I like his impassioned style of lecturing and the way he personalizes Marcus Aurelius. However, I question the consistency of Stoic ethics in exhorting us to live in accordance with nature and at the same time to live virtuously. Assuming that nature is value-free, what reason do we have to think that nature coincides with virtue?

Gods Critique of Nietsche is better. Called “The Holy Bible”. You read 10,000 pages of stuff you don’t understand and pay $150,000 to have a paper say you did. Why not read 1,300 pages for free and go to heaven forever? For free because Jesus Christ already payed the price. ❤️‍🔥

40:20 Best part 🖤💮 39:00 closest part to my specialty 🖤 35:16 just mesmerizing 🖤 This is a gem of a lecture !

Huge thank you for this 🖤💮

I would have loved school if there was a teacher lke this. Captivating start to finish.

Russian literature is overrated. Dostoevsky writes about a degenerate, and somehow people in the West find this criminal's thoughts deep. I would summarize Russian literature...for the most part...as glorification of the degenerate soul.

How many Canadian republics? ZERO

Like this comment if you saw him drop his bookmark

34:30 michael heiser Deuteronomy 32 world view and psalm 82.

Wow! Impressive class. Thank you for putting it on the internet.

Shaman convinced hundreds of people? Try con man. (Yeah ... they had them in 9600 BC as well.)

Sounds like a angsty incel pos

Yes, I discovered Michael sugrue years ago. I hope he knew how many minds/ lives he touched

Dasein is easily translated: being here/there, not being human.

My favorite kind of people are the kind of people whose weekends are made better by some “landslide of information”

Rest in peace sir

Wow. The value of this is priceless

It would be useful to analyze existentialism in light of process philosophy. Process ontology allows for a metaphysical system that doesn't fall prey to Heidegger's criticism of post-Socratic metaphysics and Sartre's criticism of essentialism. You will find that that the religious existentialists like Kierkegaard, Marcel, Jaspers, and Tillich are more at home with "atheist" existentialists like Nietzsche, Sartre, and Heidegger. Your average theist (Jewish, Christian, and Islamic) would consider religious existentialism heretical. I see process philosophy, pragmatism, and existentialism as the "three teachings" of the West analogous to Taoism, Confucianism, and Buddhism respectively. When Buddhism became religious and devotional (like in the Pure Land and Nichiren sects), the influence of Taoism on Buddhism led to Zen Buddhism. So yes, existentialism without process philosophy can sometimes sound like talking in circles or talking about nothing.

Tell Staloff to come back please

This is on of the greatest Scholars I ever had the pleasure of listening to. Thank you Universe💜😻

Rest in peace Dr. Sugrue, thank you folr this lecture. I am going through a lot right now and this helps me.

Goethe distanced himself from "Werther". He wrote many letters to friends and relatives about his embarrassment with it.

So analytic statement such as 1+1=2 or for that matter any other "analytic" statement, is just two synonyms i.e. "a = synonym of a". And who decides "a" and "synonym of a"? Or better when do we agree with synonyms? And why a limited number of synonyms are so "objectively/widely" agreed upon? Is that from culture? And what about rules of logic? Where do they come from? Now if we are gonna do away with analytical/synthetic distinction, why not just do away with rules of logic, because why tf should universe follow logic? Logic can either be a) Empirically learned or b) Feature of human language, which is again empirically learnt or c) A hard wired evolutionary way of processing data. In either case, its origins are very earthly. But well so is mathematics, why does mathematics seem to be applicable to entire cosmos? Why do we have conservation laws? Is it possible that, at some point mere human mathematics will be unable to figure out predictive formulation for the physical phenomena? But it is kinda amazing that all analytical statements are just agreed upon, tautologies i.e., "a = synonym of a".

If only Schopenhauer had found the middle way

Love this man 😂

Jorden Peterson was obsessed with Fredric because he’s the first person that made him question his faith. Then Sam Harris put him in a coma in Russia! 😂

Point me to the thing called matter

I'm glad that "The Lives of Others" was discussed, as it really is a remarkable film.

He simply gave an explanation of what people were already doing.

Wow. That thumbnail looks WAAY more like Norm McDonald that Machiavelli or whatever that dude's name was. Ehh. 🎉

Just say why not reasons and this causal picture of the world falls apart. Not that it's all wrong, just inappropriate. Humans don't get married or write up constitutions out of cause. There are more appropriate words to explain which connote reasons. Mind-independent reality is mindless reality. This positivist way of thinking about the world is self-deceptive. It is not that we doubt the external world, but we get caught up in self-deception because we use misleading terms.

i was searchin kant's philosophy for so long now i get but zis man english abit hard to me

“There’s no way you can be a serious intellectual believer in this age without paying your dues and getting smacked around by Nietzsche…” incredible 😂

Clarification: most likely the supposed integrations of legacy are infact continuos literary revisions from the same peoples as cultural & social innovations advanced. Meaning that the same peoples are responsible for the epic & biblical traditions; anthropological assumptions are the out of place aspect we, as students of history, have to repair for appropriate perspective. Also the polytheistic heritage is social group opportunity personified, not worshiped gods (although gross infatuations did occur with those feebly constituted) or magical imaginative but actual occupational descriptions with fantastic embellishments. More respect should be granted to our ancestors than afforded by those whose rhetoric is propagandized for mass dissemination as historical accuracy or fact.

Amazing

Amazing

The most interesting part to me was that when he gave this lecture (in the 90's) he thought that the notion of an ultra-polarized society - between the extreme right and left - to be uncharacteristic of America. Yet not 30 years later that is exactly the position in which we find ourselves.

Michael Sugrue's Nietzschean philosophical knowledge is what people think Jordan Peterson has, but he hasn't. Pr. Sugrue is the real deal.

Bruh...this how i felt and thought ALL the time growing up as a jehovahs witness since birth. Worry worry worry about faaaaawking everythingg

How about the debt that ancient Greece--and therefore Western Europe--owes to Egypt? Why did Thales, Pythagoras, and Plato spend years in Egypt (esp Pythagoras--the bulk of his life!)? Doesn't sound like they were there on summer vacation. What did they learn there and then "expropriate" to call their own? Inquiring minds want to know--and historians need to tell us.

Bro. Let him cook. Sugrue just goes off at the end.

I’d like to thank Professor Sugrue for his insights into philosophy and history. His intellect and insight really motivate an individual to learn subjects that are difficult to understand. He makes these subjects understandable and relatable making him one of a kind in the world of academia. Thank you for everything you have left us professor, you will be missed. I have a copy of your book and I will be sure to read it, page by page.

I thought Godel showed that an axiom system could be consistent or complete, but not both.

Wow amazing. Forever memory to pr. Sugrue

Michael is talking so fast here. Probably earlier in his career, before he realized his potential, and was still trying to prove himself.

Those majoring in Political Science and philosophy, leave a comment.

3@@@

3@@@

This man changed my life. You are missed, Doctor.