Podcasts about solovey

Radio International - The Ultimate Eurovision Experience is broadcast from Malta's Radio 105FM on Tuesday evenings from 2100 - 0059 hours CET. The show is also broadcast on SWITCH Radio Europe in the United Kingdom live on Wednesday evenings from 1900 - 2300 hours CET as well as on the Facebook Page of Eurovision Radio International with an interactive chatroom.   AT A GLANCE - ON THE SHOW THIS WEEK Interview with Kateryna Pavlenko of GO_A (Ukraine 2020 and 2021) done at the Madrid Eurovision PreParty 2024 Eurovision Weekend 2024 in Hamburg (12 - 14 Jul 2024) - Meet the contestants of the FANVision Song Contest 2024 (Part 4: Malta, Poland and Slovenia) Eurovision Weekend 2024 in Hamburg (12 - 14 Jul 2024): Update with the Organising Team Eurovision News with Nick van Lith from www.escXtra.com Eurovision Spotlight:  Eurovision's Magical Numbers with Eurovision Lordship Marcus Keppel-Palmer Eurovision Birthday File with David Mann Eurovision Cover Spot with David Mann Eurovision Calendar with Javier Leal New Music Releases by Eurovision Artists Your music requests Kateryna Pavlenko - the Voice of GO_A (Ukraine 2020 and 2021) with JP Interview with Kateryna Pavlenko of GO_A (Ukraine 2020 and 2021): This week's interview with a Eurovision acts that as been on stage of the Eurovision Song Contest is Kateryna Pavlenko who is the voice of Ukrainian Group GO_A. They were selected to represent Ukraine at the Eurovision Song Contest 2020 with the song "Solovey". Due to the Corona Pandemic that hit the globe in 2020 the Eurovision Song Contest 2020 was cancelled, however, GO_A kept the right to represent Ukraine in the Eurovision Song Contest 2021 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, however, with another song called "Shum" which came 5th in the Grand Final. The Interview Team of Radio International met Kateryna at the Madrid Eurovsion Pre Party 2024 and you can hear this interview on the show this week. Eurovision Weekend 2024:  The first Eurovision event after the Eurovision Song Contest 2024 itself if the Eurovision Weekend 2024 out of Hamburg hosted by the Hamburg branch of Eurovision Club Germany e.V.. The event will include the FanVision Song Contest 2024 where young artists from different countries perform a cover of a Eurovision Song. The organisers received about 16 entries to this contest and a jury as well as public audience of the Eurovision Weekend 2024 will vote for the performances and the winner of which will decide in which country the Eurovision Weekend 2025 will be held. The Winning Act in 2023 was Germany with Mirko Bulian and Maxima Love performing their own version of "My Way" originally by Tone Sekelius from Sweden's Melodifestivalen. In the run up to the event, Radio International will be interviewing the contestants to showcase the artists. This week meet the final remaining participating acts from Malta, Poland and Slovenia. In addition, not only Frank and Salman who are the brain behind the Eurovision Weekend will be joining JP in the studio but also members of the organisational team from Hamburg to give us all the details what is planned around the Eurovision Weekend 2024 in Hamburg. The Facebook Page of the Eurovision Weekend 2024 can be viewed here:  CLICK HERE To reach the artists' profiles please visit the website of EC Germany here:  CLICK HERE Eurovision Spotlight - Eurovision's Magical Numbers: The brand new series with the new summer feature continues this week as the Radio International Colleagues will introduce something completely new that has never been on Radio International - Eurovision's Magical Numbers as Eurovision Lordship Marcus Keppel-Palmer will continue the series. Also JP will be joined by David Mann for the Eurovision Birthday File and Eurovision Coverspot.  Nick will be presenting the Eurovision News courtesy of escXtra.com. There will be a lot of the great new releases of Eurovision artists on the show as well as great Eurovision Classics. Javier will be updating us on the upcoming Eurovision events in the Eurovision Calendar and and and....   Find out more details of how to tune in live - click here For full details of this week's Show Content and Play List - click here

Continuamos en LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA con la SEGUNDA PARTE de la audioserie titulada "Érase una vez el Este". Coma ya sabéis, en esta ocasión viajamos al sudeste asiático, concretamente a Myanmar, más conocida como Birmania. Este es el segundo capítulo titulado "El Triángulo de Oro". Al igual que la anterior serie ambientada en el conflicto entre Rusia y Ucrania, esta serie o audioserie en la que se mezclan la realidad y la ficción, consiste en una serie de programas en los que escucharéis como se habla de hechos reales que han sucedido en los últimos años y también en fechas recientes en parte del sudeste asiático, y concretamente en los territorios de Birmania y sus alrededores. Como digo, es una audioserie muy conectada con la actualidad en los momentos en la que estamos presentándola. Y este proyecto de "Érase una vez el Este" que continúa con esta segunda serie, es idea como ya sabéis de dos grandes amigos de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA, como son Juan Lamas, malagueño, historiador, escritor y guionista, y Verónica, barcelonesa, licenciada en administración y finanzas, actriz y cantante amateur y gran apasionada por la historia. Ellos son los artífices de esto y les agradezco su trabajo. Os dejo con el segundo capítulo titulado "El Triángulo de Oro". *En este programa tenemos el placer de contar con la voz de el amigo Doc Salvaje del podcast Relatos Salvajes, Raluca interpretando a Solovey, y al amigo Ratzinger interpretando al piloto de helicóptero kazajo. Sinopsis: La mejor forma de entrar en Myanmar, la antigua Birmania, sin levantar las suspicacias de la Junta Militar es a través del triángulo de oro, la triple frontera entre Thailandia, Laos y Myanmar. Desde allí llegar a Pangsang será coser y cantar. La capital del Estado Wa nos espera con los brazos abiertos... y también a todo aquel que quiera divertirse y tenga buen dinero para gastar. Chicas, todos los juegos de azar imaginables, alcohol, subidones químicos, lujo y desenfreno nos esperan. Bienvenidos al Ombligo del Mekong. La entrepierna lujuriosa del Sudeste asiático. Bienvenidos, señoras y señores... al Triángulo Dorado. Este es un Podcast producido y dirigido por Gerión de Contestania, miembro del grupo "Divulgadores de la Historia". Somos un podcast perteneciente al sello iVoox Originals. Enlace a la web de "Divulgadores de la Historia": https://divulgadoresdelahistoria.wordpress.com/ Canal de YouTube de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA: https://www.youtube.com/@labibliotecadelahistoria3997 Correo electrónico: labibliotecadelahistoria@gmail.com *Si te ha gustado el programa dale al "Like", ya que con esto ayudarás a darnos más visibilidad. También puedes dejar tu comentario, decirnos en que hemos fallado o errado y también puedes sugerir un tema para que sea tratado en un futuro programa de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA. Gracias. Música del audio: -Entrada: Epic Victory by Akashic Records . License by Jamendo. -Voz entrada: http://www.locutordigital.es/ -Relato: Music with License by Jamendo. Noticias: -France 24. Aung San Suu Kyi, una líder aclamada y cuestionada en Myanmar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyCwkN6yF8Y -Euronews. Birmania supera a Afganistán como el mayor productor de opio del mundo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvKULfYjqyc -Euronews. Birmania | La Corte Internacional de Justicia rechaza las objeciones de la junta militar https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtYf9Xp7G_U -Agencia EFE. El mayor narcoejército de Birmania busca legitimarse. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GNsP_TNgus -Agencia EFE. El relator de la ONU advierte de que la crisis de Birmania se ha vuelto invisible. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU5rkgSh2jI -Mizzima TV. Images of Myanmar rebel armies ambush military convoy and aftermath. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4ZKyUHaEz4 -Euronews. La ONU denuncia la violación de los derechos humanos en Birmania. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N9KRckz_l8 -Euronews. Nobel de la Paz Aung San Suu Kyi niega en La Haya el genocidio rohinyá https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2N9KRckz_l8 -AFP. Latigazos o rezos contra las drogas en Birmania. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwXpSSs6JaY&t=48s -Euronews. Myanmar el gobierno y la poderosa guerrilla Karen pactan un alto el fuego. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qk4oY90FdMk -Channel 4. The Gen Z army fighting Myanmar's military dictator https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo8-v8lZ95M Música: -Time Arrow — White Rabbit (Jefferson Airplane Cover) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJ1ZjFmaoAI -08 Beyond Rangoon - Hans Zimmer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s89HXiYwBrE - Akasha Hippy Shit. Pasqual Vestner. https://www.youtube.com/watchv=P7g7TXt2MSw&list=RDP7g7TXt2MSw&start_radio=1 -Club Report. Arabic Club 4K in Grace Hotel in Bangkok Thailand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxFbfPAM7FA -Bo Bo Han က န န ႔မၾကည အ င https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tKo0SqZjOko -Die Internationale in Yangon (Myanmar) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrIEXdHdOkU -Alaa Starves. Eggs Bananas The Most Popular Roti Lady in Bangkok. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OgviTn4zW9c -Eric Serra - Once Upon a time in burma (The Lady) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxTdMnLbu3c -Eric Serra. Be of Good Cheer. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdFCw1CS8eI -Brunhville. Fantasy World Music Celestial Temple. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D2LIEQsZQew -The Mask Guy. Far Cry 4 Unofficial Soundtrack Lakshmana In game Version. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoLsEuPPHIA -Folk dance of China s Wa people. Hi China. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKETRqy3uMs -Sitar Rock. Jefferson Airplane White Rabbit Sitar Cover. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39cbyX8SHi4 -Mekong River song. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI8iO_0DI3c -Loran. Mil Mi 2 Engine Start up Departure Landing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MR2w47fCjVA -Daniele: Tension. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C87eURhi7yk -Riddima Sharkel. Musical magic Bangkok Palace Hotel. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MddDTfeFtoE - One Night In Bangkok FULL HD REMIX DJ R. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBu-ewMRhkA -Rambo 4 Soundtrack - 1.Rambo theme HD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otR7rx8A2Go&list=PL0B554A4978698773 -Rambo 4 Soundtrack - 9.The Village HD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6krDEvKdOQ&list=PL0B554A4978698773&index=9 -Sai Lay (CICADA)-Pyi Taw Thar ( Official MV, Myanmar Rock Song Full HD ) စိုင်းလေး-ပြည်တော်သာ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqeII0hHmfA - แค อ ายหว น เบ ยร พร อมพงษ LYRIC VIDEO. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PGthc-h1rwo Redes Sociales: -Twitter: LABIBLIOTECADE3 -Facebook: Gerión De Contestania Muchísimas gracias por escuchar LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA y hasta la semana que viene. Podcast amigos: La Biblioteca Perdida: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-podcast-la-biblioteca-perdida_sq_f171036_1.html Niebla de Guerra: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-niebla-guerra_sq_f1608912_1.html Casus Belli: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-casus-belli-podcast_sq_f1391278_1.html Victoria Podcast: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-victoria-podcast_sq_f1781831_1.html BELLUMARTIS: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-bellumartis-podcast_sq_f1618669_1.html Relatos Salvajes: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-relatos-salvajes_sq_f1470115_1.html Motor y al Aire: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-motor-al-aire_sq_f1117313_1.html Pasaporte Historia: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-pasaporte-historia_sq_f1835476_1.html Cita con Rama Podcast: https://www.ivoox.com/cita-rama-podcast-ciencia-ficcion_sq_f11043138_1.html Sierra Delta: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-sierra-delta_sq_f1507669_1.html Permiso para Clave: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-permiso-para-clave_sq_f1909797_1.html Héroes de Guerra 2.0: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-heroes-guerra_sq_f1256035_1.html Calamares a la Romana: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-calamares-a-romana_sq_f12234654_1.html Lignum en Roma: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-lignum-roma-ler_sq_f1828941_1.html Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Jenn and guest Erica talk about their favorite character pairings in SF/F, from romantic to platonic to #complicated, and discuss the Hugo Awards shenanigans, Dolly Parton's connection to Buffy, and more. Subscribe to the podcast via RSS, Apple Podcasts, or Spotify. To get even more SF/F news and recs, sign up for our Swords and Spaceships newsletter! 2024 is the tenth year of the Read Harder Challenge! Join us as we make our way through 24 tasks meant to expand our reading horizons and diversify our TBRs. To get book recommendations for each task, sign up for the Read Harder newsletter. We'll also keep you informed about other cool reading challenges, readathons, and more across the bookish internet. If you become a paid subscriber, you get even more recommendations plus community features, where you can connect with a community of passionate, like-minded readers in a cozy and supportive corner of the internet. Visit bookriot.com/readharder to sign up. This content contains affiliate links. When you buy through these links, we may earn an affiliate commission. News Buffy Reboot news via Dolly Parton [Popverse] Hugo 2023 Shenanigans, Recapped, Plus Resignations [Book Riot, File770] The Audie Awards Finalists [Book Riot] Books Discussed Platonic Soulmates: Camilla Hect and Palimedes in The Locked Tomb by Tamsyn Muir  Complicated Besties: Johnny and Nick in Beneath the Rising by Premee Mohamed Unconditional Acceptance Romance: Yasira and Productivity in The Outside by Ada Hoffmann Former Mentor/Mentee Turned Bros: Cas and Rio in Zero Sum Game by SL Huang Pining Sapphics/Beefing Rappers Turned Lovers: Red and Blue in This Is How You Lose the Time War by Amal El-Mohtar, Max Gladstone Friends on a Quest: Miuko and Magpie Spirit Geiki in A Thousand Steps into Night by Traci Chee Annoying Friends and Low-Key Co-Parents: Murderbot and ART/Perihelion in Murderbot Diaries by Martha Wells Human/Animal Companions: Vasilisa and Solovey (the horse!) in The Winternight Trilogy by Katherine Arden Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Langsam nimmt die Saison Fahrt auf. Griechenland hat die Künstlerin bekannt gegeben: Die Singer/Songwriterin Marina Satti wird in Malmö antreten. Die BBC hat bekannt gegeben, dass sie einen Act gefunden hat. Malta beginnt mit dem ersten Halbfinale - es wird spannend.Go_A kommt nach Deutschland und Österreich! Die Ukrainian Magic Tour 2023 ist gerade unterwegs und als sie in Glasgow Zwischenstation hatte, hat Marco Go_A zu einem Interview getroffen. Die ukrainische Band sorgte 2021 in Rotterdam mit "Shum" für Furore, nachdem sie bereits 2020 teilnehmen hätten sollen. Der Eurovision Song Contest veränderte das Leben der Band, wie sie erzählen. Sängerin Kateryna Pawlenko und Mastermind Taras Schewtschenko sprachen mit Marco.Eigentlich hätten Go_A mit "Solovey" 2020 in Rotterdam antreten sollen, der Song Contest damals wurde aber auf Grund von Corona abgesagt. Go_A wurden direkt nominiert und ihr Song "Shum" wurde zur Internetsensation, obwohl er eigentlich gar nicht als Beitrag geplant war. Er wurde für Eurovision umgearbeitet und erreichte 2021 in Rotterdam den 5. Platz. Eurovision hat ihnen die Möglichkeit gegeben, neue Auftrittsmöglichkeiten im Ausland zu bekommen und zu zeigen, dass Folk und Electro durchaus zusammen passen. Kataryna berichtet von der Recherche, alte Volkslieder zu finden, die nur mündlich überliefert sind. Aus einem dieser Songs haben sie ihre neue Single "Rosalochki" aufgenommen, ein Song über Waldnymphen.Natürlich müssen auch Kataryna und Taras die drei Fragen am Schluss beantworten:Lieblingssong von Eurovision 2023? Kataryna hat die Gewinnerin Loreen mit "Tattoo" und Moldaus Pasha Parfeni mit "Soarele şi Luna" auf der Bühne auf der Playlist, Taras brennt immer noch für Käärijäs "Cha Cha Cha"Der Eurovision-Lieblingssong aller Zeiten? Für Taras ist es Loreens "Euphoria" und für Kataryna ist es Cornelia Jakobs' "Hold Me Closer" aus dem Jahr 2022.  In der Kleinen Song Contest Geschichte am Schluss erzählt Marco von einem Vertrag, der nicht unterschrieben wurde.

LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA presenta la audioserie titulada "Érase una vez el Este". Este es el duodécimo y último capítulo (o quizás no), y se se titula "El Pacto con el Diablo". Esta serie o audioserie en la que se mezclan la realidad y la ficción, consiste en una serie de programas en los que escucharéis como se habla de hechos reales que han sucedido en los últimos años y también en fechas recientes en Europa, concretamente en la zona del este de Europa. Como digo, es una audioserie muy conectada con la actualidad en los momentos en la que estamos presentándola. Y este proyecto no es idea mía, sino que es idea de dos amigos de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA, como son Juan Lamas, malagueño, historiador, escritor y guionista, y Verónica, barcelonesa, licenciada en administración y finanzas, actriz y cantante amateur y gran apasionada por la historia. Ellos son los artífices de esto y les agradezco su trabajo. Os dejo con el duodécimo capítulo titulado "El Pacto con el Diablo". *En este programa como colofón, tenemos el placer de contar con el amigo Doc Salvaje del podcast Relatos Salvajes interpretando la voz del Subsecretario del Interior de la Federación Rusa, con la amiga Raluca interpretando la voz de Solovey, con el amigo Joaquín interpretando la voz de Ahjmat y con un servidor interpretando la voz de Valeriy Yevgenyevich. Sinopsis: Absolutamente todos tenemos un precio. Unos cambian de parecer por poca cosa, otros venden su alma a un precio excesivo. En Rusia se pueden comprar lealtades y se pueden hacer pactos sólo con un gesto de buena voluntad, aunque a veces no haya dinero en el mundo para comprar el perdón. Este es un Podcast producido y dirigido por Gerión de Contestania, miembro del grupo "Divulgadores de la Historia". Somos un podcast perteneciente al sello iVoox Originals. Canal de YouTube de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfHTOD0Z_yC-McS71OhfHIA *Si te ha gustado el programa dale al "Like", ya que con esto ayudarás a darnos más visibilidad. También puedes dejar tu comentario, decirnos en que hemos fallado o errado y también puedes sugerir un tema para que sea tratado en un futuro programa de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA. Gracias. Música del audio: -El podcast LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA cuenta con licencia de Jamendo Music. Enlaces a los cortes de noticiarios y a la música empleada en el programa: Noticias: -THE PRAYER WITH WHICH OUR SOLDIERS GO ON A COUNTEROFFENSIVE TO LIBERATE UKRAINE-Krystyna from Ukraine. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kC1z5X8WTqM -GUERRA UCRANIA: MOSCÚ vuelve a ATACAR el puerto de ODESA como represalia al PUENTE de CRIMEA | RTVE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KkzCydGrZs -RUSIA-WAGNER: PRIGOZHIN REAPARECE en SAN PETERSBURGO mientras se CELEBRA la CUMBRE con ÁFRICA | RTVE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOatieg26RM -Prigozhin reaparece en África Wagner hace que Rusia sea aun más grande. La Vanguardia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tp8JOU9SV34 -LA PMC CONVOY, la posible heredera de los negocios africanos de Wagner. Bellumartis actualidad Militar. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FxdNa8HACcs&t=25s -RUSIA: "Wagner inició la rebelión antes de que Putin hiciese rodar su cabeza" | EL PAÍS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VZ96bBy2hk -GRUPO WAGNER_ PUTIN se reunió con PRIGOZHIN cinco días después de la rebelión, revela el Kremlin. Diario Gestión. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmAayxO11b0 -Según el presidente bielorruso, el líder del Grupo Wagner estaría en Bielorrusia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enF2QNP7y1o&t=55s -RUSIA_ LUKASHENKO confirma que PRIGOZHIN, jefe del GRUPO WAGNER, está en BIELORRUSIA. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7op_p16lM0&t=31s -RUSIA PRIGOZHIN jefe del GRUPO WAGNER enterrado en un FUNERAL PRIVADO. RTVE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzdx0Emrmtg -Entierran al jefe militar y confundador del Grupo Wagner. Agencia EFE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_5XE58FiaBY&t=18s -REVELAN ÚLTIMO VIDEO de Yevgueni Prigozhin antes de morir: "Todo va bien" - CHV Noticias https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07_rwewMih4&t=76s -RUSIA | Putin sobre Prigozhin: “Cometió errores graves, pero logró sus objetivos” | EL PAÍS- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uH8_bYUT4uE&t=64s -Putin sobre Prigozhin: “Tenía un destino complicado y cometió graves errores” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EIhUY5XHjY&t=74s -Fingió para escapar del Kremlin Teoría apunta que Yevgeny Prigozhin no murió en el avión. El Heraldo de México. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7FaZPQW98s&t=56s -Casinos y metanfetamina: la prosperidad de un hermético narcoestado birmano. EFE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZMQfDhums4&t=69s -El mayor narcoejército de Birmania busca legitimarse en su 30 aniversario. EFE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GNsP_TNgus&t=7s -Muere Yevgeny Prigozhin, líder del grupo Wagner; tras accidente aéreo en Rusia. Milenio. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RH_EBCInSpk -RUSIA: Analizan las CAJAS NEGRAS y ADN para resolver las INCOGNITAS de la muerte de PRIGOZHIN | RTVE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH_Pt0ODG_A Música: -Digital Remaster Vesti la giubba - Caruso 1907 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udJmZXobWiU -"Scandinavianz - Stockholm" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qS4m0dvEbOQ -Música de violín. Hvega. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QjxMWlUDbBU -Grabando música para películas - Escena de suspenso. Justo Morao. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5uukBu_d0g&t=25s -March of The Bogatyri (Epic Russian Music) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyPCp4_DNcQ -Dmitri Shostakovich - The Second Waltz. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hTvc3f83Ws -DJ Blyatman Gopnik. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHpWTC_QrwA -Dark Night - Russian Ballad - Mikhail Gorbachev's "Songs for Raisa". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pfJIokpUtk -The Ballad About Russian Boys Leonid Kharitonov the Alexandrov Red Army Choir 1966. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBqNRsfosTo -IC3PEAK Марш. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqohApD6Ng8 -IC3PEAK ft GHOSTEMANE - THE PIT. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IcWDCUdBlQ4 -Keane Bedshaped Cover Version. Mikko Kilpinen. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiZzffftkJE -Amazing Mandalay. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BXBd71wW8Tc -L-Gante X El Mas Ladron X DT.Bilardo - PISTOLA - Cumbia 420 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prjCrIuy9Fk Redes Sociales: -Twitter: LABIBLIOTECADE3 -Facebook: Gerión De Contestania Muchísimas gracias por escuchar LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA y hasta la semana que viene. Podcast amigos: La Biblioteca Perdida: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-podcast-la-biblioteca-perdida_sq_f171036_1.html Cliophilos: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-cliophilos-paseo-historia_sq_f1487551_1.html Niebla de Guerra: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-niebla-guerra_sq_f1608912_1.html Casus Belli: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-casus-belli-podcast_sq_f1391278_1.html Victoria Podcast: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-victoria-podcast_sq_f1781831_1.html BELLUMARTIS: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-bellumartis-podcast_sq_f1618669_1.html Relatos Salvajes: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-relatos-salvajes_sq_f1470115_1.html Motor y al Aire: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-motor-al-aire_sq_f1117313_1.html Pasaporte Historia: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-pasaporte-historia_sq_f1835476_1.html Cita con Rama Podcast: https://www.ivoox.com/cita-rama-podcast-ciencia-ficcion_sq_f11043138_1.html Sierra Delta: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-sierra-delta_sq_f1507669_1.html Permiso para Clave: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-permiso-para-clave_sq_f1909797_1.html Héroes de Guerra 2.0: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-heroes-guerra_sq_f1256035_1.html Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA presenta la audioserie titulada "Érase una vez el Este". Este es el séptimo capítulo, y se se titula "Cadena perpetua". Esta serie o audioserie en la que se mezclan la realidad y la ficción, consiste en una serie de programas en los que escucharéis como se habla de hechos reales que han sucedido en los últimos años y también en fechas recientes en Europa, concretamente en la zona del este de Europa. Como digo, es una audioserie muy conectada con la actualidad en los momentos en la que estamos presentándola. Y este proyecto no es idea mía, sino que es idea de dos amigos de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA, como son Juan Lamas, malagueño, historiador, escritor y guionista, y Verónica, barcelonesa, licenciada en administración y finanzas, actriz y cantante amateur y gran apasionada por la historia. Ellos son los artífices de esto y les agradezco su trabajo. Os dejo con el séptimo capítulo titulado "Cadena perpetua". *En este programa tenemos el placer de contar con la amiga Raluca interpretando la voz de Solovey y con el amigo Joaquín interpretando la voz de Ahjmat. Les doy las gracias por participar. Sinopsis: Dicen que el lago Baikal es el corazón espiritual de Rusia y que desde sus orillas se decide el destino de personas que viven a miles de kilómetros, se ejecutan planes de dominación y se castigan las traiciones. Hay pecados que no pueden ser perdonados para ciertas religiones profanas. Este es un Podcast producido y dirigido por Gerión de Contestania, miembro del grupo "Divulgadores de la Historia". Somos un podcast perteneciente al sello iVoox Originals. Canal de YouTube de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfHTOD0Z_yC-McS71OhfHIA *Si te ha gustado el programa dale al "Like", ya que con esto ayudarás a darnos más visibilidad. También puedes dejar tu comentario, decirnos en que hemos fallado o errado y también puedes sugerir un tema para que sea tratado en un futuro programa de LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA. Gracias. Música del audio: -El podcact LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA cuenta con licencia de Epidemic Sound. Enlaces a los cortes de noticiarios y a la música empleada en el programa: Noticias: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNtiwTf3BcE CULTURA RUSA - TEMA Baikal El precio del agua. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BfsKExW6eWg Euronews. Alerta en el Lago Baikal - science. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-HORiOqBtI&t=99s Screen TV. El Lago BAIKAL, el ojo azul de Siberia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OB94naTUYgLa región siberiana de Irkutsk, en estado de emergencia por las llamas. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iq2PMZXWQdU Euronews. ¿Pornografía en el billete de cien rublos? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvMRlCRfqGI&t=4s France 24. ¿Qué es el Novichok?. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnm6i7N6UcM El descontento resucita al Partido Comunista ruso. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KTV4otVoNc El lago Baikal, en peligro por una plaga de algas verdes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiHr50Qr42Y euronews reporter - Los nuevos sindicatos rusos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_NwctfZALs Hostigamiento contra homosexuales en Rusia genera preocupación -- Noticiero Univisión. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzbcegO7F6A La abuela rusa que recorre el hielo del Baikal a los 79 años. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXih5QRxSnQ Los comunistas rusos critican al Kremlin en el Día de los defensores de la Patria. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKq7BmxE1g0 Moscú endurece ley sobre “propaganda LGBT” DW en español. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AN1YULSv-Y0 MUERE GORBACHOV: ¿Qué significó su FIGURA para la URSS? ¿cómo lo valora la RUSIA de PUTIN? | RTVE. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOmnCQDOBH4 Putin no asistirá al funeral de Mijaíl Gorbachov | El Espectador. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfJnnESsr-4Rusia arresta a una veintena de activistas LGBT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eumzr5XrRwgRusos AFP Rusos aún divididos sobre su pasado en la URSS. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTZeWZLI9xE Putin sobre contaminación de lago Baikal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6I2URfRFdaU Canal 22. Historia. Siberia. Música: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pb9cOAnw6Y4 "Noche Oscura"(Dark is the Night-Тёмная ночь) subtitulado en español. Mark Bernes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j6x3CHbL3ocРусь от края до края» Кубанский казачий хор https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WMRzxcdBei0 Ойся ты ойся Если Девушка Казачка Kazachka https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNpLOo0xFfs Moscow, 1953. Christopher Willis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4r8K3naJSE&t=27s Aram Khachaturian - Bed-Time Story (Children's Album, Book 2, No. 2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCGnyRiLFBY Estepa rusa HYPNOFON https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E__Q4mmPKLY Korobeiniki https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4AQsqpSLZQ Música sin Copyright/Rock Oscuro/Floor Plan/Silent Partner. caseif - Particles & Trap Nation Visualizer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUHhY8kSEr0 ЯОЙ || MARRY ME, BELLAMY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-zH3Dgo7ow Russian Cyberfolk Song. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeSm9mQDkHA Песня красноармейца из фильма «Кортик» (Валентин Никулин) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTS7HBGpy5c RAMMSTEIN - MUTTER | кавер НА РУССКОМ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=luwK7ttrJ2o В НЕБО - Polina Poliakova (RIVER) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXATiyN0Yek. Arrojar dados (No son dientes de oro!!!) Redes Sociales: -Twitter: LABIBLIOTECADE3 -Facebook: Gerión De Contestania Muchísimas gracias por escuchar LA BIBLIOTECA DE LA HISTORIA y hasta la semana que viene. Podcast amigos: La Biblioteca Perdida: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-podcast-la-biblioteca-perdida_sq_f171036_1.html Cliophilos: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-cliophilos-paseo-historia_sq_f1487551_1.html Niebla de Guerra: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-niebla-guerra_sq_f1608912_1.html Casus Belli: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-casus-belli-podcast_sq_f1391278_1.html Victoria Podcast: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-victoria-podcast_sq_f1781831_1.html BELLUMARTIS: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-bellumartis-podcast_sq_f1618669_1.html Relatos Salvajes: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-relatos-salvajes_sq_f1470115_1.html Motor y al Aire: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-motor-al-aire_sq_f1117313_1.html Pasaporte Historia: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-pasaporte-historia_sq_f1835476_1.html Cita con Rama Podcast: https://www.ivoox.com/cita-rama-podcast-ciencia-ficcion_sq_f11043138_1.html Sierra Delta: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-sierra-delta_sq_f1507669_1.html Permiso para Clave: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-permiso-para-clave_sq_f1909797_1.html Héroes de Guerra 2.0: https://www.ivoox.com/podcast-heroes-guerra_sq_f1256035_1.html Escucha el episodio completo en la app de iVoox, o descubre todo el catálogo de iVoox Originals

Solovey by Mr Dee Swiss House

Brendan and I dive into big life changes and the role they play in a spiritual awakening, as well as navigating these moments and learning how to approach life with ease, trust, and a light heart. Follow me to keep up with updates, offerings, events, and daily content: Instagram: @sarahlockwood TikTok: @sarahlockwood96 Website: sarahlockwoodcoaching.com This podcast is for educational purposes only. The host claims no responsibility to any person or entity for any liability, loss, or damage caused or alleged to be caused directly or indirectly as a result of the use, application, or interpretation of the information presented herein.

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. 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

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

This is part two of a two part interview. Mark Solovey's ‘Social Science for What?' is essential reading for anyone in either the history of science policy or the history of the social sciences in the United States. The book is not, as the subtitle might imply, merely an institutional history of the social sciences at the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF). Rather, Solovey's follow-up to his 2013 book, ‘Shaky Foundations: The Politics-Patronage-Social Science Nexus in Cold War America', is a commanding explanation of certain characteristics of academic social science as commonly practiced in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. — Audra J. Wolfe, PhD. history and sociology of science, in ISIS Vol. 113, No. 2, June 2022 In our first episode, Professor Solovey shared some of the political and legislative history establishing the National Science Foundation; heated controversy over the social sciences that undermined the effort to include them in the initial legislation for the new science agency; how they nevertheless became included on a small and cautious basis grounded in a scientistic strategy; and some of the landmark developments, controversies, and interesting individuals involved from roughly the mid-1940s to the late 1960s. This included Senator Harris's remarkable legislative proposal in the mid-to-late 1960s to establish a separate national social science foundation. This second part of the interview opens with the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot and draws on Mark's 2001 journal article in the Social Studies of Science, titled ‘Project Camelot and the 1960s Epistemological Revolution: Rethinking the Politics–Patronage–Social Science Nexus' - which remains the professor's most often cited scholarly article. We then move up through the dark days of the Reagan years, along the way discussing key figures, from David Stockman to Talcott Parsons, Clifford Geertz, Thomas Kuhn, Milton Friedman, and Richard Atkinson, the emergence and impact of the Consortium of Social Science Associations (COSSA), alternatives to the scientistic strategy, and persistent challenges faced by the social sciences at the levels of institutional representation, leadership and funding constraints relative to the natural sciences - all of which continue to the present day. We end with Professor Solovey's call for reviving the idea of a new federal agency for the social sciences, a National Social Science Foundation, as first introduced by Senator Harris of Oklahoma, and finally, with some book recommendations. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. 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

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/history

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/political-science

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/anthropology

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/american-studies

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/public-policy

This is part one of a two part interview. "The social sciences have prospered best in the federal government where they have been included under broad umbrella classifications of the scientific disciplines. … In close company with scientific areas which enjoy the prestige and status of biological or physical sciences, the social sciences have enjoyed a protection and nourishment which they normally do not have when they are identified as such and stand exposed, 'naked and alone.'" — Harry Alpert, sociologist and first social science policy architect, 1960 (Solovey: Ch. 1 lead-in) In the early Cold War years, the U.S. government established the National Science Foundation (NSF), a civilian agency that soon became widely known for its dedication to supporting first-rate science. The agency's 1950 enabling legislation made no mention of the social sciences, although it included a vague reference to “other sciences.” Nevertheless, as Mark Solovey shows in this book, the NSF also soon became a major—albeit controversial—source of public funding for them. Solovey's analysis underscores the long-term impact of early developments, when the NSF embraced a “scientistic” strategy wherein the natural sciences represented the gold standard, and created a social science program limited to “hard-core” studies. Along the way, Solovey shows how the NSF's efforts to support scholarship, advanced training, and educational programs were shaped by landmark scientific and political developments, including McCarthyism, Sputnik, reform liberalism during the 1960s, and a newly energized conservative movement during the 1970s and 1980s. Finally, he provides a balanced assessment of the NSF's relevance in a “post-truth” era. Solovey's study of the battles over public funding is crucial for understanding the recent history of the social sciences as well as ongoing debates over their scientific status and social value. In this first part of two episodes the professor takes us from the mid-1940s up to the tumultuous 1960s and the (ultimately unsuccessful) legislative proposal for a National Social Science Foundation. Look for the second part which moves from the late 1960s' controversy over Project Camelot up through the dark days of the Reagan years, culminating in a call to revive discussion about the need to create a new federal agency, a National Social Science Foundation. An open access edition of Social Science for What?: Battles over Public Funding for the "Other Sciences' at the National Science Foundation (MIT Press, 2020) was made possible by generous funding from the MIT Libraries. Mark Solovey is professor at the University of Toronto's Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology. His research focuses on the development of the social sciences in the United States, and especially the controversies regarding the scientific identity of the social sciences, private and public funding for them, and public policy implications of social science expertise. He has written and co-edited a number of books related to the Cold War and social science history. Keith Krueger lectures in the SILC Business School at Shanghai University. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/science-technology-and-society

On Wednesday, February 16, law enforcement officers raided the Moscow home of political analyst Valery Solovey. Solovey and his son Pavel were then taken to the Russian Investigative Committee for questioning. As it turns out, Solovey is considered a witness in a criminal investigation into felony hate speech. Solovey and his son were released late Wednesday evening after being questioned. According to unofficial reports, the felony investigation is connected to an anonymous Telegram account called "SVR General" -- allegedly, Solovey may have been involved in creating content for this channel, which regularly criticizes the Russian authorities. Meduza recounts how Valery Solovey, a former professor at Moscow's prestigious MGIMO University, became an extravagant political commentator known for his colorful (and increasingly wild) conspiracy theories. Original Article: https://meduza.io/en/feature/2022/02/18/the-professor-and-his-prophecies

Laidą „Vakarop su Vyteniu“ pradėjome su ukrainiečių grupės „Go_A“ daina SHUM. Unikaliu elektro folko muzikos stiliumi išsiskirianti grupė su šia daina 2021 metų „Eurovizijoje“ užėmė penktąją vietą, o pagal žiūrovų balsus liko antri. Priminsiu, kad Lietuva grupei „Go_A“ skyrė maksimalų įmanomą taškų kiekį – Ukraina po 12 balų gavo tiek iš mūsų šalies komisijos, tiek iš televizijos žiūrovų.Jau rytoj, penktadienį, Vilniuje „Go_A“ surengs koncertą „Avia Solutions Group“ arenoje, o šiandien, tiesiai iš oro uosto grupė „Go_A“ atvyko į Radiocentro studiją. Sveikinomės su dviem „Go_A“ grupės nariais: Kateryna Pavlenko ir Taras Shevchenko.Laidą „Vakarop su Vyteniu“ klausyk šiokiadieniais nuo 16 val., o geriausius epizodus rasi mūsų podcaste „Vakarop su Vyteniu“.

Is "constructing" halakhic concepts legitimate? Is "privacy" a coherent concept? Discusses critiques by Solovey and Schreiber, defense by Washofsky, and more

TOMANDO DECISIONES En este nuevo episodio tuvimos de invitado a Guillermo Solovey, Doctor en Física y con un post-doctorado en neurociencia y ciencias cognitivas, área en la cual inevestiga y de la cual charlamos. Hablamos sobre cómo trabaja la confianza en la toma de decisiones. Cómo se experimenta en esta área tan interesante y cómo se puede trabajar computacionalmente . Saber qué cómputo está haciendo el cerebro es la pregunta que se hacen. Para los más memoriosos, recordamos el famoso vestido blanco y dorado o azul y negro, ya que se relaciona con el area de estudio del invitado, él nos enseño que fue lo que sucedio con esa imagen. Charlamos sobre la práctica científica y la reproducibilidad de las investigaciones. La diferencia entre lo que hizo él cuando se formo y cómo trabajar formando estudiantes para hacer las cosas de manera más profesional, siguiendo con las buenas prácticas. Guille remarcó la importancia de estimular la duda sobre lo que cada uno hace, para mejorar la investigación. Para finalizar, Guille nos cuenta el experimento que más lo sorprendió, donde se encontró un sesgo entre la actualización de nuestras creencias sobre cosas postivas y negativas. Donde tendemos a sobreestimar lo postivo y subestimar lo negativo.

In this week's episode the boys are joined by a special guest who lends their thoughts on the songs that made up the Ukrainian national selection show, Vidbir 2020. Live Performances of Selected Songs: Go_A with "Solovey"Katya Chilly with "Pich"KRUTЬ with "99"Jerry Heil with "Vegan"Khayat with "Call For Love"Fo Sho with "Blck Sqr"David Axelrod with "Horizon" Other Links: Matt & Monty's Good Thing of The Week That is Good: Senhit's cover of "Cheesecake"Ellie Chalkley's ESC Insight article "Black Square: It's Got A Lot Of Layers"Second Cherry on TwitterSecond Cherry on InstagramSecond Cherry on Facebook Email us: hello@secondcherry.vision