Відео

damn good

brilliant saved my life

Thanks for this

Har sok kor k angrazi na wai 🖐🏻🖐🏻🖐🏻

Da ganji bachiya, kho lag easy language use kawa kana

very good explanations, thank you!

Gracias amigo , you saved me 😂 🎉…

we have a paper in our college where we study Heidegger's Introduction to Metaphysics & Strawson's Individuals. Your videos are helping me a lot in understanding, thanks a bunch!

Thank you so much for this! Really clear and helpful.

I don't know how materialism has survived over substantialism and I don't understand how substantialism has survived over theology

in needed this, i have been long admiring spinoza's ideas and jumped right into his ethics book but the level of abstraction and definitions he uses were causing me great deal of confusion. this really helped me grasp it better.

Thank you! I really enjoyed listening to your talk! I was not so interested in Gadamer before. Now I am!

I hope that you will read my Ma Thesis on AM for checking

Watching from Brazil. Thank you!

Everybody, move your body

56:11 bookmark

12:16 bookmark

Glad I found this channel

You are such an excellent teacher! You helped me learn this topic both as a PhD student and inspired me to teach with greater clarity as an instructor. Thank you!

1:12:54 bookmark

this is great, thank you very much

The historical record clearly establishes that Martin Heidegger was an unabashed Nazi, admirer of Hitler and crude anti-semite- "world Judaism is ungraspable everywhere and doesn't need to get involved in military action while continuing to unfurl its influence, whereas we are left to sacrifice the best blood of the best of our people"-- who eagerly participated in the Dominion of the third Reich. Not once did he ever show any self-reflection or sense of remorse for the fate of the victims of the holocaust, among others. He is however quite fortunate that his intellectual heirs who handled and oversaw his posthumous publications whereas duplicitous as he was and attempted fraudulently conceal Heidegger's inconvenience Nazism, such as in his Black Notebooks. See Richard Wolin's recent book on the topic.

Thank you! Carl Jung uses archetypes and patterns in dreams much after this concept of Plato. I always thought Plato's forms were like this in my readings. Also, Nietzsche's concept of eternal return, I feel, is after the platonic idea of archetypes repeating themselves.

Thanks . I have watched all of your videos in the series. Extremely helpful!

plato aristotle schopenhauer plato with jesus and the buddha aristotle with jacoband moses and muhamed onthe side

The science of linguistics was never meant to answer the kind of questions that Heidegger asks. Science starts with concepts, Heidegger starts with words to which he is trying to attach a meaning by navel-gazing on the word itself. Poetry does this beautifully, and this is why we need the arts. Heidegger serves us bad poetry masquerading as philosophy.

Free will is uncaused, eternal, substance of an infinite nature, mind, God. Every person is half man and half woman impossibility possible miracle God. A person is half genetic information from male and half from female. Kids look like their mother and father. Free will proves the existence of God and that's why atheists deny life exits. Without free will life can not exist. Without free will reality is determined. It's fact. It's reality. It's truth. It's what happened. God is the Mind that stores all reality past, present and future. When reality dies God die for ever. God is the perfect idea, to create your own life and death from self, a perfect game to eternal life or death. It's an idea that is censored and can not do harm. To end the war the discovery that atheism is a logical fallacy has to be news. Atheism is a logical fallacy that assumes God is the religious idea of the creator of the creation to conclude wrongly no creator exists because a particular idea of God doesn’t exist. If God die all reality in the present of God will be deterministic. The past of God will not get new information from the present. Urgent. Thank you.

whataddress can i write to you immediately iwould write to you about my ideas you are super super brilliant in all honestly ihave always preferredplato over aristotle the three greatest philosophers plato aristotle schopenhauer and then nietzsche and bertrand Russell the very best

ch

7:39 Socrates asked Zeno to explain what he means. 11:44 Form of likeness & unlikeness. 20:38 Tall&Short Relatively 21:16 One & Many Bookmark 22:42 Forms must be Pure and Separate. 30:47 Republic quote 34:47 One like a day 48:25 Third Man 58:01 thought of a form 1:01:31 Form as model. 1:04:19 Likeness regress 1:07:21 6th Objection - Greatest Difficulty

you are super intelligent how can i communicate with you god bless

But the thing is that is not how he expressed forms therefore to say the first part of Parmenides is an objection or critique of his own theory of forms doesn't seem to make sense . Forms are metaphysical conditions that are generative . And they could never be separated and stand alone he was always showing that they possessed a Unity between them. Because they flowed from The One or The Good and are distinct not separate.

I would think that "brands" could be icons: 'I wear Nikes, and these shoes make me cool. And I advertise the fact with the highly visible swoop logo" that turns me into a human sandwhich board. etc.

You can kill another but you only kill yourself, you can Love another but you only Love yourself, there is ONE Life so LOVE NOW

1:03:00 Kant suggests that the pleasure we derive from beauty results from the "free play" between our faculties of imagination and understanding when we perceive an object.

Thanks a lot professor, that's a really good class. Hope I find the time the watch the whole course.

Thank you for the very clear explanations. I have a question: Does every potentiality soon or later must be actualized? What does "potentiality of not actualization?

Thank you!

Excellent conclusion, thank you Brent.

I like to think of it as a particular thing's participation in a Form as a whole, the forms are pure unity. The difference is the particular thing's quality of participation. I can draw many triangles of varying quality and size, while they all participate/partake in the wholeness of triangularity, the level at which they attempt to communicate the Form varies.

The Forms are not sensible things, they belong to the intelligible world of eternal Being. However, I agree with Parmenides, that hair, mud, and dirt must too have a form, and why do they need to be undignified? A potter seeks the "good mud" for making beautiful pottery, the gardener seeks out the "prime dirt", highly conducive to makings things grow, and all types of animals, including humans, can have a gorgeous mane of hair.

Enjoyed the video as a nice review. Waiting for the whiteboard scribbling was a bit tedious though...oh well, worth it.

If a man bequeaths his eyes at death to another man, after surgery, are the eyes part of the primary substance of the first individual man who died or do they become part of the primary substance of the individual recipient of the eyes from the dead man?

Great Analysis, Thank You! But where can I find the six premises, starting at 29:12?

Great

Thank you for the video! I have one question: what are the differences between these concepts: icon, symble, sign?

Thanks

this helped with my essay thank u sir

awesome video; I am a student studying ancient philosophy, and also have done a podcast on this so understand very much how hard it is to do a video actuality and potentiality; and therefore have a lot of appreciation for you for this

Brilliant! 🙏❤ . Any chance of doing UA-cam on Heidegger’s understanding of MOODS. I read fundamentals of metaphysics but do get Moods the way you explain other concepts. 🙏 again