In this episode I am sitting down with Professor Simon Critchley: 

He is the Hans Jonas Professor of Philosophy at the New School for Social Research.

Simon and I discuss the role of story and narrative in making sense of our biographies. 

We explore how the stories we tell about ourselves often rely on stability and coherence. The reason is to convey authenticity. And perhaps in some ways to fit a mold others recognize and value. 

In practice, though, we often don’t live in a very consistent or coherent way. As Simon and I discuss, insisting on the constancy and continuity of the self is a bit of a fiction.

Against the narrative version of the self, living out a coherent story, Simon pits the “episodic self”. On this account, we live out our biographies in fits and bursts, stops and starts; in episodes, which don’t necessarily add up to a coherent whole. 

Rather than seeing this fragmentation as a problem, as a kind of identity crisis, leaving people to wonder who they “really” are, Simon celebrates the “freedom *from* identity”. 

He argues that our attachment to “authenticity” is restraining, and that there is freedom in trying out new episodes, new versions of the self, all the time. 

There are many sides to us, and we constantly evolve - especially if we are open to getting outside our heads and looking at what’s going on in the world. Here, we connect back to episode #24 on this podcast with Christian Madsbjerg in which we discuss how to see with neutral eyes (I can really recommend this conversation; please do check out the episode if you have a chance).

In the end of our conversation, the version of the self that we land on is that of the curious observer; less obsessed with their own narrative and presentation of self, and more open to new impulses and people. 

I found this conversation insightful and really refreshing - and hope you do, too. 

In this episode, I am talking to Dr. Peter Kim. He is a Professor of Management and Organization at University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business. His research focuses on the dynamics of social misperception, with a particular focus on the violation and repair of trust.

His latest book is called How trust works: the science of how relationships are built, broken, and repaired. 

In this conversation, we kick off by exploring the broader question of what trust actually is. The most cited definition of trust is that of: "The willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party" (source).

We find that trust is ultimately about how we navigate mixed-motive situations: Does the other seek to benefit only themselves or others, too? 

We then look at how you scientifically measure how trust is established, broken, and repaired. What do the studies, the experiments look like?

Then we touch on how trust is built. You might know the trust equation (e.g., from the work of Charles Green) that describes trustworthiness as the result of credibility + reliability + intimacy (or openness); all divided by self-orientation. But the scientific literature has a few more factors worth considering:

1) availability, being present when needed 

2) competence, skills and professionalism

3) consistency or even loyalty 

4) discreetness

5) fairness and other markers of integrity

6) benevolence and benign intent

7) openness, not just in the sense of being ready to share, but also in the sense of being receptive and responsive.  

The elements of the trust equation will get you far, however, it is ultimately about figuring out the traits that are most important in a given situation and bolstering those. 

We then turn to the role of competence and integrity:

As Dr. Kim argues, we weigh matters of competence and integrity differently: in breaches of trust, lapses in integrity weigh more heavily than incompetence.

So how do we differentiate matters of competence and integrity? We don't do it well! We are easily influenced and led astray by our biases. Also, most matters are not clear cut; often both dimensions are involved when trust is broken. 

We explore whether we should be more trusting, pay it forward and assume good intent? Will people abuse trust or work to prove trusting people right? Peter Kim tells us that research shows “people who are more trusting are happier in life”.

Finally, we cover our unknown irrationalities when it comes to trusting others: Trust is so vital. But we make these judgements poorly. Here's one nugget from the research: It turns out we want to preserve relations with those in power, so we find reasons to trust them more.

Hope you enjoy this far-ranging conversation with Dr. Peter H. Kim.

In this episode, I am speaking to the amazing and prolific Viv Groskop (www.vivgroskop.com). She is a journalist, author, podcaster, and comedian.   

She is the author of 6 books, two of which we spend some time on in this episode: “How to Own the Room” and her recent book, out now, called “Happy High Status”. 

In our conversation, we talk a bit about Viv’s experiences with comedy and what it’s taught her. we work through how our minds trick us about how we are perceived by others, for example.  

We talk about her book chapter “How to be more like a comedian (well, sort of)”. What that gets at is how to bring more lightness, joy, and fun into our lives, without becoming clownish, of course. 

We then turn to how to own the room in a way that is authentic to you: This could involve extraversion, positive energy even enthusiasm, but it can also be about radiating a kind of quiet energy, focus, presence. 

In short, we discuss, "how to exist in life in front of other people", as Viv puts. 

We then finally turn to happy high status, the subject of her latest book. It’s about being at ease, radiating a kind of self-assuredness, without arrogance. We land on a definition that blends humility and confidence into an authentic presence. 

Really enjoyed this conversation with Viv Groskop, and hope you do, too!