Episode 193: Hosts Scott Rada and Richard Kyte explore the erosion of social etiquette in American life and why it may be more consequential than it first appears.

From rising road rage and customer service outbursts to the coarse tone of online discourse, the episode looks at how rudeness has become more visible — and perhaps more accepted. One recent Pew Research Center study found that nearly half of Americans believe people have become ruder since the COVID-19 pandemic, though most don’t see themselves as part of the problem.

The conversation touches on generational divides, including sharp differences in attitudes toward profanity, and explores how digital communication and AI-driven systems reshape civility expectations. Kyte also reflects on his own classroom experiences and the ways formality and politeness in education have shifted over time.

Rather than seeing manners as outdated relics, Kyte argues they play a vital role in building trust, humility and cooperation. While norms constantly evolve, he cautions against the assumption that abandoning them altogether leads to greater freedom. Instead, he calls for a redefinition of etiquette that upholds respect and reinforces a more community-minded society.

Episode 192: Hosts Scott Rada and Richard Kyte delve into the critical role of curiosity in modern life, examining how individuals can maintain a sense of wonder and learning throughout their personal and professional journeys.

The discussion highlights how children naturally embody curiosity, constantly exploring and questioning the world around them. However, as people age, this innate sense of wonder often diminishes, replaced by routine and narrow professional focus.

Kyte emphasizes the importance of asking questions and challenging existing beliefs. He notes that many educational systems prioritize test scores and information retention over genuine understanding and intellectual exploration.

The podcast explores several key challenges to maintaining curiosity, including:

• The tendency to seek information that confirms existing beliefs
• The increasing political polarization that narrows perspectives
• Professional environments that reward specialization over broad learning

The hosts think curiosity is closely linked to humility, suggesting that truly curious individuals must be willing to admit what they don't know and remain open to changing their understanding.

They also critique modern educational and professional systems that often discourage questioning and prioritize narrow expertise. The podcast suggests that individuals should actively work to maintain their sense of wonder, continually seeking new knowledge and perspectives.

Episode 191: In an era where arguments often erupt into shouting matches or retreat into silence, hosts Richard Kyte and Scott Rada explore how we can disagree better — and why it matters more than ever.

Drawing on insights from philosophy, journalism, childhood play and even sports fandom, the conversation unfolds into a thoughtful examination of how disagreement has shifted in our culture. The hosts argue that we’ve increasingly lost sight of what disagreement is meant to do: open our minds, sharpen our thinking and strengthen our democratic institutions. Instead, disagreement has become a contest to be won, often reduced to emotionally charged sound bites or dismissed entirely.

Kyte recounts a scene of children negotiating the rules of a flag football game, using it as a metaphor for the character-building that underpins both democracy and self-governance. He connects these playground moments to the deterioration of civic norms, highlighting our increasing acceptance of executive overreach and our mistrust of those enforcing rules, ranging from referees to elected officials.

The hosts also reflect on their experiences navigating disagreements at work, in relationships and even online. They differentiate between healthy disagreement and toxic confrontation, emphasizing the importance of humility, curiosity, and mutual respect.

They caution, too, that constructive disagreement isn’t always appropriate. Silence or solidarity may be more ethical than critique in moments of grief, stress or unity. But avoiding all disagreement, they warn, risks eroding creativity, growth, and understanding — not just in politics or the workplace, but in our everyday lives.

Ultimately, this episode is a call to reclaim disagreement as a civic skill. It’s not just about speaking up — it’s about listening well, staying engaged and valuing the process of understanding even when consensus is elusive.