Reflections On Philosophy (2024)

17/09/2021

Plato's poem ''Apología Sokrátous'' depicts the dialogue of Socrate's legal self-defence speech which he uttered at his trial for impiety and corruption in 399 BC.

''I know that I know nothing.''

''The unexamined life is not worth living.''

''No evil can happen to a good man, either in life or afterlife.'' (no one can change a good person into a bad person)

''When my sons are grown up, I would ask you, O my friends, to punish them if they seem to care about riches, or anything, more than about virtue.''

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-R7s2c8v22E

Plato's Apology—The Trial of Socrates. Bonevac

17/09/2021

Limits of knowledge — I don't know how the world is out there; all I know is how it appears to me; I will never have knowledge about the things in themselves.

We do have a priori knowledge, concepts and laws of understanding that will tell us many things, like the fact that the world is composed from objects that persist over time, but we can talk about those objects only in the limits of how we perceive them. We can know things only as they are processed by out perceptional and cognitive faculties. We can't know the things-in-themselves.

Kant draws a distinction between the appearances — those are things that we can know and for who we have some a priori knowledge of them — and the things in themselves about which we can know nothing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2yiOHqzUSBo&t=924s

Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason

11/09/2021

Rationalists like Avicenna, Descartes and Leibniz had held that universality and necessity require synthetic a priori knowledge (of the world that is independent of experience).

David Hume says that universality, causation and necessity aren't comming from one's contingent and particular experieces of the world, but neither from reason. Hume thinks that when we see something happening a bunch of times, we get a feeling of expectation that it will happen againg. It is a sentiment inside us. A habbit of the mind.

Kant thinks that Hume is right that the source is in us, but that he is wrong to say that it's something outside reason that's just a feeling.

Do our concepts revolve around objects? Or di the objects revolve around our concepts?

Kant says that the mind is what it is and that the world has to conform to it (Kant's Copernican Revolution - ''the objects must conform to our knowledge'') The world adapts to be understood by our minds. The structure of the world is the result of the structure of our minds.

What Kant means is that our minds are constituted in such a way that they can only process the information that our bodies and our minds are receiving from the world in certain ways. And out of that information they form a conception of objects - the objects are constructed by the mind. ''If the intuition must conform to the nature of the objects, I do not see how we can know anything of them a priori. If, on the other hand, the objects conforms to the nature of our faculty of intuition, I can then easily conceive the possibility of such an a priori knowledge.''

Here's how Kant describes it and how he presents his transcendental argument:

- there are innate ideas: pure concepts of the understanding (the categories)
- there are synthetic a priori truths (laws of understanding)
- but they apply only within realm of experience
- q is a necessary condition for the possibility of p (p would be impossible if it weren't the case that q)
- p (p is true; p is possible)
- therefore q

Limits of knowledge

''...we only know in things a priori that which we ourselves place in them.'' We know nothing about what they are in themselves; we only know what we put into them. So the laws that govern the realm of experience are in us (those are the laws of the understanding). We can know things only as they are experienced by us, not as they are in themselves.

In other words: the world is as we humans perceive it and we will never know how the world is in reality (how things are in themselves). We can't know anything about the things in themselves or what is the relation between the objects we experience and the things in themselves.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JE-pY-1J_WA&t=1s

Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, in one lecture. Bonevac

08/09/2021

Kant proposes a system of categories of logical function of judgement.

- There are innate ideas: pure concepts of the understanding (the categories)
- But also there are some synthetic a priori truths (laws of understanding)

A priori concepts and laws of the understanding are necessary conditions for the possibility of experience. And we do have experiences. Therefore there are a priori concepts and laws of understanding.

Kant raises the question (what princpiles must we assume as synthetic a priori truths in order to have experience possible?) and gives the answers:

Space and Time
-those are a priori forms of sensibility. Perceptible objects exist in space and time. To be able to experience something (say a building or a field of flowers) those things have to be represented in space and time.

Categories are part of the understanding - things that our mind does with the informations it receives from sensations. Those aren't things that we get from experiences, but that are already built into our minds. Kant says that there are basically 4 families of categories:

1) QUANTITY: a) Unity (one, this one, that one etc); b) Plurality (some, several etc); c) Totality (all, every etc)

2) QUALITY: a) Reality (is, yes, true etc); b) Negation (no, not, false etc); c) Limitation (un- (ex: unhappy), a- (a historical), in- (inauthentic) etc).

3) RELATION: a) Inherence and subsistence (is, substance, quality, property, exemplifies, participates in, has, for example, for instance, such as etc); b) Causality and dependence (if... then, cause, effect, because, depends, determines etc); c) Community (reciprocity, if and only if, and, or, unless, part, whole, with etc).

4) MODALITY: a) Possibility/Impossibility (words like: possible, can, may, might, could etc); b) Existence/Non-existence (is, exists, will etc); c) Necessity/Contingency (necessary, must, needs to, has to, would etc).

Those are built into the structure of the mind. They are part of the logical functions of judgements. They are built into logic, the very foundation of reason.

Other synthetic a priori judgements: mathematics (1+1=2); the world consists of objects that have properties and stand in relation to one another; substances persist through change; every event has a cause; everything relates to everyhting else.

Kant says that we can know categories and a priori principles independently of experience. But they apply only to the phenomena (appearances, objects as we perceive them) and not to the noumena (the things-in-themselves) about which we know nothing at all.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBMrOiAVMV4&t=8s

The Categories in the Critique of Pure Reason, and the pure concepts of the understanding. Bonevac

05/09/2021

1) How do we tell right from wrong?
2) What makes right actions right and wrong actions wrong?

Right actions are rational. Wrong acctions are irrational.

Why be moral? Beacause it's the rational thing to do.

Kant asks what is an UNQUALIFIED GOOD? And what makes it different from a QUALIFIED GOOD? (an unqualified good is one good that would be good no matter what circumstances or conditions, while a qualified good is good for someone or some purposes, under certain conditions (good if ... various things happen))

Kant thinks that A GOOD WILL is the only UNQUALIFIED GOOD for rational beings. ''Nothing can possibly be conceived in the world, or even out of it, which can be called a good, without qualification, except a good will.''

A good will is something that will act on the basis of universal considerations and that will not be influenced by subjective, particular determinations.

Evaluating actions: character -> motive -> intention -> action -> consequences. Starting from that there are 2 kinds of moral theory:

1. CONSEQUENTIALISM: the value of an act depends entirely on it's consequences.
2. DEONTOLOGISM: the value of an act depends on more than consequences.

A consequentialist will evaluate by what might be expected (or what was accomplished) after the act, while a deontologist judges by what comes before the act.

Kant is an extreme deontologist - he thinks that the moral quality of an act does not depend on consequence at all. He judges by the agent's intentions, the thing he calls MAXIM, the subjective principle of one's actions.

Imperatives can be HYPOTETICAL (something that depends on your circumstances or goals - do this if you want to accomplish that - ex: drink if you want to quench your thirst) or CATEGORICAL (Do this! Don't do that!)

A qualified good and a hypotetical imperative go hand in hand so there is only one categorical imperative possible: a good will. And here Kant says that ''One ought to have a good will.'' This means that one should always decide and act on the basis of universal considerations = act only on the basis of principles. ''Act only on the maxim that you can will to become an universal law.'' meaning that when someone does not know if he should do something than he should ask himself if what he plans to do can become a universal habbit. For example: should I steal something because I need it? If everyone would do that then there will be no such thig as possesions or properties and such a world is unimaginable. So no, it is not ok to steal. A person with moraluty doesn't do it. Kant also attracts attention that noone shoud make an exception from the maxim for themselves (ex: a thief knows that it is wrong to steal and most probably does not want that things should be stolen from him, but he makes an exception for himself when he steals from others).

Kant's example of perfect obligations: promises.
Can I borrow some money and promise that I will return them next week despite the fact that I know that I cannot repay them? Kant thinks that a person who appeals at his maxim will find that if everyone in this world would borrow money on fals promises, the promises will soon won't mean anything, so it would become impossible to actualy promise something, which makes promissing impossible, which makes false promissing impossible. So making false promises is unjust and completely wrong. Kant states that we have a perfect obligation to keep our promises.

Kant's examples on imperfect obligations: talent (to self) and charity (to others). Some people can chose to neglect their talents (like singing, painting etc) and to do other things. But a world where everyone talented decides to do something else is not a good and desirable one. When it comes to charity Kant thinks that a world where everyone thinks only for themselves and not help others is not possible, because from time to time anyone is going to need help from others.

Someone with good will acts with respect for the moral law. They act out of duty and do the right things for the right reasons specifically that it is the right reason and the right thing to do.

Treat others as rational beings - and since rational beings value their own rationality they must respect rationality whereve it occurs. ''You ought to respect moral agents and treat people as ends and never as meanings! Don't use people! Respect all rational beings!'' (categorical imperative)

We have to respect other persons right to make decisions and live how they chise and others have to respect our rights to live on our way.

Kant's practical test are important for autonomy and thus for dignity:
*if i make false promises about returning the money, then I use people.
** You are using yourself, your own life and rationality purely for enjoyment, if you decide to ignore a talent that you have.
*** If I don't help someone when he needs then I don't give full respect as a rational agent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISkoG8oCjTY&t=1s

Kant's Ethics, Introduction to Philosophy, Fall 2016

08/08/2021

Nietzsche's ubermensch (superhuman) is not necessarily physically strong or super smart, but psychologically superior. Superhumans are those free spirits that have mastery over their emotions, who take joy in simply existing and who create above all else.
A superhuman can create its own values, breacking the chains of society norm and culture, in which they were rased.
In his masterpiece ''Thus spoke Zarathustra'' Nietzsche lays out 3 metamorphoses that the individual must go through to become a superhuman: 1. CAMEL (embracing the greatest ideals that were created before you); 2. LION (freedom); 3. CHILD (creating new values and new beginngins).

1. A camel knees down waiting to be loaded. The camel represents a strong spirit, capable of taking heavy burdens and travelling long distances.
Not many people can undertake this journey and even fewer do. Most people preffer having a confortable life, without hard work, just following the standard template for living, the local societal rules and moral codes, breaking them only when is convenient for them, without having too much moral integrity.
A camel by contrast is different: it takes societal rules and moral codes very seriously, trying to become a person of good moral values, role models and persons of integrity and honor. Unfortunately most people will fail to reach this stage.
In Nietzsche's book the societal rules and moral codes - be it religious or humanistic values or ideeas like ''every man is created equal,'' ''you have to get a job,'' ''everybody has the right to an opinion'' etc - are represented by a golden dragon.
- to become a camel you must know your dragon (superego), you have to start carrying true values in life and you have to follow your dragon.
To discover your personal dragon make 2 lists: a list of everything you consider good and bad in life and a list of everyone you admire. Then try to find a common ground between them.
Althrough it has faith in its capabilities, the camel does not question the values and obligations imposed upon it. The camel is just a great player in the social matrix, following rules in an excellent way, winning quest after quest, but ultimately being a prisoner of the matrix, no matter how successfully it plas the game.
However some camels can wake up and understand the pointless tasks of their lives and how meaningless is to live according to someone else values. Thus they can start their own transformation, becoming lions and breaking free from the matrix.

2. Lion methamorphosis. This transformation is essential, otherwise the camel will be ruined by its own quest. The lion will try to find its own meaning and its own mission in life, independent of the environment. The lion will confront the dragon, because the dragon is the enemy of true self-mastery.
The lion is commited to its own freedom and expressing its individuality. But it won't be easy, because the dragon will say to the lion that all values are already created and that the lion doesen't need to create new ones. In fact, the dragon will say to the lion that it is forbidden to create new values.
This moment is very important. If the lion will say ''NO!'' that moment will be the start of its freedom, the moment when he will start living its life in his own terms.
Lions metamorphosis doesen't need to be a violent and sudden reaction. It can be a smart, calm and definitive one.
But while a lion can create freedom for itself it is still not capable of creating new values. And here the final metamorphosis comes into play: the child metamorphosis.

3. The spirit becomes the child, the creator. After complete destruction of imposed morals and values comes the creation of new values, new beginnings, with no restrictions, but just pure creativity in a state of flow.
The child forgets the past to create a new present and a brighter future, THe child continously creates new values and lives by them. In Nietzsche's view, a free spirit, being a part of this nature, is like a child at play, in a state of permanent creation.

To become a superhuman you need to get in touch with the child you were when you were playing, to love life beyond good and evil, creating your values and following your own rules of playing this game of life.
To reach the child phase you should not seek external answers and approvals. You need to find the joy of life now worrying about the societal traditions and moral codes. You need to be confident, afirmative and creative, in a permanent state of flux, forever changing and developing. You are the one who is chosing how to talk, behave and act in the world and you can change those decisions as you please.
The more people become superhumans, tapping into their unlimited potential, the more the world will come alive and flourish.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_HF9npeC3uc&t=1s

In this video we will understand how we can all become superhuman, according to the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. Friedrich Nietzsche lays out the three...

07/08/2021

1. Be an essentialist.
Nietzsche teaches us to focus on what is really important in our lives (family, lifetime dreams or goals, taking a world tour etc) and do only the things that represent who we really are. An essentialist is an individual with high self-esteem and high goals and priorities.
2. Be authenic.
''I looked for great human beings, but all I ever found were the apes of their ideals.''
In his book ''Twilight of the idols'' Nietzsche performs what he calls ''the philosophy with hammer'' knocking on the secret doors of human psichology, taking out all the idols and finding what is truly authentic and real. He discovered that most people followed a heard mentality, running away from their true selves. Consequently very few people are real, authentic and honest with themselves, because being authentic takes effor and courage.
3. Look for wisdom.
Wisdom is gathered from day to day experiences and is a state of being wise. A person should never stop reflecting on why they do somenthing and should seek only high quality informations, related to their goals in life and to who they really are.
4. Put your WILL into things.
Or at least put a meaning into them... We should also face the reality as it is, with good and bads.
Nietzsche disanced himself from untrue stories (religion), fake paradises (church and heaven), which in his mind uses faith in order to keep people in check and thus controlls them. Nietzsche tried to find a new type of freedom, which is a freedom from any repressive system, such as political or religious systems. He learned to put his will into things by creating his own values after a total reconsideration of all values, thus achieving an extraordinary level of mastery in philosophy.
5. Love your destiny (Amor fati)
Accept your destiny with open arms. Look at your existence with a deep understanding and a deep acceptance. Allow yourself to manifest in life your true free being. Follow your passions and live in accordance with your personality. Be free to feel good in your skin and make the best our of everything that like gives you.
The more we love who we are and our destiny the more aeare of life we become and the more fully we experience it.
Don't lament about your past (the mistakes you'ved made) or about your future. You need to accept that things are not always rosy and that the purpose of your life is not your happiness, but a constant process of self-discovery.
6. Never fear failure.
''You must be ready to burn yourself in your own flame; how could you rise anew if you have not first becamed ashes?''
Anybody who wants to achieve something extraordinary in life should not fear any quest. Fear should be only a stimulus for succes and self developement and not more. Keep going, learn from experiences and rise anew just like the phoenix, from its ashes.
7. Always speak your truth.
''All truths that are kept silent become poisonous.'' ''To be extraordinary is to have the courage to express your most extraordinary truths.''
Truths come from autenticity. And our interpretation of the world is the most solid truth we have. So we'd better be good at interpreting the world.
8. Stay connected to nature.
Nietzsche reminds us that all trully great thoughts are conceived while walking. Walks are a source of inspiration and allow our brains to think in a natural way. We must not forget to learn from our environment. Also it is beneficial to realise how small and insignificant our problems appear compared to the spectacle of nature.
9. Be pragmatic.
''If you have no acces to something from experience, you will have no ear for it.''
Finding solutions for human problems should be the fundamental responsability of any branch of knowledge. Being pragmatic means reaching solutions to your problems through testing (approach the problem from different ungles) and through first hand experience.
To have extraordinary achievings in life one needs to be pragmatic.
10. Be a dynamite.
''I am not a man. I am dynamite.''
Nietzsche philosophy focuses heavily on the ideea of ''the ubermensch'' or superhuman, a hypotetical extraordinary human being with psychologically superior qualities. In Nietzsche's view humans are just bridges to those extraordinary qualities.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lQqrB3cZ6k&t=3s

In this video we will talk about how to be extraordinary from the philosophy of Friedrich Nietzsche. Friedrich Nietzsche was one of the main precursors of ex...

07/08/2021

Existentialism is a philosophical movement that arose in 19th century Europe. Kierkegaard, Nietzsche and Dostoievsky are considered to be the founding fathers of the movement which became proeminent in the mid 20th century with the works of Kafka, Heidegger, Albert Camus, Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Jean-Paul Sartre.
Existentialist are concerned with the problem of living life as a human being. Why am I here? What does it mean to be a human? How should I live my life?
In adressing the human condition, existentialists tend to vehemently reject systems or theories that attempt to answer questions regarding the meaning and purpose of the human life in an definitive and absolute manner. Like religion, for example. Systems like Christianity have been very attractive throughout history as they have largely removed the massive burden one would have to face when trying to create meaning and purpose for themselves in a unique and personal manner.
The reason that existentialist are largely in favor of individuals finding answers to life problems on their own is because they believe that adherence to systems that spouse absolute and definitive answers (like religion) is detrimental to one's developement into an authentic and free human being. Existentialists think that we should have a human perspective of our existence and not a divine one.
Divine perspective vs Human perspective
- the Divine perspective comes with a belief in immortality (life after death - Heaven).
Some existentialists suggest that it is essential for humans to face up our temporal existence and our mortality because the shock of such a realization can give humans the strenght to stop living in conformity with the masses and instead take control of their own lives and live by the standards and values that they create/chose.
''Existence precedes essence'' - JP Sartre
*essence (definition by Aristotle): every independent thing (be it a peson or a rock or a tree) has an essence = properties and characteristics required for the thing to be what it is. For example, a grain of wheat has the essence of becoming an ear of wheat; an acorn has the essence of becoming an oak tree; a human has the essence to act in full accordance with reason.
Thise whi see humans as being designed by God also hold that our essence precedes our existence.
Sartre on the other hand saw the situation of humans in the opposite light: in Sartre's mind humans are fundamentally different from things (cars, watches etc) because for things of this type it is obvious that their essence precedes their existence, as they were designed with a predetermined function.
Sartre thinks that humans are not designed by God with predetermined functions/goals. Rather he thinks that we come into this world lacking a predetermined essence. However, our ability to make free choices, gives us the chance to sculpt an unique essence for ourselves during the course of our lifetime.
Existentialism is not the same thing as nihilism and nihilism is not a necessary characteristic of existentialism. Nihilists thing that there is no meaning or purpose in life and that people cannot create their own personal meaning (a view not shared by existentialists).
Friedrich Nietzsche, who say nihilism as a terrible disease, formulated the ideea of becoming who you are, which is aimed at helping individuals overcome the affliction. This path of creating your own meaning, purpose and values is not simple, as Nietzsche warns the people who chose to take such a road: ''Injustice and filth they throw after the lonely one: but, my brother, if you want to be a star, you must not shine less for them because of that. And beware of the good and the just! They like to crucify those who invent their own virtues for themselves - they hate the lonely one.''

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilg7PiDD8yY&t=161s

Become a Supporting Member and get access to exclusive videos: https://academyofideas.com/members/========Recommended Readings on Existentialism:Existentiali...

05/04/2021

Why does evil exist? If God is entirely good and God created the universe it's hard to see where the evil might have came from.
Did God create evil? Does evil exist as a supernatural entity over which God does not have power or control? How can we explain the evil that exists in the universe?

Is evil the consequence of us having free will (crimes, wars, injustice etc) and of the original sin (tornados, earthquakes, wild fires, death etc)?

Augustine has a problem with this view. He asks if evil is our fault and the consequence of the original sin, why did God made us this way? Why would God create us with the capacity to sin (sin seems all arround us) and with a tendency to sin? Why would God make us like that?

He has another answer: God is indeed good and everything that he created is good (evil is the absence of good); However it is impossible for God to create a perfect world. Why? Because God is the perfect being and there can be only one perfect being. There can't be 2 beings that are omnipotent. There can't be more than one perfect being. He concludes that if God is going to create then He will create imperfect beings.

And there's more: an imperfect universe, a universe where adversity, sufferance or difficulties are present is an interesting universe, the same way a good book or a good movie is interesting only when it has action, conflict, adversity overcome etc. A universe in which we have to suffer, struggle, endure pain and overcome adversity becomes a better universe than one where we simply relax and have everything given to us.

God has created the best possible universe, not the best life possible for you or for me. The ultimate goal is not human happiness or tranquility. It is believing and resting in Him and having a comunion with Him. That's our highest good and our function. We've had to have a universe that promotes that.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuDYTwp9sL0

Augustine on the Problem of Evil, in Books 5–9 of the Confessions and in the Enchiridion. Bonevac

05/04/2021

1. Find yourself in solitude
''We can only be entirely ourselves as long as we are alone. Therefore whoever does not love solitude (≠loneliness) also does not love freedom, for only when we are alone are we free.''
The capacity to be alone is one of the most distinctive marks of a high intellectual being. Sociability has an inverse relationship with the intellectual capacity of someone. The more sociable we are, the less we can invest in developing our intellectual capacity. The less sociable we are, the more time we have to reflect on the meaning of our existence, on who we realy are and our goals in life.

2. Remove suffering to be happy
Schopenhauer didn't link happiness with feelings of joy, pleasure and ecstasy, which he saw merely as ways to escape frome boredom and negativity, but rather he saw in happiness the absence of suffering in the first place.
In order to be happy we need to remember the happy times we had in life, to evaluate where we are now, what kind of suffering we're experiencing at that moment and make the effort to remove that sufferance. We need to track our happy moments and try to relive them as much as possible.

3. Understand your subsconscious mind
''Man can do what he wills, but he cannot will what he wills.''
Will is the basis on which Schopenhauer's philosophy as a whole was built. In his masterpiece ''The world as will and representation'' he presents the concept of will as a psychological irrational force that automatically controls our minds and actions.

4. Limit your expectations
''The safest way of not being very miserable is to not expect to be very happy.''
Schopenhauer argues that a life with less suffering is much better than a life with the greatest joy. Instead of fighting to acquire or experience things, to make us happy for a moment, we should focus on minimizing the pain.
We need to work on how we see the world and how we see ourselves, because the way we see ourselves and the world is oftentimes the rood of our unhappiness.
We need to be more realistic about our qualities and skills, we need to put our professional goals on a more realistic scale. Also we need to be more compassionate towards other people, have fewer expectations from our partner and stop demanding other people be perfect.
To be happy, peaceful and healthy is much more important than to be famous, adored or having a partner as a trophy to show off. We need to learn to enjoy life as it is.

5. Be compassionate
''Compassion is the basis of morality.''
We need to find meaning in this world and one of the most effective ways is to learn to be compassionate towards other human beings.
We should not pursue our happiness at the cost of other people: ''injure no one. help everyone as much as you can.''

6. Avoid boredom
The 2 foes of human happiness are pain and boredom.
Boredom is the second enemy of living a happy life and is also preventing us from having a fulfiled life.
As soon as we remove pain from our life, we will usually have boredom taking its place and not pleasure.
We are perpetually in the pursuit of trying to capture what we desire, need or lack and once we succed in obtaining our goal we realise it does not give us the satisfaction or the happiness we anticipated. And off we go again, pursuing something else to make us happy, only to find ourselves back to the very boredom we were trying to avoid.
In order to avoid this from happening Schopenhauer recommends us to concentrate less on the outside world and more on the inside. Only by ignoring the shiny objects of external world we will be able to escape from oscilating around the pain-boredom axis. We should focus on our inner world and on our close relationships and not on the external world of possesions, success or fame.

7. Make room for art
Art is one great way to temporarily escape from the pain-boredom cycle and from our ordinary lives. Through art we can liberate ourselves from the ordinary desires and needs who keep us in pain or boredom. Art has the quality to transcend reality and to connect us with the real spiritual essence of this world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cyq02jZV0g

In this video we will be talking about 7 Life Lessons From Arthur Schopenhauer. Arthur Schopenhauer is considered to be one of the greatest philosophers and ...

Reflections On Philosophy

17/09/2021

17/09/2021

11/09/2021

08/09/2021

05/09/2021

08/08/2021

07/08/2021

07/08/2021

05/04/2021

05/04/2021

Address

Website

Alerts

Shortcuts

Share