Podcasts about sartre

Dans IDÉES cette semaine, Pierre-Édouard Deldique reçoit Gilles Hieronimus, docteur en Philosophie, auteur d'un «Que sais-je ?» sur Gaston Bachelard. Ce petit livre est une synthèse précise de l'œuvre du philosophe, articulée autour de sa double vocation scientifique et poétique. Cet ouvrage précieux éclaire la cohérence d'une pensée souvent jugée inclassable qu'il résume avec clarté dans l'émission. Gilles Hieronimus souligne le côté Janus de ce penseur hors-norme. «Deux images se superposent : celle de l'austère professeur de philosophie des sciences, astreint à la rigueur et à la prudence ; celle de l'ami enjoué des poètes et des artistes, réceptifs à leur audace et volontiers fantasque.», écrit-il à propos de ce personnage à la longue barbe blanche. Bachelard (1884–1962), figure majeure de la philosophie française du XXè siècle, est présenté comme un penseur subversif, dont la démarche réconcilie rigueur scientifique et liberté imaginative. Pour lui, il y a «l'homme rationaliste» et «l'homme de la nuit» et du rêve. Bachelard révolutionne la philosophie des sciences en introduisant les notions d'obstacle épistémologique, de rupture et de discontinuité dans le progrès scientifique. Il défend une rationalité dynamique, toujours en reconstruction. À travers ses études sur l'imaginaire (l'eau, le feu, l'air, la maison…), il développe une poétique des images fondée sur l'intuition, la rêverie et la résonance affective. L'imagination devient un mode de connaissance à part entière. L'auteur insiste, dans l'émission et dans son livre, sur le rythme alterné que Bachelard propose entre rationalité et rêverie. Cette alternance n'est pas une contradiction, mais, au contraire, une méthode de vie et de pensée : un art de vivre philosophique, respectueux de la pluralité des formes de la vie bonne et de la liberté de l'esprit. Cette éthique du renouveau repose sur une sagesse qui refuse les dogmes et valorise le mouvement. Elle s'incarne dans une pédagogie de l'éveil, où le philosophe est aussi un éducateur. Le livre montre comment Bachelard, souvent marginalisé dans les grands courants philosophiques, a pourtant influencé des penseurs majeurs comme Sartre, Merleau-Ponty, Ricœur, Deleuze, Foucault ou Simondon. Son style, mêlant rigueur conceptuelle et lyrisme, échappe aux classifications habituelles. Gilles Hieronimus le présente comme un philosophe combattant, marqué par son expérience de la guerre, un homme libre «logé partout mais enfermé nulle part». Au fil de ses propos, l'auteur qui dirige l'édition commentée des œuvres de Gaston Bachelard, confirme ce qu'il écrit dans son livre, le philosophe «cultive une spiritualité joyeuse, un gai savoir rationaliste, en s'appuyant sur la méditation privilégiée d'images heureuses, vitalisantes, verticalisantes». Un précieux compagnon de route en somme à «la recherche d'une sagesse et d'un art de vivre».

Dans IDÉES cette semaine, Pierre-Édouard Deldique reçoit Gilles Hieronimus, docteur en Philosophie, auteur d'un «Que sais-je ?» sur Gaston Bachelard. Ce petit livre est une synthèse précise de l'œuvre du philosophe, articulée autour de sa double vocation scientifique et poétique. Cet ouvrage précieux éclaire la cohérence d'une pensée souvent jugée inclassable qu'il résume avec clarté dans l'émission. Gilles Hieronimus souligne le côté Janus de ce penseur hors-norme. «Deux images se superposent : celle de l'austère professeur de philosophie des sciences, astreint à la rigueur et à la prudence ; celle de l'ami enjoué des poètes et des artistes, réceptifs à leur audace et volontiers fantasque.», écrit-il à propos de ce personnage à la longue barbe blanche. Bachelard (1884–1962), figure majeure de la philosophie française du XXè siècle, est présenté comme un penseur subversif, dont la démarche réconcilie rigueur scientifique et liberté imaginative. Pour lui, il y a «l'homme rationaliste» et «l'homme de la nuit» et du rêve. Bachelard révolutionne la philosophie des sciences en introduisant les notions d'obstacle épistémologique, de rupture et de discontinuité dans le progrès scientifique. Il défend une rationalité dynamique, toujours en reconstruction. À travers ses études sur l'imaginaire (l'eau, le feu, l'air, la maison…), il développe une poétique des images fondée sur l'intuition, la rêverie et la résonance affective. L'imagination devient un mode de connaissance à part entière. L'auteur insiste, dans l'émission et dans son livre, sur le rythme alterné que Bachelard propose entre rationalité et rêverie. Cette alternance n'est pas une contradiction, mais, au contraire, une méthode de vie et de pensée : un art de vivre philosophique, respectueux de la pluralité des formes de la vie bonne et de la liberté de l'esprit. Cette éthique du renouveau repose sur une sagesse qui refuse les dogmes et valorise le mouvement. Elle s'incarne dans une pédagogie de l'éveil, où le philosophe est aussi un éducateur. Le livre montre comment Bachelard, souvent marginalisé dans les grands courants philosophiques, a pourtant influencé des penseurs majeurs comme Sartre, Merleau-Ponty, Ricœur, Deleuze, Foucault ou Simondon. Son style, mêlant rigueur conceptuelle et lyrisme, échappe aux classifications habituelles. Gilles Hieronimus le présente comme un philosophe combattant, marqué par son expérience de la guerre, un homme libre «logé partout mais enfermé nulle part». Au fil de ses propos, l'auteur qui dirige l'édition commentée des œuvres de Gaston Bachelard, confirme ce qu'il écrit dans son livre, le philosophe «cultive une spiritualité joyeuse, un gai savoir rationaliste, en s'appuyant sur la méditation privilégiée d'images heureuses, vitalisantes, verticalisantes». Un précieux compagnon de route en somme à «la recherche d'une sagesse et d'un art de vivre».

This episode is a replay from The Existential Stoic library. Enjoy! Are your choices really your own, or are they influenced by societal norms, beliefs...values? Are you limited by your own beliefs?  Danny and Randy explore Existentialism and how it can help us live free. Subscribe to ESP's YouTube Channel! Thanks for listening!  Do you have a question you want answered in a future episode? If so, send your question to: existentialstoic@protonmail.com 

In dit gesprek spreekt Ad Verbrugge met filosoof Ger Groot over zijn bijdrage aan het boek Denken over film. Aan de hand van de serie Westworld onderzoekt Groot wat er gebeurt wanneer de grens tussen mens en machine vervaagt. Wat zegt de aantrekkingskracht van geweld, vrijheid en schijn over onze tijd? En wat betekent bewustzijn in een wereld van kunstmatige wezens?-

Imagine a woman setting herself the task of liking her son's choice of wife. At first she finds her daughter-in-law unbearable, but through the effort of seeing her clearly and justly she comes to accept and even appreciate the younger woman. For Iris Murdoch this is an example of moral labour, the struggle to achieve virtue that is understood intuitively by all of us. In her 1970 book The Sovereignty of Good, a collection of three lectures, Murdoch rejects the unambitious, ‘milk and water' ethics of her fellow English moralists at Oxford in favour of a Platonic system in which morality has the same objectivity as mathematics. In this episode Jonathan and James discuss Murdoch's lifelong philosophical project to establish what the rational unity of morality might be like without God. They consider her ideas of ‘unselfing' and of goodness as a replacement for God, and what she got wrong about Sartre's distinction between authenticity and sincerity. Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and to all our other Close Readings series, subscribe: Directly in Apple Podcasts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/applecrcip⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ In other podcast apps: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/closereadingscip⁠ Further reading in the LRB: Alexander Nehamas: John Bayley's 'Iris': https://lrb.me/cipep12murdoch1 James Wood: Existentialists and Mystics: https://lrb.me/cipep12murdoch2 Rosemary Hill on Iris Murdoch: https://lrb.me/cipep12murdoch3 Audiobooks from the LRB Including Jonathan Rée's 'Becoming a Philosopher: Spinoza to Sartre': https://lrb.me/audiobookscip

Neste episódio apresentamos o estoicismo prático de uma das principais figuras do período romano: Caio Musônio Rufo. Sempre que falamos sobre o estoicismo do período imperial, os três nomes geralmente abordados são Sêneca, Epicteto e Marco Aurélio. Eles não foram, no entanto, os únicos filósofos em atividade nestes séculos. É verdade que pouquíssimos textos desta época chegaram até nós, mas há também filósofos menos conhecidos hoje que, naquele tempo, causaram grande impressão em seus contemporâneos.

In this episode, I talk with Tyrique Mack-Georges, a PhD student in philosophy at Penn State, about the deep connections between Frantz Fanon and Jean-Paul Sartre. We explore how both thinkers help us understand the systemic nature of racism, the power of language in maintaining or challenging colonial systems, and Fanon's vision of a new humanism.Tyrique shares how his Caribbean background shapes his philosophical journey and how Fanon reworked Sartre's existentialism to illuminate what it means to become fully human in a world structured by domination.

“You become what you pretend to be, so be careful what you pretend to be.” — Jean-Paul SartreIn The Great Patriotic Heist, I argued that the American Left has begun performing patriotism — waving flags, quoting Jefferson, rediscovering “our Republic” — not from love of country but from narrative panic. The populist Right had taken ownership of rebellion, freedom, and 1776's mythic energy, leaving progressives with a choice: mock it or mimic it. They chose mimicry. My warning then was that performance can't last forever; it either collapses or becomes real.This episode asks: what happens if it becomes real — if the actors forget it started as theater?Sartre's “bad faith” applies perfectly here. It isn't lying; it's self-deception — performing a role so convincingly that you trap yourself inside it. America has done that for centuries. We pretended to be a land of liberty until the pretense began shaping reality. Pretending here is creative, even dangerous. So when the Left wraps itself in patriotic language — “No Kings,” “Our Republic,” flag emojis on bios — it isn't just PR. It's ontological trial and error: trying on belief until it fits.And maybe it will. That's America's trick — performance and belief blur until the act becomes identity. The Left may start by faking affection, but the repetition could harden into conviction. The question is what kind of nation that conviction would build.Think dialectically: thesis, antithesis, synthesis. The thesis was the curated moral order of the 2010s — technocratic, globalist, emotionally micromanaged. The antithesis was the populist revolt — a messy fusion of Left and Right embodied in Trumpism. For a brief, volatile moment, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump spoke different dialects of the same rebellion: against expertise, against the soft tyranny of moral management. That was synthesis one — populism as raw authenticity, a revolt against hypocrisy dressed as virtue.But every revolution becomes self-aware. The movement that began as candor became theater. Its outrage hardened into ritual; its populism into fandom. The Right began mirroring the spectacle it loathed. And that's when the Left made its move. If authenticity couldn't sustain itself, it could be domesticated. Patriotism was rebranded for polite society. The institutions that once scorned the Founders began praising them again — provided the “work” never ends. Thus the rise of Progressive Patriotism: corporate, focus-grouped, inclusive, safe.It looks real but feels like simulation — an algorithm's impression of love of country. Yet Americans crave sincerity so badly that even counterfeit conviction sells. Pretend long enough, and it might stop being pretend.If “inclusive patriotism” becomes orthodoxy, it will dominate for a generation — until someone notices that enforced sincerity isn't sincerity. Then the rebellion resets. Each synthesis ossifies into a new establishment; each establishment breeds its own opposition. The next populists will reject all theater entirely. They won't wave flags or hashtags. They'll simply live differently.That's the American metabolism: we don't resolve contradictions; we absorb them. We act first, believe later. We fake it till we make it — or till it breaks us. Pretending isn't harmless; it's nation-building. When you play patriot long enough, you forge the country you deserve.So maybe this new performance will stick. Maybe the Left's flag-waving feels genuine by 2026. Maybe the fireworks and “inclusive Republic” sermons convince millions that the dream still lives. But belief engineered from above is belief with a leash. And when people start feeling the collar, they'll tear it off.That's America: not thesis or antithesis — perpetual rehearsal.A country pretending to be free, and somehow, staying that way.

“You become what you pretend to be, so be careful what you pretend to be.” — Jean-Paul SartreIn The Great Patriotic Heist, I argued that the American Left has begun performing patriotism — not feeling it, performing it. The same institutions that once mocked the flag now wrap themselves in it, speaking solemnly about “our Republic” and “the unfinished promise of 1776.” It's not rediscovered affection — it's narrative survival. The populist Right took the flag hostage, so the only way to reclaim it was to start waving their own. My warning then was simple: performance has a half-life. It either collapses or becomes real.This episode is about what happens if it becomes real — if people pretending to love America start actually loving it. Here, pretending isn't lying — it's creation. We perform ideals until they exist. We said “all men are created equal” long before we believed it, and through repetition made it partly true. America evolves not through honesty but rehearsal.Sartre called it “bad faith.” Not hypocrisy, but self-entrapment — when you play a role so long you forget it's a choice. America's moral managers — experts, editors, educators — now perform patriotism because they know you can't govern people who think you hate their country. But repetition changes people. Roles have gravity. Pretending shapes the pretender.What happens when actors start believing their own script? When “freedom,” “democracy,” and “the Republic” stop being props and start being convictions again? Maybe the costume fuses to the skin. Maybe the same Left that once saw America as villain becomes its strictest guardian. That fusion could create something new — not the populist Right's raw nationalism nor the technocratic Left's therapy-state, but a hybrid: moral nationalism wrapped in empathy, managed through control.That's the Hegelian rhythm — thesis, antithesis, synthesis. The thesis was neoliberal order: global, expert, moralized. The antithesis was populism — Left and Right fusing in rebellion. For a moment, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump spoke the same language of revolt: different grammar, same fury. That was synthesis one — populism as authenticity, revolt against curated virtue.But populism became self-aware. Its anger turned ritual, its authenticity cosplay. MAGA became fandom. Once authenticity becomes aesthetic, the establishment knows how to sell it back. Enter synthesis two: Progressive Patriotism — focus-grouped, diverse, emotionally ergonomic. Patriotism as lifestyle brand.It looks real, sounds real, even feels real — but it's patriotic the way a corporate mission statement is heartfelt. Still, America's hunger for sincerity is so deep even simulation can work. If enough people perform belief, it becomes belief.Picture 2026 — the 250th anniversary. “America 250” events: diverse, polished, professional. Fireworks with spoken-word poetry. Speeches about freedom delivered like mindfulness apps. It'll be immaculate — and in some way, it might succeed. Millions will feel pride, gratitude, even tears. The performance may cross into faith.And when belief hardens, rebellion returns. Every orthodoxy breeds heresy. Somewhere, a younger generation is already rolling its eyes at both MAGA's nostalgia and the Left's choreography. They'll want danger, not safety; truth, not optics. Their patriotism, if it exists, will be quiet, personal, unbranded.That's the American cycle: imitation becomes belief, belief institution, and institutions rebellion's target. Each generation pretends until the mask becomes its face — then rips it off.Maybe progressive patriotism sticks. Maybe the country becomes gentler, managerial, moralistic — a nation of caretakers with flags. But someone will always stand up, roll their eyes, and say “enough.”Because America's soul belongs to the unmanageable — the ones who stop pretending.And that, in the end, was Sartre's warning: the danger isn't pretending. It's when the pretending works.

In this solo episode, I explore Frantz Fanon's ambivalence toward religion—how he wrestled with the sacred, the modern, and the so-called “primitive.” Drawing on Federico Settler's thought-provoking essay, I reflect on Fanon's complex relationship with Catholicism, Islam, and indigenous spirituality, and how those tensions shaped his vision of liberation and the “new man.”I'm also excited to share some of the conversations coming up on the podcast, including Tyrique Mack-Georges on Fanon and Sartre, Todd McGowan on Fanon and Hegel, Donovan Miyasaki on Fanon and Nietzsche, and Matthew Beaumont on Fanon and Reich. I'm hoping to keep expanding this exploration—into Fanon's engagement with Manichaeism, his possible connections to Alfred Adler, Simone de Beauvoir, and others who helped shape his revolutionary psychology.

Zwischen Selbstwahl und Selbstoptimierung«Ich bin nicht Stiller.» Mit diesem Satz hat uns Max Frisch einen der stärksten Romananfänge beschert. Zugleich hat er eine Losung ausgegeben: Ich lasse mir von der Gesellschaft nicht vorschreiben, wer ich bin. Als der Roman 1954 erschien, stand Stiller für eine radikale Wende. Die Erfahrung der totalitären Gesellschaft in Nazideutschland und im faschistischen Italien und Spanien steckte den Menschen noch in den Gliedern. Es stellte sich die Frage: Wie kann ein Mensch in einer solchen Gesellschaft er selbst sein? Für Max Frisch und seine Zeitgenossen war klar: Die kollektiven Identitätsentwürfe hatten versagt. Nation, Klasse und Religion taugten nicht mehr als Kompass. In dieses Vakuum stösst Jean-Paul Sartre vor mit einem Satz wie ein Trompetenstoss: «L'homme n'est rien d'autre que ce qu'il se fait.» – «Der Mensch ist nichts anderes als das, wozu er sich macht.» Sartre macht das Individuum zum Schöpfer seiner selbst. Er trägt die Verantwortung, sich selbst zu wählen. Genau das tut Stiller, stösst dabei aber auf den Widerstand der Gesellschaft um ihn herum, die ihr Bild von ihm nicht ändern will. Heute, siebzig Jahre nach Stiller, hat sich die Frage verschoben. Nicht mehr die Selbstwahl steht im Zentrum, sondern die Selbstoptimierung. Die Aufforderung lautet nicht mehr: «Werde, was du bist!», sondern: «Werde besser, in dem, was du tust!» Doch wie sollen wir uns optimieren, wenn wir nicht wissen, wer wir sind?Matthias Zehnder ist Autor und Medienwissenschaftler in Basel. Er ist bekannt für inspirierende Texte, Vorträge und Seminare über Medien, die Digitalisierung und KI.Website: https://www.matthiaszehnder.ch/Newsletter abonnieren: https://www.matthiaszehnder.ch/abo/Unterstützen: https://www.matthiaszehnder.ch/unterstuetzen/Biografie und Publikationen: https://www.matthiaszehnder.ch/about/

Você provavelmente conhece alguém que sempre se coloca nas mesmas situações erradas na vida, de modo que ficamos às vezes perplexos pelo fato de a pessoa sempre repetir os mesmos erros. Veremos neste episódio como Freud explica casos semelhantes através do conceito de compulsão à repetição.

POUR COMMANDER MON LIVRE : Sur Amazon : https://amzn.to/3ZMm4CY Sur Fnac.com : https://tidd.ly/4dWJZ8OD'où vient l'amour ? Voilà une question qui n'a jamais cessé d'alimenter la réflexion des philosophes. Et parmi les théories les plus célèbres, on trouve le mythe des Androgynes. Présenté par Aristophane dans "Le Banquet" de Platon, le mythe des Androgynes nous parle de la condition des premiers êtres humains, et de leur séparation en hommes et en femmes. Telle serait, selon lui, l'origine de l'amour. Analyse de cette conception.---Envie d'aller plus loin ? Rejoignez-moi sur Patreon pour accéder à tout mon contenu supplémentaire.

In this episode of the Psyche Podcast, I sit down with Dr. Peter Hudis for a rich and energizing conversation on the life, thought, and legacy of Frantz Fanon. As I mention at the start of our discussion, Peter's book Frantz Fanon: Philosopher of the Barricades has been one of the most accessible and illuminating introductions to Fanon I've ever encountered. If you've wanted to understand Fanon beyond the buzzwords—this is the place to begin.Together, we explore the philosophical influences that shaped Fanon's thinking, from the Negritude movement and Sartre to Merleau-Ponty, Hegel, and beyond. Peter shares fascinating stories about Fanon's early exposure to philosophy in Martinique, his evolution as a revolutionary thinker, and the ways he transformed the ideas he inherited rather than simply repeating them. We also discuss Fanon's commitment to a new humanism—one rooted in mutual recognition, dignity, liberation, and social transformation.Whether you're new to Fanon or have been journeying with his ideas for years, this episode offers both depth and accessibility. I left the conversation energized, challenged, and more convinced than ever that Fanon's work remains essential for thinking about race, liberation, and humanity today.Tune in, reflect with us, and see what new connections emerge for you as we revisit Fanon's enduring legacy through the eyes of a leading scholar.

En este episodio de Podcast UR conversamos con Diego Barragán, Director Artístico del Teatro Libre, sobre su montaje de Muertos sin sepultura de Jean-Paul Sartre, una obra escrita en el contexto de la Francia ocupada que explora la libertad, la resistencia y la condición humana en medio de la violencia y la tortura. Hacemos un paralelo entre el momento histórico que vivió Sartre y los retos que enfrenta Colombia hoy, reflexionando sobre el papel del teatro como espacio de memoria, ética y compromiso social. Una conversación profunda que invita a cuestionar lo que somos cuando la historia nos exige elegir y resistir.Para adquirir entradas y conocer más sobre la programación del Teatro Libre, visita: https://teatrolibre.com

As one of the fantasy genre's most successful authors, R.A. Salvatore enjoys an ever-expanding and tremendously loyal following. His books regularly appear on The New York Times best-seller lists and have sold more than 30,000,000 copies. Salvatore's most recent original hardcover, The Two Swords, Book III of The Hunter's Blade Trilogy (October 2004) debuted at # 1 on The Wall Street Journal best-seller list and at # 4 on The New York Times best-seller list. His books have been translated into numerous foreign languages including German, Italian, Finnish, Greek, Hungarian, Turkish, Croatian, Bulgarian, Yiddish, Spanish, Russian, Polish, Czech, and French. Salvatore's first published novel, The Crystal Shard from TSR in 1988, became the first volume of the acclaimed Icewind Dale Trilogy and introduced an enormously popular character, the dark elf Drizzt Do'Urden. Since that time, Salvatore has published numerous novels for each of his signature multi-volume series including The Dark Elf Trilogy, Paths of Darkness, The Hunter's Blades Trilogy, and The Cleric Quintet. His love affair with fantasy, and with literature in general, began during his sophomore year of college when he was given a copy of J.R.R. Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings as a Christmas gift. He promptly changed his major from computer science to journalism. He received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Communications from Fitchburg State College in 1981, then returned for the degree he always cherished, the Bachelor of Arts in English. He began writing seriously in 1982, penning the manuscript that would become Echoes of the Fourth Magic. Salvatore held many jobs during those first years as a writer, finally settling in (much to our delight) to write full time in 1990. The R.A. Salvatore Collection has been established at his alma mater, Fitchburg State College in Fitchburg, Massachusetts, containing the writer's letters, manuscripts, and other professional papers. He is in good company, as The Salvatore Collection is situated alongside The Robert Cormier Library, which celebrates the writing career of the co-alum and esteemed author of young adult books. Salvatore is an active member of his community and is on the board of trustees at the local library in Leominster, Massachusetts. He has participated in several American Library Association regional conferences, giving talks on themes including "Adventure fantasy" and "Why young adults read fantasy." Salvatore himself enjoys a broad range of literary writers including James Joyce, Mark Twain, Geoffrey Chaucer, Shakespeare, Dante, and Sartre. He counts among his favorite genre literary influences Ian Fleming, Arthur Conan Doyle, Fritz Leiber, and of course, J.R.R. Tolkien. Born in 1959, Salvatore is a native of Massachusetts and resides there with his wife Diane, and their three children, Bryan, Geno, and Caitlin. The family pets include three Japanese Chins, Oliver, Artemis and Ivan, and four cats including Guenhwyvar. When he isn't writing, Salvatore chases after his three Japanese Chins, takes long walks, hits the gym, and coaches/plays on a fun-league softball team that includes most of his family. His gaming group still meets on Sundays to play.

In this episode, we sink our teeth into The Addiction (1995), Abel Ferrara's moody, black-and-white vampire film that's as much about Sartre and sin as it is about blood. We unpack the heavy philosophy behind the movie's take on evil, addiction, and moral decay — and ask whether vampirism is just a metaphor for being human. Along the way, we wrestle with Nazi imagery, existential dread, and whether philosophy helps or just makes everything way more confusing.

Qui est responsable de la crise dans laquelle la France est engluée depuis des mois ? Acculé, plus impopulaire que jamais, poussé à la démission dans son propre camp, Emmanuel Macron rejette la responsabilité sur les oppositions, à la veille d'une journée cruciale qui nous dira si le pays s'enfonce dans la crise ou si le tout nouveau gouvernement échappe à la censure… Ce bras de fer entre un chef de l'Etat qui a donc choisi de nommer une fois de plus l'un de ses fidèles à Matignon et des partis politiques qui lui reprochent un exercice de plus en plus solitaire du pouvoir, nous allons en débattre ce soir avec nos invités : ▶︎ Samuel Hayat Politiste, chercheur CNRS en science politique au Cevipof (Sciences-Po)▶︎ Perrine SIMON-NAHUM Historienne, philosophe, directrice de recherches au CNRS et professeure attachée au département de philosophie de l'ENS-Ulm, autrice de « Aron critique Sartre » aux éditions Calmann Levy (12.03.25)▶︎ Thierry BEAUDET Président du Conseil Économique, Social et Environnemental (CESE)▶︎ Etienne CAMPION Journaliste pour Marianne, auteur de « Le Président toxique. Enquête sur le véritable Emmanuel Macron» aux éditions Robert Laffont (06.02.25)▶︎ Agnès PANNIER-RUNACHER Députée Renaissance du Pas-de-Calais, ancienne ministre de la Transition écologique, de la Biodiversité, de la Forêt, de la Mer et de la Pêche de France

Never trust anyone who tries to be ethically pure. This is the message of Albert Camus's short novel La Chute (The Fall), in which a retired French lawyer tells a stranger in a bar in Amsterdam about a series of incidents that led to a profound personal crisis. The self-described ‘judge-penitent' had once thought himself to be morally irreproachable, but an encounter with a woman on a bridge and a mysterious laugh left him tormented by a sense of hypocrisy. In this episode, Jonathan and James follow Camus's slippery hero as he tries and fails to undergo a moral revolution, and look at the ways in which the novel's lightness of style allows for twisted inversions of conventional morality. They also consider the similarities between Camus's novels and those of Simone de Beauvoir, and his fractious relationship with Jean-Paul Sartre. Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and to all our other Close Readings series, subscribe: Directly in Apple Podcasts: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/applecrcip⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ In other podcast apps: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/closereadingscip⁠⁠ Further reading in the LRB: Jeremy Harding: Algeria's Camus: ⁠⁠https://lrb.me/cip11camus1⁠⁠ Jacqueline Rose: 'The Plague': ⁠⁠https://lrb.me/cip11camus3⁠⁠ Adam Shatz: Camus in the New World: ⁠⁠https://lrb.me/cip11camus2⁠⁠ Audiobooks from the LRB Including Jonathan Rée's 'Becoming a Philosopher: Spinoza to Sartre': ⁠⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/audiobookscip⁠

Sie gilt als Ikone des Feminismus. Simone de Beauvoir hat mit ihrem Buch über "das andere Geschlecht" die Emanzipationsbewegung geprägt. Der Philosoph Wolfram Eilenberger nähert sich der Denkerin aber aus existentialistischer Perspektive. Moderation: Jürgen Wiebicke Von WDR 5.

Todo indivíduo se pergunta alguma vez pela origem do mal. Se Deus existe, como conciliar sua bondade com a existência do mal no mundo? Se Deus é o criador de todas as coisas, isso quer dizer que ele criou também o mal? Como seria possível um Deus bom criar o mal?

What happens when Deleuze and Hegel are set in violent philosophical encounter over the ruins of Kantian representation? In this episode, we explore how both thinkers attempt to move beyond the categories of judgment and identity to recover the genesis of sense itself. Henry Somers-Hall joins us to trace Deleuze's path through Kant, Sartre, and Bergson toward a field of pre-individual difference and immanent synthesis. What emerges is a portrait of thought that no longer begins with the subject, but with the forces that make thinking possible.Extended Conversation (Patrons Only) In the extended discussion, we turn to the politics of the practical in Kant, Fichte, and Hegel—and ask whether Deleuze's constructivism truly escapes the metaphysical State. Henry also reflects on what it means to make oneself a body without organs and where he sees the next frontier for Deleuzian thought.Hegel, Deleuze, and the Critique of Representation: Dialectics of Negation and Difference: https://sunypress.edu/Books/H/Hegel-Deleuze-and-the-Critique-of-RepresentationAlso: https://archive.org/details/hegeldeleuzecrit0000someSupport the showSupport the podcast:Current classes at Acid Horizon Research Commons (AHRC): https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/ahrc-mainWebsite: https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/Linktree: https://linktr.ee/acidhorizonAcid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcast Boycott Watkins Media: https://xenogothic.com/2025/03/17/boycott-watkins-statement/ Join The Schizoanalysis Project: https://discord.gg/4WtaXG3QxnSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438Merch: http://www.crit-drip.comSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast platform: https://pod.link/1512615438 LEPHT HAND: https://www.patreon.com/LEPHTHANDHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.com​Split Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/​Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/ and https://thecominginsurrection.bandcamp.com/

This episode is a replay from The Existential Stoic library. Enjoy! Are your choices really your own, or are they influenced by societal norms, beliefs...values? Are you limited by your own beliefs?  Danny and Randy explore Existentialism and how it can help us live free.Subscribe to ESP's YouTube Channel! Thanks for listening!  Do you have a question you want answered in a future episode? If so, send your question to: existentialstoic@protonmail.com

00:05:40 — Lana Del Rey nepotism exposé 00:10:46 — Antarctic ‘Agartha' captive speaks Egyptian 00:13:58 — Is Catholicism pagan? Rapid defense 00:18:36 — TikTok sale, Oracle web explained 00:25:36 — Sartre's mescaline crab hallucinations 00:27:26 — Rasputin: creepiest man in history ~00:43:35 — Most-bombed country wasn't at war 00:54:29 — Opium wars: Britain's “forbidden plant” 00:56:28 — Origins of political correctness 00:59:24 — AI deepfake: Jake Paul “coming out” 01:07:39 — China's famous UFO encounter recap 01:13:10 — Nero reportedly recants on deathbed Watch Full Episodes on Sam's channels: - YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@SamTripoli - Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/SamTripoli Sam Tripoli: Tin Foil Hat Podcast Website: SamTripoli.com Twitter: https://x.com/samtripoli Midnight Mike: The OBDM Podcast Website: https://ourbigdumbmouth.com/ Twitter: https://x.com/obdmpod Doom Scrollin' Telegram: https://t.me/+La3v2IUctLlhYWUx Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

En este nuevo episodio de Grandes Maricas de la Historia, nos adentramos en la vida incendiaria y lírica de Jean Genet, el escritor, ladrón, preso y amante que convirtió la marginación en arte y la homosexualidad en resistencia. Abandonado al nacer, criado en hospicios, y perseguido por la ley desde adolescente, Genet no solo sobrevivió: reinventó la literatura con un lenguaje feroz, erótico y desobediente. Os guiamos por las calles de la Francia de entreguerras, los correccionales del horror, los prostíbulos, los escenarios del Théâtre de l'Athénée y las trincheras de la revolución. Exploramos cómo su homosexualidad fue núcleo creativo y político, cómo sus amores, desde el acróbata marroquí Abdallah Bentaga hasta marineros y presos, fueron el centro mismo de su escritura y cómo su deseo fue, ante todo, un acto de insurrección. Desde El diario del ladrón hasta Las criadas, pasando por su compromiso con los Panteras Negras y los Palestinos, este episodio reivindica a Genet como una figura clave de la cultura queer y de la lucha contra todas las opresiones. Y sí, también hablamos de por qué se negó a lavar su imagen, de cómo Sartre intentó canonizarlo, y de por qué sigue siendo incómodo incluso hoy. Un episodio para los que no encajan. Para los que no se rinden. Para los que, como Genet, escriben con sangre y aman sin pedir perdón. Las músicas de este episodio: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/0ACAg4KoAX1gmHj60op2wn?si=d32b441880ec4a63

Velibor Čolić je po nekaj mesecih vojne v Bosni in Hercegovini kot begunec odšel proti Parizu. Leta 1992 je znal le tri francoske besede: Jean, Paul in Sartre. Danes je cenjen in večkrat nagrajen francoski pisatelj. V slovenskem prevodu je izšel njegov avtobiografski roman Vojna in dež. Bridkim in pretresljivim zgodbam dodaja ironijo ter razmišlja tudi o aktualnih vojnah. Beseda “vojna” v južnoslovanskih jezikih pozna množino, mir pa je vedno le v ednini.

El antropólogo Manuel Delgado dijo en Hoy por Hoy que "todas las películas son de guerra, incluso las de amor". Tal afirmación , tan contundente, llevó a Pepe Rubio y Sergio Castro a plantear el mito "En la vida todo es conflicto". Y para confirmarlo invitaron al filósofo Eduardo Infante , autor de "Filosofía en la calle" y "Ética en la calle" ¿Y qué nos dijo?  Partió de Heráclito para decir "que no se entiende la vida sin tensión",  siguió con la idea hegeliana de que sin oposición no hay avance y que los conflictos nos hacen más libres. Sartre, nos comenta Infante, nos llevó el conflicto al amor para decir que el que menos ama en una pareja es el que somete al que más ama. Y fue Simone de Beauvoir la que le rebatió para decir que para superar el conflicto amoroso se necesita el reconocimiento mutuo ¿Y como se sale del conflicto? Gestionándolo y dialogando. Dicho todo esto, entre los oyentes y el filósofo Eduardo Infante confirmaron el mito de que "En la vida todo es conflicto". 

O conceito de razão instrumental é um dos mais interessantes da Escola de Frankfurt para nos ajudar a compreender a forma como pensamos hoje nas sociedades capitalistas.

Tune in to hear:What can we learn from circus animals about learned helplessness and how can we free ourselves from the chains of a small existence we feel we can't escape?What are the positive and negative implications of habituation? How does it serve us evolutionarily and how can it hold us back?How does habituation affect the joy we get from our favorite songs and how can we renew this joy when we've overplayed a song?How can we change things up to disrupt our status quo and tendency for habituation?Why is diversifying your experiences, and your life overall, just as vital as diversifying your portfolio?What does Existentialist Jean Paul Sartre mean by his example of a waiter who is “playing at being a waiter in a cafe?” What does Sartre mean that he is acting in “bad faith” and how can we think about this in our own lives?LinksThe Soul of WealthOrion's Market Volatility PortalConnect with UsMeet Dr. Daniel CrosbyCheck Out All of Orion's PodcastsPower Your Growth with OrionCompliance Code: 2371-U-25246

durée : 00:57:38 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann, Nassim El Kabli - Adorno désapprouvait la conception de l'engagement, qui, selon Sartre, mettait la pensée et l'art au service de la diffusion d'un message politique. - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Michèle Cohen-Halimi Philosophe, professeure de philosophie à l'université Paris 8; Gilles Moutot Maître de conférences en philosophie au département de sciences humaines et sociales de la faculté de médecine de Montpellier-Nîmes, membre du centre d'études politiques et sociales : environnement, santé, territoire (université de Montpellier)

durée : 00:58:06 - Avec philosophie - par : Géraldine Muhlmann, Nassim El Kabli - Sartre ou la mémoire de Paul Nizan, ce “fantôme” de l'ami, qui renvoie autant à la figure de l'écrivain engagé qu'au rappel d'un idéal de jeunesse perdu, ce lien intime entre eux où se croisaient amitié, mémoire et engagement littéraire. - réalisation : Nicolas Berger - invités : Annie Cohen-Solal Professeure émérite, commissaire d'exposition.; Hadi Rizk Professeur honoraire en khâgne au Lycée Henri IV à Paris

At the heart of human existence is a tragic ambiguity: the fact that we experience ourselves both as subject and object, internal and external, at the same time, and can never fully inhabit either state. In her 1947 book, Simone de Beauvoir addresses the ethical implications of this uncertainty and the ‘agonising evidence of freedom' it presents, along with the opportunity it creates for continual self-definition. In this episode Jonathan and James discuss these arguments and Beauvoir's warnings against trying to evade the responsibilities imposed upon us by this ambiguity. They also look at the ways in which Beauvoir developed these ideas in The Second Sex and her novels, and her remarkable readings of George Eliot, Virginia Woolf and E.M. Forster. Non-subscribers will only hear an extract from this episode. To listen to the full episode, and all our other Close Readings series, subscribe: Directly in Apple Podcasts: ⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/applecrcip⁠⁠⁠ In other podcast apps: ⁠⁠⁠https://lrb.me/closereadingscip Read more in the LRB: Joanna Biggs: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipbeauvoir1⁠ Toril Moi: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipbeauvoir2⁠ Elaine Showalter: ⁠https://lrb.me/cipbeauvoir3⁠ Audiobooks from the LRB Including Jonathan Rée's 'Becoming a Philosopher: Spinoza to Sartre': ⁠https://lrb.me/audiobookscip

O Manifesto comunista é um dos textos mais importantes dos últimos séculos. Sua leitura é indispensável para todos aqueles que buscam compreender não apenas a sociedade em que vivemos hoje, mas também o curso da história recente.

Nesta sexta-feira, convidamos o filósofo Ricardo Timm de Souza para responder uma pergunta que muitos se fazem: Por quê Existencialismo? Qual é a relevância e a importância deste tema para os nossos tempos? Em nossa conversa passamos por autores fundamentais dessa corrente como Sarte, Beauvoir, Kierkegaard, Camus, Merleau-Ponty e Cioran. Se você quer começar os estudos no existencialismo, acreditamos que este programa é um bom primeiro passo. ParticipantesRicardo TimmRafael LauroRafael TrindadeLinksLive no YouTubeTornar-se PsicanalistaOutros LinksFicha TécnicaCapa: Felipe FrancoEdição: Pedro JanczurAss. Produção: Bru Almeida Support the show

durée : 00:03:45 - Le Fil philo - Notre genre serait-il une prison de laquelle nous ne pourrions sortir ? Nassim El Kabli interroge la liberté d'être soi face aux stéréotypes de genre. De Beauvoir à Sartre, comment certains discours – sous couvert d'émancipation – enferment-ils hommes et femmes dans de nouveaux conformismes ?

Anna Maria Boschetti"Benedetto Croce"Festival Filosofiawww.festivalfilosofia.itFestival Filosofia, ModenaVenerdì 19 settembre 2025, ore 20:30Anna Maria BoschettiBenedetto CroceUn dominatore della cultura italianaAnna Maria Boschetti ha insegnato Letteratura francese presso l'Università Ca' Foscari di Venezia. È membro corrispondente del Centre européen de sociologie et de science politique (CESSP) di Parigi, a partire dal Centre de sociologie européenne (CSE) fondato da Pierre Bourdieu presso l'Ecole des Hautes Etudes en sciences sociales (EHESS) di Parigi. Le sue aree di indagine si collocano prevalentemente nel solco della sociologia della cultura e della sociologia della letteratura, ispirandosi al pensiero di Pierre Bourdieu, di cui è stata collaboratrice e traduttrice in italiano delle sue opere. Ha dedicato numerose ricerche a questioni teoriche e a studi di caso riguardanti il campo culturale francese contemporaneo, con particolare attenzione a temi quali i modelli intellettuali, le istituzioni (riviste, editori), l'avanguardia poetica e artistica, comprendendo anche Sartre e Apollinaire. Si è interessata allo studio dei processi di genesi e consumo dei prodotti culturali, sia dal punto di vista teorico che pratico. Ha indagato i rapporti tra nazionale e transnazionale nella storia letteraria italiana contemporanea. Le sue ricerche si focalizzano, più nello specifico, sui rapporti tra le forme letterarie e la struttura degli spazi sociali, in contesti sia nazionali che internazionali. Tra i suoi libri: La rivoluzione simbolica di Pierre Bourdieu. Con un inedito e altri scritti (Venezia 2003); Pierre Bourdieu, Le regole dell'arte. Genesi e struttura del campo letterario (a cura di, Milano 2009); Teoria dei campi, “Transnational Turn” e storia letteraria (Macerata 2023); Benedetto Croce. Dominio simbolico e storia intellettuale (Macerata 2024).Anna Maria Boschetti"Croce. Dominio simbolico e storia intellettuale"Quodlibetwww.quodlibet.itBenedetto Croce ha dominato per mezzo secolo la vita culturale italiana. Non si può capire la storia intellettuale del primo Novecento senza tener conto di questo fatto, eccezionale per ampiezza e durata. È vero che su Croce si è scritto e si scrive moltissimo, ma non esistono analisi che rendano conto in modo soddisfacente del suo lungo regno e di tutto il suo percorso intellettuale e politico. Le biografie sono focalizzate sul soggetto, gli studi sull'opera risentono della specializzazione, sono settoriali e fanno sparire l'essenziale: l'ubiquità di Croce, gli effetti della straordinaria concentrazione di risorse e di ruoli da lui realizzata. Per spiegare i testi e la fortuna di un autore non bastano le analisi «interne», e neppure quelle «esterne»: è un corto circuito ricondurre direttamente le opere e il prestigio al contesto sociale e politico. Si supera questa sterile alternativa prendendo in considerazione il microcosmo specifico, relativamente autonomo, che circoscrive le possibilità e i limiti rispetto ai quali si definiscono le scelte intellettuali. Anna Boschetti ricostruisce lo stato del campo di produzione culturale in cui Croce era inserito e, inseparabilmente, il suo rapporto con questo spazio, orientato dalla posizione che vi occupava e dal suo habitus. L'analisi mostra come le idee di Croce su Marx, Hegel, la storia, l'arte, la logica, la scienza, la letteratura e la politica prendano forma nel confronto con i modelli, i maestri, i concorrenti, gli avversari che il campo di gioco gli propone. Appare così la connessione inscindibile che lega la sua traiettoria alla storia del campo culturale, italiano ed europeo. Emergono, inoltre, le condizioni di possibilità e gli effetti del dominio crociano. Al tempo stesso, questo libro fa rivivere cinquant'anni di storia intellettuale, con i suoi problemi e le sue battaglie appassionate, restituendo un'immagine di Croce e dei suoi interlocutori più concreta e più vera.IL POSTO DELLE PAROLEascoltare fa pensarewww.ilpostodelleparole.itDiventa un supporter di questo podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/il-posto-delle-parole--1487855/support.

Imagine os primeiros seres humanos sobre a face da Terra. Nossos antepassados se encontravam em uma constante luta pela vida, buscando a todo momento comida, abrigo e proteção contra os perigos da natureza. Neste cenário de tantos perigos e preocupações, por que então os primeiros seres humanos criaram religiões? Neste episódio de hoje vamos tentar compreender as raízes antropológicas da religião com o filósofo alemão Ludwig Feuerbach.

In this podcast we will be talking about how to focus on yourself from the wisdom of 6 different philosophers and philosophies for life. The 6 philosophers we will be talking about for finding purpose in this video are Albert Camus (Absurdism), Nietzsche (Existentialism), Sartre (Existentialism), Marcus Aurelius (Stoicism), Lao Tzu (Taoism) and  Buddha (Buddhism). Diogenes, an ancient philosopher with the spirit of a wild beast and the wit of a poet, saw through the illusion of civilization. Where others pursued wealth and honor, he saw vanity. So, he rejected it all, choosing a life most would call madness but which he knew was true freedom. He didn't just talk about philosophy—he lived it, stripped down to its rawest form. He owned nothing but a cloak, a staff, and a ceramic jar he called home. While others debated virtue in grand halls, he lived it under the open sky. He mocked the powerful, exposed the foolishness of the so-called wise, and reduced life to its barest essence: harmony with nature, free from the absurd expectations of society. Then came the moment that made him immortal. One day, Alexander the Great, the most powerful man alive, stood before him and declared, “Ask for anything, and I shall grant it.” Now, most would have begged for riches or status. Diogenes barely looked up and said, “Move aside, you're blocking my sunlight.” Think about that for a moment: The conqueror of nations stood powerless before a man who wanted nothing. So who, then, was truly free? Most of us aren't. From birth, we're shaped by the world—told what to value, what to chase, what to fear. We measure ourselves by status, companion, and approval. And in an age of endless screens and constant judgment, this enslavement has only deepened. How do we break free? Diogenes didn't ask us to live like him—he wanted us to see like him. To strip life down to what truly matters, to stop chasing what others say is important, and to reclaim the freedom to be ourselves, without apology or permission. So what's next? Turn inward. Let go of borrowed desires. Stand firm in your own life. The world will always whisper its demands—but whether we listen is entirely up to us. In this video, we'll explore how to focus on yourself through the wisdom of the world's greatest philosophers. Starting with 01. Albert Camus -  Accept the absurdity 02. Nietzsche – Be the Superhuman 03. Sartre - Take responsibility for yourself 04. Marcus Aurelius – Control What You Can, Ignore the Rest 05. Lao Tzu – Flow Like Water 06. Buddha – Understand the True Nature of Self I hope you enjoyed listening to this podcast and hope that these lessons from 6 Brilliant Philosophers on how to focus on yourself will help you in your life.. 

Tune in to hear:What are Victor Frankl's 3 paths to a meaningful existence? For Frankl, which of these is the first and most path to meaning?How does the French Existentialist, Jean Paul Sartre, further validate Frankl's emphasis on having meaningful work, or a project?Why did Schuller and Seligmann believe that pleasure, meaning and engagement are 3 unique predictors of subjective wellbeing?Why is finding purpose and fulfillment in your dayjob so important?What are “global” and “domain-specific” types of meaning?According to Psychological research, what does meaningful work usually look like?LinksThe Soul of WealthOrion's Market Volatility PortalConnect with UsMeet Dr. Daniel CrosbyCheck Out All of Orion's PodcastsPower Your Growth with OrionCompliance Code: 2293-U-25234

This is the famous last line in one of Beckett's novels. But it's not just a last line, it's a credo for human existence! 

Conhecer novos idiomas e ser capaz de ler textos em outras línguas é uma das coisas mais recompensantes que você pode fazer em sua vida privada, profissional ou acadêmica. Neste episódio falamos sobre como idiomas podem abrir portas e indicarei alguns métodos – tanto gratuitos quanto pagos - que você pode começar hoje mesmo.

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

This episode is a replay from The Existential Stoic library. Enjoy! Sartre famously wrote, “Hell is–other people!”  Do other people frustrate you? In this episode, Danny and Randy explore why we can become frustrated by others.Subscribe to ESP's YouTube Channel! Thanks for listening!  Do you have a question you want answered in a future episode? If so, send your question to: existentialstoic@protonmail.com  Danny, Randy, and their good friend, Russell, created a new podcast, CodeNoobs, for anyone interested in tech and learning how to code. Listen to CodeNoobs now online, CodeNoobs-podcast, or wherever you get your podcasts.

durée : 01:01:36 - Les Grandes Traversées - par : Nedjma Bouakra - Auteur clandestin, Genet fascine et fait sensation dans le gratin parisien. Cocteau, Sartre, Giacometti, Matisse et plus de quarante-cinq artistes et auteurs demandent une grâce présidentielle définitive. Mais Jean Genet souhaite-t-il être sauvé ? - réalisation : Angélique Tibau - invités : Abdellah Taïa Écrivain et cinéaste marocain d'expression française; Olivier Neveux Professeur d'histoire et d'esthétique du théâtre à l'Ecole Normale Supérieure de Lyon.; Albert Dichy Directeur littéraire à l'Institut Mémoires de l'Edition Contemporaine (IMEC); Bertrand Ogilvie psychanalyste et professeur de philosophie émérite à l'Université de Paris 8; Emmanuelle Lambert Écrivaine française; Antoine d'Agata Photographe; Agnès Vannouvong Romancière.

fascists don't give a shit about facts, logic, or reality. They only care about framing their narrative as legitimate, and as soon as you engage with them, you lose. "A lie can travel half way around the world before the truth can even get its boots on."Sartre's Words: https://redsails.org/sartre-reason-falsely/Other Sources:"Troll Wars": https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/culture-shrink/201411/troll-wars-and-narcissistic-rage"The Case for NOT Debating Fascists": https://criticalresist.medium.com/the-case-for-not-debating-fascists-3608623f00e"Why are political discussions with fascists impossible?": https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2022.951236/full"Lose the Debate": https://armoxon.substack.com/p/lose-the-debate"Why you shouldn't debate fascists": https://www.vaia.com/en-us/magazine/troll-on-the-internet/https://aurelmondon.medium.com/why-you-should-never-debate-fascists-racists-and-other-reactionaries-6478572c16aResources for Resisting a Coup: https://makeyourdamnbed.medium.com/practical-guides-to-resisting-a-coup-b44571b9ad66SUPPORT Julie (and the show!): https://supporter.acast.com/make-your-damn-bedDONATE to the Palestinian Children's Relief Fund: www.pcrf.netGET AN OCCASIONAL PERSONAL EMAIL FROM ME: www.makeyourdamnbedpodcast.comTUNE IN ON INSTAGRAM FOR COOL CONTENT: www.instagram.com/mydbpodcastOR BE A REAL GEM + TUNE IN ON PATREON: www.patreon.com/MYDBpodcastOR WATCH ON YOUTUBE: www.youtube.com/juliemerica The opinions expressed by Julie Merica and Make Your Damn Bed Podcast are intended for entertainment purposes only. Make Your Damn Bed podcast is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/make-your-damn-bed. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Un amant pour se sentir plus libre ? C'est la femme forte, libre, par excellence. L'éminence féministe et existentialiste. Son fameux turban, ses grandes boucles d'oreilles et sa relation si spéciale avec Sartre. Mais Simone de Beauvoir a aimé un autre homme, avec une intensité toute particulière : Nelson Algren. Un podcast Bababam Originals Ecrit et raconté par Alice Deroide Première diffusion : 14 février 2019 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

What happens when the dialectic between Sartre and Fanon is not one of influence, but of mutual transformation? Today we're live at Webster's in State College with Tyrique Mack-Georges, who returns to the podcast to discuss his research on seriality, group infusion, and the possibility of a new humanity. Together, we explore how Sartre's Critique of Dialectical Reason illuminates Fanon's revolutionary project, and how Fanon, in turn, reorients Sartre's ethics. This is a conversation about stretching Marxism, confronting racial capitalism, and recovering the lost art of collective praxis.Tyrique: @tyorriqueSupport the showSupport the podcast:https://www.acidhorizonpodcast.com/Linktree: https://linktr.ee/acidhorizonAcid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcast Boycott Watkins Media: https://xenogothic.com/2025/03/17/boycott-watkins-statement/ Join The Schizoanalysis Project: https://discord.gg/4WtaXG3QxnSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438Merch: http://www.crit-drip.comSubscribe to us on your favorite podcast: https://pod.link/1512615438 LEPHT HAND: https://www.patreon.com/LEPHTHANDHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.com​Revolting Bodies (Will's Blog): https://revoltingbodies.com​Split Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/​Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/ and https://thecominginsurrection.bandcamp.com/

Dans une nouvelle édition de « Histoire et dialectique de la violence », un des grands livres de Raymond Aron, paru en 1973 (Calmann-Levy), la philosophe et professeure de philosophie, Perrine Simon-Nahum revient sur l'opposition des deux intellectuels. Au micro de Pierre-Édouard Deldique, elle explique les divergences entre deux grands esprits du XXè siècle et montre que, finalement, il vaut mieux avoir raison avec Aron que tort avec Sartre...  Nés la même année 1905, condisciples à l'École normale de la rue d'Ulm, Aron et Sartre ont noué leur amitié dans l'étude des grands textes de la philosophie et l'horizon de la montée des régimes autoritaires du XXème siècle. Pourtant, leurs chemins philosophiques divergent dès la fin des années 1930. Aron pressent le déclenchement de la guerre quand Sartre se projette dans la figure du grand écrivain.  La rupture va être consommée au début des années 1950.  Les deux philosophes s'opposent sur l'interprétation du marxisme et la question du sens de l'histoire. Aron reconnaît le génie de l'écrivain Sartre, mais il ne ménage pas ses critiques à l'égard de sa philosophie. « Histoire et Dialectique de la violence », résultat du grand cours qu'il consacre treize ans après sa parution en 1960 à la Critique de la raison dialectique, le dernier grand ouvrage philosophique de Sartre, marque le point d'orgue de ce « dialogue » philosophique. Ce livre de Raymond Aron est au cœur de ce nouveau numéro d'IDÉES.  Perrine Simon-Nahum, directrice de recherches au CNRS et professeure attachée au département de Philosophie de l'ENS-Ulm, restitue le cadre de ces débats et éclaire toute leur actualité.   Programmation musicale : Yeliz Trio : Artvax ; Winter Journey.

Aussi étrange que cela puisse paraître, oui, Jean-Paul Sartre a bien connu une obsession pour les crustacés, et plus précisément pour les homards. Mais il ne s'agit pas là d'un goût culinaire ou d'une fascination philosophique : cette obsession trouve son origine dans une expérience hallucinogène, vécue par le philosophe dans les années 1930.À cette époque, Sartre s'intéresse de près aux états modifiés de conscience. Dans un cadre semi-expérimental, il accepte de consommer de la mescaline, un puissant psychotrope extrait de cactus comme le peyotl, utilisé traditionnellement par certaines tribus amérindiennes. La substance est connue pour provoquer des hallucinations visuelles et des distorsions sensorielles intenses.Peu de temps après cette expérience, Sartre est victime d'hallucinations récurrentes. Il voit apparaître, autour de lui, des homards qui le suivent dans la rue, l'attendent dans les couloirs, surgissent dans son champ de vision. Il en parlera comme de "crabes", ou de "grosses bêtes aux pinces", qui deviennent une présence quasi constante, parfois intrusive, parfois presque familière.Loin de disparaître avec le temps, ces visions persistent plusieurs semaines après la prise de mescaline. Sartre, alors âgé d'environ 30 ans, s'en amuse parfois, mais en garde une certaine inquiétude. Il confiera plus tard à Simone de Beauvoir, puis à des journalistes, que ces créatures semblaient l'accompagner dans ses déplacements — une sorte de délire visuel lucide, dont il avait conscience, mais qu'il ne pouvait totalement maîtriser.Dans une interview donnée à John Gerassi dans les années 1970, Sartre expliquera avec humour :"J'ai vu des homards pendant longtemps. Ils m'accompagnaient partout. Je savais bien qu'ils n'étaient pas réels… mais ils étaient là."Cette anecdote étrange n'a rien d'un délire permanent ou pathologique. Elle montre plutôt la curiosité de Sartre pour les frontières de la perception, la nature de la conscience, et la subjectivité. Des thèmes qu'il explorera d'ailleurs dans La Nausée ou L'Imaginaire, où le trouble de la réalité occupe une place centrale.Aujourd'hui, cet épisode est devenu presque légendaire. Il illustre le côté expérimental et audacieux de Sartre, qui n'hésita pas à mettre son esprit à l'épreuve pour mieux comprendre ce qu'il appelait "l'existence pure".Alors oui, Sartre fut bien escorté par des crustacés… du moins dans sa tête.--------------------Vous cherchez des récits inspirants de course à pied ? Avec Course Epique découvrez les plus belles histoires de coureurs, amateurs comme élites, qui vous encouragent à débuter, continuer ou exceller. Ecouter Course Epique sur :Apple Podcasts : https://podcasts.apple.com/fr/podcast/course-epique/id1510967100Spotify : https://courseepique.fr/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Spotify.pngDeezer : https://www.deezer.com/fr/show/1174282ou encore : https://shows.acast.com/course-epiqueYouTube : https://www.youtube.com/@CourseEpique Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Charles Robin est philosophe et créateur de la chaîne YouTube « Le Précepteur », qui réunit aujourd'hui plus d'un million d'abonnés. Il s'est dernièrement intéressé à une thématique aussi fascinante que complexe : le hasard. C'est donc tout naturellement que j'ai eu envie de l'inviter pour plonger dans cette notion que nous utilisons tous, parfois à tort, souvent avec mystère.Dans cet épisode, nous nous interrogeons ensemble : est-ce que le hasard existe vraiment ? Ou est-ce simplement un mot que nous utilisons pour désigner ce que nous ne comprenons pas ? Charles, avec son approche pédagogique et nuancée, nous entraîne sur les traces de Spinoza, Sartre, Jung et d'autres penseurs majeurs pour explorer le déterminisme, la liberté, le sens et nos conditionnements, aussi bien sociaux que biologiques.J'ai voulu comprendre avec lui si donner du sens à une coïncidence était un acte rationnel ou une nécessité psychologique. Nous avons parlé de synchronicités, de loi de l'attraction, de spiritualité, mais aussi du besoin très humain de croire que certaines choses sont "destinées". Car au fond, dans un monde incertain et parfois brutal, n'est-ce pas réconfortant de penser que les signes existent pour nous guider ?Avec beaucoup de sincérité, Charles partage aussi son parcours : comment il a commencé à publier des vidéos de philo à une heure du matin, sans plan de carrière, juste porté par une envie de transmettre. Il parle de ses inspirations, de ses lectures, de ce que la philosophie peut nous apporter dans nos vies très concrètes, à travers nos relations amoureuses, nos colères en voiture ou nos moments d'échec.Ce que j'ai particulièrement aimé dans cette discussion, c'est cette manière de ramener la pensée philosophique dans notre quotidien, avec simplicité et honnêteté. Nous avons aussi exploré des sujets qui me sont chers : la liberté réelle (ou illusoire), la responsabilité individuelle, le regard que l'on porte sur soi et sur les autres, et cette capacité à prendre du recul, à observer nos propres conditionnements pour mieux avancer.Un échange dense, humain, et profondément inspirant. À écouter si vous vous êtes déjà demandé pourquoi certaines choses vous arrivent, ou si vous voulez simplement apprendre à mieux comprendre votre propre façon de voir le monde.Citations marquantes“On ne se croit libre que parce qu'on ignore qu'on est déterminé.” — Charles Robin“Prendre les choses personnellement, c'est croire que l'autre agit contre nous.” — Charles Robin“Le fatalisme, c'est attendre que le destin fasse à notre place.” — Charles Robin“L'émotion, c'est le mouvement de l'âme.” — Charles Robin“La liberté, c'est ce moment d'inconfort où tu dois choisir.” — Charles RobinLes grandes questions posées Pourquoi avoir choisi le thème du hasard pour ton TED Talk ?Quelle est la vision de Spinoza sur le hasard ?Peut-on vraiment être libre si tout est déterminé ?En quoi la spiritualité et l'ésotérisme peuvent-ils mener à la philosophie ?Est-ce que prendre les choses personnellement est une erreur ?Peut-on forcer le destin ?Quelle différence fais-tu entre déterminisme et fatalisme ?L'amour est-il un terrain privilégié pour comprendre nos conditionnements ?Comment es-tu venu à faire de la philosophie sur YouTube ?Est-ce que donner du sens au hasard est vital pour les humains ?Timestamps YouTube00:00 – Introduction sur le hasard et la loi de l'attraction01:21 – Rencontre avec Charles Robin, aka Le Précepteur03:00 – Pourquoi choisir le hasard comme thème de vulgarisation ?05:30 – Synchronicités, clins d'œil de la nature et perception08:40 – Spinoza : le hasard comme ignorance des causes11:00 – Liberté, déterminisme et responsabilité selon Spinoza17:00 – Les Accords Toltèques et la rationalisation des émotions23:00 – Conditionnements biologiques et sociaux29:00 – L'impact des biais cognitifs sur notre perception35:00 – L'émotion : expression du mouvement intérieur38:00 – Le déterminisme comme participation au réel45:00 – Perception sélective et réalité subjective52:00 – Science, croyance et besoin de sens56:00 – Origine de la chaîne YouTube “Le Précepteur” Suggestion d'autres épisodes à écouter : #277 Le pouvoir de la mémoire : vivre avec son passé pour avancer avec Charles Pepin (https://audmns.com/kymWSYh) #160 Comment gérer la violence actuelle de la société? avec Marie Robert (https://audmns.com/oJoWbXn) [BEST-OF] Comment ne pas être esclave de la société? avec Alexandre Lacroix (https://audmns.com/cWqkPXv)Distribué par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.