There are few things from my undergraduate education that can hold a candle to this. It's difficult for me to fully express how thankful I am for this series of lectures.
Scored your book "About Philosophy" Seventh Edition today, sign me up Dude! Subscribed. If you care enough to do this at over 80 years of age, when you really don't have to, I sure as hell will listen to you!! You are important.
Thank you so much for these lectures. I am so grateful that you are willing to spend your time spreading knowledge for anyone to see, regardless of their economic status. You're a credit to humans. :)
Thanks for these lovely lectures as well as your earlier series on Kant's critique of pure reason. I'm not a bit embarrassed to admit that they helped me greatly on my field exams. These lectures and your blog are inspiring.
this is an excellent project. i am presently studying your kant lessons and do look forward to entering the very important terrain you treat here. wonderful is your selection of books and i thank you bringing the credibility of kant to that i missed in my studies years ago.
Thank you, Robert Wolff, for these lecture(s): the ideas you engage with are stimulating and challenging. I regularly read your blog but these lectures, so easily accessible, will provide me with a banquet for thought ! Andy
So, for anyone seeing this, I want to ask the most obvious question probably answerred thousands of times in thousands of different places: is thinking about thinking possible? How can this have self-referring consistency? How can you refute a claim that critique of ideology is an ideology? I am reading Ideology and Utopia right now, so I may find the claim valid, but I would love it if someone would try to explain it still.
Based on the central thesis of the necessitation of context as a precursor to understanding, would it then follow that Mannheim does not believe in universal truths, or axioms at all? It would seem common sense that if one were to develop an ideological critique for the benefit of the laymen and women that it should be steeped in or atleast based upon some franework of universality. Elsewise no distinct culutre or ethnic group would be privy to the scope of information being presented. If you do not believe in axioms and their derivations then it would stand to reason that everything becomes subjective and experiential... which is eerily similar to the postmodern argument. I always appreciate listening to both sides of an argument and I have enjoyed this and will continue to do so, yet it seems to me that this ideological critique is ideologically driven. The irony! In any case I always appreciate academics posting their material, cheers for that Professor!
Professor... please on the next lecture, "outline what you are going to talk about in the description section." I follow a few professors lectures every month on youtube and would like to share it ... without a well defined description, it will not have much impact on the share to build an audience. Thank you so much! Great lecture. - Marty
Dr. Wolf, I'm a philosophy undergrad major at UNC, and I immensely enjoy these lectures. Regarding the example of the sentiment "Capitalism is the most productive economic system known to man," You say this is not ideological per se in virtue of it being factually true, but does it not conceal an ideological presumption that "productivity" is an ideal criterion of an economic system? Is that presumption not inextricably tied to capitalist ideology? It seems to me that, if this is true, then it satisfies the 2nd pillar of the working definition of ideology you illustrate and use in your analysis. I'm splitting hairs really, but as radical leftist I can't let capitalism escape this small trifle.
mediocre stuff, a bunch of sheep seem super thrilled about this guy though, makes me sad at how one sided these people must think everyone in here needs to broaden their ideological focus thats for sure... but i do like this guy to bounce off and rebuttle other thinkers I respect
31:05 With senators, it is the States that are talking with each other. With congressmen, it is the People. Federalist Paper # 68 re the electoral college. etc. FYI. 38:50 I've read Marx's Das Kapital. Marx didn't know what he was talking about, and he couldn't write. And I bleive Marx wrote the first book, Engels the rest of it. 41:57 You need to check your math skills. The Labor Theory of Value has been completely discredited. Goods and services sell at whatever the market will bear, they are NOT worth the number of hours of labor that are put into the product. I loved your Kant videos on Alec Campbell's CZcams channel. but now, you have disappointed me greatly.
There are few things from my undergraduate education that can hold a candle to this. It's difficult for me to fully express how thankful I am for this series of lectures.
Scored your book "About Philosophy" Seventh Edition today, sign me up Dude! Subscribed. If you care enough to do this at over 80 years of age, when you really don't have to, I sure as hell will listen to you!! You are important.
Your lectures are always a enjoyment for me, thank you, professor.
hes an anarchist.
Thank you so much for these lectures. I am so grateful that you are willing to spend your time spreading knowledge for anyone to see, regardless of their economic status. You're a credit to humans. :)
I'm so glad this has finally come to fruition!!! Thank you for sharing!!!
Thanks for these lovely lectures as well as your earlier series on Kant's critique of pure reason. I'm not a bit embarrassed to admit that they helped me greatly on my field exams. These lectures and your blog are inspiring.
Great to see you finally doing videos professor!
We will be very grateful if you can lecture on Kierkegaard and Nietzsche
This is fantastic! I'm glad I found it on reddit.
Thank you! About the subject, no one in the world knows better than you.
Hi Dr. Wolff. Your lectures are so valuable in my current research in ideological critique and Marxism. Thank you very much!
Thanks for your time and energy!
A most interesting lecture. Thank you for your many contributions to humane scholarship.
Thank you so much for this, professor.
this is an excellent project. i am presently studying your kant lessons and do look forward to entering the very important terrain you treat here. wonderful is your selection of books and i thank you bringing the credibility of kant to that i missed in my studies years ago.
This is fantastic!
Dear Professor Wolff, thank you
Excellent lectures!
Thank you, Robert Wolff, for these lecture(s): the ideas you engage with are stimulating and challenging.
I regularly read your blog but these lectures, so easily accessible, will provide me with a banquet for thought !
Andy
Dayijgsddssjsiijsslhjhaotwfslgj
Hlgjsgddddfhff
Thank you,Professor.
Thanks for sharing your knowledge! I hope you
lecture about other subjects.
Thank you Professor.
What a gift.
You are rockstar proff
So, for anyone seeing this, I want to ask the most obvious question probably answerred thousands of times in thousands of different places: is thinking about thinking possible? How can this have self-referring consistency? How can you refute a claim that critique of ideology is an ideology? I am reading Ideology and Utopia right now, so I may find the claim valid, but I would love it if someone would try to explain it still.
I sometimes think that when you have asked a question that no one wants to answer then you have asked a good question
Seems as tho this is adressed in lecture two
Based on the central thesis of the necessitation of context as a precursor to understanding, would it then follow that Mannheim does not believe in universal truths, or axioms at all? It would seem common sense that if one were to develop an ideological critique for the benefit of the laymen and women that it should be steeped in or atleast based upon some franework of universality. Elsewise no distinct culutre or ethnic group would be privy to the scope of information being presented. If you do not believe in axioms and their derivations then it would stand to reason that everything becomes subjective and experiential... which is eerily similar to the postmodern argument. I always appreciate listening to both sides of an argument and I have enjoyed this and will continue to do so, yet it seems to me that this ideological critique is ideologically driven. The irony!
In any case I always appreciate academics posting their material, cheers for that Professor!
Professor... please on the next lecture, "outline what you are going to talk about in the description section." I follow a few professors lectures every month on youtube and would like to share it ... without a well defined description, it will not have much impact on the share to build an audience. Thank you so much! Great lecture. - Marty
Please, More,Kant Dialectic
so cute
listening in Oct 2022: just saying it is relevant
Dr. Wolf, I'm a philosophy undergrad major at UNC, and I immensely enjoy these lectures. Regarding the example of the sentiment "Capitalism is the most productive economic system known to man," You say this is not ideological per se in virtue of it being factually true, but does it not conceal an ideological presumption that "productivity" is an ideal criterion of an economic system? Is that presumption not inextricably tied to capitalist ideology? It seems to me that, if this is true, then it satisfies the 2nd pillar of the working definition of ideology you illustrate and use in your analysis. I'm splitting hairs really, but as radical leftist I can't let capitalism escape this small trifle.
mediocre stuff, a bunch of sheep seem super thrilled about this guy though, makes me sad at how one sided these people must think everyone in here needs to broaden their ideological focus thats for sure... but i do like this guy to bounce off and rebuttle other thinkers I respect
anarchy is NEVER justified.
robert wolfe is an anarchist born in 1933 the same year hitler was born.
31:05 With senators, it is the States that are talking with each other. With congressmen, it is the People. Federalist Paper # 68 re the electoral college. etc. FYI.
38:50 I've read Marx's Das Kapital. Marx didn't know what he was talking about, and he couldn't write. And I bleive Marx wrote the first book, Engels the rest of it.
41:57 You need to check your math skills. The Labor Theory of Value has been completely discredited. Goods and services sell at whatever the market will bear, they are NOT worth the number of hours of labor that are put into the product. I loved your Kant videos on Alec Campbell's CZcams channel. but now, you have disappointed me greatly.
A link to the reading list: app.box.com/shared/n72u3p7pyj/1/79244772/48402466469/1
Thanks!
Thank you Professor.