Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Iris Murdoch on what philosophy actually is: Philosophy is notoriously difficult to define even for those who practise it. Speaking with Bryan Magee in 1977, Murdoch doesn't sidestep the question. She leans into it. "It's notoriously difficult to find philosophy… it's very difficult to say what it is." Her... first move is to locate philosophy in the territory of structure and depth. It is "to do with conceptual structures," she says with "very deep structures of belief and knowledge," with meaning, with significance, with the question of how language relates to the world. But definition by content isn't enough. So she defines it by exclusion. Philosophy is not science. That much feels familiar. Yet Murdoch adds a subtler distinction: even when philosophy adopts a scientific style, "the actual what you're doing is certainly not science." The manner may borrow from the lab, but the activity is something else entirely. And philosophy is not art either. Her sharpest line is reserved for this boundary: "It's very important it's not sounds… as soon as you start doing sounds you're falling right out of philosophy." Sound aesthetic sensation, the seductive surface of language pulls the mind away from what philosophy actually is. The moment writing becomes music, it stops being thought. So if it is not science and not art, what is philosophy? Murdoch's answer is quiet but precise: "a kind of reflection on concepts." Not experiment. Not expression. Reflection. A sustained, disciplined turning of attention onto the structures we use to think — and asking whether they hold.show more

Big Brain Philosophy

14,148 subscribers

18,908 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

“In any area where you’re not quite sure what the right questions are—whether you’re asking the right questions—what you’re doing is philosophy, whether you like it or not. […] It is really fascinating and even entertaining to watch really brilliant scientists start thinking about tough issues and reinventing all the mistakes of the history of philosophy. If you don’t know the history of what’s wrong with Hume and Kant and Aristotle and Plato and all the rest, then you’re going to fall into those mistakes. [You] don’t know for sure if [you]’re asking the right questions.” —Daniel Dennett on science and philosophy.

“In any area where you’re not quite sure what the right questions are—whether you’re asking the right questions—what you’re doing is philosophy, whether you like it or not. […] It is really fascinating and even entertaining to watch really brilliant scientists start thinking about tough issues and reinventing all the mistakes of the history of philosophy. If you don’t know the history of what’s wrong with Hume and Kant and Aristotle and Plato and all the rest, then you’re going to fall into those mistakes. [You] don’t know for sure if [you]’re asking the right questions.” —Daniel Dennett on science and philosophy.

Phil Hoyeck

18,163 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Bertrand Russell on Philosophy, Doubt, and the Danger of Hate Philosopher Bertrand Russell, asked if he can offer a positive philosophy for those who reject Marx, responds with something unexpected: a warning against dogmatism itself. "One of the troubles of the world has been the habit of dogmatically believing something or other, and I think all these matters are full of doubt." Russell refuses to replace one certainty with another. Even his own views, he insists, should be held loosely: "The rational man will not be too sure that he's right. I think that we ought always to entertain our opinions with some measure of doubt. I shouldn't wish people dogmatically to believe any philosophy not even mine. Not even mine." But doubt alone isn't enough. Russell argues there's a second ingredient that determines whether a philosophy helps or harms the world. The emotional foundation it's built on: "If a philosophy is to bring happiness, it should be inspired by kindly feeling." This is where his critique of Marx becomes pointed. For Russell, the problem is the feeling underneath them: "Marx is not inspired by kindly feeling. Marx pretended that he wanted the happiness of the proletariat. What he really wanted was the unhappiness of the bourgeoisie. And it was because of that negative element, because of that hate element, that his philosophy produced disaster." His conclusion: "A philosophy which is to do good must be one inspired by kindly feeling and not by unkindly feeling."

Bertrand Russell on Philosophy, Doubt, and the Danger of Hate Philosopher Bertrand Russell, asked if he can offer a positive philosophy for those who reject Marx, responds with something unexpected: a warning against dogmatism itself. "One of the troubles of the world has been the habit of dogmatically believing something or other, and I think all these matters are full of doubt." Russell refuses to replace one certainty with another. Even his own views, he insists, should be held loosely: "The rational man will not be too sure that he's right. I think that we ought always to entertain our opinions with some measure of doubt. I shouldn't wish people dogmatically to believe any philosophy not even mine. Not even mine." But doubt alone isn't enough. Russell argues there's a second ingredient that determines whether a philosophy helps or harms the world. The emotional foundation it's built on: "If a philosophy is to bring happiness, it should be inspired by kindly feeling." This is where his critique of Marx becomes pointed. For Russell, the problem is the feeling underneath them: "Marx is not inspired by kindly feeling. Marx pretended that he wanted the happiness of the proletariat. What he really wanted was the unhappiness of the bourgeoisie. And it was because of that negative element, because of that hate element, that his philosophy produced disaster." His conclusion: "A philosophy which is to do good must be one inspired by kindly feeling and not by unkindly feeling."

Mateus — eu/acc 🇪🇺

21,260 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

#WATCH | Jammu, J&K | PDP leader Iltija Mufti says, "There is a lot of difference between Hindutva and Hinduism. Hindutva is a philosophy of hate that Veer Savarkar spread in India in the 1940s with the aim of establishing the hegemony of Hindus and the philosophy was that India belongs to Hindus and is for Hindus. Like Islam, Hinduism is also a religion that promotes secularism, love and compassion. So, let's not deliberately distort it. The slogan 'Jai Shri Ram' is not about 'Ramrajya' but it is being linked to lynching... It is very shameful that Hinduism is being distorted... I criticized Hindutva as it is an illness..."

#WATCH | Jammu, J&K | PDP leader Iltija Mufti says, "There is a lot of difference between Hindutva and Hinduism. Hindutva is a philosophy of hate that Veer Savarkar spread in India in the 1940s with the aim of establishing the hegemony of Hindus and the philosophy was that India belongs to Hindus and is for Hindus. Like Islam, Hinduism is also a religion that promotes secularism, love and compassion. So, let's not deliberately distort it. The slogan 'Jai Shri Ram' is not about 'Ramrajya' but it is being linked to lynching... It is very shameful that Hinduism is being distorted... I criticized Hindutva as it is an illness..."

ANI

155,752 просмотров • 1 год назад

To all anti-China Chinese, the US wants all Chinese to be poor, and that includes you. This is not a brutalist philosophy, but a loser's philosophy. The America does not accept peer competitors, and even if China adopts the Constitution and laws of the US, the US will find ways to limit the growth of China to the point where it falls back into poverty.

To all anti-China Chinese, the US wants all Chinese to be poor, and that includes you. This is not a brutalist philosophy, but a loser's philosophy. The America does not accept peer competitors, and even if China adopts the Constitution and laws of the US, the US will find ways to limit the growth of China to the point where it falls back into poverty.

小A来摘🍑

100,231 просмотров • 2 лет назад

No one at a cocktail party is going to say, "Yeah, I can't actually read..." Illiteracy is not acceptable, but innumeracy is kind of cute. And frankly, we don't have a word for it, but the inability to understand what science is and what it's not, and to track scientific arguments, to see rhetoric when it's being used as if it's science... That's just not, it doesn't even come up for these people.

No one at a cocktail party is going to say, "Yeah, I can't actually read..." Illiteracy is not acceptable, but innumeracy is kind of cute. And frankly, we don't have a word for it, but the inability to understand what science is and what it's not, and to track scientific arguments, to see rhetoric when it's being used as if it's science... That's just not, it doesn't even come up for these people.

The DarkHorse Podcast

30,597 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Elon Musk: We don't know the meaning of life, but we can expand consciousness to understand more. “Our AI Grok is modeled after the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which is one of my favorite books. It's a book on philosophy disguised as a book on humor. And I would say that forms the basis of my philosophy, which is that we don't know the meaning of life. But the more we can expand the scope and scale of consciousness, digital and biological, the more we are able to understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe. I have a philosophy of curiosity.” Interview with Lex Fridman, November 9, 2023

Elon Musk: We don't know the meaning of life, but we can expand consciousness to understand more. “Our AI Grok is modeled after the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which is one of my favorite books. It's a book on philosophy disguised as a book on humor. And I would say that forms the basis of my philosophy, which is that we don't know the meaning of life. But the more we can expand the scope and scale of consciousness, digital and biological, the more we are able to understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe. I have a philosophy of curiosity.” Interview with Lex Fridman, November 9, 2023

ELON CLIPS

33,335 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

Pat Riley shares what culture really is - and why everyone has one whether they know it or not. "Everybody has a culture. A culture is simply a shared vision of what it is you wanna do to get to where it is you wanna go." "It's a shared vision of what you have to do to get there." Culture isn't a slogan. It's a standard everyone commits to. "It's up to the coach to create the philosophy." "You can take each one of those acronyms - hard work, conditioning, toughness - and talk about that for 30 minutes. But it has to mean something." Then he explained what great culture builders do: "Once you set the tone about what your philosophy is going to be - you have to paint the picture. You paint the picture of what it's going to look like." Words create the vision. Actions build the culture. Culture isn’t what you say - it’s what you reinforce daily. It's shaped by your actions and what you allow. ( 🎥The Why with DWade)

Pat Riley shares what culture really is - and why everyone has one whether they know it or not. "Everybody has a culture. A culture is simply a shared vision of what it is you wanna do to get to where it is you wanna go." "It's a shared vision of what you have to do to get there." Culture isn't a slogan. It's a standard everyone commits to. "It's up to the coach to create the philosophy." "You can take each one of those acronyms - hard work, conditioning, toughness - and talk about that for 30 minutes. But it has to mean something." Then he explained what great culture builders do: "Once you set the tone about what your philosophy is going to be - you have to paint the picture. You paint the picture of what it's going to look like." Words create the vision. Actions build the culture. Culture isn’t what you say - it’s what you reinforce daily. It's shaped by your actions and what you allow. ( 🎥The Why with DWade)

Coach AJ 🎯 Mental Fitness

37,829 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Ruben Amorim is gone. And it's probably not for the reason we think. Yes, performances were slightly better and the table is a bit deceiving, but ultimately, this is not the way a top club operates. If you bring in a man for his philosophy, you back that philosophy, and if it's not working, you make that clear to him when it becomes apparent. Instead, it looks like naive owners have regrettably not pulled the trigger when they wanted to and meandered to this conclusion. And that's a NASTY precedent to set. Because it WILL happen again. I've tried my best to condense my thoughts in this video and keen to hear your thoughts below.

Ruben Amorim is gone. And it's probably not for the reason we think. Yes, performances were slightly better and the table is a bit deceiving, but ultimately, this is not the way a top club operates. If you bring in a man for his philosophy, you back that philosophy, and if it's not working, you make that clear to him when it becomes apparent. Instead, it looks like naive owners have regrettably not pulled the trigger when they wanted to and meandered to this conclusion. And that's a NASTY precedent to set. Because it WILL happen again. I've tried my best to condense my thoughts in this video and keen to hear your thoughts below.

Dev Bajwa

56,349 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Why the Thought of Ending One’s Life Appears — Ashtavakra’s Silent Answer ⸻ A disciple once asked Ashtavakra a question that many carry silently within: Why does the thought of ending one’s life sometimes arise? This reflection does not speak about destruction. It points toward exhaustion — exhaustion with false identities, roles, expectations, and the endless pressure to become something. Ashtavakra’s insight is direct and uncompromising. The mind becomes heavy when it mistakes itself for the self. When this confusion deepens, disappearance appears as relief — not because existence is unbearable, but because the mind is. This teaching does not encourage harm. It reveals something subtler: the one who wants to disappear is not you. It is only a story, an idea, a false center built from thought. The moment this is seen, even briefly, a great lightness appears. Nothing needs to end. Only misunderstanding falls away. This is not motivation. This is not philosophy. This is a mirror. ⸻ 📚 Source: Inspired by the Advaita wisdom of Ashtavakra, as expressed in the spirit of the Ashtavakra Gita. ⸻

Why the Thought of Ending One’s Life Appears — Ashtavakra’s Silent Answer ⸻ A disciple once asked Ashtavakra a question that many carry silently within: Why does the thought of ending one’s life sometimes arise? This reflection does not speak about destruction. It points toward exhaustion — exhaustion with false identities, roles, expectations, and the endless pressure to become something. Ashtavakra’s insight is direct and uncompromising. The mind becomes heavy when it mistakes itself for the self. When this confusion deepens, disappearance appears as relief — not because existence is unbearable, but because the mind is. This teaching does not encourage harm. It reveals something subtler: the one who wants to disappear is not you. It is only a story, an idea, a false center built from thought. The moment this is seen, even briefly, a great lightness appears. Nothing needs to end. Only misunderstanding falls away. This is not motivation. This is not philosophy. This is a mirror. ⸻ 📚 Source: Inspired by the Advaita wisdom of Ashtavakra, as expressed in the spirit of the Ashtavakra Gita. ⸻

श्री

16,467 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

There are people who discovered Karbala not in books, not in lectures, but in prison cells. One man from Gaza spoke about learning the story of Imam Hussain while imprisoned by the Zionist entity and seeing in it something deeper than history — a philosophy that breaks chains long before walls fall. Karbala is not a call to seek suffering. It is a refusal to surrender truth for comfort, dignity for survival, or principles for permission. The greatest prison is not concrete — it is accepting that oppression is normal, that resistance is futile, that power defines truth. To understand Karbala is to understand that victory is not always measured by who remains standing, but by who refused to kneel. That is why oppressed people across generations keep returning to it. A philosophy that liberates the mind before the land.

There are people who discovered Karbala not in books, not in lectures, but in prison cells. One man from Gaza spoke about learning the story of Imam Hussain while imprisoned by the Zionist entity and seeing in it something deeper than history — a philosophy that breaks chains long before walls fall. Karbala is not a call to seek suffering. It is a refusal to surrender truth for comfort, dignity for survival, or principles for permission. The greatest prison is not concrete — it is accepting that oppression is normal, that resistance is futile, that power defines truth. To understand Karbala is to understand that victory is not always measured by who remains standing, but by who refused to kneel. That is why oppressed people across generations keep returning to it. A philosophy that liberates the mind before the land.

Shia Of Palestine

42,926 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

David Chalmers on the one thing science can't explain: Consciousness is at once the most familiar thing in the world and the one science has almost nothing to say about. That's the puzzle Chalmers lays out in this early interview, and it's as disorienting today as it was then. His starting point is deceptively simple. Everything we know about the external world: subatomic particles, distant stars, the chemistry of life. We know through consciousness. It's the very first thing we have. And yet when we turn science around and try to explain consciousness itself, we hit a wall. "Consciousness is what we start with when it comes to knowing the world and looking out at the world… everything else is secondary." What makes this so strange is the asymmetry. We've made extraordinary progress understanding things that are genuinely remote and difficult quantum mechanics, stellar evolution, molecular biology. But understanding our own inner experience? Almost nothing. "It almost sticks out like a sore thumb in the scientific picture." This is what Chalmers would later formalise as the "hard problem of consciousness": not just explaining how the brain processes information or controls behaviour. Those are hard, but tractable. The real mystery is why any of that physical activity is accompanied by experience at all. Why is there something it feels like to be you? The question isn't abstract. It sits at the intersection of neuroscience, philosophy, physics, and AI. As we build systems that process language and reason about the world, the question of whether they are or could be conscious presses harder than ever. Chalmers doesn't offer an answer here. Only the sharpest possible version of the question.

David Chalmers on the one thing science can't explain: Consciousness is at once the most familiar thing in the world and the one science has almost nothing to say about. That's the puzzle Chalmers lays out in this early interview, and it's as disorienting today as it was then. His starting point is deceptively simple. Everything we know about the external world: subatomic particles, distant stars, the chemistry of life. We know through consciousness. It's the very first thing we have. And yet when we turn science around and try to explain consciousness itself, we hit a wall. "Consciousness is what we start with when it comes to knowing the world and looking out at the world… everything else is secondary." What makes this so strange is the asymmetry. We've made extraordinary progress understanding things that are genuinely remote and difficult quantum mechanics, stellar evolution, molecular biology. But understanding our own inner experience? Almost nothing. "It almost sticks out like a sore thumb in the scientific picture." This is what Chalmers would later formalise as the "hard problem of consciousness": not just explaining how the brain processes information or controls behaviour. Those are hard, but tractable. The real mystery is why any of that physical activity is accompanied by experience at all. Why is there something it feels like to be you? The question isn't abstract. It sits at the intersection of neuroscience, philosophy, physics, and AI. As we build systems that process language and reason about the world, the question of whether they are or could be conscious presses harder than ever. Chalmers doesn't offer an answer here. Only the sharpest possible version of the question.

Mateus — eu/acc 🇪🇺

14,034 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

US Special Envoy Barrack: “The rhetoric between Netanyahu and Erdogan is… just rhetoric. At the end of the day, I think they both realize that neither wants the Ottoman Empire. The US belief, is he's not interested in extending the Ottoman Empire. The same with Prime Minister Netanyahu is Israel is being pushed on all sides. The Greater Israel philosophy and theory can be done with business and prosperity. It's not going to be done with geography. Domestic policy for both of them is quite difficult, but it's just politics. I think it'll vanish.”

US Special Envoy Barrack: “The rhetoric between Netanyahu and Erdogan is… just rhetoric. At the end of the day, I think they both realize that neither wants the Ottoman Empire. The US belief, is he's not interested in extending the Ottoman Empire. The same with Prime Minister Netanyahu is Israel is being pushed on all sides. The Greater Israel philosophy and theory can be done with business and prosperity. It's not going to be done with geography. Domestic policy for both of them is quite difficult, but it's just politics. I think it'll vanish.”

Ragıp Soylu

57,612 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Philosophy is the last discipline worth studying in the AI age. 1. For the first time in history the interface with technology is semantic not numeric. That gives masters of language incredible power. 2. AGI is the end of techne, the end of instrumentality. Yet philosophy is the only discipline that's non-instrumental. I could care less who discovers the cure for cancer, but at the end of the day I need to decide what is the good life. AGI can't replace that because I need to be the one making the decision.

Philosophy is the last discipline worth studying in the AI age. 1. For the first time in history the interface with technology is semantic not numeric. That gives masters of language incredible power. 2. AGI is the end of techne, the end of instrumentality. Yet philosophy is the only discipline that's non-instrumental. I could care less who discovers the cure for cancer, but at the end of the day I need to decide what is the good life. AGI can't replace that because I need to be the one making the decision.

Johnathan Bi

34,964 просмотров • 1 год назад

Paul Ryan on Trump's GOP: "What you think of as the Republican Party now, it's populism, untethered to principle, wrapped around the cult of personality of Donald Trump. This is not a populism that is anchored in some kind of core philosophy other than his personality."

Paul Ryan on Trump's GOP: "What you think of as the Republican Party now, it's populism, untethered to principle, wrapped around the cult of personality of Donald Trump. This is not a populism that is anchored in some kind of core philosophy other than his personality."

Republican Accountability

388,364 просмотров • 2 лет назад

At #VrijSpraak in Mechelen, I sat with philosopher Alicja Gescinska in a conversation that went to the heart of what I do and why. We talked about journalism and resistance. What it means to keep writing when a regime like Paul Kagame’s wants you silent. What it costs. What it demands. Moderated by the thoughtful Gie Goris, the conversation moved between philosophy and frontline reality, between the idea of freedom and the lived experience of fighting for it. For me, resistance is not abstract. It is the choice to document what Kagame's regime Government of Rwanda does not want documented. It is filing litigation when laws criminalize the truth. It is continuing to publish from exile while colleagues inside Rwanda face prison for doing the same. Resistance in journalism is not heroism. It is the refusal to accept that silence is the only safe option. Grateful to VrijSpraak for holding this space. 🖊️

At #VrijSpraak in Mechelen, I sat with philosopher Alicja Gescinska in a conversation that went to the heart of what I do and why. We talked about journalism and resistance. What it means to keep writing when a regime like Paul Kagame’s wants you silent. What it costs. What it demands. Moderated by the thoughtful Gie Goris, the conversation moved between philosophy and frontline reality, between the idea of freedom and the lived experience of fighting for it. For me, resistance is not abstract. It is the choice to document what Kagame's regime Government of Rwanda does not want documented. It is filing litigation when laws criminalize the truth. It is continuing to publish from exile while colleagues inside Rwanda face prison for doing the same. Resistance in journalism is not heroism. It is the refusal to accept that silence is the only safe option. Grateful to VrijSpraak for holding this space. 🖊️

Samuel Baker BYANSI

10,857 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

The CDC Doesn't Want You to Hear This Conversation Between Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson TUCKER: Is your average Amish teenager happier than your average conventional American teenager on Instagram? ROGAN: Well, they certainly have less instances of autism, which is really fascinating. It's very, very fascinating. CARLSON: The Amish have less autism? ROGAN: Yeah, there's almost none. TUCKER: Well, I'm not surprised. ROGAN: It's extremely rare. TUCKER: Why do we think that is? ROGAN: I wonder. I really do. TUCKER: Well, I can think of a couple — Yeah, I don't want to go Bobby Kennedy on you. ROGAN: But that's the problem. If you go Bobby Kennedy, they'll come for you. But the question is why? TUCKER: Look, and I don't know the answer, but... ROGAN: How is that not in the debate? How is that not in the conversation? TUCKER: Well, it's not only not in the conversation, you're punished for adding it to the conversation. And so, like... ROGAN: We are dancing around anti-vax conspiracy theories right now. TUCKER: Why be on the defensive? It's like, if you purport to represent science, and you're mad about a question. ROGAN: And you're ignoring data. TUCKER: Yeah, but even in the absence of data, science is a process. Yes. It's not a result. It's a way of doing things. And at the core of science is asking questions, including unlikely questions. That's what science is. And if you don't allow that, then you may be doing something, but what you're not doing is science. We can say that conclusively. So, for people to wrap themselves in the mantle of science and attack you for asking a question, they're frauds.

The CDC Doesn't Want You to Hear This Conversation Between Joe Rogan and Tucker Carlson TUCKER: Is your average Amish teenager happier than your average conventional American teenager on Instagram? ROGAN: Well, they certainly have less instances of autism, which is really fascinating. It's very, very fascinating. CARLSON: The Amish have less autism? ROGAN: Yeah, there's almost none. TUCKER: Well, I'm not surprised. ROGAN: It's extremely rare. TUCKER: Why do we think that is? ROGAN: I wonder. I really do. TUCKER: Well, I can think of a couple — Yeah, I don't want to go Bobby Kennedy on you. ROGAN: But that's the problem. If you go Bobby Kennedy, they'll come for you. But the question is why? TUCKER: Look, and I don't know the answer, but... ROGAN: How is that not in the debate? How is that not in the conversation? TUCKER: Well, it's not only not in the conversation, you're punished for adding it to the conversation. And so, like... ROGAN: We are dancing around anti-vax conspiracy theories right now. TUCKER: Why be on the defensive? It's like, if you purport to represent science, and you're mad about a question. ROGAN: And you're ignoring data. TUCKER: Yeah, but even in the absence of data, science is a process. Yes. It's not a result. It's a way of doing things. And at the core of science is asking questions, including unlikely questions. That's what science is. And if you don't allow that, then you may be doing something, but what you're not doing is science. We can say that conclusively. So, for people to wrap themselves in the mantle of science and attack you for asking a question, they're frauds.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

13,620,181 просмотров • 2 лет назад

As someone from the Jewish community, I'm very aware of what a rude awakening it is to come to terms with what Zionism actually is. It's a difficult discussion, but it has to happen.

As someone from the Jewish community, I'm very aware of what a rude awakening it is to come to terms with what Zionism actually is. It's a difficult discussion, but it has to happen.

Dr. Jill Stein🌻

325,267 просмотров • 2 лет назад