7 Burst results for "Paul Satra"

"paul satra" Discussed on The Philosopher's Zone

The Philosopher's Zone

06:13 min | 6 months ago

"paul satra" Discussed on The Philosopher's Zone

"A month ago Yeah definitely actually i. I've always kind of liked the idea. Free well i. I enjoyed that. Your free will so being faced with this dog. Had the car analogy kind of rubbed me the wrong way at first. Because i didn't want to be a dog tied to a cart in intact to follow. You know wherever faith leads me i. I really don't like that idea that our choices are firings of neurons in our brain that and we don't have any say actually we just think we do I don't like that at all But i do think the way that the stoic raised it having autonomy in conjunction with necessity so no matter what the cart is going to go in any direction. It chooses anyway. The driver chooses for it to go. But your choices as you're tied to the rope you can move around right. So if a cart the cart crosses your path and decided to sideswipe you you can learn how to jump over it or move around left rights and you can either walk the pace of the cart or you. Can you know. Sit on your button. Be dragged it does matter. But i like to think of free will in that way that you you still have choices but your future is unknown. So you don't know you're going to end up fake decides that for you tight. You definitely are in charge of your mind. I just want to finish by bringing up the element of fatalism in stoicism and that resignation to leaving the world as it is draft. Get all bent out of shape trying to fashion the world the way that you think it should be and john. Paul satra famously thought that stoicism was designed to keep master and slave in their respective positions. Since i want to ask you is there something installs ism that stops it from being a recipe for political quietest and political inactivity and just sort of and accepting accepting things that we shouldn't because it brings up this point of what's the point of political action or struggling against injustice. Yes so i see the force of searches critique. I definitely think there's something to this so we don't have any stoic tax for example doing against the institution of slavery. I think though that it is a misinterpretation of stoicism to say that it leads to political quietest him. So i think here are some notable features that i think are relevant to this quiet objection. So one is that the stocks themselves very well well aware of this argument so cicero reports. What was called the lazy argument against the stoic conception of fake which is basically. Why would i to anything if everything is faded right. So if i'm sick well i'm faded to get better. Faded to stay sick. So why bother calling a doctor. It's out of my hands stomach responses that no that's the wrong way to think about it If you're faded to get better your faded to get better along with being faded to call the doctor so actually our own agency is important. We are participants in our Faded events actions of course our own. Participation has faded. But it's still there. We are still participants. Another notable feature of stoa system is that they were very politically active unlikely epicurious who were deliberately retreated from political life. The stokes never advocated doing that. In fact they advocated for participating in civic life and polite fen. Of course the best example of that is marcus. Aurelius who is the roman emperor. Anna and an still philosopher himself as so. There's no inconsistency between being still being politically active. Is there an inconsistency between being stoic and agitating for political change for example. Our advocate against the institution of slavery. I think that there is because of the stoic idea that part of our human nature part of our work as humans is to be social animals that we are born to live together and the stoic idea of seeing each and every person as kogi quill citizen in the cosmopoulos universal city as an equal rational agent with an equal dignity and i think that if we took those ideas seriously and follow through their consequences i think it would be quite clear what sorts of political actions would be appropriate. And i think we'd be highly motivated to for example argue against the institution of slavery or other forms of oppression. Where where. I think this stowing Will then come in is to say that we need to remember the difference between what is up to us and what is not up to us what we can control and what we cannot control and control. They think fully control are only our intentions. And that's what we really need to pay attention to is the intentions behind our actions whether they come to fruition or not is not something that is up to us that depends on the world which we don't control. I don't think that should lead us to fatalism. Required cement it among the stoic themselves. Didn't because of all this evidence of how politically active work but it does provide a kind of maybe check on our expectations that we should try to change. The world tried to promote the common good and the inner dignity of all equal citizens of the cosmopoulos. But we shouldn't expect that our actions will turn out as we hope them to. At least we should count on it. David bronstein lecturer in philosophy at the university of new south wales. And you also heard. Jessica putnam philosophy student at unionist w info available on the website where you can also access our back catalogue of past programs or you can find survive. The abc listen app. This is being the philosopher zone. I'm david rutledge. Find me on twitter at david zone. Thanks for your company. And i hope you can join me again next week for.

David bronstein Anna Aurelius next week A month ago Jessica putnam twitter david rutledge marcus Paul satra john each abc listen app university of new south wales roman kogi quill Faded one every
"paul satra" Discussed on Christopher Lochhead Follow Your Different™

Christopher Lochhead Follow Your Different™

06:56 min | 8 months ago

"paul satra" Discussed on Christopher Lochhead Follow Your Different™

"The ability to benefit from pleasures. Such as you know making your environment better by understanding it Such as eating food. You know having friends and stuff like that. Yes very much now. One of the things. That i was surprised and delighted to discover about you. Professor is your deep Interest in commitment to philosophy and in particular existential philosophy as a young man myself. I found it fascinating and so the another question. I've been a fascinated to ask. You is if John paul satra. We're sitting here with us right now and you shared with him. What you've shared with me. What might he say. I think he would be fascinated by that. I mean he was studying the human experience here on earth. But the what i'm trying to do is extend it beyond earth and us in the bigger context you know. Can we change the way we behave by understanding that we are not alone. And then what would do to our For example Aspirations and i would love to have would have loved to have a discussion with him about that than how. The new perspective will change the way we behave. There is an interesting question would lead to cooperation among nations. Because we are all the human species who have one team when we face the universe outside earth and you know that's an interesting question and then it's not clear to me whether people would be sufficiently broad minded to come together after life is found elsewhere. Well maybe we can go here I have been very saddened by Humanities response to this horrible virus and there's a quote you might remember and i'll paraphrase it. I won't get one hundred percent right from ronald reagan who apparently had quite the fascination with extraterrestrials and i think he would making the comment in the context of the cold war where he said something along. The lines of if an alien was to attack from another Part of the universe or solar system we would stop all this petty fighting and we would come together to protect ourselves from that alien and of course now we know when an alien attacks humanity We argue about masks vaccines. Yeah there is another aspect of koby. Nineteen that i would highlight. You know so people Many scientists have a problem dealing with the search for ecological signatures Realizations because they said there is this literature on science fiction he's not saying defect. There are all these reports about unidentified. Flying objects without saint defy therefore we should shy away from this subject and my replied to that is Imagined that there was a lot of fan. Wrong statements made about kobe That was a hardly torture saying nonsense about kobe. Nineteen that mean that the scientific community should not develop a vaccine using its standard of study always lee not so science should focus on problems and apply the best tools that it has been it respective of the nonsensical Comments being made in other quarters such society that's my point and therefore especially if the public is so curious to know are we alone you know and whether there are technologies signatures out there and the public funds science we should definitely follow this path and through my book. I hope to change the current state of mind. And i hope to encourage the scientific community also could be more open minded and then more bannon's in its response to invasion because the commercial sector already realize the blue-sky research and ideas. That are out of. The box are quite valuable. for financial benefits. And it's strange the to find the academic community is more costs tied to innovation than the compassion community. Yes it is quite It is quite fascinating. The other thing. I i have interpreted from reading your book and sort of consuming some of the other interviews and papers and so forth and i'm no scientist but it strikes me that there is a headset a mindset in science. That says we can't declare that something is so until we prove that it is so and the approach and if this is not the way you want me to think about please educate me but the approach you seem to have taken with a momoa's you seem to saying look. I can't prove that it was in alien visitor of some sort. But i can prove it wasn't anything else that we've ever seen before and so if it wasn't what if we if we say that it potentially was it opens us up to a line of investigation that we would not pursue and so you're sort of purposely being provocative taking a counter protest. Look i can't tell you it wasn't but i can. I was but i can tell you it wasn't and therefore maybe it was a my getting that the way you want me to Yeah i mean i. I think it's a mistake to pretend that science is clear about its messages So sizes work in and most of the time. You just don't have enough evidence to be sure. And i think scientists rather than close themselves in ivory towers and come out with the public when they are sure about something they should communicate to the public and and you know the the king The emperor has no clothes and most of the time. We just don't know what the answer is. And and when the public would see this process in the making as more and more evidence comes to support one possibility. Just make a detective story then the public will believe that conclusions but if the public is being lecture about the conclusion without seeing the process trig us some sense of alien nation and just next students sitting in class listening to the professor telling them what's the truth. I mean it would be much more natural for the communicate the process and the reason i say that is because sometimes when public announcements are made after this thing. Typical unity converged on resolve. Sometimes it retracts. The results does other was wrong. And then it's very embarrassing.

John paul satra earth ronald reagan Nineteen one team One one possibility cold war one hundred percent things
"paul satra" Discussed on Serious Inquiries Only

Serious Inquiries Only

14:21 min | 1 year ago

"paul satra" Discussed on Serious Inquiries Only

"I still. I still think he would have. He would have hated. It would have been really fun to Tweet Crab Emojis at him I would. I would have enjoyed that. But so we've talked. Say Jamie say something so I guess he had done hit had like a really bad trip was LSD or acid Lesko maskell and he had hallucinated crabs. And he was this hallucination was ongoing and residual and he used to Mike have the sensation of being harassed by crustaceans Very Funny Story. Yeah they apparently they followed him around and He would call them. I don't know my little friends or something and you know. He really struggled to get rid of them until I think how it ended was one day he said right. I'm just GonNa talk to them anymore. And they went away. Yeah so we had a really unrelenting case of crabs but not not the kind that you would think given his sexual proclivities which kind of crabs sounds worse or something just nagging you all. The time I don't know I think the hallucinatory crabs might be more comforting actually but for those who don't know John Paul Satra and Simone Du Var had this sort of almost infamous packed where they decided that they were one another's essential loves but they would be able to have contingent lobster right and that caused a lot of collateral damage over the years but it went to become this sort of iconic relationship and yet it's iconic in a way that's very different from how are more modern even the right word but how relationships tend to be played out more commonly right. We tend to kind of pair off into monogamous relationships. And that was very much. Not How Sean Paul? Satra and onto boo Var lived their lives. And so the question I have is. Is there an insight here that can help us help? Guide us into what can be authentic for couples. Is it less about doing any one particular thing so much? As it is the couple coming together and deciding for themselves to decide on a trajectory of the relationship that might work for them and that could take a variety of different sorts of pats and would include defining romantic terms to one another to maybe mean things that they don't always meet right to get very clear about what it means. When you say that you love one another or that I'm yours in a way that's different than how he normally take those kinds of phrases to function. Yeah I mean you're absolutely right. It was really their relationship was really outrageous at the time But you know in. That's one of the I mean. I am not Paulie Morrison's or don't have an open relationship but what I admired was that they did kind of Throw all these like social expectations out the window and created a relationship on their own terms. And I think Jamie you're absolutely right when you say you know it's it can be hard to avoid certain times and Yeah. I think defining the relationship on your own terms finding specific times. I think it does help to talk about You know not only what you mean by certain things but also what's really important is talking about what you expect out of the relationship and I think some of the language of love kind of perpetuates harmful notions especially possessiveness in submissiveness Especially when it's used in manipulative ways like y'all my girlfriend therefore you own me devotion or whatever it is when we start to compel juicy on the other person for being in a relationship. I think that closes down people's freedom and I think it would be really valuable if more people kind of practiced more accurate ways of expressing themselves and they love. I mean for example My partner and I kind of joke. You Know How's the how's the marriage going so far good And you know. It seems dismissive. But for us that's really meaningful because what it means is that you know. We're not specifically tied by the marriage contract but we both recognize that relationships are contingent and that either one of US could walk away. If one person breaks the reciprocity or one person Kind of really violates the agreement that we've come to and you know we're not trapped in the relationship forevermore and I think for me like being having that kind of Honesty is is really romantics. Me Sorry and it's not only what you say but it's also you know what you do because for the Central Philosophies. I think I'm love really does exist in the actions of love as well as the language but it's I get my point is that it's not just about talking the talk sawyer like walking the walk to musically yet. So what thing? I'm curious about with this. You talk about how. It's our relationships to one another. That help us understand who we are right in our genuine sense of self comes from knowing others and I worry about The difficulty with expressing romantic feelings in a way that can be taken to be genuine in that framework. Because if I can't know myself until I'm relating to other people by somehow lack self knowledge or like setting aside something metaphysically problematic like the self not existing or or whatever like that. How can I genuinely communicate feelings of affection to my lover or is romantic expression? Just fundamentally disingenuous until we have a clear sense of who we are. And how do we come by that? Yeah so I mean this is. This is a tough question. I think so for example. Nietzsche would say that you love you have to be firmly grounded in yourself and you have to be able to stand here bravely on your own two feet So nature kind of says yes absolutely self mastery is basically a prerequisite for being in you know a great loving relationship but I think for the the later. Existential views is that Yeah you can't really ever know yourself because as I said we are being and nothingness and you can't no nothing nothing but that's home yet so facade tra- the goal of life is to know ourselves to become our own foundation. But's that's actually impossible because part of like an aspect of Al being lies with other people and actually we weren't ever really know ourselves until death But I think what we need to do in in. That situation is come. Try and be comfortable with the fact that we are not yet. Because you know as as you know. The human condition is ambiguous. We can't fully know ourselves. We know another person but that shouldn't stop us from from loving and from from acting one of the things that You know one of the I guess. The implications of the existence precedes essence. Is that sometimes? We don't know what we want or don't know the wearing love until we kind of pursue a romantic relationship we'll throw ourselves into into loving and so I don't know that I think we can still talk about love in an honest way express feelings but I. I don't think it's knowing ourselves is either possible or you know even necessarily desirable when you talk about love and this way I think you know there's there's like a chemical component and there's more like an intellectual component. Do you think that's right or do you? How do you think about that? I mean when it comes to like for example my kids. There's not really much thought involved. You know it's just instant for me anyway Instant love about maximize the brain chemicals For me 'cause they're they're still very. Yeah they're under two and under so it's it's But but and I think that that can be true to when you first meet someone or maybe early on the honeymoon phase. They say Versus later on. Maybe there's different kinds of love that evolves does that ring true to you or did you thoughts on that. Yeah absolutely a lot of the philosophers talked about this before neuroscience discovered like oxytocin. What are what are the other stuff mainly active peptides or whatever they also Yeah I mean I think people have known about these phases regardless and yeah. It's true that these brain chemicals tend to spike in the early stages of love that tend to lost anywhere between six to twenty four months depending on which which study you look at and I mean that's certainly not incompatible with The existential view of love. And I think that would fit into this You know the facts of our existence and they. I mean. They don't seem to talk much about why we fall in love with particular people or I mean if we why we fall in love immune yes their chemicals but I mean there are so many different reasons why we're attracted to other people that end. It's going to be different for every single person. And so I think maybe these The Chemicals and sort of thing is kind of maybe pot of the infectivity of our existence that I mentioned earlier. And but the question is you know. Maybe you're attracted to someone but the question is how. Are you going to act on that attraction when animals who suddenly were attracted to someone we try to have sex with them? Well maybe some people going states and I'm sorry politics. Yeah Yeah so. The point is that we can choose whether to act on that animal attraction or not we can choose behavior in response to it so we seem to be able to override those kind of animal lusty feelings and that's kind of where the existential freedom and choices kind of start to kick in. Awesome. I just noticed. We're we're kind of running close to time so I'm going to shift focus a little bit because there are a couple of things that I wanNA make sure that I get to ask you before we do. Run out of time As should be obvious to anybody. Listening to the PODCAST. Your work has been heavily influenced by Simone to before and she's got quite quite a number of works ranging from the second sex to her novels to her political essays to the speeches that she gave to her memoirs. Could you tell us what your favorite of her works is and why it resonates with you and also if that's different than what you would recommend somebody to read if they if they wanted to to get to know who simone to before was sure? I mean it's really hard to choose a favorite And I mean for a long time. My favorite has been She came to stay which is above US first novel and it's quite a a juicy story based roughly on Baronne Saunas life and how they have a relationship with the young woman so it becomes like a whole steamy like nausea twelve. And why I like. It is because it deals very much with a love and freedom and jealousy and being caught in cycles of possessiveness submissiveness of loving relationships. And what I find interesting about it. Is there all the characters in the novel China? Find kind of a place of hominy with one another in China you know give each other freedom and and see if that works desert trying to be a like commit to one another of being no devotion to one another but you know all these kind of dynamics different ways that people are trying to And she's not necessarily happiness but I think hominy in life so at that stage she was very much exploring the dynamics of laws but another favorite so I guess that's Valley Straightforward and really nice to read and of introduction. But I really love the Mandarin's which is though One that won the Prix gone call. Which the big French Literature Prize And deals with a lot of the same issues but it also on the wall was older when she wrote it. So it's more I guess more mature and it's also more political so it talks a lot about the resistance posted around World War. Two so I really love that one But if novels aunts your thing then I would recommend. Ambiguity is a really important one is. It's a tough one but it's Is a really important in terms of her philosophy and it's not very long yes very short dense but but not a lot of pages so I also happen to know that you're Camus Fan as well which is by unrelenting current obsession And so in fact when I had seen you and Massimo speak at the night of philosophy ideas at the Brooklyn Public Library two years ago I was actually struck by how readily and fluently you just sort of quoted Camus while speaking off the cuff so I have really strong opinions on. Which of Heaven's works are the best people where people should start But I wanted to know if you would tell us what your favorite was and what you would recommend people start reading.

Simone Du Var Jamie US China Satra Crab Emojis Sean Paul Mike LSD John Paul Satra Paulie Morrison partner pats Brooklyn Public Library Al Central Philosophies sawyer Nietzsche oxytocin
"paul satra" Discussed on Lochhead on Marketing

Lochhead on Marketing

07:11 min | 1 year ago

"paul satra" Discussed on Lochhead on Marketing

"All right disagreeing commit this. This episode is inspired by a recent conversation. I had with legendary technology executive a Lisa Steele on episode one twenty nine failure different and on the episode one one of Things Lisa touches on is the power of being able to disagree and commit now as a marketing leader. CMO Or frankly CEO or executive any kind On big decisions we get a lot of help and for some reason in marketing we get a lot of and I put help here in. Air quotes Even more help than I think. A lot of other department department leaders or Group leaders in business get and so I think debate and discussion and disagreement are good things. When we're we're working on strategies or creative ideas or new campaign ideas or for trying to design a category etc and so I think debate discussion and agree? A disagreement disagreement are good. Here's what I think is bad consensus because what I've learned is if everybody agreed by definition the decision probably probably sucks. If someone is scared maybe even little upset or at least a little concerned. The decision we've just made is probably not a legendary everyone and so if you understand this How do you get in front of it from the very first meeting when you're working on a new initiative in marketing tell people well number one we want to do something legendary here number to China Jim generate as many legendary ideas and creative strategies as possible in the beginning? When we're we're in the you know what the consultants call the quote unquote idea stage And number three when we finally decide we're going to lock and load and we're going to execute like my friend marketing assassin. Rick Bennett says like a pack of speed crazed wolverines and so I think it's essential to lay that foundation on Dacian upfront in the first meeting and And understand as we go forward and frankly tell people this that some people Maybe potentially even board members of the company or senior executives will not like the strategic decision that we make and that's okay let everybody know from the beginning. It's fine nine and here's what they also need to know. We are not aiming for consensus. Were amazing legendary results so from the start of the project let everybody know a who the decider is in business. It's great to get feedback. It's great to get input. It's great to consider ideas but most businesses says are not democracies and so making it clear who the sole decider is you know typically in marketing it's the CMO sometimes of course it's a CEO but make that very clear. Second set the expectation that we expect even if you violently disagree with the decision that we make that everybody audie on the team is going to commit an that might mean disagreeing commit even if you hate it and you know I want to share share with you a story about this I was involved with a major strategic category design initiative a little while ago and it was uh the future of the company was really at stake and it was a multi multi month process that included the board the senior executive team of course the marketing team team senior sales leaders senior product leaders etc.. And as we were going through this one of the major leaders in marketing decided that he did not like the kind of leading candidate idea for the new category that was emerging and he even brought forth a competing heating idea and tried to sort of UNHOOK the decision. That was in the process of being made which frankly I think is fair game. If you have a competing idea that you think is better. I think you should stand up and talk about that anyway. Here's what happened over time This marketing leaders counter idea was not chosen and The idea that was sort of in play from the beginning ended up becoming the idea. I thought this guy was probably going to have to get fired. Given how much he disagreed with the idea for the new category that had been decided and this guy did something I have rarely seen in my career. He did did what you could think of as a complete stop change. Start and the minute. The decision was taken. He got on board and he executed like a pack of speed crazed Wahlberg Wolverines and later on through the process as the execution was going forward. I pulled this guy set aside and I said you know I'm incredibly impressed. Most people who disagree as much as you do can't get on board with the decision that they disagreed with and we had a powerful conversation around why he thought it was important essentially to disagree and commit and once the decision was made he got over it and got on with it and I think that's incredibly powerful and I think it's an important skill and one that I've always tried to get behind. There have been points in my career where I disagreed and I wanted the world to think I think even if I hated the idea if this was the idea that was being committed to that I I loved it and I was on board from the get-go and I think that's what legendary leaders do do and I think it's especially important marketing. Where big marketing decisions tend to get a lot of visibility train? Everybody coach everybody condition. Everybody that that we are going to WE'RE GONNA launch. We're going to get aggressive. We're going to execute an order to do that. People are going to disagree and part of being legendary marketing leader. Frankly part of being legendary executive is the ability to disagree and commit all right. We would like to thank the amazing Marketing podcast gas marketing over coffee with my buddy John Wall. If you love marketing check it out marketing over coffee if you WANNA design dominate legendary categories. My Friends Eh. Category Design Advisors Dot Com can. Help you check them out. CATEGORY DESIGNED ADVISORS DOT COM if you're in the UK and you want to do some legendary marketing and trend Jax you've heard him on this odd cast checkout positive marketing. That's Paul Mars Company in the UK Positive Marketing Dot Com speaking of legendary companies. They do marketing outside the US my friends at rapid media DOT COM dot. A you are the leading Independent Agency Agency in Australia for legendary marketing across all platforms check him out a rapid media DOT COM dot. AU and also check out the number one bestseller from my friend. Bruce Cleveland traversing the traction gap. I think is a must read before entrepreneurs and speaking something that I think is a must one of my favorite podcasts. grumpy old deeks. Check it out wherever you get legendary. PODCASTS the thought I'll leave you with comes from Asia. Paul Satra who said commitment is an act not a word. Stay legendary my friends and until were together again while you're different.

executive CEO Lisa Steele senior executive Rick Bennett China UK Paul Satra Asia Bruce Cleveland Dacian US Wahlberg Independent Agency Agency Paul Mars Company John Wall Australia
"paul satra" Discussed on Lochhead on Marketing

Lochhead on Marketing

07:11 min | 1 year ago

"paul satra" Discussed on Lochhead on Marketing

"All right disagreeing commit this. This episode is inspired by a recent conversation. I had with legendary technology executive a Lisa Steele on episode one twenty nine failure different and on the episode one one of Things Lisa touches on is the power of being able to disagree and commit now as a marketing leader. CMO Or frankly CEO or executive any kind On big decisions we get a lot of help and for some reason in marketing we get a lot of and I put help here in. Air quotes Even more help than I think. A lot of other department department leaders or Group leaders in business get and so I think debate and discussion and disagreement are good things. When we're we're working on strategies or creative ideas or new campaign ideas or for trying to design a category etc and so I think debate discussion and agree? A disagreement disagreement are good. Here's what I think is bad consensus because what I've learned is if everybody agreed by definition the decision probably probably sucks. If someone is scared maybe even little upset or at least a little concerned. The decision we've just made is probably not a legendary everyone and so if you understand this How do you get in front of it from the very first meeting when you're working on a new initiative in marketing tell people well number one we want to do something legendary here number to China Jim generate as many legendary ideas and creative strategies as possible in the beginning? When we're we're in the you know what the consultants call the quote unquote idea stage And number three when we finally decide we're going to lock and load and we're going to execute like my friend marketing assassin. Rick Bennett says like a pack of speed crazed wolverines and so I think it's essential to lay that foundation on Dacian upfront in the first meeting and And understand as we go forward and frankly tell people this that some people Maybe potentially even board members of the company or senior executives will not like the strategic decision that we make and that's okay let everybody know from the beginning. It's fine nine and here's what they also need to know. We are not aiming for consensus. Were amazing legendary results so from the start of the project let everybody know a who the decider is in business. It's great to get feedback. It's great to get input. It's great to consider ideas but most businesses says are not democracies and so making it clear who the sole decider is you know typically in marketing it's the CMO sometimes of course it's a CEO but make that very clear. Second set the expectation that we expect even if you violently disagree with the decision that we make that everybody audie on the team is going to commit an that might mean disagreeing commit even if you hate it and you know I want to share share with you a story about this I was involved with a major strategic category design initiative a little while ago and it was uh the future of the company was really at stake and it was a multi multi month process that included the board the senior executive team of course the marketing team team senior sales leaders senior product leaders etc.. And as we were going through this one of the major leaders in marketing decided that he did not like the kind of leading candidate idea for the new category that was emerging and he even brought forth a competing heating idea and tried to sort of UNHOOK the decision. That was in the process of being made which frankly I think is fair game. If you have a competing idea that you think is better. I think you should stand up and talk about that anyway. Here's what happened over time This marketing leaders counter idea was not chosen and The idea that was sort of in play from the beginning ended up becoming the idea. I thought this guy was probably going to have to get fired. Given how much he disagreed with the idea for the new category that had been decided and this guy did something I have rarely seen in my career. He did did what you could think of as a complete stop change. Start and the minute. The decision was taken. He got on board and he executed like a pack of speed crazed Wahlberg Wolverines and later on through the process as the execution was going forward. I pulled this guy set aside and I said you know I'm incredibly impressed. Most people who disagree as much as you do can't get on board with the decision that they disagreed with and we had a powerful conversation around why he thought it was important essentially to disagree and commit and once the decision was made he got over it and got on with it and I think that's incredibly powerful and I think it's an important skill and one that I've always tried to get behind. There have been points in my career where I disagreed and I wanted the world to think I think even if I hated the idea if this was the idea that was being committed to that I I loved it and I was on board from the get-go and I think that's what legendary leaders do do and I think it's especially important marketing. Where big marketing decisions tend to get a lot of visibility train? Everybody coach everybody condition. Everybody that that we are going to WE'RE GONNA launch. We're going to get aggressive. We're going to execute an order to do that. People are going to disagree and part of being legendary marketing leader. Frankly part of being legendary executive is the ability to disagree and commit all right. We would like to thank the amazing Marketing podcast gas marketing over coffee with my buddy John Wall. If you love marketing check it out marketing over coffee if you WANNA design dominate legendary categories. My Friends Eh. Category Design Advisors Dot Com can. Help you check them out. CATEGORY DESIGNED ADVISORS DOT COM if you're in the UK and you want to do some legendary marketing and trend Jax you've heard him on this odd cast checkout positive marketing. That's Paul Mars Company in the UK Positive Marketing Dot Com speaking of legendary companies. They do marketing outside the US my friends at rapid media DOT COM dot. A you are the leading Independent Agency Agency in Australia for legendary marketing across all platforms check him out a rapid media DOT COM dot. AU and also check out the number one bestseller from my friend. Bruce Cleveland traversing the traction gap. I think is a must read before entrepreneurs and speaking something that I think is a must one of my favorite podcasts. grumpy old deeks. Check it out wherever you get legendary. PODCASTS the thought I'll leave you with comes from Asia. Paul Satra who said commitment is an act not a word. Stay legendary my friends and until were together again while you're different.

executive CEO Lisa Steele senior executive Rick Bennett China UK Paul Satra Asia Bruce Cleveland Dacian US Wahlberg Independent Agency Agency Paul Mars Company John Wall Australia
"paul satra" Discussed on Lochhead on Marketing

Lochhead on Marketing

07:11 min | 1 year ago

"paul satra" Discussed on Lochhead on Marketing

"All right disagreeing commit this. This episode is inspired by a recent conversation. I had with legendary technology executive a Lisa Steele on episode one twenty nine failure different and on the episode one one of Things Lisa touches on is the power of being able to disagree and commit now as a marketing leader. CMO Or frankly CEO or executive any kind On big decisions we get a lot of help and for some reason in marketing we get a lot of and I put help here in. Air quotes Even more help than I think. A lot of other department department leaders or Group leaders in business get and so I think debate and discussion and disagreement are good things. When we're we're working on strategies or creative ideas or new campaign ideas or for trying to design a category etc and so I think debate discussion and agree? A disagreement disagreement are good. Here's what I think is bad consensus because what I've learned is if everybody agreed by definition the decision probably probably sucks. If someone is scared maybe even little upset or at least a little concerned. The decision we've just made is probably not a legendary everyone and so if you understand this How do you get in front of it from the very first meeting when you're working on a new initiative in marketing tell people well number one we want to do something legendary here number to China Jim generate as many legendary ideas and creative strategies as possible in the beginning? When we're we're in the you know what the consultants call the quote unquote idea stage And number three when we finally decide we're going to lock and load and we're going to execute like my friend marketing assassin. Rick Bennett says like a pack of speed crazed wolverines and so I think it's essential to lay that foundation on Dacian upfront in the first meeting and And understand as we go forward and frankly tell people this that some people Maybe potentially even board members of the company or senior executives will not like the strategic decision that we make and that's okay let everybody know from the beginning. It's fine nine and here's what they also need to know. We are not aiming for consensus. Were amazing legendary results so from the start of the project let everybody know a who the decider is in business. It's great to get feedback. It's great to get input. It's great to consider ideas but most businesses says are not democracies and so making it clear who the sole decider is you know typically in marketing it's the CMO sometimes of course it's a CEO but make that very clear. Second set the expectation that we expect even if you violently disagree with the decision that we make that everybody audie on the team is going to commit an that might mean disagreeing commit even if you hate it and you know I want to share share with you a story about this I was involved with a major strategic category design initiative a little while ago and it was uh the future of the company was really at stake and it was a multi multi month process that included the board the senior executive team of course the marketing team team senior sales leaders senior product leaders etc.. And as we were going through this one of the major leaders in marketing decided that he did not like the kind of leading candidate idea for the new category that was emerging and he even brought forth a competing heating idea and tried to sort of UNHOOK the decision. That was in the process of being made which frankly I think is fair game. If you have a competing idea that you think is better. I think you should stand up and talk about that anyway. Here's what happened over time This marketing leaders counter idea was not chosen and The idea that was sort of in play from the beginning ended up becoming the idea. I thought this guy was probably going to have to get fired. Given how much he disagreed with the idea for the new category that had been decided and this guy did something I have rarely seen in my career. He did did what you could think of as a complete stop change. Start and the minute. The decision was taken. He got on board and he executed like a pack of speed crazed Wahlberg Wolverines and later on through the process as the execution was going forward. I pulled this guy set aside and I said you know I'm incredibly impressed. Most people who disagree as much as you do can't get on board with the decision that they disagreed with and we had a powerful conversation around why he thought it was important essentially to disagree and commit and once the decision was made he got over it and got on with it and I think that's incredibly powerful and I think it's an important skill and one that I've always tried to get behind. There have been points in my career where I disagreed and I wanted the world to think I think even if I hated the idea if this was the idea that was being committed to that I I loved it and I was on board from the get-go and I think that's what legendary leaders do do and I think it's especially important marketing. Where big marketing decisions tend to get a lot of visibility train? Everybody coach everybody condition. Everybody that that we are going to WE'RE GONNA launch. We're going to get aggressive. We're going to execute an order to do that. People are going to disagree and part of being legendary marketing leader. Frankly part of being legendary executive is the ability to disagree and commit all right. We would like to thank the amazing Marketing podcast gas marketing over coffee with my buddy John Wall. If you love marketing check it out marketing over coffee if you WANNA design dominate legendary categories. My Friends Eh. Category Design Advisors Dot Com can. Help you check them out. CATEGORY DESIGNED ADVISORS DOT COM if you're in the UK and you want to do some legendary marketing and trend Jax you've heard him on this odd cast checkout positive marketing. That's Paul Mars Company in the UK Positive Marketing Dot Com speaking of legendary companies. They do marketing outside the US my friends at rapid media DOT COM dot. A you are the leading Independent Agency Agency in Australia for legendary marketing across all platforms check him out a rapid media DOT COM dot. AU and also check out the number one bestseller from my friend. Bruce Cleveland traversing the traction gap. I think is a must read before entrepreneurs and speaking something that I think is a must one of my favorite podcasts. grumpy old deeks. Check it out wherever you get legendary. PODCASTS the thought I'll leave you with comes from Asia. Paul Satra who said commitment is an act not a word. Stay legendary my friends and until were together again while you're different.

executive CEO Lisa Steele senior executive Rick Bennett China UK Paul Satra Asia Bruce Cleveland Dacian US Wahlberg Independent Agency Agency Paul Mars Company John Wall Australia
"paul satra" Discussed on Serious Inquiries Only

Serious Inquiries Only

04:38 min | 2 years ago

"paul satra" Discussed on Serious Inquiries Only

"And hello and welcome to serious inquiries only this two hundred five. I'm thomas smith and over. There is current co host jamie lombardi. How're you doing jamie. I'm i'm doing all right. Hi guys how're you will let them and give them a minute to answer and then <hes> yeah. They'll email you their answer. You love the listeners <hes> we have gotten awesome awesome feedback lately. It's been really fun so <hes> we're here to do some more and you can correct me if i'm wrong but here's here's what i feel like is happening today. We've we've covered a lot of great stuff and while you know everything we've talked about your definitely utilizing your philosophical tool kit and everything in but like today we decided to fund actually talk about something that not as not as using your your training all that but is actually related to someone you've read ed and studied and it will be right out of your. I don't know your actual degree and training. Is that accurate so soared off off so i i studied philosophy at rutgers and bioethics at n._y._u. But they were very serious analytical philosophy <music> schools and the person. We're gonna be talking about today. Albert camus is not an analytical philosopher at all and so he has never been formally assigned to me <hes> i've never officially studied him and of course <hes> because analytic department sort of it just gloss over the existential assists in continental philosophy more broadly so all the reading. I've done on camus has been self salvo well. That's interesting that you say that. I think <hes> it could be cool to maybe remember that you're talking to a layperson a lay audience and maybe do you wanna talk about the difference between kind of the analytical philosophy it 'cause i'm. I'm glad you said that because a <hes> that's really cool and be i when i read this essay that you want to read by camus. I was thinking like oh. This is not exactly what i expected out of. You know philosopher like i it. It is very it's more. It's kind of poetic. It doesn't strike me as particularly technical now. I don't know if he has other work. That's that's different but <hes> yet you wanna talk about. Maybe the distinctions there in in the different kinds of philosophy that would probably require its own episode to sort of breakdown on analytical philosophy. Fi is the sort of philosophy that any of the listeners who have taken a philosophy course in the united states have most likely encountered entered. It's very much concerned with <hes> the phrase <hes> carving the world at its joints and it's an attempt to us very precise ascites logically based language to sort of make sense of our reality and it's done in a way that can often be described does as dry and devoid of passion and continental philosophy is done very differently than the way that much of analytical philosophy as done today and some of some of the big names in continental philosophy. Are those like martin. Heidegger sean paul satra albert camus multiple voire dr <hes> kirkegaard is another one and their approach is much more literary and much more poetic as you saw with the essay the almond trees he's by almar albert camus sent. You and they're trying to answer. I think the same questions right what is the meaning of life. How do we live good or better lives. What is an ethical person to do and the biggest difference in my opinion is how they approach these questions and the particular way they apply by the tools on toget- at their best guesses at an answer down was a perfect explanation. I don't feel like we need another episode. That has exactly a podcast answer. You gave us a good indication of it and you know. I don't feel like we read a dissertation. That's perfect so yeah. We're we're going to be <hes>. <hes> <hes> doing camus. We're going to be doing as the logo for the podcast. Has you know philosophy skepticism. <hes> politics kind of it's a philosophy episode so that'll be fun. What what drew you to camus. Apparently it wasn't assigned reading but what would eventually lead you that way so it wasn't..

Albert camus jamie lombardi thomas smith ascites rutgers ed united states Fi