Відео

I don't think marxism contradicts egoism. I think it is a very egoistic ideology. It's an ideology of interests and if you don't cater to them, you will be shot (not unethical, just pure materialistic fact). Is a worker egoistic under capitalism?

Truth is first referability, then consistency, then physicality, then thought, then correspondence. None can exist without the prior. Empty names refer to referrables but not consistants, nor physicals. Every physical must first be consistent. Every consistant must first be referable. All predication can be converted into reference. Reference is ontological. Predication is epistemic.

The US, Congress and high ranking Democrats are above the law

There is no asymmetry. logically speaking , looking at the meaning of absence , it should be "presence of pain bad, presence of pleasure good, absence of pain not bad, absence of pleasure not good" As for his argument for the asymmetry , his reasoning is inconsistent because both his justifications could just as easily be applied to pleasure and pain. If you say that the absence of pleasure is only bad if someone exists to be deprived or pleasure then you can just as validly say that the absence of pain is only good if someone exists to be relieved from that pain. If you say that absence of pain is good because of the explanation at 8:44 , in the sense that it would be better for x to be absent of pain than for x to possess pain even if x does not exist, then you can just as validly say that the absence of pleasure is bad in the sense that it would be better for x to possess pleasure than for x to be absent of pleasure even if x does not exist. As for the 4 asymmetries, they don't exist. You have a duty both not to have kids whose lives would not be worth living (in their view) and a duty to have kids whose lives would be worth living (in their view). It is better for that person to feel pleasure than to never feel pleasure. If you object that it can't be better for that person to feel better because they don't exist (yet) then you can't object that it would be better for a person who will be born with harlequin fetus syndrome not to feel pain because they also don't exist (yet).

Great video and presentation of Rawls's work, thank you! Are you planning to discuss the article of T. Nagel: The Problem of Global Justice? It can make sense if we are talking about Rawls.

Thank you so much for the amount of effort you put in each lecture; In a way I kinda feel guilty that I can watch them for free. Hats off 🙂‍↕️

Doesn't egoistic concern start only when you become a person? Therefore how can the Embodied Mind Account start before you were even a person?

Thank you Professor for this great lecture!

Does Quine, open the gate to Subjectivism?

About your FLO critique, A women can only have a limited amount of pregnancies in their lifetime (lets say 10 for easy math) That means only ten out of a trillion sperms a man will have can be fertilized, and 10 out of a million eggs can be fertilized, and so their chance of FLO is only 10 in a trillion or ten in a million respectively. If there is only a 1/100,000 chance of occurrence, it's by detention not a future like ours, or a fertilized egg which have feasible chances to occur. An interesting follow up would be, at the very least, do we have a moral responsibility to have the 10 or so kids then? "Future like ours" the wording is critical, I would say someone living in 'heaven' has a different future as someone living in 'hell' theirs no "future like [each-others]" shared between them (and the area under the curve of the 'vital life' diagram also wouldn't be comparable', likewise If everyone tried to have as many kids as possible, we would live in a different (and I'd argue a relatively hellish) world, at most we would only have a moral responsibility to has as many kids that is most likely to yield a future comparable to ours, to create a future like ours. About the specific example of contraception in the video. For a sperm to fertilize an egg, If it would be fertilized, then that embryo is blocking the chance for future fertilization for a certain time period. I think it is much more sound to consider how many lives a couple could feasibly make in a lifetime, then envisioning a sperm fertilizing an egg as a sole incident, and that would embark the train of thought I put above. I do not know if FLO is valid, I only intend to object the video's objection, (and that objection's, objection) in this comment.

The first treaty is kinds strawman after strawman, very understandable everyone skips to the second

your Judas part is a misreading of the biblical text. God foresaw a Person to betray the Lord, does not mean that that person was selected or determined to do those act.

Not expert here professor, but having read dworkin’s justice for hedgehogs I don’t quite see dworkin as a luck egalitarian. Am I missing something?

Does democratic equality theory entail that if there were two hypothetical kingdoms that never had a relation with each other, and one kingdom was much more prosperous than the other because of mere geographical differences and one day they finally met each other, the abundant kingdom want have any obligation to give away any of its resources to the poor kingdom since the inequality between them didn’t erupt from a social context?

you can transcript symbolic language to describe human sentiment. To do so one needs the relation a sentiment and its symbol.

There are not two philosophies: constituints are in two parts inter- dependents, where one can not experience both at once but one can do it alternativily called dialectic move.

Tornadoes. The counterpart of the Floridians would be Michiganders whose houses get destroyed by tornadoes.

Capitalism isn't free markets. It's one of the opposites of free markets. Capitalism is when owners of capital are systematically advantaged over sellers of labor.

There are a lot of interesting things in marx. I wish he was not so demonised and people really took a chance to read the godamn thing.

Geek Bruv

No matter so many times the same experiment (empirical) prooved right, it not prooved there exist a necessity suporting it.

Any sentence must be a relation univocal ( only) to its meaning in a phylosophical argument proposition

sick paper

The meaning of a sentence can not be transmited by a empirist(particular) language but only by logic (formal/generall) language

Sylogism of the old greek do it as a wholle, than there is conclusion.

There is no room for conclusion in case one considers just one part.

Planning to do some dworkin?

The only slight correction I’d make is the claim most Christian’s believe everyone goes to heaven. Here in America, evangelical theologies are dominated by the belief most will go to hell. However, many here do believe babies go to heaven so the conclusion is the same. It’d be better for the fetus to give them a better chance to go to heaven before being tainted by sin according to their theology.

Thank you kindly for this!

Definition of woman (female): Genetically defined as two (2) X chromosomes. Definition of man (male): Genetically defined as one X chromosome and one Y chromosome. That's all there is.

So very good! Thank you. Can we talk?

Today is a good day! Thank you!!!

not me doing a thesis on this subject that is due in 2 weeks

Love the videos , great content ^^ It's especially good as a refresher

Very interesting video thank you

Appreciate what you’re doing! Keep up the good work🎉

The takes on China are a bit superficial imo. China is presented as capitalist when it comes to the positive aspects and communist when it comes to the negative ones. Also, China's so called capitalist current development cannot be understood as being totally divorced from the previous communist period under Mao... which already saw periods of high economic growth and substantial increase in key sociological indicators like education or life expectancy etc. For example, check the work of Rémy Herrara and Zhiming Long

The liberal Popper, who became anti marxist at the age of 17(!), said in an interview that the decolonialization process might have happened too quickly and that the colonized people were sort of infantile children who needed to be educated. I'm paraphrasing and quoting from memory but that was the gist of it, showing the liberal historical blindspot towards colonialism and racialization

Losurdo argues that racialization and even racial segregation or apartheid can only be fully understood in terms of historical class struggles. In this sense, if class antagonism wasn't the main/root drive of the anti racist struggle against apartheid, how do we explain the role of uMkhonto weSizwe, the SACP or the ANC? Of marxists like Mandela or Chris Hani etc? Of countries like Cuba or the USSR in fighting sa apartheid?

could watch you summarize marx for hours

This is nihilist religion with a superficial economic theory tacked onto it. Read Marx' earliest works. A doomsday nutter enamoured with Faust's poetry about the apocalypse. Everything he wrote afterwards is pretext.

If you ever find the time, I would love a philosophy of autism lecture. Thank you

Now, in many countries, pretty much any worker who has a run of good luck at avoiding unexpected expenses or interruptions of income can open a brokerage account and buy shares. The stated impossibility of workers owning the means of production under capitalism makes me wonder how long this has been the case. Stocks existed at the time of writing of Capital, but I doubt that it was possible for an ordinary worker with a few weeks' pay saved up to buy them. I sort of think there were substantial barriers to stock ownership until the 1920s or maybe teens. I do remember hearing that the ability of the hoi polloi to buy stocks was (wrongly) blamed for the crash of '29.

Wow! Prof. Cushing, pls continue with these lectures, esp. political philosophy and ethics.

So China and the US - with racing with AI Accelerationism will bring about Communist Utopia? Neat haha. (Jk pls don't hurt me)

thxs again

Hell yeah thanks for this

Napoleon wasn't exiled in Corsica, rather, he was born there

Algorithm served me this video. Glad to have found it, it's a great summary.

There is just one Philosophy as unity divided in two partes: one "in a analitic (explicative) mood and in a syntetic( construtive mood)