Видео

00:20 - The definition of morality in "The Moral Landscape". 2:00 - Wittgenstein "Lecture on Ethics". 5:50 - The mistake Harris makes - We can optimize the relative usage of the words good and right, until it becomes absolute.

Why not just push the point to its obvious conclusion. There is no essential essence to gender because there is no such thing as gender. Sex is descriptive, not prescriptive....and everything else is more genre than gender.

Noam Chomsky humans like him are genuine and a rare treasure. You got to do what your purpose on our divine universe is to learn and serve with love. My country India great leaders like Dalai Lama’s their wisdom is working beautifully. In schools like Tashi Namgyal Academy children are taught and trained. Hopefully with the help of mighty Indian armed forces and loving kind leaders Indian humans will prove our traditions and culture is the best of best in this world. Love and peace to all

Very insightful analysis of Chomsky's work on media bias and I find it extremely relevant to how political themes and wars in the Middle East are being reported by so-called impartial Western media. Will use this video's contents to help me develop a research brief for one of my classes in a sociology Master's program.

I think the problem of a moral framework is that it easily leads to a punitivist point of view of things

You have a male and female physical form, what is poured into them is infinite in possibility

Hipies took a great nation and over a forty year period turned it to shit

Handed the strongest most stable family freindly economy in the world .Hey man lets just drop out and smoke weed and think about our seves all day 2024 and look at America today

Today, generative AI does not provide mass production, but still signals the end of authenticity.

The worst generation in world history

Thanks for this channel. Excellent and important. Please do a channel on truth and relativism, responding to this excellent provocation: ruclips.net/video/OVQ6-m5iy_o/видео.htmlsi=Mof8BT6aUTsIjI04

The ITV Programme is not called 'Idol". It is called 'Britain's Got Talent'.

Lol!!!

Doesn't Baudrillard reproduce notions of use value and exchange value in his privileging of reciprocity over hyperreality? Such as with the lavender field where exchange value determines its creation (for tourism), rather than use value (subsistence for the people who live there).

I always love how determinists sweat to make me choose determinism.

Watching this video to shape my identity

I consider Peterson to be engaged in a Kantian critique, however clumsily, rooted in the biological conditions for judgment and Jung's painfully vague archetypal scheme. On the whole, I don't see much by way of philosophically justifying any of it -- it passes the muster of popularity insofar as it adds a third pillar of pragmatism. Peterson resuscitates James without so much as mentioning him, unfortunately. The result is the ability to weave together common sense (comforting) paternal rhetoric with mythopoeticism (almost always within the confines of the Hebrew Bible) in such a way as has seen a revival in at least one public intellectual per decade. Peterson's thought would not have been so different from, say, Sam Keen in terms of its impact -- most of these guys were somehow connected to Jung -- had he not been preparing himself for the boom of RUclips intellectualism for a decade before anyone was paying attention. Nobody can say Peterson wasn't greasing the groove well before it began paying off.

I largely agree with what you have to say about the basic differences between guilt in shame, especially in contrast to this novel phenomenon of cringe. However, I do wonder if the Christian tradition, properly construed, in fact incorporates far more elements of shame than it does the traditional western, Dostoevskian-existential guilt. From the orthodox Catholic perspective, what "sin" is is not simply a matter of adverse effects on social relations wrought by personal actions, which seems to correspond to how guilt is defined here, as primarily a matter of personal (that is, individual) decisions that are found to violate some objective set of standards. However, although sin is not reducible to an action's effects on social relations, it is fundamentally an offense against God, which for the Christian is not some idealized self-projection or Freudian super-ego, but rather a person to whom one is always already subject and to whom one is actively judged. That's why sacramental reconciliation is so powerful and efficacious - not because, as Zizek has suggested, the violator is merely indemnified of the eternal consequences of her actions - but because she is restored to full communion with the very real person against whom one has committed offense. She is also restored to the broader Christian community, which can become quite conspicuous when she is physically observed not partaking in the Eucharist during Sunday Mass and other such external signs. Anyway, a great video and I can appreciate the connection to profilicity. Edit: clarity.

I love this video, I always comeback here

What is the samurai film at 1:59?

We should do a series of these, or just one extended video: Freedom in thoughts Academy of ideas Weitgeist The Living Philosophy Essentialsalt Wisecrack Eternalized

ja maybe true but as you know: any ( big ?) attention for Philosophy even the bad ones is good attention...

Wild thing, you make my tongue swing!

I only know how to pee pee dance.

So "news" is "new" information 🤔 so old information should be called "olds"😂. So gossip and fomo make sense as a search for novelity. No wonder the media is so addictive 😢

Oh my goodness, these videos broadened and deepened my mind. God bless you, man 🙌🏽

This dude is basically the left-wing version of Rush Limbaugh. Chomsky should have been cancelled a long time ago. Platforming him is basically the equivalent of platforming Alex Jones.

This was quite enlightening.

I personally take a wide perspective on personal identity, i dont see personal identity as a personal commitment

Nietzsche was against the idea of people dogmatically following him, if Pewdiepie wants to interpret Nietzsche in his own way that is fine.

While Sam Harris fumbles and fails in his endeavor to demonstrate objective morality, the principles of such do actually exist, and are logically discernable: *P1* - The existence of sentient subjects is an objective reality. *P2* - As real entities, subjects have properties inherent to them which may be objectively known and explicated. *P3* - Among the properties of sentience is the inherent capacity to have interests, which may be harmed or benefited. *P4* - This dichotomy of benefit & harm is the ontological basis of intrasubjective normativity, as it entails existential conditions such as "good/bad" and "better/worse" defining what's preferable or non-preferable for a given subject. *P5* - The property of inhering interests further entails that subjects as entities are ultimate ends. *P6* - There exist a multiplicity of distinct subjects with their own interests which may align or conflict with one another, entailing an intersubjective landscape for them to navigate which broadly coincides with the domain we call "morality". *P7* - Subjects are liable to have motive dispositions which generally incline them towards wanting to benefit the interests of others or harm them, entailing that subjects may themselves have normative value of an intersubjective nature, defining their worth as moral ends. *P8* - The concept generally referred to as "justice" entails reciprocity (i.e. commentsurate responsivity) in the intersubjective domain, with impartial and equitable judgments in such matters constituting an objective approach to it. *P9* - The equitable distribution of justice inevitably promotes general intersubjective well-being, in that it reinforces benevolent interpersonal choices & subjects while simultaneously punishing malevolent choices & subjects. *C* - Given the objective reality of sentient subjects, the inherent normative properties of their existence, and the possibility of making epistemologically objective assessments of such normative conditions _(which includes the matter of reciprocity in the intersubjective domain)_ it stands to reason that impartial, existential justice is definitionally the objective basis of natural rights.

Born 1928

Physical wars, like invasions of the US, are not a threat today. The future battles are in the minds of our citizens. Look at the divisions within the US and even within the EU-far right, far left-the constant hype and the constant dictatorial type threats of extreme right rising up as if in a Global and Multinational Narcissistic Fourth Reich. But where does this hype come from? Consider the Global Center for Combating Extremist Ideology. Recall, it is the home of the laying on of hands of the mysterious glowing orb exerting uncanny power over the world’s social media. These centers are not just in the Middle East; they're in Russia, China, Brazil, and South America. These centers disdain Western "liberal" ideology. They work to eradicate what they see as a corrupt and sinful way of life. This is the war of our time-ideological warfare for minds through influence. Let's recognize this reality, defend our values, and stay vigilant against manipulation and misinformation. To divide is to conquer. So simple that a young child, regardless of the reason for one parent, can simply understand.

Religion must be seen separately from faith. Philosopher and scientist are both guided by faith. Faith in their method, faith in the ability to uncover truths (in the sense of Popper). Religion on the other hand, is an instrument of power and the place where faith dies.

please talk about representation, because it is really fit into your profilization philosophy. Representation basically ethnic profilization. Where ethnic identity shape not by community but how it is viewed in media.

That philosophy tube guy/ girl / trans is a new age atheist turned Woke that's why he not only misunderstood Kant but also wants to block him.

What happens when the wizard's circle is broken, and the magic no longer works? I often enjoy listening to your work, but the problem I've always had with your brand of philosophy is that it doesn't account (or even allow) for the existence of an an intrinsic, underlying reality. It's true that there aren't perfectly defined boundaries between categories, and it may simply be impossible to incorporate the entirety of the world into any kind of coherent, rigorous ntellectual framework, but it seems totally counterproductive to me to respond to that dilemna in the way that critical and structuralist theories do. If all we have is illusion, contigency and uncertainty, why not interpret the whole world as having it's fundamental basis in these things? Because... that's nonesense lol. Who's to say that the stage magician isn't really sawing the woman in half? I hope that made some kind of sense. This way of thinking has such a masturbatory, Luciferian flavor that I sinply will never stop being shocked and dismayed that anybody takes it remotely seriously. What happens when the trick is seen through, and the crowd realizes the magic isn't real? There is sinply no such thing as "gender", it's mere sleight of hand. So much of the modern zeitgeist is sleight of hand and unreality. What happens when the magic no longer works?

Excellent post.

Thank you!

Smartphones are tools ⚙ however technology is not the problem. It is the control over the user & the philosophical inexistent of honest useful user's manual / now technology is used as means of coercion brainwashing & it is even believed it shapes reality.

Great video as always! I have recently started a RUclips channel myself, and its fascinating to experience it from the inside. I imagine many of your insights on prolificity comes from that experience. For instance, I notice that I value praise from random people more than from my friends. This is of course I see them as more objective and doesn't feel obliged to give me praise. Also, the amount of statistics youtube gives for each video, with live updating viewer numbers etc is quite stressful and I notice my mood follows the views-graph which obviously isnt good.

The problem of democracy is democracy reason why the allegory of the cave is now the allegory of social media main media 🛒♟📲🤡🤳 propaganda in short after 1776 nothing has taken place but rather 🐑🤡regression in 1066 tool where not available in 2024 tool are available 🌎🎹however in the hands fo dictators that call themselves democratic 2024 the planet lost nobility class 🤡🤳 refinement honesty integrity creativity no longer exist 🐕‍🦺 gained comfort numbness commerce consumption independence is simply ignorance is now strength and freedom is being mindless zombie a modern slave if you like.🪐🏔🥠

It would be interesting to compare profile building on different platforms. I have no empirical evidence to support this assertion, but I feel like the average reddit user is happier than the average instagram user. Both have mechanisms to allow for feedback/validation from the general peer, but (with a number of the exceptions like subreddits that focus on rating people’s face or body etc) I feel like feedback on reddit is more focused on the quality of the posted content than on the quality of the person who posted the content. In other words, I feel like criticism on reddit doesn’t have such a direct impact on a person’s self-perception. The greater anonymity is likely a major factor, but I feel like there are other factors at play.

This is one of the best corners of the Internet. Thank you!

Gotta be rich to be a hippie!

I love your Warning! :)

Thank you, this is so inspiring and clarifying. Brings many things together for me.

I recently was called a “old fucking dirty hippy “ he was twenty something years old I’m fifty two . He thought I would be offended. Hey thought it was a slam on me. It was in fact a compliment to me .

@23:22 저는 그가 그 특정 질문에 대해 이것을 언급한 이유에 대해 여전히 혼란스럽습니다. 이것은 편집인가요?