The Social Context of Philosophy with Bryan Magee (1977)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 вер 2017
- World-renowned author and professor Bryan Magee and London School of Economics professor Ernest Gellner discuss contemporary philosophy, its historical and social backgrounds, and its role in modern society. Gellner examines the radical expansion of scientific knowledge and its dehumanizing effect on society as expressed by sociologist Max Weber. Marxism’s messianic expectation is blamed for its failure to reconstruct society. Gellner dismisses today’s philosophy of relativism as unworkable.
Join us on Patreon! / manufacturingintellect
Donate Crypto! commerce.coinbase.com/checkou...
Share this video!
This is from the series Modern Philosophy.
Watch the other episodes here:
Introduction to Philosophy with Isaiah Berlin: • Isaiah Berlin intervie...
Herbert Marcuse interview: • Herbert Marcuse interv...
Heidegger and Existentialism: • Heidegger and Existent...
Wittgenstein's Philosophy: • The Philosophy of Witt...
Logical Positivism: • Logical Positivism wit...
Linguistic Philosophy: • Linguistic Philosophy ...
Willard Van Orman Quine interview: • Willard Van Orman Quin...
Philosophy of Language with John Searle: • John Searle interview ...
Noam Chomsky interview: • Noam Chomsky interview...
Philosophy of Science: • The Philosophy of Scie...
Philosophy and Politics: • Philosophy and Politic...
Philosophy and Literature with Iris Murdoch: • Philosophy and Literat...
The Social Context of Philosophy: • The Social Context of ...
Join us on Patreon!
The gentleman is the kind of professor I would listen all day. One can easily notice he is got a brilliant mind!
This is the best video I have ever stumbled upon on the UA-cam. Always wondered what Gellner looked and sounded in person. Thank you so much for uploading this!
Excellent. Very thought provoking. Ernest Gellners very intelligent assessment. Thank you.
This was awesome! My eyes have been opened and much has been gleaned! Tku for sharing🥳🤓🎓
Thank you!
This was so good
Thanks mate
Provocative! Worth further discussion
Perhaps someone can help me understand Gellner regarding his critique of the later Wittgenstein, Magee emphasized this very point later on in the interview b/c I think, like me, he is not sure how Gellner‘s critique applies to the later Wittgenstein, ie language as a game picture. Gellner clearly says that Wittgenstein’s later view goes to far, which I have always instinctively agreed with-actually my view is there is not that big a break between the Two Wittgensteins in the first place, but I‘m convinced that Gellner really misses this question or thinks like I do that Wittgenstein I and II are inadequate for the same reason.
Viciously intelligent
What I take from this discussion, whithin my limited understanding of Philosophy as the most basic method for logical reasoning; is that how to come up with a universal and almost indisputable body of knowledge by which humanity can be brought together in a common view of how we should behave and act for the sake of the continuation and preservation of humanity. As the debaters here have stated, science once regarded as the unquestionable method by which we could achieve that, has over time, and since it became evident that science can’t provide answers for absolutely every problem arising from the very existence of humans as individuals, and collectively as members of society. Personally, I see humanity destine to disappear, whether as a result of our own self destruction, and the inevitable destruction of the environment we so much depend for to actually exist. Even if humanity were more or less successful in something how preserve its existence without destroying the planet, it would and it must without doubt evolve into something very different from what we are today. We are doomed to perish with the planet! We came out of it and by virtue of set of conditions that made our existence possible. Had any of those conditions been different than they are and we would not be here at all.
Listened to this very intently. Gellner is one of those intellectuals who speaks very eloquently and gives imposing answers, but gives answers that somehow evade the questions (e.g. the problem of relativism). So, it's a frustrating exercise to listen and gleen anything of substance from him - at least here.
Gellner is a bright dude.
Any one know what Gellner thought of the Frankfurt School?
Oh look Teller became a philosopher, I hope he does a magic trick.
:)
Funky shirt and tie combo
Te amo profe de filosofía pero no te voy a decir quién soy 🥺👄🥺
Critical examination of marxism (largely be marxists) has already corrected the errors in marxism that gellner identifies; it is dangerous to claim that any analytical approach is sufficiently explanatory, hence why self-criticism is an essential, and necessary, component of successful marxist thinking..