Thanks! We're actually on our way thanks to the Better Call Saul vid almost doubling the sub count in the last month. (Hopefully it doesn't get get copyrighted again 🙈)
@@marketing_monster That's the one that brought me to this channel, probably because I'd been watching Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul videos from their official channel. TH-cam algorithm brought me to the right place :)
We should just ignore the fact that an old idea in new words is the same old idea. Words convey meaning and emotion and almost all of the impact is the emotion which changes with every word choice. So rephrasing can be just as powerful as inventing a concept.
@13:41: I think you mean, "It's no accident," or "It's not _merely_ a coincidence." It's nonsensical to say that it's not a coincidence that two things _coincided._
@marketing_monster. Again, you're saying that the coincidence of two events is not a coincidence, yet you seem unfazed. This is what the erosion of language and meaning can achieve. We should be able to describe the sensibility of our language, not merely appeal to strength in numbers. I'm sure you can see that you're saying only that the phrasing you used is _common,_ not that it is _sensible._ Many people think dictionaries are authorities on meaning rather than records of common uses, including misuses. It's an appeal to a non-authority rather than an explanation of meaning. I'm well aware that people commonly misuse words, that some misuses become embedded in language (abetted by dictionaries that document common uses), and that many people think there's no point to paying close attention to consistent or sensible meaning. Personally, I think language matters and that ambiguity has social and political consequences, much as Orwell did. A coincidence is when two or more events coincide--i.e., happen at the same time. To say a co-occurrence is "just a coincidence" is to say that there was nothing more to it than that. The common misunderstanding you've adopted is that _all_ coincidences are _merely_ coincidences. This reminds me of the detachment people now have from the actual meanings of metaphors, the increasingly effective plausible deniability of sarcasm, etc. People simply don't know what they or others mean, and they retreat to "Who are we to say?" It's deference rather than explanation.
Hey, I love your channel, always learning something new about psychology from your videos. Would you need help with research, audio editing or something else? I'm happy to get involved.
Everything is a footnote to -Fill in the Blank-. Pick one: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Tzu, Machiavelli, La Rochefoucauld, Chesterfield, Franklin, Emerson, Nietzsche, yadda, yadda.
some of both. But if they didn't, it's not like those people would have to the original version anyway. Also I get the sense that meditation techniques have always been changing and repackaged. There are so many different schools and techniques !
Commenting this video before this channel explodes above 100k.
Stan, your content is incredibly well written and produced. Keep it up!
Thanks! We're actually on our way thanks to the Better Call Saul vid almost doubling the sub count in the last month. (Hopefully it doesn't get get copyrighted again 🙈)
@@marketing_monster That's the one that brought me to this channel, probably because I'd been watching Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul videos from their official channel. TH-cam algorithm brought me to the right place :)
Been enjoying your videos, not too many reliable people that discuss psychology in business, I appreciate your work
thanks!
We should just ignore the fact that an old idea in new words is the same old idea. Words convey meaning and emotion and almost all of the impact is the emotion which changes with every word choice. So rephrasing can be just as powerful as inventing a concept.
If it's old for you, then it being old matters. But then maybe that book wasn't meant for you.
Dude, you deserve more views. Great video!
Thanks man! The views will come in time.
I just discovered your channel bro. You're gold, keep this up 🔥
thanks man, I appreciate that!
Subscribed, that was an absolutely fantastic video. You really made me think.
thanks!
Watching from Kenya. Love your content bro.
thanks man !
the game, seems like an interesting topic
@13:41: I think you mean, "It's no accident," or "It's not _merely_ a coincidence."
It's nonsensical to say that it's not a coincidence that two things _coincided._
coincidence (noun): a remarkable concurrence of events or circumstances without apparent causal connection.
=> I claim a causal connection.
@marketing_monster. Again, you're saying that the coincidence of two events is not a coincidence, yet you seem unfazed. This is what the erosion of language and meaning can achieve.
We should be able to describe the sensibility of our language, not merely appeal to strength in numbers.
I'm sure you can see that you're saying only that the phrasing you used is _common,_ not that it is _sensible._ Many people think dictionaries are authorities on meaning rather than records of common uses, including misuses. It's an appeal to a non-authority rather than an explanation of meaning.
I'm well aware that people commonly misuse words, that some misuses become embedded in language (abetted by dictionaries that document common uses), and that many people think there's no point to paying close attention to consistent or sensible meaning. Personally, I think language matters and that ambiguity has social and political consequences, much as Orwell did.
A coincidence is when two or more events coincide--i.e., happen at the same time. To say a co-occurrence is "just a coincidence" is to say that there was nothing more to it than that.
The common misunderstanding you've adopted is that _all_ coincidences are _merely_ coincidences.
This reminds me of the detachment people now have from the actual meanings of metaphors, the increasingly effective plausible deniability of sarcasm, etc. People simply don't know what they or others mean, and they retreat to "Who are we to say?" It's deference rather than explanation.
Hey, I love your channel, always learning something new about psychology from your videos. Would you need help with research, audio editing or something else? I'm happy to get involved.
Thanks! I don't need help currently as I have a great team, but when it changes I'll be sure to post an announcement around here :)
Everything is a footnote to -Fill in the Blank-. Pick one: Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Tzu, Machiavelli, La Rochefoucauld, Chesterfield, Franklin, Emerson, Nietzsche, yadda, yadda.
ah is it
still not sure if, in repackaging meditation, they butchered my boy, or enriched many peoples lifes
some of both. But if they didn't, it's not like those people would have to the original version anyway. Also I get the sense that meditation techniques have always been changing and repackaged. There are so many different schools and techniques !
The game!
It's coming. Probably
The game was wild!
yeeeeep
Also, the game
working on it!
The game
slowly working on it!
The Game
📝
The Game
slowly working on it 🙏
The game
working on it!
The game
The Game