The Social Context of Philosophy with Bryan Magee (1977)
Vložit
- čas přidán 17. 09. 2017
- World-renowned author and professor Bryan Magee and London School of Economics professor Ernest Gellner discuss contemporary philosophy, its historical and social backgrounds, and its role in modern society. Gellner examines the radical expansion of scientific knowledge and its dehumanizing effect on society as expressed by sociologist Max Weber. Marxism’s messianic expectation is blamed for its failure to reconstruct society. Gellner dismisses today’s philosophy of relativism as unworkable.
Join us on Patreon! / manufacturingintellect
Donate Crypto! commerce.coinbase.com/checkou...
Share this video!
This is from the series Modern Philosophy.
Watch the other episodes here:
Introduction to Philosophy with Isaiah Berlin: • Isaiah Berlin intervie...
Herbert Marcuse interview: • Herbert Marcuse interv...
Heidegger and Existentialism: • Heidegger and Existent...
Wittgenstein's Philosophy: • The Philosophy of Witt...
Logical Positivism: • Logical Positivism wit...
Linguistic Philosophy: • Linguistic Philosophy ...
Willard Van Orman Quine interview: • Willard Van Orman Quin...
Philosophy of Language with John Searle: • John Searle interview ...
Noam Chomsky interview: • Noam Chomsky interview...
Philosophy of Science: • The Philosophy of Scie...
Philosophy and Politics: • Philosophy and Politic...
Philosophy and Literature with Iris Murdoch: • Philosophy and Literat...
The Social Context of Philosophy: • The Social Context of ... - Zábava
![My Grandfather Met Napoleon: Bertrand Russell Interview 1952 - Enhanced Video & Audio [60 fps]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4OXtO92x5KA/mqdefault.jpg)
![My Grandfather Met Napoleon: Bertrand Russell Interview 1952 - Enhanced Video & Audio [60 fps]](/img/tr.png)
Join us on Patreon! www.patreon.com/ManufacturingIntellect
Donate Crypto! commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/868d67d2-1628-44a8-b8dc-8f9616d62259
Share this video!
The gentleman is the kind of professor I would listen all day. One can easily notice he is got a brilliant mind!
This is the best video I have ever stumbled upon on the CZcams. Always wondered what Gellner looked and sounded in person. Thank you so much for uploading this!
Excellent. Very thought provoking. Ernest Gellners very intelligent assessment. Thank you.
I know I am kinda off topic but does anyone know a good website to watch newly released tv shows online?
This was awesome! My eyes have been opened and much has been gleaned! Tku for sharing🥳🤓🎓
Thank you!
This was so good
Provocative! Worth further discussion
Thanks mate
Viciously intelligent
Perhaps someone can help me understand Gellner regarding his critique of the later Wittgenstein, Magee emphasized this very point later on in the interview b/c I think, like me, he is not sure how Gellner‘s critique applies to the later Wittgenstein, ie language as a game picture. Gellner clearly says that Wittgenstein’s later view goes to far, which I have always instinctively agreed with-actually my view is there is not that big a break between the Two Wittgensteins in the first place, but I‘m convinced that Gellner really misses this question or thinks like I do that Wittgenstein I and II are inadequate for the same reason.
What I take from this discussion, whithin my limited understanding of Philosophy as the most basic method for logical reasoning; is that how to come up with a universal and almost indisputable body of knowledge by which humanity can be brought together in a common view of how we should behave and act for the sake of the continuation and preservation of humanity. As the debaters here have stated, science once regarded as the unquestionable method by which we could achieve that, has over time, and since it became evident that science can’t provide answers for absolutely every problem arising from the very existence of humans as individuals, and collectively as members of society. Personally, I see humanity destine to disappear, whether as a result of our own self destruction, and the inevitable destruction of the environment we so much depend for to actually exist. Even if humanity were more or less successful in something how preserve its existence without destroying the planet, it would and it must without doubt evolve into something very different from what we are today. We are doomed to perish with the planet! We came out of it and by virtue of set of conditions that made our existence possible. Had any of those conditions been different than they are and we would not be here at all.
Listened to this very intently. Gellner is one of those intellectuals who speaks very eloquently and gives imposing answers, but gives answers that somehow evade the questions (e.g. the problem of relativism). So, it's a frustrating exercise to listen and gleen anything of substance from him - at least here.
I agree completely about his answers. Wouldnt call him eloquent, just opaque. He's an obscurantist.
Couldn't disagree with you more. And, incidentally, it's "glean", not "gleen".
@@SuperMookles Well, it's a free country. As for "gleen," I was using the original French use of the term. But feel free to use your English version.
Gellner is a bright dude.
Any one know what Gellner thought of the Frankfurt School?
there are some comments about the Frankfurt School in his short and entertaining book 'Postmodernism, Reason and Religion'
I don't even know what he thinks about the link between the "social context" and philosophy, other than a kind of "history of ideas" where the different "traditions" are explored. But this is because Magee (whom I admire for this series of interviews) does a very good job in maintaining history and philosophy divided... 30 minutes into the interview, anyway.
Oh look Teller became a philosopher, I hope he does a magic trick.
🤣🤣
Funky shirt and tie combo
:)
Te amo profe de filosofía pero no te voy a decir quién soy 🥺👄🥺
😷👌👏👏👏👏👏
Critical examination of marxism (largely be marxists) has already corrected the errors in marxism that gellner identifies; it is dangerous to claim that any analytical approach is sufficiently explanatory, hence why self-criticism is an essential, and necessary, component of successful marxist thinking..
but don't disregard the fact that he is a "professional philosopher", from which it axiomatically follows that he hates serious thoughts, active engagement, and earnest devotion..
At 1' 00": Absolute bollocks. Before Descartes, Hobbes' philosophy was fundamentally un-Christian
What's up with Gellner's way of speaking?!
Okay, here's the deal: Gellner is (mainly) a native German speaker. So, it helped me a lot to attune my ears to expecting a German speaker who acquired an Oxbridge accent :)
I have the impression that at the time of this interview, he had a moderate speech impediment (or maybe just a habitual way of speaking) that expressed itself in repetition of words as he tried to formulate answers to questions or to state ideas. I also think that he wasn't very articulate in this setting (a back-and-forth dialog requiring on-the-spot elaboration of ideas), and probably would make more sense if given more time to respond (which most of us can relate to).
The son of Czech Jewish parents. born in Paris, having mostly spoken German and Czech until at the age of 13 he took off from Prag to London to escape the Nazi invasion, I think he has plenty of good excuses to have a 'foreign' accent. Also, very intelligent people have a mind that runs so fast that the mouth cannot follow. Elon Musk is like that as well.
Far better than listening to Isaiah Berlin..
I'm even more troubled by his robotic lack of facial expressions while talking than by his way of speaking.
the blithering take on Marx here is just another example of well spoken and ostensibly intelligent academics being appallingly nonsensical
Marx was the first spoiled rotten hippie--a utopian adolescent fool
Hi Mahmoud - Marx himself said he was not a "Marxist". Why?
@@existentialistsociety8453Because the ppl of his era were coming to wild conclusions about his work and playing the Scholastic game of “rigor” and “argument” rather than trying to stay embedded in the concrete.
The language the guest uses is abstract jargon, unsuitable for television audience.
The manufacturing intelligent, is basic for, power, supremacy and the roll of the law of the capital .... but the intellect is not for the masses, we the middle class .. have... smart people to....or not. 🫵👽