Відео

A perfect solution

Let me establish the source of “Transcendental apperception”. Quran(only scripture with 100% preservation/accuracy) says:”Allah:there is no deity worthy of worship except he”:The Neccessary life/consciousness,sustainer of life/consciousness.” Wire like neuronal structures that conduct electricity via ions/neurotransmitters in the CNS/PNS possess no attribute of thinking/life and yet that has “randomly” led to life. Consciousness/thinking is an innate idea(“Fitra”)that is distinct from carbon skeleton and yet the materialist scientist believes that chemistry turned into biology(abiogenesis) via “god of randomness”/”Emergent property”/”law of nature”. Limited/Imperfect Consciousness can only stem from Necessary Consciousness (Allah-One/Indivisible/All-Loving/Self-Sufficient Infinite Perfection)…

Thanks for explaining that. And showing you need a balance. What if you worry about others feelings to much. It seems as though my heart is to big at times and gets in the way a lot. Then I hurt for trying?

👉energy is God 😂😊

God's eyes are on the wicked and the righteous both. The wicked could care less, but the righteous strive to do what is right always.

Great video! Clear, succinct, and organized. Thank you so much!

Nominalistic sounds bogus. Basically it is against unity of humans. So they made a case for individuality . They do not want collectivist culture . Individuals are easier to fool when they don’t feel they have anything in common

thank you for making this video keep going

Good word!

Well does it work? Like yeah it seems to be working but does it?

Excellent video.

This video was great I needed more info about her view point after watching an Alex o connor interview and it's very interesting

No one DESERVES rewards or punishment, including involuntary confinement. But rewards may be socially USEFUL in promoting desirable behavior. And punishment, or involuntary confinement, may be USEFUL in changing behavior and/or protecting society. Thank you for this video.

You're an idiot. The fact that you're doing anything, let alone proposing constructivism is an objective fact. That's an example of what we mean by objectivity, dickhead😂

How infinitely complicated we are!

So what's intrinsic about the tennis ball is the rubber substance that is made of and that it does have to have a spherical shape when initially taken in hand, but that ball has the intrinsic properties of rubber (or whatever) that have the hidden ability to change shape (compress) under the intense smack of the tennis racket.

Hunger and headaches are not good examples of private-access mental states because they can be observed in physical brain and body states. But he gave a good example of private-access only mental state in his suggestion of the plans we make. Also the sorrow and joys we feel are private-access mental states as no one else can know them by observing our physical brain state.

I see people who work hard all their life and still end up broke.

Incorrigible is here confused with indubitable. Incorrigible is unable to be corrected or proven false.

Amen 🙏🏾 I need that at 4:45am reading King James version 9.6.2024 GOD BLESS ALL

how can the first be necessary through another? can you explain ?

This seems to inappropriately shift the argument from Determinism and Free Will to an argument of Determinism and Moral Responsibility. Moral responsibility tends to be based on freedom of will, so saying there is moral responsibility irrespective of freedom of will seems to be strange.

sir can we get the notes after lecture

Sir I want to thank you for making these videos. It's really helpful to me as my church small group is discussing book 2 of Mere Christianity now. Your book review is very concise. This is like a crash course on Mere Christianity. God bless you and I am very grateful for your work!

The statement "objective truth and falsity doesn't exist" is relatively true, not objectively or absolutely true. Challenge met. It must be meaningful, of course: As a social constructivist/constructive relativist, they can hold to the correspondence theory, so for something to be true is for it to correspond to reality. But since the facts themselves are made by us, the facts are also relative. Another challenge met. It cannot be objectively true. A relativist or anti-realist about truth isn't going to say that anything is objectively or absolutely true. Challenge met. As Alasdair Mcintrye said:.......**Relativism** like skepticism , is one of those doctrines that have by now been refuted a number of times too often.Nothing is perhaps a surer sign that a doctrine embodies some not to be neglected truth that than in the course of history of philosophy it should have been refuted again and again.Genuinely refutable doctrines only need to be refuted once.

A few points to be made here since I am a relativist and hold to a form of anti-realism where I take it that all objects, properties, facts-everything-is constructed by us. This is a form of social constructivism and anti-realism that I hold to. I also call it constructive relativism. So, about the past and the mountain existing before we did-that can be true under a constructive relativist framework too, given that the past is constructed. I can make things even when I am not there, i.e., that we can make things that exist before we existed, given the past is constructed. So the mere fact that things existed before us does not entail that these things are unconstructed. A constructive relativist isn't going to say that the past is unconstructed, so that does not rule out anti-realism.

Thank you so much for making this available in English. This is rare

Bible?

Two distinct claims: 1/ I am able to do something that strictly implies the door is unlocked. 2/ I am able to unlock the door. The door is locked. I cannot unlock the door. Yet if my friend unlocks the door, I am able to leave the room.

Point 1 is not a coherent sentence.

1:05

Thank you from kenya.

Your criterion for doubting Clifford’s thesis is that many people disagree with it? Really?

what kind of nihilism is this supposed to be? i thought philosophical nihilism was that nothing matters and all that exists is material

Amen

Very good explanation of the topic. Thank you

Great content, but the hand that is writing the concepts on the screen is a little distracting.

❤🙏❤🙏😂🙏❤🙏❤🙏❤🙏❤🙏💖

No, lying is just wrong universally the same as cold blooded murder or theft is always wrong, i can't believe people swallow these self serving lies.

Great week, especially with page numbers👍👍👍

It is telling that this person (PvI) starts with dismissing outright a very real possibility: The universe is like this because it happened this way. In an infinite set of time, which is possible since we cannot prove this universe does NOT exist in an infinite state outside of itself, it is possible that this universe came into being and coagulated in a way as to make it like we see in this moment of infinity. Just because you are _finite_, does that imply everything that is not you must also be finite? Just because our universe appears finite, does that mean everything that could exist not within our view of this universe must also be finite? There is rational explanation that considers the universe to be cyclical wherein it expands and then collapses and starts over. Repeat that infinitely, you could have an instance where our universe is created. It is reasonable.

I am a atheist finding myself missing something in life. I am 40 years old never thought I be really spending this much time understanding clearly what I been running a away. Thank you making videos sharing your knowledge.

Good stuff! When you say that the universe cannot have a causal explanation, do you mean physical? It seems like God is a perfectly plausible causal explanation,

You can't compute the likelihood of the universe existing. You have no clue as to how possible it actually is.

Reward and punishment can be useful for conditioning, essential for socialization, whether the subject is "ultimately" responsible or not.

What is a good reference for your presentation?

Thanks for this, it's helping w my college class

17:40 I very much agree with your approach. Maybe only one possible outcome is required for Moral Responsibility but I think it’s very intuitive that more than one available path to reach that outcome is necessary for Moral Responsibility.

It does not seem self-evident to me that the present surface content of our own minds are more reliably known than external objects. In fact, it is by these external objects that we confirm that our senses are reliable. If our minds had no external objects to perceive, we would never develop surface thoughts at all. If you were born as a brain in a vat for example, having grown up as a brain in a vat, not in a mother's womb, I suppose you wouldn't have any thoughts at all, or if you did they would be very much unrecognizable to us. You bring up the example of pain. If I were to experience the pain of breaking my leg but I happened to be dreaming, my brain might send pain signals identical to the signals it would send if I had actually broken my leg. Upon waking and reviewing my leg, any residual pain from the dream would quickly subside, having been corrected by external objects.

What does determination mean ?