Keep up the good work!! Your videos are a great and valuable resource. I would be interested in hearing your views if you ever feel up to it. Maybe a Q & A?
Who knows, perhaps! Although I have no experience doing anything live on UA-cam. Of course, if you have specific questions, you can ask them in the comments. I don't reply to everything, but I try to reply to the comments that I believe I can usefully address.
@@VictorGijsbers I’m not sure if you cover this in one of your videos. Do you think Kant is a one worlder or two worlder? I have understood him as a two worlder since the first time I read him in college and didn’t know the one world interpretation was taken seriously let alone that it was supported by the plurality of philosophers.
@@VictorGijsbers Some Philosophy UA-camrs, have for example, made a video or post, and let the questions accumulate for a day or two. Then, they will just respond to the comments on a recorded video. So that is an option too!
Sorry, 4 models ? (1) Consequences/ends (2) Actions/deeds ? (3) Aims/Intentions? (4) Preferred - Motivation - the earnest search for truth (philosophy is after all the love of truth) Didn't really get distinction between 1 and 2. Will re-watch due to the love of truth or the avoidance of household tasks. Or maybe, the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao? Maybe the concrete nature of our concept of knowledge is the problem. Phlogiston, Aether, Action at a Distance (this idea comes and goes), MWI theory of QM, String Theory, Christianity (people died for this set of ideas), etc. etc. etc. Maybe the truth is not found but approached by adopting a Taoist state of fluidity and a Zen like suspicious of words (antagonistic to western philosophy) - I remember an old (no doubt highly racist) Hollywood movie where an American Indian said 'white man speak with forked tongue'; I think he had a good point (those signed treaties weren't worth the paper they were written on). Maybe we should always preface with Maybe, and not get so entrenched. Focus on the method, not on the end. Reading Zen and the Art of Archery gave me a whole new perspective on human experience that does not require so much dependence on language and logic (Satan, Nazis, lawyers, used car salesmen and Trump use language and logic to do many bad things). But they sounded good at first mom. Maybe knowledge is impossible and we are groping around blindly in the dark struggling for something solid to hold onto, when all we need to do is transcend the illusion of fixed things. Everything is in a state of being fluxed (avoiding censor) Thanks for a great journey to no particular end but a re-evaluation of our flaws and limits. The grounding of truth may be in humility.
![[UA] NAVI vs MOUZ | BO5 | IEM Rio 2024](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/CMBYk0cbGoA/mqdefault.jpg)
Keep up the good work!! Your videos are a great and valuable resource.
I would be interested in hearing your views if you ever feel up to it. Maybe a Q & A?
Who knows, perhaps! Although I have no experience doing anything live on UA-cam. Of course, if you have specific questions, you can ask them in the comments. I don't reply to everything, but I try to reply to the comments that I believe I can usefully address.
@@VictorGijsbers I’m not sure if you cover this in one of your videos. Do you think Kant is a one worlder or two worlder? I have understood him as a two worlder since the first time I read him in college and didn’t know the one world interpretation was taken seriously let alone that it was supported by the plurality of philosophers.
@@VictorGijsbers Some Philosophy UA-camrs, have for example, made a video or post, and let the questions accumulate for a day or two. Then, they will just respond to the comments on a recorded video.
So that is an option too!
can we just make intellectual truth and goodness the law of the land? ... would that it were so simple
Sorry, 4 models ? (1) Consequences/ends (2) Actions/deeds ? (3) Aims/Intentions? (4) Preferred - Motivation - the earnest search for truth (philosophy is after all the love of truth) Didn't really get distinction between 1 and 2. Will re-watch due to the love of truth or the avoidance of household tasks. Or maybe, the Tao that can be spoken is not the true Tao? Maybe the concrete nature of our concept of knowledge is the problem. Phlogiston, Aether, Action at a Distance (this idea comes and goes), MWI theory of QM, String Theory, Christianity (people died for this set of ideas), etc. etc. etc. Maybe the truth is not found but approached by adopting a Taoist state of fluidity and a Zen like suspicious of words (antagonistic to western philosophy) - I remember an old (no doubt highly racist) Hollywood movie where an American Indian said 'white man speak with forked tongue'; I think he had a good point (those signed treaties weren't worth the paper they were written on). Maybe we should always preface with Maybe, and not get so entrenched. Focus on the method, not on the end. Reading Zen and the Art of Archery gave me a whole new perspective on human experience that does not require so much dependence on language and logic (Satan, Nazis, lawyers, used car salesmen and Trump use language and logic to do many bad things). But they sounded good at first mom. Maybe knowledge is impossible and we are groping around blindly in the dark struggling for something solid to hold onto, when all we need to do is transcend the illusion of fixed things. Everything is in a state of being fluxed (avoiding censor) Thanks for a great journey to no particular end but a re-evaluation of our flaws and limits. The grounding of truth may be in humility.