IMMANUEL KANT PART 1 BY CHRISTOPHER INSOLE

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 30 июл 2024
  • Complete videos are available on the St John's Timeline, which was relaunched in Autumn 2021. It comprises of over 200 full videos with improved subtitles from leading philosophers and theologians. You can subscribe for £22 (£15 concessions) per year. Institutional subscriptions are also available. stjohnstimeline.org/
  • Авто/МотоАвто/Мото

Комментарии • 105

  • @escensu293
    @escensu293 7 лет назад +22

    I love this kind of explaining, I feel like this has a chill coffee vibe, we could have had this conversation over lunch. very easy to understand and remember

  • @johnmott8047
    @johnmott8047 4 года назад +5

    Hard to imagine greater clarity of presentation.

  • @africanenergyleadershipcen3079
    @africanenergyleadershipcen3079 5 лет назад +5

    You Sir, are a magnificent teacher, as a uni lecturer for over 15 years I have not yet heard such succinct and measured delivery combined with insight, thank you and well done.

  • @johnageosdaferanosphotogra9577
    @johnageosdaferanosphotogra9577 11 лет назад +6

    The Best Intro to Kant I've ever heard, congratulations to St. John's and to Mr. Insole

  • @wodge73
    @wodge73 11 лет назад +3

    This is an exquisite overview of Kant, and to my mind, should be compulsory to anyone wanting to read him. Despite having a first in Philosophy, I have always struggled with Kant, and really only came to start understanding
    his ideas through Schopenhauer. It is so difficult to access Kant from the primary texts. Christopher Insole presents the complexity of Kant's thought with stunning insight, and a staggering ability to translate his thought sympathetically to the viewer, without losing depth

  • @tonywestbrook9876
    @tonywestbrook9876 3 года назад

    Thank you for this presentation and series!

  • @kojifresh
    @kojifresh 11 лет назад

    This is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you sir, for taking time to make this detailed interview.

  • @JoshuaCookLibertyIsRising
    @JoshuaCookLibertyIsRising 12 лет назад +1

    This is awesome. I can't wait for the complete timeline to be finished!

  • @DC-zi6se
    @DC-zi6se 5 лет назад

    Immanuel Kant is the one man from history whom one would love to have alongside when contesting a debate.

  • @CNCTEMATIC
    @CNCTEMATIC 8 лет назад +18

    so do you want money or what??
    trying to interpret what you guys want from your website to actually access the "larger project" is harder than understanding Kant. just spell it out for god's sake

  • @read1communications
    @read1communications 10 лет назад

    Well done. You make me want to read more. Thank you.

  • @uncljoedoc
    @uncljoedoc 9 лет назад +1

    What I would love to gain from Kant was how did he remain serene when trying to explain something complicated and new.
    Thanks.

  • @dromgarvan
    @dromgarvan 8 лет назад

    Very nice , very clear.
    Many Thanks

  • @jwaddy4204
    @jwaddy4204 2 года назад

    Great explanation of transcendental arguments, how we know what we know, are the conditions in the mind to make sense of how we acquire knowledge in epistemological terms to ascertain the possibilities of the functioning of mind.

  • @nafeesyoutube9996
    @nafeesyoutube9996 Год назад

    Thank s for your insights

  • @zacheray
    @zacheray 11 лет назад

    Thanks for this, very interesting and thorough

  • @INVICTUS9100
    @INVICTUS9100 10 лет назад

    Facsinating. Thank you.

  • @jcs200000
    @jcs200000 6 лет назад

    A very clear and informative lecture.

  • @Albertanator
    @Albertanator 7 лет назад

    Can anyone recommend a book to me about understanding Kant? Something along the lines of Kant for Beginners as I have only lightly ever touched on his teaching? Thanks....

  • @jeffpicklo525
    @jeffpicklo525 3 года назад +2

    Ahhhhh why did the explanation stoppppp , very good stuff

  • @joellucyszyn6001
    @joellucyszyn6001 10 лет назад +2

    invaluable, thankyou

  • @timquigley986
    @timquigley986 3 года назад

    these videos are great

  • @ROGERWDARCY
    @ROGERWDARCY 9 лет назад +1

    Do you think that thoughts of Spinoza are open to all all?

  • @anthonymartin419
    @anthonymartin419 11 лет назад +2

    "The thicket of views." - Gotoma

  • @slmedia4426
    @slmedia4426 5 лет назад

    Dear Sir,
    You are a Mark Antony in Oration 👍👍👍

  • @oliviawong3112
    @oliviawong3112 3 года назад +1

    Where’s the rest of the lecture?

  • @NReclining
    @NReclining 11 лет назад

    Brilliant

  • @k0be55
    @k0be55 11 лет назад

    great vid

  • @oliviawong3112
    @oliviawong3112 3 года назад +1

    How can we access the complete video? Do we register somewhere and create an account?

  • @vishmonster
    @vishmonster 9 лет назад +2

    Oh, this was just a teaser?

  • @benquinneyiii7941
    @benquinneyiii7941 Год назад

    Every event has a cause

    • @FightXScience-wh6kx
      @FightXScience-wh6kx 11 месяцев назад

      On Kant's terms, that cannot be subsstantiated.
      We know not what things are in themselves. We are confined to the form of our experience.

  • @scottjad83
    @scottjad83 12 лет назад

    What a shame this excellent 24 minute interview is only a demo of a 28 minute interview. Does anyone know where Kant himself responds to the criticism mentioned at the end of this interview?

  • @dirtbrainrecordings
    @dirtbrainrecordings 4 года назад

    I want to see the rest, and I'm happy to pay to see the rest, but the link doesn't work.

  • @nafeesyoutube9996
    @nafeesyoutube9996 Год назад

  • @maryf6284
    @maryf6284 4 года назад +1

    Content was good but it is abruptly cut off

  • @kentrob99
    @kentrob99 10 лет назад

    I was pretty much following this! Very interesting and then it stopped :(

  • @Emily-rb4px
    @Emily-rb4px 8 лет назад +2

    Just as it gets fucking interesting

    • @zakirullahkhan1188
      @zakirullahkhan1188 7 лет назад +1

      why do you use the word "fucking,"? Do you mean it somewhere?

  • @scottjad83
    @scottjad83 12 лет назад

    Your website appears to be wrong then. stjt dot org dot uk slash modern dot html says that it's 28 minutes long.

  • @PopGoesTheology
    @PopGoesTheology 2 года назад

    6:50 Baron von Swedenborg (till 1766)

  • @jonathanewen7585
    @jonathanewen7585 9 лет назад +1

    19:19

  • @nafeesyoutube9996
    @nafeesyoutube9996 Год назад

    Could you plz suggest some reading too

    • @FightXScience-wh6kx
      @FightXScience-wh6kx 11 месяцев назад

      Epistemology: Critique of Pure Reason
      Morals: Groundwork to the Metaphysics of Morals
      Politics & History: Perpetual Peace, What is Enlightenment, The End of History
      Religion: Religion with the Boundaries of Mere Reason

  • @TOR1Hershman
    @TOR1Hershman 11 лет назад +1

    Yeah, I bet his mum knew ALL about saddles!!!
    Oh yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!

  • @geeezer9
    @geeezer9 4 года назад +1

    cruel cruel cruel. at the best bit too

  • @HeggemusNL
    @HeggemusNL 11 лет назад

    its very simple, and logical if you are taught well! The only problem is its not to say in half an hour interview.

  • @RunningCordoroy
    @RunningCordoroy 11 лет назад

    check out the readings on librivox

  • @SuperScoobydoob
    @SuperScoobydoob 11 лет назад

    Reason and logic

  • @mindsprawl
    @mindsprawl 10 лет назад

    How do we know that time is true?

    • @pop9095
      @pop9095 8 лет назад

      The same way we know anything about the physical world, through our senses. We sense time in a similar way to the way we experience sound or space.

    • @wastedstupid4686
      @wastedstupid4686 5 лет назад

      The same way we know that we were made to look like our parents...which universally is true

  • @ottodachat
    @ottodachat 10 лет назад +2

    I am reading Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, and it is not as intimidating as I had thought.

    • @xxFortunadoxx
      @xxFortunadoxx 10 лет назад +2

      If you're reading the CPR fresh and you don't think it's intimidating, then it's very likely you're not understanding some very basic points in it and assuming things that Kant isn't assuming. What Kant is doing is not really intuitive. Aside from Heidegger or obscurantist philosophy like post-structuralism, Kant is pretty much the hardest to fully grasp. The reason being is because so many new terms are introduced and the modern conception of what an object is that comes from Descartes is abandoned.
      I would suggest you read the Prolegomenon first, as it is much more accessible. If somehow you are among those gifted to understand Kant easily, the worst that can happen by reading the Prolegomenon first is that you say to yourself "yep, that's the stuff I read in the CPR; and philosophy is a subject which requires repetition.

    • @ottodachat
      @ottodachat 10 лет назад

      Dialectical Materialism Thanks for the tip. i'm trying to get some background to Hegel, and thought I'd start with Kant. Philosophy is difficult and I tend to get easily confused. Have you read Adorno's published lecture on Kant? That too helps, but I'll look up the Prolegomenon and see if it
      makes Kant more accessible.

    • @xxFortunadoxx
      @xxFortunadoxx 10 лет назад

      ***** Knowing Kant wouldn't be an absolute requirement to understanding Hegel, but it would definitely help. A lot of secondary readership on Hegel would give a basic introduction on the points in Kant that Hegel disagrees with.
      Yeah, I love Adorno's conclusion in it to. He basically says, "yeah. Kant was right and scientism is wrong." To which all other academics, particularly other Neo-Kantians said "yeah, right. we're going to keep demanding that Kant be understood without a ding an sich because it sounds too mystical."
      I particularly adore his work with Horkheimer on the culture industry. It really provides a large basis for modern Marxist theory like Marcuse and such.
      The Prolegomenon is Kant's way of summing up the main arguments and conclusions of the CPR. The reviews of the first CPR weren't particularly good, and a lot of people misunderstood what Kant was trying to deduce, particularly in the Transcendental Deduction. If you read the B deduction, he flips the argument and argues backward from the categories to experience.

    • @ottodachat
      @ottodachat 10 лет назад

      I've always been a big fan of Adorno and really like how he critiques pop music especially jazz.
      However, I've always avoided reading the 19th century philosophers (except Nietszche) and would like to read Hegel's Phenomenology of the Mind -- first in English and then once more slowly in German.
      Have you read any Lacan?

    • @xxFortunadoxx
      @xxFortunadoxx 10 лет назад

      ***** Lacan is obscurantist, but still not as obscurantist as post-structuralists like Derrida and Lyotard. It's strange, but I actually enjoy reading Lacan once you understand all of the terms he introduces, or the definitions of Freud's terms that he re-appropriates for his own project.
      I can't even remember the title of the paper from his Ecrits that I remember reading last because the title was hilariously obscurantist. It was something like "The Mirror Stage as a formative function of the I" or something like that. Considering that I was studying M&E, this paper seemed like it made the most sense to read. I've read others, but that one hit me as the most philosophic, whereas the others just struck me as critical theory in general.

  • @arzukhan3284
    @arzukhan3284 7 лет назад

    One human who is aware about the knowledge is limited and faces it when it comes to him or her as a free thinking human individual ,then it is a good question we all think over it .At the time of experience we all do face it about the world in itself from our individual perspective.Thus,Kant may not be imposing but talking that there is this possibility.If I want to think about the masons and their establishment of utopies as what a priori is there for them and how they achieved in the phase of experience all the assimilations through although none was either a native of one country nor could have achieved what they achieved to rule the world.Kant has lived in one place but with huger vision of logic than utopians and this gets objectivists to madness...Ayn rand is one I dislike among them.

  • @lewisalmeida3495
    @lewisalmeida3495 4 года назад

    Kant believed that we can will ourselves to live from reason
    and reject emotions. However, Spinoza understood that freewill is an illusion
    and freedom comes about when we understand the laws that influence human nature.
    The law of necessity, the law of self-preservation, the law of cause and effect
    and the law of inertia. There is a way, WayofSpinoza.com

  • @ROGERWDARCY
    @ROGERWDARCY 9 лет назад

    I mean Socarties

  • @matheusiglessiasmazzochi4204
    @matheusiglessiasmazzochi4204 5 лет назад

    You can't interrupt someone explaining Kant like that...

  • @moesypittounikos
    @moesypittounikos 4 года назад +1

    A great introduction but, alas, Swedenborg is pronounced as it is spelt.

  • @houdanaitelbarj8068
    @houdanaitelbarj8068 10 лет назад +3

    Aahhh... Science is destroying Kant's philosophy ...
    Everyday, we get to access more and more the "noumenes" which he thought were out of reach for us humans. However, I deeply believe that the problems lies not it discovering the noumene but rather in understanding the relation between phenomenons and noumenes

    • @Moribus_Artibus
      @Moribus_Artibus 10 лет назад +6

      Not really, Kant's theory on the noumenal/phenomenal world states that as soon as we experience something it becomes part of the phenomenal world. That everything (Including space and time) are all a priori concepts
      There is no way to get access to noumenes because we are humans, and us humans can only perceive through the phenomenal world. As far as us having empirical evidence about all these new discoveries solves nothing.
      We can be totally wrong about everything, just because we have all these cool new telescopes doesn't mean we debunked Kant, don't overestimate our scientific discoveries, we are just human, all too human

    • @houdanaitelbarj8068
      @houdanaitelbarj8068 10 лет назад +1

      Yes, but had you read more carefully you would have known that in " La critique de la raison pure" Kant explicitly states that Men will never reach and understand the noumenal world. Yet, with scientific and technical progress we're slowly getting to fathom the noumenal world !

    • @aaronmrl
      @aaronmrl 10 лет назад +2

      Immanuel Kant impresses me as somewhat of a great Mystic.
      His notion about "[humans] never reach[ing] and understand[ing] the noumenal world" is a highly mystical concept, not new to Western or Eastern religious traditions. As these religious traditions are constructed to provide the necessary conditions for the human being to experience a noumenal experience, inwardly. But, the human body cannot transcend into the realm of noumenal experience because the experience(s) are Inside and occurring in Consciousness. The consequences of this noumenal experience producing phenomenal experiences in Matter, externally, physically, materially afterwards.
      Noumenal is of the Mind. Phenomenal is of the Body and Brain.
      Constructive thoughts? Feelings? Insights?

    • @sambanks760
      @sambanks760 10 лет назад +1

      AARON VAN DOORN That makes complete sense, and is a really impressive insight. Although, it just sounds strange to hear Kant called a mystic - lol. My only gripe would be that while Kant seems content to stop his inquiry after discovery of the existence of mystical (or noemenal?) knowledge, which is opposed to other mystics (especially Eastern) who might teach methods of discovering mystical knowledge.

    • @houdanaitelbarj8068
      @houdanaitelbarj8068 9 лет назад +2

      ***** Take this example :
      Phenomenon ( from ancient greek : what you see )
      Noumena ( from greek, the substance, the essence, the thing in itself)
      Phenomenon : light, as we see it
      Noumena : definite wavelength composed of photons which are invisible, and untouchable
      that is just one example of course we have way much more

  • @martinijazz9
    @martinijazz9 6 лет назад

    Oh that was cruel

  • @BrainiacFingers
    @BrainiacFingers 3 года назад

    This would have been enjoyable had he addressed the correct camera. Why spend 25 minutes talking to the wrong camera when it would be much more engaging for the viewers if he talked directly to them. I've noticed this irritating "technique" seems to be very popular these days. Probably because someone somewhere at the TV networks decided that the public don't like to be lectured to directly because it intimidates them , leading to their switching channels.

  • @poehamilton8731
    @poehamilton8731 10 лет назад

    I think its safe to say Immanuel Kant for me, has awoken me from "a dogmatic slumber." His theory's and ideas are milestones in the field of human thought(metaphysics) and human behavior (deontology), to the fact that we are unknowingly teaching them now to the majority of people in this world. He should be at the top of human greatness. With respects to newton, Einstein, tesla, Edison, found fathers of America, and of course god. lol just kidding. what am I, unreasonable? (Kant joke)

    • @jarrodyuki7081
      @jarrodyuki7081 2 года назад

      i hate deontologists more than nazis hate jews.

  • @PascaldeAguiar
    @PascaldeAguiar 8 лет назад +3

    19 people are Kanye West fans

  • @binzsta86
    @binzsta86 11 лет назад

    I don't understand his philosophy

    • @ripvanwinkle1819
      @ripvanwinkle1819 5 лет назад

      In sum, he is the representative of the rule based literally bloody disaster of the modern world. He destroyed all virtues into a rational pile of horse shyte that naturally follow virtue ethics. In other words, an overthinking dumba**.

  • @llewellynhamiltoniiim.d.1057
    @llewellynhamiltoniiim.d.1057 5 лет назад

    Casual determinism..Where? Freedom and Nature...French philosophers were awry..too much wine,,,Every cardiac event has a cause! SCD ACS?

  • @axiomaddict
    @axiomaddict 6 лет назад

    Buzzkill!

  • @andreasnilsson7738
    @andreasnilsson7738 9 лет назад +1

    I think that Immanuel Kant was a real pissant Who was very rarely stable
    Heidegger, Heidegger was a boozy beggar. Who could think you under the table

  • @meh4770
    @meh4770 8 лет назад +5

    Stop talking boringly

  • @UnslavedPodcast
    @UnslavedPodcast 5 лет назад

    a piss poor introduction to Kant