The part where Dr. Sadler demonstrates how to question a desire is very helpful, something I am going to work on. This video on practical reasoning reminds me a bit of Greg's excellent critical thinking class videos.
You are my internet philosophy professor. I wish I would have found you before 2024, but now I'm here! Thank you for all the great content and dedication. Time to jump in!
As you know, I've enjoyed many of your lectures. But I must say that these more "bite size" ones are my favorites. As much as I wish I had the time, it's difficult to fit in a 1-2 hour lecture as often as I'd like. These are dead nuts in the Goldilocks Zone. They're "just right". That said, great topic. The examples you gave do a great job of making philosophic concepts of a few thousand years ago relevant and understandable.
Great video! Thank you for posting this. The only point that would be controversial with some of the more orthodox Epicureans today is the view that static or abiding pleasure is superior to kinetic pleasure. The accusation is that this is used by some to propose asceticism. Its probably more accurate to say that all pleasures are important, and that the teachings on different pleasures are needed because our hedonic regimen should be varied to avoid addiction and in consideration of hedonic adaptation/treadmill. In this way we have a life-affirming philosophy of personal happiness and learn to avoid the mistakes frequently made in the pursuit of happiness. Also in one of your other vids you mention that you dont know of any practicing Epicureans today. There are a few groups in English, Spanish and Greek online, two Gardens in Athens and Thessaloniki and Athens, a Sydney meetup, the Society of Friends of Epicurus and the webpage New Epicurean
Society of Friends of Epicurus I suppose then orthodox Epicureans today would be heterodox Epicureans from the classical perspective, since the latter are very clear in maintaining the superiority of static pleasures. Keep in mind that Core Concept videos are on the figures and texts, not on their modern interpreters I mention I don't know any practicing neo-Epicureans in the recent Anger video, though I did know there had to be some out there. I'll take a look at them
Gregory B. Sadler that might be the case, that orthodoxy today us different from then. It's usually colored by Nietzschean influences and an anti ascetism ethical approach. But the scientific approach like seen in "Tending the Epicurean Garden" draws heavily on Dan Gilbert's theories on science of happiness and on how abiding pleasure (which he calls synthetic happiness) is superior to kinetic (which he calls natural happiness) by virtue of allowing self sufficiency in pleasure. It then becomes a sign of a liberated being. And abiding pleasure takes a bit more training so it becomes a focus for learning. Not sure if that makes it superior but clearly nurturing katastematic pleasure is essential for an Epicurean
Reminds me of J.S. MIll's distinguishing between higher and lower pleasures,,...and a Hiedeggarian dies every authentic moment of his life...you are not a victim of akrasia, may I suggest you take a walk in a quiet green area. I suspect you want to have integrity and be wise, not only reporting the words of others. It is quite apparent you have come a long way in searching for wisdom. No doubt those findings have already help to guide your living. Very good video. This could be a good place to start on ends, and then contrast ends against stoics and platonists. But it is a good sell to someone who does not know ancient philosophy. I like how the life of pleasure leads to reason, and how static pleasures are identified.
Mark Trumble Mill drew on Epicurus, so there's the answer. One becomes a historian of philosophy by realizing that one important way a person acquires integrity and wisdom is through the words of others.
Thanks for the videos! Maybe I missed it, but could you give more detail as to which part of Epicurus' work you are referring to? I am using the Penguin Classics version of his works, and did not find a 'chapter 12' on attentiveness.
Got it - thanks. I'm using Penguin Classics translated by Robert Dobbin... Discourses Books I-IV, Fragments, Enchiridion. The Discourse Books are divided by segment (not chapters! :)), for example Book 1 has 30 segments. That's what I was wondering - would it be possible for you to point to which book or segment you refer to? Thanks again
@@jensallis2 You have the entirely wrong author there. Epicurus is not Epictetus. And I'm pretty clear in the video about what parts of the very short Epicurean texts I'm discussing
This is a sort of off topic question and very subjective. But how long on average should it take to closely read a typical philosophical work like The Republic or Tractatus.
You're one of the best channels on TH-cam sir! Thanks for posting such amazing videos.
yash kapila You're welcome -- and thanks!
The part where Dr. Sadler demonstrates how to question a desire is very helpful, something I am going to work on. This video on practical reasoning reminds me a bit of Greg's excellent critical thinking class videos.
You are my internet philosophy professor. I wish I would have found you before 2024, but now I'm here! Thank you for all the great content and dedication. Time to jump in!
Yes. Better now than later or never!
Keep it up Dr. Sadler! Keep coming back to your videos.
Marcello Val Glad to read it --and I will
Here's a new Core Concept video created for my Ethics class -- part of a sequence of eight covering main concepts from Epicurus' works
As you know, I've enjoyed many of your lectures. But I must say that these more "bite size" ones are my favorites. As much as I wish I had the time, it's difficult to fit in a 1-2 hour lecture as often as I'd like. These are dead nuts in the Goldilocks Zone. They're "just right".
That said, great topic. The examples you gave do a great job of making philosophic concepts of a few thousand years ago relevant and understandable.
John Graber Yes, different strokes for different folks -- why I produce a range of different types of videos
Great video! Thank you for posting this. The only point that would be controversial with some of the more orthodox Epicureans today is the view that static or abiding pleasure is superior to kinetic pleasure. The accusation is that this is used by some to propose asceticism.
Its probably more accurate to say that all pleasures are important, and that the teachings on different pleasures are needed because our hedonic regimen should be varied to avoid addiction and in consideration of hedonic adaptation/treadmill. In this way we have a life-affirming philosophy of personal happiness and learn to avoid the mistakes frequently made in the pursuit of happiness.
Also in one of your other vids you mention that you dont know of any practicing Epicureans today. There are a few groups in English, Spanish and Greek online, two Gardens in Athens and Thessaloniki and Athens, a Sydney meetup, the Society of Friends of Epicurus and the webpage New Epicurean
Society of Friends of Epicurus I suppose then orthodox Epicureans today would be heterodox Epicureans from the classical perspective, since the latter are very clear in maintaining the superiority of static pleasures. Keep in mind that Core Concept videos are on the figures and texts, not on their modern interpreters
I mention I don't know any practicing neo-Epicureans in the recent Anger video, though I did know there had to be some out there. I'll take a look at them
Gregory B. Sadler that might be the case, that orthodoxy today us different from then. It's usually colored by Nietzschean influences and an anti ascetism ethical approach.
But the scientific approach like seen in "Tending the Epicurean Garden" draws heavily on Dan Gilbert's theories on science of happiness and on how abiding pleasure (which he calls synthetic happiness) is superior to kinetic (which he calls natural happiness) by virtue of allowing self sufficiency in pleasure. It then becomes a sign of a liberated being. And abiding pleasure takes a bit more training so it becomes a focus for learning. Not sure if that makes it superior but clearly nurturing katastematic pleasure is essential for an Epicurean
As always, great content, Mr. Sadler !
Sloomoon Thanks!
Great 👍 sir
Thanks!
Reminds me of J.S. MIll's distinguishing between higher and lower pleasures,,...and a Hiedeggarian dies every authentic moment of his life...you are not a victim of akrasia, may I suggest you take a walk in a quiet green area. I suspect you want to have integrity and be wise, not only reporting the words of others. It is quite apparent you have come a long way in searching for wisdom. No doubt those findings have already help to guide your living. Very good video. This could be a good place to start on ends, and then contrast ends against stoics and platonists. But it is a good sell to someone who does not know ancient philosophy. I like how the life of pleasure leads to reason, and how static pleasures are identified.
Mark Trumble Mill drew on Epicurus, so there's the answer.
One becomes a historian of philosophy by realizing that one important way a person acquires integrity and wisdom is through the words of others.
Thanks for the videos! Maybe I missed it, but could you give more detail as to which part of Epicurus' work you are referring to? I am using the Penguin Classics version of his works, and did not find a 'chapter 12' on attentiveness.
There aren't chapters in the works we have from Epicurus.
Got it - thanks. I'm using Penguin Classics translated by Robert Dobbin... Discourses Books I-IV, Fragments, Enchiridion. The Discourse Books are divided by segment (not chapters! :)), for example Book 1 has 30 segments. That's what I was wondering - would it be possible for you to point to which book or segment you refer to? Thanks again
@@jensallis2 You have the entirely wrong author there. Epicurus is not Epictetus.
And I'm pretty clear in the video about what parts of the very short Epicurean texts I'm discussing
Apologies! I meant Epictetus - you are correct, I had the wrong author. Thank you.
This is a sort of off topic question and very subjective. But how long on average should it take to closely read a typical philosophical work like The Republic or Tractatus.
dsettleascii There is no "on average" for that
Roman and grkeel
No idea what you're on about