Thought Falsifies Reality - NIETZSCHE’S FOUR GREAT ERRORS

[@cavaleer]

This is Nietzsches most brilliant and least covered insight. One can almost induce and deduce everything from this passage.

[@cavaleer]

And I should add, “Good” for Nietzsche was “Virtuosity”. Physiology is Philosophy, and vice versa.

[@riccello]

To be fair, Nietzsche's mustache did much of the thinking for him, which he mistook for his own follies.

[@Vapourwear]

I think maybe you mean his own…(pause for effect)….folli(cl)es?

[@ElinorRigby]

@@VapourwearI liked it.

[@robertmyerson8024]

Deep beneath the soil of, beneath the dirt, lies the consciousness of his moustache's follie-cules... Verily ....

[@sebdoesnothing6889]

Damn... slave-morality for your own stash...

[@LordEriolTolkien]

Rule #1: Don't believe everything you think.

[@shaunkerr8721]

... You do NOT talk about EssentialSalts. Rule number two ...

[@zerotwo7319]

@@shaunkerr8721 You know I actually do not talk about him, I guess I am afraid of losing this essentialsalts

[@ZM-dm3jg]

Rule #2: Don't think everything you believe

[@MegaFarinato]

@@grosbeak6130 with another question, witch seems to happen whenever you awnser any question at all. Probably

[@LordEriolTolkien]

@@grosbeak6130 With you falling afoul of the maxim. I never claimed to be the author of the line. I merely propagate a truth. And here's you believing what you think, and being wrong. Kinda proves my point

[@vikramchatterjee4495]

Against mediators: just as I will never fully understand Nietzsche by taking the word of Nietzsche podcasters as a full understanding, I will never understand my own life fully merely by reaching for Nietzsche to understand my own life situation. It’s interesting to think about the parallels between Nietzsche’s “confusion of causes with consequences” and Buddhism’s “dependent arising”. Before Nietzsche, I would read Buddhist texts like Nargajuna’s “garland of ratnavali” in which he says “high status precedes definite goodness” and Ikkyu’s poem in which he gets into sexuality. “Everyone can touch Buddha, but so few can touch the devil.” Big ups to essentialsalts as always, wish I still had so much time to sit around and contemplate with him.

[@austinmackell9286]

Interesting you made the link to Buddism. First association for me was Hume, who was also kind of buddist-ish on occasion.

[@unknowninfinium4353]

So many parallels, thank you guys. Lots to search and think about.

[@arnavrawat9864]

What does it mean that few can touch the devil?

[@Avo7977]

“High status precedes definite goodness” - mind expanding on that

[@politikedi]

20:23 Okay... So if the criticism of Cornaro is not about cause and effect, which I thought it to be, is it about too broadly extending principles? To include metabolic diseases? Because it is currently proven that diet affects metabolism, and even impulses through the gut biome. Studies on long term calorie restriction, and fasting have demonstrated effects on longevity, resistance to diseases, and improved cellular processes thanks to autophagy. I was thinking I'm on board with "correlation is not causation," but his example was incorrect.

[@SifoDiaz66]

Yeah, ignore the example 😂 His conclusion is perfectly rational, but it’s an outdated example. However, I can see why he chose it to some degree, though it failed to withstand the test of time.

[@binra3788]

​ @wanshitong5101 Cornaro was at that time current example of a reversal of cause with effect that Nietzsche drew on. This reversal has since become so normalised as to be uncommunicable to those who identify in its framing. Calorific restriction is still a thing for seeking health & longevity - not always inappropriate. The current biological model represents a form of psuedo religion. Interjecting complex systems of 'cause and effect' onto the prevalent 'cause of existence' (physical determinism and reductionism - as crowned in genetic dogma ). Discerning life is of the living. Trading life for system management will indeed reflect metabolically! Disconnect of 'ego' and Nature - or true being is a result of 'what cometh from the mouth' - Our own word, The meanings we unwittingly give frame the results we 'suffer' as insults. Pushback against tyranny attracts sympathy but in time will reveal the same shared assumptions and generate the same outcomes. But to create breathing space in which to question our assumptions is of course helpful to releasing negative outcomes. What is your diet in terms of thought, feeling and true fulfilment? I find discernment is a gift, it does not live in 'internalised facts'. I don't think anyone is saying that is no value in re-evaluating diet, or fasting and etc - but the belief in linear causation assumes the ego of 'free will' and arbitrary parameters. If that is our current world, we have to honour our current beliefs, as I respect you freedom to make choices, but its not the only way to see or be.

[@ChucksExotics]

The 5th great error: Not being subscribed to essentialsalts.

[@untimelyreflections]

The only unforgivable error

[@Sosa-m5n]

Lmao. True!!

[@reginaldbauer5243]

This doctrine of 'responsibility' does not originate with Christianity, though Christianity does magnify this concept. It goes back to Plato and possibly to Hesiod. There was no Greek word for 'responsibility', but the way Plato describes his legal system and even earlier with his critique of the Sophists, one can see its importance in his philosophy. Hesiod’s insistence on the need for justice sanctioned by the gods, and his emphasis on individual goodness can be a search for moral responsibility. In Homer, there is no distinction between mistake and moral error. Agamemnon succumbs to blindness, ate, a blindness to dishonor the man who is aristos, but this blindness is not a moral blindness or moral error. The only aspect of aretê in which Agamemnon has fallen short is success in war. Only failure is aischron and nothing is worse. In the Homeric world there are no public institutions responsible for restoring balance when someone’s timê is slighted, or when dikē is grossly ignored. In Homer’s world, responsibility is not assigned to any mortal or god in the outcome of an event because there exists no ‘problem of evil’, no responsibility, no moral will, no moral decision, no intent. You should probably read more Homer and Plato and compare them if you want to understand how these ideas came into existence.

[@untimelyreflections]

True, you could find it in Hesiod, or in the Egyptian religion. You could argue that, philosophically, it even goes back further than Plato to Anaximander. I think Nietzsche is using the term “Christianity” in a broad, extended sense here. Like when Nietzsche says that Epicurus didn’t oppose paganism, but rather “Christianity”, ie the movements in paganism that believed in judgment after death. To Nietzsche, its all the spirit of Christianity.

[@composerlafave]

This is first-rate commentary. Thank you.

[@Hoganoutdoors]

22:29 - Fasting and caloric restriction are red-hot in longevetity circles right now. It seems these things come and go in cycles. Diet is so complex and multivariate that's it's almost impossible to properly control under experimental conditions - especially over a lifetime. What's left is self reporting and statistical analyis of groups of closed scieties like prisoners or relgious sects. They are so many other factors besides diet that might impact longevity, that the whole endevor becomes a fools errand. What can be observed, comntrolled for and studied are the direct impacts of poor diets - obesity and insulin resistance / metabolic syndrome and chronic inflamation being markers associated causily with a variety of chronic diseases that tend to shorten lifespan on average. Anyway, this is great stuff - Neitsche using logic to point out how emotionally appealing faclicites that flow from our intitioun's attraction to simple and clear associations as explanainations for phenomena, rather than doing the critical thinking required to truly understand how the world works . The world is not so simple as instict supposes it is.

[@khaderlander2429]

judgment and justification are separate processes. Margolis shared Wason’s view, summarizing the state of affairs like this: Given the judgments (themselves produced by the nonconscious cognitive machinery in the brain, sometimes correctly, sometimes not so), human beings produce rationales they believe account for their judgments. But the rationales (on this argument) are only ex post rationalizations. Margolis proposed that there are two very different kinds of cognitive processes at work when we make judgments and solve problems: “seeing-that” and “reasoning-why.” “Seeing-that” is the pattern matching that brains have been doing for hundreds of millions of years. Even the simplest animals are wired to respond to certain patterns of input (such as light, or sugar) with specific behaviors (such as turning away from the light, or stopping and eating the sugary food). Animals easily learn new patterns and connect them up to their existing behaviors, which can be reconfigured into new patterns as well (as when an animal trainer teaches an elephant a new trick). Yet moral judgments are not subjective statements; they are claims that somebody did something wrong. I can’t call for the community to punish you simply because I don’t like what you’re doing. I have to point to something outside of my own preferences, and that pointing is our moral reasoning. We do moral reasoning not to reconstruct the actual reasons why we ourselves came to a judgment; we reason to find the best possible reasons why somebody else ought to join us in our judgment. This is an excerpt by Jonathan Haidt, The Righteous Mind, why good people are divided by politics and religion.

[@MaryLee-k6t]

This is one of the best podcasts for me... ❤

[@Crunkachu]

Thanks for posting this. I am just starting the audio now. This is something I have always wanted to learn more about ever since I 'heard about....Which was only in the last few years or so surprisingly

[@linkytunes2133]

37:25 the idea of post-hoc explanations. The split-brain experiments by Michael Gazzaniga and Joseph DeLoux seem to corroborate this. Patients with split-brains, meaning their left and right brains can’t communicate, were told to select a few specific pictures out of many, and with their right brain they could do this. But when asked why they did this, they gave absurd explanations. Left-brain post-hoc explanation of right-brain actions.

[@Censeo]

Even without these experiments, we can ask ourselves. Did we pick our ego? Did we pick our soul?

[@youtubehatesfreespeech2555]

Right brain is not connected to action

[@khaderlander2429]

Do we have ideas or do ideas have us? Just like the quantum understanding of light as having duality of both waves and particles. I venture to say the same about ideas in their duality. Both intrinsic and extrinsic. Consciousness is fundamental, more fundamental than spacetime.

[@Corpusinverted]

Finding myself at an impasse, where I am trying to overcome thought by thinking - truly comedic. The idea is that I want to replace-like a transplant of the mind-intellectualism with poetical thinking, which I see as closer to the dream-thinking, mythological and ultimately aesthetic viewpoint, which embraces everything as imagery. But you'd have to think and convey everything in the sphere of poetry, as this kind of wider aesthetic attitude. Poetry is a way to imagine the world, like waking dream images - it is very similar to the way Nietzsche described the Apollonian, or how Schiller described the sentimental poet. But it is kind of ironic to think about it; it is very contradictory and self defeating. Send prayers, good vibes, wishes, pats on my back, etc. I will complete the transplant and transform into this aesthetician.

[@EdT.-xt6yv]

Must detox and then change the brain a la Frankenstein'z style?

[@Hyacinth_Rose]

For the poet it is not him expressing himself to the world, it is the world expressing itself through him. See? I didn't do that...

[@Corpusinverted]

@@Hyacinth_Rose I want to wander upon the waves of the undulating landscapes of the dream image, as much as I want to breathe the thin air on the peaks of the world, where I can gaze through the eagles eye upon everything at once; similarly, I want to learn to follow, to imitate, to be and exist as the eagle of the dreams - upon these landscapes I create worlds of my own; in imitation, reverence and honor of beauty itself. This has reminded me of the spirit, that need to breathe like the frog jumping from falling pieces of crumbling stone onto clouds... and then back down from the world turned upside down - clouds as our floor, and the earth as our ceiling.

[@nathanielbeha833]

​@@Hyacinth_Rose what does it mean that you can't speak or see. To be neither living nor dead, and to know nothing?

[@Hyacinth_Rose]

@@nathanielbeha833 that's a virus

[@ggrthemostgodless8713]

1:06:12 This whole segment on your take of freewill is pure "dynamite" as Nietzsche himself would say. Thanks so much for this. I came back to listen to it again PRECISELY bc this segment ill understood by me, kept nagging me during the following days.

[@isaacbarratt854]

1:09:00 'where did we get the notion of free will?' Did we extrapolate the concept of free will from this capacity to find new utility for affects of great utility? For example, aggression is an emotion that often causes civilisational issues if it is not repurposed, redirected or reappropriated. Capitalism found a way to repurpose our aggression in a way that is good, it helps us compete and thereby expands upon our division of labour as innovations accrue. Capitalism found a use for our aggression: it turned a vice into a virtue: it found new utility for an emotion of great utility. I think that this capacity to find a new utility for things of great utility is intuitive and not indicative of free will: but I believe that the notion (concept) of free will was likely extrapolated from this exact capacity. Do you think this is plausible? another example: is anger good when directed at others? what if i direct my anger and frustration at myself? insofar have I found new utility for an emotion of great utility. was this free will?

[@SimEon-jt3sr]

It's important to Feel ones thoughts. Let them go wild. When you go crazy or looked at as WRONG is when you are certain. Anyone who is certain is suspect. Or, they know stuff. A lot of stuff. Most people just assume they know stuff. We don't know anything. Barely.

[@josephpercy1558]

30:17 - "...or the Buddhist abandonment of desire." That's a belief or assumption of popular Buddhism for the masses. The masters, however, secretly know that desire cannot be expelled, as this is desire manifesting, in situ. So, it is through what the orientals call upāya ("skillful means, play") that a treatment plan (intense meditation, et al.) is offered as a potential remedy to the suffering "I." Except, this is what (in Platonic terminology) could be called a "noble lie." Skillful rhetoric and posturing by the Buddhist masters to prod these believers of desire to eventually (hopefully) realize that desire is not the problem.

[@XeLYoutube]

agree. my desire is to self sacrifice as a clown for the world to laugh at my dance while upfilling them helping them be happy. jester archetype mixed with caregiver and magician.

[@jayasooryasuriyanarayanan6954]

What is this piss poor take masquerading as some enlightened position?

[@GokuTheSuperSaiyan1]

This episode feels like a journey to listen along and think through, good video

[@alchemicalembrace]

First time listening and fully enjoyed the exploration of Nietzsche. Thank you. ☯️

[@mephesh]

The opening premise is great, I realised this literally as a young adult, pulling up the large overgrown weeds is a lot of work but its worth doing. What I dont think about makes me what I am.

[@davedoyle4970]

This was very good! Not going to elaborate b/c I’m too lazy. Please just know that this is high-level stuff. Thank you.

[@abcrane]

Nietzsche seemed to have embraced Ayurvedic wisdom regarding psychosomatic dynamics between mentality and physiological health. .

[@Impaled_Onion-thatsmine]

He's sick all the time they stole his toilet paper

[@bryanutility9609]

Banger of an episode!

[@BlackMetalBass]

You do great work! I really enjoy listening

[@VICKILANGENDYK]

thank you so much for a wonderful episode that makes me feel more at home in the world

[@johnstewart7025]

Cicero said pursuit of happiness eventually leads to virtue. Anyone who has become gravely unhappy and recovered can tell you that getting well is hard but gets easier. So happiness produces virtue.

[@SwornInvictus]

One of Nietzsche and your most important works, this is the crux of the whole thing. I was piecing together the puzzle of how exactly rational self examination through morality was making people so miserable, and it's essentially that they're trying to make the tail wag the dog, so to speak. It would make sense from the natural standpoint since we evolved higher cognitive abilities later, the more fundamental forces of physiology would be upstream. Socrates had the whole thing completely inverted.

[@Randomness65535]

The subject matter of this video is what really got me into philosophy and metaphysics years ago. Particularly about critically assessing our fundamental beliefs. Because most of those were given to us by our culture, or the very structure of society, and not at all conducive to actually finding peace or contentment. But it's important to tread carefully - the greater one's zeal for Truth, the more caustic the pesticide we clear our garden with becomes, and the more reckless we get at using it, sometimes washing away everything and leaving us in a state of madness...

[@EdT.-xt6yv]

Must delete the resentments, regrets ,past failures yet all that makes you human, all too human?

[@TR13400]

​@EdT.-xt6yv you cannot delete them but you can be forgiven for them, freed of the bindings of them.

[@TR13400]

The more you say what you actually believe, the crazier you will sound. Because the closer to truth you are, the closer you are to the unlanguageable reality of direct conscious experience, and further away from the low resolution descriptions of human language.

[@Wholly_Fool]

Lets not kid ourselves, if there is no God, there is no truth. And all of this has been a waste of your time. If there is no such thing as good or better, what does it matter looking for truth? That is the true madness of your world. At that point, you might as well start praying. Praying is not more childish than philosophy. Its only a matter of worldview.

[@ummon995]

Are you going to do a deep dive into Twilight of the Idols like you did with Beyond Good and Evil and The Birth of Tragedy? We're ready for it.

[@untimelyreflections]

Next one is an earlier book than that…

[@ummon995]

@@untimelyreflections If it’s Zarathustra or Joyous Science I’ll be joining you on that ride 🤘

[@kredit787]

Peirce wrote similar about fixation of belief due to distress of uncertainty and doubt which then is relieved by explanations or causes despite being false. Hume also wrote about flaws of cause effect reasoning.

[@milainkstincto]

I adore your work ❣️. Beautifully well explained. Thank you and please Keep doing it 🙏😊

[@of9490]

Thanks!

[@XeLYoutube]

thx dono

[@wppw123]

Wow i'm only a few minutes in and i'm already commenting. Powerful.

[@Hyacinth_Rose]

For the poet, it is not he who bares his soul to the world, but the world that pours its heart through him... Do you understand now? This was never truly me, but the universe whispering through my being... We are awareness, we are one...

[@robinbroad8760]

Christianity is the metaphysics of the hangman. Sublime. The final understanding of the evil dillusion of choice

[@winryanYouTube]

Similar to Alan Watts beautifully translating, articulating end summarizing eastern ideas and philosophy into something the west can digest quickly, I feel like what you're doing is similar in some way for the English speaking masses to quickly get a hold on Nietzsche's ideas and philosophical content. I know you've critiqued Jordan Peterson's content on him (imo his content on him is powerful and brought huge audiences your way as a result) but I think the service being provided by those summarizing great work and ideas clearly for the masses to digest is much more important than most realize. There's no reason that this excellent channel and delivery should exist. It could easily not, same with someone like Musk doing what he's doing, it could easily be the case that he never existed. We have to be thankful for the great ones and what you're doing here is a big deal imo, you're very good at it. Just my thought after listening to this one. It's a keeper.

[@ryanmaxwell5076]

Nietzsche would’ve seen Peterson and Musk as weak moralists. Jordan for being a slave-morality-shill that hasn’t the slightest clue what he’s doing and Musk for having the gull to be so weak as to loose a bet to himself, buy something like Twitter, tank it and then complain and argue for attention. Extremely “last man” behaviors from the lot.

[@prohumanityperspective]

@54:40 this explains all the pit bull attacks on repeat

[@samuelwoods6648]

Not all religions state that virtue is the cause and happiness is the effect. The Buddha has said Goodness is another word for happiness. There are none who are properly called virtuous who are miserable and none who are unvirtuous who are happy. It is just a matter of defining that which brings happiness as virtue. Just as one should define steps towards a goal as progess. It is not a consequence of morality per se, but goals in general that demand the distinction of good and bad actions. Surely I have misunderstood?

[@planetvegan7843]

Doubtful the annihilation of an ancient lagoon ecosystem is anywhere close to being in the longterm good of a population. Funny eventuality how venice itself probably smells worse today than the lagoon ever did.

[@Raydluow]

Nietzsches only error was sharing anything of his mind with baby mice.

[@philalethes216]

42:00 I wonder if you have read Alfred North Whitehead's Process & Reality

[@isaacbarratt854]

1:11:00 'beliefs supplanted into society to motivate a certain type of behaviour'. 'This behaviour is conditioned with guilt, thus the individual complies.' Is this not strange: how do unpleasant feelings motivate people to act virtuously? Does this not reveal something peculiar: perhaps within us all is this innate desire to 'be good'. If this was not the case it makes no sense that guilt would be an ineffective conditioning force/apparatus/measure.

[@isaacbarratt854]

how is it that we 'find' the resolve to be good? Is this not an innate driving force, the drive behind all impulse

[@isaacbarratt854]

morality claims to possess an understanding of the good: and yet in regular practice we find that the good lacks consistency (it does not always feel good to be honest). When morality does not know how to reconcile this incongruence: in response it becomes more totalitarian, or it surrenders to the impulse.

[@rhyton66]

Brilliant! Reason = Virtue = happiness. The weirdest equation ever!

[@untimelyreflections]

I agree, what a strange take from the ancients. Still never seen the QED on that one!

[@BINGUS712]

Love your work! Have you ever spoken about your own spiritual/philosophical/thought life? I come from a Christian background and only found Nietzsche in my early 20s. I'm in my 30s now and I feel that Nietzsche has completely overturned the modes of thinking common in my early life. How have you changed?

[@codegeek98]

Causality is a mystery, but one thing we know with certainty about it is, “it is that which is revealed by randomized controlled trials.”

[@josephpercy1558]

You're describing a modern scientific model of causality. In antiquity, causality was very different, known popularly as cosmic sympathy.

[@36cmbr]

In this reading/expiation the author explains FN through a prism of well rationalized (not reasoned) explanations. FN is enough of a critic, his second coming is not needed.

[@ggrthemostgodless8713]

This is How to think properly by eliminating errors. But once we do that, and eliminate error, and conclude better ideas and ways, how do we incorporate that into a society that insist on the errors?? Per the examples given here with religion health etc... A lot of they right thinking is done or is accomplished by being alone, and yet society insist that alone is not god for you, they keep confusing alone with loneness... Alone(ness) is something I love, while "loneliness" is the longing to not be alone, longing for other people perhaps. If I were NOT alone I wonder if I could listen to this uninterrupted.

[@adrianhigh4210]

I have a theory that "SELF" might be thought of "that which tells the story" Of our lives, of our wishes and dreams AND that the self "back edits' in a "non cause and effect" way of keeping ALL of our stories within (SELF) acceptable limits.? ALL comments welcome.

[@alohm]

I love to point to a Japanese Zen monk come Nietzschean(sp?) - He used the Japanese characters that mean Basho - place - the warrior ready for battle at the place of battle - Present, place to Jung - That we may react to our reality rather than ressentiment: a reaction to the present that is rooted in the past...ParaRealismo? Paralétheia?

[@nguyenquangminh4814]

Sorry but… with all due respect, what? I don’t think your English had enough grammar there to make sense

[@alohm]

@@nguyenquangminh4814 🤣😂😅

[@oteila6151]

seems like an interesting point but i gotta gree with the other guy it just got lost in the sauce

[@XanDionysus]

Vice and luxury are not causes, but symptoms. The cause is the desire for comfort that breeds complacency and sloth.

[@josephpercy1558]

Are you certain that desire is the root cause? Even comfort is but one small step away from luxury.

[@XanDionysus]

@@josephpercy1558 If you look at Morality as Anti-Nature, he would agree but to get rid of desire would be an affront against life.

[@SwornInvictus]

What about the desire for adventure and struggle? What strangles initiative and the very human need for exploration?

[@GokuTheSuperSaiyan1]

1:15:26 you missed another deterministic claim, self contained circular chains of causation, where there could be as many distinct non-overlapping circular chains as you want More abstractly, there could exist as many chains as you want, a finite number of chains, or an infinite number. Some chains might have an uncaused cause, other chains could have an infnite regress, and others still could be a circular chain would repeats itself after enough ""time"" (this would generalise above time) has passed E.g. our universe would be a single self contained chain, whethee you think that chain is an infinite regress, uncaused cause, or circular chain. Despite the chain we're in, there could be other chains we have no relation to, "somewhere else"

[@amorfati4096]

34:40 Trading is even better Analogy

[@binra3788]

We are "not a cause of our selves."..but a masking of thought by which to gain 'a world' of fiction framed by false claim of function at cost of direct awareness of living participance. (Soul as creative extension - not as a personal possessive). Mind can create myth but what it creates is not itself creative (alive). Discernment can recognise the baby in the bathwater of any living teaching. What constitutes a living teaching is the resonance of teaching and learning - not as may seem in time, but as revealed in the virtue or quality of the timeless of which time is taken as a personal possessive focus of experience, exploration and unfolding meaning. For Meaning is lived and share by extension, while conflicted 'meanings' cannot be truly shared though they can become an alliance of mutual agreements that run beneath the soil we think to grow a bit on the side for our own gratifications, that must reveal the temporary or transient 'unfulfilment' of external seeking. Perhaps via a deadening over stimulation of repetitive stress-release as 'pleasure'. I chose this to listen while washing dishes after commenting into threads on contested 'causation', medical or biological models and countermeasures to flagged evils or perceived ills. I appreciate the elucidation of a self-honesty in its own cultural and linguistic framing. Anything coming into or arising within our 'world' will be subverted or re-framed to operate as support for its core beliefs and definitions. The drive for possession and control as an external validation or vindication is the 'freedom' of the dispossessed to seek limit against greater or total loss. Only halfway at the moment - but I felt to participate in the living themes. In truth I find Cause & Event to be un seperable - thoughts do not leave the mind that accepts/thinks them so we can only leave, lose or obscure true Cause in concept born of imaged symbols taken 'in vain' or as we now might say; being phished by our own image as the corollary to a grasp of a mind (wish) to possess and control life in specifics - that are then falsely abstracted or generalised as a 'world view' or modus operandi for the persistence of vested themes that are facets of All That Is and that we are - but framed in a fear of what we are Not - ie a sense of self-lack seeking external reinforcement in place of an integrally aligned expression and extension of living communication (at all levels). The flip of the Greek culture to Platonic intellectual elitism is very interesting. I recommend a discernment of 'Pharmakon Plato, Drug Culture, and Identity in Ancient Athens' by Michael Rinella. Not necessarily its preface! Magical thinking cannot mock God (falsify Reality) - but it can invest in the wish and belief that it can and has done so. Uncorrected errors persist by projecting them as a foundation from which to think some more. Hence the masked fear and guilt in the seeking of 'virtue' or credit boosting against a world of projective denials set in magical 'solutions'. Compound conflicts will tip the system to self-destructive attack on the basis of its support - which is our creative engagement of which choice remains -albeit hidden. Choosing not to use or decide by what we took to be our own 'thinking' opens to a field of guidance and direction that cannot be codified or defined-even if guidelines can be draw in general - for each situation or event is a unique creation, but discerning the true from the false is not 'achieved' by attacking or destroying the false, but by only accepting and aligning true. For what we resist, persists, while what is left unused, fades from non use.

[@binra3788]

That Christian love runs co-opted and corrupted was attacked instead of redeemed. The true is salvaged from the realm of falsely vested assumptions by discernment - the gift of the 'Holy Spirit' - revealing our mind (and thus our world) in a new light - as the undoing of guilting or gaslighting cover-stories to which we adapted by sacrifice of moral integrity - which is not more or less than true to our being- not to codified interjections. If we lie to our self, we frame our own measure. That doesn't make us sinners deserving hell, but self-hatred is already hell - even if masked over in masking manipulations of self-justifictions of fantasy acted out on bodies and world. Self-hatred is masked by wanting to see the error in the Other and thus 'correcting' the other as if to 'solve' our self. Releasing an 'other' of our own projections is thus a willingness to learn anew. Thinking we are free of 'project sin' is belied by noticing we are triggered to emotional reaction that is not honestly attributable to the seeming circumstance of upset, but to the framing of our own past-projections and associations. Willingness to heal - to accept healing - is our sole responsibility - for without that are we persisting in refusal to accept what is - as it is - but insisting it is as our judgement asserts and our perceptions and responses 'prove'. Release and be released has nothing to do with 'how to act in the world' but with how to release a false world (of ego agency and the distribution of guilt). Now in the specific circumstance are you free to seek and find the will of the whole situation - for all that you are - and so reveal the more of what you are through the whole situation.

[@composerlafave]

The priests who invented responsibility are not responsible for having invented it. Don't blame them!

[@untimelyreflections]

Yes.

[@markbroad119]

You've got a new subscription 😊

[@ImJustAnOnion]

And so do you ❤

[@TheWay-u1n]

There is nothing profound about dualism and or trashing your ancestors in pursuit of liberal progress.. Dont be scared of the dark lest you become blind to one half of reality

[@TheWay-u1n]

pray to the outer periphery to enable what is bigger.. faster.. and stronger

[@H.C.J.]

This was a really good episode.

[@Stacee-jx1yz]

Let's now explore how we can apply logic, math, and physics to formalize the relationship between determinism and indeterminism in causality within the monadological framework. First, let's define our basic entities and relations: - Let M be the set of all monads (fundamental psychophysical entities). - Let T be a set of "time points" or "moments." - Let S be a function from M × T to some set of "states," where S(m, t) represents the state of monad m at time t. - Let C be a relation on M × M × T, where (m1, m2, t) ∈ C means monad m1 "causes" or "influences" monad m2 at time t. Now, let's formalize the idea of determinism and indeterminism in causality: - Determinism: ∀m ∈ M, ∀t ∈ T, S(m, t) is uniquely determined by {S(m', t') : (m', m, t') ∈ C}. - Indeterminism: ∃m ∈ M, ∃t ∈ T, such that S(m, t) is not uniquely determined by {S(m', t') : (m', m, t') ∈ C}. In other words, determinism means that the state of each monad at each time is uniquely determined by its causal influences, while indeterminism means that there are some monads whose states are not uniquely determined by their causal influences. We can formalize this further using the mathematical framework of graph theory and probability theory: - Let (M, E) be a directed graph, where E ⊆ M × M represents the "causal edges" between monads. - Let (Ω, F, P) be a probability space, where Ω represents the set of all possible "outcomes" or "histories," F is a σ-algebra on Ω, and P is a probability measure on F. - The determinism and indeterminism of causality can be expressed as: - Determinism: ∀m ∈ M, ∀t ∈ T, ∃f : Ω → S, such that S(m, t) = f(ω) for all ω ∈ Ω. - Indeterminism: ∃m ∈ M, ∃t ∈ T, such that ∀f : Ω → S, P({ω ∈ Ω : S(m, t) ≠ f(ω)}) > 0. Here, determinism is formalized as the existence of a function f that maps each possible outcome ω to a unique state for each monad at each time, while indeterminism is formalized as the non-existence of such a function (i.e., there are some monads whose states have a non-zero probability of differing from any given function). Finally, we can connect this to physics by noting that this formalism is compatible with both deterministic and indeterministic approaches to causality: - Deterministic models like classical mechanics describe the evolution of physical systems as uniquely determined by initial conditions and dynamical laws. - Indeterministic models like quantum mechanics describe the evolution of physical systems as inherently probabilistic, with outcomes determined only probabilistically by initial conditions and dynamical laws. The monadological framework accommodates both perspectives by treating determinism and indeterminism as emergent properties arising from the complex web of causal relations between fundamental monads. In summary, by using tools from logic, math (graph theory and probability theory), and physics (classical and quantum mechanics), we can formalize the both/and nature of determinism and indeterminism in causality within the monadological framework: - Causality is a relational structure arising from the web of causal influences between fundamental monads. - Causality exhibits both deterministic and indeterministic properties, depending on the scale and perspective of observation. - This formalism is compatible with both deterministic and indeterministic approaches to causality in physics. This showcases the potential of the monadological framework to provide a unified language for expressing and reconciling the complex, often seemingly contradictory nature of reality. By embracing a both/and perspective and drawing on the tools of logic, mathematics, and physics, we can develop a more nuanced and comprehensive understanding of the world and our place within it.

[@bretrohde7300]

Outstanding!!!

[@ajaxfilms]

"Without necessity there is neither causality nor finality..." C.G. Jung

[@AquariusGate]

All beliefs belong to some form of ego archetype. 21:50 we get here putting a sense of life before living.

[@Sosa-m5n]

Fire episode. No one understand “not having free will”

[@languagegame410]

in the spirit of Zarathustrean brutal honesty... i wish to confess that i've listened to this "podcast piece" more than 5 times in its entirity already... (a most excellent endeavor, no doubt!!)... pretty pleaszzzze, do an episode on that famous Nazi philosopher, Heidegger... so that i can loathe/punish myself for ever doubting your relentlessly restless masochistic intellectually pure style... that double KK is know for... and i take my leave of your noble majesty's presence muchly... (many thankssss!!)

[@sergiosatelite467]

This is all fantastic. Like Hume. Beautiful. And yet…what, dear sir, are we to do with our apparent increased predictive powers in that last 300 or so years? How….might that…ehhm….relate?

[@bangthehankers1985]

Your channel name caught my eye. A fan of Nile?

[@untimelyreflections]

Yes, many years ago I picked my username to promote my doom metal band and thought I should use a metal song for my name. Went with, of all things, a song that is not doomy at all lol

[@isaacbarratt854]

1:08:40 It is proposed by Nietsche that morality was invented so that we may punish: we are perceived as free agents only to justify cruelty as justice. This indeed seems to be a truism, I too have seen religion used in such a manner, but to presume the morality was invented for a purpose seems ridiculous. those that invented (discovered) morality likely did it because it felt good, in the process they discovered conduct? What even is conduct? observers of this moral behaviour confused the outcomes (the conduct) with the intention (where there was none) and insofar repurposed morality as a means of normalising behaviours that are of social advantage. they observed morality: and then used guilt to make people conform to standards of conduct that were deemed desirable by the elect: in summa, they repurposed morality to serve a social function. the person to initially discover morality likely didnt equate it to conduct: they did it because it felt good. Observers of the process likely confused the outcome (conduct) with the imagined cause (the good) in an attempt to cultivate the good in ones self. In practice we find that this theory does not live up to expectation; imitation 'feels' empty.

[@TheExceptionalState]

Without thought we would know nothing of the reality Nietzsche claims to know. This is the same mistake he makes when he uses the Apollanian mode to elevate the Dionysical above reason.

[@Azazello321]

God, this f''cking channell kills me! Thank you!

[@CynthiaJohnson1ofmany]

Thank you.

[@itamarperez]

Thank you❤

[@Scott-et4kd]

Discussion about N on CE (cause-and-effect) is unintelligible, because N doesn't define the terms. His famous "refutation" of Descartes' "cognito" is paradigmatic. So, many philosophers reject N simply out-of-hand. Nevertheless, this is a superb vid on N's thoughts on the mater, and very fruitful. Thx so much.

[@sudhirpatel7620]

Nature goes on forever for everyone and everything to return as everyone and everything an infinite number of times through evolutionary processes. 🌌

[@dominiknewfolder2196]

People simply behave like others around them. It's seems that this is the strongest drive in human nature. By reading Nietzsche I can become lonely, whining while preaching some sort of elitism 😂 No, thanks. I'm grateful that he warned about people like him in his writings. That's the biggest benefit of reading Nietzsche 😉 His self-awarnes makes him very unique

[@linkytunes2133]

There seems to be a huge overlap with Eastern thought here, and with Alan Watts’ ideas.

[@MegaSudjai]

Blamers gotta blame!

[@bogusbladegameing4897]

Similar minds think alike

[@vivekkaushik9508]

Wasn't it like - "Great minds think alike"?

[@untimelyreflections]

X = X

[@nescius2]

yeah, and which of those are clear causes and effects in here? could cause be even something different? like an idea or something.

[@michellescalia2142]

Thanks!😊!

[@KhoiNguyen87]

This perfectly demonstrates that Nietzsche is too profound by half, like very hot water that never quite gets itself to the boiling point.

[@ptcosmos]

26:42 JOIN MY CULT, I LOVE YOU

[@whatsinameme5258]

Awesome perspective. Free will vs Determinism is a false dichotomy. I like that. Believing in Fate seems pretty based.

[@josephpercy1558]

Fate is more like an "ur-law" (patterns and rhythms of nature established preceding humanity) which is propagated in natural forces through which humans are integrally connected. That was the perception of the ancients and can also plug in nicely with the modern theory of evolution.

[@Unearth122]

If anyone wants to understand this line of thought that springs from romanticism i'd recommend listening to the excellent isiah berlin lectures on romanticism. Going from Roussoue, to Kant, then to Herder, to Nietzsche. But the idea that you cannot compartmentalize any one phenomenon of your biological totality in drives, extinct etc, comes straight from Romanticism. And that line of thinking overlaps heavily with early Marxs conception of Alienation and also a left communist sympathy in regard to how capitalism and instrumental labor is a long, historical process of turning ones self (or others) in to an alienated instrument of production that estranges oneself, and creates this rationalization of parts in property, money, objects', time, space etc. Leading to those who fetishizes this process to self-exploiting via a efficiency criteria that can then start to expand and dominate others in that process, making other labor subordinated in this institutionalized process. You'll find this kind of left communism has strong parallels with a lot of romantic and even Nietzschean thought and i think is a pretty fruitful in explaining a lot of the social psychological problems of mental health that plague modern man, and one that needs to be "course corrected" if we are to be free of the maladjustments of modernity. Where this radically delineates with Nietzsche is where and what he thinks is "vital" in human phycological drives. Painted by (like most romantics who were the wayward sons, intellectuals, and poets of a declining and displaced aristocracy with a longing for provincial feudalist social relations) the extremely reactionary notions of natural hierarchies, where as obviously any left wing value judgements are more willing to see in mens vital instincts solidarity, cooperation as a driving factor in human vital factors. Though by my sources Nietzsche oscillated between the 2 poles himself. Though those on the right will find a strong justification to "return" to feudal, theocratic, monarchical relations to "fix alienation". "the fathers stern hand to make right the world by power along". Which is ironic but that's what his brand of romanticism pushes towards. Stability through hierarchy in a cycle . Which isn't an answer to anything and more or less completely negates anything of value he had to say in deconstructing the problems with instrumental modes of becoming.

[@josephpercy1558]

It doesn't "come straight from Romanticism." Ironically, you're conflating causal influences. We can also detect phenomenological impulses in what's survived from antiquity, for example. Can I say, then, that the latter periods of history is _the_ cause? Certainly not. Phenomena _seem_ to arise interdependently. And what of Marx? Not much, considering that his analyses seem to myopically constrain Nietzsche's ideas into a strictly economic paradigm.

[@jjharvathh]

So what were the 4 great errors? better if these were listed somewhere. then people would not need to watch video. a simple list could save so many people a lot of time.

[@sviatoslaviigorevich7360]

If you can't spare an hour and a half to learn more about some philosophical ideas, a short list of no-no's isn't gonna to do you much good. I like to think that these podcasts make the point that you can't just reduce life down to a list of do's and don'ts... It's a bit more complicated than that.

[@jjharvathh]

@@sviatoslaviigorevich7360 Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on these points.

[@AndyParkinson-r2h]

Thank you that was fantrastic

[@ouroborosnexus]

Everyone is different and has varying physiological responses to different foods, but low calorie diet actually is increasingly data-linked with longevity. Nietzsche might be committing his own error, as low metabolism is affected positively by lower calorie intake (and higher calorie intake can increase metabolism). This is clearly not the only factor. Causality as a principle is still not put to bed, despite the efforts of the Germans. Nietzsche’s “solution” to the fork between submission corrupt (religious/moral) authority OR complete Schopenhauerian pessimism and nihilism was to embrace the “will to power” and extreme egoism, essentially. This is, in many ways, an inevitable result of the ego-centered starting point of Descartes, the cogito, where the only thing we can accept as “real” is the individual self. Even though Nietzche criticized Descartes (and everyone else, really 🤷🏻‍♂️) the snowball effect through the generations is obvious. That suggestion itself is anti-deterministic, despite his many deterministic (and very insightful, in some cases) criticisms of free will, eg drives competing, myriad factors, affirming causality as a principle prior to human perception, etc. -- Also, Plato opens the republic with a conversation about old age, presenting it as a time for freedom from libidinal and “will to power” drives, ie a time of peace, relaxation, and contentment, without being compelled by maddening human passions.

[@josephpercy1558]

Sorry, but Descartes has a point in "I think therefore I am." Thinking is a biological process synonymous with the human organism as biological process/pattern. The "self" is "real" but not substantively so. As a linguistic convention, yes indeed.

[@TheirIAre]

Bravo.

[@vincentrockel1149]

Is the essence of lightning the flash or the bang or neither?

[@untimelyreflections]

No essence, only action.

[@Taygetea]

43:00 did... did he just preempt the inhuman thingless nature of quantum mechanics

[@456now2]

Thanks to the suggestions from KZbin Shorts, I now know you look like you invented Thrash Metal.

[@alanG3806]

Philosophy aside, long term caloric restriction does prolong life. Been known to biologists for decades now. Probably not the best example for what is clearly a truth.

[@untimelyreflections]

So why doesn’t everyone do it?

[@efegokselkisioglu8218]

​@@untimelyreflectionsit's fun to eat the big calories 😊

[@surobyk]

​@@untimelyreflectionsbetter question would be: Not overeating=caloric restriction? So it's just truism?

[@tristhoth]

Nietzsche's ONE great error of wallowing in the sewer of Humian scepticism.

[@nescius2]

-scepticism- skepticism...

[@josephpercy1558]

Oh dear, we're not angels after all, but gutter rats... :/

[@Chris-xv7wd]

Who did more damage to the West him or Darwin?

[@GreenTeaViewer]

"St" Paul?

[@syfarthewolf9139]

I love your voice

[@404no57]

It's frustrating hearing somebody clearly well read on the subject throw out "yoodemownya" to substitute Eudaimonia

[@GreenTeaViewer]

It's a pretty common kind of thing, because we don't really have the kind of education anymore that will guide us on the pronunciation of less common words. We just read them. Then occasionally we are called on to speak them, and we slip into incorrect pronunciation. I used to be critical of this too, until it happened to me when I was giving a seminar at graduate school. We're just not a society as literate as a gathering of Oxford dons circa 1920. Much as we might wish otherwise.

[@coleride]

OK but what is nietzsche's morality? How does his philosophy not lead to anarchy, to a free-for-all of cruel criminality? His biggest handicap as a thinker is his own sweet nature.

[@whatsinameme5258]

You are still operating under the premise that an idea is responsible for people's actions. Christianity, or Humanism, or any other belief system would not change people who are already predisposed to cruel violence. Those individuals will just use post-hoc rationalizations to justify what they are already going to do. They will just claim they committed violent acts in the name of god, or that they did it for some allegedly noble political crusade. If someone claimed they committed violent acts because of Nietzsche's ideas, I guarantee they were already going to do that anyway, and were just looking for an excuse.

[@lusilverrr]

how does an ant colony function in unison when they don’t have morals

[@lusilverrr]

That is nietzsche’s fear. There are the free spirits, who will reject metaphysicality first. They will learn how to forgive themself, how to treat others, how to carry the burden of their humanity without God. Then there are those who depend on religion for those things, and without it will crumble under the weight of existence without a higher power. Nietzsche fears the latter.

[@thehermit_777]

Oooh early for this one

[@foodchewer]

Unsettling

[@tomato1040]

14:09-12:🕺WE=mc2💃can All🌎BE=mc2☯️🪽 kosher✡️🕎rejuvenating N🎯W🌅as "the👑 Kingdom🌅of Heaven is♾️already👁️within❤️‍🔥US🧘"as the Journey of the Soul😇 towards🤗Bliss✨transfigures⚡US👣directly🪽2☺️Nirvana!

[@tomato1040]

The Unknown actually fears😔US👣 because "IT" is😮afraid 2👐BE=mc2 Star👁️Naked👀thus🌅revealing ⚛️2👣US🧘all🙈of🫦the👄Hidden🤹Variables of💋 the🌎All🌌😂!

[@fusion9619]

Dangit. This means i probably was wrong in condemning Calvinism. Thanks, Neech

[@untimelyreflections]

Calvinism is still trash. Determinism + moral judgment = psychopath universer

[@fusion9619]

@@untimelyreflections good!

[@peterwinters-uc7ft]

12 ounces of food is exceeded by 14 ounces of wine which is caloric, meaning food. I don't know if you have a genuine education. But I dount it.

[@GeorgeEdwardsVlog]

Libertarianism doesn’t have a free will philosophy. Or, at least it’s atheistic when it comes to it despite individual adherents personal beliefs.

[@Sebastian-rf1hz]

Metaphysical libertarianism is the correct word that describes people are willingly able to choose among different possible paths. It just comes from the same etymology like liberty/freedom as political libertarianism