.) Also check out: 1. The Hunter Becomes the Hunted -- Episode 200 of The Seen and the Unseen, where Amit Varma answers questions from his guests. 2. Pratap Bhanu Mehta on Twitter, Amazon and the Indian Express. 3. What Have We Done With Our Independence? -- Episode 186 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Pratap Bhanu Mehta). 4. Self-Esteem (and a Puddle) — Amit Varma's post with Douglas Adams's puddle quote. 5. The End of History? — Francis Fukuyama's essay. 6. The End of History and the Last Man — Francis Fukuyama's book. 7. Francis Fukuyama on Amazon. 8. Ideas of India: The Theory of Moral Sentiments -- Pratap Bhanu Mehta discusses Adam Smith with Shruti Rajagopalan. 9. Conversation and Society -- Russ Roberts discusses Adam Smith with Amit Varma in episode 182 of The Seen and the Unseen. 10. Human — Michael S Gazzaniga. 11. The Interpreter — Amit Varma. 12. Free Will on Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 13. Free Will — Sam Harris. 14. Immanuel Kant on Amazon, Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 15. The Median Voter Theorem. 16. 'Thinking and Reflecting' and 'The Thinking of Thoughts': Gilbert Ryle's essays on 'thick description' and Winks vs Twitches, also found in Collected Essays. 17. Thick Description: Towards an Interpretive Theory of Culture -- Clifford Geertz. 18. Fighting Fake News -- Episode 133 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Pratik Sinha). 19. The Greater India Experiment: Hindutva and the Northeast -- Arkotong Longkumer. 20. Memories and Things -- Episode 195 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Aanchal Malhotra). 21. Remnants of a Separation — Aanchal Malhotra. 22. Don't think too much of yourself. You're an accident -- Amit Varma's column on Chris Cornell's death. 23. Alice Evans Studies the Great Gender Divergence -- Episode 297 of The Seen and the Unseen. 24. Scientism. 25. Ludwig Wittgenstein on Amazon, Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 26. Wanting — Luke Burgis. 27. René Girard on Amazon and Wikipedia. 28. Jean-Jacques Rousseau on Amazon, Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 29. A Meditation on Form -- Amit Varma. 30. Agarkar's Donkeys: A Meditation on God -- Amit Varma. 31. Faust, as portrayed by Christopher Marlowe and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. 32. The Measure of a Man -- Episode 9, Season 2, Star Trek: The Next Generation (Wikipedia entry). 33. Ex Machina -- Alex Garland. 34. Reality+: Virtual Worlds and the Problems of Philosophy -- David Chalmers. 35. Yoga Vasistha. 36. On a Certain Blindness in Human Beings -- William James. 37. Capitalism and Freedom -- Milton Friedman. 38. The Experience Machine -- Robert Nozick. (Wikipedia entry.) 39. Utilitarianism: For and Against -- JJC Smart and Bernard Williams. 40. Reasons and Persons -- Derek Parfit. 41. Episode of The Seen and the Unseen with Ajay Shah: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. 42. Ethics and the Limits of Philosophy -- Bernard Williams. 43. Bernard Williams on Amazon, Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 44. India's Greatest Civil Servant -- Episode 167 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Narayani Basu, on VP Menon). 45. A Life in Indian Politics -- Episode 149 of The Seen and the Unseen (w Jayaprakash Narayan). 46. Friedrich Hayek on Amazon, Econlib, Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 47. The Dark Side of Democracy -- Michael Mann. 48. Jayaprakash Narayan on proportional representation. 49. Pakistan or the Partition of India — BR Ambedkar. 50. Don't Insult Pasta (2007) — Amit Varma. 51. Manish Sisodia invokes ‘Rajput' caste amidst CBI probe -- Janta Ka Reporter. 52. Caste, Capitalism and Chandra Bhan Prasad -- Episode 296 of The Seen and the Unseen. 53. Defying the Odds: The Rise of Dalit Entrepreneurs — Devesh Kapur, D Shyam Babu and Chandra Bhan Prasad. 54. Beware of Half Victories -- Pratap Bhanu Mehta. 55. Hussain Haidry, Hindustani Musalmaan -- Episode 275 of The Seen and the Unseen. 56. Carl Schmitt on Amazon, Wikipedia, Britannica and Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 57. Raghu Sanjaylal Jaitley's Father's Scooter -- Episode 214 of The Seen and the Unseen. 58. Justin Amash on why he left the Republican Party. 59. Kashi Ka Assi — Kashinath Singh. 60. Rational Ignorance. 61. The Economics of Voting — Amit Varma on Rational Ignorance. 62. Karthik Muralidharan Examines the Indian State -- Episode 290 of The Seen and the Unseen. 63. Lessons from an Ankhon Dekhi Prime Minister -- Amit Varma on the importance of reading.   64. John Aubrey's biography of Thomas Hobbes. 65. Ludwig van Beethoven, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, George Frideric Handel and Felix Mendelssohn on Spotify. 66. Digital Concert Hall -- Berliner Philharmoniker. 67. Berliner Philharmoniker on YouTube, Twitter and their own website. 68. Nikhil Banerjee on Spotify, YouTube and Wikipedia. 69. Wolf Hall, Bring Up the Bodies and The Mirror and the Light -- The Wolf Hall Trilogy by Hilary Mantel. 70. The World of Premchand: Selected Short Stories — Munshi Premchand (translated and with an introduction by David Rubin). 71. Premchand's Kazaki And Other Marvellous Tales — Munshi Premchand (translated and with an introduction by Sara Rai). 72. Sara Rai Inhales Literature -- Episode 255 of The Seen and the Unseen. 73. Yeh Premchand Hai -- Apoorvanand. This episode is sponsored by CTQ Compounds. Check out The Daily Reader and FutureStack. Use the code UNSEEN for Rs 2500 off. Check out Amit's online course, The Art of Clear Writing. And subscribe to The India Uncut Newsletter. It's free! Episode art: ‘Radiant Knowledge' by Simahina.

"The limits of my language mean the limits of my world." -Ludwig Wittgenstein. Join the author conversation in Ink Authors: https://www.facebook.com/groups/inkauthors/ Learn more about YDWH and catch up on old episodes: www.yourdailywritinghabit.com Learn more about me, “Christine Ink,” and how I support authors: https://christine-ink.com/ 5 Things To Know Before Hiring a Book Coach: https://christine-ink.com/book-coaching-2/

As you may have been hearing on recent podcasts, I've been training in solution focused therapy / coaching recently. I've been finding it pretty transformational, both for me personally but I've also found it really useful in work too. It's a very postmodern practice, in that it just works. In the training that I've attended the trainers have been disinterested in the theory, or why it works. Their response is that it does, and here's how we do it. That's good enough for me, I really enjoyed getting cracking with it and trying it out on lots of my loved ones before doing coaching with paying clients. However, I have a podcast to run and I need that content baby! So what is the deal with solution focused therapy and what's the theory behind it? [for the full blog post that I read out here head over to the Patreon where I've unlocked it https://www.patreon.com/posts/70372857 ] If you're interested in booking a session with me (Patrons get 10% discount) check out the coaching page at justinhancock.co.uk If you want to have a session with someone who isn't me, I can recommend Biba (who I've had some sessions with too). She's great https://ribalon.org/ If you're interested in getting some training yourself, I'd recommend the courses at Brief, which is where I've been training. https://www.brief.org.uk/ To help with this I've been reading How to Read Wittgenstein by Ray Monk and Ludwig Wittgenstein by Edward Kanterian (part of the Critical Lives series). This article by Steve de Shazer is really interesting (and helpful) https://www.sdstate.edu/sites/default/files/2018-06/dont_think_but_observe.pdf The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy came up trumps again with their excellent entry (such an amazing resource) https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wittgenstein/ The Wikipedia page for solution focused therapy is packed with links to the evidence for how effective it is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solution-focused_brief_therapy If you want to understand what I meant by postmodern check out this podcast by Jeremy Gilbert (when Liz Truss was having a go at postmodernism, obviously she didn't understand what that meant)

Out of this paradoxical mish-mash of empire, Fascism, Catholicism, tradition, and modernity stepped a big dose of genius. Men who became giants in their fields, ranging from music to economics to psychoanalysis, many of whom fled Fascism to settle in western Europe or the United States. A partial list: Carl Menger, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Rudolph Carnap, Sigmund Freud, Martin Buber, Karl Popper, Viktor Frankl, Arnold Schoenberg, Ludwig von Mises, F.A. Hayek.And Eric Voegelin.Voegelin is possibly the least known but possibly the greatest among them. He was poor at self-promotion, his prose was difficult, and his ideas were nearly impossible to appreciate. To compound the problem, he refused to “write down” to make his prose more accessible, insisting the reader make the required effort to understand the problem that was modernity, and then he compounded the problem even more by using neologisms that no one understood. Voegelin biographies spend a lot of time defining words, some even including a separate glossary at the end.But I suspect the real reason Voegelin never really caught on like, say, Freud or von Mises: He simply didn't resonate. Luther wouldn't have resonated in the 11thcentury; Nietzsche would have lived with the wolves in the 8th.Voegelin, with the analytic precision of a mathematician, tried to explain how transcendence plays into earthly politics. It wasn't a song that played well in the exuberant and optimistic days of post-WWII America, which cared for such things about as much as Stalin cared about the Pope's legions.On top of that, I believe Voegelin set himself an impossible task. The Tao can't be explained in mathematical terms. But he was also correct: The Tao can't be ignored, whether currently or in historical explanations.Show notes here

313: People who “yes-butt” you. People who resist exposure. Does God exist? Does the “self” exist? How to you justify Ellis?  "Should" we care about Putin's war on Ukraine? " 1. Rhonda asks: How can you respond to someone who yes-butts you? 2. Thomas asks: Do we have a self? Does God exist? 3. Thomas also asks: Ellis said we should upset ourselves over someone else's problems, but how about Putin, and Russia? Note: The answers below were generated prior to the podcast, and the information provided on the live podcast may be richer and different in a number of ways. 1. Rhonda asks: How can you respond to someone who yes-butts you? David's Reply Thanks, Rhonda. We can demonstrate this with Matt on the podcast recording later today! Matt's Reply: The answer is to fall back to Empathy and try to see how we are creating the problem.  For example, when we are giving advice, we may have fallen into a trap, in which we are getting ahead of their resistance and would want to get behind it. As often happens, the question, and its answer, went in an unexpected direction. Rhonda, like many therapists, noticed that one of her social anxiety patients was subtly resisting exposure—facing her fears. Matt and Rhonda model how to respond to patients who keep putting off the exposure. This answer illustrates how therapists and the general public alike can improve your use of the Five Secrets of Effective Communication (LINK) with the use of “Deliberate Practice,” with role reversals and immediate feedback on your technique. Rhonda starts with a low grade, and then rapidly achieves an A grade! Click here for the Five Secrets of Effective Communication 2. Thomas asks: Do we have a self? Does God exist? Thank you for giving me your time and attention. I appreciate it, even if we don't agree. I have talked about whether or not God and the self exist. David Hume made the argument about not having a self, only perception. Of course, questions arise if we don't have a “self.” Thomas Thomas also comments on Nathaniel Brandon: Why do we use the words who? Him? Her? He she they.?? I certainly don't believe Nathaniel Brandon's horseshit. He talks about a teenage self, a father self, and a child self And all that is just horseshit. But do we have any self? David's response: Hi Thomas, Thanks for your question! You ask, “But do we have any self?” You ask about God, too. People have been asking for my chapter on the “Death of the Self,” and my efforts to debunk the idea of a “self.” I have not had the time and motivation to bring that chapter back to life, since it is so hard for people to “get” what I've been trying to say, which is exactly what Wittgenstein and the Buddha were trying to say. But I will try to share one idea with you, in the hopes that it might make sense. As I have previously suggested, these questions about some “self” or “God” have no meaning. For example, how about this question: ‘What would it look like if someone had no ‘self?' What, exactly, are we talking about? I know what this question means: “So you think Henry is too high on himself.” This means that we think some person named Henry is arrogant or narcissistic, something like that, and we want to know if someone agrees with us. I understand this question, it makes sense. There is a distinct difference between people who are quite humble and folks who are overly impressed with themselves. So, we are talking and using words in a way that has meaning and makes sense. However, I cannot answer the following question because it does not make any sense to me: “Does Henry have a ‘self'?” So, this question, to me, is language that is out of gear, like a car in neutral gear. No matter how hard you press on the accelerator, it will not move forward or backward. If you cannot “see” or “grasp” the difference between my examples of a meaningful question and a nonsensical non-question, that's okay. In my experience, few people can grasp or “get” this. But to me, the difference is quite obvious. Is it okay if I use your email as a somewhat edited “Ask David?” I can change your name if you prefer. I don't think people will “get” my answer, but hope springs eternal! David Matt's Response Many brilliant minds have addressed this question in more eloquent and thorough ways than I could, including the Stanford-trained neurologist and philosopher, Sam Harris, in his book, ‘Free Will' and Jay Garfield in his book, ‘Losing Ourselves' There's very little I can say, about this topic, that hasn't been said more eloquently by individuals like these and many others. Meanwhile, I'm glad that this question has arisen on the podcast because I see clinical utility in the implications of this question, including in the treatment of depression, anxiety, anger, narcissistic pride and relationship problems. For example, I might be thinking, ‘I'm so mad at my (bad) self for eating all those cookies'.  Or, I'm so proud of myself for making a million dollars'.  I might start to think I deserve more, because of my special self and feel superior and angry, ‘that persons (bad self) shouldn't have cut me off in traffic!'. When we take the ‘self' out of the equation, we realize that these thoughts don't make sense.  If our brains are just following the laws of physics, without any self, jumping in there to influence the process, then we couldn't have done differently, with the brains we had, and neither could anyone else. Hence, the idea that people have ‘selves', which can be good or bad, make decisions and the like, is a setup for suffering.  In the cookie example, I would have to train my brain, through practice with therapy methods, to develop a different set of habits, rewiring of my brain, to reach for a salad rather than a cookie.  I can't simply insist that my ‘self' rewire my brain for me.  I'd have to practice and do my TEAM therapy homework! Anger and Narcissism are some of the hardest-to-defeat problems.  However, realizing other people are simply doing what their brains are programmed to do, takes away the anger and blame.  Just like we wouldn't hold a grudge for years against a wild animal that bit us, we could also forgive and accept a person who bit us.   and we can't feel unnecessarily superior or proud of our ‘self' if we accomplish something wonderful, because we don't' have a ‘self' that did those things, just a brain and the right environment, neither of which we can take credit for. This approach is called ‘reattribution' in TEAM, which is useful for defeating ‘self-blame' and ‘other (self) blame'. Here are some other methods to leverage the no-self concept and free your mind of this hazardous way of thinking: 1. Experimental Technique:  Try to define what a ‘self' is.  Then conduct an experiment to see whether the self is capable of doing the things you think it can do.  For example, can your ‘self' stop understanding the words you are seeing on this page?  Or does your brain helplessly decipher the shapes of these letters into meaningful sounds and language?  Can your self exert its free will to decide to focus exclusively on one thing for one minute, like your breath or a point on the wall?    It can't.  If your self can't do such simple tasks, what can it do?  One can see meditation as a kind of ‘experiment' to see whether our ‘self' is calling the shots, using its free will, or if our brains are just doing what brains do. 2. Socratic Questioning: You can ask questions that can't be answered to show that the ‘self' is more like a ‘unicorn' than a cat.  For example, how big is the ‘self'?  What's it made of? Where is it located?  Can you see it on a MRI?  No radiologist has ever visualized a ‘self' and you probably realize you can't answer these questions, any more than you can, ‘what do Unicorns like to eat?', bringing us closer to understanding that it's probably a made up thing. 3. Examine the Evidence: What evidence is there that there's a Self?  What evidence is there that there is no self? On the latter side, Consider Occam's Razor, which suggests that the better hypothesis is the simpler one which still explains the observations.  One hypothesis is we have a brain generating consciousness.  Another hypothesis is that we have a brain that generates consciousness and a self that is having those experiences, operating the brain.  Based on Occam's Razor, the better hypothesis is the former, that we have a brain creating consciousness. 4. Outcome Resistance: People get scared off by the idea that there's no self or free will, that their brain is making decisions, without a self intervening.  In Christian Tradition, for example, Thomas Aquinas essentially invented the concept of ‘free will' so that God's punishment of Adam and Eve could be explained, morally. Otherwise, God would seem rather cruel, to create a system where he knew that would happen.  This is an example of how ‘free will' and the ‘self' are linked to blame and anger. Even if you don't believe in God, you might be concerned that the idea that there is no free will would mean that the criminal justice system would fall apart.  Criminals could say, ‘I had no choice'.  Talking back to these elements of ‘resistance' could help free one's mind. For example, without free will, it's true that blaming other people and retaliatory justice wouldn't make sense.  However, one could still enforce laws, only in a compassionate way, for the sake of protecting others making the same mistake.  A murderer, if they realized this, could mind meaning in fulfilling their sentence, realizing they were doing a service to humanity, rather than being punished for their bad self.  Instead of seeing other people as having ‘bad' selves, we can have a sense of sadness, connection and concern, even with a murderer, when carrying out justice, understanding that, ‘there but for the grace of God, go I'. David mentions, in passing, a mild red flag with the concept of "free will." He points out that this is another concept, like "God" or the "self," that has no meaning, if you really grasp what Ludwig Wittgenstein was trying to say in his classic book, Philosophical Investigations. One way to "see" this, although it is admittedly almost impossible to "see:" because it is so simple and obvious, would be to ask yourself, "What would it look like if we "had" something called "free will?" And what would it look like if we "didn't?" The question is NOT "do we have free will," but rather, "Does this concept have any meaning? Once you suddenly "see" that the answer is no, you will be liberated from many philosophical dilemmas. But as they say, enlightenment can be a lonely road! the Buddha, as well as Wittgenstein, ran into this problem that people could not "grasp" the simple and obvious things they were trying so hard to say! As humans, we get spellbound by the words we using, thinking that nouns, like "self," must refer to some "thing" that either exists or doesn't exist! To my way of thinking the question is NOT "Does god exist" or "do human have free will," but rather, do these questions make sense? Do they mean anything? The answer, to my way of thinking (DB), is no. However, . . . you might not "get" this! 3. Thomas also asks about Dr. Albert Ellis Hi David, Do you agree with Ellis that one is better off without making oneself upset over other people's problems? What about Putin and Russia and all the violence, another mass shooting, and trump running for president again? Ellis didn't think one should be disturbed about these things. Or at least upset. What do you think? David's reply Hi Thomas: Here's my take. Healthy and appropriate negative feelings exist! One SHOULD be upset by horrific war crimes. I suspect that if Beck and Ellis, were they still alive, they would both strongly agree, but of course, I cannot speak for them! Thanks for listening today! Matt, Rhonda, and David!

Dr. Peg O'Conner Ph.D is interviewed by Paul Krauss MA LPC about the addiction recovery community, the difficulties with the Christian-centric God that is a part of many Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, how to participate in recovery and understand the concept of a "higher power," etc. Dr. Peg also discusses her personal journey in recovery as well. Dr. Peg O'Conner's book Higher and Friendly Powers (Wildhouse Publications / September 1, 2022) is a comprehensive alternative for people who have had trouble with the "higher power" of AA's 12-step program. It delivers a feeling of human decency, moral principles, and even a better version of oneself. Peg O'Connor, PhD, speaks to those in recovery who have battled with the Christian-centered God at the center of Alcoholics Anonymous in Higher and Friendly Powers. She draws our attention to a little-known fact: William James, a philosopher, psychologist, and intellectual titan of the early 20th century, created the phrase "higher power," a touchstone in Alcoholics Anonymous' twelve steps. Peg O'Connor, Ph.D., is a Professor of Philosophy at Gustavus Adolphus College in St. Peter, Minnesota. Her training is in moral philosophy, feminist philosophy, addiction studies, and the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein. She believes that philosophy helped her to get and remain sober. Avoiding Alcoholics Anonymous for the first 20 years of her sobriety because of the concept of a “higher power,” she is focused on using some of the great canonical thinkers in western philosophy to illuminate dimensions of addiction.  She further shares this in her new book, Higher and Friendly Powers: Transforming Addiction and Suffering (Wildhouse Publications, 2022).   Preview an On-Demand Online Video Course for the Parents of Young Adults by Paul Krauss MA LPC   Want to get trained in EMDR Therapy? Looking for some great advanced EMDR therapy trainings? Check out EMDR Training Solutions and Register Today! Use the code INTENTIONAL at checkout, and get $100 Dollars OFF at Checkout! Paul Krauss MA LPC is the Clinical Director of Health for Life Counseling Grand Rapids, home of The Trauma-Informed Counseling Center of Grand Rapids. Paul is also a Private Practice Psychotherapist, an Approved EMDRIA Consultant , host of the Intentional Clinician podcast, Behavioral Health Consultant, Clinical Trainer, and Counseling Supervisor. Paul is now offering consulting for a few individuals and organizations. Paul is the creator of the National Violence Prevention Hotline (in progress) as well as the Intentional Clinician Training Program for Counselors. Paul has been quoted in the Washington Post, NBC News, and Wired Magazine. Questions? Call the office at 616-200-4433.  If you are looking for EMDRIA consulting groups, Paul Krauss MA LPC is now hosting weekly online and in-person groups.  For details, click here. For general behavioral and mental health consulting for you or your organization. Follow Health for Life Grand Rapids: Instagram   |   Facebook     |     Youtube    Original Music: ”Shades of Currency" [Instrumental] from Archetypes by PAWL (Spotify) "Taking Flight (feat. Brandee Younger)" from Resavoir by Resavoir (Spotify)  

O fi filosofia doar o încurcătură lingvistică sau totuși există adevăruri obiective și universale? Cum a fost influențată cinematografia de postmodernism și ce-a aflat Ludwig Wittgenstein pe câmpul de luptă în Primul Război Mondial? ▶LINKURI RELEVANTE: Video: https://youtu.be/S4jqZ0zi6vE Text: https://podcastmeditatii.com/blog/originea-postmodernismului ▶PODCAST INFO: Website: https://podcastmeditatii.com Newsletter: https://podcastmeditatii.com/aboneaza YouTube: https://youtube.com/c/meditatii Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/meditatii Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/meditatii/id1434369028 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/1tBwmTZQHKaoXkDQjOWihm RSS: https://feeds.soundcloud.com/users/soundcloud:users:373963613/sounds.rss ▶SUSȚINE-MĂ: – Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/meditatii – PayPal: https://paypal.me/meditatii ▶DISCORD: – Comunitatea: https://discord.gg/meditatii – Arhiva dialogurilor: https://www.patreon.com/meditatii/posts?filters%5Btag%5D=Discord ▶SOCIAL MEDIA: – Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/meditatii.podcast – Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/meditatii.podcast – Goodreads: https://goodreads.com/avasilachi – Telegram (jurnal): https://t.me/andreivasilachi – Telegram (chat): https://t.me/podcastmeditatii ▶EMAIL: andrei@podcastmeditatii.com ▶CRONOLOGIE: 0:00 – I. Nietzsche și „pervertirea rațiunii” 4:51 – II. Seneca, adevărul și încurcăturile lingvistice 7:30 – III. Modernismul, „A șaptea pecete”și tăcerea lui Dumnezeu 13:44 – IV. Semințe postmoderne în cinematografie 22:23 – V. Prăbușirea între real și aparent, sau nașterea postmodernismului 31:45 – VI. Wittgenstein cel timpuriu vs. Wittgenstein cel târziu 46:53 – VII. Multitudinea paradigmelor 50:13 – VIII. Mijlocul auriu în postmodernism

Summary James Brundage (LinkedIn; Twitter) joins Andrew (Twitter; LinkedIn) to discuss prisoners-of-war and intelligence. He is the Curator at the Pritzker Military Museum & Library in Chicago.  What You'll Learn Intelligence The intelligence dynamics of “prisoners-of-war” Tap codes and other ways to covertly communicate Using POWs for propaganda Debriefing POWs after their release  Reflections Comparing across time (WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc.) Comparing within time (German/Japanese/American POW camps during WWII) And much, much more… Episode Notes What intelligence questions are generated when we discuss “prisoners of war”? The prisoner's side asks: what happened? Are they alive? If so, where? What did they know? Can they compromise operations? Can we get them out? The other side asks: what do they know? Can they tell us anything we don't know? Are they misleading us? The prisoner asks: where are we? Are there any friendlies? Can we share information to escape?  To answer these questions, this week's guest is James Brundage who curated the May 22-Apr 23 exhibit, “Life Behind the Wire: POW” which explores life in captivity. He is a public historian who has also worked at the Obama Presidential Library, the Chicago History Museum & the James Garfield Historic Site.  And… Jeremiah Denton Jr. was shot down while leading an attack over North Vietnam in 1965 and the title of his memoir, When Hell Was in Session, gives you an idea of what he endured during his captivity. As part of a propaganda campaign, the North Vietnamese arranged for him to be interviewed by a Japanese reporter. Hi blinked T-O-R-T-U-R-E in Morse code. Needless to say, the intelligence community took great interest in the video footage. He passed away in 2014.  Quote of the Week "So roughly 1% of the POW population perished in Europe at the hands of the Germans versus in Japan…the death rate was almost 40%. A lot of that was the conditions of the camp…in Vietnam, of the more than 700 American POWs, there were 73 who perished in POW camps in North Vietnam, which is roughly 10%." – James Brundage Resources *Andrew's Recommendation* The Railway Man: A POW's Searing Account, E. Lomax (Norton, 2014)  A powerful, powerful memoir. Lomax had nightmares about his WWII experience for over half a century. *SpyCasts* Operation Chaos – Matthew Sweet (2018) Eavesdropping in Vietnam – Tom Glenn (2012) Studies & Observations Group – Donald Blackburn (2012)  Intelligence Lessons from Vietnam – Rufus Phillips (2009) *Beginner Resources* The Vietnam War Explained in 25 Minutes, The Life Guide (n.d.) ([video]  Intelligence in the Vietnam War, Vietnam War 50th [posters] POW's: What You Need to Know, ICRC (2022) [webpage] Books Spies on the Mekong, K. Conboy (Casemate, 2021) War of Numbers, S. Adams (Steerforth, 2020) Tap Code, C. Harris & S. Berry (Zondervan, 2019) Articles Meet the Hero: Douglas Hegdahl, Milliken Center (n.d.) OSS's Role in Ho Chi Minh's Rise, B. Bergin, SII 62/2 (2018) Intel. Support to Comms. with POWs in Vietnam, G. Peterson & D. Taylor, SII 60/1 (2016) Takes on Intelligence and the Vietnam War, C. Laurie, SII 55/2 (2011) Documentaries The Vietnam War, K. Burns & L. Novick (2017) The Fog of War, R. McNamara (2003) Hearts & Minds, P. Davis (1974) Oral Histories Veterans History Project Vietnam POW Interviews, U.S.N.I. Primary Sources POW/MIA Closed Briefing, DD CIA (1991) Report on US-Vietnamese Talks on POW/MIAs (1985) Causes, Origins & Lessons of the Vietnam War (1972) The POW Scandal in Korea (1954) *Wildcard Resource* Interestingly, philosophers Ludwig Wittgenstein, John Paul Sartre, Paul Riceour, Emmanuel Levinas and Louis Althusser were all POWs – now, the impact this had on their thinking would be one hell of a rabbit hole to go down!

On this ID the Future from the vault, philosopher of science Paul Nelson concludes his talk with host Andrew McDiarmid on what it takes to converse effectively with scientists who are trapped in a naturalistic parabola — that is, researchers who draw their conclusions from naturalism's authority rather than following the evidence wherever it leads. Nelson urges us to keep the third party in the conversation: nature herself. We listen to nature through experiment, he says, and warns against the message from scientists such as CalTech's Sean Carroll who have suggested that testing is “overrated.” If we listen and test, nature can keep revealing herself in surprising ways, says Nelson, which is what makes science so fun. Source

Sound-Art · "Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muss man schweigen", schrieb Wittgenstein in seinem Traktat. Eines der wichtigsten philosophischen Werke des 20. Jahrhunderts: Nicht die Gegenstände, sondern ihre Verbindungen machen die Welt aus - als Hörspiel mit Musik von Andreas Ammer & Console. // Mit Oswald Wiener, Moritz Eickworth, Lars Freikorn / Komposition: Console/Nu / Realisation: Andreas Ammer/Console / BR 2014 // Exklusive Hörspiel- und Kultur-Tipps unter br.de/kultur-newsletter

Edmund “Ed” Dain, Ph.D., is the winner of the 2021-2022 Joseph R. Accinno Teaching Award — Providence College's highest honor for excellence in undergraduate instruction. Get to know Dain, and it's clear to see why students love his philosophy and Civ courses. To Dain, philosophy isn't a subject — it's a skill. You don't learn about philosophy; you learn to philosophize.Learn about Dain's approach to training philosophers, his background before Providence College, how core courses are anything but a bore, and a little bit of Ludwig Wittgenstein in this week's episode of the Providence College Podcast.Subscribe to the Providence College Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, Google Play, and YouTube.  Visit Providence College on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, and LinkedIn.

In this mini-episode, we discuss , The Philosophical Investigations, the differences between early and late Wittgenstein, “Language Games”, meaning as use, and much more.Two Guys One Book is now in podcast form! It is available on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Please consider subscribing directly to our feed so you get updates in your podcast catcher whenever a new podcast goes live!Follow us on Goodreads to see what we're reading:https://www.goodreads.com/user/show/96149881-max-chapinhttps://www.goodreads.com/user/show/96136938-pedro-michelsYou can also watch the video here: This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit maxchapin.substack.com

Miles is joined by Clare Mac Cumhaill and Rachael Wiseman to discuss their new book, Metaphysical Animals. https://blackwells.co.uk/bookshop/product/Metaphysical-Animals-by-Clare-Mac-Cumhaill-Rachael-Wiseman/9781784743284 Clare Mac Cumhaill (pronounced Mc Cool!) is a philosopher of mind, working mostly on perception, but with interests in emotion and action, as well as aspects of the metaphysics of mind, and in topics relating to aesthetics. Most of her work is on perception of space, and spatial properties. Her doctoral thesis looked at the perception of empty space and she is still somewhat hung up on this topic, though the ambit of her interests has expanded into working out what explanatory work reflection on space can do, in particular in trying to characterize the nature of our experience in ways that make it immune to skeptical re-description. With Rachael Wiseman (Liverpool), she is co-director of the In Parenthesis project, which focuses on the life, work and friendships of Iris Murdoch, Philippa Foot, Elizabeth Anscombe and Mary Midgley (sometimes called the Quartet). The project is investigating whether the collective corpus of these philosophers has the hallmarks of a distinct philosophical school. Read about it here: http://www.womeninparenthesis.co.uk/ Rachael Wiseman work at the intersection of philosophy of mind, action and ethics and has published mainly on the work of G. E. M. Anscombe and Ludwig Wittgenstein. She is currently working on an AHRC-funded project, Perception, Action and the Genesis of Everyday Ethics (PAGE). The project, with Dr Clare MacCumhaill (Durham) is a study of the lives and philosophy of 'The Quartet' of women philosophers who met at Oxford during WWII: Anscombe, Philippa Foot, Mary Midgley and Iris Murdoch (www.womeninparenthesis.co.uk). As well as studying the philosophy of four wonderfully creative thinkers they want to understand why there are so few women in philosophy and to work out what they might do about it! The Integrity Project (www.integrityproject.org) looks at the meaning and importance of integrity. Rachael was awarded a British Academy Rising Star Engagement Award (2016-2017) for work with a local arts organisation, Wunderbar (www.wunderbar.org.uk), exploring artistic integrity and arts fundraising.

We are looking at how conversations about theology and politics break down by analyzing Ludwig Wittgenstein's classic work Philosophical Investigations. Wittgenstein argues that words have no stable meaning and that, like the rules of a game, people need to define terms during conversations if we want to be able to productively communicate with each other. We will then look at how F.A. Hayek recognizes that totalitarian regimes use the subjectivity of language to oppress people.*This was originally supposed to be episode 10, which is why I sometimes say things like ‘last week' and ‘next week' referring to shows that I published weeks ago.Episode Outline:I. Why Conversations FailII. Ludwig Wittgenstein, Philosophical Investigations (1953) III. Having Productive Conversations as Protestants and Libertarians  Media Referenced:The Future of Justification, John PiperJustification, N.T. WrightPhilosophical Investigations, Ludwig WittgensteinThe Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek Questions, comments, suggestions? Please reach out to me at theprotestantlibertarian@gmail.com.  You can also follow the podcast on Twitter: @prolibertypod. If you like the show and want to support it, you can! Check out the Protestant Libertarian Podcast page at https://www.buymeacoffee.com/theplpodcast. Also, please consider giving me a star rating and leaving me a review, it really helps expand the shows profile! Thanks!

In the second episode of Read Me to Sleep, Ricky, I'll read from Ludwig Wittgenstein's 1922 Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.  --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/rick-whitaker/messageSupport this podcast: https://anchor.fm/rick-whitaker/supportSupport the show

Mientras esperamos por Herman Schnell, hablamos de la islamofobia de Daniel, la integración de Vicente después del viaje a Perú. Alan Watts, Ludwig Wittgenstein y el Tao Te King de Lao Tsé. Roe vs Wade, la caida del imperio norteamericano. La empresa cosmodemónica, el asalto al Congreso de los EEUU el 6 de enero, Kyle Rittenhouse y la desinformación.  Música: Shoes and Socks Off, Emerald Park.

In this episode we close out season four.  What conclusions can be drawn, what similarities can be observed, amongst our four philosophers?  Join us for one last round with Blaise Pascal, G. K. Chesterton, C. S. Lewis, and Ludwig Wittgenstein.

In this episode, we conclude our discussion of Wittgenstein, the Villain. In particular, we discuss the question, “does Wittgenstein illuminate or obscure our understanding of God?”

As we come to the end of our series on Wittgenstein, we look at an intelligent challenge to a Wittgensteinian understanding of life and language.  Is Wittgenstein a hero or villain?  In this episode we look at a charitable and intelligent argument for Wittgenstein, the villain.

This week, the panel begins by re-visiting the Top Gun academy with Top Gun: Maverick. Then, the panel is joined by critic and author Jason Bailey to assess the career of George Carlin, presented in the two-part documentary George Carlin's American Dream. Finally, the panel discusses the defamation trail of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard that is gripping the media.  In Slate Plus, the panel remembers the career of Ray Liotta. Email us at culturefest@slate.com. Endorsements Dana: The film Paris, 13th District, which is a light, French relationship movie where everyone has perfect sweaters, deep wine glasses, and engaging romantic arguments. Julia: A birdwatching app, Merlin. Which can now identify birds by shazaming its song to identify the bird species. Steve: Guardian book review from Anil Gomes, titled “Private Notebooks 1914–1916 by Ludwig Wittgenstein review—sex and logic,” about the first translation of famous philosopher's notebooks in English. Podcast production by Cameron Drews. Production assistance by Nadira Goffe. Outro music is "Any Other Way" by Particle House. Slate Plus members get ad-free podcasts, a bonus segment in each episode of the Culture Gabfest, full access to Slate's journalism on Slate.com, and more. Sign up now at slate.com/cultureplus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, the panel begins by re-visiting the Top Gun academy with Top Gun: Maverick. Then, the panel is joined by critic and author Jason Bailey to assess the career of George Carlin, presented in the two-part documentary George Carlin's American Dream. Finally, the panel discusses the defamation trail of Johnny Depp and Amber Heard that is gripping the media.  In Slate Plus, the panel remembers the career of Ray Liotta. Email us at culturefest@slate.com. Endorsements Dana: The film Paris, 13th District, which is a light, French relationship movie where everyone has perfect sweaters, deep wine glasses, and engaging romantic arguments. Julia: A birdwatching app, Merlin. Which can now identify birds by shazaming its song to identify the bird species. Steve: Guardian book review from Anil Gomes, titled “Private Notebooks 1914–1916 by Ludwig Wittgenstein review—sex and logic,” about the first translation of famous philosopher's notebooks in English. Podcast production by Cameron Drews. Production assistance by Nadira Goffe. Outro music is "Any Other Way" by Particle House. Slate Plus members get ad-free podcasts, a bonus segment in each episode of the Culture Gabfest, full access to Slate's journalism on Slate.com, and more. Sign up now at slate.com/cultureplus. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Wittgenstein wrote that, “whereof one cannot be speak, thereof one must be silent".  Elsewhere he wrote that, “What can be shown cannot be said."  In this episode we examine what some call the later Wittgenstein.  Take up and listen as we contemplate the the Wittgenstein, the mystic.

Perhaps the idea most associated with Wittgenstein is the idea that life is a collection of “language games”.  Wittgenstein was a gamer.  In this episode of Red Letter Philosophy we explore the enigmatic concept of language games; in the process we discover how an obscene gesture altered the course of philosophy.

Does philosophy entail skepticism?  Does philosophy lead one to solipsism, the belief that one cannot know the world outside one's own head?  In this episode we look at one of Wittgenstein's most well known arguments, the private language argument.  We explore Wittgenstein's refutation of radical skepticism and the possibility of solipsism.

Erik Hoel joins Ash Milton to discuss the current state of education, how it succeeded aristocratic tutoring, and what it means for progress. Up until the creation of mass schooling in the nineteenth century, tutelage was the most common form of education. Only aristocrats were able to afford this, and with the disappearance of aristocratic society so too has tutoring fallen out of practice. But its advantages are what enabled great works of genius to emerge over the past three hundred years. Scientists like Bertrand Russell, William James, and Ludwig Wittgenstein were all given individual instruction at a young age, which was a key part of their success. Erik and Ash discuss the history of the practice and if there is a viable future for it.    Erik Hoel is a research assistant professor at Tufts University. He recently published his debut novel, and his other writing can be found at his Substack.

Miles Hollingworth is known for his biographies of Saint Augustine of Hippo and Ludwig Wittgenstein. He lives in the USA with his wife, Susan Wessel. Together, they run the Wessel-Hollingworth Foundation. He may be contacted through the W-H Foundation's website: wessel-hollingworthfoundation.org In this episode we discuss his philosophical biography of Ludwig Wittgenstein, alongside discussions on God, mysticism, the problems of language, love and more... Miles' book: https://global.oup.com/academic/product/ludwig-wittgenstein-9780190873998?cc=gb&lang=en& --- Become part of the Hermitix community: Hermitix Twitter - https://twitter.com/Hermitixpodcast Support Hermitix: Hermitix Subscription - https://hermitix.net/subscribe/ Patreon - https://www.patreon.com/hermitix Donations: - https://www.paypal.me/hermitixpod Hermitix Merchandise - http://teespring.com/stores/hermitix-2 Bitcoin Donation Address: 3LAGEKBXEuE2pgc4oubExGTWtrKPuXDDLK Ethereum Donation Address: 0x31e2a4a31B8563B8d238eC086daE9B75a00D9E74

“One should really only do philosophy as poetry.” What could Ludwig Wittgenstein have meant by this? What was the context for this odd remark? In Wittgenstein's Artillery: Philosophy as Poetry (MIT Press, 2021), James Klagge provides a perspective on Wittgenstein as a person and how his life intersected with his work, in particular in the transition from his early Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus to the later Philosophical Investigations. Based on private notebooks and memoirs by some of Wittgenstein's students, Klagge, a professor of philosophy at Virginia Tech, sees Wittgenstein's interactions with his students as gradually prodding him to come grips with the problem of how to influence the frames of mind that people take to philosophical problems. Poetry, along with parables, similes, and other imaginative presentations, exemplify a way of addressing these non-cognitive attitudes – and Wittgenstein conceded that he was not entirely successful in his efforts. Carrie Figdor is professor of philosophy at the University of Iowa. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network