Aristotle Part 1

[abosaar976]

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali The greatest philosopher and guide to the modern experimental Alflm supports the philosophical theories such as shrinking and wilting sun and the expansion of the universe

[Ultermarto]

AXIOMATIC LOGIIIIIICCCCC!!!!!!

[mattbeezy910]

master your chi

[blurtoutbert]

alot of wat aristotle said was probably BS

[salasvalor01]

The most important philosopher, and the Founder of Reality itself, if you really would like to place a title to one individual.

[animalnt]

looks like father ted

[Spissky95]

where's 8:59 ???  :O

[ukgreaterlondon]

the man doing this video is boring .

[Freshlilboyxx]

@ukgreaterlondon its not suppose to be funny or fun or what you expected it was meant to learn something.

[MOIZIYAH]

ya man



[catshavesouls]

Aristotle: my nigga.

[MrUsman007]

@catshavesouls : Haha.

[redquoter]

Socrates asked questions.

Plato discussed ideas.

Aristotle went outside and explored.

[Thisperspectivesays]

@redquoter I feel i have alot in common with all 3 now that im hearing about them.

[TylerThrashPeace]

@redquoter That is far from the truth. They all did all of those things. Aristotle was just a great thinker and had a curious, insightful soul. Perhaps greater than any other human in known history. But it was clear he was also extremely serious and responsible, by seeing all of his works.

[Norm1011616]

@theDeckisStacked However, the problem with Aristotle's 'prime mover' is that 'time' needed to exist before the primary cause arose itself, as the meaning of the word 'Prime' disperses without the existence of time, sequence, order. The only solution to such a paradox is to make every part of the universe a causa sui, a result of itself, which means the prime mover for each and every event is cyclically infinite and not necessarily the same for every existent thing.

[07Aristotle]

@Norm1011616 Concerning the prime mover, Aristotle's conception of the prime mover indeed gave birth to time. If time can only exist if there is movement, and time is a measurement of that which is moving in a linear consecutive manner, then therefore time only existed after the result of the first cause or prime mover of that which moves. Movement sustains itself through natural cause and effect, as a chain holds the boat to its dock, never detaching itself, except by something 'foreign' to it.

[Norm1011616]

@07Aristotle "If time can only exist if there is movement". No, time can only be accurately measured against a lineal succession of events through relative measurements of movement. When events occur without causal effects but seem to be random, it simply means temporal, linear statements lose meaning, such as with Quantum mechanics. But that doesn't mean the start of linear processes creates the existence of time, but simply that it allows reference to the concept of time seem meaningful.

[Norm1011616]

@07Aristotle How does this >>"TIME only existed AFTER the result of the first cause or prime mover of that which MOVES", jibe with this >> "If TIME can only EXIST if there is MOVEment"... If time didn't exist until after the first cause, but that first cause is itself a kind of movement within time, then isn't that a paradox? Haven't you created a 'chicken or the egg' scenario? You are pulling yourself out of the quicksand by your own hair.

[07Aristotle]

@Norm1011616 ''How does this >>"TIME only existed AFTER the result of the first cause or prime mover of that which MOVES", jibe with this >> "If TIME can only EXIST if there is MOVEment"''

They are essentially the same thing. Movement is contingent on the action of the immaterial first cause. Time can only exist after the first cause. This leads to movement on a sequence of cause and effect, thereafter, creating time. It is a time with movement or movement with time.

[Norm1011616]

@07Aristotle "They [time/movement] are essentially the same thing" - Doesn't that make most of what you said about time/movement tautologous then? As when you said "time can only exist if there is movement" could be equated to 'A can only exist if there is A'.

[07Aristotle]

@Norm1011616 '' Doesn't that make most of what you said about time/movement tautologous then?''

Not if time is a construct. It is a distinguishing term to make sense of movement; a human tendency to organize and label. Time is more of the idea of movement. The only thing that exists is movement, even at a molecular level. Stillness is impossible because something still moves at the minute level. Dead matter is not exempt from movement since eventually it changes its shape. 

[07Aristotle]

@Norm1011616 ''If time didn't exist until after the first cause, but that first cause is itself a kind of movement within time, then isn't that a paradox''

First cause by definition is outside of time. Time began to exist after the first cause's effect. The first cause would have to be self-motivating, in other words, intelligent. Something non-intelligent could not cause moment, hence, that would have to have cause. We would regress until a cause moves itself because that cause is necessary.

[Norm1011616]

@07Aristotle "First cause by definition is outside of time"

But then you can simply say "cause", as the "first" is meaningless if the cause is outside time and a natural sequence. Then that which is subject to time would be the 'First effect' of the cause, as it were. But if this cause is external to nature, from that perspective points in time are indefinable. The 'cause' drives and motivates every event in every moment at all moments.

[07Aristotle]

@Norm1011616

So, there is really only (A)= movement; the premise regarding movement must be true in order for premise of time to be ''true''. That is why is said they are basically one and the same. There is contingency involving the two premesis. It is understandable why you see it as a tautology because they are one and the same; one thing.

[Norm1011616]

@07Aristotle "The first cause would have to be self-motivating, in other words, intelligent. Something non-intelligent could not cause moment,..." - That's quite a leap. To me it simply suggests that the immaterial, under certain conditions, goes through a process of materialisation, which then adheres to cause and effect.

[07Aristotle]

@Norm1011616 There needs to be an self-motivating immaterial first cause, only, because if the ''first'' cause were materialized this would lead to an inevitible infinite regress,therefore, infinite material past. Indeed material is finite and temporal with no infinate past. It is incomprehensible that the immaterail would be ''non-intelligent'', wherefore what would cause the materialization of matter in the first place. There would be no relationship between the causer and caused.

[Norm1011616]

Hmm, why does the notion of splitting up all the different disciplines and subjects (biology, physics - Meteorology, astronomy) get held in such high esteem by the narrator of this video? Like it's the only way. I concede immediately that dissection can have it's uses, but we are at a point in human knowledge where unifying various theories are what the current great minds regard as the only road to anything like an 'ultimate truth'. A lot of Aristotle's practices lead us to false dualities.

[07Aristotle]

@Norm1011616 Aristotle's theories concern only the natural world. Dualities make sense because the natural world only works on a dichotomous level. It sees simplistic but in nature things either happen or they do not. A plant either grows soft petals or protruding points, a plant has yellow and red pigmentation or some other admixture, an animal has adaptive mechanisms to adapt to an unforgiving environment, or defensive mechanisms to protect against predators etc. Plato took care of abstract.

[lanmerd]

LIES!



[drushtvo]

Aristotle was Macedonian.

[PhobosRevenge]

@drushtvo he was definitely not slavobulgarian. Go back to your propaganda books and dream on.

[spacebetweensound]

this is great. thanks for uploading. I'm reading the ethics and some parts are hella dense. Any suggestions on how to help me understand this better?

[fdsfdsfdsism]

I'm now a smarticle

[noezelaya7]

the narrator sounds like a fucking robot

[klt332]

wow his smart thumbs up if u agree

[rexsl88]

This video is better because it doesn't make me feel sleepy. :]

[Magarmach09]

Aristotle was beautiful