"Philosophical Insights: Will Durant's Perspective on David Hume"
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 16 พ.ค. 2015
- Delve into the philosophical insights of David Hume, one of the most influential figures of the Scottish Enlightenment and a pioneer of empiricism and skepticism, with the esteemed historian, Will Durant, as your guide. In this enlightening video, Durant navigates the key ideas and contributions of Hume's philosophy, shedding light on his impact on the Enlightenment era and modern philosophy.
📜 Explore Durant's insightful commentary as he covers the following key aspects of David Hume's philosophy:
Hume's early life and the intellectual climate of 18th-century Scotland
His groundbreaking work on empiricism and the philosophy of knowledge
Hume's critique of causality, induction, and the limitations of human reason
His exploration of skepticism and the problem of induction
Hume's views on religion, ethics, and the concept of the self
The enduring influence of Hume's philosophy on subsequent philosophers and thinkers
I have known of Will Durant for a time(I'm not from the US), and have seen these videos popping up on youtube several times. Have been planning to check them out, but thought they might be a bit dry for leisurely listening. But what do you know, very entertaining! Well written, now I get why he is held in such high regards, but the narrator is fantastic! Big thanks to you for this treasure trove:)
Yeah the vocal style of the narrator makes it very engaging and entertaining, I've been able to listen to them leisurely while doing mindless tasks or eating
Yeah he's (the narrator)got a very wry and somewhat humorous tone, kind of perfect for will durant's writing.
I love your channel Rocky, thank you.
HI, this may sound a bit crazy but I can offer you the answer how, we can conclude that based on the same cause we will get the same consequence. This is possible if we make a deduction from the induction, that is, if we understand why it happened for the first time. Then we will understand why this will happen every time it is repeated. And why in these circumstances nothing else can happen. Take for example that you walk towards a wall and your body stops when you are in contact with a wall. The first question is why did that happen? And not something else ... When we divide the whole case into "all" factors that make it up, we will get: you who move, the floor, the space you pass through, the wall ... What we must understand is that every factor that exists has its own identity and cannot be different at the same time. So, just as in the identity of the body as well as in the identity of that wall there is no transience through each other due to the structure of those identities, it is not possible for those identities. That is why it happened, what is only possible, which can only happen through the contact of these identities. Therefore, in each repeated case, the same consequence will occur, stopping the body in contact with the wall. And for the first time, what was only possible in the contact of these identities happened. It is impossible for nothing to happen, and the only thing that can happen depends on the identities involved in the process. Every identity can react only according to what it is and in no other way. This limits the consequence and therefore only what each identity brings to the process for itself can always happen. Now try to imagine any other possible consequence, without having to change the identities we had in the first case, any different consequence will require some change of some identity in the process, and that implies a change of what Hume call the cause. Each repeated case will end the same if the same identities are present because each factor from that process has its own identity which at the same time cannot be different and therefore cannot react differently. A wall cannot have the identity of transience and non-transience for the body at the same time, the same goes for the space you walk through ... An identity is one that limits the possibility of a consequence to the identity it possesses. This is a simplified example of necessity in causality and I don’t think it provides a deeper understanding of necessity in causality but it is a powerful example that points to necessity that is indisputable without changing any identity in the process itself, and if we do, change something in the process itself, then we have changed the cause itself, so we should not expect the same consequence. I apologize if the translation is not perfect everywhere, I am dyslexic. That’s part of my charm.
Will gets flambuyant on this one a true queen of his time. 🍻 cheers...
Honest man Hume shredded the hypocrisies and superstitions of his time, and from time to time had to flee!
Vnnn
N
Nvnnvnnnnnnnñnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnvnnnnv
Nnnnnnñnnnvnnnnnnnnvnnnnvnvnnnnnvnnvnnv
Nv
Vvnnnnnnvnnvnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
N
M
.n.m
Nnnnnnnnnnnnñmnnnnmn.
.m
Mnnnnnnnnnnññnnnñnn
V
V
N
N
N
V
Vv
. My
My... My n m..
..
.
.
.. I cn
Nfnnnnnf
F
.........f
.....f....f me. F
.........f
.....f
.f...... No m. I
F..........
F me...f....f....f
...f
...f my.........f my...f
...f.f my...f
.f. No.......
N
.
.... Me...f
.f my f
.f..
.
.. Me.....f.f
.f....f.
...f
F
. My...
.. My...
. Me mm
.. Me... My.............f....
...
I.... My...f.f
F.nnf
Nf no n.....f
.....
F............f
...f
F...f
F.... Me..
.....
....
F..
...
..
.
Fcffffçfcfccfcffcffffffffffcfff
Cf
Fffffffffffffc
F
Fff
Fg
F
Many..
F
Fm
G.
F......cnc.
G
F
Gff
G
Fg
Fgggf
G
G
F
Fg
F
G v can c be. .f. Bbc v. …
&&. .gg.
G
G
Mn.
.
G.
G.
.&&
..g
Ggg
.ggg..
&.
Ggfather
Gcffggggggcccc.c.
.
.
…..... .
. ..
. .
Gg
Gg
.
,
.,
. ..,.
.
.…
V. Cv
Ggggggg. . . N
Go Bf me n.,.. ... I...
I v
V
V
V v.v v,, can . Cc v .... . Be. B . .vvv v bcv
.. . ._'::. Vv b v. V. . v can 🥰🥰🥰:0(*_*)🥰🤗🤗
Scotland could do with a man like him now.
May we know more about Rocky C, please?
11:40 On free will & physical properties
thanks for sharing
Nature goes on forever for everyone and everything to return as everyone and everything an infinite number of times through evolutionary processes. 🌌
Infinity does not exist on the physical plain. Nature is finite because it had a beginning. Evolution as described by modern science is a fairy tale and life has never come from non life.
How would one Aquire the transcript or the name of the book this talk came from
Rocky C The Story of Civilization: The Age of Voltaire. I checked The Story of Philosophy but I did not found a section on Hume.
@@peteryoung301 I guess Hume was right about the nature of human perception :D He was wrong about Jesus though.
I'll take an active honest mind to a beautiful body any day. Hume was a great man IMO.
What is an honest mind? 🤔
@@harrybalszak7526 one that attempts despite the common faults .?
Scott Havens true say, “attempt” being the key word.
Bullshit. Look up halo effect.
35:32 and following.
🙏🙏🙏
"He was an Atheist!", "No matter, he was an honest Man." The same can be said of Hitch. An honest Man ... to the end.
Honest men are not easy to come by in any age.
Hitchens hard a bit of Neo-Conservative bent to his view on war. I never really liked the way that he argued for nearly every conflict we were in at the time and argued the lack of WMDs in Iraq as some kind of a ploy on the American citizens to justified U.S. troop involvement. I’m a noninterventionist so I hold bias on that end. I’m a Christian and loved his debates and form in-doing-so, even when he went off on tangents about his assumptions on the faults of Christianity, we all knew he really, really wanted to see a complete wasteland of the Islamic republic countries.
Christians exist to this day with no matter of fact. This proves the silliness of men. God is and always has been made up by men. If you believe otherwise you're naive and weak. Period.
@@buff3dn3rf26 It's like if people haven't been paying attention the last few centuries. But this is true not only of christians.
@@buff3dn3rf26 you really could be nicer lmfao
Do you mean his brother at 12 entered university?
Also a piast background ?
Scott Havens- yes, apparently and David at 10
Get into the boat this instant.
Dauphin River First Nation Canada 🇨🇦
Three hour church service!?
From Plato to Hume, so few have been able to write philosophical dialogues; as didactic as they are eloquent.
As usual, you are on point!
Ever noticed how Durant never uses the first person singular?
Roman Brown Yea,that's very clever of him,it allows one to get lost in his talk and forgetting that it is coming from his perspective.
will do, taking a break from Durant though, trying to learn Italian, keeping l'inglese to a minimum.
cool
Hows the Esperanto going?
Rocky C Hello Rocky, I would appreciate this MP3, would you send it over TH-cam messenger?
This is not in the book, The Story of Philosophy. What book of Durant's is this taken from? I want to buy a hard copy.
It is from one of the volumes of the story of civilization most probably from the age of reason or the age of Voltaire
College of Justice
17:00
Starting from the assumption
0g V6
"Animal Faith" children. Let us have faith in the animal. The heart is much wiser, much more ancient than the mind.
Ughhh...
A logical mind listens to the heart before any belief is undertaken. Most people who claim to value logic are themselves rarely logical imo.
A beautiful death
Sounds sped up....
Hume wore pillowcases on his head with sone eloquence it must be said.
I have mean friends from England and they study philosophy I asked them about Hume the most of them said they I don’t know him 🤭
@Carlos Gonzalez check out RG Collingwood (Autobiography) and Ortega y Gasset (Revolt of the Masses). Then you'll be able go identify genuine philosophers via their works. David Hume is one of the most revolutionary figures.
Mussolini appropriated Machiavelli as Hitler did to Nietzsche. I highly suggest The Prince and Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
(Marx was inspired by Epicurus, Machieavlli, Hume, Rousseau, Hegel. Marx comes from philosophy but wanted to turn philosophy into method and praxis... Marx is different because he promotes a vision and an ideology, he want to immenatize the Eschaton, hence history is reduced to linear progress).
Terry Eagleton has a great book on Africa that shows how Marxs critique does not apply to civilizations absent of feadualism in their evolution. This poses a major weakness to a method that wants to create the abolition of classes as a universal actualization.
@Carlos Gonzalez yeah Darwin thought the same about racial struggle. I disagree class struggle exists and I also disagree racial struggle is rooted in at the beginning of history, at least, not a material understanding of the blood. You might fancy Evola's Myth of the Blood.
As for ted... yes, very interesting book... not as derivative as it seems. He can be consider a seeker of wisdom as much as Mark Twain can be considered one. Perhaps the few American philosophers alongside Santayana.
@Carlos Gonzalez I don't really think history exists ourside of Mind and I don't think there is such thing as an eschaton or a teleology, the only progress to be made in the world is not in social affairs but in thought alone, hence the seeking of wisdom
I am actually not very concerned with history or its alleged evolution because I do not think it is conducive to creating a future onto an unprecedented trajectory. Much more concerned about the philosophy of history and the history of ideas, Herodotus and Tocqueville are good examples.
I dont think a racial struggle exists anymore than does a material struggle. I think they are both manufactured and used as methods for controlling property and beliefs, i.e to divide people and create disparity They are not necessarily inherent struggles in existence, and human existence is only a struggle if it is believe there is a necessity to survive. It is different to say life is suffering than a struggle, which I think is the case, and the philosophies of the East are way more sophisticated and humane at affirming and embracing existence as is, descriptively and not normatively.
But if you say history begins with the genetic engineering of humans (or something of the like...) then I understand what you are saying but it is difficult because you are a little... too... vague...
Hume now erased from Edinburgh University. They'll be coming for Boswell next.
@@DurantandFriends His "comments on matters of race, though not uncommon at the time, rightly cause distress today".
Distress..really
Hume used reason to criticize miracles? Used reason to criticize Christianity? Used reason to criticize superstition? 🤔😉😎
God-given faculties-why not?
@@mikev4621 Mother Nature gave me my faculties.
@@owlnyc666 where did she get them though?
@@mikev4621 I do not know.
Hume did not “criticize” miracles. He declared the reports of miracles to be delusions or deliberately false.
Why do so many of these videos have narrators with such irritating voices?
It's probably a combination of recording quality and the number of years these videos have been on TH-cam. This being said, we hope to have some more up-to-date content coming out soon. I'm sorry you find the recordings irritating, did you listen to the recordings while you were hungry?
@@DurantandFriendsDon't patronize me. You well know your answers are irrelevant and specious. You must get used to dealing with a lot of stupid fucks.
Voice is sped up. This is what the narrator actually sounds like: th-cam.com/video/8A8jSBDPPxE/w-d-xo.html&ab_channel=DurantandFriends This narrator has read a lot of philosophical works and is generally liked, so while you are entitled to your opinion you are in the minority.
@@kylehuisman759And how does my original statement not still stand, based upon it being altered?
@@DurantandFriends Lol