Are your most viewed videos really the most original.mov

No description available.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Are
• your
• most
• viewed
• videos
• really
• the
• most
• original

[Contextcatcher]

Talking about deep. I did a little bit of research on your channel. I found a very instructive vid's "The Languages of truth". You're a reader of analytic philosophy (Quine) and seemed to be disappointed in philosophy. Anton is the opposite of this he still believes somehow in the language of truth. That's the bottom of your unspoken irritation. But isn't truth in a gradual form not something on which everybody relies on? Is language not a fine detector for it ? Not only eternal truth

counts..

[randyhelzerman]

@Contextcatcher I'm not irritated with Prof Anton, I'm sad at his unused potential. Like I said, if you enjoy Prof Anton's kind of thing, great! If you want to understand why I don't enjoy it, you'll never understand it if we just sit here and swap smooth sayings like pokemon cards. Do my exercise and lets talk. If you don't wanna do that, that's great to!! But you are not going to understand where I'm coming from without experiencing something which cannot be written down in a book.

[Contextcatcher]

The problem is deeper than only the YT form. Anton tries to be near the authentic WORDS, without making a scheme and dividing it already in categories, so he shows us the unique quality of it. His approach is more like reading poetry: the best way knowing it is learning it by heart and when you love the words, it goes automatically and... you don't need a scheme. Your approach is more a detached 'dialogue' translating the text in your own categories and scheme. I miss the original feel of it.

[randyhelzerman]

@Contextcatcher *chuckle* spoken like a true Prof Anton fan. Look at the backdrop to this video; I'm way nearer to the authentic words than he is--those books aren't more than 2 feet away from my head...

[aaronhemeon]

The extent of the fallout of this whole situation should demonstrate to anyone who is not up on the philosophical jargon involved, that dospooks critique was devastating. The lesson should be, when you do not understand someone's critique of your work, do not set it aside until you comprehend the meaning of their charge. Sometimes the fact that you do not understand the critique is actually evidence that it may be crippling to ignore.

[1140Cecile]

I tend to agree that Corey's reaction to dospook's video seemed to "demonstrate a blindspot in his scholarship". One thing about YT is that one never knows who is watching, who may respond or if one will be challenged in a manner they're not prepared to handle. As I said earlier, I think dospook introduced conglomerations of ideas that, for most people, would require re-reading to fully comprehend. To me, it seemed that Corey wasn't prepared to do this re-reading. C'est la vie!

[Contextcatcher]

@randyhelzerman "But you are not going to understand where I'm coming from without experiencing something which cannot be written down in a book".

Sometimes you must try to reach the impossible... but maybe I did go too far. Of course I respect your bottom line. But there is something serious significance behind these words. TNX for your response.

[Contextcatcher]

@randyhelzerman A dull remark Randy. And you know it. You' ignore my point: scheme. the typical 'mathematical' approach. Distance. Anton is ironical enough more a human medium... But I like your approach in "The legend of Immanual Kant"...nice done...but in shallow idiom of many vids. Words contains more content...

[randyhelzerman]

@Contextcatcher Here's an exercise you could try. You don't have to, but you'll probably see things my way if you do it. Find 10 videos on YouTube which show things which can be done with a $99 webcam which absolutely, positively, could not be done in on TV, EVEN if money were no object. If you can do that, you'll know why I chided Prof. Anton. But If you are happy enough with what IS that you don't yearn for what COULD BE, then don't bother, and have a great life!

[Contextcatcher]

@randyhelzerman You project your personal argument "I've already have the book" on a general argument if other people also have the book and...read it. I'm Dutch and I like Antons readings of e.g. Heidegger. His vision is fresh. He made me listen sharp. I'm learning so also English. I like to see his personal approach. You-tube made it possible for me. That's for you as pretentious interactive idealist a shallow use of the Tube. But it is called: YOU Tube: freedom. New stuff? I want quality.

[randyhelzerman]

(cont, to Contextcatcher) I actually think that Prof Anton has the capability of giving us something utterly new. Which is why I would bother spending my precious few minutes I have on this earth making videos to encourage him to do so. It was very sad to me that he didn't take up the challenge, and its very sad to me that his accolytes and fans on YouTube don't encourage him to be all that he can be either.

[randyhelzerman]

(cont, to Contextcatcher) Compare with the switch from radio to television. Radio was great, but television made certain art forms possible which were never possible before. YouTube is an even bigger leap from Television. But Professor Anton's channel is just a youtube video of a television show of a person sitting around a radio microphone reading a book. I already have the book--why do I need Prof Anton's channel? (cont)