It's a shame that channels like these don't have millions of views. You can transmit the taste of knowledge and talk about it in practical terms related to the reality of everyday life in simple terms.
Excellent video! Admittedly, this whole video is somewhat beyond my present (undergraduate) level of understanding, but (if I’m not completely mistaken about the issues presented in the video) the Parable (of The Kingdom), as presented near the end of the video, seems to suggest that there are problems with all three criteria of our “accepted” “definition” of knowledge (namely, “justified”, “true”, “belief”). The most apparent problem is the self-referential inconsistency involved in the sage’s pronouncement that he has “come to the kingdom to be hung/hanged”. Interestingly, the self-referential inconsistency involved here is an indirect kind rather than a direct kind (as, for example, in the case of the “Liar’s Paradox”) because it involves an action (namely, the hanging of the sage) that can (or at least, is presumed to be able to) affect the truth value of the sage’s pronouncement. (Actually, the type of paradox that is involved in the Kingdom parable is more like that involved in the paradox of the writer who writes about everyone who doesn’t write about her/himself, where the problematic question is, does the writer write an autobiography?) But this particular assessment (above) of the issues raised by the Kingdom parable (again, as it is presented in the video) presumes (at the time it is made, and apparently without justification) that we can “know” right now (or at least ascertain at some time in the future) the actual truth value of the sage’s pronouncement. In fact, it doesn’t even seem possible to identify a way to provide an a priori justification to believe in the accuracy of the sage’s pronouncement even apart from any question of the existence of evidence for an a posteriori justification. Moreover, there appear to be problems with regard to “beliefs” in the parable. Apart from the consideration that there would be no way for other people to know that the sage actually believed that he would be hung after he gets hung, there doesn’t appear to be any way to determine (ahead of time) whether the sage himself actually believed that he would be hung (at the outset). Of course, none of this means that the parable is a poorly constructed illustration. In fact, if its goal was to highlight the complexity in discussing and thinking about the concepts of truth (knowledge, justification, etc.) it, in my view, has succeeded in achieving that goal. And I think Kant’s skeptical ideas about our knowledge of reality (as it “really is” outside of all mental constructs) just adds another layer of complexity to this whole area of inquiry.
No one can ever know reality as it is but rather one can only have an idea of it such as a cup for example. All our ideas are false to varying degrees and we must learn to accept that our idea of something is either good enough or not good enough for us to act upon it.
It's a shame that channels like these don't have millions of views. You can transmit the taste of knowledge and talk about it in practical terms related to the reality of everyday life in simple terms.
Excellent video!
Admittedly, this whole video is somewhat beyond my present (undergraduate) level of understanding, but (if I’m not completely mistaken about the issues presented in the video) the Parable (of The Kingdom), as presented near the end of the video, seems to suggest that there are problems with all three criteria of our “accepted” “definition” of knowledge (namely, “justified”, “true”, “belief”). The most apparent problem is the self-referential inconsistency involved in the sage’s pronouncement that he has “come to the kingdom to be hung/hanged”. Interestingly, the self-referential inconsistency involved here is an indirect kind rather than a direct kind (as, for example, in the case of the “Liar’s Paradox”) because it involves an action (namely, the hanging of the sage) that can (or at least, is presumed to be able to) affect the truth value of the sage’s pronouncement. (Actually, the type of paradox that is involved in the Kingdom parable is more like that involved in the paradox of the writer who writes about everyone who doesn’t write about her/himself, where the problematic question is, does the writer write an autobiography?)
But this particular assessment (above) of the issues raised by the Kingdom parable (again, as it is presented in the video) presumes (at the time it is made, and apparently without justification) that we can “know” right now (or at least ascertain at some time in the future) the actual truth value of the sage’s pronouncement. In fact, it doesn’t even seem possible to identify a way to provide an a priori justification to believe in the accuracy of the sage’s pronouncement even apart from any question of the existence of evidence for an a posteriori justification.
Moreover, there appear to be problems with regard to “beliefs” in the parable. Apart from the consideration that there would be no way for other people to know that the sage actually believed that he would be hung after he gets hung, there doesn’t appear to be any way to determine (ahead of time) whether the sage himself actually believed that he would be hung (at the outset).
Of course, none of this means that the parable is a poorly constructed illustration. In fact, if its goal was to highlight the complexity in discussing and thinking about the concepts of truth (knowledge, justification, etc.) it, in my view, has succeeded in achieving that goal.
And I think Kant’s skeptical ideas about our knowledge of reality (as it “really is” outside of all mental constructs) just adds another layer of complexity to this whole area of inquiry.
Thanks for sharing❤
No one can ever know reality as it is but rather one can only have an idea of it such as a cup for example. All our ideas are false to varying degrees and we must learn to accept that our idea of something is either good enough or not good enough for us to act upon it.
You can't handle the truth! 😁
a prioris even refuted by analytic philosophy ...eg Quine [ the kingdom q is more grammatical than anything]
Are you from Spain?
Truth is Transient. Universal Laws Endure...