Socrates on Self-Confidence part 2 of 3

[artisticdrama92]

Interesting video.

[UnitedKorean]

I never knew a guy with that kind of thick English accent could speak French with such French accent! What a boss!

[1awareness]

........

[Mrjaguarpaw1]

CHICKS AND PHILOSOPHY....DOENT WORK

[PMRyall]

@Mrjaguarpaw1 Idiot face

[Kentsu827]

In Socratic view of justice, a just person will always be better off than the unjust. The soul of the just person is well-ordered and harmonious, whereas the unjust person has parts of the soul overcoming others, such as appetites overrule the reasons. No matter what happens, a just person will always have a happier life and justice is worthwhile even if there are no rewards that might confer.

[longfootbuddy]

democracy is the majority forcing their will on the minority...nothing new about that bullshit

[greenghost2008]

Holy shit he knows french.

[NathanAndBike]

The Australians were ranking very high in answering with sensible answers! Aussie win! :)

[green20103]

Life is a test to prove yourself who you are , and enjoy , recognize all the blessings of the creator.

[preemptivestrike20]

@green20103 Which creator? Zeus?

[whobirds]

the photos in that pile are all the same, there is no use going through them in slow motion....

[capitalcontested]

How is france the most philosophical nation?

[orlando098]

@capitalcontested

Well, it's produced quite a few famous philosophers, has a reputation for valuing intellectuals, and everyone who goes through the whole of high school studies philosophy (among other subjects) in the last year. I think they are also looking at introducing it in the second to last year as well. So the comment is not so far-fetched.

[Gazer124]

Does anyone else love this guys' voice?

[WindChildsWorld]

@Gazer124 yes but he looks like young Voldemort, doesn't he? :)

[franco121760]

Amazing stuuf

[6stringplaya77]

what a great place to visit...

[Sokies51]

Hey guess what, my name is Socrates ;O

[parkerjwill]

The reason not everyone thinks about life critically is because they have not obtained a body or nature that encourages such a lifestyle. Indeed, Socrates and other thinkers are to be considered the topmost class. The Vedas inform us that society should be structured with this in mind, that the thinkers and saintly people are first class and from there, there are three subsequent classes of people.

[ADOPTmeBITCH]

he asked the priest : what do u think a good life is? BEING a fucking crooked Greek priest leeching on government money DUH

[ScavengerData]

@ADOPTmeBITCH agreed

[UTUBEBITTU]

The world is what you think and not what others think.....But the reallity is that , That world will remain what it is, no matter what other thinks about it and more importantly no matter what you think about it.....

( from: gaurav sethi-jaipur(India) well i am unemployed so i have time to make comments...)

[Otevra13]

I've heard or read that ancient Athen's was three quarters a slave population~if true it doesn't appear at all rigorous to leave this out in discussions of the 'will of the majority'. To do so is to continue a lie. How could there ever be a demo~cracy with such disparities? This lie of course continues into the modern world with our so called democracies.

[PhilosophicalMedia]

@Otevra13 Women couldn't vote and you had to be from Athens to participate as well.

[DukeofColumbia]

@PhilosophicalMedia and wasn't it only property owners in ancient Athens could vote?

[CabronDioz]

@PhilosophicalMedia Well, I'm just happy that women can't vote today either. Big relief.

[NLBondage]

@PhilosophicalMedia Please Otevra, try to comprehend the ancient times and just don't judge with your 21th century criteria poisoned by more than 2000 years of christianity. Tasks were divide by men and women: women were the leaders in what was called oikos (the house, the farm, the family etc) so the men could service the collection of oikos : the community of Athens. Called: public services, politics. It may be a different point of view butthat does not mean their democracy is a lie.

[Gazer124]

@Otevra13 Not really, you forget that it is arguably the stepping stones to a greater world.

The interpretation of democracy was quite different, as political systems of democracy remain so to this day. If anything it was effective. It was based on those voting who had interests. E.g. particularly families etc. This extends to war. Only those who could afford weapons could go.

[waypor1]

@Otevra13 There is no definition to what we are doing so there is no goal or concensus to any real agreement, however, the true basis to unity can only be explained as the evolution in technology through the mediums of human extension which forms the basis to our sustenance occupation through the transfers of our natures of foraging rights which are all a form of despotism which is why democracy fails in the loss of our liberties and freedom through the many forms of indoctrination eforced bylaw

[bvssvni]

@Otevra13 There will always be a country or society where we have no voice or rights, like we can be slaves or prisoners but not in our mind :-)

[MrPontiusPilate]

@Otevra13

No one ever said it was truly democratic in the modern sense. You just assumed that. Even the United States wasn't truly democratic.

[gwcstudio]

@MrPontiusPilate - that most "democracies" are shams is one of the biggest complaints against that political system. I'd say so far all of them have been, but someone might know of an exception. Some of the anti-franco socialist militias were completely democratic, which is why they accomplished little and got killed.

[gwcstudio]

@Otevra13 - slaves weren't even considered relevant to democracy in ancient Athens. Or, for that matter, in the USA, when it was founded.

There are many many good arguments against democracy that are seldom heard, but many people would characterize it as a bad political system but probably better than the others. :) If you look for Paul Wolff's "In defense of anarchism" there is an excellent takedown of the idea of rule by the masses.

[ParrhesiaJoe]

@Otevra13 There are a lot of problems with Athens. Slavery, though.

Please be precise about slavery. If an Athenean stepped into 2011, he or she would assume that all the people wearing uniforms and reporting for duty every day to a boss was in fact, a slave. He would see the non-working upper middle class as the "Citizen" class, and the upper class as the "Aristocracy".

Athenean slaves earned wages, were educated, and could own property. A closer modern approximation might be "Employee"

[lagook]

@Otevra13 hence plato disliked democracy

[NLBondage]

@Otevra13 We could even learn from the old Greek politics: evry one was asked, if they could undertsand the question. the task of the Senate was, wise old men, to divide complex problems in smaller parts so simple, the people could understand it and choose. Quite different from the system of democracy now where everyone, also they who don't understand have to vote ...... Awkward.

[polevaultrockstr]

@Otevra13 In america do we not also have requirement for voting? The populace, at least the one that mattered when it came to political decisions, were those with the right to vote. How many women had any real say or power in those times? Allowing them to vote would be silly.

[ilikeyouallot]

most people don't even think.they just limit themselves about what other people said first, and if more than 2 or 3 vote for something, the rest will go for it.without thinking that they each one of them could have a different way of seeing a thing and have different and independent opinion, people's fear is every moment, all the time, and reflects on most of our actions. The man does allot of exercise, he want to be strong and impress others; because his weakness. the simple man is less afraid

[bananabread119]

I reject Socratic method! I find it fallacious!

[TheSlovenc123]

@bananabread119 why?

[Nanaeon05]

Damn priests -they have brought Greece to pity .(talking about the scene that the priest shrowed the narrator off;)

[thebreed2]

Why did he keep looking at the same card in the end, when he knew they were all the same?

[renumeratedfrog]

Polish graffiti at 0:38. It says "PRZEZNACZENIE" which means "destiny". Apparently even vandals can have a philosophical bend.

[EddieOtool]

@renumeratedfrog : I wonder if some vandals are vandals precisely because they think (at least a little) and don't want to be sheeps...

[DreamsofMajesty]

scribd (dot) com/nb812

[wiccc1]

the level of psuedo intellectualism in these comments makes my balls heart.

I think that's Plato?

[EddieOtool]

@wiccc1 Question is: is your own opinion very different from theirs?

What is an opinion anyway? Truth itself? Or only part of it?

So what is truth? If we are living in a dualistic world, right/wrong, what is true? Right, or wrong? And is right always right, and wrong always wrong, or can sometimes right be wrong and wrong be right?

What are right and wrong anyway? Is there any certainty about all that? Anything that can't be proved untrue under any circumstances?

Absolutivity, or relativity?

[atfatw]

one of the very best of all thinkers that ver walked on earth.

[KamikazeKoscki]

Health is Number one, intelligence is important so college is very important, a Good job, not living beyond one means, soulmate is very important. Peak Experiences are important visiting and challenging Mother Nature.

[qaplatlhinganmaH]

The mental attitude of equanimity and dispassionate outlook in front of events was also characteristic of the Cynics and Stoics, who called it "Apatheia"[25]

Nagarjuna's dialectic developed in the Madhyamaka can be paralleled to the Greek dialectical tradition

[qaplatlhinganmaH]

Similarly the Prajnaparamita, precursor of the Madhyamika, explained that all things are like foam, or bubbles,"empty, false, and fleeting", and that "only the negation of all views can lead to enlightenment" (Nāgārjuna, MK XIII.8). In order to evade the world of illusion, the Cynics recommended the discipline and struggle("askēsis kai machē") of philosophy, the practice of "autarkia" (self-rule),and a lifestyle exemplified by Diogenes, which,like Buddhist monks,renounced earthly possessions

[EddieOtool]

@qaplatlhinganmaH : Believe me I do profundly respect what you are quoting here.

The only problem is that you are quoting instead of thinking.

[silversobe]

"They must find it difficult .... those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority" - Gerald Massey

Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause and reflect. — Mark Twain

[doctorw2]

that was so typical, when he went up and asked that greek orthodox priest what the good life was he quickly walked away. religious people are the most closed minded.

[charisma0182]

Ironic because their prophets were the people that challenged the ideas and ideals of their society.

[EddieOtool]

@doctorw2 : Is this an absolute truth to you?

[doctorw2]

absolute truth is the logos.

[EddieOtool]

Isn't it the gnostic point of view of the logos? If so, what is the logos to you? What experience do you personnaly have with Him?

[doctorw2]

the logos is the first thought the reason and logic of the supreme being that set all the universe in motion all that there is or has been is one within the logos all that i have seen, touched, and tasted is a testement to this truth.

[EddieOtool]

Sorry, I meant: Isn't the logos the conception of the truth according to the gnostics? (And so forth.)

[doctorw2]

no, the logos is the fundamental principle of the cosmos full of wonder,awe, and beauty yet so simple and common people disregard it like ashes. it is no conception it is sublime truth itself.

[EddieOtool]

Very interesting, sincerely. Where is it and how can we experiment it, or see it?

[doctorw2]

its all around you in everything.

[EddieOtool]

And how can we see it?

[doctorw2]

you must see through the mind of reason and comprehend.

[EddieOtool]

Right. It unfortunately seems that most people can't do this. Or, to be more precise, most people are not willing, or are affraid, to see through mere appearances what is in the heart of everything.

[renumeratedfrog]

@Eddie:

Actually, what most people can't see through is that Socrates is a philosophical icon based largely on myth and nothing factual. 99% of his ideas are known to us through Plato, who is on record claiming that lying is sometimes necessary to convince the populus of a "larger truth".

[EddieOtool]

This can be; history is what it is: past, and unknown of us experimentaly. If we have not seen it ourselves, nothing can be sure about what has been reported of it, because any report, however precise it can be, will always be incomplete.

The socratic question that remains, if I may, is: wheter Socrates (or Jesus, or Buddha, etc.) existed or not, can we deny the profound logical thinking that underly all the dialogues reported by Plato? If not, who cares if he did really existed?

[EssiacHempLaetrile]

4:12 ... The truth, in so far as a human being is able to attain such a thing, lies in a statement which it seems impossible to disprove.

Rick Simpson's Cancer Cure Hemp Oil is Cannabis extract full of Cannabinoids including THC.

Ask any Oncologist if Cannabinoids kill Cancer Cells.

[translationwiz]

thanks 4 this quality of a video.

[attaintruefreedom]

Also Socrates would have been the very first to state that he didn't know the answer to a question, which makes the narrator's comment about the French girl confusing.

[Metallic7Dust]

I think the idea of walking up to strangers and asking them questions out of the blue revolves around getting everyone to stop what they're doing and actually think about what they "Justice" is or "Self Control". It has nothing to do with a right or wrong answer.

[attaintruefreedom]

This guy is an idiot. Socrates didn't just randomly wander up to people and ask them questions point blank while they were in the middle of eating lunch. His conversations typically took place among friends or other philosophers in locations where it had been established, or at least seemed sensible, that a coversation would be taking place.

[spinesnapper]

Are you sure about that? You seem very confident! hmmm.

I never got the impression that De Botton said that Socrates typically spoke to strangers, more so than to friends, philosophers etc.

[Curder86]

This makes youtube such a valuable learning tool.

[translationwiz]

YESSSSSSSSSS!!!! Thats what I have been saying all along. We can learn and communicate. Share ideas exchange thoughts using audio and video w/script. An amazing breakthrough! The sad part is that once again our population exposes its ingratitude and prefers to use this gift for pleasures and entertainment values. Thus, I fear what happened to tv&radio might repeat itself w/youtube. Contrary to beliefs we had a choice then; we can lose this too. Thanks 4 your comment.

peace.

[centervilletn]

i used Socrates "on happiness" in my literature class....i teach emotionally disturbed teen boys...youd be amazed

[myjuliaisacutie]

how interesting,,, please explain more,,

[centervilletn]

I used the great books curriculum to suppliment my course....the kids i teach are lost and searching for something...I have them read from classical philosophy and define "happiness"...seems that most of them havent really thought about what "happiness" is ...its one of my favorite classes to teach..i spend a week on it. Most people discuss things like "happiness',"love" and "anger" but really dont have definition for these emotions...it helps my kids express their feelings more appropriately

[myjuliaisacutie]

that is fascinating! so which ideas of Socrates do they respond best to?

I wonder how their own conception of themselves, ie do they love themselves, fits in.

[goddessnadiya]

7:18 "he would have objected not only to the decor, of course" lol

[laxman9677]

the host looks like a pedophile

[RyunSharp]

Venomfang?!?!?!?!?!?! What the fuck were you doing here?

If ya don't have evidence for your point, Richard Dawkins is gonna own your ass!

[spacefroggie]

Great video , Clear and simply put. Thanks

[theinternetscholar]

after reading Socrates you are forced to think and reflect on yourself . . . the hardest thing to understand is yourself

[MazeMurdersOfHeaven]

I guess what you mean is..."after reading plato about Socrates".

[EddieOtool]

@MazeMurdersOfHeaven : I don't get the importance of this detail here.

Of course, if there's a point missing on an i, you can always point it, but what's the point if you still can understand the statement?

[DukeofColumbia]

@MazeMurdersOfHeaven yeah . . . wasn't Socrates illiterate? Not a slam against him, but I have read that . . .

[PhilosophicalMedia]

Sounds like a delusion of grandeur to me!

[PhilosophicalMedia]

You may want to check out the ontological argument for god. I'm an atheist and think it's lame(though it is good for dialogue), but it is much more intelligent than Kent Hovind's stuff. I also like seeing theists dig into some philosophy! You guys have room there, the creationist stuff is not convincing bro.

[NGS712]

Philosophical: Yeah, creationism doesn't hold much water.

I don't see why people think that if you believe in Evolution you cannot believe in God. Everything has to be this/that, black/white, coke/pepsi. ;)

[onetocome]

Without God, philosophy is stupidity, why the hell would you want to tell anybody how to live their lives. Philosophy is a wordly view of live, it's secular people trying to be like God, lol. I wipe my ass with secular philosophy.

[NGS712]

onetocome: Ok .  . .

[jayeshchoudhari]

coke/Pepsi was rather funny lol!...but overall I do agree with your statement.

[NGS712]

jayesh: Thanks, it's always great to make someone laugh. ;)

[u2ber87]

Well it is oposite and this is why:

Creationism just says God made man. And thats it. From earth's dust .. nevermind. The point is to keep it simple and to give people peace of mind.

( which is not bad... just a matter of choice)

And you do not question that.

On the other hand science always questions things, even science stuff.

And evolution theory has a tendency of being more and more elaborated and detailed.

That is the core difference. It doesn't matter which one is true. You can't mix it

[NGS712]

u2ber: 'And you do not question that.'

I don't question what? I never said I believe in creationism and I don't see how I'm 'mixing' anything.

[u2ber87]

Not you.. it's just how it's based.

Creationism is a part of religion which is made not to be questioned but accepted.

And it is a crucial part of religion.

So it is black and white. Approach to knowledge is different for science and faith.

You have to choose one.

You cannot join it... believe in both.

[NGS712]

u2ber: I think I see what you mean. However one doesn't necessarily have to belong to a religion to have faith in something.

[u2ber87]

I agree.

[Gazer124]

@PhilosophicalMedia Think about the Contingent Arguments :P Or perhaps the Teleological. I'm not strongly religious, and I'm against organized religion (I find it a paradox having to be told about one's God rather than an individual figuring it for themselves), but for the sake of philosophy.

[czarnick123]

That guy made a nice pot.

[bossystop]

what does religious comes in term means to you?

[jason4130]

definatly need more active thinking in this world

[candytheentertainer]

Socrates is the MAN!

[NGS712]

Maybe they should apply this philosophy of logic and reason in my country . . . the USA. ;)

[birthdaykid7]

socrates is like jesus, only less religious.

[gazmondcantona7]

and he actually lived and was a real person.

[ThaRollingTube]

that is not sure..

it has been said that plato used the character as a gain for more autorithy

[gazmondcantona7]

there's no credible evidence that Socrates was a fictional character. Perhaps Plato used Socrates name to throw weight behind some of his ideas, but he most definitely existed.

Plato was not Socrates' only student who recorded his teacher's thought. Aristphanes and Xenphon were among several others.

[xwast3dxy0uthx]

There is no credible evidence that Jesus was a fictional character.

[gazmondcantona7]

But there's absoluetly no evidence that he lived either, except from a few stories written hundreds of years after his supposed death.

[xwast3dxy0uthx]

How can you dismiss Jesus as a fictional character, yet the narratives of Xenphon and Aristphanes are enough to convince you that Socrates existed.

[gazmondcantona7]

You assumed they are the only reasons i believed Socrates lived? Why?

Obviously you are Christian, so i don't wish to offend. I'll say that perhaps someone called Jesus once lived and preached kindness. Very possible. Likely, even. But i will not believe he was the son of God, that he turned water to wine, walked on water, died and came back to life etc. Those were just stories, full of superstitions and interpretations.

Religion doesn't stand to reason, so i dismiss it.

[xwast3dxy0uthx]

That would be an incorrect assumption, I myself am not a Christian. I could not say one way or another that Jesus Christ was the son of God (although most religions based on one god say we are all children of god). I do, however, believe that there was a character (call him Jesus, call him Chuck, or Bob, or Sue) who led a great following and preached morality, who's followers now claim Christianity (although not very well). I am agnostic.

[xwast3dxy0uthx]

There is no basis for argument on the subject of religion, either for or against. There are inexplicable things, things that can not be proven or disproven in our existance. In my opinion, to say one way or another that any one religion (including Athiesm, and yes, it is a religion) is right or wrong, is ignorant and requires a blind eye and blind faith.

[gazmondcantona7]

Of course there's a basis for argument. You cannot avoid it.  It affects all of our lives.

"Most religions" do not claim one God either. The three most dominant religions in our world do(Islam, Christianity and Judaism). And because each one contradicts the others by claiming to be the one true religion, conflict and debate arise that affects all of us, including agnostics and athiests.

Anyway, did you have a point?

[xwast3dxy0uthx]

Point being, this is a pretty good video, I wish they had stuff like this on television.

[gazmondcantona7]

Actually this was on TV in the UK, but i think there should be much more programming like this.

[xwast3dxy0uthx]

Figures, the U.S. isn't really into educating people, I suppose it's easier to get away with shit when people aren't educated.

[PhilosophicalMedia]

Our media is terrible, but we are not as uneducated as you think :) . I know the UK does very well with education though. The state I'm from ranks 3 for education(in the US). The town I grew up in valued education greatly. The BBC is great. I love it! I don't watch TV anymore, but when I did I loved our History Channel, Discovery Channel, and our public access was very educational when I was watching TV years back. As for Jesus, I have no idea if he existed.

[EddieOtool]

@gazmondcantona7 : About religion, I would find interesting if we could extract the living philosophical principles underlying them and discuss them instead of arguing about their dogmatic principles, that we could call "act of faith", which would seam to me but an endless war of subjective opinions. Believing and thinking, to me, are two different things that don't mix very well. Does it seam reasonnable to respect what one believe, but to challenge what one think?