This is a great documentary! This video is not only informative but it is very engaging. It didn't even feel like 20 minutes had passed when it ended and I was ready to hear more of the story. I'm hoping a longer version will come out someday and we can tell more of the idealist side of the story which has been neglected for far too long.
I've had a hard time finding philosophy documentaries on RUclips which are both entertaining and provide a thorough and deep understanding of their subject matter. This summarizes a huge amount of heavy material in a way that's both succinct and comprehensive. Learned a lot, thanks very much!
It is very interesting to discover these British Idealists . When was having idealistic thoughts as a youngster many years ago I had to go on a quest over many years in order to understand them . In the end I mercifully found advaita Vedanta which very broadly speaking is Idealism . So interesting to find we had our own tradition of Idealism . Thank you for posting ✌️
@J J Hi . I am the other way around in the sense that I have had contact with Advaita Vedanta for over 40 years ( particularly as personified by Sri Ramana Maharshi) which is essentially Idealistic - saying that the world is a mental creation . Despite having studied some philosophy when I was younger I never really knew about Idealism in the Western philosophical tradition till relatively really and that is mainly due to the internet ! Of course there are all sorts of nuances both within western Idealism and Advaita and between the two but the central idea that the world is a mental creation is very similar . Another big connection between Advaita and the West is via Quantum Physics. When I read some of the conclusions of people like Neils Bohr who said that nothing exists until you perceive it I thought ' crikey that s is very advaitic ' . Many of these similar threads come together in the works of Bernardo Kastrup who is both a scientist and philosopher . He gives great evidence for Idealism - both through science and philosophy - and as he worked at CERN is pretty well qualified to talk about these matters . Best wishes .
An excellent accounting of the decline of British idealism and the rise of the analytic tradition. I will bookmark this video for additional viewing. All very well done.
Moore critiques of idealism are based on ad hominem and straw man fallacies. I read Berkeley's treatise on the principles of human knowledge and the dialogues and they already answered his objections. Berkeley also insisted a lot in saying that materialism is against common sense and not idealism like the opponents affirm.
So fascinating! I find myself in a state of nondualism (I am aware of the contradictory usage of the word ‘I’ in that statement) and wonder what your opinions are on the Vedantic teaching regarding the nature of reality. I think it is very comparable to the absolute idealism of Bradley. Love the video!
To be quite honest, as some philosophical historians such as Harris E. Errol would speculate, the reason that logical positivism dominated the mainstream was because scientist moved into the philosophical sphere without being aware of the drastic changes in science.
Hey, I really love your work! A year ago, I actually read Errol E Harris and Whitehead. These were pretty much the remaining British idealists of the 20th century. I was wondering what happened to the philosophy. Even online I could hardly fine enough that's quite satisfying. So, I applaud you for your work! Also, since I follow you on Instagram, I can't wait to read your objections on objectivism. Lastly, I'm curious. What are your thoughts on pantsychism/pantheism?
Modern idealist need to go back to its roots and understand the arguments put forth by these philosophers. Theism used to be neglected in the literature because of logical positivism. It was Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne who turned things around. And now most philosophers of religion are theist. The same thing needs to happen to Idealism because it didn't get the same revival that Theism did.
Moving on from the circularity of idealist arguments to the psychological, sociological, and logical complexity of the linguistic turn, was due to German xenophobia, not because it helped us to better understand the project of philosophy and to what extent talk of truth is possible. While being led by German war hero Wittgenstein. Does this really make any sense to you?
I must admit that your comment “doesn’t really make any sense” to me. The sentence fragments and comma splices in your comment render it unintelligible. On a side note, you did make a reference to “the circularity of idealist arguments.” I think it would benefit everyone if you specified which arguments (of the British Idealists) you had in mind.
@@PessimisticIdealism ok, let me try it this way - 1. I appreciate your desire to understand this last wave of pre-modern thinking, and the production value of this video. 2. You attribute the death of the pre-modern to anti-german sentiment when progress towards understanding logic, language, and meaning was led by Frege, Wittgenstein and arguably Husserl. 3. Your "school" reductions are painfully siloed, as they usually are. "New Realism" is a minor movement updating traditional empricism and of course dismisses forms of Idealism in the process. Low hanging fruit. 4. The early twentieth century is where the United States becomes the new world power. And, where technology creates a new global network (intercontinental travel days not weeks, telegraph, etc). Suddenly, Harvard was at least as important as Cambridge or Oxford. And much more important than Jena however you slice it. That happened before the war. 5. Perry was perhaps the fourth Harvard faculty of note, after the world-famous James (for whom he wrote the first biography), Santayana, and Royce. The latter two create some interesting bridges between idealism and the American push, adopted by Russel, to admit human evolution and the utility of symbolic logic for more than "math". Your counterposing Perry and Bradley is unimportant. 6. You seem to forget the explosion of connections made between logical symbology and real world utility - gravity, electricity, speed of light - of course philosophy became more interested in how those revelations were possible than 2500 year old semantic paradoxes. 7. You leaning into false antagonisms using terms like "scathing" "cavalier", is not useful. James had a regular correspondence with Bradley, friendly and productive, and the letters were published by Perry. You should look them up. 8. I object to the implication of phrase "British Idealism" for two reasons. Nothing particularly British about it, on the whole rehashes many points made by the pre-socratic Greeks, and is no more British than, say, Spencer's scientism or Mill's liberalism. You didn't coin it, nor do you think to question it. 9. As for circularity, I mean a basic premise of any idealism project is no propositional framework has grounds to support itself, therefore God, reality, fill in blank for supreme otherness, and Mind is our special access to "real", not this clumsy rock stuff I keep tripping over. This is a loop inside a silo, ignores the multiple dimensions of our actual world (including mind/language as a rock-like tool you are arguing idealism with) and what human evolution means for the development of spirit. 10. Again, this last point downgrades the obvious relevance of Hegel et al., and offers a primary explanation for twentieth century philosophical developments. Not world war I.
Just rewatched this. A bloody fantastic video!
Here we are, 100 years later, with Idealism’s renaissance.
This is a great documentary! This video is not only informative but it is very engaging. It didn't even feel like 20 minutes had passed when it ended and I was ready to hear more of the story. I'm hoping a longer version will come out someday and we can tell more of the idealist side of the story which has been neglected for far too long.
Thanks man! I would have loved to go into more detail. I plan on working on another one in a few weeks after I finish the semester.
I've had a hard time finding philosophy documentaries on RUclips which are both entertaining and provide a thorough and deep understanding of their subject matter. This summarizes a huge amount of heavy material in a way that's both succinct and comprehensive. Learned a lot, thanks very much!
Thank you so much. I’m really happy to hear that you learned a lot. 😊
Very well written, but why so pessimistic? Idealism is back, baby!
Dude how are you and every idealist on RUclips in the comments
It is very interesting to discover these British Idealists . When was having idealistic thoughts as a youngster many years ago I had to go on a quest over many years in order to understand them . In the end I mercifully found advaita Vedanta which very broadly speaking is Idealism . So interesting to find we had our own tradition of Idealism . Thank you for posting ✌️
You are very welcome! We must complete the system of British Idealism!
@J J Hi . I am the other way around in the sense that I have had contact with Advaita Vedanta for over 40 years ( particularly as personified by Sri Ramana Maharshi) which is essentially Idealistic - saying that the world is a mental creation .
Despite having studied some philosophy when I was younger I never really knew about Idealism in the Western philosophical tradition till relatively really and that is mainly due to the internet !
Of course there are all sorts of nuances both within western Idealism and Advaita and between the two but the central idea that the world is a mental creation is very similar .
Another big connection between Advaita and the West is via Quantum Physics. When I read some of the conclusions of people like Neils Bohr who said that nothing exists until you perceive it I thought ' crikey that s is very advaitic ' .
Many of these similar threads come together in the works of Bernardo Kastrup who is both a scientist and philosopher . He gives great evidence for Idealism - both through science and philosophy - and as he worked at CERN is pretty well qualified to talk about these matters . Best wishes .
Good video.
RUclips decided to recommend this off of a Tom Scott video, so you may just be the algorithm's next winner. Good luck.
this is so beautiful, amazing video!
Thank you so much!
Beautifully written and presented. Thanks.
Thank you. I really appreciate your comment.
Fantastic overview!
Thanks. I would have loved to go into greater depth; however, I had to limit it to 20 minutes
@@PessimisticIdealism Why did you limit it to 20 minutes?
An excellent accounting of the decline of British idealism and the rise of the analytic tradition. I will bookmark this video for additional viewing. All very well done.
Thank you. :)
Since you seem very educated on this, what would you say is the difference between phenomenology and British idealism?
Moore critiques of idealism are based on ad hominem and straw man fallacies. I read Berkeley's treatise on the principles of human knowledge and the dialogues and they already answered his objections. Berkeley also insisted a lot in saying that materialism is against common sense and not idealism like the opponents affirm.
So fascinating! I find myself in a state of nondualism (I am aware of the contradictory usage of the word ‘I’ in that statement) and wonder what your opinions are on the Vedantic teaching regarding the nature of reality. I think it is very comparable to the absolute idealism of Bradley. Love the video!
Language, Truth, and Logic was the first philosophical book I read more than like 10 years ago lolol
Chapter XXXVIII at minute 2.02 titled "Idealism" from which work comes from?
McTaggart’s “The Nature of Existence” (Vol. II). Here is a link to it drive.google.com/file/d/1qLP1awecCdIsU39UpPnHI8zyAtsiDE0q/view?usp=drivesdk
To be quite honest, as some philosophical historians such as Harris E. Errol would speculate, the reason that logical positivism dominated the mainstream was because scientist moved into the philosophical sphere without being aware of the drastic changes in science.
What are your thoughts on CD broads response to mctaggarts philosophy
Fantastic and very informative Video!
Greetings from Germany
Thank you!
What books do you recommend for people who are new to idealism for reading?
I would recommend Mary Whiton Calkin’s “The Persistent Problems of Philosophy.” It’s available on Google Ebooks and archive.org for free
Hey, I really love your work! A year ago, I actually read Errol E Harris and Whitehead. These were pretty much the remaining British idealists of the 20th century. I was wondering what happened to the philosophy. Even online I could hardly fine enough that's quite satisfying. So, I applaud you for your work! Also, since I follow you on Instagram, I can't wait to read your objections on objectivism. Lastly, I'm curious. What are your thoughts on pantsychism/pantheism?
Feel free to shoot me a message on Instagram or on my discord. I’d be happy to chat there in greater depth 🙂
Found this by random. It's pretty neat
Modern idealist need to go back to its roots and understand the arguments put forth by these philosophers.
Theism used to be neglected in the literature because of logical positivism. It was Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne who turned things around. And now most philosophers of religion are theist. The same thing needs to happen to Idealism because it didn't get the same revival that Theism did.
based
And then realism is back!
Moving on from the circularity of idealist arguments to the psychological, sociological, and logical complexity of the linguistic turn, was due to German xenophobia, not because it helped us to better understand the project of philosophy and to what extent talk of truth is possible. While being led by German war hero Wittgenstein. Does this really make any sense to you?
I must admit that your comment “doesn’t really make any sense” to me. The sentence fragments and comma splices in your comment render it unintelligible. On a side note, you did make a reference to “the circularity of idealist arguments.” I think it would benefit everyone if you specified which arguments (of the British Idealists) you had in mind.
@@PessimisticIdealism ok, let me try it this way -
1. I appreciate your desire to understand this last wave of pre-modern thinking, and the production value of this video.
2. You attribute the death of the pre-modern to anti-german sentiment when progress towards understanding logic, language, and meaning was led by Frege, Wittgenstein and arguably Husserl.
3. Your "school" reductions are painfully siloed, as they usually are. "New Realism" is a minor movement updating traditional empricism and of course dismisses forms of Idealism in the process. Low hanging fruit.
4. The early twentieth century is where the United States becomes the new world power. And, where technology creates a new global network (intercontinental travel days not weeks, telegraph, etc). Suddenly, Harvard was at least as important as Cambridge or Oxford. And much more important than Jena however you slice it. That happened before the war.
5. Perry was perhaps the fourth Harvard faculty of note, after the world-famous James (for whom he wrote the first biography), Santayana, and Royce. The latter two create some interesting bridges between idealism and the American push, adopted by Russel, to admit human evolution and the utility of symbolic logic for more than "math". Your counterposing Perry and Bradley is unimportant.
6. You seem to forget the explosion of connections made between logical symbology and real world utility - gravity, electricity, speed of light - of course philosophy became more interested in how those revelations were possible than 2500 year old semantic paradoxes.
7. You leaning into false antagonisms using terms like "scathing" "cavalier", is not useful. James had a regular correspondence with Bradley, friendly and productive, and the letters were published by Perry. You should look them up.
8. I object to the implication of phrase "British Idealism" for two reasons. Nothing particularly British about it, on the whole rehashes many points made by the pre-socratic Greeks, and is no more British than, say, Spencer's scientism or Mill's liberalism. You didn't coin it, nor do you think to question it.
9. As for circularity, I mean a basic premise of any idealism project is no propositional framework has grounds to support itself, therefore God, reality, fill in blank for supreme otherness, and Mind is our special access to "real", not this clumsy rock stuff I keep tripping over. This is a loop inside a silo, ignores the multiple dimensions of our actual world (including mind/language as a rock-like tool you are arguing idealism with) and what human evolution means for the development of spirit.
10. Again, this last point downgrades the obvious relevance of Hegel et al., and offers a primary explanation for twentieth century philosophical developments. Not world war I.
This is great content. Thank you!