Buridan's Puzzles
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 жов 2023
- Two puzzles from Jean Buridan: Buridan's ass (the donkey undecided among piles of hay) and the fifteenth sophism, "I owe you a horse," both of which relate to H. A. Prichard's puzzle-we seem never to have a reason or obligation to perform any particular action. @PhiloofAlexandria
I just want to say that, while I still love this channel and regularly check it for new content, you've already done more for all of us than we could ever have asked. Your work has expanded the minds of countless individuals and thanks to technology will live on to touch many more. You've more than earned a permanent vacation, should that be your will or interest. Take care of yourself...O captain, my captain.
I’ll be back soon! I’ve been helping to set up a new college at UT, and am now in Rome, where I’ve been at the Angelicum. But back to normal next week!
@@PhiloofAlexandria Very totally awesome (on all three counts!)
I like your solution and agree with it. The general reason transfers to the particular. However the choice between the particulars need not exist in order to actually have a reason. So it would seem the PSR is still fulfilled.
I thought of a similarity in listing necessary and sufficient conditions.
To fulfill the obligation it is necessary and sufficient to give a horse. For any particular horse, it is not necessary that it be given, but it would still be sufficient.
I don't know if this has anything to do with it but it is what came to mind lol.
This thought experiment perfectly describes my conundrum having pathological indecisiveness
I know so little of medieval philosophy professor. Thank you so much.
You're very welcome!
I hope that complex solution at the end is the topic of the next video~
The puzzle is basically all Spinoza tried to understand as the third knowledge but couldn't (?)... I'm not sure how but it is a sort of freedom I strive to find.
Schreber uses a french idiom in his book "if hungry eat" or something like that one of idioms that helps neurotic conditions.
Thanks for Ghazali explanation here.
It's been years since I saw your videos- I did not have UA-cam for a while, and I am so happy that you are still teaching! Always a pleasure to learn from you! thank you so much!
This guy is a legend.
Maybe in the future you could do a lesson of Prufrock like you did with the Wasteland which I very much enjoyed.
It is interesting to think that a contractual obligation looks like an imperfect duty in this regard.
LOL. I end up losing many chess games because of Buridan's ass (having a winning position and then failing to choose in time between multiple winning continuations).
lifes not fair. all my Hay is so far away.....
Very nice art, I have to say.
May I ask from where did you get the paintings?
I produced them in Midjourney.
@@PhiloofAlexandria that thumbnail with the woman holding two glasses... she’s something else!
Actually, I’ve been looking at your other videos. Really nice art!
If I have reason to write a comment do I have an obligation to write this particular comment over another?
You're compelled to choose so you'll need a tie breaker to take a path. Doesn't this support determinism? Entropy to the ground state.
Landlord: sir you owe me 300 dollars
Me:
The Urge of instinct versus the Unction of Will. Hunger versus purpose.
Is it not detestable to impose on life reasons? To make one's choice a purpose? To decide IN FAVOR? Can we not choose without favor? Decide without desire?
Hunger is not a duty is it? It is a call to satisfy a need, a need necessary to life. How I satisfy the need, or if I do is not just my choice. It is also dependent on Nature or other things.
While I can decide not to eat, such decision will not be for long. The Urge of my body forces my hand. In the end my choice must be in MY FAVOR.
Suppose, however, I made a decision without desire? Neither in my favor nor by favor of which repast? Suppose I chose without reason or purpose? Not without Will but without Thought? Is such a choice possible?
Are not all impulses of instinct made without thought? Mere reaction rather than action? Flight or fight?
What pretext serves not my will, my thought, my desire? Unless it be some involuntary Urge? Is it not my duty to live? No matter the choices before me?
Therefore what constrains those who balk at choosing? It can only be reason, not duty. What is it about reason that gives the animal, man, pause? Amusement? Stubbornness? Obtuseness? Premonition of danger? A higher duty than life: survival? Liesure? The brain 🧠 or the mind? Consciousness or self-consciousness?
Choice without thought is consciousness, with thought it is self-consciousness. It is the the self that gives pause because the self has a duty to the self. No longer to survival, or, rather, evolution. That life and its form gives way to my life and my form. Ultimately to my responsibility.
Such a cognition or "cataleptic impression" need not be sustainable. It may pass and never be entertained again, or it may persist. Only with memory and instances when such pause aids survival does such self-consciousness thrive.
I don't understand the picture of the video? Why you chose that picture? Is this a clickbait?
She's holding a glass silly.
She's holding two-deciding which one to drink!