Thanks to all my Patreon supports who continue to make this possible. TH-cam continues to make it difficult for independent content and I'm seeing less traffic overall from my videos being recommended by the algorithm - please subscribe, and more importantly, please, please hit that bell to let TH-cam know you do want to see these videos! Thanks everyone!
Olan McEvoy *Wes Cecil:* He is a English & Humanities professor out of Oregon. He is a true gem and the most accessible lecturer in the field of philosophy, civilizations and culture - in my opinion of course. *Philosophize This:* This is a podcast, but there is a TH-cam channel as well. If you are completely green on a particular philosopher, subject or movement this is an excellent resource to cut your teeth. They're relatively short episodes and the creator, Stephen West, clearly invests tremendous time and precision into his craft. *Corporeal Fantasy | Martin Butler:* A disclaimer, this channel is definitely an acquired taste. If you love Spinoza & Schopenhauer with a splash of Gurdjieff combined with art from surrealism you won't be disappointed. If you're looking for caffeinated *_"Pop-philosophy/School of Life"_* content - *skip this channel.* *Notable lecturers* to search for with several channels hosting their work: - *Michael B. Brezinsky:* Philosophy professor out of Louisiana. Excellent for a deep dive into Kant, Nietzsche, Heidegger and virtue ethics. - *Rick Roderick:* American professor of Philosophy. Very Socratic in his teaching style. Excellent tour guide into American post-modernism. Died young before his time. His lecture videos are 20+ yrs old and suprisingly durable. I'm sure I left out several phenomenal philosophy channels and lecturers, but those are just a few that come to mind that I have benefited from. Enjoy.
I used to debate myself in my head constantly about many points from simple to complicated issues and came to a conclusion that its the best to keep both sides of the argument as true and false at the same time. Any perspective is useful for something and can teach us something different,when i take something as true or false it changes the actions i take, and it works in one aspect, but has downside on many other aspects. There js a possibility that there are more than one, two or three sides of something, and when either is taken as true, all other fall in water and I miss out on many other positive aspects. its important to remember that everything is just someones perspective on something, and the truth about something can never be fully realized.
P1: Amazing video P2: not an amazing video P1: he used good sources and good writing P2: what determines a good source and writing? P1: there is no more direct way of citing literature in 13 minutes P2: this video is a summery of arguments, which is less than ideal material for study P1: good sourcing is when you discuss meanings and provide different variations and perspectives of the argument to give a fuller overview of the topic P2: how many variations? You've given no finite answer P1: if this is bad then the criteria for sourcing and good writing is impossible P2: bingo
Just a little comment to thank you for your work : you are amazing. I love philosophy, but I a have a limited time (I am a student) and intellectual capacity. But thank to your work and pedagogy I can learn the new concepts every day ! I am definitely starting to support you on Patreon. PS : your videos on Foucault and modernity are clearly 10/10 👏🏻
The art of suspending judgement to dislodge oneself from the burdens of questioning in light of the premise of ontological indeterminant has already been taught in a much earlier ascetic school founded by Sanjaya Belatthiputta in ancient India around 5th-6th century BCE contemporaneous to the Buddha.
Really?? Because Pyrrhon DID go to India! He also studied there! He travelled there with Anaxarchus, whom were friends with Alexander the Great himself! I mean, that is pretty awesome coincidence in history. Meaning, that pyrrhonism probably started from India, not Greece!
This has already been noted, but there is no evidence that Pyrrho either went to India, or that he encountered Indian philosophy in Greece unfortunately. And whilst it is not impossible that he did, we cannot definitively state he did, or did not. All we can do is observe the similarities and leave it at that, as the Stanford Online Encyclopedia of Philosphy does. The evidence we do have is indirect as Pyrrho did not publish his ideas, but his students did, and so we have to cautious in coming to conclusions. We often forget that we all draw from the same well of human experience, which is why the 5 Blind Philosophers and the Elephant allegory is one Pyrrho himself would appreciate.
To a Pyrrhonian nothing is apparent as by the modern day meaning of that word. Pyrrhonians have sensations, hence perceptions. Perception is the proper word to use in modern day context. A pyrrhonian can perceive a cliff and be inclined to step away. Not due to a belief, but due a concept of what a cliff is, an imagination of what happens when you fall of it and a preference for a different outcome. There's no belief, concept of reality, estimation / judgement involved. There's also no fear.
Great video! Just might be a little kinder to the Academy. After all, Diogenes Laertius says that the Platonist Arcesilaus was himself compared to Pyrrho in his skeptical turn to reading Plato!
Where do you think he began his video? "To have no position, is still a position." This is the Paradox of Skepticism, and possibly very close to being the root of the idea that we live in a simulation. Pyrrho's ideas are most useful in the necessity to not to hold onto ones opinions too tightly. We don't like uncertainty, and as it interferes with our need for order, but we tend to impose order on reality, just like the image coming into our eye is upside down, but our brain turns it what we call the "right way up." Hence Pyrrho's idea that neither our perceptions or beliefs are determinatively true or false. This friction between what we call Certain and Uncertainty drives much of our behaviour, mainly because we tend to imply Risk with Uncertainty. That's our evolutionary bias for survival at work, and such instincts trigger our Flight or Fight response, leaving us hyperaroused, anxious, or stressed. Pyrrho suggested detachment as suspension of judgement in order to find peace of mind when confronted by a dilemma. And his later followers expanded that to being a default position for approaching life in general. But the paradox of skepticism remains.
Ataraxia rather hard to experience. It appears that men struggle with knowledge when they do not make it clear to themselves exactly what knowledge is, thus there needs to be some sort of benchmark of knowledge or scale of knowledge, or a clear example of knowledge to which all other experiences are relative or comparable that one may say as much knowledge as X, in which case let X be pain, Y is as known as .... ?
Is not all talk of " knowledge empty waffle without some criterion of knowledge, something like as known as pain?-that known, thus it appears that knowledge is relative, that it can be said that X is as known as pain. When I experience pain, I do not suppose or believe that I am experiencing pain -there simply is no question about it, thus plainly I cannot say that I know that the battle of Hastings took place in 10066 as surely as I know when I hit my thumb with a hammer, from which it follows that the past cannot be *known* to that standard. It is meaningless to speak of "knowledge with out some basis for comparison- e.g. as *known* as pain. I it known that the sum of two and two is known exactly as pain is known? Thus there can be some measure of knowledge from which it follows that knowledge is relative-or one can say as known as X where X=pain, or pick anything else as a clear example of knowledge. From that it follows that knowledge can be defined as direct immediate personal experience, as direct immediate and personal as pain, for without some such comparator talk " of knowledge consists of nothing but vague generalisations it simply will not do to speak of knowledge without nailing it down or giving it a clear definition or satisfactory comparator, for example as know n as X, possibly as known as pain, which means that "we" can no mor *Know* than " we" can have a headache If pyrro aserts that few thing as can be known as pain is know, he is correct, which means that some sort of measure of knowledge must be established, for without such n objective measure, all talk of *Knowledge* can only be vague generalised blather.
Pragmatism: Whatever is convenient Skepticism: How do you know that pragmatism is better than skepticism? Quite evident that you're a pragmatist when the question is left unanswered. It's only more convenient that way. Convenience may bring you answers, but does it really bring you the right answers? Or are they wrong?
Thanks to all my Patreon supports who continue to make this possible. TH-cam continues to make it difficult for independent content and I'm seeing less traffic overall from my videos being recommended by the algorithm - please subscribe, and more importantly, please, please hit that bell to let TH-cam know you do want to see these videos! Thanks everyone!
This has to be the most underrated TH-cam philosophy channel. Maximum appreciation.
Tübermensch any recommendations for other channels?
Olan McEvoy *Wes Cecil:* He is a English & Humanities professor out of Oregon. He is a true gem and the most accessible lecturer in the field of philosophy, civilizations and culture - in my opinion of course.
*Philosophize This:* This is a podcast, but there is a TH-cam channel as well. If you are completely green on a particular philosopher, subject or movement this is an excellent resource to cut your teeth. They're relatively short episodes and the creator, Stephen West, clearly invests tremendous time and precision into his craft.
*Corporeal Fantasy | Martin Butler:* A disclaimer, this channel is definitely an acquired taste. If you love Spinoza & Schopenhauer with a splash of Gurdjieff combined with art from surrealism you won't be disappointed. If you're looking for caffeinated *_"Pop-philosophy/School of Life"_* content - *skip this channel.*
*Notable lecturers* to search for with several channels hosting their work:
- *Michael B. Brezinsky:* Philosophy professor out of Louisiana. Excellent for a deep dive into Kant, Nietzsche, Heidegger and virtue ethics.
- *Rick Roderick:* American professor of Philosophy. Very Socratic in his teaching style. Excellent tour guide into American post-modernism. Died young before his time. His lecture videos are 20+ yrs old and suprisingly durable.
I'm sure I left out several phenomenal philosophy channels and lecturers, but those are just a few that come to mind that I have benefited from.
Enjoy.
@@bebeezra Thank you! Much appreciated back. And thanks for the list... would add Greg Sadler to it!
nderrated by who?-you?
Ah, was waiting for this! Ever since I came to know about Pyrron, I just loved it. Thanks for making a video on it!
You're welcome! Thanks for watching :)
his name was Pyrro, not PyrroN.
I used to debate myself in my head constantly about many points from simple to complicated issues and came to a conclusion that its the best to keep both sides of the argument as true and false at the same time. Any perspective is useful for something and can teach us something different,when i take something as true or false it changes the actions i take, and it works in one aspect, but has downside on many other aspects. There js a possibility that there are more than one, two or three sides of something, and when either is taken as true, all other fall in water and I miss out on many other positive aspects. its important to remember that everything is just someones perspective on something, and the truth about something can never be fully realized.
P1: Amazing video
P2: not an amazing video
P1: he used good sources and good writing
P2: what determines a good source and writing?
P1: there is no more direct way of citing literature in 13 minutes
P2: this video is a summery of arguments, which is less than ideal material for study
P1: good sourcing is when you discuss meanings and provide different variations and perspectives of the argument to give a fuller overview of the topic
P2: how many variations? You've given no finite answer
P1: if this is bad then the criteria for sourcing and good writing is impossible
P2: bingo
This made me laugh, thanks :)
Just a little comment to thank you for your work : you are amazing. I love philosophy, but I a have a limited time (I am a student) and intellectual capacity. But thank to your work and pedagogy I can learn the new concepts every day ! I am definitely starting to support you on Patreon. PS : your videos on Foucault and modernity are clearly 10/10 👏🏻
I just became a Patreon supporter. It's a lot as I'm a student, however can't keep free-riding. I look forward to every single video! Great work!
The art of suspending judgement to dislodge oneself from the burdens of questioning in light of the premise of ontological indeterminant has already been taught in a much earlier ascetic school founded by Sanjaya Belatthiputta in ancient India around 5th-6th century BCE contemporaneous to the Buddha.
We're talking about the greeks though
Really?? Because Pyrrhon DID go to India! He also studied there! He travelled there with Anaxarchus, whom were friends with Alexander the Great himself!
I mean, that is pretty awesome coincidence in history. Meaning, that pyrrhonism probably started from India, not Greece!
This has already been noted, but there is no evidence that Pyrrho either went to India, or that he encountered Indian philosophy in Greece unfortunately. And whilst it is not impossible that he did, we cannot definitively state he did, or did not. All we can do is observe the similarities and leave it at that, as the Stanford Online Encyclopedia of Philosphy does. The evidence we do have is indirect as Pyrrho did not publish his ideas, but his students did, and so we have to cautious in coming to conclusions.
We often forget that we all draw from the same well of human experience, which is why the 5 Blind Philosophers and the Elephant allegory is one Pyrrho himself would appreciate.
the quality of this video was so impressive :o fantastic job on the narrative, visuals , your communication and the research behind it mate
lol nice one when Person A said, "i'm tired" lol
The collage shot in the beginning is really cool!
Gracias por estos vídeos, no sabes lo que aprendo con ellos :)
Great explanation!!! Thanks for the efforts
You should do a continuation to this. Addressing whether maybe I have a position, is a position? Addressing the paradox of skepticism.
It is not a paradox, save that all truth is essentially paradoxical.
To a Pyrrhonian nothing is apparent as by the modern day meaning of that word.
Pyrrhonians have sensations, hence perceptions. Perception is the proper word to use in modern day context. A pyrrhonian can perceive a cliff and be inclined to step away. Not due to a belief, but due a concept of what a cliff is, an imagination of what happens when you fall of it and a preference for a different outcome. There's no belief, concept of reality, estimation / judgement involved. There's also no fear.
Well said
OK, so Pyrrhonists were the original Galaxy Brain Centrists. Got it.
To quote a relatively recent sceptic, Krishnamurti:" The state of not-knowing *Is* intelligence.
I do not assert that I have given this video a thumbs up. I assert that only that there is the appearance of my having given this video a thumbs up.
Great video. Thanks for uploading. I think Skepticism is sadly overlooked.
Great video! Just might be a little kinder to the Academy. After all, Diogenes Laertius says that the Platonist Arcesilaus was himself compared to Pyrrho in his skeptical turn to reading Plato!
Agripa should have added that after the 5 modes, the opponent will start using his arguments again but with insults.
Really great video, I hope in the next time you could add sub (English), because it will get more point attention to each other.
Ty
What if Pyrro's point was that things are both indeterminate AND indeterminable, and he chose to present it in a succinct and poetic way?
That's exactly what I was thinking
What a great video!
Cool
Is the sceptic certain that they are sceptical. Good video. Will donate when I have some spare cash.
Woah, I came because I'm exploring Hellenistic philosophy but this is a rabbit hole I want to go down.
You really saved my lazy ass, I can’t thank you enough!
Isn’t a paradox circular when he starts talking about the position towards the end of the video
Where do you think he began his video? "To have no position, is still a position." This is the Paradox of Skepticism, and possibly very close to being the root of the idea that we live in a simulation. Pyrrho's ideas are most useful in the necessity to not to hold onto ones opinions too tightly. We don't like uncertainty, and as it interferes with our need for order, but we tend to impose order on reality, just like the image coming into our eye is upside down, but our brain turns it what we call the "right way up." Hence Pyrrho's idea that neither our perceptions or beliefs are determinatively true or false. This friction between what we call Certain and Uncertainty drives much of our behaviour, mainly because we tend to imply Risk with Uncertainty. That's our evolutionary bias for survival at work, and such instincts trigger our Flight or Fight response, leaving us hyperaroused, anxious, or stressed. Pyrrho suggested detachment as suspension of judgement in order to find peace of mind when confronted by a dilemma. And his later followers expanded that to being a default position for approaching life in general. But the paradox of skepticism remains.
11:58 do we have a JOKE?? on this channel?? Wow I’m astonished good on you
Haha, I know... must have eaten something weird. Might take this as a challenge to add one joke to each video!
Is that really a joke? How can you determine if it is a joke or not?
@@albertwidjaja5938Can we really know what a Joke is?
😊😊😊
Ataraxia rather hard to experience.
It appears that men struggle with knowledge when they do not make it clear to themselves exactly what knowledge is, thus there needs to be some sort of benchmark of knowledge or scale of knowledge, or a clear example of knowledge to which all other experiences are relative or comparable that one may say as much knowledge as X, in which case let X be pain, Y is as known as .... ?
Do we even know Phyrron said that?
"we" being you and who else?
Toby
To state you have no position does not entail that THAT is a position!🤣
Is not all talk of " knowledge empty waffle without some criterion of knowledge, something like as known as pain?-that known, thus it appears that knowledge is relative, that it can be said that X is as known as pain.
When I experience pain, I do not suppose or believe that I am experiencing pain -there simply is no question about it, thus plainly I cannot say that I know that the battle of Hastings took place in 10066 as surely as I know when I hit my thumb with a hammer, from which it follows that the past cannot be *known* to that standard.
It is meaningless to speak of "knowledge with out some basis for comparison- e.g. as *known* as pain.
I it known that the sum of two and two is known exactly as pain is known?
Thus there can be some measure of knowledge from which it follows that knowledge is relative-or one can say as known as X where X=pain, or pick anything else as a clear example of knowledge.
From that it follows that knowledge can be defined as direct immediate personal experience, as direct immediate and personal as pain, for without some such comparator talk " of knowledge consists of nothing but vague generalisations it simply will not do to speak of knowledge without nailing it down or giving it a clear definition or satisfactory comparator, for example as know n as X, possibly as known as pain, which means that "we" can no mor *Know* than " we" can have a headache
If pyrro aserts that few thing as can be known as pain is know, he is correct, which means that some sort of measure of knowledge must be established, for without such n objective measure, all talk of *Knowledge* can only be vague generalised blather.
.ins.
I am the skepticest of all. I don't have any views and I don't do philosophy and I just eat pizza.
I'm tired
Pragmatism> scepticism
Pragmatism: Whatever is convenient
Skepticism: How do you know that pragmatism is better than skepticism?
Quite evident that you're a pragmatist when the question is left unanswered. It's only more convenient that way.
Convenience may bring you answers, but does it really bring you the right answers? Or are they wrong?
the amount of bullshittery
Too bad greek philosophy is so boring
I'm tired