Thanks for the snapshot... and I think you did a good job blending some good finfo with an entertaining style... kudos, you've got some zing! Thx good stuff!
Can you give me an e.g. of some behavior that causes no pain that may not be ethical? Behavior seems to me would be good, neutral or bad ethically. I'm not sure how to respond to that. As far as finding happiness I think I know what you mean, but doesn't seem so hard in Utilitarianism to simply give an educated 'guess' (guess because we only know the future to a degree) and know that most likely if I do this it's going to be a good thing or bad thing and in some cases not matter if you act.
@dreamerwebdev My criticism is centered on that we cannot know if something inflicts pain or causes happiness, because it's so subjective and different from case to case.
Cutting the arm of a person that cannot feel pain is still unethical, for an example.
I read Mill's book Utilitarianism and didn't like it a bit. It has the same flaw, it talks about happiness as if it's easily definable, ignoring the fact, which has slapped every emotionally sensitive person in the face at least several times in their lives, that you cannot know what makes other people happy.
you are doing it wrong. you lack a sense of pace. you just say a, then b, then c, without worrying about how it'd feel to the listener. don't rush it. you should also get a better microphone with, say, a pop filter
@Iloerk no, you should really make some deliberate pauses between sentences. to give people time to let a thought sicker in. every good speaker does that
@Diosukekun I agree, although the lectures sound interesting, you definitely rush it for no reason, I cannot focus, and why on earth you conclude that something is confusing? perhaps to some it is not... anyway, some lessons of speech are greatly recommended...
Have to say consequential ethics of Bentham and Mills Utilitarianism makes a lot more sense. Kant's Idea that one with good intentions is doing right is obviously true to me as well but following law or duty like following ten commandments or not lieing are great guidelines but not always the right thing to do as it doesn't always make the most happiness and least pain possible. It is that intent thought out for results; that is where I find 'goodness'.
@Iloerk I don't think happiness needs a lot of defining, it is goodness, pleasure, and the opposite of pain and suffering. If you need it defined look it up in a dictionary. I'm not a dictionary and I'm not Mill's book 'Utilitarianism' so perhaps you read them if you need them defined and a clue to what I mean as if it isn't obvious to even the dull minded.
@dreamerwebdev Also, if I think about my own happiness I know it has appeared under very diverse conditions and there's almost no formula for it, and that recreating the conditions and "re-living" it makes it duller each time. I also know that my happiness has a lot more to do with what I do than what others do to me. What good things others do to me can be categorized as luck and that only gives a very short-lived and dull version of happiness.
@dreamerwebdev I looked it up in my dictionary. Happy - fortunate; having, expressing or enjoying pleasure or contentment, pleased, appropriate, felicitous.
How do you formulate this into a universally applicable ethic-system? What makes everyone consider themselves fortunate, what makes everyone pleased and content? Ok, formulating absence of pain and suffering is of course more easy, but is every behaviour ethical as long as it doesn't inflict pain?
Hitler thought. he was doing good by killing lots of Jews.. he was probably happy at the time. I need not go into detail about other type of same people. but it conflicts with your entire chat. Doing good and feeling happy. Bollox
Typical of the usual thoughtless assumption: existentialism (people assumed to be ultimately responsible for themselves, though we don't create ourselves, and we have no responsibility to whatever did create us, if anything did). Since Kant's 'duty' idea is based upon 'free choice', without very carefully qualifying this concept, his idea about 'duty' is rife with flaws. Very poorly thought out.
Existentialism, as we know it, had it's background in Kierkegaard, who lived during the 19th century, after Kant died. And whos to say Duty isn't our's, as individual's, meaning to life. If the women who works at the Soup Kitchen duty is the feeling of happiness and makes herself feel good and complete that she atleast tried to make a difference, then she has given herself meaning through Duty.
With the decline of Judaeo-Christian socio-ethical strictures Kant is looking somewhat a victim of his time. Nietzsche, apparently a homosexual, was the most influential philosopher in the twentieth century. Plato, another homosexual, apparently, was historically the most influential philosopher of all time... I don't know what my point is here.
The lecture is brilliant. The idea of providing transcripts is ideal for those who are partially deaf or those who like to know the spellings of difficult terms. However, the transcriber does not seem to know even the name "Kant". "Kant" is misspelt several times. There are too many embarrassing spelling mistakes in this transcription. If the transcript was not done by machines, please allow volunteers to edit the transcripts of philosophy lectures. Please delete this post after the editing.
i would lie and say im 18 because i have a good will and would give most of the money to charities & i would also lie because I know this cant apply to everyone, as a large percentage of people would simply want to satisfy their egos... this applies to everyone with the same intention.
Old Kant was rather strange, his self order and moral dicipline, gives away his philosophy. It is clear that his will to power willed synthetic A priori judgements, not a will to truth.
doody
brulee34 1 month ago
Thanks for the snapshot... and I think you did a good job blending some good finfo with an entertaining style... kudos, you've got some zing! Thx good stuff!
jawneethecurious 1 month ago
Gosh, you read the text too fast, were you in a hurry or what?
rilkeneo 2 months ago
Wow! You've helped a poor student today! Your intentions must be good! ;)
Williamoest 3 months ago
Can you give me an e.g. of some behavior that causes no pain that may not be ethical? Behavior seems to me would be good, neutral or bad ethically. I'm not sure how to respond to that. As far as finding happiness I think I know what you mean, but doesn't seem so hard in Utilitarianism to simply give an educated 'guess' (guess because we only know the future to a degree) and know that most likely if I do this it's going to be a good thing or bad thing and in some cases not matter if you act.
dreamerwebdev 4 months ago
@dreamerwebdev My criticism is centered on that we cannot know if something inflicts pain or causes happiness, because it's so subjective and different from case to case.
Cutting the arm of a person that cannot feel pain is still unethical, for an example.
Iloerk 3 months ago
I read Mill's book Utilitarianism and didn't like it a bit. It has the same flaw, it talks about happiness as if it's easily definable, ignoring the fact, which has slapped every emotionally sensitive person in the face at least several times in their lives, that you cannot know what makes other people happy.
Iloerk 4 months ago
you are doing it wrong. you lack a sense of pace. you just say a, then b, then c, without worrying about how it'd feel to the listener. don't rush it. you should also get a better microphone with, say, a pop filter
Diosukekun 5 months ago
Comment removed
Iloerk 4 months ago
@Diosukekun You joking? This is fairly slow, as it should be. I agree about the microphone though
Iloerk 4 months ago
@Iloerk no, you should really make some deliberate pauses between sentences. to give people time to let a thought sicker in. every good speaker does that
Diosukekun 4 months ago
@Diosukekun I agree, although the lectures sound interesting, you definitely rush it for no reason, I cannot focus, and why on earth you conclude that something is confusing? perhaps to some it is not... anyway, some lessons of speech are greatly recommended...
rilkeneo 2 months ago
Have to say consequential ethics of Bentham and Mills Utilitarianism makes a lot more sense. Kant's Idea that one with good intentions is doing right is obviously true to me as well but following law or duty like following ten commandments or not lieing are great guidelines but not always the right thing to do as it doesn't always make the most happiness and least pain possible. It is that intent thought out for results; that is where I find 'goodness'.
dreamerwebdev 5 months ago
@dreamerwebdev Define happiness.
that should keep you busy for the rest of your life
Iloerk 4 months ago
@Iloerk I don't think happiness needs a lot of defining, it is goodness, pleasure, and the opposite of pain and suffering. If you need it defined look it up in a dictionary. I'm not a dictionary and I'm not Mill's book 'Utilitarianism' so perhaps you read them if you need them defined and a clue to what I mean as if it isn't obvious to even the dull minded.
dreamerwebdev 4 months ago
@dreamerwebdev Also, if I think about my own happiness I know it has appeared under very diverse conditions and there's almost no formula for it, and that recreating the conditions and "re-living" it makes it duller each time. I also know that my happiness has a lot more to do with what I do than what others do to me. What good things others do to me can be categorized as luck and that only gives a very short-lived and dull version of happiness.
Iloerk 4 months ago
@dreamerwebdev I looked it up in my dictionary. Happy - fortunate; having, expressing or enjoying pleasure or contentment, pleased, appropriate, felicitous.
How do you formulate this into a universally applicable ethic-system? What makes everyone consider themselves fortunate, what makes everyone pleased and content? Ok, formulating absence of pain and suffering is of course more easy, but is every behaviour ethical as long as it doesn't inflict pain?
Iloerk 4 months ago
Everything really does start out with Aristotle and Plato, then connects through Hume and Kant. How interesting.
invulnerable23 6 months ago
I like Kant but i think he got it wrong with Religion
whatmynameisayyy 7 months ago
Hitler thought. he was doing good by killing lots of Jews.. he was probably happy at the time. I need not go into detail about other type of same people. but it conflicts with your entire chat. Doing good and feeling happy. Bollox
guitarboogieboogie 8 months ago
I love Kant...he's so easy to understand!!
jenfuh91 8 months ago
@jenfuh91
It's refreshing to have an accessible philosopher isn't it?
Try Derrida. That shit will blow your mind. I spent 6 months reading his works and still don't understand a damn word.
MrHowToDoIt 8 months ago
i myself believe that kant has it right.
johnnjess09 9 months ago
Great 9 minute lecture! Allowed me to practice writing chinese characters and learn about Kantian Ethical Theory at the same time!!
chessgod34 11 months ago
who wants to write my essay on selfless action
BarbieBiitch420 11 months ago
Typical of the usual thoughtless assumption: existentialism (people assumed to be ultimately responsible for themselves, though we don't create ourselves, and we have no responsibility to whatever did create us, if anything did). Since Kant's 'duty' idea is based upon 'free choice', without very carefully qualifying this concept, his idea about 'duty' is rife with flaws. Very poorly thought out.
andersoncouncilpf 1 year ago
@andersoncouncilpf
Existentialism, as we know it, had it's background in Kierkegaard, who lived during the 19th century, after Kant died. And whos to say Duty isn't our's, as individual's, meaning to life. If the women who works at the Soup Kitchen duty is the feeling of happiness and makes herself feel good and complete that she atleast tried to make a difference, then she has given herself meaning through Duty.
forttrres 11 months ago
Does the healthy dictator not think that what he's doing is good?
aaronomy 1 year ago
very good teacher, able to explain somewhat complex philosophical ideas in a funny but spot on manner
m4ttm0nk 1 year ago
hahah,it's funny that he says silly stuff that's funny,all in a dry voice XD thanks for the summation of Kant tho!
luminousstrawberries 1 year ago
Great video
josephsoninstitute 1 year ago
Excellent explication of a very difficult Kantian discourse. Thanks.
RayL1983 1 year ago
With the decline of Judaeo-Christian socio-ethical strictures Kant is looking somewhat a victim of his time. Nietzsche, apparently a homosexual, was the most influential philosopher in the twentieth century. Plato, another homosexual, apparently, was historically the most influential philosopher of all time... I don't know what my point is here.
RayL1983 1 year ago
this guy speaks as if someone is chasing him.
okaramercan 1 year ago
The lecture is brilliant. The idea of providing transcripts is ideal for those who are partially deaf or those who like to know the spellings of difficult terms. However, the transcriber does not seem to know even the name "Kant". "Kant" is misspelt several times. There are too many embarrassing spelling mistakes in this transcription. If the transcript was not done by machines, please allow volunteers to edit the transcripts of philosophy lectures. Please delete this post after the editing.
masaw9 1 year ago
i would lie and say im 18 because i have a good will and would give most of the money to charities & i would also lie because I know this cant apply to everyone, as a large percentage of people would simply want to satisfy their egos... this applies to everyone with the same intention.
im not sure how this applies to kant... study on
MGX890 1 year ago
Old Kant was rather strange, his self order and moral dicipline, gives away his philosophy. It is clear that his will to power willed synthetic A priori judgements, not a will to truth.
brigadierugly 1 year ago
I wish you would stick to facts rather than trying to make it fun.
And saying "cunt" over and over doesn't make this good for England
But despite these, thanks
crumpits 1 year ago
It is not hard to understand Kant with a great explanation such as yours! Finally, thanks to you, i understand Kant!!
dantesaq 1 year ago
Good review keep them coming.
CBALL2212 1 year ago