Anthony Quinton on Spinoza and Leibniz: Section 5

[Israe5l]

The main distinction is the difference between empirical knowledge and the synthetic apriori (or knowledge of language (Reason seems too narrow.)) Empirical knowledge are inductive. Comes from experience. While knowledge of language is passed down from language user before.

[BagarozziBoi]

Quinton clearly doesn't like Kant, he disses him quite badly at a couple of points in the program.

[JamesPliny]

I certainly gained something from this video and appreciate the fact that it was relatively easy for a novice like me to understand. On Spinoza: I have never before found an explanation of the nature of God that appealed to me.

Thank you.

[p3tr0114]

Yes, I was considering myself why Spinoza and Leibniz went down the corridor of thought on ideas of God.

A likely explanation is that they were trying to fit in the idea of God with ideas like Newton's theorys.

[newcjon]

Thanks so much for uploading. These videos are brilliant.

[Adastra14]

Mr Flame. you rock sir :D

[corsarioriddim]

Thanks for posting

[petebax1]

The difference between all thought is weather we believe in logic and reason or miracles. I believe that logic and reason are the gifts of God but have an open mind

on everything else as logic and reason dictates.

[luitek]

Excellent conversation... What eloquence! Leibniz was my favorite philosopher in college... lovely to hear such a well articulated synopsis on his outlook.

[Kitsua]

Great series of videos, and Shostakovich to play us out! Perfect.

[RoadlessPath]

Thank you for posting this video

[sirharryflashmanVC]

"This solomonic carve up of the cosmic baby". I think Quinton was quite pleased with that one...

Thanks flame0430 great show, it really makes me want to do some reading and find out more.

[dedbusted]

The closing comments were definitely the best in the show.

[zaaz369]

Leibniz argued against Newton's Absolute space and time, basically setting up Einstein. That's what a great thinker he was. Completely ahead of his time.

[mankato86]

jew, never changing

HOBBS hobbs hobbs

[Yatukih]

I read my own views here and I´m appearently making total tosh about Leibniz.

I need to read him and then be able to tell my opinions instead of posting bullshit - so sorry guys - will do better next time.

These interviews are so useful and they saved me a whole lot on the school courses I am taking in philosophy.

Leibniz was clearly no ´underling´or somebody whose work doesn´t deserve at least some praise. What utter bolloks in me.

warm regards,

y

[Yatukih]

There is all this talk about that Edward which Leibniz was in contact with having ´founded´the British Royal family when they had been there all along since way before Leibniz.

I find that to be unfair on Leibniz´part to associate him with the founding of the modern British royal family. Today his reputation is much greater and it´s amazing that their reputation ceased to be so quickly after 2001,

Maybe it´ll be back who knows

regards,

y

[Yatukih]

Underling meaning ´servant or representative of the royals´,

regards,

y

[Yatukih]

Nobody can deny the influence he had on western philosophy though,

y

[Yatukih]

I don´t acknowledge persons like Leibniz to be great philosophers.

A great philosopher at the time of Leibniz would have to be genetically traced.

If he or she had type o positive blood type and was unrelated to the monarchy , great - let´s put that person above Leibniz if he or she had anything important to say.

Even if he was of type o + I would still characterize him as an underling,

Not that I dislike him,

warm regards,

y.

[Yatukih]

philosophical thought is something all living beings are capale of , and the more intelligent the greater.

It´s the same in any world or any universe.

Therefore the projection of philosophical thought upon some problem or another is part of life itself,

y

[Catz007]

Leibniz rules - for me, he is the greatest philosopher in the West since Plato.

After Leibniz, I guess one can call Kant as the next master - but Schopenhauer does it for me.

David Hume should also be chosen as the greatest Skeptic since Zeno.

And no philosopher since Schopenhauer has contributed to philosophy to any extent as much as Russel and Wittgenstein, although for me, they are logicians and linguists and not mighty philosophers, cracking with wisdom.

[codpiecfish]

Check out Plotinus- he's a lot like Plato and Leibniz...they have a lot in commmon.

I'd say Bayle was a greater skeptic.

[Libertarian87R]

Hume is not a pure sceptic. Only in the case of cause&consequence chains. In his opinion there is no clear and stable fundament for our knowledge. But he don't reject it - I mean, the knowledge:)

[LiberalVichy]

Yes, Hume is a skeptic of justification - he does not deny justification of knowledge, much less knowledge itself, but is skeptical about claims to have justified knowledge.

[theinternetscholar]

i'm always fascinated by how many different strands of philosophy and science when taken down to a fundamental level, or even an entire perspective, is linked to the essence of god and nature.

great vid!

[dfthompson]

Thank you flame0430. I wish we had stuff like this on TV in the U.S.

[Sgirardacus]

Voltaire's Candide is a great response to Leibniz's overall theories of pre-established harmony and the best of all possible worlds. Leibniz's ideas of Haecity and truth by definition and reason are far more profound.

[djsmurfie]

@Sgirardacus I don't think it is really. Voltaire was a very average thinker.

[EmmaCharlotteStubbs]

Liebniz was brilliant..the greatest philosopher of all time

[Patsan120]

Mathematician also!

[EmmaCharlotteStubbs]

so i'm told..have to take that one on faith however

[tromba8]

let's say polymath :)

[K2nsl3r]

Brilliant, thank you for the video. Quinton presents his case well, and is probably the only philosopher to target his gaze at the camera.