Avsnitt
-
Frederic describes his program The Week in our conversation. I did it last year, invited by a friend (whom I misname in our conversation, sorry) and recognized him. Podcast guest and mutual friend Lorna Davis had introduced us before he had started creating The Week.
The Week is one of the few programs on sustainability approaching it as a leadership effort, not management or lecture. Anyone can do it. It's a series of videos you watch with a group, then engage in discussion about it. It's different than the Spodek Method, but shares many aspects.
I could describe it more here, but the best way to learn is to hear his description in our conversation, then sign up for it.
Frederic's program The WeekHis book Reinventing OrganizationsHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I find this series of conversations with Bruce to be ending up excellent examples to learn advanced Spodek Method from. I think they're also engaging. I certainly enjoyed the conversations with Bruce.
You can tell he believes in the vision and isn't trying to answer askew, or maybe I'm not picking up on cues, but the interaction is both not clicking but not falling apart either. If you're learning the Spodek Method from the How-To Guide or a workshop, or finished either, I think you can learn a lot from these conversations. Also, from Bruce, a lot about addiction, science, and applying them to modern life.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Saknas det avsnitt?
-
Regular readers of my blog know I took a course, Conservatism 101, from the Leadership Institute, which led me to read conservative literature I hadn't before: Edmund Burke, Frederic Bastiat, Friedrich Hayek, Russell Kirk, and more. This reading came after I started reading and watching Milton Friedman, Julian Simon, Ayn Rand, and current followers of their work like Marian Tupy, Gale Pooley, and Alex Epstein. I had blogged about them after reading their works too. I began seeing relevance of their work to sustainability that I don't think even their fans appreciate.
At a social event, I met a woman who works at the Cato Institute. I told her of what I was learning and invited her to talk about it. She said sustainability and the environment weren't her focus, but she could put me in touch with colleagues. She knew Jack Spencer from the Heritage Foundation.
I share some of my background, generally left politics, but opening up to learning more from (podcast guest) Jonathan Haidt's work, then attending an event at the Trump Bedminster Golf Course, which led to learning about the Leadership Institute. There I took Conservatism 101, which led the above.
Jack shares some of his background, also not starting on the political right, and how he applies the above to politics today, especially energy, regulation, subsidy, and the motivations of government employees and what he sees happen as they gain power.
We don't reach the point of talking policy. I started to bring up the Spodek Method, but became so engrossed in Jack's sharing about nature, I followed up with it, especially wondering if he experienced environmentalists saying he didn't care. He clearly cares plenty about the environment.
This conversation is different than nearly any I've heard on sustainability. I think you'll like it. My main flaw was my inexperience in talking about some topics so was tongue-tied at times.
Jack's profile at Heritage FoundationHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Regular readers of my blog know I took a course, Conservatism 101, from the Leadership Institute, which led me to read conservative literature I hadn't before: Edmund Burke, Frederic Bastiat, Friedrich Hayek, Russell Kirk, and more. This reading came after I started reading and watching Milton Friedman, Julian Simon, Ayn Rand, and current followers of their work like Marian Tupy, Gale Pooley, and Alex Epstein. I had blogged about them after reading their works too. I began seeing relevance of their work to sustainability that I don't think even their fans appreciate.
At a social event, I met a woman who works at the Cato Institute. I told her of what I was learning and invited her to talk about it. She said sustainability and the environment weren't her focus, but she could put me in touch with colleagues. She knew Nick Loris from when he worked at the Heritage Foundation. Now he works at C3 Solutions---the Conservative Coalition for Climate Solutions.
I invited him to talk about our approaches to the environment, both our historical journeys and our philosophical views. We talked about first-principles approaches from a limited government, free market view.
I haven't heard conversations like this one on sustainability. You'll hear genuine curiosity and learning.
Nick's profile at C3 SolutionsHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Kevin and I talk about volunteering at the Chelsea Community Fridge, how it formed, how it's evolved, and our roles.
You'll hear he's involved with it more. I was curious to learn about parts I don't know about. It's outdoors so it operates 24/7, 365 days a year. New York City has no lack of hungry people, nor places with extra food. It's insane to see how much we waste, except that nearly every American wastes food. We can reduce that waste.
I hope hearing our conversation inspires you to volunteer more, waste food less, and appreciate what food you have. Volunteering for me replaces time in front of screens, so it saves time and money. It connects me with my neighbors, including the hungry and homeless.
I write about Kevin in my upcoming book, so if the book isn't out yet, I hope it whets your appetite to read it. If it's later and you've read the book, this episode will let you learn more about a fellow volunteer.
Besides volunteering, you can start a community fridge. As you'll hear the woman who started this one has moved on, and the community continues to grow and thrive, though it has its challenges.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Trish and Evelyn took the workshop, and neither seriously acted on sustainability before it, so one thing to listen for in this conversation is what people who look at personally living more sustainably sound like. I think it's safe to say we have fun. Partly we express exasperation at the depravity of our polluting and depleting culture. We also share the experience of our eyes opening to those things. Trish, for example, shares how she doesn't want to take cruises, despite anticipating enjoying them and her friends not seeing their pollution. I share how our culture turned preserving fruit from a way to conserve to a way to waste.
We also talk about our vision to create sustainability awards. A few of them exist, often won by companies on the forefront of sustainability like Coca-Cola and DuPont </sarcasm>. We want to make meaningful, authentic ones. Since some would be for contributing to sustainability and others would be to highlight greenwashing and other nefarious, deceptive anti-sustainable practices, we want a name that can suggest positive and negative. Listen to hear what we came up with. In a few years they'll become the go-to sustainability awards.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
If you like food, you'll love this episode.
I shared before how unbelievably delicious Andrew's food was, even if it were at a top restaurant. But he works at a hospital, so it was healthy too. I almost don't go to restaurants any more since they just pile salt, sugar, and fat onto everything. I don't need a stick of butter in every dish.
I also tasted his food at a chef competition. He's shared his background training at groundbreaking top restaurants.
I couldn't help indulge in asking him about behind the scenes in top kitchens and he shared. We talked about his artistry, how he learned, and teamwork.
He also shared about his commitment, which led to talking about leadership, changing culture, intrinsic emotion, and liberation. How long can you go without your phone?
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I'd heard about Chip long ago but only met him recently at a launch event for his book Learning to Love Midlife. It resonated since at 52 years old, I was smack in the middle of the part of life he was talking about, after adulthood but before old age. I've also been approached by universities with programs for people in their third acts.
A big topic is finding and creating meaning and purpose. My life is overflowing with them since no one seems to be leading on the biggest issue or even know effective things we can do. So I was curious how sustainability fit into Chip's curriculum.
Since he started a program from scratch, I was curious how it started and what drove him. Then we did the Spodek Method.
Chip's home pageHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I think I can safely say Bruce and I have formed a friendship, both professional and from similar interests, even though he's retired and I'm not a psychologist. I learn psychology to help lead. We're both intrigued by addiction. We both want to improve our environmental situation, not just give in.
He likes the idea of the Spodek Method. He hopes it works beyond just one person. He's not sure it can. In this episode we start practicing it.
Working with him was one of the more challenging times doing the Spodek Method. I expect that as more people learn it, these conversations with Bruce will make effective lessons in challenging cases. He wasn't trying to challenge me. So far, it just works with some personalities more smoothly than with others. Finding examples of different types lets me learn how to apply it with different people and personality types.
Some types I haven't figured out. Let's see how things go with Bruce. If you're learning the Spodek Method, I think you can learn a lot from this conversation. I'd say it's advanced. On further thought, it might be me. Maybe other people would have an easy time. If so, let me know what I might be missing.
Bruce's home pageHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I rarely get to talk to people who expect living more sustainably to be joyful and rewarding from personal experience, not just hoping for the best. I enjoyed sharing that perspective with Erica last time, I invited her back with no specific agenda.
This episode presents conversation between two people who have left mainstream culture and are living more how many people agree we should, but hold themselves back. So they speak in speculation and generalities. They still think more sustainability means lower quality of life because they can't speak from experience otherwise.
Erica and I can, so we do. We don't lament missing out on things we don't do any more because we don't miss them. Moreover, we realize they weren't helping us in the first place. Soon we'll all talk about how much we prefer living more locally with less stuff. Today, for listeners who suspect it's possible but haven't witnessed it, enjoy listening.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I loved where this conversation led.
We began by talking about recent news: Greta Thunberg taking a political stand and acting publicly on it on an issue unrelated to the environment. Guy described how he saw this action distracting and undermining her credibility in sustainability. We got to talking about overwhelming tribalism today.
In the process, Guy shared views he once held that he overcame, specifically about Apartheid. We talked about ones views changing.
In the end we got to Guy sharing what I read as something he's had to settle on: that while he generally prefers limited government, low tax policies, with our environmental problems, he's concluded otherwise. Like with national defense, where you need aircraft carriers and such, with the environment he's concluded we need big government solutions.
I shared some of my views on big action but to limit government's ability to permit pollution. I read that the views were new to him and attractive. They led him to read my book. Sorry you have to wait until fall to read it, but what I share in this episode hints at why he's written a wonderful endorsement for the book.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I start my conversation with Andy with what brought me to him: the meal after recording with the guy who hired him, podcast guest Sven Gierlinger, and the Washington Post article that read like a paid ad for their food, Hospital food is a punchline. These chefs are redefining it. I didn't record in my conversation with Sven how off-the-charts the food was because I at it after recording.
Andy was the Executive Chef at the hospital where we met who prepared that food. It was amazing. It would have been amazing in any restaurant, let alone a hospital.
We talk about two main things. One was the art of food preparation. Andy shared his path there from washing dishes through working with chef Raymond Blanc, chef Daniel Boulud, and the restaurant Rouge Tomate. At each stage he learned appreciation for ingredients and honed his craft.
The other was changing culture. Regular listeners know my goal in sustainability is changing culture. Nearly all attempts to change how our culture impacts Earth's biosphere use technology, market reforms, and legislation. Those things don't change culture.
Northwell Health is deliberately changing their culture around food. They've come a long way, but can still go a long way. Changing culture means resistance, including from the people it would help. It's hard and takes a long time. In the case of Northwell, I hear that despite the challenges, nobody wants to go back.
We living in unsustainable cultures could benefit from learning what Northwell achieved.
Here's the picture Andy mentioned:
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
This conversation was brief, but covered the important points, particularly the challenges of changing habits. Dave didn't do everything he intended, though I thought he succeeded more than he did. The goal of the Spodek Method isn't to make big changes, though some do, but to share and act on intrinsic motivation relevant to nature and the environment. Just accessing intrinsic motivation at all can be a challenge in a world where most messages on the environment are based in lecture and telling people what to do.
Yet we care about the environment. If we expect to be told what to or lectured at, we hold back from sharing. Dave seemed partly to hold back, but he also works in leadership so overcame the inhibition and shared.
He didn't do as much as he hoped, but the parts he did he enjoyed. If you're concerned about acting yourself, you might appreciate Dave's experience. Starting new habits or even just acting once or twice for the first time can be challenging. When done for intrinsic motivation, you'll feel meaning and want to continue. Dave also skipped some Dunkin' Donuts, which seems like a big success to me.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Adam treats dependence and addiction in some ways different and unique than past guests who have covered addiction. One way is the business side. For example, early in this conversation, he talks about how people at companies that create products designed to addict, like cell phones, tablets, and the apps and games on them, don't allow their children to use them. Yet they gleefully reach trillion-dollar valuations based on making it difficult for children or anyone to stop using their products.
Is this pattern not outrageous? Adam reinforces about how widespread the patterns are.
The result is growth in addiction beyond anything before and people keep finding more ways to addict. People often feel isolated and helpless. Addiction wrecks your self-esteem. We miss that our culture supports it. Adam shares how they keep us coming back for things we don't even like.
Adam teaches at one of the world's top business schools. He doesn't oppose business, but he explores our culture's addiction problems. He elaborates on the problems, research, and possible solutions.
At the end, I ask him his thoughts about the viability of contracts and society when people can control others as predictably and effectively as by coercing through threat or violence. We as individuals are outmatched by corporations and institutions able to control people this effectively with big, long-term consequences.
Adam's home pageHis book Irresistible: The Rise of Addictive Technology and the Business of Keeping Us HookedHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I start by describing how podcast guest Carl Erik Fisher, author of bestseller The Urge, reviewed my upcoming book Sustainability Simplified as a subject matter expert on addiction. Carl mentioned how my book suffered from what Bruce describes as the demon drug myth. He pointed to Bruce's work as seminal, so I started reading it.
I'd heard of Rat Park and later remembered Johan Hari mentioning Bruce in his TED talk where he said "the opposite of addiction is community". I couldn't wait to talk to Bruce. Carl introduced us. We spoke. Bruce clarified the demon drug myth. I described how addiction and doof figure in my sustainability leadership work.
In our conversation, Bruce described how working with self-described junkies in the early 1950s led him to reinterpret the common wisdom "proved" by experiments that some chemicals addicted people, end of story. He then described how he created Rat Park, which showed a lot more nuance and alternative explanations. You can read about Rat Park on Bruce's page or this comic book version, but his description in our conversation is engaging and thorough.
Then he shares how people continue to stick with the old view of addiction and drugs. It's easy. It takes parents and others off the hook.
He describes new views of addiction. You won't see addiction the same after. If you want to stop polluting and depleting yourself and help people you know and communities you are a member of, this conversation will change how you view it forever. You'll approach it with more understanding, empathy, and compassion.
Bruce's home page, aka Bruce K. Alexander's Globalization of Addiction WebsiteHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
I started by sharing my experience giving after reading Peter's book The Life You Can Save. I confess I only read it after our first conversation, but loved it. I feared reading a book by an academic philosopher arguing a point would be dry and boring. Instead it led me to donate to causes. Then, even though I didn't donate for recognition or personal benefit, the organizations I donated to contacted me with gratitude, connected to me, and one even invited me to its annual dinner.
Then we talk more about flying, following up our last conversation. From Peter's perspective, I view flying too black-and-white, not considering someone's reason for flying or what benefit it might provide. I don't challenge that perspective. I'm just looking to learn from my guest. My book treats that perspective.
Then I share my new take on his drowning child analogy as it relates to sustainability.
Other topics too, but we close with our mutual appreciation for calm conversation and democracy, both lacking these days.
Peter's home pageHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Regular listeners know I see our relationships with many activities that are enabled by pollution as behavioral addictions like gambling or playing video games. Thus, I bring experts in addiction.
Anna's book Dopamine Nation is one of the most accessible I've read. She covers the scale of addiction, how much it's increasing, how it works, her personal history with her own addiction, and the stories of several of her patients.
After she describes her background, we start by talking about the shame that accompanies addiction and makes it hard to share about, including our personal experiences of it. We cover how much our culture and economy have embraced addiction. It's profitable, after all.
She describes in lay terms how addiction works, how it disrupts homeostasis and the results, for example tolerance. She talks about the paradox that as we create more material abundance, we see more anxiety, depression, and other problems. We find addictive things lead us to feel we're treating our problems, but more often add to them.
She asked me about avoiding packaged food, doof, and other sustainability experiments. I read she asked out of genuine curiosity, recognizing I'm not just doing it for myself. I think she wants to practice sustainability more and is looking to learn how.
We talk about our culture. She identifies commercially-driven epidemics for profit. You can tell I enjoyed this conversation.
Selected publications
Lembke, A., Digital Addictions Are Drowning Us in Dopamine, The Wall Street Journal, August 13, 2021Lembke, A., Eyal, N. Is Social Media Hijacking our Minds?, Pairagraph: A hub of discourse between pairs of notable individuals, 2021Lembke, A. Unsafe Supply: Why Making Controlled Prescription Drugs Available for Unsupervised Use Will Not Target the Syndemic of HIV, Hepatitis C, Overdose, and COVID-19, Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 2020 Sep;81(5):564-565.Lembke, A. Purdue Pharma is Done Promoting Opioids: Here’s Why It’s a Big Deal, Fortune Magazine, Feb 2018Lembke, A., Papac, J., Humphreys, K. Our Other Prescription Drug Problem, NEJM, 2018; 378(8):693-695.Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
Kimberly has, by dramatically reducing her flying, improved her life, living more deliberately and consistent with her values.
I met her when she was a panelist at an event on promoting hurting people less by flying less. I invited her as someone to explore her journey of reducing her flying. In our conversation, the shared how she went from learning the possibility to promoting staying grounded. Many stages overlapped with mine, from the analysis paralysis of not starting to finding more travel experience despite less flying, or rather because of it.
She shared how you need to act to see what we have to do, not just to change ourselves but to change culture. After being in room where Paris Agreement was signed, she realized, we have to do what the signatories agreed to. It means action, not just talk. She realized that every nation, company, and individual has to live sustainably (to which I add: we'll love it even though from our current perspective it looks like sacrifice).
The point of acting on important issues is to know how to lead others. Science, facts, and lecturing had their role, but have to act on emotions to motivate and sustain action.
Much of what she said was music to my ears.
Kimberly's book Under the Sky We MakeHer Substack newsletter We Can Fix ItHer home pageHosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
People who fly think most people fly, but it's more like a few percent. A small fraction of people fly, let alone across oceans or multiple times per year. If you fly, it's probably your action that hurts people most through its environmental impact, but you probably rationalize and justify it. Unlike many other polluting activities, most of the money you spend on flying goes to polluting, displacing people and wildlife from their land to extract fuel and minerals, and lobbying governments to pollute and extract more.
Stefan has been reporting and publishing on flying for decades longer than I've worked on it. I met him following a panel he participated in hosted by Stay Grounded on the impacts of flying on people and wildlife. That talk was on frequent flyer programs, but Stay Grounded works on many related issues.
After sharing his background, Stefan talks about his research. My biggest takeaway: People believe a lot of myths about flying. Partly the industry promotes the myths, but people will do whatever mental gymnastics they have to to accept those myths, even when they're blatantly false. Some things Stefan shares:
Around 2 - 4 percent of people fly in a given year outside their countryPeople who fly think more like half the population fliesFlying is heavily subsidizes, so poor people help fund rich people flyingAirports and airlines are often supported and bailed out by taxesPoor people are hurt moreStefan shares more information in more detail. Despite knowing much of it, even I was outraged anew at new things I learned of how much flying hurts people and how much people who fly pay to cause more of that suffering, while telling themselves they are helping. Of course, they aren't choosing to fly from reasoning things out. They want to travel without effort, feel inner conflict at hurting people, and try to resolve their inner conflict by rationalizing and justifying their choices.
Here is the post I refer to, documenting the travels of a guy whose email newsletter I subscribe to: What do you think of this person’s flying habits? (part 1).
Stefan's home pageHis page at Linnaeus University, including links to his recent publications.Some recent publications:Are emissions from global air transport significantly underestimated?. Current Issues in Tourism. Status: Epub ahead of printNational tourism organizations and climate change. Tourism Geographies. Status: Epub ahead of printOn track to net-zero? Large tourism enterprises and climate change. Tourism Management. 100. 104842-104842Net-zero aviation : Transition barriers and radical climate policy design implications. Science of the Total Environment. 912A review of air travel behavior and climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews : Climate Change. 14 (1)Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
-
"What I do doesn't matter" is one of the more common sentiments of our time. We use it to avoid acting when we see problems. A similar rationalization not to act: "I have faith that younger people will solve our environmental problems. After all they will be affected more." People say these things to avoid acting, avoiding personal responsibility.
If anyone can say she deserves to relax and not have to work on problems, nobody would tell someone with incurable cancer she can't spend her time how she wants. Trish has incurable cancer. She worked her whole life to enjoy her retirement. She didn't grow up planning to act on sustainability. She didn't plan to take my sustainability leadership workshops, but her niece, Evelyn, and sister, Beth, told her about taking the workshop so she did.
In this episode, you'll hear Trish sharing why acting on sustainability and leading others is spending her remaining time how she wants. She once envisioned flying around in her retirement. She could and no one would judge her. But having learned that she can make a difference from the workshop, she's acting on sustainability. Living by your values and helping others live by theirs isn't deprivation or sacrifice.
The above is my read of Trish's situation and motivations. Listen to the episode to hear her describe why someone who could do anything she wants and doesn't have to care about people far away or younger finds helping future generations and people far away she'll never meet the best way to spend her precious time. Then sign up for a workshop to create as much meaning in your life.
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
- Visa fler
