Pavel Florensky: Skepticism and Epoche (and a little Sartre)

Рет қаралды 3,868

Жыл бұрын

TREY’s book “Aphesis: The Impossibility of Subjectivity”: amzn.to/3hzxZAR
WE make at least 3 videos a week on Patreon discussing everything from philosophy, to theology, to biblical typology, to music, and to whatever else comes to my head. / telosbound
TELOSBOUND THEOLOGICAL AND PHILOSOPHICAL ASSOCIATION: docs.google.com/document/d/1g...
THEOSBOUND: / theosbound
DISCORD: / discord
INSTAGRAM: / telosbound
ODYSSEY: odysee.com/@telosbound:c
GET The Philosopher's Notebook amzn.to/3h7Iyrn
HASHTAGS:
#philosophy #theology #metaphysics #ontology #orthodox #christianity #orthodoxchristianity #communion #church #jesus #christ #catholic #bible #hegel #negation #dialectics #epistemology #psychoanalysis #logic #ethics #theory #socialtheory #apologetics #God #aphesis #subjectivity #paradox #contradiction #reading #books #intellectual #politics #conservative #politicaltheory #sigma

Пікірлер: 41

@dissemination_1414 Жыл бұрын

That intro was so good. And Florensky’s explication of skepticism is very valuable

@glasselevator Жыл бұрын

Wow, Florensky gave words to what I was agonizing over when I was first considering Christianity. Love the connection with The Scream. Great video!

@glasselevator Жыл бұрын

@@telosbound so so true

@gabrielsprach8323 Жыл бұрын

We’re so back

@O.G.Rose.Michelle.and.Daniel Жыл бұрын

Magnificent-I have not read Pavel Florensky, but goodness he sounds like my beloved David Hume, who argued against “autonomous rationality” for reasons that sounds incredibly similar to Florensky. For Hume, rationality must ultimately defer to “common life” or it will turn into a source of totalitarian and totalizing destruction, similar to how Florensky describes pure skepticism as leading to hell. Donald Livingston is magnificent on Hume, and you should see the new book Samuel Barnes put out, "The Iconoclast," which is exactly about this subject. There’s clearly a lot of overlap, so I’ll do my best to become more familiar with Florensky. As always, excellent work!

@O.G.Rose.Michelle.and.Daniel Жыл бұрын

@@telosbound That’s so wonderful! No doubt your discussion with Barnes will be magnificent: he actually just visited the farm, and we had a divine time. I think you’ll like “The Iconoclast” very much, and I’ll certainly read “The Pillar and Ground of the Truth.” I see the great James Kourtides has also reviewed Florensky, and I enjoyed his videos as well. Thank you for bringing his work to my attention! Also, I currently have “Ainsi bas la vida” on loop…

@pavlosstaios6954 3 ай бұрын

I know nothing about philosophy, but I know something about the Greek language. I don't know if epoche is a technical term in philosophy, but I think that the right rendering of the concept of " suspension of all judgement", using a Greek term, would be Apoche.

@WooDeeWoo123 Жыл бұрын

Excellent video! Btw, I seriously can't wait until the release of the second edition of your book, Aphesis.

@stutterstep831 Жыл бұрын

amazing content as always brother!

@xd_elta9970 2 ай бұрын

Searched for Gold, found diamonds. Very wise. IMO, this would be very good extension/addition of/to the Manion Paper

@enchantingamerica2100 Жыл бұрын

Awesome visuals dude 🤙🏼

@haenkules9538 Жыл бұрын

Tight video love the music at the beginning 👌🏻

@Wesenschau Жыл бұрын

Great video, snd fantastic intro

@Xaloxulu Жыл бұрын

Thank you for this video and others like it! The subject matter was also touched upon from a buddhist perspective (albeit with references to Heidegger and Hegel, Nietzsche and Sartre, Eckhart and saint Francis...) by Nishitani in Religion & Nothingness. The nothingness described is a sorry place to be stuck in indeed.

@williamchisham Жыл бұрын

Interesting video trey

@Normvids Жыл бұрын

Pavel florensky, Ora pro nobis

@Mdeil20 Жыл бұрын

I keep coming back to this just for that intro

@zachtupper3934 Жыл бұрын

Looks like a good vid excited to watch

@Wesenschau Жыл бұрын

A-are you the… the real Alex Jones?

@zachtupper3934 Жыл бұрын

@@Wesenschau yes…

@Wesenschau Жыл бұрын

@@zachtupper3934 we are so back…

@mclkr9174 Жыл бұрын

Great vid. Need sophiaology content soon!! 🤧

@Kevin-pg6uz Жыл бұрын

That's a very interesting theology of gehenna. Can I get some recommendations please on other theological descriptions of hell?

@Gabriel-im5zr Жыл бұрын

Let’s gooo

@Tommy-wq4ow Жыл бұрын

BASED

@newglof9558 Жыл бұрын

Awesome. Didn't Florensky write a bunch on sophiology as well, or was that only Soloviev/Bulgakov? Would be interested in hearing your take on sophiology

@Wesenschau Жыл бұрын

Yeah, Florensky has some writings on sophiology. Much less than bulgakov - sophiology was much more accidental to Florensky compared to how foundational it was to Bulgakov.

@Mdeil20 Жыл бұрын

I always get these guys mixed up

@acuerdox Жыл бұрын

interesting background

@garycottreau8442 8 ай бұрын

Skepticism self destructs and is untenable from what I have seen. Its like painting yourself into a corner and stuck. The really smart people realize we have an heart and mind; and find the balance. Aristotle was bang on; man is a social animal. We need to relate to 'others', the world, and the Other. I have also noticed you cannot squash reality into head; its to big for your head... a promethean task.

@johnndamascene Жыл бұрын

Bigggg W

@johnsajo6399 Жыл бұрын

Also, appreciate the Chopin

@webmasterultra3487 Жыл бұрын

Pavel Florensky will be Canonized as surely as the Iconoclastic heresy was a mistake, Florensky is a Saint and will be recognized as such and his critics will be shamed like Haman.

@webmasterultra3487 Жыл бұрын

@@telosbound start with prayer.

@johnsajo6399 Жыл бұрын

Is the background AI generated art?

@GuitarTunings33 10 ай бұрын

Good video. "I lack a belief in God but can't say it's true God doesn't exist" 😂 so many conversations with atheists on KZfaq

@philipm3173 Жыл бұрын

This ontology is very reminiscent of Nagarjuna!

@sisyphus645 Жыл бұрын

Great video; just one note: I am not sure where you got this 'consistent skeptic' term from but I'd suggest against its use. A skeptic needn't be consistent. I (a closeted skeptic) am usually aware of the divide between 'objective reality' and 'subjective reality' but as long as I withhold judgement on the structure of subjective reality, I am at peace. In other words, I *accept* that life is subjectivity. I don't *value* that acceptance. Finally, I must ask you to excuse my inarticulation. Edit: And concerning the consistent skeptic's championing of the two propositions: I must say it makes no sense. The skeptic does not uphold anything. It's a lack of a claim, not an active claim itself

@theunfortunategreek. 11 ай бұрын

i would argue that the goal of a true or (in this case) "consistent" skeptic is to no longer be skeptic. Remaining in the constant circular agony of constant skepticism without the desire of destination will create staleness. or as Florensky puts it, "An infinitely excruciating torment, an agony of the sprirt. So I disagree with your notion, "a skeptic needn't be consistent", if the skeptic was truly not then it would refer back to my previous statement of spiritual agony.