Will Durant---The Philosophy of Kant
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 июн 2024
- Will Durant---The Philosophy of Kant
Embark on a profound exploration of the philosophical insights of Immanuel Kant, one of the most influential figures in Western philosophy, with the esteemed historian, Will Durant, as your guide. In this enlightening video, Durant delves into Kant's groundbreaking contributions to metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and the Enlightenment era.
📜 Explore Durant's insightful commentary as he navigates the following key aspects of Immanuel Kant's philosophy:
Kant's early life and the intellectual climate of 18th-century Europe
The foundations of Kant's transcendental idealism and the nature of reality
Kant's critique of pure reason and his theory of knowledge
Kant's moral philosophy, including the categorical imperative and ethics of duty
The impact of Kant's philosophy on subsequent thinkers and the Enlightenment era
The enduring relevance of Kant's ideas in contemporary philosophy and ethics
This video offers a unique opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of Immanuel Kant's profound philosophical contributions and their impact on the course of Western thought. Will Durant's eloquent narration and historical expertise make this exploration of Kant's philosophy a must-watch for philosophy enthusiasts, scholars, and anyone interested in the foundations of modern philosophy and ethics.
🔔 Don't forget to like, share, and subscribe to our channel for more enlightening insights into the lives and philosophies of history's most influential thinkers. Stay tuned for our latest content by turning on notifications.
![Oscar Maydon x Junior H - Volver Al Futuro [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sa52xabMSB8/mqdefault.jpg)
Narrator's voice is excellent, perfect for this.
"He thought everything out carefully before acting, and therefore remained a bachelor all his life long." Hahaha
A thinking man has no need for the absurdity that's called woman.
An excuse for vulgarity ugliness and lack of confidence
@@blackholesun9068 what is "absurd" about women?
That's a holy roman that's 800 years old crossed back a whole bunch of years
@@blackholesun9068 Because he’ll personify absurdity himself in madness [cue Nietzsche].
I never expected this book would be so funny. Durant's little jabs in the margins are absolutely side-splitting.
I love listening to this guy.
Spitting philosophy like poetry...
No poet spits poetry.
Dale Reynolds whatever you say cutie
Sounds like same person that reads one of my favorite works of PKD.
ruclips.net/video/acFcu8K2NHg/видео.html
@@dalereynolds7638the reason why you’ll never understand Kant.
Will Durant - one of America's greatest treasures that hardly no one had heard of. And wow, the voice actor who did these originals is just superb.
Thank you SO much for uploading these Rocky C!
I did not know Durant was American but I read his history book when I was at high school and was greatly impressed.
don't forgrt his wife "ARIEL ".
So true!
The best use of 1,5 hour in a long while!! - Thanks!!
11:12 “No matter, never mind” absolutely hilarious haha
"When liberty exceeds intelligence, it begets chaos, which begets dictatorship.”
― Will Durant
And when education exceeds intelligence, it begets snobbery.
Sarcastic Towelie indeed
Steven Yourke Yeah, can't have that, let's spin into chaos and usher in totalitarianism...
I`m going to google that.
Quite fitting of what's going on right now in America.
I just came here to thank the lifesaver Rocky C for uploading these.
I've heard most of these a hundred times by now, but these audiobooks really help me sleep.
I thought I was the only one
Very useful all around, ha!
This guy was great, I am loving all of his work, for someone to have been able to write down most of our human choices. How great is that?
19:30 Kant himself
28:10 The critique of pure reason
52:52 The critique of practical reason
1:17:03 Criticism and estimate
Thank you
Right on, a great RUclips video with clever commenters! Thanks for the upload. This is how the Internet was meant to be exploited - a replacement for encarta and phone lines.
S4
I spend 3 hours a day walking my dogs and was a philosophy minor, love listening to these.
Who's your favorite? What is the most influential book you have ever read so far?
I'm not drilling you. I'm just trying to get other people's views 👍
I agree with Schopenhauer on several topics but I hate him for being so negative and pessimistic and I try to change my feelings because of it 😂
@@zacharystuart7162"The Ego and Its Own" -Max Stirner aka J.K. Schmidt
Durant was really a great writer
He's the best standard for a writer.
Wasn't he though?
What, even better than E. L. James ??
Yes he was wonderful although not without fault. Although those faults are not his prose as much as his thought. E.g. his explanations of Hegel and the fall of Rome.
Gossip and verbiage artist.
This is very good. To me, Kant makes more sense today. I am going to read his work on politics. I am happy. Thank you to all the people who made this knowledge possible.
Having read his first two critiques recently for the first time, I can back up that his work is wonderful. He has interesting and nuanced views on politics, also. Supportive but scared of revolution.
For those interested in Kant: Kant wrote three "Critiques" on on Pure Reason (structure and limits of percieving the natural world), Practical Reason, aka morality, and Pure Judgement, aka what in English is called aesthetics. He wrote three separate books because after thinking it all through and finding limits to each he had to treat them separately. Separate treatment works out well, as it turns out.
I find Critique of Pure Reason intriguing. The short summary, which never suffices: Sense data is filtered, formed, colored, in a way gussied-up before processing begins on it. The gussying-up presents to the next processing step data that can be processed. That next processing step has various rules for processing, but the master rule from which all others are generated is that the data must appear to be spatial, temporal and of quantity (1, a zillion, or fractions of 1...any number will do). All the rules of processing are not known in advance, but if empirical data comes in, is filtered and then processed upon and the data fits with all other data in some way, then a sub-rule(s) is discovered. Knowledge, according to Kant, is empirical data that fits the rule(s) (rules=concepts).
Some empirical data may not even make it through the filter stage, but in such a case one would'nt be aware it was filtered out. Some of what makes it through the filter and gussying stage may only be part of the phenomenon and not enough to make sense out of it. As a general rule, the more empirical data one takes in on a matter, in different ways of measuring, the more likely it will be taken up by the rules, the concepts, and then make sense and become knowledge. Because the master rule is space, time and number, that which become knowledge will be of predictive use, predictive in space time and number.
The scheme sketched out by Kant is extremely useful and allows for further and further scientific investigation to the smaller, the larger, the shorter in time, the longer and of course an number. But that's it. If any phenomenon does not fit the rules we will either know nothing about it, or it will be paradoxical. This limitation on Reason+Empirical data is why for instance the dual slit experiment leaves us saying..."that does not make sense". Kant would say that the in the double slit experiment something is happening for sure, but a key part of it is not happening within the confines of space, time and number, and thus we can Never know.
I Kant is wrong about limits of Reason, then the opposite, unlimited, seems preposterous: What are the chances that the human mind, the brain, a bodily organ, just so happens to be able to figure out everything, when for instance the stomach can't digest everything?
This issue is non-trivial and has shaped science and society in a way that we are less prone than in the past to believe we can Reason to an answer, like in a criminal trial, without sufficient evidence, and the evidence must make sense, that is fit with Reason. In a criminal trial, if we relied too much on Reason which would lead to suppositions, all the guilty would be found guilty but too many innocents would also be found guilty. If we relied only on evidence too many of the guilty would be turned loose.
Lastly...if Reason is considered to be all we have to make sense of empirical data then we use it as we can for that, but it can't go beyond that pragmatic utility. Kant did demote Reason to some degree making arguments based soley on reasoning less convincing.
Itz all you to you Haha I believe the critique of practical judgment has her transcendental idealism they hid it from us. The mind is designed to collapse on itself to process reality as an emergent objective entity that's historically affective that knowledge is processed after the mind reverses itself he would call your knowledge empirical sensibilities he gets called to be a doctor that's when he eats it I'm assuming that's when he writes those papers
@John Smith I understand why Ayn Rand said Kant ruined philosophy. Forever.
@John Smith you should show the MoMA your post history
@@valkyriefires , Kant ruined more than philosophy !
Look at those who came after him !
The arrogant little philosopher of Königsberg (Kaliningrad) !
The Red Army never destroyed his statue (and memory), but held it in great honour !
I wonder why !!
Yeah, that's pretty good, thanks. As a footnote to both Kant and Hume, Cognitive Science has been able to hook-up electrodes to the backs of eyeballs to all sorts of animals, so that we can see what they see on TV monitors. It's sometimes like "The Matrix:" Frogs, for example, see their world as triangles. Most animals see a straight oar in the water. Turtles can see, under water, everything on a shore from as far as a hundred yards.The reason for the differences concerns how an eye's optics use the blue and red light spectrums.
Thank you, Rocky. It was a blessing to listen that built my faith. God bless you!
These uploads are exceptional, thank you
Golden man thanks for the share !
Beautiful.
Love it!!
Thoroughly enoyed it. Thanks for uploading.
This video awoke me from my catmatic slumber.
Kant changef the way I perceive reality for the rest of my life. Thank you for such a great video!
I Kant understand!!!
🤣😂🤣
thank you
Absolutely brilliant!!
Sleep with/on it!
yes, I just Kant!
Will Durant clarifies Kant like no one I've heard before or since. This is remarkable. And Kant makes short work of Locke and friends as is rightly so.
Exquisite - essential for all
Thank you!
Rocky, you rock! I can't thank you enough for this!
I love these Will Durant videos that Rocky C has uploaded. What is the voice reading Durant’s work? Does anyone know if it is an audio series? I’ve watched them all and would love to buy more.
The narrator is Grover Gardner, I think
Such an extraordinary mind
It'd be great if this narrator was reading 'The Lessons of History' and 'The Greatest Minds and Ideas of All Times'.
With modern thechnology that should not be too hard... yet the soul would be missing i guess if it were AI atm at least.
Atheism was so fashionable in the salons of France that even the clergy took it up.
you listened at least 2 minutes of the video, a new personal record of your attention span ?
Jean Meslier.
In Christianity, God for a moment became an atheist. -G.K. Chesterton
@@nightoftheworld Why?
Fernando Alamón he was forsaken of himself through the death on the cross
Immanuel Kant's Ideas- The Greatest of the Greatest! Thanks for the review!
I am not sure if I agree with the "Greatest of the Greatest", for me, I think that title belongs to Plato vis-a-vis Socrates.
This is the first time I've heard anyone explaining Kant coherently. Until now, Kant's own writings were impenetrable, and others trying to explain him sounded overcomplicated and boring.
Wow! What an amazing philosopher! He stands at the root of so many: not just philosophers, but scientists from totally different fields. The roots of Boltzmann's statistical mechanics are here, as well as those of Piaget and Levi-Strauss, the "Selfish Gene" of Richard Dawkins, and my biology teacher N. Wilson. Even where he was wrong, he was at the root of great things, just turned in the opposite direction. In this way, he is the precursor of Lobachevsky, Riemann, Poincare, Einstein.
And, with only a few corrections, his theory still holds.
It really should be taught more widely. Then we won't have repetitive arguments in the style of Hume (only way more dumb).
Can you explain why you think his ideas are at the root of all these disparate thinkers you mentioned? In particular Einstein and Boltzmann. His concepts of Analytical and synthetic statements are precursors to Kurt Godel's Incompleteness theorems. Synthetic statements are the unprovable theorems within a system.
Those who cant explain him in simple syntax dont understand him.
@@maartenvandenberg4825 It is said in this video that he did not explain his own ideas in simple syntax.
@@rocketpig1914 Kant didn't understand himself.
@@mitchyoung93 Kant understand himself
Will Durant is a badass.
56:40 *categorical imperative* “We must apply the perfect law in the imperfect state. It is a hard ethic you say-this placing of duty above beauty, of morality above happiness, but only so can we cease to be beasts and begin to be Gods.”
my friends have said I've been being a Kant recently
zakk davis You must have strange friends
The reader makes the philosopher understood.
"How contemporary truth is.."
Reiterate, Refresh
I’ll delight myself with this audio and some wine.
I delight myself by reading these comments to know there’re still people who appreciate the finer stuffs in life.
A Tapestry of Memories is all within the heart soul & Holographic Human Minds Eye!
MWM
Thanks
thanks!
Philosophy is knowledge of knowledge
Hi, which Mr. Durant book is this from ? I was thinking to buy if it would be available. Thanks.
Thanks Rocky, I will look it up.
What was the quote in the first 20 minutes or so about, people who have a problem with reason.... Something like that. Can't find it.
📝 Morals (56:45-59:58)
55:46-56:25
The good of unsociableness
1:08:28-1:09:36 “Nature’s….”
Thanks :)
I am reading the book second time, am betting mature and understanding - i hope to read another dozen times and make it part of my blood so that it remans in me tilll i am alive.
Extraordinary
I can't Kant get no satisfaction!
Watching for the 53rd time
Does anyone know who the narrator for the many Will Durant videos is?
As a podcast/audiobook enthusiast this narrator is excellent
Grover Gardner, I think
In terms of utter scope of impact on philosophy, no one can beat Kant.
My only peeve with Kant is his Catagorical Imperitive. It's such an amazing word combo but forever it will be meant to be a catchall for human ethics.
What Kant is all about is explaining how synthetic judgemts are possible, to justify RATIONAL Human Action, to survive and thrive. You'll be lost in his discussion unless you understand that Aristotle, who wrote the first treatise on the grammar of the subject of formal argument, which concerns ONLY the validity of an argument's form, called his treatise, "Organon;" in English, "The Tool." Argument is THE tool of learning to survive. Without learning, you die. You'll also be lost in Kant unless you really understand the signifigance of Hume pointing-out that all arguments concerning matters of fact are predicated on the relation of cause and effect (AECHU, 4.1.22.)
Kant sees that Aristole's apriori grammar of validity, and Hume's empirical content, as a relation of cause and effect, synthesize into a judgement on which we predicate what we believe is rational human action, and Kant calls this judgement "synthetic judgement." Kant is explaining (by cause and effect?) how the apriori epistemic category and the empirical epistemic category can VALIDLY form a synthetic judgement. He devises a "transcendental grammar" for this validity, in terms of space, time, and number.
Thank you Minerva, would you consider writing a series on planksip?
@ planksip® Sounds like fun, but I really don't know much. I know little very well, is all.
El hombre que no vivió una vida vivida.
Yes
Thankyu X
As much as people dunk on Kant, agree with him or not, he truly had a great mind
Which book of Durant is this reading taken from ?
The ultimate reason is "all things are connected" in the observable circumstances of Eternity-now Superspin Superposition-point Singularity positioning,.., by the resonant-superconducting modulation of the "remembered/shaped" past there-then, with the tuned reciprocal positioning of wave-package frequency coordination here-now forever.
Simplicity and inverse complexity, of the universal standing wave positioning, which is the reason why we are in the Interval between +/-1-0Duration superimposed modules axially and unique compounding resonances tangentially. It IS what it IS, Time Duration Timing.
It's a mapping ex-plan-ation of the cross-sectioning cause-effect in which we have the options to choose a general goal of international relations with the Universal holistic environment, and "call it what you will".
Transcendence is the e-Pi-i multi-phase resonance, empirical imaging condensation of 1st and 2nd laws of Thermodynamics in "orbital of numberness", in constant continuous creation connection, according to the natural occurrence of primes and cofactors of phase-locked multi-phase state resonance, interpreted mathematically as the log base"e" antilog real-ization of reciprocal positioning, density and intensity substantiation of phenomena including all material Spacetime.
If the individual seeks Union of general context of thought and personal mind, the goal manifests itself in "inspirational" condensation and resonance, as a direct understanding tuned to the actual systems of Existence.
"Names" of any sub components are not necessarily definitive.., including all individuals who misunderstand this general context. (Approximately = Kant in current Observation)
Because an identity is composed of compounded mixtures of "the point" objective in relative magnitude and it's converse wave-package of location in context. Eg position-momentum dichotomy of particles in motion, and the converse dualistic context of measurement.
In context, therefore, dualism implies that the identity is defined by the action, Act-tually of "Christ-ian IS as christ-ian does", (in the aggregate) not the converse.
(In effect, Kant repeated the observation that reversed the assertion that the Church is not a building and hierarchy of political positioning, it is "more than the sum of its parts" in the actions of the Congregation, or any such institutional human embodiment of these abstract constitutional concepts.
Conceptually, therefore the congruent positioning of a Rigorous Mathematical proof with Actuality is forever incomplete, uncertain and indistinct because it's QM-TIMESPACE Principle In-form-ation formulae Dualism.
Kant appreciated fact. Durant reiterated, updated the perceptions, and clarified his observations.
Basic Observation is compelled to compare personal experience existence with the chaos of WYSIWYG into the cause-effect of Perspectives, accumulative modulation, interference positioning in personal cognitive coherence.
Tabula Rasa): clean slate of the senses J Locke. Will Durrant legend
Metaphysics means first you dream it then you live it. Stay Free
Very pleasant voice - who narrates?
Grover Gardner, I think
3:00 Nicolas de Condorcet, was a French philosopher and mathematician. His ideas, including support for a liberal economy, free and equal public instruction, constitutional government, and equal rights for women and people of all races, have been said to embody the ideals of the Age of Enlightenment, of which he has been called the "last witness,"[2] and Enlightenment rationalism. He died in prison after a period of hiding from the French Revolutionary authorities.
103115 Kant critically criticized again:
Almost everyone created on this planet gets a genius capable brain, how much of it you utilize is a free will choice entirely yours to make...
Immanuel Kant for instance;
Here it appears he was using the ‘stupid’ level of his ‘genius’ capable brain...
“I have therefore found it necessary to deny knowledge in order to make room for faith.” Critique of Pure Reason (1781; 1787)
Here it appears he was using the ‘reasonable and logical’ level of his ‘genius’ capable brain...
Idea for a Universal History from a Cosmopolitan Point of View (1784)
Second Thesis:
“Reason itself does not work instinctively, but requires trial, practice, and instruction in order gradually to progress from one level of insight to another.”
The issue for me here is that he accurately describes the process of practicing reason, but it seems that he is inferring that instinct and insight are a faculty of reason, and if that inference was intended, then he is incorrect.
Fourth Thesis
“The greatest problem for the human race, to the solution of which Nature drives man, is the achievement of a universal civic society which administers law among men.”
The issue for me here is that he accurately describes the ‘drive to do good’ that innately motivates humankind, and the desire for humankind to live in a universal civic society, but that he is of the opinion that a ‘law’ or ‘laws’ will make it so, leads me to the conclusion that he was only utilizing the ‘insane’ level of his ‘genius’ capable brain. I think we are all aware of the common cultural definition of insane; that is; doing the same thing over and over and over again and expecting a different result. When you analyze all of human history for the success rate of administrative organizations for the purpose of providing universal civic society, I think my point about ‘insanity’ level use of the brain is confirmed...
It’s not looking very good for Kant’s use of brain ability, but be patient, it gets better...
“There is … only a single categorical imperative and it is this: Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” .Metaphysics of Morals (1797)
‘I ought never to act except in such a way that I could also will that my maxim should become a universal law.” .Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (1785)
But it does not get better with these two quotes, variants of the same concept. Again, “law” has never produced long-term universal civic society, and if he’d just paid more attention to human history, this would have been abundantly clear...
And now; Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone (1793)
“The question here is not, “How conscience ought to be guided? For Conscience is its own General and Leader…
By Jiminy, this is a ‘genius’ level use of a genius capable brain.
May I provide a quote of mine?
“By Jiminy, the little cricket got it right when he tried,
to advise you to; ‘’Always Let Your Conscience Be Your Guide.’’
Back to Kant;
... “it is therefore enough that each man have one.”
Pardon me?...it is therefore enough that each man have one? ‘Stupid’ level again. One question, of many, leaps readily to mind; Why is it therefore enough to have a conscience?
Then;
“What we want to know is, how conscience can be her own Ariadne, and disentangle herself from the mazes even of the most raveled and complicated casuistical theology.”
“Genius’ level usage of the brain to raise this question. But, he was not able to answer the question raised, so back to just ‘average’ level use of a genius capable brain....
You have been patient, and now you shall be rewarded…
In 1784, Immanuel Kant told us very succinctly what enlightenment is:
"Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage(immaturity). Tutelage(immaturity) is the incapacity to use one's own understanding without the guidance of another. Such tutelage(immaturity) is self-imposed if its cause is not lack of intelligence, but rather a lack of determination and courage to use one's intelligence without being guided by another." 1784 essay (What Is Enlightenment?)
This is ‘genius’ level work, enough said…
But...
“Only the descent into the hell of self-knowledge can pave the way to godliness.” Immanuel Kant Metaphysics of Morals (1797)
Everything about this quote is ‘genius’ level except for two words, “hell”, and “godliness”, which hover down around the ‘stupid’ to ‘insane’ levels again…
Now try this for a rewrite of the quote;
“Only the decent into the insanity of the ‘information masquerading as knowledge’, held within your subconscious mind, will lead you to the self-knowledge that can pave the way to individual human enlightenment.” Stephen Kirby (2015)
I am an ‘everyman’... if I can do it... anyone can………………………………………..Aha
Stephen Kirby, Senior Program Designer
Conscience-ness Recovery and Retention Center
the happier project:
1cnrrc@gmail.com 103115 5:20 am pdt
Stephen Kirby . Fool
Written like a true schizophrenic.
I’m lost at first try. Will try one more time.
"[Robespierre] had merely killed a King and a few thousand Frenchman - which a German might forgive."
And the Brits, and the Spanish, and the Italians, and the Austrians...
Love the little bits of humour in these.
Great voice. Thanks for the upload. But digesting Kant is like eating a pot of bread flour.
Good stuff.
Who painted the thumbnail for the video?
That was Midjourney
I'm here because of The Good Place.
A metaphysical powerhouse.
Worship my 🏀s
i need a break.
No matter, no mind.
My daughter used to say I can't ( Kant) know 😂😊
Who is doing the narrating?
audiobookstore.com/narrators/grover-gardner-audiobooks/
Kant may not have destroyed religion, but he sure sounded the death knell of theology. After Kant, religion was forced to rely on emotions and the moral sense as a basis, not on sense and reason, on the heart and not the mind.
Well, that's because his philosophy is designed to undermine sense-perception and destroy the mind. When you do that all you have left are emotions and ineffable duty (=categorical imperative).
@@dougpridgen9682
This is the most blatant misrepresentation imaginable.
Only an Objectevist could reach this conlusion.
@@napoleonbonaparteempereurd4676 Feel free to correct me then. Are you saying it doesn't mean we're trapped in subjectivity because we can never know things as they are, only as they appear to us? What else could it mean?
@@dougpridgen9682
All Kant did was show that short-term instremental reason can lead to negative and irrational long-term outcomes.
Think of it this way:
You have McDonalds reasonably trying to create as many burgheres as cheaply and quickly as possible to sell them on the cheap for profit.
People buy McDonald's because they dont have enough time to make their own food and cant afford anything better. This is a reasonable decision.
All kf this short-term instrumental reason leads to irational outcomes of obesity and diabetes.
@@dougpridgen9682
The idea that Kant hated reason and existence stems from Ayn Rand, who knew less about philosophy then the average undergrad
Kant wrote the Critique of PURE Reason, that is, reason detached from empirical evidence.
I could listen to will Durant read anything 😂
This is Durant's writing, read by Alexander Adams.
@@mitchyoung93 I thought it was Grover Gardner narrating
Thanks to Rocky C.
This is just the thing to play loudly and utterly piss off my house mate whome has never actually been experienced.
Watched all of it 1:30:16
What did you think?
Kant's ultimate concept, his perception that we are not blank slates, has been today proven correct. If only Mendel bred his peas a century earlier. We have genetic memory, each human on this planets is slightly different from one another, and each grouping of humans average memory slightly different from one another. A baby is scared of a snake. A infant is scared of a spider. They do not know that the snake bites, that the snake has venom, that this venom is toxic, nor that it poses a risk to its life. The baby's fear is ingrained, it is pre-learned, and it is now provable within the genetic code. Within the concepts of Darwinism, we can assume that so many infants died to spiders or snakes over millions of years of primate evolution, that such an innate fear, however hard it was to come by and imprint, ended up with us today. The environmentalists and Randians are living in the past, before science had proven we are not, in fact, blank slates. The great minds of the great peoples on this planet are threatened, we are not eternal, and the fate of primates could be set back hundreds of thousands of years if we are not careful.
28:23
William Wallace - Kant (BPC)
Friedrich Paulsen - Immanuel Kant, his life and doctrine
Stewart chamberlain - Immanuel Kant vol. I and II
He was it seems to me very close to the whole , determine how fast but can't determine exact location mentality.
A man that has been dismissed by reason.
impressive.brilliant.A God
1:44 "The LONGEST distance between two points is a straight line"
Whaaat?
If you were stranded in the hostile wilderness, who would you rather be partnered with, Kant, or Aristotole? Whos philosophy would serve you best as you tried to survive? The answer is clear, unless you like lying to yourself. The answer should relegate the rejected to the trash can, and nut house of ideas, the other, as the standard for all to live his life by.
Dauphin River First Nation Canada 🇨🇦
I am new to philosophy, very new, but all the Kant hate is interesting. The guy promotes thought, which is what I believe the point of philosophy is for the masses. His labeling of education as sophist knowledge for cleverness, is completely contrary to what I believe. Intuition is guided by stimuli, memory consolidates stimuli as experience, thus people behave more cohesively with their reality automatically, IMO.
Thanks for the reply. I'll keep those things in mind. :)
***** Thank you very much, I am flattered :) I wanted to respond to your question without being glib.
Upon reflection, I believe I've been able to view reality with a critical eye since losing my mother at age 5. I was precocious as a child according to my family; I would watch, and say things that were beyond developmental expectation. I've had a natural curiosity since that age, and I understood young that remembering disjointed facts was not ideal compared to understanding why the facts were what they were. Depth of analysis in other words.
I love observing, learning for hours in a self-structured manner, and utilizing the knowledge I have to form idea's and reach semi-conclusions. I believe this is my outlet of 'creativity', which is a construct I had difficulty defining within me, as I have no real artistic inclination. I love tying variables together, and it comes naturally - often automatically to me. The evolution of thought is a creative process, I now realize :) Philosophy was on my list, but having self-direction in what I learn means obsessions with a topic inhibits the love being shared around!
I have no preoccupation with money, as my enjoyment hinges on being comfortable doing as I do right this moment; learning and sharing the knowledge. This works against me at times, as I have no real urge to take on the burden of responsibility to formally use the knowledge for career ends.
I hope this wasn't too extensive haha
Thanks :) You're very aware for an 18 year old, which is lovely to know. Of course we can chat, I'd be glad to have the new set of ideas to dicuss things around. I have never read Ayn Rand's work, though I know some of her beliefs are..interesting; her work will be approached shortly, I'm sure.
UnslavedFilms Thanks a lot. I'll look for some info.
+UnslavedFilms Fredrich Schelling was a minor purported philosopher, and his Transcendental Philosophy was not rock solid philosophy... you would have to clarify for the entire world just how ''vastly important' Schelling was to the cause of individual human enlightenment... could you do that for us...?
Will Durant is a man who lives for philosophy and and never has the genius to philosophize as far as Kant goes he was secondary to Heidegger and Schopenhauer .Schopenhauer knew him like the back of his hand and HIS SHORT COMINGS
Anyone knows who’s voice is reading this?
Grover Gardner. Star narrator in Audible.
Better than the thousand dollar course I took at university on Kant, and much less pretentious.
Will Durants comments are dubious at best
What do you mean?
Either you can or you kant!
I was vibing with Kant up until he said that morality is more trustworthy than reason and used that to postulate the existence of god.
Can’t morality be explained by evolutionary psychology? Since we are a social animal, we act in a way that allows for social grouping? Of course that is a science which is based on fallible senses, but I don’t understand how morality is placed on a higher pedestal than other senses.
I haven’t listened all the way through, maybe there’s more explanation.
What a brilliant mind yet so many assumptions that are incorrect.
Given in what age he was born, forgivable, yet let this be a lesson to all those who think they know, we are as humanity like seeds who just sprouted in our knowledge, mere infants.
To give an example, shortest route between two points isnt a straight line. Simply connect the dots.
Love the video especially the clear articulation of the speaker.