The audience underestimated Rick's witty humor here :D

If I am allowed to express my personal opinion: Dostoevsky is one of the most overestimated writers of all time. Really D.? What can one say about Alyosha's theological discussions with a 13 year old boy? What can one think about the ending of Brothers Karamazov, where Alyosha together with some pre-adolescent children (!) are all together cheerfully happy as they celebrate... the coming of the Last Judgement Day!... Seriously? Is this suppose to be good literature? Even a believer reader should have enormous problems with such a literary, such an artistic solution, which is not. In Dostoevsky we find always the following concept: All "good" guys get to be rewarded and all "bad" guys either commit suicide or go to prison or get crazy. Ivan Karamazov, the one that could have saved Dmitri's - his brother's - life, gets crazy one day before the court! And why? Because he is the "atheist" of the novel! Is there anything more p r e d i c t a b l e in whole literature? Do we want our literature to be predictable in that silly way? How can a healthy human mind accept this forced and totally disgusting solution? And this novel is considered by many, many, many "serious" people that read (do they actually read?) serious literature as "the best novel ever written". H o l y cow! After having read Dostoevsky's works again and again I have come to this conclusion: He is the most horrible, boring and kitsch author out there. Not even his language has anything to offer! And although I don't agree with every single critical opinion Nabokov expressed for a number of authors, I totally agree with his opinion on Dostoevsky. There are so many writers out there that are... writers! D. is at least mediocre. And please, for all of you reading this comment and thinking that I am crazy: Read D. anew; don't let yourself repeating "what the world is saying". Shape your own opinion.

Sugrue's & Staloff's lectures are more evergreen because they preclude dated pop culture references but this guy is a worthy contemporary

Great video, thank you very much , note to self(nts) watched 29:25

I was watching some other debate video and one person quoted the "unexamined life is not worth living” which immediately reminded me about PLE. I used to listen to this show on the long greyhound trips home from college every couple of weeks, but that was years ago. Quite a backlog I got to listen to.

33:59 “it’s not the Big Bang anymore now I think they call it -ddddddddddddddddddddddddddd”

very lively and precise qualification of those vague issues; waiting for the second part.

"you cant make it disappear but it can make you disappear", wow

Great content

I'm really curious of the justification claim that the person who gets the job has 10 coins in his pocket. If my justification is because I have good evidence to believe John has 10 coins in his pocket and I have good intel that he will get the job. Then how do I have justification that the person will have 10 coins in his pocket if someone else gets hired?

Doesn’t know what the snake and eagle mean? Aesop maybe? Subtle hint towards Apollo and Dionysus?

This man just wanted his father to love him. Shaky on the feet

"See, there are conditions for the possibility of all of us being who we are and doing what we do, and sometimes they're as bloody and ordinary as economics". Bars

I would give my pinky finger to see Rick and Slavoj in conversation. To Habermas or to Lacan that is the question.

He’s integrating some of Jean Baudrillards social theory on the hyper real and perhaps Marshal McCluhan’s medium is the message.

Found this. Thank you! Love her and her music.

Please try Charles Taylor!

The key to understanding and even going beyond Tomasello is the notion of primary empathy, with which we are born. We virtually identify with our significant other (usually our mother from whose womb we have just emerged). We don't have to learn of the other's consciousness: we have to learn of our distinctness. We don't need a "theory of mind" to conceive of other minds, for we are born identifying with another's mind. It takes learning, exploration, & experimentation to learn of our own identity.

I think you're wrong on "concepts". A concept must be a symbol to have *meaning* in itself. It's not just a feeling.

In his later works, Tomasello went beyond joint intentionality to "collective intentionality", which has a moral component. I'm not sure if this works. (And surely you know Langer is getting the information you cite on signal vs symbol right from Cassirer?)

Some misunderstanding of Tomasello. Joint intentionality is a shared focus and to some extent cultural consciousness, but he does not say this ability is "innate", though *primary empathy* may lead to it. Primary empathy (which, by the way, does away with the need for "mind-reading" or "theory of mind") probably comes with development in the womb and being born as a dependent.

Mostly with Tomasello, but better: Philippe Rochat (2009). *Others in Mind: Social origins of self-consciousness*. Cambridge University Press. Emphasis on the creativity of language: Charles C. Taylor (2017). *The Language Animal: The full shape of the human linguistic capacity*. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Both anti-Chomsky.

10:12 maybe the kind of intelligence they have in DC and Chicago is not the kind of intelligence the benevolent ETs are interested in conversing with No one ever considers that

alright alright alright

My favorite philosopher. Cheers.

Love me some G.E. Moore!

Greetings from Uzbekistan 🇺🇿🇺🇿🇺🇿

« The word is not the thing « this is what Magritte showed with the painting « this is not an apple « …

Gotta love “Hai-degger” and “moh-derna-tee.” Just discovered this guy, big fan. Reminds me of home (TN), though I think his accent is from a different state. It’s hilarious because you expect a Baptist sermon from that accent, and then you realize you’re not in church.

Could you please avoid using the phrase "mind-independent reality" for the sake of those who believe in objects and everyone?

"refusal as a fear of complexity" damn. thats truth.

I'm just a "regular guy", and I think there is a neo platonic resurgence on the horizon. Maybe I'm wrong but I describe it as a "non religious Hellenistic spiritual path". I think that having an experience of transcendental Beauty helps one be more open to the words of Plotinus. I found neo Platonism after searching for something that might explain an ineffable encounter I had with that "Beauty". I was a staunch materialist at the time and the way that Plotinus and Plato approach the transcendent allowed me to find ways to grok that experience without feeling "weird" about delving into the world religion or new age.

The great Peter Green, after he had his unfortunate experience with LSD and while he was recovering from a bout of mental illness from that experience, reportedly said that although he could still play, he could (as a way of trying to explain what he had lost) no longer play the notes "between the lines." Not that I am anywhere near the same league, but as a bass player, I understood what that meant. When I felt I had become a good bass player (early 80s, began playing in late 60s), my best lines happened when I stopped thinking about what I was playing. The magic happens when you just let yourself go and see what happens. Unfortunately, Greeny was no longer able to do that, and it only happens to me, anymore, on those rare occasions when I have been practicing a lot and am on top of my game, as it were. So I totally get what Bruce Thomas means when he says he plays it and then figures out what he played. I think the best playing, on any instrument, comes when you can shut off your conscious mind and let the music play your fingers, rather than the other way around, if that makes any sense. Trying to explain music is like trying to dance to architecture, as I believe Frank Zappa (and no doubt others) said.

Thank you

"They hope nothing, dream nothing, expect nothing." He might as well be describing Gen Z.

at around 20:10 or so Roderick speaks on the phrase "The one who dies with the most toys wins" and then makes a remark about Trump's funeral :')

Hey Partially Examined Life, I have to turn my volume up really high to hear this.

22:22 - Foucault's Whole New Disciplinary Matrix Around Madness: "I've joked about this process - I don't want to use the strong word “madness” here - but when we look at the expansion of this therapeutic zone on into the late 20th century, we now find out that very few of us don't belong in it. I mean, if you're not on a 12-step program today, you're out of fashion; I mean, who would have guessed, that the discourse of madness would eventually cover the whole social field and, until, perhaps the last growth industry we have - other than making movies about sex and violence - is psychiatry, and in running 12-step programs? This is a growth industry." Who would have guessed? Thomas Szasz, in his book The Myth of Mental Illness, published in 1961. It wasn't a guess, either.

42:58

Someone ought to re animate Rick so he can talk about the Cynics.

Well he was wrong about rejecting Chaucer in colleges that has begun to happen at some colleges already. Of course it didn't happen when he was alive.

The film THX1138 came to mind.

Thanks for mentioning They Live as a helpful visual aid. Fight Club might have something to offer as well.

Love your podcast. But one thing that would be really helpful is to first hear about where your personal sympathies lie in terms of, among the hundreds of philosophical ideas and thinkers you have read, which ones you agree with the most. Not the hosts as a group but individually. You can get the sense of this as you listen to many episodes but it's still not very clear. This would help the listener frame your discussion and actually help in better understanding the topic in question. If there is a previous episode or something that you have released that serves this purpose then please point me to it as i haven't seen it yet. Thank you, you guys are awesome.

Your comments on country music shocked me. You say you played Bob Willis and that it was "square" Nashville cats were some of the hippest musicians anywhere. You can't judge a genre by the mediocre. Every genre is largely mediiocre because unfortunately most of us humans are mediocre and shallow, but country has some of the best musicians. Also those guys could keep people dancing as well as cryin and laughing. Funny the black guy has the best take and country the whites are ignorant. Politics?

I wish professors were all this down to earth. I thoroughly love listening to him.

What an inspirering human being. Thank you Rick Roderick.

He seems very resentful for a smart man.

Looking forward to the next part.

How prescient this guy is. I feel like David Foster wallace listened to this guy, or read a lot of marcuse