Solvitur ambulando

I read this book in early highschool. And never forgot it! Still one of my favorites

It's fascinating. One can see the parallels between Lucifer and The Last Man. Do you get me? That victim mentality. Agonizing themselves over the fact that "Life is not fair". And instead of equalizing the playing field and envisioning their will. They come to the conclusion that they're a victim of life and it isn't worth living. So they deny it. Rebel against it. Against life.

Religion is a shorthand to govern many things, scientific concepts but also societal dynamics. As an an atheist, I think religion has evolved for a reason, it's obviously useful as a trait, or it was, to humans. I don't deny that I am a cultural Christian, but I lack the belief in a god. You don't need the bible to justify and explain the golden rule. Ideas and actions, or lack thereof, have consequences. If I'm nice, I possibly create a nicer environment, both for myself and others. I don't need the 10 commandments to think that not to steal or murder is a good idea, etc.

Beat writer, I respect this man a lot

is anyone else watching this just to think that youre smarter than you actually are but dont understand anything hes saying after 5 mins

Maths and critical thinking are two completely different things. Mathematics is a specifical skill that does not influence how you see the world. The only benefit is that it trains your discipline, because you have to stay focused and "grind" your way to solve problems, witch is a pretty common thing in life and intellectual jobs

You would make a fantastic lit professor.

Frankly I started losing it right from the beginning of the 3rd part. Perhaps that’s because it’s beyond my capacity to even fathom this degree of love.

Yo I’m the man from the underground. Even when people try to show me love I either reject it or loathe the other person. That’s how deep my self hatred is. Needless to say I try and stay out of intimate relationships.

This is good but you are speaking too fast. Take your time. Don't rush.

It seems to me that the book of Ecclesiastes in the Bible has a very similar vibe to Epicurus. It doesn't dwell much on an afterlife. The first part is about the uselessness of most human pursuits, and at the end it says we should enjoy friendship, our partner, and food and drink. Is that a fair comparison?

i want to add that at 9:18 Gregor doesn't become rebellious. but rather infuriated that his family (sister and mother ) were removing his stuff from his room. this prompted him to get on a painting that's hanging on the wall as to protect it from being taken away from them. to state that Gregor becomes rebellious is misleading in my opinion. But i guess that that's the beauty of this book we can interpret it however we please.

Its already in the Scriptures. Mathew 7:11 'If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him!' Romans 3:10-12 'None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” so nothing new here people, move along.

There is a difference between believe and faith. Better have faith in the experience of God and life,the infinite worlds of God, of reality and love. Better to understand, without understanding.

U think Dimitri killed his dad? The story leaves it ambiguous, and I always figured it was Smeardyakov (the deformed groundskeeper- and likely the offspring of rape)

Flawed

What a great Video

That's subjective not objective fella

The irony of Camus is that by moving past all values he affirmed liberty as his highest value. You can't excape value. His highest value was simply "not caring".

Peterson is mr word salad when it comes to religion. I think he really doesn't believe his god but doesn't want to loose his conservative base.

I just read this book very recently, I have just finished it today. And I found a different version within it. I found a man bound by tradition and the inability to change due to past and the inability to question such past. Linking with what you said regarding following a leader and refusing ones own moral compass and once a new age has set and the true brutality is seen for what it is, it as if the man has given himself to newer times and to end the ability of the pain caused as the new age takes over with the new commandant. I find you reasoning comforting as it fills in some blanks I had. Wonderful explanation

Why aren't we taught this shit in school?

Ah yes, the old you gotta love but in a way that’s selfless even if you receive nothing in return. It’s better than not loving but he never answers if one is fundamentally unlovable for being odd in ways that others struggle to understand. The fundamental flaw is this love only works if you look the part. It’s out there I know but if one is odd enough in a given frame it is only the fault of the person that they are unlovable. Should they lose everything to love? No is the brutal answer. And there is no guarantee anything comes. Furthermore selfless love results in hate. Also, another flaw kindness doesn’t present love in a meaningful way. The hunchback of Notre Dame. Just know that story. It shows the flaw in Dostoyevsky’s view.

The assumed the position of God is better than the position that there is no God. Not because of any torment for not believing (illogical) but because intrinsic value to love is assumed. Both Theists and Atheists have the premise of God incorrect. Where God is the Source of all that is, we are gods in the vantage point of God agreeing to partake of God's own creation and create within the creation. To assume God is, is to assume eternal life. (The New Testament in incorrectly interpreted to mean a conditional eternal life when the subject matter is a conditional revelation of eternal life.) To assume God is to not only value the human, and the human experience of being human, it is to assign a value of the consciousness of the human as infinite. To presume God (source of all that is, unchangeable intelligence) is to presume a worth and dignity that secular humanism tries to do but cannot because its own philosophy is to reject what cannot be proven without empirical evidence. To presume God is to Assume God loves and cares for the unbeliever. Most theists and atheists imo have it all wrong. If God exists we are in a compartmentalized evolution of consciousness that enables creation within the compartmentalized matrix. To start with God is to end up with inescapable meaning. Responsibility while being human is not liability for being a human.

" Kafka, the story goes, encountered a little girl in the park where he went walking daily. She was crying. She had lost her doll and was desolate. Kafka offered to help her look for the doll and arranged to meet her the next day at the same spot. Unable to find the doll he composed a letter from the doll and read it to her when they met. 'Please do not mourn me, I have gone on a trip to see the world. I will write you of my adventures.' This was the beginning of many letters. When he and the little girl met he read her from these carefully composed letters the imagined adventures of the beloved doll. The little girl was comforted. When the meetings came to an end Kafka presented her with a doll. She obviously looked different from the original doll. An attached letter explained 'My travels have changed me.' Many years later, the now grown girl found a letter stuffed into an unnoticed crevice in the cherished replacement doll. In summary it said: *Every thing that you love, you will eventually lose, but in the end, love will return in a different form."

Peterson is not difficult to understand on God, he simply makes those arguments while not subscribing to the enlightenment epistemology. I would say he is to be blamed for not clarifying that too often, but that is where the problem lies. When he says the biblical stories are still happening in response to the questions directed towards the objectivity of those events, he is talking with a different metaphysics than the actual, objective, event-oriented reality in time, he is talking about the truth of biblical stories as patterns in nature. The idea of FICTION and REALITY. Fiction being true in patterns of reality regardless of the minutia and objective events taking place, while reality is one occasion where we see the patterns playout. One has to clear the air in terms of the epistemology with him first and then take into consideration his arguments.

I sympathize with the devil not because he unrepentantly does evil things, but because the game was rigged since the beginning. If god is omniscient and allmighty then he could do something to avoid all of the needless suffering, free will is often brought up as an excuse, but that doesn't explain the perishing of babes or catastrophies and calamities hitting the innocent. It's as if free will is only there to make the conscious worship of god and submission to his will a more flattering choice to him, because for everything else it's mostly presented as a stumbling block in holy texts. So yeah, I don't think that god is really the good guy, either.

Me watching this a week before the students president speach at my college 💀.

Bravo, good sir. Your commanding video essays inspire and encourage me to practice redeveloping my own fluency in creating meaningful, quality essays. Thank you for being an agent and champion, not only for the profound works and authors that you seek truth from, but for us, the hopeful viewers as well. <3 Much love, brother.

FOMO was my original fear of death, and it was quite an intense experience. But Epicurus’s concept of “enough” applies to lifespan as well as other desires.

I'd like to politely throw in my two cents. Nihilism can kinda be interpreted in different ways, and that interpretation part can really make or break a person's life. The idea of meaning is entirely subjective, and people can take the phrase "nothing matters" a million different ways. It's a comforting thing for me, but it can absolutely diminish another person's will to live. In the end, I take solace in nihilism, but I'm not saying it's always a source of comfort.

Pragmatic theory of truth is about maximal predictability which is related to usefulness but not reduced to it. I'm surprised nobody seems to bring that distinction up, neither Alex, nor Dawkins, neither did Harris

The description of "the last men' is literally a spot on description of the majority of the American people in this decade

The Public = BLM + ANTIFA

Love is nothing but the choices available.

Why love others when youre not loved. Don't be a tool. I used to have stronger feelings towards others, glow up on my crush etc. Today no more. I'm indifferent.

The first 10 minutes none of those examples were love😂 good video though

TBF the republic's most valuable lesson we could extract is that you ought to sacrifice privacy for power and power for privacy. Nowadays the working class has less privacy than ever when the smartphones in your pocket can track almost everything you do all the while that nobody knows who's actually in charge in practical terms to the extent everyone believes in conspiracy theories. That is ofc if you dont consider the lesson that self sacrifice is what makes a society.

Interesting content, but the number of add breaks makes it unwatchable.

I mean...the guy convinced me... with the word salad part 🤣🤣

What I wonder is who are these unbelievers that Thomas acquaintances talking about? I doubt there were a huge numbers of atheists back in the 12th century.

Day 3 of asking to do "The Tragedy of Man" by Madách Imre

I think that everything is cool but even today is different being born in Switzerland than in Brazil or Mexico. It’s a different pov when safety security and happiness are a different concept in one’s life.

Single use plastic or toilet paper

i love your content man ,keep going u're doing great

Dostoevsky is my favorite. He describes the Dynamics between all types of interpersonal relationships of codependent people. Codependency stealing each other's agency while each being destroyed in lack of love. Until he finally gets to the brotherly Love type of perfection. The healthy independent person. Loving w personal sacrifice, but without taking anyone's agency and maintaining their own agency. The highest virtue. I won't agree with the apotheosis of f****** Christ dying. Because that to me sounds insane. That is not love. But I'm no ancient philosopher. I'm just a modern forensic badass. Thanks for another great vide brother. You're such a young wise man. And it's really refreshing to see a young person with this intellectual capacity of emotional reasoning and presenting the old authors that have been long forgotten.