Thanks man. I appreciate you taking the time to delve into it and making the ancients more accessible.

i know this video is old but THANK YOU SO MUCH MY PROFESSOR DOESNT EXPLAIN ANYTHING WELL THIS IS SAVING ME

Chapter 1: 7:07 Chapter 2: 19:57 Chapter 3: 33:30 Chapter 4: 42:20

starting a new series of course videos on Aristotle's Category. Maybe I can adequately cover the whole text in 3 videos. . . or maybe 4

Mr Sadler you are awesome, thanks for keeping philosophy alive and providing lectures for everyone to receive in a friendly format

Aristotle's works are coming to me at a sensitive time in my life. I really appreciate how you break major concepts down so I can understand them better when I read the actual text. Many props my dude!

Thanks for the video, Prof. Sadler! My book club is starting Aristotle next month (yes, with the Categories) and my early attempts at reading were leaving me befuddled. I'll be sending out your videos to the the rest of my group!

Thank you Dr. Sadler! This video was an excellent companion to my independent study of Aristotle.

Absolutely riveting, thank you Gregory. How many people have read this text without understanding the three kinds of meaning, four kinds of predications, and ten categories? and here it is all laid out. Great work.

Bless your soul!!! I was having the hardest time trying to understand this book! Read it like 10 times, and still made 0 sense to me! But after i watched your video, now that i read it, it all makes so much more sense. Thank you sooo much!

Thank you so much, you videos helped me while studying for my Ancient Philosophy final. You make the concepts so understandable, unlike some other philosophy professors, I wouldn't even call them a professor, they don't deserve it, some can't even form a simple context to which one can look into while observing a philosophical claim. I had one professor who could't even back up their claim with an example. It shows so much how little they can actually teach philosophy, let alone grasp it in its fundamental form. It so easy to access philosophy these days, but so hard to find someone who can actually understand and teach it correctly. Thank You...

I love that he is a philosopher and professor but so genuinely likeable due to his lack of pride. Learning alot...very helpful.

Thank you so much for your videos! I don't learn so well by text and hearing and watching your videos helps me a lot!!

thanx so much Professor Sadler for this video, really helped me in understanding better the first 4 chapters....

It is very interesting the way you explain what Aristotle actually mean with the categories. I really appreciate your job!!!

thanks a lot professor for your hard work, hopefully you will keep uploading material of this type. great, great job sir.

i've spent 3 days trying to figure out the first 4 chapters and getting no where. this is very helpful!

This is fantastic! I'm reading this now, and sure enough chapter 2 tripped me up. You definitely helped me to understand what he meant by predicate! Do you have any suggestions for commentaries on the Organon?

This helps a lot, though I think I must study more to fully understand. I'm told it's helpful to study grammar before tackling Categories.

You're welcome. Glad the videos are useful for you

This is my new "smart break" from the daily humdrum ;D love it

Thanks Gregory, this is really great.

Hello! Thanks a lot Prof. Gregory Sadler for this amazing introduction to the first 4 parts of the Categories of Aristotle which has have been made very easy to read by your effort. I have a suggestion to make. I am a teacher of English Grammar and I really think that language and logic and their rules are closely connected (it is interesting that in Arabic the word 'mantiq' is used both for logic and for speech). I think it would be useful if you could use concepts from Grammar to explain difficulties like the one regarding, as for example, knowledge being 'in' a subject and knowledge being predicated 'of' a subject. The noun 'subject' is, in the first case, in possession of an abstract noun called Knowledge. And so in this case there are ultimately two nouns, one being the subject and the other the possessed abstract noun object. In the second case, the noun 'subject' is being qualified by an attribute called 'knowledgeable' and thus the predicate here works as an adjective, and hence attributes the one and only noun in the statement. So in one case the situation generates two nouns: the subject that possesses, and the abstract object that is being possessed. And in the other, there is only one noun, the subject, which is being qualified by an adjective and so the attribute merely colours the subject (the adjective, as we know, cannot exist on its own and needs a noun to qualify). Wouldn't this grammatical approach help people better understand these complications?

My professor loves to beat around the bush. So this video has helped me a lot!

Thank you so much! This will help me a ton on my essay, but more importantly you made this subject fun to learn!

This video helped me a great deal, but I noticed that there were no other videos explaining chapters 5+. Thanks for the video and I hope there will be more in the future.

Thanks, I'm having trouble with Aristotle and glad to know it comes together

Glad to read it.

Thank you legend.

Good question -- in this piece, Aristotle isn't using that term of "analogy" (i.e. kat'analogian), but. . . yes, you are on the right track. The examples he's using make it clear that he does have something similar in mind. In the Categories, he's more interested in the language itself than the metaphysics, so he thinks in terms of derivation -- "healthy" from "health", etc. Those sorts of terms are typically related by structures of analogy of one form or another.

Concerning chapter 3, how about the differentium 'is liked by Jennifer'? It seems that this judgement can be used to categorize both Animal and Knowledge, and a similar argument can be made about other judgements as well. Btw thanks for this video Gregory, it really helped me understand the first four chapters of Categories.

Categories was always a odd duck for those first introduced to Aristotle. My first introduction was the Nicomachean ethics and the when I took a metaphysics class we came back to pieces of the categories.

Dr. Sadler, this is so helpful. Thank you! I can’t make heads or tails on Prior Analytics as well. Do you have any recommendations on how to read that specific text? Is it possible for it to be self taught?

Very good. It would be nice to see a breakdown of the chapters of Aristotle's books in the Metaphysics. A lot of work, I know. But, hey, if you are up to it. Anyway, thanks for the work you put into this. It helped.

I came here primarily for Chapter 3 since it's not in your other playlist discussing the Categories. This was all very helpful, thank you! Do you have a recommended order through which to go through Aristotle (and by extension Plato and Socrates) for someone more logic and philosophy oriented? You mentioned in this in other videos that categories is usually what students are first ushered toward, and you mentioned his Metaphysics and the Art of Rhetoric(which I'm currently reading). Any direction would be helpful! Thanks again! :)

Thanks you my friend.

Thank you so so much this is great help

Prof. Sadler, this is great. You really demystified Chapter 2 and "of" and "in" for me. But where are the rest of the videos on the Categories? I can't find any of your videos on Chapt 5+. Given the high quality of your teaching I'd love it if you finished the set. Promises were made.... see your own comment below.

I really enjoyed watching a video of someone who reads Aristotle's "Categories" and, I suppose, other works of him in general, to actually comprehend them, and not only to approach them, like many scholars, in the same monotonous dogmatic manner which is so widespread, though completely non-instructive. Thanks for that. My point is: Aristotle stated the definition of what he meant by something being present in a subject, which, despite its lack of precision, at least is something. But what do you think he exactly denoted by something being predicated of another? In other terms: in your opinion, what would, for Aristotle, a cat being a animal, a rose being a flower, the Earth being a planet etc. practically stand for?

How is "predicable of" different from set membership? I'm thinking of "predicable of" as specifying "[the subject] belongs to [the category]", e.g., "Gregory Sadler belongs to (the class of) humans" means the same as "Gregory Sadler is predicable of humans", or am I mistaken? (Is there some immediate or latent danger of this anachronistic thinking?) (Edit: Thanks again for this video! I thought it would go without saying to thank you for it, but I thought I should be explicit in my gratitude.)

Greg Sadler smashes it again.

Gregory, I notice there don't seem to be other organon videos. I like how you explain the purpose and meaning of the Categories, and I think a more general exploration of the overall significance of the Organon might be fascinating. Just a suggestion.

Thanks a lot for the lecture. Could you expand on what you say at 45:00, about the reverse order of Substance-QUALITY-Quantity versus Substance-QUANTITY-Quality in Modern Philosophy? What do you mean?

7:20 ur welcome

What is substance and what is he meaning of the distinction between primary and secondary substance? How do the two varieties of substance fit in the fourfold classification of beings set out in chapter 2? How do the other forms of being enumerated in chapter fourrelate to substance and how do they fit into chapter two’s classificatory scheme? the prof that gave me this question should be anything but a prof at a university. He explained nothing to me. Do you mind briefly answering as much as possible just to be sure that i am on the right track? ps: I got through the first two years of university with a 3.0 gpa thanks to your videos. Thank you!! :)

I was so confused on chapter 2(in a subject, predicated of a subject etc.), but then I realised that I was overthinking it lol. I was personally dragged into the Categories in an effort to understand Aristotle's Metaphysics. I am yet to find a reason why Aristotle makes a seemingly peculiar distinction in the second chapter, but I am sure it is important. Why does Aristotle even bring up the topic of "In a subject, predicated of a subject"?

Could you open automatically generated captions? My understanding of spoken English is limited. Thank you!

Great lecture. Don't drop that ashtray on your foot! Looks super heavy!

Well that would make sense. Aristotle's works made their way into Islamic civilization fairly early on, and then got translated into Arabic.

Could you make video of chapters 5+

Thank you very much, Dr.Sadler, I have watched this video I think like 8 times... but still have problems understanding some of its concepts When we say not in a subject and not predicable of a subject: this man, I can say that this man actually belongs to the category of animal? so why is it not in a subject? it is in the subject of animal, isn't it?

In... the book, the man

50:46 - in case you need some love!

Quantity @ 48:29

Professor, do you understand Arabic?

I appreciate this lectures, but the background noise is unbearable.

2020🤪