Omg I’m doing this course now and honestly seems like ur my guide to pass!! Honeslyy could you go through the year2 ethics including a topic like meta-ethics and conscience of Freud and Aquinas
Hey! Thank you so so much! This is life saving! It is A level season right now and I'm struggling to revise even though my A levels have already started because of my neurodiversity. This video makes it a lot easier for me to learn because I can just hear you talk and take notes and it kind of eliminates the pressure I put on myself about revising and makes revising less daunting! Thank you so much! Also you are so wonderful! What are you doing now? I hope life is treating you well anyway. You seem like a great and smart person :))
Another issue with the teleological argument, is that it works as much for a single creator, as it does for 2, 3, 10, or even 100 creators. Plus, it doesn't negate the fact that a creator can also have another creator. Sure you can avoid the infinite regress, but nothing prevents 2, 3 or 10 phases of creation, where a creator has another creator, and that one has another, till the 10th order, with a first cause.
Heyy, Ofcourse you can succeed in RE! You need to put in the work and efforts too x Yes, I’m really trying to put out as much content as I can. However it’s exam season in uni at the moment. If you drop me an email for a specific question and your plan for Conscience, I can have a look and alter if need be. Hope this helps x
Thank you so much this was so helpful 😭💜 I'm doing my AS exam for this next week and I didn't know which ones to use to link together. This was such a big help💕
I’m gladdd your doing this cuz I have got a mock next week on this 🤦🏾♀️🤦🏾♀️🤦🏾♀️ and it’s just to hard to focus on 3 themes and them being critiqued by smaller scholars #IMSOOSTRESSEDOUTT
UKNOWN // Heyy, I’m glad to be of help! Just keep in mind it’s not a scholar name dropping exam. The smaller scholars can be helpful just ensure you know the key scholars. Stress is normal during exam period. However, it is how you manage it that is important. I wish you the best of luck in your exams! 🙏🏾
Induction from purely empirical framework is often criticised as a leap. Because we observe patterns doesn’t always mean there is a “greater” reason or being behind. Induction to can be very subjective too depending on individual experiences. What one person sees as order can be disorder to another person. The human experience can be argued to be fallible. For example, In a desert when the senses are compromised, the eyes sees a mirage and immediately translates it as water based on fatigue and thirst. To me, those are the problems that can be raised.
That was a really good presentation, thank you. 👍🏾 Do you think that if you came upon a watch, having never seen one, or heard about one, you would still conclude it was created for a purpose. Even though you have no idea what that purpose is? If yes, then is it reasonable to assume this cosmos is created for a purpose, without knowing why it was created, how it was created, or it’s purpose?
That’s an interesting question! If I had never seen one, I don’t think I would conclude it was made for the purpose of telling time but I personally would think it had a purpose - just one I don’t know. It’s definitely reasonable to make that assumption. After all there are a lot of things out there that have a purpose that I simply don’t know what that purpose is. I personally think the teleological argument has a lot of flaws and the use of the watch to the cosmos is such a huge leap.
@@abs.tract_ Thanks for replying. It’s good to see a young person taking an interest in subject matters like these. I wish you success in your studies. You’re correct, nothing can empirically prove God is the origin of the material world. But equally nothing can prove empirically that any watch was the product of an intelligent mind, unless we see the agent make the watch. Even then it could be argued that the person making the watch is merely copying the result of natural forces acting upon the Earth. The point is, the notion that a watch is the product of an intelligent agent, does not come about through empirical evidence. It comes about through utilising ones innate intelligence. Indeed that is what all humans have at their disposal, to discriminate between truth or illusion. Another point to consider, regarding the teleological argument that is always overlooked by those arguing against it, is the subject of the discussion. God. How can they conclude that God is a leap of knowledge, if they don’t know who and/or what God is? How is it a leap of knowledge, if God ( as understood) is the origin of the material world? If they don’t agree that is what God is, then what are they prepared to agree to? In closing, it seems to me that belief, or lack of belief, has to play a role in understanding ones conclusion. Non/ belief, and belief are simply 2sides of the same coin. Not that non-belief is the default we all must work from
Got my final tomorrow, this and a sprinkle of luck should be enough.
Glad you found it helpful!
Good luck with it all tomorrow 🙌🏾
Fascinating point mentioned on the anthropic principle
you are the biggest lifesaver and the only person i fully understand. THANK YOU
Omg I’m doing this course now and honestly seems like ur my guide to pass!!
Honeslyy could you go through the year2 ethics including a topic like meta-ethics and conscience of Freud and Aquinas
Heyy,
Hope you’re finishing the course okay ?
I will definitely do Year 2 topics
abs.tract_ thanks too youuu!!! ❤️❤️❤️💫 Yh it’s super stressful
Hey! Thank you so so much! This is life saving! It is A level season right now and I'm struggling to revise even though my A levels have already started because of my neurodiversity. This video makes it a lot easier for me to learn because I can just hear you talk and take notes and it kind of eliminates the pressure I put on myself about revising and makes revising less daunting! Thank you so much! Also you are so wonderful! What are you doing now? I hope life is treating you well anyway. You seem like a great and smart person :))
GIRLLLL DO MORE TOPICS. THIS IS AMAZINF
Another issue with the teleological argument, is that it works as much for a single creator, as it does for 2, 3, 10, or even 100 creators. Plus, it doesn't negate the fact that a creator can also have another creator.
Sure you can avoid the infinite regress, but nothing prevents 2, 3 or 10 phases of creation, where a creator has another creator, and that one has another, till the 10th order, with a first cause.
ooh I never thought of this! This is such a brilliant point
Omg I love your hair 😩😍😍
Olive Keren Thank you!!! 🥰
Your the reason I now believe I can succeed in RE.🥳 thank you and I would loveeee a video on Freud and conscience
Heyy, Ofcourse you can succeed in RE!
You need to put in the work and efforts too x
Yes, I’m really trying to put out as much content as I can. However it’s exam season in uni at the moment. If you drop me an email for a specific question and your plan for Conscience, I can have a look and alter if need be.
Hope this helps x
Thank you so much this was so helpful 😭💜 I'm doing my AS exam for this next week and I didn't know which ones to use to link together. This was such a big help💕
Heyy, you’re welcome 😊
Thanks for watching & best of luck in your upcoming AS! 🙌🏾
Great video thank you❤️
Holly Clay Glad this was of help! 🥰
Please can you create another great video on the problem of evil or differnt ethics, thank you so much! This was soooo helpful
thankyou this was really helpful!
THANK YOU IM ABT TO GO INTO A PHILOSOPHY EXAM
Best of luck with it! 🙌🏾
I’m gladdd your doing this cuz I have got a mock next week on this 🤦🏾♀️🤦🏾♀️🤦🏾♀️ and it’s just to hard to focus on 3 themes and them being critiqued by smaller scholars #IMSOOSTRESSEDOUTT
UKNOWN // Heyy, I’m glad to be of help!
Just keep in mind it’s not a scholar name dropping exam. The smaller scholars can be helpful just ensure you know the key scholars.
Stress is normal during exam period. However, it is how you manage it that is important. I wish you the best of luck in your exams! 🙏🏾
abs.tract_ OMG thankyou soo much 💕🙏🏽🙏🏽
Omg this video honestly helped so much! Would you be able to do more videos like like on more topics!
Glad you found it helpful!
I might do in the future
please make a video on Aristotle and Plato i appreciate these videos so so much thank you!!
Heyy, I’ll try to make one of that too!
Good video my friend.What's your take on the problem of induction from a purely empirical framework?
Induction from purely empirical framework is often criticised as a leap. Because we observe patterns doesn’t always mean there is a “greater” reason or being behind. Induction to can be very subjective too depending on individual experiences. What one person sees as order can be disorder to another person. The human experience can be argued to be fallible. For example, In a desert when the senses are compromised, the eyes sees a mirage and immediately translates it as water based on fatigue and thirst. To me, those are the problems that can be raised.
Thank you so much this was literally so helpful!! Xx
Glad you found it helpful!
That was a really good presentation, thank you. 👍🏾
Do you think that if you came upon a watch, having never seen one, or heard about one, you would still conclude it was created for a purpose. Even though you have no idea what that purpose is?
If yes, then is it reasonable to assume this cosmos is created for a purpose, without knowing why it was created, how it was created, or it’s purpose?
That’s an interesting question!
If I had never seen one, I don’t think I would conclude it was made for the purpose of telling time but I personally would think it had a purpose - just one I don’t know.
It’s definitely reasonable to make that assumption. After all there are a lot of things out there that have a purpose that I simply don’t know what that purpose is.
I personally think the teleological argument has a lot of flaws and the use of the watch to the cosmos is such a huge leap.
@@abs.tract_ Thanks for replying. It’s good to see a young person taking an interest in subject matters like these. I wish you success in your studies.
You’re correct, nothing can empirically prove God is the origin of the material world. But equally nothing can prove empirically that any watch was the product of an intelligent mind, unless we see the agent make the watch. Even then it could be argued that the person making the watch is merely copying the result of natural forces acting upon the Earth.
The point is, the notion that a watch is the product of an intelligent agent, does not come about through empirical evidence. It comes about through utilising ones innate intelligence. Indeed that is what all humans have at their disposal, to discriminate between truth or illusion.
Another point to consider, regarding the teleological argument that is always overlooked by those arguing against it, is the subject of the discussion. God.
How can they conclude that God is a leap of knowledge, if they don’t know who and/or what God is?
How is it a leap of knowledge, if God ( as understood) is the origin of the material world?
If they don’t agree that is what God is, then what are they prepared to agree to?
In closing, it seems to me that belief, or lack of belief, has to play a role in understanding ones conclusion. Non/ belief, and belief are simply 2sides of the same coin. Not that non-belief is the default we all must work from
what about humes criticism- doesnt matter i had to continue to watch
Nadya 210 I mentioned it around the midpoint section section