Podcasts about Musso

Seguimos comentando toda la actualidad del Atlético de Madrid en un nuevo episodio del Informativo Colchonero. Hoy hablamos de Thomas, en el que insisten como opción para el centro del campo; del plan con el 'Cuti' Romero; de la alternativa de Enzo Barrenechea; de las posibles salidas de Correa, Samuel Lino y Musso; de una posible segunda intentona del Atleti por Mosquera... Todo ello y más, en De Padres a Hijos. Conviértete en miembro de este canal para disfrutar de ventajas: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCl_X6QI3mnJsttsp96OsCZQ/join Correo: depadresahijoscontacto@gmail.com Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/depadresahijos Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/depadresahijos1903/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/DPaH1903 Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@DPaH1903/videos Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6WcodO17ASqRfxYNrjhVGD #atleticomadrid #atleti #futbol #laliga #football

En este episodio de AutoFM, nos adentramos en el mundo de Foton, una marca que llega con fuerza al mercado español. Para conocer todos los detalles, contamos con una entrevista exclusiva con Javier de la Calzada, Director de Comunicación, y Borja Ugarte, Director de Operaciones de Foton en España. Nos hablarán de la estrategia de la marca, su gama de vehículos y su apuesta por nuestro mercado. Foton es una marca fundada en 1996 en Pekín y pertenece al grupo BAIC, el quinto mayor fabricante de automóviles de China. Con 22 plantas globales, es líder en ventas de vehículos industriales en su país, un mercado que matricula 20 millones de unidades al año. Desde su nacimiento, ha vendido más de 11 millones de vehículos en todo el mundo. Su crecimiento ha sido meteórico: en 1999 ya era líder en camiones ligeros en China, en 2004 comenzó a exportar, en 2007 firmó un acuerdo con Cummins, en 2012 con Daimler, y en 2017 con ZF para la fabricación de cajas de cambio. Actualmente, cuenta con 2.100 concesionarios en China y presencia en más de 130 países, con 1.000 distribuidores y 1.200 puntos de servicio. Es líder de ventas en países como Colombia y Chile. En España, Foton desembarca de la mano de Astara, que ha establecido acuerdos estratégicos con Santander Consumer Bank y Astara Last Mile para la distribución de recambios. Arrancan con 11 concesionarios, con el objetivo de alcanzar 22 antes de final de año. En cuanto a su gama de productos, encontramos opciones para distintos usos: Foton Tunland G7 – Una pick-up turbodiésel con tracción 4x4 y etiqueta C. Equipa un motor 2.0 de 162 CV, con cambio manual de 6 marchas o automático ZF de 8. Tiene reductora, suspensión trasera de ballesta y capacidad de carga de 975 kg. Su altura libre al suelo es de 210 mm y puede vadear hasta 60 cm. Bien equipada con llantas de 18'', protector de cárter, pantalla con cámara 360º y diversos ADAS. Precio: 25.958 - 27.529 €. Foton Tunland V9 – Una pick-up más orientada al ocio, con microhibridación y etiqueta ECO. Mantiene el motor de 162 CV, pero con una longitud mayor (5,62 metros) y caja automática ZF de 8 marchas de serie. Cuenta con suspensión trasera de muelle, capacidad de carga de 895 kg, una altura libre al suelo de 240 mm y vadeo de 70 cm. Viene con un interior premium, con dos pantallas (una de 14,6''), asientos de cuero Napa y una dotación completa de ayudas a la conducción. Precio: 42.322 €. Foton eToano – Un furgón 100% eléctrico con etiqueta CERO. Disponible en dos longitudes (5,5 o 6 metros) y dos capacidades (7,5 o 10,6 m³), equipa baterías CATL de 77 o 100 kWh y un motor eléctrico de 177 CV, con hasta 450 km de autonomía en ciudad. Viene con llantas de 16'', faros full LED, pantalla de infoentretenimiento de 12,3'', y múltiples ADAS. Precio: 41.728 €. Foton apuesta por componentes de calidad con proveedores de primer nivel como Eaton para el diferencial trasero, Bosch para el sistema common-rail, ZF y BorgWarner para la tracción y la EGR. Y esto no es todo: después del verano, llegará la Foton View Grand (diésel) y Foton eView Grand (eléctrica), una furgoneta de 5,4 metros, con motor diésel de 162 CV y cambio ZF de 8 marchas, y una variante eléctrica de 184 CV con batería de 77 kWh. Además, en este episodio también ponemos a prueba la KGM Musso, una pick-up que promete ser una opción interesante en su segmento. Analizamos su comportamiento, capacidades y todo lo que necesitas saber si estás pensando en este tipo de vehículo. Todos los podcast: https://www.podcastmotor.es Twitter: @AutoFmRadio Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/autofmradio/ YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@AutoFM Contacto: info@autofm.es

Il punto con le ultimissime news di calciomercato Inter insieme a Giorgio Musso di Calciomercato.it 

This was an unusual podcast just based on the folks who showed up to chat with us. Jennifer and I had taken a trip to the Chateau Marmont on Sunset Blvd, and we had a group of folks who stopped by to say hello. At some point John Belushi talked about "ghost watching" - not to show up in the hotel to watch people onstage, but to watch "the other ghosts wandering around." Lisa Marie Presley and Michael Jackson showed up to talk about early exits - people who leave the stage early for whatever reason. And that brought a bunch of people forward, from JFK to Elvis, to Matthew Perry, Robin Williams and others... the point they were making is that people leave the stage in all different fashions, and it's about focusing on who they were while they were onstage, and not how they left it. We had a brief chat with Gene Hackman again - to clarify what happened in light of the police reports... and he made a joke about it.  I try to repeat the advice that these folks are available to anyone if they take the time to ask them questions. But be prepared for them not being all that interested in questions that relate to our journey and not theirs. I asked my old pal Charles Grodin about what it was like to see his old friend Gene, and then we shifted to an event that happened later in the day. While dining at Musso and Frank's in Hollywood two members of my group saw "a ghostly figure" sitting in the corner of the room. They didn't know who it was or could be, but said he "looked like the actor Robert Downey Jr." (And even then they didn't know his name either, and asked questions about someone named "Downey") They also heard him talking about "table #1" to them - so I invited the waiter to stop by the table and simply asked about any ghosts people might have seen in the restaurant. He said "Charlie Chaplin" and I asked where table #1 was - and he mentioned the table that I had lunch with Jonathan Winters - which was table #1 - and how that's where Charlie liked to dine. We asked Charlie about why he was seen "scribbling notes" and he said it was the place he liked to have good ideas and good food, but also said in this instance, he showed up so that members of my group would see him, and that would inspire me to invite him to chat on our podcast. I don't know how else to put it - but Jennifer and I have been doing this weekly for ten years. Not everyone who shows up in our conversations is a celebrity - but because of my 40 years in the business, and Luana Ander's 300 TV shows and movies (my friend who moderates our podcast from the Flipside, who passed in 1996) I'm not surprised when people do show up that we can recognize. Jennifer's father Jim also stopped by to clarify some things, and I must say - the topic of leaving the stage early came up - if someone is in need of help or counseling, there is help - and one should reach out to 988 and the counselors there from any telephone. But in my desire to not use the S word in the podcast, I tried to leave it out of the conversation, as the algorithms will generally not want it to be discussed - but the important point was made by people offstage - that is to realize that life goes on no matter what happens, and that everyone onstage signed up to be onstage, and should see what things might occur or happen that we could not be aware of. Oh, and Robin Williams showed up to not only discuss the same topic, but to confirm that during a recent guided meditation, this woman saw him in her "classroom in the afterlife" - and he confirmed that it was him BEFORE I COULD ASK THE QUESTION. Anyways, all of it is mind bending, and hopefully whomever needs to hear what they are talking about is able to hear what they're trying to say. Thanks for tuning in!

After enjoying her new book Open Socrates so much (and having written about her previous book Aspiration in Second Act), I was delighted to talk to Agnes Callard, not least because, as she discusses in Open Socrates, she is a big Tolstoy admirer. We talked about Master and Man, one of my favourite Tolstoy stories, but also about the value of reading fiction, the relationship between fiction and a thought experiment, and other topics of related interest. George Eliot makes an appearance too. In the discussion about the use of fiction in philosophy classes, I was slightly shocked to hear about how much (or how little) reading her undergraduates are prepared to do, but I was interested that they love Pessoa. Agnes has previously written that the purpose of art is to show us evil. Here is Agnes on Twitter. Transcript below, may contain errors!I found this especially interesting.Exactly, and I mean, 10 seconds, that's a wild exaggeration. So do you know what the actual number is? No. On average. Okay, the average amount of time that you're allowed to wait before responding to something I say is two tenths of a second, which, it's crazy, isn't it? Which, that amount of time is not enough time for, that is a one second pause is an awkward pause, okay? So two tenths of a second is not long enough time for the signal that comes at the end of my talking, so the last sound I make, let's say, to reach your ears and then get into your brain and be processed, and then you figure out what you want to say. It's not enough time, which means you're making a prediction. That's what you're doing when I'm talking. You're making a prediction about when I'm going to stop talking, and you're so good at it that you're on almost every time. You're a little worse over Zoom. Zoom screws us up a little bit, right? But this is like what our brains are built to do. This is what we're super good at, is kind of like interacting, and I think it's really important that it be a genuine interaction. That's what I'm coming to see, is that we learn best from each other when we can interact, and it's not obvious that there are those same interaction possibilities by way of text at the moment, right? I'm not saying there couldn't be, but at the moment, we rely on the fact that we have all these channels open to us. Interestingly, it's the lag time on the phone, like if we were talking just by phone, is about the same. So we're so good at this, we don't need the visual information. That's why I said phone is also face-to-face. I think phone's okay, even though a lot of our informational stream is being cut. We're on target in terms of the quick responses, and there's some way in which what happens in that circumstance is we become a unit. We become a unit of thinking together, and if we're texting each other and each of us gets to ponder our response and all that, it becomes dissociated.Transcript (AI generated)Henry: Today, I am talking to Agnes Callard, professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago, author of Aspiration, and now most recently, Open Socrates. But to begin with, we are going to talk about Tolstoy. Hello, Agnes: .Agnes: Hello.Henry: Shall we talk about Master of Man first?Agnes: Yeah, absolutely.Henry: So this is one of Tolstoy's late stories. I think it's from 1895. So he's quite old. He's working on What is Art? He's in what some people think is his crazy period. And I thought it would be interesting to talk about because you write a lot in Open Socrates about Tolstoy's midlife crisis, for want of a better word. Yeah. So what did you think?Agnes: So I think it's sort of a novel, a story about almost like a kind of fantasy of how a midlife crisis could go if it all went perfectly. Namely, there's this guy, Brekhunov, is that his name? And he is, you know, a landowner and he's well off and aristocratic. And he is selfish and only cares about his money. And the story is just, he takes this, you know, servant of his out to, he wants to go buy a forest and he wants to get there first before anyone else. And so he insists on going into this blizzard and he gets these opportunities to opt out of this plan. And he keeps turning them down. And eventually, you know, they end up kind of in the middle of the blizzard. And at kind of the last moment, when his servant is about to freeze to death, he throws himself on top of the servant and sacrifices himself for the servant. And the reason why it seems like a fantasy is it's like, it's like a guy whose life has a lacuna in it where, you know, where meaning is supposed to be. And he starts to get an inkling of the sort of terror of that as they're spending more and more time in the storm. And his initial response is like to try to basically abandon the servant and go out and continue to get to this forest. But eventually he like, it's like he achieves, he achieves the conquest of meaning through this heroic act of self-sacrifice that is itself kind of like an epiphany, like a fully fulfilling epiphany. He's like in tears and he's happy. He dies happy in this act of self-sacrifice. And the fantasy part of it is like, none of it ever has to get examined too carefully. It doesn't like, his thought doesn't need to be subjected to philosophical scrutiny because it's just this, this one momentary glorious kind of profusion of love. And then it all ends.Henry: So the difficult question is answered the moment it is asked. Exactly, exactly, right?Agnes: It's sort of, it's, I see it as like a counterpart to the death of Ivan Ilyich.Henry: Tell me, tell me more.Agnes: Well, in the death of Ivan Ilyich, the questions surface for even, you know, when death shows up for him. And he suddenly starts to realize, wait a minute, I've lived my whole life basically in the way that Brekhunov did. Basically in the way that Brekhunov does as, you know, pursuing money, trying to be a socially successful person. What was the point of all that? And he finds himself unable to answer it. And he finds himself, it's the exact opposite. He becomes very alienated from his wife and his daughter, I think.Henry: Yeah.Agnes: And the absence of an answer manifests as this absence of connection to anyone, except an old manservant who like lifts up his legs and that's the one relief that he gets. And, you know, it's mostly in the gesture of like someone who will sacrifice themselves for another. Right, that's once again where sort of meaning will show up for a Tolstoy, if it ever will show up in a kind of direct and unashamed way.Henry: Right, the exercise of human compassion is like a running theme for him. Like if you can get to that, things are going great. Otherwise you've really screwed up.Agnes: Yeah, that's like Tolstoy's deus ex machina is the sudden act of compassion.Henry: Right, right. But you think this is unphilosophical?Agnes: I think it's got its toe in philosophical waters and sort of not much more than that. And it's in a way that makes it quite philosophical in the sense that there's a kind of awareness of like a deep puzzle that is kind of like at the heart of existence. Like there's a sensitivity to that in Tolstoy that's part of what makes him a great writer. But there's not much faith in the prospect of sort of working that through rationally. It's mostly something we just got a gesture at.Henry: But he does think the question can be answered. Like this is what he shares with you, right? He does think that when you're confronted with the question, he's like, it's okay. There is an answer and it is a true answer. We don't just have to make some, he's like, I've had the truth for you.Agnes: Yes, I think that that's right. But I think that like the true answer that he comes to is it's compassion and it's sort of religiously flavored compassion, right? I mean, that it's important. It's not just. Yeah, it's a very Christian conclusion. Right, but the part that's important there in a way, even if it's not being Christian, but that it's being religious in the sense of, yes, this is the answer. But if you ask for too much explanation as to what the answer is, it's not going to be the right answer. But if you ask for too much explanation as to why it's the answer, you're going the wrong way. That is, it's gotta, part of the way in which it's the answer is by faith.Henry: Or revelation.Agnes: Or, right, faith, exactly. But like, but it's not your task to search and use your rational faculties to find the answer.Henry: I wonder though, because one of the things Tolstoy is doing is he's putting us in the position of the searcher. So I read this, I'm trying to go through like all of Tolstoy at the moment, which is obviously not, it's not currently happening, but I'm doing a lot of it. And I think basically everything in Tolstoy is the quest for death, right? Literature is always about quests. And he's saying these characters are all on a quest to have a good death. And they come very early or very late to this. So Pierre comes very early to this realization, right? Which is why he's like the great Tolstoy hero, master of man, Ivan Ilyich, they come very, and Tolstoy is like, wow, they really get in under the wire. They nearly missed, this is terrible. And all the way through this story, Tolstoy is giving us the means to see what's really going on in the symbolism and in all the biblical references, which maybe is harder for us because we don't know our Bible, like we're not all hearing our Bible every week, whereas for Tolstoy's readers, it's different. But I think he's putting us in the position of the searcher all the time. And he is staging two sides of the argument through these two characters. And when they get to the village and Vasily, he meets the horse thief and the horse thief's like, oh, my friend. And then they go and see the family and the family mirrors them. And Tolstoy's like, he's like, as soon as you can see this, as soon as you can work this out, you can find the truth. But if you're just reading the story for a story, I'm going to have to catch you at the end. And you're going to have to have the revelation and be like, oh my God, it's a whole, oh, it's a whole thing. Okay, I thought they were just having a journey in the snow. And I think he does that a lot, right? That's, I think that's why people love War and Peace because we go on Pierre's journey so much. And we can recognize that like, people's lives have, a lot of people's lives happen like that. Like Pierre's always like half thinking the question through and then half like, oh, there's another question. And then thinking that one through and then, oh, no, wait, there's another question. And I think maybe Tolstoy is very pragmatic. Like that's as philosophical as most people are going to get. Pierre is in some ways the realistic ideal.Agnes: I mean, Pierre is very similar to Tolstoy just in this respect that there's a specific like moment or two in his life where, he basically has Tolstoy's crisis. That is he confronts these big questions and Tolstoy describes it as like, there was a screw in his head that had got loose and he kept turning it, but it kept, it was like stripped. And so no matter when you turned it, it didn't go. It didn't grab into anything. And what happens eventually is like, oh, he learns to have a good conventional home life. Like, and like not, don't ask yourself these hard questions. They'll screw you up. And I mean, it's not exactly compassion, but it's something close to that. The way things sort of work out in War and Peace. And I guess I think that you're sort of right that Tolstoy is having us figure something out for ourselves. And in that way, you could say we're on a journey. There's a question, why? Why does he have us do that? Why not just tell us? Why have it figured out for ourselves? And one reason might be because he doesn't know, that he doesn't know what he wants to tell us. And so you got to have them figure out for themselves. And I think that that is actually part of the answer here. And it's even maybe part of what it is to be a genius as a writer is to be able to write from this place of not really having the answers, but still be able to help other people find them.Henry: You don't think it's, he wants to tell us to be Christians and to believe in God and to take this like.Agnes: Absolutely, he wants to tell us that. And in spite of that, he's a great writer. If that were all he was achieving, he'd be boring like other writers who just want to do that and just do that.Henry: But you're saying there's something additional than that, that is even mysterious to Tolstoy maybe.Agnes: Yeah.Henry: Did you find that additional mystery in Master in Man or do you see that more in the big novels?Agnes: I see it the most in Death of Ivan Ilyich. But I think it's true, like in Anna Karenina, I can feel Tolstoy being pulled back and forth between on the one hand, just a straight out moralistic condemnation of Anna. And of, there are the good guys in this story, Levine and Kitty, and then there's this like evil woman. And then actually being seduced by her charms at certain moments. And it's the fact that he is still susceptible to her and to the seductions of her charms, even though that's not the moral of the story, it's not the official lesson. There's like, he can't help but say more than what the official lesson is supposed to be. And yeah, I think if he were just, I think he makes the same estimation of himself that I am making in terms of saying, look, he finds most of his own art wanting, right? In what is art? Because it's insufficiently moralistic basically, or it's doing too much else besides being, he's still pretty moralistic. I mean, even War and Peace, even Anna Karenina, he's moralistic even in those texts, but his artistry outstrips his moralism. And that's why we're attracted to him, I think. If he were able to control himself as a writer and to be the novelist that he describes as his ideal in what is art, I don't think we would be so interested in reading it.Henry: And where do you see, you said you saw it in Ivan Ilyich as well.Agnes: Yes, so I think in Ivan Ilyich, it is in the fact that there actually is no deus ex machina in Ivan Ilyich. It's not resolved. I mean, you get this little bit of relation to the servant, but basically Ivan Ilyich is like the closest that Tolstoy comes to just like full confrontation with the potential meaninglessness of human existence. There's something incredibly courageous about it as a text.Henry: So what do you think about the bit at the end where he says he was looking for his earlier accustomed fear of death, but he couldn't find it. Where was death? What death? There was no fear whatsoever because there was no death. Instead of death, there was light. Suddenly he said, oh, that's it, oh bliss.Agnes: Okay, fair enough. I'd like forgotten that.Henry: Oh, okay. Well, so my feeling is that like you're more right. So my official thing is like, I don't agree with that, but I actually think you're more right than I think because to me that feels a bit at the end like he saw the light and he, okay, we got him right under the line, it's fine. And actually the bulk of the story just isn't, it's leading up to that. And it's the very Christian in all its imagery and symbolism, but it's interesting that this, when it's, this is adapted into films like Ikiru and there was a British one recently, there's just nothing about God. There's nothing about seeing the light. They're just very, very secular. They strip this into something totally different. And I'm a little bit of a grumpy. I'm like, well, that's not what Tolstoy was doing, but also it is what he was doing. I mean, you can't deny it, right? The interpreters are, they're seeing something and maybe he was so uncomfortable with that. That's why he wrote what is art.Agnes: Yeah, and that's the, I like that. I like that hypothesis. And right, I think it's like, I sort of ignore those last few lines because I'm like, ah, he copped out at the very end, but he's done the important, he's done the important, the important work, I think, is for instance, the scene with, even on his wife, where they part on the worst possible terms with just hatred, you know, like just pure hatred for the fact that she's forcing him to pretend that he isn't dying. Like that is like the profound moment.Henry: What I always remember is they're playing cards in the other room. And he's sitting there, he's lying there thinking about like the office politics and curtain, like what curtain fabrics we have to pick out and the like, his intense hatred of the triviality of life. And I love this because I think there's something, like a midlife crisis is a bit like being an adolescent in that you go through all these weird changes and you start to wonder like, who am I? What is my life? When you're an adolescent, you're told that's great. You should go ahead and you should, yes, lean into that. And when you're like in your forties, people are going, well, try and just put a lid on that. That's not a good idea. Whereas Tolstoy has the adolescent fury of like curtains and cards. Oh my, you know, you can feel the rage of his midlife crisis in some of that seemingly mundane description. Yeah. I think that's what we respond to, right? That like his hatred in a way.Agnes: Yeah. I mean, maybe we, many of us just have trouble taking ourselves as seriously as Tolstoy was able to, you know? And that's something, there's something glorious about that, that anyone else would listen to the people around them telling him, hey, don't worry, you're a great guy. Look, you wrote these important novels. You're a hero of the Russian people. You've got this wife, you're an aristocrat. You've got this family, you've got your affairs. I mean, come on, you've got everything a man could want. Just be happy with it all, you know? Many of us might be like, yeah, okay, I'm being silly. And Tolstoy is like, no one's going to tell me that I'm silly. Like I'm the one who's going to tell myself, if anything. And that kind of confidence is, you know, why he's sort of not willing to dismiss this thought.Henry: Yeah, yeah, interesting. So how do you think of Master and Man in relation to all the others? Because you know Tolstoy pretty well. You teach him a lot. How do you place it? Like how good do you think it is?Agnes: I don't teach him a lot. I'm trying to think if I ever taught Tolstoy.Henry: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I read that you had.Agnes: I've taught The Death of Ivan Ilyich. That's the one, I have taught that one. I wish, I mean, I would love to teach. I just can't imagine assigning any of these novels in a philosophy, my students wouldn't read it.Henry: They wouldn't read it?Agnes: No.Henry: Why?Agnes: It's pretty hard to get people to read long texts. And I mean, some of them certainly would, okay, for sure. But if I'm, you know, in a philosophy class where you'd have to kind of have pretty high numbers of page assignments per class, if we're going to, I mean, you know, forget War and Peace. I mean, even like Ivan Ilyich is going to be pushing it to assign it for one class. I've learned to shorten my reading assignments because students more and more, they're not in the habit of reading. And so I got to think, okay, what is the minimum that I can assign them that where I can predict that they will do it? Anyway, I'm going to be pushing that next year in a class I'm teaching. I normally, you know, I assign fiction in some of my classes but that's very much not a thing that most philosophers do. And I have to sign it alongside, you know, but so it's not only the fiction they're reading, they're also reading philosophical texts. And anyway, yeah, no, so I have not done much, but I have done in a class on death, I did assign Ivan Ilyich. I don't tend to think very much about the question, what is the level of quality of a work of art?Henry: Well, as in, all I mean is like, how does it compare for you to the other Tolstoy you've read?Agnes: I, so the question that I tend to ask myself is like, what can I learn from it or how much can I learn? Not, it's not because I don't think the question of, the other one is a good one. I just think I trust other people's judgment more than mine unlike artistic quality. And I guess I think it's not as good as Death of Ivan Ilyich and I kind of can't see, like, it's like, what do I learn from it that I don't learn from Death of Ivan Ilyich? Which is like a question that I ask myself. And, there's a way in which that like that little final move, maybe when I'm reading Death of Ivan Ilyich, I can ignore that little final bit and here I can't ignore it. Tolstoy made it impossible for me to ignore in this story. So that's maybe the advantage of this story. Tolstoy makes his move more overt and more dominating of the narrative.Henry: Yeah, I think also, I've known people who read Ivan Ilyich and not really see that it's very Christian. Yeah, oh yeah.Agnes: I don't think I- Much less.Henry: Yeah.Agnes: That's what I'm doing. I'm erasing that from the story.Henry: But that's like much less possible with this one. I agree.Agnes: Right, exactly. That's sort of what I mean is that- Yeah, yeah, yeah. It's like, here the message is more overt. And so therefore I think it's actually a pretty important story in that way. Like, let's say for understanding Tolstoy. That is, if you were to try to take your view of Tolstoy and base it on Death of Ivan Ilyich, which sometimes I do in my own head, because it's occupied such an important place for me, then this is a good way to temper that.Henry: Yeah, they make a nice pairing. Yeah. Yeah, definitely. Let's pick up on this question about philosophers and fiction because you write about that in Open Socrates. You say, great fiction allows us to explore what we otherwise look away from. So it makes questions askable, but then you say only in relation to fictional characters, which you think is a limitation. Are you drawing too hard of a line between fictional characters and real people? Like if someone said, oh, we found out, we were in the archives, Ivan Ilyich, he didn't, it's not fiction. He was just a friend, just happened to a friend, basically word for word. He just did the work to make it kind of look okay for a novel, but basically it's just real. Would that really change very much?Agnes: I think it wouldn't, no. So it might change a little bit, but not that much. So maybe the point, maybe a better thing I could have said there is other people. That is one thing that fictional people are is resolutely other. There's no chance you're going to meet them. And like they are, part of what it is for them to be fictional is that, there isn't even a possible world in which you meet them because metaphysically what they are is the kind of thing that can't ever interact with you. And, like the possible world in which I run into Ivan and Ivan Ilyich is the world in which he's not a Tolstoy character anymore. He's not a character in a novel, obviously, because we're both real people. So I think it's that there's a kind of safety in proving the life of somebody who is not in any way a part of your life.Henry: The counter argument, which novelists would make is that if you gave some kind of philosophical propositional argument about death, about what it means to die, a lot of people just wouldn't, they'd like, maybe they'd understand what you're saying, but it just wouldn't affect them very much. Whereas if they've read Ivan Ilyich, this will actually affect them. I don't want to say it'll resonate with them, but you know what I mean. It will catch them in some way and they're more likely then to see something in their own life and be like, oh my God, I'm appreciating what Ivan Ilyich was telling me. Whereas, this is the argument, right? The statistics of social science, the propositions of philosophy, this just never gets through to people.Agnes: Yeah, so one way to put this is, novelists are fans of epiphanies. I mean, some novelists, like Tolstoy, it's quite explicit. You just get these epiphanies, right? Like in this story, epiphany. James Joyce, I mean, he's like master of every story in Dubliners, epiphany. Novelists have this fantasy that people's lives are changed in a sudden moment when they have a passionate, oh, I just read this story and I'm so happy about it. And I don't actually doubt that these things happen, these epiphanies, that is people have these passionate realizations. I don't know how stable they are. Like they may have a passionate realization and then, maybe it's a little bit the novelist's fantasy to say you have the passionate realization and everything is changed. In this story, we get around that problem because he dies, right? So, that, I don't know. I somehow am now James Joyce. I don't know. I somehow am now James Joyce is in my head. The final story in Dubliners is the dead. And there's this like, amazing, I don't know who read the story.Henry: Yeah, yeah. Also with snow, right?Agnes: Yeah, exactly.You know, and it's this amazing where this guy is realizing his wife, their relationship is not what he thought it was, whatever. But then the story ends, does he really change? Like, do they just go on and have the same marriage after that point? We don't know. I mean, Joyce avoids that question by having the story end. But, so you might say, you know, novelists like epiphanies and they're good at writing epiphanies and producing epiphanies and imagining that their readers will have epiphanies. And then there's a question, okay, how valuable is the epiphany? And I think, not nothing. I wouldn't put it at zero, but you might say, okay, but let's compare the epiphany and the argument, right? So, what philosophers and the social scientists have, what we have is arguments. And who's ever been changed by an argument? And I think I would say all of human history has been changed by arguments and it's pretty much the only thing that's ever done anything to stably change us is arguments. If you think about, like, what are the things we've moved on? What are the things we've come around on? You know, human rights, there's a big one. That's not a thing in antiquity. And it's a thing now. And I think it's a thing because of arguments. Some of those arguments, you know, are starting to come in their own in religious authors, but then really come in, the flourishing is really the enlightenment. And so you might think, well, maybe an argument is not the kind of thing that can change very easily an adult who was already pretty set in their ways and who is not going to devote much of their time to philosophizing. It isn't going to give them the kind of passionate feeling of your life has suddenly been turned around by an epiphany, but it might well be that if we keep arguing with each other, that is how humanity changes.Henry: I think a lot of the arguments were put into story form. So like the thing that changed things the most before the enlightenment maybe was the gospels. Which is just lots of stories. I know there are arguments in there, but basically everything is done through stories. Or metaphor, there's a lot of metaphor. I also think philosophers are curiously good at telling stories. So like some of the best, you know, there's this thing of micro fiction, which is like very, very short story. I think some of the best micro fiction is short stories. Is a thought experiment, sorry. Yeah. So people like Judith Jarvis Thompson, or well, his name has escaped my head, Reasons and Persons, you know who I mean? Derek Parfit, right. They write great short stories. Like you can sit around and argue about long-termism with just propositions, and people are going to be either like, this makes total sense or this is weird. And you see this when you try and do this with people. If you tell them Parfit's thought experiment that you drop a piece of glass in the woods, and a hundred years later, a little girl comes in and she cuts up. Okay, everyone's a long-termist in some way now. To some extent, everyone is just like, of course. Okay, fine. The story is good. The famous thought experiment about the child drowning in the pond. And then, okay, the pond is like 3000. Again, everyone's like, okay, I get it. I'm with you. Philosophers constantly resort to stories because they know that the argument is, you have to have to agree with you. You've got to have the argument. The argument's the fundamental thing. But when you put it in a story, it will actually, somehow it will then do its work.Agnes: I think it's really interesting to ask, and I never asked myself this question, like what is the relationship between a thought experiment and a story? And I think that, I'm fine with a thought experiment with saying it's a kind of story, but I think that, so one feature of a thought experiment is that the person who is listening to it is given often a kind of agency. Like, which way do you push the trolley? Or do you care that you left this piece of glass there? Or are you, suppose that the pond was so many miles away but there was a very long hand that reached from here and you put a coin in the machine and at the other end, the hand will pull the child out of the water. Do you put the coin in, right? So like you're given these choices. It's like a choose your own adventure story, right? And that's really not what Tolstoy wrote. He really did not write choose your own adventure stories. There's a, I think he is-Henry: But the philosopher always comes in at the end and says, by the way, this is the correct answer. I'm giving you this experiment so that you can see that, like, I'm proving my point. Peter Singer is not like, it's okay if you don't want to jump into the pond. This is your story, you can pick. He's like, no, you have to jump in. This is why I'm telling you the story.Agnes: That's right, but I can't tell it to you without, in effect, your participation in the story, without you seeing yourself as part of the story and as having like agency in the story. It's by way of your agency that I'm making your point. Part of why this is important is that otherwise philosophers become preachers, which is what Tolstoy is when he's kind of at his worst. That is, you know, the philosopher doesn't just want to like tell you what to think. The philosopher wants to show you that you're already committed to certain conclusions and he's just showing you the way between the premises you already accept and the conclusion that follows from your premises. And that's quite-Henry: No, philosophers want to tell you the particular, most philosophers create a thought experiment to be like, you should be a virtue ethicist or you should give money away. Like they're preaching.Agnes: I don't think that is preaching. So I think that, and like, I think that this is why so many philosophical thought experiments are sort of meant to rely on what people call intuitions. Like, oh, but don't you have the intuition that? What is the intuition? The intuition is supposed to be somehow the kind of visceral and inchoate grasp that you already have of the thing I am trying to teach you. You already think the thing I'm telling you. I'm just making it clear to you what you think. And, you know, like there's like, I want to go back to the gospels. Like, I think it's a real question I have. I'm going to get in trouble for saying this, but I feel like something I sometimes think about Jesus and I say this as a non-Christian, is that Jesus was clearly a really exceptional, really extraordinary human being. And maybe he just never met his Plato. You know, he got these guys who are like telling stories about him. But like, I feel like he had some really interesting thoughts that we haven't accessed. Imagine, imagine if Socrates only ever had Xenophon. You know, if Socrates had never met Plato. We might just have this story about Socrates. Oh, he's kind of like a hero. He was very self-sacrificing. He asked everyone to care about everybody else. And he might like actually look quite a bit like Jesus on a sort of like, let's say simplistic picture of him. And it's like, maybe it's a real shame that Jesus didn't have a philosopher as one of the people who would tell a story about him. And that if we had that, there would be some amazing arguments that we've missed out on.Henry: Is Paul not the closest thing to that?Agnes: What does he give us?Henry: What are the arguments? Well, all the, you know, Paulian theology is huge. I mean, all the epistles, they're full of, maybe, I don't know if they're arguments more than declarations, but he's a great expounder of this is what Jesus meant, you should do this, right? And it's not quite what you're saying.Agnes: It's conclusions, right?Henry: Yes, yes.Agnes: So I think it's like, you could sort of imagine if we only had the end of the Gorgias, where Socrates lists some of his sayings, right? Yes, exactly, yes. You know, it's better to have injustice done to you than to do injustice. It's better to be just than to appear just. Oratories should, you should never flatter anyone under any circumstances. Like, you know, there's others in other dialogues. Everyone desires the good. There's no such thing as weakness of will, et cetera. There are these sort of sayings, right? And you could sort of imagine a version of someone who's telling the story of Socrates who gives you those sayings. And yeah, I just think, well, we'd be missing a lot if we didn't hear the arguments for the sayings.Henry: Yeah, I feel stumped. So the next thing you say about novelists, novelists give us a view onto the promised land, but not more. And this relates to what you're saying, everything you've just been saying. I want to bring in a George Eliot argument where she says, she kind of says, that's the point. She says, I'm not a teacher, I'm a companion in the struggle of thought. So I think a lot of the time, some of the differences we're discussing here are to do with the readers more than the authors. So Tolstoy and George Eliot, Jane Austen, novelists of their type and their caliber. It's like, if you're coming to think, if you're involved in the struggle of thought, I'm putting these ideas in and I'm going to really shake you up with what's happening to these people and you're going to go away and think about it and Pierre's going to stay with you and it's really going to open things up. If you're just going to read the story, sure, yeah, sure. And at the end, we'll have the big revelation and that's whoopee. And that's the same as just having the sayings from Socrates and whatever. But if you really read Middlemarch, one piece, whatever, Adam Bede is always the one that stays with me. Like you will have to think about it. Like if you've read Adam Bede and you know what happens to Hetty at the end, this has the, oh, well, I'm not going to spoil it because you have to read it because it's insane. It's really an exceptional book, but it has some of those qualities of the thought experiment. She really does put you, George Eliot's very good at this. She does put you in the position of saying like, what actually went right and wrong here? Like she's really going to confront you with the situation but with the difficulty of just saying, oh, you know, that's easy. This is what happened. This is the bad thing. Well, there were several different things and she's really putting it up close to you and saying, well, this is how life is. You need to think about that.Agnes: So that last bit, I mean, I think that this is how life is part. Yeah. Really do think that that's something you get out of novels. It's not, so here's how you should live it or so here's why it makes sense, or here are the answers. It's none of the answers, I think. It's just that there's a kind of, it's like, you might've thought that given that we all live lives, we live in a constant contact with reality but I think we don't. We live in a bubble of what it's, the information that's useful to me to take in at any given moment and what do I need in order to make it to the next step? And there's a way in which the novel like confronts you with like the whole of life as like a spectacle or something like that, as something to be examined and understood. But typically I think without much guidance as to how you should examine or understand it, at least that's my own experience of it is that often it's like posing a problem to me and not really telling me how to solve it. But the problem is one that I often, under other circumstances, I'm inclined to look away from and the novelist sort of forces me to look at it.Henry: Does that mean philosophers should be assigning more fiction?Agnes: I, you know, I am in general pretty wary of judgments of that kind just because I find it hard to know what anyone should do. I mean, even myself, let alone all other philosophers.Henry: But you're the philosopher. You should be telling us.Agnes: No, I actually just don't think that is what philosophers do. So like, it was like a clear disagreement about, you know, is the, like George Eliot's like, I'm not a teacher, but the philosopher also says I'm not a teacher. I mean, Tolstoy was like, I am a teacher.Henry: Yeah, I'm a teacher.Agnes: I'm ready to guide you all.Henry: You should take notes.Agnes: But I think it's right that, yeah. So I think it's like, you know, maybe they have some other way of forcing that confrontation with reality. But I, my own feeling is that philosophers, when they use examples, including some of the thought experiments, it's sort of the opposite of what you said. It's kind of like they're writing very bad fiction. And so they'll come up with these, like I am philosophy. We have to, we're forced to sort of come up with examples. And, you know, I discuss one in my aspiration book of, oh, once upon a time, there was a guy. And when he was young, he wanted to be a clown, but his family convinced him that he should be an investment banker and make money. And so he did that. But then when he was older, he finally recovered this long lost desire. And then he became a clown and then he was happy. It's a story in an article by a philosopher I respect. Okay, I like her very much. And I haven't read it in a long time. So I'm hoping I'm summarizing it correctly. But my point is like, and this is supposed to be a story about how sort of self-creation and self-realization and how you can discover your authentic self by contrast with like the social forces that are trying to make you into a certain kind of person. But it's also, it's just a very bad piece of fiction. And I'm like, well, you know, if I'm say teaching a class on self-creation as I do sometimes, I'm like, well, we can read some novelists who write about this process and they write about it in a way that really shows it to us, that really forces us to confront the reality of it. And that story was not the reality. So if you have some other way to do that as a philosopher, then great. I'm very instrumental about my use of fiction, but I haven't found another way.Henry: Which other fiction do you use in the self-creation class?Agnes: So in that class, we read Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man and Elena Ferrante's My Brilliant Friend. And we also read some Fernando Pessoa.Henry: Pessoa, what do your students think of Pessoa?Agnes: They love it. So when I first assigned it, I'm like, I don't know what you guys are going to make of this. It's kind of weird. We're reading like just, you know, 20 pages of excerpts I like from the Book of Disquiet. I mean, it's like my own text I'm creating, basically. I figure with that text, you can do a choose your own adventure. And they like it a lot. And I think that it really, that, you know, the thing that really resonates with them is this stuff where he talks. So there are two passages in particular. So one of them is, one where he talks about how he's like, yeah, he meets his friend. And he can't really listen to what his friend is saying, but he can remember with photographic precision the lines on the face when he's smiling, or like, it's like what he's saying is, I'm paying attention to the wrong thing. Like I'm paying attention to the facial expressions and not to the content. And that I'm somebody who's in a world where my organization of my own experience is not following the rules that are sort of being dictated to me about how my experience is supposed to be organized. And that's sort of his predicament. So that's a thing that they like. And then there's a wonderful passage about how I keep trying to free myself from the social forces oppressing me. And I take away this noose that's around my neck. And as I'm doing it, I realize my hand is attached to a noose and it's pulling me. Like I'm the one who's doing, I'm the one who's suffocating myself all along when I'm trying to free myself from social forces, it's me who's doing the oppressing. Anyway, so those are some passages that we talk about that they like. They like it a lot. They have a lot less trouble making something of it than I had expected that they would.Henry: Is this because he, is he well-suited to the age of social media and phones and fragmented personalities and you're always 16 different people? Is it that kind of thing?Agnes: Partly it's the short texts. I mean, as I said, meeting a problem, right? And so, yeah. So like they like Nietzsche too, probably for the same reason, right? I mean, anything where the-Henry: The aphorism.Agnes: Yeah, exactly. Like no joke. You know, it's not the era for War and Peace. It's the era for the Nietzschean aphorism.Henry: This is so depressing. I thought this wasn't true.Agnes: Yeah, I think it's true. I like, I had a conversation with a student in my office yesterday about this and about how like just his own struggles with reading and how all his friends have the same problem. And, you know, I have made some suggestions and I think maybe I need to push them harder in terms of, you know, just university creating device-free spaces and then people having like, I think we have to view it the way we view exercise. Like none of us would exercise if we didn't force ourselves to exercise. And we use strategies to do it. Like, you know, you have a friend and you're going to go together or, you know, you make a habit of it or whatever. I mean, like, I think we just have to approach reading the same way. Just let's accept that we're in an environment that's hostile to reading and make it a priority and organize things to make it possible rather than just like pretending that there isn't a problem. But yeah, there is. And it's hard for us to see. So you're not as old as me, but I'm old enough that all of my reading habits were formed in a world without all of this, right? So of course it's way easier for me. Even I get distracted, but, you know, for me spending a couple of hours in the evening reading, that's like a thing I can do. But like a lot of people, okay, I was at a like tech, in a little tech world conference in California. And it was early in the morning and my husband wasn't awake yet. So I was just, and it was one of these conferences where there's like a little group room and then you have your own, like we had like a hotel room type room, but like then I would had to be in the room with my husband who was sleeping. I couldn't turn the light on. So it was early. I woke up at four. So I went to the group room just to read. And I'm sitting there reading and someone came up to me and they were like, I can't believe you're just sitting there like reading. I don't think I've seen someone read a book in, you know, he's like ever or something, maybe. I mean, he's a half my age. Like he's like, that's just not a thing that people do. And it was like, he's like, it's so on brand that you're reading, you know? But it's like, it's, I think it's just, it's much harder for people who have grown up with all of this stuff that is in some way hostile to the world of reading. Yeah, it's much harder for them than for us. And we should be reorganizing things to make it easier.Henry: Yeah, I get that. I'm just, I'm alarmed that they can't read, like the depth of Ivan Ilyich. It's like, I don't know, it's like 50 pages or.Agnes: Yeah, for one class, no.Henry: It's very short. It's very short.Agnes: That's not short. 50 pages is not short.Henry: It's an hour or two hours of reading.Agnes: It's like, yeah, between two and three. They also read slower because they don't read as much.Henry: Okay, but you know what I'm like…Agnes: Yeah, right, three hours of reading is a lot to assign for a class. Especially if, in my case, I always also assign philosophy. So it's not the only thing I'm assigning.Henry: Sure, sure, but they read the philosophy.Agnes: Same problem. I mean, it's not like some different problem, right? Same problem, and in fact, they are a little bit more inclined to read the fiction than the philosophy, but the point is the total number of pages is kind of what matters. And from that point of view, philosophy is at an advantage because we compress a lot into very few pages. So, but you know, and again, it's like, it's a matter of like, it's probably not of the level. So I can, you know, I can be more sure that in an upper level class, students will do the reading, but I'm also a little bit more inclined to assign literature in the lower level classes because I'm warming people up to philosophy. So, yeah, I mean, but I think it is alarming, like it should be alarming.Henry: Now, one of the exciting things about Open Socrates, which most people listening to this would have read my review, so you know that I strongly recommend that you all read it now, but it is all about dialogue, like real dialogue. And can we find some, you know, I don't want to say like, oh, can we find some optimism? But like, people are just going to be reading less, more phones, all this talk about we're going back to an oral culture. I don't think that's the right way to phrase it or frame it or whatever, but there's much more opportunity for dialogue these days like this than there used to be. How can Open Socrates, how can people use that book as a way of saying, I want more, you know, intellectual life, but I don't want to read long books? I don't want to turn this into like, give us your five bullet points, self-help Socrates summary, but what can we, this is a very timely book in that sense.Agnes: Yeah, I kind of had thought about it that way, but yeah, I mean, it's a book that says, intellectual life in its sort of most foundational and fundamental form is social, it's a social life, because the kinds of intellectual inquiries that are the most important to us are ones that we can't really conduct on our own. I do think that, I think that some, there is some way in which, like as you're saying, novels can help us a little bit sort of simulate that kind of interaction, at least some of the time, or at least put a question on the table. I sort of agree that that's possible. I think that in terms of social encounters doing it, there are also other difficulties though. Like, so it's, we're not that close to a Socratic world, just giving up on reading doesn't immediately put us into a Socratic world, let's put it that way. And for one thing, I think that there really is a difference between face-to-face interaction, on the one hand, where let's even include Zoom, okay, or phone as face-to-face in an extended sense, and then texting, on the other hand, where text interaction, where like texting back and forth would be, fall under texting, so would social media, Twitter, et cetera, that's sort of- Email. Email, exactly. And I'm becoming more, when I first started working on this book, I thought, well, look, the thing that Socrates cares about is like, when he says that philosophy is like, you know, when he rejects written texts, and he's like, no, what I want to talk back, I'm like, well, the crucial thing is that they can respond, whether they respond by writing you something down or whether they respond by making a sound doesn't matter. And I agree that it doesn't matter whether they make a sound, like for instance, if they respond in sign language, that would be fine. But I think it matters that there is very little lag time between the responses, and you never get really short lag time in anything but what I'm calling face-to-face interaction.Henry: Right, there's always the possibility of what to forestall on text. Yeah. Whereas I can only sit here for like 10 seconds before I just have to like speak.Agnes: Exactly, and I mean, 10 seconds, that's a wild exaggeration. So do you know what the actual number is? No. On average. Okay, the average amount of time that you're allowed to wait before responding to something I say is two tenths of a second, which, it's crazy, isn't it? Which, that amount of time is not enough time for, that is a one second pause is an awkward pause, okay? So two tenths of a second is not long enough time for the signal that comes at the end of my talking, so the last sound I make, let's say, to reach your ears and then get into your brain and be processed, and then you figure out what you want to say. It's not enough time, which means you're making a prediction. That's what you're doing when I'm talking. You're making a prediction about when I'm going to stop talking, and you're so good at it that you're on almost every time. You're a little worse over Zoom. Zoom screws us up a little bit, right? But this is like what our brains are built to do. This is what we're super good at, is kind of like interacting, and I think it's really important that it be a genuine interaction. That's what I'm coming to see, is that we learn best from each other when we can interact, and it's not obvious that there are those same interaction possibilities by way of text at the moment, right? I'm not saying there couldn't be, but at the moment, we rely on the fact that we have all these channels open to us. Interestingly, it's the lag time on the phone, like if we were talking just by phone, is about the same. So we're so good at this, we don't need the visual information. That's why I said phone is also face-to-face. I think phone's okay, even though a lot of our informational stream is being cut. We're on target in terms of the quick responses, and there's some way in which what happens in that circumstance is we become a unit. We become a unit of thinking together, and if we're texting each other and each of us gets to ponder our response and all that, it becomes dissociated.Henry: So this, I do have a really, I'm really interested in this point. Your book doesn't contain scientific information, sociological studies. It's good old-fashioned philosophy, which I loved, but if you had turned it into more of a, this is the things you're telling me now, right? Oh, scientists have said this, and sociologists have said that. It could have been a different sort of book and maybe been, in some shallow way, more persuasive to more people, right? So you clearly made a choice about what you wanted to do. Talk me through why.Agnes: I think that it's maybe the answer here is less deep than you would want. I think that my book was based on the reading I was doing in order to write it, and I wasn't, at the time, asking myself the kinds of questions that scientists could answer. Coming off of the writing of it, I started to ask myself this question. So for instance, that's why I did all this reading in sociology, psychology, that's what I'm doing now is trying to learn. Why is it that we're not having philosophical conversations all the time? It's a real question for me. Why are we not having the conversations that I want us to be having? That's an empirical question, at least in part, because it's like, well, what kinds of conversations are we having? And then I have to sort of read up on that and learn about how conversation works. And it's surprising to me, like the amount of stuff we know, and that it's not what I thought. And so I'm not, maybe I'm a little bit less hostile than most philosophers, just as I'm less hostile to fiction, but I'm also less hostile to sort of empirical work. I mean, there's plenty of philosophers who are very open to the very specific kind of empirical work that is the overlap with their specialization. But for me, it's more like, well, depending on what question I ask, there's just like, who is ready with answers to the question? And I will like, you know, kind of like a mercenary, I will go to those people. And I mean, one thing I was surprised to learn, I'm very interested in conversation and in how it works and in what are the goals of conversation. And of course I started with philosophical stuff on it, you know, Grice and Searle, speech act theory, et cetera. And what I found is that that literature does not even realize that it's not about conversation. I mean, Grice, like the theory of conversational implicature and you know, Grice's logic on conversation, it's like if you thought that making a public service announcement was a kind of conversation, then it would be a theory of conversation. But the way that philosophers fundamentally understand speech is that like, you know, speakers issue utterances and then somebody has to interpret that utterance. The fact that that second person gets to talk too is not like part of the picture. It's not essential to the picture. But if you ask a sociologist, what is the smallest unit of conversation? They are not going to say an assertion. They're going to say something like greeting, greeting or question answer or command obeying or, right? Conversation is like, there's two people who get to talk, not just one person. That seems like the most obvious thing, but it's not really represented in the philosophical literature. So I'm like, okay, I guess I got to say goodbye philosophers. Let me go to the people who are actually talking about conversation. You know, I of course then read, my immediate thought was to read in psychology, which I did. Psychology is a bit shallow. They just don't get to theorize. It's very accessible. It's got lots of data, but it's kind of shallow. And then I'm like, okay, the people who really are grappling with the kind of deep structure of conversation are sociologists. And so that's what I've been reading a lot of in the past, like whatever, two months or so. But I just wasn't asking myself these questions when I wrote the book. And I think the kinds of questions that I was asking were in fact, the kinds of questions that get answered or at least get addressed in philosophical texts. And so those were the texts that I refer to.Henry: So all the sociology you've read, is it, how is it changing what you think about this? Is it giving you some kind of answer?Agnes: It's not changing any, my view, but any of the claims in the book, that is the exact reason that you brought out. But it is making me, it's making me realize how little I understand in a sort of concrete way, what like our modern predicament is. That is, where are we right now? Like what's happening right now? Is the question I ask myself. And I get a lot of, especially in interviews about this book, I get a lot of like, well, given where things are right now, is Socrates very timely? Or how can Socrates help or whatever? And I'm like, I don't think we know where things are right now. That is that given that, where is it? Where is it that we are? And so part of what this kind of sociology stuff is making me realize is like, that's a much harder question than it appears. And even where do we draw the lines? Like, when did now start happening? Like my instinct is like, one answer is like around 1900 is when now started happening. And, and so like, so I guess I'm interested both at the very micro level, how does the conversational interaction work? What are the ways in which I am deciding in this very conversation, I'm deciding what's allowed to be in and what's not allowed to be in the conversation, right? By the moves I'm making, and you're doing the same. How are we doing that? How are we orchestrating, manipulating this conversation so as to dictate what's in it and what's out of it in ways that are like below the surface that we're not noticing, that we either that we are doing it or that we're doing it ourselves. Neither of us is noticing, but we're doing that. So that's at the micro level. And then at the macro level is the question about when did now start happening? And what are the big shifts in like the human experience? And, are we at a point somehow in human history where culture like as a mechanism of coordination is a little bit falling apart and then what's going to come next? That's like a kind of question that I have to put in that kind of vague way. So maybe the right thing to say is that reading all these sociology texts has like, has given me a sets of questions to ask. And maybe what I'm trying to do is, it's like, what my book does is it describes a kind of ideal. And it describes that ideal, you know, using the power of reason to see what would it take to sort of set us straight? What is the straightened version of the crooked thing that we're already doing? And I think that that's right, but that's not at all the same thing as asking the question like, what's our next step? How do we get there from here? That's the question I'm asking now. But part of trying to answer the question, how do we get there from here is like, where are we now? And where are we both very, very locally in an interaction, what are we doing? And then in a big picture way, where are we? What is the big, what is like, you know, in the Taylor Swift sense, what era are we in? And, you know, I guess I still feel like we are, we are living in the world of Fernando Pessoa, Robert Musso, Virginia Woolf, James Joyce, Hermann Bruch, Franz Kafka, like that set of writers, like around 1900-ish set of writers who didn't all know each other or anything, didn't coordinate, but they all, there was this like primal scream moment where they were like, what the hell is going on? What has happened to humanity? Where are the rules? Like, who are we supposed to be? I mean, of all of those, I would pull out Musso as like the paradigm example. So this is me, I guess, taking inspiration from literature again, where I feel like, okay, there's something there about we're lost. There's an expression of, there's a thought we're lost. And I'm trying to understand, okay, how did we get lost? And are we still in that state of being lost? I think yes. And let's get a clear, once we get very clear on how lost we are, we'll already start to be found. Cause that's sort of what it is to, you know, once you understand why you're lost, like that's situating yourself.Henry: Those writers are a long time ago.Agnes: Yeah, I said around 1900.Henry: Yeah, but you don't, you don't, but there's nothing more recent that like expresses, like that's a very long now.Agnes: Yeah. Well, yes, I agree. So I say, when did now start happening? I think it started happening around 1900. So I think-Henry: So are we stuck?Agnes: Yeah, kind of. I think, so here's like a very, he's like a very simple part of history that must be too simple because history is not, is like, it's very mildly not my strong suit. I can't really understand history. But it's like, there is this set of writers and they don't really tell stories. It's not their thing, right? They're not into plot, but they are issuing this warning or proclamation or crisis, like flashing thing. And then what happens? What happens after that? Well, World War I happens, right? And then, you know, not very long after that, we got World War II and especially World War II, the result of that is kind of, oh no, actually we know what good and bad are. It's like fighting Nazis, that's bad. And, you know, so we got it all settled. And, but it's like, it's like we push something under the rug, I guess. And I think we haven't dealt with it. We haven't dealt with this crisis moment. And so, you know, I think I could say something very similar about Knausgaard or something that is, I think he's kind of saying the same thing and his novel has a novel, whatever you want to call it, the, you know, I'm talking about the later one. That's the kind of weird sort of horror quadrilogy or something. It has this feeling of like trying to express a sense of being lost. So there's more recent stuff that, a lot of it's autofiction, the genre of autofiction has that same character. So yeah, like maybe there is some big progress that's been made since then, but if there is, then it has passed me by.Henry: Agnes: Callard, thank you very much. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.commonreader.co.uk/subscribe

This week on Breaking Bread Harland Williams joins us in the studio. We reveal his two biggest claim to fames: starting the John Deere trend and being the king of Canada. He shares about growing up, getting sent to boarding school, and realizing he was on his own in this life. Tom and Harland also share an open dialogue about the current political climate. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0:00:00 Intro 0:03:00 Resturants, Musso & Franks 3:00 0:07:14 Being mocked as a kid 7:14 0:14:23 Boarding school 0:21:10 Realizing he's on his own 0:25:13 Dating Scene 0:26:00 Catholic School 0:29:10 Meeting Harland when he moved to LA 0:30:15 John Deere trend & Ashton Kutcher 0:35:00 Religion growing up 0:38:08 Canada assimilation 0:50:57 Uncomfortable Moment 0:56:25 Elon Musk 1:05:40 Media & politics 1:18:20 Jan 6th 1:22:13 Bird Flu 1:27:30 International Comedy 1:30:20 Beirut 1:33:32 Bread & Goodbyes ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Papa is a celebrated stand-up comedian with over 20 years in the industry. Watch Tom's new special "Home Free" out NOW on Netflix! Radio, Podcasts and more: https://linktr.ee/tompapa/ Website - http://tompapa.com/ Instagram - https://www.instagram.com/tompapa Tiktok - https://www.tiktok.com/@tompapa Facebook - https://www.facebook.com/comediantompapa Twitter - https://www.twitter.com/tompapa #tompapa #breakingbread #comedy #standup #standupcomedy #bread #johndeere

Hey! We're screaming at you with an artist deep dive into the man who had the jerky, Mitchel Musso, from his debut album to his soundtrack appearances, all the way up to his 2022 album GHOST. Did his music career really work-y? ----- Follow The Time Mousechine: Instagram Twitter TikTok Patreon Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

En la ida de la primera semifinal de la Copa del Rey, se pudo vivir un partidazo donde el Atlético de Madrid terminó empatando en el minuto 93 gracias a un gol de Sorloth (4-4). Hay que destacar el regreso al once titular de Ferran Torres y Dani Olmo en ataque junto a Lamine Yamal, que fue duda hasta última hora por lesión, son las principales novedades del Barcelona para medirse este martes al Atlético de Madrid, que contó con cinco cambios en la alineación respecto a su último partido.El técnico Hansi Flick introdujo cuatro cambios respecto al once que ganó el pasado sábado en Las Palmas (0-2), con la entrada de Ferran Torres, Dani Olmo, Frenkie de Jong e Íñigo Martínez por Robert Lewandowski, Marc Casadó, Fermín López y Eric Garcia.Por su parte, el Atlético de Madrid presentó cinco novedades con la entrada de Musso bajo palos por Oblak, de Giménez por Le Normand en el centro de la defensa, de Barrios por Samu Lino en la medular, de Javi Galán por el lesionado ...

Lamine Yamal encontró a Koundé con un pase al espacio con el exterior por banda derecha. El lateral metió un pase atrás para que Pedri, de primeras, rematase con el interior de la bota derecha y batiese a Musso con un disparo raso a la izquierda del portero.

En el episodio inaugural en Español de The Red Bucket, nuestros compañeros de Carboline España Juan Pablo Ortega y Emilie Musso hablan sobre la reciente renovación del icónico Estadio Santiago Bernabéu en Madrid, España. El alcance del proyecto incluyó la aplicación de materiales ignífugos cementosos e intumescentes, así como recubrimientos protectores de alto rendimiento.    00:58 – Introducción: Presentación de Emilie Musso y Juan Pablo Ortega.  02:24 – Renovación del estadio: Alcance del proyecto.  04:21 – Requisitos contra incendios: Normas aplicadas en estadios.  05:47  – Césped retráctil: Impacto en los revestimientos.  07:28 –  Tipos de protección: Uso de mortero y pintura intumescente.  08:55 – Pyrocrete 40: Beneficios y aplicación.  10:20 – Nullifire SC902: Dónde y por qué se usó.  13:55 – Aplicación en una sola capa: Importancia del espesor.  15:58 – Protección anticorrosión: Recubrimientos adicionales.  17:15 – Plazos exigentes: Cómo se cumplió el tiempo.  18:51 – Cierre: Reflexión final sobre el proyecto.  20:45 – Preguntas extra: Toque personal para cerrar el episodio.

Tras el Día de Reyes, volvemos con el episodio 23 del Informativo Colchonero con todas las noticias del Atlético de Madrid. Hoy hablamos del adiós oficial de Andrea Berta, de la cláusula de renovación automática de Reinildo, de las posibles salidas de Witsel y Azpilicueta, del deseo de Musso de seguir en el Atleti, del lío con Thiago Almada... Todo ello y mucho más, en De Padres a Hijos. Conviértete en miembro de este canal para disfrutar de ventajas: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCl_X6QI3mnJsttsp96OsCZQ/join Correo: depadresahijoscontacto@gmail.com Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/depadresahijos Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/depadresahijos1903/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/DPaH1903 Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@DPaH1903/videos Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/6WcodO17ASqRfxYNrjhVGD #atleticomadrid #atleti #futbol #laliga #football

In hour two of After Further Review, Matt reacts to comments Brian Kelly made on Wednesday clarifying LSU's portal approach and recruiting strategy. Next, John Keim joins the show to preview the Washington Commanders ahead of their matchup with the Saints. Breaking news takes over the third segment as LSU quarterback Garrett Nussmeier announces he will return for his fifth season. What does this mean for 2025. Musso wraps the hour with Tigers in the Pros. 

In hour two of After Further Review, Matt is joined in studio by LSU infielder Steven Milam and outfielder Ashton Larson. We get an update on how fall ball went for the guys and details on an event they have coming up. Next, Matt reacts to LSU being projected to land one of the best wide recievers in the transfer portal Kentucky's Barion Brown. Matt has some thoughts on Lane Kiffin's comments surrounding NIL and high school quarterbacks. Musso wraps the hour with Tigers in the Pros. 

Matt Musso updates where things stand with LSU and the transfer portal as it is now officially open. Which Tigers are in the portal? Which decisions are we still awaiting? Plus, we talk portal targets including an offer out to a tight end and the Tigers already landing in the final three for a coveted EDGE transfer. Next, we react to LSU's bowl destination and their opponent, Baylor. Finally, Musso recaps LSU's 80-71 win over Florida Gulf Coast in hoops. 

In hour two of After Further Review, Matt updates the very latest with LSU in the transfer portal. Who are the Tigers top targets? Next, we get Matt's thoughts on the Saints 14-11 win over the Giants. LSU hoops improved to 8-1 after defeating Florida Gulf Coast. Musso wraps the hour with Tigers in the Pros and Matt reacts to two former LSU quarterbacks entering the transfer portal again. 

Matt Musso reacts to Mason Taylor entering the draft and the most recent portal additions. Musso also gives you his four most important positions LSU must address in the portal when the window opens on December 9th. 

Matt Musso puts a button on the early signing period for LSU and the class of 2025. How does this class stack up against the best in the nation? Is it Brian Kelly's greatest class? Next, Musso reacts to Aaron Anderson's decision to return to LSU for another year. How does it impact the Tigers wide receiver room for 2025? Finally, a thought on LSU's Slade Nagle leaving to take the offensive coordinator job at Houston. 

Matt Musso updates everything you need to know surrounding the first half of the Early Signing Day for LSU, including five-star running back Harlem Berry making it official. Next, we react to the latest portal entrants from LSU including the surprising decision of wide receiver CJ Daniels. Finally, Musso recaps LSU's 85-75 win over Florida State in hoops. 

In hour two of After Further Review, Matt reacts to Brian Kelly's on the record comments on how NIL impacted LSU's 2025 recruiting class. Ryan Field of ABC7 joins the show to preview the New York Giants ahead of their matchup with the Saints. We recap LSU's 85-75 win over Florida State. Matt explains the difference between NIL and revenue sharing. Musso wraps the hour with Tigers in the Pros. 

In hour three of After Further Review, Matt tells you how Brian Kelly's national championship prediction can come true. We update the lastest with LSU in the transfer portal. Musso has Tigers in the Pros. The guys give you their college football takeaways from Week 14. Otter Locks wraps the show. 

In hour two of After Further Review, Matt reacts to five star cornerback Kade Phillips flipping his commitment from LSU to Texas. What went on behind the scenes leading up to the decision? Plus, Matt looks at where the Tigers turn next to replace Phillips in the class of 2025. Next, we pass along the latest update from Darren Rizzi on Saints center Erik McCoy. Rizzi says the expectation is for McCoy to be back at practice on Wednesday. Coach Rizzi also updated the status of guard Lucas Patrick. Next, Matt talks the impact of the Giants placing Dexter Lawrence on IR ending his season ahead of the game with the Saints. Matt reacts to the surprising portal decision of LSU wide receiver CJ Daniels. Plus, a thought on EDGE Da'Shawn Womack and safety Jordan Allen adding their names to the portal. Musso wraps the hour with Tigers in the Pros.

Matt Musso recaps LSU's 37-17 win over Oklahoma to close the regular season at 8-4. We go through key sequences from the game, standout individual performances and a look at what was the general theme of the night. Plus, we react to Brian Kelly's national championship comments from post-game. Finally, Musso gives his thoughts on backup quarterback Rickie Collins being the first player to enter the portal in 2024. 

Matt Musso recaps the highlights from Brian Kelly's Monday press conference including plenty of talk on the transfer portal and roster building this offense. We also discuss the future of some current players on the team like Harold Perkins, CJ Daniels, Garrett Nussmeier and Emery Jones. Finally, Musso takes his first look at the Oklahoma Sooners.

In hour two of After Further Review, Matt looks at LSU's strategy for roster building after Brian Kelly talked about an aggressive approach coming this offseason. Should the Saints pursue Daniel Jones? Matt lays out the one scenario where he would be good with it. Peter Burns joins the show to recap a wild Week 13 in the SEC. Musso wraps the hour with Tigers in the Pros. 

In hour two of After Further Review, Matt is joined by Sarah Barshop of ESPN to preview the Rams as they come into the Dome Sunday to face the Saints. LSU linebackers West and Whit Weeks join us in studio to preview Oklahoma, talk their younger brother Zach commiting to LSU and their NIL experience. Musso wraps the hour with Tigers in the Pros. 

Matt Musso passes a long the latest update on offensive lineman Garrett Dellinger and Miles Frazier in conjuction with the SEC Availability Report. Next, we dive into LSU's players only meeting. We hear from Brian Kelly and Will Campbell and Musso tells you why he believes it is a sign of strength in the program not weakness. Finally, we preview LSU's battle with Pitt at The Greenbrier. 

Matt Musso takes his first look at the LSU-Vanderbilt matchup. We talk plenty of Diego Pavia and the challenges he presents to the Tigers defense, but Musso also looks at other matchups that will decide the game. Next, we recap LSU's 77-68 win over Charleston Southern in men's hoops.

Matt Musso begins the show by updating injuries to LSU's Miles Frazier and Garrett Dellinger. Next, we look at the growing narrative that Bryce Underwood is the only thing that can save Brian Kelly's tenure at LSU. In doing so we look at the current roster and why it's in the position it is. Musso explains why he believes it's bigger than just landing Bryce Underwood. The conversation also paints a picture of what needs to be done in the transfer portal as well. Finally, Musso gives a brief thumbnail on LSU Hoops against Charleston Southern. 

Matt Musso reacts to LSU's third straight loss in 2024. What went wrong for the Tigers against Florida? How did LSU lose a game it largely controlled? Next, Musso once again looks at the big picture of the program going forward after a fourth loss. Can the Tigers get it back on track this season?

Matt Musso kicks off the show reacting to five-star LSU quarterback commit Bryce Underwood turning down Michigan's latest NIL offer of $10.5 million to remain with the Tigers. Is the Wolverines pursuit reaching an end? Next, Musso gives his final thoughts and prediction for LSU vs. Florida. What are we looking for out of the Tigers in The Swamp? Finally, Musso wraps the show with his thoughts on LSU hoops 76-65 win at Kansas State on Thursday night. 

Matt Musso recaps Brian Kelly's appearance on the SEC Coaches Teleconference, including talk centered around Garrett Nussmeier and a change at the position. Billy Napier updates the status of quarterback DJ Lagway. Next, Musso reacts to Kim Mulkey and Jay Johnson each signing a No. 1 ranked recruiting class for 2025. We close with Matt McMahon's thoughts on his team's trip to Kansas State. 

Matt Musso spends the first half of the show looking at the lack of touches for LSU running back Caden Durham in the red zone. It strays from an earlier trend in the season and nobody seems to have an answer as to why. Next, Musso passes along the latest update on Florida quarterback DJ Lagway from Billy Napier. 

Matt Musso looks back at LSU's shameful performance vs. Alabama on Saturday night. We talk everything from preparation to playcalling to personnel. Next, Musso looks at the Brian Kelly tenure to this point in his third year. What consistent problems plague the Tigers and is help on the way?

Throughout history, brotherhood has taken many forms.  On the battlefield, it's the bond forged between soldiers who face danger side-by-side. In the lodge, it's the shared commitment to timeless values and the pursuit of personal improvement. But what happens when those two worlds intersect? WB Eddie Mosso is the State Director of the Masonic War Veterans and shares the "Triple Tie" that binds these distinguished Freemasons.Show notes:Visit the New York Masonic War VeteransGet tickets to the first New York Masonic Con, happening on January 18, 2025 at the Grand Lodge of New YorkFollow the Craftsmen Online Podcast on Spotify.Subscribe to the Craftsmen Online Podcast on Apple Podcasts.Follow Craftsmen Online on YouTube, hit subscribe and get notified the next time we go LIVE with a podcast recording!Visit the Craftsmen Online website to learn more about our next Reading Room event, New York Masonic History and see the Lafayette Bicentennial Calendar!Get our latest announcements and important updates in your inbox with the Craftsmen Online Newsletter.Email the host, RW Michael Arce! Yes, we will read your email and may even reach out to be a guest on a future episode.Support the Craftsmen Online Podcast. Whether it's a one time donation or you become a Patreon Subscriber, we appreciate your support!Sponsor offer: Don't forget to use the promo code CRAFTSMEN to receive free shipping with your first order from Bricks Masons!Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/craftsmen-online-podcast--4822031/support.

Matt Musso puts a button on LSU-Alabama week. We begin with a few brief thoughts on Omar the Tiger making his debut in Death Valley as the live tiger tradition returns to pregame. Next, Musso gives his final thoughts and prediction on this year's rendition of LSU vs. Alabama.

Matt Musso looks at the key matchup of LSU's conerbacks and Alabama's wide receivers. What is the Tigers path to slowing down the Tide's freshman sensation Ryan Williams. Next, Musso examines the significance of special teams in the matchup especailly in the punt return game where Bama is turning to two freshman. Finally, Musso gives thoughts on how the CFP committee set up a path for LSU with their first rankings.

Matt Musso gives his opening take on LSU's matchup with Alabama. Next, we update injuries to LSU OG Garrett Dellinger and WR CJ Daniels. Plus, a look at a season injury to an Alabama starter. Finally, Musso tells you one tendecy the Tigers should break against the Tide.

Matt Musso reacts to LSU WR Chris Hilton returning to practice as a full participant. Is the Tigers deep threat ready for Saturday? Next, Musso gives his final preview and prediction for LSU and Texas A&M. Is the Tigers defense the difference in the game? Are the Aggies ready for the big stage?

Matt Musso begins to look at the matchup between LSU's offense and Texas A&M's defense. How it compares to previous units the Tigers have seen. Plus, we discuss the continued increase in touches for Caden Durham and how's he's factored into the biggest wins of the season. Finally, Musso reacts to a report that Jacobian Guillory will return for a sixth season at LSU. 

Matt Musso recaps LSU's dominating 34-10 win on the road over Arkansas. We discuss the swing moments in the game, individual standout performances and what it means going forward for the Tigers. Plus, Musso tells you why this win showed growth for LSU.

Matt Musso reacts to the news that key LSU reserve offensive lineman Tyree Adams underwent surgery. What does that mean for the Tigers depth up front? Next, Musso dives into his final preview and prediction for LSU's trip to Arkansas. 

Matt Musso reacts to the official injury report ahead of LSU's trip to Arkansas. Will quaterback Taylen Green play for the Hogs? Plus, will the Tigers see returns at the wide receiver position? Next, Musso tells you two areas he's watching in the matchup on Saturday night that could go a long way in deciding the winner. Finally, Musso reacts to the latest commitment for LSU Men's basketball in 4-star point guard Jalen Reece.

Matt Musso reacts to Brian Kelly's Monday press conference, including moving tight end Trey'Dez Green to wide receiver. What does this add to LSU's offense? Plus, Kelly provided an update on the injuries to CJ Daniels and Chris Hilton. Next, we pass along the latest update on injured Arkansas quarterback Taylen Green. Will the Hogs starter be ready for Saturday? Finally, Musso reacts to the latest commitment for LSU in 4-star safety Jacob Bradford. 

Matt Musso recaps LSU's electric 29-26 win over Ole Miss in overtime on Saturday night. We look at key sequences, plays and players. Musso celebrates the best LSU defensive performance in years. Finally, we discuss the incredible atmosphere in Tiger Stadium as the iconic venue celebrated 100 years. 

Matt Musso begins to look ahead to the LSU vs. Ole Miss showdown set for Saturday. Will the Rebels be without their best offensive weapon in Tre Harris? Plus, Musso recaps all the chaos in Week 6, from Vandy's upset of Alabama to Miami's wild comeback at Cal. 

In this first episode of a 5-part series on GLP-1 therapies, host BreeAnna Cox explores the pros and cons of medications like semaglutide and tirzepatide with nurse practitioner Melissa Musso. The discussion dives into how GLP-1 therapies work, the differences between semaglutide and tirzepatide, and the impact these medications can have on weight loss, muscle preservation, and overall wellness. Bree addresses common concerns, such as how to maintain progress after stopping the medication, the importance of preserving muscle mass through strength training, and why mental and emotional wellness are crucial components of long-term success. With insights from practitioners and real-life users, this episode offers a balanced view on the benefits and challenges of GLP-1 therapy for those seeking sustainable, holistic health outcomes.Mention BREE or the BETTER ME WITH BODYBYBREE PODCAST for 10% off Contour Health Services in your initial consultation.You can find more information from Melissa and Contour Health on Instagram @saltyinjector and www.contourhealthrx.comWant more? Find and follow Bree onwww.bodybybree.comInstagramPinterestYouTubeBlog

Matt Musso previews LSU's first bye week of the 2024 season. What areas do the Tigers need to focus on most? Plus, we look at the three newest offers handed out by the staff to the class of 2027. Finally, Musso reacts to the newest commitment for Matt McMahon and LSU Basketball, Mazi Mosley.

Matt Musso gives you his final thoughts on LSU's matchup with South Alabama. We focus in on what we want to see from the Tigers in their final non-conference tilt of the season. How does LSU begin to replace Harold Perkins? Brian Kelly points to Whit Weeks. Plus, the further development of Dom McKinley and what the Tigers are hoping for in the secondary. Finally, the latest on a potential return for Chris Hilton and Musso's score prediction.

Matt Musso reacts to the news of a possible Chris Hilton return for the LSU offense. How does the latest developments in Trey Holly's case impact the Tigers running back room? Plus, Musso gives his final thoughts, preview and prediction for LSU and UCLA.

Todays interview is with the co-founder of Contour Health, Melissa Musso, where we're talking mostly about my experience with weight loss and GLP-1 medication, some of the shame and misconceptions and breakthroughs I personally had as I explored this as an option for my health. I decided to do this interview because honestly I get so many DMs about this that I knew it would be easier to tell the whole story, with Melissa, on a podcast where people could hear and really see how amazing she is! We tell the story of how Melissa helped me, even before I officially started going to her as my medical provider. If you listen to this and want to work with Melissa, you can go to contourhealthrx.com. She has assembled a team of like minded providers who are all providing the highest quality patient care. You can definitely book with Melissa but sometimes she's booked out for weeks, so if you don't want to wait, the other nurse practitioners in her company are excellent and will give you that same level of amazing care. And exclusively for mint arrow messages listeners, if you mention that you found contour health from mint arrow, you'll get 10% off your first month. Again the website is contourhealthrx.com and now let's get into the interview!  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices