Arif Ahmed on David Hume’s Disturbing Conception of the Self

[@sabinehaberlein4504]

Tuning in from Trier, Germany. Thank you for the continued intellectual inspiration !

[@davidlakhter]

Great lecture!

[@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices]

Great and lowly are RELATIVE. 😉

[@johnmac8525]

Oh philosopher, start with a bigger hair…do your work, if you must…then go dancing.

[@codegeek98]

26:56 (I don't say this as a "gotcha"): isn't "it" defined as "the local environment or ecosystem"? Expanded form "it's raining outside", you can pedantically rephrase it as "the local clouds are emitting rain", "the local ecosystem is in the _rain_ phase of the water cycle", etc. It does gel with your overall point anyway, as it suggests that these ("rain", "see", "think") aren't really subjectless, despite the fact that the ecosystem outside my house is _somewhat_ privileged (to me) over remote ecosystems due to my direct access to it.

[@thanksfernuthin]

You ARE being pedantic. And you ARE correct. I thought the same thing. "It's" does indeed refer to something. The status of the weather. It can be perceived many ways. Each with a subject for the rain to apply to. I didn't think enough of it to comment on it. But It's cool that you did. You don't absorb a conversation like this without being hyper sensitive to truth.

[@BobJ-iw7kq]

Just listened to it today (1/23/2023). This is going to be an intellectual comment. Love the idea of Ralston College by the way. I apologize ahead of time for my typos. I stink as a proof reader. I think (in agreement with Isaiah Berlin) that Hume is one of the most influential thinker in history and his work has been a disaster for mankind. The only thinker I would put in his category is Hegel, who was heavily indebted to Hume (indirectly rather than directly) and Hegel's thought has been absolutely toxic (a substantial contributing factor the the slaughter of 200,000,000 humans). What surprised me in the presentation was the failure to link Hume expressly to Psychology. I thought the reference to Right Hemisphere and Left Hemisphere brain function spot on, but only "opened the door" to what I think is one of the critical issues in understanding Hume. I know Dr. Blackwell has interviewed Iain McGilchrist, so I was surprised that Dr. McGilchrist's work was not mentioned when the RH and LH function was discussed. Which returns me to the issue of Philosophy and Psychology. I think Hume is best seen as the first thinker who "collapsed" Philosophy and Psychology. He is normally presented as a Philosopher (which he clearly was) but he linked his philosophy to psychology as his philosophy is based on what we now call "Behaviorist Psychology" (ala B.F. Skinner). In fact, his entire intellectual enterprise is based on behavioristic psychology. I think he is best viewed the founder of the school of behavioristic psychology and one who created a new way to do philosophy via psychology. Thomas Reid, Hume's fellow Scot and a contemporary, also did philosophy exactly the same way. But, Reid did not accept behaviorism. That way of doing philosophy seems to have died with Hume and Reid only to be resurrected by Jordan Peterson and Iain McGilchrist. In fact, I think that after McGilchrist (and Ralston Chancellor Jordan Peterson), that is impossible to separate philosophy from psychology - they must be approached as Reid and Hume approached it - as a unified discipline. I would add that my view is that that it is impossible after McGilchrist (and Peterson) for philosophy to be separated from psychology, neurology, and history. For example, Hume's thought (including his view of the self) is based on behaviorism and behaviorism has been obsoleted in psychology. Hence, to do the issue approached in this lecture justice, I would suggest one must do a clear explanation of psychological behaviorism and its fall. I also view Hume's view of the self as absurd. To deny that human consciousness exists (which is what Hume is doing, no matter how much he sugar coated it) is bizarre. While Reid used this comment to describe Descartes, I think it applies equally to Hume "“A man who disbelieves his own existence is surely unfit to be reasoned with, as a man that believes he is made of glass. There may be disorders of the human frame that may produce such extravagances; but they will never be cured by reasoning.” (“An Inquiry into the Human Mind, on the Principles of Common Sense”, Chapter 1) I agree with several theorists I have read that Hume's thought is based on Pyrrhonic Skepticism. In fact, he treats the philosophical quest for truth exactly the manner of the Pyrrhonics AND he treats how to live in exactly the same manner. Richard Popkin carefully researched this point and found that Pyrrhonic Skepticism was introduced into France in the late 1500's by Michel Montaigne and developed over time with the last major writer on the subject being Pierre Bayles. Hume was introduced to this form of thought via Pierre Bayles. Per Popkin, Hume had a copy of Bayles,' work in his library. I am not going to develop this part of Hume's thought, but he was disastrous in my opinion because he introduced a modified form on Pyrrhonic Skepticism into Western thought, which has simply not been understood (his Pyrrhonic approach has been used in modified forms by Hegel, Marx, the neo-Marxists Critical Theorists, Heidegger, and the Post moderns). I did enjoy the lecture and really look forward to your lecture on Wittgenstein. I am presently doing my initial research project into Wittgenstein's work. I will be interested to hear your take on it.

[@OccamsRazor393]

Thank you for making this available.

[@dionysianapollomarx]

Very rich lecture

[@chelebeaqueen]

hello! greets and thanks ❤️ at 1:17:50 on thru to 1:21:00 (maybe also on from there) -- perhaps the discernable factor to allow for arguing one is/was present despite particular memory would be lack of documentation, formal and sensory, that one did not die and be reborn at precisely the same point of development/existence... 🤔😊

[@KO-fx8bp]

min 1:27 . I agree with Mark. Furthermore, I don't think I can buy into any intellectual thought that says, hey don't worry about everything I just said, forget it and go to the pub otherwise you can't function as a human being. Something important is missing here. Thank you though for the thought experiment.

[@BobJ-iw7kq]

1/24/2023. I do not know if anyone reviews these comments. I just listened to Jordan Peterson's lecture at Ephesus on the Logos. It is the perfect explanation and evaluation of Hume's view of the self (and Hume's entire philosophical Paradigm). Peterson explains why Behaviorism is false (and hence Hume's entire project is fatally flawed) and then explains how to evaluate Hume's Philosophical Paradigm. Ralston College has a wonderful opportunity if it takes advantage of it. The explanation that Philosophy, Psychology, Neurology and History are in fact a unified discipline and one cannot "do" one without "doing" the others. This is not a "discovery". It is simply "revealing" what presently exists and provides a totally different paradigm by which to "understand/see" how truth is sought and hopefully found. Peterson's lecture explains why that is so is very clear terms (although he did not expressly use this theme). And, to clarify, by Psychology I mean theoretical Psychology and experimental Psychology. I do not mean therapy, which is the medical application of those other two parts of it. I conclude with a core criticism of Dr. Ahmed's approach, which is common to every presentation I have heard when presenting Philosophical thinkers. There is no way provided to evaluate Hume. Was he right? Wrong? And how do we tell? Really, why read Hume if not to learn from him? And what are we supposed to learn? The lecture provides no answer to these fundamental question. (FYI, I am working on a solution to this lack).

[@chelebeaqueen]

O, Academia! i wish i could grace your halls, for at least a season...! i am a college graduate, History (intellectual/ historiography) with minor in German and focus in Italian and French, mother of a near 10yo, living with mother for a decade due to single-momhood up until the last few years, no longer practicing profession since 1995 of cosmetology in part thanks to covid complications, now with functioning father figure / 'forever boyfriend/"husband"/father to my son from another man...Life is so complicated these days! 🤪 ... i have Ralston in the scope... i feel there is so much i have to offer, and could benefit from the diligence of study, in Academia in the way that Ralston College imbues and encourages... i do have a letter of rec on hand when needed, and will keep trying for applying with hopes of being accepted... for with only a BA, the teaching option is limited (CA, USA). with an MA i could, in theory, teach! without much extra steps to the dance. we shall see... thanks for publishing what you do. at less than a month from being 48, i feel a pressure to Produce... got the offspring, so we're good there -- but perhaps this is a general call to whatever my areas of strength and helpful contribution are, that to continue the pursuit in the search for my Ultimate Use will hopefully provide answers and subsequent Path which is best suited to that call... cheers! and thanks ❤️