What is Philosophy?

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 8 лют 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 195

  • @jonno52
    @jonno52 12 років тому +5

    This is lucid, articulate, very readily comprehensible, and doesn't demand anything of the listener/viewer than attention, a genuine interest and an open mind. I for one am most grateful. Can't really imagine a better introduction to the subject.
    In particular, learning for the first time about the pre-Socratics, especially Thales, has been something of a revelation. The most important word in our language: INQUIRY.

    • @adaptercrash
      @adaptercrash 2 роки тому

      Hellenism not that great and they just go back and think we'll I think he thought

  • @kidbuu234
    @kidbuu234 12 років тому +11

    I'm a junior in high school, and I have a high interest in Philosophy and knowledge, and these videos are extremely helpful, and intriguing :) My school doesn't offer a Philosophy elective as a class, but these videos are a good substitute, and I'm learning more than I would have in a high school level class. Thank you! :)

  • @sebastiansalazar3553
    @sebastiansalazar3553 3 роки тому +5

    Dr Brown. Even Ten Years After, this course is still very useful.
    Thank you very much indeed.

    • @onemorebrown
      @onemorebrown  11 місяців тому +1

      @sebastiansalazar3553 It is hard for me to keep up with these comments, but thanks! I appreciate that!

    • @alittax
      @alittax 10 місяців тому

      @@onemorebrown
      I also agree with Sebastian! Well done! Excellent content.

  • @alainaaugust1932
    @alainaaugust1932 2 роки тому +5

    Excellent introduction. Recommend, viewer, you determine to ignore the frequent intrusions by the purveyors of the video, increase the speed, and persevere without judging what you hear. By this series I’ve learned some about philosophy, more about how the human mind works, and most about the yearnings of philosophers (humans) to know and the dangers of human arrogance. Thank you, Dr. Brown. This Introduction will never get old. Subscribed now, blessings to you. Daniel 12:3-Those who teach will shine like stars for all eternity.

  • @jaybells100
    @jaybells100 13 років тому +2

    Thank you for making these videos and allowing the public access to them.

  • @2c-deokylanicole724
    @2c-deokylanicole724 5 років тому +31

    HELLO CEBU DOC STUDENTS

    • @eynnieboo
      @eynnieboo 13 днів тому +1

      Send tips huhu unsay mogawas aning videoha T-T

  • @EM0208F
    @EM0208F 12 років тому +2

    Thank you so much for uploading you lectures. It's very hard in my country to attend such a class, so you've been a major help.

  • @milliondollardon7043
    @milliondollardon7043 12 років тому +1

    Wow this has to be the best source to find for introduction of philosophy. Im only 17 and always curious of what philosophy really is about.This really helped me alot.

  • @nostalgia63
    @nostalgia63 4 роки тому +1

    Excellent video. Philochrony is the theory that describes the nature of time and demonstrates its existence. Time is magnitive.

  • @tombouie
    @tombouie 7 років тому +2

    In a nutshell philosophy is the discipline of rationally thinking for yourself. Although Dr Brown seems to have the right balance of rationalism & pragmatism, most philosophers are obsessed with rationalism but lack empiricism, pragmatism, etc. Thks Dr Brown
    Philosophy branches
    Meta (ex: beyond) physics; Ontology (what exist or categories-of existence); epistemology (ex: discipline of what, why, when, while, how, etc do you rationally know) ; Skepticism (ex: rational heckler) ; Ethics (ex: dicipline of ono-objective right-&-wrong conduct and moral-values) ; Logic (ex: validity - it impossible for the premise to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false)

  • @rochelledixon383
    @rochelledixon383 13 років тому +4

    I enjoyed this series. Your intorduction to the class was very interesting. It make you think about life.

  • @Hickey66
    @Hickey66 13 років тому +1

    I am enjoying your series. It is the best intro to Philosophy that I know. Thank you. Great Britian is made up of England, Wales, Scotland and Northren Ireland. All persons within that group are refered to as British. So to refer to Hume as British is correct.

  • @dr.lambda9163
    @dr.lambda9163 2 роки тому

    Thanks for uploading the videos and making them public.

  • @MEDOO3231
    @MEDOO3231 12 років тому +1

    Thanks now i have an idea of what is philosophy somehow is about and i have been really wanting to know this thing since a long time !

  • @oqayls
    @oqayls 9 років тому +4

    I've been always interested in philosophy but I didn't know where to begin my reading. I find this lecture very helpful. Thank you sir and I will watch the rest of your videos.

  • @joecarter3735
    @joecarter3735 5 років тому +1

    Great video Richard. The information and structure is making the subject interesting. I want it to go on more which is good for my learning. Thank you

  • @jmmahony
    @jmmahony 12 років тому +1

    It's interesting to note the change in tone between the earliest bible and later parts (time of Solomon). Early interactions were almost entirely emotion-based (for example, Abraham being very sycophantic to local kings so he could pass unmolested through their territory as he moved into Canaan). But many stories around Solomon's time use logic to come to decisions. Between these times, even Moses' interaction with Pharoah used some logic to convince him to free the Israelites.

  • @kirilhadjiev1765
    @kirilhadjiev1765 11 років тому +2

    Really clear and helpful (much better than some pseudo documentary with cheap actors and crazy dramatic music). Thank you very much!

  • @Ariane-
    @Ariane- 4 роки тому

    very interesting and gave a good point aboutB.C and AD. It really makes you wonder and think about life in more than one way and the possibilities out there along with their explanations

  • @CharlotteTranp
    @CharlotteTranp 12 років тому +1

    i've got no foundation in philosophy and it was very helpful. thank you very much!

  • @dr.lambda9163
    @dr.lambda9163 2 роки тому

    On a flat Earth you would also see the lower part of ships disappear first, due to perspective. Try it, look at a ship, see it seemingly sink into the sea, but then use a telescope or other zooming equipment to visually zoom in on the ship. You will see the ship move up again and it's lower part will come into sight again. It never hid behind a curve, it was just perspective.
    In fact, there is an experiment where you can make toy cars seemingly go around the curve of a flat table by recreating the perspective trick. It is pretty cool.

  • @TheSteinmetzen
    @TheSteinmetzen 9 років тому +6

    Great lecture Mr. Brown. Thank you.

  • @torosalvajebcn
    @torosalvajebcn 6 років тому +1

    Excellent course, thanks.

  • @onemorebrown
    @onemorebrown  11 років тому +1

    I have now updated the captions so just click CC and you will get the subtitles

  • @dsshakespeare
    @dsshakespeare 8 років тому +2

    Awesome! Thanks...for passing on your knowledge!

  • @dr.lambda9163
    @dr.lambda9163 2 роки тому

    I see philosophy as the the kind of science which uses informal reasoning as it's evidence.
    Science is the creation, sharing, and collecting of theories with accompanying evidence and the verification of those theories through verifying their accompanying evidence. In other words, science is the collection of testable knowlegde and the testing of that knowledge.
    In my view, there are 3 kinds of science:
    - Empirical science. Theories for this science come accompanied with descriptions of testing procedures. People who follow emperical science will perform these procedures, thus in effect doing experiments to find out whether the theories are correct.
    - Formal science. For example, mathematics and computer science. These sciences have theories that are accompanied by formal proofs. To verify the theories, verify the formal proofs.
    - Philosophical science. These sciences are accompanied by informal reasoning as evidence. Due to being informal, it is often (but not always!) impossible to find an objective truth. However, one can often still verify whether a theory is consistent with itself.
    So basically, each science differ in the nature of it's evidence. But all 3 forms of science are baeed in the fact that the evidence is verifiable by anyone with enough resources.

  • @onemorebrown
    @onemorebrown  11 років тому +1

    I have now corrected the subtitles just click the CC sign

  • @seandoran2209
    @seandoran2209 9 років тому +3

    I am greatful......

  • @richardhill3405
    @richardhill3405 5 років тому +1

    Brilliant stuff, but earth does float on magma which is liquid. Tectonic plates are like two boats tied together rubbing against each other. He may have got the liquid wrong yet his basic understanding was correct. Amazing what they could work out with what they knew.

  • @richardspringer55
    @richardspringer55 11 років тому +1

    Very helpful video on Philosophy, thanks.

  • @dr.lambda9163
    @dr.lambda9163 2 роки тому

    Ultimate skepticism debunk: If nothing can be known, then how do you know that nothing can be known?

  • @DJSTOEK
    @DJSTOEK 5 років тому +1

    Interesting

  • @onemorebrown
    @onemorebrown  11 років тому +1

    I don't know how you were able to guess it! After going through it the automatic translations were horrible!

  • @joshchamplin5652
    @joshchamplin5652 9 років тому +7

    This is more of a history of philosophy.

    • @RajuGogul
      @RajuGogul 9 років тому +3

      +Josh “JmastaC” Champlin
      Right.. to begin with...

    • @ArtyCraftZ
      @ArtyCraftZ 8 років тому

      Josh Champlin Nice profile pic.

  • @vanderbilt4918
    @vanderbilt4918 11 років тому

    It would be but then it clearly isn't. This isn't a matter of argument either, simply look at the works of even the most respected philosophers and it's clear clarity isn't of major concern, to put it mildly. So what if one has to deal with the unclear? So does mathematics, so does physics, so does biology, yet they do actually manage to clarify.

  • @KovertKitty
    @KovertKitty 11 років тому

    I think that statement is meant as this:
    You can believe something true that isn't known to be true, but once light is shed on the truth, you can't know it as anything else but that truth...
    Minor example... I can walk up to you and say I have $500 in this envelope, and you can BELIEVE it to be true without KNOWING whether it is or not... But if it is confirmed that there isn't $500 in the envelope, then you can't KNOW of anything else outside of that to be true...

  • @Lioninthenight
    @Lioninthenight 10 років тому +2

    Awesome Lecture.

  • @dromgarvan
    @dromgarvan 4 роки тому

    Thank you very much for your work.

  • @humblejumpify
    @humblejumpify 12 років тому +1

    Good work very conscise and clear--

  • @ydoesthishurt
    @ydoesthishurt 12 років тому +1

    It's good but could be dramatically shortened if scripted correctly...

  • @mrnettek
    @mrnettek 11 років тому +1

    Philosophy student here...thanks!

  • @02jonald
    @02jonald 12 років тому +1

    very excellent..i love this video...awesome...

  • @pganuga
    @pganuga 9 років тому +1

    Hi Sir, your videos have been of great help to me...for my exam prep...I'd like to request you for videos on the other rationalists(spinoza and leibnitz) and also on hegel...if possible..thanx

  • @Fordz
    @Fordz 8 років тому +9

    Can I have a summary of this in text form please?

    • @mssndlss
      @mssndlss 7 років тому +2

      Right where you see the thumbs up and down, you see three consecutive dots, Click on those dots and an option for a transcript comes up. You can select or run your cursor on them and then hit copy. After that you can paste the whole lecture on Word or your notepad and have your copy of the lecture,

    • @joshuadareencabaltera8701
      @joshuadareencabaltera8701 5 років тому

      @@mssndlss great! thank you lifesaver

  • @lonelymabale8826
    @lonelymabale8826 9 років тому +1

    everything in our daily life is created. and there is no way we can say things just happen. everything is invented.

  • @akrititiwari6249
    @akrititiwari6249 5 років тому +1

    Thanks

  • @MyChannel-ic8oj
    @MyChannel-ic8oj 11 років тому

    i really enjoyed it,, one can not get all of this without reading many books,, so you help me a lot
    but i just want to say about the vice,, which is a little imbalance in case of volume, can you place microphone in a place which make your vice in a good balance?
    Very Respectfully,
    Sekander

  • @nmim4994
    @nmim4994 8 років тому

    26:15 things disappear from our LINEAR peripheral vision
    piece by piece starting from the bottom. If the earth were
    ROUND then we wouldn't be able to re-reveal objects once
    they've left our vision using a telescope, that's how to tell
    if the earth is round versus if it were linear or flat. Peace

  • @alwaysincentivestrumpethic6689
    @alwaysincentivestrumpethic6689 6 років тому +2

    Great video !!! Good work I think

  • @1250productions
    @1250productions 9 років тому +2

    Of all the words I felt were least likely to show up in this video, ectoplasm was number one.

  • @trebot9292266
    @trebot9292266 11 років тому +1

    You can prove something is true, how do you prove something is untrue?

  • @TheManofFest
    @TheManofFest 12 років тому +2

    I got here from bill and ted
    Now that's philosphy

  • @charlytaylor1748
    @charlytaylor1748 2 роки тому

    During the pandemic doctors and pharma and politicians and nudge units and psychologists and uncle harry were all consulted. We could have done with a couple of philosophers.

  • @spitama1234
    @spitama1234 12 років тому +1

    Thank You

  • @paulbottomley42
    @paulbottomley42 11 років тому +2

    Loving this video.
    But you say that the pre-philosophy world relied on divine revelation for its rules and answers, which is fine, but surely the gods didn't *actually* tell the supposed prophets this stuff. Surely the prophets thought about what might be good rules to follow, and thought that a great way of getting other people to follow them would be "because god says so". In this sense, are prophets just early philosophers, even if they resort to appeals to authority rather than discussion?

    • @SaminHam
      @SaminHam 5 років тому

      Paul Bottomley Great question. Wish he answered it

  • @KovertKitty
    @KovertKitty 11 років тому

    What you believe will be a subjective stand on the truth, but it will not change the objective truth about it... You can't KNOW objective truth to be anything else...

  • @MariaRamirez-ff5vc
    @MariaRamirez-ff5vc 12 років тому +1

    Thanks for this video!.

  • @ClaudiaVirmondMadeira
    @ClaudiaVirmondMadeira 6 років тому +1

    THANK YOU SO MUCH!!

  • @vanderbilt4918
    @vanderbilt4918 11 років тому

    Also, notice you haven't answered my challenge. So here it is again:
    Name me two major advancements which have been made in the philosophy of mind over the last couple of centuries. Please, I'm curious.

  • @WalyB01
    @WalyB01 8 років тому +3

    Ooh how this makes me want to start playing civilization I

  • @BossChronicles
    @BossChronicles 9 років тому +1

    Which major teaches and gives you more skills ? Philosophy or political science ?
    Plan to attend law school

    • @jesuschrist2616
      @jesuschrist2616 9 років тому +3

      +Shawn Afshar statstics say that people who study philosophy get better score's

  • @hadlevick
    @hadlevick 6 років тому

    The polydynamics of the movement generates pseudo-autonomy as material property, of the autogenous phenomenon; existing.(...)

  • @ChrisPBacon-fp1pp
    @ChrisPBacon-fp1pp 5 років тому +2

    Please can someone summarize this :( i need a topic outline

    • @alecadarna8439
      @alecadarna8439 5 років тому +6

      hello cebu doc student

    • @claire939
      @claire939 5 років тому

      @@alecadarna8439 HAHAHAHAHAHAH yeah right

  • @vanderbilt4918
    @vanderbilt4918 11 років тому

    Philosophy is definitely not all about clarity, not at all. Let me just mention the works of Wittgenstein and Kripke, to say nothing about Heidegger or Derrida. In fact I could name drop dozens of highly regarded names if not more. Arguments on the basis of personal authority also do not convince me in the slightest ('I know because I such & so').

  • @tapiwa65
    @tapiwa65 10 років тому +2

    awesome

  • @gigelchiazna_censored
    @gigelchiazna_censored 7 років тому

    changing time nomenclature because some people do not belive in Christ is lame; let them use mayan or other calendar instead but since the refrence is made to the DATE of BIRTH of JESUS CHRIST, morons should stick at least to using common sense terms until they move to Star Trek calendar; that is "Before Christ" and "After Christ"; having alergy to using at least such a harmless reference, only proves that devil exist and hates CHRIST; apart from that, this is a great course and thank you for your work, Richard

  • @vanderbilt4918
    @vanderbilt4918 11 років тому

    Nor have I claimed everything to be empirical. But I do think it's rather charming that you're trying to justify progress in philosophy by stating that is has invented the scientific method, which kind of proves my point.
    And why should my personal qualities have any bearing on the truth value of my propositions?

  • @sandman3698
    @sandman3698 11 років тому

    how exactly would one gauge an "advancement" in philosophy. in the time of heraclitus he reasoned that everything must be made of fire. if this had been accepted, would you accept it as an advancement? and also the "challenge" to list two philosophies that have appeared over "the last couple of centuries" is impossible. since somewhere at somepoint in time, most idea's have presented themselves over the thousands of years man has been thinking.

  • @sjmousavi8754
    @sjmousavi8754 4 роки тому +1

    I enjoy free college. Thanks.

    • @onemorebrown
      @onemorebrown  4 роки тому

      college is more than just getting information but I am glad you enjoy the lecture!

  • @karinasan7825
    @karinasan7825 12 років тому

    Can you please Include lectures or conversations on free will? Thank you!

  • @GameOn71795
    @GameOn71795 5 років тому

    I wanna ask you some question from reference of Hurley,patrick J(2014) A Concise Introduction to Logic exercise 2.5 can you help me ?

  • @KovertKitty
    @KovertKitty 11 років тому

    37:30 made me chuckle a bit... Setting their calendar around the flooding of the Nile... The Nile flooded.... That's day one... That's new years... (in my mind I'm thinking... This isn't very festive... I'm not excited... My house just got washed away)

  • @RetSquid
    @RetSquid 11 років тому

    1. Where did you get the idea that it was written in one style?
    2. Did Paul also write secular historians and order them to write about Jesus?

  • @hopefullife5145
    @hopefullife5145 8 років тому

    Your sound is very low, it would be better if you could enhance a little more

  • @itsfantastic5048
    @itsfantastic5048 4 роки тому

    which book ?

  • @rowerv87
    @rowerv87 12 років тому +1

    dude your an awesome teacher !!!!!!!! :)

  • @AlexandruAnonymus
    @AlexandruAnonymus 12 років тому

    What's whit the volume???

  • @hadlevick
    @hadlevick 6 років тому

    Metaphysics? Let philosophy answer: Simultaneous

  • @sheenakopko956
    @sheenakopko956 5 років тому +1

    🙏🙏🙏

  • @Donnie7843
    @Donnie7843 9 років тому +2

    Sound is bad

  • @toliveistolearnandtolove7858
    @toliveistolearnandtolove7858 9 років тому

    how to practice my philosophy reasoning , make other people that i'm right?

  • @hadlevick
    @hadlevick 6 років тому

    Simultaneous is 1; the unidimensional variability...

  • @sorpakdi
    @sorpakdi 11 років тому

    please, take up Schopenhauer's philosophy I am searching his view but I don't know detail and rarely texts, thanks.

  • @killorocko18
    @killorocko18 12 років тому

    IS it possible you can download the Powerpoint on this description so i can download it ?

  • @Cookwitch
    @Cookwitch 12 років тому

    Is an official transcript available for this talk? I have a friend who is hard of hearing, and the sound fluctuations make it impossible for her to understand. Thank you.

  • @Cookwitch
    @Cookwitch 12 років тому

    Aah. Oh dear! Thank you so much for replying!

  • @randomvide1
    @randomvide1 3 роки тому

    Gopekli tepe shows civilisation started alot earlier than 3500bce.

  • @sukhumskie
    @sukhumskie 11 років тому

    Jesus himself was great philosopher thats how i see this great man

  • @vanderbilt4918
    @vanderbilt4918 11 років тому

    Advancement in philosophy is not possible imo, so gauging it would be a mistake. Hence my challenge to find advancement in some specific area. You can't, not unless where philosophy has transformed into some empirical science of sorts. Again, I'm not 'against' philosophy, I simply want to strip it of its false overtly academic pretensions, which have been prevalent especially in the West.

  • @gregbalteff1529
    @gregbalteff1529 10 років тому +7

    RICHARD ARE YOU SAYING THERE IS A GOD ?...hopefully not

    • @endoscented
      @endoscented 9 років тому +1

      Use rational arguments, not hope.

    • @shortsmike
      @shortsmike 8 років тому

      the existence of god isn't dependent on your belief of its existence but rather independent of it. The clues a god created existence are all around you and flow thru you in oceans of electromagnetic waves in and tides of air so graciously provided on your behalf to let you breath and spout nonsense that god is not there. Luckily I am not god because I wouldn't have given you that pleasure, but rather snuffed you out from the get go. God doesn't need to prove anything because if your too stupid to see the clues.. well good luck in this world..

    • @brianstewart1077
      @brianstewart1077 8 років тому +2

      Mike Epperson nice example of that good old xtian tolerance

    • @shortsmike
      @shortsmike 8 років тому

      Christians ought to learn NOT to tolerate people who trample on the cross. Being tolerant isn't what christ taught. Love isn't letting the lost wander aimlessly nor letting them walk all over you. Love is tough and sais it how it is.

    • @brianstewart1077
      @brianstewart1077 8 років тому

      Mike Epperson yup, the love that desires to 'snuff out' that which it finds offensive, a representative of all that is 'good', do you realise what your saying?

  • @sandman3698
    @sandman3698 11 років тому

    making the statement "philosophy is definately not all about clarity, not at all",shows your lack of understanding of philosophy. philosophy is the love of truth. wouldnt finding truth be to search for clarification? and also in order to obtain clarification/truth, one must deal with the unclear. philosophy is to navigate through the unclear in order to clarify. jumping into philosophy with no regards to reach clarification is like jumping into a ship set sail with no destination.

  • @gda295
    @gda295 10 років тому

    JC usually 4 bce to 6 ce. Also there were no orderly rows at the beginning of farming...............////? they just chucked em down and headed for the pub.........

  • @Vahik88
    @Vahik88 12 років тому +1

    What is philosophy is a big philosophical problem :)

  • @NixOfArden
    @NixOfArden 10 років тому

    3500BCE the beginning of civilization? How about Uruk in ancient Mesopotamia? Is this not thought to be founded in around 4100BCE? Also, "the out of Africa theory"? Hasn't tracing DNA showed this to be the case, along with many hominid fossils? (8.24 - I can't watch anymore.)

  • @toliveistolearnandtolove7858
    @toliveistolearnandtolove7858 9 років тому +3

    By the way thank you

  • @vanderbilt4918
    @vanderbilt4918 11 років тому

    I utterly disagree. Whenever advancements are possible thanks to empirical investigation, indeed new fields spin off leaving philosophy in the dirt.
    Here's a challenge: show me one or two real advancements which have been made in the philosophy of mind over the last couple of centuries. Please do.
    Philosophy is filled to the brim with rhetoric. One has to be quite naive not to see this.
    I'm not saying philosophy is useless, but it has to know its place.

  • @hadlevick
    @hadlevick 6 років тому

    (Reproduction/Feed/Reasoning) decanted selfover hexagon...

  • @sandman3698
    @sandman3698 11 років тому

    pt2. there is no way to prove when an idea came into thought.

  • @hopefullife5145
    @hopefullife5145 8 років тому +4

    Your VOICE IS VERY LOW< cannot hear you at all,

  • @lukestevenson6465
    @lukestevenson6465 10 років тому

    is philosophy not the search of lifes truth, and to see the truth the actuality of life would we need perception, can a person perceive and think at the same time, of course not this is obvious, to perceive is to see it now as it is, to think is to select memory witch is in the past, to define perception in thought is to defile it, if i perceive and think then i have an idea of what i perceive, and then its not perception the image is tainted, hence to gain knowledge is the cultivation of memory whereas intelligence is derived from perception, like a computer, you can install many programs to the computer, but it doesnt get any more intelligent, it has nothing to do with the intelligence of the machine its simply memory, the intelligence of the machine is the cpu the information that operates the programs and give the programs a platform to operate from. so to see the truth we need to see it not with thought but with the eyes.