How Any Idiot Can Memorize The Entire History of Philosophy

Summary

This video offers a concise 30-minute overview of the history of philosophy, explaining it through six key concepts: metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, pre-modernism, modernism, and post-modernism. It traces philosophical thought from pre-Socratics to contemporary issues, emphasizing how each era's approach to these concepts shaped its worldview. The video simplifies complex ideas, making philosophy accessible and equipping viewers to understand any philosopher within this historical framework.

Takeaways

• 🧠 Philosophy can be summarized into three fundamental categories: metaphysics (study of ultimate reality), epistemology (study of knowledge), and axiology (study of value, including ethics and aesthetics).
• 📚 The history of philosophy is often divided into three periods: pre-modernism, modernism, and post-modernism, each with distinct approaches to metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology.
• 🌟 Pre-modernism starts with metaphysical claims about reality and then considers how knowledge conforms to these realities.
• 🔍 Modernism, marked by the Enlightenment, prioritizes epistemology, focusing on how we know what we know, often doubting or questioning metaphysical claims.
• 🔧 Post-modernism emphasizes axiology, particularly ethics, and is suspicious of any claims to objective truth, viewing them as power plays.
• 🤔 The shift from pre-modernism to modernism is known as the 'epistemic shift,' where the focus moves from metaphysical to epistemological concerns.
• 📉 Hegel's dialectic process (thesis, antithesis, synthesis) suggests that history and human thought progress through a rational dialectic towards a more unified and reasonable state.
• 🙏 Kierkegaard反驳了黑格尔的观点，认为宗教状态是个体与上帝相遇的最高阶段，而不是黑格尔所说的婴儿阶段，强调个体性和主观性在理性中的重要性。
• 🌐 Post-modernism arose in part as a response to the Holocaust, with philosophers like Emmanuel Levinas and Martin Buber seeing it as an outcome of Enlightenment rationality's failure to account for metaphysical realities.
• 🔄 The script suggests that in the face of modernity and post-modernity's challenges, some look to pre-modern sources like religious revelation for a re-enchantment with the world and a grounding in metaphysics.

Q & A

What is the main goal of the video?

The main goal of the video is to provide a 30-minute summary of the entire history of philosophy, enabling viewers to understand and locate any philosopher within the historical context of philosophical thought.

What are the three fundamental categories of philosophy mentioned in the video?

The three fundamental categories of philosophy mentioned are metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology.

What does metaphysics study according to the video?

Metaphysics studies ultimate reality, including the immaterial world that gives shape and orders the material world.

How is epistemology defined in the video?

Epistemology is defined as the study of knowledge, including what we can know, how we can know things, and the right and wrong ways of knowing.

What is axiology and what are its sub-disciplines?

Axiology is the study of value, including sub-disciplines like aesthetics, which studies beauty and ugliness, and ethics, which studies right and wrong.

What are the three ways of relating metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology discussed in the video?

The three ways of relating metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology are pre-modernism, modernism, and post-modernism.

What is the difference between pre-modernism and modernism in philosophy?

Pre-modernism begins with metaphysical claims and then asks how epistemology conforms to that metaphysics, while modernism prioritizes epistemology over metaphysics, focusing on method rather than ultimate reality.

What is the significance of the epistemic shift in the history of philosophy?

The epistemic shift signifies the move from prioritizing metaphysics as the foundation of knowledge to prioritizing epistemology, which is marked by the Enlightenment and the idea of thinking for oneself rather than speculating about substances and forms.

How does the video describe the philosophical contributions of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle?

Socrates is described as teaching the world to ask bigger questions about reality, Plato applied the concept of 'thinking meta' to the entire world, suggesting the material world is less real than the world of ideas, and Aristotle argued that forms exist within material things, not in a separate reality.

What is the main critique of modernism according to post-modernism as presented in the video?

Post-modernism critiques modernism for its inability to see metaphysical realities and its disenchantment with the world, which, according to some philosophers, allowed for the Holocaust to occur by enabling the dehumanization of Jews.

What is the role of ethics in post-modernism as discussed in the video?

In post-modernism, ethics is front-loaded, meaning that ethical responsibility to one's neighbor and the pursuit of global justice are prioritized, with epistemology serving as a tool to defend and fortify this pursuit.

Outlines

00:00

📚 Introduction to the Philosophy Summary

The speaker introduces a 30-minute summary of the entire history of philosophy, aiming to provide a framework that allows anyone to understand and locate any philosopher, no matter how obscure. The speaker acknowledges the intimidation that comes with philosophical knowledge but emphasizes the importance of grasping the basic story of philosophy, which can be summarized in six essential words. These words are divided into three categories: metaphysics, epistemology, and axiology. Metaphysics deals with ultimate reality, epistemology with the study of knowledge, and axiology with the study of value, including aesthetics and ethics. The speaker assures that by memorizing this simple story, one can make sense of any philosophical concept or figure.

05:01

🌟 The Pre-Socratics and the Birth of Philosophy

The paragraph delves into the pre-modern period of philosophy, highlighting the pre-Socratic philosophers who lived before Socrates. These early thinkers made elemental claims about the world, such as 'all is water' or 'all is fire,' which were metaphysical in nature. The pre-Socratics were divided into two schools: the Heracliteans, who saw the world as in constant flux and chaos, and the Eleatics, who emphasized order and unity. The Heracliteans prioritized sense experience as the proper epistemology, while the Eleatics favored reason. Socrates then shifted the focus to asking bigger questions about reality, leading to metaphysical inquiries about the nature of concepts like goodness and rightness.

10:02

📖 Plato, Aristotle, and the Development of Metaphysics

The speaker discusses the philosophies of Plato and Aristotle, emphasizing their differing views on the nature of reality. Plato believed in a separate, ideal world of forms that were more real than the material world, which was merely a shadow of the ideal. He argued that true knowledge came from reason and contemplation of these forms. Aristotle, on the other hand, believed that forms or essences exist within material things, making the material world itself metaphysical. This shift influenced his ethical views, leading him to emphasize virtues that balanced human nature rather than conforming to abstract forms of justice.

15:04

🔄 The Epistemic Shift and the Enlightenment

The paragraph introduces the concept of modernism, marked by an epistemic shift that prioritizes epistemology over metaphysics. This period, known as the Enlightenment, focused on thinking for oneself and method over speculation about substances and forms. Key figures like Descartes, with his method of radical doubt, and Hume, with his distinction between impressions and ideas, are discussed. Descartes' rationalism and Hume's empiricism set the stage for a philosophical approach that prioritized how we know what we know over questions of ultimate reality.

20:05

🤔 Kant, Hegel, and the Pursuit of Reason

The speaker discusses the philosophies of Kant and Hegel, who attempted to reconcile the rationalism of Descartes with the skepticism of Hume. Kant introduced the distinction between the noumenal (things as they are in themselves) and the phenomenal (things as we perceive them) worlds, arguing that we can only have justified knowledge of the phenomenal world. Hegel, on the other hand, saw the world progressing through a rational dialectic, where each generation's ideas would be challenged and synthesized into a higher truth, leading to a more reasonable and unified human existence.

25:06

🌐 Post-Modernism and the Search for Global Justice

The final paragraph addresses post-modernism, which prioritizes axiology and ethical responsibility, particularly in the wake of events like the Holocaust that cast doubt on the Enlightenment's rationality. Post-modernism is characterized by a focus on the pursuit of global justice and equity, often skeptical of claims to objective truth. The speaker suggests that in the absence of a metaphysical foundation, post-modernism seeks to establish human dignity and ethical obligations through a commitment to global justice. The paragraph concludes by hinting at the potential for a return to metaphysics through revelation, as suggested by the Judeo-Christian tradition.

Keywords

💡Metaphysics

Metaphysics is defined as the branch of philosophy that deals with the first principles of things, including the nature of reality, identity, time, and space. In the context of the video, metaphysics is described as the study of ultimate reality, which gives shape and orders the material world. It is used to explain concepts such as the existence of the soul or the world's adherence to logical laws. The video contrasts metaphysical claims with epistemological ones, using the example of atheism versus agnosticism to illustrate the difference.

💡Epistemology

Epistemology is the study of knowledge, specifically focusing on what we can know, how we can know it, and the right and wrong ways of knowing. The video emphasizes that every philosophical concept falls within this domain or relates to it. It is exemplified through the discussion of logic and evidence as types of epistemology, which together form the scientific method. The video also uses the accusation of being 'irrational' as an epistemological critique.

💡Axiology

Axiology is the study of value, which includes sub-disciplines like aesthetics and ethics. Unlike metaphysics and epistemology, which deal with absolutes, axiological concepts are measured in degrees, reflecting relativity and subjectivity. The video explains axiology through the study of beauty and ugliness in aesthetics and right and wrong in ethics, indicating that these values can vary and are not as definitive as metaphysical or epistemological claims.

💡Pre-Modernism

Pre-Modernism is a philosophical approach that begins with metaphysical claims and then considers how epistemology conforms to those metaphysics. The video discusses various pre-modern philosophers, such as the pre-Socratics, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, who all posit the nature of the metaphysical world before addressing epistemology. Pre-Modernism is characterized by a focus on ultimate reality and the order or chaos of the world, influencing subsequent philosophical and theological thought.

💡Modernism

Modernism in philosophy is marked by the prioritization of epistemology over metaphysics, a shift known as the 'epistemic shift.' The video describes this as a move towards thinking for oneself and focusing on method rather than speculation about substances and forms. Modernism is exemplified by the Enlightenment, where reason and experience become the foundation of knowledge, as seen in the philosophies of Descartes and Hume.

💡Post-Modernism

Post-Modernism is characterized by a focus on axiology, or values, rather than metaphysics or epistemology. The video suggests that post-modernism arises from a historical context where the failure to recognize metaphysical realities led to ethical crises, such as the Holocaust. It emphasizes the pursuit of global justice and ethical responsibility, often skeptical of claims to objective truth, viewing them as power plays. Post-modernism is portrayed as a reaction to the limitations of modernism and a scramble to address ethical damages caused by secularism.

💡Dialectic

The dialectic, as explained in the video, is a process of reasoning and argument where a thesis is contradicted by an antithesis, leading to a synthesis that resolves the conflict. This concept is central to Hegel's philosophy, where the rational dialectic is seen as propelling humanity toward a more reasonable state. The video uses the dialectic to illustrate the progression of ideas and the development of human thought over generations.

💡Revelation

Revelation, in the context of the video, refers to the metaphysical world reaching out to the material world, particularly in the Judeo-Christian worldview where God is believed to reveal Himself. This concept is introduced as a way to become 'enchanted' with the world again, contrasting with the skepticism and disenchantment that can arise from a purely rational or materialistic perspective.

💡Authenticity

Authenticity, as discussed in the video in relation to Kierkegaard's philosophy, refers to an individual's genuine encounter with the divine and the true nature of existence. It is presented as the highest tier of human existence, where one recognizes the individuality and the right of God to act as He wills. Authenticity is seen as a state of being where one can be truly ethical and reasonable, embracing the beauty of the world while acknowledging one's lack of entitlement to it.

💡Enlightenment

The Enlightenment, as mentioned in the video, is a period in history that emphasized reason, individualism, and skepticism of traditional authority. It is described as a key moment in the epistemic shift towards modernism, where philosophy began to prioritize method and empirical evidence over metaphysical speculation. The video connects the Enlightenment to the development of modern philosophical thought, including the ideas of Descartes and Hume.

Highlights

The talk aims to summarize the entire history of philosophy in 30 minutes, providing a framework to understand any philosopher.

Philosophical knowledge can be intimidating, but understanding the basic story of philosophy can demystify it.

The story of philosophy is based on six essential words: metaphysics, epistemology, axiology, pre-modernism, modernism, and post-modernism.

Metaphysics is the study of ultimate reality, including the immaterial world that shapes the material one.

Epistemology is the study of knowledge, including what we can know and how we can know it.

Axiology is the study of value, encompassing aesthetics and ethics.

Pre-modernism starts with metaphysical claims and builds epistemology based on those claims.

Modernism prioritizes epistemology over metaphysics, focusing on method and human reason.

Post-modernism emphasizes axiology, particularly ethical responsibility and global justice.

The pre-Socratics made elemental claims about the world, emphasizing either change or order.

Socrates encouraged thinking 'meta' about realities, seeking justification for immaterial realities.

Plato believed in a separate, ideal world of forms, which is more real than the material world.

Aristotle argued that forms exist within material things, not in a separate reality.

Christianity was heavily influenced by Platonic thought, especially through figures like Augustine.

Aquinas used Aristotle's conception of substance to articulate Christian doctrine.

Descartes initiated the epistemic shift with radical doubt, prioritizing thinking over being.

Hume's empiricism questioned the justification of causality and moral principles from experience alone.

Kant attempted to reconcile rationalism and skepticism through the distinction between noumena and phenomena.

Hegel introduced the dialectic process of thesis, antithesis, and synthesis as a rational progression.

Kierkegaard critiqued Hegel, arguing for the importance of individuality and the religious state.

Post-modernism arose as a response to the Holocaust, questioning the Enlightenment's disenchantment with the world.

Philosophy's task in the post-modern era is seen as the establishment of global justice and ethical responsibility.

The talk concludes by suggesting that revelation is a way to reconnect with metaphysics in a post-modern context.

Transcripts

today we're going to give a 30-minute

summary of the entire history of

philosophy and if you are ever sort of

pushed on your heels by somebody drop

name-dropping a particular philosopher

and you're not sure how to understand

them I'll tell you what once you

understand this summary and you can

memorize this story of philosophy no

matter what name anybody drops you even

if you've never heard them before I'm

gonna give you a story

in with in which you can locate that

person so that you're never going to be

caught off guard again you're going to

know the entire history of philosophy

how to make sense of it and how to

locate any philosopher that you come

across no matter who they are

[Music]

I'm often very intimidated by

philosophical knowledge okay people will

name job philosophers and ideas with

such fluency I often kind of feel like

an idiot right let's start talking about

show up and hire and I'll be like did it

did right and even after teaching

philosophy at a college level for years

I'm still kind of insecure about my

philosophical knowledge but one thing

that has always succeeded in making

sense of very unknown figures in

philosophy is my basic conception of the

story of philosophy and it is a very

simple story and can be explained

without footnotes or block quotes and if

you can memorize this simple story which

is constituted basically by six words

you will be able to locate and sort of

plug in a play any unknown or obscure

philosopher now there are three

fundamental categories of philosophy

which are these categories and they

constitute six of the essential words

that you need to understand basically

the entire story of philosophy and these

categories are this metaphysics

epistemology and axiology now what are

these words every single philosophical

concept falls within these three domains

or somehow relates relates these three

words to one another so metaphysics is

the study of ultimate reality

so if physics studies what is true of

the material world then metaphysics is a

way of describing them the immaterial

world which gives shape and orders the

material world so for example the claim

that the soul exists is a metaphysical

claim a more basically the claim that

the world exists according to the laws

of logic that's a metaphysical claim

metaphysics is the study of ultimate

reality so it explains not merely the

material but the conditions in which a

material world could exist

so that's metaphysics epistemology is

the study of knowledge epistemology is

the study of what we can know how we can

know things and right in wrong ways of

knowing so for example logic and

evidence are two kinds of epistemology

if you combine them together you get the

scientific method so the charge if

someone says to you you know you're

being irrational

that's an epistemological accusation so

atheism is a metaphysical claim right

God doesn't exist whereas agnosticism is

it's an epistemological claim which is

that we can't know that God exists okay

so that's how you kind of slice the pie

between metaphysics and epistemology

with reference to the question of God

so metaphysics is ultimate reality

epistemology is the study of knowledge

axiology is the study of value so within

axiology false sub disciplines like

aesthetics which is the study of beauty

and ugliness and ethics which is the

study of right and wrong

and unlike metaphysics and epistemology

which are black and white categories

axia logical realities can be measured

in degrees so a metaphysical claim such

as the claim the soul exists is either

true or it's not the epistemological

claim you have committed a logical

fallacy is either true or it's not

whereas the oxi illogical claim this

painting is beautiful or you should have

done better our statements of relativity

and statements of degree so every so

every single philosophical idea is

either metaphysical epistemological or

Axia logical or relates those three

somehow so those are the first three

words metaphysics the study of ultimate

reality epistemology the study of how we

know what we know the study of knowledge

and axiology the study of value

including aesthetics which is the study

of beauty and ugliness and ethics which

is the study of right and wrong now the

second set of three words which

constitutes the six basic words of the

story of philosophy are pre modernism

modernism and post-modernism and these

are three ways of relating metaphysics

epistemology in axiology pre modernism

begins all philosophical thought with

metaphysical claims that's what pre

modernism is it's a kind of worldview

it's a category of worldview so multiple

worldviews would fall within pre

modernism there are multiple pre-modern

worldviews to believe and epistemology

was determined by the pre-modern buyed

the nature of metaphysical reality so

for example the first philosophers the

pre-socratics who came right before

Socrates pre-socratics in the seventh

and sixth century BC they made very

elemental claims about the world like

all his water always fire and what they

meant by statements like this was

something metaphysical right they didn't

mean that we're literally all on fire

right now what they meant was in the

same way that fire is a flux the whole

world is a flux and change is real and

order is an illusion right and the

pre-socratics were composed to basically

two schools the Le addicts and the my

lesions and the my lesions emphasized

the disorder in the chaos of the world

and the Le addicts emphasized the

orderliness and

oneness of the world so accordingly that

my legions because they saw the

metaphysics of the world as chaotic they

emphasized sense experience as the

proper epistemology whereas the Le

addicts emphasized the orderliness of

the world even to the point of rejecting

that change was real at all and they saw

reason as the proper epistemology as

opposed to sense experience so the man

lesion philosophy emphasized changed or

metabolite was essentially what their

philosophy was about the world was in

metabolite wasn't change and the eleatic

philosophy emphasized unity or lagos so

metabolite versus lagos and Socrates

then came on the scene and taught the

world to ask bigger better questions

about reality so instead of asking what

is the right thing to do a philosopher

should ask what is goodness what is

rightness and in a sense Socrates taught

the world to think meta about realities

so to conceive of the immaterial

realities behind our operational use of

certain concepts so Socrates pushed for

conceptions of important realities that

could be justified and universally

applied without exception so Socrates a

student Plato took this notion of

thinking meta and applied it to the

entire world his claim kind of in line

with the Le addicts was that the

material world was less real than the

ideal world in fact it was the only

world of ideas which was actually real

so the material world was just a shadow

of the ideal world since ideas are

incorruptible and unchangeable and fixed

well while the material world fades and

disappears and Plato called these ideas

forms and defended the notion that we

must access this world of forms through

Reason through thinking of them through

conceiving of them in our minds and that

right reasoning was the necessary path

to live in the real world Plato's

student Aristotle argued against Plato

so Aristotle argued that forms or more

Fay as wise Plato called them using the

Greek word morphe a forms don't exist in

some separate reality but they exist in

the material things themselves so in

other words the metaphysical world isn't

just up there it's actually down here

it's actually in the things things

things themselves are a metaphysical

rather than being the shadows of the

metaphysical so take for example the

metaphysics of a human being is the

substance of a human being is it an

action

idea to which human beings perform you

know that a human need needs to conform

himself to through reason or is it an

intrinsic potential that he needs to

fulfill in order to be his best self so

Plato would say that the idea human

being is a form to which humans should

conform themselves whereas Aristotle

would say that a human being is a

substance that contains both form and

matter which dictates proper action in

order to fulfill its maximum potential

so Aristotle's metaphysical shift

changed the way he viewed ethics so

acting ethically for Aristotle was not

conceived in terms of conforming

yourself to some abstract form of

Justice like Socrates and Plato argued

instead for Aristotle ethics was

conceived as a balanced expression of

certain virtues which were inherently

fitting to human nature so for example

take the act of facing danger right if

you shy away from danger you're a coward

which is a vice but if you always rush

headlong into danger without thinking

tactically or strategically

well that's foolishness - but if you so

you have cowardice on one side and

foolishness on the other side or

foolhardy nassif you tactfully and

strategically engage danger not shying

away or rushing in that is a balance and

therefore is a virtue okay so it's not

so Aristotle because he believed that

metaphysics resided in the person it was

a different way of governing why people

should act rightly rather than

conforming yourself to an abstract idea

you fulfill what is right in a balanced

way and Christianity was heavily

platonic at its birth because the

Platonic notions of abstract forms

correlated well with the judeo-christian

speech about like the incorruptibility

of the divine essence and things like

that there was a happy marriage between

neoplatonism and Christianity and

platonic language served the early

Christology debates very well as it

starts to articulate a balanced

Christology and it was through Augustine

that Plato became the ruling

architecture of Christian doctrine for

the next millennium in the same way that

Plato really emphasized the oneness of

the world the order of the world

Augustine emphasized the oneness of the

Trinity over the three nests of the

Trinity and so on and so forth there

were multiple other similarities a

millennium later

Aristotle made its way back into the

West after his writings had been

preserved by Islamism actually and

philosopher

it's Aquinas most popularly popularly

used Aristotle as a framework for

articulating Christianity and the

sophistication of Aristotle's conception

of substance which we talked about

earlier as being in the object rather

than a form up there in the world

allowed Christian doctrine to exit the

realm of abstraction and begin making

more sophisticated formulations about

the spirituality and materiality of

Christianity which is why Aristotle gave

birth to a whole conversation about

sacrament ology because you're really

trying to account for the coexistence of

the spiritual and the material in the

same place in the same substance right

so all of these philosophers have in

common a pre-modern architecture all the

way from the pre-socratics through to

Socrates to Plato to Aristotle to the

early church and up to Thomas Aquinas

they are all pre modernist because the

first thing they do is posit the nature

of the metaphysical world and afterward

they ask how epistemology conforms to

that metaphysics then we move from pre

modernism to modernism modernism

prioritizes epistemology over

metaphysics this is called in history

this moment or this event in

philosophical history is called the

epistemic shift because it changes from

prioritizing metaphysics as the bottom

to epistemology instead it flips it buts

epistemology underneath and before

metaphysics and this epistemic shift is

sometimes historically called the

Enlightenment and the Enlightenment

being defined as thinking for oneself

rather than speculating about substances

and forms and modernism in the form of

the Enlightenment is when philosophy

really started thinking primarily about

method not so much about ultimate

reality

so this epistemic shift occurred first

in the philosopher Rene Descartes in the

17th century who doubted all

metaphysical knowledge he you know he

asked what happens if we doubt

everything that's the only way we could

be certain of anything is to mercilessly

prosecute and doubt every single thing

and then what's the end of this doubt

well a simple proof that even doubt is a

thought Descartes reasoned that even

doubt is a thought which means that even

if you doubt everything you're still

thinking which means that the act of

thinking can't be doubted therefore the

human mind exists yet the foundation of

doubt and he uses logic to construct an

entire philosophical edifice without any

religious or metaphysical speculation of

pre-modern ISM right

so if the pre-modern conceived the world

in terms of the phrase I am which is a

metaphysical claim therefore I think

which is in pitch is thinking is an

epistemological act so the pre-modern

conception of the human being would have

said I am therefore I think and it was

Dick Hart who flipped everything through

the epistemic shift right and he said

instead not I am therefore I think but I

think therefore I am because thinking is

the proof of itself then along comes

David Hume an 18th century philosopher

and he took des cartes radical doubt to

the next level so he made an important

distinction between impressions and

ideas impressions are experiences of the

world so if I see an eight ball on a

pool table and that eight ball makes an

impression on my mind because I see it

so if I see a cue ball on that same

table that cue ball makes a separate

impression on my mind if I see someone

hit the cue ball into the eight ball and

I witness the eight ball move Hume

argues that I impose the idea of

causality onto the relationship between

the cue ball and the eight ball

so in Humes view I am justified to

believe that the cue ball and the eighth

ball in the eight ball are real because

they've made direct impressions in my

mind but I am not justified in saying

that I know the cue ball caused the

eight ball to move because causality

isn't an object in the world so it can't

make an impression on my mind and we're

only justified in knowing in our knowing

of things which make impressions on our

mind

we've only impressed knowledge is

certain knowledge or can be certain

knowledge so Jim also classified

morality as an idea rather than an

impression and infamously declared is

doesn't entail aught you can't get from

is to ought you can't get from

metaphysics to ethics you just can't do

it

there's no metaphysical claim that

entails a certain ethical action so in

other words you can't deduce any binding

moral concepts from the bare material

world and Descartes philosophy is called

rationalism because he builds an entire

worldview based on a modernist

conception of reason

meaning that reason as a way of knowing

is the foundation of all justified

knowledge Humes philosophy is called

empiricism not rationalism empiricism

because he builds an entire worldview

based on a modern

conception of experience meaning that

experience as a way of knowing is the

foundation of all justified knowledge

then comes in a philosopher named

Immanuel Kant several decades after Hume

and Kant's attempted to reconcile their

carts rationalism and Hume skepticism so

Kant argued that we need to make a

distinction between what he called the

neumann already Phenom '''l realm the

new mental world represents the world as

it really is the world of ideas in

Descartes right and the phenomenal world

represents the world as it exists in our

perception so the world of impressions

in Hume so if a tree falls in the woods

and nobody is there to witness it did

anything happen

Numan only speaking yes it did

phenomenally speaking no it did not and

we only have access to the phenomenal

world but there is a mechanism in our

mind called the transcendental which

translates the new mental realm for us

and displays the phenomenal world in our

perception like a movie projector right

to use another metaphor think of the

transcendental the transcendental

operating in your mind which Kant

positives posits translates the numerals

of the phenomenal for us think of it

like a sausage maker so imagine the

numeral world is the raw material of

sausage in the phenomenal world is the

processed packaged sausage link now

imagine you go to a grocery store and

you read on the label that the sausage

is made of the highest quality pork and

it's organic

right so you try to visit the sausage

factory to verify that the sausage is

organic and that all the materials are

high-quality but they won't let you in

for security reasons for sanitary

reasons right and that seems

understandable to you why would they let

some Rando walk into their sausage

factory right so you decide you know I'm

just going to trust the sausage company

conte argues that we need to take the

same posture toward the transcendental

we will never have justified knowledge

of the world as it really is we'll never

be able to escape our mind we can never

make it to the sausage factory to visit

to verify whether our experience of the

world conforms to the actual world all

we have is our experience and in that

sense Humes critique of Descartes is

correct since all we have are sense

experiences but we should trust that the

transcendental gives to us in the form

of the phenomenal world what is

practically true and therefore while we

may not be epistemological a justified

in assuming that our claims about the

phenomena

we'll translate to the newman 'l we are

practically justified in assuming that

the laws of logic can establish common

rules of perception that govern

everyone's mind and therefore work as

common rules which human beings are

justified in taking for granted so Kant

likewise attempts to rectify Humes moral

crisis of saying you can't move from is

to oughts

by proposing what he calls the

categorical imperative which is the

notion that a moral law is binding if it

can be universalized so for example

lying or not telling the truth right

purposely to deceiving other people is

categorically wrong because if everybody

lied all the time there would be no such

thing as truth-telling and therefore no

such thing as lying

so therefore lying should be morally

wrong because to universalize it would

be to destroy the possibility of the

concept itself same thing for adultery

and murder and even homosexuality

content arguments have been made and

then comes along philosopher Georg Hegel

GWA Hegel who came in the 19th century

to critique Kant and his basic critique

is that Kant's nominal phenomenal

distinction doesn't actually solve the

disagreement between Descartes and Hume

but actually fortifies the tension and

is even more problematic for us it traps

people in the phenomenal and locks them

out of any justified knowledge of the

Newman award of the real world so Hegel

argued that ultimate reality makes

itself known to the world through

rationality but the way it makes itself

known is unique to Hegel

okay so Hegel argues that rationality uh

sure is the new mental world into our

world progressively through dialectic

what does that mean this mean what this

means is that one generation of

humankind may hold to a particular idea

that idea could be called a thesis about

the way the world works then the next

generation rebels income up comes up

with like an opposing idea right and

that idea is called the antithesis so

you have a thesis from the first

generation the antithesis from the

second generation then the third

generation rebels against the second

generation and combines the strengths of

both theses into a synthesis so you've

got thesis antithesis and then synthesis

then the fourth generation rebels

against the third generation and the

third generation synthesis becomes the

new thesis

and the fourth-generation proposes an

antithesis then the fifth-generation

rebels against the fourth-generation and

proposes a new synthesis and so on

thesis antithesis synthesis thesis

antithesis synthesis and that is called

the dialectic and so and so on and so

forth right

this is called an Hegel the rational

dialectic pure reason in a sense is a

future reality that is pulling us toward

itself through the dialectic like a

black hole reason is inevitable the

dialectic is pushing us forward is

propelling us to play a time place and

time in history before us in front of us

prospectively that will be perfectly

reasonable and the human race is

becoming inevitably and unstoppably more

reasonable and it is through reason that

the world will be saved and all

individuals will on the last day think

the same way and at the same perspective

and hold the same opinions then the

Newman and the phenomenal worlds will be

identical however we must resist the

notion that we are perfectly reasonable

today according to Hegel because to

suggest that we are dogmatically correct

today is to fall into the trap of

believing that no antithesis will come

that our beliefs will never be falsified

which is to fall into the error of the

pre-modern in Hegel's view so Hegel

thought Christianity is the most

rational expression of the Newman

already and for that reason ought to be

believed so we should all be Christians

but we must hold in principle that it

will be overcome and antitheses din the

future and therefore ought to be held in

an open hand so Hegel thought that the

human race was born in a religious state

that was the first thesis and was

liberated from that state through

objective ethical thinking and will one

day be rescued from merely ethical

thinking into a bliss of pure aesthetic

enjoyment through the rational

dialectics so he's saying all the human

the human race began in this religious

state moved to ethical and is moving to

religious oh sorry is moving to

aesthetic so it goes from religious to

ethical to aesthetic not only is that

the biography of the human race it is

the biography of each man and the way

that he enlightens himself the way he

liberate himself is to liberate himself

from the religious through ethical

thinking and to liberate himself through

the ethical thinking into aesthetic

thinking and the reason that the

aesthetic no longer

acquires ethics is because when

everybody thinks the same way

ethics won't be required reason will

bring us all together and in this way

Hegel saw the world unfolding in three

acts as the path every man ought to

journey for himself he's born stupid and

religious and grows into an ethical

state and through reason learns to

achieve existential bliss and Hegel gave

birth to two movements his defenders and

his detractors and his defenders believe

that the world ought to move in a more

homogeneous direction in which all

individuals eventually meld into a

single perspective where everything is

the same and individuality is now

important and obviously Hegel is in this

way the root of Marxism detracting from

Hegel are those who thought that

individuality was the essence of

rationality and to be an individual was

irreducible element of being reasonable

and in essence Hegel's detractors

conceived Hegel as the opposite of

rationality and this detraction was

represented most famously by Soren

Kierkegaard who argued that Hegel had

the three acts of the world and of the

human life exactly backwards in the

exact opposite order

so Kierkegaard argued that aesthetic

enjoyment is not the sophisticated

highest tier of human existence but is

rather the mental state of the infant

kind of drooling blissful and aesthetic

bliss right right according to his own

mind he's correct right then man exits

the aesthetic infantile stage of his

life and enters the ethical and then he

achieves the highest tier the religious

mode of existence which is not the

infantile stage as Hegel proposes but

the most sophisticated stages the

religious mode of existence which is a

man's authentic encounter with God as an

individual rights and in which in that

state and the religious state he

recognizes that God has the right to do

whatever he wants with him it is only in

this state of individuality which

Kierkegaard calls authenticity that a

man can be reasonable and ethical and

properly celebrate the true beauty of

the world as that to which he is not

entitled and in this existential age one

ethical entailment is the is that moral

principles have been relevant

relativized and in the rejection of

count through his alien ism Humes dictum

you can't get from is to oughts

haunted the world and the human race

pondered the potential

consequences of a modernist view of the

world that couldn't justify a universal

conception of the good as Socrates had

defended thousands of years earlier so

we moved from pre modernism which is a

way of looking at the world that

prioritizes metaphysics to modernism

which is a way of looking at the world

that prioritizes epistemology now to

post modernism and post-modernism front

loads not the metaphysical or

epistemological but the axial aaj achill

okay and post-modernism was rooted in

Hegelian existentialism but was jolted

into existence by the Holocaust and many

philosophers such as Emmanuel Levinas

and Martin Buber sought the Nazi Party

as representative of the inevitable

consequence of the Enlightenment they

saw they philosophize rather that

modernism's inability to see

metaphysical realities

their disenchantment with the world

allowed the Nazis to dehumanize the Jews

because the Nazis were slaved to a myth

of rationality that was in reality a way

of masking their attempt to gain

political power it is the entailment of

losing sight of the new moon or rome

altogether which is a product of contine

ISM so philosophy had two options in the

21st century to prevent another

Holocaust to go back to pre modernism

and give human beings dignity through

acknowledging their metaphysical value

such as the soul or abandon metaphysics

entirely in front-load axiology that is

front-load wants ethical responsibility

to one's neighbor and to pursue global

justice then epistemology simply becomes

a tool in defending and fortifying that

pursuit of justice and in this way

post-modernism is always on the hunt for

the agenda behind truth claims

post-modernism sees any claim to

objective truth as a veiled attempt to

gain power over another human being by

persuading them to submit to their way

of seeing the world because again we in

a world after Conte there's no such

thing in the new as as the new Manal all

we have is perception therefore all we

have to protect those around us is to

front-load the the human dignity of each

person with no metaphysical basis to

front-load your ethical obligation to

equity to perfect global equity or and

then and then to make sense of the world

after the fact and we must recognize

here that post-modernism did not

originate the claim that we do not have

access to objective truth that was

caught

who fortified the distinction between

the Newman world in the phenomenal world

and all that needed to occur for the

relationship between those worlds to be

broken is for some event to occur which

casts enough suspicion on the

transcendental that Kant posited to

distrust it to distrust the

sausage-maker and that event was the

Holocaust and once you're stuck in the

phenomenal world with no trustworthy

transcendental media at the numeral

world to you and people are acting as if

human dignity doesn't exist you're stuck

with subjectivity and an ethical

absolute and in this way the task of

philosophy becomes the establishment of

global justice not because people were

eager to abandon truth but because

through de cartes Hume and Kant people

became blind to metaphysics and

therefore blind to the necessary

theological foundations which exist at

the very bottom of every philosophical

question and post-modernism is not an

eager pursuit of relativism although

maybe it has become that in some circles

but a desperate scramble to minimize the

ethical damages that secularism has

wreaked on the world through an

unchecked enlightenment modernism and

today we exist not so much in a

postmodern age but in an age of

competing modernity x' people don't know

how to become enchanted with the

metaphysical world again even though

they want to people are grasping towards

something more than materialism but they

can't attain it because the structure of

modernity requires them to begin with

epistemology which dict or or even worse

a post modernity which requires them to

front-load and begin with an unjustified

axiology which dictates a principle of

radical doubt which will never allow the

justification of metaphysics ever so

what direction should we go how couldn't

become how can we become enchanted with

the world again you know should we not

all just become pre-socratics again and

start from scratch and start claiming

all is fire all is water certainly not

as the judeo-christian worldview

emphasizes the only way to begin with

metaphysics is not to speculate about

the metaphysical world but to have the

metaphysical world actually reach out to

you and Christians have historically

called this metaphysical point of

contact revelation God actually deigns

to reach down into the material world

and manifest himself to those who will

accept his self witness and much more

could be said about the relationship

between philosophy and theology and the

complex ways that philosophy has bearing

upon our cultural moment but for the

purpose of keeping the summary as short

as possible

doctrine of Revelation is as good a

place as any to conclude this

comprehensive survey on that survey of

the entire history of philosophy there

you go

[Music]