Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Philosophy Thread: What?

124

Comments

  • i'm about 9 mins in and this is a great video! i love being inside the classroom! i would have loved this teacher!
  • OLLY!!!!! <3

  • The Elon Musk one was the first philosophy tube I watched, I definitely enjoy his perspective
  • His master/slave video was fascinating as well.
  • true
    Olly <3
    i've been influenced, for sure.
  • I WAS THERE FOR THE PREMIER!!!!
  • no shit?! what premier!!! where???!!!!!
  • but very cool! and holy fuckin !!!!!!!! this! video!!!
  • I forgot to post a link to it. It wasn't an actual physical premier, it's a new YouTube feature where when the video first becomes available you can watch the video "live" and participate in live chat. Olly was even in the live chat!

    I'll post the link next time if I'm not busy at work.
  • cool - i'll keep it in mind.
  • BUT the video!!!! i love the content and peach and green and peach and deep blue!
  • @yama how did the audience reach toward the video realtime?
  • You can read the chat replay, if you'd like. Just open the video on YouTube's website and click "Show Chat Replay" on the right side. I'm Frozen Sea on YouTube, so you might see some of my messages.

    They were going crazy when Olly started to strip off his shirt, and tons of people kept asking "Is that real blood"?"

    A few people said his lighting was "totally Contra", which made me smile.

    There was a part at the beginning where Olly described my just-came-out-atheist-im-still-pissed-off-at-religion phase to an eerily accurate degree (I commented this in the chat, too). When I first abandoned my non-denominational-but-basically-baptist religious beliefs, I read most of the writings of the four horsemen of the counter-apocalypse (as Hitchens coined it) and held them to be near-infallible. This was not just foolish -- to replace one set of prophets with another -- but also dangerous. I was primed to agree with their poltical views because I already agreed with, and took action on the basis of, their criticisms of religion. It's a really pernicious strain of the argument from authority fallacy, but it's not exactly that. I don't know, I think a cultivated persona and ethos with a certain audience can leave people credulous enough to take on some whacky beliefs (just look at the all-meat diet Jordan Beeee Peterson's daughter is grifting to his followers!), all because of a few banal talking points that people agreed with (free speech good, tyranny bad, clean your room or the multural carxists will steal your soul!).

    Sorry for rambling...
  • edited October 27
    not at all!

    i didn't know about the live chat feature - a angle to re-watch the video.
    found you!
  • Shout out to Simon!
  • u guys fuck with any phenomenology?
  • i mean, yes. deeply.
  • i don't understand it
  • @demi what works/ideas/people do u fuck with? I remember you describing yourself as a structuralist before, where does that fit in with phenomenology?

    @yama what aspects or works have you had difficulty with?
  • why fck with it?
  • edited December 10
    @shoots structuralism is about the awareness of form, the ability to deconstruct it into compositional items, and reconstruct the form. Phenomenology is the conscious awareness of experience and how we experience and deep dives into how the experiences affect the individual as compositional items, that when put together, reconstruct the form.

    i don't think they necessarily overlap as much as they parallel each other. but i also don't really think it's that black and white, either. it's "The Talking Cure" in psychology.

    There's a pretty good book called "Regeneration" by Pat Baker - (it's a part of the trilogy but i haven't read the rest) that exemplfies post-WWI Behavorial Psychologist vs. Phenomenological Psychologist.

    Satre, but then Husserl, Edith Stein, and then I continued the observations in literature and psychology.
  • Thats cool demi I havn't read Husserl but I've read Sarte and Heidegger and I'm starting Merleu-Ponty rn. What of his did u peep? Was it fulfilling?

    @2pl idk it helps u think about the space and time in a really novel way if that's interesting to u. pragmatic value is pretty low but also it gives you a new take on what pragmatic value even is so maybe its relevant to that
  • edited December 10
    I don't get how a thought can be 'about' something outside of the mind
  • nah, i can't remember the book - i think my intro was paper handouts of certain chapters.

    @yama have you ever told yourself a joke inside your head and it made you burst out laughing cuz you weren't expecting the conclusion? i feel like that's an "outside of the mind" moment
  • @yama Well, I'm not like a registered phenomenologist, but in the phenomenology I've read it's not that thoughts are "about" something outside the mind, its the entire border between mind/outside the mind that is being called into question.
    The whole idea of a "phenomenological reduction" is to mark one's belief in "an inside and an outside of the mind" as only a belief one has, and instead to focus on the concrete structures of immediate experience, like how your emotions change the way you perceive things "outside" of yourself.
    You get a lot of stuff in phenomenology that completely defies the mind/body distinction, one of the central concepts, "being-in-the-world" is like that.

    As said above tho I'm not like pro level at this stuff yet but I'm about 90% confident in what I just said regardless. I know it's at least true for Merleu-Ponty and Heidegger (i think). By the "about" of a thought I assume you mean what it is representing, and conceiving thought as representation I know is a thing phenomenology generally doesn't like to do.
  • Do you know a really good introductory text I could go read?
  • Yeah Sarte's introduction to Being and Nothingness communicates the general idea pretty well, but also this video series is pretty great
  • Honestly I'm not really sure about a single introductory text though, I only really figured out what was going on through struggling through Heidegger's Being and Time but I'm sure there must be a better way
Sign In or Register to comment.