I have read everything David Hume has published and huge portions of secondary literature on him. However, "...because one day somebody will hand you a red apple and you'll feel like a wanker." is still by far the best summary of the problem of induction I've seen.
@@georgegrubbs2966 Thinking requires existence of a thinking mind, so 'you' exist insofar as your mind exists. Hume disagreed with Descartes idea that minds think themselves into existence, and instead focussed on perceptions as the mental activity. The mind is just a bundle of perceptions. So, both believe the mind exists; Descartes proposes cognition as the proof, and Hume proposes perception as the proof.
@@TheJthom9 But Descartes claimed a priori that the thinking was his - "I" think. Others defined the "mind" to represent a variety of things from 'spirit', 'breath', 'memory', and today the entire collection of mental activity. I do not think Descartes statement is proof that he exists, that's all. I think Hume was closer to reality and foreshadowed modern neuroscience. "We" are a complex of circuit impulse patterns, our thoughts, emotions, consciousness, and total inner life.
@@georgegrubbs2966 Thinking is a priori 'you', what else would thinking be? This is not a neuroscientific problem, but a philosophical one. You can go as far as you can scientifically defining what the 'mind' is, what cognition and perception are, etc. But, you still have not defined how 'existence' is defined philosophically. Descartes stopped asking 'what is truth?' and started asking 'what is certainty?' He is demonstrating how you can 'know' for sure that the mind is there (because thinking this point needs a mind in the first place), not what constitutes the mind's physical substance.
+Tabitha Rodriguez I got to TCNJ (the college of New Jersey) My philosophy prof is like something from a movie--big beard doc martins and the same 3 shirts and khakis. He's from UK and taught in Ireland before coming to the US. His personality is probably what Humes was in real life.
You are my philosophy hero. I watch your videos, laugh, and feel so much better informed. You make insightful comparisons and you lighten up so much dry information in the most wonderful way. Thank you.
Hume was an agnostic not an atheist. He did not deny the existence of God just that we do not know enough and never will know enough to assert or deny the existence of God.
To be an Agnostic you have to be without Gnosticism, Theology requires a Gnostic approach to its dogma. Now atheism isn't the belief that no god exists, but rather the rejection of current claims, therefore to be agnostic is to be without the acceptance of the theological claim, therefore to be Agnostic is to be Atheist.
newonaginnalf cept Christians are faith-based which is opposed to certainty. gnostics were a heretical group of 'we're in the know, therefore, saved.' so technically that makes me a agnostic theist. i don't know, i believe. :)
One correction: Hume did deny self, but he never said "you don't exist." He said one exists as bundle of qualities, that's it. The controversy between Descartes and Hume was that the former thought of himself as "a thing that thinks" and the latter "bundle of qualities." For my part, I think I'll side with the former.
+Nika Zardiashvili The problem with that is that thoughts are phenomena, not things. To believe that you are "a thing that thinks" would necessitate being able to show some sort of irreducible object doing that thinking. There is no such object. As best we can tell, thoughts are the result of many neurons interacting, but each part of that complicated process that ear neuron is responsible for is the result of a signal received from either a sensory nerve or another neuron. Thoughts themselves, then, are really just the collection of the perceptions of many different interacting neurons, ie., exactly the kind of "bundle of qualities" that Hume says. The perception of "I" is a net effect of numerous interacting qualities, which is not to say that the stuff that makes "you" up doesn't exist, but that you aren't a discrete, single thing that inherently exists in some sort of eternal idea or form as the rationalists posited. Having the idea of something doesn't mean that that something exists. That you think you think doesn't necessarily mean that there's a real "you" doing it.
Winston Deleon I don't see how being a collection of things makes you any less real also when things come together they can create things that are separate from their original properties and usually more complex than them same thing happens with ocean waves.
I don't know what I'd do without these videos tbh. I swear, my professor is saying the exact same thing and its not registering like these videos do. I'm so grateful :)
I am a great admirer of Hume and I enjoyed this short clip, which gives a very good introduction to the man and his thought. One error however: Hume was not an atheist. Many of his followers write that he was (Bertrand Russell and AJ Ayer for example), but this is found nowhere in his writings. it is true that he criticized religion and Christianity in particular, but he did not rule out that God existed. He was called an atheist in his day, but so were Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson; both of whom believed in God but rejected organized religion.
***** Hume did not believe in the God of classical theism (I.E. the God of Christianity, Islam, or Judaism). He did not rule out the idea of plurality of God's. Read his Natural History of Religion and Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. He would be finite theist, or an open theist.
I think Jefferson was more of a closet Atheist than Paine was, also take in mind this is Pre Darwin so at that point in time deist beliefs were somewhat practical for a logical thinker. You could be executed in Scotland if you were an Atheist, but by Humes readings its clear he was an Atheist
Right on, thanks, I read my textbook over and over and can't remember a damn thing. Short INFORMATION videos like this have really been helpful in getting through my class and grasp the ideas we're covering.
Hume's epidemiological skepticism pretty much destroys all knowledge and results in dead philosophy. I believe there is also a mistake with this video. It was actually the Bishop George Berkeley who asserted that there were no such as things as mind-independent objects and rather everything was simply ideas in the mind of God. Hume believed the exact opposite, that there are no immaterial things such as ideas only material objects. He was one of the first proponents of atheistic naturalism.
Hume's Bundle theory and Bishop Berkeley's idealism is somewhat same. However the minor difference between both theories is that Berkeley talked specifically about "perceiving". If there is no one to perceive, material and physical things simply won't exist but Hume, in his Bundle theory, said any object is collection of properties. If properties cease to exist, material objects won't exist. Hume didn't discuss about perceiving or perceiver.
"Epidemiological skepticism"? Lemme guess. That's when your campus is infested with swarms of philosophers all sounding off with different theories of knowledge and rather than spraying them all with nerve gas, thus solving the pesky disease, you decide to switch to engineering because all the engineers' words are easier to spell?
Hume is so underated. When I choose to write essays on him at uni the professors always gave me funny looks but for me his work felt down to earth. I found him very good philosopher for your early uni studies especially if you are more interested in the philosophy of science than ethics or the continental tradition.
This is amazingggggg! I needed a summary on David Hume and wikipedia doesn't cut it in uni. You helped me with my notes and even got me interested in the ideas of Hume; into which I will research further :) thanks!
Great video. I really love your videos. Your take on many prominent figures in Western Philosophy is both refreshingly funny and educative. Major props and thanks. Still waiting for you to take on that bad boy known as Hegel.
Thank you so much! I really enjoyed this :P it is relaxing me about my philosophy exam, coming up in approximately half an hour. It makes me laugh :) and I loved the 'scientists don't seem too bothered'. Thank you! It is highly appreciated :)! You have made my day :D
I love how the creators of the show Lost incorporated so many Real inspirational beings. Hume... Desmond Hume, John Locke... Even Richard Alpert, if you have heard of the book Remember Be Here Now. Awesome series you got going on btw! Rock on
We need to learn from and stop fighting each other. This algorithm has existed for quite some time. Peace cannot be kept by force, it is achieved through understanding, ourselves, others around us, and the intricate role we play upon our existence.
these are very entertaining, even though extremely conscise, they can make the basic reasonings of major philosophical idea more accessable to the lay person. Hopefully there will follow more on Frege, Wittgenstein, Russell, hussrl, heidegger, kierkegaard, etc...
TRANSLATION HELP: "Cents darter" is a spoken-British phrase (see e.g., video at 1:18) that translates into written English as "sense data", as in, information that you receive from your senses, such as sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch. Excellent videos!
![PHILOSOPHY - Kant: On Metaphysical Knowledge [HD]](/img/n.gif)
I have read everything David Hume has published and huge portions of secondary literature on him. However, "...because one day somebody will hand you a red apple and you'll feel like a wanker." is still by far the best summary of the problem of induction I've seen.
Didnt someone write that you get as much info in one page of Hume than in the entire books of Hegel and Kant together?
Descartes : I think therefore I am
Hume : you don't exist
"I" think? Descartes assumes "a priori" that he does exist in order to think. All he did was confirm "thinking."
You know what happens when you assume.
@@georgegrubbs2966 Thinking requires existence of a thinking mind, so 'you' exist insofar as your mind exists. Hume disagreed with Descartes idea that minds think themselves into existence, and instead focussed on perceptions as the mental activity. The mind is just a bundle of perceptions. So, both believe the mind exists; Descartes proposes cognition as the proof, and Hume proposes perception as the proof.
@@TheJthom9 But Descartes claimed a priori that the thinking was his - "I" think. Others defined the "mind" to represent a variety of things from 'spirit', 'breath', 'memory', and today the entire collection of mental activity. I do not think Descartes statement is proof that he exists, that's all. I think Hume was closer to reality and foreshadowed modern neuroscience. "We" are a complex of circuit impulse patterns, our thoughts, emotions, consciousness, and total inner life.
@@georgegrubbs2966 Thinking is a priori 'you', what else would thinking be? This is not a neuroscientific problem, but a philosophical one. You can go as far as you can scientifically defining what the 'mind' is, what cognition and perception are, etc. But, you still have not defined how 'existence' is defined philosophically. Descartes stopped asking 'what is truth?' and started asking 'what is certainty?' He is demonstrating how you can 'know' for sure that the mind is there (because thinking this point needs a mind in the first place), not what constitutes the mind's physical substance.
"Even though it doesn't make any sense, it still seems to work"
Philosophy of Science in a nutshell.
No, that's the description of reality that we are logically drawn to. This is true in philosophy of science and elsewhere.
if I existed I would say thank you
if I existed, I'd make some daft comment about your comment.
U sure?
This series of videos are not only very informative and simple, but genuinely amusing, non-existent hats off
And you're hot.
Noxus Axios Well, he is :D
Dorkly Van de Dork Dorkly, you came back to look again after one month? Well-named, you are.
@ khalpernia1943
Your problem being? Alcoholic mother? Abusive father? No friends?
Still smoooooth
your videos are the only ones in 144p that I like.
Why does it take my lecturers an hour to deliver the same content as presented in a 3 minute video
+Tom Walsh LMAO . . . An excellent question . . .
+Tom Walsh Teacher's love to talk that's why they enter the field.
yep. xD
This is a very basic overview
It's fun to hear yourself talk...and a 3 minute class doesn't really convince a department chair haha 😂
I feel like this is the only case in which I've heard the word "wanker" and "batshit" in school.
+Kitsune Misuto (Kit) Wow my philosophy professor will get so excited talking about his lecture that many F-bombs come out in a single class.
Descartes: "I think. Therefore I am."
Hume: "Sorry, no, you don't."
Hume in 3 minutes for 21st century web surfers. Funny.
Sally Morem Hi Grandma! Do you still exist?
This video taught me more than my own college philosophy professor did...
Seconded.
third
what school is that?
Ruben Borges A Catholic one. Go figure...
+Tabitha Rodriguez I got to TCNJ (the college of New Jersey) My philosophy prof is like something from a movie--big beard doc martins and the same 3 shirts and khakis. He's from UK and taught in Ireland before coming to the US. His personality is probably what Humes was in real life.
I love these videos. They make me want to speak fast and sound intelligent :)
You are my philosophy hero. I watch your videos, laugh, and feel so much better informed. You make insightful comparisons and you lighten up so much dry information in the most wonderful way. Thank you.
My life is pointless... I think I'll go sit on a chair and think, wait, that chair doesn't exist DARN IT!!!
These drawings could not fail to make a lasting impression on the viewer. Kudos!
Great video , thank you. Enlightening, witty and enjoyable!
Hume was an agnostic not an atheist. He did not deny the existence of God just that we do not know enough and never will know enough to assert or deny the existence of God.
He was agnostic atheist. He considered the idea. He did not consider it to be that way.
To be an Agnostic you have to be without Gnosticism, Theology requires a Gnostic approach to its dogma. Now atheism isn't the belief that no god exists, but rather the rejection of current claims, therefore to be agnostic is to be without the acceptance of the theological claim, therefore to be Agnostic is to be Atheist.
newonaginnalf cept Christians are faith-based which is opposed to certainty. gnostics were a heretical group of 'we're in the know, therefore, saved.'
so technically that makes me a agnostic theist. i don't know, i believe. :)
One correction: Hume did deny self, but he never said "you don't exist." He said one exists as bundle of qualities, that's it. The controversy between Descartes and Hume was that the former thought of himself as "a thing that thinks" and the latter "bundle of qualities." For my part, I think I'll side with the former.
I agree. I can doubt alot, even the possibility of a lack of a physical form. But to to deny that I am consciously thinking is a little too far.
+Nika Zardiashvili The problem with that is that thoughts are phenomena, not things. To believe that you are "a thing that thinks" would necessitate being able to show some sort of irreducible object doing that thinking. There is no such object. As best we can tell, thoughts are the result of many neurons interacting, but each part of that complicated process that ear neuron is responsible for is the result of a signal received from either a sensory nerve or another neuron. Thoughts themselves, then, are really just the collection of the perceptions of many different interacting neurons, ie., exactly the kind of "bundle of qualities" that Hume says.
The perception of "I" is a net effect of numerous interacting qualities, which is not to say that the stuff that makes "you" up doesn't exist, but that you aren't a discrete, single thing that inherently exists in some sort of eternal idea or form as the rationalists posited. Having the idea of something doesn't mean that that something exists. That you think you think doesn't necessarily mean that there's a real "you" doing it.
Winston Deleon I don't see how being a collection of things makes you any less real also when things come together they can create things that are separate from their original properties and usually more complex than them same thing happens with ocean waves.
I don't know what I'd do without these videos tbh.
I swear, my professor is saying the exact same thing and its not registering like these videos do. I'm so grateful :)
these are great. please do more of these, specifically more modern philosophy if you can. really enjoying these
this was much more interesting and amusing than reading about this in my textbook
I am a great admirer of Hume and I enjoyed this short clip, which gives a very good introduction to the man and his thought.
One error however: Hume was not an atheist. Many of his followers write that he was (Bertrand Russell and AJ Ayer for example), but this is found nowhere in his writings. it is true that he criticized religion and Christianity in particular, but he did not rule out that God existed. He was called an atheist in his day, but so were Thomas Paine and Thomas Jefferson; both of whom believed in God but rejected organized religion.
***** Hume did not believe in the God of classical theism (I.E. the God of Christianity, Islam, or Judaism). He did not rule out the idea of plurality of God's. Read his Natural History of Religion and Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion. He would be finite theist, or an open theist.
Yes, I am an academic. I am a philosopher. Hume is my emphasis, or one of them anyway.
Tarik LaCour I like how you didn't flaunt your credentials in an attempt to prove yourself right - I've seen (on the internet) and met many who do.
Thats not the point on a public forum. We are all equal here in my opinion.
I think Jefferson was more of a closet Atheist than Paine was, also take in mind this is Pre Darwin so at that point in time deist beliefs were somewhat practical for a logical thinker. You could be executed in Scotland if you were an Atheist, but by Humes readings its clear he was an Atheist
This video literally helped me in my AS philosophy exam today!
You are a WONDERFUL man.
Superb series, thank you.
I'm so glad I understood this.
Now I don't have to worry about Donald Trump cause he doesn't exist.
xD lol that's so true.
+tpacca1 Quiet sheep the shows about to start.
Hume was agnostic, not atheist.
If he existed...
Kay, so I have a philosophy midterm tomorrow, and these videos are a godsend. They make perfect review and knowledge-checking material.
THANK YOU.
Right on, thanks, I read my textbook over and over and can't remember a damn thing. Short INFORMATION videos like this have really been helpful in getting through my class and grasp the ideas we're covering.
Yo Gus this shit is tight home doggy biscuit
thumbs up for scotland....
alot of good info, great sarcasm, and witty interpretation of some difficult topics. This is classic man.
I love these videos. Please do them new ones
Hume's epidemiological skepticism pretty much destroys all knowledge and results in dead philosophy. I believe there is also a mistake with this video. It was actually the Bishop George Berkeley who asserted that there were no such as things as mind-independent objects and rather everything was simply ideas in the mind of God. Hume believed the exact opposite, that there are no immaterial things such as ideas only material objects. He was one of the first proponents of atheistic naturalism.
Hume's Bundle theory and Bishop Berkeley's idealism is somewhat same. However the minor difference between both theories is that Berkeley talked specifically about "perceiving". If there is no one to perceive, material and physical things simply won't exist but Hume, in his Bundle theory, said any object is collection of properties. If properties cease to exist, material objects won't exist. Hume didn't discuss about perceiving or perceiver.
"Epidemiological skepticism"? Lemme guess. That's when your campus is infested with swarms of philosophers all sounding off with different theories of knowledge and rather than spraying them all with nerve gas, thus solving the pesky disease, you decide to switch to engineering because all the engineers' words are easier to spell?
144p? recorded with a rock in a cave.
It's all MS-Paint images. If it were any higher quality you would only see sharper pixels :P.
I love all of these videos. Great job sir
Hume is so underated. When I choose to write essays on him at uni the professors always gave me funny looks but for me his work felt down to earth. I found him very good philosopher for your early uni studies especially if you are more interested in the philosophy of science than ethics or the continental tradition.
Thank you soi much, dude. This is truly so helpful! It was simple, short concise and understandable. Thanks a lot, man!
Great videos! Have an exam in philosophy coming up, and these videos really help me remember things. They are fun and tutoring at once :)
I love the gentleman that makes these things..
Your videos are a few of my favorite on youtube.
YOU ARE HELPING ME PASS MY PHILOSOPHY CLASS. THANK-YOU.
Love it! You just saved me from reading tons of pages so I can be ready for my exam tonight. Whoo hoo!
Great video's man! Simple, funny, informative and crappily animated!
Studying Hume in my knowledge and reality class. Great video.
This is amazingggggg! I needed a summary on David Hume and wikipedia doesn't cut it in uni. You helped me with my notes and even got me interested in the ideas of Hume; into which I will research further :) thanks!
You know these videos are helping me pass my Morals and Philosophy exam, thank you for providing easy revision
hume is one of my favorite philosophers :)
Very enlightening!
collegebinary you are fantastic. and wonderful. and witty!
thank you!
I love these!
Great video. I really love your videos. Your take on many prominent figures in Western Philosophy is both refreshingly funny and educative. Major props and thanks.
Still waiting for you to take on that bad boy known as Hegel.
Excellent, thanks!
Finally, been waiting for eons
love it
I'm watching these in my Philosophy class and have learned more from it than from my professor.
I love Hume's expression at the end.
using this for my college presentation on hume.... thanks a MILLION
Thank you so much! I really enjoyed this :P it is relaxing me about my philosophy exam, coming up in approximately half an hour. It makes me laugh :) and I loved the 'scientists don't seem too bothered'. Thank you! It is highly appreciated :)! You have made my day :D
This is really entertaining and helping me keep focused on my intro to philosophy class which has been boring and difficult to understand
Learnt more from this than I have in the last 3 months of philosophy classes
Should I drop out of school or
THIS IS SO HELPFUL
I love how the creators of the show Lost incorporated so many Real inspirational beings. Hume... Desmond Hume, John Locke... Even Richard Alpert, if you have heard of the book Remember Be Here Now.
Awesome series you got going on btw! Rock on
Best I have seen!!!!!! any videos on Disinterestedness and Formalism?
"Round, green, and revolting."
Love it.
this video is so awesome. thanks a lot man.
Damn fantastic. Love it. Gonna read the hume now.
Very insightful!
damn this was good -- mad props! I took Modern Philosophy at Cornell and learned about this guy, but this was way way way better.... 🙏
Great video! Thanks.
'one should not assume the philosophy of David hume is nothing more than a subjective conclusion'
Canibus, poet laureate 2
This video is amazing
GENIUS!
This is just epic.
We need to learn from and stop fighting each other. This algorithm has existed for quite some time. Peace cannot be kept by force, it is achieved through understanding, ourselves, others around us, and the intricate role we play upon our existence.
beautifully illustrated!
excellent, thanks!
This is great.
Wow! Thanks for this!
Brilliant!
I LOVE IT!!! HILARIOUS!
Awesome and funny video!
Lol I love your three minute videos
good video. Im glad you made this.
Great video.
these are very entertaining, even though extremely conscise, they can make the basic reasonings of major philosophical idea more accessable to the lay person. Hopefully there will follow more on Frege, Wittgenstein, Russell, hussrl, heidegger, kierkegaard, etc...
Brilliant.
I fully admit to be using this as a starting point for revising for my uni philosophy exams.
totally helped me understand! Merci!
I study philosophy and I think these videos are fantastic
My faforite philosopher
Fantastic
this is brilliant
This. is. AWESOME
i have a philosophy exam in 4 days and have realised im screwed, but thanks to these BRILLIANT VIDEOS i might pass
yay!!
thankyou soo much!!!!!!
I love Hume. He's been my favourite philosopher for aggggges x]
TRANSLATION HELP: "Cents darter" is a spoken-British phrase (see e.g., video at 1:18) that translates into written English as "sense data", as in, information that you receive from your senses, such as sight, hearing, smell, taste, and touch.
Excellent videos!
LOL Brilliant and spot on.
If I existed I'd comment on this video but as I don't I can't.
Thank you allot you are helping me to understand philisophy and passing the exam !
thanks very funny and very informative.
bundle (sp) theory sounds really interesting.
I really enjoy your videos man I hope you still make them.