Ludwig Wittgenstein (Karl Johnson) giving a lecture in Derek Jarman's "Wittgenstein" (1993).
Пікірлер: 605
@Albeit_Jordan3 жыл бұрын
Imagine walking into a lecture hall and seeing the notes of the previous lecture being a doodle of a dog and a pineapple with the words 'a dog' and 'this is a very pleasant pineapple'.
@freebornjohn26872 жыл бұрын
Especially if you saw all the students trailing out looking incredibly confused.
@Fidder4922 жыл бұрын
“It must be philosophy”. Would be my first guess. Especially if someone draws a chair, it’d be a dead giveaway.
@user-nn4gk5tc9q2 жыл бұрын
Seen worse
@uncleusuh2 жыл бұрын
@@user-nn4gk5tc9q Please tell us.
@user-nn4gk5tc9q2 жыл бұрын
@@uncleusuh Aristotle's concept of how sperm work
@sjuvanet4 жыл бұрын
one must imagine pineapple pleasant
@sidharthwarrier90014 жыл бұрын
Camus will be proud .
@yojiviriak6753 жыл бұрын
Best comment
@shmulilederer88253 жыл бұрын
Comment of the year
@bernardocarleial88702 жыл бұрын
When Albert Camus goes Wittgensteinian
@bagajohny1673 Жыл бұрын
@@shmulilederer8825 I dont understand it. Could you please provide the context?
@Albeit_Jordan2 жыл бұрын
*Wittgenstein:* It makes no sense to speak of _knowing_ something in a context where we could not possibly doubt it... *Descarte:* well fuck
@buckets36287 ай бұрын
Descartes is still valid assuming this, but at face value it’s funny
@Bill-ou7zp5 ай бұрын
Makes no sense though, because of course ‘knowing’ without doubting is literally as high of a form of knowledge as we can get. That’s what Decartes is saying when he can safely doubt everything but his very self. Decartes is correct.
@buckets36285 ай бұрын
@@Bill-ou7zp I met a hobo the other day who "knew without doubting" that the world was going to end yesterday.
@Bill-ou7zp5 ай бұрын
@@buckets3628 Obviously we're not grouping in faith in delusions with faith in true knowledge. That hobo could not provide sound reasoning for his 'knowledge' in the way that Decartes could when he says cogito ergo sum.
@buckets36285 ай бұрын
@@Bill-ou7zp The only difference then between delusion and 'true knowledge' is that you need provide 'sound reasoning'. But Sound Reasoning is a subjective attribution, so now we're at a point where 'true knowledge' doesn't take us any further than an agreement with reasoning before branching off. Which I think might be apart of W.'s point here (idfk): something we cannot possibly doubt is a rare abstraction that should be considered in its own right rather than compared to something we can doubt. On this Descartes would agree aswell, I think (I still dfk)
@constancewalsh36463 жыл бұрын
"Philosophy is just a by-product of misunderstanding language! Why don't you realize that!" He gets it.
@stant71223 жыл бұрын
A misunderstanding on a misunderstanding. Then by chance, just like a broken clock is right twice a day, philosophy may have some understanding. --Me
@covermaiden2 жыл бұрын
@@stant7122 Socrates.
@cosmojg Жыл бұрын
They don't understand him. They remain philosophers.
@Opposite271 Жыл бұрын
Maybe philosophy is just misunderstanding language. But an equally valid explanation is that Wittgenstein is the one who doesn’t understand language. Maybe the only option we have is either blind faith or pyrrhonian skepticism.
@doclime47926 күн бұрын
@Opposite271 so a pleasant little pineapple or refrain from speaking? You sound like Wittgenstein.
@draculanova65486 жыл бұрын
Having Wittgenstein as a professor would have been pretty awesome.
@SpaghettiToaster4 жыл бұрын
But not as awesome having a lion
@SpaghettiToaster4 жыл бұрын
@@geolazakis Because lions are EPIC
@tarvoc7464 жыл бұрын
@@SpaghettiToaster And also easier to understand than Wittgenstein.
@keyboardcorrector23404 жыл бұрын
Would've gotten hit a lot but it would've been worth it.
@EGarrett014 жыл бұрын
Yeah I heard he would beat kids up and once threatened a guy with a hot poker, so certainly entertaining.
@SafirLamkhantar4 жыл бұрын
KZfaq recommendations are getting really dank.
@RickFoxChicken4 жыл бұрын
Went to the comments in search of discussion, found only memes.
@gertrudelaronge68642 жыл бұрын
This also explains the communication difficulties between autistic and neurotypical people.
@AdamBechtol4 ай бұрын
That did kinda of pop up in my thought as well, but I'm not super well versed on it.
@j.j.47084 жыл бұрын
My boy Witty G in the house! R A I S E T H E R O O F (3cm)
@mrgomelonsolaris4 жыл бұрын
wicked smaht
@ba35344 жыл бұрын
lol
@econometrics4694 жыл бұрын
Hhhhhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
@Nif34 жыл бұрын
Nice.
@Volthan4 жыл бұрын
😄😄😄😄😄
@davepangburn4 жыл бұрын
Every time I have seen Karl Johnson act, I keep thinking he could have emerged as one of acting greats of cinema if fate had worked itself out another way. I'm that impressed by his talent & command of presence. For the most part of his career, I think he focused on stage. He does have an extended resume in filmography and television, yes. But I can't help but feel we were deprived of a talent that could have had more extensive exposure to the big & small screen in posterity. Shame as it is, I can enjoy this performance & other roles in, such as, HBO's "Rome", "Ancient Rome: The Rise and Fall of an Empire", and sillier, fun films like "The Death of Stalin" and "Hot Fuzz". Thank you, Karl.
@GrandMoffTarkinsTeaDispenser4 жыл бұрын
Yes agreed.
@clocko27004 жыл бұрын
Maybe he didn’t want to be famous
@FourOf920004 жыл бұрын
he ain't dead; there's still time
@rhizomania76073 жыл бұрын
Bold of you to assume that greatness lies on being integrated to the holism of capitalist machinery.
@DavidTheRoss8 ай бұрын
Cocks
@beatonthedonis4 жыл бұрын
I'm looking at my dog now. And he's lying on the couch.
@kschiavo4 жыл бұрын
Are you sure you can not doubt that affirmation?
@guidemeChrist3 жыл бұрын
But how do you know he isn't being sincere on the couch tho
@die_schlechtere_Milch2 ай бұрын
@@guidemeChrist he plans on being sincere next tuesday
@fitnesspoint200614 күн бұрын
The couch also knows there is a dog lying on it.
@darkus1311 жыл бұрын
why are there two guys in raincoats? and a guy in shorts? and a guy in a tennis sweater for that matter. wtf is wrong with the people attending???
@razielgalizur23186 жыл бұрын
They are all totally different to the point that they cannot see in each others shoes...? Like how we cant imagine what a lions life is like. They cannot imagine their lives any differently.
@Sprite_5254 жыл бұрын
Bro, academics have no fashion awareness. Philosophy majors are insanely dressed in my experience
@malamindulo4 жыл бұрын
They just got off their shift at the meth lab.
@medievalmusiclover4 жыл бұрын
Simply, because we do not understant what symbols are. In concequence, things are words that try to communicate but fail because we do not understand that symbols are limited to show us the undetectable
@timellis77244 жыл бұрын
Errr... If you can't handle the deck chairs, then it's best to stay away from the other films of Derek Jarman. On this occasion you are being invited not to loose yourself in the story but remain objective as an outsider.
@maskttr3 ай бұрын
This is absolutely amazing, the idea that this videos shares is simple, yet so complex and done in such a short period. I absolutely love studying philosophical, sociological, and also linguistical theories and studies, and something I always say is that "languages work with concepts, not with words" most specifically that languages work with our worldview, the way we, humans, see the world itself is completely biased towards not only our own species, but also our completely individual experiences as human beings. As he says it there "to imagine a language is to imagine a form of life". If at times it is difficult to understand or to explain a topic to someone of your same species who too speaks the same language, I cannot fathom how of a challenge it would be to understand a dog or lion language, they are completely different species compared to us, thus having a completely different view of how things work, so it's no surprise Wittgenstein thinks that there are no philosophical questions, but rather only linguistical, but I personally think that these linguistical, mathematical, ethical, logistical and religious problems are all part of what I see as "philosophy". And when he says "this is a very pleasant pineapple", he could be talking about how the pineapple looks, or how the pineapple seems to look, or how it smells, or how it seems to smell for him, or maybe the text, he could not even be talking about your or my perception of what "pleasure" or "pineapple". I believe it's important to separate things between *what is said* vs *what it means*, it is the phrase and "the thought", and what's really dangerous here for me is the question of perspective, even though we may be able to perceive something in a certain way, it's impossible to know if that's what it really means, many people could say the same thing, and to many other people inside their own context and personal experiences, it could mean many different things, it's the ambiguity of linguistics, and to imagine that could be fixed by saying what you actually think precisely using careful and well thought words is really lovely, but merely a delusion. Humanity has this problem of looking for exact views and absolute perceptions where they simply don't exist, we are not perfect, nor is the world we live in, nothing is absolute, we're all living in constant contradicton with the knowledge and the unknown.
@michaelfern40792 жыл бұрын
I watched this film 10 years ago and wasn’t impressed with the acting but after reading his biography by Ray Monk, I think this covers how he’s described brilliantly! Long silences with his head on the table during lectures.
@jacobnavarro24424 жыл бұрын
Why did this appear in my recommendation pages.
@farerolobos93824 жыл бұрын
Because you like pineapples?
@franckmarronier1304 жыл бұрын
Because u r fuckin smort
@david7777834 жыл бұрын
Because KZfaq thought it's about time to add some confusion to your life
@mrnarason4 жыл бұрын
No clue, but I was watching a ton of philosophy video, like Bryan Magee's interviews and this was a great recommendation by KZfaq's algorithm. Gonna check out the movie now. But it must seem completely random to people to don't care about philosophy.
@dislike__button4 жыл бұрын
I thought you'd like it
@vinayseth11146 жыл бұрын
Brilliant acting, and brilliant filmmaking as well! I love the stage approach.
@NothingMaster4 жыл бұрын
My dog lies everyday and tries to pull the wool over my eyes; especially when it come to his favorite treats. But he is incredibly sincere about his love for me. So take that Mr. Fictitious Wittgenstein.
@estebancabrera86254 жыл бұрын
😂😂😂
@Aivottaja4 жыл бұрын
Pretense or deception are not the same as lying. To be able to lie, you need to communicate through language. Also, your dog doesn't love you. It doesn't know what love is.
@apes4days2542 жыл бұрын
@@Aivottaja I disagree. You can lie using sign language, no?
@Aivottaja2 жыл бұрын
@@apes4days254 Sign language *is* language, no?
@apes4days2542 жыл бұрын
@@Aivottaja a dogs actions aren't perceived as language?
@animanoir3 жыл бұрын
this scene gives me goosebumps
@blinkvideo4 жыл бұрын
"THERE ARE NO GENUINE PHILOSOPHICAL PROBLEMS! ONLY LINGUISTIC PROBLEMS!"
@samluke81215 жыл бұрын
Wittgenstein(this satirical character) is right, we cannot see the world through the eyes of another animal, culture or ethnic religion.Translated mythology or poetry may appear to tell us about a familiar sequence of say natural phenomena, but by rendering these descriptions into ordinary language we miss out on it's essential meaning.
@StarryGordon Жыл бұрын
I think the lion thing is sort of overworked. The general form of the idea is that those who produce language are embedded in particular material bodies and we can't know what they mean because we do not experience that body. However, as people above have noted, cats and dogs (and, presumably, lions) do express themselves and often we do sort of know what they mean -- "I'm angry", "I'm hungry", "I'm glad to see you," and so forth. The case is not quite as black and white as as Wit seems to be proposing.
@unfortunatebeam4 жыл бұрын
Wittgenstein is the kind of professor I wish I had when I was at University.
@isaacolivecrona61144 жыл бұрын
Really? Are you a masochist? You like being screamed at and abused?
@isaacolivecrona61142 жыл бұрын
@@jcudal32 Wittgenstein appear to have been a rather unsympathetic person and not a very important philosophy either. There’s a word for the thing he achieved: a cult of personality.
@martinmaguire-music6692 Жыл бұрын
@@isaacolivecrona6114 When you've tried to study the problem of self-understanding and identity from a philosophical standpoint, (not sociological or psychological) and all you have to go on are the enquiries of Merleau-Ponty, or those of the middle Wittgenstein, then he becomes important. I don't care if he was a dickhead, his remarks on the use of language at the most common and basic level have proven to be very helpful - if a little meandering. Though I don't deny people (my younger self included) gushed at his personality in a way that was philosophically irrelevant, but people will gush, won't they?
@kaffeephilosophy Жыл бұрын
@@isaacolivecrona6114”not a very important philosophy”? Ridiculous.
@RaccoonGrrrl2 жыл бұрын
Imagine if Wittgenstein live to see "Pineapple pen" meme in 2016
@user-hu3iy9gz5j Жыл бұрын
He would see his life work succeed. Everything he fought for
@sacha_mskyАй бұрын
he would turn gay for sure
@simply_mapleАй бұрын
I'm addicted to his voice
@sacha_mskyАй бұрын
one must imagine addiction
@screensaves5 ай бұрын
whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must remain silent
@jangeertbruggink70403 жыл бұрын
Probably will cost me the rest of my life to comprehend this.
@jmarsh205 Жыл бұрын
Howndo you communicate that to me/other readers? What is the function of that feeling/terminology your use? You might say it's a inner, subjective feeling you have, therefore so is your meaning subjective. Wittgenstein thinks meaning can only be captured by referring to what's publicly available. The private [insert word(s) here] is an illusion, but that's not to say you don't have individuality going on in your head, just that we can't produce meaningful 'signs' / representations for such thinking. He famously said the limits of language are the limits of my world.
@ruanbatista28344 жыл бұрын
''For me or for the lion?'' Fatality!
@Stpetersburginjurylawyersmp9 жыл бұрын
Reminds me Nagel's "What it's like to be a bat"
@christophergraves67254 жыл бұрын
Really, it's the opposite of what Nagel is saying. Wittgenstein is a philosophical behaviorist. He denies there are internal private experiences while Nagel is saying that the bat's consciousness is constructed so differently from ours that we cannot really imagine what it is like to be a bat. Who Wittgenstein reminds me of in the sequence with the lion's language is Heidegger.
@daniloi.79974 жыл бұрын
"You have lost Rome without even raising your sword!" "You have lost Rome!"
@komina123454 жыл бұрын
For real, I know Karl has done other stuff but all I see is Cato
@htf55554 жыл бұрын
Calm yourself Cato, you lack understanding of things philosophical else you would see that my actions have been perfectly correct at all times
@ishmaelm19324 жыл бұрын
@@htf5555 Ooooooohhhh shiyyyyt. We got ourselves fans of Rome Representin'
@dinosaurfilms4 жыл бұрын
I knew he looked familiar!
@daniloi.79974 жыл бұрын
@@htf5555 I believe it was "of things military" and not philosophical which would be weird as it was Cato afterall.
@markbennett89274 жыл бұрын
The uncle of my friend ger, spent many hours sat in front of his peat fire telling stories and sharing time with Wittgenstein, the cottage is located in a sparse unspoilt part of the world with sea otters washing off the sea salt of the harbour in the tiny freshwater stream that ran across the end of his front garden, every evening at dusk. There is a dancing spot just inside the front (and only) door, folks just go about their daily business, the sun shines, the rain falls and all is well where people care for one another....we here in the west, under the shadow of uncertainty, stuck on the threads of a poisonous web of lies spun by crazy people wait...hope.....listen and then despair....time after time.....seek the truth, seek honesty and heed the lesson of the sermon on the mount spoken by a well decent geezer.....👊peace out xxx
@GataZGinkgo4 жыл бұрын
@@melby1839 where can I learn more?
@paulcunnane44 жыл бұрын
What drivel.
@cmoran91038 ай бұрын
Where? Ireland? I know Wittgenstein was in Wicklow
@ChrisMessina Жыл бұрын
This might explain why LLMs hallucinate. Though the use of "hallucinate" in the context of a large language model may itself be trivializing hallucinations.
@8balljunkie2 жыл бұрын
Philosophy is just a by product of misunderstanding language. Fuck, this quote changed the way i think drastically
@slappy89414 жыл бұрын
This gives a good glimpse into the mindset of the early twentieth century.
@TUTMENA5 жыл бұрын
"LINGUISTIC CONFUSION MADE ME DO IT" (C) Ludwig Cube Wittgenstein
@OLUCART4 жыл бұрын
he looks so much like wittgenstein i had to double check his birthdate like "wtf is that possible"
@williamkoscielniak8203 жыл бұрын
I was thinking the same thing. I'm amazed they were able to find an actor who looks like a spitting image of Wittgenstein who was also capable of playing his character so well.
@dennisvlasten12584 жыл бұрын
Who has noticed, that the face of the pineapple changes through the scene? What does it mean ?
@jaspreetsingh-nr6gr4 жыл бұрын
it means that soon, it's going to get a haircut and drive a shiny red mclaren P1, after snorting some *thicc* lines..
@jaspergardner-medwin17234 жыл бұрын
It means it's a pleasant pineapple
@YVray4 жыл бұрын
Whoa, didn't notice that. I doubt there's any deeper meaning to it. It's probably just a gaff in editing. The actor playing Wittgenstein didn't draw identical pineapples in every take so when they spliced bits from Take A and Take B together, we got some shots of Pineapple A and some from Pineapple B.
@paulcunnane44 жыл бұрын
To which I say no it didn't.
@sacha_mskyАй бұрын
it mean that spongebob is homeless
@OhSugarify12 жыл бұрын
Damnit, I just began to understand Wittgenstein.....
@isaacolivecrona61144 жыл бұрын
Stay off the drugs!
@criticalbil14 жыл бұрын
Batman's butler among the audience. "Hullo, Batman's butler." "Hullo."
@justbede11 жыл бұрын
To show the chacter of the society in Cambridge through their diverse dressing manners. And to compare with Wittgenstein, who does not fit in his own manners. An accurate, brilliant, "symbolic" representation, including of Russel, Keynes ways shown in their dressing manners
@pukulu6 жыл бұрын
"Philosophy is just a byproduct of misunderstanding language." Paradox arises because of the misuse of language.
@johnfrancis90865 жыл бұрын
Is that profound? Paradox arises because of the misuse of language?
@NiePieerdol4 жыл бұрын
@@johnfrancis9086 It's not. We need paradoxes to express things exceeding the possibilities of language, I send you all to Jung for more in that matter. If we lived on Wittgenstein's logical language rules, boy it would be mathematically boring!
@montsemajanmartinez98244 жыл бұрын
🤔 The question could be asked : Must a truth be Profound in order to be valid?
@thehellyousay4 жыл бұрын
Paradox arises whenever you have 2 dox...
@TheTheode4 жыл бұрын
Language muddles axioms and this is why math is the true language of philosophy, honestly philosophy should be separated into different studies as moralists are a completely different breed than mathematical philosophers.
@toddtrimble25556 ай бұрын
Quite the colorful crowd. The one in red: would that be Bertrand Russell?
@nyuzoo10 ай бұрын
I watched the video without knowing anything about Wittgenstein. Now i know what is he talking about.
@hellap.65726 жыл бұрын
Karl Johson's acting was fascinating, if professior Wittgenstein was really like him, I would really liked him.
@isaacolivecrona61144 жыл бұрын
You wouldn’t.
@michaelfern40792 жыл бұрын
If you were a kid and you got something wrong, he’d whack you over the head. He fled from a job after a child collapsed after thumping him.
@hellap.65722 жыл бұрын
@@isaacolivecrona6114 how t f u know
@hellap.65722 жыл бұрын
@@michaelfern4079 pretty much agreeable
@isaacolivecrona61142 жыл бұрын
@@hellap.6572 Reading biographies.
@00avc14 жыл бұрын
Hello fellow brains, whirring through this virtual world
@josephhoward40104 жыл бұрын
Bello
@terencemichaels4 жыл бұрын
Hi there.
@MrScreaminglarry3 жыл бұрын
Fellow brain passing by. Hello.
@ricochetsixtyten3 жыл бұрын
im not a brain
@DSAK555 ай бұрын
wrong Ludwig
@KaninTuzi4 жыл бұрын
If you drive through Norway there is a little town by a beautiful turquoise lake. Next to a little camping site on the other side of the water there is an almost hidden, worn-out sign that says: "Wittgenstein's hut”. Me and my family stumbled upon this by mere accident and followed the sign up a narrow path and it leads you to a small overgrown stone-house foundation on the edge of a steep cliff overlooking the serene lake. Also, I heard Wittgenstein was gay.
@kolbeinlkka368210 ай бұрын
They buildt it back up. The house was never demolished, just moved.
@TheyMadeMePickAName4 жыл бұрын
this man has obviously never kept a dog in his life
@Adventure_fuel4 жыл бұрын
Why is this fake intelectual?
@TheyMadeMePickAName4 жыл бұрын
Rebirth Resurrection an inte- what?
@gemznyan92634 жыл бұрын
@@Adventure_fuel intellectual*
@GamerwithaConscience6 жыл бұрын
Neuroscience has told us that language can affect our perception of life by changing its brain chemistry
@tenbre57485 жыл бұрын
Though I respect your delivery of information and regard it as accurate, I do not like that the rhetorical structure of your argument. To me, it implies that science must confirm an idea and/or that the scientific method is without fault. That, however, is a perception - you may have typed your comment because you find it interesting for example. The structure of the phrase presents no obvious attempt at the rhetorical, other than an observation.
@aegisrille45465 жыл бұрын
@@tenbre5748 The comment doesn't seem to imply that at all. It's not an argument, it's an observation of a fact that is related to the topic.
@tenbre57485 жыл бұрын
aegis rille I mean, I realize this now that I not suffering from a major fever and wacked or on cough syrup. Wiggenstein p deece though.
@kvnboudreaux4 жыл бұрын
Exactly one of the way trauma survivors integrate their fragmented sensory memories is to put them into words...
@loveulez4 жыл бұрын
We knew that already
@jmufferaw4 жыл бұрын
I can’t understand, because it’s a “pleasant pineapple”. This man was a genius.
@zootsoot2006 Жыл бұрын
It's not a pleasant pineapple compared to mine.
@janremoto48498 ай бұрын
He wasn't supposed to lie or it's over. So what?
@thenatureofthings9312 Жыл бұрын
There are two philosophies for Wittgenstein. This is his first philosophy --> 3:39 Later in life, he himself criticized this first philosophy of language. In his second philosophy, language is a social activity, not just for philosophical questions.
@dumitruvegas1497 ай бұрын
go and search "wittgenstein brought back to life" - thank me later
@medievalmusiclover4 жыл бұрын
Good way to understand that we do not understand what we should understand but only because we do not understand how to understand symbols.
@iunnox6664 жыл бұрын
Yep, it sure it a good way to get hung up on words while providing no solutions or anything else of value.
@petergacs12664 жыл бұрын
Philosophie ist ein Mißbrauch von Terminologie die zu diesem Zweck eigens erfunden wird. -- Heine
@anuragdubey36962 ай бұрын
well enough ❤
@jstormclouds3 күн бұрын
the correct definition of a word or sentence is the intended idea in the mind of the speaker at a point in time. . Words are intended to convey ideas, but much communication may be unintended.
@abooswalehmosafeer1734 жыл бұрын
Now I think what he is getting at but no sooner did i think than I lost it again.
@cloudystraightfromeden7 жыл бұрын
if we can't speak of doubt , we can't speak of knowledge either
@faviod7526 жыл бұрын
But knowledge and doubt and led by a rule. Awareness of a rule imply awareness of the lack of it, this is, a person can tell when someone follows the rule if and only if the very same person can tell when someone doesn't follow the rule. To know X I have gone through a rule - mathematical, physical, chemical, etc.- and the possibility of a missaplied rule is always present (as suggested in on certainty: a rule that tells people when a rule is correctly applied is useless, because it goes ad infinitum). Because of this knowledge and doubt are either together. To think of an absolute "knowledge", Wittgenstein invites us to think of what rule we followed to have that knowledge, and what a mistakes in this "absolute knowledge" contitutes to make it impossible. Because of the rule-following conditions, such "absolute knowledge" is senseless. This does not plead for skepticism, the very condition of knowledge and doubt is being tied together.
@LuyahDunnit6 жыл бұрын
Doubtin Thomas you know you are in pain because you know when you are not in pain and the same goes for when you observe others. Wittgenstein is trying to say that differing perspectives and outcomes that can be linked to the same conclusion are what create the absolution of knowledge
@KeeperOfProphecies6 жыл бұрын
What is doubt without knowledge? What is light without dark? etc. etc. Tautologies that are nonsensical. If you cannot doubt, you cannot know as there is only knowing; in what manner can one doubt when it doesn't exist?
@John-lf3xf5 жыл бұрын
cloud y That’s a false bifurcation
@John-lf3xf5 жыл бұрын
fret wait no.... why?
@daveherbert62154 жыл бұрын
This small excerpt of a film does not do justice to Wittgenstein, though Lord knows I have found him to be difficult. In the early days he was associated strongly with the Vienna circle of philosophy. They were against metaphysics/religion, every statement had to be testable/objective or it was metaphysics. After he wrote his magnum opus outlining his theory held gave up on philosophy as in his opinion he had solved the problem of philosophy. Later he returned to philosophy as he became aware that his account of language was deficient. He then championed his philosophical psychology. Objectivity was achieved by the language that we share with each other eg English. These are my words that I write but hey are still English. there would be no point in having a private language as it could not be shared
@whoami84344 жыл бұрын
The quickest way to solve any problem is to stop thinking about it.
@davejacob52084 жыл бұрын
it is not generally agreed upon that wittgenstein really wanted to say that philosophy itself is the thing with the problem in his first tractatus.
@DarkAngelEU4 жыл бұрын
But isn't it more that there is no problem with philosophy, as there is a moral crisis among human thought? Sartre, Foucault, Deleuze, Derrida, Chomsky, all have alot to say about this. Wittgenstein just went "bleuhdzbczozdlehbclzfqunelzf,qef" and checked out.
@davejacob52084 жыл бұрын
@@DarkAngelEU wittgenstein actually was very analytically, more in the direction of the opposite of "bgdjgdsjgnj"
@JStack3 ай бұрын
So much of his writings come off as an Autistic person metaphorically screaming at the disconnect between language and societal promotion of "honesty," and the actual material state of what he lives in and sees. I say that as someone who is Autistic and find his writings on language and honesty almost descriptive of my thoughts, but phrased more concisely. "Limits of my language mean the limits of my world."
@marclayne92614 жыл бұрын
Absolute Genius.......
@justbede11 жыл бұрын
To SS. Language is what we say. It doesn't tell us anything. We create it. His point is to show that misunderstanding of how language works leads to non sense and/or pseudo problems.
@Jamie-js3qw4 жыл бұрын
that makes no sense. be clearer or less superficial.
@davidpiersol23754 жыл бұрын
@@Jamie-js3qw it makes perfect sense. Think more clearly.
@bobolinkr4 жыл бұрын
@@davidpiersol2375 explain it then, so we can see if your language should tell us anything about how your mind works
@televikkuntdaowuxing4 жыл бұрын
bobolinkr it is quite well explained, and with the video explanation it should be more than enough. If you still don’t get it, go look up wikipedia’s explanation, or watch some godard movie (preferably My Life to Live). You’re not gonna instantly understand everything people throw at you, you’ve got to make an effort for the developing of your intellect. The video’s basic idea, and of the original comment too, is words by itself are dead. We give meaning to them, so we never can be certain we are correctly filtering and organizing our thoughts, or that we’ve been understood. I’m sure you’ve experienced this before, this feeling of being sure you’re not being correctly understood by someone, or being insufficiently able to express your thoughts correctly. Wittgenstein takes this as the base, and develops it to understand why philosophy exists and why even problems exist at all. Sorry if my english is kinda bad, not my first language.
@iunnox6664 жыл бұрын
@@Jamie-js3qw You understand, it's just that it is as superficial as it sounds. Words don't have meaning by themselves, we all have internal dictionaries translating it into our native thought patterns. Very obvious and basic stuff, but some people like to jack themselves off by explaining it in the most convoluted overly verbose manner possible.
@hookflash6994 жыл бұрын
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."
@topspinaurelius4 жыл бұрын
that is the standard reply of ppl who are either too lazy and / or too dumb to understand a specific subject
@hookflash6994 жыл бұрын
@@topspinaurelius "The Emperor's new clothes are absolutely *stunning*!"
@topspinaurelius4 жыл бұрын
@@hookflash699 , you can copy and paste a million of these trite "truisms" and there is still just a vacuum between the ears afterward, worthwhile thoughts and understanding require real effort
@GurniHallek4 жыл бұрын
@@topspinaurelius Yeah, yeah, sure, we all just a bunch of peasant who do not understand the deep profundity and world-turning wisdom that is hidden in this gem of philosophy. Unlike you, who are clearly superior to us, if only by the virtue of assuming that this gibberish has some profound meaning hidden in it.
@tangerinesarebetterthanora70607 ай бұрын
Wittgenstein could really have taken his own advice more, it seems.
@abhilashattri26657 ай бұрын
The best unintentional asmr😂
@likeriver11 жыл бұрын
"ooh deeeaah"
@justbede11 жыл бұрын
4) Again, the point is to show that weekdays don't belong to a dog's "form of life".
@DSAK555 ай бұрын
everyday is the weekend for a dog
@iggyj2614 жыл бұрын
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus 4.003-4.0031
@deejay8ch8 ай бұрын
Gold. Like a pineapple. Made of gold. Pleasant gold.
@DEBO521 күн бұрын
The object is the pineapple. The pineapple is moving in the direction of ”pleasant” with the ambiguous quantifier “very”. The pineapple serves us as an atomic fact simply due to its existence in the first place, and the fact that its constituent parts are of no use in this context.
@anomienormie81264 жыл бұрын
A word is not the thought, it's merely a clumsy portrayal of a thought. We only understand the approximation of what a person means when they say something.
@hellucination99054 жыл бұрын
Significant/significate distinction.
@adekkamalov16055 жыл бұрын
This reminds me of Charlie Day in Always Sunny
@DSAK555 ай бұрын
you obviously don't get the implication
@zimpooooooАй бұрын
Look at my dog. My dog is amazing. And so is my pineapple.
@lostsoul58484 жыл бұрын
Geez man okay you win
@JohnconnoКүн бұрын
Colorless Green Ideas Sleep Furiously
@kalbininkas4 жыл бұрын
"It's not the dog we need".
@vaxxmilosevic6764 жыл бұрын
Bill Nye giving an actual lecture
@michaelburke68714 жыл бұрын
The words here are to be thought of with the smile, the posture, the nodding of the head, etc. They don’t convey any facts about the pineapple and could’ve been replaced with “yum!”
@pabloop98918 ай бұрын
2:46 can someone explain this part to me please? “If you cannot doubt a thing, you cannot know it.” Why is that?
@xavierdeltoro28862 ай бұрын
to negate "i know" is to say "i don't know" (i.e. doubt), so to use the phrase "i know ___" means that the thing known must be capable of being doubted for it to make sense that it is known
@SerPinkKnight Жыл бұрын
I'm currently rotating a 3D very pleasant pineapple in my mind
@benthayermath4 жыл бұрын
0:34 That guy's face omg
@jacquiecotillard96994 күн бұрын
Karl’s Wittgenstein looks so sad, staring off during pauses. How do you perform a deeply lonely man, when one could not possibly know what his world was like?
@sammohunk9 жыл бұрын
Those who have seen the entire film, Please rate this film on IMDb here: www.imdb.com/title/tt0108583/combined
@edwardwebb12465 жыл бұрын
i luv th furniture, camera on a rail? cool swing no less!
@sithdestroya4 жыл бұрын
They have taught several animals a rudimentary form of language. So I would reason to think that that means our world is much more objective than we think
@weewee21692 жыл бұрын
noam chomsky would disagree
@gargarcomedy6 жыл бұрын
He went a tad Fuhreresque at the end!!
@AimanAbdallah17204 жыл бұрын
he was classmates with Hitler after all
@gargarcomedy4 жыл бұрын
@@AimanAbdallah1720 teachers were busy so lol
@Aivottaja4 жыл бұрын
Well, they went to the same school, so..
@dionbridger59443 жыл бұрын
@@AimanAbdallah1720 It makes you wonder what was going on at that school.
@ricochetsixtyten3 жыл бұрын
i keep coming back to this video because of how non-sensical it is
@stephenridley115317 күн бұрын
Sane as a box of frogs innit!
@katherinekelly64326 жыл бұрын
"This is a very pleasant Pineapple" is subjective. Language that is subjective is a language only spoken by the subject. It belongs wholly to the speaker. He is correct. Nothing is hidden and all is open to view once you understand why language is subjective and learn the language the speaker is speaking.
@dionbridger5944 Жыл бұрын
Inter-subjective. See Wittgenstein's private language argument.
@TheEleatic4 жыл бұрын
Did the dog eat the pineapple?
@yuriarin32375 жыл бұрын
there is no recording of Wittgenstein's voice?
@Albeit_Jordan2 жыл бұрын
*Wittgenstein:* this is a very pleasant pineapple *The **_'this is not a pipe'_** painting guy:* No, this is not a pineapple
@ibrahimibrahim-jn3dw Жыл бұрын
please what’s the name of that movie?
@friedrichschopenhauer29008 жыл бұрын
I enjoyed it, but a problem I've always had with reenactments is that they tend generally to overdramatize ... was Wittgenstein really such an emotional lecturer? I do know he got in trouble for boxing his female students' ears.
@NightDoge8 жыл бұрын
+Safespace Invader -- He was very emotional. I heard in a lecuter that in one of Russel's diaries he said of Vitty, along the lines of, "There's a crazy German in my office yelling at me in German". (Austria, but whatevs.)
@contemporaryart57187 жыл бұрын
I happen to love you Kant. I appreciate all you have done to stop the forward march of demons within atheism and indeed you rival, one Adam Weishaupt.
@keyboardcorrector23405 жыл бұрын
Friedrich Schopenhauer, He knocked a boy unconscious once because the boy could not adequately follow along with Wittgenstein's teachings when he was lecturing at a youth school in some village in Austria.
@Jide-bq9yf4 жыл бұрын
Friedrich Schopenhauer there you go .
@LuigiSimoncini4 жыл бұрын
I read he menaced Karl Popper with a poker once during a debate
@hasanshafy_10 ай бұрын
Where can I get the full video?
@lm581423 ай бұрын
He would have been a great aeronaut.
@nunyanunya63984 жыл бұрын
Crown me with poppy and hibiscus ! crown These brows with nightshade, monkshood and vervain ! Let us anoint us with the unguents brown That waft our wizard bodies to the plain Where in the circle of unholy stones The unconsecrated Sabbath is at height ; Where the grim goat rattling his skulls and bones Makes music that dissolves the dusk of night Into a ruddy fervour from the abyss Such as I see (when cunning can surprise Our Argus foe and give us leave to kiss) Within your deep, your damned, your darling eyes. Ay ! to the Sabbath where the crowned worm Exults, with twisted yard and slime-cold sperm.
@123Frederiic1232 жыл бұрын
Wittgenstein II, btw. 3:40
@justbede11 жыл бұрын
3) everybody understands what a pleasant pinneaple is?
@DSAK555 ай бұрын
especially if you've had an evening with an unpleasant pineapple
@MrJJBhizzle4 жыл бұрын
I'm surprised there's no YTP on this.
@herbertmoon998 Жыл бұрын
So this is how cato became so skilled at filibusters
@robzworkz33584 жыл бұрын
I remember I urinated by a tree when I was 10 years old and my dog did afterwards. I didnt know what that meant. Did he say, "this is my territory"? Or did he say, "this is what I consumed for breakfast human, you smell it"? Why did he leave a scent signal?
@EGarrett014 жыл бұрын
My dog would just watch on occasions when I did that when we were out for a walk in nature, so I presume that unless he was protecting you by covering your scent with his (I was already an adult), he probably was just going to pee on most of the trees when he could to mark his territory. Although we had a pet bird who would eat everytime we ate.