Sugrue’s ability to articulate a subject, put it in its contemporary context, AND cross reference it to virtually any historical and intellectual tradition is inspiring and mind boggling.
@jlwcarroll2 жыл бұрын
Quick qqq
@donmilland7606 Жыл бұрын
That nerd is brilliant!
@robertb1138 Жыл бұрын
He said in one lecture he tends to be Gadamerian in his outlook, and that encyclopedic referencing and criss-crossing of time is very much Gadamerian.
@cheri238 Жыл бұрын
I want to thank Dr. Sugre again. I have enjoyed all his videos.
@alfredogomez471410 ай бұрын
He died amigo😢! Heard about it yesterday
@vusisindane10 күн бұрын
He doesn't lecture, he delivers a symphony. Astounding and breathtaking. Incredible!
@Noxshus4 жыл бұрын
If I had had philosophy profs like this, I would have a master's right now.
@peterlemmonjello67993 жыл бұрын
same
@cinnamon46053 жыл бұрын
I would've been one of the person: that they would've studied about me in the future. Just we are listening to Socrates, Kant, Kierkegaard, Neichtze.
@eliajahrenteria3222 жыл бұрын
Master's in Sass
@andrewocampos32032 жыл бұрын
Forreal
@austinmackell9286Ай бұрын
When I compare this to my university prof's I feel very cheated.
@JamieEHILLS4 жыл бұрын
Thank you for uploading these Mr. Sugrue, they are absolute gold!
@enlightenedanalysis Жыл бұрын
Thank you Dr. Sugrue. This was excellent.
@MyRealName148 Жыл бұрын
My favorite man and professor on the interwebs. Rather an intellectual target I can work towards.
@steveschramko23864 жыл бұрын
Hume has always been the great mountain of western philosophy....old and new roads begin and end here. No one has been better able to articulate the fundamental paradoxes of life than Hume. Not all 'miracles' involve suspension of natural laws, but may be perfectly natural events (a military victory, seagulls eating locusts) whose timing and context make them 'miraculous' to a people. The Conclusion of Book I of the Treatise of Human Nature contains some of the most lyrical, poetic passages in all of philosophy....itself a kind of irony. It's a tour de force of ironic writing.
@Vgallo2 жыл бұрын
Sone of his explanations for miracles, namely that they require extraordinary proofs for extraordinary claims has since been shown to be erroneous though, still an intellectual giant though.
@michaelkingsbury4305 Жыл бұрын
Hume is one of the most readable of all the great philosophers.
@danielgrotz6599 Жыл бұрын
I don't believe this phrase "extraordinary proofs for extraordinary claims" is anywhere in Hume. He says that the unlikelihood of the miracle not occurring has to outweigh the unlikelihood of it occurring. I.e. the resurrection should be doubted because the unlikelihood of a resurrection so greatly outweighs the testimonies for it.
@englishbiblereadings6036 Жыл бұрын
@@danielgrotz6599 Yet one of the arguments against the originality of the Christ's Resurrection is that it appeared in forms and shadows in pre-Christian religions.
@nanashi7779 Жыл бұрын
@@englishbiblereadings6036 What is this supposition meant to refute?
@taniasara75588 ай бұрын
Thank u so much for the lecture 🙏
@biedl863 жыл бұрын
The pathos of your speech at the end of the lecture was amazing. No wonder, the whole lecture was exceedingly interesting.
@fightingwords89552 жыл бұрын
Excellent Lecture as Always. I Hope your Health is WELL.
@christopherheijjer5942 Жыл бұрын
This channel is fantastic! Thanks for all the knowledge and free learning!!
@Bruh_moment018 ай бұрын
Based Sugrue 🙌🐐🙌 r.i.p🌹✨💫
@dionysian2226 ай бұрын
He made me based that gentle soul Sugrue!
@aryencas3 жыл бұрын
This guy is absolutely brilliant.
@cheri238 Жыл бұрын
Thank you again, Dr. Sugrue. I have enjoyed your lectures.
@havefunbesafe3 ай бұрын
I love listening to this man’s voice ….smooth, erudite, entertaining 🎉
@andytaylor34624 жыл бұрын
Wonderful lecture as usual thanks 😊
@chrishughes799110 ай бұрын
Rollercoaster for the mind and soul. ❤️🔥
@Jake_Funk2 жыл бұрын
40:35 "Irony always means that a cultural tendancy is dying."
@shaunkerr87212 жыл бұрын
It amazes me that Socrates & Plato are so influential in the canons of Western history then given they're possibly the most ironic ppl in Western literature.
@pearz42024 күн бұрын
@@shaunkerr8721 It's because the greatest historical myth of them all is progress.
@truthisaquestion Жыл бұрын
All your lectures are excellent, but this is one of my faves. Thank you for posting!
@kevinrombouts30273 жыл бұрын
Tremendous lecture.Loved it.
@CornellD.Cavendish2 жыл бұрын
Hesitated to click this one for a while but this is classic Sugrue. I would rate it with his Nietzsche and Aurelius lectures.
@a.t.316811 ай бұрын
You're a remarkable teacher.
@davidrogers49173 жыл бұрын
I think this is an interesting lecture considering civic religion has so much prominence in the foundation of this country, and that at least a few of the founders were deist. Idk
@pearz4202 жыл бұрын
"For the whole history of the West, irony always means that a cultural tendency is dying."
@LethalBubbles3 жыл бұрын
13:30 - Gibbon adapted this amazing quote from Lucretius' De rerum natura, an Epicurean work.
@dhieuayuen14676 ай бұрын
The best lecture about Hume.
@andrewbacon88116 күн бұрын
"Perhaps those who want to keep public order want to keep it around (speaking of Christianity)". That is a great line. Those kind of people are indeed the most dangerous to all.
@slorbitify4 жыл бұрын
Great lecture! Does mr Sugrue plan on uploading his presentations on the Platonic dialouges?
@dr.michaelsugrue4 жыл бұрын
They should be uploaded sometime in the near future.
@drbonesshow12 жыл бұрын
Jonathan Swift could have been the editor of Mad Magazine.
@cheri238 Жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@yipekiyay13 жыл бұрын
this guy top 5 that are a live
@benbell91702 жыл бұрын
It turns out that the Romanticism was even more devastating to the progress of human thinking than the religions itself... Thank you again Prof. Sugrue for as always exceptional lecture of you!
@noobieexplorer4697 Жыл бұрын
But what are we progressing to? Is there any goal?
@acropolisnow9466 Жыл бұрын
@@noobieexplorer4697 Progress is a myth because nature is perennial.
@pearz42023 күн бұрын
"Now He was questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, and He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs that can be observed; nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.”"
@joekopsick1540 Жыл бұрын
He mentions felicity in every lecture, and veneers in like a quarter of them. I'm still playing the "take a shot when you hear veneer" game from Frasier, I'm a wreck
@blairhakamies41323 жыл бұрын
Brilliant 🌹
@tianac.6730 Жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for this video! My questions are, what is the ultimate collapse of pantheism/deism within a post-civilizational context, and why is philosophy's bedrock embedded within Hume's notions of perceptual reality? Also, why does modernism entail the notion of a hyper-idealistic civilization in the first place? Also, what leap of faith does it take to become a Hume-inspired deist/pan-psychic campaigner? Also, why do the fruits of civilization blossom often only within the context of Westernization? Also, why is the collapse of Christianity considered an Epicurean heraldic movement in spite of the crown of civilization's rapturous fluidity? Finally, what does it take to re-bedrock the Christian-inspired reins of the chariot of deism/pantheism within an Absolute ideally inspired politic of society, so to speak?
@Rico-Suave_ Жыл бұрын
Watched all of it 42:47
@ryans30012 жыл бұрын
Thank you!
@IvanTheHeathen2 жыл бұрын
Perhaps the greatest irony of Hume’s philosophy is the fact that his account of miracles actually contradicts the rest of his philosophy. Hume says that a miracle is any contravention of a law of nature. But if we see a law of nature contravened, then that gives us empirical evidence that that alleged law of nature isn’t really a law of nature. And so, he rejects miracles on the grounds that they’re inconsistent with the idea of a lawlike universe. The problem with this argument is that _it’s only persuasive if you believe that laws of nature are objective facts about reality. But Hume clearly doesn’t believe that!_ He says that our ideas about causality only come from the fact that we happen to have repeatedly observed that event A tends to be followed by event B, not because there’s anything about events A and B in themselves that account for why they are connected. Bread that has nourished us whenever we have eaten it could, for all we know, end up poisoning us the next time we eat it. The irony here is that, if you take Hume’s account of causality seriously, you should be _more_ inclined to believe claims that a miracle has occurred, not less.
@danielgrotz6599 Жыл бұрын
If you think these things you mentioned didn't occur to him you are underestimating him, I think.. He fully acknowledges that a new observation can change our understanding of the laws of nature. He gives the example of hypothetical global darkness in 1600. He doesn't "reject miracles" like you say but rather says we should only believe them if the unlikelihood of them not occurring outweighs the unlikelihood of them occurring. He personally thinks no miracle has occurred which meets this criterion.
@IvanTheHeathen Жыл бұрын
@@danielgrotz6599 - I think the problem with Hume's approach runs deeper than you appreciate. On Hume's view, we really don't have any reason to believe that there are such things as "laws of nature" at all (there are contemporary philosophers who agree with Hume's account of causality and accordingly do not believe that laws of nature exist). Yes, we inductively observe regularities in nature, but as Hume stresses, induction is not deduction. In his view, just because we happen to repeatedly observe event B following event A many times does not mean that there is anything in the nature of things that connects events A and B. For all we know, event C might suddenly start following event A tomorrow instead of event B. The regularities that we happen to observe are just that - happenstantial. They're pure coincidences. There's no deeper reason that explains their connection - or at least, none that we have access to. As Hume puts it, the connections between events are "loose and separate." The irony of this account of the metaphysics of causality is that not only does it mean that miracles are possible, _it actually means that literally every event whatsoever is, in some sense, a miracle,_ because each event is causally disconnected from every other event.
@noobieexplorer4697 Жыл бұрын
@@IvanTheHeathen last paragraph was great.
@Anon-jr7or Жыл бұрын
@@IvanTheHeathen That’s certainly true if you regard induction as invalid, which Hume concluded. However Hume also concluded that it is simply a fundamental part of human nature to believe in induction. Therefore what Hume says about miracles is from the position that induction is reliable which makes his position consistent.
@cheri238 Жыл бұрын
I love Jonathan Swifts novel, "Gulliver's Travel." Travels Into Several Remote Nations, In Four Parts. By Lemuel Gulliver 1. A Letter Capt. Gulliver to his Cousin Simpson 2.The Publisher to the Reader 3. The Contents PART I: A Voyage to Lilliput Part II: A Voyage to Brobdingnag Part III: A Voyage to Luputa, Balnibarbl.,Glubdubdrib, and Japan Part IV: A Voyage to the counrt of Houyhnbnms David Hume-(1711- 1776) at the age of twenty- six shocked all Christendom with is "Trieatise of Human Nature." We only know the mind only as we know matter: by perception though it may be case intrenal. No wit. could get himself in more trouble when he said: No matter, no mind" Hallucinations of philosophy ad science. Mathematics Hume and Swift diesim is split into. Philosophers how ironic we still have them. Thank god, whichever one chooses. What is the soul? Or is there one? William Blake is my favorite poet among many. Thank you, Dr. Sugrue again. Please be well and remain courageous. Sending you many blessing of joy.
@englishbiblereadings6036 Жыл бұрын
To divide miracles into Christian ones and Hindu ones is absurd. Moses was confronted by Jannes and Jambres and scripture clearly speaks of lying signs and wonders and the idolatry behind them. For Hume to have had such a detached view of the miraculous indicates he lived in spiritual deadness. Symptomatic of the Deistic wasteland he was born into perhaps? Little wonder that the Wesleyan revival had such an impact on that barren land.
@sp22m3 Жыл бұрын
It's interesting thinking about gnostic traditions and meister Eckhart's "God has no name" quote at the same time. It's reminiscent of the undescribable form of God that Sophia and the demiurge descended.
@johnstewart702525 күн бұрын
Perhaps we can just describe empirically the world and subjectively our experience. Spiritual people wait and, by waiting, find that they change, especially their attitudes and personalities.
@emadr57802 жыл бұрын
Could you talk about Freud?
@shakespearaamina911711 ай бұрын
Fascinating 😊😊
@anthenehbeze.9 ай бұрын
RIP😢
@davidfost57773 жыл бұрын
I'm always looking for new interesting lectures on Psychology/Philosophy, please let me know if you guys have any recommendations, would be highly appreciated
@josephwinnard66662 жыл бұрын
John Vervaeke!!!
@beartime9728 Жыл бұрын
“Irony always means that a cultural tendency is dying”
@Tadesan2 жыл бұрын
"REAL baby-back ribs! Meat falling off the bone!" - Jonathan Swift
@PooyanDoozandeh Жыл бұрын
Good, thank you. However, I wish Hume’s main contribution to philosophy was discussed which had lasting implications on ethics: the destruction of empiricism which led to the rise of belief! Yes, Hume was empiricist, but towards the end of the first book of his main Treatise, he questioned the foundations of empiricism and observation. I would argue that Nietzsche is a continuation of Hume’s conclusions.
@thunkjunk5 ай бұрын
Anyone know the approximate date of this or this lecture series.
@finnmacdiarmid32504 ай бұрын
I’m not sure but his daughter would absolutely know. Dr. Staloff could still be reached as well.
@Zsswimmer12 жыл бұрын
Speaking of irony as a signal of an eras degradation and on the decline.... We have meta levels of irony now lol. I suppose every generation thinks something like this to some degree. BTW This channel is fucking awesome for us that are on the road for our jobs. Love listening to these going to bed too, you can really feel the passion this man has for the subjects he teaches
@nightoftheworld4 жыл бұрын
11:56 This is what necessitates Hegel’s journey through madness! To become something more than a Machiavellian hypocrite you must “fall into” the world and traverse the fantasy. To have faith is thus a constitutive aspect of becoming more fully human.
@TheRaveJunkie2 жыл бұрын
Yeah no, this is incredibly debatable.
@nightoftheworld2 жыл бұрын
@@TheRaveJunkie maybe, but faith is a hard thing to hold, it’s not a system that offers certainty and satisfaction but is a mode of living free from these desires. It allows us to look at ourselves and what we are more seriously, to put aside the fantasy of who I _feel_ I am. It is a stumbling block for the self, a naked confrontation with others, a practice which dims our constellations to let in new light from other stars in order to expand our universe. This ability to intervene into ourselves, to cut against our own worlds, I believe makes us more human, more capable of opening up, of listening to others and finding common ground despite certain ideological differences.
@TheRaveJunkie2 жыл бұрын
@@nightoftheworld Just another load of empty phrases, devoid of any logic or meaning. You're simply doubling down on your deeply ideological claim of faith being a "constitutive aspect".
@nightoftheworld2 жыл бұрын
@@TheRaveJunkie faith in my view is an anti-ideological in practice, it is a direct challenge to our sense of certainty/righteousness. Faith is a disruptive/reflexive mindset which can help us expand beyond the rigidity of our beliefs and into deeper engagement with others in the world. This is a critical/progressive orientation to truth, it certainly isn’t empty or meaningless or illogical-in the natural sciences it is the philosophical perspective of _fallibilism._
@nightoftheworld4 жыл бұрын
34:39 No it isn’t intellectually dishonest, it’s just communicating through another _register_
@because_the_internet2 жыл бұрын
David Hume could out-consume, Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
@benquinneyiii7941 Жыл бұрын
The meaning of meaning
@jasonavant7470 Жыл бұрын
My devoutly Christian mother could only sit in silence when I mentioned to her what Hume said about miracles - minutes 32:55 - 36:35
@englishbiblereadings6036 Жыл бұрын
She should consider the miracles of Pharaoh's magicians in Exodus 7:11
@jasonavant7470 Жыл бұрын
@@englishbiblereadings6036 That's right. I forgot about that. Thank you
@yeezystreetteam Жыл бұрын
I haven't read Hume, but I estimate he might ask what is the point of sense organs if we cannot rely on them? And why are we asked to rely on them just enough to comprehend and ingest revelation, but not a scintilla more? Perhaps the only practical answer is metaphor, using a hammer to pound a nail too hard may cause the surface to fracture. The surface being our unique human conscious experience, or soul, which is as real as the oakwood table Hume is pointing to. Playing a little god's advocate.
@jeffmarcuse64502 жыл бұрын
The problem with abandoning dogma is we can do a lot of stupid things and just say it's good or bad even if it's completely unreasonable.
@danielgrotz6599 Жыл бұрын
If you are defending dogma , which maybe you aren't, then it should be pointed out that dogma can also lead people to believe that seemingly evil things are good (flying planes into towers/slavery/persecuting lgbtq people/a global flood/hell) and that seemingly silly things are reasonable (celibacy for all priests/Balaam's talking donkey/scriptural inerrancy)
@noobieexplorer4697 Жыл бұрын
@@danielgrotz6599 if you dont have dogma then you have no ground to say that those are evil or unreasonable. Cause then you have your own dogma
@danielgrotz6599 Жыл бұрын
@@noobieexplorer4697 if you are trying to scare me into dogma by arguing that there is no good or evil without it then I'm sorry, I'm not falling for it. I defy you to explain why a God demanding child sacrifice is more moral than a human who lives by love. Job teaches correctly that humans have limited understanding of the physical universe but it says nothing about our moral conscience. Now maybe there is no true morality and that's fine. We shouldn't say that the world can't be that way just because some of us are afraid. Our fear has no bearing on the truth. In the meantime you can continue to teach the morality of murder and persecution and war that your dogma teaches and we will continue to love.
@pearz42023 күн бұрын
@@danielgrotz6599 You have no concept of good and evil without religion. You only have, at best, plagiarism - and social consensus which is objectively more fickle than any dogma. You have a naked ideal based on nothing, but you assert it as somehow better than dogma, and since you gave some temporal examples, you demonstrate that nothing more than emotional feelings of 'right' and 'wrong' are your guideposts. Your idea of "good" is what is popular in mass media.
@danielgrotz659923 күн бұрын
@@pearz420 You will quickly learn when you study philosophy that there many ways to establish the existence of good and evil without religious dogma. Plato's forms don't require a God, and Kant's moral system doesn't require a historical religion. I'm not saying either of them are correct, only that people who think we need religious dogma in order to have good and evil are not worth taking seriously on this point. But as many of the Church Fathers pointed out, if we really on God to teach us our morality, then we cannot identify that Jesus is the Christ, because without morality his actions and teachings do not appear any better than those of pagan deities and prophets. Miracles are totally insufficient (Tertullian, for example, in Against Marcion points this out) because miracle claims are everywhere. You must first accept your own moral conscience, and only then can you accept that Jesus is the Christ.
@tangerinesarebetterthanora70607 ай бұрын
Swift inverted postmodern critiques before they existed.
@36cmbr2 жыл бұрын
Teach seems to be rewriting critical “humanists” & “Swifties”. Why would he do such a thing?
@gustavderkits84333 жыл бұрын
Terry Pratchett assures us that there is almost certainly a monster in the closet or under the bed, but right nanny can deal with effectively.
@kenoohki Жыл бұрын
Gibbon was on point with that statement. 😂
@tupiguarani24011 ай бұрын
Scotland/Scottish and England/English are not interchangeable terms - you make the same mistake in your lecture on Adam Smith
@sapientum82 жыл бұрын
Hume's argument about miracles is kind of lame. As a Christian, I wouldn't deny Hindu miracles, but rather ascribe them to the devil. With that, his argument kind of falls apart.
@danielgrotz6599 Жыл бұрын
You have good company in thinkers like augustine, but if you really believe all or many of these other miracles are legitimate, then you have a couple of problems. How do you know your miracles didn't come from the devil? Why have miracles from demons become so much rarer? And if you are a Christian, your opinion seems to contradict Deuteronomy 18:21-22. I'm fairly sure Hume read Augustine so I doubt your belief didn't occur to him. I guess he didn't think it worthwhile to engage with so he needed stops like me
@sapientum8 Жыл бұрын
@@danielgrotz6599 Contradict the Deuteronomy 18 ? In what way? It only provides negative confirmation. If something prophesied didn't happen, it was definitely not from God, that's all. Nothing more, nothing less. Hume was a rationalist who didn't believe in any miracles, and his assumption was that anything that can be labeled "supernatural" simply doesn't exist. Apparently he never had any experience in his life with that, so his point of view is understandable. Nor did he believe in demons, or for that matter, in God (even though he had to hide this fact because of obvious reasons). I am sure he read Augustin, and many others, but his argument on miracles is still quite lame.
@casteretpollux Жыл бұрын
Oh come on, both are codolgy but good stories.
@pearz42024 күн бұрын
@@danielgrotz6599 Since we're cherry-picking from the Bible for the sake of argument, you might want to check out Matthew 13:54-58 for ACTUAL Christian insight on why miracles might be less common.
@danielgrotz659924 күн бұрын
@@pearz420 That passage doesn't help the situation. If God only performs miracles in response to faith, then that would cause us to doubt whether or not people praying for miracles that don't happen have sufficient faith. Did all the people who every prayed for amputations to be restored lack faith? That's a huge can of worms that we shouldn't open here.
@user-vg7zv5us5r2 жыл бұрын
31:20 Only in Bioshock:Infinite 😉
@EsatBargan2 ай бұрын
Gonzalez Jason Moore Donald Miller Edward
@EsatBargan2 ай бұрын
Hernandez Joseph Gonzalez Larry Lopez Laura
@EuropeanQoheleth8 ай бұрын
40:31 Sounds like the new atheism.
@LawrenceMabel-y8y2 ай бұрын
Wilson Daniel Jones Jessica Thomas Jennifer
@Phoenix0F83 жыл бұрын
"May I suggest, not just for the enlightenment but for the whole history of the west: Irony always means that a cultural tendency is dying." well, at least the culture of the last few generations here in the states isn't almost entirely based on irony . . . . .
@christinemartin639 ай бұрын
Thank God ... for atheism. 😉
@bbHoodski3 жыл бұрын
"irony is a sign that the dominant ideology is dying" Goodbye late stage capitalism! 🥳🎉🎉
@benbell91702 жыл бұрын
Considering that it was the Romanticism that rose after the death of the Enlightenment, I'm very pessimistic about whatever would eventually rise after the death of this "late stage Capitalism" and its consequences...
@colincoulter1257 Жыл бұрын
Does Foster Wallace pick up on this?
@donmilland7606 Жыл бұрын
Well , , , if one would wear an ill-fitting Republican suit with those glasses and that (ahem) haircut, then to through out "censorious." That dude would be called a NERD!!!!
@donmilland7606 Жыл бұрын
throw out
@saleens Жыл бұрын
ok big guy on campus
@optimusprimum2 жыл бұрын
a = A
@Tadesan2 жыл бұрын
[ ]
@kevinrombouts30273 жыл бұрын
The miracle of Jesus' resurrection was reportedly seen by several hundred people Take note Hume.
@suatustel7463 жыл бұрын
Reportedly????
@TheRaveJunkie2 жыл бұрын
hahaha, you utter fool do not even realize the ridiculousness of your supposed gotcha
@BenJehovah69692 жыл бұрын
It's hearsay through the grapevine, which is even more unreliable than actual eyewitness testimony. Nobody knows what they saw, some author spoke what they saw for them. I like to imagine a magician like Chris Angel doing magic tricks in front of those same people. I wonder what they would say they saw. We will never know.
@danielgrotz6599 Жыл бұрын
We do not in fact have hundreds of first person accounts. We have just a couple second hand accounts that appear to be written decades after said resurrection and whose oldest complete copies come centuries later. But even with hundreds of first person accounts the evidence would be insufficient as I think Hume clearly shows. I recommend you read him if you haven't, especially his passage on miracles. He knew full well about the supposed witnesses and he addresses it.
@casteretpollux Жыл бұрын
@@danielgrotz6599I saw Prighozin in my local cafe this morning.