Hi Patrick, I just wanted to let you know that I've read your book "The Best Argument for God," and I consider it one of the best on the subject. I also really enjoy the content you create here, as well as your articles on the CA website. As someone who suffers from anxiety and OCD, I find that your work, while not directly related to these conditions, helps me relax and calms my mind. Thank you for all that you do! 👍
I hope you guys like this. You can let me know : ) P.S. I'll try to make these more visually interested soon; I'm just waiting on a teleprompter to arrive so I can use my better camera. Cheers!
I am so excited by this. I am an engineer but I took philosophy at university and it was a love I could not pursue and deeply miss. This fills my beginner philosophy-shaped hole.
Question for you pat, in your philosophical approach, you seem to rely a fair bit on what one may expect given x or what one may not expect given x. How do we know this is an accurate picture of reality, given that our expectations could be wrong or the ones we we initially expect are wrong can be rationalised into not being erroneous in some larger picture,. But how do we know if we are actually getting closer to the truth or are we just trying to make reality fit with our expectations? What if we can't rely on our expectations because we are very finite beings or even if something falls under our expectations, it could turn out to still be false even if it makes a lot of sense and something that does not fall under our expectation is truly part of reality but we have no idea how to make sense of it. It's just a concern I'm happy with certain probable arguments. It seems like whatever aligns with my expectations is correct or acts as confirmatory signs, but what if I have wrong expectations altogether. That said all the best to you, I really do enjoy making these types of expectation arguments.
Trying to say what Aristotle would have thought about modern concepts I feel is pretty unproductive. Aristotle was a product of his time and was limited to the current philosophical and scientific understanding of the time. Notable Aristotle was one of the first to argue that the earth was a sphere but he still thought it was the center of the universe. How could this understanding of reality not impact your less scientific and more philosophical beliefs? After all the importance placed on earth is infantly more central if you believe you are at the universes center.
![Chris Langan - The Interview THEY Didn't Want You To See - CTMU [Full Version; Timestamps]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9miVG2xT5jY/mqdefault.jpg)
Hi Patrick, I just wanted to let you know that I've read your book "The Best Argument for God," and I consider it one of the best on the subject. I also really enjoy the content you create here, as well as your articles on the CA website.
As someone who suffers from anxiety and OCD, I find that your work, while not directly related to these conditions, helps me relax and calms my mind.
Thank you for all that you do! 👍
Thank you, very much, for the kind words. It makes me smile to hear you've found my work so helpful. God bless you!
I hope you guys like this. You can let me know : )
P.S. I'll try to make these more visually interested soon; I'm just waiting on a teleprompter to arrive so I can use my better camera. Cheers!
Pat never rambles yo. But I'm psyched on this series concept.
Glad to hear it. More to come!
Hey Pat! I would love to see a video going over mereological nihilism aka partism.
@@Mdeil20 will definitely consider it!
I second this!
I am so excited by this. I am an engineer but I took philosophy at university and it was a love I could not pursue and deeply miss. This fills my beginner philosophy-shaped hole.
Love hearing this : )
Your world view is what you think IS and what you think OUGHT. Self is the story about how you fit into the world and society.
What are the chances you will have a discussion with Christian B Wagner from the channel Scholastic Answers in the future.
If somebody wants to organize it, I'd be happy to.
Question for you pat, in your philosophical approach, you seem to rely a fair bit on what one may expect given x or what one may not expect given x. How do we know this is an accurate picture of reality, given that our expectations could be wrong or the ones we we initially expect are wrong can be rationalised into not being erroneous in some larger picture,. But how do we know if we are actually getting closer to the truth or are we just trying to make reality fit with our expectations? What if we can't rely on our expectations because we are very finite beings or even if something falls under our expectations, it could turn out to still be false even if it makes a lot of sense and something that does not fall under our expectation is truly part of reality but we have no idea how to make sense of it. It's just a concern I'm happy with certain probable arguments. It seems like whatever aligns with my expectations is correct or acts as confirmatory signs, but what if I have wrong expectations altogether. That said all the best to you, I really do enjoy making these types of expectation arguments.
Trying to say what Aristotle would have thought about modern concepts I feel is pretty unproductive. Aristotle was a product of his time and was limited to the current philosophical and scientific understanding of the time. Notable Aristotle was one of the first to argue that the earth was a sphere but he still thought it was the center of the universe. How could this understanding of reality not impact your less scientific and more philosophical beliefs? After all the importance placed on earth is infantly more central if you believe you are at the universes center.
Truth does change.