What is Philosophy? - First Lecture of the Semester
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2024
- I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: www.jeffreykaplan.org/
I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.
For more philosophy videos: / @jeffreykaplan1
This is a video intended for college students considering taking a class in philosophy, but who are not sure exactly what philosophy is. This is also a video for parents or other relatives or friends of college students who have decided to major in philosophy, but who are not sure exactly what philosophy is.
In this lecture, I argue that philosophy is the attempt to rigorously answer questions that cannot be answered either (a) by observation or experimentation or (b) by calculation from stipulated definitions and axioms.
Your lectures are so serious fun that I watch each of them many times. You speak so well , I love them.
I don't comment a lot, but I feel that I have to do it. Thanks a lot for your channel. I came here a few weeks ago to learn about philosophy of the mind, and stayed there since. It's such a wonderful endeavor to explain those difficult concepts with such pedagogy, and for free, open to everyone !
You are one very useful teacher :)
Useless.
I am currently studying philosophy, just through the love of it. These videos are incredible, thanks for the time you take in explaining them.
Whose your favorite philosopher
@scrubfive9239 hi, I have really enjoyed reading John Searles books
You must be Chinese sponsored.
I've recently stumbled upon your channel. As a retired engineer I tended to dismiss Philosophy as idle naval gazing. However as I've gotten older have come to appreciate its value. For me this has been driven largely by what the hard sciences have learned over my lifetime and being in awe that brains evolved to prevent being eaten by lions have been able to figure out so much. The models our brains have evolved to create do not do a very good job of describing the underlying reality.
I loved the stoner reference, I did have a lot of those back in the 1970s.
Naval gazing is actually used all the time - to spot ships, for example.
@@MathTravels spell check strikes again, my bad.
@@tomschmidt381 No, I though it was great!
I came here to chirp "navel."
I'll see myself out.
I wish I had taken philosophy seriously when I was at school. Not because of the career prospects but because of the enormous personal benefits. Absolutely loving these videos.
You must be Chinese sponsored.
I agree to a point. I agree that philosophical questions can be outside the realm of mathematics and empirical science, however the questions of mathematics and science are themselves a part of philosophy.
In other words science and mathematics and religion are a subfield of philosophy but philosophy is not a subfield of any of these things.
Exactly ! Good observation ! That is exactly how it was in Ancient Greece !!
this makes sense. it answers @Kurt Mohler's question. Cause if mathematics is a subcategory of philosophy that would explain why
@@jan_v_ier im glad to hear it but I have a question or two of my own. Who’s @Kurt Mohler and what was his question?
You have me feeling like the supercomputer from Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy.
I studied philosophy as part of my MA in Theology at Saint Meinrad Seminary and School of Theology. Loved it because it was challenging and clarifying. Your videos are excellent.
So does GOD exist?
@@summerbreeze5115 😂
I love this guy!! He has helped me with so many philosophy papers….
keep making these videos please. I love your philosophy content and the videos by Michael Sugrue. You both are amazing.
Your lecture about philosophy helped me a lot. Thank you so much ❤
Love this channel. I have always liked philosophy, particularly the mind experiments so common in philosophy.
Mathematician here. I would argue that a society is no more real than a triangle is. Of course, it depends a lot on your definition (as it depends for the triangle). If you define a society simply as a group of individuals, then may be it is "more real" (more tangible, more physically present) than a triangle. But I do think that the shared culture of those individuals, their share rights and responsibilities, their shared knowledge, and their institutions are integral parts of a society, without which a society is not a society. Those are as abstract and intangible as a triangle.
Thank you for posting your lectures and reading lists online. May I know if it is possible for us to have a look at the essay and quizzes questions for your courses? I am new to philosophy and would like to know how difficult it would be to write a piece of philosophical article. Thanks a lot.
Absolutely amazing videos! You sir should have millions of subscribers
I was fortunate enough to have a full semester of philosophy in College. By far, my favorite subject and the most indespensible part of the method and validity of scientific thyeory, method and existence itself. Thank you so much for this. You are a kick-a##, bad-a## prof, the best I have ever seen anywhere. Thank you so much for giving your time to educate us.
You must be Chinese sponsored.
Thank you for taking the time to make those videos. I appreciate it and you for doing it :)
One of the BEST videos on the subject. Please also make a video on the "Scientific Method" and whats similar and whats different among Religion, Philosophy and Science at the most fundamental level.
Great work! I had a wider understanding of Philosophy because of you sir.
You must be Chinese sponsored.
I am a student of literature but interested in philosophy as well. The way you express the ideas, let them remain constantly. Keep going sir.
You must be Chinese sponsored.
You are an excellent professor of philosophy......you attract the inquiring mind...
This is gold! Thanks, Professor Kaplan.
Very appropriate explanation of the question what is philosophy...you have simplified to the maximum possible..thank you
Very interesting and making philosophy simple to understand
I love this, very well presented, you deserve my subscription
Absolutely ingenious!!! Best philosophy introduction ever!!!
Great class! By the way, have you some text published on this topic? Thank you in advance.
Really appreciate your work 🙂❤️keep it man bruh I am here 😊
Back in 1996 I was in Greensboro college area with my Air Force comrades... we were partying with the college gals, wow small world, fast forward, I degreed in Phil + Social Sci for a double, worked hard in other occupations for many many years, half retired now after hard work grinding and investing, enjoying these awesome vids... !
I'm an Engineering student, but watching philosophy videos😂
You can be both
Same here 😂
You get two gold stars!
Same here 😂
And keep in mind that no triangles exit, and, if they’re stipulated to exist, they’re never 2-dimensional but are 3 dimensional- owing to the 3D atoms in the ink used to describe the 2-dimensional plane that itself is actually 3-dimensional. 😂 And I get that. 🤵⌒🐬⌒µ⌒🦉
Great lecture, Professor! I wish I had you when I was in school!
I am really loving that you break my brain into gooo and I have to stuff it back in again...(and asprin). :)
Great video, clear and well explained. A few questions though 9:50 Couldn't you lay out say nine apples and visually observer them? And could you physically experiment with the nine apples? Therefor making it empirical? Also 10:43 Couldn't God take the place of the triangle in this scenario where I could draw my take on God with the ink and therefor making it non-empirical?
Really interesting thanks for making these videos!
Philosophy is best understood as three distinctive areas, each with its own tools and aims. Truth Wisdom, Practical Wisdom, and Academic Philosophy require answers, solutions, and credentials respectively. An answer is a framework of understanding. A solution is an action plan.
I will have to contemplate HOW you did that, but THANKS. So well done.
Thank you for this!
Love your lecture! Many thanks
Bro I love these videos. Thanks so much.
Glad you enjoy them!
While building a fair society certainly involves philosophical reflection, I don’t believe doing so can necessarily be divorced from empirical investigation. Provided one believes how people feel and their well-being are relevant to building a fair society, then one will necessarily run into empiricism as one investigates, even scientifically, how people actually feel and fare in various societies, past and present. Indeed, one might well spend much more of the process diving into empirical research than engaging in philosophical discussion.
Thnks Sir, your explaination really help me to learn philosofy
I encouraged my son to be a Philosophy major. Why? It teaches you to think clearly. This education has helped him in law school and in his law career.
Did he do anything with his degree other than law school?
Good points, thank you for your lectures.
@26:05 Whoa! I think of statistics as a kind of applied mathematics. What is going on between the Mathematics and Statistics results on the GMAT?
I am 72 years old man ,learning from your channel and realized that if your channel would have been available to me when I was younger my life would have been very different, perhaps a happier one .
It helps me now , and for that I kindly thank you.
So many people learn these things very late in life. It's not their fault. I hope you are doing well ! I wish you good health so that you are able to engage in philosophical discourse !! 😄
Man, this might be the best video I've seen in my life, for me, you know.
Amazing job
Well, that means that you haven't seen many awesome videos then ! 😂 But yeah, I get you. The video above is awesome ...
Hmmm very interesting course of study. It awakes one's curiosity in knowing what he ought to know.
Wow thank you so much for sharing today we had a lecture on introduction to phylosophy bt i didn't understood. I tried to search on CZcams thank God I found your lec here
“Fair way to arrange society” plus some axioms about fairness, society and other related model components can then potentially have proof.
Prof. Kaplan, do you think Prof. Singer's article on affluence, famine, and morality could also be alternatively titled "Charity Is not Feel Good on the Cheap"?
Thank you, this has been insightful 👍
I am from India, I like watching your video they are informative and easy to understand.
While watching your videos I feel like I have always been wanting to watch videos on Philosophy and legal Philosophy like your videos.
Thank you.
I want to ask, do you write on a transparent glass backwards, so that it is visible to us the right way.?
Hello
Thank you very much, Mr. Kaplan. I didn’t get why philosophy was born in Greece. Your explanations help me out a lot to come up with an answer.
Philosophy was not born in Greece , that is the Eurocentric misinformation . Thousand years before there were Indian and Chinese philosophers.
@@jeetsharma5691 philosophy has existed since mankind could make choices
The first of the "Greek" philosophers were actually from modern-day Turkey.
Awesome video. Thanks
Thank you, I've watched this twice now. I'd like to request a video on good philosophy books for beginners and/or your favorite if you have the time.
I don't know if you are going to read this, but he just put out a new video about the 7 philosophy books to read.
Many after holding degrees of attainments could neither understand nor therefore teach... that makes educational attainments meaningless and wastage of resources. It's a good presentation. Thank you!
Wow! Great job! Thanks, prof.
Amazing video! Who would of thought that Charlie from "It's always sunny..." could be so smart!!!! :)
Thanks for making this video
Thank you for this video. I have always seen myself as poetic and philosophical, but is that not subjective ? It is an opinion, my own and the opinion of others.
I have another definition of philosophy. Mine is based on its purpose (what it is for). Philosophy is the infrastructure of thought, in other words it is the study of assumptions. It is interesting that it is nearly a synonymn of Jeff's definition except it includes all religion as well as a proper subset.
Philosophy is the discipline that examines the human capacity to produce meaning.
This is my take on the subject, of course, but I'm willing to argue it as well.
The video is great but it doesn't answer what philosophy is, just what it isn't.
Keep up the incredible work, Jeffrey!
Examining the capacity of humans to produce meaning is just a part of epistemology. Asking if there is a world separate from myself or if I exist are clearly questions that fall under philosophy, but not your definition. David Hume, John Locke, and George Barkley would somewhat agree with you. They thought that philosophy should, 1st and foremost, define the limits of a human mind to understand/produce meaning.
@@sibanbgd100I see your point, but asking those questions and trying to answer them is a production of meaning.
I feel so much better about my two philosophy degrees now.
What is it providing you
I mean is it worth in build a career Or future
Thank you very much for sharing this video Sir
I don't know what you would say at the age of 45 years I will enroll myself as a student of M.A. in philosophy from IGNOU in our country! I like the subject very much. I will follow your channel obviously. you're really doing a nice job.
Thanks for sharing. ❤
At 14:41 Professor Kaplan raises the question of “What is the fair way to arrange society?”, and then goes on to assert that it cannot be answered empirically. Yes, it cannot be answered through controlled experiments, but if we have information about various ways in which past societies were arranged and, for each, how fair it turned out to be, then we can run a correlational test to see if there is any relationship between the two variables (societal arrangement and fairness). It is through such scientific studies of history that we know societies arranged based on totalitarianism and injustice do not last long because the human spirit yearns for freedom and justice.
But philosophy would still be useful in this context as it would help define terms such as “societal arrangement” and “societal fairness” operationally before any data can be collected. Philosophy can also be useful in interpreting the results, as to why a particular connection exists between these two variables.
Can a certain experience be still a philosophical question? "Let's say a person that pronounced dead then came back to life" is that considered as observation or experimental in a way?
An excellent explanation
The chief philosophical question about fairness is: what is fairness? (Which might be best approached by first asking: what is "fairness"? Ie what do we mean by the *word* in our language games?)
Once we have a shared understanding of what constitutes "fairness", the question of whether a given social arrangement is fair becomes empirical. Yes?
Fantastic video. Really cool.
At first, I thought this was a re-upload of your March 2020 video, also titled _"What is Philosophy?" Edited to 30 minutes, down from 51 minutes. The talking points are identical: children, stoners, religious people, pickles, baby chicken, 9, empirical v. non-empirical, triangle, ice tea, chemists, GMAT, LSAT, GRE, money. But this looks like a different recording. For one, you've written using larger letters.
Now I'm convinced you're a real professor. Because my college professors were exactly like that-every semester, they gave identical lectures. Same talking points, same scribblings on the board, same jokes. After a few years, they didn't even have to think about what they wanted to say. They spoke robotically from rote memory.
Anyway, looking forward to next semester's _"What is Philosophy?"_ lecture. I bet you'll be able to trim it even further, say around 18 minutes-TED length.
Fantastic video!
Great lecture. Here are some thoughts. I think it's great how it distinguishes it from science and math, but then could do more to relate them all. When you take these three (and possibly religion or "faith", four) together, only then you can be confirm your "sophos". What do I mean by that?
Let's take "What is a fair way to arrange society". The first needed is consensus about the meaning of Fairness, assuming that can be achieved. It's not even an argument about how to organize anything, but runs prior to that. The meaning, usually, will be derived by observing commonality in examples that we thought were more or less fair, or more fair in some ways than other examples. Now, there may be no way to organize it fairly, because there may be no agreement on the definition. Now, if someone can provide a definition and have all others agree, we are not far from a religion: a definition is just a concept explained with words attached to a label. The abstract concept of fairness when narrowed, can be reasoned now logically and mathematically. But since we are talking about "organizing Society", it's likely that whatever the axioms and rules at play, wherever logic takes us, if applied to an actual Society, would have effects on its members. Do they matter?
For example, is it fair to organize society in a way that gets all it's members killed? Half the members drowning? All of them sad and depressed? So from axioms (what is the essence of "fairness" if it exists, or its fruits, and what is the noun "society"), we develop arguments and reach conclusions or "wise" answers, which are supposed to be wise irrespective of actual examples. But if in practice by Society we mean societies like any, including ours, then when applied to societies, we would expect the outcomes to be congruent with what we have defined is Fair.
Now, what if, and that's what often happens in practice, what is fair ends up resulting in the most unfair, horrendous consequences, abhorrent and a mockery of any fairness and patently unjust and unfair? We could argue that it is Fair, but that unfortunately humans (or any other society) can live fairly. Well then, is it fair to organize societies in a way that results in unfairness? This would inform the definition, which may need fine-tuning. And this makes Mayeutics more interesting. For it is about logic (math), it is also about experiments (ie. reasoning by bringing to mind past real life experiences and actual observations as in Plato's dialogs, and making predictions), and making effort to try to predict the consequences ofways to organize society, as it is about Wisdom, either by faith (if religiously), or reasoning i(f philosophically addressed).
Usually, we have these separated, because philosophy isn't about experiments, nor math, then we can arrive at false wisdom, for example, concluding that in order to organize society in a way that is fair, we'd have to organize it in a way that results in unfairness. The fault isn't the logic, it's either the definitions or the misunderstanding of important details - the wrong model. And this is in part why philosophy can't be just about things that aren't math or experiments, but rather, the perfect complement in tandem with them, for those with Sophos in their hearts.
I suggest that you read Plato’s Republic.
Loved your video ❤
It is the examination of concepts.
So, to sumarize:
The question "What is philosophy" is philosophical in itself.
But you argue, that it is the search for answers with rational arguments, that can't be observed or calculated.
Therefore (this are my 2 cents), it is very useful to predict consequences, that you don't want to risk find out impericaly.
10:51 - Never seen a triangle?
Consider the Kanizsa triangle illusion. Since the triangle we are seeing
isn't there, I submit that it is in fact a abstract triangle. And it's a real triang because you can't not see it.
Please sir, Make a video on John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, ?? I am from India (university of North bengal)
What I've been looking for.
Question: Why is this lecture listed twice? (This one is better than the one from three years ago.)
8:43 I think that 9 being prime is not a good non-empirical question.
I think all mathematics are constructed from the natural numbers and
Euclidian geometry.
We learn about the natural numbers and geometry from experience by manipulating collections of distinct items in space and time.
Composite numbers are numbers that can be arrange into a square or rectangle with rows and columns of equal size (with at least two rows
or columns)
Prime are natural numbers that can't be arranged as such.
Thus nine being prime is defined by observation and experiment.
clearly explained! very compelling, that i now want to shift from computer science to philo lol)
You are amazing, dude
Fair is a matter of perception - I think what is a fair society or fair structure for society is subjection - it is subject to your perception, your taste. What you percieve, what you think "tastes" fair.
I think we can find a definition of "fair" that most reasonable people would agree on, something like "a situation wehre all parties benefit or suffer equally". The problem comes with measuring equal benefit of suffering.
'Tastiness of something' doesnt matter if reaction good or bad the flavor is TASTED. So that argument is on the strength of the flavor, the tastiness. Would that still be subjective?
Thanks a lot dear Friend.
Philosophy is the position taken by thought in relation to being, that is to say, to what is.
This is a great series. Thanks for putting it online. :)
I have a question about the number 9 example: You say that we didn't discover that 9 was a prime number experimentally, but you *could* do that, couldn't you? you could take all the numbers between 1 and 9 and see if anything other than 1 produced a whole number when you divided 9 by that number.
This isn't true really because division and the existence of numbers are defined axiomatically. Kaplan makes this point in the video itself.
@@autumnfox4870 But this isn't about division directly. It's about prime numbers. We're still finding prime numbers today. A prime is a particular kind of number.
When you use the word "number", you must consider what you mean by that. The way "numbers" are defined are a bit more abstract, namely: we start from nothing, the only thing we expect to exist is the object "nothing"/the empty set. (= A set with no elements). We define this to be zero, the next step we allow is combining the empty set with itself in any way. You can interpret the empty set as an empty box, it's still an object, but empty. Now let's make a set with element: the empty set: {{empty set}}. Intuitively this is a box with an empty box inside it. Do this process infinitely many times and we define a new "number", which is a set, to be smaller than another number if it is contained in that set. 0 < 1 because {} is in {empty set} (Theorem used: the empty set is in any set), 1 < 2 because {empty set} is in {{empty set}, empty set}. The operations between numbers are also rigorously defined in mathematics. Asking what the properties (eg. division) of numbers are is useless when you are unaware of what a number is in itself, without using circular reasoning. Hope this helps a bit. (Another great, simple, question would be: why is 0*a = 0 for any integer a? Try to prove this without using the following argument: "because 0 times any number is zero" in any way. To prove this look up axioms of a "field").
Next class we'll try to define what's art.
(My nephew is studying philosophy - he's a good student. We need more philosophy, more philosophers and more non-philosophers applying the throught process philosophers use.)
Thanks a lot ❤
How do you write backwards?
He has a really cool video about it, it was a few months back
Mirrors.
Look at his shirt and wedding ring.
I LOVE the little "..or whatever" additions
Great class... 😊
I am unable to study philosophy at an academic level. But what books would you recommend that I could read to become more philosophical
Please balance the audio left and right. :) other than that, really nice initiative to spread knowledge freely.
Philosophy is really interesting
is the philosophical question not so much the complete "what is the fair way to arrange society" but more so "what is fundamentally fair and just" and then therefore abiding by what you philosophically conclude as "fundamentally fair and just" how you can accordingly implement that within the way you arrange society. Unless what is "fundamentally fair and just" doesn't correlate exactly to what it is to "fairly arrangement" something although i think it might be.
Great video would be great to hear what you or anyone thinks!
Clear understand.
I like those videos, because he explains well how philosophers think, problably most of the time other philosophers, not his thoughts. And at the same time I'm extremely frustrated, because I search an answer to why they think this way. I can find some glimpses of information that give me some clue, but mostly I'm learning about "how" and almost never about "why".
Example. He said your mind either exists or not after death. This explains well how a philosopher thinks.
However, because I'm not a philosopher, I do not think that way. I think that it is impossible that your mind does not exist. The question is where. There is one obvious place, which is the past. But I don't see a reason that nakes it impossible to have multiple places all of them having your mind. Just like you can have multiple copies of a file.
So really I can't get why they will even consider that your mind doesn't exist after death.
That question can be answered by examining someone's core assumption about reality. From my understanding, there are three choices: 1. reality originates and exists in the mind or is part of everything else; 2. reality originates with and is only what is observable in nature; 3. reality originates with a God/creator. Someone with core assumption #2 would naturally reject the idea the mind exists after death.
Love this guy! 🤵🔬😎