Betrand Russell Life and Philosophy
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- Visit my new website: www.wescecil.com A lecture delivered at Peninsula College by Wesley Cecil Ph.D. on the life and Philsophy of Bertrand Russell.
For information on upcoming lectures, essays, and books by Wesley Cecil Ph.D. go to / humanearts
www.wescecil.com
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
Kind of weird not to include anything about Russell's anti-war stuff or that Russell said "“I dislike Nietzsche because he likes the contemplation of pain, because he erects conceit into a duty, because the men whom he most admires are conquerors, whose glory is cleverness in causing men to die.”
I wish this lecture was videographed instead of just taped. I would have liked to see what is written on the board.
I totally agree - I love to see Wes in action too
I would have loved to look around that room for a rhinoceros. Make sure Wes wasn’t BS-ing
@@kamarinmann3572 There's always ab elephant in a room, and yes, it was there🤫
❤❤ Qb q😊😊
I haven't laughed so much listening to a lecture for years - love your style Wes
Excellent lecture on Bertrand Russell! I just finished reading "Conquest of Happiness" and "Mysticism and Logic".
I love how Cecil calls Kurt Godel a "math magician" instead of "mathematician." haha
Laughter is dynamite blasting in front of eyes, and Bertrand Russell experienced life. There had been two Bertrand Russells: one who died during during the war: and another who rose out of that one's shroud, an almost mystic communist born out mathematical logical. Yep.
He is also a complicated man, his background history with his own family, how he was raised, his brilliant mind, and the woman he met and married. Sex. I liked Mysticism and Logic, 1919. It was much clearer to the earth."Mysticism and Logic, p.3. The Prblems of Philosophy, p.156.
2. The twi volumes , Analysis of Mind, and the Analysis of Matter serve to of energy and physics. That was hard for me physics. I don't understand , but I always admired that do such as Russell and Einstein, Telsa in more modern day.
As for his post-war books were easy reading, though they suffer from confusion to a man whose idealism is slipping into disillusionment, these treats for the times.
Why Men Fight is the best tracked for times.
3. Roads to Freedom is a genial survey of social philosophy as old as Diogenes, which Russell explodes with magnificence to mathematics, and this was the new ambition of the new Pythagoras
Then we get to America. HELP.
An extradinary mind was Bertrand. Russell.
The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation.
Bertrand Russell. 😊
Euclid, a mathematician, the"Father of Geometry," was a Greek born in Alexandria in Egypt and lived 300 b.c. Very little is knownabout him except that he taught mathematics in the reign Plotemy I., who died in 282 b.c. When Plotemy asked him if there was not an easier way to learning geometry, he made the celebrated answer: " There is no royal road to geometry. His principal is the Elements, in thirteen books. ( Very little is known about him , except he taught mathematics.)
The Elements had been translated in many languages and it is probably known better than any other mathematical work. The first printed edition was translated from Arabic in 1482. Many years was uses as a textbook in Great Britain. Besides, the Elements, Euclid wrote the Data, a collection of 100 propostions, a book much valued by Newton, and Phoenomena, or appearance of the heavens. C.J. Dodgeson's book, " Euclid and His Modern Rivals.
Russell was a character. The bedroom stimulated him.( Lol)
Who am I to judge?( Lol)
He was a great mind, indeed.
"Colette" a farm girl entered Paris in 1898. What a writer she was.
No, he was not Nietzsche..
I've recently purchased, "Critique of Reason" by Kant, and "First and Last Freedom" by J. Krishnamurti, super excited to delve into Critique of Reason though.
Delve all you like but Kant never wrote a book entitled ‘Critique of Reason’ !
@@bernardliu8526yes he did
Why are people whining about the laughter. He uses humour to amuse, engage and interest his audience. I bet his students really enjoy his lectures (I know I do) and rarely miss them. I've had many excellent teachers but they were boring and and even though I enjoyed the subject, I did not enjoy the lectures. I should imagine few of his students forget the lesson as quickly as they would with a dry as dust lecture, no matter how academically well presented. AND if you don't like it, there are plenty of other lectures on YT and elsewhere on the net. Get a life and stop moaning.
An excellent lecture of my favourite philosopher.
A pig not a philosopher.
Really enjoying these uploads, Wes. Hope you continue to do so
One of Greatest Mind Ever
Russell❤
So he went from frustrated Victorian puberty to enlightenment just like that.
Holy f*ck.
I would say that "The conquest of happiness" shows Russell had some understanding of human emotions, even though there is an occasional detached slip.
P1: I do what I do to keep them away.
P2: I do not know who they are.
C: What I do works.
Worth the listen! I concur with jorgbeijer, that the Lecturer's (I'm assuming Wes?) proposition about the rhinoceros is fallacious because it is overly-broad. You cannot extract [P1] - There are people screaming, [P2] - therefore, there must necessarily be a rhinoceros in the room. It COULD be a reason, but certainly not necessary for it to be the only one.
The only other thing that concerns me is that this Bertrand Russell was not very happy in his personal life. I am coming to find that not many philosopher's are. :-/
I given up the platonic ideal.
Empiricism - Empirical logic - We know the world through our senses - and what we have to do is try and determine the best way to analyze our senses, but knowing our senses are misleading -- Logic is explained by mathematics and the other empirical sciences - To explain the world.
Mathematics is not explained by logic. Logic is explained by mathematic and the other empirical sciences. The role of philosophy is to explain the role of physic's and chemistry and mathematics and bring those into the realm of philosophical discourse that people who do not have access to those fields can understand.
We need the sciences and take their results and use those to derive the world.
25:38, isn't the term "set", not "class"? I'm reading a book on category theory and they explicitly go out of their way to use "classes" instead of sets to avoid russel's paradox (which is avoided due to classes being more strictly defined than sets)
Awesome lecture Wes!!
I would love to be in his lectures. It I said hilarious and knowledgeable in equal measure. Notice how primed his students are they start laughing at the mere mention of Russell's name.
In a sense one brings objects into the "room" by bringing them into every mind of those hearing the word. Certainly there is more "rhinoceros" in "the room" after the word has been brought forth than there was before. My memory of Paris is now in the room. what is this "room"? its bounds? where are the contents of thought if not in the room with the thinker?
Truly mesmerizing as my name is Jeff
The job of philosophy is to translate science to the general public huh? I like it!
Great talk. Thanks
But you can experience a lack of things: If all the oxygen is taken out of the room do you not experience that through its absence? Your senses tell you it is missing because your lungs cannot interact with it. Is not your eyes’ inability to interact with a rhinoceros just as valid knowledge?
Cy Cooper You are still assuming too much. Why is it that you are sensing a lack of oxygen in the room? Is it because it escaped? Or is it because your lungs stopped working? Or is it because somehow the molecular structure of oxygen changed instantaneously rendering it unusable? The possibilities are endless for the given experience you are describing. What we associate as a necessary condition for a given sensation are generally not so and it seems we make such assumptions constantly with other phenomena as well. After all, do we know there are no pygmy rhinoceroses, one of which could be hiding in a desk?
+Cy Cooper I would say you're right, but it proves a problem for empiricists and positivists because absence is not a sense. You can not see something, but in the example of "there is no rhinoceros in this room" it causes you to infer what properties a rhinoceros has, thus conjuring up an ideal type of rhinoceros.
Russell's analytical study of math and language seems like he was trying to provide a solid basis for inferential logic. His late life conclusions, by moving to a more empirical philosophical posture, suggests he thinks we can't know for sure all the categories (again, going back to the rhino example) a rhinoceros would possess and thus have to rely on our prior sensory information (ex. they are grey, they have horns, etc.) as good enough.
Actually, the human body can't tell the difference between helium and oxygen. regardless, the point stands that if you can prove to your own satisfaction that your senses can lie to you (think about the refracting effect of a pencil in a glass of water, it looks broken, but we know it isn't) they can't be trusted. Like people, if you catch someone lying or stealing from you, you can't trust them. that's the basis of the argument about questioning one's own senses. and if sensory input can be false, can't everything be false?
Good lively lecture. He suffered from dreadful breath also...because of Pyorrhea.
Awesome lecture! congrats
11:30 Then what you’re doing is - what the lecturer says it is! Somehow “his words” have meaning but your senses do not. - Assume it to be false (hint - but that’s absurd) - then implies a contradiction. There is no rhinoceros in the room. Assume it to be false - where’s the rhinoceros? QED. Note the “fallacy” in epistemology is that the words change meaning. Including what “is” is.
My Favourite Philosopher ❤
he was born in wales
@jorgbeijer not true. Your example, and your explanation of it, really comes down to the definition of "people" and the definition of "rhinosaurus", both of which are defined very loosely in your statement. By your reasoning, another example why -B then -A wouldn't hold is "Rhino is bound". But in fact that is not within the scope of your if A then B statement at all. A rigorous statement would be, If there's a wild rhino in the room, then the living people are screaming. Your reasoning isn't strictly speaking incorrect, it just doesn't apply to the problem at hand.
Please spell rhinoceros correctly.
Wales is not England
Yeah it is
Russell was simply brilliant, inherently logical and rational; he was something of an empiricist; his intellect was uncluttered; this remarkable man has a timeless quality about him; he was extraordinarily brave; On an amusing note can one imagine him being interviewed by any of the many shallow commentators of this era: Hannity, O'Reilley and , of course, their opposite numbers on the fanatically liberal side ? He would be utterly dismissive of these morons.
great lecture but i sadly can not download the lecture handout from your website. is it possible that the handout download link be added ?
Get those kids some cough-drops please
Most of his lectures are ruined by
class members coughing incessantly . Wes is too polite to ask them to leave . And unfortunately they lack the good manners to do so voluntarily.
Golden
wonderful
-_- the audience's during these lectures are incredibly annoying.
I stand in agreement.
anyone know a way of getting your hands on this "logic and mysticism" work by bertrand russell that he was speaking of?
+z0uLess I found it ;)
Amazon
Also:
archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.32256
This guy's modeled his lecturing style on Jerry Seinfeld
Maybe I’m just a miserable individual, but I didn’t laugh out loud once listening to this
Too many lecturers these days under the illusion that they're stand up comedians.
Eh, little logic fallacy there. He says proposition If A then B. If there's a rhinosaurus in the room then people are screaming. We know -B (people are not screaming) so we derive -A. But that's false. You can't derive from the fact that there's no one screaming, that there necessarily is no rhinosaurus. Because there could be a thousand other reasons why people aren't screaming. One example: they're all dead.
What you want is proposition: If, and only if, A then B.
He lived for our intellectual sins
I like your lectures. But your audience... they'll laugh at anything.... and cough ...
Sorry, but there is too much student laughter and unnecessary and annoying noise in the background! that spoils the listener's focus!!
yes students get in the way of education.
Russell was born in Wales, not England. He was Welsh, not English.
Same thing
He despised petty nationalism .
No one chooses where or when they are born.
I refuse to trust any philosopher who DOESN'T wear a tweed
jacket and smoke a pipe .
OMG this is so damn entertaining and intellectually delicious!!
P implies Q
what! what does he believe? damn.
How about that other room? Nobody mentioned another room with a rhino in it.
+Yatukih001 A good question to ponder!
No, the other room contained an elephant.
Oh.
Build a new room then.
Wonder where Russell sat on the Autism spectrum?
Such a shame, a lecture about Bertrand Russell and then the only question is about frikkin' Nietzsche. Sigh
Why is there always one a*****e who coughs all the way
through the lecture. ?
Kinda entertaining but sloppy. If you want the facts in the correct order and relationship, read the Wikipedia articles about Russell.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Russell%27s_philosophical_views
Some lecture.....more like ridiculing an undoubtedly great but somewhat flawed and ultra conservative intellectual.
Diwash Shrestha...You are absolutely correct and it's my fault for not making my comment clearer. By conservative I didn't mean 'morally' as he was an early advocate of what became known later as free love. In fact he fell out with some very important people who didn't approve of his constant 'philandering'. I think he was very conservative in his attitude to certain ideas which he might have considered somewhat abstract: If he had been as open minded about accepting new ideas as he was in regard to his personal life he might have achieved even more than he did. He was a great man who deserves to be recognized as one of the finest minds of the twentieth century.