This is an awesome opportunity again to listen to Professor Daryl Staloff on William James. What an enormous contribution William James gave all of us.
0:24 Anglo-American Pragmatist Movement *William James & Fredrich Nietzche* 1:16 American Nietzsche 1:48 Idealism, Romanticism, Darwinian Revolution, Psychology 3:23 Ideas Purchasing/Cash Power 5:35 Truth is Serviceable 6:05 Mature *Average philosophy* 7:03 A series of lectures, pitched to the average person 8:28 Dilemma: Tender vs Tough 12:22 We Hold Both 13:22 Have your cake and eat it too 14:32 Method and Theory 15:59 We want _Definite Differences_ 18:43 Marrying Truth and Belief *Personal Experience* 19:02 Camping 🏕 Man chases Squirrel 🐿 What do you mean by “going around?” 20:49 If it works, it’s right; pluralism They’re equal in explanatory power *X or Y?* 23:17 The real meaning Materialism - No Hope Spiritualism - Hope 24:52 Law settles Issues Determinism - Future resembles The Past, which leads to Despair Free-Will: The Future will be Different, Optimism 27:28 God vs Design 29:21 The animal has this need, it’s biological 31:08 Mental Pictures = Copies of Reality True Ideas demand Application False Ideas fail to be Applied in Life 34:14 Expediencies 35:17 Humanism 37:37 37:58 Make the world Our World Man Created Truth 40:09 Cultural-Survival, Cultural-Evolution 41:24 Common Sense *Freedom* 42:09 There are as many solutions as there are forms of life 43:30 Use all faculties, all paths Belief without violation of conciousness 44:39 Tough: Scientific Rationality Mediator: Pragmatism Tender: Psyche/Moral/Spirit
It feels like the intellect is beaten down more than ever these days. These videos keep providing me evidence to the contrary. Thank you, Prof. Sugrue.
What a brilliant speaker. I love how Staloff tries to channel Nietzsche and James, bravely incurring into theatrics to let us have some emotional purchase on these authors. I thank him for the effort, it is immensely useful to for me as it helps me grasp the message better.
This is such a terrific series of lectures, I'm so glad you are uploading these lost classics for all to enjoy. I've always loved the Great Courses and for a long time have cherished the two courses by Lawrence Cahoone on modern intellectual and political thought, but you and Dr. Staloff are every bit as good. Thank you Dr. Sugrue for making these available to us.
The Varieties was my intro to philosophy when I looked for salvation from drugs. The book seller was approving of my obvious unacademic threadbare habit. He decried the academics and their grades. Opening the book I was warmly greeted by the great man himself , what a teacher. The circumscription of the topic made sure I was included and the language was courtly . That was the best part of the book for me at the time 35 years ago. I held onto the spirit of it ever since and felt he was talking to me as an equall which I appreciate from this video.
Independence is the recognition of the fact that yours is the responsibility of judgment and nothing can help you escape it-that no substitute can do your thinking-that the vilest form of self-abasement and self-destruction is the subordination of your mind to the mind of another, the acceptance of an authority over your brain, the acceptance of his assertions as facts, his say-so as truth, his edicts as middle-man between your consciousness and your existence.
James's concepts surely make sense. Regarding the many philosophical theories to which I've listened to for the past two years, I would say, yes, for the most part "all disputes are idle."
Materialists should be hopeful in my opinion. Because the end of the universe doesn't have to mean the end of humanity or life in general. We should find a new universe or an alternative. Just because the problems seem big, doesn't mean you should give up.
Re: going around the squirrel argument But once “around” is defined, it’s objectively true what the answer is, right? There’s no perspectivalism, there are true facts that have nothing to do with usefulness. If that’s true, shouldn’t pragmatism include that definition of truth in how it defines itself?
How can there be truth in a paradoxical Universe composed of binary opposites and ambiguities? I sat on a bench once trying to understand how I could possibly engage in any course of action without expectation. Of course I had an expected outcome, otherwise why would I bother. I got the answer in James Pragmatism, not to have an expectation but a hypothesis, and question the possibility of it being a live hypothesis, and that it only ever remained a possibility or a probability, but never an expectation. This took a lot of practice. I have a bit to say in relation to determinism and free will, another binary opposite, but I'll finish listening to the lecture later, and thank you for the lecture. I like your analysis of Nietzsche too.
For those who are well versed, how would one get into philosophy best? What books to read? In what order? Good UA-cam channels besides this one? Thank you
These are my takes from the video. I encourage and welcome pointing out my potential mistakes. The meaning of a given thing is the correspondent output (effects and consequences) it would produce, if that thing would be the case. In other words, we have Wittgenstein's behaviorism, as all knowledge must be reduced to what sort of behaviors it generates. Truth is practical, instrumentalized to our psychological needs, inevitably subjective and pluralistic. The measure of our truths is the “cash value” they possess, that is: what can we achieve with a given set of prepositions? Do they relatively satisfy you? Then they are probably true. Using the pragmatic method to resolve philosophical dilemmas: cut out the abstract, reduce posits to their practical consequences - assume that they're right - and assess if their “effects” are desirable or useful to you. There's no point to dwell in universals, what matters is to integrate new knowledge to your “web of belief”/framework. Assuming that a solid, stable framework will probably make the world better, as you, working on your interests, will ultimately benefit your surroundings. Resonates with posterior phenomenology, humanizing the world of knowledge. Pragmatism is predicated upon Darwinian posits: ideas are the ultimate judges - their value is measured by the survival benefits they bring, and their “judgement” is the result of our ancestor's trial and error, collective expressed by common sense.
Truth is probably the single idea that's rooted deepest within the human spirit. I would argue that truth is not, even as a human idea, abstract at all, and is instead directly connected to, and thereby inseparable from, existence itself. What is true is what is real. Not only is the world true but our experience of it is as well. To assume truth can be contained within a single formula or line of reasoning is the height of arrogance
I don't agree with the watch example. We can find the inner workings by taking it apart. The copy of truth is merely the rationalistic take, the watch is the watch as it appears. But its inner workings can also be a copy, and thats where materialism comes in, the watch makers toolkit. So, in my opinion, our ideas can be copies of the world, but not without effort which is James point.
The Reason that Nietzsche advocated for a re-evaluation of values is because the weak imposed their morality on Nature to oppress the strong. This has all sorts of implications, it serves their interests in a number of ways, it causes misery and suffering which as Foucault observed drove people to seek spiritual guidance and now psychiatry and psychology. They have consciously or unconsciously created a market which is not conducive to the evolutionary process. So to re-evaluate the values that cause this misery requires Reason, especially in the face of dogma, hierarchical structures and social contracts. Really it can only be achieved by understanding Nature, a very difficult task and what is the best weapon of choice in this fight? Philosophy.
Let's start with defining our terms, what is Reason? If the just man uses Reason, what is Reason. If you think only of yourself and your own selfish interests, is that Reason?
Then we come to free will, what is the extent of our free will? Our attitude towards the way of things? At a certain point it extends beyond that. If we hanker after money, how will that affect our moral choices, what about sex? Or power? What if we hanker after nothing but are concerned only with our duty to Nature? If we want to live in accordance with Nature, if we really understand who and what we are and stop with the woo, consciousness and all that bullshit that no one understands, just ethical doctrine to ensure security and comfort. Rules made by the weak to protect the interests of the weak, in spite of their misery. What if we realised that Hitler had his role for a reason Cromwell had his. What instead of imposing our morality we seek to understand, we learn about physics, and dialectics, and about the nature of things. Then and only then can we Reason and start to determine the Nature of change. Only then have we free will.
Regardless of which "side" has arrived at deeper insight, I think it is reasonable to say that the tender-minded side has a disproportionate attraction for "annoying people", puritans, idealists, "pacifists", progressives, Professor Panglosses. This is a personal preference, I'm aware, but a striking one
I watched a cat sneak up on a lame bird once. I intervened and lifted the bird to safety. One could ask why I intervened in the course of Nature? But I too am Nature, that is a choice I get to make.
Ah yes, my online philosophy class with my online philosophy classmates, greetings from California!
Cheers!
Saludos amigo 🖖
Greetings from South Carolina 💕
Netherlands, am I the foreign exchange student?
What's up bitches
Years....YEARS of therapy could not give me the peace of mind and clarity of this one lecture.
This is an awesome opportunity again to listen to Professor Daryl Staloff on William James.
What an enormous contribution William James gave all of us.
0:24 Anglo-American Pragmatist Movement
*William James & Fredrich Nietzche*
1:16 American Nietzsche
1:48 Idealism, Romanticism, Darwinian Revolution, Psychology
3:23
Ideas Purchasing/Cash Power
5:35 Truth is Serviceable
6:05 Mature
*Average philosophy*
7:03 A series of lectures, pitched to the average person
8:28 Dilemma: Tender vs Tough
12:22 We Hold Both 13:22
Have your cake and eat it too
14:32 Method and Theory
15:59 We want _Definite Differences_
18:43 Marrying Truth and Belief
*Personal Experience*
19:02 Camping 🏕
Man chases Squirrel 🐿
What do you mean by “going around?”
20:49 If it works, it’s right; pluralism
They’re equal in explanatory power
*X or Y?*
23:17 The real meaning
Materialism - No Hope
Spiritualism - Hope
24:52 Law settles Issues
Determinism - Future resembles The Past, which leads to Despair
Free-Will: The Future will be Different, Optimism
27:28 God vs Design
29:21 The animal has this need, it’s biological
31:08 Mental Pictures = Copies of Reality
True Ideas demand Application
False Ideas fail to be Applied in Life
34:14 Expediencies
35:17 Humanism 37:37
37:58 Make the world Our World
Man Created Truth
40:09 Cultural-Survival, Cultural-Evolution
41:24 Common Sense
*Freedom*
42:09
There are as many solutions as there are forms of life
43:30 Use all faculties, all paths
Belief without violation of conciousness
44:39
Tough: Scientific Rationality
Mediator: Pragmatism
Tender: Psyche/Moral/Spirit
Excellent contribution to the thread. Edit: Username checks out.
Thank you !
It feels like the intellect is beaten down more than ever these days. These videos keep providing me evidence to the contrary. Thank you, Prof. Sugrue.
What a brilliant speaker. I love how Staloff tries to channel Nietzsche and James, bravely incurring into theatrics to let us have some emotional purchase on these authors.
I thank him for the effort, it is immensely useful to for me as it helps me grasp the message better.
This is such a terrific series of lectures, I'm so glad you are uploading these lost classics for all to enjoy. I've always loved the Great Courses and for a long time have cherished the two courses by Lawrence Cahoone on modern intellectual and political thought, but you and Dr. Staloff are every bit as good. Thank you Dr. Sugrue for making these available to us.
Finally, I'm on time for the lecture!
Nietzsche: We are the master race!
James: I wonder which channel the master race is on?
Yes! Principals of Psychology is one of my favorite books. Would love to see a lecture on his theories of mind and soul
The Varieties was my intro to philosophy when I looked for salvation from drugs. The book seller was approving of my obvious unacademic threadbare habit. He decried the academics and their grades. Opening the book I was warmly greeted by the great man himself , what a teacher.
The circumscription of the topic made sure I was included and the language was courtly . That was the best part of the book for me at the time 35 years ago. I held onto the spirit of it ever since and felt he was talking to me as an equall which I appreciate from this video.
You were a slave and you released yourself from bondage. Stay immersed in sanity and grace. Respect
Do a keto diet to deal with your drug addiction
@@iche9373 currently 25 years clean , sober . But yes high protien is good for replenishinh neurotransmitters
@@georgejo7905 You mean fat, because keto is about high-fat
@@iche9373 high protein low carb also causes ketosis
These thumbnails for Dr. Staloff are just golden
Independence is the recognition of the fact that yours is the responsibility of judgment and nothing can help you escape it-that no substitute can do your thinking-that the vilest form of self-abasement and self-destruction is the subordination of your mind to the mind of another, the acceptance of an authority over your brain, the acceptance of his assertions as facts, his say-so as truth, his edicts as middle-man between your consciousness and your existence.
James's concepts surely make sense. Regarding the many philosophical theories to which I've listened to for the past two years, I would say, yes, for the most part "all disputes are idle."
Dr. Darren staloff thanks a lot for your beatifull simplicity of theoretical explanation 🏅
Finally, some James! Yes!
Yeah, we will like to see young Dr Michael Sugre... please....
Cheers for Canada....
Fantastic presentation.
William James' book, Pragmatism, has subtle humor. The rhetoric has refreshing anecdotes, despite being written so long ago.😸
Best channel since I joined youtube like 15 years ago
I was just browsing this channel yesterday, looking for some lectures on pragmatism! Behold only a few days later, it is posted
Thank you both Dr. Sugrue & Staloff
I'll show up for it 😎
William James is the GOAT.
Materialists should be hopeful in my opinion. Because the end of the universe doesn't have to mean the end of humanity or life in general. We should find a new universe or an alternative. Just because the problems seem big, doesn't mean you should give up.
Hmm
Absolutely fantastic lecture.
Re: going around the squirrel argument
But once “around” is defined, it’s objectively true what the answer is, right? There’s no perspectivalism, there are true facts that have nothing to do with usefulness. If that’s true, shouldn’t pragmatism include that definition of truth in how it defines itself?
I'm pretty sure it's the River that makes the banks.. right?
Nice deepity.
How can there be truth in a paradoxical Universe composed of binary opposites and ambiguities?
I sat on a bench once trying to understand how I could possibly engage in any course of action without expectation. Of course I had an expected outcome, otherwise why would I bother. I got the answer in James Pragmatism, not to have an expectation but a hypothesis, and question the possibility of it being a live hypothesis, and that it only ever remained a possibility or a probability, but never an expectation. This took a lot of practice.
I have a bit to say in relation to determinism and free will, another binary opposite, but I'll finish listening to the lecture later, and thank you for the lecture. I like your analysis of Nietzsche too.
seems a lot of Dennett's attitudes and approaches were rooted in James. what do ya think?
I’d agree…
Patrick Bateman did such a great job in this lecture. He really is an amazing speaker!
Let’s see Paul Allen's lecture.
I've been waiting for this one!
For those who are well versed, how would one get into philosophy best? What books to read? In what order? Good UA-cam channels besides this one? Thank you
Excellent. Learnt a lot here.
Thank You!
These are my takes from the video. I encourage and welcome pointing out my potential mistakes.
The meaning of a given thing is the correspondent output (effects and consequences) it would produce, if that thing would be the case. In other words, we have Wittgenstein's behaviorism, as all knowledge must be reduced to what sort of behaviors it generates. Truth is practical, instrumentalized to our psychological needs, inevitably subjective and pluralistic. The measure of our truths is the “cash value” they possess, that is: what can we achieve with a given set of prepositions? Do they relatively satisfy you? Then they are probably true.
Using the pragmatic method to resolve philosophical dilemmas: cut out the abstract, reduce posits to their practical consequences - assume that they're right - and assess if their “effects” are desirable or useful to you. There's no point to dwell in universals, what matters is to integrate new knowledge to your “web of belief”/framework. Assuming that a solid, stable framework will probably make the world better, as you, working on your interests, will ultimately benefit your surroundings.
Resonates with posterior phenomenology, humanizing the world of knowledge. Pragmatism is predicated upon Darwinian posits: ideas are the ultimate judges - their value is measured by the survival benefits they bring, and their “judgement” is the result of our ancestor's trial and error, collective expressed by common sense.
Truth is probably the single idea that's rooted deepest within the human spirit. I would argue that truth is not, even as a human idea, abstract at all, and is instead directly connected to, and thereby inseparable from, existence itself. What is true is what is real. Not only is the world true but our experience of it is as well. To assume truth can be contained within a single formula or line of reasoning is the height of arrogance
wow.....just amazing.......much appreciate....
I don't agree with the watch example. We can find the inner workings by taking it apart. The copy of truth is merely the rationalistic take, the watch is the watch as it appears. But its inner workings can also be a copy, and thats where materialism comes in, the watch makers toolkit. So, in my opinion, our ideas can be copies of the world, but not without effort which is James point.
29:38 “James concludes his discussion of metaphysical disputes, that ‘Pragmatism represents a philosophical’, what he calls “Protestant Reformation”.
Question for your father, has he read David Deutsch? Quantum physicist/philosopher. Highly recommend the Beginning of Infinity.
The Reason that Nietzsche advocated for a re-evaluation of values is because the weak imposed their morality on Nature to oppress the strong. This has all sorts of implications, it serves their interests in a number of ways, it causes misery and suffering which as Foucault observed drove people to seek spiritual guidance and now psychiatry and psychology. They have consciously or unconsciously created a market which is not conducive to the evolutionary process.
So to re-evaluate the values that cause this misery requires Reason, especially in the face of dogma, hierarchical structures and social contracts. Really it can only be achieved by understanding Nature, a very difficult task and what is the best weapon of choice in this fight? Philosophy.
Let's start with defining our terms, what is Reason? If the just man uses Reason, what is Reason. If you think only of yourself and your own selfish interests, is that Reason?
Before we define reason, we will need to define "definition".
Words are spells.
Andrew Garfield with a ponytail
When have these been recorded? I feel like these days you could get little better resolution for these good lectures.
The voice matters more.
@@Roy-mk9zl True. But still a bit tragic.
@@toastie8173 Quite long ago actually
What scientific reality explains our world?
Then we come to free will, what is the extent of our free will? Our attitude towards the way of things? At a certain point it extends beyond that. If we hanker after money, how will that affect our moral choices, what about sex? Or power?
What if we hanker after nothing but are concerned only with our duty to Nature? If we want to live in accordance with Nature, if we really understand who and what we are and stop with the woo, consciousness and all that bullshit that no one understands, just ethical doctrine to ensure security and comfort. Rules made by the weak to protect the interests of the weak, in spite of their misery. What if we realised that Hitler had his role for a reason Cromwell had his. What instead of imposing our morality we seek to understand, we learn about physics, and dialectics, and about the nature of things. Then and only then can we Reason and start to determine the Nature of change.
Only then have we free will.
wow! I worked my way from a "tender" minded to a "Tough" minded throughout time
I've been hearing some bad things about Harvard, lately.
Regardless of which "side" has arrived at deeper insight, I think it is reasonable to say that the tender-minded side has a disproportionate attraction for "annoying people", puritans, idealists, "pacifists", progressives, Professor Panglosses. This is a personal preference, I'm aware, but a striking one
Robinson John Martinez Larry Jackson Deborah
Beautiful 😍
Pragmatism sounds like a conciliation between racionalism and empiricism mediated by an english sarcasm.
Is the video ok?
It’s not working for me either 🤷♂️
Same here!
Works for me! What country are you in? Maybe there is a filter
I watched a cat sneak up on a lame bird once. I intervened and lifted the bird to safety.
One could ask why I intervened in the course of Nature? But I too am Nature, that is a choice I get to make.
Greetings
Talk about stuffed shirts! YeeeeeeGads!