Natural Law Theory: Crash Course Philosophy #34
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ก.ค. 2024
- Our exploration of ethical theories continues with another theistic answer to the grounding problem: natural law theory. Thomas Aquinas’s version of this theory says that we all seek out what’s known as the basic goods and argued that instinct and reason come together to point us to the natural law. There are, of course, objections to this theory - in particular, the is-ought problem advanced by David Hume.
--
Produced in collaboration with PBS Digital Studios: / pbsdigitalstudios
--
Want to find Crash Course elsewhere on the internet?
Facebook - / youtubecrashcourse
Twitter - / thecrashcourse
Tumblr - / thecrashcourse
Support CrashCourse on Patreon: / crashcourse
CC Kids: / crashcoursekids
I really Kant.
Scary how much I rely on his videos to get me through A level RE
me right now
UMC _19 big mood
RE isn't taught very well in Australia. How is it where you are?
@@Ggdivhjkjl avoid those sweeping statements! Quality of education is different from teacher to teacher, school to school - often regardless of the state/country curriculum. The best teachers can take a messy curriculum with a shitty class and turn it around with fun and interesting lessons that go beyond the base requirements. I had a very open-minded and passionate teacher for RE at my high-school in Canberra and she taught damn well! Now I have a warn down intolerant teacher for college and I too find it scary how much I'm relying on Crash Course...
Watches a Crash Course Philosophy Ethics video on TH-cam instead of writing my actual Ethics essay for university.
Good luck with that. I decided to skip all classes and just study the textbooks for two Psych courses, "Tests and Measurements" and "Existential Phenomenological Psychology". Worked fine for "Tests and Measurements", I ended up with a "B". But the Existential class only had a single question on an essay test, and I ended up turning in a blank paper for an "F" and a headache.
Or did you perform subject matter research on the topic of your essay?
I'm curious. when you study philosophy and write exams, do you write what you believe or do you write stuff like "this guy in history said this and this other guy argued that etc etc" like how are you graded?
TheAnnihilator89 i use "this guys and that guys" arguments and ideas to kind of back up my own interpretation of the issue/question if that makes sense
Samuel Fanara OK I get it
Kant wait for the next one.
(sorry, not sorry)
someone had to say it
I laughed when I read this, and now I am very disappointed with myself
oh BOY, Categorical Imperative?! Categorical Imperative HERE. WE. GO!!!
Me Nietzsche!
Theorak
you kant
Emanuel Kant, tell me what to do !!!
A manual can't tell me what to do !!!
This is pure gold
One of the things I like about Crash Course is that it feels like I'm learning a lot, but it doesn't take long. I hardly notice 10 minutes have passed by the time the video ends.
LOVE how you brought up the "Don't Forget to be Awesome" quote near the beginning.
it's the golden rule in Greeneic.
Cool profile pic
Yeah, I was like: "I see what you did there..."
Is this where DFTBA came from? Not this video, but this idea
The vlogbrothers, John and Hank Green got it from somewhere but did so much to popularize it that it has kinda become their thing. Of course, I bet they don't mind others using it as well. =)
I love the way you explain things. It almost makes me cry after reading my course books which unnecessarily complicate things 🥺
Crash course is a better resource then my university lectures that I'm paying for. Sad.
1:10
I see what you did there...
With all the "Kant" puns in the comments section I was starting to think that I was the only one...
darling fetch the battle axe!
Lolz #dftba
dont forget, brains attract
That made me smile so much.
I love how Kant showed up on the edge of the screen, as "kant" is Swedish for edge.
Not just swedish; 'kant' means edge in a lot of european languages. (" from Old North French cant "corner" (perhaps via Middle Low German kante or Middle Dutch kant), from Vulgar Latin *canthus, from Latin cantus "iron tire of a wheel," possibly from a Celtic word meaning "rim of wheel, edge" (compare Welsh cant "bordering of a circle, tire, edge," Breton cant "circle"), from PIE *kam-bo- "corner, bend," from root *kemb- "to bend, turn, change" (source also of Greek kanthos "corner of the eye," Russian kutu "corner")."
In polish language it is "kant" too (as the meaning of edge). :)
Just "kant", no "ą" "ł" and other stuff.
Cool. I didn't want to mention other languages because I was only sure about the word in Swedish. I love learning new things. :D
So he was an edgy guy?
What is this russian kutu you talk about? I can only think of 'kant' as an edge of a piece of cloth/ item of clothing.
I turned out an acceptably educated young man. Barely good enough, I mean. I can't help but obsess over how much better I could have been today if I had had access to videos like these back in high school! I never cease marveling at what a great resource this channel is! Thank you for sharing.
1:56 Actually made me chuckle. It doesn't take a hard look around to see plenty of people doing things that are definitely not what's best for them.
If you get the "Don't Forget to be Awesome" reference, you've been here for a long time.
Adrián Buenfil Darling Fetch The Battle Axe!
+
Adrián Buenfil while I've been a long time fan, I missed that reference. I get it, but totally missed it.
Adrián Buenfil :)
unless...you..are...the mongols :'D
This was awesome and i loved it, i may not agree with the natural law theory but i really love to hear what both sides in any argument has to say, so that i can form my own decisions based on as much information as possible.
***** Of course i understand that this is a simplified version of it. I could give a rough version of Jordan B Petersons "maps of meaning" which is around 15-20 hours i believe but i havent looked at how long. I simply liked this video, first of all because it covers a lot of ground in very little time.
Agree to disagree...
@@TheRobExpo That isn't real natural law. That guy is completely ignorant and you should stick to academic philosophers on the subject.
Thank goodness for Crash Course! Even though I read all about this 1st, my brain doesn't seem to soak it in until I watch these. Thanks man!!
Thank you crash course! Your psychology and philosophy videos are helping me understand my college chapters better.
I cant stop loving this man
This concept always tripped me up, thanks guys!
I have never been more thrilled for the next episode
I was stuck, so now I'm here
I'm so glad there's a video about this
Hi classmates! 🤣 I know you're here because of the online class
Thank you for this very interesting episode.
I love crash course. Been here learning since the beginning
your lesson is also AWESOME!
"Do all the procreating you want" - Hank Green, 2016
I am super excited for the next episode!!! I am working on a conference project on Immanual Kant (I go to sarah Lawrence, we do crazy semester long projects called conference projects) and so I hope i can get tons of useful information from this!
Amazing! Thank you for the video.
I am so glad this series exists. I would not be able to pass my PHL class without!
STOP LEAVING ME AT SUPSENSE!!! Great video. I'm enjoying the philosophy series.
thanks to the makers of crash course, I learn a lot from their videos
The explanation was so satisfying that I understood it so easily
I’ve been listening to all of the Crash Course Philosophy episodes while I’m at work and I gotta say they have been my most productive days by far. I work at target so it’s easy for me to be able to do my job and also listen and ponder all the content of this series. Really great stuff, I’m already starting a list of books that I need to read. If anyone has any suggestions lmk!! Right now I’m mostly interested in ethics and the concept of morality. As a non-religious person I’m not comfortable with saying I have morals without any reason for having those morals. Also, the more I think, the more I realize that I’m not entirely consistent with what I believe. My favorite thing in the world is getting my worldview shattered with new evidence so these philosophy videos have been like crack😅
getting hyped for Kantian ethics!
Thomas De Aquino, folks! Thanks for the videos, always awesome ones
this channel is so helpful thanks you so much!
It would be cool if you guys turn some of these into a coloring book. Perhaps it would make memorizing history easier. :) Love your videos!!! Keep up the good work!
This is definitely my favorite Crash Course series! You're awesome, Hank! =)
Can't wait for next week. I've studied Kant's approach to morality and ethics in school and it has been my favorite since then. Can't wait to see what you have to say about it!
thank you! amazing video as usual
I said it before and I'll say it again: Crash Course is the best thing on the internet.
"It's important that you don't forget to be awesome" - roll credits!
3:21 Wow, I thought I was the only one with that feeling. It is pretty cathartic to find that I am not.
juuustt started this in a-level philosophy.. great timing!!!!!
YES!!! The categorical imperative is next. I can't wait, and neither should you! ;)
Another great lesson from Thomas Aquinus, the manus.
Yeah gotta love "the hand"
Divia Whiteberg Ah you beat me to it! lol
Gotta do what I gotta do, you know?
Anyway Marc, don't you have some speeches to write or some letters to Atticus? :P
Divia Whiteberg Nah, I've just been a bit melancholy over not getting into ERB Western vs Eastern Philosophers. Melior quam Voltaire sum.
@Marci marc Damn bro. Voltaire is cool but you have to give it up for the OGs
That's like giving a medal for best epic poem written in Italy to Dante while making eye contact with Virgil
If they have western vs eastern orators though you've got it
Excellent video! When I saw 7 basic goods, I thought "Oh no, the new natural law of Grisez and Finnis!" But the basic goods here are straight out of Thomas and have an order among them. Very impressive presentation! Still watching...
Love this series!!!
Another great one, thanks. The first couple of chapters of CS Lewis's "Mere Christianity" contain a similar idea.
Forgive me Crash Course for I have sinned. I had several chom-choms this weekend and forgot to refer to them as such. I am so sorry
😂😂
Indeed
When I say "Explain it to me like I'm five." this is what I mean.
Thank you, David Hume.
by the way i love your page you are doing a better job at teaching me this stuff than my professor. i showed your page to everyone in my class and they all agree
You know, even as an atheist, I do respect Thomas Aquinas' approach to rationality and reason. I do feel if he had an intellectual individual to lock horns with, verbally that is, they could have come up with some really nice stuff.
agreed, man was big brain
@@brendankapp5237 I think you mean Big Brian
His colleagues in the seminary called him the "dumb ox" because he was big and didn't like talking in front of the class. Then one day he helped out a classmate who was struggling to explain something and stunned the whole class (except the teacher who'd been marking his papers).
Sitting an RE exam in a few hours, arrived here, thanks for saving meeee
Congrats on 5 million subscribers!
Nice video! It would be great to add Aquinas's answer to Dave Hume's objection ...
When you're studying global law and crash course is still life
I was really hoping for a bit of Locke Hobbes and Rousseau. Also you dont exactly have to believe in god to believe in natural law, Grotius was the first in the 17th century to push a secular natural law.
Doesnt make sense tho, the end of athiesm is no morality and hedonism
@@marlonmunguia163 or it can go the exact opposite
@@jthemagicrobot3960 that makes absolutely no sense, athiesm only makes some sense through nihilism. Nihilism denys the existence of absolute truth which goes against your claim that athiesm somehow leads to virtue
@@marlonmunguia163 atheism splits to two different paths one as you state nihilism / hedonism the other is totally control of self. it is this path that causes you to adopt certain behaviors which ironically resemble in action that of Christianity (or how Christianity was). Actually think about what it means to have no god. ps I'm not an atheist and I understand this.
@@jthemagicrobot3960 the other side sounds more like Buddhism than anything, controlling ones emotions immensely. There is no logical reason for an athiest to adopt a moral code, this is because there is no reason for an athiest to believe in absolute truth. It makes man an animal instead of a creature that has an immortal soul which is believed by Christians. Athiests can be moral, but it would go contrary to their belief that there is "no God"
you guys are just awesome. I love this video
thank you for these videos!!!!
This is actually one of the most sensible interpretations of "god's will" that I've heard so far....
"It's just important that you don't...forget to be awesome."
*looks into the camera like I'm in The Office*
Great video!
Ahhh...I love this chanel.Finally achanel which providew us significant amount of knowledge about how our life and the ralations between us work.more generally philosophy!!!!
I love this Aquinas, guy.
I wish I were a philosopher...
So be one.
Max10192 Touché...
Nah, be a mathematician. Same use of logic, but the goal is agreement rather than disagreement
Well, physicists were once called Natural Philosophers....
APaleDot your comment made me smile :)
This is such a good show
My fave philosopher's up next. I. Kant wait!
I don't really think you gave the is-ought problem justice. It's not really about the bias of assigning ought based on how things are (or have been), but more of the inherent logical leap that is frequently taken when reasoning from how the world IS to how the world OUGHT to be. Basically, it's not clear how we get from IS to OUGHT, and this is a fundamental problem.
exactly
+
The world is in the state "x". In this "x", it exists a guy with the desire A, and this desire is stronger than all the other desires he has. So, the world, for the guy, ought to be in the way that desire A is satisfying. Ought from is. Am I wrong?
+
Yes, you are still using the word ought to mean simply that things are. The problem of the natural law fallacy is that one assumes that we can derive something without spacial-temporal features from that which is inseparable from them. When one says that something ought to be a certain way they are saying that it should be that way irrespective of how it is in any sense being now or later. The line of reasoning you just used could be used to justify murder without even discussing what is to be the object of ethics; that is because to natural law the object is simply that which is and nothing more. The central concern for the natural law theorist in morality is diametrically oposed to how human beings experience morality. You wouldn't say that something is right simply because it happened, would you? In your own example you devised a hierarchy of intensity for desire, and natural law theorsits generate a similar hierarchy (like Aquinas did)for relative goods to amend this. However, is it not then, something intrinsic to the nature of the goods by which we make moral judgements, and not by the arbitrary metric of how something is that we judge? This is why natural law tends to depend on god, because that lets them ignore the problem of the hierarchy. However, natural law theory still requires that one relinquish reason to a natural law fallacy in order to infer what those natural laws just so happen to be.
I remember having a debate on the last video about this concept.
This was really interesting.
I've got a friend who self-describes as a Natural Law Theorist (I'm about as far as one can get). Been waiting for this episode!
I have a question. Is it possible to maintain a natural law theory without believing in the divine source? Why or why not?
AND AS WE SAY IN MY HOMETOWN, "DON'T FORGET TO BE AWESOME"
love the start
Oh my goodness, I'm in love with your videos!!! I am definitely getting an A on my exam tomorrow. Thanks a million!!!
I'm guessing this was pre-recorded since Hank is on vacation. By the way, congrats on being a new dad Hank!
Love the channel! 💙
Read Finnis’s book, Moral Absolutes, and you can see how the Is-Ought problem is solved by Natural Law philosophers.
thank you sir for your channel.
This is a pretty good one.
I really love philosophy.
I Kant see your point, mr.
Ugh, this hurts my brain.
I need a chom chom
AMEN! I SAY THIS ALMOST 5 TIMES A DAY! 😄
You are amazing thank you.
please do a video on situation ethics, these videos are soo helpful and explain topics to me in a way that I can easily understand!
When you finish this series, you should sing the Philosophers Song from Monty Python.
At 5:40 I kind of thought Hank was going to say "And if you think it through with your goddamn brain for a second..."
Very inspiring word, "Owesome" related creator and created. Owesome is an analogy of dignity. Thank you, you Arie Owesome Sir.
Love this so good for revision
Sees Kant pop out from the side of the frame
CATEGORICAL IMPERATIVE INTENSIFIES
I want to know what the conversation was like when the writer(s) realized they could frame Aquinas's message in the form of DFTBA. I imagine there was giggling.
i like your discussion a lot. i only got to the maximum of 5 minute listening capacity but if topic is interesting i can stay an hr or more.
thanks. A lot to think about.
Search the seminar Mark Passio gave on Natural Law on TH-cam. It’s extremely informative, detailed and groundbreaking.
Watching this instead of actually studying for my exam
Thanks, Hank!
The whooshing vapor tendrils at the end are so relaxing.... ahhhhhh
The Bible does not say, "do not kill." It says thou shall not murder. " It's a difference. Murder requires premeditated.
i have a kantegorical imperative to watch the next episode
Awesome!!
I love crash course philosophy!