It would be interesting to hear what he has to say in non-performance mode… A large amount of thought, experience and analysis clearly goes into his material…
Vox Day has just published a religionist’s “response” to Dawkins, Hitchens, and Harris—The Irrational Atheist: Confronting the Unholy Trinity of Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris—so he’d be well worth having on. His response claims to take on the atheist arguments on their turf (evidence, logic, reason) and demolish them. Could be a humdinger of an interview, esp. if you get one of the Unholy Trinity to reply on-air!
George Carlin (Balak’s suggestion) is a great idea, that’s for certain. There are a lot of good ideas on this thread.
Also, I have to say that one of POI’s biggest strengths is in honestly interviewing those who would appear to hold “enemy” positions to many listeners, and without ambushing them. I’m incredibly impressed with the how D.J. handles interviews with people who i presume he disagrees with; not only is it good for everyone involved but it serves as a great reminder for the rest of us to listen in our own daily discussions. So someone like Trajan117’s recommendation of “Vox Day” would be remarkably appropriate, as would be anyone from Scientology who cared to come forward and defend themselves. I imagine that would be tough to make happen though. Unfortunately, Scientologists appear to be incredibly hard to bring out to speak on the record where they don’t have full control. Hope i’m wrong here.
I’ll keep listening anyway, whoever is on.
Cheers!
-sm
Just read an interview with Elizabeth Hess on the chimp raised by a New York family to test a linguistic theory.
Lots of ethical and philosophical questions raised that I’d love to see brought up in a podcast interview.
The Chimp Who Thought He Was a Boy
Raised like a son by a New York City family as part
of a language experiment, Nim Chimpsky was shipped
away when funds ran out. A new biography tells
Nim’s story.
By Chris Colin
<http://www.salon.com/books/int/2008/03/31/Nim_Chimpsky>
Mar. 31, 2008 |
The fascinating, ultimately
heartbreaking account has finally been told in
journalist Elizabeth Hess’ primate biography, “Nim
Chimpsky: The Chimp Who Would Be Human.”
I hope this is still active, if I don’t get any reply, I’ll start a new topic. I recommend that you invite Bruce Wilson from the Talk To Action blog . His investigative journalism on Sarah Palin’s religious beliefs is unparalleled. Why is almost no one else talking about this? There were watered down articles in Newsweek and the New York Times, but nothing with the depth that Bruce has on his site here and Huffington Post. Just because she lost does not take away from the importance of educating the public about the strength and scope of the dominionism movement, particularly the New Apostolic Reformation and its subsidiaries.
I sent the following email to D.J. Grothe some time ago and never go a response. Then I saw this forum topic and thought I would post it here.
Dear D.J. Grothe,
I enjoy your Point of Inquiry show. However, I do have a suggestion. Why not have some Marxist and socialist perpsectives on POI? Yes, some consider the intellectual tradition founded by Marx now irrelevant. So this might be one of your leading critical questions, what is the continued relevancy of a Marxist analytical perspective.
You might start your search for an interview subject with some of the editors of Monthly Review, like John Bellamy Foster, or some of their other article and book authors.
http://monthlyreview.org/
You could cover media issues with Robert McCheseney http://monthlyreview.org/politicaleconomymedia.htm
If you feel compelled for you show to always have some basis in the natural sciences, then you might consider an interview with Levins and Lewontin, as they have a recenlty released book as well. http://monthlyreview.org/biologyinfluence.htm
And of course there are plenty of other authors and topics that you might include in your show from a Marxist perspective.
Thanks for your consideration.
Sheldon
I sent the following email to D.J. Grothe some time ago and never go a response. Then I saw this forum topic and thought I would post it here.
You might start your search for an interview subject with some of the editors of Monthly Review, like John Bellamy Foster, or some of their other article and book authors.
Stephen,
Thanks for your reply. And you were a guest on the Point of Inquiry pod cast? If so I searched for the show using your name, and got no results but I will look again when I have more time.
That looks like a very interesting and important article in Monthly Review. I had missed it, but I will go back and read it carefully.
I think I was provoked to suggest that POI have on a Monthly Review author after I heard Michael Shermer come on the show to make his arguments for “free trade” and capitalism.
I would really like to see the show deal with some issues of political economy and ecology from Monthly Review’s marxist perspective.
It would be interesting to hear what he has to say in non-performance mode… A large amount of thought, experience and analysis clearly goes into his material…
Stephen,
Thanks for your reply. And you were a guest on the Point of Inquiry pod cast? If so I searched for the show using your name, and got no results but I will look again when I have more time.
No no. I was saying I was a Monthly Review contributor, not that I was on PofI. I was simply echoing your assertion that there are plenty of MR contributors out there (I’m one) to interview.
Honestly, I don’t see it happening. The only axe PofI has to grind (from what I can see) is the secularism axe; they don’t seem much into politics. It’s a pity, really;
they’re devolving into a one-trick pony (well, actually 1.5 trick pony, with the .5 being the occasional “debunking magic/UFOs/bigfoot” episodes), and being a one-trick
pony is no way to grow listenership.
Chomsky has a great interview in The Humanist this month!
What a coincidence. He also cowrote a book (published in 1986 by South End Press) on developing a humanist society called Liberating Theory. It was written with Michael Albert, Leslie Cagan, Robin Hahnel, Mel King, Lydia Sargent and Holly Sklar.
The book is centered on developing a social theory that transcends beyond monist (ie marxism, nationalism) and pluralist theories (socialist feminism) into what they call Complimentary Holism (CoHo).
Anyway, a suggestion I have since Noam is pretty busy and preoccupied (his wife died from cancer recently) is Michael Albert. He is over at http://www.zcommunications.org/
He co-created, with Robin Hahnel, an alternative economic model called Participatory Economics (aka parecon). While I would like to hear him talk about parecon I think the topic would be best suited in discussing it within the confines of Complimentary Holism.
A podcast on what CoHo is and what visions and strategies we could use to create a humanist society would be very interesting.
Chomsky has a great interview in The Humanist this month!
What a coincidence. He also cowrote a book (published in 1986 by South End Press) on developing a humanist society called Liberating Theory. It was written with Michael Albert, Leslie Cagan, Robin Hahnel, Mel King, Lydia Sargent and Holly Sklar.
The book is centered on developing a social theory that transcends beyond monist (ie marxism, nationalism) and pluralist theories (socialist feminism) into what they call Complimentary Holism (CoHo).
Anyway, a suggestion I have since Noam is pretty busy and preoccupied (his wife died from cancer recently) is Michael Albert. He is over at http://www.zcommunications.org/
He co-created, with Robin Hahnel, an alternative economic model called Participatory Economics (aka parecon). While I would like to hear him talk about parecon I think the topic would be best suited in discussing it within the confines of Complimentary Holism.
A podcast on what CoHo is and what visions and strategies we could use to create a humanist society would be very interesting.
I hope someone is reading this and considers it…
I’m reading it TA.I find it more interesting to see you try and advance the cause for progressive-leftist ideals,than to seek out these podcasts or websites.I would add that most of this is Hokum!!There have been plenty of reasonable social-economic constructs already put forth throughout the years.Some of them failed not for lack of ingenuity and probability,but failed due to repression.Repression!!
I’m with you though.I’m reading your posts.You haven’t been around for awhile.Keep up the fight!Watch out for Pigs on the Wing!!
I’m reading it TA.I find it more interesting to see you try and advance the cause for progressive-leftist ideals,than to seek out these podcasts or websites.I would add that most of this is Hokum!!There have been plenty of reasonable social-economic constructs already put forth throughout the years.Some of them failed not for lack of ingenuity and probability,but failed due to repression.Repression!!
I’m with you though.I’m reading your posts.You haven’t been around for awhile.Keep up the fight!Watch out for Pigs on the Wing!!
Yeah, I happen to feel strongly that progressive-leftist ideals respond more deeply to society than conservative or centrist ideals (if you can say centrism is really anything to begin with). Sub Marcos said in one of the early EZLN statements that humanity, like the heart, prefers to be on the Left side. I am obviously a fellow traveler.
What other examples are you referring to? Just out of curiosity. Of course many experiments have been repressed, and there is always the possibility of that with a humanist or parecon society. But that shouldnt alter our desire to work towards it.
I mean, even if we felt our chances for success were zero, that shouldnt matter. Because the choice is between apathy or inaction, in which we assure failure, or hope and action, in which we at the very least have a possibility of success. The choice shouldnt be difficult for those who are not sociopaths or cynics.
I have considered a lot of different theories and models and for various reasons I happen to think participatory economics and complimentary holism has the most to offer.
. All the supernaturalists would certainly get the last laugh
