thank you so much profesor from the ones like me who dont have to chance to go to your university and your country. i am watching you from China, i am grateful to you for your lectures you share in UA-cam.
i know Im randomly asking but does someone know a method to log back into an instagram account..? I stupidly lost the account password. I would appreciate any assistance you can offer me!
@Jackson Cayson Thanks so much for your reply. I got to the site through google and im in the hacking process atm. Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will get back to you later with my results.
well i think C(nothing) means: "(∀x)¬(x is awesome)"; the student has turned you in a totally wrong way of giving a description of the quantifier: "(∀x)¬¬(x is awesome)" is completely another thing and it's equivalent to the first assertion.
Here's the thing, the prof. had to lay down a proposition 'Nothing is not awesome', not 'C(nothing)' by itself which would be exactly what you wrote. In Russel's terminology " 'C(nothing)'means " 'C(nothing) is always false' is always true". And if we abstract from defining 'nothing' by itself, we merely use the language of logic which will even out two negations into one positive proposition. Hope I was clear. محمد صدرا منعمی نودهی
thank you so much profesor from the ones like me who dont have to chance to go to your university and your country. i am watching you from China, i am grateful to you for your lectures you share in UA-cam.
Thank you posting these lectures on youtube for free, good sire.
Listening to these lectures helped me understand a lot of connections in Semantics and Pragmatics. Thanks a lot professor!
I just watched you're first attempt at this and felt for you. I'm so pleased you had another crack at it. Thank-you.
Very engaging and easy to follow. Thank you for sharing!
You are an awesome teacher 😆 (and a nice human being too) . Thanks for all your lectures 😎
i know Im randomly asking but does someone know a method to log back into an instagram account..?
I stupidly lost the account password. I would appreciate any assistance you can offer me!
@Romeo Harold Instablaster =)
@Jackson Cayson Thanks so much for your reply. I got to the site through google and im in the hacking process atm.
Looks like it's gonna take a while so I will get back to you later with my results.
@Jackson Cayson it did the trick and I finally got access to my account again. I am so happy!
Thank you so much you saved my ass !
@Romeo Harold happy to help xD
I salute u professor. u are a great professor
Great teacher! Thanks for the video
This is an amazing lecture! I want to study more philosophy now😀
At 35:52 -"I am confused" and yes, he really messed it up contra original B. Russell's intention in the article!
I'm glad he finally erased that partial A on the chalkboard at 33:00 into the lecture.
OCD?
It's the case that every time he says "everything is awesome" is that everything is awesome
At minute 44, is there not in some sense an analogical relationship between "always" and "everything"
Enjoying your lectures. This is no. 4, I presume?...
I think this is the fifth, there's another one on Frege ( "Frege on Thought") uploaded the same day as this one.
Nice! I red the paper, but I missed some stuff.
That 'its not unnecessary' joke was pretty spot on! Or better: It is not the case that the 'its not unnecessary' joke was not spot on
I've grown acquainted to your face... Your well denoted English face... lol
22 s29
Audio is having lor of background noise and disturbance, voice is also not clear
How can you see the king out of a man?
well i think C(nothing) means: "(∀x)¬(x is awesome)"; the student has turned you in a totally wrong way of giving a description of the quantifier: "(∀x)¬¬(x is awesome)" is completely another thing and it's equivalent to the first assertion.
Here's the thing, the prof. had to lay down a proposition 'Nothing is not awesome', not 'C(nothing)' by itself which would be exactly what you wrote. In Russel's terminology " 'C(nothing)'means " 'C(nothing) is always false' is always true".
And if we abstract from defining 'nothing' by itself, we merely use the language of logic which will even out two negations into one positive proposition.
Hope I was clear. محمد صدرا منعمی نودهی
god those students are pretty dim poor guy