Hilary Putnam Interview - Mind, Truth & Science (1998)

[@Philosophy_Overdose]

00:00 Philosophy over Time 01:49 How old is the Mind? 04:48 Functionalism 08:35 Externalism 13:19 The Turing Test 16:52 The Nature of Mind 24:07 Perception 27:06 Artificial Intelligence & the Mind 28:16 Dualist or Pluralist? 29:44 Is the World Independent of our Minds? 37:55 Unconceptualizable Reality 40:49 The Role of Language 44:01 Scientific Realism 46:01 Quantum Mechanics 50:14 Scientific Theories & Realism 57:52 Theories of Truth 1:04:41 Is Truth Idealized Rational Acceptability? 1:08:11 Brains in a Vat 1:22:33 Connecting Different Fields of Philosophy 1:26:33 The Role of Philosophers

[@eternaldoorman5228]

Every day is Christmas on this channel. ❤

[@eternaldoorman5228]

16:52 "I am in the process of a radical revision of my concept of mind, however, ..." Most people would have to stop giving interviews during that phase of their intellectual life.

[@garetcrossman6626]

Christmas usually means a set of days. Saying every day is a certain set of days is inelegant. 😊

[@Phishiesmels]

Mr Putnam’s mockingly sincere chuckles. Priceless 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

[@nanashi7779]

Not sure mocking is the right word for it. Think he's being totally sincere

[@Phishiesmels]

I’ve amended the comment to accommodate the seriousness of this matter - Nietzsche once exclaimed “God is dead” - Following, I would like to exclaim “Satire is dead”

[@nanashi7779]

@@Phishiesmels What was the satire? That you were saying they were mocking when they actually weren't?

[@Phishiesmels]

The satire……? Maybe, it was the man chuckling in the video…………. As, I am now - So, I apologise. Possibly, satire isn’t dead after all. 😊

[@nanashi7779]

@@Phishiesmels Hmm

[@ahappyimago]

This is amazing. I didn’t have a chance to study Putnam as an undergraduate. I was missing out.

[@alanbooth9217]

what a marvellous range Hilary had- I could listen to him all day

[@Rudi361]

Thank you very much, you did me a very big favor!

[@drluisgoncalves]

Pure gold, also known as 24 karat gold (24k) or fine gold, has an intense and bright yellow color, with a slightly reddish hue. This hue is unique and unmistakable, making pure gold easily recognizable. It is important to emphasize that this characteristic yellow color of pure gold is natural and not altered by additions of other metals. In fact, the color of gold can vary slightly according to its origin and purity, but it will always remain within the range of yellow tones. Some factors that can influence the hue of pure gold include: Presence of impurities: Even pure gold can contain small amounts of other metals, such as silver and copper. These impurities can cause slight variations in color, making the gold appear slightly paler or redder. Surface finish: The surface finish of pure gold can also affect its color perception. A polished finish, for example, will reflect more light and appear brighter and more yellow, while a matte finish may appear darker and softer. Lighting conditions: The color of pure gold can also vary slightly depending on lighting conditions. Under natural light, pure gold will have a more intense yellow color, while under artificial light, it may appear more orange or golden. In summary, the color of pure gold is an intense and bright yellow, with a slightly reddish hue. This unique hue is one of the key elements that distinguish pure gold from other gold alloys.

[@blablabubles]

Thank you Phil Overdose! I was looking for this! I remember a video of Putnam talking about the safir worf hypothesis, do you know where that might have come from?

[@paulheinrichdietrich9518]

Yay! It's back up! Thanks man.

[@DanyJoshuva]

35:15 “There is a middle way here, but the middle way is subtle and nuanced.” I wonder if he knew anything about Nagarjuna and his philosophy

[@JTL2884]

Wow, this is fantastic. Please keep the pragmatists coming. :)

[@BugMateo]

Speaking of reductionism.. "bad for the culture, bad for the mind"... he has been proven right (at least for the "culture" part)

[@manavkhatarkar9983]

need john searle's interview too

[@Rudi361]

Didn't Putnam discuss ethics at the same room? Could you send the compilation of videos too?

[@IanDiOrio]

Such a brilliant man

[@rezamahan7109]

made my day❤

[@PlaydoughPlato]

Interestingly enough I was reading Russell’s logical atomism when you posted his earlier talks on qualia (when he was the “brain in a vat” Putnam) prior to this perspective shit and he seemed right on point with that perspective. Now listening to this I’m currently reading Merleau Ponty and he seems to be right on point with that at almost the extreme other end of the spectrum. I don’t think it’s necessarily an either/or

[@garruksson]

Does he misrepresent Searle here, does anybody know? It does strike me as odd that he doesn't believe in unconscious processing (like, surely he can't believe that?)

[@AllenWalker-pk8oo]

You can easily find your answer on specialized websites: "John Searle claims that unconscious mental states (1) have first-person "aspectual shape", but (2) that their ontology is purely third-person. He attempts to eliminate the obvious inconsistency by arguing that the aspectual shape of unconscious mental states consists in their ability to cause conscious first-person states."

[@garruksson]

@@AllenWalker-pk8oo but why would I, the whole point of a comment is to not do the work myself. "Just google it dude" is the 21st century mass psychosis knee jerk opinion, no doubt about that.

[@AllenWalker-pk8oo]

@@garruksson I just wanted to help you. Most books and scientific articles are now published on the internet for free. You can learn so much now on the internet if you are patient and select your sources well.

[@garruksson]

@@AllenWalker-pk8oo sorry I misinterpreted you, I'm weaning off antidepressants which can make you super moody. Thank u, and yes the internet is an amazing resource

[@darrellee8194]

@@AllenWalker-pk8ooWhere? 90% of what I look for is behind a pay wall (JSTOR, etc) where you need to be part of an institution, or pay for a subscription.

[@theeskatelife]

i love how he makes himself laugh

[@acorpuscallosum6947]

He who showed the way

[@madmartigan8119]

The Master and The Emissary, anyone here read it ?

[@aarnilapsi9336]

I wonder if something funny was going on off-camera.

[@officialPlacidity]

I think Putnam just enjoys philosophy that much, which is nice to see honestly

[@darillus1]

they had someone under his chair tickling his feet every now and then.

[@ghamessmona]

🇾🇪❤️

[@alexjoseph9935]

What is Western philosophy actually about? Right now reading about Daniel Dennett Freedom Evolves

[@dreamcatchersong]

Putman surely cannot be a philosopher, he admits mistakes and I seem to be able to understand what he's saying!

[@czarquetzal8344]

So a philosopher should never admit mistake? Is that what you're saying?

[@dreamcatchersong]

@@czarquetzal8344 That was an attempt by me at irony😉

[@czarquetzal8344]

@@dreamcatchersong Well, I just wanted to know your " epistemic value". Yeah, others consider philosopher to be unintelligible like the notorious Hegel.

[@aek12]

🛶

[@firstal3799]

Pheww

[@darrellee8194]

Putnams little snuffling laugh is really annoying. And the things he thinks are funny. What a nerdy laugh.

[@afdulmitdemklappstuhl9607]

This is a philosophy channel. Nerds are not allowed.

[@Rudi361]

I don't know how meaningful my answer is but is laugh his the most authentic and sympathetic I know from thinkers

[@horsymandias-ur]

I like it. He’s a bizarre character and I wouldn’t have it any other way

[@darillus1]

it's the most charming part about him