Can Human Action Be Explained? (Charles Taylor)

  Рет қаралды 11,313

Philosophy Overdose

Philosophy Overdose

Күн бұрын

Charles Taylor (Professor Emeritus of Philosophy at McGill University) considers and discusses the issue of explanation in the sphere of human action in a lecture given at Columbia University in 2009. It was co-sponsored with the Committee on Global Thought; Heyman Center for Humanities; Center for the Study of Democracy, Toleration and Religion.
00:00 Talk
54:42 Q&A
#Philosophy #Ethics

Пікірлер: 30
@JonSebastianF
@JonSebastianF Жыл бұрын
00:00 *TALK:* On the lecture title 00:42 Reduction 1: The impossibility of intrinsic meaning/value 07:02 A typology of 4 kinds of meaning 39:43 Reduction 2: The mechanistic universe 45:38 Conclusion 54:40 *Q&A*
@divertissementmonas
@divertissementmonas Жыл бұрын
The question - Does that mean that philosophy and psychology are going to part ways? Charles Taylor's response - Whose psychology? Exactly the right response.
@JohnusSmittinis
@JohnusSmittinis Жыл бұрын
I was journaling about this today! Thank you!
@noaan
@noaan Жыл бұрын
Always happy to see Charles Taylor videos
@barbcarbon9440
@barbcarbon9440 Жыл бұрын
Sounds like Harry Frankfurt. Love is more fundamental than reason. Love is the motivating factor that gives us reasons.
@sacredconspiracy
@sacredconspiracy Жыл бұрын
Hello @Philosophy Overdose, I am an undergrad student of philosophy and me and friends are setting up a scientific society with possibility of translating some of videos into Ukrainian (where i am from). The question is how should I go about copyright , is it applicable to vids you publish (not necessarily from you but from the original owners) and should I be concerned with It causing serious problems on yt? also how should I feature your channel when/if publishing those translations? thank you for your time.
@zeroonetime
@zeroonetime Ай бұрын
All actions/movements are moments are the Life force of Creation
@jonathanadams8752
@jonathanadams8752 Жыл бұрын
18th century for Hume could be the beginning of polite society but it is also the beginning of a journey towards the 19th century climax of Great Britain sucking the world dry with their colonial enterprises around the world, read “Inglorious Empire” by Shashi Tahoor to get a glimpse of what I mean. So, the wealth accumulated in Great Britain through the colonial hold up of the other countries allows this polite society myth to emerge in the West and in Great Britain the most successful colonial power from roughly 17th century until the end of 19th century.
@Junksaint
@Junksaint Жыл бұрын
Functionalism. Aren't we all just doing what is best for the organism we call "ourselves" and "me?" In that specific moment.
@OntologicalCatastrophe
@OntologicalCatastrophe Жыл бұрын
Are we doing what is the best? Functionalism doesn't work and has been abandoned anyways, It can't find a basic function that could be defined as much as they try to reduce every structure.
@blairhakamies4132
@blairhakamies4132 Жыл бұрын
It seems to me that we (living entities) do what is the easiest possible according the constraints we have regardless the level of awareness we have.
@trashygit
@trashygit Жыл бұрын
Unified regime of the organism that can decide what is good or bad for itself... This is an interesting claim, can you give an example?
@vanessali1365
@vanessali1365 Жыл бұрын
The best for me is not necessary the best for you. On top of this, 'goal(s)' change with life because life is uncertain has the habit of changing from time to time without prior notice.
@he1ar1
@he1ar1 3 ай бұрын
As long as we keep in mind that any moment any one of us could be thinking of possible futures.
@sabyasachisenapati3619
@sabyasachisenapati3619 Жыл бұрын
Do other's feel the same way as I do about Pinker, that his arguments sometimes fall way short of his claims and conclusions ? 🤘
@k.s.9400
@k.s.9400 Жыл бұрын
I don't really consider Pinker to be a serious thinker. More like a pop-sci author
@sabyasachisenapati3619
@sabyasachisenapati3619 Жыл бұрын
@@k.s.9400 Me too.
@matterasmachine
@matterasmachine Жыл бұрын
Human exists to change the world the way they want. That explains everything.
@randydelgado4548
@randydelgado4548 Жыл бұрын
Philosophy for philosophers. The extremes within two points of view on two sides of within two extremes on one side to the other side and everywhere in between. Is a person having plenty of money and no fresh water wealthy? Is a person having plenty of fresh water and no money wealthy? Every human being possess the same wealth. As our fresh water decreases the wealth of all living species decreases. The amount of money a person posses is irrelevant.
@dionysianapollomarx
@dionysianapollomarx Жыл бұрын
Spam
@randydelgado4548
@randydelgado4548 Жыл бұрын
Humanity has dominion over the Earth and our Earth resources. Which means all species posses the same wealth. However the labor from one man to another man is not owned by anyone. Corporation pay citizens to work for them using fiat currency. The only debt which exists is the debt from on man or men to another man or men. 8 billion citizens working requires a fiat currency to pay the worldwide labor force for their labor. If 4 billion citizens work for one month. How much is the payroll which needs to be paid? How much money does the federal reserve need to print up to pay everyone who works worldwide for one month? 4 billion citizens working for on month need to be paid. That's is a massive amount of money. When you do the math. Just saying.
@randydelgado4548
@randydelgado4548 Жыл бұрын
The value of money is labor. The creation of money is created by the labor of the people. The greater our labor force the greater the amount of money can be printed up. With a population of 8 billion citizens and a workforce of over 4 billion citizens and automated Artificial Intelligent robots working for Humanity. The greater amount of money which can be printed up. There is no debt. The only debt which exists is the labor from one man to another man or men and women. Labor is wealth. Natural Resources is wealth. Fresh water is wealth. Humanity all together posseses the same wealth. As humanity has dominion over the earth and over all its natural resources. Humanity owns everything. Humanity does not own the labor from one man to another man. What is the monthly payroll of over 4 billion citizens working worldwide? The federal reserve prints up that money to pay the worldwide labor force. The Corporations pays every citizen working for them receiving the money from the Federal Reserve . Our living planet is wealth. Fiat Money is not wealth. Fiat Money is the tools humanity uses to buy products to sustain ourselves. Natural resources and the labor of humanity is true wealth. Money is worthless without labor and natural resources. Corporation only make money by the federal reserve printing it up and passing the money to the corporations to pay the citizens who work for the corporations. Too be continued. Written on November 6th 2022.
@mikeg2924
@mikeg2924 Жыл бұрын
For what it's worth, after 5 minutes or so I have no idea at all what he's talking about :)
@Danyel615
@Danyel615 Жыл бұрын
I think it was really unprofessional for him to simply regrd the odea of the selfish gene as 'stupid'. Even if it is a really bad argument, you can just state why you think that is so, and give counter-arguments ... but he didn't.
@Locreai
@Locreai Жыл бұрын
Biochemical compulsion as a response to stimuli. Show me the state of the brain at the time a man makes a choice and I will show you the choice he is to make.
@StopFear
@StopFear Жыл бұрын
What if the way it works can be represented by how a game go is being played and won. Each individual stone placement does not produce a result, but the victory and accumulation of points happens (or emerges) gradually based on positions of own's stone placements and of the opponent. You could consider each particular successful surrounding of an enemy group as a "complete thought" or decision since, and the opponent's placements as the stimuli to which player (brain) responds to. What I am trying to say by that illustration is that there could likely be no state of the brain that is inherently meaningful, and that could connect to your prediction of the next choice, since there isn't a precise rule or law to it, only situational pattern recognition.
@StopFear
@StopFear Жыл бұрын
@@numbersix8919 I am not the poster to whom you wrote it, but I have seen that movie. It’s a classic of German cinema.
The Inner Self - Charles Taylor (1988)
1:20:54
Philosophy Overdose
Рет қаралды 29 М.
Charles Taylor Lecture: Disenchantment and Secularity
1:28:25
Berkley Center
Рет қаралды 48 М.
New Gadgets! Bycycle 4.0 🚲 #shorts
00:14
BongBee Family
Рет қаралды 11 МЛН
Cat story: from hate to love! 😻 #cat #cute #kitten
00:40
Stocat
Рет қаралды 15 МЛН
Miracle Doctor Saves Blind Girl ❤️
00:59
Alan Chikin Chow
Рет қаралды 52 МЛН
Metaphysical Objections to Normative Truth (Thomas Scanlon)
41:28
Philosophy Overdose
Рет қаралды 5 М.
Marxist Philosophy - Bryan Magee & Charles Taylor (1977)
45:10
Philosophy Overdose
Рет қаралды 83 М.
Philosopher Charles Taylor on How Romanticism Changed Everything
11:27
Jason W Blakely
Рет қаралды 1,7 М.
Moral Philosophy - R.M. Hare & Bryan Magee (1977)
43:52
Philosophy Overdose
Рет қаралды 24 М.
Mahmood Mamdani, "State Formation and Conflict"
55:33
Columbia University
Рет қаралды 44 М.
Charles Taylor Lecture: Master Narratives of Modernity
1:31:44
Berkley Center
Рет қаралды 86 М.
Debate on AI & Mind - Searle & Boden (1984)
57:34
Philosophy Overdose
Рет қаралды 45 М.
Russell's Paradox - a simple explanation of a profound problem
28:28
Jeffrey Kaplan
Рет қаралды 7 МЛН
Scott Galloway: The Algebra of Happiness
30:40
LUMA
Рет қаралды 494 М.
Debate on Mind-Brain Relation: Searle vs Eccles (1984)
55:20
Philosophy Overdose
Рет қаралды 47 М.
New Gadgets! Bycycle 4.0 🚲 #shorts
00:14
BongBee Family
Рет қаралды 11 МЛН