Podcast appearances and mentions of Martin Heidegger

A full century ago, a young and relatively unknown philosophy instructor in a small town in Germany would publish a book that would be swiftly picked up and radically reshape the intellectual landscape around it. Everything published before could now be reread in a new light, while everything after would often be seen as a sort of development in response to this book. Its author was Martin Heidegger, and the book was his Being and Time (Yale UP, 2026), one of the most important and influential works in the history of philosophy. Due to the difficulty of the text, filled with dense neologisms or unconventional uses of common terms, Heidegger's work has proven a consistent challenge for any translator trying to render him in English. The first attempt was by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson in 1962, with a repeated attempt by one of Heidegger's students, Joan Stambaugh, arriving in 1995, with revisions by Dennis Schmidt in 2010. Now in 2026, Cyril Welch has brought his own translation to publication. Initial work began several decades ago in his classroom where he was trying to teach the text, and so he started offering up his own translations of key passages for his students. Over time these translations were revised and added to until eventually he found he had enough to consider formal publication. The publication was held back for some time, but now is finally able to come to light, giving both seasoned and fresh readers of Heidegger a chance to read his work anew. Cyril Welch is professor emeritus of philosophy at Mount Allison University in New Brunswick, Canada. 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

A full century ago, a young and relatively unknown philosophy instructor in a small town in Germany would publish a book that would be swiftly picked up and radically reshape the intellectual landscape around it. Everything published before could now be reread in a new light, while everything after would often be seen as a sort of development in response to this book. Its author was Martin Heidegger, and the book was his Being and Time (Yale UP, 2026), one of the most important and influential works in the history of philosophy. Due to the difficulty of the text, filled with dense neologisms or unconventional uses of common terms, Heidegger's work has proven a consistent challenge for any translator trying to render him in English. The first attempt was by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson in 1962, with a repeated attempt by one of Heidegger's students, Joan Stambaugh, arriving in 1995, with revisions by Dennis Schmidt in 2010. Now in 2026, Cyril Welch has brought his own translation to publication. Initial work began several decades ago in his classroom where he was trying to teach the text, and so he started offering up his own translations of key passages for his students. Over time these translations were revised and added to until eventually he found he had enough to consider formal publication. The publication was held back for some time, but now is finally able to come to light, giving both seasoned and fresh readers of Heidegger a chance to read his work anew. Cyril Welch is professor emeritus of philosophy at Mount Allison University in New Brunswick, Canada. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

A full century ago, a young and relatively unknown philosophy instructor in a small town in Germany would publish a book that would be swiftly picked up and radically reshape the intellectual landscape around it. Everything published before could now be reread in a new light, while everything after would often be seen as a sort of development in response to this book. Its author was Martin Heidegger, and the book was his Being and Time (Yale UP, 2026), one of the most important and influential works in the history of philosophy. Due to the difficulty of the text, filled with dense neologisms or unconventional uses of common terms, Heidegger's work has proven a consistent challenge for any translator trying to render him in English. The first attempt was by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson in 1962, with a repeated attempt by one of Heidegger's students, Joan Stambaugh, arriving in 1995, with revisions by Dennis Schmidt in 2010. Now in 2026, Cyril Welch has brought his own translation to publication. Initial work began several decades ago in his classroom where he was trying to teach the text, and so he started offering up his own translations of key passages for his students. Over time these translations were revised and added to until eventually he found he had enough to consider formal publication. The publication was held back for some time, but now is finally able to come to light, giving both seasoned and fresh readers of Heidegger a chance to read his work anew. Cyril Welch is professor emeritus of philosophy at Mount Allison University in New Brunswick, Canada. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

A full century ago, a young and relatively unknown philosophy instructor in a small town in Germany would publish a book that would be swiftly picked up and radically reshape the intellectual landscape around it. Everything published before could now be reread in a new light, while everything after would often be seen as a sort of development in response to this book. Its author was Martin Heidegger, and the book was his Being and Time (Yale UP, 2026), one of the most important and influential works in the history of philosophy. Due to the difficulty of the text, filled with dense neologisms or unconventional uses of common terms, Heidegger's work has proven a consistent challenge for any translator trying to render him in English. The first attempt was by John Macquarrie and Edward Robinson in 1962, with a repeated attempt by one of Heidegger's students, Joan Stambaugh, arriving in 1995, with revisions by Dennis Schmidt in 2010. Now in 2026, Cyril Welch has brought his own translation to publication. Initial work began several decades ago in his classroom where he was trying to teach the text, and so he started offering up his own translations of key passages for his students. Over time these translations were revised and added to until eventually he found he had enough to consider formal publication. The publication was held back for some time, but now is finally able to come to light, giving both seasoned and fresh readers of Heidegger a chance to read his work anew. Cyril Welch is professor emeritus of philosophy at Mount Allison University in New Brunswick, Canada. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Med en gps i varje ficka har människan blivit förkartade. Nils Markus Karlsson älskar kartor, men funderar på om de lett oss vilse. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radios app. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna.Vi tar det från början. För att komma rätt in till ämnet är det nödvändigt att tänka sig en värld utan kartor – men också utan allt annat som gjort världen överskådlig, som tåg, telegrafer, luftballonger, automobiler, asfalt, uppslagsverk, massmedier, flygplan och satelliter. Tänk en värld där alla resor är krångliga och långsamma, och de går från en känd punkt till en annan. Emellan dem finns mycket som är okänt. Sånt som man hört talas om, kanske, men inte mer än så. Så man lever i det lokala och omfattningen av det som finns utanför är oklar. Hur tänker sig en sådan människa världen? Det är inte så lätt att föreställa sig.En lykta är tänd, i dess upplysta krets rör man sig. Men ljuset blir snabbt skummare då man rör sig bort från centrum.I kontrast till detta är en kartlagd värld något enastående. Åskådligt. Klart.Bland de äldsta kända världskartorna finns de som är strikt geometriska och med exempelvis Babylon eller Jerusalem i dess absoluta mitt. På andra syns fantastiska djur och monster, människor med tre ögon – eller Babels torn, den strandade Noaks ark och paradiset. (Paradiset antogs ligga i öster och högt upp.) Det låter kanske löjligt men självklart måste allt som man trodde fanns i världen vara med. Och hur kunde man veta vad en långt ifrån känd värld innehöll? Det kunde man inte.Staffan Bergwik påpekar i den skönt illustrerade boken ”Terranauterna” att i kartografins barndom fanns två skilda paradigm, två helt olika syften. En del kartor var narrativa – dessa skulle berätta om världen som helhet. Och så fanns kartor som var praktiska, inriktade på navigerande – de skulle hjälpa någon, ett skepp, att nå en viss plats. Då det handlade om att berätta om världen hade europeiska kartritare Gud att förhålla sig till. Men i takt med att kartorna blev bättre och kraftfullare blev konflikten med en omnipotent allvetare skarpa. Frågan var: Har Gud ensamrätt att se och förstå världen – eller är det människan som samlar information och sätter samman den utifrån dessa bitar? Under 1500-talet då långa resor blev fler ökade också kunskaperna om kulturer, växter, djur och landmassor. Sjökaptener och officerare som kom i land i Europas viktigaste hamnstad, Sevilla, fick under ed berätta om vad de sett. 1529 sammanställdes uppgifterna i Padron real, det kungliga kartregistret, i form av en spansk världskarta som visade sjövägar till kolonierna. Under de stora upptäckternas sekler var kartan en realpolitisk resurs, mer värd än guld. Den övertrumfade hundra laddade kanoner, den kunde leda en forskningsresande till världens yttersta gräns, och längre ändå...Men så fanns också de allomfattande anspråken. På 1500-talet kallades kartritare för ”kosmografer”, ”världsskrivare”, och detta värv var både visionärt och idealistiskt. Flamländarna Gerardus Mercators och Abraham Ortelius kartor gjorde dem till tidens superstjärnor. Mercator var först med en Atlas – han namngav konceptet efter guden som bär världen på sina axlar. Det revolutionerande med hans kartbok var att den gick från det hela till det lokala. Så vändes på all mänsklig erfarenhet – nämligen att börja i det egna. Med fantasin eller föreställningsförmågan gick det att zooma in och ut, och så gå från en bild till en annan. Helheter blev för första gången greppbara.Vi tar tidens tåg fram till sekelskiftet 1900. Fin-du-siècle känner många till. Men frånvaron av vita fläckar gjorde att man också talade om fin-du-globe. Att ett forskningsfält stängs är inte vanligt men det var så man såg på saken. Pusslet var klart. Jorden gick från att vara utforsknings- och koloniserbar till att beskrivas som ”ett inhägnat schackbräde”.Sen dess har de geografiska upptäckterna inte varit många men kartans betydelse för människorna har exploderat – från atlaser i varje hem till GPS-tjänster i mobiltelefoner där allt är utmärkt på förhand: smultronställen, betygsatta restauranger och rekommenderad färdväg. Man skulle kunna hävda att vi har slutat vandra i världen och istället förhåller oss till avbildningen. Människorna har blivit ”förkartade”. Jag har otaliga gånger varit med om det i sällskap med en avbildningsfixerad bekant. Vi ska hitta ett ställe och jag ser det först eftersom jag ser mig omkring. Människor ringer till människor som står precis framför dem. Det verkar på något sätt säkrare.I ”Terranauterna” poängteras kartritandets utopiska sida– idealismen som har återkommit genom historien. Genombrotten i överblick har gått arm i arm med tankar om ett globalt broderskap. Atlaser, luftballongfärder, enorma georamor och sfäriska byggnader – som Great Globe vid världsutställningen i London 1851 – har omvärvts av en retorik som hävdat att med upplysning och överblick kommer inte bara demokratisering utan också fred och en helt ny förståelse av vår värld.Det är inte svårt att hitta moteld. Kartor har genom historien varit intimt förknippat med staters besittningstagande av land som de egentligen inte har haft rätt till. Kartor är exploateringens bäste vän. Att alla tvådimensionella kartor har skevheter är också uppenbart: Det finns ett godtycke i vad som är centrum och vad som är upp och vad som är ner. Och nej, Grönland är inte jämförbart med Afrika storleksmässigt – även om många kartor påstår det.På 60-talet var det dags igen. De första bilderna av jorden från rymden väckte enorm entusiasm. Denna utifrån-syn på vår värld skulle förändra oss till det bättre, det var helt säkert! Överblick och sanning hade förenats. Kartritarnas tusenåriga visonära strävan var uppnådd. Den tyske filosofen Martin Heidegger var skeptisk, han menade att det som visades var en abstraktion som gjorde människor främmande för livets grund: att finnas till på en plats, att vara rotad. Feministiskt färgad kritik har också riktats mot överblickstanken – då den har kopplats till kontroll och en manlig blick. ”Gudstricket” kallar Donna Haraway det – anspråket att kunna se allt, bortom enskilda perspektiv. Och ja, här finns en möjlig och djup problematisering som även en kartälskare som undertecknad kan förstå.Själva ordet ”världen” bytte innebörd under århundraden då kartläggningen av den gick framåt – från att omfatta allt som finns till att användas om det vi kan visa med kartor. Så har människornas värld krympt. Och kartor är onekligen ett torrt sätt att se på världen, och det är att se – inte höra, inte lukta, inte känna. Tiden ryms inte i en karta. Allt är stabilt, statiskt. Kartor säger: Att veta något, det gör man med ett utifrånperspektiv. Men vad får kartor oss att inte se? Och vad får de oss att tro om världen? Har kartografins utveckling sprungit iväg med oss så att vi inte längre vet var vi är? För en människa är inte utifrån.Kanske skulle man ställa till med ett kartbål. Men ja, till sist skulle ingen hitta dit. Eller jo, man skulle känna röken i näsborrarna, hur den tjocknade då vinden låg på.Nils Markus Karlssonkulturarbetare LitteraturStaffan Bergwik, Terranauterna, Norstedts, 2024Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Die Karte als Kunstwerk, Verlag Dr. Alfons Uhl, Unterschneidheim 1979Phillip Allen, The Atlas of Atlases, 1988

The German philosopher Martin Heidegger argued that human existence is grounded in meaningful relationships to things. When we lose these relationships, we lose nothing less than the world.... Check out my new book! It's called: The Last Human: How Technology is Changing What it Means to be Humanhttps://www.amazon.com/Last-Human-Technology-Changing-Means/dp/1069510831/

Många har grubblat över existensens själva existens. Helena Granström ansluter sig skaran. Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radios app. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna.Om man ska tro filosofen Arthur Schopenhauer, erbjuder universum en lika pockande som gäckande gåta för varje tänkande person: ”Ju lägre stående en människa är i intellektuellt avseende, desto mindre förbryllande och mystisk ter sig själva existensen för henne.” Det vill säga: Har man bara något bakom pannbenet, så inser man att tillvaron är obegriplig: inte bara till sin natur, utan i det att den alls finns.Ska man tro honom? Tja, den som önskar belägg för hans tes kan i alla fall utan svårighet finna en uppsjö av intellektuellt ambitiösa personer som upptagits just av bryderier över existensens själva existens.1700-talstänkaren Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, till exempel, som efter att ha fastslagit sin berömda princip att varje sakförhållande också kan ges en fullständig förklaring, konstaterade att den första fråga som därpå infann sig var: ”Varför finns det något, snarare än ingenting?”En formulering som drygt två sekler senare ekade hos hans tyske kollega Martin Heidegger som också han ansattes av frågan: ”Varför är överhuvudtaget något varande, och inte snarare intet?”Han man väl låtit sig upptas av denna undran, bleknar alla andra gåtor bort i dess bländande sken. Som ett annat högstående intellekt vid namn Ludvig Wittgenstein formulerat det är det mystiska ”inte hur världen är, utan att den är”.Och varför är den då?Det visar sig att frågan har minst lika många svar som den har möjliga invändningar mot de givna svaren – som den har möjliga underkännanden av själva frågan.Till att börja med kan man ju undra hur ett tillfredsställande svar skulle kunna se ut? Vilken orsak till världens existens skulle inte i sin tur kräva en orsak, så att man i slutändan inte hade åstadkommit något alls?Leibniz själv tyckte sig kunna besvara frågan så snart han ställt den: Orsaken till världens existens är Gud.Jaha. Men vad är i så fall orsaken till att Gud finns?Jo, svarar Leibniz, det är Gud.Vilket är det som i Leibniz mening skiljer Gud och universum åt: Universum hade lika gärna inte kunnat existera, och därför kräver dess existens en förklaring. Gud, däremot, utgör sin egen nödvändighet: I Guds identitet, ingår egenskapen att han existerar. Orsaken till att Gud finns är Gud.Ett besläktat argument är det som går under det arabiska namnet Kalam, och som gör gällande att universum behöver förklaras eftersom det en gång har uppstått, medan Gud är ett tidlöst väsen som alltid har funnits, och som sådant kan förbli oförklarat.Utifrån ett sådant resonemang kan den kosmologiska teorin om världsalltets födelse i Big Bang för knappt 14 miljarder år sedan med en del god vilja betraktas som belägg för en övernaturlig varelses inblandning. Men å andra sidan kan man invända att de flesta varianter av Big Bang-modellen gör gällande att tiden uppstod först i och med ursmällen, så att universum faktiskt visst alltid har existerat, om man med alltid menar ”vid alla ögonblick i tiden”.Och därmed har man gett sig in på fysikernas försök att besvara den uppenbarligen svårbesvarade frågan om orsaken till världens existens. Varför något snarare än intet? Vad sägs om svaret: ”Därför att ett instabilt vakuum uppstod som en fluktuation i den absoluta intigheten, som i fysikaliska termer kan beskrivas som en sluten fyrdimensionell rumtid med radien noll. Detta vakuum genomsyrades av kvantfält vars fluktuationer i sin tur sådde fröet till det universum vi ser idag”?Ja, det får åtminstone mig att undra om allt ståhej kring frågan om existensens orsak åtminstone till viss del är ett resultat av de högtstående intellektens tendens att intellektualisera lite för mycket?För hur mycket har det intet som enligt Heidegger gör sig påmint i stunder av bottenlös förtvivlan eller oförstörd lycka, egentligen att göra med den teoretiska fysikens bild av ett universum som ännu inte finns? Kanske faktiskt nästan – intet?Men en sak kan man i alla fall säga om fysikernas rumtid utan utsträckning: Den är verkligen intet, mer intet än en tom rumtid, mer intet än ett tomt rum utan tid, mer intet än – ja, det mesta. Det enda som måste sägas ha funnits från början i denna modell är de naturlagar som tillåter ett kvantfält att tunnla fram ur detta totala intet. Men på vilket sätt fanns i så fall de?Frågan om varför det finns något för oss alltså oförhappandes vidare till frågan om huruvida fysikens lagar existerar inte bara oberoende av den mänskliga tanken, utan till och med oberoende av att det finns någon fysikalisk tillvaro som de kan beskriva. Och där har vi hamnat utan att vad det verkar ha kommit så särskilt mycket närmare ett svar på frågan om varför något existerar alls.Och ju mer man tänker på saken, desto mindre uppenbart tycks det att upptagenheten vid denna fråga är tecken på intellektuell finess. Är den i själva verket inte, som redan Immanuel Kant ville göra gällande, bara en effekt av att ha utvidgat idén om orsak och verkan längre än vad som är rimligt? Oavsett hur naturlig kausaliteten ter sig för oss, finns det nämligen mycket som tyder på att den inte gäller på de minsta partiklarnas kvantmekaniska nivå, och att universums födelse var en händelse då kvantmekaniken spelade roll har vi mycket goda skäl att tro. Och dessutom: Om tiden uppstod först i och med den stora smällen, hur är det möjligt att tala om en orsak som föregår den? Är det något som behövs för att orsakssamband ska kunna upprättas är det väl tid.För den som vill gå ännu djupare i sin kritik av frågan om varför något istället för intet, finns inte heller några hinder. Varför tycker vi exempelvis att existensen av något behöver motiveras, men inte existensen av intet? Varför ska intigheten på detta vis betraktas som ett naturligt grundtillstånd? Enligt filosofen Adolf Grünbaum är det ingen slump att frågan började ställas först i den moderna eran: De gamla grekerna upptogs inte av den, och inte heller antika indiska tänkare. Skälet? De var inte fostrade i den kristna tro som postulerar en skapelse ur intet, ex nihilo. Först i och med den kristna läran om en allsmäktig gud som häver existensen upp ur intet och därefter oupphörligt verkar för att upprätthålla den, skulle vi inte vara så övertygade om att varje avvikelse från intigheten kräver en förklaring. Detta alltså enligt Grünbaum. Som matematiker är jag också frestad att inflika att det finns många fler sätt att existera på, än det finns att inte existera på, vilket väl i sig är en sorts statistiskt argument för någontinget. Kanske är frågan om varför världen är i själva verket ett skenproblem?Ja, vem vet. Men hur som helst finns det också, vad Schopenhauer än påstod, tänkande personer som intar en helt annan hållning till problematiken än den djupsinnigt grubblande. Som exempelvis filosofen Sidney Morgenbesser, som när den eviga frågan ställdes till honom helt sonika snäste ifrån: ”Äsch! Även om det fanns intet skulle ni säkert inte vara nöjda ändå!”Helena Granströmförfattare med bakgrund inom fysik och matematikLitteraturJim Holt – Why does the world exist? (Liveright, 2012) Niayesh Afshordi och Phil Halper – Battle of the big bang (University of Chicago Press, 2025) Thomas Hertog – Om tidens uppkomst (Fri Tanke, 2023) Philip Goff – Meningen med universum (Fri Tanke, 2025)

Send us a textIn deze aflevering van DeepDive bespreekt Ab Gietelink met filosoof Ad Verbrugge zijn laatste studie De Gezagscrisis - filosofisch essay over een wankele orde. Verbrugge studeerde filosofie in Leiden en promoveerde op Sein und Zeit van Martin Heidegger, een van de meest invloedrijke en complexe werken uit de twintigste-eeuwse filosofie. Hij doceert filosofie aan de Vrije Universiteit en schreef eerder onder meer Staat van verwarring en Tijd van onbehagen. Daarnaast is hij medeoprichter van Beter Onderwijs Nederland, bekend van het televisieprogramma Het Filosofisch Kwintet en initiatiefnemer van het platform De Nieuwe Wereld. Minder bekend, maar niet minder relevant, is zijn achtergrond als muzikant. In De Gezagscrisis analyseert Verbrugge de maatschappelijke en culturele ontwikkelingen sinds de jaren zestig en stelt hij scherpe vragen over autoriteit, onderwijs, politiek en zingeving.  https://www.boom.nl/filosofie/100-14068_De-gezagscrisis   Support the showWaardeer je deze video('s)? Like deze video, abonneer je op ons kanaal en steun de onafhankelijke journalistiek van blckbx met een donatieWil je op de hoogte blijven?Telegram - https://t.me/blckbxtvTwitter - / blckbxnews Facebook - / blckbx.tv Instagram - ...

NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (Vernon Press, 2026) a forthcoming 2026 book by Yunus Emre Ozigci, offers a deep analysis of NATO's identity and role, suggesting it's stuck in bureaucratic inertia despite modern crises, aiming to redefine its purpose through exploring shared identity and transformation, particularly in the context of Russia's actions. This scholarly work uses intersubjectivity to understand how NATO's internal dynamics and external relations, especially concerning the Ukraine conflict, shape its meaning beyond mere military power, potentially moving beyond traditional IR theories to explore collective identity and systemic challenges. In NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (2026), Ozigci treats NATO as an intersubjective phenomenon rather than an objective entity. To him, NATO “does not exist objectively” but rather appears “meaningfully through intersubjective recognition.” His skillful integration of philosophical innovations from such thinkers as Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre supports his deep insights into Kenneth Waltz's structural interpretations of the balance of power, John Mearsheimer's offensive realism, and Robert Keohane's complex interdependence and invites readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This work reminds us that NATO's real strength does not necessarily come from being the most efficient military structure in the world, promoting those who excel at following orders, but rather from its ingenuity, resourcefulness, and unity of purpose. His study provides a rare synthesis of diplomatic experience and philosophical depth, inviting readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This is an original, meticulously argued, and intellectually stimulating contribution to both NATO studies and the philosophy of international relations. Piotr Pietrzak, Ph.D. -- In Statu Nascendi Think Tank Yunus Emre Ozigci holds a PhD degree in Political Sciences from the Université catholique de Louvain. He graduated from the Galatasaray University (International relations) and completed his MA studies at the University of Ankara (International relations). His research interests and publications cover the IR theory and phenomenology. Since 2000, he has been working as a diplomat in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and served, besides various departments of the Ministry, in Algeria, Belgium, Switzerland and Russia. Currently, he is the First Counsellor of the Turkish Embassy in Nairobi and Deputy Permanent Representative to UNON (UNEP and UN-Habitat). ORCID: 0000-0003-3388-7149 Please note: This publication is a personal work. It does not reflect the official views of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. 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

NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (Vernon Press, 2026) a forthcoming 2026 book by Yunus Emre Ozigci, offers a deep analysis of NATO's identity and role, suggesting it's stuck in bureaucratic inertia despite modern crises, aiming to redefine its purpose through exploring shared identity and transformation, particularly in the context of Russia's actions. This scholarly work uses intersubjectivity to understand how NATO's internal dynamics and external relations, especially concerning the Ukraine conflict, shape its meaning beyond mere military power, potentially moving beyond traditional IR theories to explore collective identity and systemic challenges. In NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (2026), Ozigci treats NATO as an intersubjective phenomenon rather than an objective entity. To him, NATO “does not exist objectively” but rather appears “meaningfully through intersubjective recognition.” His skillful integration of philosophical innovations from such thinkers as Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre supports his deep insights into Kenneth Waltz's structural interpretations of the balance of power, John Mearsheimer's offensive realism, and Robert Keohane's complex interdependence and invites readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This work reminds us that NATO's real strength does not necessarily come from being the most efficient military structure in the world, promoting those who excel at following orders, but rather from its ingenuity, resourcefulness, and unity of purpose. His study provides a rare synthesis of diplomatic experience and philosophical depth, inviting readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This is an original, meticulously argued, and intellectually stimulating contribution to both NATO studies and the philosophy of international relations. Piotr Pietrzak, Ph.D. -- In Statu Nascendi Think Tank Yunus Emre Ozigci holds a PhD degree in Political Sciences from the Université catholique de Louvain. He graduated from the Galatasaray University (International relations) and completed his MA studies at the University of Ankara (International relations). His research interests and publications cover the IR theory and phenomenology. Since 2000, he has been working as a diplomat in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and served, besides various departments of the Ministry, in Algeria, Belgium, Switzerland and Russia. Currently, he is the First Counsellor of the Turkish Embassy in Nairobi and Deputy Permanent Representative to UNON (UNEP and UN-Habitat). ORCID: 0000-0003-3388-7149 Please note: This publication is a personal work. It does not reflect the official views of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (Vernon Press, 2026) a forthcoming 2026 book by Yunus Emre Ozigci, offers a deep analysis of NATO's identity and role, suggesting it's stuck in bureaucratic inertia despite modern crises, aiming to redefine its purpose through exploring shared identity and transformation, particularly in the context of Russia's actions. This scholarly work uses intersubjectivity to understand how NATO's internal dynamics and external relations, especially concerning the Ukraine conflict, shape its meaning beyond mere military power, potentially moving beyond traditional IR theories to explore collective identity and systemic challenges. In NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (2026), Ozigci treats NATO as an intersubjective phenomenon rather than an objective entity. To him, NATO “does not exist objectively” but rather appears “meaningfully through intersubjective recognition.” His skillful integration of philosophical innovations from such thinkers as Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre supports his deep insights into Kenneth Waltz's structural interpretations of the balance of power, John Mearsheimer's offensive realism, and Robert Keohane's complex interdependence and invites readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This work reminds us that NATO's real strength does not necessarily come from being the most efficient military structure in the world, promoting those who excel at following orders, but rather from its ingenuity, resourcefulness, and unity of purpose. His study provides a rare synthesis of diplomatic experience and philosophical depth, inviting readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This is an original, meticulously argued, and intellectually stimulating contribution to both NATO studies and the philosophy of international relations. Piotr Pietrzak, Ph.D. -- In Statu Nascendi Think Tank Yunus Emre Ozigci holds a PhD degree in Political Sciences from the Université catholique de Louvain. He graduated from the Galatasaray University (International relations) and completed his MA studies at the University of Ankara (International relations). His research interests and publications cover the IR theory and phenomenology. Since 2000, he has been working as a diplomat in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and served, besides various departments of the Ministry, in Algeria, Belgium, Switzerland and Russia. Currently, he is the First Counsellor of the Turkish Embassy in Nairobi and Deputy Permanent Representative to UNON (UNEP and UN-Habitat). ORCID: 0000-0003-3388-7149 Please note: This publication is a personal work. It does not reflect the official views of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/world-affairs

NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (Vernon Press, 2026) a forthcoming 2026 book by Yunus Emre Ozigci, offers a deep analysis of NATO's identity and role, suggesting it's stuck in bureaucratic inertia despite modern crises, aiming to redefine its purpose through exploring shared identity and transformation, particularly in the context of Russia's actions. This scholarly work uses intersubjectivity to understand how NATO's internal dynamics and external relations, especially concerning the Ukraine conflict, shape its meaning beyond mere military power, potentially moving beyond traditional IR theories to explore collective identity and systemic challenges. In NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (2026), Ozigci treats NATO as an intersubjective phenomenon rather than an objective entity. To him, NATO “does not exist objectively” but rather appears “meaningfully through intersubjective recognition.” His skillful integration of philosophical innovations from such thinkers as Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre supports his deep insights into Kenneth Waltz's structural interpretations of the balance of power, John Mearsheimer's offensive realism, and Robert Keohane's complex interdependence and invites readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This work reminds us that NATO's real strength does not necessarily come from being the most efficient military structure in the world, promoting those who excel at following orders, but rather from its ingenuity, resourcefulness, and unity of purpose. His study provides a rare synthesis of diplomatic experience and philosophical depth, inviting readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This is an original, meticulously argued, and intellectually stimulating contribution to both NATO studies and the philosophy of international relations. Piotr Pietrzak, Ph.D. -- In Statu Nascendi Think Tank Yunus Emre Ozigci holds a PhD degree in Political Sciences from the Université catholique de Louvain. He graduated from the Galatasaray University (International relations) and completed his MA studies at the University of Ankara (International relations). His research interests and publications cover the IR theory and phenomenology. Since 2000, he has been working as a diplomat in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and served, besides various departments of the Ministry, in Algeria, Belgium, Switzerland and Russia. Currently, he is the First Counsellor of the Turkish Embassy in Nairobi and Deputy Permanent Representative to UNON (UNEP and UN-Habitat). ORCID: 0000-0003-3388-7149 Please note: This publication is a personal work. It does not reflect the official views of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/politics-and-polemics

NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (Vernon Press, 2026) a forthcoming 2026 book by Yunus Emre Ozigci, offers a deep analysis of NATO's identity and role, suggesting it's stuck in bureaucratic inertia despite modern crises, aiming to redefine its purpose through exploring shared identity and transformation, particularly in the context of Russia's actions. This scholarly work uses intersubjectivity to understand how NATO's internal dynamics and external relations, especially concerning the Ukraine conflict, shape its meaning beyond mere military power, potentially moving beyond traditional IR theories to explore collective identity and systemic challenges. In NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (2026), Ozigci treats NATO as an intersubjective phenomenon rather than an objective entity. To him, NATO “does not exist objectively” but rather appears “meaningfully through intersubjective recognition.” His skillful integration of philosophical innovations from such thinkers as Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre supports his deep insights into Kenneth Waltz's structural interpretations of the balance of power, John Mearsheimer's offensive realism, and Robert Keohane's complex interdependence and invites readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This work reminds us that NATO's real strength does not necessarily come from being the most efficient military structure in the world, promoting those who excel at following orders, but rather from its ingenuity, resourcefulness, and unity of purpose. His study provides a rare synthesis of diplomatic experience and philosophical depth, inviting readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This is an original, meticulously argued, and intellectually stimulating contribution to both NATO studies and the philosophy of international relations. Piotr Pietrzak, Ph.D. -- In Statu Nascendi Think Tank Yunus Emre Ozigci holds a PhD degree in Political Sciences from the Université catholique de Louvain. He graduated from the Galatasaray University (International relations) and completed his MA studies at the University of Ankara (International relations). His research interests and publications cover the IR theory and phenomenology. Since 2000, he has been working as a diplomat in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and served, besides various departments of the Ministry, in Algeria, Belgium, Switzerland and Russia. Currently, he is the First Counsellor of the Turkish Embassy in Nairobi and Deputy Permanent Representative to UNON (UNEP and UN-Habitat). ORCID: 0000-0003-3388-7149 Please note: This publication is a personal work. It does not reflect the official views of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (Vernon Press, 2026) a forthcoming 2026 book by Yunus Emre Ozigci, offers a deep analysis of NATO's identity and role, suggesting it's stuck in bureaucratic inertia despite modern crises, aiming to redefine its purpose through exploring shared identity and transformation, particularly in the context of Russia's actions. This scholarly work uses intersubjectivity to understand how NATO's internal dynamics and external relations, especially concerning the Ukraine conflict, shape its meaning beyond mere military power, potentially moving beyond traditional IR theories to explore collective identity and systemic challenges. In NATO's Meaning and Existence: Within the Interstate Intersubjectivity (2026), Ozigci treats NATO as an intersubjective phenomenon rather than an objective entity. To him, NATO “does not exist objectively” but rather appears “meaningfully through intersubjective recognition.” His skillful integration of philosophical innovations from such thinkers as Edmund Husserl, Martin Heidegger, and Jean-Paul Sartre supports his deep insights into Kenneth Waltz's structural interpretations of the balance of power, John Mearsheimer's offensive realism, and Robert Keohane's complex interdependence and invites readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This work reminds us that NATO's real strength does not necessarily come from being the most efficient military structure in the world, promoting those who excel at following orders, but rather from its ingenuity, resourcefulness, and unity of purpose. His study provides a rare synthesis of diplomatic experience and philosophical depth, inviting readers to reconsider how alliances exist beyond the surface of policy and power. This is an original, meticulously argued, and intellectually stimulating contribution to both NATO studies and the philosophy of international relations. Piotr Pietrzak, Ph.D. -- In Statu Nascendi Think Tank Yunus Emre Ozigci holds a PhD degree in Political Sciences from the Université catholique de Louvain. He graduated from the Galatasaray University (International relations) and completed his MA studies at the University of Ankara (International relations). His research interests and publications cover the IR theory and phenomenology. Since 2000, he has been working as a diplomat in the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and served, besides various departments of the Ministry, in Algeria, Belgium, Switzerland and Russia. Currently, he is the First Counsellor of the Turkish Embassy in Nairobi and Deputy Permanent Representative to UNON (UNEP and UN-Habitat). ORCID: 0000-0003-3388-7149 Please note: This publication is a personal work. It does not reflect the official views of the Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This video explores the theology, philosophy, and Christology of Martin Luther King Jr. I argue that he is best understood as a moderate American Unitarian.I mention Martin Luther King Jr., Martin Luther, Michael King Sr. (Martin Luther King Sr.), Schleiermacher, Paul of Samosata, William Ellery Channing, Paul Tillich, Henry Nelson Wieman, Coretta Scott King, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, Søren Kierkegaard, Friedrich Nietzsche, Karl Jaspers, Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Walter Rauschenbusch, Mahatma Gandhi, Saint Augustine, Saint Anselm, Blaise Pascal, Os Guinness, Keith Ward, Desmond Tutu, Francis Collins, Christopher Hitchens, and more.

Friends of the Rosary,Saints are like anyone else, despite how we consider them as spiritual heroes preserved from our day-to-day activities. They struggled with the same things we do, and loved the same things we do. They are not simply models to be admired.There are saints in ordinary life, in art and poetry, in motherhood, psychology, and even politics. There is a huge diversity. Each one uniquely reflects some aspect of the divine reality.The only difference is that they were smart enough to understand that what finally matters is having a holy life by being the person that God wants us to be.Above all, the saints are friends of God.And we can find a saint who is like every one of us.Léon Bloy wrote, "There is only one sadness, and that is not to be saints."Let's keep in mind that only people in heaven will be saints.Bishop Barron wrote about the diversity of saints:"There is Thomas Aquinas, the towering intellectual, and there is the Curé d'Ars, who barely made it through the seminary. There is Vincent de Paul, a saint in the city, and there is Antony, who found sanctity in the harshness and loneliness of the desert. There is Bernard, kneeling on the hard stones of Clairvaux in penance for sins, and there is Hildegard of Bingen, singing and throwing flowers, madly in love with God. There is Peter, the hard-nosed and no-nonsense fisherman, and there is Edith Stein, secretary to Edmund Husserl and colleague to Martin Heidegger, one of the most famous philosophers of the twentieth century. There is Joan of Arc leading armies, and there is Francis of Assisi channeling peace. There is the irascible Jerome and the almost too sweet Thérèse of Lisieux. There is Catherine of Siena, who stood up to popes, and Celestine V, who only reluctantly became pope. There is the grave and serious Bruno, and there is Philip Neri, whose spirituality was based on laughter."Ave Maria!Come, Holy Spirit, come!To Jesus through Mary!Here I am, Lord; I come to do your will.Please give us the grace to respond with joy!+ Mikel Amigot w/ María Blanca | RosaryNetwork.com, New YorkEnhance your faith with the new Holy Rosary University app:Apple iOS | New! Android Google Play• ⁠January 15, 2026, Today's Rosary on YouTube | Daily broadcast at 7:30 pm ET 

The Story Science Forgot: Why Psychotherapy Needs Narrative More Than Ever by Joel Blackstock LICSW-S MSW PIP no. 4135C-S | Dec 15, 2025 | 0 comments Joseph Campbell is arguably one of the most influential intellectuals of the twentieth century. If you have watched a Marvel movie or read a modern fantasy novel or sat in a screenwriter's workshop you have encountered his fingerprints. George Lucas explicitly credited Campbell's The Hero with a Thousand Faces as the structural backbone of Star Wars. Every major Hollywood studio has copies of his work floating around their development offices. Even filmmakers who actively deconstruct his monomyth model still have to be in conversation with Campbell to do so. You cannot escape him if you are telling stories in the Western tradition. But here is the thing about Joseph Campbell that we need to hold in our minds when we think about what psychology has become. He was a showman. He was a legitimate scholar but also someone who understood that the truth sometimes needs a little theatrical assistance. The Showman and the Bear Bones One of Campbell's favorite presentation techniques involved showing an image of ancient bear bones that were perhaps two million years old and discovered in a cave. The bones had been arranged in a particular way with pieces shoved back into the bear's mouth. Campbell would present this with his characteristic gravitas and explain that the ancients understood that nature must eat of itself. They knew that to take life is to participate in a cyclical loop of giving and receiving. The bear consuming itself was a ritual recognition that we are all food for something else. It is a beautiful interpretation. It is probably even partially true. We know through depth psychology and early anthropology that prehistoric humans were almost certainly trying to make meaning of existential realities. Ritual practices around death and consumption are well documented across cultures. Campbell was not fabricating this from nothing. But also come on Campbell. These are two million year old bones shoved in a hole. Maybe the jaw just collapsed that way. Maybe soil shifted. Maybe an animal disturbed them centuries after burial. He did not know. He could not know. And yet he presented it with the confidence of revealed truth. Here is why this matters. Campbell's influence is incalculable despite his methodological looseness. He told a story that resonated so deeply with something in the human psyche that it became the invisible architecture of our entire entertainment industry. He was not objectively right about those bear bones but he was pointing at something real about how humans make meaning. The story he told about that meaning making was more powerful than any peer reviewed paper could have been. We need to remember this when we think about psychotherapy and what it has become. The Dream I Had and the World I Found When I first entered the field of psychotherapy I had a fantasy. I thought I was going to be Joseph Campbell. I was going to find my way to someplace like Berkeley and immerse myself in the grand conversation between psychology and mythology and anthropology and philosophy. I imagined something like the Esalen Institute in the 1970s where Fritz Perls developed Gestalt therapy and where researchers and mystics and clinicians sat together in hot springs and argued about the nature of consciousness. Those places barely exist anymore. What I found instead was a competitive model built on H-indexes and impact factors. I found academic departments that had been siloed into increasingly narrow specializations. Each department defended its territorial boundaries against incursion from neighboring disciplines. The institute model where a psychologist might spend an afternoon talking to an anthropologist about ritual has been systematically dismantled. What we have instead are specialists who do not read outside their sub specialty and researchers whose entire careers depend on defending one narrow hypothesis. We have an incentive structure that actively punishes the kind of cross pollination that leads to genuine discovery. The Hollow Room: How the Biomedical Model Fails This is not just an academic inconvenience. It is a catastrophe for the human sciences and for the actual treatment of patients. There is a reason Freud stuck around. It is not because psychoanalysis was rigorously validated through randomized controlled trials. It is because as the science writer John Horgan observed old paradigms die only when better paradigms replace them. Freud lives on because science has not produced a theory of and therapy for the mind potent enough to render psychoanalysis obsolete once and for all. The biomedical model promised us a better story. It told us that humans are biological machines and that suffering is just a mechanical malfunction. It promised that if we could just find the right neurotransmitter or the right gene we could fix the machine. But look at what that looks like in practice. It looks like the 15 minute medication management appointment. A person comes in with their life falling apart. They are grieving a divorce or wrestling with the trauma of their childhood or facing a crisis of meaning. And the doctor looks at a checklist. They ask about sleep. They ask about appetite. They ask about energy levels. They treat the symptoms like check engine lights on a dashboard. They prescribe a pill to dim the lights and they send the person away. It looks like manualized Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. This is the gold standard of evidence based treatment. But in the vacuum of a manual it becomes absurd. A patient might be crying about the loss of a child and a therapist who is strictly adhering to the protocol has to redirect them to the agenda for Module 3 which is identifying cognitive distortions. The model has no room for the tragedy of the situation. It only has room for the erroneous thought that the patient is having about the tragedy. The result is that by most measures we are not actually helping people more effectively than we were fifty years ago. To understand the depth of this failure, we must look at the “smoking gun” of the psychiatric establishment: the STAR*D study. For nearly two decades, this massive, taxpayer-funded study was held up as the irrefutable proof that the “medication merry-go-round” worked. It cost $35 million and was cited thousands of times to justify the idea that if a patient didn't get better on one antidepressant, you simply switched them to another, and then another. The study claimed a “cumulative remission rate” of 67%. It told us that two-thirds of people would be cured if they just complied with the protocol. This was a lie built on methodological quicksand. A forensic re-analysis of the data (Pigott et al., 2023) revealed that the researchers had inflated their success rates through a series of stunning methodological sleights of hand. The original design called for the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) to be the primary outcome measure. But when that scale wasn't showing the numbers they wanted, investigators switched to a secondary, unblinded, self-report questionnaire (the QIDS-SR) which painted a rosier picture. Furthermore, the re-analysis exposed that hundreds of patients who dropped out due to side effects were excluded from the failure count, effectively scrubbing the negative data. Even worse, over 900 patients who didn't even meet the minimum severity for depression were included to boost the numbers. When the data was re-analyzed using the study's original criteria and including all participants, the cumulative remission rate plummeted from 67% to 35%. But the most damning statistic is the sustained recovery rate. Of the 4,041 patients who entered the trial, only a tiny fraction achieved remission and actually stayed well. When accounting for dropouts and relapses over the one-year follow-up period, a mere 108 patients achieved remission and stayed well without relapsing. That is a sustained recovery rate of 2.7%. If a heart surgery or cancer treatment had a failure rate of 97.3%, it would be abandoned. Yet, this study was championed by investigators with deep financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry, and the results were codified into clinical guidelines that still rule the profession today. This is the indictment: we have built an entire system of care on a statistical fabrication, prioritizing the protection of the model over the healing of the human. I have big problems with Freud. I have big problems with classical psychoanalysis. I am more of a Jungian. But here is what the depth psychologists understood that the biomedical model forgot. Humans are not just biological machines. We are meaning making creatures who navigate the world through story. When you take away our stories you do not make us more rational. You make us lost. The Flock of Dodos This separation of science from narrative has hurt the researchers too. In his book The Ghost Lab journalist Matt Hongoltz-Hetling uses the flock of dodos metaphor to describe this phenomenon. He argues that specialized creatures that are perfectly adapted to narrow environments become extinct when conditions change. Academic science has become a flock of dodos. A neuroscientist studies one particular brain region. A psychologist studies one particular therapeutic intervention. An anthropologist studies one particular culture. Nobody is allowed to step back and ask what all of this means together. When you silo information into separate academic disciplines instead of organizing it into a holistic understanding you kill the narratives that are already there. You cannot see the story until you step back far enough to recognize the pattern. Heidegger and the AI Bubble One of the primary functions of a subjective narrative in an objective field like psychotherapy is that it lets us start with things we consider self evident. These are things that do not need evidence because they are the ground upon which evidence stands. Things like humanity is important. Things like we contain multiplicities and conflicting parts. Things like consciousness is a mystery. The biomedical model has no way to accommodate these self evident truths because they are not measurable. You cannot run a randomized controlled trial on human dignity. Martin Heidegger understood this trajectory. He warned that science and technology were becoming self justifying systems that asked only whether something could be done and never whether it should be done. We are watching this play out right now with Large Language Models and Artificial Intelligence. The tech industry is boiling seawater and consuming enormous amounts of our remaining resources to build ever larger systems. As Ed Zitron has documented the current AI boom is likely a bubble that will crash and burn. It may leave us with a Google monopoly on Gemini that will not actually help anybody. Should we be doing this? Should we be fundamentally restructuring our economy around technology whose benefits are speculative at best? The Heideggerian answer is that we are not even capable of asking these questions properly because we have lost the narrative framework within which “should” makes sense. When everything is reduced to capability and efficiency the concept of values disappears. The Perennial and the Possible Can we just recognize that having a livable planet is probably a self evidencing goal? Can we recognize that having a psychotherapy willing to engage with perennial philosophy might be more valuable than another meta analysis demonstrating small effect sizes for manualized interventions? This is what I mean by reintroducing narrative. I do not mean replacing evidence with myth. I mean recognizing that the facts do not speak for themselves. Data requires interpretation. Interpretation requires a framework. And frameworks are stories about what matters. The story science forgot is the story of science itself. It is the story of how inquiry emerged from human communities trying to understand their world. We can recover this story. We can rebuild the connections that the academic silos have severed. The path is there. It always has been. We just need to be brave enough to walk it. The Exodus of the Sick If academic science has become a flock of dodos clinical practice has become something arguably worse. It has become a reenactment of the Milgram experiment where the system plays the role of the authority figure and the patient plays the victim. We often remember Stanley Milgram's famous 1961 study as a lesson about the capacity for evil but its deeper lesson was about the capacity for distance. When the subject had to physically touch the victim compliance with the order to harm them dropped to 30 percent. The White Coat only retained its authority when it created a buffer between the human actions and their consequences.   Modern psychotherapy has built a massive administrative White Coat that separates the healer from the healed. This is not just a metaphor. It is a structural reality that is actively driving patients out of the profession and into the arms of pseudoscience. The Bureaucracy as Trauma For a patient in crisis the Evidence Based system often functions as a machine of exclusion. A study on healthcare administrative burdens reveals that the psychological cost of navigating billing and insurance denials and intake forms acts as a friction that hits the most vulnerable the hardest. We ask trauma survivors to retell their stories to three different intake coordinators before they ever see a therapist. This process is itself retraumatizing. When they finally reach a provider they are often met with the biomedical gaze which is a checklist driven assessment that reduces their complex narrative of suffering to a code for billing. As the Australian Psychological Society has noted the chemical imbalance theory and the medicalization of distress have failed to reduce stigma and have instead left patients feeling defective and unheard. The result is a profound Low Trust environment. Theodore Porter in his book Trust in Numbers argues that we only rely on strict mechanical numbers when we do not trust people. We use the DSM and manualized protocols because insurers do not trust clinicians to judge and clinicians do not trust themselves to deviate. The Great Split: Why Research and Practice Are Divorcing This creates a fundamental schism that explains why the profession feels like it is cracking in half. On one side you have the academic researchers who are incentivized by grant funding and publication metrics. To get these rewards they must isolate variables and create reproducible manualized protocols. This means they must strip away the very thing that makes therapy work which is the messy and unrepeatable human relationship. On the other side you have the clinicians who are incentivized by patient outcomes. They are in the room with the messiness. They see that the manualized protocol fails the complex trauma patient so they improvise. They integrate. They use intuition. The academic looks at the clinician and sees a cowboy who ignores the data. The clinician looks at the academic and sees a bureaucrat who has never treated a suicidal patient. This is why the research is no longer informing the practice. We have created two different languages. The researcher speaks in p-values and population averages while the clinician speaks in case studies and individual breakthroughs. Why Pseudoscience Wins the Trust War This low trust environment creates a vacuum that wellness influencers are all too happy to fill. We often mock the public for turning to unverified supplements and TikTok diagnosticians and quantum mysticism. But we have to ask what these influencers are providing that we are not. They are providing narrative. They are providing connection. They are providing a. parasocial yes but still, High Trust experience. A recent analysis suggests that wellness fads thrive not because people are stupid but because the influencers offer a feeling of personal validation that the medical system denies. Even AI chatbots are now being described by users as more humane than doctors because the AI listens to the whole story without looking at a watch or a checklist. When a patient is told by a doctor that their pain is idiopathic or psychosomatic because it does not show up on a lab test and then an influencer tells them I see you and I believe you and here is a story about why this is happening the patient will choose the influencer every time. The trust gap drives them away from care that might actually help and toward solutions that feel good but do nothing. The Clinician's Moral Injury This leaves the ethical psychotherapist in a state of moral injury. We are forced to participate in a system that we know is alienating the very people we are trying to help. We are trained to value the therapeutic alliance or the bond of trust above all else yet we work in a system designed to sever it with paperwork and time limits and standardized protocols. We have to put down the White Coat of administrative distance. We have to stop hiding behind the Evidence Based label when that label is being used to deny the reality of the person in front of us. Proposals for a Unified Future If we want to stop this exodus and heal the split we need specific structural changes. We cannot just hope for better insurance reimbursement. We need to change what we consider valid science. First we must re-legitimize the systematic case study. For a century the detailed narrative of a single patient was the gold standard of learning. We replaced it with the aggregate data of the randomized controlled trial. We need to bring it back. We need journals that publish rigorous detailed accounts of what actually happens in the room when a patient gets better. Second we need to build open source repositories for clinical observation. Currently the wisdom of the field is locked behind for profit paywalls or lost in the private notes of isolated therapists. We need a Wikipedia of Clinical Practice where thousands of clinicians can document what they are seeing in real time. If ten thousand therapists report that somatic processing helps complex trauma that is a data set that rivals any RCT. Third we need to teach philosophy and narrative in graduate school again. We are training technicians when we should be training healers. A therapist who knows how to read a spreadsheet but does not know how to understand a story is useless to a human being in crisis. If we do not offer a therapy that is human and narrative and deeply relational we will continue to lose our patients to those who do even if what they are offering is a lie. The Mirror and the Map: Why Math is a Story We often treat mathematics as if it were the bedrock of reality itself. We act as though a p-value is a piece of the universe, like a rock or a proton. But we must remember that math is not the thing itself. It is a representation of the thing. It is a map, not the territory. It is a mirror, not the face. Theodore Porter's work in Trust in Numbers reminds us that we reach for these mirrors when we do not trust our own eyes. But the mirror is useless without someone to look into it and interpret the reflection. Data by itself is pointless. It is a pile of bricks without an architect. It requires interpretation to become meaning, and interpretation is fundamentally a narrative act. When we try our best to make a purely objective study, we are still telling a story. We are saying, “These numbers represent this phenomenon.” Then another researcher comes along, looks at the same numbers, and tells a different story: “No, they represent that.” This conflict isn't a failure of science; it is science. The Storytellers of Science The greatest breakthroughs in history did not come from people who just crunched numbers. They came from people who could see the story the numbers were trying to tell. These stories are really damn interesting, often stranger and more beautiful than fiction. Consider August Kekulé. He didn't discover the structure of the benzene molecule by staring at a spreadsheet. He discovered it by dreaming of a snake eating its own tail—the Ouroboros. His subjective, narrative brain provided the image that unlocked the objective chemical reality. The data was there, but it needed a myth to make it intelligible. Look at Quantum Physics. The raw math of quantum mechanics is cold and abstract. But when physicists like Erwin Schrödinger or Werner Heisenberg looked at that data, they saw a story about uncertainty, about cats that are both alive and dead, about a universe that only decides what it is when it is observed. They didn't just calculate; they interpreted. They told a story about reality that was so radical it changed how we understand existence. Even in psychology, the data of the “talking cure” was messy and anecdotal until Freud and Jung gave us the language of the Unconscious and the Archetype. Were they objectively “right” in every detail? No. But they gave us a framework—a story—that allowed us to navigate the chaos of the human mind. They provided the map that allowed us to enter the territory. The Final Integration We have spent the last fifty years trying to strip this storytelling capacity out of our profession in a misguided attempt to be taken seriously by the “hard” sciences. In doing so, we have thrown away our most powerful tool. The brain is a story-processing machine. To treat it with checklists and spreadsheets is to deny its fundamental nature. We need to be brave enough to pick up the mirror again. We need to be brave enough to look at the data—whether it's the 2.7% recovery rate of STAR*D or the trembling pupil of a trauma patient—and ask, “What is the story here?” The path forward isn't about choosing between science and narrative. It is about realizing that science is a narrative. It is the grandest, most complex, most rigorous story we have ever tried to tell. And it is time we started telling it properly again.   More @ https://gettherapybirmingham.com/

In this episode of Chasing Leviathan, PJ and Dr. Harris Bechtol discuss the death of the other—and why Western philosophy has largely failed to take it seriously. Drawing from Bechtol's book A Death of the World: Surviving the Death of the Other, the conversation explores how grief, mourning, and loss are not merely private emotions but world-altering events that rupture time, memory, and meaning itself.Together, they examine Martin Heidegger's famous claim that when someone dies we are “merely nearby,” asking whether that view can really account for the lived reality of grief. Engaging thinkers like Heidegger, Derrida, Augustine, and Nicholas Wolterstorff, Dr. Bechtol reframes death as an event—an interruption that transforms the world for those who remain. The episode explores concepts like interruption, disruption, presence-of-absence, transactive memory, and why the loss of a loved one is never confined to a single moment in time.This conversation is especially relevant for anyone wrestling with grief, sudden loss, terminal illness, or the long aftermath of mourning. Rather than offering platitudes or stages to “get over” loss, Dr. Bechtol proposes an ethic of workless mourning—a way of living on after death that remains open to sorrow, surprise, and transformation. Philosophical yet deeply human, this episode speaks to theology, continental philosophy, grief studies, and the existential realities of surviving the death of someone you love.Make sure to check out Dr. Bechtol's book: A Death of the World: Surviving the Death of the Other

What does it mean when a radical understanding of National Socialism is inextricably embedded in the work of the twentieth century's most important philosopher? Martin Heidegger's sympathies for the conservative revolution and National Socialism have long been well known. As the rector of the University of Freiburg in the early 1930s, he worked hard to reshape the university in accordance with National Socialist policies. He also engaged in an all-out struggle to become the movement's philosophical preceptor, "to lead the leader." Yet for years, Heidegger's defenders have tried to separate his political beliefs from his philosophical doctrines. They argued, in effect, that he was good at philosophy but bad at politics. But with the 2014 publication of Heidegger's "Black Notebooks," it has become clear that he embraced a far more radical vision of the conservative revolution than previously suspected. His dissatisfaction with National Socialism, it turns out, was mainly that it did not go far enough.  The notebooks show that far from being separated from Nazism, Heidegger's philosophy was suffused with it. In Heidegger in Ruins: Between Philosophy and Ideology (Yale University Press, 2022), Richard Wolin explores what the notebooks mean for our understanding of arguably the most important philosopher of the twentieth century, and of his ideas--and why his legacy remains radically compromised. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

What does it mean when a radical understanding of National Socialism is inextricably embedded in the work of the twentieth century's most important philosopher? Martin Heidegger's sympathies for the conservative revolution and National Socialism have long been well known. As the rector of the University of Freiburg in the early 1930s, he worked hard to reshape the university in accordance with National Socialist policies. He also engaged in an all-out struggle to become the movement's philosophical preceptor, "to lead the leader." Yet for years, Heidegger's defenders have tried to separate his political beliefs from his philosophical doctrines. They argued, in effect, that he was good at philosophy but bad at politics. But with the 2014 publication of Heidegger's "Black Notebooks," it has become clear that he embraced a far more radical vision of the conservative revolution than previously suspected. His dissatisfaction with National Socialism, it turns out, was mainly that it did not go far enough.  The notebooks show that far from being separated from Nazism, Heidegger's philosophy was suffused with it. In Heidegger in Ruins: Between Philosophy and Ideology (Yale University Press, 2022), Richard Wolin explores what the notebooks mean for our understanding of arguably the most important philosopher of the twentieth century, and of his ideas--and why his legacy remains radically compromised. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Om gräl, Livets Ord, mormoner och Martin Heidegger! Mm mm

What does it mean when a radical understanding of National Socialism is inextricably embedded in the work of the twentieth century's most important philosopher? Martin Heidegger's sympathies for the conservative revolution and National Socialism have long been well known. As the rector of the University of Freiburg in the early 1930s, he worked hard to reshape the university in accordance with National Socialist policies. He also engaged in an all-out struggle to become the movement's philosophical preceptor, "to lead the leader." Yet for years, Heidegger's defenders have tried to separate his political beliefs from his philosophical doctrines. They argued, in effect, that he was good at philosophy but bad at politics. But with the 2014 publication of Heidegger's "Black Notebooks," it has become clear that he embraced a far more radical vision of the conservative revolution than previously suspected. His dissatisfaction with National Socialism, it turns out, was mainly that it did not go far enough.  The notebooks show that far from being separated from Nazism, Heidegger's philosophy was suffused with it. In Heidegger in Ruins: Between Philosophy and Ideology (Yale University Press, 2022), Richard Wolin explores what the notebooks mean for our understanding of arguably the most important philosopher of the twentieth century, and of his ideas--and why his legacy remains radically compromised. 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 does it mean when a radical understanding of National Socialism is inextricably embedded in the work of the twentieth century's most important philosopher? Martin Heidegger's sympathies for the conservative revolution and National Socialism have long been well known. As the rector of the University of Freiburg in the early 1930s, he worked hard to reshape the university in accordance with National Socialist policies. He also engaged in an all-out struggle to become the movement's philosophical preceptor, "to lead the leader." Yet for years, Heidegger's defenders have tried to separate his political beliefs from his philosophical doctrines. They argued, in effect, that he was good at philosophy but bad at politics. But with the 2014 publication of Heidegger's "Black Notebooks," it has become clear that he embraced a far more radical vision of the conservative revolution than previously suspected. His dissatisfaction with National Socialism, it turns out, was mainly that it did not go far enough.  The notebooks show that far from being separated from Nazism, Heidegger's philosophy was suffused with it. In Heidegger in Ruins: Between Philosophy and Ideology (Yale University Press, 2022), Richard Wolin explores what the notebooks mean for our understanding of arguably the most important philosopher of the twentieth century, and of his ideas--and why his legacy remains radically compromised. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/critical-theory

What does it mean when a radical understanding of National Socialism is inextricably embedded in the work of the twentieth century's most important philosopher? Martin Heidegger's sympathies for the conservative revolution and National Socialism have long been well known. As the rector of the University of Freiburg in the early 1930s, he worked hard to reshape the university in accordance with National Socialist policies. He also engaged in an all-out struggle to become the movement's philosophical preceptor, "to lead the leader." Yet for years, Heidegger's defenders have tried to separate his political beliefs from his philosophical doctrines. They argued, in effect, that he was good at philosophy but bad at politics. But with the 2014 publication of Heidegger's "Black Notebooks," it has become clear that he embraced a far more radical vision of the conservative revolution than previously suspected. His dissatisfaction with National Socialism, it turns out, was mainly that it did not go far enough.  The notebooks show that far from being separated from Nazism, Heidegger's philosophy was suffused with it. In Heidegger in Ruins: Between Philosophy and Ideology (Yale University Press, 2022), Richard Wolin explores what the notebooks mean for our understanding of arguably the most important philosopher of the twentieth century, and of his ideas--and why his legacy remains radically compromised. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/biography

What does it mean when a radical understanding of National Socialism is inextricably embedded in the work of the twentieth century's most important philosopher? Martin Heidegger's sympathies for the conservative revolution and National Socialism have long been well known. As the rector of the University of Freiburg in the early 1930s, he worked hard to reshape the university in accordance with National Socialist policies. He also engaged in an all-out struggle to become the movement's philosophical preceptor, "to lead the leader." Yet for years, Heidegger's defenders have tried to separate his political beliefs from his philosophical doctrines. They argued, in effect, that he was good at philosophy but bad at politics. But with the 2014 publication of Heidegger's "Black Notebooks," it has become clear that he embraced a far more radical vision of the conservative revolution than previously suspected. His dissatisfaction with National Socialism, it turns out, was mainly that it did not go far enough.  The notebooks show that far from being separated from Nazism, Heidegger's philosophy was suffused with it. In Heidegger in Ruins: Between Philosophy and Ideology (Yale University Press, 2022), Richard Wolin explores what the notebooks mean for our understanding of arguably the most important philosopher of the twentieth century, and of his ideas--and why his legacy remains radically compromised. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/european-studies

Am Donnerstag hat sich der Todestag der politischen Denkerin Hannah Arendt zum 50. Mal gejährt. Heute macht sich der Literaturkritiker Cornelius Hell „Gedanken für den Tag“ über eine – nun – „ungewöhnliche Liebesgeschichte“. Gestaltung: Alexandra Mantler – Eine Eigenproduktion des ORF, gesendet in Ö1 am 06.12.2025

Straffbarhetsåldern har varit 15 år i över 100 år. Regeringen vill sänka den till 13 år för de som begår grova brott. Har barn som begår grova brott ett större ansvar för sina handlingar? Lyssna på alla avsnitt i Sveriges Radios app. Åldersgränsen på 15 år har utgått ifrån den mognad som anses krävas för att kunna ta ansvar för brottsliga handlingar. Barn under 15 år kan begå brott, men de ska inte straffas utan i stället ska socialtjänsten ta ansvar. Om åldersgränsen nu sänks, innebär det en ny syn på barns mognad? Har barn som begår grova barn ett större ansvar för sina brott än barn som snattar?Regeringen och Sverigedemokraterna vill sänka straffbarhetsåldern för barn som begår grova brott, från 15 år till 13 år. Bakgrunden är den grova kriminaliteten där barn under 15 år har varit inblandade i mord och mordförsök. Vilken betydelse har det om ansvaret för barn som begår grova brott överförs från socialtjänsten till rättsväsendet? Är det en ny syn på straffets funktion? Argumentet för sänkt straffbarhetsålder är att man behöver skydda samhället, ge brottsoffren stärkt upprättelse och bättre förutsättningar att bryta kriminella mönster för de barn som begår grova brott. Förslaget från regeringen har möt massivt motstånd från en rad remissinstanser. Experterna pekar bland annat på att det inte kommer ha några positiva effekter på brottsligheten och eller på de barn som begår grova brott. Är fängelse för barn, som begår grova brott, en logisk följd av den ändrade syn på straff som vi ser nu från politiken? Vad är det som avgör om lagen får legitimitet?Medverkande: Magnus Hörnqvist, professor i kriminologi vid Stockholms universitet, Alva Stråge, forskare i filosof vid Göteborgs universitet, Bengt Sandin historiker och professor emeritus på Tema barn vid Linköpings universitet:Programledare: Cecilia Strömberg Wallin Producent: Marie Liljedahl Veckans tips: Böcker: Trollkarlarnas tid : filosofins stora årtionde 1919-1929 - Walter Benjamin, Ernst Cassirer, Martin Heidegger, Ludwig Wittgenstein - Wolfram EilenbergerHäng city - Mikael YvesandTV-serie:Adoloscence - Philip Bartantini

Mercredi 17 septembre 2025Eugenio Mazzarella - Europe, christianisme, géopolitique : le rôle géopolitique de l”espace chrétien”Editions mimésisEn dialogue avec Jean-Pierre DarnisSCIENCES HUMAINESPour donner un poids géopolitique à la contribution coopérative que l'Europe peut apporter au monde multipolaire de la mondialisation, nous avons besoin de l'utopie selon laquelle l'espace de la civilisation chrétienne trouve son écoumène, non seulement spirituel, mais aussi politique et culturel, sur la scène mondiale. La différence européenne, que cet espace a générée et qui est inscrite dans le catholicisme romain, peut faire beaucoup pour résister, d'une part, à l'individualisme mercantile anglo-saxon et, d'autre part, à l'interprétation laxiste des valeurs démocratiques libérales dans de nombreuses régions de la civilisation chrétienne latine ou orthodoxe. Seul un écoumène chrétien en tant qu'espace géopolitique pourra se mettre au service de l'écoumène humain en coopération avec les autres grands espaces spirituels devenus nations, institutions, espaces géopolitiques, civilisations : de l'Islam au Confucianisme en passant par l'Hindouisme.Eugenio Mazzarella est un philosophe, homme politique et poète italien. Professeur de philosophie théorétique à l'Université de Naples Federico II, il fait partie des principaux interprètes italiens de la pensée de Martin Heidegger. Il a été député, élu en 2008 au Parlement italien, pour le Parti démocrate.

Die Debatte mit Natascha Freundel, Anne Eusterschulte und Willi Winkler Aufgezeichnet am 22. November 2025 im Deutschen Theater Berlin in Kooperation mit DT Kontext „Denken ist gefährlich.“ „Niemand hat das Recht zu gehorchen.“ Fünfzig Jahre nach ihrem Tod ist Hannah Arendt allgegenwärtig – als vielzitierte, intellektuelle Größe zu Fragen von Nation, Totalitarismus und Gewalt. Gefährliches Denken bedeutet bei Hannah Arendt, dass es „standardisierte Leitbilder des Denkens aufsplittert, zertrümmert“, so die Philosophin Anne Eusterschulte. Dagegen betont Arendt-Biograph Willi Winkler die Widersprüche in Arendts Leben und Werk: „Man wird nie fertig mit ihr.“ Von einigen Widersprüchen – Arendts Liebe zu Martin Heidegger, ihrem Verhältnis zu Israel, der Rolle des BND im Eichmann-Prozess – zur Weltliebe, zur amor mundi bei Hannah Arendt: Im Kontext unserer Zeit bleibt es eine philosophische und politische Aufgabe, „im Angesicht des Schreckens für die Welt einzustehen; den Mut zu haben, eine Stimme zu erheben“ (Anne Eusterschulte). Willi Winkler ist Autor, SZ-Journalist, Übersetzer und Literaturkritiker. Seine Biografie „Hannah Arendt. Ein Leben“ ist bei Rowohlt Berlin erschienen. Anne Eusterschulte ist Professorin für Geschichte der Philosophie am Institut für Philosophie der FU Berlin. Sie ist eine der HauptherausgeberInnen der Kritischen Gesamtausgabe der Werke von Hannah Arendt: Critical Edition. Complete Works. 00:00:00 Intro 00:07:00 War Arendt eine gefährliche Denkerin? 00:16:05 War "Origins of Totalitarianism" revolutionär? 00:18:55 Mit Arendt Totalitarismus und Trump verstehen 00:24:36 NYC-Bürgermeister Mamdani und Antisemitismus 00:32:10 Israelkritik und -solidarität 00:40:33 Eichmann in Jerusalem und der BND 00:44:19 Was ist Weltliebe? 00:48:30 Treue zu Heidegger? 00:56:18 Publikumsfrage: Mit Arendt über Gaza sprechen 01:00:40 Publikumsfrage: Nochmal zu Heidegger 01:01:41 Outro/ Der zweite Gedanke Mehr Infos und Bildergalerie s. https://www.radiodrei.de/derzweitegedanke Schreiben Sie uns gern direkt an derzweitegedanke@radiodrei.de

Nuestro filósofo Toño Fraguas se detiene a pensar en algo tan esencial como el acto de preguntar. En 1984, el grupo Siniestro Total lanzó una batería de interrogantes que nos invitan a avanzar: ¿Quiénes somos? ¿De dónde venimos? ¿A dónde vamos? ¿Dónde estamos antes de nacer? ¿Dónde vamos después de morir? Preguntas que podrían ocupar toda una vida en busca de respuestas. Sin embargo, hoy el reto es aún más complejo: reflexionar sobre qué significa preguntar en sí mismo.En este camino aparece Martin Heidegger, filósofo alemán tan controvertido como inevitable. En una conferencia pronunciada en 1953 en la Academia Bávara de Bellas Artes, titulada La pregunta por la técnica, Heidegger afirmaba que “preguntar es estar construyendo un camino” y que “ese camino es un camino del pensar”.Escuchar audio

#KöşedekiKitapçı'da

In this episode, Breht speaks with Dr. Richard Wolin, author of Heidegger in Ruins: Between Philosophy and Ideology, about the dark entanglement between Martin Heidegger's philosophy and his lifelong commitment to National Socialism. Heidegger is often hailed as the most important philosopher of the 20th century, yet his work was deeply shaped by the reactionary politics of his time. Wolin explains how Heidegger's central ideas -- Being, Dasein, authenticity, rootedness, and the "decline of the West" -- became intertwined with fascist notions of destiny, hierarchy, and belonging. They discuss the long history of attempts to sanitize Heidegger's record, what the Black Notebooks reveal about his true convictions, the interwar period in Germany and the conservative revolution, Heidegger's spiritual racism, and how the same civilizational despair and longing for renewal echo through today's far-right political movements. This conversation explores how the search for meaning and authenticity, when divorced from solidarity and democracy, can turn toward reactionary myth-making, hierarchical exclusion, and fascist authoritarianism. Check out Dr. Wolin's articles in the LA Review of Books HERE   ---------------------------------------------------- Support Rev Left and get access to bonus episodes: www.patreon.com/revleftradio Make a one-time donation to Rev Left at BuyMeACoffee.com/revleftradio Follow, Subscribe, & Learn more about Rev Left Radio https://revleftradio.com/

In this episode of Ojai Talk of the Town, we sit down with artist Tom Pazderka — a Czech-American painter, sculptor, writer and thinker whose journey from communist Czechoslovakia to America as a teenager has deeply shaped his practice. Born in Český Brod in 1981 and emigrating to the U.S. at age 12, Pazderka says those early years of dual identity and upheaval still echo in his work. LUM+4LUM+4MeetFactory+4We explore his recent achievements — his solo exhibition at the Carolyn Glasoe Bailey Foundation and his award of a residency at Taft Gardens — and how his practice engages with themes of memory, ideology, home and the stark beauty of process. (Pazderka often burns wood panels, layers ash and oil paint and works in monochrome to evoke both the material and metaphoric weight of his experience.) Bender Gallery+1We also talk about how Ojai has become both studio and sanctuary — how the landscape and quiet enable his reflections, and how this community intersects with his work of reinvention, belonging and creation. Join us for a rich conversation about art, exile, finding home and making something new out of what we leave behind.We also talked about El Chapo Traphouse, Slavoj Zizek and Metal Gear Solid. We did not talk about Rene Girard, Martin Heidegger or Grand Theft Auto 6.Learn more about Tom and his art at https://tompazderka.com/home.html

This episode features Dr. David Bentley Hart discussing his book, The Light of Tabor: Notes Towards a Monist Christology. Hart explains his theological project as deconstructing centuries of Christological debate to move past dualistic tensions that separate the divine and human. He argues for a "radically monistic" understanding of the Incarnation, where Christ's perfect human identity is wholly and eternally transparent to the Logos.DBH's youtube channel :  @leavesinthewind7441  DBH's substack - https://substack.com/@davidbentleyhart We mention Jordan Daniel Wood, Arius, Eunomius, Paul the Apostle, John the Apostle, Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine of Hippo, Philip the Chancellor, John of St. Palmus, Aristotle, Carl Bart, Meister Eckhart, Sergei Bulgakov, Vladimir Solovyov, Sarah O'Rean, Yakob Boehme, Martin Heidegger, John Milbank, Cyril of Alexandria, Pope Leo I, Gregory of Nazianzus, John Behr and more.

Paul Axton preaches: John identifies Jesus as the the rejected Logos, which means he is not the Greek logos, the Jewish logos, the philosophical logos, or the religious logos, or the logic, language, reason, or word that grounds this world's systems of human thought. Martin Heidegger is the prime example of recognizing the violence of the Greek logos, and then of presuming the Logos of Christ is a continuation of the same. René Girard brings out the absolute difference, developed most completely by Anthony Bartlett.  If you enjoyed this podcast, please consider donating to support our work. Become a Patron!

The British author and journalist Oliver Burkeman has spent decades pondering what it means to live a meaningful life, both in his former Guardian column “This Column WIll Change Your Life” and across several books—most recently, Meditations for Mortals, out in paperback this October. That's why he brings a healthy dose of skepticism to so-called “time management” systems and productivity hacks as a means toward true fulfillment. Burkeman's compelled by the notion that, rather than being separate from time, human beings are time. If people faced the reality of their limited time on the planet head on, he believes there's a real chance to experience greater, more engaged feelings of aliveness.On the episode—our Season 12 kick-off—Burkeman discusses why he's eschewing  perfectionism and finding unexpected liberation in the premise that, to some extent, the worst has already happened, and the best may still be ahead.Special thanks to our Season 11 presenting sponsor, Van Cleef & Arpels.Show notes:Oliver Burkeman[4:26] “Meditations for Mortals” (2024)[6:48] Donald Winnicott[7:46] Martin Heidegger[7:46] "Technics and Civilization" (2010)[7:46] “Being and Time” (1927)[7:46] “Time Warrior” (2011)[7:46] “Time Surfing” (2017)[7:46] “Anti-Time Management” (2022)[10:14] Medieval peasants[10:14] “The 4-Hour Workweek”[13:18] Alicja Kwade[19:23] “Ichi-go, ichi-e” (“one time, one meeting”)[22:00] Eckhart Tolle[22:36] Agnes Martin[23:28] “The Road Not Taken”[40:03] “This Column Will Change Your Life”[51:00] Nicholas Carr[51:00] Clay Shirky[53:40] Jennifer Roberts[59:04] Pomodoro Technique [59:13] Kanban[1:01:33] James Hollis[1:02:40] Alfred Adler[1:02:40] “The Courage to Be Disliked” (2024)[1:06:24] Stoicism

In this episode I look at Heidegger's theories about the role of the poet in carrying the message of the gods to the people, as described in his 1936 essay Holderlin and the Essence of Poetry.

In this episode Barry and Mike begin their two-part discussion of Martin Heidegger's 1949 lecture, “The Thing.” They focus on his concept of distancenessless as a unique problem of modernity and discuss how what he calls nearness might serve as an antidote.

What is an emotion? In his Sketches for a Theory of the Emotions (1939), Sartre picks up what William James, Martin Heidegger and others had written about this question to suggest what he believed to be a new thought on human emotion and its relation to consciousness. For Sartre, the emotions are not external forces acting upon consciousness but an action of consciousness as it tries to rearrange the world to suit itself, or as he puts it at the end of his book: a sudden fall of consciousness into magic. In this episode Jonathan and James discuss why Sartre's rejection of the idea of the subconscious is not as much a departure from Freud's theories as he thought they were, and the ways in which his attempt to establish a ‘phenomenological psychology' manifested in other works, including Nausea, Being and Nothingness and The Words. Note: Readers should use the translation by Philip Mairet. The earlier one by Bernard Frechtman, as Jonathan explains in the episode, contains numerous (often amusing) errors. Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and all our other Close Readings series, subscribe: Directly in Apple Podcasts: ⁠⁠https://lrb.me/applecrcip⁠⁠ In other podcast apps: ⁠⁠https://lrb.me/closereadingscip Further reading in the LRB: Jonathan Rée on 'Being and Nothingness': ⁠https://lrb.me/cipsartre1⁠ Sissela Bok on Sartre's life: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipsartre2⁠ Edwards Said's encounter with Sartre: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipsartre3⁠ Audiobooks from the LRB Including Jonathan Rée's 'Becoming a Philosopher: Spinoza to Sartre': ⁠https://lrb.me/audiobookscip

In this essay I look at Heidegger's famous essay 'What is Metaphysics?' as well as the accompanying essay by Werner Brock that examines and interprets the essays in the book. I explore Heidegger's assertion that nothingness is a critical component of metaphysics and that metaphysics is a critical compenent of science and the human experience.

Bitcoin'in sadece bir teknoloji olmanın ötesindeki derin felsefi anlamını hiç düşündünüz mü? Martin Heidegger'in 'Teknik Üzerine Soruşturma' eserinden ilham alan bu podcast, Bitcoin'i bir dil fenomeni, mutlak gerçeğin bir ifadesi olarak inceliyor.Günümüz dünyasında devletin "Panoptik Terörü" ve dilin yitirilmiş anlamı karşısında, Bitcoin "Weltgeist'in Dasein'i" olarak, insanlığın kaderini yeniden şekillendirme potansiyeli taşıyor. O, eylemi ve dili birleştirerek "Tanrısal Şiddet" ile devleti kansızca ortadan kaldıran "Mesihvari" bir güç olarak sunuluyor.Satoshi Nakamoto, sıradan bir insan değil, dilin ve hakikatin yitirildiği bu çağda insanlığın sözünü yeniden dirilten, saf düşüncenin bir tezahürüdür. Onun sanat eseri Bitcoin, teknolojinin sadece bir araç değil, bir "açığa çıkarma" (aletheia) biçimi olduğunu gösteriyor.Yanlış anlaşılan 'kripto' teriminin ve devletle birleşen "Tehlike"nin (Merkez Bankası Dijital Para Birimleri aracılığıyla teknolojik panoptikon) tuzaklarına dikkat çekiyoruz. Bu tehlikenin içinde gizli olan "Kurtarıcı Güç," insanın makineyle özgür bir ilişki kurarak kendini dönüştürmesiyle ortaya çıkabilir.Bitcoin'in dört temel nedeni — kriptografiyle oluşan "ilahi madde," hesaplama enerjisiyle şekillenen "form," yeni bir "toplumsal sözleşme" olarak amacı ve yaratıcısı Satoshi Nakamoto — onun varoluşsal derinliğini ortaya koyuyor. Bu, sadece teknolojik bir tartışma değil; "Homo Sacer"in yaşamı, "Dasein"in gerçek özü ve hayatın riskini sorgulama üzerine bir yolculuktur.Kaynak

What does it mean for a jug to be a jug? Or for any thing to be called a ‘thing'? In his 1950 lecture ‘Das Ding', Heidegger attempts to cajole his audience away from their everyday way of seeing the world as consisting of objects that can be represented objectively, and into the kind of thinking that ‘responds and recalls'. For Heidegger, the world we experience is one of dynamic movement between revelation and concealment, where the essential nature of a thing lies in its ‘thinging', and the ‘jug's jug character consists in the poured gift of the jug's pouring out'. In this episode Jonathan and James work through Heidegger's ideas about both ‘things' and time, and consider the purpose of his poetic style. Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and all our other Close Readings series, subscribe: Directly in Apple Podcasts: ⁠https://lrb.me/applecrcip⁠ In other podcast apps: ⁠https://lrb.me/closereadingscip Further reading in the LRB: Richard Rorty: Heidegger's Worlds ⁠https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v12/n03/richard-rorty/diary⁠ J.P. Stern: Heil Heidegger ⁠https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v11/n08/j.p.-stern/heil-heidegger⁠ James Miller: Arendt and Heidegger ⁠https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v17/n20/james-miller/thinking-without-a-banister

This is a preview — for the full episode, subscribe: https://newmodels.io https://patreon.com/newmodels https://newmodels.substack.com Our guest is American media theorist Douglas Rushkoff. He is the author of such seminal books on digital culture and networked communication as Cyberia (1994), Media Virus (1995), and Coercion (1999); and numerous further titles including, Program or Be Programmed (2010/2025) and Survival of the Richest: Escape Fantasies of the Tech Billionaires (2022). He is also the host of Team Human and a professor of Media Theory and Digital Economics as CUNY/Queens. On this episode, Doug speaks with us about the evolution (and devolution) of digital culture across web 1, 2, 3, and beyond via a synthesis of media theory, psychedelic thinking, and practical wisdom for navigating our contemporary networks. Names cited: Adam Curtis, Alex Garland, Allan Kaprow, Amazon, Art Bell, AT&T, Bernie Madoff, CNN, Cyberia, CVS, Dan Rather, Daniel Dennett, David Bowie, David Hershkovitz, David Lynch, Donna Haraway, Douglas Rushkoff, Elon Musk, Emmanuel Levinas, Francis Bacon, Genesis P-Orridge, Jake Tapper, Jeff Bezos, Jeffrey Epstein, Jesse Armstrong, Joe Rogan, John Brockman, John Perry Barlow, Joseph Chaikin, Kamala Harris, Lauren Sanchez, Louis Rossetto, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Madonna, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Marshall McLuhan, Martin Buber, Martin Heidegger, Media Virus, Michael Jackson, Milton Friedman, Naomi Klein, Naomi Wolf, Neil Simon, New Models, New York Times, Norbert Wiener, Orit Halpern, Paper Magazine, Peter Thiel, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, Present Shock, Ray Kurzweil, Richard Dawkins, Robert Anton Wilson, Ross Douthat, Skinny Puppy, Spinoza, Star Trek, Team Human, Temple of Psychic Youth, The Long Boom, The Process Church, The Simpsons, Vanessa Machado de Oliveira, Walter Benjamin, William S. Burroughs, Wired Magazine

Finally, we reach the conclusion of our exploration of Heidegger's lectures on Nietzsche. This time we consider another lecture on will to power, from Volume II of Heidegger's collected lectures on Nietzsche, in which will to power is considered instead as a framework for knowledge, and the principle of a new valuation.

Continuing with Heidegger, we consider his first lecture on Nietzsche, "The Will to Power as Art", in which Heidegger gives an unorthodox but very enlightening reading of will to power, then hinges the second half of his argument on a passage where Nietzsche describes art as will to power's most perspicuous manifestation.

In this episode, we begin a three-part series on Martin Heidegger and his reading of Nietzsche. The episode begins with a discussion of the background of Heidegger's life and ideas, as well as a brief tour of the content of Being & Time in which we look at Dasein, temporality, care, being-towards-death among other core concepts. In the latter half of the episode, we turn towards an introductory discussion of how Heidegger sees Nietzsche & his place within the Western philosophical tradition, as well as his comments about the necessity of the interrelation between will to power and the eternal return.

In this episode of Identity at the Center, Jeff Steadman and Jim McDonald are joined by Alejandro Leal, Senior Analyst at KuppingerCole, live from the EIC 2025 stage in Berlin, Germany.Alejandro delves into the critical distinctions between misinformation and disinformation, exploring their historical context and how they manifest in today's technological landscape, particularly within social media and legacy media. He discusses the intent behind disinformation, often aimed at creating chaos or confusion, versus misinformation, which can be an unintentional spread of false or inaccurate information.Chapters:00:00:00 Defining Misinformation vs. Disinformation & Historical Context00:02:00 Introduction at EIC 2025 & Guest Welcome00:06:14 The Role of Intent, Generative AI, and Countermeasures00:12:15 Impact of Mis/Disinformation on Business, Politics, and Philosophy00:16:02 How Mis/Disinformation Intersects with Identity Management00:18:07 Balancing Anonymity, Privacy, and Truthful Content Online00:23:09 Connecting to Digital Identity, Verification, and Potential Solutions (AI Labeling, VCs)00:26:45 AI Guardrails, Free Speech vs. Hate Speech, and Authenticity00:29:24 Worst-Case Scenarios and the Global Impact of Mis/Disinformation00:31:24 Actionable Advice: Responsibility and Critical Thinking00:35:38 Book Recommendation: "The Question Concerning Technology"00:39:31 Wrapping Up and Final ThoughtsConnect with Alejandro: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alejandro-leal-a127bb153/The Question Concerning Technology (essay): https://bpb-us-e2.wpmucdn.com/sites.uci.edu/dist/a/3282/files/2018/01/Heidegger_TheQuestionConcerningTechnology.pdfConnect with us on LinkedIn:Jim McDonald: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jimmcdonaldpmp/Jeff Steadman: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeffsteadman/Visit the show on the web at http://idacpodcast.comKeywords:IDAC, Identity at the Center, Jeff Steadman, Jim McDonald, Alejandro Leal, KuppingerCole, EIC 2025, Misinformation, Disinformation, Identity and Access Management, IAM, Digital Identity, Cybersecurity, Tech Podcast, Technology Ethics, Generative AI, AI Ethics, Truth in Media, Social Media Responsibility, Privacy Rights, Verifiable Credentials, Critical Thinking Skills, Fake News, Online Safety, Political Disinformation, Business Reputation, Philosophical Tech Discussions, Martin Heidegger, The Question Concerning Technology.

“The spiritual decline of the earth is so far advanced that people are in danger of losing their last spiritual strength, the strength that makes it possible even to see the disintegration and to recognize it as such.”   Martin Heidegger, Introduction to Metaphysics Carl Jung held a pessimistic view of the future of Western […] The post Carl Jung's Apocalyptic Vision first appeared on Academy of Ideas.

What if I told you one of the most influential philosophers of the 20th century wasn't just a Nazi sympathizer, but that fascism was fundamental to his entire philosophical project? In this profound conversation with Colin Bodayle, doctoral student in philosophy at Villanova University, we peel back the sanitized layers of Martin Heidegger's legacy to reveal the uncomfortable truth behind his continued influence.The mystification around Heidegger's Nazism represents one of academia's most persistent blind spots. While other Nazi intellectuals like Carl Schmitt are acknowledged for what they were, Heidegger enjoys special treatment. Colin reveals how Heidegger's manuscripts were likely edited to remove explicitly fascist content, creating a historical deception that continues to this day.Most importantly, we explore how Heidegger's core philosophical concepts—authenticity, Dasein, and his critique of technology—directly support his fascist worldview. His concept of authenticity isn't about individual self-creation but about embracing one's heritage and historical destiny as part of a "folk." His subjective idealism dissolves the possibility of objective truth in favor of interpretation, creating a philosophical framework perfectly aligned with fascist thought.The conversation takes fascinating detours through German idealism, Nietzsche's reactionary politics, and the strange appropriation of Heideggerian concepts by both the contemporary left and far-right figures like Alexander Dugin. We also discuss how continental philosophy's language games often obscure the political implications embedded in philosophical concepts.Rather than suggesting we abandon these thinkers entirely, this conversation invites critical engagement. As Colin notes, "Heidegger can teach you things about being human—he wasn't wrong about everything." But we must approach his work with our eyes wide open to its political foundations.If you've ever grappled with continental philosophy, critical theory, or the political dimensions of abstract thought, this episode offers a masterclass in intellectual clarity and honest critique.Send us a text Musis by Bitterlake, Used with Permission, all rights to BitterlakeSupport the showCrew:Host: C. Derick VarnIntro and Outro Music by Bitter Lake.Intro Video Design: Jason MylesArt Design: Corn and C. Derick VarnLinks and Social Media:twitter: @varnvlogblue sky: @varnvlog.bsky.socialYou can find the additional streams on YoutubeCurrent Patreon at the Sponsor Tier: Jordan Sheldon, Mark J. Matthews, Lindsay Kimbrough, RedWolf, DRV, Kenneth McKee, JY Chan, Matthew Monahan, Parzival, Adriel Mixon

In the early 1900s, Edmund Husserl founded a new school of philosophy called phenomenology. This new approach attempted to discard previous philosophical assumptions and explore the direct conscious experience of the human being. Husserl's student, Martin Heidegger, furthered the project with his book "Being and Time," which had a massive impact on both left- and right-wing philosophy while influencing many other fields such as medicine and business. Heidegger scholar Michael Millerman joins me to give an overview of the movement and its impact. Follow on: Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-auron-macintyre-show/id1657770114 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3S6z4LBs8Fi7COupy7YYuM?si=4d9662cb34d148af Substack: https://auronmacintyre.substack.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuronMacintyre Gab: https://gab.com/AuronMacIntyre YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/c/AuronMacIntyre Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-390155 Odysee: https://odysee.com/@AuronMacIntyre:f Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/auronmacintyre/ Today's sponsors: Follow https://x.com/WillHild Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices