The 30 in the first series include: 1. Immanuel Kant 2. Plato 3. Galileo Galilei 4. Ayn Rand 5. Jean-Jacques Rousseau 6. René Descartes 7. Jean-Paul Sartre 8. Socrates 9. Martin Heidegger 10. Thomas Aquinas 11. Arachne and Athena 12. Aristotle 13. Albert Camus 14. Friedrich Nietzsche 15. John Dewey 16. Sigmund Freud 17. G.W.F. Hegel 18. William James 19. Søren Kierkegaard 20. John Locke 21. Karl Marx 22. John Stuart Mill 23. Thales 24. Benito Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile 25. William Paley 26. C.S. Lewis 27. David Hume 28. John Maynard Keynes 29. Thomas Kuhn 30. George Orwell Full Series playlist: ruclips.net/video/z-kR5Ove3tI/видео.html
Since it takes something, to do something, there has always been something. Which means there is no beginning. It never began. and there is no first cause. It is almost impossible to imagine this. How can something not have a beginning? And we cannot live with that in mind. It can drive you crazy. To the idea that nothing makes sense. We must therefore invent a beginning to the story. A beginning, and why not, a great engineer. Who made the engineer?... But that is another question... 🙂
The question "Why is there something instead of nothing?" is a legitimate question, with only one legitimate answer: "We don't know." Any answer beyond that, even the most favoured scientific theory today for the creation of our universe, the Inflationary Theory by Alan Guth et al, is provisional, that is, not absolute, not definitive.
Would have been interesting if he had been around in the age of LSD. I have often wished psycodelics had a different early history, and were in a rigours tradition.
@@oldsachem the other is also constitutive of the self - dasein is always *being-with* to borrow Heidegger’s idiom. But however qualified it boils down to the same thing: other or Other means other people.
Is this kind of a prose rumination about the current scientific quandary to explore and explain the black hole phenomena of quantum physics of the universe?
I don't see how it's absurd to say that there is no reason why beings exist. It just means that they are there by a combination of circumstances. There is no absurdity if that is the case. It's just that that's the way it is (assuming that it is the way it is). Then beings have to get busy doing things, including asking the question "Why are there beings rather than nothing?", which in my opinion is a totally stupid question, because there can be no answer. I don't see the point in asking questions that can't have an answer. Like "Why is there something rather than nothing?"... There are more useful things in life than asking such stupid questions and spending a considerable amount of time trying to answer them, when there is no possible answer. Not to mention it can drive people crazy.
Does every question imply an answer by its very asking? If a question metaphysically has no answer, can it even be a question? This, I ask Merrick Garland, when I am tired and redacted.
I've just found this channel, and it's hard to explain how delighted I am. You have just gained a loyal student and a subscriber.
Thanks a lot Sir!
The 30 in the first series include:
1. Immanuel Kant
2. Plato
3. Galileo Galilei
4. Ayn Rand
5. Jean-Jacques Rousseau
6. René Descartes
7. Jean-Paul Sartre
8. Socrates
9. Martin Heidegger
10. Thomas Aquinas
11. Arachne and Athena
12. Aristotle
13. Albert Camus
14. Friedrich Nietzsche
15. John Dewey
16. Sigmund Freud
17. G.W.F. Hegel
18. William James
19. Søren Kierkegaard
20. John Locke
21. Karl Marx
22. John Stuart Mill
23. Thales
24. Benito Mussolini and Giovanni Gentile
25. William Paley
26. C.S. Lewis
27. David Hume
28. John Maynard Keynes
29. Thomas Kuhn
30. George Orwell
Full Series playlist: ruclips.net/video/z-kR5Ove3tI/видео.html
Why is there something rather than nothing?
Because there is something.
Since it takes something, to do something, there has always been something. Which means there is no beginning. It never began. and there is no first cause. It is almost impossible to imagine this. How can something not have a beginning? And we cannot live with that in mind. It can drive you crazy. To the idea that nothing makes sense.
We must therefore invent a beginning to the story. A beginning, and why not, a great engineer.
Who made the engineer?... But that is another question...
🙂
Excellent
The question "Why is there something instead of nothing?" is
a legitimate question, with only one legitimate answer:
"We don't know." Any answer beyond that, even the most favoured
scientific theory today for the creation of our universe, the Inflationary
Theory by Alan Guth et al, is provisional, that is, not absolute, not definitive.
Would have been interesting if he had been around in the age of LSD. I have often wished psycodelics had a different early history, and were in a rigours tradition.
Who knows in what direction philosophy could have gone
What is the difference between the Nothing/negation/Nought of Heidegger and the Other of Hegel/Marcuse/Derrida?
Other means persons other than oneself just as in everyday talk.
@@Omulosi No.
@@oldsachem the other is also constitutive of the self - dasein is always *being-with* to borrow Heidegger’s idiom. But however qualified it boils down to the same thing: other or Other means other people.
العدم عند هيدجر هو أصل للنفي والسلب المنطقي وليس العكس
Is this kind of a prose rumination about the current scientific quandary to explore and explain the black hole phenomena of quantum physics of the universe?
Of course, asking such a question implies such things exist somewhere.
From the standpoint of time, space, motion, history, and consciousness, can Nothingness be a placeholder, as in the number system?
I don't see how it's absurd to say that there is no reason why beings exist. It just means that they are there by a combination of circumstances. There is no absurdity if that is the case. It's just that that's the way it is (assuming that it is the way it is). Then beings have to get busy doing things, including asking the question "Why are there beings rather than nothing?", which in my opinion is a totally stupid question, because there can be no answer. I don't see the point in asking questions that can't have an answer. Like "Why is there something rather than nothing?"... There are more useful things in life than asking such stupid questions and spending a considerable amount of time trying to answer them, when there is no possible answer. Not to mention it can drive people crazy.
Does every question imply an answer by its very asking? If a question metaphysically has no answer, can it even be a question? This, I ask Merrick Garland, when I am tired and redacted.
Xi believes the generation of Nothing is a dynamic process that channels power for the Lingdao.
Is he being sarcastic or is he serious?
What is the difference between Heidegger's boredom and the flat affect of schizophrenia?
Everything. Also getting back.
Maybe he read Heidegger, but he doesn't understand him.
Well, did Heidegger understand himself? He was a freakin' Nazi (and not half-hearted at that) after all... Just saying.