Why Do We Ask The Question "Why"? | The Principle of Sufficient Reason (Schopenhauer)

[@kadressmoothoosamy5490]

A very clear rexplanation to assist in better understanding Shopenhauer's masterpiece ..." The world as will and representation.

[@numbersix8919]

Thanks. "Those who like to watch hard-core philosophy videos before falling asleep." I resemble that statement.

[@maxr.k.pravus9518]

Thank you for finally making English subtitles, really helps when I'm watching the video at 1.5 speed. Good video overall, the quotes aren't a problem imo

[@chrismanchola3460]

You really did a great job. One the best videos of philosophy I've ever seen

[@eversbrothersproductions1476]

Really appreciate your enthusiasm! That keeps up going 😄

[@marianionescu7481]

Great video, didn't even notice how time passed listening to the informations you have shared. Thank you for taking the time making this!

[@saifmohammad2540]

I hope you get more subscribers. There aren't many youtube channels that produce this type of content.

[@Haveuseenmyjetpack]

Thank you for this video! Schopenhauer is so enjoyable to read. You did a great job with the summary. I’ll sub

[@mihirsingh5644]

Since I am the first to reach here. I want to appreciate how great your videos have been. Great work guys

[@eversbrothersproductions1476]

Thank you so much! Appreciate it 😊

[@shaulascorpion8439]

Underrated!!!

[@derek3778]

Well done, and you deserve more subscribers! Just subscribed!

[@draganbogdan4267]

Great summary! Nice work! Thank you!

[@EwingAmaterasu]

Very good job, a perfect video which explains (in my opinion) a perfect epistemological system. Even Wittgensteins Tractatus can be seen as a clarification of Schopenhauer’s explanation of the principle, and I can’t stop seeing how any good epistemology from past and present is good or bad depending on how close it gets to what Schopenhauer explains here. I just think Schopenhauer got to the end of the matter, his forth-fold root has just exhausted and completed epistemology in my opinion.

[@eversbrothersproductions1476]

I totally agree! 😀

[@Plutão-r3h]

Great video!!! Greetings from Brazil!!

[@zhengyangwu8289]

Very good, thanks!

[@bozodorochenko8872]

4:30 is actually mind boggling

[@Anas-iq4su]

Thank you so much

[@johnmichaelbagatela884]

It is very clear

[@andrewrae8064]

Cool channel

[@wuwang55]

great man.

[@thumpertieder8110]

I do not see the rising of the thermometer as a ground of being. I understand that an increase in heat is a cause (Becoming) of the rise in mercury-- and the rise in mercury is (knowing). I do not see being in this example. Maybe "being" in the sense that if the temperature was 20, and it went to 22, then you know (being) that 21 must have occurred. A better example is a triangle with equal angles. But if you have more insight on the rising as "being" please share. Great video by the way, and thanks

[@draganbogdan4267]

What is we find the particle that cause gravity, wouldn't that mean to know gravity in itself ?.

[@c.guydubois8270]

Why implies agency. Type 1 and type 2 errors illustrate our evolution.

[@MrJamesdryable]

I think, therefore I am confused.

[@eversbrothersproductions1476]

That is one of the best comments I have seen so far hahaha 😄

[@timmeaney2900]

Thank you for making this, now can you explain Kant’s synthetic a priori cognition and transcendental idealism to me. Seriously, the Critique makes me feel like a stupid. Thanks.

[@eversbrothersproductions1476]

Thanks for your comment! I would say that if you watched this video and our video on Schopenhauer's Will and Representation, then you should definitely understand Kant better I think 😄. The first part of your question, the synthetic a priori cognition, is comparable to the Principle of Sufficient Reason in that it is the basis of how we humans interact with the world. Before Kant, the empiricists like Hume assumed that whatever knowledge we have must come from the senses i.e. by seeing or hearing etc. In other words, that our knowledge is only empirical. But according to Kant, there are intuitions that we need to perceive the world in the first place that come before experience i.e. that are not a postetriori, but rather a priori. So for example, to observe an object we need our senses, but we also need to have the intuition of Space. But our intuition for space is not learned, it comes 'pre-installed'. For Kant therefore we need these pre installed categories to be able to see the world. This is similar to the what Schopenhauer says when he says that we can only see the world as representation, as the idea, through the principle of sufficient reason i.e. space, time and causality. What Kant then tries to do in his critique of pure reason is find out what the roots are of these categories and how they effect us in our reason. "I call all knowledge transcendental which deals not so much with objects as with our manner of knowing objects insofar as this matter is to be possible a priori." - Kant - The 'critique' is the process where he strips the world of its subjective gaze and tries to find what remains. I hope this helps a bit! I would recommend to read Schopenhauer's "the world as will and Idea", before delving deeper into Kant becouse Schopenhauer refers to Kant a lot and his system is (I think) easier to understand. I hope this helps a bit! I will make a video on Kant's transcendental Idealism in the future though 😄.

[@theQuickRundown]

Based and kazuhirapilled

[@mariatrouver9365]

Why do you live......... 💀