Some posit the idea that we have an internal view of our conscious states. Unfortunately, he all but dismissed this option and moved on without leveling any serious critiques. (33:45) The lecturer disputes on two points: if it is a 3rd person, objective account, the skeptic is left room to doubt the means of evidence just as though we were observing another person, thus removing the infallible authority of our self-knowledge. I would be more compelled by this argument if I didn't think it entirely plausible that we are fallible in our self-knowledge, unathoratative. Recall that “know thyself” is a heavy task for the best of men. We certainly do not have infallible knowledge of our inner state, hence the practicality and memetic transfer of the word "subconscious". Also he says that answering self-knowledge does not feel like taking a moment to scan our internal state to see what we believe. This of course, could be explained by a body of subconscious knowledge depthless around what our minds are presently illuming. Later in the video he was discussing a philosopher who said something along the lines of: we are inundated ceaselessly day by day with opinions subcognitively. These ideas are held in the subconscious and when asked for our opinion, we glance to those preconceived notions and there they are. This is the only model he calls a "terrible idea". Perhaps it is and I am too slow to understand why. Could someone enlighten me?
@@Philosophy_Overdose Indeed, the fact that he concludes the report of self-knowledge to be partially constituted of self-knowledge blew my mind. I've been thinking this kind of things for a long time. I usually need writing or out load enunciation to be critically thinking. When I am alone, I actually imagine saying things to achieve deductive goals. And in fact now I (literally) understand why perfectly sane people talk to themselves to progress in a certain task. Apart from this, his exploration of the immunity of self-knowledge to skepticism and his decomposition of it in terms of authority and objectivity is among the clearest expositions I've ever seen. Philosophy Overdose, you never disappoint me.
I'm imagining that a good method of therapy would be to present powerful art to encourage perspective for contextualizing and then gradually unfold awareness of self by understanding experience through therapy. Context is where common ground exist. The problem with that is what is powerful art? Well, I would say think of stain glass windows of the old churches and the primitive yet powerful effect it had consciousness, especially because the art was contextualized in instructions of various kinds. Without the art, instructions or guidance would be futile. Art is the most versatile medium of expression we have and contains truths and inspires perspective. I think the trickiest thing to consider is what kind of art to that individual that will insight a realization in that person to self.
There is a whole field of psychology dedicated to this, look up art therapy. It has visual arts branches, dance and movement, music, bibliotherapy... Art and psychology goes back a century to Jung and his symbolism
Oh, Barry Smith. Thanks PO
Some posit the idea that we have an internal view of our conscious states. Unfortunately, he all but dismissed this option and moved on without leveling any serious critiques. (33:45)
The lecturer disputes on two points: if it is a 3rd person, objective account, the skeptic is left room to doubt the means of evidence just as though we were observing another person, thus removing the infallible authority of our self-knowledge.
I would be more compelled by this argument if I didn't think it entirely plausible that we are fallible in our self-knowledge, unathoratative. Recall that “know thyself” is a heavy task for the best of men. We certainly do not have infallible knowledge of our inner state, hence the practicality and memetic transfer of the word "subconscious".
Also he says that answering self-knowledge does not feel like taking a moment to scan our internal state to see what we believe. This of course, could be explained by a body of subconscious knowledge depthless around what our minds are presently illuming. Later in the video he was discussing a philosopher who said something along the lines of: we are inundated ceaselessly day by day with opinions subcognitively. These ideas are held in the subconscious and when asked for our opinion, we glance to those preconceived notions and there they are.
This is the only model he calls a "terrible idea". Perhaps it is and I am too slow to understand why. Could someone enlighten me?
We know ouselves best, but we can fool ourselves best too.
Wow..great comment
Who is the speaker?
Marvelous!
Yes, this is an amazing lecture!
@@Philosophy_Overdose Indeed, the fact that he concludes the report of self-knowledge to be partially constituted of self-knowledge blew my mind. I've been thinking this kind of things for a long time. I usually need writing or out load enunciation to be critically thinking. When I am alone, I actually imagine saying things to achieve deductive goals. And in fact now I (literally) understand why perfectly sane people talk to themselves to progress in a certain task.
Apart from this, his exploration of the immunity of self-knowledge to skepticism and his decomposition of it in terms of authority and objectivity is among the clearest expositions I've ever seen.
Philosophy Overdose, you never disappoint me.
As I said on the other channel, this is still the best talk I've ever heard on self-knowledge and the issues that arise surrounding it.
I'm imagining that a good method of therapy would be to present powerful art to encourage perspective for contextualizing and then gradually unfold awareness of self by understanding experience through therapy. Context is where common ground exist. The problem with that is what is powerful art? Well, I would say think of stain glass windows of the old churches and the primitive yet powerful effect it had consciousness, especially because the art was contextualized in instructions of various kinds. Without the art, instructions or guidance would be futile. Art is the most versatile medium of expression we have and contains truths and inspires perspective. I think the trickiest thing to consider is what kind of art to that individual that will insight a realization in that person to self.
There is a whole field of psychology dedicated to this, look up art therapy. It has visual arts branches, dance and movement, music, bibliotherapy... Art and psychology goes back a century to Jung and his symbolism
pffft pseudoscience
5:00 bookmark
Hey Overdose I need your help. If you respond to my message I’ll explain.
yes!... PHILOSOPHY OF MIND... more and more and more, philosophy overdose... gimme what i want... what i need... and then i'll go away... promise!!!