Today, Jason and Juan Pablo discuss political theorist Evgeny Morozov’s article, “Digital Socialism? The Calculation Debate in the Age of Big Data” (NLR, 2019, https://newleftreview.org/issues/II116/articles/evgeny-morozov-digital-socialism). In this article, Morozov critiques the idea that technology will somehow reinvent capitalism. He argues that technology-enabled capitalism (technology within the logic of markets) is STILL capitalism and thus it does not escape challenges produced or compounded by capitalism. However, what if technology enablers could be applied beyond the realm of capitalism? Morozov posits that the public sphere could apply modern technologies (e.g. social media, knowledge management platforms, advanced analytics, artificial intelligence, etc.) to efficiently coordinate and solve problems outside the markets. Fascinating! But Jason and Juan Pablo are skeptical. Maybe not for the reasons you expect... In this episode, we address: the Austrian-British economist Friedrich Hayek’s successful theory of the relationships between knowledge, prices, and human behavior; markets vs. non-markets vs. new markets; existing technology enablers and how they map across the private and public spheres; challenges associated with technology ownership and maintaining a democratic process; and the problem of turning knowledge into meaningful action. We also harken back to our ongoing debate surrounding whether massive financial incentives are required to inspire innovation or make people want to solve the world’s most pressing social challenges. For more on this, listen to our previous “listener case study” episode called, “The Protestant Ethic, Instrumentalizing Everything, and Devotion to Work.” The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod
 Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod
 Website: www.panopticpod.com/
 Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx

Pan-Optic is pleased to present part three of our three-part series on radicalization and ideology. In today’s episode, we address: individuation and socialization; a critique of generalizable interests; existential and absurdist interpretations of the ”ideological grounding” problem; the people side of mergers and acquisitions; applications to change management and strategic communications; and more. The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod
 Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod
 Website: www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx

Today’s episode is Pan-Optic’s first ever "personal case study" response, where we react to listener Sep’s account of working in big tech and grappling with feeling intellectually and morally limited by her work requirements and the logic of the firm. In reacting to Sep’s personal case study, we explore: Max Weber on the protestant work-oriented ethic; the tendency to justify something’s existence by instrumentalizing its purpose; Jason’s aversion to divine command theory; being socialized and acculturated within neoliberal and meritocratic structures; research on what motivates high-output performers; and who should be let on the plane first. Thank you Sep for an excellent submission. We hope we did you justice. Pan-Optic is always accepting personal case study submissions. Share your story by contacting us at [email protected] or through any of our social media platforms. We look forward to hearing from you and reacting to your story. Addendum: we are issuing a correction after failing to do our homework... Sep, who we addressed using he/him/his pronouns, goes by she/her/hers pronouns. HUGE apology to Sep! We really feel bad about this and won’t make the same mistake again. Thank you for going easy on us and for making our first personal case study reaction possible and so much fun. The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx

Pan-Optic is pleased to present part two of our three-part series on radicalization and ideology. In today’s episode, we address: the moral and legal implications of ideological discrimination; the extent to which government can avoid values-oriented decision making; a clear functional definition of ideology vs. a general definition of ideology; canonical social theoretical literature on ideology (Emile Durkheim and George Herbert Mead); the so-called ”loan wolf” phenomenon; and categorizations of violent activity. Part two sets the stage for our further reflections on notions of the good and the need to ground ideology in some normative framework to reliably identify “extreme.” The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx

Pan-Optic is pleased to present our three-part series on radicalization and ideology. In the knowledge age and especially in the COVID world, institutions are pressured to change the way they operate and do business frequently and rapidly. We spend much time pontificating about the need to transform workforces (us included), but often without considering the psychological precursors to attitudinal and behavioral change. To help address this problem, we consult the literature on radicalization and ideology with a mind toward the following questions: how do people fundamentally ideologically change? And how can we apply this knowledge to inspire adoption of change in the real world? In part one, we address: a framework for understanding how someone adopts violent ideology; why framing and frame alignment are key to making ideology stick; the case of “Boston Bomber” Tamerlan Tsarnaev; ethnographic approaches to capturing human intelligence; and the importance of identifying notions of the good or generalizable interests to differentiate normative ideology from potentially problematic ideology. Part one sets the stage for follow-on discussions surrounding the legal implications of managing ideology and uses and applications of radicalization theory for change leaders and managers. You may read Jason’s article, “Countering Jihadism in America: A Policy Review,” here: http://www.saisreview.org/2017/03/27/jihadism-in-america/. The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx

Today’s episode starts off with a 30-minute, ad hoc discussion surrounding the recent murder of George Floyd and the ensuing national campaign against police racism. Please refer to Pan-Optic’s website for additional resources on how to support reputable activist groups in the fight against racism (https://www.panopticpod.com/post/pitching-in-to-fight-racism-and-police-violence). During Pan-Optic’s two-part series “Philosophers in Firms,” Jason and Juan Pablo investigate the mystery of why Google hired a philosopher and what this individual does. Along the way, we address the following more fundamental questions: Should firms hire philosophers? Does it make good business sense? How does the business case compare to the moral case? Do they conflict? Today’s episode (part two) explores: philosopher Luciano Floridi’s theory of information; how Google applied Floridi’s theory to navigate complex international legal challenges pertaining to data privacy; change management professional Paul Gibbons’ critique of the change consulting industry; how change managers might leverage the humanities to “philosophically ground” strategic recommendations and improve client outcomes; and opportunities for professionals with strong humanities backgrounds to innovate and make a difference in the consulting world. The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx

During Pan-Optic’s two-part series “Philosophers in Firms,” Jason and Juan Pablo investigate the mystery of why Google hired a philosopher and what this individual does. Along the way, we address the following more fundamental questions: Should firms hire philosophers? Does it make good business sense? How does the business case compare to the moral case? Do they conflict? Today’s episode (part one) explores: the downcast job market for humanities and philosophy PhDs; the rationale for apparently superficial corporate ethics statements; the moral and functional analyses of Google's statement of ethics; why Google hired the ”in-house philosopher” Damon Horowitz and what he does; and the uses and applications of thought leadership and implications for authentic critical thinking in business contexts. The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx

Our Foundations Crossover P.3 — In light of the ongoing COVID-19 situation, today’s segment (part three of our three-part crossover with Our Foundations podcast) couldn’t be more apropos. What happens when you equip strategic actors with predictive analytical power? Some may say we’re living it. In parts one and two, we traversed: the 18th century rise of the liberal public sphere; the 20th century breakdown of communicative-participatory democratic procedures; the 90s burgeoning of neoliberalism; the rise of modern military contractors in post 9/11 America; and the state’s increasing dependence on corporations to fight wars. These constituent parts share at least one common theme: increasingly surgical, private applications of strategic action. In today’s segment, we explore the rise of a new type of strategic actor: the modern technocrat. Due to the pandemic, industry urgently shifts to digital work environments; people are uniquely dependent on digital social platforms to stay connected. Data is knowledge and knowledge is power accreting around Silicon Valley. Will the technocrats use this power to expand or constrict democracy? The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-…st/id1475726450 Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx Our Foundations Website: http://www.ourfoundations.podbean.com/ Our Foundations Twitter: https://twitter.com/Foundationspc

Our Foundations Crossover P.2 — In theory, public discourses should influence law creation in a democracy. But has big advertising undermined the legal objectives of communicative action? After 9/11, why did the U.S. outsource approximately 50% of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan to companies like Blackwater? Surprisingly, the answers to these questions may intersect and provide fodder for worrying about strategic applications of advanced technology today. Juan Pablo and Jason are pleased to present part two of our collaboration with Our Foundations podcast. We recommend listening to part one first. The conversation just gets bigger and bigger, as does the administrative state’s reliance on contractors. Should we actually be worried about this? Hope you enjoy! The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: https://twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: https://www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-optic-podcast/id1475726450 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx Our Foundations Website: http://www.ourfoundations.podbean.com/ Our Foundations Twitter: https://twitter.com/Foundationspc

Our Foundations Crossover P.1 — What happens when you arm strategic actors with big data and predictive analytical power? Juan Pablo and Jason are pleased to present Pan-Optic's collaboration with the Our Foundations podcast, further reflecting on some of the challenges (and solutions) posed by strategic communications throughout Western history. As part of this collaboration, we explore: the rise and fall of the bourgeois public sphere; shifting powers of corporate and government institutions in post-9/11 America; modern private military contractors, Silicone Valley tech corporations, and technology consultants; and practical strategic applications of technology and their effects today. Pan-Optic and Our Foundations present different, sometimes competing political views of the world. Our differences made for a truly fascinating conversation that listeners of both podcasts will appreciate and hopefully learn from. Please join us for part one of our first podcast crossover experiment. (And let us know what you think!) The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: https://twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: https://www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-optic-podcast/id1475726450 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx Our Foundations Website: http://www.ourfoundations.podbean.com/ Our Foundations Twitter: https://twitter.com/Foundationspc

Episode 9 is part two of our exploration of Aaron Benanav’s critique of the so-called “automation discourse.” We further probe the hypothesis that system overcapacity caused the collapse of manufacturing labor demand. What happens to the job market when manufacturing labor is down and the cost of living is up, chronically? Which possible economic solutions do we have in our toolbox to affect meaningful, productive workforces? In an attempt to answer these questions, we weigh the costs and benefits of a universal basic income (UBI) versus a green new deal. And in conclusion, we reexamine the effects and potentials of technology and automaton through a new lens. Recommend listening to Episodes 7 and 8 first. The views expressed on this podcast are our own. If you enjoy what you're hearing, please follow/support us through any of the below media: Twitter: https://twitter.com/Panopticpod Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/panopticpod Website: https://www.panopticpod.com/ Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/pan-optic-podcast/id1475726450 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0edBN0huV1GkMFxSXErZIx