You’re amazing dude. I wish you cover this text again

I'm just about to eat a boiled egg and I think of Foucault

🎉

news coverage of recent student protests is another example of media sanitization. it's always "student protests against israel's war on hamas and the growing humanitarian crisis in gaza." like yes theres a humanitarian crisis but why. they never elaborate on the fact that israel not only bombs innocent palestinians but also purposely prevents aid from going in to the strip. even the tamest things like student protests get censored by the media.

GOATED

Beautiful description of the skewness of human perspective.

😭😭😭🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙌🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Speak your truth and let the chips fall where they may 💜

This was really good, and very approachable to the non-philosophers of us!

I was 2 years old

Until falling more deeply in love becomes a real possibility for us, every day, there is going to be some anxiety in every day.

Remove Marx from the pictures, dude

probly 2 little 2 late BUT again (as elsewhere on base/superstructure issue) the most valuable concept ta explain Ideology ie DEnegation/VERneinung ET AL has escaped our host. C'est la vie - Lutte Continue !

Not that I agree with Althusser's Marxism but (alas!) this is No (Sufficient) explanation of his concept of Ideology. what ever eh.

But would you want the New York times giving equal commentary space to racists and anti-racists? Is it not better that the NY times reflects the opinions of the educated class?

When people call the US as "America" is very cringe. the blacks are "african" the americans are called "latin" or native, but the "europeans" are the "americans" 😅

I wish you could hear my virtual metal chair being slid up close to your virtual lectern

We are so back.

You are alright with me, bro. Now, if you were to recommend 5 books to a person who wanted to fundamentally better understand the spectrum of phenomenons on a sociohistorical, sociopolitical, socioeconomic, psychosocial, sociocultural, etc. level, what would they be? Imagine this being a dispassionate reader (white, black, asian, or whoever) who just wanted to gain a broader perspective on the international and racial worldviews and experiences.

I think he came up with this term to dehumanize the German people and bind them to mean mustache man.

Ur podcasts are fire 🔥

This is phenomenal, ty

It’s not just Chomsky who sees the contradiction in Foucault protesting repressive regimes on the one hand, and on the other saying that there is no way to escape them. Deleuze himself pointed out this contradiction, and this was one of the reasons for their falling out.

All your criticism in this video is basically "OK boomer". I thought you were a theory guy, but all your commentary in the video is basically liberal? He is not assigning moral blame when pointing out that people can't read anymore or suffer a kind of impotent depression - if you watch his videos you see that he makes these observations about himself first and foremost. He is writing about the kind of subjectivities and structures generated by late stage capitalism, and why these are needed to reproduce the capitalist system.

Please talk straight and stop wasting our time.

Pure nostalgia. Played the game yesterday for the first time.

wondering if there's anything else you can give advice on ??? like the guitar behind you and looking at doing my own CDS and covers

Hi I'm doing a philosophical essay on sex and gender but couldn't really understand what Butler was trying to say and this has been very helpful. You seem very nice and transparent and explain things clearly but casually. Thank you.

Thanks for the videos! I found them valuable after having read the text. To me Debord's discussion of time was interesting but seemed like the most half-baked part of the book (which I generally liked). Maybe I'm lacking some philosophical priors he's basing it on, but the notion that some kind of cyclical, non-irreversible time existed prior to capitalism seems nostalgic and not really supported by history. Stuff like the Peloponnesian War and the Black Death existed long before capitalism and had a direct, irreversible effect on everyone in the societies they affected, from rich to poor.

This was a wonderful discussion!!

Great video! Keep it up :)

Great Kant admirer here, but he was badly wrong about space and time. I often ask myself why he came up with such solipsistic thoughts. Space and time are a prerequisite for any being at all, everything else exists and must exist in space and time. Therefore space and time are objective reality. Same with his „thing as such“ which he argued we principally cannot ‚fully’ experience. The ‚noumena‘ which he invented clearly do not exist. Sometimes there can be, however, contradictions between the phenomena and how we perceive them and the ‚essence‘ , i.e. objective reality, of such phenomena (sun around the earth, Marx‘s distinction between essence and appearence of capitalism etc.) but thats not what Kant really meant. For him the noumena are forever hidden to us. Frankly, thats b a d metaphysics. The English saying that the proof of the pudding is eating it fully debunks Kant‘s speculation. If a carpenter makes a chair, what does Kant think is the noumenon of that chair? Kant was an ardent fighter against all superstition. Protestant christianity, „of course“, had nothing to do with superstition, though I think he was a quite modern „culture christ“ and agnostic( the code word for atheist). Maybe he feared exactly that if he had declared that man can always detect the objective reality, which, as is well known, is the position of Feuerbach, Marx, Engels and Lenin. But do you have to be a communist to agree to that?

I like to think of science as the prototype of the achievement of the enlightenment. It’s true that in science, there are no ultimate truths. All it’s latest claims are always contingent and subject to further observations and revisions. It’s also true that one can learn a lot about where we stand in our scientific understanding by excavating the archaeology and history of the field. But that doesn’t make one current scientific claim as good as any other, and it does not make all of them random or based on power. Claims are based on mountains of evidence and ability to make predictions, build useful things, heal disease, etc… truth and science are a very pragmatic affair and always a process. Although we humans may never be able to achieve ultimate truth, with a capital T, this should not lead to a sort of stupid and irresponsible nihilism, which I worry a lot of poststructuralist thinking tends towards. Reading the writings of philosophers like John Dewey and Richard Rorty can be very therapeutic in this regard.

No contest. Chomsky makes more sense.

Wonder if I get a chance to play my guitar with some point any advice on how music and therapy with the mental health care sides??? anyone

Nice vid

I think one voice that’s very underrepresented in these debates is that of John Dewey and the philosophy of pragmatism: on the one hand, Dewey can defend the enlightenment ideals of reason, rationality, science, justice, freedom, equality, etc… and yet on the other, he can avoid the more tyrannical and totalitarian tendencies of enlightenment thought by maintaining an anti-foundation list/anti-essentialist position. I wonder why more people are not talking about him.

Does oxygen have 'universal value' ?

This video really goes off the rails at a certain point. Seemingly deliberately misunderstanding/misrepresenting Chomsky’s point

Rhizome or how inferior marxism starts to vaguely see the light at the end of the tunnel of what would become free market anarchism. Don't worry loser communists you will eventually get to the truth, it might take you another 2000 years but you will get there.

Hmm... I wonder why you reuploaded this video recently. (I'm kidding. Thanks for the relevant reupload.) Anyway, I recommend you read "Inhuman Power: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Capitalism" by Nick Dyer-Witheford. The main issue with David Golumbia's critique of "The Cultural Logic of Computation" is that he takes issue only with cognitive theories that see "built in" or "innate" modules in the brain, obviously inspired by deterministic algorithms. Well, the connectionist school of thought in cognitive science - including Geoffrey Hinton - has now "won over" the popular conception of how the human brain works, and you could very well argue that connectionism is perfectly compatible with Skinner's behaviorism. In fact, besides being at odds with Chomsky's theory of language acquisition, connectionism is perfectly fine with categories being social constructs, such as during the training of an artificial neural network. So, if intelligence is learning and the field of artificial intelligence is on its way to creating intelligent beings by making use of this knowledge, what now does that mean for you? Alright, so categories are socially constructed. Agreed. And all intelligence is learned, such as from contextual information. Agreed. *Now, what is stopping someone from building a human being?* And if they can do so, and if they can test the abilities of intelligent agents through experimentation and find that they are objectively better at certain tasks than human beings, what is stopping human beings from being replaced? What I don't like about your style of criticism is that I already know that your response is going to "take issue with" the idea that humans can be ranked, etc. instead of simply responding to these very real problems that I have outlined. I also do not want humans to be ranked nor do I want technology used against me. I am also much younger than you and see this technology as a very real obstacle that will make gaining (and keeping!) employment harder than ever. So, again, serious answers should not begin with "taking issue with" the idea that humans can be ranked at certain tasks because if you seriously have a problem with that, then you should have a problem with us ranking AI tools as well. Further, once we have very high-performing robots, I guess someone should stand side-by-side the robot and ask you: "Why do you deny that this is a human being? What makes you human and it not?"

fantastic explanation, would love to hear more on loss from the 1923 revised theory from Freud :)

Ton chandail ne représente pas la constante. Le féminisme de l'hypermodernité est mus par le ressentiment.

Unimpressed with this argument. "Conspiracy theory" is a loaded term and should be restricted to cases where it's clearly applicable. The accusation is typically used in propaganda against dissidents, as you imply here. It's a bad idea to encourage this usage.

Agamben soberanía y el uso de control lleva a las vidas a la vida nuda, gente reducida a carne y huesos, solo “seres vivientes” que pueden zarandearse en trabajos como se desee o despojados de su vida

Im just gonna have to stop you at 9 flat. Ive spent over 20 years in the seduction community. One unchanging fact: Men who over-cerebralize or seek (focus on) patterns in seduction, UNILATERALLY struggle with it. Youre not an exception to this. This pseudo intellectual youre referencing is no exception to this, and Freud FAMOUSLY struggled with women. This video is a perfect example of why. I cannot even bear this beyond 9 minutes. Its pseudo intellectual bs and ego stroking and without question, ineffective and impractical. I hope no one worsens their game listening to this.

This is surprising because Derrida as a French he knows we said "noir and blanc" so the Black people will be privileged if we fallow what you said in this video?!

At 5:15: please explain the methods you used to arrive at the conclusion you stated. Thanks!

Do all Marxist thinkers get the 5 minute disclaimer at the beginning for the 100+ million deaths by communism in the 20th century? 🤔 other than that, good analysis.

I am pleased this video was produced as it will provide cultural context for future generations researching this time period. Please refrain from editing this if possible. Do not doubt the importance of what you are doing.