Bertrand Russell - Mankind's Future & Philosophy

[@BaldingEagle51]

As brilliant a mind as philosophy has ever seen. If you are to read one philosopher in your life, make it Bertrand Russell, and read all he's had to say. You will automatically be 50 years ahead of your peers. I have known this long, yet in this old clip, the impression of his views is as fresh as a summer's breeze in the way he curtly and with clarity details the correct perception of life, science, philosophy and knowledge perfectly and so effortlessly, and I can't help but be impressed again. His answers contain everything you have to know to make sense of the world.

[@JesseBFournier]

His work "A history of western philosophy" is also one of the most concise and literary pleasing overview of philosophy i have ever come across. So i must say i am inclined to share your intuition.

[@isaacmccracken3218]

+BaldingEagle51 Russell was brilliant, no doubt, but he has a certain clumsiness about him. If you must choose one, Nietzsche is more profound IMO. One of the primary differences between them is that Russell has an almost slavish devotion to the truth. Nietzsche questioned the value of truth itself. If truth is a woman, and I believe she is, then Russell is a man who knows how to appreciate her, but he doesn't quite know how to make love to her.

[@JesseBFournier]

+Isaac McCracken In fact, the ONLY critique i would dare to make about his "history of western philosophy" is precisely the chapter about Nietzsche.. It's inconsistent and a bit ridicule (it was a shock to me when i read it, and heard it). One could feel, emotional disdain and a violent opposition in taste despite Russell's ambition to remain objective. I have a stronger inclination to Nietzsche than to Russell but both are great, in my modest and insignificant opinion.

[@BaldingEagle51]

+Isaac McCracken Perhaps Russell appeals to those who would not only *not* ask you to define "make love to truth", but would also proceed to summarize the person who utters such vague statements in a way that you deem "clumsy". It's also a strange thing to say about a man of the world who fought against Victorian attitudes at a time when that was controversial, while Nietzsche was a shut-in who wanted to make love to his sister. If love-making is the skill required to attain, and not only appreciate, the object of desire, and the object of desire is truth, then Russell's works in logic rather shows others how to make their desires come true.

[@alecmisra4964]

Yeah bur logical atomism is retarded

[@lessevdoolbretsim]

B.R. "If you're certain, you're certainly wrong, because nothing deserves certainty." I wish there was a thousand hours of him talking...I'd listen to it all.

[@lessevdoolbretsim]

Popular Certainly wrong, only about being certain. If you're certain, you're wrong, because you're certain. At least, that's the way I interpret it.

[@lessevdoolbretsim]

Popular I understand your point.

[@MiniMervii]

lessevdoolbretsim i loved it as well. somebody had to say it

[@notanothermichael4676]

He did wrote a thousand pages worth of books and alot of it are fairly accessible for those without a background in analytic philosophy or mathematical logic.

[@sfanevl5146]

@Monty Russell is not meaning the definitely things

[@rubhami]

The clip remind us once again how humble, sincere, honest and inspiring person Bertrand Russell was in his views/advice and in his thinking! - He was blessed with a mind with such depth that enabled him to look far into future of humanity from a moral point of view!

[@drbonesshow1]

+JHOT 247 We are all retarded, however, some much more so than others.

[@drbonesshow1]

+JHOT 247 Then dig him up and give him a job as a writer for reality TV.

[@Suiseisexy]

+JHOT 247 lol look at this illuminati confirmed 3d doritos bullshitter

[@jimmuncy5636]

Stop talking about me!

[@jimmuncy5636]

"To be certain is to be certainly wrong."

[@pravinda333]

In 1948, Bertrand Russell wrote: "I once received a letter from an eminent logician, Mrs. Christine Ladd-Franklin, saying that she was a solipsist, and was surprised that there were no others. Coming from a logician and a solipsist, her surprise surprised me."

[@rickbunte3147]

So a guy walks into a room and says, "Is it really solipsistic in here, or is it just me?"

[@japeking1]

I walked into a bar and served myself. ( That will only "work" in the context of this forum. Its a massive conversation stopper in any other telling of bar jokes. )

[@unggrabb]

Very funny

[@johnparadise3134]

00:53 “Philosophy consists of speculations about matters where exact knowledge is not as of yet possible.” 1:10 “Science is what we know and philosophy is what we don’t know.”

[@Michael-qk9pf]

Thank you kindly for the upload. It’s precisely videos such as these which prove how valuable a resource KZbin has become.

[@dickyboyryw]

Such a character. I remember in the 1980s, some teachers like him. But now. They're all but gone. But a great man.

[@WimbledonEngland]

This is priceless. Hearing the man himself is just, well, ineffable.

[@davidbevan8149]

Hi

[@itsprivate4360]

One of the greatest intellectuals of insight or understanding...

[@burlingtonpark4136]

thank you so much for posting this lovely interview of bertrand russell. there is another great one on youtube from a 1959 Face to Face interview. at the very end he is asked to offer some wisdom from himself to anyone who might come upon the interview one thousand years hence and he obliges quite brilliantly.

[@lecturesbeyondbeyond]

+Burlington Park You're welcome! Here's the one from 1959 if people will follow up on your comment - kzbin.info/www/bejne/eKrGgqefgLiJpqs /All the best

[@Neptunade]

+lecturesbeyondbeyond Thank you, man.

[@Neptunade]

+lecturesbeyondbeyond, uhh, that link does not turn up with anything.

[@lecturesbeyondbeyond]

Neptunade Re-uploaded the clip with improved audio, here it is - kzbin.info/www/bejne/rqXGn4R9nd2ijqM

[@natepea5917]

+lecturesbeyondbeyond lord Bertrand Russel ran a school called Beacon Hill. in that school he conducted sexual experiments with pre pubescent children including his own daughter to see how it would affect them in later life. he wrote about it himself in his own books, but you could research this very easily yourselfas for politics Bertrand Russel was a social Darwinist trying to create a eugenic utopia. he didn't keep it a secret. it is the work of Darwin, galton, russel etc that informed the Nazi party and gave them a scientific basis for their ideas of racial purityI look for and watch these things because I want to hear how these evil men hid their intentions in plain sight. kind of like a joke. like.....ha ha, they're so stupid they wont even know when I tell them to their face.still, as long as people can still imply vicariously that they are some kind of thinker or intellectual simply by leaving some meaningless platitude on here then its all good right? your worse than dribbling idiots. filthy morons

[@ExiledVidcast]

I woke up at 1am, its now 3:58am... philosophy, science and curiosity found me before i could find sleep again. This happens too much :p I'm glad that we can see these people from our past though! Very inspiring.

[@josephno1347]

I do the same, I go to work at 6am, but find myself awake at midnight or 1am to listen to brilliant minds

[@tapasroychoudhury3672]

One of the greatest philosophers of the modern era.

[@PaulGreen11]

"Science is what we know and Philosophy is what we don't know." That shit was deep.

[@js83kaxhf]

I’ll tell you what’s deep.... the pit that this guy is locked in, in hell

[@PaulGreen11]

@@js83kaxhf You DO NOT have the keys to the gates of Heaven or Hell. Whatever you think you know about the scriptures Jesus would correct you just like He did when He was questioned about the scriptures while He was on earth.

[@js83kaxhf]

@@PaulGreen11 - doesn’t change the fact that Russell is an antichristian eugenicist so I’m not really sure what your point is

[@PaulGreen11]

@@js83kaxhf My point is, you DO NOT know what happens to any person's consciousness after any person dies. Just because you don't agree with someone while they are alive DOES NOT give you any insight of their existence after their death.

[@js83kaxhf]

@@PaulGreen11 actually it does. But you’d know that to be part of Christian doctrine if you were a Christian

[@alinn.4341]

Thanks for listing the books! Great stuff

[@supergundes]

1. Philosophy is a form of intellectual inquiry that seeks to understand fundamental truths about the world, reality, and existence. 2. It is distinct from science, which relies on empirical evidence and observation to understand the world. 3. Philosophy can be concerned with a wide range of topics, including ethics, metaphysics, politics, and more. 4. The main trend in philosophy today differs depending on the region, with English-speaking countries tending towards linguistic philosophy and Continental countries tending towards more applied and practical approaches. 5. Some philosophers believe that the value of philosophy lies in its ability to stimulate and expand our imaginations or to enable us to act with vigor in the face of uncertainty. 6. Others believe that the increasing advancement of science is diminishing the importance of philosophy. 7. Philosophy may have a practical value by helping people to understand how to conduct themselves and by providing a sense of mental training for uncertainty and doubt. 8. The future of philosophy is uncertain, but it may continue to play a role in helping people to think critically and expansively, and to understand the world around them.

[@johnparadise3134]

9:55 “Nobody should be certain of anything. If you’re certain you’re certainly wrong because nothing deserves certainty.”

[@lessevdoolbretsim]

I love the way that interviewer talks. It seems rather quaint these days.

[@jomamma4729]

"And this is what I should look to philosophy to do-to encourage people to act with vigour without complete certainty." -B.R.

[@FloridaRaider]

I enjoy these old videos.. Thank you

[@johnny4aces410]

Bertrand Russell was a mathematician's philosopher and a philosopher's mathematician. He was one of the greatest minds of all time. "The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge" BR

[@Debunker246]

thanks for uploading this

[@lecturesbeyondbeyond]

Debunker246 You and everyone else are totally welcome!

[@all_is_1485]

Thank you Mr Cholmondly Warner

[@Nauseum]

really appreciate the upload

[@syahidsyaban411]

I love betrand russel and his think He is the best freethinker and humanis in the word

[@LordGreystoke]

A lack of certainty reinforces humility and improves the well-being of all humankind.

[@thomashanson7550]

Are you certain in your lack of certainty?

[@Robin-bk2lm]

"If you're certain, you're certainly wrong." Ha!

[@cmhardin37]

i caught that too!

[@AleXoEx0]

Rob V However, Science is a establishing certainty.

[@Michael-qk9pf]

AleXoEx0 how do you mean? In the sense that science is supposed to preclude any doubt of certainty? I am of the opinion that science can only establish a singular kind of certainty, which is, empirically agreed upon evidence. When it comes to what to do with said evidence, well more questions seem to be created than answered. Much in the case of the Higgs boson. Once it was found to exist, it’s discovery created more uncertainty than it resolved. “The more you see the less you know” kind of a thing. So one might call science a never ending generator of uncertainty. Perhaps. Maybe.

[@kaugh]

@@Michael-qk9pf So you have the two sides of a coin. Unknowns-knowns Or Knowns-unknowns. I think the former is what's accomplished by science and the latter is only* accomplished by things like burning the alexandrian library.

[@AndreasDelleske]

@@Michael-qk9pf well you use "uncertainty" in different contexts..

[@jeffallcock4561]

Wonderful, thank you!

[@queensoftheocean]

Thank you for the upload.

[@lecturesbeyondbeyond]

Amir Haddad You're welcome!

[@cosmicwarriorx1]

Great interview!

[@garryferrington811]

OMG, Coronet Films! We used to see those in school on 16mm film projectors! That was...a while ago...

[@jeremywalker6200]

"To act with vigor, without complete certainty," -the true core of Stoicism.

[@Cakeordeathism]

Get home drunk and watch Bertrand Russell videos. Yeah, Philosophy!

[@vernonchelski7385]

The sharpest old man I've ever seen.

[@howardchance9779]

Perfect

[@realizedconsciousspirit]

Alcohol is the dullest of substances that create disturbances or a disconnect to what he's mostly discussing here.

[@oldschoolman1444]

Hope you weren't driving, any dui's in the last five year? =)

[@groki9572]

Great man, they don't do philosophers like this anymore.

[@Skawzzle]

legendary speech here.

[@davidmorenoperez942]

I agree and also disagree with various things he said, but I absolutly love to hear one of the preeminent minds of the past century speaking. As he said: there's no absolute knowledge, and that's what brings science and philosophy together.

[@anastasiabananastasia]

ty for posting

[@wrarmatei]

Russell was such a boss. I'd be curious to read a more complete explanation for why he thought that Marx's enterprise was not the product of a philosopher's drive to understand.There's still controversy among philosophers about whether Marx was a philosopher, which seems absurd since Marx was pretty obviously drew from a few disciplines: economics, psychology and philosophy(the amalgamation of these basically gives us sociology).

[@jeremywalker6200]

Have you read anything of Marx? Karl Marx was a social historian, nothing more. Engels was the economist and social philosopher. Neither had any inclination toward or understanding of psychology. Both were as deluded (and convinced) as Freud and Adler. All had valid insights, but narrow- minded, simplistic approaches to complex systems dressed up in academic jargon and militarism.

[@keysemerson3771]

His statement on certainty is merely highlighting the idea that we should be open to change should new factors call for it. I am certain that be believed that looking after oneself and being a productive human being is certainly a good thing, by and large.

[@1000SPFsunscreen]

word word... B-Russ also was a close homie of mine and would take a stroll in the park, smoke a joint or two sometimes 4 and sip on some mickey's ( he preferred bud ices tho) and post up. from time to time we'd play a great game of pool but would always get distracted by some females hollerin at the foo... god, such a pimp he was, he'd walk out with 4 honeys, 2 on each arm while i'd jus pull like one sometimes none. always told me to to keep my pimp hand strong tho and right he was! we too tho would chop it up and talk mathematics to end such a wonderful night... Fond memories of that ol B-Russ... gonna pour one out for you big homie, stay up G!

[@mickbrenton]

What a mind!

[@8nansky528]

I ADORE READING

[@CraigStCyrPlus]

Loving the backdrop at 9:42.

[@threeworlds131]

Bertrand Russel was an ideal type of philosopher - he taught abstract ideas, he was a major inspiration from modern computer science through his development of mathematical logic, and he was a representative for moral activism in protesting the Viet Nam war. Today Noam Chomsky represents a similar personality in his knowledgeable ways of exposing hypocrisy in politics particularly in the war mentality, and also in having originated innovative scientific knowledge on how the human brain processes language.

[@atheistclown398]

Bertrand Russell. A fellow atheist and piper. Good company.

[@bburago9]

He was not actually and atheist, so...

[@rumfordc]

Atheist Clown illuminist*

[@ObservableFiction]

bburago9 Interviewer: Why are you not a christian? Russle: I've examined all the stock arguments in favor of the existence of god and non of them seem to me to be logically valid This is word for word, I can source it if you want. Atheist or not, he certainly wans't religious.

[@mrstevehartman]

+ObservableFiction And... you certainly cannot spell, or punctuate properly. So, I should believe you?

[@rumfordc]

mrsteve hartman if you're going to criticize punctuation at least get yours right :(

[@AustralianLeprechaun]

Bertrand Russell is my homeboy!

[@lessevdoolbretsim]

Bert and I used to chill in the hood, smokin' the kronic, drinkin' our 40s, and shootin' our 9s. Every now and then, we'd holler at some bitches.....and then, of course, we'd talk philosophy.

[@BrionyDavid]

lessevdoolbretsim He was never the same after he and Fiddy cent got shot up though

[@lessevdoolbretsim]

BrionyDavid Yep, after that episode, Bert stuttered, and his left leg shook all the time.......tragic.

[@hanyuguo]

lessevdoolbretsim Actually, that was his third leg, and he shook it when he holla'd at some bitches.

[@lessevdoolbretsim]

Chino Pisces Well, I can't confirm that one.

[@dae1366]

Day 7 of the Osaka Basho followed by 20 mins of Russell sheer bliss.

[@CoalMyn1382]

I really like that dude. Great mind.

[@uchihadante77]

Really amazing thinker. I love what he said about Marx. Thanks for uploading this!

[@stevea.7406]

88 and sharp as a tack...a truly gifted mind. Thomas Sowell may be the only person to possibly rival him.

[@stanleyogden8032]

Bertrand Russell and Mick Foley, two of my heroes in one video!

[@haydenbarnes5110]

Who was Mr Foley? What is his significance?

[@dilaverali05]

The only mick foley I know of, is a fool from wwe.

[@charlesedwards4160]

@ Oggy, Just like W Axel Foley huh... (Theme tune to Beverley Hills Cop plays out in my mind :)

[@lourak613]

9:56 - "One ought to be able to act vigorously without complete certainty?" Hugh?

[@davidlogan8905]

Given that he mentions receiving letters by people left confused by their questioning of long-standing traditions and beliefs, which helped to create a sense of order and purpose in their lives, I'd say he means something like 'we should not allow ourselves to become mentally paralysed by doubt; instead, we should embrace the challenge to know, and to persevere with it'.

[@lourak613]

I guess it all depends on what he means by "vigorously" - wouldn't you say? And I guess ones vigor should be tempered - especially in cases where there exist consequences of purported severity. Bottom line, it seems to me - is that his pronouncement, at a minimum, is not much of prescription for how we live. Or - it certainly does not allow for a philosophical generalization with any teeth to it in the practical realm...

[@davidlogan8905]

True, it depends on what he means by vigorously. I'm not sure if I'm interpreting him correctly, but I think being critical would be an acceptable interpretation; one which fits into his philosophy, insofar as I understand it (which is by no means comprehensively). It may also remove the ambiguity of his chosen word. Just listening back to when he says that people have come to doubt the signposts to right action (probably referring to Christian morality) and now are not sure how to conduct themselves. That is, they believed this previous code to be set in stone (pun unintended) and thought they had certainty and the security that came with it. So Russell is saying that they never had certainty, whether they thought so or not, but they should nevertheless remain critical in their approach. Even if there are some severe consequences, which of course there are, this seems to be perfectly good advice; considering that not being critical is akin to blindly walking toward those consequences, which aligns with another reading of the word vigorously. That seems to be a view with some practical import?

[@fadebossxp]

Wow a civilized discussion.

[@jamiemcmillan6742]

'...For wit’s false mirror held up nature’s light; Showed erring pride, whatever is, is right; That reason, passion, answer one great aim; That true self-love and social are the same; That virtue only makes our bliss below; And all our knowledge is, ourselves to know.‘ Pope

[@thegrievancegordieshow9882]

Philosophy: The love of the logos the love of knowledge Straight from the out set he’s redeffining the term

[@takeavvay]

The singular view of perception of your consciousness is withheld in a universe of seemingly unlimited questions and the natural urge to understand it and the truth of it's origin is some-what of an addiction that needs answering. It seems that the majority of known human history has tried to fill these blank spaces, be it from religion or science, but both unfortunately hold void answers. Think of the universe as a tangled ball of string in which the objective is to straighten it out. You can pull to try to unravel it causing the string to indeed slightly become straightened, but in reality is just an illusion, it merely tightens the string to create knots; a step backward, continue this path or stopping does not lead to the real objective. You may continue unraveling the ball, be cautious because prejudgment will pull the string prematurely, leaving a knotted mess. Patience is key, do not pull the string till the unraveling is fully complete, once its without doubt unraveled, then the string may be pulled and the task will be complete. Let me ask ask you this, How long is the string?

[@duncaninnature]

You say 'your' consciousness...what exactly do you mean by that? Do you mean 'one's consciousness' or are you asserting something of my consciousness?

[@takeavvay]

One's consciousness, we individually can not be for certain about anything else other than our own perceived consciousness

[@takeavvay]

***** Thanks, I corrected my analogy

[@DiamondMind]

You're such a bloody intellect.

[@takeavvay]

Diamond Mind thankyou

[@blackbird5634]

science is the exploration of observable phenomena. philosophy is the speculation around those observations.

[@Spike-ee6om]

Brilliant

[@neilpollicino80]

Ain’t enough folks know about Bertram Russell never mind about his thoughts & ideas.

[@chrisconnor8086]

Does it get any better than this?

[@bobbart4198]

... You believe in a god - any god - or you don't. Believe whatever YOU wish, and give the rest of us the same courtesy ... in short, save us from those who would use a "god " to save us. This is NOT the Bronze Age - we'll decide for ourselves !

[@TieXiongJi]

Science is what we know and Philosophy is what we do not know.

[@sabyasachisenapati3619]

At 9:00 does anyone else think Russell had Nietzsche in mind

[@rileywhite9776]

How do I find more interviews like this, much of it goes over my head but I love hearing them speak.

[@SonOfAnders]

“If you’re certain you’re certainly wrong”

[@alwayswondering4051]

Cool, Robin down below misquoted the very interstitial line of one of Russell's directed answers. Absolutely. This however, it seems to me anyway is very uncomfortable to people, Generally. For a very long time it was this way for me, to be sure.

[@rustler160]

What did he say about a general? I couldn't hear. "If he's a good general...is his friend, if he's a bad general...is wrong" The subtitles also couldn't understand.

[@anandsengar6602]

Russell is saying "philosophy is speculation where exact knowledge is not yet found" and then he says if ur certain ur certainly wrong.its a contradiction .

[@realizedconsciousspirit]

Hi...not sure as to what your exact sequence of thought here is, but those views are not diametrically opposed or in conflict whatsoever.

[@athleticaesthetixfitness6937]

I think what youre trying to say is that assuming science is the only way to true knowledge, when one is expressing certainty as to the truth of a particular theory, it is wrong to dismiss them. (?) You should know that there's a sharp distinction between knowledge and certainty insofar as scientific knowledge is amenable to revision. No one should express categorical certainty that Einstein's General Theory of Relativity is a fact, even if it has a successful reputation for agreeing with experiment. Science is an inductive process that we use to understand nature; we cannot know for certain that the sun will rise tomorrow in the same way that we can know that four is the sum of two and two, one is knowledge reached a posteriori, the other knowledge a priori - one can make the argument that the latter conclusion can be defended with certainty, even if it is merely axiomatic. Certainty is synonymous with dogmatism, and i've never seen or heard of a dogmatic scientist, let alone a philosopher, have you? The statement "if you're certain, then you're certainly wrong" might also sound contradictory in itself, but in this case, what do you propose Russell should have said? Epistemologically speaking, doubt is the safest position to be in if you're maximally concerned with conveying truth in your rhetoric.

[@compassioniseverything4262]

.........and despacito gets billion views. The most valuable are usually the most underrated.

[@davidemmanuelsegundorubio9081]

what does he say from 9:30 to 9:37

[@nathanielhellerstein5871]

For any two philosophers, there are three philosophies.

[@paulwalsh7134]

Peter P + "Beyond the measurable there is no being," Bertrand Russel would not have agreed with that. I would have amended that to: "Beyond the measurable there may be no being." To assert there is nothing beyond the observable is scientifically unsupportable. When confronted with the unknown/unknowable the scientific man must admit ignorance, not make assertions about the unknown/unknowable. "On the other hand, Russell admits that Science has nothing to say about morality, what is good for man." Much is asserted about morality, but nothing is verified (other than its utility). Morality is inherently in the realm of speculation, or hypotheses with little to no hope of verification. One ought to doubt assertions concerning morality, always, there is no short cut to knowledge. Science offers nothing concerning morality: This is true, also there is nothing by any other field of study, morality is as much a matter of speculation for a man of science as it is speculation for a man of scripture. All schools of philosophy are on equal footing here, regardless of unsupportable assertions to the contrary.

[@japeking1]

The Selfish Gene, Game Theory and Brain function mapping are all making inroads to your "Science offers nothing concerning morality". It is the nature of science to be indefinite, but to keep plugging on towards as definite as possible.... we are coming to have a broad understanding of the roots of morality....which might let us guard against immorality. Good or Bad?

[@1man1bike1road]

the interviewers voice is so funny

[@painandsuffer]

Science is what we think we know

[@compassioniseverything4262]

Philosophy is large and science is small, the day when this statement reverses we will be civilized.

[@johnsontunu4071]

Russellian biography is the approach for educationists globally to use to make kids get more rationality out of their formal educational upbringing

[@Rhoic]

He talks about how science will diminish the importance of philosophy, which seems strange. Not because he's a philosopher, but because he stated that there are matters of philosophy which cannot pertain to science, such as morality. Also, metaphysical and epistemological claims can arise from, and bring forth, science.

[@kevindunne701]

Listening to philosophy need to sleep; it's now morning.

[@helveticaneptune537]

Bertrand Russell was a nice creature

[@RiadhBoukratem]

" The quite losers are those who wager by an eternal life "

[@mbirxeotn]

Thank you! how does hie upper lip not move? i hope so much to be so aware at 88 . Love the conversation between the understood, science and not , philosophy. Thanks again

[@SSJHF]

"If you are certain, you are certainly wrong". Therefore, if you are certainly wrong, it is certainly wrong, that you are certainly wrong. Contradiction. Therefore, it is not the case, that "If you are certain, you are certainly wrong". In other words, some people who are certain are correct.

[@AwsAlSamarrie]

Yes

[@SomethingSoOriginal]

Sounds like Krishnamurti!

[@SomethingSoOriginal]

Yeah

[@japeking1]

With the difference that Russell makes sense.

[@sml87]

'logical atoms'... he totally knew what memes were lol

[@evanshepardofficial]

4:11 5:27 10:34

[@watchful38]

First time I've heard Lord Russell. IMO for him Science is the ultimate knowledge and will ultimately replaced Philosophy. To say this Russell must be a 'Materialist' and hence all knowledge is attainable by Science, Science uses a methodology that is limited to sense knowledge. Beyond the measurable there is no being, and hence no further knowledge to be attained. Also Russell is consequently an atheist. On the other hand, Russell admits that Science has nothing to say about morality, what is good for man. Either this leaves Russell in a dilemma or his views on morality will be non existent or have no foundation in reality. Again, my first impressions of Lord Russell. Aldous Huxley has a much more coherent and concrete view of man or so it seems to me. From Canada.

[@athleticaesthetixfitness6937]

Just because religious scripture has a lot to say about morality, it doesn't make it even remotely compatible with modern society. It doesn't mean we need it (if we want to consider ourselves a forward-thinking species). If a religious doctrine agrees with systems of government that bring out the best in people and foster prosperity, it just so happens to agree, in the same way that a blind darts player occasionally hits the board. Religiously informed moral philosophy isn't even compatible with the time in which it was composed because people back then were of the same fundamental nature as people today. If religion gets anything right that didn't arise out of common sense (e.g., 'thou shalt not kill' or 'thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife' etc.), about nature or human morality, it gets it right by pure luck. Science doesn't need to offer moral guidance for the 21st century, that's not its job. We need to outgrow bigotry, intolerance, dogma (all of which are divinely sanctioned in certain contexts) and religiously motivated violence in favour of egalitarian values that arise out of human solidarity, morality that is not knowledge a posteriori (thus good moral conduct does not depend upon exposure to religious texts) and thus does not need spiritual validation.

[@nathanhastings8293]

It is simply tragic to see a sea of shanty huts built of only facts neatly kindly stacked with only a portion of the human mind experience .........the world's children bound to analytical thought.

[@SeanCStark]

In "Marriage and Morals" he wants us to believe infidelity is really no big deal. But then the admiration society doesn't know all the other "issues" either.

[@jamesscott1189]

Certainty. Grandma loves her children, grandchildren. God loves His creation, His creatures. Philosophers are valuable, but offer no peace of mind.

[@addytorials]

Such an excellent mind. But why is he being interrogated by an uptight bobby?

[@weltgeist2604]

5:20

[@Music_Creativity_Science]

Philosophy and science are not meant to change the world, 5:00 ? He has completely misunderstood it, true science challenges and crushes old truths, that's the point of it. It is not about deriving new facts about the real reality from what is already known, it is a creative process which digs into the completely unknown. Einstein and Russell were likely not friends, lol

[@necroyoli08]

+Talents, young artists, music charts Russell never said "Philosophy and science are not meant to change the world". Even worse you seem to ignore the scientific method completely, given that everything begins with observations, just as Einstein's observations from Newton's point of view regarding space and time as separate dimensions resolved in his space-time hypothesis and later developed into a scientific fact, so I hope you see the absurd behind your "it is a creative process which digs into the completely unknown" argument. Absolute originality is the iron pyrite of egomaniacs just as there are no new discoveries without full knowledge of relevant previous ones, no matter how creative your approach is. Finally, as Russell did say at 3:28 some hypotheses take a lot of time to get proper truth, such as the Democritus atomic theory, so every science begins one way or the other as philosophy, even "true science" (whatever you meant by that), and in the end, science turns out to be proven philosophy, like the atomic theory which was NOT an "old truth" to be crushed but a scientific fact impossible to get proof over 2000 years ago.

[@jonathanseas]

@@necroyoli08 Russell's "logical atom" was what we today call first principles thinking. His wisdom is timeless.

[@artschamberg4470]

In the land of the blind the one eyed man is King. ME

[@drewberry8141]

Philosophy simply to be open-minded

[@ZIGSVIDS]

Just like Wittgenstein said our language isn't good enough.

[@aMulliganStew]

I find myself ponder the cargo cults these days.

[@ugmodude]

Wow. Charlie Watts is really smart

[@greedyfirstalgorithmlast26]

When you come to look into this argument from design, it is a most astonishing thing that people can believe that this world, with all the things that are in it, with all its defects, should be the best that omnipotence and omniscience have been able to produce in millions of years. I really cannot believe it. Do you think that, if you were granted omnipotence and omniscience and millions of years in which to perfect your world, you could produce nothing better than the Ku Klux Klan, the Fascisti, and Mr. Winston Churchill? Really I am not much impressed with the people who say: "Look at me: I am such a splendid product that there must have been design in the universe." I am not very much impressed by the splendor of those people. Moreover, if you accept the ordinary laws of science, you have to suppose that human life and life in general on this planet will die out in due course: it is merely a flash in the pan; it is a stage in the decay of the solar system; at a certain stage of decay you get the sort of conditions and temperature and so forth which are suitable to protoplasm, and there is life for a short time in the life of the whole solar system. You see in the moon the sort of thing to which the earth is tending ‐‐ something dead, cold, and lifeless.

[@greedyfirstalgorithmlast26]

#THE AL NEWPORT SHOW you are rather stupid, aren't you? Did you not realize I quoted "Lord Russell?" You religious bastards never have any education and are totally insipid idiots. You come off as a Evangelistism Type 'Christeain right winger" If you had any education you would know Christiny is a false perveerted Roman Cult of Jew Haters. Christerins attempt to Steal the God of the Jews. You obviously are a low grade non sentient beast. Now please "STFU & Go Straight To Hell." You name off a bunch of shitty ideals you hold to like www.brainyquote.com/quotes/barack_obama_409149 "It's not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." - Barack

[@japeking1]

88 and he still had 10 years left. And Woodrow Wyatt..... another Tory plonker from my childhood. Not that I know anything else bad about him except for the awful accent and prepared questions .

[@internautapopo2766]

Act with vigor in the doubt Such a profound lesson We all know what happened in germany following that principle😮 Such an amount of bs Science is what we know and philosophy is what we don't know Bs again