Thanks man! I would have loved to go into more detail. I plan on working on another one in a few weeks after I finish the semester.

Dude how are you and every idealist on KZfaq in the comments

Thank you so much. I’m really happy to hear that you learned a lot. 😊

You are very welcome! We must complete the system of British Idealism!

@J J Hi . I am the other way around in the sense that I have had contact with Advaita Vedanta for over 40 years ( particularly as personified by Sri Ramana Maharshi) which is essentially Idealistic - saying that the world is a mental creation . Despite having studied some philosophy when I was younger I never really knew about Idealism in the Western philosophical tradition till relatively really and that is mainly due to the internet ! Of course there are all sorts of nuances both within western Idealism and Advaita and between the two but the central idea that the world is a mental creation is very similar . Another big connection between Advaita and the West is via Quantum Physics. When I read some of the conclusions of people like Neils Bohr who said that nothing exists until you perceive it I thought ' crikey that s is very advaitic ' . Many of these similar threads come together in the works of Bernardo Kastrup who is both a scientist and philosopher . He gives great evidence for Idealism - both through science and philosophy - and as he worked at CERN is pretty well qualified to talk about these matters . Best wishes .

Thank you so much!

Thank you. I really appreciate your comment.

Thanks. I would have loved to go into greater depth; however, I had to limit it to 20 minutes

@@PessimisticIdealism Why did you limit it to 20 minutes?

Thank you. :)

Thank you!

Feel free to shoot me a message on Instagram or on my discord. I’d be happy to chat there in greater depth 🙂

McTaggart’s “The Nature of Existence” (Vol. II). Here is a link to it drive.google.com/file/d/1qLP1awecCdIsU39UpPnHI8zyAtsiDE0q/view?usp=drivesdk

I would recommend Mary Whiton Calkin’s “The Persistent Problems of Philosophy.” It’s available on Google Ebooks and archive.org for free

I must admit that your comment “doesn’t really make any sense” to me. The sentence fragments and comma splices in your comment render it unintelligible. On a side note, you did make a reference to “the circularity of idealist arguments.” I think it would benefit everyone if you specified which arguments (of the British Idealists) you had in mind.

@@PessimisticIdealism ok, let me try it this way - 1. I appreciate your desire to understand this last wave of pre-modern thinking, and the production value of this video. 2. You attribute the death of the pre-modern to anti-german sentiment when progress towards understanding logic, language, and meaning was led by Frege, Wittgenstein and arguably Husserl. 3. Your "school" reductions are painfully siloed, as they usually are. "New Realism" is a minor movement updating traditional empricism and of course dismisses forms of Idealism in the process. Low hanging fruit. 4. The early twentieth century is where the United States becomes the new world power. And, where technology creates a new global network (intercontinental travel days not weeks, telegraph, etc). Suddenly, Harvard was at least as important as Cambridge or Oxford. And much more important than Jena however you slice it. That happened before the war. 5. Perry was perhaps the fourth Harvard faculty of note, after the world-famous James (for whom he wrote the first biography), Santayana, and Royce. The latter two create some interesting bridges between idealism and the American push, adopted by Russel, to admit human evolution and the utility of symbolic logic for more than "math". Your counterposing Perry and Bradley is unimportant. 6. You seem to forget the explosion of connections made between logical symbology and real world utility - gravity, electricity, speed of light - of course philosophy became more interested in how those revelations were possible than 2500 year old semantic paradoxes. 7. You leaning into false antagonisms using terms like "scathing" "cavalier", is not useful. James had a regular correspondence with Bradley, friendly and productive, and the letters were published by Perry. You should look them up. 8. I object to the implication of phrase "British Idealism" for two reasons. Nothing particularly British about it, on the whole rehashes many points made by the pre-socratic Greeks, and is no more British than, say, Spencer's scientism or Mill's liberalism. You didn't coin it, nor do you think to question it. 9. As for circularity, I mean a basic premise of any idealism project is no propositional framework has grounds to support itself, therefore God, reality, fill in blank for supreme otherness, and Mind is our special access to "real", not this clumsy rock stuff I keep tripping over. This is a loop inside a silo, ignores the multiple dimensions of our actual world (including mind/language as a rock-like tool you are arguing idealism with) and what human evolution means for the development of spirit. 10. Again, this last point downgrades the obvious relevance of Hegel et al., and offers a primary explanation for twentieth century philosophical developments. Not world war I.