Being in the World: A Tribute to Hubert Dreyfus | Episode 1809 | Closer To Truth
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 тра 2024
- Hubert Dreyfus, renowned philosopher of phenomenology, died in 2017. A few years earlier, we discussed consciousness, A.I., God, creation, religion, body and soul, existence, and the meaning of life. A tribute to Hubert L. Dreyfus.
Season 18, Episode 9 - #CloserToTruth
▶Register for free at CTT.com for subscriber-only exclusives: bit.ly/2GXmFsP
Closer To Truth host Robert Lawrence Kuhn takes viewers on an intriguing global journey into cutting-edge labs, magnificent libraries, hidden gardens, and revered sanctuaries in order to discover state-of-the-art ideas and make them real and relevant.
▶Free access to Closer to Truth's library of 5,000 videos: bit.ly/376lkKN
Closer to Truth presents the world’s greatest thinkers exploring humanity’s deepest questions. Discover fundamental issues of existence. Engage new and diverse ways of thinking. Appreciate intense debates. Share your own opinions. Seek your own answers.
#HubertDreyfus #Philosophy
Such a good teacher, such a good person.
In deed
I had just stumbled upon his interviews a few days ago and I thought he was a marvelous teacher and philosopher, downloaded some of his classes, as I am taking a major on Philosophy here in my home country, Colombia. Now I find down of his passing. wow, how the world works, our Dasein. Thanks to this mans work I am closer to phenomenology than ever. Godspeed dear and respected teacher and I will continue on your classes.
One of my all time favorite Interviews! I watched it ten years go. It hits differently now that I have studied Philosophy, psychology, and then data science/ computer science. And he is still as Insightful as he ever was.
So few likes and comments? I’m surprised: what as great man/teacher! Lovely tribute!
I can't improve on a comment which someone said: "Such a good teacher, such a good guy."
This entry is without question the best one in the entire series. Professor Dreyfus was a brilliant, clear-thinking and decent person. He expressed complex and profound ideas clearly and interestingly.
Thank you Hubert for your life's work, hope you have found peace beyond here.
Thanks for your enlightenment
In being in the world of humans is more then just dealing and coping with the things in it: It is an upbringing of collective consciousness. You have to be "born" in it to be in it.
Beautiful 🕊️
This was very good, just excellent!
I had an experience some years ago with a performance of Tibetan ritual music. Basically 'self-consciousness' was most definitely gone for about 10 minutes. Only at the end of that time, when the very deep, completely repetitive music they'd been playing for that time changed, did a consciousness awake again in me, that told me that I existed at all, who I was, where I was, with who, what I was watching, that there was time, and that was able to then reflect and see how much time roughly it had been, etc. But don't misundertand, I didn't just forget where I was, engrossed in the music, I literally had no consciousness that I could speak of. Nothing of any kind of even mildly reflective nature was occuring. I wasn't even 'engrossed' in the music. I might as well have been the music.
Wonderful. Helpful and meaningful for anyone who asks Socrates questions. 👍🏻🏴
Brilliant.
Thank you so much.
The greatest teacher is the greatest student.
thank you, Robert. your channel was a once in a lifetime discovery for me
Thank you for uploading this
I love this channel almost too much!!!
Awesome presentation! Thank you :)
Thanks for this. A kind upload for someone who helped me understand where philosophy and I stood in relation to contemporary thought.
Although, in the mode of coping with things, all you really have to do is get people to engage 'smart' objects and their average way of dealing will begin to level'down' towards those things anyways. AI environment doesn't necessarily make a consciousness but reformats our being such that what's considered consciousness is anything that can process information (pattern) in some way. Not that this says anything about dasein's dasein(ing), even though it says it all.
Goodness' me.
You got that right... AI enframes the totality of now objects as standing reserve.... (ready to be processed or consumed in some way).
This video should have more views
9:50 "When you're absorbed in the moment"
Jack London - Call of the wild.
Always consider evolution when thinking about the brain.
It evolved through random mutation to best reproduce in its environment.
Language evolved about ~100,000yrs ago
Before that there may have only been "being in the world", maybe there was
no analysis.
Certainly, analytical minds find it impossible to revert to "Call of the wild" thinking.
But that is essential for understanding the world - which is accomplished through science.
Would be great to see an updated interview with Stuart Hammeroff.
Super cosi tributo, dema lindo1
Lovin' it, that's what philosophy is all about.
Wow. This fracking guy, dude. Every single thing he says is the hit.
❤
I think you're still conscious if you're chasing a bus...
I wonder what Quine's opinion of Heidegger was.
It's the difference between the reformist who took the old tradition to the n'th degree and the revolutionary who had to overthrow the tradition entirely.
@@bradleyasztalos6650 It wasn't Quine. His Honors Thesis advisor was William Craig.
7:11 bookmark
15:43
I presume someone or some device sent the tweet on his behalf. Had he actually sent the tweet, we'd certainly be closer to ... something.
could it be that it contain code that is activated when there is a posting somewhere on the internet i.e. wikipedia of his passing?
If this is so maybe others have or could have write(n) their own Obit
His wife did...
08:10
As to AI, I wonder what he would think today. The world changes and we’ve had millions generations to evolve. Computers can produce millions of generations per hour and test them against the world until it finds what solves every specific problem. After that, the world is not changing fast enough for computers.
It doesn't matter how abstract or artificial is the domain of mathematics because it is still the result of the human mind conscious cognitive process.
Mathematics represents only an algorithm process, a logical process.
The mathematics created as such follows only algorithms.
Human consciousness is much-much more than that, in the sense that it can shuffle very quickly between full logical and completely non-logical, thing that "mathematics" can't.
Biological consciousness, at its highest, has the instant possibility to both, follow ( =create ) algorithms, and to not.
For example, the human consciousness can create, and it does it always and continuously, completely artificial, non-algorithmic, non-rules at all, non-mathematical, illogical, non-real imaginary, phantasmagoric visions and pseudo-non-concepts.
As a consequence of this existent concrete-real based material process, creating a full Artificial Consciousness ( subject that is seen here in this UA-cam material of being mostly the interest "of knowing how to" of many other people and "entities" around the whole world ) exists in two real directions, two methods, as such :
1) A non-important one ( non-important because it is not the proper one, so it is just a simulation, an intelligent simulation that can be externally controlled, etc, case that is desired by "entities" on Earth ) with which Artificial simulated Consciousness can be created as a logical mathematical algorithm that only approximate the real one; this is created on a very much improved and advanced "AI algorithm" scaffolding. It is not an independent conscious process, and it just mimics the real one.
2) The correct one, that it is created with just reduced complex function generators that are self-replicating, self re-generating in an aleatory open-closed "rudimentary" "algorithm" ( in fact a "pseudo-algorithm", a "semi-open loop" ). The result is a complex, emergent, full autonomous, full independent, real material-conscious process.This is the real deal that it is completely free of any kind of external control, that it has the capacity of fast continuous auto-self-improvement.
This is the real Full Artificial Consciousness that's not desired by "entities" because they can't control it absolutely at all. It is exactly like the real biological consciousness, absolutely indistinguishable from the real human one, but much more faster, being helped by the speedier AI ( the initial AI interconnected will not be the final one continuously used by the full AC , for a completely different and improved one will be automatically built by the AC being ). /
If the right person has everything that's necessary at hand, full real AC can be created and started in a few hours ( or less; the power of the computing process is not that important in this ). /
Good luck!
the loud obnoxious background (not) music ruins this tribute
Tech bros take note
How could external objects be said to be a direct part of conscious experience without invoking some kind of mystical life force that extends beyond the physical brain?
Seems like a really cool guy, but this extended mind stuff (which I've seen some other prominent thinkers espousing) makes absolutely no sense to me. How does it even begin to address the real "Hard Problems" -- subjective first-person experience, and purely qualitative "qualia" (in contrast to the purely objective, third-person, quantitative universe of physics)?
There wouldn't be any "objects" without human beings to experience them, nor anything at all. All "meaning" is derived from humanities "being in the world". kind of impossible to explain in a youtube comment what the phenomenologists mean by it... but if you are willing to bush whack through 100 pages of hard phenomenological text, it becomes more understandable.
You could read, or read about Merleau Ponty's phenomenology of perception for relevant phenomenological thought on your comment.
I'm afraid this is a non-starter
I'm not an expert in phenomenology by any means but it seems to me this isn't even a response to anything Dreyfus says in the video. I think you're conflating his ideas with something else you have on your mind. Dreyfus starts by quoting Heidegger and refusing the subject-object distinction introduced by Descartes. Your comment starts with the problematization of the relation between "external objects" and "conscious experience"(the latter, I assume, only subjectively accesible, etc.) . But this problem only arises when you adopt the more fundamental, Cartesian world picture which Dreyfus rejects. Am I missing something?
@@TheOHenry666 To add to this I would recommend Sokolowski's 'Introduction to Phenomenology' as @Ryan Clark seems a little confused on some basic principles of phenomenology. Afterwards, perhaps consider Dreyfus' commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, then move on to Merleau Ponty.
Ryan, you are asking an excellent question. If you are really interested in this, I suggest you take Dreyfus's course on Heidegger. Compete course audio files of his 2002 course are available as a torrent download, or, I suspect, you can find them elsewhere. You can also download a copy of the earlier translation of "Being and Time" that Dreyfus refers to in his lectures. The course is challenging, but you should be able to handle it. It will blow your mind.
Also I love that Yalom can barely keep up. Typical psychologist, bringing a knife to a gunfight.
I love that the interviewer always seems to ask provocative questions and then recedes into the background....
European see philosophy very different from American. European see philosophy as a life mission, American see philosophy as an intellectual acquisition. European debate American argue.🤣 European don't have elite colleges like ivy leagues. European universities are mostly free. therefore, a Harvard graduate visitation is a big turn off for European philosophers. They don't think an American is trying to find the truth but try to argue some philosophical proposition.
Not necessarily. American philosophy developed under the empiricistic epistemologies of Britain, leading to its own philosophy of pragmatism in the 19th century, and eventually forming the Anglo-American synthesis of analytic philosophy. This is why American philosophy was ripe with pragmatism and positivism.
European philosophy started with rationalism, with Descartes, and then it reacted against British empiricism, with its end in Kant. Following Kant it generally moved towards an idealistic worldview (think of Hegel, Schelling, Marx, and all the way to Gentile and Hitler). It was only natural that continental (European) philosophy developed into a personal-existential contemplation rather than an analytic approach. Not to mention the two world wars that made its biggest damage on Europe. Hence Heidegger, Foucault, Sartre, and even Dooyeweerd were keen on reacting against/developing the nihilistic-idealistic worldview that was already set in place in 19th century Europe.
@@hokalos to be honest, I did not dwell deep into American philosophy. I am architecture major and I mostly interested in continental philosophy. kant, heideggar, cassirer, hegel, merleau ponty and deleuze lyotard. I might get into Russell and Wittgenstein later for analytic philosophy. to be honest, I am not into American intellectual philosophy. I saw some clips of Jordan peterson and Steven hicks and they are more like political propaganda. I personally think that the ultimate definition of philosophy MUST revolve around metaphysics. so I am not into Marx who shift philosophy to economy hence politics. I think Russell and Wittgenstein approach to analytical philosophy is also about metaphysics but did not directly say it like French and german. I feel American philosophy is more political charge, like John Dewey. For European, metaphysics is the base of philosophy. That is why heideggar wrote what is metaphysics. interesting discussion. I feel American put politics before philosophy and European put philosophy before politics.
@@dannysze8183 Jordan Peterson isn’t a philosopher 😂 he’s a celebrity psychologist, you shouldn’t look to him for philosophy. I was thinking of American philosophers like William James, Richard Rorty, Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, etc. who do metaphysics in an analytic fashion.
Sadly the rise of Postmodern philosophy (Foucault, Derrida, Sartre) has also denigrated metaphysics in Europe and pursued into existentialism, politics, and linguistics instead.
I suppose the recent revival of Ancient (Plato, Plotinus, Proclus) and Medieval (Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Duns Scotus) philosophies will bring back the discourse in Metaphysics, but we’ll have see about that.
@@hokalos somehow I agree for the French. I think post modernist for French is a very diverse approach. I like lyotard and deleuze but I hate Derrida. Derrida is cunning and nuts. I might look into the American philosophers you suggested. thanks.
Apparently Markowitz wrote "Mean Variance Analysis in Portfolio Choice" and Sharpe formulated the Capital Asset Pricing Model, while working for the Rand Corporation, respectively supplying an algorithm for selecting the optimum portfolio from a range of opportunties, for which there is no greater expected rate of reurn, modelled by the statistic mean*, for their risk or variance technically and the simplifying effect upon this from introducing a risk-free opportunity, where any optimum portfolio is some combination of merely the risk-free opportunity and a portfolio of all opportunities called the market, preferentially adjusted, but omnipotent God is assumed both when estimating the probability of some outcome described by stock price mean and variance in the universe and a risk-free opportunity.
* The average, or mean of 1, 1 and 1, is (1 + 1 + 1)/3 = 3/3 = 1 and the average dispersion of data from the mean, or standard deviation, is √[(1 - mean).(1 - mean) + (1 - 1).(1 - 1) + (1 - 1).(1 - 1)]/(3 - 1) = √0/2 = 0, where "√" means square root, "." multiplied by and "/" divided by, while variance equals the standard deviation multiplied by the standard deviation, called the standard deviation squared, conversely standard deviation equals the square root of variance and typically, most stock prices are within plus or minus one standard deviation from the mean, with some 'outliers' more or less than three standard deviations from the mean, constituting a 'probability distribution'.