+Gregory B. Sadler Haha, I knew it! Seriously though, a great video delivered in a refreshingly plainspoken manner - I can;t wait to work my way through all your other videos. Thanks for your efforts to bring philosophy to the masses!
Hee definitely doesn't match the stereotype. My philosophy professor does man, it looks like he crawled out of a meme. And that's ok. He's a good teacher.
Your teaching method here is exemplary. It appears that this is not your first time through this analysis. Your thorough understanding and ability to quote lines certainly enhanced your lesson as well as supported your analysis. I have been asked to study this play and do my own analysis of it. You have set the bar high. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge with us all. Please continue in your efforts.
fantastic analysis. i am in the midst of staging this very play, and your insights really helped to untangle a couple of knots and open new perspectives. i thank you!
Thanks for asking. It went great. We had about twelve people in the church book group. They all read it. They were bursting with comments. Your insights were well received. I gave more philosophical background than I expected. They surprised me by saying they thought the room as purgatory and thought that when Garcin stayed the room and protected Inez from Estelle that was the turning people. I relayed a joke told by Sartre. Which worked because the women in the group like the women in the joke were in there 50 & 60 and well educated. Sartre said, "The two women were talking when out of nowhere one of them comes out with an awful curse word." She said. "I don't know what got into me it must that awful existentialism that's going around."
I know this is an older video, but new to me! We are going to discuss Sartre in my upcoming Boston Philosophy meetup group and this is my secondary source. You make everything crystal clear with plain language and humility. Thank you Gregory for the gifts you bestowed. God bless
Your outline and description has fascinated me. This review process is what I do after watching plays. I had no idea that this was done by others. I thought I was maybe a bit crazy by becoming so immersed in thoughts provoked by plays. I have cancelled my TV satellite reception so I can occupy myself watching the rest of your videos. I started at your 2013 Philosophy Intro. Big Questions....Philosophy classification of questions/areas of inquiry. Wish me hope to develop my learning because I have some personal Big Questions of Life to think about. Thank you for all the work you have shared. You are very animated in your presentations and this is terrifically communicative.
hey, this video is amazing firstly. I am a philosophy student and am doing Philosophy of Literature this semester; this happened to be one of the pieces of literature we are studying. You made it so simple thanks.
Our AP lit teacher suggested we read this play and I hope to use it on the exam today if the prompt works out. At first I was kinda annoyed with the play understanding some stuff shallowly but not a lot about the message but this lecture was very insightful. It actually made me really excited to look over the play again. That’s super cool stuff to be able to change the view of a stubborn teen LOL
There's quite a few classic works that we can easily misjudge on the first time reading them. Good lesson to learn, I think - to go back and see what's there on a second read!
Very well explained. Hits all the points I can understand and are useful. Do you have a book where you have elaborated on this video further on Sartre? Thanks
I'm a undergraduate Studying Psychology but your videos help me unwind i would be curious of your analysis on Ayn Rand I never understood why so many people hate her work
Hi. I think you did a great explaining the play. But I think you forgot to explain some parts of the play that are very important. For example, when Garcin says "I got used to live among furniture." Or when he says "is what they tell us down there." Why there is a paper-knife? and why the objects in the room can not move? why every time they argue the place gets hotter? Any way, I like your videos.
Are you saying that "Hell is other people" would only apply if you're stuck with people, like being stuck in a room in 'No Exit'? If one is not forced to be around others and can choose who to be around, or be by oneself and be contempt and not feel like one is missing anything, does "Hell is other people" still apply?
Dr. Sadler,....I need to do a philosophy essay on this book. I have to do a comparison between Sartre and 2 to 3 other philosophers. Can you give a helping hand with this?.........Thank you, sir
Greetings dear Professor! Always happy to hear your courses and lectures. Very quickly, a French "Second Empire" Style drawing would roughly correspond to a Victorian Style drawing room should one look for an idiomatic sounding translation that would mean something to Anglo-American audiences...
Gregory B. Sadler existence preceding essence seems completely logical, but as we live in an imperfect world there are always exceptions. In this case how is essence effected in the case of someone who has suffered retrograde amnesia? The link between existence and essence becomes severely distorted.
I think you need to spend a bit of time actually reading Sartre. Quite a few of the questions and objections you're bringing up would be addressed by an attentive, close reading
What would humans do without essence, or if their existence is completely useless and absurd to their current situation? Would they have any essence per se?
He'd say they'd have to make the choice, and that any criteria that they used to make the choice were ultimately their choice as well -- so, not much help
Thank you for your videos! You make so many it's awesome! Just one suggestion. I think it would be better if you put a mic on you. That way we could hear you better.
1) it's heaven, 2) main character interacts with more than 3 people 3)everyone else belongs there but she doesn't, in huis clos they all belonged in hell
thxs, very helpful 4 my exam!! my theory, as a catholic believer, is that these three persons actually are not in hell, if we talk about plot-location, but in pre-hell, since in hell only are people who really want to go there (like IS-People), and since two died violently. Pre-hell would be a very close, strong and immediate Sensation of a really damned place, but still the Chance through very strong Mediation to get out of it... Another argument for that would be the absence of instruments of torture which probably exist in some kind of impersonal form in damnation. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo and after my research, besides Sartre's biographic Background, the Interpretation of the three persons of social groups in a state is the most lucid one to me
Born July Well, I can't say I know much about any "pre-hell"idea, and I'm someone who works in the Catholic intellectual traditions. Glad the video has helpful for your exam!
if you check the Limbo-definition, there you have the tradition and it's a very serious and also sad issue, e.g. for aborted humans (probably one of the worst huis clos situations one can imagine...)
Gregory B. Sadler understanding the symbolic nature of the setting of the drawing room, being as it is used as an interpretation of hell, lends it a fundamental importance.
Gregory B. Sadler the relative and surprising comfort of the drawing room as hell supports the final conclusion that hell is other people. Nothing whatsoever to do with environment. That at least is why I see the setting as having some relevance to the piece of work.
The lecture helped me to understand at least something (not much) in the play itself. But still it seems Sartre has little knowledge of hell. I guess a standard family, a wife, a husband and two kids may be a far better suited to serve as hell. I wonder whether Sartre was married or not. Perhaps not.
I watched the play itself. I didn't like it. First, it is hard to believe. After all, a guy, a womaniser is shut in with two attractive ladies with beautiful hair styles and clothes and all are so unhappy. It seems highly artificial. Second, and more important, it is just boring. I highly appreciate philosophy, but a play is not a philosophical treatise and treatise and is supposed to be entertaining. Look at "Macbeth" or "Hamlet" - the plays are exiting and they stimulate all kind of thoughts too.
Well, then not much conversation to be had, on this video or any others, at least not with me going forward. My time is in finite supply, and there's plenty of better conversations to spend it on.
Of course you are not obliged to reply and I even don't expect you to do so. There is a saying "Whereof on cannot speak thereof one should be silent", or something like this. It seems Sartre tries to write a play about something that is impossible to state clearly, and the result is not completely brilliant. Perhaps such literature and playwriting are attempts to bypass the limitations of clear and simple language. I think "The Stranger" or "Nausea" are well written, this paly is not. Sorry for taking your time, the reply is not necessary, though of course I will appreciate it.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Great stuff: philosophical insights from a professor who looks like he wrestles in the WWE between seminars!
+Rentaghost okish Hahaha! You've outed me. I'm the masked professor
+Gregory B. Sadler Haha, I knew it! Seriously though, a great video delivered in a refreshingly plainspoken manner - I can;t wait to work my way through all your other videos. Thanks for your efforts to bring philosophy to the masses!
True I was thinking the same thing that he explaining very well but he doesn't looks like someone who i would imagine to be a philosophy professor
Hee definitely doesn't match the stereotype. My philosophy professor does man, it looks like he crawled out of a meme. And that's ok. He's a good teacher.
Your teaching method here is exemplary. It appears that this is not your first time through this analysis. Your thorough understanding and ability to quote lines certainly enhanced your lesson as well as supported your analysis. I have been asked to study this play and do my own analysis of it. You have set the bar high. I appreciate you sharing your knowledge with us all. Please continue in your efforts.
Thanks!
fantastic analysis. i am in the midst of staging this very play, and your insights really helped to untangle a couple of knots and open new perspectives.
i thank you!
You're very welcome!
New (and rather overdue) video in the Existentialism sequence. . . this one on Sartre's seminal play, No Exit
You're welcome. I was very taken with Sartre myself in my early twenties!
View Master Glad you liked it. How did your talk go?
Thanks for asking. It went great. We had about twelve people in the church book group. They all read it. They were bursting with comments. Your insights were well received. I gave more philosophical background than I expected. They surprised me by saying they thought the room as purgatory and thought that when Garcin stayed the room and protected Inez from Estelle that was the turning people. I relayed a joke told by Sartre. Which worked because the women in the group like the women in the joke were in there 50 & 60 and well educated. Sartre said, "The two women were talking when out of nowhere one of them comes out with an awful curse word." She said. "I don't know what got into me it must that awful existentialism that's going around."
When I first read it the play it seemed depressing and confusing and now it seemed hopeful and like affirming.
I know this is an older video, but new to me! We are going to discuss Sartre in my upcoming Boston Philosophy meetup group and this is my secondary source. You make everything crystal clear with plain language and humility. Thank you Gregory for the gifts you bestowed. God bless
You're very welcome!
Your outline and description has fascinated me. This review process is what I do after watching plays. I had no idea that this was done by others. I thought I was maybe a bit crazy by becoming so immersed in thoughts provoked by plays. I have cancelled my TV satellite reception so I can occupy myself watching the rest of your videos. I started at your 2013 Philosophy Intro. Big Questions....Philosophy classification of questions/areas of inquiry. Wish me hope to develop my learning because I have some personal Big Questions of Life to think about. Thank you for all the work you have shared. You are very animated in your presentations and this is terrifically communicative.
You're very welcome. . . and you will be busy with those videos for quite a long time, I expect - there's over 1300 now!
Professor Sadler, when you said, " you can't change you can't grow." A vicious shiver struck me, and I viscerally felt, " whoa that really is hell."
Yes indeed
I wish I could site this.
Yeah, having studied the play I really appreciate what you have to say about it, it must be one heck of a pleasure to be in your class.
Well, we do quite a few online events and I do offer classes online from time to time
hey, this video is amazing firstly. I am a philosophy student and am doing Philosophy of Literature this semester; this happened to be one of the pieces of literature we are studying. You made it so simple thanks.
You're welcome!
very professional lecture . it's like listening to Sartre in person . Only he speaks in English . Many thanks . Merci beaucoup .
63 NOT OUT Hahaha! That's rather high praise. Bienvenue!
I am truly one of your biggest fans...thanks so much for sharing.
I'm a new subscriber. I'm really looking forward to digging into these lectures! Thank you for posting these.
You're welcome!
Our AP lit teacher suggested we read this play and I hope to use it on the exam today if the prompt works out. At first I was kinda annoyed with the play understanding some stuff shallowly but not a lot about the message but this lecture was very insightful. It actually made me really excited to look over the play again. That’s super cool stuff to be able to change the view of a stubborn teen LOL
Even if I don’t use it I’m glad I watched this video !!
There's quite a few classic works that we can easily misjudge on the first time reading them. Good lesson to learn, I think - to go back and see what's there on a second read!
Excellent analysis. Thank you!
Very well explained. Hits all the points I can understand and are useful. Do you have a book where you have elaborated on this video further on Sartre? Thanks
If I did, it would be very easy to find. Glad you enjoyed the video
7:25 These observation of the dead are pretty alien to a culture that doesn't keep the deceased around for long after they've departed.
I'm a undergraduate Studying Psychology but your videos help me unwind i would be curious of your analysis on Ayn Rand I never understood why so many people hate her work
You’ll find some Rand videos in the channel. People tend to hate her work because she’s such a bad reader of philosophy
Great work
Putting together this AWESOME video
Thank You :)
Glad you enjoyed it
Excellent play, awesome analysis.
Glad you enjoyed it
My favourite play
Hi. I think you did a great explaining the play. But I think you forgot to explain some parts of the play that are very important. For example, when Garcin says "I got used to live among furniture." Or when he says "is what they tell us down there." Why there is a paper-knife? and why the objects in the room can not move? why every time they argue the place gets hotter? Any way, I like your videos.
Glad you enjoy the videos. Perhaps you ought to make one about these parts of No Exit you consider vitally important
You are the "Intellectual Dude"
Thank you for making this :)
You're welcome!
very helpful! well explained and very organized
***** Glad to read it
Knowing "No Exit" only through a (well done in my opinion) early to mid 1960's cinematic short, I will now go read the script.
Well worth reading, I'd say
aMulliganStew Do you mean the BBC adaptation? If so, it was great. Far better than others on UA-cam.
Hope you will release your lecture on "The Plague" soon.
That'll be sometime this Fall
Are you saying that "Hell is other people" would only apply if you're stuck with people, like being stuck in a room in 'No Exit'? If one is not forced to be around others and can choose who to be around, or be by oneself and be contempt and not feel like one is missing anything, does "Hell is other people" still apply?
To answer your first question, No.
Thank you very much for your reply! Your channel is my new favorite, I'm working on watching all your videos, this is all very interesting!
Dr. Sadler, fantastic job. I'll be dropping you a line soon.
Dr. Sadler,....I need to do a philosophy essay on this book. I have to do a comparison between Sartre and 2 to 3 other philosophers. Can you give a helping hand with this?.........Thank you, sir
That sort of thing would be tutoring services. Right now, unfortunately, I'm not taking on any new clients.
Greetings dear Professor! Always happy to hear your courses and lectures. Very quickly, a French "Second Empire" Style drawing would roughly correspond to a Victorian Style drawing room should one look for an idiomatic sounding translation that would mean something to Anglo-American audiences...
Sorry... drawing ROOM! I always forget a word.
Philippe Renaud
Yes, I suppose that would be roughly the same period. Thanks!
To what extent does the assumption of existence preceding essence, essentially state that nurture completely overrides nature?
Those distinctions don't map on to each other
Gregory B. Sadler existence preceding essence seems completely logical, but as we live in an imperfect world there are always exceptions. In this case how is essence effected in the case of someone who has suffered retrograde amnesia? The link between existence and essence becomes severely distorted.
I think you need to spend a bit of time actually reading Sartre. Quite a few of the questions and objections you're bringing up would be addressed by an attentive, close reading
Gregory B. Sadler I'm sorry to have wasted your time.
Thanks for posting this.
You're welcome
What would humans do without essence, or if their existence is completely useless and absurd to their current situation? Would they have any essence per se?
Those questions are basically non-starters. For one, Sartre doesn't say humans don't have any essence.
what do you think sartre would say to someone who had to make the decision of taking a family member off of life support?
He'd say they'd have to make the choice, and that any criteria that they used to make the choice were ultimately their choice as well -- so, not much help
thats all the advice he would give them? no tips?
and this is becasue he believes everybody must make their own choices and build their own ways of thinking?
Great video, thanks!
You're welcome!
This room has much nicer acoustics than the other one. It's easier to hear what you're saying.
Thank you for your videos! You make so many it's awesome! Just one suggestion. I think it would be better if you put a mic on you. That way we could hear you better.
Glad you enjoy the videos
I would like to see what you think of that?
Of what?
Great job -- thanks.
You're welcome!
Thank you.
You're welcome
About the things I mentioned
I already responded
Thank you for your videos, they are amazing :) the Netflix show the good place is a cute Hollywood version of no exit I find amusing
You're very welcome!
How would the good place be sartrian?
Saadiya how is it not?
1) it's heaven, 2) main character interacts with more than 3 people 3)everyone else belongs there but she doesn't, in huis clos they all belonged in hell
Lovely!
Thanks!
thxs, very helpful 4 my exam!! my theory, as a catholic believer, is that these three persons actually are not in hell, if we talk about plot-location, but in pre-hell, since in hell only are people who really want to go there (like IS-People), and since two died violently. Pre-hell would be a very close, strong and immediate Sensation of a really damned place, but still the Chance through very strong Mediation to get out of it... Another argument for that would be the absence of instruments of torture which probably exist in some kind of impersonal form in damnation. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo and after my research, besides Sartre's biographic Background, the Interpretation of the three persons of social groups in a state is the most lucid one to me
Born July Well, I can't say I know much about any "pre-hell"idea, and I'm someone who works in the Catholic intellectual traditions. Glad the video has helpful for your exam!
if you check the Limbo-definition, there you have the tradition and it's a very serious and also sad issue, e.g. for aborted humans (probably one of the worst huis clos situations one can imagine...)
I know about the history of the theology of the limbo idea -- entirely optional, and ignored by most theologians, to be quite honest.
:-) that's the point!
very good
Thanks!
Your description of a drawing room as being "gauche" or "kitschy" is at the very least debatable.
You can debate whatever you like, I suppose.
Gregory B. Sadler understanding the symbolic nature of the setting of the drawing room, being as it is used as an interpretation of hell, lends it a fundamental importance.
Well, you're certainly entitled to your interpretation. I think it's a pretty minor detail myself
Gregory B. Sadler the relative and surprising comfort of the drawing room as hell supports the final conclusion that hell is other people. Nothing whatsoever to do with environment. That at least is why I see the setting as having some relevance to the piece of work.
Yep, some very limited relevance. Pretty much everything else discussed is more central. Again, if that's where you want to focus, good luck with it
Is torture not a thing of today?
Who claimed it wasn't?
The lecture helped me to understand at least something (not much) in the play itself. But still it seems Sartre has little knowledge of hell. I guess a standard family, a wife, a husband and two kids may be a far better suited to serve as hell. I wonder whether Sartre was married or not. Perhaps not.
+Stanislaw Hrouste That's easy enough information to acquire, I think
I watched the play itself. I didn't like it. First, it is hard to believe. After all, a guy, a womaniser is shut in with two attractive ladies with beautiful hair styles and clothes and all are so unhappy. It seems highly artificial. Second, and more important, it is just boring. I highly appreciate philosophy, but a play is not a philosophical treatise and treatise and is supposed to be entertaining. Look at "Macbeth" or "Hamlet" - the plays are exiting and they stimulate all kind of thoughts too.
Well, then not much conversation to be had, on this video or any others, at least not with me going forward. My time is in finite supply, and there's plenty of better conversations to spend it on.
Of course you are not obliged to reply and I even don't expect you to do so.
There is a saying "Whereof on cannot speak thereof one should be silent", or something like this. It seems Sartre tries to write a play about something that is impossible to state clearly, and the result is not completely brilliant.
Perhaps such literature and playwriting are attempts to bypass the limitations of clear and simple language. I think "The Stranger" or "Nausea" are well written, this paly is not.
Sorry for taking your time, the reply is not necessary, though of course I will appreciate it.
Sartre was in a long-term relationship with Simone de Beauvoir.
O.K.
What's with the moaning in the background???
What's with the weird, off-topic question about a video shot five years ago?
@@GregoryBSadler But the moaning Gregory. You have to tell us.
@@rotpeter9148 How would I possibly know, more than 1000 videos later, what a background noise in some video was?