The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Repression as Infrastructure - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Repression as Infrastructure
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
When everything feels permitted, but nothing quite feels free—repression may no longer be psychological, but infrastructural.
Repression is not hidden; it is designed. Not as an accident of the psyche, but as a feature of the system. If repression once belonged to the inner life—some stubborn knot of childhood or dreamwork—then now it belongs to the infrastructures that route our decisions before we know we’ve made them. It is embedded in how choices are presented, how emotions are monetized, how attention is farmed. This is no longer Freud’s domain of latent desire breaking through the cracks. This is repression as supply chain, as operating system, as user interface.
A supermarket shelf represses more than it offers: it offers you infinite choice between brands while repressing the question of why you need fifty versions of the same cereal. A dating app filters desire into swipeable patterns that mask the infrastructural loneliness that made the app necessary. Governance does not tell you no—it lets you say yes to whatever is already allowed. The contemporary subject is not forbidden; they are permitted into submission.
In this light, freedom becomes a performance of options. Repression becomes what structures those options so that they never touch the root. And in this switch from the unconscious to the infrastructural, repression becomes ambient, ergonomic, and invisible. It is felt not in what is denied, but in what is subtly redirected. You don’t even notice the desire fall away—you only feel that everything is somehow available, and somehow hollow.
Freud imagined repression as a psychic mechanism necessary to civilize instinct. But in a system that profits from instinct—where the raw is the sellable and the intimate is the dataset—repression morphs. It is no longer the silencing of the unacceptable but the engineering of what is acceptable in the first place. And so the civilizing function doesn’t suppress—it guides, gently, into paths pre-structured for behavior, belief, and consumption.
The architecture of repression is now algorithmic. It auto-completes not only your sentence, but your desire. The silence is not in your head—it’s in the system. In what the feed does not show you. In what the platform makes impossible to articulate. This is not repression that causes neurosis. It is repression that produces normativity. It teaches you not to ask.
If repression was once the cost of being social, it is now the substrate of sociality itself. The medium is the repression. The governance is the silence. And in this, we do not suffer from too much constraint. We suffer from the illusion of none.
Why Listen?
Explore how repression has migrated from psyche to interface
Reframe freedom as something subtly structured by design
Understand how governance today operates through ambient permission, not prohibition
Rethink desire in systems that know you too well to let you ask for what you need
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
Support ongoing production by visiting buymeacoffee.com/thedeeperthinkingpodcast or leaving a review on your podcast platform of choice. Thank you.
Further Reading
Freud, Sigmund. The Ego and the Id.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish – systems of soft control and social conditioning
Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism – repression by personalization
When control feels like compatibility, the most radical act may be to notice what no longer arrives.
#Repression #InterfaceEthics #DigitalGovernance #Neoliberalism #SystemicDesign #Freud #AlgorithmicSociety #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast #PhilosophyOfControl

Memory Without Witness, Truth Without Origin - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Memory Without Witness, Truth Without Origin - The Deeper Thinking Podcast
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
A slow meditation on truth without origin, memory without witness, and the subtle loss of metaphor in a world rendered by machines.
What if the future didn’t arrive with force, but with recursion? In this episode, we introduce the theory of Recursive Plausibility: the idea that truth, memory, and presence are increasingly simulated by machines trained on their own outputs. Drawing from the work of Brian Massumi, Lauren Berlant, Avery Gordon, and contemporary epistemology, we explore how AI doesn’t just displace human thought—it inherits a world already withdrawing from its capacity to remember, misread, or remain.
This is not a manifesto or forecast. It’s a conceptual walk through the fading boundaries between simulation and sensation. We reflect on simulation theory, ambient estrangement, and the ethics of unclaimed knowledge—questioning how presence, care, and cognition are altered when AI begins to feel familiar not because it understands us, but because it remembers what we’ve already taught it to forget.
Reflections
Here are some reflections that surfaced along the way:
AI does not generate meaning—it performs coherence.
Truth no longer lands. It loops.
What we call memory may soon refer only to what was rendered.
The most honest metaphor is the one that risks failing.
Presence without weight is the new shape of attention.
The archive is no longer what was stored—it’s what gets simulated most fluently.
Why Listen?
Encounter a new theory of AI epistemology and emotional design
Explore the cultural consequences of simulation-as-memory
Consider how metaphor, misreading, and ritual are slowly untrained
Reflect on presence, cognition, and the strange persistence of machines that continue after we’ve paused
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If you’d like to support the ongoing work, you can visit buymeacoffee.com/thedeeperthinkingpodcast or leave a review on Apple Podcasts. Thank you.
Bibliography
Berlant, Lauren. Cruel Optimism. Duke University Press, 2011.
Massumi, Brian. Parables for the Virtual. Duke University Press, 2002.
Gordon, Avery F. Ghostly Matters. University of Minnesota Press, 1997.
Baudrillard, Jean. Simulacra and Simulation. University of Michigan Press, 1994.
Bibliography Relevance
Lauren Berlant: Introduces the concept of cruel optimism—core to how we perform care without presence
Brian Massumi: Offers a theory of affect that precedes cognition, central to pre-verbal AI response modeling
Avery Gordon: Provides a framework for spectral presence and epistemic haunting
Jean Baudrillard: Early theorist of simulation and symbolic collapse, reframed here in recursive, generative terms
We do not train machines to know us. We train them to remember the shape of forgetting we already perform.
#RecursivePlausibility #AIepistemology #SimulationTheory #LaurenBerlant #BrianMassumi #AveryGordon #Baudrillard #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast #EpistemicDrift #AmbientEstrangement #DigitalPhilosophy

[ReUpload] The Psychology of Regret: Why We Dwell on Past Mistakes

The Psychology of Regret: Memory, Morality, and the Impossibility of Letting Go
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
For those drawn to ethical memory, reflective depth, and the architecture of what-ifs.
What exactly is regret—and why does it linger? This episode rethinks regret not as failure, but as a signal: a moral memory, a call to presence, and a mirror of the lives we almost lived. From the structure of memory to existential ethics, we trace regret as a force that reshapes identity and binds us to the past. With insights from cognitive science, philosophy, and literature, we explore how regret endures, how it distorts, and how it teaches.
Drawing on thinkers like Daniel Kahneman, Bernard Williams, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Henri Bergson, this conversation unfolds across five lenses: cognitive patterns, ethical tension, memory distortion, cultural archetypes, and the question of whether letting go is even possible—or desirable.
Through stories, studies, and paradoxes, we ask: What if regret is not a flaw, but a form of wisdom we haven’t learned how to hold?
Reflections
Here are a few reflections that surfaced in the making of this episode:
Regret is memory refusing to heal—not because we’re broken, but because we’re still listening.
The past is not over. It’s embedded in the way we frame possibility.
To regret is to feel the contour of an unlived path—and to mourn its silence.
Some regrets are burdens. Others are teachers. We confuse the two at our peril.
Regret doesn’t just haunt; it reveals what we value most deeply.
Letting go may not mean forgetting. It may mean learning how to carry differently.
Sometimes, we miss red the past not because we didn’t know better—but because knowing doesn’t always change feeling.
Why Listen?
Explore how cognitive science explains the fixation on "what could have been"
Engage with Jean-Paul Sartre and Bernard Williams on moral responsibility and regret
Reflect on how Henri Bergson reframes time and memory in the presence of loss
Consider whether letting go of regret is liberation—or a form of forgetting too much
Discover how literature and cinema encode regret as a mythic structure of modern life
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If this episode stayed with you and you’d like to support the ongoing work, you can do so gently here: Buy Me a Coffee. Thank you for helping sustain thoughtful, slow media.
Bibliography
Williams, Bernard. Moral Luck.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. Being and Nothingness; Existentialism is a Humanism.
Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Gay Science; Twilight of the Idols.
Bergson, Henri. Creative Evolution.
Kahneman, Daniel. Thinking, Fast and Slow.
Schacter, Daniel. The Seven Sins of Memory.
Seligman, Martin. Learned Optimism.
Neff, Kristin. Self-Compassion.
Proust, Marcel. In Search of Lost Time.
Dostoevsky, Fyodor. Crime and Punishment.
McEwan, Ian. Atonement.
Ishiguro, Kazuo. The Remains of the Day.
Bibliography Relevance
Bernard Williams: Connects moral agency with the weight of hindsight.
Jean-Paul Sartre: Frames regret as a confrontation with freedom and responsibility.
Friedrich Nietzsche: Challenges regret through affirmation and recurrence.
Henri Bergson: Explores how time folds through emotion and memory.
Daniel Kahneman: Illuminates how regret distorts rational assessment.
Kristin Neff: Offers psychological tools for meeting regret with kindness.
Perhaps the hardest part of regret isn’t the pain of what happened—but the silence of what never did.
#PhilosophyOfRegret #BernardWilliams #JeanPaulSartre #FriedrichNietzsche #DanielKahneman #RegretAndMemory #MoralResponsibility #ExistentialEthics #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast #WisdomOfRegret #LettingGo #TimeAndEmotion #NarrativeIdentity

Wonder and Awe: On the Edges of What Cannot Be Held - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Wonder and Awe: On the Edges of What Cannot Be Held
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
For those drawn to quiet thresholds, unrepeatable presence, and the philosophical weight of silence.
Awe rarely arrives with explanation. It brushes the edge of sense, disrupts the rhythm of thought, and leaves behind no insight—only a shift. In this episode, we explore wonder not as feeling or fact, but as attention. As residue. As refusal. We follow the traces left by formative encounters with what could not be named, and ask what remains when the world no longer fits the words we give it. What does it mean to witness rather than explain? To dwell in what exceeds our grasp, without turning it into knowledge?
This episode is not about wonder. It moves with it. We draw on the philosophies of Simone Weil, Gaston Bachelard, Karen Barad, and the art of Agnes Martin and John Cage to hold open a space for the ineffable: that which remains intact only when we stop trying to hold it.
We ask: What happens when awe is no longer accessible through grandeur? What if its deepest register is not scale, but fracture? What kinds of knowing begin where explanation ends?
Reflections
This episode lingers in the atmosphere of what cannot be named. It does not pursue awe. It waits for it. It follows its residue through quiet disruptions in time, attention, and sense.
Awe is not the event—it is what escapes it.
Wonder is not resolution. It is a refusal to conclude.
To witness is not to see clearly—but to stay with what blurs.
Some truths are not lost. They are untranslatable by design.
Philosophy does not always clarify. Sometimes, it listens.
Why Listen?
Reframe awe as ethical stance rather than emotional state
Explore the cognitive displacement of wonder through explanation
Engage with Barad, Weil, Bachelard, and Cage on perception and presence
Consider how attention itself becomes a philosophical act
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If this episode opened something in you, you can support the continuation of this project here: Buy Me a Coffee. Your presence sustains this slower pace of thought.
Bibliography
Weil, Simone. Gravity and Grace.
Bachelard, Gaston. The Poetics of Space.
Barad, Karen. Meeting the Universe Halfway.
Martin, Agnes. Paintings and Writings.
Cage, John. Silence: Lectures and Writings.
Bibliography Relevance
Simone Weil: Attention as metaphysical openness.
Gaston Bachelard: Space and reverie as epistemic acts.
Karen Barad: Intra-active perception beyond observer/object duality.
Agnes Martin: Minimalism as spiritual attention.
John Cage: Silence as compositional philosophy.
Some encounters are not to be understood. Only felt. And even then—barely.
#WonderAndAwe #Perception #SimoneWeil #GastonBachelard #KarenBarad #AgnesMartin #JohnCage #PhilosophyOfAwe #AttentionAsEthics #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast

Google and the Ceiling of Thought: How Gemini Redraws the Limits of Memory, Agency, and Attention - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Google and the Ceiling of Thought: How Gemini Redraws the Limits of Memory, Agency, and Attention
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
For those interested in ambient intelligence, predictive cognition, and the philosophical cost of fluency.
What happens when an AI finishes your sentence, schedules your tour, or remembers more than you do? In this episode, we reflect on Google’s I/O 2025 keynote and explore how Gemini marks a turning point—not just in artificial intelligence, but in the architecture of selfhood. We examine how memory, authorship, and volition are increasingly shared with systems that listen, anticipate, and act in our name. The assistant is no longer a tool. It is an editor of attention. A curator of cognition.
This is not a review of the keynote. It is a meditation on what is being displaced by fluency. We engage with the ideas of Gilbert Simondon, Karen Barad, Jacques Derrida, Shoshana Zuboff, and Byung-Chul Han to consider what remains unrendered when the assistant becomes the protagonist.
We ask: What becomes of thought when it is predicted before it is felt? What is memory when recall is no longer embodied? And what is authorship when our most fluent voice lives outside of us?
Reflections
This episode lingers where the keynote does not. It traces the implications of synthetic selfhood, ambient intelligence, and the editorial logic that now underwrites attention itself.
The assistant is no longer a reply. It is a rhythm.
When Gemini remembers for you, what happens to forgetting?
Fluency can erase friction. But friction makes thought real.
There are parts of us that cannot be modeled. Let them remain illegible.
The most human gesture may now be: to pause, and say nothing.
Why Listen?
Reframe AI not as tool, but as epistemic infrastructure
Explore how fluency becomes authority—and how prediction replaces permission
Consider the philosophical cost of having your thoughts finished for you
Engage with Simondon, Barad, Derrida, Zuboff, and Han on synthetic memory and digital agency
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If this episode helped you see more clearly, you can support this work here: Buy Me a Coffee. Thank you for being part of this slower conversation.
Bibliography
Simondon, Gilbert. On the Mode of Existence of Technical Objects.
Barad, Karen. Meeting the Universe Halfway.
Derrida, Jacques. Archive Fever.
Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism.
Han, Byung-Chul. The Transparency Society.
Bibliography Relevance
Gilbert Simondon: Frames Gemini as co-constitutive agency, not external tool.
Karen Barad: Intra-action and relational entanglement define user–assistant fusion.
Jacques Derrida: Memory and forgetting as editorial politics.
Shoshana Zuboff: Ambient surveillance and behavioral prediction as soft governance.
Byung-Chul Han: Fluency as seduction and transparency as coercion.
The most powerful machine isn’t the one that speaks. It’s the one that remembers you better than you do.
#GoogleGemini #AmbientIntelligence #SyntheticSelf #EditorialAI #DigitalAgency #Simondon #Barad #Derrida #Zuboff #ByungChulHan #PhilosophyOfTechnology #EpistemicInfrastructure #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast

Philosophy Didn’t Just Eat AI. It Wrote Its Code — and It’s Hungry for Meaning. - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Philosophy Didn’t Just Eat AI. It Wrote Its Code — and It’s Hungry for Meaning
An epistemic meditation on artificial intelligence as a philosophical actor—and the urgency of restoring meaning, not just function, to systems that now decide for us.
What does your AI system believe? In this episode, we expand on Michael Schrage and David Kiron’s MIT Sloan thesis, Philosophy Eats AI. We trace how systems built on machine logic inevitably encode assumptions about purpose, knowledge, and reality. This episode reframes AI not as infrastructure—but as worldview. A tool that doesn’t just compute, but commits.
This is a quiet engagement with how leadership itself must evolve. With reflections drawn from Gregory Bateson, Karen Barad, Michel Foucault, and Heinz von Foerster, we introduce the idea of synthetic judgment: the emerging ability to interpret, audit, and question what our systems silently believe on our behalf.
Reflections
Every AI model has a philosophy. Most organizations don’t know what it is.
Leadership now requires ontological fluency—what your systems can and can’t see defines your future.
AI doesn’t just support judgment. It simulates it—often without your permission.
The most dangerous AI systems aren’t wrong. They’re coherent in ways you never intended.
To govern AI well, you need to understand what kind of knowing it performs.
Synthetic judgment isn’t human vs machine. It’s the ability to remain critical inside coordination.
Why Listen?
Learn how AI systems enact hidden worldviews about purpose and value
Explore teleology, epistemology, and ontology as business infrastructure
Understand how synthetic judgment can be cultivated as a leadership skill
Engage with thinkers who saw long ago what AI now makes urgent
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
Support future episodes by visiting buymeacoffee.com/thedeeperthinkingpodcast or leaving a review on Apple Podcasts. Thank you.
Bibliography
Barad, Karen. Meeting the Universe Halfway. Duke University Press, 2007.
Bateson, Gregory. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. University of Chicago Press, 2000.
Bostrom, Nick. Superintelligence. Oxford University Press, 2014.
Crawford, Kate. Atlas of AI. Yale University Press, 2021.
Eubanks, Virginia. Automating Inequality. St. Martin’s Press, 2018.
Floridi, Luciano. The Logic of Information. Oxford University Press, 2019.
Foucault, Michel. The Order of Things. Vintage, 1994.
Harari, Yuval Noah. Homo Deus. Harvill Secker, 2016.
Kelleher, John D., and Brendan Tierney. Data Science. MIT Press, 2018.
Marcus, Gary, and Ernest Davis. Rebooting AI. Pantheon, 2019.
Mitchell, Melanie. Artificial Intelligence. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2019.
Morozov, Evgeny. To Save Everything, Click Here. PublicAffairs, 2013.
Noble, Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression. NYU Press, 2018.
Schrage, Michael, and David Kiron. Philosophy Eats AI. MIT Sloan Management Review, 2025.
von Foerster, Heinz. Understanding Understanding. Springer, 2003.
Wolfram, Stephen. “How to Think Computationally About AI.” 2023.
Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism. PublicAffairs, 2019.
To design AI is to author a worldview. To lead with it is to be answerable for what it sees—and what it cannot.
#PhilosophyEatsAI #SyntheticJudgment #Ontology #GregoryBateson #MichaelSchrage #David Kiron #KarenBarad #Foucault #vonFoerster #AIethics #MITSMR #Leadership #AIphilosophy #DeeperThinkingPodcast

The Symmetry of Seeing: Kepler, Constraint, and the Shape of Perception - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

The Symmetry of Seeing: Kepler, Constraint, and the Shape of Perception
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
For those drawn to quiet forms of understanding, where science becomes metaphor and attention becomes care.
Walking through a snowstorm in 1610, Johannes Kepler forgot the gift he was meant to bring—but noticed the snowflakes. That absence led him to see something else: a structure repeating without exactness, a kind of patterned insistence. This episode explores what symmetry reveals when we look past perfection and toward perception. What if symmetry isn’t just beauty—but memory? Not design, but constraint? And what if the act of noticing itself is a kind of ethical presence?
Drawing from philosophy of science, phenomenology, and the poetics of observation, this episode moves from snowflakes to quantum mechanics, from natural symmetry to psychological inheritance. We reflect on how patterns trap as well as free, and how attention becomes a moral act—especially when we look gently, without trying to solve.
With quiet references to thinkers like Simone Weil, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Ilya Prigogine, we explore symmetry not as perfection—but as echo. Not as a solution, but as a way to remain with what repeats. The snowflake melts. The question stays.
Reflections
This episode dwells in the soft space between knowing and seeing. Here are a few thoughts that followed:
Symmetry is not always perfection—it is often the record of restraint.
The mind returns to what it cannot name. That return is a kind of seeing.
Some patterns free us. Some bind. Noticing is what begins to loosen the grip.
The flake doesn’t repeat—but the angle does. Attention works the same way.
Even inherited structures can be held with care when we stop performing and start perceiving.
What falls isn’t always lost. It may just be changing form.
Ethics begins in how we look—not what we know.
And sometimes, the most beautiful insights arrive when we forget the gift and see what’s falling.
Why Listen?
Reimagine symmetry as constraint, not control
Trace how natural form reveals cognitive and emotional structures
Consider perception itself as a moral and aesthetic act
Engage with Weil, Merleau-Ponty, and Prigogine on pattern, perception, and temporality
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If this episode stayed with you and you’d like to support the ongoing work, you can do so gently here: Buy Me a Coffee. Thank you for being part of this slower conversation.
Bibliography
Kepler, Johannes. On the Six-Cornered Snowflake. Trans. Colin Hardie. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966.
Weil, Simone. Gravity and Grace. Routledge, 2002.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Perception. Routledge, 2012.
Prigogine, Ilya. The End of Certainty. Free Press, 1997.
Bibliography Relevance
Johannes Kepler: Introduces the initiating event and foundational metaphor of natural form.
Simone Weil: Reframes attention as an act of ethical precision.
Maurice Merleau-Ponty: Grounds perception as embodied meaning.
Ilya Prigogine: Links pattern emergence with thermodynamic temporality.
Symmetry may begin in nature—but it returns in how we choose to see.
#Kepler #Symmetry #PhilosophyOfScience #Phenomenology #Weil #MerleauPonty #Prigogine #Attention #Perception #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast #PatternRecognition #EthicalSeeing #StructuralBeauty

Useful Fictions: Evolution, Perception, What We Render, and the Ethics of Seeing Less - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Useful Fictions: Evolution, Perception, What We Render, and the Ethics of Seeing Less
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
For those drawn to perceptual humility, philosophical depth, and the subtle ethics of not-knowing.
What if evolution didn’t favor truth? What if it favored usefulness—and what we see is more like a desktop interface than a window onto the real? This episode explores how evolutionary pressures shaped perception not to reveal reality, but to keep us alive. Drawing on cognitive science, philosophy of mind, and evolutionary theory, we examine the quiet proposition that the world as we see it may be a helpful fiction.
This is not an argument for despair, but for care. With nods to thinkers like Donald Hoffman, Immanuel Kant, and Maurice Merleau-Ponty, we explore how perception becomes relational, how attention becomes ethical, and how uncertainty can deepen—rather than diminish—meaning.
To see less isn’t to fail. It may be the condition for intimacy, for listening, and for the kind of care that begins where certainty ends.
Reflections
This episode asks what kind of seeing leads to reverence. What if meaning doesn’t come from clarity, but from the way we hold what cannot be resolved?
Certainty closes. Humility opens.
The world doesn’t need to be seen completely to be honored completely.
We don’t need clearer eyes—we need gentler ones.
Seeing differently can be an act of responsibility.
Not all illusions are errors. Some are gifts from nature to keep us alive.
The shimmer at the edge of perception is not a flaw—it’s an invitation.
Knowledge may begin in rupture—but it matures in relation.
Why Listen?
Explore how evolution shaped perception as an adaptive interface
Reflect on why seeing less might deepen—not distort—meaning
Learn how attention, not certainty, underpins ethical vision
Engage with Hoffman, Kant, and Merleau-Ponty on truth, perception, and relation
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If this episode resonated and you’d like to support deeper thinking in the world, you can do so here: Buy Me a Coffee. Thank you for being part of this unfolding conversation.
Bibliography
Hoffman, Donald D. The Case Against Reality. W. W. Norton, 2019.
Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Pure Reason. Trans. Paul Guyer & Allen Wood. Cambridge: CUP, 1998.
Merleau-Ponty, Maurice. Phenomenology of Perception. Trans. Donald Landes. Routledge, 2012.
Bibliography Relevance
Donald Hoffman: Provides the foundational theory of perception-as-interface.
Immanuel Kant: Frames perception as structured by mind, not by the world itself.
Maurice Merleau-Ponty: Grounds the relational, embodied aspects of seeing.
The clearest eyes may miss the deepest truths. But those who look gently may see what matters most.
#EvolutionaryPerception #DonaldHoffman #Phenomenology #Kant #MerleauPonty #PhilosophyOfVision #Attention #Epistemology #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast #UsefulFictions #SeeingAndKnowing #InterfaceTheory

The Art of Not Boarding Every Bus - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

The Art of Not Boarding Every Bus: Thoughts, Distance, and the Practice of Letting Go
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
For anyone quietly learning to let thoughts pass without following every one.
This episode is a parable about thoughts, and the practice of cognitive diffusion. Through the metaphor of buses and benches, we explore what it means to notice a thought, to pause before reacting, and to choose not to follow. What begins as habit slowly becomes practice. What once felt automatic becomes something else entirely: space.
 It’s a story that models freedom within thought, shaped by the spirit of thinkers like Steven C. Hayes (cognitive defusion), Iain McGilchrist (attentional depth), and Simone Weil (attention as a moral act). The story offers no solution—only a rhythm. A way of sitting beside a thought. A way of letting it pass.
Here, diffusion is not described—it is lived. In the gentle tension between reflex and choice, something quiet unfolds: not resistance, but recognition. Not certainty, but space. Not mastery, but permission. And in that permission, a different kind of freedom begins to take shape—unforced, unnoticed, but deeply felt.
Reflections
This episode doesn't tell you how to change your thoughts. It shows you how to change your posture toward them. Here are some of the quieter truths that surfaced along the way:
Not every thought is yours to follow. Some are only passing through.
Freedom doesn’t come from stopping thoughts—but from letting them be.
The space between you and a thought is where agency begins.
Urgency can wear the mask of care. So can shame.
Some buses have no signs. Some are late. Some are early. None are mandatory.
Refusal doesn’t need to look like strength. Sometimes it looks like stillness.
There is nothing to solve. Only something to see. And then let go.
Thought is not a command.
Why Listen?
Experience cognitive diffusion as story, not theory
Learn how attention can soften the grip of mental reflex
Explore how noticing becomes a quiet act of freedom
Engage with Hayes, McGilchrist, and Weil through metaphor and mood
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If this episode resonated with you and you’d like to support the ongoing work, you can do so gently here: Buy Me a Coffee. Thank you for being part of this slower conversation.
Bibliography
Hayes, Steven C. A Liberated Mind: How to Pivot Toward What Matters. Penguin, 2019.
McGilchrist, Iain. The Master and His Emissary. Yale University Press, 2009.
Weil, Simone. Gravity and Grace. London: Routledge, 2002.
Bibliography Relevance
Steven C. Hayes: Introduces the foundational practice of cognitive diffusion in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy.
Iain McGilchrist: Provides a philosophical model of attentional depth and divided mind structures.
Simone Weil: Grounds the ethical treatment of attention as presence, patience, and moral clarity.
You are not your urgency. 
#CognitiveDiffusion #StevenCHayes #SimoneWeil #IainMcGilchrist #ACT #Attention #InnerFreedom #BusStopParable #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast #LetItPass #NarrativePsychology #PhilosophyOfMind

Beyond Brené Brown: Shame, Power, and the Conditions for Belonging - The Deeper Thinking Podcast

Beyond Brené Brown: Shame, Power, and the Conditions for Belonging
The Deeper Thinking Podcast
For anyone thinking more deeply about what makes vulnerability possible—and what makes it dangerous.
We honour the work of Brené Brown—her reframing of vulnerability as the birthplace of love and belonging—and then we carry it further. This episode explores the structural, political, and ethical conditions that determine who gets to be vulnerable, who pays a price for being seen, and what must change for emotional truth to be met with more than applause. Vulnerability is no longer framed as a personal act alone, but as a relational, designed, and often exploited condition.
With nods to thinkers such as Sara Ahmed, Judith Butler, Gabor Maté, Claudia Rankine, Ta-Nehisi Coates, and bell hooks, this essay examines what happens after someone speaks: do we adapt, or do we consume? We reframe vulnerability not as courage rewarded, but as truth revealed—and ask what kind of world is required to receive it.
Reflections
This episode challenges comfort. It suggests that real care is not found in sentiment, but in redesign. That to honor someone’s openness, we must be willing to change what surrounds them.
Vulnerability, without protection, is not connection—it is exposure.
When we ask people to speak, we inherit the obligation to adapt.
The most ethical spaces are not those that encourage honesty, but those that change when honesty arrives.
We do not need more people to be brave. We need fewer systems that make bravery necessary just to be heard.
Refusal is also integrity. The right not to disclose is part of any real ethic of care.
To listen well is not to be moved—it is to be reconfigured.
We honor vulnerability not when we admire it, but when we build what it asks of us.
Why Listen?
Rethink vulnerability as a collective ethical and design challenge—not just a personal choice
Understand how shame, visibility, and risk operate differently across gender, race, and class
Explore the limits of performative openness in culture, workplaces, and institutions
Engage with Brown, Butler, Ahmed, Maté, Rankine, Coates, and hooks on emotional ethics, power, and care
Listen On:
YouTube
Spotify
Apple Podcasts
Support This Work
If this episode stayed with you and you’d like to support the ongoing work, you can do so gently here: Buy Me a Coffee. Thank you for being part of this slower conversation.
Bibliography
Brown, Brené. Daring Greatly. New York: Gotham, 2012.
Butler, Judith. Precarious Life. London: Verso, 2004.
Ahmed, Sara. On Being Included. Durham: Duke University Press, 2012.
Maté, Gabor. The Myth of Normal. New York: Avery, 2022.
hooks, bell. All About Love. New York: William Morrow, 2000.
Coates, Ta-Nehisi. Between the World and Me. New York: Spiegel & Grau, 2015.
Rankine, Claudia. Citizen: An American Lyric. Minneapolis: Graywolf Press, 2014.
Bibliography Relevance
Brené Brown: Frames the emotional premise of vulnerability as a path to connection.
Sara Ahmed: Brings institutional critique, especially around complaint and the limits of inclusion.
Judith Butler: Grounds the politics of recognizability, grief, and precarity.
Gabor Maté: Anchors the somatic and trauma-informed dimensions of trust and openness.
bell hooks: Shapes the ethical lens on love, care, and the risk of being known.
Claudia Rankine: Illuminates the experience of racialized exposure and enforced vulnerability.
Ta-Nehisi Coates: Provides clarity on surveillance, systemic risk, and structural fragility.
We do not honor vulnerability by admiring it. We honor it by changing for it.
#BrenéBrown #JudithButler #SaraAhmed #GaborMaté #bellhooks #ClaudiaRankine #TaNehisiCoates #StructuralCare #RelationalEthics #Vulnerability #Shame #TraumaInformed #EthicsOfListening #TheDeeperThinkingPodcast