Episode

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024
  • Philosophize This! Clips: / @philosophizethisclips
    Get more:
    Website: www.philosophi...
    Patreon: / philosophizethis
    Find the podcast:
    Apple: podcasts.apple...
    Spotify: open.spotify.c...
    RSS: www.philosophiz...
    Be social:
    Twitter: / iamstephenwest
    Instagram: / philosophizethispodcast
    TikTok: / philosophizethispodcast
    Facebook: / philosophizethisshow
    Thank you for making the show possible. 🙂 Today we give some historical context necessary for our upcoming discussions on The Frankfurt School.
    www.patreon.com/philosophizethis
    www.philosophizethis.org
    Thank you for wanting to know more today than you did yesterday. :)

ความคิดเห็น • 121

  • @abcddddff
    @abcddddff 4 ปีที่แล้ว +28

    You are simply amazing! I am Yale grad but never had a professor lecture as good as you. Addicted to your channel!

    • @GoodmanMIke59
      @GoodmanMIke59 ปีที่แล้ว

      If you are a "Yale grad" (Ooooooh... and I'm USMMA82, as if anyone cares.) Maybe you should understand that you've "never had a professor lecture as WELL" as has this guy. Maybe Yale should have taught you the difference between ADJECTIVES and ADVERBS! Maybe you should ask for your money back.

  • @shravangulvadi
    @shravangulvadi หลายเดือนก่อน

    Immense gratitude to you, your podcast and Michael Surgue's lectures have brought a lot of beauty into my life in the last couple of years and for that I will always be grateful!!

  • @denverharrington4777
    @denverharrington4777 6 ปีที่แล้ว +20

    Hi Steven This podcast is incredible. I've been listening to it for close to a year and the content is rich, engaging and accurate. There's so many philosophy podcasts that, as you say, are sometimes a soapbox for pushing an agenda. But your podcast is really genuine and credits the philosophies of history in a really honest and fulfilling and focused way. Thank you for your amazing work! Please keep going.

  • @sushiyama1
    @sushiyama1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    You're an unbelievably clear and precise speaker, everything you cover is so comprehensive. I'm really impressed, there's such a need to translate complicated, nuanced historical/philosophical positions into accessible work, and this is it. Thank you so much, can't wait to discover more of your stuff.

  • @rockeroller
    @rockeroller 5 ปีที่แล้ว +45

    Could use a volume boost. I have it at full volume and it's barely coming across....

    • @jonttu617
      @jonttu617 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      I think the problem is on your end, I can hear quite well

    • @wanderlust451
      @wanderlust451 ปีที่แล้ว

      Can't hear a thing

  • @SgtJackRose
    @SgtJackRose 21 วันที่ผ่านมา

    I love politics, I like this channel because it’s an escape from it. It provides me a better understanding of it. And my mind just goes to a different place when I think of the larger questions; away from the daily firehose.

  • @claudiamarty6130
    @claudiamarty6130 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    Omg I am so happy to have found this channel!

  • @johnotis6764
    @johnotis6764 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    This is my first visit to your podcast. I like what I've heard so far, so I may have to go back to the start of it all.
    To my thinking, or lack thereof, faith still offers the best de facto solution to the problem of existence. It provides meaning, a moral sense, an epistemology, even an aesthetic. Where people seem to go awry is in coupling faith to an ideology and in trying to foist their beliefs on innocent heathens. The best one can do is practice his faith alone and in secret, and never breathe a word of it to anyone-- even when the urge to proselytize becomes. unnbearable. If his beliefs have any merit and functionality, then the person of faith will live amongst his fellows as a man among men--just, virtuous, kind, and generally upright and decent. He will be a truly human person because his awareness of the divine makes his humanity necessary (or even possible). Unless he is a Satanist of a particularly bloody and psychophathic bent; in which case all bets are off, evil reigns supreme, and lots of cure little puppies get their tails cut off for no good reason.

  • @orakulooo
    @orakulooo 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Thank you for the amazing classes. You certainly deserve more views than you currently have.

    • @Smuv_Rivvum
      @Smuv_Rivvum 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Caio Aniceto lol ouch

  • @Mariam_Kir
    @Mariam_Kir 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Amazing podcast! I'm going to donate to you as soon as I get a job

  • @smtrm212
    @smtrm212 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    i am almost at thr 7th part of this series, and enjoying it thoroughly. thank you for your service. i had downloaded those books but never started to read them. may be that will change very near future :)

  • @nightoftheworld
    @nightoftheworld 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    11:46 Hegel *never* used the words “thesis, antithesis, synthesis” to describe his dialectic (aka his ‘speculative triads’).
    His actual terms were: _abstract, negative, concrete_ or alternatively, _immediate, mediate, concrete._

    • @bitupanbhuyan5183
      @bitupanbhuyan5183 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      According to the German philosopher Walter Kaufmann: Fichte introduced into German philosophy the three-step of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, using these three terms. Schelling took up this terminology.

    • @nightoftheworld
      @nightoftheworld 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Bitupan Bhuyan *position, negation, aufhebung* “Negativity is one of the most central concepts in Žižek’s reading of Hegel. He rejects the usual image of the Hegelian dialectics as something that goes from a thesis to its antithesis before they are brought together to form a harmonious synthesis. And the fact is that Hegel himself rarely describes dialectics in that way. Instead, both Hegel and Žižek prefer the more dynamic concepts of _position, negation and negation of negation._ The last term is described by Žižek as a “double, self-referential negation [that] does not entail any kind of return to positive identity, any kind of abolition, of cancellation of the disruptive force of negativity, of reducing it to a passing movement in the self-mediating identity process of identity”. What is crucial is that the negation of the negation preserves “all its disruptive power.”
      -Anders Burman, _A Lacanian Hegelianism_

  • @k.ohalloran8758
    @k.ohalloran8758 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Newly ran across your channel and it's fantastic, thanks!

  • @FAHayekSays
    @FAHayekSays 7 ปีที่แล้ว +31

    "Life has no genuine intrinsic value, but is kept in motion by want and illusion." --Arthur Schopenhauer

    • @maximilian8959
      @maximilian8959 6 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Well, then I guess your comment has no value to it either.

    • @mvwil
      @mvwil 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      hinduism with german romantic dressing

    • @russellknippel392
      @russellknippel392 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      The life of a soulless socialist prole is futile. There truly is no reason for your existence. For you are a useless socialist prole. What Stalin called a useful idiot. Ants in an ant colony have more individual importance than you, the worthless socialist prole.

    • @figurefiguras4104
      @figurefiguras4104 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@russellknippel392 dude who r u talking to? Lol

  • @dadei8538
    @dadei8538 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Please do the podcast on Karl Marx soon. I really love your explanations and insights into the way and thoughts of the Philosopher.

  • @benzo4504
    @benzo4504 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Well, thesisi antithesis and synthess is not a Hegel´s concept but Fichte´s. Hegel´s was a bit different. ¨The terms abstract, negative, and concrete suggest a flaw or an incompleteness in any initial thesis. For Hegel, the concrete must always pass through the phase of the negative, that is, mediation. This is the essence of what is popularly called Hegelian dialectics¨

  • @islamentable1290
    @islamentable1290 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    whether you like it or not: you are now an EdgeLord! subbed.

  • @jimmyfortmoller4293
    @jimmyfortmoller4293 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    There needs to be more discussion about the Macy conference which happened between the 40s and 50s, where well known scientists were creating a new science which would control behaviourism in order to prevent patriotism and nationalism, which has lead to globalisation.

    • @rwshaw1234
      @rwshaw1234 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      There was no agenda to prevent patriotism and nationalism.
      The conference proceedings are available online.
      The conferences were meant to foster interdisciplinarity to develop a unified theory of the human mind.

    • @jimmyfortmoller4293
      @jimmyfortmoller4293 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@rwshaw1234 You need to do a better research

    • @theabsorbingman2492
      @theabsorbingman2492 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@jimmyfortmoller4293 he knows the truth he's just playing stupid

  • @user-mv1pn2sv3r
    @user-mv1pn2sv3r 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I understand what Friedrich Nietzsche was saying I often wonder what he would’ve thought about the anthropic, cosmological principle and 21st-century science of the shroud of Turin

  • @tortera
    @tortera ปีที่แล้ว

    Brilliant! Thank you so much.

  • @richardouvrier3078
    @richardouvrier3078 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Mate, you are a gem.

  • @christinemartin63
    @christinemartin63 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    So THAT'S the Frankfurt School ... another articulate explanation!

  • @javadrahmani7386
    @javadrahmani7386 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Loved it

  • @Trinitypater
    @Trinitypater 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    You are amazing!!
    I
    Love this podcast

  • @mariaoneill1145
    @mariaoneill1145 7 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    This feels very prescient

  • @gillricciardi
    @gillricciardi 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Hello, Stephen!
    Is there any more reserved mail through which i can reach you?
    Writing from Portugal.
    I would really like to contact you directly.
    Your podcast has accompanied me throughout the last year and a half, making a grueling work a little bit more easy. Learned a lot.
    I salute you and your work.
    Cheers 👌

  • @teddybarrz1247
    @teddybarrz1247 ปีที่แล้ว

    yo this is so cool he is such a great speaker

  • @bambampepe
    @bambampepe 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I have a question. If we refuse to reflect and analyze too much and in turn we decide to be fully engaged in whatever we are doing... Aren't then we becoming fully happy slaves? If Sisyphus is smiling... Isn't he a happy slave?

  • @willemdeisinger3325
    @willemdeisinger3325 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Great episode! Came back after looking through some notes on this. Anyone know where Kierkegaard talks about the couple in public and not being able to understand it through reason?? Really interesting and I want to check it out.

  • @OTAKUV6
    @OTAKUV6 7 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    To love one's fate. To adjust the perspective of your current situation. Aren't both Sisyphus and Camus just adopting a Stoic philosophy?

  • @bitupanbhuyan5183
    @bitupanbhuyan5183 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Excellent podcast but i think According to the German philosopher Walter Kaufmann: Fichte introduced into German philosophy the three-step of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis, using these three terms. Schelling took up this terminology.

  • @seanpatrickrichards5593
    @seanpatrickrichards5593 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    alot of people i know become footsoldiers of right wing radio, like Ben Shapiro.. or toxic masculine misogyny (jordan peterson, joe rogan).. this podcast is kinda like morpheus in The Matrix to help people assess the plugs going into them! :O (i know those podcasters have good stuff too, but they do seem to affect culture, not sure if its in a good way)

    • @seanpatrickrichards5593
      @seanpatrickrichards5593 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      in regards to the "we are all Sisyphus" part.. like Maximus said "The things we do in life, echo in eternity" and it still matters in the moment, plus sisyphus probably gets to be a pretty strong mofo rolling that thing and thats kinda cool :) like Arnold pushing that wheel in Conan! :O

    • @seanpatrickrichards5593
      @seanpatrickrichards5593 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Joe Rogan podcast really is great tho :D it provides a great service to me and millions of others: a "strong male presence".. it actually makes me work harder and comforts me through the night, just hearing him or Jocko Willink talk tough guy talk and about lots of toxic subjects stimulates my limbic system and warms my otherwise cold office lifestyle, and this has way more psychological benefits then any medication ever did.. i wonder if this is a world wide phenomenon

    • @anthonytbatiste
      @anthonytbatiste 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      You've not listened to JBP or Rogan very closely. Try to listen to JBP on the idea of "Toxic Masculinity".Males make mistakes but maleness in itself is not an evil.Nuances get lost when you throw out babies in ideological bathwater.

    • @DickDickstein
      @DickDickstein 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @@anthonytbatiste I find it hard to believe that this guy listens to anyone but himself.

    • @MatauReviews
      @MatauReviews 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@anthonytbatiste toxic masculinity is not the belief that masculinity in and of itself is toxic you fucking rube

  • @ViniciusLima-kj6oe
    @ViniciusLima-kj6oe 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Great Pod!!

  • @GustoStCool
    @GustoStCool 7 ปีที่แล้ว

    Awesome! Subscribed!

  • @elijaguy
    @elijaguy 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    3:54 what is "meaning"? what precisely are we looking for in Meaning? I never understood it.

  • @teporeliot
    @teporeliot 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Hegel actually never uses the terminological triade thesis/antithesis/synthesis anywhere in his works. Was it Marx's reformulation? Not sure. In any event, it isn't Hegel (whom I've read extensively). Hegel's dialectic is much more chaotic, convoluted, complex, intricate, tangled, tortuous.

  • @carlarecuero8735
    @carlarecuero8735 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Hi! Is there any transcription of the podcast?

  • @kaewonf8
    @kaewonf8 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    "This needs a bit of a setup" he says halfway through the episode...

  • @openscienceerichoeven4255
    @openscienceerichoeven4255 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    every good answer starts with asking the right questions and in my opinion a lot of good questions are asked here visit my philosophy database if you want to find out for yourself whether these questions are relevant

  • @islamentable1290
    @islamentable1290 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Also, isn't repeating the same thing, such as rolling a rock up a hill and it just keeps rolling over the other side, the very definition of insanity?

  • @politics4270
    @politics4270 ปีที่แล้ว

  • @kenramirez5782
    @kenramirez5782 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    The sad thing about Nietzsche is that he was the 19th century philosopher using 19th century science in the 21st-century science has come along way with Anthropic cosmological principle and in the science of evolution with epigenetic‘s and mathematics God is far from dead he is the one that holds life on a knife edge so fineThat if you take gravity and change it even a little there is no life

  • @07serda
    @07serda 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    “Reason” is not the tool for every job, maze, or problem you face. This makes me very uncomfortable as it shows how religious my grip has become on reason for that very purpose.

  • @JohnDoe-cb4op
    @JohnDoe-cb4op 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Fix volume, too low

  • @paulomendes4892
    @paulomendes4892 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    but as Gertz said,without a group,family,language theres no such thing as human nature,we become a blank.Imagine youre a baby and survive on your own in the Savannah. Can you image what you would be like?

  • @gwamod5199
    @gwamod5199 ปีที่แล้ว

    You said Neo-Marxists are of Jewish descent; Is Habermas Jewish?

    • @diegesisfreak
      @diegesisfreak ปีที่แล้ว

      nah but he sure is a smooth brain

    • @gillricciardi
      @gillricciardi 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @gwamod5199
      I would look deeper into the Russian Revolution (or, more precisely, Regicide + all next kin) and the ensuing “cleansing” and constitution of parliament.

  • @adamjustus3766
    @adamjustus3766 7 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    Humanities hardest battle will be, how can we defeat tribalism...?

    • @jasonaus3551
      @jasonaus3551 7 ปีที่แล้ว

      Adam Justus we out source it. We already do in fact, sports teams, Hobbies, Passions, or preference in Animal Companion. I am a dog racist ( I prefer a particular breed because I think it is superior genetically IMO) I am also A sports Fan, I like Rugby, Mixed Martial Arts. I believe most of us require activity in our life, mental, physical and social. I'll use the term "toxic Masculinity" and give you my definition of it. I think it just masculine traits many people (men and women) have in different expressions and Balance with those Traits. Like anything that is good and helpful too much or too little can be detrimental

    • @jasonaus3551
      @jasonaus3551 7 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      No one is gonna riot over which dog breed is the best, or which bird is the prettiest

  • @noah9869
    @noah9869 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    Hey I would like that parking thing or whatever, because I am sceptical of your amazon relations and a hater or whatever, please?
    With an autograph :)

  • @idiocracy10
    @idiocracy10 7 ปีที่แล้ว +8

    adding value? what a capitalist!!!!

  • @trombone7
    @trombone7 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    24:30 are you serious? I wish philosophical videos would stop referencing the death of the Sun as an indicator that life is meaningless or insignificant.
    If we haven't colonized other solar systems in 5 billion years, we deserve to die as the sun goes red giant. Our problem won't be the sun.
    It's like looking at a newborn infant and saying, "you know your parents are going to die in 35 years ... How are you going to pay rent?"

    • @trombone7
      @trombone7 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      ​@Mike Kane Humans are so mind-bendingly important in multiple ways it is a wonder we aren't disoriented and nauseated. We are the only trace of the universe becoming this advanced.
      We are the result of what we have done and everything that has happened up to this point. Therefore, everything that happens and what we do matters, big and small, for the future.
      We are the leading edge of the leading edge of the cosmic page that turns toward tomorrow.
      If we die, for all we know for the time-being, all consciousness, this advanced, in the universe is extinguished.
      Epigenetics and brain-plasticity make us deeply responsible for the physical and mental environment we keep.
      We are all deeply and powerfully responsible for our conduct and contribution, but this isn't easy to hear.
      We discovered flight in 1903 and 50 years later built planes big enough that the kittyhawk flight itself could be contained on the wingspan of a B-36 3 times over.
      20 years later we walked on the moon.
      We have 300 million years before the sun's luminosity makes life uninhabitable on earth. If we can't get our act together by then (yes, near lightspeed travel included) then we deserve to go extinct.
      But as far as I know, commenting on youtube, the internet, disease prevention, flight, space travel, mozart's Aria's and contemplating phases of the sun's demise is not done by sand, rocks, microbes, worms, salamanders, squirrels, or apes.
      Humans are the universe becoming conscious of itself to this degree.
      Until we encounter other advanced conscious life,
      we are mind-bogglingly, mind-shakingly significant.

  • @mulmeyun
    @mulmeyun 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    should change the title, barely even talk about the frankfurt school

  • @minorityvoice9253
    @minorityvoice9253 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Except Jesus was a real person who is historically verified by all standards we use to verify any historical character. Religion is not the reason for wars, the distortion of the use of power within man is the reason .

    • @gillricciardi
      @gillricciardi 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      “… here’s a church,
      here’s a steeple” (REM on the spot!).
      That’s “equality” for you, from ANY religious point of view.
      Religion is NOT equal to deep well developed spirituality.
      Way, waaay far from that.
      Atheism is a growing dis-ease, walking hand in hand with “scientism” (my coinage), not to be confused with real science.
      In time - and the best of them (scientists) know or are on route to know this, what they’ll be able to prove is something as simple as the great masters from yesteryear always said in simple ways, and that is that the Mistery is unknowable.
      Pretending otherwise or clothing it in fine, always changing wording, fouls many, but not all.
      If you/they don’t even know yourselfs thoroughly, aren’t bothered to integrate (or even try to, nowadays) your shadow-selfs,how is it you’ll know the Uni (One) Verse (Logos)?!
      From which you, they, and i, are only FRACTALS?
      By the way, look into Mandelbro, bro… 🤗
      Lastly, this fellow presents a large array of schooling/thought, and i sense an honesty in the presentations, even from different/opposite standpoints.
      How many others do that?
      Among those with access to spewing to the large mainstream media?
      Also, being well read, surely leads him to more precisely formulate his own opinions, but contrary to maaaany others, i fail to see he’s hammering his own onto others (might be my own short comings).
      Just enjoy.
      If not, don’t listen.

    • @gillricciardi
      @gillricciardi 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Ahhh..
      PLUS, Jesus rebelled against an established RELIGION.
      Can you deny that?
      And for THIS he got murdered.
      That religion still exists. Unlike all other religions, including christianity and Islam, that one still segregates (they are the “chosen”, others are goy’im).
      They don’t want you to ear this, but those “evil” muslims call/called christians as ‘cousins’. It’s written in the Koran.
      Who do you think benefits from dividing (and conquering) these two massive blocks, each 1 billion+ strong?
      Warmongering (pitting Muslims against Christians) and collecting coin from both sides?
      While still making profit from thin air (here, catholicism, not Christianity, sadly is no different today).
      Hey, did Al Qaeda, EI, ISIS, and all these created/funded real terrorist organizations EVER attacked what supposedly should be their preached ENEMY?
      Not once… but coincidentally, all other countries in the region were 🤔
      Answer me, if you are so savvy in Christianity, what was the ONLY “documented” occasion in which Jesus resorted to VIOLENCE?
      Do you know?
      Are you allowed to even THINK it through, let alone say it out loud where you live?
      I’ll make it easy for you.
      It was when he flipped over the stands also known as… banks.
      At the entry to the temple.
      (Search “Thieves in the Temple”, besides mant awesome paintings you’ll even find Prince singing about it!).
      The temple, where usurers, then AS TODAY, made profit out of other’s work money.
      And pay NO TAXES.
      The ‘reasoning’ was so that people could “gain entrance” to the temple…
      Religions still have these benefits (do you?).
      Also, usurers, who where once declared as sinners, are nowadays bankrupting the world.
      You and me are made to pay; “they” are worshipped, non-elected, no term-limits, and “too big to fail”.
      FYI, the Vatican also has A BANK. And a multi-million dollars large telescope named… Lucifer, and many other ‘details’ i can clue you in. Consistency is clearly not their strong suit.
      Bottom line is:
      If God IS, surely he isn’t hidden within some walls, hiding beneath some priest, iman or rabi’s skirts, brother.
      And sure as Heaven he is not encased in some magic-fairytale ark.
      Maybe Baal, or Moloch, or some golden calf, or whoever is preached to there might be there.
      Not God.
      And YES, existing de facto, or not (for the MESSAGE is what matters), Jesus IS a son of GOD.
      Just like YOU. And ME.
      That’s why he called us BROTHERS.
      That’s why Mohamed also rebelled; against the besmirching of the MESSAGE.
      (Some of the greatest Jesus’ message defendants were in the Orient and Near Orient - look into it).
      Jesus was young when he resorted to violence, and supposedly never used it since, even accepting death at the very hands of those he tried to redeem.
      But the MESSAGE stood.
      That’s what is still fought, to this day.
      The translations they feed you are purposefully wrong.
      For “in the beginning”
      it wasn’t the light.
      It was the LOGOS.
      In a very crude and incomplete translation,
      the VERB.
      See the importance of ideas?
      Of the message, rather than the messanger?
      Essere Quam Vedere
      Compare this to the state of the world today, and what is ‘pushed’ by the media.
      People who can’t even write anymore!
      If you can’t even write correctly, you will never unblock your thought.
      We are symbolic beings.
      Words are symbols.
      If you like Jesus, study other great masters. HE DID. He was HUMBLE enough to do so.
      Do you know what he did between the ages of 12 and 30?
      So, study far and wide.
      Share the MESSAGE.
      All is one. And none.
      At the same time.
      Some one who helps others think is to be supported.
      So, support this guy.
      His podcast is 5⭐️

  • @simonbagel
    @simonbagel 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    Individuality is dead

  • @TheMihilization
    @TheMihilization 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    ...

  • @fitnessbusinesssuccess7177
    @fitnessbusinesssuccess7177 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Disappointed in this ep, you ramble on about a bunch of tangents while shortly touching on the Frankfurt school.
    I don't mind if you tie things together, but honestly evaluate how long you spoke about the FS vs everything else and I think you'd find the break down to be severely underwhelming when it comes to FS analysis.

    • @natemathewson5200
      @natemathewson5200 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      FitnessBusiness Success only part 1, setting up background info for context

    • @jdjack519
      @jdjack519 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Lol for real. just keep listening for a couple episodes

    • @HansLiu23
      @HansLiu23 ปีที่แล้ว

      "Introduction"

  • @jasonaus3551
    @jasonaus3551 7 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Can you please do Ayn Rand?

    • @yarnheart
      @yarnheart 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      i think he has

    • @TheEthanAndKyleShow
      @TheEthanAndKyleShow 6 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      he usually does philosophers on this show so i mean

    • @malteloman
      @malteloman 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Great one.

    • @johnotis6764
      @johnotis6764 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      I did Ayn Rand. She wasn't thst great.

    • @worfsonofmogh1154
      @worfsonofmogh1154 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@johnotis6764 A deeeeeshhh!!!

  • @guywalker5442
    @guywalker5442 7 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    just discovered this podcast... terrific work.