Rene Descartes - The Four Rules of Method (Discourse on Method, pt. 2) - Philosophy Core Concepts
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 07. 2024
- Enroll in the 8-Week Rene Descartes' Meditations, Objections, & Replies class for $249.00 - reasonio.teachable.com/p/rene...
This is a video in my new Core Concepts series -- designed to provide students and lifelong learners a brief discussion focused on one main concept from a classic philosophical text and thinker.
This Core Concept video focuses on Rene Descartes' Discourse on Method, looking specifically at the Four Rules of Method Descartes sets out in part 2 of that work.
Gregory B. Sadler is the president and co-founder of ReasonIO. The content of this video is provided here as part of ReasonIO's mission of putting philosophy into practice -- making complex philosophical texts and thinkers accessible for students and lifelong learners. If you'd like to make a contribution to help fund Dr. Sadler's ongoing educational projects, you can click here: www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
Reminds me of my first algebra class. The teacher never mentioned Descartes, but told us to start with our "known's" and use them to solve for the "unknown's". Break each problem down into its smallest parts and solve the little problems first and use them to solve the big one. Then check your work and review your procedure. Ben Franklin in his "Autobiography" seemed to have used this procedure to improve his behavior. He even kept a chart of his weekly progress in eliminating bad habits. The first big step was to recognize he was the one offending people. Not many people can do that.
I'm glad they've been helpful for you -- and Yes, I typically answer most comments
All of your explanations are amazing and so helpful. Thank you!!
Glad to read it
thank you very much! Your lectures are really clear and understandable. it helped me a lot:) I am preparing for an exam and now I think I know more.
thank you so much for uploading this! it was super helpful.
+Tiffany Lam You're welcome!
Thanks helped me a ton!
+Garrett Lansdown Glad it was helpful
Glad they helped
Thanks a lot for the video/s man, you have helped me a lot.
Good to read!
thank you very much the video helped me a lot !
Glad to read it - you're welcome!
Very helpful pops :)
I read that book of Bloom back as an undegrad, about two decades ago.
I thought -- and still think -- Bloom got some things right in the work, but overplayed his hand on a number of others. Maybe I'll do a video on it sometime down the line
I'm going to leave that topic, for the time being, to you to investigate, since you already seem to have some ideas formed about it. I'm sure you'll be able to track something down, if you start reading through Ancient philosophy sources.
I've got plenty of other work to attend to, and quite frankly, while I provide these videos for free, I don't generally do tutoring or other people's research for free. Good luck with your project about Aristotle, Plato, and their relationship
So, three questions there:
1) I have no videos on non-western thought at present
2) One can be a conservative without being interested in Great Books -- I've firsthand experience of that. One can be interested in Great Books without being a conservative -- I fit that. And rejecting multi-culturalism doesn't equate to endorsing a Great Books curriculum
3) I don't think particularly highly of Bloom myself. He's someone to take account of in Plato scholarship -- one of many
How it differs from First Principle? Can anyone help? Thanks
czcams.com/video/OV_T8Emyf6I/video.html
new Core Concept video, on a key idea of one of the fathers of modern philosophy. . well, even modernity itself
Thanks for the Great video, prof.Sadler.
You're welcome! Glad you liked it
Impressive. Just an aside. Rene Descartes' first principle is a legal standard of proof (SOP) in U.S. civil cases, i.e., "clear and convincing (distinct) evidence," a much more rigorous and exacting SOP than the mere "preponderance (>50%) of evidence."
"Convincing" is definitely not equivalent to "distinct". So, no
Yes, I've seen some of his vids.
Relativism, multiculturalism, and the left in general are all in his crosshairs, that's true.
I'd say that you're partly right that the main people who endorse great books model education tend to be conservatives -- though only certain sorts of conservatives (many people who fit that designation are not really interested in Great Books at all). There's others, like myself, who aren't very well-described as conservatives, but who are for Great Books
This is how laboratory research works. Science has this veneer to provide new solutions to the unknown but it's just a method to revisit past observations.
Well, I suppose "past" relative to when theorization about those observations takes place. But there is some prospective work as well, though, right?
It's not so much theoretical but retracing your steps. Or like making a model of experience that can substitute for the original. Like experiencing something while making a model of it in parallel. Or like a representation.
Like I agree that science does not address that question. But it's basically how Descartes is billed here. If someone tries to make sense of their findings beyond just documenting their method they are practicing philosophy without a license. Scientists can be hopelessly blind to this or actually acutely aware with numerous frustrations they can talk about to death.
Scientists love doubt though or asking, "how are you so sure?" or "Why do you think that?" But they don't see it as a home away from home like Descartes. They don't take it like Descartes and then use it to illustrate the self or the intellect that brings things together. Like a doubt that isn't conscious. But conserving his hyper-awareness that he might be deceived. Kind of neurotic and destructive at times.
Nice! I don't think methheads really have any universal rules, though, do they?
Well, here's some responses:
You're missing my point by going back to Saint John's over and over. Saint John's is only one of hundreds of colleges and universities. And, see the comment about the false dichotomy between Great Books and multiculturalism.
As to Bloom, you asked, I answered. If you want to think he's great, go on ahead. And if you want to take those endorsements as meaningful, go on ahead.
Plato doesn't mention Aristotle. Other sources give us that information