Episode

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 7 ก.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 36

  • @Z1ddee
    @Z1ddee 4 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    I've listened to alot of podcasts and TH-cam videos on philosophy and your channel by far has been my favorite. You make philosophy relevant and easy to understand all without being pretentious. Thanks so much for your hard work. You deserve way more views and likes than what you have.

  • @thooks30
    @thooks30 6 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    Love your show. Thank you for all of your hard work. I can’t get enough and share with all of my friends and family. Thanks for all of your efforts.

  • @ryanholsapple5179
    @ryanholsapple5179 6 ปีที่แล้ว +10

    I LOVE THIS PODCAST

    • @elijaguy
      @elijaguy 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      so does me. very much so!

  • @tjk355
    @tjk355 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    This is one of your best yet.

  • @elijaguy
    @elijaguy 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    0:52 is polarity inevitable here? perhaps a continuous interaction between culture molding individuals and individuals molding their cultures, all the time, everywhere?

  • @snakeh9836
    @snakeh9836 6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    a zen talk would be fun.

  • @mattgilbert7347
    @mattgilbert7347 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    This is excellent work.
    When I go to your site and click on the link to the transcript to episodes 116 and 117, the link takes me to the transcript for ep 113 (Frankfurt School) which is an episode I have listened to, and I did go to the transcript for some quote-mining :) I wonder if the problem is at my end? I'd really like to be able to extract a few lines from the transcripts to these Structuralist episodes, for the purposes of sharing, or as a bit of "clickbait" when I share the audio to my Facebook. More people should be following your podcasts, and I'd like to think that by sharing, I'm maybe helping to bring a few more listeners to this excellent channel.
    Thanks, Steven.

  • @hashishincloudyeyes6887
    @hashishincloudyeyes6887 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Love the show!

  • @keegster7167
    @keegster7167 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    I love Ferdinand de Saussure!! I’m so glad you mentioned him. But to me, he’s a linguist

    • @sandersnoeren9683
      @sandersnoeren9683 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      I think he mentions that in the episode before this

  • @FranciscoAlvRai
    @FranciscoAlvRai 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    The knowledge in myth is only hidden to the literal eyes of the modern folk, but there's nothing obtuse about it nor is it trying to be. It's the most direct way you can say something at that level of complexity.
    Also, to call propaganda technics a kind of mythology is a gross reductionist misrepresentation.

  • @christinemartin63
    @christinemartin63 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Yeah, I can see how this would be. We are free to swim however we want--but are confined to the limits of our pool (i.e., context of our birth).

  • @teopasca6403
    @teopasca6403 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    "you didn't come out the womb waving at everyone"

  • @PreciseVids
    @PreciseVids 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    26:37 This is the society we live in.

  • @connerfields4753
    @connerfields4753 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Didn't the pragmatist philosopher Charles Sanders Pierce also found a more complex and technical version of semiotics at the same time?

    • @91jubaku
      @91jubaku 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      CS Peirce wrote about semiotics in the 1860s. De Saussure was born in 1857. But they were contemporaries, dying around the same time, so we should consider both founders of semiotics I would say

  • @PeterZeeke
    @PeterZeeke 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    This vocalises something I could never articulate my entire life

  • @abch5807
    @abch5807 4 ปีที่แล้ว

    🙏 Guru Dev 🙏

  • @122222770
    @122222770 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    So, if I'm in a pool and I'm swimming it's not me swimming but the structural push of the water imposing it's cultural assumptions on me? :)

  • @mobiditch6848
    @mobiditch6848 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    I get waved at a lot...but curiously they’re all missing four fingers.

  • @connerfields4753
    @connerfields4753 6 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    "God decides he needs to shake the etch-a-sketch and Noah needs to build an ark".

  • @JH-ji6cj
    @JH-ji6cj หลายเดือนก่อน

    2 minutes in and already I have a problem with the idea that babies _don't wave_ first thing after leaving the womb. You also 'wave' when drowning as a reflexive attention cevice meant to indicate need or want of attention.
    I'll keep liatening, but the idea that cutures 'make-up' or coerce subjects over co-opting natural or innate behaviors seems the opposite of how social structure emerges?

  • @samthesomniator
    @samthesomniator 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Interpretation of Mythology as a factual story. That is the thing with creationism. 😂

  • @mariadsouza9616
    @mariadsouza9616 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    WOW

  • @politics4270
    @politics4270 ปีที่แล้ว

    😂❤❤❤

  • @brianharris6437
    @brianharris6437 ปีที่แล้ว

    The way the presenter mangles the surname of Roland Barthes really grates on my ears; it should sound like Bart and not Bars because final S is nearly always silent in French words. This is on par with saying René Dess Cars. Next time he should spend the two minutes at most it takes to track down the right pronunciation online. It's on Wikipedia, for goodness sake!

  • @frederickanderson1860
    @frederickanderson1860 3 ปีที่แล้ว

    Stupid reasoning its obvious that any stupid person who meditates too much. Philosophers think to much and always never come to a final conclusion.

  • @puneetsharma4687
    @puneetsharma4687 6 ปีที่แล้ว

    this is completely bs , you can make up any meaning out of stories you like, from the most immoral story you can map so really valuable moral.

    • @91jubaku
      @91jubaku 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Not all meanings extracted by interpretation are valid or true

    • @mobiditch6848
      @mobiditch6848 6 ปีที่แล้ว

      Puneet Sharma interesting that you didn’t “make up (just) any (old) meaning”, but rather produced a fairly typical ill considered meaning. A meaning participating in and demonstrating the very notions treated. Certainly there are multiple and even contradictory meanings available yet not “any” possible meaning since for instance I didn’t get the atmospheric conditions on average for temperatures in July for Los Angeles. There are clearly constraints to the interpretive possibilities; at least if I wish to be semi coherent in a conversation with others. Even if I were to suggest that this lecture is at bottom a discussion of Southern California weather my interlocutor would be accurate in assuming that I was either demented or maybe experimenting with a highly idiosyncratic poetic device. Yet even then the interpretation would be checked within certain constraints.

    • @mobiditch6848
      @mobiditch6848 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Oners82 good one!!!