Podcasts about triangulating

“To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.”—Adam KucharskiMy conversation with Professor Kucharski on what constitutes certainty and proof in science (and other domains), with emphasis on many of the learnings from Covid. Given the politicization of science and A.I.'s deepfakes and power for blurring of truth, it's hard to think of a topic more important right now.Audio file (Ground Truths can also be downloaded on Apple Podcasts and Spotify)Eric Topol (00:06):Hello, it's Eric Topol from Ground Truths and I am really delighted to welcome Adam Kucharski, who is the author of a new book, Proof: The Art and Science of Certainty. He's a distinguished mathematician, by the way, the first mathematician we've had on Ground Truths and a person who I had the real privilege of getting to know a bit through the Covid pandemic. So welcome, Adam.Adam Kucharski (00:28):Thanks for having me.Eric Topol (00:30):Yeah, I mean, I think just to let everybody know, you're a Professor at London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and also noteworthy you won the Adams Prize, which is one of the most impressive recognitions in the field of mathematics. This is the book, it's a winner, Proof and there's so much to talk about. So Adam, maybe what I'd start off is the quote in the book that captivates in the beginning, “life is full of situations that can reveal remarkably large gaps in our understanding of what is true and why it's true. This is a book about those gaps.” So what was the motivation when you undertook this very big endeavor?Adam Kucharski (01:17):I think a lot of it comes to the work I do at my day job where we have to deal with a lot of evidence under pressure, particularly if you work in outbreaks or emerging health concerns. And often it really pushes the limits, our methodology and how we converge on what's true subject to potential revision in the future. I think particularly having a background in math's, I think you kind of grow up with this idea that you can get to these concrete, almost immovable truths and then even just looking through the history, realizing that often isn't the case, that there's these kind of very human dynamics that play out around them. And it's something I think that everyone in science can reflect on that sometimes what convinces us doesn't convince other people, and particularly when you have that kind of urgency of time pressure, working out how to navigate that.Eric Topol (02:05):Yeah. Well, I mean I think these times of course have really gotten us to appreciate, particularly during Covid, the importance of understanding uncertainty. And I think one of the ways that we can dispel what people assume they know is the famous Monty Hall, which you get into a bit in the book. So I think everybody here is familiar with that show, Let's Make a Deal and maybe you can just take us through what happens with one of the doors are unveiled and how that changes the mathematics.Adam Kucharski (02:50):Yeah, sure. So I think it is a problem that's been around for a while and it's based on this game show. So you've got three doors that are closed. Behind two of the doors there is a goat and behind one of the doors is a luxury car. So obviously, you want to win the car. The host asks you to pick a door, so you point to one, maybe door number two, then the host who knows what's behind the doors opens another door to reveal a goat and then ask you, do you want to change your mind? Do you want to switch doors? And a lot of the, I think intuition people have, and certainly when I first came across this problem many years ago is well, you've got two doors left, right? You've picked one, there's another one, it's 50-50. And even some quite well-respected mathematicians.Adam Kucharski (03:27):People like Paul Erdős who was really published more papers than almost anyone else, that was their initial gut reaction. But if you work through all of the combinations, if you pick this door and then the host does this, and you switch or not switch and work through all of those options. You actually double your chances if you switch versus sticking with the door. So something that's counterintuitive, but I think one of the things that really struck me and even over the years trying to explain it is convincing myself of the answer, which was when I first came across it as a teenager, I did quite quickly is very different to convincing someone else. And even actually Paul Erdős, one of his colleagues showed him what I call proof by exhaustion. So go through every combination and that didn't really convince him. So then he started to simulate and said, well, let's do a computer simulation of the game a hundred thousand times. And again, switching was this optimal strategy, but Erdős wasn't really convinced because I accept that this is the case, but I'm not really satisfied with it. And I think that encapsulates for a lot of people, their experience of proof and evidence. It's a fact and you have to take it as given, but there's actually quite a big bridge often to really understanding why it's true and feeling convinced by it.Eric Topol (04:41):Yeah, I think it's a fabulous example because I think everyone would naturally assume it's 50-50 and it isn't. And I think that gets us to the topic at hand. What I love, there's many things I love about this book. One is that you don't just get into science and medicine, but you cut across all the domains, law, mathematics, AI. So it's a very comprehensive sweep of everything about proof and truth, and it couldn't come at a better time as we'll get into. Maybe just starting off with math, the term I love mathematical monsters. Can you tell us a little bit more about that?Adam Kucharski (05:25):Yeah, this was a fascinating situation that emerged in the late 19th century where a lot of math's, certainly in Europe had been derived from geometry because a lot of the ancient Greek influence on how we shaped things and then Newton and his work on rates of change and calculus, it was really the natural world that provided a lot of inspiration, these kind of tangible objects, tangible movements. And as mathematicians started to build out the theory around rates of change and how we tackle these kinds of situations, they sometimes took that intuition a bit too seriously. And there was some theorems that they said were intuitively obvious, some of these French mathematicians. And so, one for example is this idea of you how things change smoothly over time and how you do those calculations. But what happened was some mathematicians came along and showed that when you have things that can be infinitely small, that intuition didn't necessarily hold in the same way.Adam Kucharski (06:26):And they came up with these examples that broke a lot of these theorems and a lot of the establishments at the time called these things monsters. They called them these aberrations against common sense and this idea that if Newton had known about them, he never would've done all of his discovery because they're just nuisances and we just need to get rid of them. And there's this real tension at the core of mathematics in the late 1800s where some people just wanted to disregard this and say, look, it works for most of the time, that's good enough. And then others really weren't happy with this quite vague logic. They wanted to put it on much sturdier ground. And what was remarkable actually is if you trace this then into the 20th century, a lot of these monsters and these particularly in some cases functions which could almost move constantly, this constant motion rather than our intuitive concept of movement as something that's smooth, if you drop an apple, it accelerates at a very smooth rate, would become foundational in our understanding of things like probability, Einstein's work on atomic theory. A lot of these concepts where geometry breaks down would be really important in relativity. So actually, these things that we thought were monsters actually were all around us all the time, and science couldn't advance without them. So I think it's just this remarkable example of this tension within a field that supposedly concrete and the things that were going to be shunned actually turn out to be quite important.Eric Topol (07:53):It's great how you convey how nature isn't so neat and tidy and things like Brownian motion, understanding that, I mean, just so many things that I think fit into that general category. In the legal, we won't get into too much because that's not so much the audience of Ground Truths, but the classic things about innocent and until proven guilty and proof beyond reasonable doubt, I mean these are obviously really important parts of that overall sense of proof and truth. We're going to get into one thing I'm fascinated about related to that subsequently and then in science. So before we get into the different types of proof, obviously the pandemic is still fresh in our minds and we're an endemic with Covid now, and there are so many things we got wrong along the way of uncertainty and didn't convey that science isn't always evolving search for what is the truth. There's plenty no shortage of uncertainty at any moment. So can you recap some of the, you did so much work during the pandemic and obviously some of it's in the book. What were some of the major things that you took out of proof and truth from the pandemic?Adam Kucharski (09:14):I think it was almost this story of two hearts because on the one hand, science was the thing that got us where we are today. The reason that so much normality could resume and so much risk was reduced was development of vaccines and the understanding of treatments and the understanding of variants as they came to their characteristics. So it was kind of this amazing opportunity to see this happen faster than it ever happened in history. And I think ever in science, it certainly shifted a lot of my thinking about what's possible and even how we should think about these kinds of problems. But also on the other hand, I think where people might have been more familiar with seeing science progress a bit more slowly and reach consensus around some of these health issues, having that emerge very rapidly can present challenges even we found with some of the work we did on Alpha and then the Delta variants, and it was the early quantification of these.Adam Kucharski (10:08):So really the big question is, is this thing more transmissible? Because at the time countries were thinking about control measures, thinking about relaxing things, and you've got this just enormous social economic health decision-making based around essentially is it a lot more spreadable or is it not? And you only had these fragments of evidence. So I think for me, that was really an illustration of the sharp end. And I think what we ended up doing with some of those was rather than arguing over a precise number, something like Delta, instead we kind of looked at, well, what's the range that matters? So in the sense of arguing over whether it's 40% or 50% or 30% more transmissible is perhaps less important than being, it's substantially more transmissible and it's going to start going up. Is it going to go up extremely fast or just very fast?Adam Kucharski (10:59):That's still a very useful conclusion. I think what often created some of the more challenges, I think the things that on reflection people looking back pick up on are where there was probably overstated certainty. We saw that around some of the airborne spread, for example, stated as a fact by in some cases some organizations, I think in some situations as well, governments had a constraint and presented it as scientific. So the UK, for example, would say testing isn't useful. And what was happening at the time was there wasn't enough tests. So it was more a case of they can't test at that volume. But I think blowing between what the science was saying and what the decision-making, and I think also one thing we found in the UK was we made a lot of the epidemiological evidence available. I think that was really, I think something that was important.Adam Kucharski (11:51):I found it a lot easier to communicate if talking to the media to be able to say, look, this is the paper that's out, this is what it means, this is the evidence. I always found it quite uncomfortable having to communicate things where you knew there were reports behind the scenes, but you couldn't actually articulate. But I think what that did is it created this impression that particularly epidemiology was driving the decision-making a lot more than it perhaps was in reality because so much of that was being made public and a lot more of the evidence around education or economics was being done behind the scenes. I think that created this kind of asymmetry in public perception about how that was feeding in. And so, I think there was always that, and it happens, it is really hard as well as a scientist when you've got journalists asking you how to run the country to work out those steps of am I describing the evidence behind what we're seeing? Am I describing the evidence about different interventions or am I proposing to some extent my value system on what we do? And I think all of that in very intense times can be very easy to get blurred together in public communication. I think we saw a few examples of that where things were being the follow the science on policy type angle where actually once you get into what you're prioritizing within a society, quite rightly, you've got other things beyond just the epidemiology driving that.Eric Topol (13:09):Yeah, I mean that term that you just use follow the science is such an important term because it tells us about the dynamic aspect. It isn't just a snapshot, it's constantly being revised. But during the pandemic we had things like the six-foot rule that was never supported by data, but yet still today, if I walk around my hospital and there's still the footprints of the six-foot rule and not paying attention to the fact that this was airborne and took years before some of these things were accepted. The flatten the curve stuff with lockdowns, which I never was supportive of that, but perhaps at the worst point, the idea that hospitals would get overrun was an issue, but it got carried away with school shutdowns for prolonged periods and in some parts of the world, especially very stringent lockdowns. But anyway, we learned a lot.Eric Topol (14:10):But perhaps one of the greatest lessons is that people's expectations about science is that it's absolute and somehow you have this truth that's not there. I mean, it's getting revised. It's kind of on the job training, it's on this case on the pandemic revision. But very interesting. And that gets us to, I think the next topic, which I think is a fundamental part of the book distributed throughout the book, which is the different types of proof in biomedicine and of course across all these domains. And so, you take us through things like randomized trials, p-values, 95 percent confidence intervals, counterfactuals, causation and correlation, peer review, the works, which is great because a lot of people have misconceptions of these things. So for example, randomized trials, which is the temple of the randomized trials, they're not as great as a lot of people think, yes, they can help us establish cause and effect, but they're skewed because of the people who come into the trial. So they may not at all be a representative sample. What are your thoughts about over deference to randomized trials?Adam Kucharski (15:31):Yeah, I think that the story of how we rank evidence in medicines a fascinating one. I mean even just how long it took for people to think about these elements of randomization. Fundamentally, what we're trying to do when we have evidence here in medicine or science is prevent ourselves from confusing randomness for a signal. I mean, that's fundamentally, we don't want to mistake something, we think it's going on and it's not. And the challenge, particularly with any intervention is you only get to see one version of reality. You can't give someone a drug, follow them, rewind history, not give them the drug and then follow them again. So one of the things that essentially randomization allows us to do is, if you have two groups, one that's been randomized, one that hasn't on average, the difference in outcomes between those groups is going to be down to the treatment effect.Adam Kucharski (16:20):So it doesn't necessarily mean in reality that'd be the case, but on average that's the expectation that you'd have. And it's kind of interesting actually that the first modern randomized control trial (RCT) in medicine in 1947, this is for TB and streptomycin. The randomization element actually, it wasn't so much statistical as behavioral, that if you have people coming to hospital, you could to some extent just say, we'll just alternate. We're not going to randomize. We're just going to first patient we'll say is a control, second patient a treatment. But what they found in a lot of previous studies was doctors have bias. Maybe that patient looks a little bit ill or that one maybe is on borderline for eligibility. And often you got these quite striking imbalances when you allowed it for human judgment. So it was really about shielding against those behavioral elements. But I think there's a few situations, it's a really powerful tool for a lot of these questions, but as you mentioned, one is this issue of you have the population you study on and then perhaps in reality how that translates elsewhere.Adam Kucharski (17:17):And we see, I mean things like flu vaccines are a good example, which are very dependent on immunity and evolution and what goes on in different populations. Sometimes you've had a result on a vaccine in one place and then the effectiveness doesn't translate in the same way to somewhere else. I think the other really important thing to bear in mind is, as I said, it's the averaging that you're getting an average effect between two different groups. And I think we see certainly a lot of development around things like personalized medicine where actually you're much more interested in the outcome for the individual. And so, what a trial can give you evidence is on average across a group, this is the effect that I can expect this intervention to have. But we've now seen more of the emergence things like N=1 studies where you can actually over the same individual, particularly for chronic conditions, look at those kind of interventions.Adam Kucharski (18:05):And also there's just these extreme examples where you're ethically not going to run a trial, there's never been a trial of whether it's a good idea to have intensive care units in hospitals or there's a lot of these kind of historical treatments which are just so overwhelmingly effective that we're not going to run trial. So almost this hierarchy over time, you can see it getting shifted because actually you do have these situations where other forms of evidence can get you either closer to what you need or just more feasibly an answer where it's just not ethical or practical to do an RCT.Eric Topol (18:37):And that brings us to the natural experiments I just wrote about recently, the one with shingles, which there's two big natural experiments to suggest that shingles vaccine might reduce the risk of Alzheimer's, an added benefit beyond the shingles that was not anticipated. Your thoughts about natural experiments, because here you're getting a much different type of population assessment, again, not at the individual level, but not necessarily restricted by some potentially skewed enrollment criteria.Adam Kucharski (19:14):I think this is as emerged as a really valuable tool. It's kind of interesting, in the book you're talking to economists like Josh Angrist, that a lot of these ideas emerge in epidemiology, but I think were really then taken up by economists, particularly as they wanted to add more credibility to a lot of these policy questions. And ultimately, it comes down to this issue that for a lot of problems, we can't necessarily intervene and randomize, but there might be a situation that's done it to some extent for us, so the classic example is the Vietnam draft where it was kind of random birthdays with drawn out of lottery. And so, there's been a lot of studies subsequently about the effect of serving in the military on different subsequent lifetime outcomes because broadly those people have been randomized. It was for a different reason. But you've got that element of randomization driving that.Adam Kucharski (20:02):And so again, with some of the recent shingles data and other studies, you might have a situation for example, where there's been an intervention that's somewhat arbitrary in terms of time. It's a cutoff on a birth date, for example. And under certain assumptions you could think, well, actually there's no real reason for the person on this day and this day to be fundamentally different. I mean, perhaps there might be effects of cohorts if it's school years or this sort of thing. But generally, this isn't the same as having people who are very, very different ages and very different characteristics. It's just nature, or in this case, just a policy intervention for a different reason has given you that randomization, which allows you or pseudo randomization, which allows you to then look at something about the effect of an intervention that you wouldn't as reliably if you were just digging into the data of yes, no who's received a vaccine.Eric Topol (20:52):Yeah, no, I think it's really valuable. And now I think increasingly given priority, if you can find these natural experiments and they're not always so abundant to use to extrapolate from, but when they are, they're phenomenal. The causation correlation is so big. The issue there, I mean Judea Pearl's, the Book of Why, and you give so many great examples throughout the book in Proof. I wonder if you could comment that on that a bit more because this is where associations are confused somehow or other with a direct effect. And we unfortunately make these jumps all too frequently. Perhaps it's the most common problem that's occurring in the way we interpret medical research data.Adam Kucharski (21:52):Yeah, I think it's an issue that I think a lot of people get drilled into in their training just because a correlation between things doesn't mean that that thing causes this thing. But it really struck me as I talked to people, researching the book, in practice in research, there's actually a bit more to it in how it's played out. So first of all, if there's a correlation between things, it doesn't tell you much generally that's useful for intervention. If two things are correlated, it doesn't mean that changing that thing's going to have an effect on that thing. There might be something that's influencing both of them. If you have more ice cream sales, it will lead to more heat stroke cases. It doesn't mean that changing ice cream sales is going to have that effect, but it does allow you to make predictions potentially because if you can identify consistent patterns, you can say, okay, if this thing going up, I'm going to make a prediction that this thing's going up.Adam Kucharski (22:37):So one thing I found quite striking, actually talking to research in different fields is how many fields choose to focus on prediction because it kind of avoids having to deal with this cause and effect problem. And even in fields like psychology, it was kind of interesting that there's a lot of focus on predicting things like relationship outcomes, but actually for people, you don't want a prediction about your relationship. You want to know, well, how can I do something about it? You don't just want someone to sell you your relationship's going to go downhill. So there's almost part of the challenge is people just got stuck on prediction because it's an easier field of work, whereas actually some of those problems will involve intervention. I think the other thing that really stood out for me is in epidemiology and a lot of other fields, rightly, people are very cautious to not get that mixed up.Adam Kucharski (23:24):They don't want to mix up correlations or associations with causation, but you've kind of got this weird situation where a lot of papers go out of their way to not use causal language and say it's an association, it's just an association. It's just an association. You can't say anything about causality. And then the end of the paper, they'll say, well, we should think about introducing more of this thing or restricting this thing. So really the whole paper and its purpose is framed around a causal intervention, but it's extremely careful throughout the paper to not frame it as a causal claim. So I think we almost by skirting that too much, we actually avoid the problems that people sometimes care about. And I think a lot of the nice work that's been going on in causal inference is trying to get people to confront this more head on rather than say, okay, you can just stay in this prediction world and that's fine. And then just later maybe make a policy suggestion off the back of it.Eric Topol (24:20):Yeah, I think this is cause and effect is a very alluring concept to support proof as you so nicely go through in the book. But of course, one of the things that we use to help us is the biological mechanism. So here you have, let's say for example, you're trying to get a new drug approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the request is, well, we want two trials, randomized trials, independent. We want to have p-values that are significant, and we want to know the biological mechanism ideally with the dose response of the drug. But there are many drugs as you review that have no biological mechanism established. And even when the tobacco problems were mounting, the actual mechanism of how tobacco use caused cancer wasn't known. So how important is the biological mechanism, especially now that we're well into the AI world where explainability is demanded. And so, we don't know the mechanism, but we also don't know the mechanism and lots of things in medicine too, like anesthetics and even things as simple as aspirin, how it works and many others. So how do we deal with this quest for the biological mechanism?Adam Kucharski (25:42):I think that's a really good point. It shows almost a lot of the transition I think we're going through currently. I think particularly for things like smoking cancer where it's very hard to run a trial. You can't make people randomly take up smoking. Having those additional pieces of evidence, whether it's an analogy with a similar carcinogen, whether it's a biological mechanism, can help almost give you more supports for that argument that there's a cause and effect going on. But I think what I found quite striking, and I realized actually that it's something that had kind of bothered me a bit and I'd be interested to hear whether it bothers you, but with the emergence of AI, it's almost a bit of the loss of scientific satisfaction. I think you grow up with learning about how the world works and why this is doing what it's doing.Adam Kucharski (26:26):And I talked for example of some of the people involved with AlphaFold and some of the subsequent work in installing those predictions about structures. And they'd almost made peace with it, which I found interesting because I think they started off being a bit uncomfortable with like, yeah, you've got these remarkable AI models making these predictions, but we don't understand still biologically what's happening here. But I think they're just settled in saying, well, biology is really complex on some of these problems, and if we can have a tool that can give us this extremely valuable information, maybe that's okay. And it was just interesting that they'd really kind of gone through that kind process, which I think a lot of people are still grappling with and that almost that discomfort of using AI and what's going to convince you that that's a useful reliable prediction whether it's something like predicting protein folding or getting in a self-driving car. What's the evidence you need to convince you that's reliable?Eric Topol (27:26):Yeah, no, I'm so glad you brought that up because when Demis Hassabis and John Jumper won the Nobel Prize, the point I made was maybe there should be an asterisk with AI because they don't know how it works. I mean, they had all the rich data from the protein data bank, and they got the transformer model to do it for 200 million protein structure prediction, but they still to this day don't fully understand how the model really was working. So it reinforces what you're just saying. And of course, it cuts across so many types of AI. It's just that we tend to hold different standards in medicine not realizing that there's lots of lack of explainability for routine medical treatments today. Now one of the things that I found fascinating in your book, because there's different levels of proof, different types of proof, but solid logical systems.Eric Topol (28:26):And on page 60 of the book, especially pertinent to the US right now, there is a bit about Kurt Gödel and what he did there was he basically, there was a question about dictatorship in the US could it ever occur? And Gödel says, “oh, yes, I can prove it.” And he's using the constitution itself to prove it, which I found fascinating because of course we're seeing that emerge right now. Can you give us a little bit more about this, because this is fascinating about the Fifth Amendment, and I mean I never thought that the Constitution would allow for a dictatorship to emerge.Adam Kucharski (29:23):And this was a fascinating story, Kurt Gödel who is one of the greatest logical minds of the 20th century and did a lot of work, particularly in the early 20th century around system of rules, particularly things like mathematics and whether they can ever be really fully satisfying. So particularly in mathematics, he showed that there were this problem that is very hard to have a set of rules for something like arithmetic that was both complete and covered every situation, but also had no contradictions. And I think a lot of countries, if you go back, things like Napoleonic code and these attempts to almost write down every possible legal situation that could be imaginable, always just ascended into either they needed amendments or they had contradictions. I think Gödel's work really summed it up, and there's a story, this is in the late forties when he had his citizenship interview and Einstein and Oskar Morgenstern went along as witnesses for him.Adam Kucharski (30:17):And it's always told as kind of a lighthearted story as this logical mind, this academic just saying something silly in front of the judge. And actually, to my own admission, I've in the past given talks and mentioned it in this slightly kind of lighthearted way, but for the book I got talking to a few people who'd taken it more seriously. I realized actually he's this extremely logically focused mind at the time, and maybe there should have been something more to it. And people who have kind of dug more into possibilities was saying, well, what could he have spotted that bothered him? And a lot of his work that he did about consistency in mass was around particularly self-referential statements. So if I say this sentence is false, it's self-referential and if it is false, then it's true, but if it's true, then it's false and you get this kind of weird self-referential contradictions.Adam Kucharski (31:13):And so, one of the theories about Gödel was that in the Constitution, it wasn't that there was a kind of rule for someone can become a dictator, but rather people can use the mechanisms within the Constitution to make it easier to make further amendments. And he kind of downward cycle of amendment that he had seen happening in Europe and the run up to the war, and again, because this is never fully documented exactly what he thought, but it's one of the theories that it wouldn't just be outright that it would just be this cycle process of weakening and weakening and weakening and making it easier to add. And actually, when I wrote that, it was all the earlier bits of the book that I drafted, I did sort of debate whether including it I thought, is this actually just a bit in the weeds of American history? And here we are. Yeah, it's remarkable.Eric Topol (32:00):Yeah, yeah. No, I mean I found, it struck me when I was reading this because here back in 1947, there was somebody predicting that this could happen based on some, if you want to call it loopholes if you will, or the ability to change things, even though you would've thought otherwise that there wasn't any possible capability for that to happen. Now, one of the things I thought was a bit contradictory is two parts here. One is from Angus Deaton, he wrote, “Gold standard thinking is magical thinking.” And then the other is what you basically are concluding in many respects. “To navigate proof, we must reach into a thicket of errors and biases. We must confront monsters and embrace uncertainty, balancing — and rebalancing —our beliefs. We must seek out every useful fragment of data, gather every relevant tool, searching wider and climbing further. Finding the good foundations among the bad. Dodging dogma and falsehoods. Questioning. Measuring. Triangulating. Convincing. Then perhaps, just perhaps, we'll reach the truth in time.” So here you have on the one hand your search for the truth, proof, which I think that little paragraph says it all. In many respects, it sums up somewhat to the work that you review here and on the other you have this Nobel laureate saying, you don't have to go to extremes here. The enemy of good is perfect, perhaps. I mean, how do you reconcile this sense that you shouldn't go so far? Don't search for absolute perfection of proof.Adam Kucharski (33:58):Yeah, I think that encapsulates a lot of what the book is about, is that search for certainty and how far do you have to go. I think one of the things, there's a lot of interesting discussion, some fascinating papers around at what point do you use these studies? What are their flaws? But I think one of the things that does stand out is across fields, across science, medicine, even if you going to cover law, AI, having these kind of cookie cutter, this is the definitive way of doing it. And if you just follow this simple rule, if you do your p-value, you'll get there and you'll be fine. And I think that's where a lot of the danger is. And I think that's what we've seen over time. Certain science people chasing certain targets and all the behaviors that come around that or in certain situations disregarding valuable evidence because you've got this kind of gold standard and nothing else will do.Adam Kucharski (34:56):And I think particularly in a crisis, it's very dangerous to have that because you might have a low level of evidence that demands a certain action and you almost bias yourself towards inaction if you have these kind of very simple thresholds. So I think for me, across all of these stories and across the whole book, I mean William Gosset who did a lot of pioneering work on statistical experiments at Guinness in the early 20th century, he had this nice question he sort of framed is, how much do we lose? And if we're thinking about the problems, there's always more studies we can do, there's always more confidence we can have, but whether it's a patient we want to treat or crisis we need to deal with, we need to work out actually getting that level of proof that's really appropriate for where we are currently.Eric Topol (35:49):I think exceptionally important that there's this kind of spectrum or continuum in following science and search for truth and that distinction, I think really nails it. Now, one of the things that's unique in the book is you don't just go through all the different types of how you would get to proof, but you also talk about how the evidence is acted on. And for example, you quote, “they spent a lot of time misinforming themselves.” This is the whole idea of taking data and torturing it or using it, dredging it however way you want to support either conspiracy theories or alternative facts. Basically, manipulating sometimes even emasculating what evidence and data we have. And one of the sentences, or I guess this is from Sir Francis Bacon, “truth is a daughter of time”, but the added part is not authority. So here we have our president here that repeats things that are wrong, fabricated or wrong, and he keeps repeating to the point that people believe it's true. But on the other hand, you could say truth is a daughter of time because you like to not accept any truth immediately. You like to see it get replicated and further supported, backed up. So in that one sentence, truth is a daughter of time not authority, there's the whole ball of wax here. Can you take us through that? Because I just think that people don't understand that truth being tested over time, but also manipulated by its repetition. This is a part of the big problem that we live in right now.Adam Kucharski (37:51):And I think it's something that writing the book and actually just reflecting on it subsequently has made me think about a lot in just how people approach these kinds of problems. I think that there's an idea that conspiracy theorists are just lazy and have maybe just fallen for a random thing, but talking to people, you really think about these things a lot more in the field. And actually, the more I've ended up engaging with people who believe things that are just outright unevidenced around vaccines, around health issues, they often have this mountain of papers and data to hand and a lot of it, often they will be peer reviewed papers. It won't necessarily be supporting the point that they think it's supports.Adam Kucharski (38:35):But it's not something that you can just say everything you're saying is false, that there's actually often a lot of things that have been put together and it's just that leap to that conclusion. I think you also see a lot of scientific language borrowed. So I gave a talker early this year and it got posted on YouTube. It had conspiracy theories it, and there was a lot of conspiracy theory supporters who piled in the comments and one of the points they made is skepticism is good. It's the kind of law society, take no one's word for it, you need this. We are the ones that are kind of doing science and people who just assume that science is settled are in the wrong. And again, you also mentioned that repetition. There's this phenomenon, it's the illusory truth problem that if you repeatedly tell someone someone's something's false, it'll increase their belief in it even if it's something quite outrageous.Adam Kucharski (39:27):And that mimics that scientific repetition because people kind of say, okay, well if I've heard it again and again, it's almost like if you tweak these as mini experiments, I'm just accumulating evidence that this thing is true. So it made me think a lot about how you've got essentially a lot of mimicry of the scientific method, amount of data and how you present it and this kind of skepticism being good, but I think a lot of it comes down to as well as just looking at theological flaws, but also ability to be wrong in not actually seeking out things that confirm. I think all of us, it's something that I've certainly tried to do a lot working on emergencies, and one of the scientific advisory groups that I worked on almost it became a catchphrase whenever someone presented something, they finished by saying, tell me why I'm wrong.Adam Kucharski (40:14):And if you've got a variant that's more transmissible, I don't want to be right about that really. And it is something that is quite hard to do and I found it is particularly for something that's quite high pressure, trying to get a policymaker or someone to write even just non-publicly by themselves, write down what you think's going to happen or write down what would convince you that you are wrong about something. I think particularly on contentious issues where someone's got perhaps a lot of public persona wrapped up in something that's really hard to do, but I think it's those kind of elements that distinguish between getting sucked into a conspiracy theory and really seeking out evidence that supports it and trying to just get your theory stronger and stronger and actually seeking out things that might overturn your belief about the world. And it's often those things that we don't want overturned. I think those are the views that we all have politically or in other ways, and that's often where the problems lie.Eric Topol (41:11):Yeah, I think this is perhaps one of, if not the most essential part here is that to try to deal with the different views. We have biases as you emphasized throughout, but if you can use these different types of proof to have a sound discussion, conversation, refutation whereby you don't summarily dismiss another view which may be skewed and maybe spurious or just absolutely wrong, maybe fabricated whatever, but did you can engage and say, here's why these are my proof points, or this is why there's some extent of certainty you can have regarding this view of the data. I think this is so fundamental because unfortunately as we saw during the pandemic, the strident minority, which were the anti-science, anti-vaxxers, they were summarily dismissed as being kooks and adopting conspiracy theories without the right engagement and the right debates. And I think this might've helped along the way, no less the fact that a lot of scientists didn't really want to engage in the first place and adopt this methodical proof that you've advocated in the book so many different ways to support a hypothesis or an assertion. Now, we've covered a lot here, Adam. Have I missed some central parts of the book and the effort because it's really quite extraordinary. I know it's your third book, but it's certainly a standout and it certainly it's a standout not just for your books, but books on this topic.Adam Kucharski (43:13):Thanks. And it's much appreciated. It was not an easy book to write. I think at times, I kind of wondered if I should have taken on the topic and I think a core thing, your last point speaks to that. I think a core thing is that gap often between what convinces us and what convinces someone else. I think it's often very tempting as a scientist to say the evidence is clear or the science has proved this. But even on something like the vaccines, you do get the loud minority who perhaps think they're putting microchips in people and outlandish views, but you actually get a lot more people who might just have some skepticism of pharmaceutical companies or they might have, my wife was pregnant actually at the time during Covid and we waited up because there wasn't much data on pregnancy and the vaccine. And I think it's just finding what is convincing. Is it having more studies from other countries? Is it understanding more about the biology? Is it understanding how you evaluate some of those safety signals? And I think that's just really important to not just think what convinces us and it's going to be obvious to other people, but actually think where are they coming from? Because ultimately having proof isn't that good unless it leads to the action that can make lives better.Eric Topol (44:24):Yeah. Well, look, you've inculcated my mind with this book, Adam, called Proof. Anytime I think of the word proof, I'm going to be thinking about you. So thank you. Thanks for taking the time to have a conversation about your book, your work, and I know we're going to count on you for the astute mathematics and analysis of outbreaks in the future, which we will see unfortunately. We are seeing now, in fact already in this country with measles and whatnot. So thank you and we'll continue to follow your great work.**************************************Thanks for listening, watching or reading this Ground Truths podcast/post.If you found this interesting please share it!That makes the work involved in putting these together especially worthwhile.I'm also appreciative for your subscribing to Ground Truths. All content —its newsletters, analyses, and podcasts—is free, open-access. I'm fortunate to get help from my producer Jessica Nguyen and Sinjun Balabanoff for audio/video tech support to pull these podcasts together for Scripps Research.Paid subscriptions are voluntary and all proceeds from them go to support Scripps Research. They do allow for posting comments and questions, which I do my best to respond to. Please don't hesitate to post comments and give me feedback. Many thanks to those who have contributed—they have greatly helped fund our summer internship programs for the past two years.A bit of an update on SUPER AGERSMy book has been selected as a Next Big Idea Club winner for Season 26 by Adam Grant, Malcolm Gladwell, Susan Cain, and Daniel Pink. This club has spotlighted the most groundbreaking nonfiction books for over a decade. As a winning title, my book will be shipped to thousands of thoughtful readers like you, featured alongside a reading guide, a "Book Bite," Next Big Idea Podcast episode as well as a live virtual Q&A with me in the club's vibrant online community. If you're interested in joining the club, here's a promo code SEASON26 for 20% off at the website. SUPER AGERS reached #3 for all books on Amazon this week. This was in part related to the segment on the book on the TODAY SHOW which you can see here. Also at Amazon there is a remarkable sale on the hardcover book for $10.l0 at the moment for up to 4 copies. Not sure how long it will last or what prompted it.The journalist Paul von Zielbauer has a Substack “Aging With Strength” and did an extensive interview with me on the biology of aging and how we can prevent the major age-related diseases. Here's the link. Get full access to Ground Truths at erictopol.substack.com/subscribe

In this episode of Narcissist Apocalypse, Brandon talks with Riley about her controlling relationship with a triangulating physical abuser. It's a story of self-love deficit, fixing potential, generational trauma, financial abuse, intimate partner violence, the struggle to leave for good, self-worth, coercive control, relationship rights, infidelity, hoovering, grief, idealization, devaluation, and single moms. *** CONTENT WARNING *** - We graphically discuss childhood sexual abuse, childhood physical abuse, sexual coercion, sexual assault, and physical abuse in this episode. *** If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please ⁠click here⁠ or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com PODCAST RECOMMENDATIONS: Perfect Prey With Dr. Christine Cocchiola | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ The Covert Narcissism Podcast | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Something Was Wrong | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ When Dating Hurts Podcast | ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠Click Here⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠www.domesticshelters.org⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ to access this free resource.  If you need help moving due to domestic violence, Shelter Movers may be able to help you. They operate by referral. Clients may be referred by any person of authority (social worker, doctor, police, crisis counselor, teacher, etc.) or public agency (shelter, hospital, school, workplace, place of worship, sexual assault centre, etc.).  To reach them, ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠click here. ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Join our new Community Social Network at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Join our Instagram Channel at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Join our Youtube Channel at ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA⁠⁠ Thank you to our sponsor BETTERHELP. If you need online counseling from anywhere in the world, please do go to ⁠https://www.betterhelp.com/nap⁠ Get started today and enjoy 10% off your first month. If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit ⁠www.domesticshelters.org⁠ to access this free resource.  Join our new Community Social Network at ⁠https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/⁠ Join our Instagram Channel at ⁠https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse⁠ Join our Youtube Channel at ⁠https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of Narcissist Apocalypse, Brandon talks with Karoline about her volatile upbringing with an abusive mother, and her marriage to a narcissistic musician, marked by emotional, physical, and financial abuse. Karoline stayed in the relationship for a long time due to the pull of their trauma bond. However, once Karoline saw her husband's manipulative behavior during a prolonged and costly divorce process, the fog of the trauma bond dissipated, and she was able to begin the healing process.  It's a story of triangulation, physical abuse, people pleasing, scapegoats, intergenerational trauma, financial abuse, intimidation, mental health, gaslighting, put downs, blame shifting, zero accountability, fear of police, the fog, ptsd, rage, destruction of property, divorce, and post separation abuse. *** CONTENT WARNING - This episode discusses physical abuse. *** If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please click here or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com To help out our podcast, please fill out our listener survey, click here. PODCAST RECOMMENDATIONS: Perfect Prey With Dr. Christine Cocchiola | Click Here The Covert Narcissism Podcast | Click Here Something Was Wrong | Click Here When Dating Hurts Podcast | Click Here If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  If you need help moving due to domestic violence, Shelter Movers may be able to help you. They operate by referral. Clients may be referred by any person of authority (social worker, doctor, police, crisis counselor, teacher, etc.) or public agency (shelter, hospital, school, workplace, place of worship, sexual assault centre, etc.).  To reach them, click here. Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode of Narcissist Apocalypse, Brandon talks with Karoline about her volatile upbringing with an abusive mother, and her marriage to a narcissistic musician, marked by emotional, physical, and financial abuse. Karoline stayed in the relationship for a long time due to the pull of their trauma bond. However, once Karoline saw her husband's manipulative behavior during a prolonged and costly divorce process, the fog of the trauma bond dissipated, and she was able to begin the healing process.  It's a story of triangulation, physical abuse, people pleasing, scapegoats, intergenerational trauma, financial abuse, intimidation, mental health, gaslighting, put downs, blame shifting, zero accountability, fear of police, the fog, ptsd, rage, destruction of property, divorce, and post separation abuse. *** CONTENT WARNING - This episode discusses physical abuse. *** If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please click here or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com To help out our podcast, please fill out our listener survey, click here. PODCAST RECOMMENDATIONS: Perfect Prey With Dr. Christine Cocchiola | Click Here The Covert Narcissism Podcast | Click Here Something Was Wrong | Click Here When Dating Hurts Podcast | Click Here If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  If you need help moving due to domestic violence, Shelter Movers may be able to help you. They operate by referral. Clients may be referred by any person of authority (social worker, doctor, police, crisis counselor, teacher, etc.) or public agency (shelter, hospital, school, workplace, place of worship, sexual assault centre, etc.).  To reach them, click here. Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA

If there's a disease that captures the toxic spirit of our times, it's what the therapist, Vanessa Resier, in her new book, calls Narcissistic Abuse. Even the language of this disease - Gaslighting. Love bombing. Hoovering. Triangulating - has become part of the dictionary of life in the 2020's. Narcissism and narcissists seem to be everywhere these days. In fact, as Resier told me (see full transcript below), all domestic abuse - from outright violence to subtle manipulation - is a form of narcissistic abuse. But if that's true, I asked her, then what, exactly, isn't narcissism?Vanessa M. Reiser is a licensed clinical social worker (LCSW), licensed in New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Florida. She is a psychotherapist and the founder of Tell a Therapist, LLC as well as the founder of the nonprofit, Tell a Therapist, INC. Vanessa holds a bachelor's degree in political science from SUNY Empire State college and a Master of Social Work (MSM) from the University of Southern California. Vanessa specializes in narcissistic personality disorder, and her practice focuses on treating victims and survivors of cults, narcissists, domestic violence, and narcissistic abuse. Her insights are both personal and professional, giving her a unique lens into this insidious form of domestic abuse. Vanessa is a long-distance runner and two-time Ironman who is best known for running the state of New York (285 miles in 11 days) in a wedding dress to raise awareness for narcissistic abuse.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting KEEN ON, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy show. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children.TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello, everybody. Long-time viewers and listeners to the show know that I have a particular interest in words. Certain words acquire fashion, and I'm always curious why. One word that seems to be particularly popular these days, gets thrown around a lot, both clinically and out of the psychotherapist's office, is the word “narcissist.” There's a new book out this week. It's called Narcissistic Abuse. It's by my guest, Vanessa M. Reiser. She is a clinical social worker, a psychotherapist based in central New Jersey. And she's joining us. Vanessa, congratulations on the new book. This word narcissist. You're all too familiar with it, of course, everyone throws it around. Do you think it's particularly fashionable these days, or is that my imagination?Vanessa Reiser: I think it is definitely a word that is misunderstood. So, to your point, I think people use it in a way or in a regard that is not totally accurate. So, somebody who has narcissistic personality disorder. Has a list of characteristics that are very specific, very hazardous. It's not just somebody who is into taking selfies, or that we might think the word is in reference to. So, there are pretty serious characteristics that they possess. If somebody has a pathological disorder.Keen: Or let me rephrase the question: do you think there are more narcissists around now in the 2020s than there were historically, or are always the same amount? Of course, the word was invented by the Greeks. Its etymology comes out of Greek mythology: the God of Narcissus. So are we particularly prone, our culture or our individuality. To two to the problems of narcissism?Reiser: I think that it's always been around. I think there are more people, but I do think that we are now developing the vernacular for the characteristics. And I do think that because we have social media, people are more inclined to discuss it. So, in some ways it's a good thing, because we are now talking about it more, and some of the toxic behaviors. But I think is also an uptick because people are more individualistic, they are potentially more vain, more narcissistic. In their approach to their marketing themselves, everybody is out there flitting about, trying to make themselves an entity of sorts. And so, we're seeing a lot of people that are seemingly narcissistic, but that is not the same as somebody who has a pervasive pathological disorder, somebody who is lacking empathy, somebody who potentially has overlaps with sociopathy and looks to hurt people. We see this in certain pop culture scenarios, like we're seeing it with the P Diddy stuff here. There's a lot of talk now about cults, which my book is about also. So, these are people that are dangerous in some regard. These are people who are interested in meeting their own needs at the expense of others. And so it is somewhat misused, the word.Keen: Aren't we all want a bit like that? Aren't we all a bit self-interested? The subtitle of your book is A Therapist's Guide to Identifying, Escaping and Healing from Toxic and Manipulative People. Aren't all people, Vanessa, aren't they all manipulative? Aren't we all seeking what we want? This word toxic...it's another one of these words that's become fashionable, it seems to be used in all sorts of generic ways. Aren't we all, in our own way, toxic too?Reiser: I think there is a level of ego that we all possess, so we are feeding our egos, we are trying to manage that up against others in society, etc. Very Freudian. But this idea that somebody would be particularly manipulative, somebody who's lying, controlling, uses isolation. And again, the book is aimed to fuse the concepts of narcissistic abuse and cult abuse. So, cult leaders are all narcissists, sociopaths or psychopaths, and the way that they operate is in line with what we see in domestic violence scenarios in a one-on-one interpersonal relationship. And those are the tactics. They are very much about mind control. So this is positive reinforcers, negative reinforcers, silent treatment. So the level of manipulation is different than, let's say, if you're having a bad day and you need a Snickers bar and you might just act like a jerk. That is not a pervasive behavior. This is more maniacal, to sort of oversimplify it.Keen: I can't resist our promise not to bring up Trump too much in this conversation, Vanessa. But this is the week, of course, that he got elected, or reelected, to office. And often people use the word narcissist in association with him. You talked about its influence on popular culture. Does it also play a role in politics? You talked about cult leaders, aren't all political leaders in their own way, cult leaders?Reiser: No, because, again, you have to have a pathological disorder. It's not to say that there aren't an abundance of--there are. There are a ton of CEOs and c-suites of, you know, poets, priests and politicians are generally able to kiss babies and potentially stab you in the back. They can be really dangerous. I wouldn't say they all are. I would say it is more prevalent in certain career paths for sure. We see this in the military. We see this in police officers. We see this in surgery rooms. So, there are certain jobs--see, I think 1 in 4 CEOs is a psychopath directly, which is very interesting.Keen: But what do you make of that? Does that suggest that everyone is a psychopath, or does that suggest that certain kinds of jobs like CEO or perhaps presidents lend themselves to psychopaths and narcissists?Reiser: I think the way that they climb the ladder without empathy, sort of lying...Jeffrey Epstein was a good example of this because he was a liar. His entire resume was a fraud. So they know how to work the system, climb to the top, convince others to do their bidding, hide, find loopholes. They're pretty slippery and sneaky. And as I mentioned, the level of manipulation is just a master level. And so this is why cult leaders in political arenas and otherwise, in the one-on-one relationship, they are able to get people to fall in line, right? Manson never killed anyone. It was his minions that did so. So, they are able to use mind control in a way that most people don't think they could fall victim to. But I think that's the beauty of the conversations we're starting to have around this, because we're bumping into these people in our work environments. We're now having a discussion about what they look like, how they behave. It's very hard to process when you go through something like this. I think most of us think that people are sharing similar perspectives and logical ideas. And when you go through this portal, you understand that not everyone is thinking the way you are. And I think it's brilliant that we're starting to talk about it, actually. I think the word is overused, but I also believe that there are far more dangerous people out there than maybe we ever realized.Keen: Vanessa, you talked about Mayor Charles Manson, mass murderer Jeffrey Epstein, a serial sexual criminal. You also talk about CEOs. Surely there's a difference between the two, though. Are there, shall we say, criminal narcissists and then people who have done well, who have an element of narcissism in their personalities?Reiser: Absolutely. I think there are unfortunately often overlaps between narcissistic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder or sociopathy. So, the way I would characterize the difference would be what you are saying, which a is very, very big difference and yet somewhat nuanced, in my opinion, is the idea of no empathy. The narcissist might step over the dead body, the sociopath put the dead body there. So, it feels like it's a huge difference and a very small difference at the same time. Why? Because without empathy, I think our society really doesn't go on. I think empathy, is in the very first place, something that occurs when the primary caregiver realizes the baby's crying. Let's take care of the baby, the baby needs something. And this sort of innate experience is why we go on as a species. Without it, we are doomed. And so, this idea of no empathy already feels very wonky to me, and I think we need to open up a dialogue about that. But you're quite right. There is a difference between somebody who steps over the dead body and somebody who puts the dead body there.Keen: Yeah, there's a very big difference. You use the E-word, empathy. It's another of these, what I think of at least, as cult words. It gets thrown around as if it's a good thing. You talked about the the species nature of empathy, that we wouldn't survive without it. I'm not an expert on evolution or Darwin's theories, but I wonder what evolutionists would say about this, that our species is a competitive one and we all compete with one another. Is empathy, then, self-interest, and does that, in a sense, undermine the idea of empathy, given that it's supposed to be about being empathetic? But if it enables us to survive and prosper, then maybe it's not quite as empathetic as we would like to think.Reiser: I think probably there's a balance there, and the imbalance is what we're seeing. I think we need to cultivate more empathy. I think we need to be kinder to one another. I feel like it's gotten a little dark, and people are maybe acting out of fear a lot more than I've ever seen. And so, I think we have lost a good amount of that. I think we see it in times of tragedy, like in New York, on 9/11, you were able to see humankind in its best light. And we saw quite a bit of it with Covid when the first responders were being highly empathetic and volunteering their time and risking their lives to look out for others. So I think it's still there, but I think that we might be trending away from it. And that scares me. So, I think it is important. Empathy, to me, is ground zero for everything. I think it's important. I understand what you're saying, but I think there's a balance that we might be getting too polarized around.Keen: Are you suggesting that if you don't have empathy, you are by definition a narcissist?Reiser: No, I think that there are certain people that don't have as strong of empathy. Maybe they understand empathy. But I think if you couple that with this recipe of other characteristics like manipulation, like lying, controlling, isolating, abusing through addiction, smearing, withholding, there's, you know, something like 20 characteristics that most of them will possess a good amount. So, it's not an exact science. But no, I think no empathy, though, is one of the things that I think lends people to behave the way that they do if they're going to be abusive. So, it is a term that I think may highlight a good amount of what narcissists jumping off point is, which is they don't care, so they're going to do anything that they can to get what they want.Keen: You mentioned Manson, Jeffrey Epstein, of course, a historic sexual criminal, both male and very male in their own way. You've talked about empathy in some detail, Vanessa, both on the show and in the book. Is there a gendered quality to this too? Do Women make, and of course, there are female narcissists, but is a female narcissist different from a male narcissist, or are all narcissists, whether they're made of female, essentially the same?Reiser: There are some slight differences. By and large, the female narcissist will oftentimes exploit their children and use their children for supply. Not that the male narcissist won't do that, but a good oversimplification to identify the female narcissist is oftentimes the “pageant mom." Their children are an extension of them and they're sort of braggadocious about, you know, “my child is a doctor." The other thing that they they can do is--Keen: Sounds like a lot of mothers, Vanessa. They're proud of their kids if they're adults, I think, or a psychotherapist...Reiser: I think proud is very different from somebody who behind the scenes in the home, they're valuing that child based only on what they can get from the child. So they get supply from the neighbors who are excited to see the daughter, or the people at the cheerleading competition. It's very superficial and shallow. Behind the scenes, they can be particularly abusive and severely so. So, these children could develop eating disorders, could be self-injuring. And a lot of this is about the mask that they wear in public versus who they are behind the scenes.Keen: But on a lot of shows, Vanessa, on social media and anxiety, as you know, as a therapist and as a writer, this is a huge issue these days: is there a connection between our age of anxiety and the prevalence of narcissistic abuse? Are some of the most important reasons why there's so much anxiety, particularly amongst young people, a consequence of the rise of narcissistic abuse?Reiser: I'm not sure. It's an interesting question. I tend to lean more into the camp of nature, less nurture. So, my belief is based not on a ton of data, because there is not a lot of data on NPD because narcissists are not going into studies and saying, “Hey, I'm a narcissist, please study me," or “I'm willing to be studied." They are generally mandated. So, you know, there's not a lot of data to pull from. So, we're kind of theorizing, but I tend to lean more into the camp of something where intergenerational trauma may play a role, or genetic or biological predisposition. So, I'm not sure. There are certain people who have different opinions on this. Some people think this is something that happens in childhood, and it's a trauma. I tend to think it's something that potentially could be genetic.Keen: Vanessa, is there a danger here? You're a clinical social worker, a psychotherapist, you have your own private practice. So I'm not suggesting, of course, you're self-interested and you're trying to build a clientele here. But aren't you, not you, but isn't this whole movement, or discourse, medicalizing the complexity of the human condition? So all parents are, in their own way, manipulative. They will perhaps use their children sometimes to self-promote. Everybody wants to control one kind of relationship, or rather, everyone has their own interest. What's the danger, in your work and in the work of others, of medicalizing the business of being human? And I mean that not in an economic sense, but in all the messiness of what it means to be human and in our relations with others.Reiser: Yeah, I definitely do not see it that way. I think when my clients come to me, they are very confused about what has happened to them. And so the word being a clinical word, narcissistic personality disorder (or clinical words, narcissistic personality disorder) can feel very validating because it would be like going to the hospital and the doctor says, “you're sick." “Well, what do I have?" “You're just sick." And so my clients, very specifically, because I work only in the domestic violence realm, really are feeling validated around the language. So the language, you opened up this conversation today talking about words, these words like gaslighting, and the level of confusion that's gone on with--Keen: --and lovebombing and hoovering and triangulating, all these words that you bring up in your book.Reiser: They're very important for people to understand what they've endured. And so, I actually quite like the medical term, because it gives an answer to those that have gone through something that is particularly difficult to process and certainly very hard to describe.Keen: You talked about abuse and a lot of your clients, you talk about violence, or as most of the narcissistic abuse verbal?Reiser: All domestic violence is narcissistic abuse, all domestic violence is narcissistic abuse. Every single one of my clients who has been physically assaulted, or has an acute trauma through physical abuse, tells me that the psychological abuse is far worse. It's a brain injury of sorts when somebody lies to you repeatedly and skews your perception. I feel like the brain is kind of a fact-finding machine, and it looks for data, and it's constantly working to make those connections. And so, when that becomes fractured, people really decompensate. They do not do well. They fall apart. They fail. Most realms of their entire life can just fall apart. And so, it's a pretty serious thing, this psychological brain injury, if you will.Keen: Yeah, I take your point. I'm certainly not trying to minimalize domestic abuse. But just to repeat, you said all domestic abuse is narcissistic abuse. Is that what you're saying? So the husband who comes home after some drinks in the bar and beats his wife up. Is that narcissistic abuse or is that just that an angry drunk man?Reiser: I would have to sort of assess further, but it very well could be, and more than likely it would be. Now, does that mean he has narcissistic personality disorder? No, but that behavior itself is narcissistic.Keen: But aren't you, again, making it such a big word that any kind of bad behavior...it becomes narcissism. So it's really everything.Reiser: Certainly the high level bad behaviors that you're referencing, yes.Keen: So domestic abuse, anything behind domestic abuse: smacking someone around, beating up your child, beating up your wife, beating up your husband, it's always narcissism?Reiser: Yes.Keen: So, okay, so we have this thing called narcissistic abuse. You're a therapist. People don't come to you to, as you suggested, to have this thing argued over. They come for help, and they come to identify it and escape it. How do you deal with it? Let's begin with children and their narcissistic mother. What's your advice? How to get out of a narcissistic relationship?Reiser: That one is particularly challenging, because when you leave an intimate relationship, oftentimes you can just go back to the person you were prior, go find that person. When you are the child of a narcissist, it is challenging because, as I mentioned earlier, you become an extension of that parent. And so, your identity has not been developed, you have to figure out who you even are. What are your likes? What are your interests? What is autonomy like for you? And so, it's a big hill to climb. You're generally filtering thoughts through "what would my toxic parent want or what would they not want?" Which ultimately gives them control over every single thought you're having. And so that is a really, really hard thing to overcome. And then I suppose what we would do, probably, would be work on low contact or harm reduction to the extent that they feel comfortable, unless they're willing to remove them from their lives. Narcissists can be dangerous, in a way. So, these are people who might manipulate your love relationship, or the relationship you have with your own children, or your career. They can infiltrate everything around you. So depending upon the severity--it would be a case-by-case basis--but generally, with a parental unit, I would say probably trying to get to a point where you would see them maybe during holidays, or whatever you're comfortable doing, and then you don't really want to share too much with them, because they tend to exploit the information that you share with them.Keen: How reformable then, Vanessa, are narcissists? You're suggesting that they can't be reformed, that they have this condition and that you shouldn't trust them with information? They're always trying to take advantage of you.Reiser: Not a lot of data on the narcissist changing. It is a rigid pathological disorder. So, the neurotypical brain can move. Trauma victims can repair and develop new pathways in the brain. This is different. It's rigid. So, I don't see a ton of movement. I think that the best-case scenario is to get away from them.Keen: But have you had patients who've come into your office and said, “I'm a narcissist or I fear I'm a narcissist. Nobody wants to talk to me. My parents, my kids, my friends, my children, my relatives won't speak to me. I need to become less of a narcissist." Is that a condition that you sometimes come across?Reiser: Yes. And we would work towards developing empathy to the extent that they can. We would work towards developing emotional connections with other people. We would work towards understanding boundaries, working on accountability, communication style, attachment style. This is generally something that is best handled in an in-patient scenario. So it could look like a sex addiction treatment center, something like this, where they are really diving in. So the work that I'm doing is the best that I can with anybody who comes to me, as you mentioned. But it's something that would be best handled with extensive therapy.Keen: So you're a therapist and you're in the business of identifying and escaping and healing from toxic and manipulative people. But what about medicine? I talked about medicalizing the condition. I'm slightly curious about that, perhaps even slightly skeptical. But are there drugs for narcissists or for people who have been abused by narcissists?Reiser: In a word, no. There are tons of things therapeutically that have been coming out. We're seeing people who are trying certain psychedelics for post-traumatic stress disorder. So in the case of the victim, I know Bessel van der Kolk talks about MDMA and other options for treating trauma specifically that is very experimental and goes up against big pharma. So he has a lot of push back. But there's different treatments and things that people are trying, but there isn't really anything per se that treats trauma. In the pharma world, everything is to treat anxiety and depression, and sometimes that can work. So again, we're going to practice harm reduction. And the same could be said for the narcissist in terms of treatment. Pharmacologically, we would probably do something like the SSRIs, but there's no data that I can provide that says that that works. It's just something that I've heard people try to probably work on the anxiety of it. But there's no there's no drug that I know of that's going to remedy trauma or NPD.Keen: So you're ambivalent on psychedelics. We've done a number of shows. It's becoming increasingly fashionable or popular.Reiser: I'm not ambivalent.Keen: You're against or for? You don't think it works, basically?Reiser: No, I think I think it I think it could be tremendous. I don't know enough about it, but I'm kind of hopeful that it would work.Keen: But isn't that kind of, some people might say, Brave New World? It's an escape? We live in a psychedelic universe, we leave the world and we go to another?Reiser: I don't know. If we are microdosing, it's possible that we could quell the trauma responses to the extent that we may be able to then focus on developing different neural pathways and changing the way that the brain is thinking and some of the cognition that's negative that's floating around in there. So I'm hopeful that those things would help. I understand what you're saying, though.Keen: In an America which, Vanessa, is very divided, a lack of, perhaps, your word, empathy, politically, on either side, an election that reflects and perhaps compounds the divisions...do you think that America needs to become more, shall we say, therapeutic? Is is that the only way to bring Americans back together? I'm not suggesting that all politicians are narcissists, although, as I said, a lot of people have argued, including, I think his own niece, that Donald Trump is a classic example of a narcissist. But does America need counseling, shall we say? Is America itself collectively suffering from narcissistic abuse?Reiser: Well, that is a good question. Just gave me the chills. Yes, but also therapeutic practices that we can all do, I do this in my own life, is just...I really think it's important for people to express themselves. I notice in my clientele, when they are just sharing, they're connecting the dots really on their own, they aren't processing things, and I think it's important to express yourself. So even if you're journaling--so it doesn't have to be this, like, you're in therapy, so something is wrong with you, and let's fix you, and this is this is my advice, and all this. No. I do think that you need to have a safe place to express yourself. So, even just good friends, some way to kind of get it off your chest if it's through, you know, anything that you enjoy doing, like, running as I do, or the written word, or kickboxing, or some way to get things off your chest, I think, will help you to feel empowered, will help you to process some of the things that you're witnessing that could be upsetting.Keen: Yeah there's a long tradition of narcissism in literature, many writers have written books about narcissism, and some people believe many of the greatest writers are themselves narcissists. You talk about, Vanessa, finally, a safe place to do this. We touched on social media earlier. You're on Instagram, you're on TikTok, like most of us. Is social media in your view, a safe place, or is it the problem, or is it both?Reiser: Oh, great timing on that one. I would say it is something that could be both, for sure. It has tremendous benefits. There's communities that have developed through something as simple as a hashtag. So, there's so much good and then there's so much horror. I mean, that's just the way I see it.Keen: Well, finally, I have to ask you this, Vanessa. Since I get some free therapy from you, sometimes my kids accuse me of being a narcissist. I think it's sometimes when they don't like what I say. Have I displayed any manifestations of narcissism in this conversation? Do I need therapy myself?Reiser: No. You know, I don't know you well enough. You were certainly a gentleman. And it would be very, very hard for me to decipher something like that unless I got to know you behind the scenes. And I'm sure the same could be said about me.Keen: Well, next time my kids accuse me of being a narcissist, I will tell them, “Go and talk to Vanessa." Well, congratulations, Vanessa, on the new book, it's an important subject, and you treated in a very down to earth, coherent way. The new book is Narcissistic Abuse--sorry--Narcissistic Abuse: A Therapist Guide to Identifying, Escaping and Healing from Toxic and Manipulative People. It's on audiobook, it's read by Vanessa, and it's also out in traditional text. Congratulations, Vanessa. Subject isn't going away, we'll get you back in the not-too-distant future to talk more narcissism. Thank you so much.Reiser: Thank you so much. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

  Narcissistic Personality Disorder 

Welcome to another edition of Puliyabaazi! In today's episode, we dive into the world of data journalism with noted data journalist Rukmini S. She is the founder of Data for India, a public platform aimed at uncovering new insights about India through data. In this conversation, we discuss the current landscape of data journalism in India. Has the quality of Indian data improved over time? What challenges still exist? Can we consider data to be the singular truth, or is it just one point in triangulating our understanding of the world? Join us for this insightful conversation!पुलियाबाज़ी के एक और संस्करण में आपका स्वागत है! आज हम डेटा जर्नलिज्म की दुनिया में गोता लगाने की कोशिश करेंगे डेटा पत्रकार रुक्मिणी एस के साथ। वे डेटा फॉर इंडिया की संस्थापक हैं, जो एक सार्वजनिक मंच है डेटा के ज़रिए भारत को बेहतर समझने के लिए। वे हमें भारत में डेटा जर्नलिज्म के परिदृश्य के बारे में बताती हैं। क्या समय के साथ भारतीय डेटा में सुधार हुआ है? क्या हम डेटा को आखिरी सत्य मान कर चल सकते हैं? या डेटा दुनिया को समझने की खोज में एक सीढ़ी मात्र है? आशा है आपको ये चर्चा पसंद आएगी। We discuss:* What is Data Journalism?* India's Statistical Systems* Sample Surveying* Challenges with public data in India* We have Data!* How data can be misleading* Complexity behind the numbers* Triangulating different data sources* Measuring India's poverty* Beware of Data MisrepresentationReadings:https://www.dataforindia.com/Whole Numbers and Half Truths: What Data Can and Cannot Tell Us About Modern India by Rukmini Shttps://amzn.in/d/7DmTKukRelated Puliyabaazi:डेटा शोषण से बचे कैसे | Save yourself from data exploitationमहिला श्रमिक और अर्थव्यवस्था The Indian Women Labour ForceIf you have any questions for the guest or feedback for us, please comment here or write to us at puliyabaazi@gmail.com. If you like our work, please subscribe and share this Puliyabaazi with your friends, family and colleagues.Website: https://puliyabaazi.inGuest: @RukminiHosts: @saurabhchandra @pranaykotas @thescribblebeeTwitter: @puliyabaazi Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/puliyabaazi/Subscribe & listen to the podcast on iTunes, Google Podcasts, Castbox, AudioBoom, YouTube, Spotify or any other podcast app. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.puliyabaazi.in

Raised By Giants Channel Members Episode "Triangulating Bermuda's Mysteries".Raised By Giants LInkTree:https://linktr.ee/raisedbygiantspodContribute to Raised By Giants on PayPal here:https://www.paypal.me/raisedbygiantsContribute on Buy A Coffee here:https://www.buymeacoffee.com/raisedbygiQ

In this episode of Narcissist Apocalypse, Brandon talks with Erika about her toxic relationship with a triangulating grifter. It's a story of sexual identity manipulation, social media smear campaigns, and escape plans. Plus they discuss, domestic violence, LGBTQ issues, Mennonite culture, gaslighting, mirroring, future faking, sense of self, homelessness, car culture, dogs, feminism, patterns, changing manipulation tactics, control, food manipulation, housing manipulation, LGBTQ manipulation, rationalization, cycles of abuse, therapy manipulation, feeling worthy, obligation, belonging, flying monkeys, animal abuse, coping with alcohol, boundaries, authentic living, and generosity from strangers. *** CONTENT WARNING - Animal abuse is discussed in this episode. *** If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please click here or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com To help out our podcast, please fill out our listener survey, click here. PODCAST RECOMMENDATIONS: Perfect Prey With Dr. Christine Cocchiola | Click Here The Covert Narcissism Podcast | Click Here Something Was Wrong | Click Here When Dating Hurts Podcast | Click Here If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  If you need help moving due to domestic violence, Shelter Movers may be able to help you. They operate by referral. Clients may be referred by any person of authority (social worker, doctor, police, crisis counselor, teacher, etc.) or public agency (shelter, hospital, school, workplace, place of worship, sexual assault centre, etc.).  To reach them, click here. Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The mystery of what is known as the Bermuda Triangle has fascinated many since a military vessel called USS Cyclops went missing back in 1918. Decades later more military personnel went missing, this time a squadron of bombers known as Flight 19. Some suggest rogue waves or sudden storms, while others suspect a more supernatural explanation. What is known for sure is that Bermuda is home to only one, not The One, mysterious triangular area. The Alaskan Triangle, Bennington Triangle, Bridgewater Triangle, and Michigan Triangle are other similar anomalous zones. Some are on land, others lakes, and still others are within the ocean like the Bermuda Triangle and its sister area called Devil's Sea, off the coast of Japan. -FREE ARCHIVE & RSS: https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-secret-teachings Twitter: https://twitter.com/TST___Radio Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thesecretteachings WEBSITE (BOOKS, RESUBSCRIBE for early show access): http://thesecretteachings.info Paypal: rdgable@yahoo.com CashApp: $rdgable EMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / TSTRadio@protonmail.com

The mystery of what is known as the Bermuda Triangle has fascinated many since a military vessel called USS Cyclops went missing back in 1918. Decades later more military personnel went missing, this time a squadron of bombers known as Flight 19. Some suggest rogue waves or sudden storms, while others suspect a more supernatural explanation. What is known for sure is that Bermuda is home to only one, not The One, mysterious triangular area. The Alaskan Triangle, Bennington Triangle, Bridgewater Triangle, and Michigan Triangle are other similar anomalous zones. Some are on land, others lakes, and still others are within the ocean like the Bermuda Triangle and its sister area called Devil's Sea, off the coast of Japan. -FREE ARCHIVE & RSS: https://www.spreaker.com/show/the-secret-teachingsTwitter: https://twitter.com/TST___RadioFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thesecretteachingsWEBSITE (BOOKS, RESUBSCRIBE for early show access): http://thesecretteachings.infoPaypal: rdgable@yahoo.comCashApp: $rdgableBuy Me a Coffee: https://www.buymeacoffee.com/tstradioSUBSCRIBE TO NETWORK: http://aftermath.mediaEMAIL: rdgable@yahoo.com / TSTRadio@protonmail.com

Shekhar Aiyar, a Non-resident Fellow at Bruegel, on leave from the International Monetary Fund, joins Kopi Time to mount a substantive case for globalisation, a much-maligned  word in some circles these days. Sharing his cutting edge research, Shekhar refers to considerable empirical evidence to establish the gains from trade for various parts of the global economy over the past half century. He then shares findings on the cost of reversing the course, a process termed as geoeconomic fragmentation. We discuss how that is measured, the estimated costs, and the implication for international monetary system and the global financial safety net. We then move on to another strand of Shekhar's research,  productivity spillovers from Foreign Direct Investment. Triangulating data from multiple sources, Shekhar and his co-authors have put together a large firm-level cross country panel dataset. Some of the findings from analysing that dataset are fascinating, from the modes of spillover to the differing results for emerging and industrial economies. This takes us to a discussion on industrial policies' role in driving investment, and the various associated perils. Deep insights.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this week's insightful episode with John, we discuss the topic of de-escalating conflict. We discuss the importance of managing the emotional climate in conversations, creating microclimates to prevent escalation, and preparing for difficult conversations. We emphasized the importance of creating a positive emotional climate, active listening, and approaching conversations with empathy and understanding. Carol highlighted the significance of empathy and effective communication in addressing customer concerns, while Mike and Carol discussed effective communication strategies for de-escalating conflict.  Join us as we delve into the significance of leveraging champions in intricate sales scenarios. Discover how champions go beyond mere support, investing their political capital for your cause. Explore the art of nurturing profound connections with champions through meaningful, personal gestures. Uncover the secrets to building lasting relationships that transcend the ordinary.  Timestamp  00:10 Leveraging internal champions for complex sales, avoiding common mistakes, and identifying potential champions. 08:32 RFP process, champions, and sales process with a focus on enterprise sales and triangulating the truth. 13:29 Leveraging champions in sales meetings for effective communication and decision-making. 18:17 Building relationships and finding solutions with a champion in a competitive RFP situation. 21:56 Sales techniques for large deals, including handling detractors.   Key Takeaways  Leveraging champions is essential in complex sales deals with multiple stakeholders. A champion is someone who not only supports you but also invests their political capital on your behalf. Techniques like pre-proposal meetings and passing the baton of power can help leverage champions effectively. Triangulating the truth by meeting with different stakeholders and understanding their personal motivations is crucial. Building deep-rooted relationships and doing things that are significant, personal, and unexpected can strengthen the bond with champions.   ========================================= SUBSCRIBE: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3Z0s7ZInq7pa2sYHDc6fw_V7T6mb657f&feature=shared  Don't forget to subscribe and leave us a comment! ========================================= Follow Us:  Twitter: https://twitter.com/SandlerTraining  Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/school/sandler-training/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sandlertraining/  Facebook: https://web.facebook.com/sandlertraining/?_rdc=1&_rdr =========================================  

In this week's insightful episode with John, we discuss the topic of de-escalating conflict. We discuss the importance of managing the emotional climate in conversations, creating microclimates to prevent escalation, and preparing for difficult conversations. We emphasized the importance of creating a positive emotional climate, active listening, and approaching conversations with empathy and understanding. Carol highlighted the significance of empathy and effective communication in addressing customer concerns, while Mike and Carol discussed effective communication strategies for de-escalating conflict.  Join us as we delve into the significance of leveraging champions in intricate sales scenarios. Discover how champions go beyond mere support, investing their political capital for your cause. Explore the art of nurturing profound connections with champions through meaningful, personal gestures. Uncover the secrets to building lasting relationships that transcend the ordinary.  Timestamp  00:10 Leveraging internal champions for complex sales, avoiding common mistakes, and identifying potential champions. 08:32 RFP process, champions, and sales process with a focus on enterprise sales and triangulating the truth. 13:29 Leveraging champions in sales meetings for effective communication and decision-making. 18:17 Building relationships and finding solutions with a champion in a competitive RFP situation. 21:56 Sales techniques for large deals, including handling detractors.   Key Takeaways  Leveraging champions is essential in complex sales deals with multiple stakeholders. A champion is someone who not only supports you but also invests their political capital on your behalf. Techniques like pre-proposal meetings and passing the baton of power can help leverage champions effectively. Triangulating the truth by meeting with different stakeholders and understanding their personal motivations is crucial. Building deep-rooted relationships and doing things that are significant, personal, and unexpected can strengthen the bond with champions.   ========================================= SUBSCRIBE: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3Z0s7ZInq7pa2sYHDc6fw_V7T6mb657f&feature=shared  Don't forget to subscribe and leave us a comment! ========================================= Follow Us:  Twitter: https://twitter.com/SandlerTraining  Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/school/sandler-training/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sandlertraining/  Facebook: https://web.facebook.com/sandlertraining/?_rdc=1&_rdr =========================================  

In this week's insightful episode with John, we discuss the topic of de-escalating conflict. We discuss the importance of managing the emotional climate in conversations, creating microclimates to prevent escalation, and preparing for difficult conversations. We emphasized the importance of creating a positive emotional climate, active listening, and approaching conversations with empathy and understanding. Carol highlighted the significance of empathy and effective communication in addressing customer concerns, while Mike and Carol discussed effective communication strategies for de-escalating conflict.  Join us as we delve into the significance of leveraging champions in intricate sales scenarios. Discover how champions go beyond mere support, investing their political capital for your cause. Explore the art of nurturing profound connections with champions through meaningful, personal gestures. Uncover the secrets to building lasting relationships that transcend the ordinary.  Timestamp  00:10 Leveraging internal champions for complex sales, avoiding common mistakes, and identifying potential champions. 08:32 RFP process, champions, and sales process with a focus on enterprise sales and triangulating the truth. 13:29 Leveraging champions in sales meetings for effective communication and decision-making. 18:17 Building relationships and finding solutions with a champion in a competitive RFP situation. 21:56 Sales techniques for large deals, including handling detractors.   Key Takeaways  Leveraging champions is essential in complex sales deals with multiple stakeholders. A champion is someone who not only supports you but also invests their political capital on your behalf. Techniques like pre-proposal meetings and passing the baton of power can help leverage champions effectively. Triangulating the truth by meeting with different stakeholders and understanding their personal motivations is crucial. Building deep-rooted relationships and doing things that are significant, personal, and unexpected can strengthen the bond with champions.   ========================================= SUBSCRIBE: https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3Z0s7ZInq7pa2sYHDc6fw_V7T6mb657f&feature=shared  Don't forget to subscribe and leave us a comment! ========================================= Follow Us:  Twitter: https://twitter.com/SandlerTraining  Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/school/sandler-training/  Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/sandlertraining/  Facebook: https://web.facebook.com/sandlertraining/?_rdc=1&_rdr =========================================  

Last week we discovered the triangular shape of Jesus' life. This week we seek to pattern our lives off of Jesus' life. As Jesus was UP, IN, and OUT, Grace 242 is called to Being, Making, and, Multiplying Disciples.   Scripture Reading: Acts 2:42-47

In this episode, Erin and Carol tackle one form of research impact growing in importance and necessity: revenue. Their guest is Claudia Natasia, co-founder and CEO of Riley AI. Before starting Riley, Claudia grew product teams at early-stage companies and worked in the financial industry. These experiences showed her the importance of linking user research outputs to the bottom line of a business.During their conversation, Claudia breaks down what revenue typically looks like for a company and where you can find the specific revenue goals for your company. Then she digs into the important processes of weaving those revenue goals into a research strategy from the start, offering examples from her time on product teams.The discussion also explores the importance of triangulation, or combining multiple data types to form a more complete whole. Claudia explains that user researchers should balance conducting primary research with existing information to help clarify how UX is linked with wider business goals. She offers suggestions for teams big and small looking to make impact with the highest level decision makers and company executives.Episode Highlights06:07 - Strategic frameworks for company growth and revenue12:05 - Leveraging competitive analysis for market success22:06 - Creating meaningful insights for your business30:05 - Tracking research impact: Setting expectations and routine updates37:13 - Elevating projects: Moving from junior to senior stakeholders44:39 - Triangulating data: Connecting research to company successAbout Our GuestClaudia is a leader with 10+ years experience leading product, strategy, and data teams across the enterprise and financial technology space. Her work has directly influenced companywide strategies, leading to a $5B total valuation, a successful international acquisition, and multi-million dollar growth fundraising rounds.  She advises and angel invests in early stage startups, in North America and Southeast Asia. Her areas of focus are enterprise, finance, and consumer AI-generated content.Resources on Research Impact and RevenueA guide to showing the value of user researchClaudia's textbook of choice for learning about revenueThe three aspects of high-impact UX researchThe Business of Research Slack Community

Erin and special co-host Ben Wiedmaier are joined by Julian Della Mattia of the180 for a deep dive into being UX team-of-one. Julian has been the first user researcher at a number of companies and shares his top to-dos, milestones, and things to consider before accepting such a role.The episode digs into the ways a solo UXR can start making an impact, but in a strategic, sustainable way. Julian identifies questions to ask stakeholder teams, processes to consider standing up, and the tools to consider investing in from the start. We also discuss the dual hat-wearing of UXR and Ops on smaller teams/teams-of-one. Julian shares how he balances his time between executing on business-critical work and organizing research workflows so that other teams can start connecting with customers. Even if you're not a solo UXR or a team-of-one, Julian's experience building bridges between/across departments and his suggestions for aligning user research to core business goals from the start will help you and your team be more impactful. Episode Highlights03:49 - Strategies for success as the first researcher in an organization12:52 - Strategies for building bridges as a researcher in a new organization19:16 - Building essential processes for small research teams27:59 - Comparing research repositories and insights hubs30:47 - Triangulating insights from different teams35:11 - Strategies for scaling your research capacityAbout Our GuestJulian is a UX Researcher specialized in Research Operations (ReOps), founder of the180 and based in Barcelona, Spain. Whether in-house or working with clients, he repeatedly found myself building Research teams from scratch as the first Researcher in the team. This experience helped him develop a real knack for infrastructure, so he decided to fully specialize myself in ReOps. He likes to talk about this as his switch "from Finder to Builder".More Resources for Building UX Research TeamsUse this checklist to organize and build your UX teamThe steps to build and lead an impactful UX teamHow to scale yourself while avoiding burnout

SummaryKyle Norton shares his insights on building elite sales teams. He emphasizes the importance of talent, systems engineering, playbooks, coaching development, and culture in creating a high-performing sales organization. He highlights the significance of repeatability and consistency in achieving success. Kyle also discusses the key elements of a scorecard and the importance of structured interviews to make better hiring decisions.Take Aways Talent, systems engineering, playbooks, coaching development, and culture are the key elements of building an elite sales organization.Repeatability and consistency are indicators of a well-functioning sales system.The performance of the middle-class salespeople is a better measure of a sales leader's abilities than the performance of top performers.Scorecards help eliminate cognitive biases and ensure consistent evaluation of candidates.Mindset, skills, and specific knowledge are important criteria to consider in a scorecard.Asking follow-up questions and digging deeper during interviews helps assess candidates' mindset and abilities.Triangulating data from scorecards, references, and other sources is crucial for making informed hiring decisions.Learn More: https://www.yardstick.team/Connect with Lucas Price: linkedin.com/in/lucasprice1Connect with Dr. Jim: linkedin.com/in/drjimkConnect with Kyle Norton: linkedin.com/in/drjimk Music credit: Epicaly by LiteSaturationFeatured mentions: https://www.owner.com/ Mentioned in this episode:BEST Intro BEST Outro

West End Musical Theatre performer, lead singer of a London Big Band, and Clinical Osteopath, Jennie Morton joins Alexa on Singing Teachers Talk for part one of a two part episode. This week the pair will be discussing how you can help your singers find their best posture and alignment. Listen in for some great exercises you can use with your students to improve their posture.  KEY TAKEAWAYS Concerns have arisen over the long-term health effects of technology-induced postures, especially among the younger generation. Habitual postures can lead to structural changes, causing discomfort as muscles become fibrous and impede blood supply. Maintaining a neutral spine is crucial for optimal posture and shock absorption, influencing the functioning of vital components like the diaphragm, emphasising the importance of understanding and addressing structural dynamics for overall well-being. Jennie emphasises the importance of dynamic stability over rigidity, likening it to a tall skyscraper built to move in the wind. She suggests lying on the floor to explore spinal alignment and identifying the felt sense of neutral curves. Singers achieve optimal posture through exercises that recognize and balance unique spinal curves. Performers in extreme roles benefit from targeted stretches. Triangulating body position, emotion, and vocal outcome enhances predictability. Unconventional exercises, like singing upside down, disrupt fear-associated contexts, facilitating effective navigation through challenging vocal passages. BEST MOMENTS  ‘Structure governs function' ‘Our bodies are kind of like Plasticine, whatever you do habitually becomes habituated' ‘Elasticity is the key to being an artist. You know where home base is' ‘Maintaining a neutral spine is crucial for optimal posture, with the definition of 'neutral' varying for each individual'   EPISODE RESOURCES  Guest Website: www.jenniemorton.com Relevant Links & Mentions:  Singing Teachers Talk Podcast: Ep.97 Elevate Your Musical Performance Through Anatomical Efficiency with Jennie Morton Singing Teachers Talk Podcast: Ep.40 Teaching Singing to Dancers with Jennie Morton  Singing Teachers Talk Podcast: Ep. 32 The Bio-Psycho-Social Model with Stephen King Singing Teachers Talk Podcast: Ep.138 Exploring the Benefits of The Alexander Technique for Singers with Patrick Ardagh-Walter  BAST Book A Call   ABOUT THE GUEST  After a long performing career as a Ballet dancer, West End Musical Theatre performer, and lead singer of a London Big Band, Jennie is now a Clinical Osteopath specialising in the field of Performing Arts Medicine. She provides treatment for musculoskeletal, neurobiological, and psycho-physiological issues from her base in Los Angeles. She also works as a Performance Coach for singers and actors, focusing on anatomical efficiency, embodiment of artistry, movement education, and rehabilitation from vocal injury. Jennie co-created the MSc in Performing Arts Medicine at University College, London, and lectures internationally to artists, arts educators, and healthcare professionals on the subject of performance-related injuries. She is the author of three books: The Authentic Performer: Wearing A Mask And The Effect On Health; The Embodied Dancer: A Guide To Optimal Performance; and Dancing Longer, Dancing Stronger. Her website www.jenniemorton.com contains many of her published articles and educational resources, as well as links to her online courses on a range of health topics. ABOUT THE PODCAST BAST Training is here to help singers gain the knowledge, skills and understanding required to be a great singing teacher. We can help you whether you are getting started or just have some knowledge gaps to fill through our courses and educational events. basttraining.com Updates from BAST Training Presenters Bios

Returning from winter break, this episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast covers a lot of ground. The story I think we'll hear the most about in 2024 is the remarkable exploit used to compromise several generations of Apple iPhone. The question I think we'll be asking for the next year is simple: How could an attack like this be introduced without Apple's knowledge and support? We don't get to this question until near the end of the episode, and I don't claim great expertise in exploit design, but it's very hard to see how such an elaborate compromise could be slipped past Apple's security team. The second question is which government created the exploit. It might be a scandal if it were done by the U.S. But it would be far more of a scandal if done by any other nation.  Jeffery Atik and I lead off the episode by covering recent AI legal developments that simply underscore the obvious: AI engines can't get patents as “inventors.” But it's quite possible that they'll make a whole lot of technology “obvious” and thus unpatentable. Paul Stephan joins us to note that National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has come up with some good questions about standards for AI safety. Jeffery notes that U.S. lawmakers have finally woken up to the EU's misuse of tech regulation to protect the continent's failing tech sector. Even the continent's tech sector seems unhappy with the EU's AI Act, which was rushed to market in order to beat the competition and is therefore flawed and likely to yield unintended and disastrous consequences.  A problem that inspires this week's Cybertoonz. Paul covers a lawsuit blaming AI for the wrongful denial of medical insurance claims. As he points out, insurers have been able to wrongfully deny claims for decades without needing AI. Justin Sherman and I dig deep into a NYTimes article claiming to have found a privacy problem in AI. We conclude that AI may have a privacy problem, but extracting a few email addresses from ChatGPT doesn't prove the case.  Finally, Jeffery notes an SEC “sweep” examining the industry's AI use. Paul explains the competition law issues raised by app stores – and the peculiar outcome of litigation against Apple and Google. Apple skated in a case tried before a judge, but Google lost before a jury and entered into an expensive settlement with other app makers. Yet it's hard to say that Google's handling of its app store monopoly is more egregiously anticompetitive than Apple's. We do our own research in real time in addressing an FTC complaint against Rite Aid for using facial recognition to identify repeat shoplifters.  The FTC has clearly learned Paul's dictum, “The best time to kick someone is when they're down.” And its complaint shows a lack of care consistent with that posture.  I criticize the FTC for claiming without citation that Rite Aid ignored racial bias in its facial recognition software.  Justin and I dig into the bias data; in my view, if FTC documents could be reviewed for unfair and deceptive marketing, this one would lead to sanctions. The FTC fares a little better in our review of its effort to toughen the internet rules on child privacy, though Paul isn't on board with the whole package. We move from government regulation of Silicon Valley to Silicon Valley regulation of government. Apple has decided that it will now require a judicial order to give government's access to customers' “push notifications.” And, giving the back of its hand to crime victims, Google decides to make geofence warrants impossible by blinding itself to the necessary location data. Finally, Apple decides to regulate India's hacking of opposition politicians and runs into a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) buzzsaw.  Paul and Jeffery decode the EU's decision to open a DSA content moderation investigation into X.  We also dig into the welcome failure of an X effort to block California's content moderation law. Justin takes us through the latest developments in Cold War 2.0. China is hacking our ports and utilities with intent to disrupt (as opposed to spy on) them. The U.S. is discovering that derisking our semiconductor supply chain is going to take hard, grinding work. Justin looks at a recent report presenting actual evidence on the question of TikTok's standards for boosting content of interest to the Chinese government.  And in quick takes,  I celebrate the end of the Reign of Mickey Mouse in copyright law Paul explains why Madison Square Garden is still able to ban lawyers who have sued the Garden I note the new short-term FISA 702 extension Paul predicts that the Supreme Court will soon decide whether police can require suspects  to provide police with phone passcodes And Paul and I quickly debate Daphne Keller's amicus brief for Frances Fukuyama in the Supreme Court's content moderation cases Download 486th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

Returning from winter break, this episode of the Cyberlaw Podcast covers a lot of ground. The story I think we'll hear the most about in 2024 is the remarkable exploit used to compromise several generations of Apple iPhone. The question I think we'll be asking for the next year is simple: How could an attack like this be introduced without Apple's knowledge and support? We don't get to this question until near the end of the episode, and I don't claim great expertise in exploit design, but it's very hard to see how such an elaborate compromise could be slipped past Apple's security team. The second question is which government created the exploit. It might be a scandal if it were done by the U.S. But it would be far more of a scandal if done by any other nation.  Jeffery Atik and I lead off the episode by covering recent AI legal developments that simply underscore the obvious: AI engines can't get patents as “inventors.” But it's quite possible that they'll make a whole lot of technology “obvious” and thus unpatentable. Paul Stephan joins us to note that National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has come up with some good questions about standards for AI safety. Jeffery notes that U.S. lawmakers have finally woken up to the EU's misuse of tech regulation to protect the continent's failing tech sector. Even the continent's tech sector seems unhappy with the EU's AI Act, which was rushed to market in order to beat the competition and is therefore flawed and likely to yield unintended and disastrous consequences.  A problem that inspires this week's Cybertoonz. Paul covers a lawsuit blaming AI for the wrongful denial of medical insurance claims. As he points out, insurers have been able to wrongfully deny claims for decades without needing AI. Justin Sherman and I dig deep into a NYTimes article claiming to have found a privacy problem in AI. We conclude that AI may have a privacy problem, but extracting a few email addresses from ChatGPT doesn't prove the case.  Finally, Jeffery notes an SEC “sweep” examining the industry's AI use. Paul explains the competition law issues raised by app stores – and the peculiar outcome of litigation against Apple and Google. Apple skated in a case tried before a judge, but Google lost before a jury and entered into an expensive settlement with other app makers. Yet it's hard to say that Google's handling of its app store monopoly is more egregiously anticompetitive than Apple's. We do our own research in real time in addressing an FTC complaint against Rite Aid for using facial recognition to identify repeat shoplifters.  The FTC has clearly learned Paul's dictum, “The best time to kick someone is when they're down.” And its complaint shows a lack of care consistent with that posture.  I criticize the FTC for claiming without citation that Rite Aid ignored racial bias in its facial recognition software.  Justin and I dig into the bias data; in my view, if FTC documents could be reviewed for unfair and deceptive marketing, this one would lead to sanctions. The FTC fares a little better in our review of its effort to toughen the internet rules on child privacy, though Paul isn't on board with the whole package. We move from government regulation of Silicon Valley to Silicon Valley regulation of government. Apple has decided that it will now require a judicial order to give government's access to customers' “push notifications.” And, giving the back of its hand to crime victims, Google decides to make geofence warrants impossible by blinding itself to the necessary location data. Finally, Apple decides to regulate India's hacking of opposition politicians and runs into a Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) buzzsaw.  Paul and Jeffery decode the EU's decision to open a DSA content moderation investigation into X.  We also dig into the welcome failure of an X effort to block California's content moderation law. Justin takes us through the latest developments in Cold War 2.0. China is hacking our ports and utilities with intent to disrupt (as opposed to spy on) them. The U.S. is discovering that derisking our semiconductor supply chain is going to take hard, grinding work. Justin looks at a recent report presenting actual evidence on the question of TikTok's standards for boosting content of interest to the Chinese government.  And in quick takes,  I celebrate the end of the Reign of Mickey Mouse in copyright law Paul explains why Madison Square Garden is still able to ban lawyers who have sued the Garden I note the new short-term FISA 702 extension Paul predicts that the Supreme Court will soon decide whether police can require suspects  to provide police with phone passcodes And Paul and I quickly debate Daphne Keller's amicus brief for Frances Fukuyama in the Supreme Court's content moderation cases Download 486th Episode (mp3) You can subscribe to The Cyberlaw Podcast using iTunes, Google Play, Spotify, Pocket Casts, or our RSS feed. As always, The Cyberlaw Podcast is open to feedback. Be sure to engage with @stewartbaker on Twitter. Send your questions, comments, and suggestions for topics or interviewees to CyberlawPodcast@gmail.com. Remember: If your suggested guest appears on the show, we will send you a highly coveted Cyberlaw Podcast mug! The views expressed in this podcast are those of the speakers and do not reflect the opinions of their institutions, clients, friends, families, or pets.

"Courage borne out of Curiosity"   New segments and lowered sumo standards. Unexamined cultural phrases. Engaging with the unknown throughout the day. Giving credence to memory. Dedicated reading rooms and responsible education. Growing up on algorithm curated feeds. Ancient character divides (Ambush vs. Surprise). A self-fulfilling mass psychosis in the form of a band that's more of an urban legend. Being the masks on the wall. The extension of interiority. Grave site obsessions. Following the orthodoxies of belief. Minority Consensus. Outsourced Beliefs vs. Integrated Religions / Profane barriers vs. Sacred Engagement. Distributable Ignorance and the shifting vectors of Progress. Irreducible emblem act-outs. Manuscripts of flesh vs. empty algorithms. Humanizing the internet (logistical organisms). The distorted mirror of our creations. "Let go" moments. Triangulating Crisis Points. Crisistianity. Drinking libraries and isolated omniscience. Being vicarized in the "Vicarious Age''. Fire in the sink solutions. Emergent archetypal heroes for Now. James Dean's preserved cool and modern cautionary tales. Fine art lawn chairs and magic scrapbooks. Stepping outside of your own language. The different humors of nap dreams. Triangulating dream-tones. Finally, we wrap up with some kitchen sink psychoanalysis.   Thanks to Nick Searfoss for the synopsis!

SummaryKyle Norton shares his insights on building elite sales teams. He emphasizes the importance of talent, systems engineering, playbooks, coaching development, and culture in creating a high-performing sales organization. He highlights the significance of repeatability and consistency in achieving success. Kyle also discusses the key elements of a scorecard and the importance of structured interviews to make better hiring decisions.Take Aways Talent, systems engineering, playbooks, coaching development, and culture are the key elements of building an elite sales organization.Repeatability and consistency are indicators of a well-functioning sales system.The performance of the middle-class salespeople is a better measure of a sales leader's abilities than the performance of top performers.Scorecards help eliminate cognitive biases and ensure consistent evaluation of candidates.Mindset, skills, and specific knowledge are important criteria to consider in a scorecard.Asking follow-up questions and digging deeper during interviews helps assess candidates' mindset and abilities.Triangulating data from scorecards, references, and other sources is crucial for making informed hiring decisions.Learn More: https://www.yardstick.team/Connect with Lucas Price: linkedin.com/in/lucasprice1Connect with Dr. Jim: linkedin.com/in/drjimkMusic credit: Epicaly by LiteSaturationFeatured mentions: https://www.owner.com/ Kyle Norton: linkedin.com/in/kylecnortonMentioned in this episode:BEST OutroBEST Intro

Kyle Harrison is the General Partner at Contrary Capital, as well as a writer. We talk about hype cycles, talent vortexes, investing in people, battles between tradition and progress, building systems, writing, and much more. — (00:46) Acceleration of FOMO and hype cycles in investing (07:04) Being people-centric is contrarian in VC (11:19) Most barriers have been lowered; networks & relationships are a moat (14:44) Why don't we have more world-class, capable founders? (19:49) Talent vortexes & curiosity (26:55) Triangulating people's careers & admitting you were wrong (29:35) Doing what's profitable vs. good for humanity (34:08) Religion vs. science/technology is a matter of altitude (37:23) What's always true in venture, and what won't be in the future (45:21) Writing vs investing (47:05) Writing, reflecting, & changing behavior (53:52) Crossing out every day on the calendar (56:24) Only take opportunities that stick around (01:01:39) Regret minimization (01:03:18) Kyle's final question for listeners — Kyle's Twitter: https://twitter.com/kwharrison13 Kyle's Site: https://kwharrison13.com/ Kyle's Newsletter: https://investing1012dot0.substack.com/ Contrary: https://contrary.com/ Spencer's Twitter: https://twitter.com/SP1NS1R Spencer's Blog: https://spencerkier.substack.com

In this episode we talk about Satan's honor and disheartened colleagues who retreat into the dark. Trading in the general malaise of critical thinking and flexibility of mind with strict psychic discipline and defense. The LX Mission Statement: "look to the fun". Triangulating problems, personalities, and proximity. The physicality of writing and performance. Erasing introversion. The Goal of Language. How your words sound through someone else's mouth. Grammar vs. Elocution. Having the courage to share. The Personal Dynamics of making noise with each other. Then we're back to bands with some genitally mutilated screech music.    Being honored by equal magic. Confusing the library for the moon. Trusting bridges you've built. Kris introduces a big idea: the Allegory of The Phonebooth. Peculiar Architecture and Occult Practicality. Photographic Morphology and Expanding Physics. Newtonian Scale vs. Quantum Time. Being aware of Street Level Tempo. Sovereign Temporality (Intention and Timing). The surprise of stillness. Enjoying the navigation and movement through Time with others. Spontaneous Shapeshifting vs. Protean Durability. "Pudding & Water". Expeditions into Metaphor & Analogy (perception and performance). The Stage of Multitudes. Reestablishing Context and Recognizing Containers. Going in the box to get out.    Philanthropic Panspermia Nuclear Intervention. Melting away metonymic icebergs. Shadow puppets in Dark Ages. Consistency & Surprise. Being alert to local metaphors. Idleness vs. Laziness (Jalan-Jalan). Volcanic Fruitions. Dimensionalizing Dream Maps. Cave Drawings and Greek Drama. Image, Ceremony, and the social dilemmas of Dream Time.

Sunday met her future husband at a wedding, started a relationship, got pregnant, and moved to Australia for a brand new start to her life. Unfortunately for Sunday, her husband was not who he portrayed himself to be, as he began to weaponize her vulnerabilities against her. Sunday details the toxic family dynamics she endured with her ex-husband's family, who made her feel unwelcome and uncomfortable. In the final chapters of her story, Sunday discusses the post-separation abuse she endured, the ensuing custody battles, and her ex-husband's relentless attempts to control her. It's a story of triangulation, smear campaigns, guilt, crazy-making, attacking competency, abusive in-laws, blame-shifting, Mr. Right, generational trauma, co-parenting, post-separation abuse, custody Battle, manipulation, shame, self-confidence, self-esteem, and no contact. If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please click here or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com To listen to the groundbreaking investigative true crime podcast about Munchausen by Proxy, NOBODY SHOULD BELIEVE ME, click here. Thank you to our sponsor BETTERHELP. If you need online counseling from anywhere in the world, please do go to https://www.betterhelp.com/nap Get started today and enjoy 10% off your first month. If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  If you need help moving due to domestic violence, Shelter Movers may be able to help you. They operate by referral. Clients may be referred by any person of authority (social worker, doctor, police, crisis counselor, teacher, etc.) or public agency (shelter, hospital, school, workplace, place of worship, sexual assault centre, etc.).  To reach them, click here. Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sunday met her future husband at a wedding, started a relationship, got pregnant, and moved to Australia for a brand new start to her life. Unfortunately for Sunday, her husband was not who he portrayed himself to be, as he began to weaponize her vulnerabilities against her. Sunday details the toxic family dynamics she endured with her ex-husband's family, who made her feel unwelcome and uncomfortable. In the final chapters of her story, Sunday discusses the post-separation abuse she endured, the ensuing custody battles, and her ex-husband's relentless attempts to control her. It's a story of triangulation, smear campaigns, guilt, crazy-making, attacking competency, abusive in-laws, blame-shifting, Mr. Right, generational trauma, co-parenting, post-separation abuse, custody Battle, manipulation, shame, self-confidence, self-esteem, and no contact. If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please click here or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com To listen to the groundbreaking investigative true crime podcast about Munchausen by Proxy, NOBODY SHOULD BELIEVE ME, click here. Thank you to our sponsor BETTERHELP. If you need online counseling from anywhere in the world, please do go to https://www.betterhelp.com/nap Get started today and enjoy 10% off your first month. If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  If you need help moving due to domestic violence, Shelter Movers may be able to help you. They operate by referral. Clients may be referred by any person of authority (social worker, doctor, police, crisis counselor, teacher, etc.) or public agency (shelter, hospital, school, workplace, place of worship, sexual assault centre, etc.).  To reach them, click here. Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA

Can anyone actually gain power/fame/money/prestige without having to sell their soul?In Episode #398 of 'Musings', Juan & I discuss: our recent accidental foray into politics, governmental vs internal vs social vs realpolitik, why people in high positions maybe aren't engaging in politics, the sheer negative emotions that spring up (and are also the root cause), plus why I won't let it take up my mental space.Massive thanks to Dave Jones, McIntosh, BadcareeradviceChad (love that name lol), Martin Lindeskog and Petar. Was a massive week of support, you're all legends!Timeline:(0:00) - No-one will believe this(1:08) - Why Juan liked David Meisel(3:49) - Clip success ... but at what cost(5:49) - Types of politics(16:40) - Status within companies(28:34) - Boostagram Lounge(44:20) - The way people behave(52:02) - The root cause of the behaviour(57:54) - Triangulating to the truth(1:04:58) - Summary(1:14:41) - V4V: Check out the support pageValue 4 Value Support:Boostagram: https://www.meremortalspodcast.com/supportPaypal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/meremortalspodcastIntro Music by 'Signs Of New Growth':https://podcastindex.social/@SignsOfNewGrowthConnect with Mere Mortals:Website: https://www.meremortalspodcast.com/Discord: https://discord.gg/jjfq9eGReUInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/meremortalspodcast/TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@meremortalspodcastSupport the show

Triangulation Triangulation is the process by which you use more than one location to find the location of something. I point gets distance, two points gets position on the ground, three points gets altitude. That's exactly how GPS works—the more satellites the better the accuracy. Imagine Limiting Belief You hear this all the time in […] The post Triangulating Limiting Beliefs first appeared on Alchemy For Life.

Today, we debut Adam's newest RPG and crowdfunding campaign: 1978: The Night THEY Came Home. Go to 1978.games and reserve your copy today!  We chat about all things 1978, the shared nightmare of being in school again, triangulating where a game fits in the world, and updates on our projects and lives.  ____ Find Adam on Twitter at @wcgameco and Will at @will_jobst Music by Will Jobst, available at https://soundcloud.com/willjobst. Also, there's a discord! We'd love for you to join! Find the link here: https://discord.gg/vGB9UYYveK

How the Sacred element in family life facilitates secure attachment. Comments/Questions: elazarbloom.com/rr/

In this month's episode, Christy Thornton discusses the surprising influence of post-revolutionary Mexico on some of the twentieth century's most important international economic institutions, including the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Triangulating between archives in Mexico, the United States, and Great Britain, Thornton traces how Mexican officials repeatedly led the charge among Third World nations campaigning for greater representation within and redistribution through multilateral institutions created to promote international development and finance. In doing so, she recovers the crucial role played by Mexican economists, diplomats, and politicians in shaping global economic governance and U.S. hegemony during the mid-twentieth century.

Link to slide deck: https://bit.ly/3L16cpC   - Today we look at the choppy equity market failing to extend the upside momentum for now as we triangulate mid-range ahead of a series of event risks, among these two days of Fed Chair Powell testimony starting today. Overnight, Australia's RBA announced a dovish hike, clearly looking for excuses to pause its tightening regime - is this a policy mistake in the making? We also look at evidence on what may have driven China's about-face on stimulating its economy, crude oil, natgas and wheat & other grain markets and much more. Today's pod features Garnry on equities, Ole Hansen on commodities and John J. Hardy hosting and on FX. Read daily in-depth market updates from the Saxo Market Call and Saxo Strategy Team here. Click here to open an account with Saxo   - Intro and outro music by AShamaluevMusic

There is a process we go through to put everything together. Today I share how I put truth together and come to a conclusion. Please LIKE, SHARE, FOLLOW and SUBSCRIBE!

In Coming to America, there's a scene where Eddie Murphy is about to marry his prescribed bride. Before the “I dos”, the groom wants to make sure the bride is a good fit. So, he whisks her “backstage” to ask some questions. She starts, “All of my life I have been trained to serve you.” He answers, “I know, But I'd like to know what you like.” She says, ‘Whatever you like.” “What kind of music do you like?” “Whatever kind of music you like.” As he points out that he knows she has been trained to like whatever he likes and do whatever he wants, he eventually has her barking like a dog. The scene is supposed to be funny, but it speaks of a deep seeded problem that many codependents face and that is the pattern of people pleasing. Pleasing others isn't inherently wrong. It's a wonderful thing to want to make others happy and comfortable. But then it falters into the land of self-sacrifice and self-betrayal in favor of others, it becomes a big problem. When you grow up in a dysfunctional family, one that is addicted, abusive, absent, narcissistic, etc, you take on a way f being in order to survive, thrive, connect or cope in that family. Especially, in a hustle to get love or at least not get hurt, you ask, “Who do I need to be?” And you become that. I call those Attachment Personality Patterns. It's programming that allows you to find a way to function in the dysfunction. One of the 8 patterns is that of the Pleaser. Pleasers are bred to make others happy and keep the peace. These aren't bad traits. But pleasers are in one-sided relationships where their behavior is not reciprocated. Pleasers become resentful and passive-aggressive. It's important to remember that Patterns aren't Pathology. You can change your patterning and become healthier , achieving balanced, mutually beneficial relationships. Here are the 5 core traits of a Pleaser Personality. Core Trait #1. Pleasers have unbalanced relationships. Pleasers give more than they receive. In an attempt to endear themselves to others, they say yes when meaning no. They tend to take on more than others and do not ask others to help. They feel that asking others to meet their needs will take them out of favor. Core Trait #2 Pleasers Have difficulty making decisions and overvalue the opinions of others. A pleaser will often need the input of others before committing to a path of action. They don't simply consider themselves when making decisions; they want to check with everyone else to make sure it's good for them too. If everyone else agrees that it is a good decision, then they'll likely do it, even if they are still unsure themselves. Core Trait #3. Pleasers will give up personal truths or desires to avoid rocking the boat or disapproval. They'll go with the flow to avoid confrontation. If a pleaser has an unpopular opinion, they will keep it to themselves. Core Trait #4 Pleasers feel overly responsible for the emotions of others and work hard to mitigate the feeling of others. Like the fixer, the Pleaser is empathy and the ability to feel others' emotions and have a sixth sense as to what others need. However, Fixers are not afraid to experience being out of rapport with another person if they believe it will help them. Meaning, a Fixer may call out a loved one to help them, whereas a Pleaser won't want to upset anyone. So, they are more likely to do what they can to ensure others feel good all the time (even at their own expense.) A Fixer can be a hero (actually helping save the day) whereas a Pleaser is more likely to be an Enabler to keep the peace. Core Trait #5 Pleasers are passive-aggressive. Because confrontation is not something a pleaser is willing to do, when the resentment from their unbalanced relationships builds,, they will behave in passive-aggressive ways to let the person know they are hurt without outright stating it. Like the withholder, they may withhold attention, affection, approval, etc. Triangulating (playing people against each other), playing the victim, or avoiding any interaction at all. So what's the path out of this behavior? Awareness is always the first step. Once you become aware, you open yourself up to having a choice. You can choose to get into codependency recovery and enable yourself to have the mutually beneficial, respectful relationships you deserve. Of course, we would love to have you join us in LYFE School. That's our codependency recovery program which is a step-by-step system to undo your patterning and find your true Self. To find out more about LYFE School, visit www.LoveCoachHeidi.Com Love, Coach Heidi

In queer culture, silence has been equated with voicelessness, complicity, and even death. Queer Silence: On Disability and Rhetorical Absence (U Minnesota Press, 2022) insists, however, that silence can be a generative and empowering mode of survival. Triangulating insights from queer studies, disability studies, and rhetorical studies, J. Logan Smilges explores what silence can mean for people whose bodyminds signify more powerfully than their words. Queer Silence begins by historicizing silence's negative reputation, beginning with the ways homophile activists rejected medical models pathologizing homosexuality as a disability, resulting in the silencing of disability itself. This silencing was redoubled by HIV/AIDS activism's demand for “out, loud, and proud” rhetorical activities that saw silence as capitulation. Reading a range of cultural artifacts whose relative silence has failed to attract queer attachment, from anonymous profiles on Grindr to ex-gays to belated gender transitions to disability performance art, Dr. Smilges argues for silence's critical role in serving the needs of queers who are never named as such. Queer Silence urges queer activists and queer studies scholars to reconcile with their own ableism by acknowledging the liberatory potential of silence, a mode of engagement that disattached queers use every day for resistance, sociality, and survival. J. Logan Smilges is Assistant Professor of English Language and Literatures at the University of British Columbia. Sohini Chatterjee is a PhD Candidate in Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies at Western University, Canada. Her work has recently appeared in Women's Studies: An inter-disciplinary journal, South Asian Popular Culture and Fat Studies. 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

In queer culture, silence has been equated with voicelessness, complicity, and even death. Queer Silence: On Disability and Rhetorical Absence (U Minnesota Press, 2022) insists, however, that silence can be a generative and empowering mode of survival. Triangulating insights from queer studies, disability studies, and rhetorical studies, J. Logan Smilges explores what silence can mean for people whose bodyminds signify more powerfully than their words. Queer Silence begins by historicizing silence's negative reputation, beginning with the ways homophile activists rejected medical models pathologizing homosexuality as a disability, resulting in the silencing of disability itself. This silencing was redoubled by HIV/AIDS activism's demand for “out, loud, and proud” rhetorical activities that saw silence as capitulation. Reading a range of cultural artifacts whose relative silence has failed to attract queer attachment, from anonymous profiles on Grindr to ex-gays to belated gender transitions to disability performance art, Dr. Smilges argues for silence's critical role in serving the needs of queers who are never named as such. Queer Silence urges queer activists and queer studies scholars to reconcile with their own ableism by acknowledging the liberatory potential of silence, a mode of engagement that disattached queers use every day for resistance, sociality, and survival. J. Logan Smilges is Assistant Professor of English Language and Literatures at the University of British Columbia. Sohini Chatterjee is a PhD Candidate in Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies at Western University, Canada. Her work has recently appeared in Women's Studies: An inter-disciplinary journal, South Asian Popular Culture and Fat Studies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/gender-studies

In queer culture, silence has been equated with voicelessness, complicity, and even death. Queer Silence: On Disability and Rhetorical Absence (U Minnesota Press, 2022) insists, however, that silence can be a generative and empowering mode of survival. Triangulating insights from queer studies, disability studies, and rhetorical studies, J. Logan Smilges explores what silence can mean for people whose bodyminds signify more powerfully than their words. Queer Silence begins by historicizing silence's negative reputation, beginning with the ways homophile activists rejected medical models pathologizing homosexuality as a disability, resulting in the silencing of disability itself. This silencing was redoubled by HIV/AIDS activism's demand for “out, loud, and proud” rhetorical activities that saw silence as capitulation. Reading a range of cultural artifacts whose relative silence has failed to attract queer attachment, from anonymous profiles on Grindr to ex-gays to belated gender transitions to disability performance art, Dr. Smilges argues for silence's critical role in serving the needs of queers who are never named as such. Queer Silence urges queer activists and queer studies scholars to reconcile with their own ableism by acknowledging the liberatory potential of silence, a mode of engagement that disattached queers use every day for resistance, sociality, and survival. J. Logan Smilges is Assistant Professor of English Language and Literatures at the University of British Columbia. Sohini Chatterjee is a PhD Candidate in Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies at Western University, Canada. Her work has recently appeared in Women's Studies: An inter-disciplinary journal, South Asian Popular Culture and Fat Studies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/sociology

In queer culture, silence has been equated with voicelessness, complicity, and even death. Queer Silence: On Disability and Rhetorical Absence (U Minnesota Press, 2022) insists, however, that silence can be a generative and empowering mode of survival. Triangulating insights from queer studies, disability studies, and rhetorical studies, J. Logan Smilges explores what silence can mean for people whose bodyminds signify more powerfully than their words. Queer Silence begins by historicizing silence's negative reputation, beginning with the ways homophile activists rejected medical models pathologizing homosexuality as a disability, resulting in the silencing of disability itself. This silencing was redoubled by HIV/AIDS activism's demand for “out, loud, and proud” rhetorical activities that saw silence as capitulation. Reading a range of cultural artifacts whose relative silence has failed to attract queer attachment, from anonymous profiles on Grindr to ex-gays to belated gender transitions to disability performance art, Dr. Smilges argues for silence's critical role in serving the needs of queers who are never named as such. Queer Silence urges queer activists and queer studies scholars to reconcile with their own ableism by acknowledging the liberatory potential of silence, a mode of engagement that disattached queers use every day for resistance, sociality, and survival. J. Logan Smilges is Assistant Professor of English Language and Literatures at the University of British Columbia. Sohini Chatterjee is a PhD Candidate in Gender, Sexuality, and Women's Studies at Western University, Canada. Her work has recently appeared in Women's Studies: An inter-disciplinary journal, South Asian Popular Culture and Fat Studies. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/lgbtq-studies

Mia met her husband as a teenager. Their relationship was a dream come true. But after the birth of their first child, everything about her husband changed. Mia was relegated to secondary supply and became the scapegoat of the family. Parental alienation began to run rampant behind the scenes, as Mia's abusive husband was sowing the seeds of doubt amongst everyone. And as time went on, the psychological abuse only intensified until Mia's husband lost complete control. It's a story of physical threats, rule following, walking on eggshells, suicide threats, stalking, tracking, legal abuse, financial abuse, people pleasing, harassment, escalation, mocking, escape plans, voyeurism, gaslighting, double lives, divorce, brainwashing, guilt, putdowns, nitpicking, boundaries, shame, smear campaigns, lying, minimization, grief, healing, intimidation, power, control, black and white thinking, manipulation, punishment, triangulation, cptsd, and much more. *** TRIGGER WARNING - We do mention physical threats in this episode and a mention of child physical abuse. *** If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please click here or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com Thank you to our sponsor BETTERHELP. If you need online counseling from anywhere in the world, please do go to https://www.betterhelp.com/nap Get started today and enjoy 10% off your first month. If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hey CX Nation,In this week's episode of The CXChronicles Podcast #180  we welcomed Tom DeWitt, P.h. D. Director of CXM@MSU and a fixed-term faculty member in the Department of Marketing of the Broad College of Business at Michigan State University. Tom is dedicated to advancing customer experience management globally by helping formalize and develop a framework for the field for more than a decade. Dr. DeWitt has provided customer experience management solutions to organizations and audiences around the world through consulting, workshops and presentations. Prior to joining academia, Tom enjoyed a career in the hospitality industry, where he served in senior management roles in the USA and Asia.  In this episode, Tom and Adrian chat through how he has tackled The Four CX Pillars: Team,  Tools, Process & Feedback throughout his career + shares some of the tips & tricks that have worked for him across his customer focused business leader journey.**Episode #180 Highlight Reel:**1. Building North America's first Masters Degree in Customer Experience Management (CXM) 2. How team-based ansychronous learning has changed  the future of employee experience  3. Being strategic with the tools your team uses to build and scale your customer portfolio 4. How service blueprints can pinpoint which KPIs & metrics your business should focus on 5. Triangulating your VOC and VOE reporting to understand what you need to prioritize  Huge thanks to Tom for coming on The CXChronicles Podcast and featuring his work and efforts in pushing the employee experience and customer success space into the future.Click here to learn more about Tom DeWitt, P.h. D.Click here to learn more about Michigan State's Masters in Customer Experience ManagementIf you enjoy The CXChronicles Podcast, please stop by your favorite podcast player and leave us a review today. This is the easiest way that we can find new listeners, guests and future business leaders to join our customer focused community!And be sure to grab a copy of our book "The Four CX Pillars To Grow Your Business Now" available on Amazon +  check out the CXChronicles Youtube channel to see all of our customer focused business leader video content + our past podcast episodes!Reach out to CXC at INFO@cxchronicles.com for more information about how we can help your business make customer happiness a habit!Support the show

Riley grew up feeling that she was hard to love. Riley's ex made her feel like loving her was easy. He was the perfect predator and Riley was sold. Who wouldn't be in this case? But unfortunately, the physical abuse and rage showed itself early on, and Riley was too trauma bonded to get out. Brandon talks with Riley about her controlling relationship with a triangulating physical abuser. It's a story of self love deficit, fixing potential, generational trauma, financial abuse, intimate partner violence, and the struggle to leave for good. Plus they discuss, self worth, coercive control, relationship rights, infidelity, hoovering, grief, idealization, devaluation, single moms, and much more. *** TRIGGER WARNING - We graphically discuss childhood sexual abuse, childhood physical abuse, sexual coercion, sexual assault, and physical abuse in this episode. *** If you want to be a guest on our survivor story podcast, please click here or send us an email at narcissistapocalypse@gmail.com To take a free Enneagram Test, click here. Thank you to our sponsor BETTERHELP. If you need online counseling from anywhere in the world, please do go to https://www.betterhelp.com/nap Get started today and enjoy 10% off your first month. If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Finding our spanreeder

“The problem is there are so many mass shootings that they are now pushing other mass shootings out of the news” and Republicans just want to change the subject each time, co-host Molly Jong-Fast says to kick off the latest episode of The New Abnormal. But the cold comfort is that “there are so many shootings that we're going to be talking about it, even though Republicans want to run out the clock, they're never gonna be able to run out.” Plus, We're Not Broken author and MSNBC columnist Eric Garcia joins the pod to tell Molly about his reporting on autism in America while having autism, and Strict Scrutiny co-host and ABC Supreme Court contributor Katie Shaw explains how politicians hide behind the Supreme Court's 2008 gun decision to pretend they're powerless now, and about what's looming when the Court issues it's first big gun decision since then any day now.  See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Brandon talks with Aszul about her toxic relationship with a rage filled narcissist. It's a story of triangulation, open relationships, creating problems that don't exist, and caretaking. Plus they discuss, gaslighting, patterns of abuse, hypocrisy, invalidation, projection, hoovering, bonding over trauma, mind reading, victim playing, boundaries, control, and much more. Thank you to our sponsor BOMBAS. Go to Bombas.com/nap and get 20% off your purchase of socks, underwear, and t-shirts. Bombas donates an item to a homeless shelter for every item purchased. They are a wonderful company. We love Bombas. Thank you to our sponsor HELLOFRESH. Go to HelloFresh.com/nap14 and use code nap14 for up to 14 free meals AND 3 free gifts! Enjoy America's #1 Meal Kit today! Thank you to our sponsor BETTERHELP. If you need online counseling from anywhere in the world, please do go to https://www.betterhelp.com/nap Get started today and enjoy 10% off your first month. Thank you to our sponsor Tru Niagen. Tru Niagen is a supplement that's clinically proven to boost N-A-D levels, an essential coenzyme required for cellular energy and repair. Add more vitality to your life today, with Tru Niagen. Right now, new customers can save 10% on their first purchase by going to https://TruNiagen.com/nap and use code nap. If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.  Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Liah McPherson is the next guest on the show! She is a Masters student with theMarine Mammal Research program through the University of Hawaii and a field assistant with the Wild Dolphin Project in the Bahamas. I was able to join her and the Wild Dolphin Project on their boat in the Bahamas doing research on Spotted dolphins!Important Times:● 00:11 Intro● 02:23 Hello again Liah! You have a really interesting lifestyle, introduce yourself!● 03:28 Why did you choose to study dolphins?● 05:08 Spinner dolphins and the species you study● 05:57 Using drones● 07:00 What research are you doing in Hawaii?● 09:48 Tell us about these Spinner dolphins!● 11:45 Why do they spin?● 13:00 How do they rest and sleep?● 14:45 Do they travel as a group?● 18:42 Conflict with humans● 21:28 Federal offense if you get too close to them● 24:56 Spinner vs Bottlenose dolphins● 27:38 What research are you doing in the Bahamas?● 32:44 Favorite memory with the dolphins● 33:22 Taking samples● 36:46 Seaweed game they play with humans● 40:09 What is the coolest part of your job?● 41:02 Martin's experience with a baby Dolphin named Basmati● 42:16 Do you feel like you're swimming with an intelligent animal?● 43:10 Language and communication● 45:45 How do they navigate?● 47:26 Humans using echolocation● 48:00 Sound underwater● 48:32 Triangulating individual dolphins from their sound● 51:25 Thank you for being on the show! Any last thoughts?Liah's Instagram: @mcfearsomeWild Dolphin Project: @wilddolphinprojectMarine Mammal Research Project: @mmrp_uh

Brandon talks with Erika about her toxic relationship with a triangulating grifter. It's a story of sexual identity manipulation, social media smear campaigns, escape plans, and the healing power of the enneagram. Plus they discuss, domestic violence, LGBTQ issues, Mennonite culture, gaslighting, mirroring, future faking, sense of self, homelessness, car culture, dogs, feminism, patterns, changing manipulation tactics, control, food manipulation, housing manipulation, LGBTQ manipulation, emojis, rationalization, cycles of abuse, therapy manipulation, feeling worthy, obligation, belonging, flying monkeys, animal abuse, coping with alcohol, boundaries, authentic living, support, generosity from strangers and much more. To view Erika's Drawing of her story click here. Thank you to our sponsor BETTERHELP. If you need online counseling from anywhere in the world, please do go to https://www.betterhelp.com/nap Get started today and enjoy 10% off your first month. *** If you or someone you know are experiencing abuse, you are not alone. DomesticShelters.org offers an extensive library of articles and resources that can help you make sense of what you're experiencing, connect you with local resources and find ways to heal and move forward. Visit www.domesticshelters.org to access this free resource.   You can listen to the Toxic Workplace Podcast at https://www.toxicworkplacepodcast.com/podcast Join our new Community Social Network at https://community.narcissistapocalypse.com/ Join our Instagram Channel at https://www.instagram.com/narcissistapocalypse Join our Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCpTIgjTqVJa4caNWMIAJllA If you want to be a guest on our show, go to https://narcissistapocalypse.com Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices