Literature vs Philosophy - Iris Murdoch & Bryan Magee (1977)
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 22 ก.ค. 2021
- A clip of Iris Murdoch discussing the similarities and differences between literature and philosophy in an interview with Bryan Magee from 1977 that I quite like. This is a re-upload from the previous channel. The full interview can be found here: • Philosophy & Literatur...
#Philosophy #BryanMagee #Literature
Please don’t stop the uploads, your old videos were great. Your very appreciated
It pains me to see you still at such a low subscriber count, hopefully more of your old subscribers will find you again as this content is much needed for those of us with philosophical inclinations, much appreciated.
The algorithm gave me this precious gem today. I should say though that I usually use youtube for philosophy and comedy, surprised it hasn't showed up earlier:)
EXCELLENT! Thanks so much for sharing!!
For a more enlightened view of the relation between philosophy and literature, read Hume's 'Of the Different Species of Philosophy' in his 'Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding'.
For an apparent repudiation of both philosophy and literature -- oddly enough by a man who is considered both a great philosopher and ingenious man of letters himself -- read Rousseau's 'Discourse on the Arts and Sciences'.
This is awesome, thank you sir/ma’am!
I absolutly do not agree with her on this, it is well known that Nietczhe was influenced by Dostoyevsky not the other way, then Camus, Hesse, Musil, Rand, Sartre, Turgenev (pretty much coined the term Nihilism etc) are all philosoposers (to lesser or larger degree) and express them in their litterature. Then ''ordinary philosophers'' such as Nietczhe, Kirkegaard, Voiltere etc did write many of their most important works as fiction or partly fiction.
Murdoch did clearly not write as them, I would rather say she indeed mystifies and then puts in a bit of philosophy, but they are not at their core philosophical I would argue
keep these coming
Philosophy is most simply defined as reflection on life and existence, with its ultimate problems being, how we should live, and what it all means ?
Hey, what happened to your channel? The other day I went to review the video on Averroes you posted some time ago and was disappointed to find your channel had been reset. Thank you for the consistent and thought provoking posts. I hope you are able to amass the great library of philosophy content you once had.
The aim of literature is first and foremost to simply entertain, yet its history also indicates that it has been frequently used to transmit cultural values and to inspire its readers to acts of courage and adventure, morality and goodness, sympathy and compassion, love and romance, faith and worship... Moreover, in its own way, literature is (or, at least can be) an examination of life-- no less than is philosophy. Indeed, philosophical writing is itself only a more disciplined and rigorous form of literature - for it is not enough for the philosopher merely to enlighten us about some profound truth about the general nature of life and existence, but to show its relevance to how we actually live our lives. In other words, philosophy is not reducible to being defined in terms of the scientific. Philosophy is not simply about truth, it's about values, it's about life, it's about the ultimate value and meaning of life -- as in, the unexamined life is not worth living ! The best literature does same -- Shakespeare, Hemingway, Twain, Eliot...
Please provide a donation area!
👌👌👌
She has such a high opinion of Plato... A philosopher who wrote in a celebrated literary style, and this is not even acknowledged when she talks about wishing to separate the two.
It seems both the interviewer and the interviewee support each other which makes me wonder by what method they two read Spinoza, Nietzsche, etc. as well. Cliff Notes?
Philosophy is disturbing to people because it asks people who live their lives subjectively -- who depend every day on their commonsense, fundamental values and beliefs, and their intuitions and emotions for guidance in life-- to view their lives objectively -- rationality, coldly, indifferently, and to question their commonsense, values, beliefs, intuitions, and emotions in a critical way. When you challenge someone's foundation upon which they lead their life, one should only expect this person to feel somewhat disturbed by the impudence of your challenge. As Socrates found-out !
One should keep literature and philosophical writing apart ? Has she never heard of Plato ? Voltaire ? Nietzsche ? Carroll ? Kafka ?
Science is the handmaiden for philosophy. (Contra the positivists)
Philosophy is not a vast and multifarious endeavor ? What has the philosopher not dared to ask ? What has he not considered a proper subject for his reflection, analysis, and commentary ? What reality or fantasy has the philosopher not imagined that is found only in woks of pure fiction ?