100. Overthinking
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 มี.ค. 2024
- Episode 100. Overthinking
Overthink goes meta! In the 100th episode Ellie and David reflect on the podcast’s journey and the origins of its (flawless!) title. They take up the question, “What is overthinking?” Is it a kind of fixation on details or an unwanted split in the normal flow of ideas? Then, they turn to psychology to make sense of overthinking’s highs and lows, as the distracting voice inside your head and a welcome relief from traumatic memories. Through the philosophies of John Dewey and the Frankfurt School, they look at different ways to understand the role of overthinking in philosophy and the humanities. Is overthinking a damper on good decisions, or perhaps the path to preserving the possibility of social critique?
Overthink is a philosophy podcast hosted by your favorite new professors, Ellie Anderson (Pomona College) and David Peña-Guzmán (San Francisco State University). Check out our episodes for deep dives into concepts such as existential anxiety, empathy, and gaslighting.
Works Discussed
John Dewey, How We Think
Max Horkheimer, “The Social Function of Philosophy”
Herbert Marcuse, “Remarks on a Redefinition of Culture”
Susan Nolen-Hoeksema, “Responses to depression and their effects on the duration of depressive episodes”
Charles Orbendorf, “Co-Conscious Mentation”
Suzanne Segerstrom et al., “A multidimensional structure for repetitive thought”
Stephanie Wong et al., “Rumination as a Transdiagnostic Phenomenon in the 21st Century”
Support Overthink on Patreon here: / overthinkpodcast
Website: overthinkpodcast.com
Facebook: / overthink-podcast-1054...
Apple podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4aIlXHT...
Buzzsprout RSS: feeds.buzzsprout.com/1455199.rss
Find us on Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok at @overthink_pod
![🎮เกมยิงปืนใหม่ ภาพสวย และ สมจริงที่สุดในโลก [ BODYCAM ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/My3l1owRY9I/mqdefault.jpg)
How fitting a topic for the 100th podcast episode! Congratulations 🎊🎉
My favorite podcast! Congrats on 100th! ! !
Kudos to both professors in their articulation of philosophical content. Their ability to speak clearly in-depth and remain true to the content is eye opening to me. Culturally I tend like many to see philosophy as arguments rather than texts to accurately absorb. It might be obvious as teachers their job is to represent what these various philosophies say, the practice of these tools is a very good model of the work of doing philosophy. From my side, I see philosophy as much more flexible and plastic. That is what has gone before is something to use, and use offers a sense of ‘more’ to these philosophical creations. It seems too, our U.S. is at a transition in which philosophy offers all of us some ways to meet these changes in a good way. I want to thank again the good work of these two fine academics.
congrats on 100 ep anniversary!
The title is nicely succinct, yet ambiguous because it also puts one in mind of the phrase, "I need to think it over". A compound noun that could work the other way around.
congrats!!!
Congrats on #100. Your early comments remind me of the great insights of Abigail Shrier on destructive influence in therapy for young children. Anyhow keep going.
Great tongue and cheek. Thanks. Very helpful concerning the problem of analysis paralysis and the paradigm of when to start at the beginning and go to the end verses starting with the end or goal then finding a path forward, serendipity-discovery verses problem solving. STEM meets HASS. Loved it.
Thank you for this diligent and inspiring labor! 🙏🏼💎!
Thank you for this. Gave me a new way to think about my ocd.
It's all in your head
Per the discussion about different fields being seen differently by the public: I think you're more likely to get accused of overthinking a subject that most people think about routinely. If a subject feels foreign to us, we're more likely to accept that it requires rigorous thinking.
Poetic topic
🎉
Overthinking is never unhealthy as long as the thoughts are new ones. Its always unhealthy otherwise.
You sound like a talented engineer in your own life L~e
The function of Philosophy is that it evolves the species and has the power to greatly propel stagnate or erode the progress of a culture in innumerable measurable aspects. A single Philosophy can change the lives of a handful of individuals or redirect the fates of nations.
"Instrumental reason" is a term that I think about quite often because it so nicely captures much of what goes down nowadays. Is it just the inevitable, natural evolution of a capitalist society? It certainly jives quite nicely with Anglo-American pragmatism. The universality of the English language has created a network in which American norms of thinking predominate. The French and German academic communities don't have all that much familiarity with one another, even though they are neighbours, but they all read American books. When they do speak with one another, the common denominator is liable to be American cultural content. Social clashes, identity politics and all of that notwithstanding, I see a world with, in fact, ever less diversity.
👏👏👏👏👏
I like the name Two Smart Cookies!
So I’m understanding that an individual whose religious experience is based in an innate (in dwelling) sense of hope are error prone, will one who’s religious experience grows our of suffering when confronted by the world is equally error prone. So the latter individual must be re-born to find happiness. So enters the divided self (a bit Freudian with the conflict between the Id and Super-ego), that attempts to reconcile the conflict (similar to the role of the Ego). I’m not seeing how the former (once born) is equally detrimental (distracting) to the twice born. It seems that as long as the optimism of the once born is kept in check with reality, it requires less effort to connect with a religious experience than the twice born that requires first suffering, then reconnecting, and finally reconciling the two.
contexturally appropriate haha
🥳📯✨²1000 More!✨
Now, what might the neurotic levels of our cool podcast philosophers be ?
European universities aren't sitting on pots of money, which is why funding has to be justified by pre-conceived objectives, and a lot of time is apparently wasted in the bureaucratic pursuit of resources. Another problem is the brain drain of professorial talent to the US, both because of the pay and the freedom accorded in a more monied environment. What's the solution? There's also a tremendous amount of frustration with the Bologna process, particularly in Germany, because it is perceived to have squeezed students into a tight schedule of bachelor's and master's degrees with much less liberty than was afforded those who had gone before. Governments and industry wanted to shorten academic study and get people into the workforce more quickly.
Horkheimer on philosophy mirrors Wilde on art: all art is quite useless.