I first saw Dave debunking conspiracy theories and pseudoscience and then his psychology series. Now a series about my favorite field of study, what a treat!
I have a philosophy masters degree, and this was a really elegant summary 👌 It's not often that scientists are so fair to philosophy as a subject, I've heard many brilliant scientists talk about philosophy being redundant, e.g. now that we have model dependent realism and advanced neuroscience etc. When anyone claims that philosophy is dead, that's the most important time to talk about it.
Wow, you really intend on covering everything don't you? Eventually people will be able to come to your channel and learn about almost anything. You've got an impressive ambition for this channel.
As an philosophy student myself (third semester) I find it very cool that you're making a video about philosophy. An as far as the connection of logic and philosophy goes, you''re right, logic is one of the basic and mandatory courses, that one should do in the first semesters, the first ideally, in my university at least. I'm from germany. So it may be different in other countries and universities but yeah. It's an important thing in all of philosophy. Great video as always. Greetings from germany!
I think it is different in the US. I never graduated, but I have taken numerous major-specific courses (perhaps most of them, I cannot even remember exactly) for a major in philosophy. IMHO it's more important to at least take introductory courses in e.g. epistemology and ethics/value theory. I am thinking of "logic" as a course in symbolic logic, though. You might mean something else.
Well, for the second semester, it's fine. But I really think intro epistemology and metaphysics are even more fundamental, or at least as important. Ethics and value theory are also right up there. My rationale is that in such intro courses, they tend to include enough logic in the course itself.
@@bsadewitz with the way my curriculum works, you have to work im modules. The first one teaching you with introduction courses, where you'll learn research fundementals, get an introduction to philososophy in genereal and theres also a course dedicated specifically to logic. Second module requires you to learn about an ancient philosophical text and one modern and so on. But you're not forced to complete one module after the other. U can have a course of the sixth module in second semester for example. But i do agree with you on epistemology and metaphysics. Both are very important
The Hindi audio is almost perfectly translated,but i think some other people may find the vocabulary a little bit difficult. We can compare this to the vocabulary of an elite class british person. I think the problem is not the translator but the problem is the subject (philosophy). People find the Hindi vocabulary hard because they use many english words in their day to day conversation so they actually don't know the Hindi words. You should continue like this. I'm pretty sure that all other Indian viewers will also like it. Have a good day.
1. Philosophy; logic 2. Science; knowledge 3. Applications of philosophy 4. Areas of philosophy; ethics / moral philosophy, epistemology, ontology, metaphysics, aesthetics, political philosophy, philosophy of science, philosophy of religion (different from theology), philosophy of mind, philosophy of language 5. Argumentation; argument; premise => conclusion; logic 6. Philosophy timeline
I just have to say, I was student of Chemistry 5 years ago and in that time when I found this channel I was extremelly happy to learn Italian and Chemistry with prof. Dave, now I am studying my 2nd college - Philosophy and DAVE STARTS PHILOSOPHY COURSE? This is just amazing!!!
3:54 So how to think? I think I found Prof Burton's favorite one! To explain: He was a professor at Purdue who taught tech students something far more useful than computer-based skills: he taught us how to think critically about our knowledge. Aka: How do you know that you know that? "What is your source? How does it prove that?" Words we heard so often that we wanted to beat our heads on our desks. But it was good times & good for us. Probably the most widely applicable thing I learned while getting my degree.
I'm currently taking a mathematical logic course and I'm so happy to see that you're doing a series on logic and philosophy! Thank you for providing educational content of such a wide breadth!
I think Philosophy lays the groundwork by probing foundational concepts and principles with rationality. Science then leverages this groundwork to explore, interpret, and apply knowledge, continually expanding our understanding of the world.
For those who are weak in English, but can understand Hindi well, the Hindi dubbing is really good. Some words are still heavy/hard even for native speakers, however that's probably just me as my hindi vocabulary is weak. You've done a amazing job, Dave. It will definitely help you reach new audience.
Hopefully this series will help me be a better arguer, and not get clammed up when I get flustered/frustrated, and stumble over my words Will you also cover fallacies and how to counter them?
@@cstgruduenmse4449 Suggesting another channel is only helpful if you can provide a *compelling* argument P1 P2 = conclusion. I am not critical of MOR, as it is a good channel, but steering people away from here is hurtful and somewhat disrespectful. Dave has numerous videos to watch on his channel, so there is no need to promote others. Prop 1 You would not be happy with your income source where another provider puts advertising posters on your storefront promoting themselves. Prop 2 Placing a comment that conflicts with your moral reasoning and Dave's effort do not serve Dave, yourself or others. Conclusion Removing the erroneous but well-intentioned comment will quickly ease the situation and show respect for Dave and his channel. I am positive that your intentions are honest, and you commented with a good heart for the benefit of everyone. If you choose to remove your comment, could you reply to me first, and I will remove this one too? Thanks for your thoughtful interest and contribution.
i clicked on this video so damn fast, i've been giving myself a little crash course in philosophy over my summer break so this is perfect timing, thanks Dave!
Thank you for delving into this area of study and spreading the good word about reason and logic. formal logic is far too absent from much of modern education. if anyone wants a fantastic and easily digestable source to get ahead of the professor here. i highly recommend the podcast Philosophize This. The host follows on a journey through the history and progression of philosophical thinkers throughout the ages, and communicates the general ideas in a pretty entertaining format.
I've lobbed praise at your channel a few times now but its worth repeating -- your channel is such a positive contribution to the collective intellect of the world. You're a powerhouse of knowledge and it truly feels like you were meant to do exactly what this channel does and you do it with an obvious respect for succinct craftsmanship while remaining uncompromising in citing research to support what you present. It really is top notch. Your editors and producers do great work too. Yo, Universe! Protect this man at all costs.
This was a well thought out introduction. The big bang model, evolution, abiogenesis. These theories attempt to describe how life emerges from a chaotic system of particle interactions driven by fundamental forces. I ask you at what point did the chaotic system determine anything to be useful? Life evolved out of chaos right? So what I am asking is at what point did this chaotic system determine anything to be useful? The moment you acknowledge that it has deemed something useful you already left the notion of chaos behind entirely because what appeared chaotic truly had a purpose and intention behind it. You know how people create simulations on computers which simulate evolution in a simplistic form? The "simplistic" is an illogical position because the system which is producing that simple simulation is quite sophisticated in terms of the programming and software/hardware that goes into driving that simplistic evolution. So what appears random and chaotic isn't actually random and chaotic. What seems simplistic is actually quite sophisticated and hands on because we programmed and constructed the physical hardware and software for that simulation to be taking place, none of which are simplistic and that is without touching on the power supplied to operate the system. So although it's simple to create such a simulation in reality it's not as simplistic as one would lead you to conclude.
After studying philosophy and logic for 6 years I think that the safest and best definition for beginning is that philosophy is the study of ideas. Philosophy is not science, because every science has to have axiomatic foundations, for instance, math...Point is not defined in math, if one tries to define it with an analytical definition that person will need "genus proximum" and "differentia specifica" and that genus proximum will have to be defined and that will go to infinity. Philosophy always starts from scratch, there are no fixed axiomatic preferential points, and that is why for example Eugen Fink in his "Introduction in Philosophy" claims that philosophy is not a science. Of course, logic is part of philosophy, at least my professors were teaching me that it is a philosophical discipline, so logic and math are considered as "organon", tools that sciences are using.
Professor Dave…. Please… do the Platonic dialogues, especially the 1st tetralogy. I’m sure this is a given but it would be cool for you to specifically get into Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo.
I'm always a little saddened when people dismiss philosophy as something that isn't or cannot be very rigorous. Several science educators have contributed to this notion, with some openly invalidating the usefulness of philosophy. Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye are two such educators, whose views on philosophy I find... puzzling to say the least. I'm glad to see this introduction mentions there's so much more to philosophy than just asking if you can clap with one hand.
Your conclusion would've been true if there was another premise that "whoever makes immortal things must also be immortal". Otherwise those 2 premises being true doesn't necessarily lead to that conclusion, so this argument is invalid.
It was a joke 😀 ha ha.. uhh 🤦🏻♂️ I don’t believe anything is immortal or forever… even the idea of infinity ♾ is hard for me fathom. Dave’s content will long outlive him tho, no doubt within bytes and book pages. but dang it y’all are right… Dave is but a mere mortal. 💔 RIP 🪦 @Professor Dave Explains
Hey Dave! I am so excited about this series. I've been teaching critical thinking and argumentation as key parts of an academic writing course for several years, and I can't wait to see your presentation of these themes. Hopefully soon, if any of my students are having trouble with something in class, I can just direct them to one of your videos for help. Keep up the great work!
Re the chart at 03:18, I would suggest that political philosophy is merely a branch of ethics (or moral philosophy). Otherwise, this is a very important chart and many confusions in philosophy (such as free will v. determinism) are a result of blurring these categories.
Thank you so much for making such a complex topic simple and easy to grasp.Soon i will be doing an Introductory course on philosophy this coming term so this video is really helpful for me to get a heads-up. Really excited 😍💕
Oh I was thinking of buying Philosophy for Dummies, but this will do! Thanks Dave, the amount and quality of content that you put out is truly humbling.
I'm so excited about this series! I'm particularly eager to see how you approach Ontology...since I've never found an Ontological Argument that wasn't built around a faulty premise.
You did an excellent job on this one. I love philosophy, and in today's society, people need philosophy. You should cover Plato's concepts, like the Philosopher-kings and the allegory of the cave.
Thank you sir for your videos , this channel is one of the greatest things I've ever stumbled upon , I am thankful for every single video you have made.
Informative & extremely essential... Our problem with science has been proselytizing Physics & molecular biology tell us our origins while religion is absent of a methodology from proteins & 20 amino acids, too DNA helix, to single cell organisms..sorry Dr, your the teacher, I will sit down But before I sit, the sciences weren't born in Greece, so can we get into what Leslie Orgel named "the origins of life..." next? Thanks Doc!
I’ve learned philosophy already, but I was wondering when You’d start uploading philosophy lol. There’s gonna be a playlist with 300 + videos most likely. There’s a lot in philosophy
This was a subject that came up today when I was having a discussion with a Christian friend of mine about the bible and science, really looking forward to this series. Critical thinking is extremely reliant on philosophy as a way to get to the meat of the understanding of the subject. Give us more knowledge please.
Sorry if it was said in the video and I missed it but will you be including eastern philosophy and philosophers like Chinese and Japanese? I feel they are often left out or only briefly mentioned when discussing philosophy and most people just teach as if western philosophy is all of philosophy.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains take a look at the Upanishads, it's philosophy quite fascinating. It's a trough that not many have covered. I would love to have your opinions on it professor
What I find interesting is the history of mechanical philosophy and I guess how it sort of mixed with spiritualism. The rather strange idea that our minds is a machine, but not the world. I remember watching a lecture maybe about Galileo, it came up that Isaac Newton might not purely have been a materialist. I read in wiki articles today that he might have thought the universe was not purely mechanistic, but somehow also "populated by mysterious forces and spirits and constantly sustained by God and angels." I heard he could have gotten killed for not being able to define matter, mixing the material and spiritual world. I have a limited comprehension of matter and even how much of that (if any) is true, but perhaps Professor Dave knows?
Thanks, Dave, for your wonderful work. Can I make a recommendation? Are you aware of Mario Bunge's work? If not, please, I urge you to read Chasing Reality. This book contains an excelñent summary of most of the views of this scientific philosopher. As formerly dedicated to physics (he's a physicist), he spent most of his life to build a system of philosophy informed, founded and restricted by scientific knowledge; a system consisting of semantics, ontology, epistemology, methodology, axiology, ethics and praxiology. He sees philosophy not as opposing nor as an alternative to science; instead, philosophy is a conceptual and theoretical activity that studies (analyses, criticizes, propose, etc.) the most general concepts (such as those of thing, property, system, theory, mind, life, society, good, and so on) and hypothesis (such as the existence of an external world or the idea that nothing come from nothing). The products of philosophy are build by studing scientific knowledge and the actual practice of science: philosphical concepts, hypothesis, arguments and theories should be consistent with scientific knowledge, and to do so, the philosopher has to be informed on the state-of-the-art of the scientific disciplines relevant to his own philosophical research. At the samd time, science should be informed about philosophy (specially about science-informed philosophy) in order to be aware of the philosophical assumptions underlying scientific theories and practice. When the scientist is not aware of the philosphical elements of science, it become likely that his theories will be founded on some questionable or unreasonable assumption (for instance, that the state of a quantum object depends on a conscious observer). I hope you could take a look at his work and views. Kind regards!
Love the video and excited for the new series! I thought our shared interests stopped at STEM and a strong distaste for religious babble, but apparently we both love philosophy too! One question though, why did you decide to define philosophy as "love of knowledge" instead of "love of wisdom?" it's not philgnosiphy after all.
Dave I think this series is going to be great, when showing how to detect valid arguments might help people (maybe new, or not to the channel) with understanding how when you expose charlatans why what they are saying basically means nothing (assuming that the majority of new viewers come from those videos) anyway, keep it up, cant wait
@@kifter4254 for me it's in the living room, most devices dont seem to have an issue connecting to it except for my pc so i use an ethernet connection, why exactly are you asking?
@@jaisere for my personal well being. I keep my wifi router right over my head infront of pillow. I heard the small radiation emitted from the router helps brain development. 8 hours of sleep a day + the router. Sleeps good.
This is so interesting. I love his content as I find the way he explains things to be very digestible and easy to take in, and these are topics that I really love but do not know near enough about. Cant wait to see the next few videos... Question though, does anyone know a rough timeline on how long it usually takes for his video series to come out? Like should I expect a new philosophy video weekly or is it more like monthly? Thanks
@@ProfessorDaveExplains And second question is that since friction is component of contact force, and since one of the components of contact force I.e., normal force is repulsive, shouldn't friction also be due to repusive intermolecular forces and not attractive
Philosophy, Logic & Abstract Math: Where c is the speed of light, c * 2 is wrong, as it violates the theory. c^2 is also wrong, wherever it appears in any context. Therefore, E=mc^2 is wrong, too - if c in the formula is meant to be the speed of light. When mass is pushed at the speed of c (forget about c^2 for a second), then the final energy delivered is a result of the energy pushing the mass, not the resultant energy - which must be less than the energy expended. Countless eyes have been seeing E=mc^2 for the last 100 years and thought nothing wrong with it - Huxley and Orwell should be forgiven for thinking their systems can last forever - finite fossil fuels are dangerously hypnotic to humans and their mental capacity. "In any system of energy, Control is what consumes energy the most. No energy store holds enough energy to extract an amount of energy equal to the total energy it stores. No system of energy can deliver sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it. This universal truth applies to all systems. Energy, like time, flows from past to future".
I first saw Dave debunking conspiracy theories and pseudoscience and then his psychology series. Now a series about my favorite field of study, what a treat!
Same, I love this!
I hope he draws on epistemology for more reasons why conspiracy theories are bogus.
@@uncleanunicorn4571 Yeah, it'll be good to have a series focusing on it to reference later.
I would love to translate this video
@@uncleanunicorn4571 oh yeah
I have a philosophy masters degree, and this was a really elegant summary 👌
It's not often that scientists are so fair to philosophy as a subject, I've heard many brilliant scientists talk about philosophy being redundant, e.g. now that we have model dependent realism and advanced neuroscience etc.
When anyone claims that philosophy is dead, that's the most important time to talk about it.
Wow, you really intend on covering everything don't you? Eventually people will be able to come to your channel and learn about almost anything. You've got an impressive ambition for this channel.
Didn't the Khan Academy already do that?
@@stauffap khan academy doesn't have Philosophy, I hope Dave and Khan makes topology, abstract algebra and more advanced and brain melting topics
Thus guy is the new crash course.
@@mono90286 crash course talks to fast
Philosophy is one of my favorite subjects. Great to see you covering it!
As an philosophy student myself (third semester) I find it very cool that you're making a video about philosophy. An as far as the connection of logic and philosophy goes, you''re right, logic is one of the basic and mandatory courses, that one should do in the first semesters, the first ideally, in my university at least. I'm from germany. So it may be different in other countries and universities but yeah. It's an important thing in all of philosophy. Great video as always. Greetings from germany!
I think it is different in the US. I never graduated, but I have taken numerous major-specific courses (perhaps most of them, I cannot even remember exactly) for a major in philosophy. IMHO it's more important to at least take introductory courses in e.g. epistemology and ethics/value theory. I am thinking of "logic" as a course in symbolic logic, though. You might mean something else.
Well, for the second semester, it's fine. But I really think intro epistemology and metaphysics are even more fundamental, or at least as important. Ethics and value theory are also right up there. My rationale is that in such intro courses, they tend to include enough logic in the course itself.
@@bsadewitz with the way my curriculum works, you have to work im modules. The first one teaching you with introduction courses, where you'll learn research fundementals, get an introduction to philososophy in genereal and theres also a course dedicated specifically to logic. Second module requires you to learn about an ancient philosophical text and one modern and so on. But you're not forced to complete one module after the other. U can have a course of the sixth module in second semester for example. But i do agree with you on epistemology and metaphysics. Both are very important
I really do appreciate your articulation.
No convoluted explanations. Just pure concise and basic.
🙏
The Hindi audio is almost perfectly translated,but i think some other people may find the vocabulary a little bit difficult. We can compare this to the vocabulary of an elite class british person. I think the problem is not the translator but the problem is the subject (philosophy).
People find the Hindi vocabulary hard because they use many english words in their day to day conversation so they actually don't know the Hindi words.
You should continue like this.
I'm pretty sure that all other Indian viewers will also like it.
Have a good day.
Yes it is that people in India don't know hindi very much , they mostly use a mix of Hinglish
1. Philosophy; logic
2. Science; knowledge
3. Applications of philosophy
4. Areas of philosophy; ethics / moral philosophy, epistemology, ontology, metaphysics, aesthetics, political philosophy, philosophy of science, philosophy of religion (different from theology), philosophy of mind, philosophy of language
5. Argumentation; argument; premise => conclusion; logic
6. Philosophy timeline
I just have to say, I was student of Chemistry 5 years ago and in that time when I found this channel I was extremelly happy to learn Italian and Chemistry with prof. Dave, now I am studying my 2nd college - Philosophy and DAVE STARTS PHILOSOPHY COURSE? This is just amazing!!!
Thanks Professor! I very much enjoyed my Philosophy courses in undergrad, so I very much look forward to this series.
It is Fantastic that not only is a scientist like Professor Dave taking Philosophy seriously, he also understands it so well.
3:54 So how to think? I think I found Prof Burton's favorite one!
To explain: He was a professor at Purdue who taught tech students something far more useful than computer-based skills: he taught us how to think critically about our knowledge. Aka: How do you know that you know that? "What is your source? How does it prove that?" Words we heard so often that we wanted to beat our heads on our desks. But it was good times & good for us. Probably the most widely applicable thing I learned while getting my degree.
i was really into philosophy about a year ago but still looking forward to this series.
I'm currently taking a mathematical logic course and I'm so happy to see that you're doing a series on logic and philosophy! Thank you for providing educational content of such a wide breadth!
Can't wait for your explanation on nihilism, existentialism, and absurdism
I think Philosophy lays the groundwork by probing foundational concepts and principles with rationality. Science then leverages this groundwork to explore, interpret, and apply knowledge, continually expanding our understanding of the world.
I agree
For those who are weak in English, but can understand Hindi well, the Hindi dubbing is really good. Some words are still heavy/hard even for native speakers, however that's probably just me as my hindi vocabulary is weak. You've done a amazing job, Dave. It will definitely help you reach new audience.
Hopefully this series will help me be a better arguer, and not get clammed up when I get flustered/frustrated, and stumble over my words
Will you also cover fallacies and how to counter them?
Yep I’ll hit that towards the end!
You should also subscribe to *Majesty of Reason* .
He did one on the misuse of logical fallacies which is quite common.
@@cstgruduenmse4449
Suggesting another channel is only helpful if you can provide a *compelling* argument P1 P2 = conclusion.
I am not critical of MOR, as it is a good channel, but steering people away from here is hurtful and somewhat disrespectful.
Dave has numerous videos to watch on his channel, so there is no need to promote others.
Prop 1 You would not be happy with your income source where another provider puts advertising posters on your storefront promoting themselves.
Prop 2 Placing a comment that conflicts with your moral reasoning and Dave's effort do not serve Dave, yourself or others.
Conclusion Removing the erroneous but well-intentioned comment will quickly ease the situation and show respect for Dave and his channel.
I am positive that your intentions are honest, and you commented with a good heart for the benefit of everyone.
If you choose to remove your comment, could you reply to me first, and I will remove this one too?
Thanks for your thoughtful interest and contribution.
I’m an IB student currently working on TOK (theory of knowledge) and I feel like this series will help a lot!
i clicked on this video so damn fast, i've been giving myself a little crash course in philosophy over my summer break so this is perfect timing, thanks Dave!
Thank you for delving into this area of study and spreading the good word about reason and logic. formal logic is far too absent from much of modern education.
if anyone wants a fantastic and easily digestable source to get ahead of the professor here. i highly recommend the podcast Philosophize This. The host follows on a journey through the history and progression of philosophical thinkers throughout the ages, and communicates the general ideas in a pretty entertaining format.
I'm blown away by the quality of your video. It outdoes my videos for sure.
I've lobbed praise at your channel a few times now but its worth repeating -- your channel is such a positive contribution to the collective intellect of the world. You're a powerhouse of knowledge and it truly feels like you were meant to do exactly what this channel does and you do it with an obvious respect for succinct craftsmanship while remaining uncompromising in citing research to support what you present. It really is top notch. Your editors and producers do great work too.
Yo, Universe! Protect this man at all costs.
Considering the amount of people that actively reject truth and attach to conspiracy theories, everyone should learn to love philosophy!
greetings and much love frim Ethiopia🇪🇹🇪🇹
“Philosophy is the womb of science.”
Looking forward to the rest of the series.
This was a well thought out introduction. The big bang model, evolution, abiogenesis. These theories attempt to describe how life emerges from a chaotic system of particle interactions driven by fundamental forces. I ask you at what point did the chaotic system determine anything to be useful? Life evolved out of chaos right? So what I am asking is at what point did this chaotic system determine anything to be useful? The moment you acknowledge that it has deemed something useful you already left the notion of chaos behind entirely because what appeared chaotic truly had a purpose and intention behind it.
You know how people create simulations on computers which simulate evolution in a simplistic form? The "simplistic" is an illogical position because the system which is producing that simple simulation is quite sophisticated in terms of the programming and software/hardware that goes into driving that simplistic evolution. So what appears random and chaotic isn't actually random and chaotic. What seems simplistic is actually quite sophisticated and hands on because we programmed and constructed the physical hardware and software for that simulation to be taking place, none of which are simplistic and that is without touching on the power supplied to operate the system. So although it's simple to create such a simulation in reality it's not as simplistic as one would lead you to conclude.
My fav youtuber in the world -deeply love form my heart to u brother .
U are really a diamond
बहुत प्यार आपको भारत वासी की तरफ से
After studying philosophy and logic for 6 years I think that the safest and best definition for beginning is that philosophy is the study of ideas. Philosophy is not science, because every science has to have axiomatic foundations, for instance, math...Point is not defined in math, if one tries to define it with an analytical definition that person will need "genus proximum" and "differentia specifica" and that genus proximum will have to be defined and that will go to infinity. Philosophy always starts from scratch, there are no fixed axiomatic preferential points, and that is why for example Eugen Fink in his "Introduction in Philosophy" claims that philosophy is not a science. Of course, logic is part of philosophy, at least my professors were teaching me that it is a philosophical discipline, so logic and math are considered as "organon", tools that sciences are using.
Great stuff Dave. I majored in philosohpy in 2014, so this series will most likely be an excellent refreshner. Thanks!
ill take fries with that.. jus kiddin.
tho fr dont forget the fries
Professor Dave…. Please… do the Platonic dialogues, especially the 1st tetralogy. I’m sure this is a given but it would be cool for you to specifically get into Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Phaedo.
Really looking forward to this series... Cheers 💖!
gotta say Dave your channel is one of my favorites! keep doing what youre doing man
Yes another series that i can follow now
Man I’m excited for this. Always loved philosophy. Thanks!
Very excited for this series. Just got into university this year, seeing Ethics and Politics and other philosophical topics.
I'm always a little saddened when people dismiss philosophy as something that isn't or cannot be very rigorous. Several science educators have contributed to this notion, with some openly invalidating the usefulness of philosophy. Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye are two such educators, whose views on philosophy I find... puzzling to say the least.
I'm glad to see this introduction mentions there's so much more to philosophy than just asking if you can clap with one hand.
🧐 Argument:
Premise 1: UA-cam videos are virtually immortal.
Premise 2: Dave is a UA-camr.
⬇️ inference 🤔
Conclusion: Dave is immortal. ☝🏼
Your conclusion would've been true if there was another premise that "whoever makes immortal things must also be immortal". Otherwise those 2 premises being true doesn't necessarily lead to that conclusion, so this argument is invalid.
This argument is invalid and unsound
It was a joke 😀 ha ha.. uhh 🤦🏻♂️
I don’t believe anything is immortal or forever… even the idea of infinity ♾ is hard for me fathom. Dave’s content will long outlive him tho, no doubt within bytes and book pages.
but dang it y’all are right… Dave is but a mere mortal.
💔 RIP 🪦
@Professor Dave Explains
Dave is virtually immortal
Hey Dave! I am so excited about this series. I've been teaching critical thinking and argumentation as key parts of an academic writing course for several years, and I can't wait to see your presentation of these themes. Hopefully soon, if any of my students are having trouble with something in class, I can just direct them to one of your videos for help. Keep up the great work!
Thanks!
Yes, please help me with philosophy.
Super excited for this series
Semantics: what is "is"
Ontology: what "is"
Me: "what"
Answer: is
I am gonna Love this series
Love your content, Dave. Your snark is legit and on point to the science deniers.
Re the chart at 03:18, I would suggest that political philosophy is merely a branch of ethics (or moral philosophy). Otherwise, this is a very important chart and many confusions in philosophy (such as free will v. determinism) are a result of blurring these categories.
Yes Save Yes! I love how you explain things, so you going to teach us philosophy is such a privilege. Thank you 😊♥️
He's doing it... he's DOING IT...
This is exactly what I’ve been waiting for
FINALLY! I've been waiting for this series for so long 😁 please release the episodes as fast as possible! Loll
Very excited, this may be the most useful series to me personally, thanks Dave!
Can't wait to see more
Dave, You are wonderful!
It is here!
Thank you so much for making such a complex topic simple and easy to grasp.Soon i will be doing an Introductory course on philosophy this coming term so this video is really helpful for me to get a heads-up.
Really excited 😍💕
Excellently explained by professor Dave. Following.
Oh I was thinking of buying Philosophy for Dummies, but this will do! Thanks Dave, the amount and quality of content that you put out is truly humbling.
I'm so excited about this series! I'm particularly eager to see how you approach Ontology...since I've never found an Ontological Argument that wasn't built around a faulty premise.
thanks you prof. Dave
You did an excellent job on this one. I love philosophy, and in today's society, people need philosophy. You should cover Plato's concepts, like the Philosopher-kings and the allegory of the cave.
Thank you sir for your videos , this channel is one of the greatest things I've ever stumbled upon , I am thankful for every single video you have made.
This is going to be excellent!🔥🔥
Prof Dave what's your philosophy about god or religion in general.
This is going to be my favorite series!!
Time to add this to the "beard stroking" playlist
Perfect timing. 🕺
Philosophy: a never-ending process of not agreeing on anything but also agreeing that nobody proved anything
Nah
Ouch.
I wish I could watch the whole series already!
Informative & extremely essential...
Our problem with science has been proselytizing
Physics & molecular biology tell us our origins while religion is absent of a methodology from proteins & 20 amino acids, too DNA helix, to single cell organisms..sorry Dr, your the teacher, I will sit down
But before I sit, the sciences weren't born in Greece, so can we get into what Leslie Orgel named "the origins of life..." next?
Thanks Doc!
Religion has been engaged into any field of science
Please hit up Stephen West from Philosophize this and do a Davecast with him.
I'm gonna hop on later and watch this, thanks Dave 😊
Bro! Excited for the new series! Keep up the great work 👍
I’ve learned philosophy already, but I was wondering when You’d start uploading philosophy lol. There’s gonna be a playlist with 300 + videos most likely. There’s a lot in philosophy
I would give you my soul if you did a video on Hegelian Dialectics.
This was a subject that came up today when I was having a discussion with a Christian friend of mine about the bible and science, really looking forward to this series. Critical thinking is extremely reliant on philosophy as a way to get to the meat of the understanding of the subject. Give us more knowledge please.
Great. Im looking forward to this one
Is this the series where you will go into the master list of fallacies, maybe covering the fallacies listed by IEP's (Tennessee) fallacy list?
Bro tomorrow is my first philosophy class, how can u know 🗿
Sorry if it was said in the video and I missed it but will you be including eastern philosophy and philosophers like Chinese and Japanese? I feel they are often left out or only briefly mentioned when discussing philosophy and most people just teach as if western philosophy is all of philosophy.
There is a bit, but unfortunately we have very little text to go by. So the series is heavily Western leaning because we have those texts.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains I wrote you a comment about a retraction from James, was it relevant?
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Okay makes complete sense hyped for the rest of the series. Tysm for a answer and explanation.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains take a look at the Upanishads, it's philosophy quite fascinating. It's a trough that not many have covered. I would love to have your opinions on it professor
Hey, you're cracking into my favorite subject! I love philosophy.
What I find interesting is the history of mechanical philosophy and I guess how it sort of mixed with spiritualism. The rather strange idea that our minds is a machine, but not the world. I remember watching a lecture maybe about Galileo, it came up that Isaac Newton might not purely have been a materialist. I read in wiki articles today that he might have thought the universe was not purely mechanistic, but somehow also "populated by mysterious forces and spirits and constantly sustained by God and angels." I heard he could have gotten killed for not being able to define matter, mixing the material and spiritual world. I have a limited comprehension of matter and even how much of that (if any) is true, but perhaps Professor Dave knows?
PROFESSOR DAVE IS MY HERO AND I AM EMPHASIZING IT❤️❤️❤️❤️
Thanks, Dave, for your wonderful work.
Can I make a recommendation?
Are you aware of Mario Bunge's work?
If not, please, I urge you to read Chasing Reality. This book contains an excelñent summary of most of the views of this scientific philosopher.
As formerly dedicated to physics (he's a physicist), he spent most of his life to build a system of philosophy informed, founded and restricted by scientific knowledge; a system consisting of semantics, ontology, epistemology, methodology, axiology, ethics and praxiology.
He sees philosophy not as opposing nor as an alternative to science; instead, philosophy is a conceptual and theoretical activity that studies (analyses, criticizes, propose, etc.) the most general concepts (such as those of thing, property, system, theory, mind, life, society, good, and so on) and hypothesis (such as the existence of an external world or the idea that nothing come from nothing). The products of philosophy are build by studing scientific knowledge and the actual practice of science: philosphical concepts, hypothesis, arguments and theories should be consistent with scientific knowledge, and to do so, the philosopher has to be informed on the state-of-the-art of the scientific disciplines relevant to his own philosophical research.
At the samd time, science should be informed about philosophy (specially about science-informed philosophy) in order to be aware of the philosophical assumptions underlying scientific theories and practice. When the scientist is not aware of the philosphical elements of science, it become likely that his theories will be founded on some questionable or unreasonable assumption (for instance, that the state of a quantum object depends on a conscious observer).
I hope you could take a look at his work and views.
Kind regards!
Awesome!
Looking for more videos!
Yes, I've been waiting ffor this
Love the video and excited for the new series! I thought our shared interests stopped at STEM and a strong distaste for religious babble, but apparently we both love philosophy too! One question though, why did you decide to define philosophy as "love of knowledge" instead of "love of wisdom?" it's not philgnosiphy after all.
Ethics is not just about what is good or bad, it's about how to act in general.
Myeah, Meta-ethics, normative ethics, applied ethics would roughly be the fields for moral philosophy. "Ethics" is a little vague on its own.
Here comes the good stuff
thanks Dave!
Dave I think this series is going to be great, when showing how to detect valid arguments might help people (maybe new, or not to the channel) with understanding how when you expose charlatans why what they are saying basically means nothing (assuming that the majority of new viewers come from those videos) anyway, keep it up, cant wait
Is 5G safe?
@@kifter4254 why wouldn't it be? it has less energy than visible light
@@jaisere ok awesome. They’re going to erect a small tower I think right beside my room. Good to know tho. Where do you keep your wifi router btw?
@@kifter4254 for me it's in the living room, most devices dont seem to have an issue connecting to it except for my pc so i use an ethernet connection, why exactly are you asking?
@@jaisere for my personal well being. I keep my wifi router right over my head infront of pillow. I heard the small radiation emitted from the router helps brain development. 8 hours of sleep a day + the router. Sleeps good.
*More about scientific logic*
I love your videos!!!!
You should get Dr. Gregory B. Sadler to help you with these videos.
Thankyou dave for hindi dubbed ❤❤
Hey Dave just watched your debate with JLP , you turned of comments so ...awsome I'd say debate but yeah...good stuff Dave
Thank you!!! Thank you!!!
This is so interesting. I love his content as I find the way he explains things to be very digestible and easy to take in, and these are topics that I really love but do not know near enough about. Cant wait to see the next few videos...
Question though, does anyone know a rough timeline on how long it usually takes for his video series to come out? Like should I expect a new philosophy video weekly or is it more like monthly?
Thanks
Every two weeks or so.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains Thanks so much for the reply! I will be looking out for them
And please make a video on the origin of friction at molecular level.
Thank you
Check my classical physics playlist.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains
Sir, if a quantity say x is directly proportional to y, does it imply that y is also proportional to x
@@ProfessorDaveExplains that video does not answer my question
@@basharatmalik2004 Check the tutorial on frictional forces. It does answer your question.
@@ProfessorDaveExplains
And second question is that since friction is component of contact force, and since one of the components of contact force I.e., normal force is repulsive, shouldn't friction also be due to repusive intermolecular forces and not attractive
Fantastic!
Philosophy, Logic & Abstract Math: Where c is the speed of light, c * 2 is wrong, as it violates the theory.
c^2 is also wrong, wherever it appears in any context.
Therefore, E=mc^2 is wrong, too - if c in the formula is meant to be the speed of light.
When mass is pushed at the speed of c (forget about c^2 for a second), then the final energy delivered is a result of the energy pushing the mass, not the resultant energy - which must be less than the energy expended.
Countless eyes have been seeing E=mc^2 for the last 100 years and thought nothing wrong with it - Huxley and Orwell should be forgiven for thinking their systems can last forever - finite fossil fuels are dangerously hypnotic to humans and their mental capacity.
"In any system of energy, Control is what consumes energy the most.
No energy store holds enough energy to extract an amount of energy equal to the total energy it stores.
No system of energy can deliver sum useful energy in excess of the total energy put into constructing it.
This universal truth applies to all systems.
Energy, like time, flows from past to future".