Podcasts about Vagueness

Ryan Raymond is a comedian working in Chicago, Illinois!

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 463. A followup discussion with André Simoni of Brazil about some questions he had about applying my/Rothbard's title-transfer. See also KOL457 | Sheldon Richman & IP; Andre from Brazil re Contract Theory, Student Loan Interest Payments, Bankruptcy, Vagueness, Usury. Grok Shownotes: 0:00–29:42] In this episode of the Kinsella on Liberty podcast (KOL463), Stephan Kinsella engages in a follow-up discussion with André Simoni from Brazil, building on their prior conversation with Sheldon Richman (KOL457). The dialogue begins with André revisiting his concerns about usury, fractional-reserve banking, and the nature of loan contracts, proposing a libertarian limit on interest rates to prevent exploitative lending practices that could lead to effective enslavement. He argues that modern financial systems, including fractional-reserve banking and fiat currency, are interconnected mechanisms designed to promote unsustainable economic activity, drawing insights from Doug French's book Walk Away. Kinsella challenges André's framing, particularly his view of loan contracts as bilateral exchanges, asserting instead that they are unilateral title transfers under Rothbard's title-transfer theory of contract. The discussion delves into the impracticality of “smart contracts” and escrow-based performance bonds, highlighting the inherent uncertainties in contractual damages and future obligations. [29:43–1:39:34] The conversation shifts to a deeper exploration of risk, inalienability, and the moral hazards embedded in modern banking systems. André connects usury and fractional-reserve banking, arguing that banks exploit depositors and borrowers by offloading risk while profiting as intermediaries, creating a system akin to a Ponzi scheme propped up by state interventions like deposit insurance. Kinsella agrees that the current system is corrupt but emphasizes that in a free market with full disclosure, such practices would be unsustainable due to economic realities and the inability to insure against systemic risks. They discuss the legitimacy of loan contracts, with André expressing concern about contracts that shift excessive risk to borrowers, potentially violating inalienability principles. The episode concludes with a discussion on corporations and limited liability, with André suggesting that corporate structures exacerbate risk-shifting, while Kinsella defends the contractual basis of corporations, referencing his prior discussions with Jeff Barr (KOL414, KOL418). Links to further resources and a promise to continue the dialogue are provided.   Youtube Transcript and Detailed Grok Summary below. https://youtu.be/8AfTdeiDJD0 Links: Mercadente, The Illiberal Nature of Limited Liability: A Libertarian Critique Recent Grok conversation Libertarian Answer Man: Legal Entities and Corporations in a Free Society (Feb. 29, 2024) Libertarian Answer Man: Corporations, Trusts, HOAs, and Private Law Codes in a Private Law Society (Nov. 11, 2023) KOL414 | Corporations, Limited Liability, and the Title Transfer Theory of Contract, with Jeff Barr: Part I KOL418 | Corporations, Limited Liability, and the Title Transfer Theory of Contract, with Jeff Barr: Part II On Coinbase, Bitcoin, Fractional-Reserve Banking, and Irregular Deposits UK Proposal for Banking Reform: Fractional-Reserve Banking versus Deposits and Loans Musings on Fractional-Reserve Banking in a Bitcoin Age; Physicalist Shock Absorber Metaphors The Great Fractional Reserve/Freebanking Debate Jesús Huerta de Soto, Money, Bank Credit, and Economic Cycles Stephan Kinsella, “The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract,” Papinian Press Working Paper #1 (Sep. 7, 2024) Corporate Personhood, Limited Liability, and Double Taxation Doug French, Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth My thoughts on bankruptcy and inalienability: see Areas that need development from libertarian thinker...

Garth Heckman TDAgiantslayer@Gmail.com  The David Alliance   The life and times of Remus Reid   Check the source Check the money trail Check the background Check the history Check the    Someone trying to manipulate you might display a range of traits aimed at gaining control or influencing your decisions and feelings. Here are some common ones: Emotional Tactics:  * Playing the Victim: They portray themselves as helpless or wronged to evoke your sympathy and make you feel obligated to help them.  * Guilt-Tripping: They make you feel responsible for their problems or emotions, leading you to do things you wouldn't normally do.  * Love Bombing: They overwhelm you with excessive attention, affection, and praise early on to create a strong emotional bond and make you more susceptible to their influence.  * Playing on Your Insecurities: They identify your weaknesses and use them against you to undermine your confidence and make you dependent on them.  * Emotional Blackmail: They threaten to harm themselves or others, or to withdraw affection if you don't comply with their demands.  * Gaslighting: They distort or deny your reality, making you doubt your memory, perception, and sanity.  * Using Charm and Flattery: They can be excessively nice and complimentary to disarm you and make you more agreeable.  * Creating Chaos and Drama: They thrive on instability and may create conflicts to distract you or make you rely on them to resolve the issues.  * Inconsistent Behavior: Their moods and actions can change unpredictably, keeping you off balance and making you try harder to please them. Communication Tactics:  * Lying and Deception: They may outright lie or omit information to control the narrative and achieve their goals.  * Exaggeration and Generalization: They might exaggerate their own achievements or misfortunes and use sweeping statements to influence your opinion.  * Blame Shifting: They avoid taking responsibility for their actions and instead blame others, including you.  * Changing the Subject: They abruptly switch topics to avoid uncomfortable conversations or deflect scrutiny.  * Vagueness and Indirect Communication: They may not clearly state their needs or intentions, making it easier to manipulate the situation later.  * Using Confusion: They might use complex language or illogical arguments to confuse you and make you doubt your understanding.  * Withholding Information: They strategically omit details to give you an incomplete picture and steer you in their desired direction. Behavioral Tactics:  * Boundary Violations: They disregard your personal boundaries and push your limits to see what they can get away with.  * Controlling Behavior: They try to control aspects of your life, such as your time, money, or relationships.  * Isolation: They may try to isolate you from your friends and family to increase your dependence on them.  * Triangulation: They involve a third party to manipulate the situation, often by creating jealousy or using the third person to relay messages.  * Pressuring You: They create a sense of urgency to make you act quickly without thinking.  * Ignoring or Dismissing Your Needs: They prioritize their own needs and disregard your feelings and desires.  * Playing the Martyr: They act as if they are making huge sacrifices for you to make you feel indebted to them. It's important to remember that these traits can appear individually or in combination. Recognizing these patterns is the first step in protecting yourself from manipulation. Trust your instincts if something feels "off" in a relationship.           What does the Bible say about deception… well it actually comes down to one simple - not so simple thing: Words! Your mouth gives away your heart… but they are tied to your actions… meaning if I use the words “I love you… sounds good, but my words might be true OR they might be manipulative. So words are only as powerful as the actions behind them.  Again… think on this: If I say one thing and it is true - it proves my heart and my words back it up. If I say one thing and it is not true according to my actions- then it is just as powerful in that it reveals my deception.      Focus on Deception and Falsehood:  * Speaking Lies and Deceit: The Bible frequently warns against lying and those who speak falsehoods. Manipulators often rely on deception to achieve their goals.    * "Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord, but those who act faithfully are his delight." (Proverbs 12:22)    * "Whoever speaks the truth gives honest evidence, but a false witness speaks deceitfully." (Proverbs 12:17)  * Having a Double Heart: This refers to those who say one thing but mean another, or who act with ulterior motives.    * "They speak falsehood to one another; with flattering lips and a double heart they speak." (Psalm 12:2) Emphasis on Selfishness and Pride:  * Seeking Their Own Interests: Manipulators are often driven by their own selfish desires and disregard the needs of others.    * "Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others." (Philippians 2:3-4) This verse highlights the contrast between selfless love and self-centeredness.  * Boasting and Arrogance: Manipulators may inflate their own importance and achievements to impress and control others.    * "The Lord detests all the proud of heart. Be sure of this: They will not go unpunished." (Proverbs 16:5) Warning Against Flattery and Smooth Talk:  * Using Flattering Words: Manipulators often use excessive praise and charm to disarm and influence their targets.    * "A man who flatters his neighbor spreads a net for his feet." (Proverbs 29:5)    * "For there is no truth in their mouth; their inmost self is destruction; their throat is an open grave; they flatter with their tongue." (Psalm 5:9) Importance of Discernment and Wisdom:  * Testing the Spirits: The Bible encourages believers to be discerning and not believe everything they hear.    * "Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world." (1 John 4:1) This principle can be applied to discerning the motives behind people's words and actions.  * Seeking Wisdom: Wisdom allows you to see beyond surface appearances and understand people's true intentions.    * "If any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask God, who gives generously to all without reproach, and it will be given him." (James 1:5) Focus on Actions and Fruits:  * Judging by Their Fruits: Jesus taught that we can recognize people by the results of their actions. Manipulative individuals often leave a trail of broken relationships, hurt feelings, and negative consequences.    * "You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So also, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit." (Matthew 7:16-17) The Contrast with Genuine Love and Humility:  * True Love is Selfless: Biblical love (agape) is characterized by selflessness, patience, kindness, and a focus on the well-being of others – the opposite of manipulation.    * "Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things." (1 Corinthians 13:4-7)  * Humility Values Others: Genuine humility leads to valuing others above oneself, which stands in stark contrast to the manipulator's self-centeredness. In summary, while the Bible doesn't provide a checklist of "manipulator traits," it equips us with principles to discern those who operate in deceit, selfishness, and pride. By focusing on truth, humility, genuine love, and the fruits of their actions, we can gain wisdom in recognizing and protecting ourselves from manipulative individuals.

​In the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR29-22-2805), the defense filed a Motion to Strike the State's Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty on the grounds of vagueness in balancing aggravating and mitigating factors. The defense argues that Idaho's capital sentencing framework lacks clear standards for jurors to weigh these factors, potentially leading to arbitrary and unconstitutional death sentences. They contend that the absence of explicit guidelines violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment and guarantee due process.​Furthermore, the defense highlights that the broad and vague nature of Idaho's statutory aggravating factors results in a majority of first-degree murder cases being eligible for the death penalty, failing to genuinely narrow the class of offenders subject to capital punishment. They assert that this overbreadth does not adequately differentiate between cases warranting the death penalty and those that do not, thereby undermining the constitutional requirement for a clear and fair sentencing process. Consequently, the defense requests the court to preclude the death penalty in Kohberger's case, citing these constitutional concerns.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:090524-Motion-Strike-States-Notice-Intent-Seek-Death-Penalty.pdf

​In the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR29-22-2805), the defense filed a Motion to Strike the State's Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty on the grounds of vagueness in balancing aggravating and mitigating factors. The defense argues that Idaho's capital sentencing framework lacks clear standards for jurors to weigh these factors, potentially leading to arbitrary and unconstitutional death sentences. They contend that the absence of explicit guidelines violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment and guarantee due process.​Furthermore, the defense highlights that the broad and vague nature of Idaho's statutory aggravating factors results in a majority of first-degree murder cases being eligible for the death penalty, failing to genuinely narrow the class of offenders subject to capital punishment. They assert that this overbreadth does not adequately differentiate between cases warranting the death penalty and those that do not, thereby undermining the constitutional requirement for a clear and fair sentencing process. Consequently, the defense requests the court to preclude the death penalty in Kohberger's case, citing these constitutional concerns.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:090524-Motion-Strike-States-Notice-Intent-Seek-Death-Penalty.pdf

​In the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR29-22-2805), the defense filed a Motion to Strike the State's Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty on the grounds of vagueness in balancing aggravating and mitigating factors. The defense argues that Idaho's capital sentencing framework lacks clear standards for jurors to weigh these factors, potentially leading to arbitrary and unconstitutional death sentences. They contend that the absence of explicit guidelines violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment and guarantee due process.​Furthermore, the defense highlights that the broad and vague nature of Idaho's statutory aggravating factors results in a majority of first-degree murder cases being eligible for the death penalty, failing to genuinely narrow the class of offenders subject to capital punishment. They assert that this overbreadth does not adequately differentiate between cases warranting the death penalty and those that do not, thereby undermining the constitutional requirement for a clear and fair sentencing process. Consequently, the defense requests the court to preclude the death penalty in Kohberger's case, citing these constitutional concerns.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:090524-Motion-Strike-States-Notice-Intent-Seek-Death-Penalty.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR29-22-2805), the defense filed a Motion to Strike the State's Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty on the grounds of vagueness in balancing aggravating and mitigating factors. The defense argues that Idaho's capital sentencing framework lacks clear standards for jurors to weigh these factors, potentially leading to arbitrary and unconstitutional death sentences. They contend that the absence of explicit guidelines violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment and guarantee due process.​Furthermore, the defense highlights that the broad and vague nature of Idaho's statutory aggravating factors results in a majority of first-degree murder cases being eligible for the death penalty, failing to genuinely narrow the class of offenders subject to capital punishment. They assert that this overbreadth does not adequately differentiate between cases warranting the death penalty and those that do not, thereby undermining the constitutional requirement for a clear and fair sentencing process. Consequently, the defense requests the court to preclude the death penalty in Kohberger's case, citing these constitutional concerns.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:090524-Motion-Strike-States-Notice-Intent-Seek-Death-Penalty.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 457. I had been meaning to talk to my old friend Sheldon Richman, of the Libertarian Institute and TGIF column, about his own IP Odyssey, as he's always been great on this issue, (( My IP Odyssey; as quoted in “Your failed business model is not my problem”; Sheldon Richman, “Patent Nonsense," IP Debate Breaks Out at FEE. Others, e.g. Richman, The Articles of Confederation Versus the Constitution. )) and many others. At the same time I had been talking to André Simoni of Brazil about some questions he had about applying my/Rothbard's title-transfer contract theory to some questions he had about interest payments on student loans and other contracts, usury, and so on. I had thought of talking to André and Sheldon separately but decided to combine them, partly because I confused André's topic with a discussion I had also been having at the same time with Galambosian Brian Gladish about IP and Galambos. (( On Galambos, see the following. On Gladish, see the next note. Galambos and Other Nuts; The Galambosians strike back; “Around this time I met the Galambosian.”; Was Galambos an IP Thief?; Galambos the Crank; Shades of Galambos: Man tries to copyright his name; Rothbard and Galambosians. )) Libertopia, San Diego, Oct. 11, 2012: Anthony Gregory, Kinsella, Roderick Long, Sheldon Richman. See KOL238 | Libertopia 2012 IP Panel with Charles Johnson and Butler Shaffer; KOL237 | Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP—Part 2 (Libertopia 2012); KOL236 | Intellectual Nonsense: Fallacious Arguments for IP (Libertopia 2012) Sheldon and I talked first about IP and other topics, and then to André about contract theory, which Sheldon jumped in on anyway. (I may talk to Gladish later about Galambos and IP.) (( Gladish on Galambos at ASC; his comments at: Have You Changed Your Mind About Intellectual Property?; Galambos and Other Nuts; Mises on Intellectual Property; Why Objectivists Hate Anarchy (Hint: IP). )) We touched on a number of topics; see the summary of our discussion points by Grok, below. https://youtu.be/7vrIz8cv2Bw Of relevance: Stephan Kinsella, “The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract,” Papinian Press Working Paper #1 (Sep. 7, 2024) Napolitano on Health-Care Reform and the Constitution: Is the Commerce Clause Really Limited?  and On Constitutional Sentimentalism (re Richman's point about the interstate commerce clause); see also his comments about federal tax power in Randy Barnett's “Federalism Amendment”–A Counterproposal; and related posts The Walmart Question, or, the Unsupported Assertions of Left-Libertarianism Ep. 382 Sheldon Richman Says Corporate Isn't a Dirty Word, Bob Murphy Show Four questions for “anti-capitalist” libertarians (Carpio)/Is Capitalism Something Good? (Richman) (2010) Left-Libertarians Admit Opposition to “Capitalism” is Substantive Capitalism, Socialism, and Libertarianism Should Libertarians Oppose “Capitalism”? Richman: Leave the “Left” Behind? Doug French, Walk Away: The Rise and Fall of the Home-Ownership Myth On libertarians who support voluntary slavery contracts: Block, Nozick, Casey: “A Tour Through Walter Block's Oeuvre”; KOL442 | Together Strong Debate vs. Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery (Matthew Sands of Nations of Sanity) Concise Grok summary using the transcript (below): Here's a concise summary of the "Interview by Stephan Kinsella of Sheldon Richman and Andre from Brazil" in about 7 bullet points with time markers: 0:02 - 2:11: Stephan Kinsella introduces the podcast ("Kinsella on Liberty 457") to catch up with Sheldon Richman, executive editor of the Libertarian Institute, about his libertarian history and IP views. Sheldon writes "TGIF" weekly, rooted in his Freeman editorship (late 1990s-~2012-13). 2:19 - 9:14: Sheldon, officially retired but freelancing, rejects "left-libertarian" as a tribal label (early 2000s usage),

​In the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR29-22-2805), the defense filed a Motion to Strike the State's Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty on the grounds of vagueness in balancing aggravating and mitigating factors. The defense argues that Idaho's capital sentencing framework lacks clear standards for jurors to weigh these factors, potentially leading to arbitrary and unconstitutional death sentences. They contend that the absence of explicit guidelines violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment and guarantee due process.​Furthermore, the defense highlights that the broad and vague nature of Idaho's statutory aggravating factors results in a majority of first-degree murder cases being eligible for the death penalty, failing to genuinely narrow the class of offenders subject to capital punishment. They assert that this overbreadth does not adequately differentiate between cases warranting the death penalty and those that do not, thereby undermining the constitutional requirement for a clear and fair sentencing process. Consequently, the defense requests the court to preclude the death penalty in Kohberger's case, citing these constitutional concerns.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:090524-Motion-Strike-States-Notice-Intent-Seek-Death-Penalty.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR29-22-2805), the defense filed a Motion to Strike the State's Notice of Intent to Seek the Death Penalty on the grounds of vagueness in balancing aggravating and mitigating factors. The defense argues that Idaho's capital sentencing framework lacks clear standards for jurors to weigh these factors, potentially leading to arbitrary and unconstitutional death sentences. They contend that the absence of explicit guidelines violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibit cruel and unusual punishment and guarantee due process.​Furthermore, the defense highlights that the broad and vague nature of Idaho's statutory aggravating factors results in a majority of first-degree murder cases being eligible for the death penalty, failing to genuinely narrow the class of offenders subject to capital punishment. They assert that this overbreadth does not adequately differentiate between cases warranting the death penalty and those that do not, thereby undermining the constitutional requirement for a clear and fair sentencing process. Consequently, the defense requests the court to preclude the death penalty in Kohberger's case, citing these constitutional concerns.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:090524-Motion-Strike-States-Notice-Intent-Seek-Death-Penalty.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​Sometimes, there is vagueness about whether it is morally permissible (or even in some situations required) to perform a certain act—moral vagueness. What is the source of moral vagueness? Ofra Magidor discusses this topic with Nigel Warburton. This episode of the Philosophy Bites podcast has been made in association with Vagueness & Ethics, a research project funded by the European Commission (grant agreement number 101028625 — H2020-MSCA-IF-2020) and led by Miguel Dos Santos at Uppsala University.

The new year self-improvement buzz can be really overwhelming if you're struggling with which goals to focus on and how to actually implement them in sustainable ways. I'm a big dreamer, but I have a hard time with organization, time management and consistency. That's why I called in the master of goal-setting and planning, the creative force behind Passion Planner, Angel Trinidad.Angel is the CEO and founder of Passion Planner, an all-in-one paper life coach, which has helped millions of people plan their goals and their lives. They have built a devoted global community of people who swear by their planners and journals.I'm so excited to share this incredible interview with you — it's a must-listen episode for setting your year and your mindset up for success with gentle productivity, creating a passion roadmap, and collaborating with your dreams.Angel shares her inspiring journey of going from lost, depressed and broke to a self-made millionaire with a mission-driven company that helps people achieve their dreams. My biggest takeaways? Vagueness creates procrastination, and the biggest antidote to hopelessness is making progress. So if you want to get unstuck and start spending your time on the things that matter, this one's for you.Tune in to hear about:Angel's journey to starting Passion PlannerThe keys to overcoming fear and procrastinationMindset shifts to get you unstuck and back in motionThe goal-setting system that helps you structure your dreams and implement the goals that will countThe importance of collaborating with your goals from a place of kindnessCreating your own passion road mapProductivity hacks for getting shit doneWhy we need to manage our time differently to change our livesAngel's powerful journaling and reflection processHow action cures fearAngel's top book recommendations for self-help and entrepreneursResources mentioned:Get started on Passion PlannerThe Never Ending Now Poetry JournalThe 4-Hour Work Week Follow Angel on Instagram Follow Passion Planner on InstagramFor advertising and sponsorship inquiries, please contact Frequency Podcast Network. Sign up for our monthly adulting newsletter:teachmehowtoadult.ca/newsletter Follow us on the ‘gram:@teachmehowtoadultmedia@gillian.bernerFollow on TikTok: @teachmehowtoadultSubscribe on YouTube

Would you like access to our advanced agency training for FREE? https://www.agencymastery360.com/training Do you struggle to write proposals? Do you know the 2 keys to winning more clients in the proposal stage? Mastering the art of creating fast, high-quality proposals remains crucial for agency growth. The best way to guarantee your proposal has a chance to stand out from competitors is to ensure speed and accuracy. That is why our featured guest is sharing how he went from owning an agency to creating the tool for overcoming proposal anxiety. He spent years thinking about ways to turn what was often the worst part of the job for him into an easier and more enjoyable process and eventually launched a software that does just that. Learn more about Joe's entrepreneurial journey and insights into the agency world. Joe Ardeeser is a former agency owner and entrepreneur who ran a web design shop and high-end WordPress shop for twelve years. He shares his journey from agency owner to launching his latest venture, Smart Pricing Table. Joe discusses his early experiences in the agency business, highlighting his desire for independence and the challenges he faced, including developing RSI and chronic back pain, which led him to hire his first employees out of necessity. He reflects on the things that took away from his agency's growth and the way to keep improving your proposals until you're yielding the expected results. In this episode, we'll discuss: 2 keys to drafting a successful proposal. Learning from past mistakes to continuously improve your proposals. The solution to overcome proposal anxiety. Subscribe Apple | Spotify | iHeart Radio When Setbacks Become Stepping Stones in Agency Growth Joe's story begins with a common entrepreneurial struggle: the desire for independence. Truth be told, he didn't like having a boss. After working in a corporate environment that stifled his creativity and autonomy, Joe ventured into freelancing. However, an unexpected challenge arose when he developed an injury that hindered his ability to perform tasks like typing. This setback, rather than derailing his ambition, became the catalyst for hiring. Enlisting help helped Joe realize that delegating tasks could free him to focus on higher-level strategic thinking. The first time he realized the critical role played by that initial hire was during a simple errand. Upon his return, he realized his employee kept everything running smoothly in his absence. He was hooked. The experience highlighted the power of collaboration and the importance of building a team that could share the workload. As his agency grew, each strategic hire—from developers and designers to a pivotal sales manager—freed Joe to focus on broader business strategy. The decision to hire a salesperson, though questioned by some who thought the agency was too small, proved particularly transformative. By delegating the pressure of closing deals, Joe could finally step away from the day-to-day stress of revenue generation. Little by little his hires and careful delegation led to the big day when a client was onboarded without his input at any level and not even knowing the client prior to that moment. It was the moment he knew he had transitioned from an owner to a CEO. 2 Keys of a Successful Proposal: Speed and Precision As for so many agencies, Joe recognizes lead generation as a significant pain point for him. Luckily, the agency got tons of leads from Clutch back in the beginning. Still, they did a lot of one-time work and hadn't cracked the code on landing retainers. #1 - Speed Back then, Joe hated writing proposals, because of the urgency that came with it. In his experience, every day that went by meant the odds of getting picked went slimmed. In his experience, clients often go with the first-engaged vendor. By reaching out immediately, an agency demonstrates its commitment and also capitalizes on the momentum of the prospect's interest. #2 - Accuracy Secondly, the proposal, scope, and expectations must be accurate. If not, the project could blow up post-sale and become a nightmare. These two proposal conditions, it having to be ready quickly but also be high-quality, are two elements that come together to create what Joe calls “proposal anxiety” which is one of the bigger stressors in agency life. Your proposal should be detailed to avoid painful mistakes like greatly underestimating the time and resources you'll be investing on that project. According to Joe, it should be detailed enough to provide “handles to grab onto” without being obnoxious. Vagueness will lead to situations where all your resources keep getting sucked into that project without the proper limits to stop at a certain point. Why You Should Record All Issues with Previous Proposals to Yield Better Results Ideally, agency owners should keep a repository of all the learnings from previous projects. Record all the issues you've ran into that could've been avoided by clearing it up in the proposal. In this sense, Joe recommends having reusable items that can be improved over time as you test through agency work. Many things might change in these documents as you get better and better but Joe makes two main recommendations for making successful proposal drafts: Make it visually appealing. Even if you are making very detailed proposals, don't underestimate the importance of the layout. If it basically looks like a wall of text the prospect will be overwhelmed and be less likely to read it, and that will inevitably lead to expectation issues. Lay out your proposal so it is digestible by creating bullet points as visual clear representation of the work included, limitations, and upsales available. Define the “Spirit of the work”. Joe particularly recommends taking to the time to define this as something you can always come back to if you feel the scope of the project is getting out of hand. As you continue to test and improve upon this document it will become a proposal that'll help you yield the expected results. The Solution to Proposal Anxiety Joe became obsessed with the idea of creating a more structured and efficient approach to proposals to streamline and agency's proposal processes. His goal was turning what is often the worst part of the job into something actually enjoyable. With this mission in mind, three years ago he took his vision to the market in the form of Smart Pricing Table, a proposal software built for marketing agencies. As someone who ran an agency for many years, Joe knows his software offers the type of features agencies want and can provide the structure to provide quick and accurate proposals. By focusing on the needs of agencies and incorporating feedback from users, the software has evolved to meet the changing demands of the industry. This adaptability is vital, as it allows agencies to continuously refine their proposal processes and stay ahead of the competition. Do You Want to Transform Your Agency from a Liability to an Asset? Looking to dig deeper into your agency's potential? Check out our Agency Blueprint. Designed for agency owners like you, our Agency Blueprint helps you uncover growth opportunities, tackle obstacles, and craft a customized blueprint for your agency's success.

Anthony Pierri is the co-founder of Fletch PMM, a consultancy that helps early-stage B2B startups sharpen their positioning and better articulate their value propositions. In this conversation, we explored: Why niche marketing is critical for early-stage success How small teams can scale effectively Practical steps for defining a product's positioning using seven key elements Anthony also dives into the importance of clear messaging, tangible go-to-market assets, and the psychology behind buyer decisions. A must-listen for B2B startups looking to stand out. EPISODE LINKS: Fletch PMM: https://www.fletchpmm.com Anthony on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/anthony-pierri TIMESTAMPS: 00:00:00 Intro and Background 00:01:20 Fletch PMM 00:01:58 Positioning and Messaging Strategies 00:05:55 Custom Services vs. Productized Services 00:07:50 Vagueness in Product Marketing 00:10:12 Stages of Product Market Fit 00:11:48 Investor Expectations and Market Focus 00:13:06 Executive Alignment and Brand Messaging 00:14:48 Mental Availability and Positioning 00:19:00 Belief Change and Niching Down 00:24:35 Organic Content and Personal Branding 00:29:00 Content Strategy and Funnel Building 00:33:22 Common Homepage Mistakes 00:35:39 The Importance of Focus in Marketing 00:36:39 Voice of the Customer 00:39:53 The Buying Decision Process 00:42:51 Homepages in Customer Acquisition 00:45:03 Positioning Transformation 00:49:24 Steps to Effective Positioning 00:50:53 Choosing the Right Market Segment 01:03:42 Closing CONNECT: Website: https://hoo.be/elijahmurray YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@elijahmurray Twitter: https://twitter.com/elijahmurray Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/elijahmurray LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/elijahmurray/ Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-long-game-w-elijah-murray/ Spotify: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/elijahmurray RSS: https://anchor.fm/s/3e31c0c/podcast/rss

Mit Begriffen wie Intelligenz oder Emotionsregulation beeinflusst die wissenschaftliche Psychologie auch die alltägliche Sprache. Oder entstammen diese Begriffen vielleicht eher dem Alltag und beeinflussen die Psychologie? Mit fragen wie dieser setzt sich der Text auseinander, der in dieser Folge besprochen wird.Die 136. Folge des Podcasts Fipsi, in dem Alexander Wendt und Hannes Wendler den Dialog zwischen Philosophie und Psychologie entwickeln.Auf YouTube finden Sie alle Episoden von Fipsi unter https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLpIT6jK3mKTiQcXbinapKRbf39mLEpKWmAuf Spotify finden Sie Fipsi unter https://open.spotify.com/show/0il832RRDoPZPaNlC7vams?si=5KbdEcF1TImSHexKYGccfw&dl_branch=1Die Website der Arbeitsgemeinschaft: https://www.phi-psy.deMelden Sie sich mit Rückmeldungen und Anmerkungen gerne unter fipsi@phi-psy.deDiskutieren Sie mit uns auf Telegram: https://t.me/FipsiPPP oder https://t.me/PhiundPsyFür das Intro bedanken wir uns bei Estella und Peter: https://www.instagram.com/elpetera

#arcane #gaming #podcast #castlevania #leagueoflegends #legendsofruneterra #teamfighttactics #television #review But I wanna know!

The guys cover CIVIL WAR (dir. Alex Garland) on this one, and it gets heated! But does it get heated because the film is hot garbage? Join the guys as they attempt to find out what this movie is trying to say through its vagueness, violence, philosophy, and potential to be a good film. Enjoy! Join the SHOW ME THE MEANING! LIVESTREAM every Tuesday at 5 PM PST on the Wisecrack 2 channel! https://youtube.com/@wisecrack_2 Follow us on Twitter! @austin_hayden (Austin) @creamatoria (Raymond) © 2024 Wisecrack / Enthusiast Gaming Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Thursday, September 12, 2024 Subscribe: Get the Daily Update in your inbox for free 1/ A North Dakota judge struck down the state's abortion ban, saying the state constitution creates a “fundamental right” to access abortion before a fetus is viable and restrictions on that right is “a violation on medical freedom.” Judge Bruce R... Visit WTF Just Happened Today? for more news and headlines, brought to you by Matt Kiser. The WTFJHT Podcast is narrated and produced by Joe Amditis.

Thursday, September 12, 2024 Subscribe: Get the Daily Update in your inbox for free 1/ A North Dakota judge struck down the state's abortion ban, saying the state constitution creates a “fundamental right” to access abortion before a fetus is viable and restrictions on that right is “a violation on medical freedom.” Judge Bruce R... Visit WTF Just Happened Today? for more news and headlines, brought to you by Matt Kiser. The WTFJHT Podcast is narrated and produced by Joe Amditis.

Thursday, September 12, 2024 Subscribe: Get the Daily Update in your inbox for free 1/ A North Dakota judge struck down the state's abortion ban, saying the state constitution creates a “fundamental right” to access abortion before a fetus is viable and restrictions on that right is “a violation on medical freedom.” Judge Bruce R... Visit WTF Just Happened Today? for more news and headlines, brought to you by Matt Kiser. The WTFJHT Podcast is narrated and produced by Joe Amditis.

Thursday, September 12, 2024 Subscribe: Get the Daily Update in your inbox for free 1/ A North Dakota judge struck down the state's abortion ban, saying the state constitution creates a “fundamental right” to access abortion before a fetus is viable and restrictions on that right is “a violation on medical freedom.” Judge Bruce R... Visit WTF Just Happened Today? for more news and headlines, brought to you by Matt Kiser. The WTFJHT Podcast is narrated and produced by Joe Amditis.

POTUS: Observing and deciphering the "strategic vagueness" presentation by the Harris-Walz campaign. @ThadMcCotter @theamgreatness 1892 Boadica raises an army for revenge

How would we explain our social structures to aliens? Can we define our social groups in a way that is easy to articulate and understand? Jason Werbeloff argues that it's extremely difficult to answer even the simplest questions about the nature of our social groups. Does this mean we should exclude any talk of groups when describing ourselves on the Golden Record?  And should we understand ourselves as individuals, rather than as members of social groups? [00:00] Introduction and Welcome [00:21] The Voyager Golden Record [02:17] Philosophical Inquiry: Social Groups and Aliens [02:57] The Alien's Perspective on Social Groups [05:08] Defining Social Groups [12:25] Margaret Gilbert's Theory of Social Groups [14:16] Challenges to Gilbert's Theory [20:41] Alternative Theories and Eliminativism [27:08] Q&A and Further Discussion [36:20] The Vagueness of Group Identity [37:10] Dispositional Refinement and Group Membership [37:47] Challenges in Defining Group Membership [38:45] Moral Responsibility and Group Identity [40:08] Individual Accountability in Group Actions [44:09] Degrees of Group Membership [46:43] The Role of Group Leaders [48:56] Relational Properties and Group Persistence [01:05:41] Human Groups vs. Animal Groups [01:11:30] Concluding Thoughts

Ken Carman and Anthony Lima continue their talk on the Cleveland Browns, as well as the Cleveland Guardians' extra-innings home loss to the Arizona Diamondbacks on Monday night.

In this episode of Passing Judgment, host Jessica Levinson and Reuters legal correspondent Jack Queen delve into two of the most politically charged trials of our era: those involving Hunter Biden and former President Donald Trump. They dissect the collapse of Hunter Biden's plea deal over the scope of immunity and dive into the trial's contentious debate on firearm purchase forms and drug use. Switching focus, they examine Trump's historic conviction related to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. Here are three key takeaways you don't want to miss:1️⃣ Hunter Biden Trial and Plea Deal Miscommunications: The plea deal for Hunter Biden unraveled when the judge questioned the broad scope of immunity it offered.2️⃣ Donald Trump and the Hush Money Case: The defense requested a mistrial due to the nature of Daniels' testimony, which was denied. Michael Cohen's cross-examination and David Pecker's damaging testimony were key moments.3️⃣ Vagueness and Second Amendment Arguments in Biden Trial: Questions about the vagueness of the law and an appeal based on Second Amendment rights. The defense argued that the timing of Biden's drug use at the time of the gun purchase was not adequately proven.Follow Our Host and Guest: @LevinsonJessica@Jackqueen_

You may have heard the recent statements made by Michael Ketchmark regarding the NAR settlement, but do you really understand the implications for offers of compensation?In this episode, Rob and Greg discuss the recent statements made by Michael Ketchmark regarding the NAR settlement. They analyze the settlement agreement and try to understand the implications for offers of compensation. They explore different interpretations of the agreement and the potential legal actions that could be taken.    They also address the introduction of concession fields in MLS listings and the possibility of offering compensation off the MLS. Don't miss out on this important conversation that highlights the need for clarity and communication from NAR to its members.   Listen to the Industry Relations Podcast, available on all podcast platforms!   Find, buy and protect the homes you love with CoreLogic.   Follow this link to subscribe to Industry Relations YouTube page Listen to the podcast on Apple Listen to the podcast on Spotify Connect with Rob and Greg:  Rob's Website Greg's Website Our Sponsors:  CoreLogic Notorious VIP This podcast is produced by Two Brothers Creative 2024.

Religion, the vagueness of consciousness and seeing things when you're blind.Ian has been reading. Dangerous, but sometimes it can't be helped. So we have a chat. First about religion and belief and then about consciousness and awareness.First up - Tanya Luhrmann's take on religion in her book How God Becomes Real. I met her when I chaired last year's Holberg debate. Her take is that to simply say, 'people who believe in a god are mistaken or stupid' does nothing to help undertand why people believe, nor why many of them say it helps them to believe . She wants to understand religious belief not dismiss it. I'm not a believer but I found her work to be insightful and fascinating. Her point is that "...the puzzle or religion is not the problem of false belief, but the question of how gods and spirits become and remain real to people and what this real-making does for humans."Next we look briefly at 'Vagueness and the Evolution of Consciousness' by Michael Tye. It's slim little book but don't let that fool you. It might look like a puddle but in fact it's a well. One of those rare science/philsophy books where an academic deep-thinker says, 'I have been wrong all these years and here's why.' Basically he began as a staunch supporter of the view that consciousness comes from witing togeher ordinary non-conscious stuff in a clever way. He now thinks this is unworkable and shows why. Leaving him to join the growing number of pan(proto)psychist people who think consciousness has to be a fundamental property of matter.And this leads us to a discussion about how there can be a difference between what your mind/brain can 'know' and what you become 'consiously' aware of. It's a fact that your mind registers, and sometimes even 'knows', a whole lot more than you do. We are all in some respects the Ronald Reagans of our own brain - just the fellow who gets handed the memos and reads them out for the public. He takes the credit but does none of the work. I jest but blind sight experiements among many others show how the brain/mind contains far more than we are consiouesly aware of. Which raises questions about the self and its role. COMMENT AT:https://substack.com/profile/126815820-david-malonehttps://www.instagram.com/hyperlandpodcast/https://www.facebook.com/groups/130898253302317Music by HYPERLANDGraphics by Caroline LargeImage NASA ID: PIA12348 Secondary Creator Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/ESA/CXC/STScI Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Paint Perspective Podcast episode 52, where we explain making a CUSTOM Space Marines chapter!The Space Marines chapter created in this episode wouldn't be possible without our new Signature Series Spray Primer from Colour Forge, which you can get your hands on via Kickstart starting from May 31st! Sign up at this link to be notified of the launch!https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thecolourforge/signature-series-0And learn more about Colour Forge below:https://thecolourforge.com/https://www.instagram.com/thecolourforge/Referenced in this ep:Paint your army FASTER (and better) https://youtu.be/u7Pl63fAq9APATREON ➡️ https://shorturl.at/tCIKU ONYX PAINTING LAMP ➡️ https://shorturl.at/ryBEGCOMMISSIONS ➡️ https://shorturl.at/xBKW8LISTEN ON THE GO ➡️ https://pod.link/1690786293DISCORD ➡️ https://shorturl.at/bwM68EVERYTHING AIRBRUSH ➡️ https://shorturl.at/bdX07Everyone loves Space Marines, but codex chapters can be a little bit limiting. In this episode of Paint Perspective, we discuss how you can create your own custom chapter of Space Marines, that are fast and easy to paint, look fantastic, and suit your own personal style. James shows us his 'Exemplars of Siege' which is his own home-brew chapter, and shares the exact methods he used to create them, so you can too!Also in this episode, we respond to our listeners comments about the confusing names from Vallejo, answer our question of the week about finding motivation to finish projects, and of course share our parting hobby hack! MAIN TOPIC around 30 minsColour Forge collab info around 0:00:00 Trailer0:00:30 The BEST board game 0:02:08 Meet us at UKGE! 0:03:25 1 year of Paint Perspective0:04:47 Joe's new army0:10:07 George finished a model! 0:12:28 Competition results 0:15:11 We got roasted0:19:07 Vallejo paint names 0:23:36 Vagueness in Warhammer 0:30:06 Making a CUSTOM Space Marines Chapter0:35:23 1: Colour scheme (Colour Forge info) 0:36:53 Colour Forge Signature Series reveal0:44:07 How to test colours fast 0:49:39 2: Lore & narrative   0:55:44 3: Basing0:58:27 4: Applying it to the army 1:04:53 TLDR Summary 1:06:47 The hardest part 1:10:51 How to find motivation?1:16:25 Custom Transfers hack1:19:19 Support the show!Join in with our upcoming monthly painting challenges:May - #AdeptusMaycanicus (Ad Mech)June - #JunestealerCults (Genestealer Cults)July - #Julegion (Horus Heresy) August - #SolarAugzillia (Humans)September - #TauSeptEmber (Tau)October - #Orktober (Orks)November - #Nidvember (Tyranids)December - #Sanguinala (Anything red / holiday themed)Support the Show.Paint Perspective is a miniature painting podcast brought to you by Siege Studios, featuring James Otero (Siege founder & CEO), Joe Hart (Siege Ops Manager) and George Coleman (Siege Content Creator & Commission Painter). Each week, our three co-hosts discuss a new topic from the point of view of people who work in the miniature painting industry.Follow us: @siegestudios / @paintperspectivepodcastWatch on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@SiegeStudios/podcasts

Rob Minkes, MD, PhD, MS-LOD, and Robert Eisinger, PhD, both coaching faculty members at the Healthcare Experience Foundation (HXF), join us on our weekly Healthcare Experience Matters Podcast to address some of the lingering questions surrounding medical professionalism. Vagueness of Medical “Professionalism” Last month, the New York Times published an article that caught our attention here at HXF entitled, The Unbearable Vagueness of Medical “Professionalism.” The article explores the evolving concept of professionalism in medical education and clinical practice, and the challenge of dealing with vague standards of professionalism, often resulting in disciplinary actions that disproportionately affect students of color. These standards extend beyond traditional behavior to include appearance and social media activity. The response led to a viral movement (#MedBikini), prompting a retraction of a newspaper criticizing unprofessional social media content. The history of professionalism in medicine reflects efforts to uphold ethical values amid changing healthcare landscapes. However, concerns persist regarding the subjective nature of professionalism assessments and their impact on diversity within the medical field. With ongoing debates about dress codes and social media conduct, this article underscores the need for a nuanced understanding of professionalism that reflects the diverse identities and experiences of healthcare professionals and patients alike. The full Times article can be found here: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/19/health/medical-students-professionalism.html The HXF Response Dr. Minkes and Robert responded to the article and ongoing debate with lack of clarity on medical professional as such: Doctors and nurses have answered a calling to care — specifically, in healing the sick. They don't think about whether their off-duty attire meets traditional definitions of appropriateness, even though some people think that is what defines or constitutes “professionalism.” But larger questions remain. How do we train medical professionals to be leaders in their field — to commence difficult conversations about death, to manage C-suite demands and requests, to work as a team with others, or to assuage patients' concerns in a way that fosters compassion and trust? Hospital executives and medical staff leaders who invest in professionalism training will be rewarded with happier, healthier patients, and doctors and nurses who bring joy and love to their work. The letter to the editor from the HXF Team can be found here: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/27/opinion/medical-professionalism-doctors-nurses.html?unlocked_article_code=1.f00.b0T_.gkexPpDIGhF5&ugrp=u  About Today's Speakers Dr. Minkes currently serves as Physician Coach with HXF. He is a board-certified general and pediatric surgeon who previously practiced as a pediatric surgeon for over twenty years in academic and private practice settings. He is also a professor and Chair of Specialty Medicine with Orlando College of Osteopathic Medicine (OCOM). Robert Eisinger is Chief Academic and Administrative Officer with HXF. A political scientist by training (B.A. Haverford College, M.A., Ph.D. University of Chicago), Robert began his leadership journey teaching and writing about public opinion, and the intersection of political institutions and behavior. He brings more than two decades of higher education and private sector experience to the HXF team. More Podcasts For a related conversion, make sure to listen to What Cultural Humility Means in Practice for Healthcare Leaders with Tiffany C. Chaney, FACHE: https://healthcareexperience.org/cultural-humility/

In this episode of 'Brain In A Vat', Hans Gutbrod addresses the gap in philosophy in understanding the ethics around statues, street names, and museums.By drawing parallels to just war theory, Gutbrod proposes a framework to navigate the complexities of commemorating historical figures and events. The discussion also touches upon the potential for altering commemorative symbols to preserve memory while adapting their messages.This episode probes the moral and aesthetic considerations of how societies remember their past.00:00 Introduction and Thought Experiment01:31 The Gap in Philosophy and Ethics02:47 The Ethics of Representations of the Past03:19 The Role of Metaphysics in Commemoration03:48 The Influence of History and Philosophy on Commemoration04:42 The Impact of Statues and Memorials on Public Perception06:30 The Ethics of Political Commemoration09:38 The Criteria for Erecting and Keeping Statues10:36 The Role of Intent in Commemoration12:11 The Role of Empirical Research in Commemoration13:17 The Challenges of Commemorating the Past15:05 The Complexity of Commemoration19:04 The Scope and Vagueness of Commemoration21:54 The Role of Conversation in Commemoration26:38 The Role of Vagueness in Commemoration28:05 The Complexity of Erecting Statues28:32 Perspectives from the Caucasus28:58 Reframing the Debate: The Case of Georgia30:00 Street Names and Shadows of the Past30:57 The Role of Art in Commemoration31:43 The Sackler Controversy and the Power of Art32:40 The Value of Preservation and Enriching Debate33:06 The Risk of Over-Inclusivity33:29 The Osama Bin Laden Hypothetical34:54 Addressing the Vagueness Problem36:20 The Ethics of Political Commemoration37:56 The Challenge of Deciding on Statues41:30 The Power of Artistic Alteration45:53 The Holocaust Memorial in Berlin: A Case Study53:12 The Role of Aesthetics in Commemoration55:31 The Personal Engagement with Commemoration

This episode of 'The Bearded Mystic Reacts' delves into the controversy surrounding Jay Shetty, a former Hindu monk turned self-help guru. The host reviews an article examining Shetty's claims to spiritual authority, his transition from monkhood to a lifestyle of influence and alleged wealth accumulation, and the authenticity of his backstory and teachings. The episode touches on criticisms of Shetty's fashion sense, his shift from promoting monastic simplicity to engaging with Hollywood elite, and questionable ventures like his life coaching certification school. The host also reflects on Shetty's spiritual narrative's inconsistencies, the strategic non-disclosure of his affiliation with ISKCON despite his spiritual guru being a known ISKCON monk, and the embarrassing outcome of Shetty's claims about his certification school's accreditation. Finally, the episode concludes with a call for closer scrutiny of self-proclaimed spiritual leaders like Shetty, emphasizing the importance of genuine spiritual teaching over commercial success.00:00 Introduction to the Jay Shetty Controversy00:42 Analyzing Jay Shetty's Style Evolution and Public Image02:26 Diving into the Article: Jay Shetty's Rise to Fame06:10 Critiquing Jay Shetty's Life Coaching Business and Capitalist Approach16:33 Exploring Jay Shetty's Alleged Misrepresentations and Legal Issues24:28 Jay Shetty's Spiritual Journey: Truths and Questions34:30 The Ambiguity of Jay Shetty's Spiritual Identity37:05 Exploring the Vagueness of 'Vedic' and Its Misuse38:29 The Controversial History of ISKCON in the U.S.39:35 The Dark Side of ISKCON's Past and Its Impact40:41 Jay Shetty's Ambiguous Association with ISKCON41:15 The Revival of ISKCON and Its Modern Challenges44:29 Jay Shetty's Monkhood: Reality vs. Representation53:09 The Rise of Jay Shetty: From Monk to Social Media Mogul58:35 The Ethical Dilemmas of Jay Shetty's Content Creation01:01:59 Jay Shetty's Influence in Hollywood and Beyond01:04:18 The Controversy Surrounding Jay Shetty's Certification School01:07:40 The Questionable Intersection of Spirituality and Wellness01:11:31 Concluding Thoughts on Jay Shetty's Spiritual BrandPatreon: Support The Bearded Mystic Podcast and get ad-free, bonus episodes along with many more benefits:https://www.patreon.com/thebeardedmysticpodcastJoin The Bearded Mystic Podcast Discussion Group on Whatsapp:  https://chat.whatsapp.com/GcCnyrjQwLuEPHBaVA6q9LPlease rate and write a review for this Podcast: https://www.thebeardedmysticpodcast.com/reviews/new/You can follow me and contact me on social media:Website: https://www.thebeardedmysticpodcast.comTikTok: https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMdk3HPJh/Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thebeardedmysticpodcast/Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/TheBeardedMysticPodcast/Twitter: https://twitter.com/bearded_mysticFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/The-Bearded-Mystic-PodcastSupport the show

Trump's classified document charges are Void for Vagueness, and must be dismissed, according to a new filing by Trump's attorneys arguing Jack Smith's prosecution is unconstitutional.Terrence Bradley's texts with Ashleigh Merchant have been released courtesy of @PhilHollowayEsq and @MegynKelly and confirm he either lying then or lying now. Members of Congress react and the Georgia Senate investigation into Fani Willis heats up.Letitia James has a long list of very curious campaign contributions from "Ghost Donors" according to a new investigation by @villgecrazylady into the NY AG's campaign finances. Will Leticia investigate herself?

Karen A and  Ben K talk about Debting and Vagueness, and the recovery from both in this Reco12 Afro-Euro Speaker Meeting and share their experience, strength, and hope.   Here is a little about Ben K:  Ben K was a disturbed little kid, after discovering program and trying out different fellowships he finally found DA. Five years later, he is solvent, pays his taxes on time (with no resentment), and tries to live in abundance one day at a time.Reco12 Afro-Euro Timezone is a Reco12 Resource in and for the Afro-Euro time zone hosted by Karen A.  We hope that you will join us and draw strength and hope from these podcasts that we will host on Wednesdays at 9AM GMT / 11AM Israel time.Reco12 is an organization with the mission of learning and sharing the similarities of addiction of all kinds and gaining and sharing tools and hope from others who are walking a similar path.  We come together from all places, faiths and backgrounds to gain tools and hope from others who are walking a similar path.Reco12 appreciates your help in keeping us working our 12th Step with these great resources and services for the addict and loved ones.  We gratefully accept contributions to help cover the costs of the Zoom platform, podcast platform, web hosting, and administrative costs.  To become a Reco12 Spearhead you can quickly and easily become a monthly donor here: https://www.reco12.com/support  or you can do one-time donations through PayPal (https://www.paypal.me/reco12)  or Venmo:  @Reco-Twelve .  Thanks for your support!If you would like to get in contact with either Karen A or Binyamin H, please send an email to reco12@gmail.com and we will get you connected with them.Support the showPrivate Facebook GroupInstagram PageBecome a Reco12 Spearhead (Monthly Supporter)PatreonPayPalVenmo: @Reco-TwelveYouTube ChannelReco12 WebsiteEmail: reco12pod@gmail.com to join WhatsApp GroupReco12 Shares PodcastReco12 Shares Record a Share LinkReco12 Noodle It Out with Nikki M PodcastReco12 Big Book Roundtable Podcast

Get full access to INDIGNITY at indignity.substack.com/subscribe

In December 1791, the Bill of Rights was ratified by the United States. Though these 10 amendments to the Constitution are rarely mentioned after high school civics class, recent events here and abroad offer a glimpse of life without those rights and a reminder why they are so important as a defense against ideological overreach.  If a proposed new law passes the legislative process in Ireland, the famous Irish gift of gab will require government approval. As Kristen Waggoner of Alliance Defending Freedom recently noted in Newsweek, this potential restriction is, at best, vague. Even though it targets “hate,” it never defines what “hate” is. As she put it,   How is the public to know what kind of speech could be subject to prosecution? Given that “hate” is an impossible word to define in law (and is not defined in this bill), this paves the way for basically any expression considered unfavorable to be prosecuted in the future.  Vagueness in a national law is, in practice, an open invitation for state-based abuse, yet that is not this particular law's only problem. If it goes forward, refusing to give the police your password if they have a search warrant will be treated as a crime, and merely possessing material that “is likely to incite violence or hatred” might get you two years in jail. In other words, according to this proposed law, a crime doesn't even have to involve actually hating anyone or saying something that could be hateful. Anything that the powers-that-be think could possibly be interpreted as hateful would be sufficient. It's no wonder Waggoner added, “[I]t's not hard to imagine Ireland rapidly descending into an authoritarian state with the passage of this law.”  Back in June, Pauline O'Reilly of the Green Party defended the proposed law with a line directly out of the totalitarian playbook: “We are restricting freedom, but we're doing it for the common good.” This would include curtailing rights guaranteed in the Irish constitution “if people's views on others cause them deep discomfort...” Again, under this view, no crime has to be committed, if someone is caused “deep discomfort.” This kind of scrutiny will, of course, target some and not others. To paraphrase George Orwell's great line from Animal Farm, all discomfort is equally wrong, but some are more equal than others.   The way this inverted logic most often plays out is by the argument that not all speech is protected speech. Typically, this reasoning is followed by the necessary caveat, “After all, you can't yell fire in a theater!” This logical-sounding and necessary exception, however, becomes less exceptional when it is applied to more and more speech that a select few deem dangerous. In practice, at least in the United States, appeals to burning theaters have rarely, if ever, held up in court. As Jeff Kosseff notes in his new book Liar in a Crowded Theater, “[O]ne reason that a wider swath of false speech does not fall within an exception to the First Amendment is because regulation is simply not terribly effective at achieving the government's goals.”  The First Amendment has, so far, been an effective barrier against unnecessary limits on freedoms, even when done “for our good.” On the other hand, situations in European countries that lack anything like our First Amendment, not to mention the selective censorship at America's elite universities, expose how much can go wrong when there's nothing to limit the people in power from acting for our own good.   As C. S. Lewis put it in God in the Dock:  Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.  The reason that the speech protections of the First Amendment, with its guarantees of liberty of conscience, do not exclude speech that is merely offensive is that inoffensive speech doesn't need protection. By allowing potentially and even truly wrong things to be said, the Bill of Rights ensures space for the truth to be heard, and for those committed to truth to make the case for it.  This Breakpoint was co-authored by Dr. Timothy Padgett. For more resources to live like a Christian in this cultural moment, go to breakpoint.org.

A federal judge who once ruled plaintiffs challenging Illinois' gun and magazine ban may be able to prove their case now has the option of striking the law down based on the merits.  Illinois' ban on more than 170 semi-automatic rifles, shotguns and pistols was enacted on Jan. 10. The law also bans the sale and possession of handgun magazines over 15 rounds and rifle magazines over 10 rounds. Firearms owners with such guns purchased before Jan. 10 have until Jan. 1, 2024 to register their firearms, attachments and .50 caliber ammunition, or face potential criminal penalties. --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/illinois-in-focus/support

What happens when a popular pastor like Andy Stanley hosts a controversial conference advocating for same-sex marriage? This episode pulls back the curtain on the Unconditional Conference, exploring Stanley's sermon and the far-reaching implications of his stance. We tackle the hard questions around traditional marriage, compassion for the LGBTQ community, and the vital boundaries that theology imposes.Stanley's influence cannot be ignored, and neither can his shift from a Biblically grounded view of sexuality. We challenge the misleading narrative that rejecting someone's sexuality equates to not loving them, a misconception often amplified by the LGBTQ community. From the confusion between sexuality and personhood to the mistaken belief that chastity is unsustainable, we're peeling back the layers of these complex issues. We don't shy away from the tough conversations, questioning if individuals in same-sex marriages are aware of their sin but still opt for it, and debunking the flawed notion that marriage shouldn't be pursued for love, companionship, or family.Lastly, we raise red flags around the dangers of basing theology on personal experiences and emotions. Stanley's sermon left more questions than answers, and we're here to delve into that vagueness. We scrutinize his deviation from God's standard for sexuality and the potential spiritual fallout for his followers. Armed with grace, truth, and a wealth of resources, we invite you to join us as we navigate these tricky waters with open dialogues that strengthen faith and foster understanding.Timestamps:(0:00:16) - Andy Stanley's Controversial Conference and Response(0:08:26) - LGBTQ+ Issues and Biblical Marriage(0:16:30) - Concerns About Deceptive Theology and Vagueness(0:21:36) - Shift on Sexuality by Andy StanleyJoin us weekly as we strive help people embrace God's standard for sexuality! Other ways to listen:https://linktr.ee/calibrateconversations#AndyStanley #LGBTQ #Homosexuality 

A discussion with distinguished scholar and educator, Bish Sanyal from Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In this podcast, introduced by Yvonne Rydin, Mona Fawaz explores Bish's contribution to planning research and planning theory over the years.

Stiles and Guru talk 49ers QB situation off the comments of Peter King. Plus, is Steph Curry the greatest PG ever?

Ireland is currently in the process of passing into law the Criminal Justice (Incitement to Violence or Hatred and Hate Offences) Bill 2022.If passed Ireland will have some of the strictest hate speech laws in the world and it will be possible to prosecute citizens for simply possessing material that is interpreted as an incite to hate.I spoke to Alexander Sheridan from Free Speech Ireland about the bill's contents, what citizens can be targeted for if passed, the vagueness/subjectivity of the various terms and protected catergories, Leo Varadkar's inability or unwillingness to state the govt's position on gender and much more00:00 Intro 02:50 WHAT CAN YOU BE PUNISHED FOR UNDER PROPOSED LAWS? 7:55 Similar laws elsewhere in the world ??11:35 Vagueness of new legislation 14:00 GOVERNMENT'S STANCE ON GENDER??16:30 How close to passing are the proposed laws? 22:40 CAN THESE LAWS BE USED TO SHUT DOWN PROTESTS & TARGET JOKES?30:00 Where to find Free Speech Ireland If you do enjoy the podcast please subscribe and leave a rating to help us growhttps://twitter.com/FreeSpeechIre

Vague instructions from the Board or CEO are the norm, and in fact mean great opportunity. Listen to this episode of Troubleshooting Agile to discover why there's no recipe that gets the right answers to executive problems, with Squirrel & Jeffrey! Links: - The Psychology of being a CEO: https://a16z.com/2011/03/31/whats-the-most-difficult-ceo-skill-managing-your-own-psychology/ - Cynefin: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework -------------------------------------------------- Order your copy of our book, Agile Conversations at agileconversations.com Plus, get access to a free mini training video about the technique of Coherence Building when you join our mailing list. We'd love to hear any thoughts, ideas, or feedback you have about the show. Email us at info@agileconversations.com About Your Hosts Squirrel and Jeffrey first met while working together at TIM group in 2013. A decade later, they remain united in their passion for growing organisations through better conversations. Squirrel is an advisor, author, keynote speaker, coach, and consultant, helping companies of all sizes make huge, profitable improvements in their culture, skills, and processes. You can find out more about his work here: https://douglassquirrel.com/index.html Jeffrey is Vice President of Engineering at ION Analytics, Organiser at CITCON, the Continuous Integration and Testing Conference, author and speaker. You can connect with him here: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jfredrick/

In this episode of the Planning Theory podcast, Catherine Brinkley reflects on the special issue of the journal that she edited looking afresh at the concept of the 'commons' and discusses what the concept offers to planning theory today.

How to make big decisions? This theme has come up over and over in my sessions with clients. People who struggle to make big decisions are immersed in confusion and hesitation. Besides, they may be waiting for something to happen before making these big decisions. And they also think that they are not brave enough and that some other people are wired to jump, but they simply can't do it. It doesn't work like that. Everyone has the same design in their brain. It's not that they're brave and you're not. The people who make big, bold decisions have overridden the fear installed by the primitive brain. And you can do it too. So today, I share with you guys how I have made big decisions in my life and the framework I use to walk myself through the other side, especially when I'm really scared and don't know what I will find once I make the leap. What I mention in this episode:The big seven leaps I made in my own personal lifeThe reason why vagueness is the enemy of actionThe role of consistency when making changes What you'll learn from it:The definition and characteristics of a big decisionThe four steps to making big decisions A practical exercise for overriding the fear center of your brain How to deal with the fear of loneliness I hope this episode helps you realize that you must be willing to blow things up a little bit to find the beauty waiting for you on the other side. With love, KavethaPS- Are you looking to create a solid emotional foundation and nourish fulfilling relationships?Then I have something to help you. Heal Your Relationships, my program specifically designed for women, provides evidence-based tools, training, and a community to build an unshakeable foundation and rock-solid relationships.In this 8-week program, you will get the HYR™ Framework and Tools, and weekly calls with certified coaches, both in a group environment as well as privately. You'll also be accompanied by a group of women who have each other's back. Do you want to learn more? Click here and book a breakthrough call with me: https://healyourrelationships.com/heal-your-relationships/In This Episode:00:00 Welcome back to another episode of Emotional Mastery00:33 I want to invite you to a free marriage communication challenge02:02 Today we are gonna talk about how to make big decisions 04:09 Vagueness is the enemy of action 04:50 What is a big decision? 06:58 The big seven leaps I made in my life 14:20 The first step to making big decisions18:42 A practical exercise for implementing the first step 24:15 The second step 30:43 The third step 33:16 The fourth step 38:31 There is no achieving but deepening confidence in your capacities 40:49 Your next version of yourself is knocking 44:27 How to deal with the fear of loneliness45:41 The role of consistency when making changes 51:06 You can do the things that seem impossible to you today Register here for the free 5 Day Marriage Communication Challenge —>

Dan Wetzel & SI's Ross Dellenger break down all of the latest movement in college football from players to administration on today's podcast.Ross had the chance to speak with new NCAA president Charlie Baker & provides information about what college sports fans should expect from the new administration.Big Ten commissioner Kevin Warren is leaving his job to become the next president of the Chicago Bears. The podcast looks back on his impact on college football including his alliances and media rights maneuvering.In player movement news, quarterback recruit Jaden Rashada is stirring up drama with likely impending free agency, following a gaffe from the Florida Gators's NIL collective. The SEC de-commitments continue with the latest big name being Walker Howard, who has left LSU in pursuit of a new program.Coming out of Monday's title game loss, TCU offensive coordinator Garret Riley and Clemson are in discussions as Dabo Swinney is looking outside of the family to improve the Tigers offense.In Ann Arbor, the Michigan Wolverines can't stop being vague and cryptic. Their latest head-scratcher stems from head coach Jim Harbaugh replying to a tweet from Michigan's president.Lastly, Carl's Jr. is offering an odd pairing with their cheeseburgers — Dan and Ross investigate.2:35 Ross spoke with new NCAA president Charlie Baker8:30 Kevin Warren leaves the Big Ten to become the new president of the Chicago Bears23:35 Jaden Rashada's NIL deal at Florida fell through34:38 Walker Howard has left LSU36:30 Garrett Riley is expected to be hired by Clemson42:30 More cryptic tweets are coming out of Ann Arbor, Michigan48:30 The NCAA is trying to make a second transfer more difficult than the first55:00 Carl's Jr is releasing a wine to pair with their A-1 double cheeseburgerStay up to date with the latest college football news and coverage from Yahoo Sports on Twitter @YahooSportsCFB.Follow Dan @DanWetzelFollow Pat @ByPatFordeFollow Ross @RossDellengerCheck out all the episodes of the College Football Enquirer and the rest of the Yahoo Sports podcast family at https://apple.co/3zEuTQj or at Yahoo Sports PodcastsSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

When did consciousness first evolve? If physicalism is true, we'd expect it to have evolved gradually, just as other biological phenomena evolved gradually. The complex physical states produced over the course of biological evolution came about little by little over time, so it's unsurprising that they admit of borderline states. But how could this be the case with experiences, feelings, and sensations? It's easy to see how it'd be the case with particular types of experiences, but how could it be the case with experience itself? The transition from feeling nothing to feeling something couldn't have been gradual. No matter how minimal a conscious experience is, if it's “like something” to exist – anything at all – it's not like nothing at all. It might be indeterminate what you're feeling, but not whether you're feeling. On reflection it seems hard to imagine anything other than a sharp borderline between wholly non-experiential reality and experiential reality. On the other hand, complex physical states admit borderline cases. If we remove one atom at a time from a given brain state, it will eventually be vague or indeterminate whether or not the organism is still in that physical brain state. So if consciousness is just a kind of physical state, then we'd expect consciousness to follow suit. But since it seems impossible that there could be a borderline case of consciousness – it's either like something for a creature or like nothing – then we have reason to think that physicalism is false.  Michael Tye - Vagueness and the Evolution of Consciousness  David Papineau's review of Vagueness and the Evolution of Consciousness in NDPR Nino Kadic - Phenomenology of Fundamental Reality YouTube Listen to our sister show, Counter Apologetics here Support at patreon.com/counter or patreon.com/waldenpod  Music by ichika Nito and used with permission. Transcript  Twitter @waldenpod @OnPanpsychism linktr.ee/emersongreen / timestamps / 00:00 The vagueness argument 04:18 Which creatures are conscious? 06:18 The sharpness of consciousness 10:09 The vagueness of biological phenomena 12:41 The sharpness of consciousness (cont.) 20:14 Weak emergence 21:42 The advantage of vagueness arguments

A short UNEDITED morning reminder or coaching mindset episode. I do coaching for sales reps and small business owners and I thought some of the stuff we cover in our coaching conversations may help a few other folks as well. TODAY: Clarity vs. Vagueness! Please consider leaving us a review on Apple and giving us a share to your friends! THANK YOU TO OUR SPONSORS: Granite Garage Floors of Chattanooga: https://granitegaragefloors.com/location/chattanooga Vascular Institute of Chattanooga: https://www.vascularinstituteofchattanooga.com/ MedicareMisty: https://medicaremisty.com/ The Barn Nursery: https://www.barnnursery.com/ Rent-My-Equipment: https://www.rentmyequipment.com/ Optimize U Chattanooga: https://optimizeunow.com/chattanooga/ Alchemy Medspa and Wellness Center: http://www.alchemychattanooga.com/ Please consider supporting the podast by becoming a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/duringthebreakpodcast This podcast is powered by ZenCast.fm

CNN Following Davos Orders, Weaponized Vagueness, & YouTube Censored Us (DNB) Thank you for listening. Help Keep The Show Going With A One Time Donation At The Like Below PayPal.Me To Get Exclusive XR Content, DNB Ad Free, Check Out The Links Below Propaganda Report is creating Podcasts | Patreon Propaganda Report Community (locals.com) Propaganda Report | Rokfin Follow me on Twitter (12) Binkley (@freedomactradio) / Twitter Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Haim Gaifman is a philosopher and mathematician. He teaches at Columbia University in New York City. Robinson and Haim talk about vagueness, a branch of philosophy that deals with borderline phenomena like heaps and baldness. (Note that this interview was conducted in May of 2022, before the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade, which is used as an example in the discussion.) Instagram: @robinsonerhardt --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/robinson-erhardt/support