Video

With social media it only appears to be unlimited while it totally limits the minds capacity to operate and to relate.

Did he say the lizards takng control? What was the last line?

Great vid! I'm curious about postmodern philosophy more now! Can you recommend some books to read?

The irony here is that the panopticon silences discourse and is for liberal fascism. So conservative panopticon is bad but liberal panopticon is good, according to identity politics. Brave new world indeed.

I really enjoyed this, thank you for putting it out there ❤

Cant wait for the critique of Marx.

" ALL PSYCHOLOGISTS are so-called psychologists - because the real psychology does not exist yet, because man is still not known. Psychology is just a groping. It is still not a science; it is just in a very primary stage. So every psychologist is a so-called psychologist because psychology is a so-called psychology. The real psychology is yet to be born. But the so-called psychology is paving the way for it, so it is valuable. When I say it is so-called psychology, I am not condemning it. It is just like alchemy preceded chemistry and astrology preceded astronomy. This so-called psychology is preceding, is a requirement, for the real psychology to be born. Just as alchemists are no longer remembered, forgotten, you cannot even mention their names, sooner or later Freud and Jung and Adler will be forgotten the same way - they are alchemists of the inner world. Sooner or later, you will be surprised, a few other names will become more important which are already there but known only to a few people. For example, Gurdjieff will become more important than Freud in the coming century - because he has tried to give a few keys for a real, objective psychology. Ouspensky’s name will become more important than Jung’s. And a few completely unknown names will bubble up into prominence. But Freud, Jung and Adler have done a great service. They have paved the way. Without alchemy chemistry would not have been born. It is a must - but it is so-called. We call it psychology because nothing else exists, but it is not yet real. It simply watches human beings from the lowest rung of the ladder. You go to a pond; you see a lotus - the lotus comes out of dirty mud. The modern psychology reduces the lotus to the dirty mud: it says the lotus is nothing but the dirty mud. It is right in a way, and yet absolutely wrong. Right in a way because the lotus needs the dirty mud; it comes out of the dirty mud. But to reduce it back to the dirty mud is not right. The real psychology, if you ask a Buddha, or you ask a Patanjali, who are the pioneers of a real psychology - which has not yet settled, which has not yet found its place in the human consciousness, which is still hovering around, seeking, searching for a nest - they will say that rather than reduce the lotus to the dirty mud, why not raise the value of dirty mud to the lotus itself? Why say that the lotus comes out of the dirty mud? Why not say that the dirty mud carries a lotus within itself? that the dirty mud is an abode of the lotus, a temple? Why not raise the value of the dirty mud? And that seems to be better, more objective. The higher should never be explained by the lower. The lower cannot explain the higher, but the higher can explain the lower. Watch… Darwin says man comes from the monkeys, so he is nothing but a monkey. Freud says art comes out of sexuality, so it is nothing but sexuality; meditation, religion, God are nothing but frustrations, repressions, complexes. Then religion looks like a mass neurosis. Darwin or Freud, they reduce the higher to the lower - mm? But then go on the whole way. From where do the monkeys come? Then reduce them back, further back, go on, go on… finally you will come to matter. Then everything is reduced to matter. Then even Darwin is reduced to matter. You reduce religion to repressed sexuality, then how will you treat Freud himself? Then what is psychology? Then that too is reduced…If religion is repressed sexuality, art is repressed sexuality, science is repressed sexuality, then what is psychology? What are Freud, Jung and Adler? Then you go on reducing backwards, and finally nothing is left - only matter. But everything comes out of this matter! - that means everything is implied in matter; then matter is no more material; then matter carries gods hidden behind it… because a Buddha is born, a lotus flowers. In the East we have a totally different attitude about psychology, and the attitude is: Always explain the lower by the higher. We say that sex is nothing but the lowest rung of samadhi, sex is nothing but the lowest rung of your superconsciousness. Then the whole view changes. Then there is a possibility to grow. The modern psychology leaves no possibility for growth. It reduces everything to dirt - and there is no possibility to grow. In fact, there is no point in growing because all is going to be just repressed sexuality. If you listen to the modern psychologists, their definition of the normal man makes life worthless. Einstein is abnormal, because a normal man never bothers about the mathematics of the world - why should he bother? Michelangelo is abnormal; he must have some psychological problem - that’s why he becomes so imaginative. Van Gogh is abnormal. Buddha, Jesus, Krishna - all are in some way neurotic. They are not normal: abnormal. They are all condemned. Then who is normal? The man who only lives in unconsciousness is normal: he gets up early in the morning, goes to the marketplace, earns his living, gives birth to children, makes a house - goes on moving in a routine for seventy years, then dies. This is the normal man. Not creative, not innovative, not original in any way; has nothing to contribute - no art, no science, no religion. Just think about a really normal world according to Freud: it will be the most boring world possible. There will be no music because it is repressed sexuality. There will be no poetry because it is just fantasy. There will be no science, because to be a scientist is just nothing but a deep instinct of voyeurism. If you remain clean, you like a shower, you use beautiful clothes, then it is exhibitionism. Then everything is condemned. Then everything is suspected and doubted. Then only animals are normal - and if man is to be normal he has to just live an animal life. Then you cannot soar high. Then the whole sky is taken away from you, and you live caged in your small cages of normal routine life. A world of normal people according to Freud is going to be worse than hell. Hell at least must be interesting! The world is beautiful because people soar high - because there are Buddhas and Michelangelos and Van Goghs and Picassos; musicians and dancers and philosophers, and psychologists and poets and painters. The world is beautiful because not all are normal - a few people try to be abnormal, a few people try to go beyond the norm, beyond the ordinary. And they try to raise themselves a little higher, to see more, to perceive more, to Live more. People who are not satisfied with a dead, routine life, people who are adventurous, people who take risks, people who dare, and people who go into the unknown and the unfamiliar…"

Philosophy is fiction. And has no usefulness.

I don't know why someone might think--as a comment says above--that the best eras of Philosophy are long past. No, this audio presentation on Deleuze's book informs us that Philosophy must create new concepts in every era to deal with new human concerns and problems.

Very interesting video. Clarified my ideas about what Philosophy does.

i liked....i subscribed....my feedback: work on the breathing and room noise....however....really great vid!

Great video and I look forward to the follow ups. Interestingly, I was recently considering something which I believe is related to some of the threads of thinking you touch upon here. The whole "quantified self" movement and self monitoring and tracking apps and devices that are brandished as ways to optimize oneself into some peak performing, post modern, neoliberal, commodified individual is a fascinating phenomenon to me. Having read Taylor's Principles of Scientific Management (1911), which is arguably the birth of a highly structured and rationalized system of monitoring human labor for optimizing labor efficiency, I can't help but think that this modern quantified-self/self-optimization movement is in a way a postmodern evolution of Taylor's modernist treatise. Monitoring for optimized output is no longer a matter of external pressure, but one of self monitoring and and the exertion of control from within. This is essentially, the dreams of the likes of Taylor taken to their heights. Obviously, there is much to consider in terms of the political, social, and cultural ramifications of this shift. Anyway, thanks for the thought provoking video.

Great video! I’d really appreciate subtitles as I had difficulty understanding you at times.

Actually tearing up rn

You prefer the first anime from Brotherhood. You are the first person I hear saying that. I am currius to hear your take.

great video keep it up ! -topics concerning Foucault are difficult to listen to given his moral issues, alleged child r*pe and advocating for decriminalizing the age of consent in France. I do agree work ppl do and their controversial ideas can be separated its hard to appreciate his thoughts when he clearly has very little concern for defenseless children...

The topics of your videos are fantastic, but I always have a hard time to hear you clearly, the volume is always low.

Nice video 👏

Can you pls make a video about atoms, and elements pls. It would be cool and is a nice video idea. Every other video about atoms, to me, doesn't explain it well.

if there ever was a grand age of philosophy it is certainly dead

deleuze video? lets go

I think Deleuze would probably make a really good chef

Nah. Universal truth is still important. Especially now in an age where people can't even agree on basic facts.

Subscribed. It always seems to me that its a very easy trap to fall into of simply trying to carve out concepts, especially philosophically tinted ones, via negation, not this and not that and so on. Whereas D & G subtly undermine and augment this demand and perhaps necessary educational method with further powers of addition and combination, and all the other flavours of the/a/any creative act. And more power to them... And by corollary, ourselves. 🧐🗣️🤾🦸🕺

Great video and well structured. The music is a little too loud but overall very informative, I think it deserves way more views.

I'd like to spank you personally for making these insane ideas more comprehensible.

"I am very anti-philosophic and I avoid philosophy because it is playing with shadows, thoughts, speculation. And you can go on playing infinitely, ad infinitum, ad nauseam; there is no end to it. One word creates another word, one theory creates another theory, and you can go on and on and on. In five thousand years much philosophy has existed in the world, and to no purpose at all. "But there are people who have the philosophic attitude. And if you are one of them, please drop it; otherwise you and your energy will be lost in a desert.” “I am not teaching philosophy here because I am teaching no-mind. And if you become a no-mind all philosophy disappears: Christian, Hindu, Mohammedan, Buddhist - all philosophies disappear; Hegelian, Kantian, Russellian - all philosophies disappear. If the mind disappears, where can the philosophy exist? Where can it grow? Mind is the breeding ground of philosophy. "Let the mind disappear. And the beauty is, when there is no mind and nobody to philosophize and nothing to philosophize about, one comes to know. Philosophy is the blind man’s effort. It is said: Philosophy is a blind man in a dark room on a dark night, searching for a black cat which is not there….” “I am not a philosopher. The philosopher thinks about things. It is a mind approach. My approach is a no-mind approach. It is just the very opposite of philosophizing. It is not thinking about things, ideas, but seeing with a clarity which comes when you put your mind aside, when you see through silence, not through logic. Seeing is not thinking. “The sun rises there; if you think about it you miss it, because while you are thinking about it, you are going away from it. In thinking you can move miles away; and thoughts go faster than anything possible. If you are seeing the sunrise then one thing has to be certain, that you are not thinking about it. Only then can you see it. “Thinking becomes a veil on the eyes. It gives its own color, its own idea to the reality. It does not allow reality to reach you, it imposes itself upon reality; it is a deviation from reality. Hence no philosopher has ever been able to know the truth. “All the philosophers have been thinking about the truth. But thinking about the truth is an impossibility. Either you know it, or you don't. If you know it, there is no need to think about it. If you don't, then how can you think about it? “A philosopher thinking about truth is just like a blind man thinking about light. If you have eyes, you don't think about light, you see it. Seeing is a totally different process; it is a byproduct of meditation. “Hence I would not like my way of life to be ever called a philosophy, because it has nothing to do with philosophy. You can call it philosia. The word ‘philo’ means love; ‘sophy’ means wisdom, knowledge - love for knowledge. In philosia, ‘philo’ means the same love, and ‘sia’ means seeing: love, not for knowledge but for being - not for wisdom, but for experiencing.” Philosophy Is the Worst Wastage of Human Intelligence that Is Possible “I am not a philosopher. The philosopher thinks about the truth. His approach is rational. Reason is his instrument, and here just the opposite is the case. I am an irrational man. And the people who have gathered around me - around the world - the appeal to them is my irrationality, because reason has failed so utterly. For three thousand years in the West, ten thousand years in the East, philosophers have been struggling to find the truth, and not a single philosopher has been able to find it. “The way of philosophy does not go with truth at all. It is just rational gymnastics. So one philosopher can argue against another philosopher, and they go on arguing for centuries, but they have not come to agreement on a single point. Philosophy is the worst wastage of human intelligence that is possible. When I say I am not a philosopher, I simply mean that my approach towards reality is not through the head, it is through the heart. “Philosophy has not reached to any conclusion and it will never reach - it is an exercise in utter futility. It is a good game if you want to play an intellectual game, an intellectual gymnastics; it is hair splitting. “But I am not interested in it at all - and I know it from the inside: I have been a student of philosophy and a professor of philosophy too. I know it as an insider that the most useless activity in the world is philosophy, the most uncreative, the most pretentious - but very ego-fulfilling, gives you great ideas of knowledgeability without making you wise at all.”

Great vid But please... turn off the music. It So annoying. Thanks

Nice video

📩🦷👀🦾🧑‍💻⚡🌅🔄🤫⚠️

Great video my friend…thank you!

Well done.

Brilliant insights on " What is philosophy ? " The art of concepts Wish everybody knew it, like this . Million thanks to you and all philosophical thinkers and knowledge translators 🙏

Väl sagt landsgranne. Nu känner jag allt🙃

It’s not telling the truth either.

Great video …as someone who loves philosophy and has considered making content as well. Your narration and editing is great, but getting a better mic might help in the future. Unfortunately there’s a high pitched ringing throughout as well as a lot of noise.

Awesome video! I love the cadence and eloquence of your voice. Couldn’t help but subscribing. Look forward to your future topics!!

Good video, I think this video sort of reminds me of ooold school videos and such idk if that's the nice you're targetting Maybe you could start by having some sort of introduction and follow-able texts on screen? Kane B's channel might be up your alley. Overall good video though

Wonderful video! I like your accent too! Where are you from?

Great video by any standard, but especially by the standards of philosophy tube

They actually are neo marxists

I certainly agree that scientism is invalid. I find this challenging and I have never heard of this guy. Good overview but hard to follow and the speaker’s voice is hard for me to understand as well.

These videos are good enough !

Great job !

10:20. Ben Shapiro got roasted about his hot take on the song W.A.P. I think because this sort of a popculture book is why she mentioned it.

Thank you so much for making this wonderful video! I really enjoyed. "... to provide new alternative responses to the problems ... philosophy must change with them ... create concepts for problems that necessarily change ... the value of the creative act ... a call to embrace creativity and explore new possibilities ... " :)

Succinct, informative and engaging. Subscribed.

quitec annoying and distracting BG music which spoils the content, use subtle BG or even better no BG please

This is such an interesting topic. I never knew much about Taoism, until I watched the video. As a spiritual, I admire Eastern philosophies, like the Yin and Yang