ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
2. Hume's Central Principles: Overview, Theory of Ideas, and Faculty Psychology
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ม.ค. 2013
- Second lecture in Peter Millican's series on Hume's Central Principles.
University of Oxford Podcasts
podcasts.ox.ac....
Hume's Treatise and his Enquiry
Courtesy of the University of Adelaide Library Electronic Texts Collection
ebooks.adelaide...
ebooks.adelaide...
I really appreciate these lectures as I want to understand Hume. I have watched lectures 1 and 2 so far and will watch the next two over the next couple of days.
I am so glad that they have been uploaded to TH-cam.
the will is a passion. it doesn't deliberate over anything. it simply follows as a desire after deliberation is done.
an idea is raw sense impressions reworked and ordered into a whole unit as a simple recognition not involving discursivity.
a concept is an idea extended by discursive explanation.
I just need to gleam "some- light" into Hume's Philosophy!
From 16,000 views for the first lecture down to 5,600 views for the second lecture - most people just don't care about learning.
john. his lectures help me fill the gaps about Hume and his thoughts
Unfortunately this lecturer misses the point of Hume's argument that the impressions and ideas are one and the same thing, differing only in the force and vivacity with which they appear to conciousness. He (Millican) cherry picks the ideas that suit his own interpretation and blames Hume for faulty or lazy reasoning when Hume's ideas don't conform to his own. Too bad.
Richie Whitehead start at 27:56 where he asks us to ignore Hume's use of force and vivacity as a defining principle. If you read Sartre's Theory of the Imagination, Sartre says there is no essential difference between our original impression of a mountain and our memory of it - no difference except (as Hume said first) force and vivacity. To ignore this is to miss Hume's contribution to phenomenology as set out by Husserl for instance. Its a very important principle.
You seem advanced on these topics compared to me and I find these topics interesting. At first, I hated being retired. Now I love having time and PMA to learn about anything I want. I had my head in a bag where anything of interest was related to urban planning. For years, it seemed I could never learn enough about that. I studied hard, and studied little else.
it's obvious from watching his series on the treatise that the lecturer does not much care for hume. he clearly does not apprehend what hume is getting at.
His deflationary reading of Hume is so boring. Why are professional scholars always bent on domesticating their subjects, as if they need to make them uncontroversial, palatable, and commonplace.
he doesn't understand hume so he has to rephrase him as something else.