Thanks for this overview video. I also like the plant. It makes me think of those souls from above in Plotinus's theory that jump down, or fall in love, when bodies rise up from nature, like you said. Cool art too.
much to consider here.. of the little I know about Bergson some is compelling - some is not at all. Some is applicable in the context of other theories. Implying or speculating that memories "want" is a little loose of an interpretation. Perhaps if we spoke of valence or in the Freudian sense as unresolved. Perhaps it is far more involved than what is presented here. But to think a memory has it's own "will" gets way to complicated.
Excellent video. Bergson was such a towering figure in Belle Epoque Europe, but even most philosophy majors don't know much about him!
Well done! You explained a difficult topic very clearly. Thank you.
This channel is great! Keep it up
WAIT (been a podcast listener for a month and loving it) both of y’all r way more attractive than i visualized. like. across all podcast expectations.
Love the concepts reviewed here. Glad for my poor sketch of a memory.
Thanks! Interesting . I was not previously familiar with his work but you have sparked a interest !
Wow, what a fantastic video!
Something, so hilarious 😂 and yet so akin to Practical reality of Life/ Existence 🧐😂🌺
Small correction: Plotinus' dates are approximately 205-270 AD, so he was a third-century thinker. Otherwise, great work.
Fascinating!
Which Bergson talk does the speaker refer to?
অনেক ধন্যবাদ, প্রফেসর আপনাকে। 😊
এমন আরও ছোট ছোট নানান বিষয়ে আপনার ভিডিও চাই। অপেক্ষায় থাকলাম।ভালো থাকবেন আপনি।
Extrapolating a dream from light dusk sounds so similar to how AI renders an image out of noise using latent diffusion. :)
Bergson must have been a great opponent of Descartes.
Thanks for this overview video. I also like the plant. It makes me think of those souls from above in Plotinus's theory that jump down, or fall in love, when bodies rise up from nature, like you said. Cool art too.
Spinoza was that guy
much to consider here.. of the little I know about Bergson some is compelling - some is not at all. Some is applicable in the context of other theories. Implying or speculating that memories "want" is a little loose of an interpretation. Perhaps if we spoke of valence or in the Freudian sense as unresolved. Perhaps it is far more involved than what is presented here. But to think a memory has it's own "will" gets way to complicated.
When I'm triggered that's a baby memory right?