Here’s a thought. Maybe fundamental reality IS what we call experience and it’s not actually objective in any way. It constantly transforms in an infinite void to produce structure in the understanding of itself, but the essence that IS is simply experience itself. Reality structures itself to better understand itself, now through humans, using concepts to categorize patterns of its own form/structure and representing the concepts with symbols. What we would call our own individual experience is simply a small unit/aperture in which the universe focuses its awareness. (Experience requires sensation, body-environment relationship) “structuring”. The 3D structure of the world unites into units to build complexity, perhaps that is what the “soul” is as well, the universe understanding itself at a complex level as a unit. Maybe dreams are these soul/units falling away from the desire to seek objectivity and understanding and entering the realm of impossibility to the greater perpetual flow of objectivity.
Materialism taken literally is so incredibly dense and myopic. Yes the sensible world is real, wow, but how do you think it works? It emerges from underlying phenomena, which if you trace back far enough must at some point become necessarily immaterial. Sensible reality is clearly the product of physical laws. Some try to argue physical laws are somehow material, but even then mathematics is clearly fundamental to physics. Mathematics is decidedly nonphysical, immaterial, and ontologically prior to physical sensible reality. Arrogant materialists often get smug and close their ears to this obvious truth. It makes me want to throw them off a cliff.
Thank you for this vid. It does a good job of laying out the ideal and the real conceptions of the philosophy of that time - much better, succinctly and to the point than other vids I've watched, including some from some university professors.
The problem with saying the Christians borrowed from Plato is that the foundation of christianity is rooted in the old testiment or tanakh. Which is written before Plato. The entire new testiment can be found in the old testiment, all the old testiment or tanakh is written about Jesus pointing to Jesus. So to say that Christian's borrowed from Plato's philosophy while creating the religion isnt true because Christian's would say that God yahweh, from the old testiment or tanakh is the same God as Jesus is God in the new testament. Thank you for the video I enjoyed it.
@Erik Schmunzeler Both Plato and Aristotle have left huge mark on Christianity. And there should be no debate whether their ideas are Biblical or not. Truth is the truth no matter who says it. I suggest checking out Christian(ised) concept of "Logos".
Hey I really loved the video! You have a very good voice for these types of videos and liked the exercise. Very thought provoking. However, Would like to know where specifically in the Bible the idea of Sun being God or the Sun (allegedly translated as the Hebrew God) illuminates truth and provides understanding was inserted as a result of Plato's work? Because the issue i see with that notion is that the idea of God being sovereign and truth comes from the Old Testament. The Old Testament was A) written in Hebrew (so good and god as it relates to Greek is irrelevant) And a majority of the Old Testament - and certainly the first utterances of the Hebrew God - predate Plato and are found in Syriac translation copies from the original Hebrew dated 463/464 B.C. (the copyist wrote the date). There are also some earlier Greek copies translated from the original Hebrew that date to the 5th Century B.C. but the point is that the idea of the "Christian God" came from a Greek philosopher in the late 4th to mid 3rd Century BC doesnt really hold any weight. The New Testament doesnt form any new ideas on a conceptual scale about God. I guess my main point is (and i humbly would like to say that I am no Theologian/Historian/Philosopher, so i could be mistaken) that I dont see the relevance a Greek philosophers doctrine on a preexisting concept of God that was codified in other languages prior to Platos existence. Would love to hear your answer. I have an interest in philosophy and like your channel Adam!
Both are correct as we have mental and physical contents to attend to and try to make sense from. The point, I feel, is that we never figure it all out. We can suspect, guess and philosophy but we will never prove anything with certain absolution!
This is a really great video summary, I liked it. A point of correction though: I can see the axiomatic similarities between Christianity and Platonism, but Christianity did not emanate from Greek Philosophy, but rather from Judaism.
@@nulliusinverba6324 St Paul was a Roman citizen & familiar with Greek thought. Compare : “Those that think all virtue is to be found in their own party principles push matters to extremes; they do not consider that disproportion destroys a state. A nose which varies from the ideal... ceases to be a nose at all on account of some excess in one direction or defect in the other; and this is true of every other part of the human body.” [Aristotle - Politics] with: "For the body [of Christ] does not consist of one member but of many... If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? “ [1Cor12v14-17] Later St Augustine based his 'City of God' on Plato's 'Republic' & this became the dominant philosophy of the Medieval period, while St. Aquinas' 'Summa Theologia' re-integrated Aristotelian thought with Christianity in the early Renaissance, and his 'Great Chain of Being' was given the Latin name 'evolution' at this time.
@@differous01 And Philo of Alexandria used Platonic philosophy to make exegesis of scriptures. These integrations like you've mentioned are cogent, and have produced wonderful and profound materials, that benefit us to date.
Reality/Life = That which is/That I am. That which is (Life), that is nothing in particular (actual), is by definition everything in general (potential). It is the nature of Life, the All in One in All, to function/serve as a diversified unity of infinite potential, eternally actualizing as a unified diversity or Unni-verse. 0. Potential = Being 1. Actual = Becoming (actualized) Now is eternal. Past, present and future are temporal. Love is the recognition of our shared Being.
Nice video! But one thing I don’t get is when you talk about how the Christian faith turned Good into God by dropping an o. Was that just some kind of allegory? Because I highly doubt the similarities were the same between the Greek words and that the english translators had that in mind. And again, thank you for a great introduction!
thanks for the video. just one thing: it could really be useful to have the youtube links of the video on the comments, or at least the video`s title so that we can find it without having to type the whole url. =)
As the Church took control of iconography in the Medieval period, controlling what was to be projected into Plato's Cave, so today's media can do the same. Once enough people believe in their subjective experience as revelation, reason and evidence become subordinate to moral outrage. “Those that think all virtue is to be found in their own party principles push matters to extremes; they do not consider that disproportion destroys a state.” [Aristotle - Politics]
Really enjoyed the video it made me think. I believe math is the bridge between material and immaterial world. When you describe something using math its more defined in the imagination. And inverse your imagination is more easily made material when math is used to create the object you imagine and not purely pulling from ones imagination. A horse is easily described in detail using numbers in order to describe. 7 feet tall, 1/4 inch fur, 4 legs, 2 foot neck, ect.. Justice is more tangible when numbers are put behind it. For example teacher gives you only one cookie from a package one could feel slighted the teacher keeps the rest untill more numbers are added. Did teacher buy it? How many other students will need a cookie? How deserving of a cookie are you based on your performance? The more numbers added the more the "Justice" could be unjust or the inverse.
8:08 RUclips link: ruclips.net/video/MgotDFs6cdE/видео.html PLATO ON: The Forms by School of Life FYI / Warning: This one's ok but, as a philosophy lecturer, School of Life videos do sometimes present things outright inaccurately (eg Sartre On: Bad Faith - evidently misunderstood and not as S. presents it in Being and Nothingness)
@@adamhands2537 Christian conception of God comes mainly from Judaism, there are some theories that Plato also took some inspiration for his philosophy from the Jews.
how could Christianity have barrowed from this, Plato was born a few hundred years after it was founded. also Christianity stemmed from Judaism which is even older
Aristotle is the greatest philosopher ever. Plato may be on to something with his ideal ghost world, but unless you’re a mathematician, or the like, for the average human, who are mind-blowingly dumb - and in groups - Look out! Do you want proof of their “Thighlight Zone” level of stupidity? Look around you at these assholes parading around in masks. The media can bombard the masses with most any “nonsense,” and they actually believe it. I have such little respect for people at this stage. I could never have imagined they were capable of being so insane, and Plato’s phantom world idea, only enables this disaster. It’s self evident, yet few see this....The schools system and media have achieved their goal, SO MANY of THE MOST clueless people I encounter have degrees, and it runs the gamut, from BA’s PhD’s. Aristotle we need you.
@@adamhands2537 your response proves you wrong. Not much happens, only ostensibly ( for those who only see the shadows), via government nor academia, with the interests of a community. History, even our propaganda filled history, proves this.
@@clee1985 and why would anyone bring life into this world, anyone who sees things for what they are? Save the Ad Homenems; you're proving my point beautifully.
@@adamhands2537 I want objective truth, and most of all freedom. I question much. I piss off, quite easily, and very passionately both the left and the right. However, I can't question the logical answers which my MANY questions have revealed (though I'd accept that I am partly or wholly wrong, because evidence can't be denied, if evidence were to dictate thus). But I can't question -- Nor can you, not in a society where if one say's "this or that," they face the Pavlovian - like, mindless, rabid frothing mouths of the zombified herd. **That should freak you out** How can anyone know under such circumstances? Well, evidence is the only way under any circumstances; tangible evidence, and ironically, and maybe even more so ( at the risk of sounding Platonic), but more so that which is obviously unseen, and clearly unseen, because of deliberate censorship, THAT is empirical itself. Prove me wrong, but to do so, you'll have to have evidence, evidence that can only be found in THIS world. I assure you, Ive always craved truth, of course we all have biases, but that doesn't change what evidence reveals, until new evidence arrives to negate the former. My saving grave is I don't care what people think, well I do ( I have to survive), but II won't sell my soul so that I can be be part of the group, like the average human will...I think that the need to belong is why the masses believe all the grotesuqe absurdities fed to them by the media, and academe; even smart people aren't immune, not in the least. It's quite mind blowing.
I think revisionists don't understand how language evolves. Written definitions follow changes in the application of the word not the other way around.
The Christian "idea" of heaven long predated Greek philosophy... In Christianity they changed good into God? Do you even know how silly you sound? How does that idea work for other languages? let's say Spanish: good = bueno, God = Dios. Do you believe Christianity originated with the English-speaking?
@@adamhands2537 Please read my first sentence again... I did not state that Christianity was before Greek philosophers, but that the "idea" of heaven in which Christians believe far predated that. Moreover, I am not in the least emotionally upset, but was hoping to receive some gainful insight into Greek philosophy, since both the New Testament writers and second century Christian apologetic writers addressed those philosophies in detail. It might be useful for you to know that with the advent of Christianity, Greek philosophy was halted -- developed no further. And why was that? because Christians preached the resurrection of the dead; which led to the Greek nation converting as it is till this day in Orthodox Christianity. So please don't take cheap unfounded jabs.
@@adamhands2537 Unfortunately, Protestant Christianity has formed that "stifling" notion in your mind. But as a learned man, I suppose you well know that for 300 years Christians suffered bitter martyrdom under the 10 wicked Roman emperors. Therefore, the Greeks' conversion was motivated by reason, and not military force. All the Greek philosophical speculation of heaven or earth were satisfactorily answered in the Christian message of God's incarnation in Christ. That is why it [Greek philosophy] died. The "heaven" discussion will only become theological, so I will end that here.
@@adamhands2537 I actually suspected you were Roman Catholic turned atheist. Notice in my second comment where I stated that Greek philosophy never *developed* further with Christianity on the scene; and God, in His providence, knew well that the highest philosophy ie, Christianity, appeared when the Greek thought was ripe enough to answer ALL their speculation.
@@adamhands2537 It is a matter of the heart, not proof. With our hearts we believe or not believe. And no empirical device can quantify the immaterial mind of mortal man, much less an infinite God.
Thank you for making these! They are excellent and immensely helpful
Its a top quality video. I am surprised it does not have millions of views already. Thank you so much.
Views of millions belong to Ariana Grande's videos.
pro tip: you can watch movies at flixzone. Been using it for watching a lot of movies lately.
@Canaan Eric yup, I've been watching on flixzone for since november myself :D
Cuz we're living in an immaterial world, and I am a material boi
-Plato
Here’s a thought.
Maybe fundamental reality IS what we call experience and it’s not actually objective in any way. It constantly transforms in an infinite void to produce structure in the understanding of itself, but the essence that IS is simply experience itself. Reality structures itself to better understand itself, now through humans, using concepts to categorize patterns of its own form/structure and representing the concepts with symbols.
What we would call our own individual experience is simply a small unit/aperture in which the universe focuses its awareness. (Experience requires sensation, body-environment relationship) “structuring”.
The 3D structure of the world unites into units to build complexity, perhaps that is what the “soul” is as well, the universe understanding itself at a complex level as a unit.
Maybe dreams are these soul/units falling away from the desire to seek objectivity and understanding and entering the realm of impossibility to the greater perpetual flow of objectivity.
9:00 I wrote horse is one of two extant sub species of equus ferus
Great video, online classes are brutal and youtube has been an endless help!
A horse is a horse, of course, of course.
Hand reveal at 1k subs?
Materialism taken literally is so incredibly dense and myopic. Yes the sensible world is real, wow, but how do you think it works? It emerges from underlying phenomena, which if you trace back far enough must at some point become necessarily immaterial.
Sensible reality is clearly the product of physical laws. Some try to argue physical laws are somehow material, but even then mathematics is clearly fundamental to physics. Mathematics is decidedly nonphysical, immaterial, and ontologically prior to physical sensible reality. Arrogant materialists often get smug and close their ears to this obvious truth. It makes me want to throw them off a cliff.
Navak this has nothing to do with Aristotle or Plato
Thank you for this vid. It does a good job of laying out the ideal and the real conceptions of the philosophy of that time - much better, succinctly and to the point than other vids I've watched, including some from some university professors.
Great videos! Really explain metaphysics and the theory’s of Plato and Aristotle, helped me really understand, thank you!!!
The problem with saying the Christians borrowed from Plato is that the foundation of christianity is rooted in the old testiment or tanakh. Which is written before Plato. The entire new testiment can be found in the old testiment, all the old testiment or tanakh is written about Jesus pointing to Jesus. So to say that Christian's borrowed from Plato's philosophy while creating the religion isnt true because Christian's would say that God yahweh, from the old testiment or tanakh is the same God as Jesus is God in the new testament.
Thank you for the video I enjoyed it.
@Erik Schmunzeler Both Plato and Aristotle have left huge mark on Christianity. And there should be no debate whether their ideas are Biblical or not. Truth is the truth no matter who says it. I suggest checking out Christian(ised) concept of "Logos".
Hey I really loved the video! You have a very good voice for these types of videos and liked the exercise. Very thought provoking.
However, Would like to know where specifically in the Bible the idea of Sun being God or the Sun (allegedly translated as the Hebrew God) illuminates truth and provides understanding was inserted as a result of Plato's work?
Because the issue i see with that notion is that the idea of God being sovereign and truth comes from the Old Testament. The Old Testament was A) written in Hebrew (so good and god as it relates to Greek is irrelevant) And a majority of the Old Testament - and certainly the first utterances of the Hebrew God - predate Plato and are found in Syriac translation copies from the original Hebrew dated 463/464 B.C. (the copyist wrote the date). There are also some earlier Greek copies translated from the original Hebrew that date to the 5th Century B.C. but the point is that the idea of the "Christian God" came from a Greek philosopher in the late 4th to mid 3rd Century BC doesnt really hold any weight.
The New Testament doesnt form any new ideas on a conceptual scale about God.
I guess my main point is (and i humbly would like to say that I am no Theologian/Historian/Philosopher, so i could be mistaken) that I dont see the relevance a Greek philosophers doctrine on a preexisting concept of God that was codified in other languages prior to Platos existence.
Would love to hear your answer. I have an interest in philosophy and like your channel Adam!
Good work
Both are correct as we have mental and physical contents to attend to and try to make sense from. The point, I feel, is that we never figure it all out. We can suspect, guess and philosophy but we will never prove anything with certain absolution!
Hi Adam, how do I find the second video on Aristotle?
Loud and clear.Thanks.
This is a really great video summary, I liked it. A point of correction though: I can see the axiomatic similarities between Christianity and Platonism, but Christianity did not emanate from Greek Philosophy, but rather from Judaism.
However to add, there are those that amalgamate Christianity and Greek Philosophy.
@@adamhands2537 okey dokey 👍
@@nulliusinverba6324 St Paul was a Roman citizen & familiar with Greek thought. Compare :
“Those that think all virtue is to be found in their own party principles push matters to extremes; they do not consider that disproportion destroys a state. A nose which varies from the ideal... ceases to be a nose at all on account of some excess in one direction or defect in the other; and this is true of every other part of the human body.”
[Aristotle - Politics]
with:
"For the body [of Christ] does not consist of one member but of many... If the whole body were an eye, where would be the hearing? If the whole body were an ear, where would be the sense of smell? “ [1Cor12v14-17]
Later St Augustine based his 'City of God' on Plato's 'Republic' & this became the dominant philosophy of the Medieval period, while St. Aquinas' 'Summa Theologia' re-integrated Aristotelian thought with Christianity in the early Renaissance, and his 'Great Chain of Being' was given the Latin name 'evolution' at this time.
@@differous01 And Philo of Alexandria used Platonic philosophy to make exegesis of scriptures. These integrations like you've mentioned are cogent, and have produced wonderful and profound materials, that benefit us to date.
Reality/Life = That which is/That I am.
That which is (Life), that is nothing in particular (actual), is by definition everything in general (potential).
It is the nature of Life, the All in One in All, to function/serve as a diversified unity of infinite potential, eternally actualizing as a unified diversity or Unni-verse.
0. Potential = Being
1. Actual = Becoming (actualized)
Now is eternal. Past, present and future are temporal.
Love is the recognition of our shared Being.
Thank you for this!! Any book suggestions of metaphysics studies?
The Handy Philosopher I studied the Republic in my literature course. I think I’ll try to buy it! Also the matrix is a classic 💖thank u
well done
Nice video! But one thing I don’t get is when you talk about how the Christian faith turned Good into God by dropping an o. Was that just some kind of allegory? Because I highly doubt the similarities were the same between the Greek words and that the english translators had that in mind. And again, thank you for a great introduction!
Good video this helped me i dropped a like for you
thanks for the video. just one thing: it could really be useful to have the youtube links of the video on the comments, or at least the video`s title so that we can find it without having to type the whole url. =)
how does mind access to this world of ideas ? would you please to explain .......
As the Church took control of iconography in the Medieval period, controlling what was to be projected into Plato's Cave, so today's media can do the same. Once enough people believe in their subjective experience as revelation, reason and evidence become subordinate to moral outrage. “Those that think all virtue is to be found in their own party principles push matters to extremes; they do not consider that disproportion destroys a state.” [Aristotle - Politics]
Great vid!
Really enjoyed the video it made me think. I believe math is the bridge between material and immaterial world. When you describe something using math its more defined in the imagination. And inverse your imagination is more easily made material when math is used to create the object you imagine and not purely pulling from ones imagination. A horse is easily described in detail using numbers in order to describe. 7 feet tall, 1/4 inch fur, 4 legs, 2 foot neck, ect.. Justice is more tangible when numbers are put behind it. For example teacher gives you only one cookie from a package one could feel slighted the teacher keeps the rest untill more numbers are added. Did teacher buy it? How many other students will need a cookie? How deserving of a cookie are you based on your performance? The more numbers added the more the "Justice" could be unjust or the inverse.
Talking of the circle; what about the golden ratio? It exists in the physical world not in the immaterial or metaphysical world....
Great video Adam, very helpfull, thanks!
8:08 RUclips link: ruclips.net/video/MgotDFs6cdE/видео.html PLATO ON: The Forms by School of Life
FYI / Warning: This one's ok but, as a philosophy lecturer, School of Life videos do sometimes present things outright inaccurately (eg Sartre On: Bad Faith - evidently misunderstood and not as S. presents it in Being and Nothingness)
Absolute banger
Amazing video, really well presented. Thank you very much.
Thank you. :)
ruclips.net/video/MgotDFs6cdE/видео.html video link.
Idealism
Two wrong ideas from the start which made an unreal division.
@@adamhands2537 The artificial polarization of materialism versus non material is what I am referring to. Common sense says the world is both.
The concept of God existed before Philosophy did.
@@adamhands2537 Christian conception of God comes mainly from Judaism, there are some theories that Plato also took some inspiration for his philosophy from the Jews.
how could Christianity have barrowed from this, Plato was born a few hundred years after it was founded. also Christianity stemmed from Judaism which is even older
It is a click-bite.
You said nothing about Aristotle .
Aristotle is the greatest philosopher ever.
Plato may be on to something with his ideal ghost world, but unless you’re a mathematician, or the like, for the average human, who are mind-blowingly dumb - and in groups - Look out! Do you want proof of their “Thighlight Zone” level of stupidity? Look around you at these assholes parading around in masks. The media can bombard the masses with most any “nonsense,” and they actually believe it. I have such little respect for people at this stage. I could never have imagined they were capable of being so insane, and Plato’s phantom world idea, only enables this disaster. It’s self evident, yet few see this....The schools system and media have achieved their goal, SO MANY of THE MOST clueless people I encounter have degrees, and it runs the gamut, from BA’s PhD’s.
Aristotle we need you.
Cool story bro. Please don't breed.
@@adamhands2537 your response proves you wrong. Not much happens, only ostensibly ( for those who only see the shadows), via government nor academia, with the interests of a community. History, even our propaganda filled history, proves this.
@@clee1985 and why would anyone bring life into this world, anyone who sees things for what they are? Save the Ad Homenems; you're proving my point beautifully.
@@adamhands2537 I want objective truth, and most of all freedom. I question much. I piss off, quite easily, and very passionately both the left and the right. However, I can't question the logical answers which my MANY questions have revealed (though I'd accept that I am partly or wholly wrong, because evidence can't be denied, if evidence were to dictate thus).
But I can't question -- Nor can you, not in a society where if one say's "this or that," they face the Pavlovian - like, mindless, rabid frothing mouths of the zombified herd. **That should freak you out** How can anyone know under such circumstances? Well, evidence is the only way under any circumstances; tangible evidence, and ironically, and maybe even more so ( at the risk of sounding Platonic), but more so that which is obviously unseen, and clearly unseen, because of deliberate censorship, THAT is empirical itself. Prove me wrong, but to do so, you'll have to have evidence, evidence that can only be found in THIS world. I assure you, Ive always craved truth, of course we all have biases, but that doesn't change what evidence reveals, until new evidence arrives to negate the former. My saving grave is I don't care what people think, well I do ( I have to survive), but II won't sell my soul so that I can be be part of the group, like the average human will...I think that the need to belong is why the masses believe all the grotesuqe absurdities fed to them by the media, and academe; even smart people aren't immune, not in the least. It's quite mind blowing.
@@adamhands2537 So are you denying facts, as evidenced by our senses?
man they sure did a lot of drugs to come up with this shit
How could you say the ancient Christians dropped an "o" and made good to God. Plato didn't write in English, nor did the Hebrews
Christianity borrowed It's concept for God by dropping the o in Plato's good, this is a gross misrepresentation.
it was a joke, a witty one
Its BC not BCE. I loath revisionist. What else has been changed so as to not offend snowflake sensibilities?
I think revisionists don't understand how language evolves. Written definitions follow changes in the application of the word not the other way around.
The Christian "idea" of heaven long predated Greek philosophy...
In Christianity they changed good into God? Do you even know how silly you sound? How does that idea work for other languages? let's say Spanish: good = bueno, God = Dios.
Do you believe Christianity originated with the English-speaking?
@@adamhands2537 Please read my first sentence again... I did not state that Christianity was before Greek philosophers, but that the "idea" of heaven in which Christians believe far predated that.
Moreover, I am not in the least emotionally upset, but was hoping to receive some gainful insight into Greek philosophy, since both the New Testament writers and second century Christian apologetic writers addressed those philosophies in detail.
It might be useful for you to know that with the advent of Christianity, Greek philosophy was halted -- developed no further. And why was that? because Christians preached the resurrection of the dead; which led to the Greek nation converting as it is till this day in Orthodox Christianity.
So please don't take cheap unfounded jabs.
@@adamhands2537 Unfortunately, Protestant Christianity has formed that "stifling" notion in your mind. But as a learned man, I suppose you well know that for 300 years Christians suffered bitter martyrdom under the 10 wicked Roman emperors. Therefore, the Greeks' conversion was motivated by reason, and not military force. All the Greek philosophical speculation of heaven or earth were satisfactorily answered in the Christian message of God's incarnation in Christ. That is why it [Greek philosophy] died.
The "heaven" discussion will only become theological, so I will end that here.
@@adamhands2537 I actually suspected you were Roman Catholic turned atheist.
Notice in my second comment where I stated that Greek philosophy never *developed* further with Christianity on the scene; and God, in His providence, knew well that the highest philosophy ie, Christianity, appeared when the Greek thought was ripe enough to answer ALL their speculation.
@@adamhands2537 It is a matter of the heart, not proof. With our hearts we believe or not believe. And no empirical device can quantify the immaterial mind of mortal man, much less an infinite God.
@@Troy-Moses it's still your assumption, believing by heart is another false argument