Terrific, thank you! Where do I find the other lectures in this series? This was wonderful in both content and presentation, a pleasure to see and hear! Pete Eklof SLP in NH
Wouldn't the argument that 'Knowledge once acquired that now cannot be recalled is not knowledge at all' contradict the empiricists view in that if the individual later proceeds to remember what he/she had forgotten then it would be as if he/she 'acquired' that knowledge without having observed anything new?
The modern rationalism is the Existentialism which postulates that ``existance precedes the substance`` in a sense that the nature of our inspirations as the outcome of space-time which is aprioric. In this sense, the inspirations in our age would be different than those in times of antiquity.
Isaiah 57:15 For this is what the high and exalted One says-- he who lives forever, whose name is holy: "I live in a high and holy place, but also with the one who is contrite and lowly in spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite.
Taking the example you have about the rule of large numbers; it doesn't make any sense at all that the principle of general uniformity can come from even an infinite number of experiences. If I found that I had a billion heads in a row after flipping the coin a sufficient number of times I would still not be able to say that the next coin flip is anything but a 50/50 chance of coming up heads. The problem is with inductivism. The future does not resemble the past. If that were the case there would be nothing novel in the world which is self evidently not the case.
Hi Guy - Most (but not all) of the reading assingments can be found here: www.amazon.com/Classics-Western-Philosophy-Eighth-Steven-ebook/dp/B00E1IWXAC/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=steven+m+cahn+classics&qid=1608394450&s=books&sr=1-2
The repetition of experience compels us to assume the same experience and compels us to assume uniformity of nature. That's the bases in kids mind for such conclusion The reason the law of big nubmers is not intuitive is because it does not happen in our experience.
Lucidly Brilliant !
Thank you!! One of the best videos I have seen. Which book did you refer to the class?
Terrific, thank you! Where do I find the other lectures in this series? This was wonderful in both content and presentation, a pleasure to see and hear! Pete Eklof SLP in NH
Hi Pete - try th-cam.com/play/PLg4lEYaHO--SDCgjDUP1nQbn3_Fztv4LK.html - Jack
Good one, thank you 👍
great lecture thank you
Wouldn't the argument that 'Knowledge once acquired that now cannot be recalled is not knowledge at all' contradict the empiricists view in that if the individual later proceeds to remember what he/she had forgotten then it would be as if he/she 'acquired' that knowledge without having observed anything new?
40:33
The modern rationalism is the Existentialism which postulates that ``existance precedes the substance`` in a sense that the nature of our inspirations as the outcome of space-time which is aprioric. In this sense, the inspirations in our age would be different than those in times of antiquity.
Thanks man
what was the reading assignment ?
it's the framework of our brain :)
Isaiah 57:15
For this is what the high and exalted One says-- he who lives forever, whose name is holy: "I live in a high and holy place, but also with the one who is contrite and lowly in spirit, to revive the spirit of the lowly and to revive the heart of the contrite.
Thank you for sharing that...
Taking the example you have about the rule of large numbers; it doesn't make any sense at all that the principle of general uniformity can come from even an infinite number of experiences. If I found that I had a billion heads in a row after flipping the coin a sufficient number of times I would still not be able to say that the next coin flip is anything but a 50/50 chance of coming up heads. The problem is with inductivism. The future does not resemble the past. If that were the case there would be nothing novel in the world which is self evidently not the case.
that was humes problem of induction -- no matter how many previous times something happens you can never say you know it will happen the next time.
Textbook?
Hi Guy - Most (but not all) of the reading assingments can be found here: www.amazon.com/Classics-Western-Philosophy-Eighth-Steven-ebook/dp/B00E1IWXAC/ref=sr_1_2?dchild=1&keywords=steven+m+cahn+classics&qid=1608394450&s=books&sr=1-2
Thanks Professor, I will check it out!
The repetition of experience compels us to assume the same experience and compels us to assume uniformity of nature. That's the bases in kids mind for such conclusion
The reason the law of big nubmers is not intuitive is because it does not happen in our experience.
In ref. to student in 20-30 minute
@@Dosadniste2000Sure, it tends to compel us to assume the uniformity of nature but the question is whether we have good grounds for that assumption.
teach me to thiioioionk...now!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! er, thnx. helpful video.
gda295 Thanks gda - Jack