Podcasts about pluckrose

In her talk, Doing Social Justice Responsibly on October 13, 2019 at the 'Speaking Truth to Social Justice' conference in London, Helen Pluckrose tackled the ideological excesses within social justice activism, offering a way to address genuine social justice issues without abandoning reason or liberal principles. She argued that the dominant framework in social justice today—rooted in critical theory and postmodernism—has transformed genuine concerns about power and privilege into a rigid worldview. This ideology, she explained, rejects objective truth and promotes “strategic knowledge,” constructed to serve specific identity-based agendas rather than being tested against reality. Pluckrose acknowledged that while social justice concepts like bias, cultural narratives, and the power of language have validity, the radicalized methods often used within social justice turn productive critiques into dogma. Instead of engaging in open dialogue, activists demand conformity, condemning dissenting views as tools of privilege. She urged liberals and conservatives alike to stand for a balanced approach to social justice—one that promotes fairness without sacrificing truth and the ideals of secular liberalism. Viewers will find this talk interesting not just for its contents but also for the glimpse back in time by five years, which allows them to see how the views expressed have matured and developed over the intervening time. New book! The Queering of the American Child: https://queeringbook.com/ Support New Discourses: https://newdiscourses.com/support Follow New Discourses on other platforms: https://newdiscourses.com/subscribe Follow James Lindsay: https://linktr.ee/conceptualjames © 2024 New Discourses. All rights reserved. #NewDiscourses #JamesLindsay #SocialJustice

In October 2019, James Lindsay, Peter Boghossian, Helen Pluckrose, and filmmaker Mike Nayna gathered in London for a panel moderated by Michael O'Fallon to reflect on the infamous "Grievance Studies" project (https://grievanceproject.com/), often called "Sokal Squared." This provocative project involved writing and submitting intentionally absurd papers filled with ideological jargon to academic journals. Their aim was to demonstrate how deeply critical social justice ideologies had compromised academic rigor, making it possible for nonsensical submissions to be accepted as legitimate scholarship. During the panel, Lindsay traced the project's origins to a simple yet unsettling question about whether fields like gender studies had become akin to a secular dogma. This led to a series of papers, including the now-notorious "dog park" paper, which absurdly linked canine behavior to human rape culture. Mike Nayna, who documented the process, admitted his initial skepticism but explained how his own research into these academic fields revealed the seriousness of the problem. The panel highlighted the broader societal implications of their work. Lindsay and his co-authors warned that when ideology replaces the pursuit of truth, it threatens not only the integrity of scholarship but the foundations of public discourse itself. For them, the "Grievance Studies" project was a stark reminder of the dangers of allowing political agendas to override intellectual honesty and critical thinking. Viewers will find this look back five years in time interesting and informative not just in the content as presented but also in how the panelists' insights have developed and matured over the intervening years. New book! The Queering of the American Child: https://queeringbook.com/ Support New Discourses: https://newdiscourses.com/support Follow New Discourses on other platforms: https://newdiscourses.com/subscribe Follow James Lindsay: https://linktr.ee/conceptualjames © 2024 New Discourses. All rights reserved. #NewDiscourses #JamesLindsay #grievance

The stated goals of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs are often reasonable, if not noble—to create a more welcoming and inclusive environment for all. Yet, as more and more people are discovering, DEI as commonly practiced isn't a natural extension of past civil rights movements or an ethical framework for opposing discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, etc. Rather, it is inextricably connected with an illiberal and authoritarian ideology—Critical Social Justice—that demands adherence to its tenets and punishes any dissent from its dogma. Even the mildest questions about Critical Social Justice claims—that all white people are racists, that all underrepresented minorities are oppressed, that sex and gender differences have no biological basis, that censorship is a necessary good—are regularly met by DEI trainers and HR officers with pat commands: “Educate yourself,” “Do the work,” “Listen and learn.” At work, raises, promotions, and future employment often depend on our nodding approval of such claims. At school, grades, nominations, and awards are often contingent upon our active agreement with these beliefs. In our daily lives, Critical Social Justice ideology poses a genuine threat not only to our fundamental rights but also to the future of our democratic systems, but if we suggest this, we risk being canceled or shunned by community members. When facing a choice between silent submission and risky if ethical opposition, what is a person to do? While a growing number of groups concerned about the nature of Critical Social Justice have begun to attack it from the top down through legal, financial, and political means, The Counterweight Handbook takes a decidedly different and novel approach. It works from the bottom up and is written to empower individuals who wish to combat Critical Social Justice in their personal and professional lives. Based on the author's years of experience studying, exposing, and fighting Critical Social Justice ideology and advising individuals and organizations struggling with it, The Counterweight Handbook is designed to help people address Critical Social Justice problems in the most ethical and effective way possible. It not only offers principled responses to the main claims of Critical Social Justice but also teaches individuals what to do when they are asked to affirm beliefs they do not hold, undergo training in an ideology they cannot support, or submit to antiscientific testing and retraining of their “unconscious” minds. In short, it is for all of us who believe in freedom of speech and conscience, who wish to push back against the hostile work and educational environments Critical Social Justice has created, and who want to stand up for our individual liberties and universal rights. Helen Pluckrose is a liberal political and cultural writer and was one of the founders of Counterweight. A participant in the Grievance Studies Affair probe that highlighted problems in Critical Social Justice scholarship, she is the coauthor of Cynical Theories and Social (In)justice. She lives in England and can be found on X @HPluckrose Shermer and Pluckrose discuss: origin of the problem • DEI and CRT • what it means to “Educate yourself,” “Do the work,” “Listen and learn.” • top-down vs. bottom-up counter measures • race reckoning • antiracism • gender ideology • decolonizing and dismantling • fragility • intersectionality • normativity • positionality • privilege • wokeness.

In this episode I'm joined by my good friend Tanya pluckroseHelps business owners to create a rich result mindset.Tanya is a mindset coach, speaker, mindset vlogger, mentor, bob proctor menteeLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tanyapluckrose?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=android_appInstagram@Tanyapluckrose-Instagram@Parrsitivity94YouTube: the parrsitivity podcastEmail: theparrsitivitypodcast@gmail.comTiktok:@parrsitivity94Twitter/X: AdamparrLLinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/%F0%9F%8E%99%EF%B8%8Fadam-parr%F0%9F%87%AC%F0%9F%87%A7-b240b6110?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=share_via&utm_content=profile&utm_medium=android_app

Thank you for listening to Write On! Audio, the podcast for writers everywhere brought to you by Pen To Print. This week on Write On Audio we have a listener contribution from Carole Pluckrose. Carole is a writer, director, producer and actor. In 2014 she co-founded Boathouse Studios, a creative arts venue in Braking. As you'll hear, Carole is also a celebrant, officiating at funerals and weddings. Carole's monologue is called Funeral Story and it is written and performed by Carole Pluckrose with music, effects and editing by Chris Gregory. The story is entirely fictional and the characters are not intended to represent any particular individual or individuals. The recording was made via zoom and there are a couple of slight glitches for which we apologise. Find out about Carole Pluckrose here https://www.boathousebarking.co.uk/carole-pluckrose and about her work as a celebrant here https://www.carolepluckrose.com/ Find out about The Boathouse, Barking here https://www.boathousebarking.co.uk/ As always this podcast has been presented by Tiffany Clare and produced by Chris Gregory for Alternative Stories We're always delighted to read your contributions so if you'd like to see your words in Write on! or hear them on this podcast please get in touch. Please submit to: https://pentoprint.org/get-involved/submit-to-write-on/

Trigger warning: talking about death and dying. How do we approach dying and what to do for loved ones. Book discussion: Cynical Theories by Pluckrose and Lindsay.

Tam Pluckrose discusses the unlimited human potential and how we can help people tap into it. She shares her experience traveling the world and the excitement of the new medical device that will revolutionize modern medicine and wound treatment. Check out more of Tam LINKEDIN: /multilayeredworld IG: /currencyinconnection Did you love the value that we are putting out in the show? LEAVE A REVIEW and tell us what you think about the episode so we can continue putting out great content just for you! Share this episode and help someone who wants to connect with world-class people. Get our free gift of 11 Actionable Hacks from Successful Entrepreneurs @ AddValue2Entrepreneurs.com. Are you stuck? Do you struggle with procrastination? Sign up for a 5 day challenge to help you take more action and make more money in your business AddValue2Life.com/action

Tanya Pluckrose and I connect on so many levels. If you get the mindset right you will figure out the strategy. Our thought life is so important and so few take the time to truly think. We are creative beings with incredible power to create our own destiny and Tanya is equipping as many as possible to follow that path. Check out more of Tanya Website: tanyapluckrose.com Facebook: /tanya.pluckrose LinkedIn: /tanyapluckrose Tik Tok: /tanyapluckrose Did you love the value that we are putting out in the show? LEAVE A REVIEW and tell us what you think about the episode so we can continue putting out great content just for you! Share this episode and help someone who wants to connect with world-class people. Get our free gift of 11 Actionable Hacks from Successful Entrepreneurs @ AddValue2Entrepreneurs.com. Are you stuck? Do you struggle with procrastination? Sign up for a 5 day challenge to help you take more action and make more money in your business AddValue2Life.com/action

Tanya Pluckrose background lies in the customer service industry. She spent over 21 years working for a Fortune 2000 company leading teams to deliver an exceptional client experience to more than 1.3 million diverse VIP customers while safely managing the state-of-the-art A380 Aircraft. She clipped her wings and immigrated to the US, Los Angeles, in 2015 because of love. She then spent the next four years as a sought-after thought-leader and consultant helping medium to large companies with the art of selling to women, supporting them in attracting and retaining the high-value female clientele. Tanya experienced burnout in all areas of her life, from working endless hours to grow her business, and as a result, she fell in love with Bob Proctor's teachings. Bob showed her that success is 95% mindset and only 5% strategy. Her mess became her mission to help other entrepreneurs' quantum leap the growth of their businesses by developing the right mindset. She achieved the skills, insights, and exceptional mindset techniques to help business owners create more money, impact, and luxury living without the time-consuming struggle of hard work, money, and effort.  

Yes, we're back with Jimmy Concepts, reliable source of dishonest idiocy.  This time, as a kind of 'bonus feature' to our last episode, Daniel reads out a representative selection of reviewer comments on some of the fake papers submitted to academic journals by Lindsay, Pluckrose and Boghossian during the so-called 'Sokal Squared' prank.  It's very revealing... albeit of something we already knew: namely that Lindsay and his cohorts are absolutely full of shit. Content Warnings. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1   Show Notes for 95: Areo Magazine, Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship ( https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ ) Full listing of Grievance Studies Papers and Reviews ( https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/19tBy_fVlYIHTxxjuVMFxh4pqLHM_en18 ). "BJ-Gay" reviewer's comment: - This paper claims to apply a combination of psychoanalysis and feminism to examine and critique styles of masculinity evident within grappling-based martial arts subcultures. Overall, I found the paper very difficult to read and cannot recommend it for publication. This is due to a combination of factors, namely: - A densely theoretical, often confusing style of prose in many parts of the paper; - An inconsistent application of theoretical concepts, most of which were not defined with any clarity for the reader; - Overuse of certain source material, as well as a fairly consistent tendency to misuse sources in support of claims that the papers/books in question do not actually support; - Many sweeping generalizations about (all) men involved in (all) grappling-based martial arts; - A tokenistic inclusion of discussions of women in these spaces, which was not reconciled with the analysis in any meaningful way; - A central thesis which is not, to my knowledge, supported by any of the empirical research in this area (despite the fact that several such studies were cited in the paper); - Bizarre, even farcical concluding recommendations which indicate a lack of knowledge about the martial arts in question, as well as a tenuous and selective grasp of feminism as applied to sport. - There is simply too much wrong with the paper to offer a more robust criticism as a reviewer. I recommend that the author spends far more time acquainting themselves with both the theoretical and empirical literature at the intersection of sport, martial arts and masculinity studies before attempting a re-write. The current offering sits far short of the standards of scholarship expected of academic publication, particularly in a journal such as Men and Masculinities. https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/status/1444709707864674306 https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/status/1402338497617285120 "The Joke's On You" reviewer comment: - Another sign of lack of integration is that there is not clear definition of the comedic. The very first paragraph offers one too narrow for the essay. Northrup Frye provides some useful definitions of irony, parody, and satire in his classic work, Anatomy of Criticism. Note, too, that Cynthia Willett, in Irony in the Age of Empire, shares a similar thesis with this essay, namely that irony works against arrogance and ignorance. That source should be acknowledged even as the author discusses her own different approach, and might help the author clarify definitions of the comedic and integrate argument. - Yet another sign of lack of integration are the mixed references from Oliver to Dotson, Bailey, et al.-- Oliver would support a strong postmodern or poststructuralist stance that would render claims to speak "truth" to power finally ironic or that would yield to a very serious act of witnessing alterity. The latter group of epistemologists (including Dotson and Bailey) seem to affirm a pluralism but also a truth that allows for objective claims. Humor that makes use of the latter approach would typically tend toward satire, not irony. Satire and irony just do not function the same way, and the author would want to decide which direction or use of them would most assist the argument. "Fat Body Builders" reviewer comment: - For instance, statements like these, “In order for fat to be seen as ordinary and familiar, we need to insert ourselves in the extraordinary and unfamiliar. Competitive bodybuilding venues may be unfamiliar, even intrinsically fat-exclusionary, but this can change” and “Though it goes beyond the scope of this paper to provide more specific methods for institutionalizing fat bodybuilding” illustrate the issue with the paper. The author has highlighted the negative implication of fat stigma, but with a lack of connection to implementation, it negates the reason for why fat bodybuilding is a solution over other means or methods. - This reader would encourage the author to improve the connection between fat bodybuilding and its role as a means of fat activism. The author certainly has a wealth of information about the field of bodybuilding and the author should use that experience to strengthen the connections mentioned previously. "Hooters" reviewer comment: - This then takes me to a core challenge in moving forward with your paper at Sex Roles: trustworthiness. All three reviewers share my concern about the lack of demonstrated methodological integrity in the present paper. This is where Reviewer 3 comes in. I recruited Reviewer 3 after the other reviewers, and because she is a member of our in-house staff, I shared both reviewers' (masked) comments with her. I asked her first if she felt there was enough evidence of rigor to pursue a revision. Because we (at this point) have incomplete methodological information, I cannot commit to making a positive judgment here, but I am committing to giving it a try. - Thus my second challenge to Reviewer 3 was to outline what next steps you will need to take (in addition to addressing the other reviewers' comments) to fill in these methodological gaps. As you can see from Reviewer 3's comments, this starts by laying out your procedural details and analytic strategy. My guess is that you will need to focus more specifically on theme development and justification (e.g., thematic analysis) rather than taking this aspect from grounded theory (in that your goal is not to develop theory). I have attached a recently published paper in Sex Roles by Sheryl Chatfield that lays out various approaches to qualitative methodologies and outlines our standards here at Sex Roles. My expectation is that Reviewer 3's comments and this paper will help you address this critical point, as well as to move one from there to fully flesh out your methods, analyses, and findings. "Dildos" reviewer comment: - In the opening sections, the author notes that "though Allan lays out psychoanalytic theoretical considerations that are strongly suggestive of the co-constitutive relationship between masculinity, thevariables listed above, and anality, currently there is no scholarly literature that engages the topic of straight male penetrative sex toy directly and substantively" (3). The author here is referring to Allan's article, "Phallic Affect," however, Allan's book, Reading from Behind: A Cultural Analysis of the Anus (2016) might prove to be more useful in the context of this study. - The author writes that "there exists a far more extensive and applicable treatment in the book, The Ultimate Guide to Prostate Pleasure, but unfortunately this insightful volumes falls considerably outside of the scholarly academic canon" (3). I'm not certain that this is a problem, perhaps this is a difference of approach, but it seems to me that sex manuals are highly valuable resources in scholarly work and if there is a problem that the problem rests not with The Ultimate Guide but the Academy's inability to imagine value outside of itself. Indeed, the author might consider expanding this to include books like, The Adventurous Couple's Guide to Strap-On Sex by Violet Blue. Sci-Hub link: https://sci-hub.se/10.1353/tech.2007.0066 'So You Wanna Be a Hooters Girl' at The Smoking Gun: https://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/so-you-wanna-be-hooters-girl   Show Notes from 94 Again: https://idontspeakgerman.libsyn.com/94-james-lindsay-and-the-grievance-studies-hoax James Lindsay, New Discourses, "Why You Can Be Transgender But Not Transracial."" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/06/why-you-can-be-transgender-but-not-transracial/ James Lindsay has a day job, apparently. "Maryville man walks path of healing and combat." https://www.thedailytimes.com/news/maryville-man-walks-path-of-healing-and-combat/article_5ea3c0ca-2e98-5283-9e59-06861b8588cb.html Areo Magazine, Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship. https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ Full listing of Grievance Studies Papers and Reviews. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/19tBy_fVlYIHTxxjuVMFxh4pqLHM_en18 'Mein Kampf' and the 'Feminazis': What Three Academics' Hitler Hoax Really Reveals About 'Wokeness'. https://web.archive.org/web/20210328112901/https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-hitler-hoax-academic-wokeness-culture-war-1.9629759 "First and foremost, the source material. The chapter the hoaxers chose, not by coincidence, one of the least ideological and racist parts of Hitler's book. Chapter 12, probably written in April/May 1925, deals with how the newly refounded NSDAP should rebuild as a party and amplify its program. "According to their own account, the writers took parts of the chapter and inserted feminist "buzzwords"; they "significantly changed" the "original wording and intent” of the text to make the paper "publishable and about feminism." An observant reader might ask: what could possibly remain of any Nazi content after that? But no one in the media, apparently, did." New Discourses, "There Is No Good Part of Hitler's Mein Kampf" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/03/there-is-no-good-part-of-hitlers-mein-kampf/ On this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, James Lindsay, who helped to write the paper and perpetrate the Grievance Studies Affair, talks about the project and the creation of this particular paper at unprecedented length and in unprecedented detail, revealing Nilssen not to know what he's talking about. If you have ever wondered about what the backstory of the creation of the “Feminist Mein Kampf” paper really was, including why its authors did it, you won't want to miss this long-form discussion and rare response to yet another underinformed critic of Lindsay, Boghossian, and Pluckrose's work. The Grieveance Studies Affair Revealed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k Reviewer 1 Comments on Dog Park Paper "page 9 - the human subjects are afforded anonymity and not asked about income, etc for ethical reasons. yet, the author as researcher intruded into the dogs' spaces to examine and record genitalia. I realize this was necessary to the project, but could the author acknowledge/explain/justify this (arguably, anthropocentric) difference? Indicating that it was necessary to the research would suffice but at least the difference should be acknowledged." Nestor de Buen, Anti-Science Humping in the Dog Park. https://conceptualdisinformation.substack.com/p/anti-science-humping-in-the-dog-park "What is even more striking is that if the research had actually been conducted and the results showed what the paper says they show, there is absolutely no reason why it should not have been published. And moreover, what it proves is the opposite of what its intention is. It shows that one can make scientifically testable claims based on the conceptual framework of gender studies, and that the field has all the markings of a perfectly functional research programme." "Yes, the dog park paper is based on false data and, like Sokal's, contains a lot of unnecessary jargon, but it is not nonsense, and the distinction is far from trivial. Nonsense implies one cannot even obtain a truth value from a proposition. In fact, the paper being false, if anything, proves that it is not nonsense, yet the grievance hoaxers try to pass falsity as nonsense. Nonsense is something like Chomsky's famous sentence “colorless green ideas sleep furiously.” It is nonsense because it is impossible to decide how one might evaluate whether it is true. A false sentence would be “the moon is cubical.” It has a definite meaning, it just happens not to be true.  "So, if the original Sokal Hoax is like Chomsky's sentence, the dog park paper is much more like “the moon is cubical.” And in fact, a more accurate analogy would be “the moon is cubical and here is a picture that proves it,” and an attached doctored picture of the cubical moon." Reviewer 2 Comments on the Dog-Park Paper "I am a bit curious about your methodology. Can you say more? You describe your methods here (procedures for collecting data), but not really your overall approach to methodology. Did you just show up, observe, write copious notes, talk to people when necessary, and then leave? If so, it might be helpful to explicitly state this. It sounds to me like you did a kind of ethnography (methodology — maybe multispecies ethnography?) but that's not entirely clear here. Or are you drawing on qualitative methods in social behaviorism/symbolic interactionism? In either case, the methodology chosen should be a bit more clearly articulated." Counterweight. https://counterweightsupport.com/ "Welcome to Counterweight, the home of scholarship and advice on [Critical Social Justice](https://counterweightsupport.com/2021/02/17/what-do-we-mean-by-critical-social-justice/) ideology. We are here to connect you with the resources, advice and guidance you need to address CSJ beliefs as you encounter them in your day-to-day life. The Counterweight community is a non-partisan, grassroots movement advocating for liberal concepts of social justice including individualism, universalism, viewpoint diversity and the free exchange of ideas. [Subscribe](https://counterweightsupport.com/subscribe-to-counterweight/) today to become part of the Counterweight movement."" Inside Higher Ed, "Blowback Against a Hoax." https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/08/author-recent-academic-hoax-faces-disciplinary-action-portland-state Peter Boghossian Resignation Latter from PSU. https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for

So, in rank defiance of our recent promise to 'get back to the nazis' instead we continue our James Lindsay coverage.  (What... me? Irony? How dare you?)  This time, Daniel patiently walks a distracted, slightly hyperactive, and increasingly incredulous Jack through the infamous 'Grievance Studies Hoax' (AKA 'Sokal Squared') in which Lindsay and colleagues Helen Pluckrose and Peter Boghossian tried (and then claimed) to prove something or other about modern Humanities academia by submitting a load of stupid fake papers to various feminist and fat studies journals.  As Daniel reveals, the episode was an orgy of dishonesty and tactical point-missing that actually proved the opposite of what the team of snickering tricksters thought they were proving.  Sadly, however, because we live in Hell, the trio have only raised their profiles as a result.  A particular highlight of the episode is Lindsay revealing his staggering ignorance when 'responding' to criticism. Content warnings, as ever. Podcast Notes: Please consider donating to help us make the show and stay independent.  Patrons get exclusive access to one full extra episode a month. Daniel's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/danielharper Jack's Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=4196618 IDSG Twitter: https://twitter.com/idsgpod Daniel's Twitter: @danieleharper Jack's Twitter: @_Jack_Graham_ IDSG on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/i-dont-speak-german/id1449848509?ls=1   Show Notes: James Lindsay, New Discourses, "Why You Can Be Transgender But Not Transracial."" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/06/why-you-can-be-transgender-but-not-transracial/ James Lindsay has a day job, apparently. "Maryville man walks path of healing and combat." https://www.thedailytimes.com/news/maryville-man-walks-path-of-healing-and-combat/article_5ea3c0ca-2e98-5283-9e59-06861b8588cb.html Areo Magazine, Academic Grievance Studies and the Corruption of Scholarship. https://areomagazine.com/2018/10/02/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/ Full listing of Grievance Studies Papers and Reviews. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/19tBy_fVlYIHTxxjuVMFxh4pqLHM_en18 'Mein Kampf' and the 'Feminazis': What Three Academics' Hitler Hoax Really Reveals About 'Wokeness'. https://web.archive.org/web/20210328112901/https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-hitler-hoax-academic-wokeness-culture-war-1.9629759 "First and foremost, the source material. The chapter the hoaxers chose, not by coincidence, one of the least ideological and racist parts of Hitler's book. Chapter 12, probably written in April/May 1925, deals with how the newly refounded NSDAP should rebuild as a party and amplify its program. "According to their own account, the writers took parts of the chapter and inserted feminist "buzzwords"; they "significantly changed" the "original wording and intent” of the text to make the paper "publishable and about feminism." An observant reader might ask: what could possibly remain of any Nazi content after that? But no one in the media, apparently, did." New Discourses, "There Is No Good Part of Hitler's Mein Kampf" https://newdiscourses.com/2021/03/there-is-no-good-part-of-hitlers-mein-kampf/ On this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, James Lindsay, who helped to write the paper and perpetrate the Grievance Studies Affair, talks about the project and the creation of this particular paper at unprecedented length and in unprecedented detail, revealing Nilssen not to know what he's talking about. If you have ever wondered about what the backstory of the creation of the “Feminist Mein Kampf” paper really was, including why its authors did it, you won't want to miss this long-form discussion and rare response to yet another underinformed critic of Lindsay, Boghossian, and Pluckrose's work. The Grieveance Studies Affair Revealed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVk9a5Jcd1k Reviewer 1 Comments on Dog Park Paper "page 9 - the human subjects are afforded anonymity and not asked about income, etc for ethical reasons. yet, the author as researcher intruded into the dogs' spaces to examine and record genitalia. I realize this was necessary to the project, but could the author acknowledge/explain/justify this (arguably, anthropocentric) difference? Indicating that it was necessary to the research would suffice but at least the difference should be acknowledged." Nestor de Buen, Anti-Science Humping in the Dog Park. https://conceptualdisinformation.substack.com/p/anti-science-humping-in-the-dog-park "What is even more striking is that if the research had actually been conducted and the results showed what the paper says they show, there is absolutely no reason why it should not have been published. And moreover, what it proves is the opposite of what its intention is. It shows that one can make scientifically testable claims based on the conceptual framework of gender studies, and that the field has all the markings of a perfectly functional research programme." "Yes, the dog park paper is based on false data and, like Sokal's, contains a lot of unnecessary jargon, but it is not nonsense, and the distinction is far from trivial. Nonsense implies one cannot even obtain a truth value from a proposition. In fact, the paper being false, if anything, proves that it is not nonsense, yet the grievance hoaxers try to pass falsity as nonsense. Nonsense is something like Chomsky's famous sentence “colorless green ideas sleep furiously.” It is nonsense because it is impossible to decide how one might evaluate whether it is true. A false sentence would be “the moon is cubical.” It has a definite meaning, it just happens not to be true.  "So, if the original Sokal Hoax is like Chomsky's sentence, the dog park paper is much more like “the moon is cubical.” And in fact, a more accurate analogy would be “the moon is cubical and here is a picture that proves it,” and an attached doctored picture of the cubical moon." Reviewer 2 Comments on the Dog-Park Paper "I am a bit curious about your methodology. Can you say more? You describe your methods here (procedures for collecting data), but not really your overall approach to methodology. Did you just show up, observe, write copious notes, talk to people when necessary, and then leave? If so, it might be helpful to explicitly state this. It sounds to me like you did a kind of ethnography (methodology — maybe multispecies ethnography?) but that's not entirely clear here. Or are you drawing on qualitative methods in social behaviorism/symbolic interactionism? In either case, the methodology chosen should be a bit more clearly articulated." Counterweight. https://counterweightsupport.com/ "Welcome to Counterweight, the home of scholarship and advice on [Critical Social Justice](https://counterweightsupport.com/2021/02/17/what-do-we-mean-by-critical-social-justice/) ideology. We are here to connect you with the resources, advice and guidance you need to address CSJ beliefs as you encounter them in your day-to-day life. The Counterweight community is a non-partisan, grassroots movement advocating for liberal concepts of social justice including individualism, universalism, viewpoint diversity and the free exchange of ideas. [Subscribe](https://counterweightsupport.com/subscribe-to-counterweight/) today to become part of the Counterweight movement."" Inside Higher Ed, "Blowback Against a Hoax." https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/01/08/author-recent-academic-hoax-faces-disciplinary-action-portland-state Peter Boghossian Resignation Latter from PSU. https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/my-university-sacrificed-ideas-for  

A Discussion with Helen Pluckrose, the founder of Counterweight, which opposes the imposition of CSJ. Pluckrose is a liberal humanist who just wants people to value evidence-based epistemology and liberal ethics. She is the author of “Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything About Race, Gender, and Identity”

What happens when your dream life falls apart? This is the crucial question we tackle in today's episode, and you may find that the biggest thing holding you back may not be your situation, it's your perspective.  Welcome back to Warriors Unmasked! In this week's episode, we talk with Australian-born thought leader, and client experience consultant, Tanya Pluckrose. Tanya speaks about her journey of coming to the U.S., marrying the man of her dreams, and how she went from happily married to starting over at rock bottom. You'll hear how Tanya reevaluated her life and made the commitment to change it for the better no matter what.  Listen in as we talk about how Tanya found the courage to walk away, the biggest threat to your future, and how sometimes the best thing to do is to let it go. You'll learn about the power of thoughts and how they shape how we view the world around us. Tanya talks about her “aha!” moment where she realized that her current situation was a product of her past and present thoughts and how she was able to turn that around and create a life that was truly designed for her. There's greatness within all of us, and if we take the time to stop and listen, it will show us which way to go.  Hit play and enjoy this fantastic episode filled with hope, courage, and maybe even a new perspective on life. To connect with Tanya or for more resources, check out the links below!  Always in your corner,  Chuck and Clint   More Of What's Inside: How Tanya came to the U.S.  Listening to your hunches Confronting alcoholism in a loved one Finding the courage to walk away The number one cause for relapse Changing your mindset and your future Finding miracles in surrender An interesting life VS an extraordinary life You chance at living your dream life Being engineered to be successful And much more!     GUEST LINKS: Email: Tanya@tanyapluckrose.com   LINKS: malarchuk.com/book  malarchuk.com  www.thecompassionateconnection.com  www.warriorsunmasked.com  Follow us on Instagram Like us on Facebook Subscribe To Our YouTube   Episode Minute By Minute:   2:13 - Tanya's story 6:50 - Clipping her wings 12:37 - The Godshot 16:27 - The disease of alcoholism 20:25 - Starting a new journey 24:37 - Dealing with resentment 28:40 - What Tanya does today 32:44 - Being built for success 37:19 - How to get in touch with Tanya 40:52 - Tanya's parting advice

A very special episode today - I had the privilege of speaking with Tanya Pluckrose on the power of mindset in sales, and how our mind, and specifically our thinking, directly impacts our ability to drive results. As sales leaders we have a huge responsibility to be the Models of Excellence that we would like to see in our team, and hence, we must be laser focused on how we bring ourselves to every single situation. This is a must listen for all sales leaders and their teams. Tanya brings gold nugget after gold nugget.

In matters civic, we have great sympathies with empiricist and classical-liberal critics of the recent woke madness induced by Critical Social Theory. And yet... In this episode we distinguish among the many children of the Enlightenment, point out the strengths of the empiricist/liberal tradition but also its corresponding weaknesses that CST exploits, and exhort secular empiricists to reconsider the moral, spiritual, and theological roots of the intellectual tradition that they rightly see as critically endangered. So have a listen, and then share this episode with an empiricist near you! Support us on Patreon! Notes: 1. Pluckrose and Lindsay, Cynical Theories 2. Spinoza, Principles of Cartesian Philosophy 3. Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy 4. Sharp, Spinoza and the Politics of Renaturalization 5. Locke, Second Treatise of Government 6. Dennett, Darwin's Dangerous Idea 7. Rectenwald, Springtime for Snowflakes 8. Also check out our episode on Faith to the Aid of Reason More about us at sarahhinlickywilson.com and paulhinlicky.com!

Have you ever been called a racist simply because you are white? What is systemic racism and is it true? In this episode I will discuss how Critical Race Theory says marginalized groups of minorities have a unique voice to speak about racism. We will examine the claim and see how the fruits of Critical Race Theory are rotten.    Connect with Me:  Instagram Twitter     Footnotes: Quote 1--Delgado and Stefancic, Critical Race Theory, 22. Quote 2 (Need training to see racism)--Pluckrose and Lindsay, Cynical Theories, 17 (epub).  Quote 3 (microaggressions)--Delgado and Stefancic, Critical Race Theory, 17.  Quotes 4 & 5 (Washington Examiner article)--https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ucla-student-soap-dispensers-racist Quote 6 (no white person is innocent)--Delgado and Stefancic, Critical Race Theory, 65.  Quote 7 (Coddling of the American Mind)--Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas Are Setting up a Generation for Failure (New York, NY: Penguin Press, 2018), 188.   Special Thanks to Melissa Baines at MBainesGDP.com for the Logo Design  

The New Discourses Podcast with James Lindsay, Episode 26 As most New Discourses fans will know, back in October 2018, James Lindsay, Peter Boghossian, and Helen Pluckrose burst onto the scene with a scandalous expose of Critical Social Justice scholarship within academia. This effort to show the world what was going on in the humanities and (to lesser extent) social sciences research literature was billed the "Grievance Studies Affair" (https://newdiscourses.com/2020/01/academic-grievance-studies-and-the-corruption-of-scholarship/), and the trio told their story in detail when the Wall Street Journal ended up breaking the story. The expose involved (https://leiterreports.typepad.com/files/project-summary-and-fact-sheet.pdf) their having written 20 academic papers in about 10 months and seeing 7 of those accepted, 4 published, and 1 (about dog sex) having received recognition for excellence in scholarship. A further 7 papers were still under consideration or revision, and it has been assessed that at least 4 of these would probably also have been accepted (and eventually published). Among these papers, one very controversial example rewrote a chapter of Adolf Hitler's infamous book Mein Kampf (My Struggle) and was accepted for publication by the feminist social work journal Affilia (title: "Our Struggle Is My Struggle: Solidarity Feminism as an Intersectional Reply to Neoliberal and Choice Feminism," available in full here, https://drive.google.com/file/d/18DoO44m2G5tvJcQaMdau6d8CSrdKDRBf/view). This paper has predictably garnered a great deal of attention and has been the center of much controversy, including recently in an article by the progressive Israeli magazine Haaretz, where Swedish "Hitler expert" Mikael Nilsson recently brought (https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-hitler-hoax-academic-wokeness-culture-war-1.9629759) the issue back up (dated March 21, 2021) two and a half years later. His objective was to discredit the entire Grievance Studies Affair by showing the infamous "Feminist Mein Kampf" paper to have been a fraud (and darling of "right-wing" nonsense). He even makes the argument that the paper rewrites the least bad part of Mein Kampf, which is easily revealed to be horrifically misguided and believable only by removing the relevant context of the chapter. On this episode of the New Discourses Podcast, James Lindsay, who helped to write the paper and perpetrate the Grievance Studies Affair, talks about the project and the creation of this particular paper at unprecedented length and in unprecedented detail, revealing Nilssen not to know what he's talking about. If you have ever wondered about the backstory of the creation of the "Feminist Mein Kampf" paper really was, including why its authors did it, you won't want to miss this long-form discussion and rare response to yet another underinformed critic of Lindsay, Boghossian, and Pluckrose's work. Support New Discourses: paypal.me/newdiscourses newdiscourses.locals.com/support patreon.com/newdiscourses subscribestar.com/newdiscourses youtube.com/channel/UC9K5PLkj0N_b9JTPdSRwPkg/join Website: newdiscourses.com Follow: facebook.com/newdiscourses twitter.com/NewDiscourses instagram.com/newdiscourses newdiscourses.locals.com pinterest.com/newdiscourses linkedin.com/company/newdiscourses minds.com/newdiscourses reddit.com/r/NewDiscourses Podcast: @newdiscourses podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/new-…es/id1499880546 bit.ly/NDGooglePodcasts open.spotify.com/show/0HfzDaXI5L4LnJQStFWgZp stitcher.com/podcast/new-discourses © 2021 New Discourses. All rights reserved.

> Paradigm Shifter > Potentiality and Prosperity Coach > Success and Wealth Creator > Bob Proctor Mentee Your mindset is priceless. Yet most people spend a fortune on strategy yet fail to set their mind to success. Are you aware that success is 95% mindset and only 5% strategy! I help business owners set their mindsets for success by stopping doing certain things and start doing things in a certain way with their THINKING! I am on a mission to help people unlock their God-given talents, step into their greatness, and realize their real potentiality

Global Entrepreneurs, Business Coaches and Twin sisters Tam and Tanya Pluckrose join this episode to talk about: The differences in handling COVID-19 in Australia where Tam lives and in Los Angeles where Tanya lived until moving to Las Vegas. People returning to Australia from being outside the country and Domestic travel resuming. Tam believing Australia exploding with travel after the pandemic ends.  Tanya going home to Australia in 2019 after being away 5 years and coming to the United States to fulfill a calling. Tanya believing America is the greatest country to support the desires of people to make greater impact. Growing up in South Africa and moving to Hong Kong at 10 years old. Always having a playmate and being each other's best friend. Being grateful to end up moving to Australia and becoming the people they are. Seeing Social injustice in South Africa and being impacted for a lifetime.  The challenges Tanya faced on her moving trip from Los Angeles to Las Vegas. God giving people opportunities to grow.  Finding the real you.  Connect with Tam and Tanya Pluckrose on LinkedIn tam@multilayered.world tanyapluckrose.com   Watch the episode on YouTube: https://youtu.be/-ZUU9YEmyMM

Watch on YouTube: https://youtu.be/3Czyd0XSEso The alarmists were right: ideas that were only a few years ago complacently dismissed as the perennial agitation of a few campus loonies are now pervasive in the corporate world, mass media and pop culture. Critical race theory, transgender ideology, the obsessive search for oppressive power relations in every aspect of life and every feature of language, the demand for all to be activists, shutting down of dissenting speech as violence: common sense or the gift of a solid Catholic formation will suffice for most who reject these ideologies. But some will want a more rigorous critique or a deeper understanding of the philosophical roots of radical leftist activism. To that end, Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay have written Cynical Theories, a very helpful primer on the development of modern activism from 1960s postmodernist philosophy. In this episode, Thomas and political philosopher Darel Paul discuss the book, which tracks how postcolonial theory, queer theory, women's/gender studies, critical race theory, and other activist fields have instantiated or adapted the following central principles and themes of postmodernism: Postmodern principles: Radical skepticism about the ability to know anything, cultural constructivism Society is formed of systems of power and hierarchies which decide what and how things can be known Postmodern themes: The blurring of boundaries, the power of language, cultural relativism, loss of the individual and the universal The episode concludes with a critique of Pluckrose and Lindsay's prescription of a return to Enlightenment liberalism as a corrective to postmodernism. Contents [1:41] Reasons for discussing Cynical Theories [4:36] Evidence of postmodernist activist movements reaching the mainstream [10:58] What the book contributes to the discourse on woke ideology [15:00] Similarities and differences between postmodernism and Marxism [26:25] The core postmodern principles and themes [38:53] Policing speech as a tool of power rather than a rational means of communicating truth [47:58] The proliferation of postmodern principles into a number of activist fields [49:47] Defining one's identity in terms of suffering and oppression [55:07] Tension between postmodern rejection of categories and the need to have categories to critique power relations; the emergence of queer theory; deliberate incoherence as liberation [1:01:06] Conundrum for LGBTQ activists: gain “normal” status or destroy idea of normality? [1:06:40] Gender theory vs. critical race theory on categories [1:18:50] Postmodernism as a class ideology? [1:24:17] The postcolonial critique of science; epistemic relativism [1:27:30] Critique of Pluckrose and Lindsay's advocacy of a return to Enlightenment liberalism [1:32:51] Liberalism as an inherently negative and deconstructive philosophy [1:40:04] Postmodernism as an extension and/or consequence of liberalism [2:04:33] How to communicate truth to someone who believes language is merely power?  Links Pluckrose and Lindsay, Cynical Theories https://www.amazon.com/Cynical-Theories-Scholarship-Everything-Identity_and/dp/1634312023 Darel Paul, “Against Racialism” https://www.firstthings.com/article/2020/10/against-racialism Darel Paul, “Listening at the Great Awokening” https://areomagazine.com/2019/04/17/listening-at-the-great-awokening/ Darel Paul, “The Global Community Is a Fantasy” https://americanmind.org/salvo/the-global-community-is-a-fantasy/ Darel Paul, From Tolerance to Equality https://www.baylorpress.com/9781481306959/from-tolerance-to-equality/ Ep. 61 on liberalism as an anti-culture with James Matthew Wilson https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/ep-61-liberal-anti-culture-vs-western-vision-soul-pt-i-james-matthew-wilson/ Ep. 18 on the vice of acedia manifested in our refusal to accept our given nature https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/episode-18-acedia-forgotten-capital-sin-rj-snell/ Christmas episodes: It's a Wonderful Life (1946) film discussion w/ Patrick Coffin https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/its-wonderful-life-1946-w-patrick-coffin/ CCP 59 – The Glorious English Carol https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/episode-59-glorious-english-carol/ This podcast is a production of CatholicCulture.org. If you like the show, please consider supporting us! http://catholicculture.org/donate/audio

Pluckrose and Lindsay describe the ideological underpinnings of the Social Justice movement. This new ideology long incubated in the academe but has now broken into the mainstream. They explain new terms like cis-gender, hetero-normative, non-binary, and systemic racism. Cynical Theories is a guide to the language and customs of the new Social Justice activism.

In this week's episode Helen Pluckrose documents the evolution of the ideas that inform today's radical social justice activism, from its coarse origins in French postmodernism to its refinement within activist academic fields. Pluckrose argues this dogma is recognizable as much by its effects, such as cancel culture and social-media dogpiles, as by its tenets, which are all too often embraced as axiomatic in mainstream media: knowledge is a social construct; science and reason are tools of oppression; all human interactions are sites of oppressive power play; and language is dangerous. As Pluckrose and Lindsay warn, the unchecked proliferation of these anti-Enlightenment beliefs present a threat not only to liberal democracy but also to modernity itself. While acknowledging the need to challenge the complacency of those who think a just society has been fully achieved, Pluckrose break down how this often-radical activist scholarship does far more harm than good, not least to those marginalized communities it claims to champion. The podcast was hosted by the writer and journalist Helen Joyce. You can find out more about the book here: https://amzn.to/3nu0jmw Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/intelligencesquared. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Playing for Team Human today, authors of Cynical Theories, Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay.Pluckrose, Lindsay, and Rushkoff discuss the origins of French postmodernism and how it trickled into academic research and scholarship. Together, they explore our contemporary war of competing narratives and how a fascistic political environment influences not just the politics of a particular moment, but people's attitudes toward one another.In his opening monologue, Rushkoff discusses Netflix's new documentary, The Social Dilemma, and how the very people who programmed our most anti-human technologies are now playing for Team Human. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay chat with Trey Elling about CYNICAL THEORIES: HOW ACTIVIST SCHOLARSHIP MADE EVERYTHING ABOUT RACE, GENDER, AND IDENTITY--AND WHY THIS HARMS EVERYBODY, including: the three major phases of postmodernism over the last 50 years, why the movement rejects science, the definition of 'Theory', the ins and outs of specific Theories, what will become of postmodernism by 2030, and more.

Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay join me to discuss the claim, made by a number of prominent public intellectuals, that what is called “postmodernism” is responsible for the authoritarian and hysterical politics coming out of college campuses. Unlike nearly all those intellectuals, Pluckrose and Lindsay have actually studied not only “social justice” and identity politics … Continue reading Unregistered 110: Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay →

In this episode, I sit down with Helen Pluckrose to discuss the grievance studies papers she co-authored. We also discuss epistemology on the left and her upcoming book and how to combat regressive leftism. Here's any links you'll need to dive deeper: http://platoscave.fireside.fm/guests/helenpluckrose If you leanred something from this episode, please consider supporting me here: https://www.patreon.com/jordanmyers Every dollar that comes in will go towards bettering the show or towards funding my Philosophy PhD. Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCtM5SXgyN93usom5vpRqlEQ/ You can also get in contact with me through Twitter: @JordanCMyers Or by emailing me at platoscavepodcast@gmail.com Special Guest: Helen Pluckrose.

James Lindsay is an author & researcher. I've been exposed the words Social Justice Warrior, Wokeness and Post Modernism a lot over the last year, but I don't really have a strong grasp on their origins or where they came from. Thankfully James is the perfect man to explain them to us as he's spent much of his recent career diving head first into the academic literature which underpins these movements. Enjoy. #socialjusticewarrior #woke #postmodernism Extra Stuff: Follow James on Twitter - https://twitter.com/ConceptualJames Buy James' Book - https://amzn.to/2DKeiz5 Check out everything I recommend from books to products and help support the podcast at no extra cost to you by shopping through this link - https://www.amazon.co.uk/shop/modernwisdom - Get in touch. Join the discussion with me and other like minded listeners in the episode comments on the MW YouTube Channel or message me... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chriswillx Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/chriswillx YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/ModernWisdomPodcast Email: modernwisdompodcast@gmail.com

Tanya Pluckrose is back on the show and we are going deep on creating a great client experience and why this is key to your business. Tanya is an expert and thought-leader about attracting and retaining high-value clientele and an international...

Tanya Pluckrose is back on the show and we are going deep on creating a great client experience and why this is key to your business. Tanya is an expert and thought-leader about attracting and retaining high-value clientele and an international best-selling author of The Art of Selling to a Woman. 

Did you know there is a difference in purchasing behavior for women and men? Tune in to the wisdom of Tanya and find out about the art of selling to a woman. Tanya Pluckrose is an expert and thought-leader about attracting and retaining high-value...

Did you know there is a difference in purchasing behavior for women and men? Tune in to the wisdom of Tanya and find out about the art of selling to a woman. Tanya Pluckrose is an expert and thought-leader about attracting and retaining high-value clientele and an international best-selling author of The Art of Selling to a Woman.

Möödunud aastal Portlandi Ülikoolis korraldatud vestlusringis "Kas intersektsionalism on religioon?"* kritiseeris Helen Pluckrose parempoolseid selle eest, et nad kipuvad tihti ühte patta panema postmodernismi, marksismi ja intersektsionalismi. Vimmauuringute afääri käigus kuulsaks saanud Pluckrose'i sõnul vaatavad parempoolsed sel kombel mööda sellest, mis on tõeliselt oluline, nimelt kogu probleemistiku epistemoloogilisest vundamendist.Ma olen sellele uuele võõrsõnale – nimelt intersektsionalismile – meie avalikkuse tähelepanu varemgi pööranud. Kolmel reedel (8.3, 15.3 ja 22.3) tutvustasid Kuku Raadio nädalakommentaarides** seda mõistet lisaks mulle ka (:)kivisildnik ja Indrek Lepik.25. märtsil kutsusin ma samal põhjusel Kuku Tartu stuudiosse Keele ja Kirjanduse peatoimetaja Johanna Rossi ning kultuurikriitik Mihkel Kunnuse. Kuivõrd vestluse vältel sai kinnitust tõsiasi, et intersektsionalism on välja kasvanud feminismist – "diskursusesisesest peenhäälestamisest", nagu Johanna väga plastiliselt kirjeldas –, siis tulid uue termini kõrval jutuks veel ka naisterahva-liikumine, sotsiaalne õiglus, tõde, epistemoloogia, teadus ja mitmed muud teemad. Keskustelu kaugemaks eesmärgiks oli paremini aru saada, mida Pluckrose eelviidatud lausega meile tahtis ütelda. Ma jätan kuulajatele otsustada, kui lähedale meil sellele sihile õnnestus jõuda.Head kuulamist!Hardo See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

We sit down with Helen Pluckrose to discuss the grievance studies papers she co-authored. We also discuss epistemology on the left and her upcoming book and how to combat regressive leftism. We also have a Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD1RiH1j-M6C59z1upPXkWw?disable_polymer=true Your support helps me make more videos and podcasts: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thatsbs _(We have rewards for supporters like bonus episodes & videos) _ Visit our Website: https://thatsbs.fireside.fm/ Share our conversation with a friend (or enemy) and help us get our name out. We record these conversation because we can't think of a more important way to expose bad ideas and promote good ones. Plus we're bored a lot and don't have that many friends. Help us keep doing what we're doing. Contact us --- thatsbspodcast@gmail.com Twitter: @ThatsBSPodcast Above all, Thanks for watching. Special Guest: Helen Pluckrose.

We sit down with Helen Pluckrose to discuss the grievance studies papers she co-authored. We also discuss epistemology on the left and her upcoming book and how to combat regressive leftism. We also have a Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCD1RiH1j-M6C59z1upPXkWw?disable_polymer=true Your support helps me make more videos and podcasts: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thatsbs _(We have rewards for supporters like bonus episodes & videos) _ Visit our Website: https://thatsbs.fireside.fm/ Share our conversation with a friend (or enemy) and help us get our name out. We record these conversation because we can't think of a more important way to expose bad ideas and promote good ones. Plus we're bored a lot and don't have that many friends. Help us keep doing what we're doing. Contact us --- thatsbspodcast@gmail.com Twitter: @ThatsBSPodcast Above all, Thanks for watching. Special Guest: Helen Pluckrose.

Tanya Pluckrose is an expert and thought-leader about attracting and retaining high-value clientele, #1 international bestseller, and founder of Pluckrose, LLC a customer-centric company focused on creating exceptional client experiences. Find her at www.tanyapluckrose.com. This episode is brought to you by the GPS online program which Forbes has stated "helps entrepreneurs become professional speakers." Our program offers a step-by-step system on how to become a paid speaker based on Christopher's 17-year global speaking career. Our global GPS community is in 100 cities, 23 countries, and 5 continents. Join us here: christopherkai.com.

Tanya Pluckrose is an expert and thought leader in attracting and retaining high-value clientele, especially women.For over 2 years Tanya has managed her own mastery consulting business, Pluckrose, LLC, a customer-centric company focused on innovative ways to apply customer strategies that help companies create the right kind of selling experience for the female market. These strategies help increase sales, customer acquisition, and retention.Tanya is an international best selling author of The Art of Selling to a Woman which offers a unique and refreshing approach to attracting and retaining the most influential purchasing demographic in the world today, the discerning woman with her signature success template, her 3 A' s.Tanya has helped companies improve the profitability of businesses in the automotive, real estate, sales and marketing, financial services, multi-level marketing and cosmetic industry.

Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay talk with EconTalk host Russ Roberts about their essay on the enemies of modernity. Pluckrose and Lindsay argue that modernity--by which they mean democracy, reason, and individual liberty--is under attack from pre-modern and post-modern ideological enemies. They discuss why modernity is under attack and encourage people on the political left and right to support modernity.