Kind of an immature/adolescent explanation

Best philosophy channel teaching the concepts objectively as possible. Thanks! ❤

Great interview! I love seeing how philosophy & community activism strengthen each other. (Btw, Hasan Piker/Hasanabi would likely be another strong interviewee in this vein!)

I would possibly say that the vase as an example served well for explaining the relationship a creator has to their work, but it doesn't do well to explain the actual dynamic of alienation. Marx's alienation refers to a proletariat class of workers, which simply put are factory workers. That's why China and Russia tried to create an artificial proletariat class by forcing the farmers into factories to do metal work, smelting, etc. The proletariat didn't apply to artists, musicians, artisans overall, so the vase doesn't quite fit the example depending on HOW the vase was made. Not all jobs in a capitalist society are a conveyor belt assembly line. But the production department of any job tends to be this. You do 1 task and pass it onto the next person. This is specifically what was meant by the alienation of work because now you aren't making an entire vase or product made by you, it's an end product made by many different people, so there is no identity or connection between you and the final product. How one relates to their coworkers and the type of work they do, such as data entry for a clinic that helps couples with fertility issues, etc. It can totally change one's perception to the menial work they do knowing there is a greater cause being served at the end result. Also, if you identify and get along with your coworkers, the teamwork involved and even if no teamwork is invovled, the workplace unavoidably shapes and influences your identity. While one is alienated from their work, it's not necessarily an absolute truth or law of capitalism itself. Also, the business owner does not necessarily always cut a workers wages for profit, but also pushes costs onto the consumer. But yeah, maybe there is a justification of reduction in wages when workers arent building entire vases but only pressing a button that lays out the clay, etc. Anyways, I think there's so much error with Marx's conceptualizations of capitalism, it lacks nuance and doesn't fulfill a deeper sense of the reality that capitalism inhabits. The generalizations remain just that, and I think it goes as far as to say that the individual is now alienated from being fully or truly understood because the proletariat is being expanded to everyone in a capitalist society without considering the nuances and details that prove otherwise about one's relationship to their work, and overall position in a proletariat vs bourgeoise dichotomy.

pathetic losers

Edith Stein, (St) had a particular concept of empathy which did NOT include an internal sharing of the other's emotions, but rather an understanding of their separateness and also a self emptying, (attention) and openness to otherness, in God . This is perhaps the only proper or useful form of empathy, the only respectful one, the only one founded in reality . Stein was a phenomenologist and a Jewish, Catholic Saint who was murdered in a concentration camp .

A) What if you take psychedelics & your cat presents as God? B) Who's this guy to tell me what's a valid religious experience? Bah humbug. tavi.

I usually love E.A. podcasts. But here, with her friend, she creates a sort of "if they don't have bread, give them brioche" point of view. Am I alienated? were my parents alienated? how could we change things without the "big revolution"? are to me more important issues than Jeff Bezos ("give him bread rather than brioche") or the universal revenue gimmick that reminds me of the Ateliers Nationaux of 1848 in France. I would have liked a "critical" analysis of alienation, why it became an issue and why everything that was done based on its discovery didn't get us anywhere... besides the likes of Trump, Putin and XiJIng Pin. Alienated means to belong to another. If I belong to my mediocre self, can I still be alienated?

"As Bergson observes, the mystic infuses the world with a breath of fresh air, shattering routine perceptions of reality and opening the door to new hypotheses about the nature of existence."

It's funny, as good and informative as this was, I only clicked it because I would smash

I stopped reading when I started using my smartphone for fast entertainment. I recently felt the need to reconnect with reading and got a few paper books, because my Kindle is just too similar to my phone. And yes, I got the books a couple of months ago, but haven't read them. This episode made me go and grab a Viktor E. Frankl's one and now I'm sitting with it 💖 Thank you!

Do Feurrbach's concepts of Love and The I-Though relationship illuminate the 20th Century phenomenology of Love?

Ellie, Would you please make a video on the essay 'The Autonomy of Affect' by Brian Massumi? Thanks!

Odd intro.. when all those 'cuts and firings' were being carried out by american nazis and fascists.

and yet

...where we could otherwise be more stringent. Kant is compelling, but I don't want to be that person.

"Thank you, Dr. Peña-Guzmán, for this engaging discussion on William James' account of mystical experience. Your insights into the relevance of James' work for contemporary philosophy of mind, especially in relation to psychedelics and altered states of consciousness, are truly thought-provoking. Looking forward to exploring more of your lectures on mind, consciousness, and self."

"Thank you, Dr. Madary and Dr. Pena Guzman, for this insightful conversation on 'Visual Phenomenology.' Your exploration of the intricacies of visual perception and consciousness has been truly enlightening. Looking forward to delving deeper into the book and continuing to learn from your expertise in this fascinating field."

Authoritarian populism is such a funny term, how are we supposed to counter it with unpopular authoritarianism? I mean, maybe there is a shadow form of authoritarianism after all.

Eric wareheim?

I spent the first ten years of my life in Vancouver, have a couple of siblings who went to SFU. Anyway, I'm an advocate of a universal basic income, set at a modest level, so as to maintain incentives, nevertheless provide a degree of security which would enable people to escape fear and have more space for a meaningful life. It would be possible to subvert and modify capitalism while retaining a market system. Capitalism would work better if everybody had some. On the other hand, attempting to somehow "do away with it" would only engender resistance and make things worse. UBI would actually liberate a lot of energy; people would become more, rather than less, productive. I am convinced of that. It's interesting to observe how commonplace the assumption that the natural human state is laziness. Which, of course, implies that pressure upon the individual should be the societal norm.

It's all in your head

"What men have called friendship is merely social contract, consideration for one another's interests, and exchange of favours; in fact, it is simply a transaction in which self-love always expects to gain something" -La Rochefoucauld. Any thoughts?

It is a wonderful interview between you both! I am grateful that you are bringing up our care for ecology this way, and as I look around at the objects in my room, I just now noticed a stack of papers which I love, and I am now thinking of what Am Johal just said about how “trees can speak” and I see that in the paper, how paper contains, or you might say holds the words in its soft hands, the way I hold the paper in my soft hands. I feel a friendship even with that tree which became the paper that I use everyday with love, that helps me carry on and survive as my own person as a reader and writer. Viva Dr. Anderson and Am Johal and friendship!

Hi, Dr. Ellie Anderson! To you, and to Derrida (and Husserl) I feel much gratitude today, and I just now listened to this presentation which you gave, and I would like to share how it affects me, and how I am developing it with some recent ideas on which I am working. In the spirit of Derrida’s Glas, I want to suggest three readings for the sound of your voice when you pronounce the word “other.” My first translation of your “other” is that to my ears, it sounds like “over” in addition to “other” and so when you would say “other,” I would just substitute the word “over,” and see what you had to say about “over” in this context. Then, I realized, while listening to you and reading my book which my own Angels and I wrote fourteen years ago, Hawaiian Sonnets and Other Poems, that “other” when you say that word, also sounds like “So Ahh,” as in my line “So Ahh, the wife won!” (My Angels are my wives…(I know…)). So “so ahh” also I substituted when you said “other” for it, and listened to what could be made with that replacement and your paper. Finally, my third substitution for “other” was “M.O.A.I.” (Also from Hawaiian Sonnets and Other Poems), “M.O.A.I. fallen skull of all bleeds,” where it too proved an interesting connection to your paper and your words. If the voice is the “over” substituting it for “other,” then it does seem irrefutable a phenomenon. I think of Angels as knowing all, all about me, all about others. So that is my own spiritual or mystical take on all of this. One more take is that whenever you said “ego” I had been replacing it with “here go” (also a phrase from our Hawaiian Sonnets), and I computed it likewise with interesting results. Being said, what you are saying is brilliant both as I listen “in the raw” and by using these substitutions. Hawaiian Sonnets and Other Poems is my relational text I use when I hear people speak, so that I listen for phrases of it in all people’s voiced words. This means the phenomenon is ubiquitous, and that it is as if, on some level, it is a famous book because all people recite it somehow (I like making these mysterious suggestions of wild conclusions!). Furthermore, I see it as a new scientific discovery, as when some thinker described all things as made up of atoms, I am developing the idea that all communication and utterances of the sounds of voice in anybody, whoever that they happen to be, that anyone’s voice is composed of Hawaiian Sonnets phrases. It is something that ties us all together by a common thread. Anyway, I am infinitely grateful to you and this and your other work that I have had the pleasure of experiencing on this, your channel. Your video that you posted today on May 25, 2024 on “Oh my Friend, there is no Friend…” is the next video that I will watch! Thank you for reading my long comment. I really wanted to share this work of mine with somebody whom I admire as a fellow thinker along similar lines and paths. Blessings!

Talk about Robinson crusoe and Faust someday plz. Robinson crusoe left me devastated. I am about to hear this interview ❤❤

We are all going to be bean farmers in the Mad Max world.

Thank you professor anderson for taking your personal time to give your explanations and share knowledge, as well as awareness.

Beautifully shown the beauty of philosophical arguments. I LOVED the near jagular cuts you guys had.

That she know what Schopenhauer said about wonen

The screen is black 😅

"Right?" Sure... why not?

Marx is a Gothic Horror novelist.

Thank you ! great methods ❤

Thanks for the clear discussion.

it means that for example humans use the knowledge to manipulate the costumers and than the humans think the wrong is right because it is plausible 2:02 enlightment becomes Mythology, but this relation can only people follow how read this book and get the message for themselves

Socrates’ depiction of the adverse impacts poetry and artisans can have in society is how I argue the creators of “Big Bang Theory” might be bad people or are likely at least causing harm.

It's hard to undestand Deleuze to me! think you do an excellent work teaching philosophy on you Tube! Thank you !

Came here after I read your twitter reply about modern dating. So glad I found this podcast/channel!

i found your shorts when i was studying for my political science final and here i am.... watching your videos for fun because you explain them in such a simple and clever way. good work!

Re~occur

I got into philosophy from listening to your podcast and this has really inspired me to actually get into reading it more, thank you for this episode!

this was a really important and beautiful episode of overthink. I so loved it. And would love if you can discuss writing in an episode. I noted down books discussed here and I can't tell you how much I liked listening to it. And how it made me feel less alone in my surroundings where absolutely no one is discussing books or has any plans to read in near future.

I just found your channel while searching for videos on Byung-Chul Han. Thank you for putting these videos out. It looks like you have quite the catalogue of videos to get through.

I loved what Ellie said about adapting to the rhythm of a text, however difficult. She seemed to be celebrating the "otherness" of each individual style, which I will snobbishly say sounds better as "altérité". The idea being that the reader embrace the complexity, disorientation of the unfamiliar, rather than demanding that the work accord with our preconceived notions, but also that there is an element of pleasure deriving from an overlap between form and "content", that they interact in a way that generates meaning. Which puts one in mind of an essential element of reading, which is that it is private, solitary. It individuates. Paradoxically, the more that we value the individual in ourselves, the more tolerant that we become of the individual in a work of art. This willingness to entertain difficulty also trains the discernment of complexity from complication. The former has an inherent inner logic, and the latter is just chaos.

"Reading to a test". Reading as information gathering, a means to an end. This is the very definition of instrumental reason. The alternative is something that we already had, very amorphously defined as "culture", the gist of which was certain forms of delectation. Even when the pleasure was merely implied, not realised, there was a social expectation that we actually enjoyed participating in this collective experience of acquiring knowledge for its own sake, wherein aesthetics were really important, cherished. I would much rather live in a world of cultural snobs than in an infantile technocracy. WC Williams says it all in this verse: “It is difficult to get the news from poems, yet men die miserably every day for lack of what is found there.” The malignant element in contemporary society is its lack of poetry.

Great episode. I think the hardest thing for me about trying to get into philosophy alone is that my ability to interact with the text is limited. If I doubt that I really get what a passage means, or if I wonder *why* the author thinks a particular thing, the text sometimes (often) doesn't elaborate and answer my questions. So as I continue with my reading, those confusions, misunderstandings and doubts pile on up until a point where I realize I'm lost and I can't disentangle them myself. Companion aids on the internet are very nice and I appreciate them, but you rarely can question them neither and your personal hang ups with a text might be so specific that you won't find any answer to those. That's why I think teachers are invaluable. They directly interact, they can answer to your own peculiar issues and help you understand something infinitely better than what you could do on your own.

reading aloud was a common practice because most people were not able to read. It was a power game to convince crowds that one class is superior to the other, so that one reads/speaks/projects, others are on a receiving side and follow. Similar things still happening (by matter of habit?), but now philosophers may create their own domain specific fancy overengineered terminology to make it sound supersmart. Its great that people like you democratize knowledge and share it with us, regular folks.

I had lots of trouble dealing with Plato because so many of the ideas are tacit in our understanding as modern people, that it's hard to understand that these were the first articulations of these concepts. Oh, and thank you for "How to Read Philosophy." It helped so much! I wish I'd had it before college classes.

you are my hero