Видео

Wow…. no wonder the world is fuk’d up…this passes as something to think about…

Did anyone notice if the narrator mentioned what these groupings of things are called? I must’ve missed it.

I’ve given you some of my time and to be charitable to you, you are in the wrong arena. You aren’t charismatic and you prolong your explanations with fluff and your timing is off and you take too much time to get to the point and by that time I’m lost. This is not your forte. You could do much better with some editing and coaching, you are far behind in this game

Thank you sir to teach me

Thank you.I have used this to debate numerous christians on the realm of objective morality.

All I could think of is “rep your set” and then I was blown away 😮”

How do you write? The script for us is left to right, but it appears to me to be right to left from your perspective? It's bugging the hell out of me.

Objects and classes like in programming

What is a woman ?

i can't thank you enough professor Kaplan Jeffrey, keep up the good work!

Jack the Ripper cannot be a proper name. It’s an imaginary name. Btw Jack the Ripper was the prince of wales.

the nature of ground truth just is.....we dont just assume them to be true, they prove themselves to be. Obviously when it comes to morality the labelling system can vary widely. Ground Truths or Virtue is perhaps the simplest meaningful notion that can be expressed, and the inverse is not meaningful enough to be expressed. It appears "Vicious" or false things are an accumulation of a multiple of known actions not inherent to perception. What I mean is Virtue can happen without or needs an explanation, it is apparent. Vicious things are a system of failures resulting from the accumulated of a lack of virtue. Virtue or Truth is the simplest notion that can be expressed, everything else requires more. I come to the conclusion, there is truth and imaginary, the imaginary can be virtuous. Virtue is not.

Virtue is the essence of God's perfect nature. He has informed us what he deems to be virtue and what he deems to be evil. Given that he has all authority over the universe, who are we to contest what he deems good and evil?

lol 'girdle'... I think he means Gödel.

It's been a lot of years since I originally heard about N&N, but as of 8:30 in this video, I think that we use names differently in different contexts. When we talk about a fictional character, something like Searle's theory is correct: if we imagine an alternate story where the character didn't do at least the important parts of what they did in the canonical story, the one in our new story isn't really the same character. They're a different character with the same name, based on the original. So it's necessary that the character has enough of their character-defining traits. Normally, when we talk about a real person, something like Kripke's theory is a better description of what language game we're playing. We can talk about scenarios where Lincoln wasn't nominated, intending to have it be the same guy, and not have our discussion lapse into incoherence. But it's not entirely clear-cut. We play whatever game works, to say what we want to say. For a figure from distant history, we could be so wrong about them that it makes sense to say that maybe there was no Julius Caesar or no Jesus Christ, because no one satisfies enough of the traits we associate with them, but it's hard to avoid lapsing into incoherence if we try to discuss counterfactuals where they didn't do the things we know them for. -- Yeah, after listening to the whole video, I think that a lot of our ordinary language is a lot closer to being like Jack the Ripper than Kripke is willing to acknowledge.

This has all of the appeal (ie none) and all of the sophistry of the ontological argument. I agree with Dennett's assessment of it as embarrassing. Anyone skeptical of philosophy and philosophers in general would find their skepticism justified by this nonsense. It's not just bad philosophy it's bad for philosophy.

Did he just say Socrates might not have existed..?

this nigga be writing backwards

I have solved your paradox, in fact . Without get rid of any rule. Who or where do I send my research paper.

Damn if he was here now, he could solve climate change......by naming it differently.....

Nietzsche's genealogy is flawed to begin with, but even if such “just so” stories were plausible, any suggestion that they suffice to refute the targeted beliefs would commit the genetic fallacy. Apart fork that his work inspired dangerous ideologies like Fascism and Nazism. History itself demonstrates the flaws behind his views.

So glad I came upon this. Thank you Mr Kaplan

I think this is just a linguistic limitation, not a logical one per se.

Clicked for Kirk

This is torture

One thing confuses me and leaves me unable to distinguish between the Jack the ripper case and Abraham Lincoln case. What differenciates an object having a particular rigid designator and any other property of the object. It seems to me that we can only say that every object has a rigid designator, but we cannot claim to be using it when referring to the object. It seems unknowable what the actually rigid designator for an object is. Thus, in practical circumstances Searle's theory is correct as Kripke states in the case of Jack the ripper, but in theory it collapses when we have access to the rigid designator of the referred object.

I solved the problem. By turning the channel.

Fascinating

What are your views on modern psychology prof.Kaplan?

You are not writing backwards because I am reading forwards. I am not reading forwards because you are writing backwards. Is this the paradox you're talking about?

love ya

I have no interest in mathematics and no advanced training in mathematics, but i can follow the concepts --and more to the point - I love listening to characters who love what they do, and Jeff, you are a fascinating character. And that is a compliment.

Le Bomboclot

Bro really likes Lebron James.

I think a moral law is just some electrical impulses which push you to do the right things. It is not that I first think of the moral law and then try to follow it. I am first pushed to do the right thongs and then to explain my action I start thinking of some moral law

Could it be that the sentences are empty vessels? We are referring to their truth value, yet they are not about anything except the vehicle of communication, which must either be considered always true, or neutral logically. I mean, it would be like talking about the weight of the weighing pan in a balance scale that had been precisely calibrated. The "weight" for purposes of weighing other items would be irrelevant (or 0). So, when we say something like Sentence two is true, and sentence 1 is false, we may be talking nonsense because the sentences have yet to bear any burden of meaning.

Kobe > Iverson > Jordan > LeBron

I don't understand how "Abraham Lincoln" necessarily describes a person, but his other unique properties don't. The person named Abraham Lincoln in this world could have been given some other name in a different world. Then it's not necessarily true that he is named Abraham Lincoln, so that can't be his proper name.

Donald Trump associated properties are adulterer, criminal, fraudster, cheater, rapist, narcissist, etc.

From email i sent last year: Dear Dr Kaplan, 20:40 Just wanted you to know that I was enthralled by your video and have subscribed to the series. I wish I had profs like that -- and I wish I had been a prof like that. Alas, as a 90-year-old long-retired philosophy professor, I can only wish. Keep it going! Best, Bob

plus i also have this problem with philosophers till talking about states of affairs of the world edging around the law of contradiction ( aka necessary analytic a priori ) that can all be discarded easily when you show there being no real necessity ( not logical necessity but necessity in terms of stats of affairs of the world ) in law of contradiction.

Hi professor , great work you are doing here on youtube , i have a request, could u kindly do a lecture series on russels's book " introduction to mathematical philosophy "

@androidinsider

Me moving books into the "banned books" section of the library because they don't belong there: "If they're banned from the banned book section then they belong here! If they do belong here, then they don't!!" The responding officers: "Sir, please put the gun down down this is a Wendy's!"

If you were to make a "set" containing Only the "Schrodinger's Cat"(box and all), how would one be able to tell the identity or who is the Object OR what is the predicate of such a "thing", that only exist to 50%. My brain works so hard i can actually smell it.

Haha, i got it. Really funny. Took a good night sleep though.

40 something white dudes. And Obama If ya wanna get descriptive.

What Nietzsche thinks powerful is actually bourgeois, because it comes from a false sense of meritocracy

What distinguishes the senses from the feelings? How can Hume tell that the feeling of wrongness is not a sense? because if it is a sense, then I did experience a vice, and if it is not a sense, then what differentiates it from the senses?

Best discovery ever in RUclips. I was just looking for new info on how to take notes effectively, and, boy, let me tell you, is this channel addictive? Do I want some more? I'm amazed, when I graduated from college I was requested to take a "social services" subject, and I chose to translate A History of Ethics. vol. I (by Vernon J. Bourke)... I'm fascinated with Ethics ever since! Thank you, Mr. Jeffrey you're a genuine genius, and also an utterly talented comedian, I can't stop watching your videos.