Podcasts about Sandel

This week, Michael Sandel, professor of political philosophy at Harvard University and author of “The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good?” addresses the myth of meritocracy - the idea that, if all chances in life were made equal, then people would advance based on merit and succeed as far as their talent and effort would take them. Less acknowledged, Sandel says, is the role of luck; family, teachers, neighbors, time and place in success. Shifting from a merit-based perspective and appreciating the contingency in life, fosters a much deeper understanding and humility towards those who are less fortunate. 

Scripture Reference: Mark 5:21-43

Vandaag bespreken we het boek Gelijkheid van Thomas Piketty en Michael Sandel. Ondertitel: Wat het is en waarom het er toe doet Klein boek - 150 pagina's - twee experts op het gebied van gelijkheid in de maatschappij, een met Europese visie ander met Amerikaanse visie. Eerder bespraken we De tirannie van verdienste van Sandel. https://decideforimpact.com/tirannie-van-verdienste-boekencast-afl-77/  Voorwoord Tom ‘S Jongers - Armoede uitgelegd aan mensen met geld https://decideforimpact.com/armoede-uitgelegd-aan-mensen-met-geld-boekencast-afl-105/  Het is een fijn boek, de transcriptie van een gesprek tussen Piketty en Sandel op 20 mei 2024 aan de Paris School of Economics - waar Piketty professor is. Het leest fijn en gaf mij veel inzichten in korte tijd. Ik ben een groot fan van dit boek omdat het gelijkheid aan veel meer mensen kan uitleggen in begrijpelijke taal, al is er nog ruimte voor verbetering. Zoals ik zelf voor sociale én ecologische gelijkheid ga. Het gesprek lijkt zich te concentreren op gelijkheid in de Westerse omgeving, waarbij de kapitalistische economie een belangrijke rol blijft spelen. Het boek heeft negen hoofdstukken Voorwoord Tim ‘s Jongers 1 Waarom moeten we ons zorgen maken over gelijkheid? 2 Zou geld minder belangrijk moeten zijn? 3 De morele grenzen van markten 4 Globalisering en populisme 5 Meritocratie 6 Lotingen: zouden ze een rol moeten spelen bij de toelating tot universiteiten en de selectie van parlementaire vertegenwoordigers? 7 Belastingheffing, solidariteit en gemeenschap 8 Grenzen, migratie en klimaatverandering 9 De toekomst van links: identiteit en economie Nawoord Voorwoord Tim ‘s Jongers Tim onderschrijft uiteraard de visie van Sandel en Piketty, sterker nog hij ziet ze als gidsen op het pad van de radicale wending. OF het wachten op de hooivorken. Tim noemt alvast twee ideeën voor deze radicale wending, limitarisme (boek van Robeyns) en belastingen op erfenissen. 1 Waarom moeten we ons zorgen maken over gelijkheid? In Europa rijkste 10 procent bezit meer dan 50% van totale vermogen. Al is de lange langetermijntrend richting meer gelijkheid. Drie redenen waarom ongelijkheid een probleem is: universele toegang tot basisvoorzieningen, politieke gelijkheid (inspraak, invloed, macht en participatie) en waardigheid. Liberté, égalité et fraternité ofwel Vrijheid, gelijkheid en broederschap. Als je als rijkere tijd van anderen kunt kopen, dan schept dat sociale afstand. Piketty benoemt de Noord-Zuid-dimensie - de welvaart in het Noorden heeft kunnen groeien door de exploitatie van natuurlijk en menselijke hulpbronnen uit het Zuiden. 2 Zou geld minder belangrijk moeten zijn? Sandel drie aspecten om ongelijkheid tegen te gaan: progressievere belastingheffing, een uitbreiding van de welvaartsstaat en successiebelasting (erfenis voor iedereen). Als burgers hun krachten bundelen kunnen ze voor verandering zorgen. Participatief en democratisch socialisme. Decommodificatie om inkomens en vermogensongelijkheid irrelevant te maken (99 procent). Het monetaire component van het inkomen is 1 procent van het nationaal inkomen. Een sociale staat (ipv welvaartsstaat) mogelijk gemaakt door opkomst van vakbonden, socialezekerheidsfondsen, en sociale bijdragen. De salaris en inkomenskloof drastisch verminderen. 3 De morele grenzen van markten 4 Globalisering en populisme 5 Meritocratie Het is niet ‘jouw' geld. 6 Lotingen: zouden ze een rol moeten spelen bij de toelating tot universiteiten en de selectie van parlementaire vertegenwoordigers? 7 Belastingheffing, solidariteit en gemeenschap publieke dienstverlening met publieke middelen verbeteren 8 Grenzen, migratie en klimaatverandering 9 De toekomst van links: identiteit en economie Immigratie een kwestie die ons dwingt om te kijken naar het morele belang van nationale grenzen, en het morele belang van landen.

This is an episode we think you'd enjoy of Stay Tuned with Preet.  Michael Sandel is a professor of political philosophy at Harvard University. He's also the author of several publications, including his latest, Equality: What It Means and Why It Matters. Sandel joins Preet to discuss what human nature can tell us about our government, how higher education can foster free expression, and dealing with moral disagreements in our politics. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. You can listen to more of this podcast by searching for Stay Tuned with Preet in your podcast app.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Scripture Reference: Matthew 6:5; 6:16

In the latest episode of NewsData's People in Power, upstream natural gas drilling executive Jason Sandel, chair of the Western States and Tribal Nations Energy Initiative, sits down with Abigail Sawyer to discuss the value of Rocky Mountain-sourced natural gas for providing electric reliability and heat in the West. Sandel, who runs a family-owned drilling and well-servicing business in the San Juan Basin, also discusses how natural gas producers can pivot to drilling geothermal and advanced-geothermal wells to provide emissions-free baseload power with little to no investment in new equipment or retraining.

Karches, Nora www.deutschlandfunk.de, Büchermarkt

Scripture Reference: 2 Corinthians 3:18 

Michael Sandel is a professor of political philosophy at Harvard University. He's also the author of several publications, including his latest, Equality: What It Means and Why It Matters. Sandel joins Preet to discuss what human nature can tell us about our government, how higher education can foster free expression, and dealing with moral disagreements in our politics. You can now watch this episode! Head to CAFE's Youtube channel and subscribe.  Show notes and a transcript of the episode are available on our website.  Have a question for Preet? Ask @PreetBharara on Threads, or Twitter with the hashtag #AskPreet. Email us at staytuned@cafe.com, or call 669-247-7338 to leave a voicemail. Stay Tuned with Preet is brought to you by CAFE and the Vox Media Podcast Network. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Scripture Reference: Mark 1:16-19; John 14:5-6

For freelancer Graphic Designers, the grind is real—low-paying clients, endless revisions, and that sinking feeling of being stuck. But Kady Sandel knows a thing or two about breaking free. Starting her journey hustling on Craigslist, Kady turned $65 logo gigs into $35K projects and built a thriving creative agency.This week on The Angry Designer Podcast, we're joined by Kady Sandel, a Freelance Graphic Designer turned agency owner who went from hustling on Craigslist to landing massive clients and building a thriving creative business. Together, we dig into why so many freelancers hit a ceiling and the brutal truth about what it takes to scale.In this episode you'll discover:• How to set higher rates and land premium projects• The power of niching down and targeting the RIGHT clients• Real strategies from Kady's journey—from Craigslist hustler to six-figure dealsIf you're ready to ditch low-paying clients and start commanding the rates you deserve, this episode is your no fluff guide to scaling for success.It's time to learn from the best, embrace the hustle, and charge what you're worth.Stay Angry our Friends –––––––––––Join Anger Management for Designers Newsletter at https://tinyurl.com/mr4bb4j3Want to see more? See uncut episodes on our YouTube channel at youtube.com/theangrydesigner Read our blog posts on our website TheAngryDesigner.comJoin in the conversation on our Instagram Instagram.com/TheAngryDesignerPodcast

Fabulous souls, welcome back to the fourth session in our Christmas Conversations series. I have been having so much fun with these, I don't want them to end! Today I am joined by Kate Sandel, Elsa Sinclair & Chantel Prat for what was a wonderful conversation- I would love to hear your thoughts also! Happy Listening! xx Jane You can find... Kate Sandel here at Soft & Sound Elsa Sinclair here at Taming Wild Chantel Prat here on her website

Scripture Reference: Luke 1:26-38

Gladiator II Should have been a huge deal.  It should have been the talk of the town.  Should have been.  It's okay but it's nowhere near the masterpiece that film from 2000 is.            0:10:30 - Box Office 0:19:00 - Movie Recommendation- Gladiator (2000)  0:22:45 - Some of our favorite Sword and Sandel films. 0:36:00 - Gladiator (2000) 1:00:00 - Gladiator II, Dir. Ridley Scott   Hosted, produced and mixed by Grayson Maxwell and Roger Stillion.  Also hosted by Christopher Boughan.  Visit the new Youtube channel, "Post Credits Podcast" to see watch the video version.   Thank you for listening!

Are you wondering if true freedom from an eating disorder is possible? In this episode, I sit down with Chris Sandel, founder of Seven Health, who has dedicated his career to helping people find lasting freedom. Together, we explore why “full recovery” is achievable and what's really necessary to reach it. In this epic episode, Chris shares how recovery goes beyond just eating or following rigid rules. We dive into the common traps people fall into—like waiting to feel ready or trying to negotiate with the eating disorder. This episode offers a fresh perspective on building resilience, letting go of control, and finding true self-compassion. It keeps giving, right to the end, so keep listening! Here's what you'll gain: A clear understanding of why full recovery is possible, no matter where you are right now. Powerful insights on why taking meaningful action—not just gathering information—is key to recovery. Practical ways to start building a life beyond the eating disorder, filled with joy and self-trust. Listen now, and if this resonates, join my email community for daily mantras and a free recovery guide to support your path. If this episode spoke to you, take the next step toward freedom. Both Chris and I can help you. Chris's details are: Seven Health Website Real Health Radio YouTube Channel Instagram Facebook Free Guide: First Five Steps For my gold standard 1:1 coaching, reach out to me here: Begin Your RecoveryI also offer plenty of free resources:Sign up to receive daily mantras and a free recovery guide when you join my email community – you can do this here My details: Website YouTube Spotify Podcast Instagram Facebook Don't forget to follow this podcast, and if you enjoyed it, please leave a review to help others find support on their recovery journey.

On this episode, we meet Chris Sandel, an incredible nutritionist, coach and expert in the field of eating disorder recovery. Chris has worked with clients for over 15 years (including our very own Florence!), helping them to reach a place of full recovery, where they are no longer impacted by eating disorder thoughts and can get on with what's truly important in their life. Access Chris Sandel's FREE mini-course here: the First 5 Steps To Take In Your Eating Disorder RecoveryOr contact him for his group programme or 1:1 coaching via https://seven-health.com/ To find support in your HA recovery:Get the "No Period. Now What?" book at noperiod.info/book.Get the French version "Je n'ai plus mes regles" book at noperiod.info/livreTo join the NPNW English support group, please visit noperiod.info/supportTo join the French support group, please visit noperiod.info/communauteTo make an appointment with Dr Sykes and get individual support to get your period back or improve your fertility, please go to noperiod.info/appointmentsTo make an appointment with Florence Gillet and get help with the body and mind changes happening in recovery please visit www.beyondbodyimage.comYou can find us on social mediaNo Period, Now What? on Instagram in EnglishNo Period, Now What? on Instagram in FrenchBeyond Body Image on FacebookBeyond Body Image on InstagramEmail us via allin@noperiodnowwhat.comIf you enjo...

The connection between eating disorders and anxiety has been well established, but what about seeing eating disorders as a form of anxiety? In today's episode of the Liv Label Free Podcast, Livia Sara chats with Chris Sandel, a nutritionist, coach and eating disorder expert. Chris is the founder and owner of Seven Health, a platform through which he helps people with eating disorders fully recover. Chris is trained in several specialties including Intuitive Eating, Health At Every Size, polyvagal theory, and trauma. He's originally from Sydney and now lives in the UK with his wife Ali and 6-year-old son Ramsay. Topics discussed: How addressing anxiety can prevent the development or reemergence of eating disorders The importance of creating a vision beyond recovery Embracing challenges through gradual but repeated exposure to fear foods Emphasizing the role of love in healing and holistic recovery rather than focusing solely on meal plans and nutrition The Domino Effect in eating disorder recovery Recognizing negative thoughts associated with eating disorders as separate from yourself

Find the full episode show notes by clicking here!If you like this podcast, and you have been dealing with anxiety, the effects of trauma, or have sometimes wondered why you act or feel a certain way when you logically know it doesn't make any sense, then come work with me, where we can together make a difference for you with the anxiety, triggers, and traumas you've been dealing with, so that they no longer show up at all.I'm hosting a free live training, where you can discover the secret to healing anxiety and triggers even if you've tried everything to heal already. Go to https://www.meganhillukkacoaching.com/joinus

Scripture Reference: Romans 8:31-39

In this enlightening episode, Carolyn Sandel, founder of Older Stronger Wiser Counseling, discusses her journey from helping her brother with special needs to becoming a leading expert in geriatric social work. She delves into strategies for supporting those with Alzheimer's and their caregivers, highlighting the importance of empathy, mindfulness, and community engagement. Sandel also addresses the unique challenges faced by LGBTQ elders and the impact of isolation and stress on caregiving. 01:29- About Carolyn Sandel Carolyn is the principal, the CEO, and the founder of Older Stronger Wiser Counseling in Western Massachusetts. She provides mental health counseling to older adults and their caregivers right out of the comfort of their own homes.  Before starting this agency, she had over 20 years of experience in the aging services field, including spearheading many initiatives, like running one of the first assisted living facilities to become nationally accredited as an LGBTQ-friendly community. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tbcy/support

Abby Sandel aka Appellation Mountain joins me for an AMAZING conversation about the world of baby naming. We chat about trends but also the deeper and darker topics of naming a baby, and Abby offers some tips for success. I am absolutely humbled by Abby's talents and wisdom, and so honored to share this conversation with all of you. It will stick with me forever. Find Abby here: Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/appmtn/ Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/AppMtn/ Patreon | https://www.patreon.com/AMbabynames

Scripture ReferenceRomans 8:15-25

Vandaag bespreken we het boek Armoede uitgelegd aan mensen met geld van Tim ‘S Jongers. Een indrukwekkend boek waarin Tim veel schrijft vanuit zijn eigen ervaring hoe het is en voelt om arm te zijn. Wat het effect van armoede is op je welzijn, fysieke gezondheid, mentale gezondheid en meer. Van zijn eerste boek verkocht Tim meer dan 10.000 exemplaren. Dit boek is een aanrader voor beleidsmensen, mensen inde hulpverlening, en intellectuele mensen die beslissingen nemen over voorzieningen en acties om armoede tegen te gaan of mensen in armoede te helpen. Het is een waardevol boek om te lezen voor ondernemers voor een andere kijk op de maatschappij en medewerkers die ze willen aannemen of in dienst hebben die een achtergrond hebben van armoede en sociale tegenslag. Weer een krachtig boekje van de Correspondent dat je inzicht geeft op een sociaal probleem in onze maatschappij. Inhoud 1 Wat is armoede nou écht? - Waarom armoede zo veelkantig is 2 Dom, dik en dood - Waarom armoede zo duur is 3 30 miljoen woorden minder - Waarom armoede overdracht van ellende is 4 Niet willen maar kunnen - Waarom armoede en clusterfuck is 5 Uit de tunnel kruipen - Waarom armoede aan je blijft kleven 6 In de wereld van de dominanten - Waarom armoede je buitensluit 7 Hier om je nooit meer los te laten  -Waarom armoede eeuwig is 8 De potentie van ervaringskennis - Waarom armoede en andere blik geeft 9 Waar blijft de tegenmacht?  - Waarom armoede schreeuwt om een opstand Proloog 200.000 kinderen groeien in armoede op, in een welvarend land. De hoogopgeleiden welvarenden bepalen alles voor de mensen die in armoede leven, maar hebben er geen ervaring mee. 1 Wat is armoede nou écht? - Waarom armoede zo veelkantig is Twee verschillende visies op wat de onderkant is, CBS (vanuit inkomen kant) en SCP (vanuit uitgaven kant). Ook als je officieel hier niet onder valt kan het zijn dat je moeite hebt om rond te komen, zo'n 40 procent in Nederland. Bestaansonzekerheid - onzeker van werk en inkomen, de gezondheid, de woonsituatie of de sociale relaties. Nibud 1.4 miljoen Nederlandse huishoudens hebben risicovolle schulden, 614.000 hiervan komen zonder hulp niet meer van hun schuld af. Op papier ziet het er goed uit, we behoren tot de welvarendste en gelijkste landen. De mythe van de meritocratie (Sandel). De hoogopgeleiden hebben de laatste jaren belachelijk goed voor onszelf gezorgd. Terugtrekking van de overheid op sociale vraagstukken, doorgeschoven naar de gemeente, daar geen kennis, en ontbreekt aan menskracht en geld. 2 Dom, dik en dood - Waarom armoede zo duur is Uitgestelde zorg is dure zorg. Een voorbeeld wat het effect is van de tandarts uit de basisverzekering halen, voor de mensen, en voor de maatschappij kosten. Leven in een huis dat niet gezond is. Eten wat goedkoop maar niet gezond is. Rijker worden van de rijken en armer worden van de armen. Denk aan subsidies die voor arme mensen niet van toepassing zijn, zoals voor zonnepanelen die voor goedkope stroom zorgt of een elektrische auto, en de fossiele energie die steeds duurder wordt. Bij iedere euro die we investeren in de preventie van dakloosheid, besparen we uiteindelijk 2euro20 aan maatschappelijke kosten. Korte termijn denken op armoedebeleid omzetten naar lange termijn visies. 3 30 miljoen woorden minder - Waarom armoede overdracht van ellende is De overdracht van armoede op de twee volgende generaties. De structuur van ons DNA veranderd. Interessant onderzoek in Overkalix en de hongerwinter. Belang van de eerste 1000 dagen van een mens. Het is de blauwdruk voor de rest van ons leven. Het belang van waar je wieg heeft gestaan. Driejarigen hebben tot dan toe 30 miljoen woorden minder gehoord. Een kleinere woordenschat en dus andere resultaten op school en de baan die je kunt krijgen. De docu Step in the Circle is op YouTube te zien Programma Kansrijke Start - Tessa Roseboom (investeren in ee...

In the early days as a web designer, it's common to say “yes” to any project that comes your way just to make some money and build a portfolio. But it doesn't take many “bad client experiences” before you're ready to weed out those bad-fit clients.But what makes a client bad-fit? Are they cheap? Do they not understand your value? Are they a bad personality fit? Are they super-intensive with communication and a drain on your mental bandwidth? All of the above?If you seem to attract a lot of these folks, it's because you don't have a weed-out funnel (or filter in place. And that's exactly what we cover in this podcast episode.I was recently on Kady Sandel's Profitable Graphic Designer Podcast sharing the ins and outs of my weed out funnel and I'm excited to share that conversation with you!There's no right or wrong way to filter out leads but I'm sharing, in depth, what worked for me and what works for hundreds of members of my community Web Designer Pro™.We cover:How to identify bad fit leads from one emailWhether or not you should have an in-depth contact formOverview of my “potential client page”How to know if a lead is questionable or qualifiedHow to attract those high-paying, awesome clientsWe also dig into how to stand out in an oversaturated market of web designers, nightmare client experiences that led to me being more stern about weeding people out and more!Want my proven, weed out process for your business? I've packaged up my funneling framework for you!Included is:Full video training (18:50)My potential client page (and examples of other real world potential client pages)Email template for questionable leadsEmail template for quality leadsNormally this is $47 but you can snag it now for only $7!Use coupon code FUNNELCLIENT40 to activate your discount.https://joshhall.co/product/web-design-client-funneling-framework/Get all links and resources mentioned along with a full transcription at:https://joshhall.co/335View all Web Design Business Podcasts with show notes and full transcriptions at: https://joshhall.co/podcastSupport the Show.Join Web Designer Pro™ before we hit the 250 member cap!https://joshhall.co/pro

Scripture ReferenceRomans 6.1-7

In this episode, Victoria interviews nutritionist and eating disorder recovery coach Chris Sandell. They discuss why all eating disorders have commonalities in terms of recovery, what skills help build resilience to fully recover, and mindset shifts and action steps to move forward into recovery. Connect with me Join my free support group: https://victoria-kleinsman.circle.so/c/free-support-group/  Come hang out with me on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/victoriakleinsmanofficial/  Work with me: https://victoriakleinsman.com/11-coaching/ Chris attended the College of Naturopathic Medicine (CNM) and graduated with a Diploma in Nutritional Therapy. He founded his own company, Seven Health, in 2009 and found his calling in working with eating disorders and helping people fully recover. As a perpetual student, Chris Sandel is also trained in Intuitive Eating (IE), Health At Every Size (HAES) ®, Motivational Interviewing (MI), Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), polyvagal theory, Neuro-linguistic programming (NLP), trauma, behavioural psychology, and habit formation. Originally from Sydney, Chris lives in the UK with his wife Ali and 6-year-old son Ramsay. Main Discussion Points: - Why restriction is present in all eating disorders and the common threads between them (00:13:17) - Building resilience - physical, psychological, emotional, connection - to enable full recovery (00:41:09) - Taking meaningful action versus small incremental changes in recovery (00:25:44) - Creating distance from unhelpful thoughts through diffusion techniques (00:48:20) - Connecting to your vision and values to move through fear of weight gain (00:55:52) Key Quotes: "I am a full advocate that people can reach a place of full recovery and that full recovery is for everybody, and it's not a maybe or possible. It's like a yeah." (00:09:31) "The only way to build resilience is to take action. And so really, if if I'm looking at this in terms of a visual, the the thing that connects all of those things is action taking." (00:45:58) "It doesn't matter whether something is true or not. Because you can be thinking a thought that is true, that is really, really unhelpful for you to to continue thinking of." (00:49:50) Connect with Chris https://seven-health.com/https://seven-health.com/real-health-radio/ https://www.instagram.com/sevenhealthcompany https://www.facebook.com/SevenHealthCompany/ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/victoria-kleinsman/message

Ever wondered what working on projects over $100K is like? In this episode, Kady Sandel of Aventive Academy reveals her experience collaborating with a branding agency on a $250,000 project, securing clients exclusively through SEO, and leveraging networking to launch her design business. Wealthy Client Blueprint → https://aventiveacademy.com/wealthy-client/ Follow Kady On Instagram → https://www.instagram.com/aventiveacademy/ Design Biz Academy → https://thebriefcollective.com/course Share Your Design Opinion Anonymously → https://forms.gle/yFJonAwfvjuFeZPH9 --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/theunapologeticdesigner/support

Kady Sandel, founder of Aventive Academy and host of the Profitable Graphic Designer Podcast is back on the show sharing some incredible insight on how to get past the 100k annual revenue mark with your web design business.If 6-figs is the goal, honestly don't miss this one.In This Episode00:00 - Achieving Six Figures in Web Design04:22 - Navigating Six Figure Income Expectations09:25 - Raising Rates and Business Growth13:57 - Building a Six-Figure Web Design Business26:19 - Effective Pricing Strategies for Web Designers38:14 - Growing a Design Business50:27 - Scaling and Success in Entrepreneurship57:37 - Show Growth and Gratitude MessageGet all links, resources and show notes at:https://joshhall.co/323Grab my brand new (completely free) training to help you start and build your web design business at:

Cohosts John Stewart and Connor Hendrickson recap The High Cotton Classic and more before Tanner Sandel joins to discuss this weekend's event and reveal pairings for The Education at Sewanee.

Director Jeff Wadlow discusses his new film, Imaginary, with fellow Director Ari Sandel in a Q&A at the DGA theater in Los Angeles. In the conversation, he discusses working with a child actor, creating his creatures with a renowned creature effect house, and collaborating with the film's lead, DeWanda Wise, as a producing partner. The film follows Jessica, whose daughter develops an eerie attachment to a stuffed bear they find in the basement of her childhood home. What begins as innocent games quickly becomes sinister, as they realize that the bear is much more than just a stuffed toy. See photos and a summary of this event below: https://dga.org/Events/2024/May2024/Imaginary_QnA_0324

This week I'm talking to Kady Sandel of the Profitable Graphic Designer podcast and Aventive Academy all about how to price your services as a web designer and niche down the right way. Get the full show notes at https://webdesigneracademy.com/080 When you're ready, here are 3 ways we can help you with your web design business:​ 1)

Join us for an enlightening conversation with one of the world's foremost public intellectuals, Michael Sandel. Renowned for his exploration of pressing moral dilemmas, Sandel's influential books, including "The Tyranny of Merit" and "What Money Can't Buy," offer profound insights into contemporary issues through the lens of history. Sandel will be in conversation with Anant Goenka and Aakash Joshi of the Indian Express. They talk about the concepts of Secularism and Nationalism in today's time and how they have changed over the years, the limits to Free Speech in different societies and they play a game of 'What's the right thing to do'.

Filosofia e One Piece se misturam mais uma vez nesse crossover entre OPex e SciCast. Vamos usar One Piece como desculpa para falar de filosofia da justiça (ou usar filosofia da justiça como desculpa para falar de One Piece, dependendo da sua preferência).         Patronato do SciCast: Patreon SciCast Padrim SciCast Sua pequena contribuição ajuda o Portal Deviante a continuar divulgando Ciência! Contatos: contato@scicast.com.br https://twitter.com/scicastpodcast https://www.facebook.com/scicastpodcast https://instagram.com/scicastpodcast Fale conosco! E não esqueça de deixar o seu comentário na postagem desse episódio! Expediente: Produção Geral: Tarik Fernandes e Fernando Malta Edição: Podsphere  Parceria: Opex Cast Referências e Indicações: Sugestões de literatura: MASCARO, Alysson Leandro. Filosofia do Direito. 9. ed. Grupo GEN: 2021. REALE. Miguel. Filosofia do direito. 20. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2010. SANDEL, Michael J. Justiça - O que é fazer a coisa certa? 35. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Civilização Brasileira, 2011. One Piece. https://onepieceex.net/mangas/    Sugestões de filmes: The Good Place (2016) Sugestões de vídeos: Aulas do André Trapani sobre Filosofia do Direito https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHf8XaYCd7N6sNvzs2t28zYIq0xC7hthT  melontee https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jx1oJqRGfNw  Sugestões de links: OPEXCast #181. Manipulação da Verdade. https://onepieceex.net/opexcast-181-manipulacao-da-verdade/  OPEXCast #204. Filosofia da liberdade..https://onepieceex.net/opexcast-204-filosofia-da-liberdade/  SciCast #504: Sistema Político em One Piece. https://www.deviante.com.br/podcasts/scicast-504/  SciCast #516: O Direito. https://www.deviante.com.br/podcasts/scicast-516  Opex. https://onepieceex.net/  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this wide-ranging conversation with one of our favorite authors, philosopher Michael Sandel explains how the concept of meritocracy has helped to create such a massive divide in American politics and culture.  Michael Sandel is a world-renowned philosopher who teaches political philosophy at Harvard University. His course “Justice” is the first Harvard course to be made freely available online and has been viewed by tens of millions of people around the world. Sandel's books relate enduring themes of political philosophy to the most vexing moral and civic questions of our time. They include The Tyranny of Merit (2020), Democracy's Discontent (2022), and more. The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374289980/thetyrannyofmerit Democracy's Discontent: A New Edition for Our Perilous Times https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674270718  Website: http://pitchforkeconomics.com Twitter: @PitchforkEcon Instagram: @pitchforkeconomics Nick's twitter: @NickHanauer

O #RodaViva entrevista o escritor americano Michael Sandel. Sandel é professor de filosofia política em Harvard, e acaba de lançar no Brasil o livro "O Descontentamento da Democracia", com questões como acirramento da polarização na sociedade e a entrada em massa das pessoas na esfera pública com o uso da tecnologia.  Os temas de seu último título, além de importantes assuntos da vida, serão debatidos por Sandel, que é professor em Harvard desde 1980 e ficou mundialmente conhecido com o curso "Justiça", com discussões sobre temas como igualdade e cidadania. Michael também é autor de diversos outros livros. Com apresentação da jornalista Vera Magalhães, participam da bancada de entrevistadores Gabriela Prioli, mestre em Direito Penal pela USP e apresentadora do programa Saia Justa, da GNT; Thiago Amparo, professor na Faculdade de Direito da FGV-SP e colunista da Folha de S.Paulo; Paula Miraglia, doutora em Antropologia e diretora-geral do Nexo Jornal e da Revista Gama; Juliana Wallauer, roteirista, apresentadora e co-fundadora da plataforma Mamilos de Diálogo; e Joel Pinheiro, filósofo, economista e colunista da Folha de S.Paulo. #TVCultura #Literatura #MichaelSandel

If something is "good" is that good enough? Who decides? In this episode, Bill and Andrew discuss how people define "good," what interchangeability has to do with morale, and the problem with a "merit-based" culture. Bonus: Learn how Americans became the first to use the French idea of interchangeable parts in manufacturing. Note: this episode was previously published as Part 5 in the Awaken Your Inner Deming series.  TRANSCRIPT 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 30 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. The topic for today is, Deming Distinctions: Beyond Looking Good. Bill, take it away. 0:00:30.4 Bill Bellows: Funny you mentioned that. You remind me that I've been at this for over 30 years, and coming up in July, I'll be celebrating 40 years of marriage. Like 30 years, 40, where do these numbers come from? 0:00:44.5 AS: Okay. Yeah. Who defines quality in a marriage, Bill? 0:00:47.0 BB: Alright. 0:00:50.8 AS: Okay, we won't go there. Take us, take it away. 0:00:52.2 BB: We won't go there. So we are gonna talk about who defines quality, and to get into "beyond looking good." As I shared with you, I've listened to each of the podcasts a few times. And before we get into who defines quality, I just wanna provide clarification on some of the things that came up in the first five episodes. And so, one, and I think these are kind of in order, but if they're not in order, okay, well, I made reference to black-and-white thinking versus shades-of-gray thinking. And I called black-and-white thinking - black and white data - category data, and the word I was searching for that just wasn't coming out was attribute data. So for those who are keeping score, attribute data is probably the most relevant statistician term in that regard. 0:01:44.9 BB: Attribute data versus variable data. And what I've made reference to, and we'll talk more in a future session, is looking at things in terms of categories. And categories are black and white, or it could be red, yellow, green, that's three categories, or looking at things on a continuum. So I'm still excited by the difference that comes about by understanding when we're in the black-and-white mode or the category mode or the attribute data mode versus the variable mode, and still have a belief that we can't have continuous improvement or continual improvement if we're stuck in an attribute mode. 0:02:22.9 BB: And more on that later, that's one. I talked about Thomas Jefferson meeting Honoré Blanc and getting excited about the concept of interchangeable parts. And I had the date wrong, that was 1785, if anyone's keeping score there. He was ambassador to France from 1785 to 1789, but it was in 1792 that he wrote a letter to John Jay, who was a...I think he was a Commerce Secretary. Anyway, he was in the administration of Washington and shared the idea. I was doing some research earlier and found out that even with the headstart that Blanc had in France, 'cause back in 1785, Jefferson was invited to this pretty high level meeting in Paris where Blanc took a, I guess, like the trigger mechanism of 50 different rifles. Not the entire rifle, but just the...let's just call it the trigger mechanism with springs and whatnot. And he took the 50 apart and he put all the springs in one box, all the other pieces in their respective boxes and then shook the boxes up and showed that he could just randomly pull a given spring, a given part, and put 'em all together. And that got Jefferson excited. And the...what it meant for Jefferson and the French was not just that you can repair rifles in the battlefield quickly. 0:03:56.9 BB: Now, what it meant for jobs in France was a really big deal, because what the French were liking was all the time it took to repair those guns with craftsmanship, and Blanc alienated a whole bunch of gunsmiths as a result of that. And it turns out, Blanc's effort didn't really go anywhere because there was such a pushback from the gunsmiths, the practicing craftsmanship that jobs would be taken away. But it did come to the States. And then in the early 1800s, it became known as the American System of Production. But credit goes back to Blanc. I also made reference to absolute versus relative interchangeability. And I wanna provide a little bit more clarification there, and I just wanna throw out three numbers, and ideally people can write the numbers down, I'll repeat 'em a few times. The first number is 5.001, second number is 5.999, and the third number is 6.001. So it's 5.001, 5.999, 6.001. And some of what I'm gonna explain will come up again later, but...so this will tie in pretty well. So, what I've been doing is I'll write those three words on the whiteboard or throw them on a screen, and I'll call... 0:05:28.9 AS: Those three numbers. 0:05:31.4 BB: A, B, and C. And I'll say, which two of the three are closest to being the same? And sure enough people will say the 5.999 and the 6.001, which is like B and C. And I say that's the most popular answer, but it's not the only answer. People are like, "well, what other answer are there?" Well, it could be A and C, 5.001 and 6.001, both end in 001. Or it could be the first two, A and B, 5.001 and 5.999. So what I like to point out is, if somebody answers 5.999 and 6.001, then when I say to them, "what is your definition of same?" 0:06:14.9 BB: 'Cause the question is, which two of the three are close to being the same? And it turns out there's three explanations of "same." There's same: they begin with five, there's same: they end in 001. And there's same in terms of proximity to each other. So I just wanna throw that out. Well, then a very common definition of "quality" is to say, does something meet requirements? And that's the black-and-white thinking. I've also explained in the past that requirements are not set in absolute terms. The meeting must start at exactly 1:00, or the thickness must be exactly one inch. What I've explained is that the one inch will have a plus or minus on it. And so let's say the plus and minus gives us two requirements, a minimum of five and a maximum of six. Well, then that means the 5.001 meets requirements and the 5.999 meets requirements. 0:07:15.4 BB: And so in terms of defining quality, in terms of meeting requirements, A and B are both good. And then what about the 5.999 and the 6.001? Well, those numbers are on opposite sides of the upper requirement of six. One's just a little bit to the left and one's a little bit to the right. Then I would ask people, and for some of you, this'll ring - I think you'll be smiling - and I would say to people, "what happens in manufacturing if, Andrew, if I come up with a measurement and it's 6.001?" Okay, relative to defining quality as "meeting requirements," 6.001 does not meet requirements. So what I'll ask people is, "what would a non-Deming company do with a 6.001?" And people will say, "we're gonna take a file out, we're gonna work on it, we're gonna hit it with a hammer." And I say, "no, too much work." And they say, "well, what's the answer?" "We're gonna measure it again." 0:08:25.7 AS: Until we get it right. 0:08:27.7 BB: We will measure it until we get it right. We will change the room temperature. We will take the easiest path. So then I said, get people to realize, they're like, yeah, that's what we do. We measure the 6.001 again. Well, then I say, "well Andrew, why don't we measure the 5.001 again?" And what's the answer to that, Andrew? [laughter] 0:08:51.5 AS: 4.999. [laughter] 0:08:54.7 BB: But what's interesting is, we'll measure the 6.001 again. But we won't measure the 5.001 again. We won't measure the 5.999 again. And so to me, this reinforces that when we define quality as "meeting requirements," that what we're essentially saying in terms of absolute interchangeability, what we're pretending is that there's no difference between the 5.001 and the 5.999. At opposite ends, we're saying that Blanc would find them to be interchangeable, and putting all the things together. I don't think so. 0:09:36.7 BB: I think there's a greater chance that he'd find negligible difference between the 5.999 and the 6.001. And that's what I mean by relative interchangeability, that the difference between B and C is nothing, that's relative interchangeability. The closer they are together, the more alike they are in terms of how they're integrated into the gun, into the rifle, into the downstream product. And I just throw out that what defining quality as "requirements" is saying is that the first two are...the person downstream can't tell the difference. Then I challenge, I think there's...in terms of not telling the difference, I think between 5.999 and 6.001, that difference is minuscule cause they are relatively interchangeable. The other two are implied to be absolutely interchangeable. And that I challenge, that's why I just want to throw that out. All right, another thing I want...go ahead, Andrew. 0:10:38.3 AS: One of the things I just highlight is, I remember from my political science classes at Long Beach State where I studied was The Communist Manifesto came out in 1848. And Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were talking about the alienation of the worker. And what you're talking about is the kind of, the crushing of the craftsmen through interchangeable parts that was a lot like AI coming along and destroying something. And after 50 or 60 or 70 years of interchangeable parts, along comes The Communist Manifesto with the idea that when a person is just dealing with interchangeable parts, basically they're just a cog in the wheel and they have no connection to the aim of what's going on. They don't have any connection, and all of a sudden you lose the craftsmanship or the care for work. And I think that the reason why this is interesting is because that's, I think, a huge part of what Dr. Deming was trying to bring was bring back...it may not be craftsmanship for creating a shoe if you were a shoemaker, but it would be craftsmanship for producing the best you could for the part that you're playing in an ultimate aim of the system. 0:12:02.6 BB: Yes. And yes, and we'll talk more about that. That's brilliant. What you said also reminds me, and I don't think you and I spoke about it, you'll remind me. But have I shared with you the work of a Harvard philosopher by the name of Michael Sandel? 0:12:24.3 AS: I don't recall. 0:12:27.0 BB: He may be, yeah, from a distance, one of the most famous Harvard professors alive today. He's got a course on justice, which is I think 15 two- or three-hour lectures, which were recorded by public television in Boston. Anyway, he wrote a book at the beginning of the pandemic. It came out, it's called The Tyranny of Merit. 0:12:54.0 BB: And "merit" is this belief that "I did it all by myself." That "I deserve what I have because I made it happen. I had no help from you, Andrew. I had no help from the government. I didn't need the education system, the transportation system. I didn't need NASA research. I made it happen all by myself." And he said, what that belief does is it allows those who are successful to claim that they did it by themselves. It allows them to say those who didn't have only themselves to blame. And he sees that as a major destructive force in society, that belief. And I see it tied very well to Deming. Let me give you one anecdote. Dr. Deming was interviewed by Priscilla Petty for The Deming of America documentary, which was absolutely brilliant. 0:13:49.8 BB: And she's at his home, and he's sharing with her the medal he got from the Emperor of Japan, and he's holding it carefully, and I think he gives it to her, and she's looking at it, and she says to him something like, so what did it mean to you to receive that? And he said, "I was lucky. I made a contribution." He didn't say I did it all by myself. He was acknowledging that he was in the right place at the right time to make a contribution. And that's where Sandel is also heavily on, is don't deny the role of being born at the right time in the right situation, which is a greater system in which we are. Well, for one of the college courses, I was watching an interview between Sandel and one of his former students. 0:14:48.1 BB: And the point Sandel made that I wanted to bring up based on what you just said, he says, "what we really need to do is get people dignity in work." And that's what you're talking about, is allowing them to have pride in work, dignity in work instead of as they're making interchangeable parts, having them feel like an interchangeable part. And I'm really glad you brought that up because when we talk later about letter grades, I would bring back one of the reasons I find Deming's work astounding, is that he takes into account psychology in a way that I hope our listeners will really take heart to in a deeper way. 0:15:30.2 AS: And so for the listeners out there, just to reinforce, the book is called The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good. Published in 2020 by Michael Sandel. And the ratings on Amazon is 4.5 out of five with about 2,446 ratings. So it's a pretty well-rated book I'd say. And looks interesting. Now you got me wanting to read that one. 0:15:57.0 BB: Oh what I'll do is I'll send you a... Well, what I encourage our listeners to do is find the interview... Harvard Bookstore did an interview in 2020, 2021, with Michael Sandel being interviewed by his former student by the name of Preet Bharara. [laughter] Who used to be the... 0:16:24.3 AS: SEC... 0:16:24.4 BB: Head of these...no, well, he prosecuted a number of people for SEC crimes, but he headed the Justice Department's long oldest district, which is known as SDNY or the Southern District of New York. And so he was a...in one of the first classes his freshman year at Harvard, Preet Bharara's freshman year at Havard was one of Sandel's first years. And so they had an incredible conversation. So I would encourage the listeners to... 0:16:51.8 AS: Yeah, it's titled: Michael J Sandel with Preet Bharara at Harvard. And the channel is called Harvard Bookstore. 0:16:58.6 BB: Yes, absolutely. All right. So another topic I want to get to in terms of clarification and key points, last time we talked about tools and techniques and what I'm not sure I made much about.... First of all, I just wanna really reinforce that tools and techniques are not concepts and strategies. Tools are like a garden tool I use to dig a hole. Technique is how I go about using it, cleaning it, and whatnot. Not to be confused from a concept...and what is concept? We talked about last time is a concept is an abstract idea and a strategy is how do we apply it? So tools and techniques within Six Sigma quality could be control charts, could be design of experiments. And all, by the way, you're gonna find those tools and techniques within the Deming community. So it's not to say the tools and techniques are the differentiator. 0:17:50.8 BB: I think the concepts and strategies are the differentiators, but I don't wanna downplay tools. Lean has tools in terms of value streams, and you won't find value streams per se in Dr. Deming's work. Dr. Deming looks in terms of production viewed as a system. In a later session, I want to talk about value streams versus Deming's work. But I just wanna point out that I find it...it's easy to get lost in the weeds with all we find within Lean, Six Sigma, Deming and whatnot. And this is why last time I wanted to focus on tools and techniques as separate from concepts and strategies. And what I think we did speak about last time, again, for just as a reminder, is what's unique that we both enjoy with Dr. Deming's work is that KPIs are not caused by individual departments, assigned to individual departments. 0:18:46.0 BB: KPIs are viewed as measures of the overall system. And if you assign the KPIs across the organization and give every different function their own KPI, what you're likely to find - not likely - what you WILL find is that those assigned KPIs are interfering with others' abilities to get their KPIs met. And in the Deming philosophy, you don't have that problem because you understand that things are interdependent, not independent. And so I just wanna close by saying what I find in Deming's work to be most enlightening is this sense of "what does it mean to look at something as a system?" And it means everything is connected to everything else. When you define quality in terms of saying "this is good because it meets requirements," what you've just said is, "this is good in isolation." Whether it's the pass from the quarterback to the wide receiver, saying the pass met requirements. 0:19:52.0 BB: What I think Dr. Deming would ask is, "is the ball catchable?" [laughter] And yet, what I've seen in my aerospace experience is parts being measured for airplanes in Australia that they meet requirements because the measurements are taken early in the morning before the sun has had a chance to heat the part up. And we get the 6.001 is now 5.999. You know what that means, Andrew? It's - we can now ship it. [laughter] 0:20:23.9 BB: And send it off to America for some airplane factory. 0:20:26.2 AS: When we shipped it, that's what it was. 0:20:28.9 BB: Exactly. And so, again, interdependence is everything. Go ahead, Andrew. 0:20:34.6 AS: I wanted to point on, there's a company in Thailand that really has gotten on the KPI bandwagon, and I was talking with some people that work there, and they were just talking about how they've been rolling out the KPIs for the last couple of years and down to the number of seconds that you're on the phone and everything that you do is tracked now. And then I just witnessed that company basically use that KPI as a way to basically knock out a whole group of people that they were trying to get rid of by coming in with tight KPIs and then saying, "you're not keeping up with 'em and therefore you're out." And I just thought...and the manager that was involved I was talking to, you could just see, he saw how KPI can just be weaponized for the purposes of the senior management when you're doing KPIs of individuals. And the thing that I was thinking about is, imagine the CEO of that company in a couple of years, in a couple of months, they happen to listen to this podcast, or they pick up a book of Dr. Deming and they think, "Oh my God, what did I just do over the last five years implementing KPIs down to the individual level?" [laughter] 0:21:48.5 BB: Oh, yeah. And that's what we talked about last time is...as I told you, I had a friend of a friend who's worked for Xerox, and he said there wasn't a KPI that was flowed down that they couldn't find a way to beat. And that's what happens, and you end up getting things done, but what's missing is: at whose expense? All right. So we talked about...now, let's get into beyond looking good, Deming distinctions. Who defines quality? Well, from Philip Crosby's perspective, quality's defined by the...it could be the designer. The designer puts a set of requirements on the component, whatever it is. The unit, the requirements have latitude we talked about. They're not exact. There's a minimum of six, a maximum of...or a minimum of five, maximum of six. 0:22:48.8 BB: There's a range you have to meet, is the traditional view of quality. And in my 30 years of experience, I've not seen quality defined any other way than that. It has to be in between these two values. Sometimes it has to be five or below or six or above, but there's a range. But also what we talked about last time is Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." But what I found profound about that definition, it is not me defining quality and saying, "Andrew, the parts met requirements when I threw it. Now, it's your job to catch it." It's me saying, "I've thrown the ball and you tell me, how did I do? You tell me how did I do?" And if you said, "Bill, if you throw it just a little bit higher, a little bit further out, a little bit faster," that's about synchronicity. Now, I'm realizing that my ability to throw the ball doesn't really matter if you can't catch it. So if I practice in the off season, throwing it faster and faster, but don't clue you in, until the first game, how's that helping? So I've got a KPI to throw it really, really hard. And you're thinking, "how's that helping?" So that's... 0:24:19.9 AS: And can you just go back to that for a second? Quality is on a product or service, you were saying that how Dr. Deming defined that, it helps someone... 0:24:26.7 BB: Yeah. Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." And so my interpretation of that is two things. One is, it's not me delivering a report and saying the report met requirements. It's saying, "I get the report to you, and I ask Andrew, how did I do?" And then you say to me, "I had some problem with this section, I had some problem...." But the important thing is that you become the judge of the quality of the report, not me. And it could be information I provide you with in a lecture. It's you letting me know as a student that you had a hard time with the examples. And I'm thinking, "well, I did a great job." So it's not what I think as the producer handing off to you. It's you giving me the feedback. So quality is not a one-way...in fact, first of all, quality's not defined by the producer. It's defined by the recipients saying, "I love this or not." And so that's one thing I wanna say, and does it enjoy a sustainable market? What I talked about in the past is my interpretation of that is, if I'm bending over backwards to provide incredible quality at an incredible price, and I'm going outta business, then it may be great for you, but it may not be great for me. So it has to be mutually beneficial. I just wanna... Go ahead, Andrew. 0:26:03.1 AS: You referenced the word synchronicity, which the meaning of that according to the dictionary is that "simultaneous occurrence of events which appear significantly related, but had no discernible causal connection." What were you meaning when you were saying synchronicity? Is it this that now you're communicating with the part of the process ahead of you, and they're communicating back to you and all of a sudden you're starting to really work together? Is that what you mean by that? 0:26:33.1 BB: Yeah. When I think of synchronicity, I'm thinking of the fluidity of watching a basketball game where I'm throwing blind passes to the left and to the right and to the observer in the stands are thinking: holy cow. That's what I'm talking about, is the ability that we're sharing information just like those passes in a basketball game where you're...I mean I cannot do that without being incredibly mindful of where you are, what information you need. That's what I meant. That's what I mean. As opposed to - I wait until the number is less than...I'm out there in the hot sun. I get the measurement, 6.001, no, no, no, wait. Now it's five. Where's the synchronicity in that? Am I concerned about how this is helping you, or am I concerned about how do I get this off my plate onto the next person? And I'd also say... 0:27:32.6 AS: Yep. And another word I was thinking about is coordination, the organization of the different elements of a complex body or activity so as to enable them to work together efficiently. You could also say that the state of flow or something like that? 0:27:48.7 BB: I'm glad you brought up the word "together." The big deal is: am I defining quality in a vacuum, or am I doing it with some sense of how this is being used? Which is also something we got into, I think in the, one of the very first podcasts, and you asked me what could our audience...give me an example of how the audience could use this. And I said you're delivering a report to the person down the street, around the corner. Go find out how they use it. I use the example of providing data for my consulting company to my CPA, and I called 'em up one day and I said, "how do you use this information? Maybe I can get it to you in an easier form." That's together. I mean relationships, we talked earlier about marriage, relationships are based on the concept of together, not separate, together. Saying something is good, without understanding how it's used is not about "together." It's about "separate." 0:28:54.1 BB: And so what I find is, in Lean, we look at: how can we get rid of the non-value-added tasks? Who defines value? Or I could say, and Lean folks will talk about the...they'll say this: "eliminate things that don't add value." My response to them is, if you tell me that this activity does not provide value in this room for the next hour, I'm okay with that. If you tell me this activity doesn't add value in this building for the next year, I'm okay with that. But if you don't define the size of the system when you tell me it doesn't add value, then you're implying that it doesn't add value, period. 0:29:43.4 BB: And I say, how do you know that? But this is the thinking, this is what baffles me on the thinking behind Lean and these concepts of non-value-added, value-added activities. I think all activities add value. The only question is where does a value show up? And likewise in Six Sigma quality, which is heavily based on conformist requirements and driving defects to zero, that's defining quality of the parts in isolation. What does that mean, Andrew? Separate. It means separate. Nothing about synchronicity. And so I'm glad you brought that point up because what I...this idea of "together" is throughout the Deming philosophy, a sense of together, defining quality in terms of a relationship. 0:30:31.1 AS: And I remember when I was young, I was working at Pepsi, and they sent me to learn with Dr. Deming. And then I came back, and what I was kind of looking for was tools, thinking that I would...and I came back of course, with something very different, with a new way of thinking. And then I realized that Dr. Deming is so far beyond tools. He's trying to think about how do we optimize this whole system? And once I started learning that about Dr. Deming, I could see the difference. Whereas, you may decide - let's say that you wanna learn about Lean and get a certification in Lean or something like that. 0:31:15.5 AS: Ultimately, you may go down a rabbit hole of a particular tool and become a master in that tool. Nothing wrong with that. But the point is, what is the objective? Who defines the quality? And Dr. Deming clearly stated in the seminars that I was in, and from readings that I've read, that the objective of quality isn't just to improve something in...you could improve something, the quality of something and go out of business. And so there's the bigger objective of it is: how does this serve the needs of our clients? So anyways, that's just some of my memories of those days. 0:31:52.4 BB: Yeah. But you're absolutely right. And the point I'm hoping to bring out in our sessions is: I'm not against tools and techniques. Tools and techniques are incredible. They're time savers, money savers, but let's use them with a sense of connections and relationships. And I agree with you, I've done plenty of seminars where people are coming in - they're all about tools and techniques. Tools and techniques is part of the reason I like to differentiate is to say....and again, I think people are hungrier for tools and techniques. Why? Because I don't think they've come to grips with what concepts and strategies are about. And I'm hoping our listeners can help us...can appreciate that they go together. Tools and techniques are about efficiency, doing things faster, doing things cheaper. Concepts and strategies are about doing the right thing. Ackoff would say "doing the right thing right." And short of that, we end up using tools to make things worse. And that's what I'm hoping people can avoid through the insights we can share from Dr. Deming. 0:33:05.4 AS: And I would say that, would it be the case that applying tools, and tools and techniques is kind of easy? You learn how they work, you practice with them, you measure, you give feedback, but actually going to figure out how we optimize this overall system is just so much harder. It's a complex situation, and I can imagine that there's some people that would retreat to tools and techniques and I saw it in the factory at Pepsi when people would basically just say, "well, I'm just doing my thing." That's it, 'cause it's too much trouble to go out and try to negotiate all of this with everybody. 0:33:50.7 BB: I think in part, I think as long as they're managing parts in isolation, which is the prevailing system of management, then, I agree with you. Becoming aware of interdependencies in the greater system, and I'll also point out is whatever system you're looking at is part of a bigger system, and then again, bigger system, then again, bigger system. What you define is the whole, is part of a bigger system. No matter how you define it, it's part of a bigger system because time goes to infinity. So your 10-year plan, well, why not a 20-year plan? Why not a 30-year plan? So no matter how big a system you look at, there is a bigger system. So let's not get overwhelmed. Let's take a system, which Ackoff would say, take a system which is not too big that you can't manage it, not too small, that you're not really giving it the good effort, but don't lose sight of whatever system you're looking at - you'll begin to realize it is actually bigger than that. Again, what Dr. Deming would say, the bigger the system, the more complicated, which is where you're coming from, but it also offers more opportunities. I think we're so used to tools and techniques. 0:35:14.3 BB: I don't think people have really given thought to the concepts and strategies of Deming's work as opposed to Lean and Six Sigma as being different, which is why I wanted to bring it up with our listeners, because I don't think people are defaulting on the tools. I just don't think they appreciate that concepts and strategies are different than tools and techniques. And I like to have them become aware of that difference and then understand where black-and-white thinking works, where continuum thinking has advantages. There's times to look at things as connected, and then there's times to just move on and make a decision, which is a lot easier because the implications aren't as important. But at least now we get back to choice, be conscious of the choice you're making, and then move on. All right, so also on the list we had, who defines quality? 0:36:09.0 BB: We talked about that. What is meant by good: the requirements are met. Who defines good? Again, if you're looking at Phil Crosby, who defines good? Someone has to set, here are the requirements for being "good." I could be giving a term paper and me saying to the students, this is what "good" means. Next thing I wanted to look at is, "why stop at good?" And, I'm pretty sure we've talked about this. A question I like to ask people is how much time they spend every day in meetings, discussing parts, components, things that are good and going well. And what I find is people don't spend a whole lot of time discussing things that are good and going well. So why do they stop? Why not? Because they're stopping at "good." 0:36:57.1 BB: And that goes back to the black-and-white thinking. They're saying things are "bad" or they're "good." We focus on the bad to make it good, and then we stop at good. Why do we stop at good? Because there's no sense of "better." All right. And what does that mean? So again, we have why stop at good? Why go beyond good? And this is...'cause I think we're talking about really smart people that stop at "good." And I think to better understand what that means, what I like to do is ask people, what's the letter grade required for a company to ship their products to the customer? What letter grade does NASA expect from all their suppliers? And I asked a very senior NASA executive this question years ago. He was the highest ranking NASA executive in the quality field. 0:37:50.5 BB: And I said, "what letter grade do you expect from your contractors?" And he said, A+. A+. And I said, actually, it's not A+. And he is like, "What do you mean?" I said, "actually the letter grade, your requirement is actually D-." And he pushed back at me and I said, what...he says, "well, what do you mean?" I said, "how do you define quality?" And he said, "We define quality as requirements are met. That's what we require." I said, "so you think A+ is the only thing that meets requirements?" He's like, "well, where are you coming from?" I said a pass-fail system, now we get back to category thinking, if it's good or bad, what is good? Good is passing. What is passing? What I explained to him: passing is anything from an A+ down to a D-. 0:38:38.9 BB: And he got a little antsy with me. I said, "well, the alternative is an F, you don't want an F, right?" I said, "well, what you're saying is that you'll take anything but an F and that means your requirements are actually D-." And then when I pushed back and I said, "is a D- the same as an A+?" And he said, "no." I said, "well, that's what I meant earlier" in the conversation with him. And I told him that they weren't interchangeable. So when you begin to realize that black and white quality, Phil Crosby-quality, allows for D minuses to be shipped to customers. Again, in this one way I define quality, I hand it off to you. 'Cause in that world, Andrew, I make the measurement, it's 5.999, it meets requirements, I ship it to you, your only response when you receive it is to say, "thank you." [laughter] 0:39:33.2 BB: For a D minus, right? Well, when you begin to understand relationship quality, then you begin to understand that to improve the relationship, what's behind improving the relationship, Andrew, is shifting from the D- to the A. And what does that mean? What that means is, when I pay attention to your ability to receive what I give you, whether it's the pass or the information, the more synchronously I can provide that, the letter grade is going up, [laughter] and it continues to go up. Now, again, what I'm hoping is that the effort I'm taking to provide you with the A is worthwhile. But that's how you can have continuous improvement, is stop...not stopping at the D minus. 0:40:17.6 BB: Again, there may be situations where D minus is all you really need, but I, that's not me delivering to you a D minus blindly. That's you saying to me, "Hey, I don't need an A+ over here. All I really need is a D minus." That's teamwork, Andrew. So on the one hand, and what I think is, our listeners may not appreciate it, is who defines the letter grade? So in your organization, I would say to people, you give everyone a set of requirements to go meet, what letter grade does each of them has to meet to hand off to a coworker, to another coworker, to a customer? Every single one of those people, all they have to do if they're feeling disenfranchised, as you mentioned earlier, they're feeling like an interchangeable part, well, under those circumstances, Andrew, I don't have to call you up, I just deliver a D minus. And you can't complain because I've met the requirements. 0:41:14.2 BB: So what I think it could be a little scary is to realize, what if everybody in the company comes to work tomorrow feeling no dignity in work and decides to hand off the minimum on every requirement, how does that help? And what I find exciting by Deming's work is that Dr. Deming understood that how people are treated affects their willingness to look up, pay attention to the person they're receiving and deliver to them the appropriate letter grade. So I'm hoping that helps our audience understand that if it's a black and white system, then we're saying that it's good or it's bad. What that misses is, keyword Andrew, variation in good. So the opportunities to improve when we realize that there's a range, that "good" has variation. Another point I wanna make is, what allows the Deming philosophy to go beyond looking good? 0:42:16.2 BB: Well, if you look at the last chapter 10, I think, yeah, chapter 10 of the New Economics is...like the last six pages of the New Economics is all about Dr. Taguchi's work, and it's what Dr. Deming learned from Dr. Taguchi about this very thought of looking at quality in terms of relationships, not just in isolation, Phil Crosby-style meeting requirements. And the last thing I wanna throw out is I was listening to a interview with Russ Ackoff earlier today, and he gave the three steps to being creative. This is a lecture he gave at Rocketdyne years ago. And he said, the first thing is you have to discover self-limiting constraints. Second, you have to remove the constraint. And third, you have to exploit that removal. And what I want to close on is what Deming is talking about is the self-limiting constraint is when we stop at good. [laughter] 0:43:20.7 BB: And I'm hoping that this episode provides more insights as to the self-imposed constraint within our organizations to stop at "good." What happens when we go beyond that? And how do you go beyond that? By looking at how others receive your work and then expand that others and expand that others and expand that others. And then what I find exciting is, and the work I do with students and with clients is, how can we exploit every day that idea of synchronicity of quality, and not looking at quality from a category perspective? Again, unless that's all that's needed in that situation. So I don't want to throw out category thinking, use category thinking where it makes sense, use continuum thinking where it makes sense. So that's what I wanted to close with. 0:44:12.1 AS: Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'm gonna leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and it's very appropriate for the discussion that we've had today. "People are entitled to joy in work."  

Kate Sandel is back on the podcast! In less than a week's time, Kate and I are co-teaching at a three-day clinic called Camp of the South, in Devon, UK. Initially we had the idea to record a conversation together to send to participants of the camp as a “here's some helpful information” type spiel but it quickly became obvious that our chattering extended far beyond the limits of those three days to encompass the broader expectations we might have in learning environments, what it takes to be open to learning and what we consider to be “the best way to show up” as a student. In this episode, we discuss:

If something is "good" is that good enough? Who decides? In this episode, Bill and Andrew discuss how people define "good," what interchangeability has to do with morale, and the problem with a "merit-based" culture. Bonus: Bill gives us a short history lesson on how Americans became the first to manufacture using interchangeable parts even though the originator was a Frenchman. 0:00:02.3 Andrew Stotz: My name is Andrew Stotz, and I'll be your host as we continue our journey into the teachings of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Today, I'm continuing my discussion with Bill Bellows, who has spent 30 years helping people apply Dr. Deming's ideas to become aware of how their thinking is holding them back from their biggest opportunities. The topic for today is, Deming Distinctions: Beyond Looking Good. Bill, take it away.   0:00:30.4 Bill Bellows: Funny you mentioned that. You remind me that I've been at this for over 30 years, and coming up in July, I'll be celebrating 40 years of marriage. Like 30 years, 40, where do these numbers come from?   0:00:44.5 AS: Okay. Yeah. Who defines quality in a marriage, Bill?   0:00:47.0 BB: Alright.   0:00:50.8 AS: Okay, we won't go there. Take us, take it away.   0:00:52.2 BB: We won't go there. So we are gonna talk about who defines quality, and to get into "beyond looking good." As I shared with you, I've listened to each of the podcasts a few times. And before we get into who defines quality, I just wanna provide clarification on some of the things that came up in the first five episodes. And so, one, and I think these are kind of in order, but if they're not in order, okay, well, I made reference to black-and-white thinking versus shades-of-gray thinking. And I called black-and-white thinking - black and white data - category data, and the word I was searching for that just wasn't coming out was attribute data. So for those who are keeping score, attribute data is probably the most relevant statistician term in that regard.   0:01:44.9 BB: Attribute data versus variable data. And what I've made reference to, and we'll talk more in a future session, is looking at things in terms of categories. And categories are black and white, or it could be red, yellow, green, that's three categories, or looking at things on a continuum. So I'm still excited by the difference that comes about by understanding when we're in the black-and-white mode or the category mode or the attribute data mode versus the variable mode, and still have a belief that we can't have continuous improvement or continual improvement if we're stuck in an attribute mode.   0:02:22.9 BB: And more on that later, that's one. I talked about Thomas Jefferson meeting Honoré Blanc and getting excited about the concept of interchangeable parts. And I had the date wrong, that was 1785, if anyone's keeping score there. He was ambassador to France from 1785 to 1789, but it was in 1792 that he wrote a letter to John Jay, who was a...I think he was a Commerce Secretary. Anyway, he was in the administration of Washington and shared the idea. I was doing some research earlier and found out that even with the headstart that Blanc had in France, 'cause back in 1785, Jefferson was invited to this pretty high level meeting in Paris where Blanc took a, I guess, like the trigger mechanism of 50 different rifles. Not the entire rifle, but just the...let's just call it the trigger mechanism with springs and whatnot. And he took the 50 apart and he put all the springs in one box, all the other pieces in their respective boxes and then shook the boxes up and showed that he could just randomly pull a given spring, a given part, and put 'em all together. And that got Jefferson excited. And the...what it meant for Jefferson and the French was not just that you can repair rifles in the battlefield quickly.   0:03:56.9 BB: Now, what it meant for jobs in France was a really big deal, because what the French were liking was all the time it took to repair those guns with craftsmanship, and Blanc alienated a whole bunch of gunsmiths as a result of that. And it turns out, Blanc's effort didn't really go anywhere because there was such a pushback from the gunsmiths, the practicing craftsmanship that jobs would be taken away. But it did come to the States. And then in the early 1800s, it became known as the American System of Production. But credit goes back to Blanc. I also made reference to absolute versus relative interchangeability. And I wanna provide a little bit more clarification there, and I just wanna throw out three numbers, and ideally people can write the numbers down, I'll repeat 'em a few times. The first number is 5.001, second number is 5.999, and the third number is 6.001. So it's 5.001, 5.999, 6.001. And some of what I'm gonna explain will come up again later, but...so this will tie in pretty well. So, what I've been doing is I'll write those three words on the whiteboard or throw them on a screen, and I'll call...   0:05:28.9 AS: Those three numbers.   0:05:31.4 BB: A, B, and C. And I'll say, which two of the three are closest to being the same? And sure enough people will say the 5.999 and the 6.001, which is like B and C. And I say that's the most popular answer, but it's not the only answer. People are like, "well, what other answer are there?" Well, it could be A and C, 5.001 and 6.001, both end in 001. Or it could be the first two, A and B, 5.001 and 5.999. So what I like to point out is, if somebody answers 5.999 and 6.001, then when I say to them, "what is your definition of same?"   0:06:14.9 BB: 'Cause the question is, which two of the three are close to being the same? And it turns out there's three explanations of "same." There's same: they begin with five, there's same: they end in 001. And there's same in terms of proximity to each other. So I just wanna throw that out. Well, then a very common definition of "quality" is to say, does something meet requirements? And that's the black-and-white thinking. I've also explained in the past that requirements are not set in absolute terms. The meeting must start at exactly 1:00, or the thickness must be exactly one inch. What I've explained is that the one inch will have a plus or minus on it. And so let's say the plus and minus gives us two requirements, a minimum of five and a maximum of six. Well, then that means the 5.001 meets requirements and the 5.999 meets requirements.   0:07:15.4 BB: And so in terms of defining quality, in terms of meeting requirements, A and B are both good. And then what about the 5.999 and the 6.001? Well, those numbers are on opposite sides of the upper requirement of six. One's just a little bit to the left and one's a little bit to the right. Then I would ask people, and for some of you, this'll ring - I think you'll be smiling - and I would say to people, "What happens in manufacturing if, Andrew, if I come up with a measurement and it's 6.001?" Okay, relative to defining quality as "meeting requirements," 6.001 does not meet requirements. So what I'll ask people is, "what would a non-Deming company do with a 6.001?" And people will say, "We're gonna take a file out, we're gonna work on it, we're gonna hit it with a hammer." And I say, "No, too much work." And they say, "Well, what's the answer?" "We're gonna measure it again."   0:08:25.7 AS: Until we get it right.   0:08:27.7 BB: We will measure it until we get it right. We will change the room temperature. We will take the easiest path. So then I said, get people to realize, they're like, yeah, that's what we do. We measure the 6.001 again. Well, then I say, "Well Andrew, why don't we measure the 5.001 again?" And what's the answer to that, Andrew? [laughter]   0:08:51.5 AS: 4.999. [laughter]   0:08:54.7 BB: But what's interesting is, we'll measure the 6.001 again. But we won't measure the 5.001 again. We won't measure the 5.999 again. And so to me, this reinforces that when we define quality as "meeting requirements," that what we're essentially saying in terms of absolute interchangeability, what we're pretending is that there's no difference between the 5.001 and the 5.999. At opposite ends, we're saying that Blanc would find them to be interchangeable, and putting all the things together. I don't think so.   0:09:36.7 BB: I think there's a greater chance that he'd find negligible difference between the 5.999 and the 6.001. And that's what I mean by relative interchangeability, that the difference between B and C is nothing, that's relative interchangeability. The closer they are together, the more alike they are in terms of how they're integrated into the gun, into the rifle, into the downstream product. And I just throw out that what defining quality as "requirements" is saying is that the first two are...the person downstream can't tell the difference. Then I challenge, I think there's...in terms of not telling the difference, I think between 5.999 and 6.001, that difference is minuscule cause they are relatively interchangeable. The other two are implied to be absolutely interchangeable. And that I challenge, that's why I just want to throw that out. All right, another thing I want...go ahead, Andrew.   0:10:38.3 AS: One of the things I just highlight is, I remember from my political science classes at Long Beach State where I studied was The Communist Manifesto came out in 1848. And Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels were talking about the alienation of the worker. And what you're talking about is the kind of, the crushing of the craftsmen through interchangeable parts that was a lot like AI coming along and destroying something. And after 50 or 60 or 70 years of interchangeable parts, along comes The Communist Manifesto with the idea that when a person is just dealing with interchangeable parts, basically they're just a cog in the wheel and they have no connection to the aim of what's going on. They don't have any connection, and all of a sudden you lose the craftsmanship or the care for work. And I think that the reason why this is interesting is because that's, I think, a huge part of what Dr. Deming was trying to bring was bring back...it may not be craftsmanship for creating a shoe if you were a shoemaker, but it would be craftsmanship for producing the best you could for the part that you're playing in an ultimate aim of the system.   0:12:02.6 BB: Yes. And yes, and we'll talk more about that. That's brilliant. What you said also reminds me, and I don't think you and I spoke about it, you'll remind me. But have I shared with you the work of a Harvard philosopher by the name of Michael Sandel?   0:12:24.3 AS: I don't recall.   0:12:27.0 BB: He may be, yeah, from a distance, one of the most famous Harvard professors alive today. He's got a course on justice, which is I think 15 two- or three-hour lectures, which were recorded by public television in Boston. Anyway, he wrote a book at the beginning of the pandemic. It came out, it's called The Tyranny of Merit.   0:12:54.0 BB: And "merit" is this belief that "I did it all by myself." That "I deserve what I have because I made it happen. I had no help from you, Andrew. I had no help from the government. I didn't need the education system, the transportation system. I didn't need NASA research. I made it happen all by myself." And he said, what that belief does is it allows those who are successful to claim that they did it by themselves. It allows them to say those who didn't have only themselves to blame. And he sees that as a major destructive force in society, that belief. And I see it tied very well to Deming. Let me give you one anecdote. Dr. Deming was interviewed by Priscilla Petty for The Deming of America documentary, which was absolutely brilliant.   0:13:49.8 BB: And she's at his home, and he's sharing with her the medal he got from the Emperor of Japan, and he's holding it carefully, and I think he gives it to her, and she's looking at it, and she says to him something like, so what did it mean to you to receive that? And he said, "I was lucky. I made a contribution." He didn't say I did it all by myself. He was acknowledging that he was in the right place at the right time to make a contribution. And that's where Sandel is also heavily on, is don't deny the role of being born at the right time in the right situation, which is a greater system in which we are. Well, for one of the college courses, I was watching an interview between Sandel and one of his former students.   0:14:48.1 BB: And the point Sandel made that I wanted to bring up based on what you just said, he says, "what we really need to do is get people dignity in work." And that's what you're talking about, is allowing them to have pride in work, dignity in work instead of as they're making interchangeable parts, having them feel like an interchangeable part. And I'm really glad you brought that up because when we talk later about letter grades, I would bring back one of the reasons I find Deming's work astounding, is that he takes into account psychology in a way that I hope our listeners will really take heart to in a deeper way.   0:15:30.2 AS: And so for the listeners out there, just to reinforce, the book is called The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good. Published in 2020 by Michael Sandel. And the ratings on Amazon is 4.5 out of five with about 2,446 ratings. So it's a pretty well-rated book I'd say. And looks interesting. Now you got me wanting to read that one.   0:15:57.0 BB: Oh what I'll do is I'll send you a... Well, what I encourage our listeners to do is find the interview... Harvard Bookstore did an interview in 2020, 2021, with Michael Sandel being interviewed by his former student by the name of Preet Bharara. [laughter] Who used to be the...   0:16:24.3 AS: SEC...   0:16:24.4 BB: Head of these...no, well, he prosecuted a number of people for SEC crimes, but he headed the Justice Department's long oldest district, which is known as SDNY or the Southern District of New York. And so he was a...in one of the first classes his freshman year at Harvard, Preet Bharara's freshman year at Havard was one of Sandel's first years. And so they had an incredible conversation. So I would encourage the listeners to...   0:16:51.8 AS: Yeah, it's titled: Michael J Sandel with Preet Bharara at Harvard. And the channel is called Harvard Bookstore.   0:16:58.6 BB: Yes, absolutely. All right. So another topic I want to get to in terms of clarification and key points, last time we talked about tools and techniques and what I'm not sure I made much about.... First of all, I just wanna really reinforce that tools and techniques are not concepts and strategies. Tools are like a garden tool I use to dig a hole. Technique is how I go about using it, cleaning it, and whatnot. Not to be confused from a concept...and what is concept? We talked about last time is a concept is an abstract idea and a strategy is how do we apply it? So tools and techniques within Six Sigma quality could be control charts, could be design of experiments. And all, by the way, you're gonna find those tools and techniques within the Deming community. So it's not to say the tools and techniques are the differentiator.   0:17:50.8 BB: I think the concepts and strategies are the differentiators, but I don't wanna downplay tools. Lean has tools in terms of value streams, and you won't find value streams per se in Dr. Deming's work. Dr. Deming looks in terms of production viewed as a system. In a later session, I want to talk about value streams versus Deming's work. But I just wanna point out that I find it...it's easy to get lost in the weeds with all we find within Lean, Six Sigma, Deming and whatnot. And this is why last time I wanted to focus on tools and techniques as separate from concepts and strategies. And what I think we did speak about last time, again, for just as a reminder, is what's unique that we both enjoy with Dr. Deming's work is that KPIs are not caused by individual departments, assigned to individual departments.   0:18:46.0 BB: KPIs are viewed as measures of the overall system. And if you assign the KPIs across the organization and give every different function their own KPI, what you're likely to find - not likely - what you WILL find is that those assigned KPIs are interfering with others' abilities to get their KPIs met. And in the Deming philosophy, you don't have that problem because you understand that things are interdependent, not independent. And so I just wanna close by saying what I find in Deming's work to be most enlightening is this sense of "what does it mean to look at something as a system?" And it means everything is connected to everything else. When you define quality in terms of saying "this is good because it meets requirements," what you've just said is, "this is good in isolation." Whether it's the pass from the quarterback to the wide receiver, saying the pass met requirements.   0:19:52.0 BB: What I think Dr. Deming would ask is, "is the ball catchable?" [laughter] And yet, what I've seen in my aerospace experience is parts being measured for airplanes in Australia that they meet requirements because the measurements are taken early in the morning before the sun has had a chance to heat the part up. And we get the 6.001 is now 5.999. You know what that means, Andrew? It's - we can now ship it.   [laughter]   0:20:23.9 BB: And send it off to America for some airplane factory.   0:20:26.2 AS: When we shipped it, that's what it was.   0:20:28.9 BB: Exactly. And so, again, interdependence is everything. Go ahead, Andrew.   0:20:34.6 AS: I wanted to point on, there's a company in Thailand that really has gotten on the KPI bandwagon, and I was talking with some people that work there, and they were just talking about how they've been rolling out the KPIs for the last couple of years and down to the number of seconds that you're on the phone and everything that you do is tracked now. And then I just witnessed that company basically use that KPI as a way to basically knock out a whole group of people that they were trying to get rid of by coming in with tight KPIs and then saying, "you're not keeping up with 'em and therefore you're out." And I just thought...and the manager that was involved I was talking to, you could just see, he saw how KPI can just be weaponized for the purposes of the senior management when you're doing KPIs of individuals. And the thing that I was thinking about is, imagine the CEO of that company in a couple of years, in a couple of months, they happen to listen to this podcast, or they pick up a book of Dr. Deming and they think, "Oh my God, what did I just do over the last five years implementing KPIs down to the individual level?" [laughter]   0:21:48.5 BB: Oh, yeah. And that's what we talked about last time is...as I told you, I had a friend of a friend who's worked for Xerox, and he said there wasn't a KPI that was flowed down that they couldn't find a way to beat. And that's what happens, and you end up getting things done, but what's missing is: at whose expense? All right. So we talked about...now, let's get into beyond looking good, Deming distinctions. Who defines quality? Well, from Philip Crosby's perspective, quality's defined by the...it could be the designer. The designer puts a set of requirements on the component, whatever it is. The unit, the requirements have latitude we talked about. They're not exact. There's a minimum of six, a maximum of...or a minimum of five, maximum of six.   0:22:48.8 BB: There's a range you have to meet, is the traditional view of quality. And in my 30 years of experience, I've not seen quality defined any other way than that. It has to be in between these two values. Sometimes it has to be five or below or six or above, but there's a range. But also what we talked about last time is Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." But what I found profound about that definition, it is not me defining quality and saying, "Andrew, the parts met requirements when I threw it. Now, it's your job to catch it." It's me saying, "I've thrown the ball and you tell me, how did I do? You tell me how did I do?" And if you said, "Bill, if you throw it just a little bit higher, a little bit further out, a little bit faster," that's about synchronicity. Now, I'm realizing that my ability to throw the ball doesn't really matter if you can't catch it. So if I practice in the off season, throwing it faster and faster, but don't clue you in, until the first game, how's that helping? So I've got a KPI to throw it really, really hard. And you're thinking, "how's that helping?" So that's...   0:24:19.9 AS: And can you just go back to that for a second? Quality is on a product or service, you were saying that how Dr. Deming defined that, it helps someone...   0:24:26.7 BB: Yeah. Dr. Deming said "a product or service possesses quality if it helps someone and enjoys a sustainable market." And so my interpretation of that is two things. One is, it's not me delivering a report and saying the report met requirements. It's saying, "I get the report to you, and I ask Andrew, how did I do?" And then you say to me, "I had some problem with this section, I had some problem...." But the important thing is that you become the judge of the quality of the report, not me. And it could be information I provide you with in a lecture. It's you letting me know as a student that you had a hard time with the examples. And I'm thinking, "well, I did a great job." So it's not what I think as the producer handing off to you. It's you giving me the feedback. So quality is not a one-way...in fact, first of all, quality's not defined by the producer. It's defined by the recipients saying, "I love this or not." And so that's one thing I wanna say, and does it enjoy a sustainable market? What I talked about in the past is my interpretation of that is, if I'm bending over backwards to provide incredible quality at an incredible price, and I'm going outta business, then it may be great for you, but it may not be great for me. So it has to be mutually beneficial. I just wanna... Go ahead, Andrew.   0:26:03.1 AS: You referenced the word synchronicity, which the meaning of that according to the dictionary is that "simultaneous occurrence of events which appear significantly related, but had no discernible causal connection." What were you meaning when you were saying synchronicity? Is it this that now you're communicating with the part of the process ahead of you, and they're communicating back to you and all of a sudden you're starting to really work together? Is that what you mean by that?   0:26:33.1 BB: Yeah. When I think of synchronicity, I'm thinking of the fluidity of watching a basketball game where I'm throwing blind passes to the left and to the right and to the observer in the stands are thinking: holy cow. That's what I'm talking about, is the ability that we're sharing information just like those passes in a basketball game where you're...I mean I cannot do that without being incredibly mindful of where you are, what information you need. That's what I meant. That's what I mean. As opposed to - I wait until the number is less than...I'm out there in the hot sun. I get the measurement, 6.001, no, no, no, wait. Now it's five. Where's the synchronicity in that? Am I concerned about how this is helping you, or am I concerned about how do I get this off my plate onto the next person? And I'd also say...   0:27:32.6 AS: Yep. And another word I was thinking about is coordination, the organization of the different elements of a complex body or activity so as to enable them to work together efficiently. You could also say that the state of flow or something like that?   0:27:48.7 BB: I'm glad you brought up the word "together." The big deal is: am I defining quality in a vacuum, or am I doing it with some sense of how this is being used? Which is also something we got into, I think in the, one of the very first podcasts, and you asked me what could our audience...give me an example of how the audience could use this. And I said you're delivering a report to the person down the street, around the corner. Go find out how they use it. I use the example of providing data for my consulting company to my CPA, and I called 'em up one day and I said, "how do you use this information? Maybe I can get it to you in an easier form." That's together. I mean relationships, we talked earlier about marriage, relationships are based on the concept of together, not separate, together. Saying something is good, without understanding how it's used is not about "together." It's about "separate."   0:28:54.1 BB: And so what I find is, in Lean, we look at: how can we get rid of the non-value-added tasks? Who defines value? Or I could say, and Lean folks will talk about the...they'll say this: "eliminate things that don't add value." My response to them is, if you tell me that this activity does not provide value in this room for the next hour, I'm okay with that. If you tell me this activity doesn't add value in this building for the next year, I'm okay with that. But if you don't define the size of the system when you tell me it doesn't add value, then you're implying that it doesn't add value, period.   0:29:43.4 BB: And I say, how do you know that? But this is the thinking, this is what baffles me on the thinking behind Lean and these concepts of non-value-added, value-added activities. I think all activities add value. The only question is where does a value show up? And likewise in Six Sigma quality, which is heavily based on conformist requirements and driving defects to zero, that's defining quality of the parts in isolation. What does that mean, Andrew? Separate. It means separate. Nothing about synchronicity. And so I'm glad you brought that point up because what I...this idea of "together" is throughout the Deming philosophy, a sense of together, defining quality in terms of a relationship.   0:30:31.1 AS: And I remember when I was young, I was working at Pepsi, and they sent me to learn with Dr. Deming. And then I came back, and what I was kind of looking for was tools, thinking that I would...and I came back of course, with something very different, with a new way of thinking. And then I realized that Dr. Deming is so far beyond tools. He's trying to think about how do we optimize this whole system? And once I started learning that about Dr. Deming, I could see the difference. Whereas, you may decide - let's say that you wanna learn about Lean and get a certification in Lean or something like that.   0:31:15.5 AS: Ultimately, you may go down a rabbit hole of a particular tool and become a master in that tool. Nothing wrong with that. But the point is, what is the objective? Who defines the quality? And Dr. Deming clearly stated in the seminars that I was in, and from readings that I've read, that the objective of quality isn't just to improve something in...you could improve something, the quality of something and go out of business. And so there's the bigger objective of it is: how does this serve the needs of our clients? So anyways, that's just some of my memories of those days.   0:31:52.4 BB: Yeah. But you're absolutely right. And the point I'm hoping to bring out in our sessions is: I'm not against tools and techniques. Tools and techniques are incredible. They're time savers, money savers, but let's use them with a sense of connections and relationships. And I agree with you, I've done plenty of seminars where people are coming in - they're all about tools and techniques. Tools and techniques is part of the reason I like to differentiate is to say....and again, I think people are hungrier for tools and techniques. Why? Because I don't think they've come to grips with what concepts and strategies are about. And I'm hoping our listeners can help us...can appreciate that they go together. Tools and techniques are about efficiency, doing things faster, doing things cheaper. Concepts and strategies are about doing the right thing. Ackoff would say "doing the right thing right." And short of that, we end up using tools to make things worse. And that's what I'm hoping people can avoid through the insights we can share from Dr. Deming.   0:33:05.4 AS: And I would say that, would it be the case that applying tools, and tools and techniques is kind of easy? You learn how they work, you practice with them, you measure, you give feedback, but actually going to figure out how we optimize this overall system is just so much harder. It's a complex situation, and I can imagine that there's some people that would retreat to tools and techniques and I saw it in the factory at Pepsi when people would basically just say, "well, I'm just doing my thing." That's it, 'cause it's too much trouble to go out and try to negotiate all of this with everybody.   0:33:50.7 BB: I think in part, I think as long as they're managing parts in isolation, which is the prevailing system of management, then, I agree with you. Becoming aware of interdependencies in the greater system, and I'll also point out is whatever system you're looking at is part of a bigger system, and then again, bigger system, then again, bigger system. What you define is the whole, is part of a bigger system. No matter how you define it, it's part of a bigger system because time goes to infinity. So your 10-year plan, well, why not a 20-year plan? Why not a 30-year plan? So no matter how big a system you look at, there is a bigger system. So let's not get overwhelmed. Let's take a system, which Ackoff would say, take a system which is not too big that you can't manage it, not too small, that you're not really giving it the good effort, but don't lose sight of whatever system you're looking at - you'll begin to realize it is actually bigger than that. Again, what Dr. Deming would say, the bigger the system, the more complicated, which is where you're coming from, but it also offers more opportunities. I think we're so used to tools and techniques.   0:35:14.3 BB: I don't think people have really given thought to the concepts and strategies of Deming's work as opposed to Lean and Six Sigma as being different, which is why I wanted to bring it up with our listeners, because I don't think people are defaulting on the tools. I just don't think they appreciate that concepts and strategies are different than tools and techniques. And I like to have them become aware of that difference and then understand where black-and-white thinking works, where continuum thinking has advantages. There's times to look at things as connected, and then there's times to just move on and make a decision, which is a lot easier because the implications aren't as important. But at least now we get back to choice, be conscious of the choice you're making, and then move on. All right, so also on the list we had, who defines quality?   0:36:09.0 BB: We talked about that. What is meant by good: the requirements are met. Who defines good? Again, if you're looking at Phil Crosby, who defines good? Someone has to set, here are the requirements for being "good." I could be giving a term paper and me saying to the students, this is what "good" means. Next thing I wanted to look at is, "why stop at good?" And, I'm pretty sure we've talked about this. A question I like to ask people is how much time they spend every day in meetings, discussing parts, components, things that are good and going well. And what I find is people don't spend a whole lot of time discussing things that are good and going well. So why do they stop? Why not? Because they're stopping at "good."   0:36:57.1 BB: And that goes back to the black-and-white thinking. They're saying things are "bad" or they're "good." We focus on the bad to make it good, and then we stop at good. Why do we stop at good? Because there's no sense of "better." All right. And what does that mean? So again, we have why stop at good? Why go beyond good? And this is...'cause I think we're talking about really smart people that stop at "good." And I think to better understand what that means, what I like to do is ask people, what's the letter grade required for a company to ship their products to the customer? What letter grade does NASA expect from all their suppliers? And I asked a very senior NASA executive this question years ago. He was the highest ranking NASA executive in the quality field.   0:37:50.5 BB: And I said, "what letter grade do you expect from your contractors?" And he said, A+. A+. And I said, actually, it's not A+. And he is like, "What do you mean?" I said, "actually the letter grade, your requirement is actually D-." And he pushed back at me and I said, what...he says, "well, what do you mean?" I said, "how do you define quality?" And he said, "We define quality as requirements are met. That's what we require." I said, "so you think A+ is the only thing that meets requirements?" He's like, "well, where are you coming from?" I said a pass-fail system, now we get back to category thinking, if it's good or bad, what is good? Good is passing. What is passing? What I explained to him: passing is anything from an A+ down to a D-.   0:38:38.9 BB: And he got a little antsy with me. I said, "well, the alternative is an F, you don't want an F, right?" I said, "well, what you're saying is that you'll take anything but an F and that means your requirements are actually D-." And then when I pushed back and I said, "is a D- the same as an A+?" And he said, "no." I said, "well, that's what I meant earlier" in the conversation with him. And I told him that they weren't interchangeable. So when you begin to realize that black and white quality, Phil Crosby-quality, allows for D minuses to be shipped to customers. Again, in this one way I define quality, I hand it off to you. 'Cause in that world, Andrew, I make the measurement, it's 5.999, it meets requirements, I ship it to you, your only response when you receive it is to say, "thank you."   [laughter]   0:39:33.2 BB: For a D minus, right? Well, when you begin to understand relationship quality, then you begin to understand that to improve the relationship, what's behind improving the relationship, Andrew, is shifting from the D- to the A. And what does that mean? What that means is, when I pay attention to your ability to receive what I give you, whether it's the pass or the information, the more synchronously I can provide that, the letter grade is going up, [laughter] and it continues to go up. Now, again, what I'm hoping is that the effort I'm taking to provide you with the A is worthwhile. But that's how you can have continuous improvement, is stop...not stopping at the D minus.   0:40:17.6 BB: Again, there may be situations where D minus is all you really need, but I, that's not me delivering to you a D minus blindly. That's you saying to me, "Hey, I don't need an A+ over here. All I really need is a D minus." That's teamwork, Andrew. So on the one hand, and what I think is, our listeners may not appreciate it, is who defines the letter grade? So in your organization, I would say to people, you give everyone a set of requirements to go meet, what letter grade does each of them has to meet to hand off to a coworker, to another coworker, to a customer? Every single one of those people, all they have to do if they're feeling disenfranchised, as you mentioned earlier, they're feeling like an interchangeable part, well, under those circumstances, Andrew, I don't have to call you up, I just deliver a D minus. And you can't complain because I've met the requirements.   0:41:14.2 BB: So what I think it could be a little scary is to realize, what if everybody in the company comes to work tomorrow feeling no dignity in work and decides to hand off the minimum on every requirement, how does that help? And what I find exciting by Deming's work is that Dr. Deming understood that how people are treated affects their willingness to look up, pay attention to the person they're receiving and deliver to them the appropriate letter grade. So I'm hoping that helps our audience understand that if it's a black and white system, then we're saying that it's good or it's bad. What that misses is, keyword Andrew, variation in good. So the opportunities to improve when we realize that there's a range, that "good" has variation. Another point I wanna make is, what allows the Deming philosophy to go beyond looking good?   0:42:16.2 BB: Well, if you look at the last chapter 10, I think, yeah, chapter 10 of the New Economics is...like the last six pages of the New Economics is all about Dr. Taguchi's work, and it's what Dr. Deming learned from Dr. Taguchi about this very thought of looking at quality in terms of relationships, not just in isolation, Phil Crosby-style meeting requirements. And the last thing I wanna throw out is I was listening to a interview with Russ Ackoff earlier today, and he gave the three steps to being creative. This is a lecture he gave at Rocketdyne years ago. And he said, the first thing is you have to discover self-limiting constraints. Second, you have to remove the constraint. And third, you have to exploit that removal. And what I want to close on is what Deming is talking about is the self-limiting constraint is when we stop at good.   [laughter]   0:43:20.7 BB: And I'm hoping that this episode provides more insights as to the self-imposed constraint within our organizations to stop at "good." What happens when we go beyond that? And how do you go beyond that? By looking at how others receive your work and then expand that others and expand that others and expand that others. And then what I find exciting is, and the work I do with students and with clients is, how can we exploit every day that idea of synchronicity of quality, and not looking at quality from a category perspective? Again, unless that's all that's needed in that situation. So I don't want to throw out category thinking, use category thinking where it makes sense, use continuum thinking where it makes sense. So that's what I wanted to close with.   0:44:12.1 AS: Bill, on behalf of everyone at The Deming Institute, I want to thank you again for this discussion. For listeners, remember to go to deming.org to continue your journey. This is your host, Andrew Stotz, and I'm gonna leave you with one of my favorite quotes from Dr. Deming, and it's very appropriate for the discussion that we've had today. "People are entitled to joy in work."  

The kids are alright… or are they? On today's episode, Megan and Frank cover the following topics: is childhood a morally horrible stage of life? What does the “good life” look like for a kid? Should children get the right to vote for elected officials? Can young children understand philosophical questions and reasoning? And if so, should we be bringing philosophy to the youth?-----------------------Hosts' Websites:Megan J Fritts (google.com)Frank J. Cabrera - Research (google.com)Email: philosophyonthefringes@gmail.com-----------------------Bibliography:Paul, LA. - Transformative Experience - Oxford University Press (oup.com)Kazez, J. - Old Age as a Stage of Life - Journal of Applied Philosophy - Wiley Online LibraryFerracioli, L. - Carefreeness and Children's Wellbeing - Journal of Applied Philosophy - Wiley Online LibraryCicero — De Senectute [On Old Age] (uchicago.edu)Mill, J.S. - On Liberty (Ch. 3)Sandel, M. - the Case Against Perfection - The AtlanticBig Ideas for Little Philosophers (penguinrandomhouse.com)Social Contract Theory | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Feminist Critique)Nussbaum, M. - Frontiers of Justice (Ch. 2, "Disabilities and the Social Contract)Rowlands, M. - Contractarianism and Animal RightsWiland, E. - Should Children Have the Right to Vote? Brennan, J. - Against Democracy | Princeton University PressAristotle - Nicomachean Ethics (Bk. 1, Sect. 3)Philosophy for Children (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)Do Kids Have a Fundamental Sense of Fairness? - Scientific American Augustine - Confessions, (Bk. 1, Ch. 7)-----------------------Cover Artwork by Logan Fritts-------------------------Music from #Uppbeat (free for Creators!):https://uppbeat.io/t/simon-folwar/neon-signsLicense code: LBJAOXPIK1VAALIR

I'm joined by Chris Sandel, nutritionist and coach. We're talking about what we can learn about eating disorders and diet recovery from the Minnesota Starvation Experiment, why eating disorders are like anxiety disorders, how treating eating disorders in this way can help with recovery, and Chris's framework that he uses with clients to help them heal. Show notes: summerinnanen.com/266 In this episode, we talk about: - What the Minnesota Starvation Experiment was, - The symptoms noted in the experiment in both the malnourished state and the recovery phase, - How the caloric amounts that were given during the experiment are in line with many mainstream diets' recommendations, - That there's a honeymoon period with anxiety and an eating disorder where it feels like it's working, but then anxiety starts to ramp up - The three common things all eating disorders share, - That you can be malnourished at any size, - Plus so much more! Get the shownotes: summerinnanen.com/266 Get the free 10-Day Body Confidence Makeover with 10 steps to feel better in your body at summerinnanen.com/freebies If you're a professional who has clients or students that struggle with body image, get the Body Image Coaching Roadmap for professionals at summerinnanen.com/roadmap

It's a special 4/20 EmMajority Report Thursday! Emma hosts Michael Sandel, professor of Government Theory at Harvard University, to discuss his book Democracy's Discontent: A New Edition for Our Perilous Times. Michael Sandel then dives right into why he decided to update his 1996 work “Democracy's Discontent,” looking back at that period as simultaneously the apex of faith in the neoliberal Washington consensus and one that saw the first tricklings of unraveling community infrastructure, the diminishment of citizens' representation, and general feelings of insecurity which were all affirmed with the 2008 financial crisis. Picking up in the wake of the crisis, Professor Sandel explores how the elite decided to put the system back together again, rather than actually rethinking the role of finance in the economy, sparking bipartisan anger that birthed two movements: a new socialist movement on the left, and the tea party movement on the right. Parsing deeper through this anger. Sandel and Emma discuss the explicit rejection of elites' credentialism and meritocratic hubris, tackling what these concepts entail, how they birthed the populist nominations of Bernie Sanders and Donald J. Trump, and why they so contributed to growing feelings of alienation during the first two decades of the 21st Century. Next, Michael walks through a distinction between two conceptions of freedom, one grounded in consumerism and the other in civic ideals, exploring how the emphasis on the former has bolstered democracy's discontent, while the latter offers us a route out of it, before they wrap up the interview by exploring what a reorganizing of our economy towards civic ideals would entail, and why universal service programs might (MIGHT) be an answer. And in the Fun Half: Emma is joined by Brandon Sutton and Matt Binder as they tackle Elon Musk's natalism perfectly coalescing with Tucker Carlson's direct white supremacy, Nick from Pittsburg dives into the horrors of SpaceX's failed experiment, and the MR Crew covers Elon's crackdown on free speech, capitalizing on the same rules that pushed the Hunter Biden coverup. They also discuss a CEO's “pity city” speech to those she's exploiting, Elly from South Carolina dives into Nancy Mace's abortion switch-up, and Charlie Kirk fears WokeGPT. Kevin from Philly reflects on the Pity City speech, plus, your calls and IMs! Check out Michael's book here: https://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674270718 Become a member at JoinTheMajorityReport.com: https://fans.fm/majority/join Subscribe to the ESVN YouTube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/esvnshow Subscribe to the AMQuickie newsletter here: https://am-quickie.ghost.io/ Join the Majority Report Discord! http://majoritydiscord.com/ Get all your MR merch at our store: https://shop.majorityreportradio.com/ Get the free Majority Report App!: http://majority.fm/app Check out today's sponsors: Seder's Seeds!: Sam tried to grow some cannabis last year, didn't know what he was doing, but now has some great cannabis seeds! Use code "420" and you'll get a free pack of "Trainwreck" seeds (enter Trainwreck manually in your cart)! Go to http://www.sedersseeds.com and MajorityReporters will get an automatic 15% off. Enter coupon code "SEEDS" for free shipping! Follow the Majority Report crew on Twitter: @SamSeder @EmmaVigeland @MattBinder @MattLech @BF1nn @BradKAlsop Check out Matt's show, Left Reckoning, on Youtube, and subscribe on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/leftreckoning Subscribe to Brandon's show The Discourse on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/ExpandTheDiscourse Subscribe to Discourse Blog, a newsletter and website for progressive essays and related fun partly run by AM Quickie writer Jack Crosbie. https://discourseblog.com/ Check out Matt Binder's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/mattbinder Check out Ava Raiza's music here! https://avaraiza.bandcamp.com/ The Majority Report with Sam Seder - https://majorityreportradio.com/

On episode 166, we welcome Adam Sandel to discuss the consequences of obsessive striving, how the philosophy of the enlightenment helped create a culture obsessed with social progress, why a good life shouldn't only entail endeavors to make the world or our lives better, enjoying activities for their own sake, the transitory nature of success and Adam's gaining and losing the Guinness world pull-ups record, why happiness is unpredictable and we're often happier with imagined success, criticisms of stoic philosophy and the importance of friendship as more than a preferred indifferent, what Socrates can teach us about self-possession and its contribution to well-being, and the significance of learning universal truths from nature. Adam Sandel is a philosopher, Guinness World Record holder for Most Pull-Ups in One Minute, and an award-winning teacher. Author of the critically acclaimed book The Place of Prejudice: A Case for Reasoning within the World, Sandel has taught at Harvard University and is currently an assistant district attorney in Brooklyn. His newest book, available now, is called Happiness in Action: A Philosopher's Guide to the Good Life.   | Adam Sandel |   ► Website | http://www.adamsandel.com ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/professor.pullups ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/professor.pullups ► Youtube | https://bit.ly/42GWCP6 ► Happiness in Action Book | https://amzn.to/3KaaiuH   Where you can find us: | Seize The Moment Podcast |   ► Facebook | https://www.facebook.com/SeizeTheMoment ► Twitter | https://twitter.com/seize_podcast ► Instagram | https://www.instagram.com/seizethemoment ► TikTok | https://www.tiktok.com/@seizethemomentpodcast ► Patreon | https://www.patreon.com/user?u=32208666  

The national purpose of the American state is to realize and then sustain the democracy and the equality that was the promise of our founding. I believe that requires perennial struggle and … groups like Black Lives Matter are an essential part of that struggle … Those are the social movements I hope to join, support, and that I hope will always be qualified by the adjective ‘liberal'. – Michael Walzer, NBN interview (2023) In the 1990 collection What is Justice? Classic and Contemporary Readings edited by Solomon and Murphy and published by Oxford, teachers had a textbook to help introduce students to a broad cross-section of political thinkers ranging from Hobbes to Hegel to Hayek to Mill, Nozick, Rawls, Sandel, Taylor and Walzer among others. It is worth mentioning because Michael Walzer insists he is not a formal philosopher, does not in fact, deserve to be grouped with the likes of a Dewey or a Hegel, as Richard Rorty had done in the introduction of his 1999 collection of essays in Philosophy and Social Hope: ‘Recently Michael Walzer, a political philosopher best known for his earlier work, Spheres of Justice, has come to Hegel's and Dewey's defense. In his more recent book Thick and Thin, Walzer argues that we should not think of the customs and institutions of particular societies as accidental accretions around a common core of universal moral rationality, the transcultural moral law. Rather, we should think of the thick set of customs and institutions as prior, and as what commands moral allegiance.' Rorty's broader point remains as relevant as arguably, the positions of the political philosophers as collected in the Solomon and Murphy reader mentioned above, What is Justice?, which also recognized the appeal of Walzer's ‘very different approach' to the Rawls' paradigmatic A Theory of Justice. That same collection also shares Nozick's critical response to Rawls - mentioned because of the well-known course, ‘Capitalism and Socialism', that Robert Nozick and Michael Walzer taught together at Harvard. A former student, the Washington Post columnist, Brookings senior fellow, and policy professor E.J. Dionne once said: it was one of the best courses he ever took, adding, it was Michael Walzer ‘who very much shaped my view'. A short list of Professor Walzer's book titles include Just and Unjust Wars, Spheres of Justice - A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, The Company of Critics, Thick and Thin - Moral Argument at Home and Abroad, On Toleration, Politics and Passion, The Jewish Political Tradition, The Paradox of Liberation: Secular Revolutions and Religious Counterrevolutions, A Foreign Policy for the Left, as well as a published conversation - Justice is Steady Work: A Conversation on Political Theory - published by Polity in 2020. This interview focuses primarily on his latest book, The Struggle for a Decent Politics: On “Liberal” as an Adjective (2023, Yale University Press) which does much to clarify a simple, yet crucial distinction, between liberal and illiberal sensibilities underlying the pluralism, populism, and polarization today. Michael Walzer is professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and editor emeritus at Dissent magazine. Professor Walzer studied on a Fulbright Fellowship at Cambridge and completed his PhD in government at Harvard University. Keith Krueger can be reached at keithNBn@gmail.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

The national purpose of the American state is to realize and then sustain the democracy and the equality that was the promise of our founding. I believe that requires perennial struggle and … groups like Black Lives Matter are an essential part of that struggle … Those are the social movements I hope to join, support, and that I hope will always be qualified by the adjective ‘liberal'. – Michael Walzer, NBN interview (2023) In the 1990 collection What is Justice? Classic and Contemporary Readings edited by Solomon and Murphy and published by Oxford, teachers had a textbook to help introduce students to a broad cross-section of political thinkers ranging from Hobbes to Hegel to Hayek to Mill, Nozick, Rawls, Sandel, Taylor and Walzer among others. It is worth mentioning because Michael Walzer insists he is not a formal philosopher, does not in fact, deserve to be grouped with the likes of a Dewey or a Hegel, as Richard Rorty had done in the introduction of his 1999 collection of essays in Philosophy and Social Hope: ‘Recently Michael Walzer, a political philosopher best known for his earlier work, Spheres of Justice, has come to Hegel's and Dewey's defense. In his more recent book Thick and Thin, Walzer argues that we should not think of the customs and institutions of particular societies as accidental accretions around a common core of universal moral rationality, the transcultural moral law. Rather, we should think of the thick set of customs and institutions as prior, and as what commands moral allegiance.' Rorty's broader point remains as relevant as arguably, the positions of the political philosophers as collected in the Solomon and Murphy reader mentioned above, What is Justice?, which also recognized the appeal of Walzer's ‘very different approach' to the Rawls' paradigmatic A Theory of Justice. That same collection also shares Nozick's critical response to Rawls - mentioned because of the well-known course, ‘Capitalism and Socialism', that Robert Nozick and Michael Walzer taught together at Harvard. A former student, the Washington Post columnist, Brookings senior fellow, and policy professor E.J. Dionne once said: it was one of the best courses he ever took, adding, it was Michael Walzer ‘who very much shaped my view'. A short list of Professor Walzer's book titles include Just and Unjust Wars, Spheres of Justice - A Defense of Pluralism and Equality, The Company of Critics, Thick and Thin - Moral Argument at Home and Abroad, On Toleration, Politics and Passion, The Jewish Political Tradition, The Paradox of Liberation: Secular Revolutions and Religious Counterrevolutions, A Foreign Policy for the Left, as well as a published conversation - Justice is Steady Work: A Conversation on Political Theory - published by Polity in 2020. This interview focuses primarily on his latest book, The Struggle for a Decent Politics: On “Liberal” as an Adjective (2023, Yale University Press) which does much to clarify a simple, yet crucial distinction, between liberal and illiberal sensibilities underlying the pluralism, populism, and polarization today. Michael Walzer is professor emeritus at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, and editor emeritus at Dissent magazine. Professor Walzer studied on a Fulbright Fellowship at Cambridge and completed his PhD in government at Harvard University. Keith Krueger can be reached at keithNBn@gmail.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

Burnout is real and you've likely experienced it a time or two, but you don't have to! In today's episode, Kady Sandel joins us to share how designers can keep more profit without burning out! Listen in as she shares how she's built a flexible and free schedule in her business to maintain a healthy […] The post Episode 259: How Designers Can Keep More Profit Without Burning Out with Kady Sandel appeared first on b is for bonnie design | brand design, strategy & education for creative entrepreneurs.

For the beginning of the year, we are revisiting two previous yet timely conversations, with Adrian Wooldridge (author of "The Aristocracy of Talent: How Meritocracy Made the Modern World") and Michael Sandel (author of "The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good").With them, Bethany and Luigi discuss whether meritocracy creates a better world for everyone, or if it creates massive inequality. Wooldridge makes the nuanced case that while meritocracy is generally beneficial, we as a society need to recapture the notion of merit from the elites. Sandel, on the other hand, argues in a nuanced way that essentially the problem with meritocracy is not the failure to live up to the ideal, but the idea itself.Capitalisn't will be back in your feeds with a brand new episode on January 19. Don't forget to rate and review our podcast if you haven't already, and leave us a voicemail at https://www.speakpipe.com/Capitalisnt.

In this episode of 92Y Talks, join renowned political philosopher and Harvard University professor Michael J. Sandel and David Brooks, accomplished New York Times columnist and commentator, for an exploration of the new edition of Sandel's book Democracy's Discontent, which addresses the perils democracy confronts today. Now, a quarter century later, Sandel updates his classic work for an age when democracy's discontent has hardened into a country divided against itself. He shows how Democrats and Republicans alike embraced a version of finance-driven globalization that created a society of winners and losers and fueled the toxic politics of our time. In a stirring new epilogue, Sandel argues the necessity of reconfiguring the economy and empowering citizens. The conversation was streamed live as part of The 92nd Street Y, New York's online talks series on December 1st, 2022.

Business Coach for Designers Kady Sandel of Aventive Academy unpacks all the strategies she's learned over the years in getting her BEST clients to help you as web designers do the same. All while choosing the right marketing strategy that suits you.In This Episode00:00 - Introduction02:36 - Greeting to Kady08:19 - Nomad networking11:48 - Switching to SM13:35 - Finding ideal clients15:44 - Utilizing LinkedIn18:44 - Social media strategy21:22 - Using time wisely23:44 - Decide & change to niche30:07 - Perfecting the process33:50 - Don't be exclusive37:14 - Showcase results40:13 - How to get case study47:07 - Empowering clients52:14 - Working on downtime53:55 - Cold emailing1:03:12 - Timing1:08:42 - Final thoughtsGet all links, resources and show notes at:https://joshhall.co/235

An unhealthy relationship with food can manifest as being overly fearful about eating certain foods.  This can be problematic for people who have been researching healthy diets because there are different healthy diets, all calling to remove different foods.  It's important to understand how to eat healthy while also maintaining a healthy relationship with food. Let's expand upon how to cultivate this healthy relationship. https://drruscio.com/?p=27368 My new book is finally available: Healthy Gut, Healthy You. Click here to learn more: https://drruscio.com/getgutbook/ Looking for more? Check out our resource page that includes how to become a patient, how to pick up a copy of my new book, how to sign up for my clinical training newsletter, and more. https://drruscio.com/resources