I interpret Plato's 'Three Parts Of the Soul' different to how Augustine does. If reason is at conflict with reason the final outcome will be reasonable. Which means the initial conflict was a misunderstanding of reason. What I learn from Plato's 3 parts of the soul is that everything ultimately resolves to or from either reason, desire or emotion. To see it as more than 3, as Augustine does, muddies the waters that Plato so carefully cleared. When we know what we are "dealing" with we can best act for the better of ourselves and others. Also a thank you to Daniel Bonevac, I don't comment on UA-cam normally, but I love your channel and the questions it raises. You are a great teacher.
Excellent video! In fact, I have the confidence of your understanding of Plato to perhaps help me with my integration of hedonism into a coherent and applicable ethical philosophy utilizing these three variables through slightly alternate means, based on some basic psychological presuppositions which may or may not be valid. You perhaps can identify any inconsistencies or weaknesses which I have not considered based on your demonstration here as a potentially effective interlocutor with considerable knowledge in these matters! Rather than virtue, hedonism of course considers "the good" to be pleasure. With pain as necessarily the evil in which we avoid. I believe this is a universal truth in accordance with the human nature you proposed was vital to any realistic contemplation of an ethic. Therefore I posit that ethical behavior begins with making value judgement based on our subjective experiences and the resulting pleasure or pain they result in, and the emotional impact they have on our lives. That it is through the spectrum of pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, love and hate that we experience a degree of effect, somewhere between two extreme variables, that we place our subjective value on and determine the importance of something in our lives and pursuits. The degree of effect we experience is also going to determine the strength of our desires to pursue such experiences again, along with the subjective value we place on them. So value and desire can be considered complementary impulses that we use to determine our behavior, pursuits and the choices we make towards everything in our lives. But the problem I have found is placing objective value beyond our own experiences that might be considered a universally applicable ethic providing consistency and the objectivity necessary for a consensus within a group or society. This is because each person is going to have their own subjective values and desires which may or may not correspond to my own. I believe utilitarianism attempts to resolve this, and it seems to take hedonistic considerations and make them "writ large" to maximize pleasure, or at least well-being, beyond the consideration of one's own subjective desires and values and applicable to the group or society. But again, without some means to objectively define the values and desires of others, it seems difficult to propose any "ought to" statements that can be universally applied. And this is where reason is required as I hope I have addressed my idea of the desire and emotional aspects of the three accounts of the soul you discussed here. Within virtue there are "ought to" statements and maxims based on ideals beyond subjective experience, and objectivity is assumed according to presuppositions that define the well-being of others and the behavior that results in the best outcomes for oneself and the group or society, and even sometimes without consideration of the individuals own values and desires. But basic Hedonism, particularly Epicureanism in which I am exploring, fails to utilize any objectivity or presuppositions regarding any "ought to" statements towards a group or society. By using pleasure as the definition of "the good" the only method I have considered is my own subjective values and desires derived from my own experiences. So an "ought to" statement or maxim for me regarding ethical behavior towards others would be very close to reciprocal ethics, or "The Golden Rule". So a kick to my shin causes pain, therefore since pain is considered an evil, then kicking someone else in the shin would be considered unethical behavior. Condescending ridicule and hateful tones towards me causes distress and sadness, which are psychological pains and therefore considered evil as well and becomes again an unethical act. So by measuring both physical and psychological pleasures and pains subjectively this determines the corresponding "ought to" behaviors I would employ towards others and would consider the ethical foundation of my own philosophy, incorporating the consideration of the three aspects of the soul: reason, desire and emotion. So I hope I have described the issues and deficiencies in hedonism I have personally encountered and considered, and hope you might have the ability to elaborate on them from your perspective or provide alternate considerations I have not. Again, I enjoyed this video very much, my first of yours to watch, and have subscribed to your channel and hope to talk to you again perhaps in another video in the future! Thanks!
The corn. The soul ultimately is the eternal sea of glass that is the spiritual body of the mind of the spirit. That acts as a chamber for the unconscious in the eternal being of the individual.
Instinct, ego, higher self. Brain stem, limbic system, neo cortex. Our brain is split up into 3 categories. Our brain has been likened to an animal menagerie, home to a lizard, a horse and a human, all trying to inhabit the same body.
This was not only informative in a way that was very helpful, but also entertaining, engaging, yeah fun and well, something that genuinely made me happy. Thank you for helping me study for my exam in ethics. :) If I get an A or a B my boyfriend has promised me a cat.
I interpret Plato's 'Three Parts Of the Soul' different to how Augustine does. If reason is at conflict with reason the final outcome will be reasonable. Which means the initial conflict was a misunderstanding of reason. What I learn from Plato's 3 parts of the soul is that everything ultimately resolves to or from either reason, desire or emotion. To see it as more than 3, as Augustine does, muddies the waters that Plato so carefully cleared. When we know what we are "dealing" with we can best act for the better of ourselves and others.
Also a thank you to Daniel Bonevac, I don't comment on UA-cam normally, but I love your channel and the questions it raises. You are a great teacher.
Thank you!
Thank you for uploading these for free!
This is a great video! Thank you for the awesome explanation.
These are excellent! Please keep them coming
The difficult part of real life is, there are conflicting reasons, conflicting emotions, maybe conflicting desires as well.
Yeah!
Thank you for this!
Excellent video! In fact, I have the confidence of your understanding of Plato to perhaps help me with my integration of hedonism into a coherent and applicable ethical philosophy utilizing these three variables through slightly alternate means, based on some basic psychological presuppositions which may or may not be valid. You perhaps can identify any inconsistencies or weaknesses which I have not considered based on your demonstration here as a potentially effective interlocutor with considerable knowledge in these matters!
Rather than virtue, hedonism of course considers "the good" to be pleasure. With pain as necessarily the evil in which we avoid. I believe this is a universal truth in accordance with the human nature you proposed was vital to any realistic contemplation of an ethic. Therefore I posit that ethical behavior begins with making value judgement based on our subjective experiences and the resulting pleasure or pain they result in, and the emotional impact they have on our lives. That it is through the spectrum of pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, love and hate that we experience a degree of effect, somewhere between two extreme variables, that we place our subjective value on and determine the importance of something in our lives and pursuits. The degree of effect we experience is also going to determine the strength of our desires to pursue such experiences again, along with the subjective value we place on them. So value and desire can be considered complementary impulses that we use to determine our behavior, pursuits and the choices we make towards everything in our lives.
But the problem I have found is placing objective value beyond our own experiences that might be considered a universally applicable ethic providing consistency and the objectivity necessary for a consensus within a group or society. This is because each person is going to have their own subjective values and desires which may or may not correspond to my own. I believe utilitarianism attempts to resolve this, and it seems to take hedonistic considerations and make them "writ large" to maximize pleasure, or at least well-being, beyond the consideration of one's own subjective desires and values and applicable to the group or society. But again, without some means to objectively define the values and desires of others, it seems difficult to propose any "ought to" statements that can be universally applied. And this is where reason is required as I hope I have addressed my idea of the desire and emotional aspects of the three accounts of the soul you discussed here.
Within virtue there are "ought to" statements and maxims based on ideals beyond subjective experience, and objectivity is assumed according to presuppositions that define the well-being of others and the behavior that results in the best outcomes for oneself and the group or society, and even sometimes without consideration of the individuals own values and desires. But basic Hedonism, particularly Epicureanism in which I am exploring, fails to utilize any objectivity or presuppositions regarding any "ought to" statements towards a group or society. By using pleasure as the definition of "the good" the only method I have considered is my own subjective values and desires derived from my own experiences. So an "ought to" statement or maxim for me regarding ethical behavior towards others would be very close to reciprocal ethics, or "The Golden Rule". So a kick to my shin causes pain, therefore since pain is considered an evil, then kicking someone else in the shin would be considered unethical behavior. Condescending ridicule and hateful tones towards me causes distress and sadness, which are psychological pains and therefore considered evil as well and becomes again an unethical act. So by measuring both physical and psychological pleasures and pains subjectively this determines the corresponding "ought to" behaviors I would employ towards others and would consider the ethical foundation of my own philosophy, incorporating the consideration of the three aspects of the soul: reason, desire and emotion.
So I hope I have described the issues and deficiencies in hedonism I have personally encountered and considered, and hope you might have the ability to elaborate on them from your perspective or provide alternate considerations I have not. Again, I enjoyed this video very much, my first of yours to watch, and have subscribed to your channel and hope to talk to you again perhaps in another video in the future! Thanks!
Excellent!
Thank you!!
Every video is a gift !
Nice Video!
Very interesting lecture
The corn. The soul ultimately is the eternal sea of glass that is the spiritual body of the mind of the spirit. That acts as a chamber for the unconscious in the eternal being of the individual.
Instinct, ego, higher self. Brain stem, limbic system, neo cortex. Our brain is split up into 3 categories. Our brain has been likened to an animal menagerie, home to a lizard, a horse and a human, all trying to inhabit the same body.
This was not only informative in a way that was very helpful, but also entertaining, engaging, yeah fun and well, something that genuinely made me happy. Thank you for helping me study for my exam in ethics. :) If I get an A or a B my boyfriend has promised me a cat.
Good luck! I love cats! 🐱
I want to live a life where my big dilemma is whether I should eat cookies or not
Clark Margaret Anderson Deborah Harris Deborah
افلاطون ( الفيلسوف اليوناني الأشهر)
صاحب مذهب الاعتقاد بالهوى العذري
WE are thankful to you for your detailed analysis of Plato's tripartite soul!!
Of course metaphysical! Why reject. Religions are different, some true , others false
Human Beings are supposed to be Humane .....