I've always known, from back in the 90's, that this is the man I'm going to look to for the truth. I'm not an educated man and I have to take notes and really pay attention to grasp what he is saying in these videos. What a blessing it is to live in the same age as Bishop Williamson. He really is a light in this darkness.
Wow, my brain just exploded! "The parents want the corruption of the youth in the schools. They don't want their children coming home and telling them they are not living right!" That is so true! Never heard it put into words!
The core of the Kantian view is - instead of God creating Man, Man creates God. Therefore the argument one so often hears today, you're free to practice your religion but your belief is not based in reality therefore when push comes to shove the State (man's power) is God. Besides needing Kantian ideas to justify moral sin, at its root, it justifies that God isn't real and something man creates to make himself feel better. This evil has a Source. SO easy to understand Kant! He can't. He just Kant do it. He's a big zero and a nothing! He Can't! If you Kant understand this go back to Aquinas and his proof of God. Air tight. No flaws.
Vatican 2's destruction of the First Commandment is based on the premise you state. "Nostra Aetate" would have us believe that goodness and holiness are found in all religions. That's because these Modernists worship man himself, and they believe man is the source of religion, so it's all sacred.
What a bunch of utter garbage. He says: He relies on his senses all they long: When he sees hot black liquid, he knows it's coffee. -> Technically yes, but actually no. The human assumes that things are as the senses show them. Unfortunately, however, the senses are not an incontrovertible medium that allows me to perceive reality as such. He cannot say that he knows there is coffee there, but that he thinks he knows there is coffee there. He has a mental state about a mental state, but that is not the mental state itself. We may even see a lot of truth in common sense, but common sense cannot articulate why that is. It cannot give reasons! It is thus completely unreflective and useless. He claims that Thomas Aquinas is true and Kant is false. Okay, where is the argument? Heterosexuality and homosexuality are not moral positions. Sexuality is amoral unless one is already assuming a religious-inspired morality, which itself is not even substantiated but merely asserted. Hegel speaks of real opposites. It can be said that the theorem of contradiction in its condition of application falls away, because Hegel does not conceive of things statically, but dynamically, and characterises them in terms of process. The point is: the dialectical movement works precisely because we hold to the law of contradiction in such a way that we apply it against one-sided absolutisations and in the culmination, against the one-sided absolutisation of understanding itself, which makes use of the theorem of contradiction. Real example of a contradiction: I can stand in the room and not stand in the room at the same time. This is when I stand in the doorway with one foot in the room and the other foot not in the room. So yes, what Williamson is saying in this video is really stupid. Don't waste your time on this like I did.
I’d suggest to you that standing at the threshold of a room in the manner you describe is not what most people mean by standing in a room! But even if it were, it wouldn’t matter. What the law of contradiction says is that you can’t at the same time both stand in that way and not stand in that way.
"Human assume things as senses show them" Senses aren't capable of abstract objects for example knowing what cat is as such by seeing a cat and abstract from them of what a cat is extent to infinity or rise up to higher Intelligibility beyond the capacity of what senses can do.
Saying what his excellence say is garbage without understanding a single word of what he means and brought up Hegel is just utterly moronic and retarded. "Principle of Contradiction" that is just utterly retarded and nonsense. Principle of Non-Contradiction is the principle of logic itself or the logical premises for logic. Being is non-contradiction there is principle of Identity and distinction and St Thomas Aquinas use this Aristotelian dialectic to draw the distinction and resolve the puzzles.
![เปิดคำทำนาย นอสตราดามุส - บาบา วานก้า ปี 2025 คนทั่วโลกต้องเจออะไรบ้าง? | แฉ 11 ธ.ค. 67 [2/3] |GMM25](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xmTIKWJUMPM/mqdefault.jpg)
You've done very well to publish these for everyone.
you're welcome
I've always known, from back in the 90's, that this is the man I'm going to look to for the truth. I'm not an educated man and I have to take notes and really pay attention to grasp what he is saying in these videos. What a blessing it is to live in the same age as Bishop Williamson. He really is a light in this darkness.
Wow, my brain just exploded! "The parents want the corruption of the youth in the schools. They don't want their children coming home and telling them they are not living right!" That is so true! Never heard it put into words!
God bless you, Bishop Williamson!
Just two words---thank you !!!
your welcome :)
The “Strawberry fields” analogy was just enlightening
The Copernican revolution should have been the signal that man had begun to worship himself.
“We can’t go into the form of things because that’s another story.” Lol Precisely.
How would I get in contact with him?
Bishop Williamson, would the three terms "mind", "intellect" and "soul" mean the same faculty? Thanks.
The soul is composed of intellect (to know Truth) and will (to choose/do the Good).
31:38 Clippable content.
15:00
The core of the Kantian view is - instead of God creating Man, Man creates God.
Therefore the argument one so often hears today, you're free to practice your religion but your belief is not based in reality therefore when push comes to shove the State (man's power) is God.
Besides needing Kantian ideas to justify moral sin, at its root, it justifies that God isn't real and something man creates to make himself feel better. This evil has a Source.
SO easy to understand Kant! He can't. He just Kant do it.
He's a big zero and a nothing! He Can't!
If you Kant understand this go back to Aquinas and his proof of God. Air tight. No flaws.
Vatican 2's destruction of the First Commandment is based on the premise you state. "Nostra Aetate" would have us believe that goodness and holiness are found in all religions. That's because these Modernists worship man himself, and they believe man is the source of religion, so it's all sacred.
What a bunch of utter garbage.
He says: He relies on his senses all they long: When he sees hot black liquid, he knows it's coffee.
-> Technically yes, but actually no.
The human assumes that things are as the senses show them.
Unfortunately, however, the senses are not an incontrovertible medium that allows me to perceive reality as such.
He cannot say that he knows there is coffee there, but that he thinks he knows there is coffee there. He has a mental state about a mental state, but that is not the mental state itself.
We may even see a lot of truth in common sense, but common sense cannot articulate why that is. It cannot give reasons! It is thus completely unreflective and useless.
He claims that Thomas Aquinas is true and Kant is false. Okay, where is the argument?
Heterosexuality and homosexuality are not moral positions. Sexuality is amoral unless one is already assuming a religious-inspired morality, which itself is not even substantiated but merely asserted.
Hegel speaks of real opposites. It can be said that the theorem of contradiction in its condition of application falls away, because Hegel does not conceive of things statically, but dynamically, and characterises them in terms of process.
The point is: the dialectical movement works precisely because we hold to the law of contradiction in such a way that we apply it against one-sided absolutisations and in the culmination, against the one-sided absolutisation of understanding itself, which makes use of the theorem of contradiction.
Real example of a contradiction: I can stand in the room and not stand in the room at the same time. This is when I stand in the doorway with one foot in the room and the other foot not in the room.
So yes, what Williamson is saying in this video is really stupid. Don't waste your time on this like I did.
Your critique is just word salad.
I’d suggest to you that standing at the threshold of a room in the manner you describe is not what most people mean by standing in a room! But even if it were, it wouldn’t matter. What the law of contradiction says is that you can’t at the same time both stand in that way and not stand in that way.
"Human assume things as senses show them"
Senses aren't capable of abstract objects for example knowing what cat is as such by seeing a cat and abstract from them of what a cat is extent to infinity or rise up to higher Intelligibility beyond the capacity of what senses can do.
Sexuality is moral issue because it's about Teleology and purpose of what sexuality is for and what it is not.
Saying what his excellence say is garbage without understanding a single word of what he means and brought up Hegel is just utterly moronic and retarded.
"Principle of Contradiction" that is just utterly retarded and nonsense.
Principle of Non-Contradiction is the principle of logic itself or the logical premises for logic.
Being is non-contradiction there is principle of Identity and distinction and St Thomas Aquinas use this Aristotelian dialectic to draw the distinction and resolve the puzzles.