I always thought that Nietzsche was more of a Ninja Gaiden type of guy

@42PalaceOfWisdom42

10 жыл бұрын

Nietzsche introduced the term 'Übermensch' (over human) ->Megaman Those clever bastards!

@Redem10

10 жыл бұрын

Palace Of Wisdom Well I got my mind blown

“The very meaninglessness of life forces man to create his own meaning. [...] The most terrifying fact about the universe is not that it is hostile but that it is indifferent; but if we can come to terms with this indifference and accept the challenges of life within the boundaries of death - however mutable man may be able to make them - our existence as a species can have genuine meaning and fulfillment. However vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.” ― Stanley Kubrick

@jouchan101

10 жыл бұрын

Something tells me Stan wasn't a hit at parties...

@iederedagscherper2186

4 жыл бұрын

'Why' would the absence of 'why' implicitly mean that there is no meaning of life? Humans have created institutions that actually do have a why. And those institutions are as real to life as nature is us.

@omnijack

3 жыл бұрын

The perceived indifference comes from the expectation that effort translates into a particular type of reward. The structure of things is much more subtle.

@ParkerSmith0212

3 жыл бұрын

I think that's been the problem from the beginning. In the event that we desire to supply our own light, when we truly look within us, there is no sufficient light to be found to extinguish darkness.

@karlazeen

2 жыл бұрын

@@ParkerSmith0212 There actually is, it just varies from person to person. Some find more meaning in life than others.

Why does there have to be an ultimate meaning? Humans are wired to see patterns and things we recognize in randomized settings (TV static, clouds etc) so it's obvious when we're talking about the ultimate question of 'why?' we assume there is an answer, but perhaps the question itself is faulty. Perhaps everything just 'is'.

@theb1rd

10 жыл бұрын

Another angle: "Why?" means "For what purpose?", and that carries a presumption--that there must be a purpose. There is no reason to presume a purpose. To ask the question is already an act of faith.

@coreypnorris

10 жыл бұрын

theb1rd Woah

@nopenoteven

10 жыл бұрын

Maybe it's for our own curiosity. To see all of life happen and to dance with it all. To help, be helped and go through all manner of experiences. Only to come back to 'what is'.

@quantumaxe6468

10 жыл бұрын

just is because that's the only way it could be.

@Agora13

10 жыл бұрын

Shut up, Stan! I hate you!

I am neither a literature student, nor a philosophy student, yet here I am enjoying these videos regardless.

@MeinosKaenStudios

10 жыл бұрын

No need to study it in an institution to enjoy knowledge. That's the beauty of it.

@cooljackster7390

3 жыл бұрын

No one like this comment it has 69 likes

I've heard some negative things about Nietzsche but I heavily agree with his views presented in this video.

@seamuskennefick7692

8 жыл бұрын

+givemetruth YES! Let's be rocks! Much easier!

@XEspadaSaDiosX

8 жыл бұрын

+Human Resources Ahh I see. Makes sense why people would gravitate away from that. Thanks for the well thought out reply.

@DustinRodriguez1_0

8 жыл бұрын

+XEspadaSaDiosX Nietzsche had some... interesting views. The first book of his that I read was 'Ecce Homo'. I picked it up because of the chapter titles. "Why I Am So Right", "Why Everything I Say is True", and things like that. I found out later that it's believed that book, his last, was written when he was already being affected by the syphilis that eventually drove him insane and killed him (after spending 11+ YEARS paralyzed in a bed, a world record at the time so far as we know). In that book, he goes on at length about why Germany can never produce anything of true value because their food causes indigestion, and one cannot think properly when they have indigestion. Overall, I think it was a great book to read as one of the very first books I ever read by a philosopher. It was hilarious and extremely absurd. His other books are much more reasonable, and though I haven't read all of them, I don't think the things presented in Ecce Homo can be said to show the beliefs he held for much of his life. He certainly had some views that were, for his time, mostly unique, and some of them indeed ring true. I forget exactly which book I read it in of his, but in one he discussed the idea that 'to be most like ones parents is the greatest sin' (paraphrasing, but I believe that is very close and might be an exact quote), pointing out that if one is just like their parents, humanity has not progressed with each generation. One of the things I love about philosophy, and why I went for a philosophy minor in college alongside my majoring in Computer Science (an unusual combination apparently), is the wide variety of viewpoints and how really accessible most of it is. Reading older philosophers are especially interesting to learn about how people thought in the past, and why they thought that way. Especially anything which purports to be about 'human nature' or 'the fundamental nature of the world/life/etc' are about timeless subjects, and any truth to their writings would remain as true today as it was when they wrote it if indeed they figured out something true. If nothing else, learning about the extremely wide variety in peoples thinking opens ones eyes to what is possible, and to the idea that almost nothing about our lives or societies are fixed, and are instead within our control to at least attempt to change.

I read through the comments section. The first page gave me hope for society that maybe we had intelligent life on this planet, but then I kept scrolling.

@DarkArtistKaiser

8 жыл бұрын

Unfortunately it is often wise to avoid the comment section to any video that has to do with religion or lack there of. It tends to attract the piranhas of both sides.

@libertyprime7448

8 жыл бұрын

But did you see that it was called "gay science"? Hehehe he said gay ='D

@jam123255

6 жыл бұрын

Do you need a step ladder getting down from that high horse of yours?

@metodoinstinto

3 жыл бұрын

Forget it. People just want to crack the wisest joke for likes. It sums up most of KZread comment sections.

brilliant! Thanks so much for making these & thanks to Thug Notes for putting them on their channel.

amazing video. you are effectively able to take complex concepts from famous philosophers and distill them into a concise, and easily digestible message.

megaman 2 opening theme best 8 bit music ever = TRUTH

"Knowledge is knowing that science is true, wisdom is knowing that there is no absolute truth"

These new videos are fantastic. This channel just keeps getting better.

a true scientist questions everything, even his/her's own data and theories. Slowly smoothing out our knowledge of the universe

@sirsimplexton3151

9 жыл бұрын

Dragonwing16 I think that's the best thing science has going for it, a clear criterion for evaluating right and wrong to converge to a state of accuracy. For any field to progress, it needs a clear notion of "better" and "worse" that everyone participating in can at least reasonably agree.

Hope these keep coming.

This channel just keeps getting better!

I think this is my new favorite youtube series. Keep it up, guys!

These videos are awesome! It really does put things into perspective that I have never really seen in that way before! Please make more of these videos man they are amazing!

"[Science] is the search for fact, not truth. If it's truth you're interested in, Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall." -Dr. Henry "Indiana" Jones Jr. Science is about quantifying natural phenomena, and nothing else. If it's unqualifiable or supernatural, it isn't Science's concern. This limitation of scope is by design, and it's the job of Philosophy and/or Religion to explain the rest. 

@theeNappy

7 жыл бұрын

Eh, I dabble more than know a lot. The first, third, and fourth sets of definitions can be found in a dictionary, I'll refer you there. Truth is somewhat more esoteric. It's based in fact, but it requires context and a certain amount of personal judgment to define.

@theeNappy

7 жыл бұрын

Here's an example of truth vs. fact After the Vietnam War, a saying started floating around: "you can't win a land war in SE Asia." Now, the fact is that you can many powers have, but due to many geopolitical reasons, the US couldn't win a land war in SE Asia. So, while not strictly factual, the saying is true. Does that help any?

@theeNappy

7 жыл бұрын

Well, facts exist independent of an observer, 2+2=4 etc. Truth in this conversation is something that requires an observer to contextualize a set of facts in order to achieve that greater, more platonic Truth.

@theeNappy

7 жыл бұрын

It's got to do with truth requires a continuous mind. A truth has to be known to exist, facts exist independently of that. A rock can't know that along side 3 other rocks they are 4 rocks, but it's a fact that they do. A rock can't know that Lenard Skynard'a Freebirdd is a long song, but it's a near universal truth that it is. Truth is really just a well founded opinion. Also, keep in mind that I am by no means an authority on the subject

@JappaKneads

6 жыл бұрын

"Well, facts exist independent of an observer, 2+2=4 etc." Facts need to be proven if not, by definition, they cannot be considered facts. Facts can be disproven....not Truth. Facts need an observer to prove that they have the status of being factual...you confuse facts with Reality (or the Raw Data of the universe).

I keep returning to this video every year, as a philosophy major this is my favorite video ever. I personally wish this was one of the most viewed videos on youtube.

@rontimus

9 ай бұрын

As someone who grew up playing this game and a Nietzsche devotee, I couldn’t agree more 😎

Another amazing episode of 8-bit Philosophy! thanks for sharing!

This channel is GREAT! Keep it up guys. You should post mote 8-bit philosophy videos they are actually pretty helpful to study.

What if there is no greater meaning, and ultimate purpose in anything, except what we as individuals give it? Science is not about "truth". It's about verifiable facts. If you want truth. take a philosophy class.

@RS-nb4sw

10 жыл бұрын

"Archaeology is the search for fact... not truth. If it's truth you're looking for, Dr. Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall." -Henry Jones Junior

@Andrewcranky

10 жыл бұрын

Thank you. That's the quote I was thinking of, but couldn't quite remember.

@luhe36682

10 жыл бұрын

As MisterOjete (i kwow what that mean :P ) said. That's the point of Nietzsche.There is no ultimate meaning or ultimate truth, its all contextual and mostly individual.

@fossks685

10 жыл бұрын

luis hernan tobar cortes Not that you're wrong, but you are kind of wrong:p Nietzschean thought does not tolerate relativism in the flaccid, neo-liberal sense that we're used to thinking about today.

@Andrewcranky

10 жыл бұрын

I don't really give a rats ass what Nietzche said. He was hardly the superman he wrote about. He was a small, sickly little man, who accomplished next to nothing in his sad short life. And, it should be pointed out. He was insane.

Brilliant video, does a fantastic job of explaining it

You have just earned yourselves a subscriber my good fellows!!! All your videos are wonderfully interesting and thought provoking. I'm looking forward to seeing what you produce in the future!

This is awesome! Keep them coming!

Paradox: Life is a mystery, don't waste time trying to figure it out. Humor: Have a sense of humor about yourself. It is powerful beyond measure. Change: Know that nothing stays the same.

@ThatBrownMink

10 жыл бұрын

Wisdom.

@bret6484

3 жыл бұрын

Only 3 rules

The Hypest Philosophy on KZread!

plz make longer episodes !! these videos are awsome

Very well done! Keep them coming!

Awesome channel !!!

@WisecrackEDU

9 жыл бұрын

Angel Zakeroji Thanks!

@homeofthemad3044

8 жыл бұрын

+Wisecrack please make a HOUSE MD episode

@UnanimousDelivers

7 жыл бұрын

I couldn't disagree more passionately. This video continually implies that purpose in all things is a given, and that's not just stupid, it's disgusting. What is the purpose of children starving to death? What is the purpose of Josef Fritzl locking up his wives/daughters in his basement? What's the purpose of tsunamis and people dying from lightning strikes? And what of people born with no feet who wear athletic prosthetics and run racetracks? Are they DEFYING their purpose of being a legless person? If a woman has large breasts and decides to never have children or become a "wet nurse" is she defying HER purpose? Maybe people are just people and life is just life and that's good enough.

@BlueMorningStar

7 жыл бұрын

Unanimous Delivers you don't understand Nietzsche. At all.

@silverskid

7 жыл бұрын

Where does Nietzsche, or this video state that purpose are built into existences? Certainly N doesn't think that, and I didn't hear it stated in the video.

"The sciences do not try to explain, they hardly even try to interpret, they mainly make models. By a model is meant a mathematical construct which, with the addition of certain verbal interpretations, describes observed phenomena. The justification of such a mathematical construct is solely and precisely that it is expected to work." -John Von Neumann

@colourglue

8 жыл бұрын

+Omar kyon Postmodern garbage, pal. Neumann pretentiously declares that he sees no attempt by scientists to describe and/or interpret events, but merely brush off said events with the construction of generic models. This is merely a failure on Neumann's part to understand what science is and probably has a lot to do with his dissatisfaction of simplification, favouring instead the more deconstructionist approach (which ironically seeks to obscure or pervert observations). Science doesn't describe observed phenomena, it objectively measures present phenomena (or absence of). And Neumann can scrap the "mathematical construct" and "verbal interpretations" jargon. It's science, not literary studies... As I said at the start, this is postmodern garbage and it deserves every ounce of contempt and ridicule it receives from the scientific community.

@omarkyon1933

8 жыл бұрын

Skeptik That made me chuckle a bit. You basically just made a bunch of statements about this and that.

@colourglue

8 жыл бұрын

Omar kyon "statements about this and that." are enough to get a chuckle out of you, yet fail to provoke any type of legitimate response? So much for standing by your quote! :-P A well-read, quote pasting smarty-pants like you should have no trouble understanding what i said! ;-)

@omarkyon1933

8 жыл бұрын

Skeptik I didn't think I could get a legitimate argument from you considering how your original comment was just opinions and statements with hints of hubris so I didn't even bother. Also statements don't warrant a thought out argumentative response because they are conclusions without premises. They have no basis to stand on. I do however feel tempted to post your comments on /r/iamverysmart

@colourglue

8 жыл бұрын

Omar kyon "you basically just made a bunch of statements about this and that"... You accuse me of jumping to conclusions without a foundation for said conclusions, but how would you know? You never inquired any further, but instead seem to prefer outright denial of my argument. To this you will likely respond with: " what argument? You don't have one." You won't define a set of conditions under which you would accept my argument either, giving me nothing to work with. You have nothing but the very thing you accuse me of having: hubris. You dropped a shitty quote from some hack postmodernist, and, in the spirit of postmodernism, you will never take an objective stance on it, preferring instead the strategy of continuously moving goal posts and speaking vaguely in the hope that I will give up. Then you make this weird combination of a threat and appeal to authority: "I'm going to post your comment on some lousy subreddit that I believe is full of smart people who will laugh at you"... Post away, oh inept one, but don't forget you have yet to respond to a single point I made. You may dismiss this engagement as being unfruitful (which is a reasonable excuse to leave), or you may flee for lack of ability to respond. Just know that even if you claim the former, the latter will be assumed. Cheers

Dawg, I appreciate yhe way you educate in a way we can understand and follow, while entertaining us at well. Great job! please continue to teach.

Very interesting, good summary, but if you could perhaps turn down the sound of the 8-bit stuffs a little next time? :)

Science is a language humans use to explain the world around them. A dolphins' interpretation of the ocean will be very different to that of an Oceanographer.

@theblukatlife

9 жыл бұрын

Why do you believe or think a dolphin interprets or thinks? Humans invented those words to define or give a meaning to things they write or to toughts they think. A dolphin doesn't have hands to write or create words. Checking the brain of a dolphin and seeing his brain doesn't mean anything to the dolphin and the explanation you recieve by checking his brain is in human understanding of human understanding of his own existance but if humans doesn't truly understand their existance how can understand other existances?

@joc6344

8 жыл бұрын

+chris pease Well not really... Science is universal. There is least interpretation possible. The ocean, no matter the units or the method used, Its volume, density, temperature, etc. would be the same as us. Even if they would measure it in square sand per shell, we would simply have to make the conversion.

@wezzuh2482

5 жыл бұрын

"There are no facts, only interpretations" -Nietzsche

These videos kick ass. Keep it up!

Best explanation of Nietzsche I have seen yet... Thankyou ThugNotes!!!

these are epic

I dont believe there is such thing as objective purpose.

@Poetabrasileiro

7 жыл бұрын

Holy shit, me too! People i argue with always get confused when my argument is "Life doesn't need a meaning. Neither do Existence. They do not have a asbolute end goal other than arguably preserve itself." And people think i'm a lunatic. Omg!

@mrcooper6318

7 жыл бұрын

Congratultion you're both nihilists

@AEPPLE_MUSIC

7 жыл бұрын

MrCooper I am not a nihilist. I believe in subjective purpose. That I can create my own purpose. Nihilism is more about if performing an action is worth something. I am a nihilist when it comes to death. We cannot do anything about it. I have accepted that. Though my nihilism stops there.

@wezzuh2482

7 жыл бұрын

nihilists also reject subjective purpose. This guy is an existentialist

@Poetabrasileiro

7 жыл бұрын

Jakob Carøe I don't really think those labels aren't being used correctly, or if they even can be used in my or Apple's Case. I don't actually contemplate the reason for existence or try to elaborate about it. I just actively argue that Existence does not serve any function besides arguably preserving itself.

Another great piece. I'm really enjoying it so far!

Best philosophy youtube videos ever!!! This channel has so many great ideas!!!

I like these, thank you.

I noticed Confucius is in the select screen. I am hoping eventually you'll do a episode on some Eastern philosophy.

I really like these. Keep up the good work!

Liking the new series man, keep it up.

Wow I'm learning so much.

I echo some of the criticisms other commentators have made. This film commits a classic error of assumption right from the beginning - that the universe inherently has meaning. It doesn't have to. It just exists. The burden of proof is on the filmmaker to prove that the idea of "meaning" isn't an artificial construct in the first place. Teleological argument. Also, describing how something behaves and explaining why it behaves that way are in many ways the same question, both of which scientific investigation can shed light on. False dichotomy between the two. Example: a bird species on one island has a certain shape beak, and it uses that beak to eat a certain food that is only on that island. Describing HOW would just be stating the obvious. The square object fits in the square shaped hole, or in this case, the food fits in the beak. WHY? Well, so it doesn't starve to death, first of all, and also because it got stranded there, and its beak shape gradually adapted over many generations to be optimized for that food.

I love the new addition to the channel. Keep up the good work.

These are fantastic. A bit entry-level, but I guess that fits great with the aesthetics. Fantastic stuff. Keep it up.

I forget who said it but it was on this channel somewhere - might as well just embrace the absurdity. Maybe universe just exists without meaning, fire just exists because it's fire. Myth of Sisyphus and all that xD

@tster4494

8 жыл бұрын

Albert Camus; Why Shouldn't We Commit Suicide

@rometimed1382

7 жыл бұрын

"If you believe an existence after this awaits you that is superior to the life that I know in this realm why don't you commit suicide." I'm not religious but most religions hold that you carry forward your "soul" from life into the "after-life" so someone who is shunning life would also be unhappy in death. From Dante's Divine Comedy, Inferno: "Inferno Canto XIII:31-78 The Wood of Suicides: Pier delle Vigne Then I stretched my hand out a little, and broke a small branch from a large thorn, and its trunk cried out: ‘Why do you tear at me?’ And when it had grown dark with blood, it began to cry out again: ‘Why do you splinter me? Have you no breath of pity? We were men, and we are changed to trees: truly, your hand would be more merciful, if we were merely the souls of snakes.’ Just as a green branch, burning at one end, spits and hisses with escaping air at the other, so from that broken wood, blood and words came out together: at which I let the branch fall, and stood, like a man afraid. My wise sage replied: ‘Wounded spirit, if he had only believed, before, what he had read in my verse, he would not have lifted his hand to you, but the incredible nature of the thing made me urge him to do what grieves me. But tell him who you were, so that he might make you some amends, and renew your fame up in the world, to which he is allowed to return. And the tree replied: ‘You tempt me so, with your sweet words, that I cannot keep silent, but do not object if I am expansive in speech. I am Pier delle Vigne, who held both the keys to Frederick’s heart, and employed them, locking and unlocking, so quietly, that I kept almost everyone else from his secrets. I was so faithful to that glorious office that through it I lost my sleep and my life. The whore that never turned her eyes from Caesar’s household, Envy, the common disease and vice of courts, stirred all minds against me, and being stirred they stirred Augustus, so that my fine honours were changed to grievous sorrows. My spirit, in a scornful mode, thinking to escape scorn by death, made me, though I was just, unjust to myself. By the strange roots of this tree, I swear to you, I never broke faith with my lord, so worthy of honour. If either of you return to the world, raise and cherish the memory of me, that still lies low from the blow Envy gave me.’ Inferno Canto XIII:79-108 The fate of The Suicides The poet listened for a while, then said to me: ‘Since he is silent, do not lose the moment, but speak, and ask him to tell you more.’ At which I said to him: ‘You ask him further, about what you think will interest me, because I could not, such pity fills my heart.’ So he continued: ‘That the man may do freely what your words request from him, imprisoned spirit, be pleased to tell us further how the spirits are caught in these knots: and tell us, if you can, whether any of them free themselves from these limbs.’ Then the trunk blew fiercely, and the breath was turned to words like these: ‘My reply will be brief. When the savage spirit leaves the body, from which it has ripped itself, Minos sends it to the seventh gulf. It falls into this wood, and no place is set for it, but, wherever chance hurls it, there it sprouts, like a grain of German wheat, shoots up as a sapling, and then as a wild tree. The Harpies feeding then on its leaves hurt it, and give an outlet to its hurt. Like others we shall go to our corpses on the Day of Judgement, but not so that any of us may inhabit them again, because it would not be just to have what we took from ourselves. We shall drag them here, and our bodies will be hung through the dismal wood, each on the thorn-tree of its tormented shade."

This is the perfect explanation of what I see very often. I don't mind an atheist but when they go out of their way to call someone who has faith in something "stupid" when they themselves worship Science is not the brightest thing to do. Science explains the how and not the why. And of course religions aren't a definite truth.

@BugzyUK

10 жыл бұрын

Science does explain how, but also for most things it also explains why through pinning down cause and effect. E.g. it explains WHY we don't all just don't float off the face of the earth. You might argue that is just a rephrased HOW statement, but WHY and HOW does have that relationship. If by WHY you mean it can't answer questions like "Why are we here?" it is because you assume a supernatural or special reason for your existence. You assume you have a predefined purpose here. Take that assumption away and science can explain why you are here just as it can answer the question of why a termite is here. [No offense to your or termites intended]

@AlSween

10 жыл бұрын

That's a THEORY... that we are here by chance. But that's the point. Neither science nor religion can answer definitely "why are we here".

@BugzyUK

10 жыл бұрын

Haha... I didn't exactly say chance, but without getting bogged down in the details lets call it chance. It is a theory indeed, one with a staggering amount of evidence for it, the opposing theory has no evidence for it but relies on faith. The problem with these discussions is in your use of "definitely". Are you definitely 100% sure you don't owe me $1,000,000? I know there is no evidence you do, but have you never forgotten something before?, you may have forgotten you owe me the money, you may also have forgotten you spent it or stashed it somewhere. Does the fact that you can't be definite mean it is a credible possibility? as we will never know lets compromise, just transfer me $500,000. Knowledge isn't proving something 100%, if that is your definition i don't see how you function because you have no knowledge at all. This is clearly not true as you are still alive, so maybe you should reevaluate what you consider necessary evidence to call something fact

@Manuelomar2001

10 жыл бұрын

AlSween Gravity is also a "theory". Electromagnetism is a theory. Do the light bulbs in your room work? Well, it's "just a theory", maybe angels make it glow, rather than the alternating current that's passing from the neighborhood transformer-substation to the house. The word "Theory" doesn't mean the same thing in scientific literature that it does in everyday speech. Something doesn't get called a Theory unless there is tons of testing, experimentation, repeated independent testing, independent confirmation, and peer review involved.

@Manuelomar2001

10 жыл бұрын

Science is not a religion to be "worshipped". The very core of science, that observation and testing are what is needed to determine truth, goes against the inherent quality of religion: In religion, truth is something revealed by a divine power of some kind, and immutable. In scientific research, truth is something discovered by observation, testing, and proof. A good scientist will believe something only as long as the preponderance of the evidence and proof support it. If new information is discovered, a good scientist will take that information into account, test it, and modify his understanding of the world if the new information supplants or contradicts what he previously thought. And no, text in a holy book does not count as "proof" of anything.

I could never understand philosophy until this new series came out, I feel embarrassed but DAMN! Reading it always screwed up my mind when I tried to comprehend it, this feels so solid and simple. I really like it.

This video is just ridiculously well done and clever.

i like your kind of videos, but sadly the music is a bit too loud. I hope you can make it a bit quieter in your next video ;)

One issue with the "why" part is it is entirely possible there is no why question to begin with. Asking why implies purpose and it's entirely possible there was never any purpose to begin with. If you want to ask why is there fire or why am i here, you must first explain what reason you have to believe there is any logical reason to suspect purpose which would require the why question. The way its presented is like if lightning struck and you asked "why did Zeus do this"?

@darkmario720

7 жыл бұрын

InMaTeofDeath I forget who said this but there was one philosopher that said something along the lines of "Humans cannot *think* of anything that doesn't or cannot exist whether it be concrete or abstract" (sorry I can't think of the sorce) but my argument would be because the word "why" exist in the first place it proves that why must apply to something

@InMaTeofDeath

7 жыл бұрын

darkmario720 Does that mean because the words flying spaghetti monster exist that also proves it applies to something? Seems like a bad argument imo.

@darkmario720

7 жыл бұрын

InMaTeofDeath well when you put it like that at first thought it would be no it doesn't but let's look at it from a different perspective: technically we *can* think of things that don't exist but without a single doubt no matter what we think of that thing will always be made of things (or concepts) that already exist so in a way it does apply to something when you consider the things that is made out of. In the case of the Flying Spaghetti Monster it is made up of 3 parts 2 are concepts (flying and monster) and 1 is an object (spaghetti) therefore the fact that the words "flying spaghetti monster" exist it applies it's self to the idea that a monster made of spaghetti that can also fly can exist in some form, in this case fiction

@InMaTeofDeath

7 жыл бұрын

darkmario720 Yeah but what you're doing is changing my answer. In truth you also showed how it's possible to make the words mean whatever you want and that is not a good argument for anything. By your logic if I make up a word like "Rinedine" that must mean somewhere out in the universe it applies to something, do you really believe that every single made up word ever uttered by humans has a real counterpart out in the universe or relates to something? Seems far crazier than most religions imo..

@silverskid

7 жыл бұрын

I think Nietzsche's discussions of "why questions" occur at a psychological and not a metaphysical level. He agrees that teleology is a projection. But he takes projections, myths and religions very seriously. They have a value for giving life the *sense* of animating purpose whether true or false. Thus he speaks of necessary myths for most people. Only a few can deal with a world drained of mythology or religion which is why he is concerned about an age in which nihilism will become prevalent. The truth has value sometimes, but it is the will to truth that destroys myths, illusions, most of all in the West it destroys Christiandom which science cannot replace. He would like to imagine that he and a few others can overcome nihilism by "creating" their own values and purposes. Though I find this self-creation less then satisfactory as an answer to a cultural, even civilizational crisis, the point is that he never said things inherently have meaning or purpose "the fire exists because X" is not true. But mythologizing and anthropomorphizing nature can have advantages for cultures by giving them a sense of meaning and direction. In everyday life too we find that illusions can be useful (if I inflate the importance of my job I'll probably do better work, if an athlete thinks he's better than he really is he will often perform better than he would with a realistic appraisal as research has shown.) N. thought it was sometimes better to honor truth than lies and myths if it helped us to affirm life; but at other times (esp. when the myths-- like Judaeo Christian ones-- are stifling and against this life and this world) truth is important to destroy the myths. But after the myths are destroyed only a few people seem to avoid nihilism or the sense that nothing has purpose. In fact, for N, everything CAN be given purpose by you as you "color the world" in one of his phrases. We can create our own values "will a self; give style to your character" etc.

I'm liking this series so far :) Keep it up ^.^

You guys deserve more views. Both shows are top-notch!

I was going to question the validity of the question of "purpose," but StanMarsh1 below summed it up quite well. Purpose is not intrinsic to reality; it's an assumption. "How" is really the only question that matters objectively, and it's the only question which leads to technological advancement and improved standards of living.

@malliemaile6746

3 жыл бұрын

Huh?

This video was a surprisingly fair description of the attitude someone who is earnestly seeking truth ought to have. I did not expect to watch something approaching wisdom when I clicked this video.

For such a short video this is brilliant

ok......so I am a high school English teacher and amateur philosopher who just stumbled upon your work tonight while trying to compile resources for the philosophy course I am offering at my school this year. you just became an automatic favorite youtuber for me based on the philosophy content and when I saw what you had available as a whole on your channel, I was blown away. I think I am going to watch a lot of your stuff soon : )

@franzkissel1369

3 жыл бұрын

How'd it go?

@theheebs100

3 жыл бұрын

@@franzkissel1369 mostly ok. I only taught that elective for one semester, but I use a ton of that info in my pre-ap and language & composition courses

@franzkissel1369

3 жыл бұрын

@@theheebs100 sweet

Great video (and contents). Love the 8-bit stuff you're making. Science limitations isn't just about the meaning behind phenomenons, it is in the core of what science is (Finding a rational answer to explain events around us).. What if in reality the world actually runs by some sort of an irrational (magical) logic? (Yes, gods and angels.. etc).. By science, one may try to find this rational answer... Without proper evidence, the most an honest scientist can do is saying "I don't know, I don't have the tools to find an answer. I stop here" and deny/reject all sorts of claims not supported by evidence. (Even if by pure luck were correct). I don't believe/buy any of the religious nonsense, and I know that such questions are meaningless (Suggesting imaginary scenarios just to satisfy the point), but I think science (I'm talking about the scientific philosophy as a whole) is somehow "atheistic". It is a healthy and sane way to look at the world.. but the thing is, claiming that "Your philosophy is wrong because it isn't scientific" isn't a fair disprove for something..

This channels comment section is the most intelligent one out of all channels on yt

Dictionary definition of 'Science' from the source Google provides when you search "Science definition": "the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment." Dictionary definition of 'truth' from the source Google provides when you search "Truth definition": "that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality." The studying of the natural world provides knowledge of the reality we live in, this provides us with the truth, therefore, Science = Truth.

@harrisonnancoo6401

9 жыл бұрын

gOdislove

@SleepyBabyYT

9 жыл бұрын

Harrison Nancoo gOdislife

@thewhiterat9889

9 жыл бұрын

LonelyBread What is fact and reality though?

@SleepyBabyYT

9 жыл бұрын

The White Rat Reality is what our brain perceives, each persons reality is different to another's. Also deeeeeeep

@charquidesesos4037

9 жыл бұрын

+LonelyBread therefore google = source of truth

Amazing work guys.. you've nailed it.

New Idea: Do both!, I am religious and love science, alright peace achieved.

@davidtimothy7319

9 жыл бұрын

ethan45ful www.icr.org/article/bible-believing-scientists-past/

@davidtimothy7319

9 жыл бұрын

ethan45ful so am I

@davidtimothy7319

9 жыл бұрын

ethan45ful Because; Then there'd be no free will, and God by his word decreed he would allow free will, God cannot go against his own word

@davidtimothy7319

9 жыл бұрын

ethan45ful The price of sin had to be paid by somebody who had no sin; you cannot pay another's dept when ye are also in dept, so, he needs to pay the dept in pain, who to send; God the father can not dwell in the presence of the unclean(like anyone could hurt him anyways) and the holy ghost posses no body of which to be harmed. so; Process of elimination; the answer is C; Christ, why did the dept need to be paid; Justice, that's why!

@davidtimothy7319

9 жыл бұрын

ethan45ful Goodness; This is circular, Ok then, he also predicted the many who would get eternal Life! , also knowing somebody would do something DOESN'T MEAN YOU MADE THEM DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!

Damn you Nietzsche! I thought I thought of it first!

I watch this a lot; thank you wisecrack team for making this video.♥

just as good as the 1st video :) really like this series so far!

OMFG TWO TIMES THIS SERIES CHANGES MY LIFE. THAT'S TWO FOR TWO. WHAT'S NEXT. COME AT ME, PHILOSOPHY.

@BillyElliottDMT

10 жыл бұрын

Ok. i could say the same thing....that's two times a young man has introduced me to fascinating concepts or vidz! (connoism and now a thug teaching science?) #AWEsome! Thankx lil dude - that was pretty cool. . .

@x3naurus

10 жыл бұрын

Billy Elliott hahaha, I love the internet... the only place where that is possible. No problem, man!

@Grinsekatze113

10 жыл бұрын

lol so now you think science is a religion? do you believe anything ppl tell you?

@x3naurus

10 жыл бұрын

Grinsekatze Cheshire when did I say that? O.o are we about to play that game?

@Grinsekatze113

10 жыл бұрын

Jadden Norman "TIMES THIS SERIES CHANGES MY LIFE." I just asumed it. I think this video totaly missunderstood science.

WOW! This fit with my core beliefs system better then I could describe. I never seen science and religion as competing ideas in my head. More like complementary points of view.

@omanflag

10 жыл бұрын

They are not complementary. Religion bases a lot of its core beliefs on "faith." Science never acts on faith as faith is what you get when you believe something with no good reason. That is anti-science and should never be practiced.

@d5dizzler962

4 жыл бұрын

Pretty P+ I disagree! All science needs faith all these ‘facts’ and theories you have to put some faith in to just assume all that technobabble actually means something and that doesn’t seem meaningless. And the whole no good reason thing. Believing in science is.. well I just explained that. And religion, while I can’t speak for myself but some people need meaning in their lives and that doesn’t seem like ‘no good reason’ But hey it’s not really my battle to fight. Personally I don’t care about science or religion but I see the value in both!

I kind of expected this series to be about bits of philosophy that actually show up in video games, but this is still pretty good.

These are awesome! Keep it up!

I also see a lot of people vitriolically defending science or evolution without understanding what it is. A theory is as close to a fact as a scientist is willing to get, we really don't like to be wrong in science so if you ask "is evolution a fact" you won't hear "yes" you'll most likely hear "we have overwhelming evidence in support of the theory, and no credible evidence against it"

@Lambda_Ovine

5 жыл бұрын

Yes. I always thought that if you can't defend an argument using scientific knowledge by understanding it to, at least, a fundamental level, then you're in no position to defend it. "Because science says so" is just as meaningless as "because the bible says so."

This one I am saving to strengthen my argument when I run into a dogmatic atheist scientist who tries to convince us they are the answer to explaining the nature of reality. As long as thy are stuck on matter (materialism) their words become theories and beliefs that suffer the same consciences as religion. That is formulating dogmas that paralyses progress.

I have no clue what this channel is about but I subbed since the part 1 of 8 bit philosophy came out

Wow I'm in love with these great work guys really humbling :)

What if Video game are little universes?

@virgomontclare5553

10 жыл бұрын

Couldn't be because they are created within our universe.

@ShrinkingChef

10 жыл бұрын

You may have heard of this little movie called Tron.

that made my day

THIS IS ALUCINATING. THANKS FOR DOING THIS!

Some really amazing animations

"Man should not be the servant of knowledge. Knowledge should be the servant of man." Spoken like an OG. GET SOME SCIENCE!

@theshaolin2391

9 жыл бұрын

The Last Sophist Science doesn't answer everything.

The idea of fulfillment though any means, to me, it stupid. Science or religion, I don't think it's useful or smart to try fill the void of unanswerable questions with dogmas. I just simply accept all that is around me and that I am here, if there is a issue that can be solved, then I strive to solve it and for me, that's why I accept science. There's no reason to try find a purpose or explanation for our creation, only to try figure how the world works so we can better our situation. Our existence, to me, is just a chain of infinitely unlikely and likely possibilities that just happened to fall into place and we should try to make the best of our immensely short lives.

@sladifer4565

8 жыл бұрын

I am a christian. I believe that God created everything and gave it order. Then shredded the instructions and dropped us in it to figure things out as we go. I love science and scientific theories. I love to find out how thing work even to the smallest level we can find. I don't see why science and religion can't peacefully coexist. The problem to me seems to arise when people try to either prove or disprove God's existence when neither can be done. The things that we have definitive proof for in science, as far as I know, don't conflict with what I and many others believe to be true from the bible. If we would stop going at each other to prove one another wrong, throw out past prejudices that may exist we can have a peace between science and religion.

@nivolord

7 жыл бұрын

But without purpose or meaning, how can you recognize what an 'issue' is? An issue seems to imply something is less then it should be, hence its existence demands some kind of valuation, a meaning. Do you not, by acting, try to fulfill some wish? Isn't solving a problem some kind of fulfillment? What constitutes a better life?

@ZiPolishHammer

7 жыл бұрын

+nivolord Whatever YOU feel constitutes a better life, is what constitutes a better life. After all, you're the only one living your life. No one else can do it for you. So a problem can exist in the sense that it interferes with YOUR objectives, when others might see no problem at all given the same circumstances.

@rometimed1382

7 жыл бұрын

"Whatever YOU feel constitutes a better life is what constitutes a better life. After all, you're the only one living your life." Which is interesting because we all are living like "gods" compared to those a few generations ago built on the backs of those who came before and they had their own feelings on what constituted a better life, etc.

This series should return!

That start screen was awesome haha

Neitzsche makes the fatal assumption that there must be an ultimate purpose of any one thing and that is a faulty assumption.

@walruspictures

10 жыл бұрын

The criticism Nietzsche is making is not that there must be meaning in life, but, that people treat science as if it were a religion. In place of a religion. Which many people in this day and age very commonly do.

@omanflag

10 жыл бұрын

walruspictures who does this?

@walruspictures

10 жыл бұрын

Pretty P A lot of people, go to r/atheism on reddit and that describes almost everyone there. Also, just a large swath of the "progressive" liberal crowd. I don't have a problem with people not believing in a God, I just strongly dislike it when people treat that as a religion.

@omanflag

10 жыл бұрын

We may have two different definitions of the word religion. And using r/atheism as the basis for an argument is hugely intellectually dishonest. A large portion of people who submit posts to r/atheism use it as an outlet for frustrations they have with religious action around them. They express themselves there because there may be no other place for them to express themselves without getting ridiculed or persecuted by those around them. Science is not a religion because it has no dogma. And non-belief is the same way. Both science and non-belief have no creed, no dogma, and no belief that cannot be changed when new evidence presents itself. You may dislike r/atheism and that is ok. It wasn't made for you.

@xxalestarxx

10 жыл бұрын

if you read Nietzsche you would know that he absolutely didn't believe in absolute truths

Last week someone brought up quantum mechanics and I hope that continues here.The thing about science is that there comes a point where the instrument we use to gauge observable phenomena has limits.I don't wanna shoehorn Heisenberg's uncertainty principle but an example is (the observer effect?) an how the mind has to understand that light is both a particle and wave.What we try to do after is model with math and ask not "How can we get the best answer with our science" but reformat things to "how can we continue to do research with our science. While I personally despise Neitzche on various levels but that last quote from "the gay science" was actually okay.Grief would I like to what what epistemologists actually think about him >~ Wikipedia once told me that intellectualism is a form of consequentialism/ teleology with an undertone of making the imperative that "the best action is the one that best fosters and promotes knowledge" which sortas goes with the "going after knowledge for knowledges own sake" thing that's being said here. However clinging to that premise even when life itself is put at risk can backfire terribly on a person and their endeavour to the point that it's an empty and destructive Pryrrhic victory. Intellectual clinging/attachment for something abstract like dominance, fame,superiority,a fact or answer,victory, someone's love,advantage,glory, wanting whatever suits you to be affirmed,status,wanting to quantify or technologize everything,even wanting/craving for the well-being a/o happiness of someone who declines it or is on the course to an unfavorable inevitable etc can indeed cause some of the worst kind of suffering as I'm sure many of us have felt.

@knightbrolaire526

10 жыл бұрын

Time to pass the pipe.

@tsuich00i

10 жыл бұрын

Amor fati Nietzsche answer to the problem of suffering, its worth a Google search.

Very interesting. I really enjoyed this. Got yourself a new sub.

Im glad I found this series, and also upset it took me this long to

This video misses several key points. First: It assumes that the universe HAS meaning, that searching for meaning--rather than making meaning--is a worthwhile endeavor. Meaning may be something humanity wants...but it may not be something humanity can have because it may not exist. Second: When it talks about evangelizing science, and then gives examples, what it's showing is the difference between science which has basis in demonstrable fact...and religion "just saying so". The latter is evangelizing, to be sure...but the former is doing nothing of the kind; it is simply stating what we know to be so after rigorous research and testing, presumably in the face of because-god-says-so opposition. The comparisons given in the video are apples and oranges, yet the maker of the vid does not appear to recognize this. Third: At the end, the video pulls a kind of switcheroo, changing from "science" to "knowledge", and then telling us to be critical of both...yet the very nature of science, of science when it is done properly, is to be critical of everything. Even well-established theories, even facts thought to be well-understood, are subject to revision; science quite often tells us that what we know is wrong. Whether the video is intentionally misleading or unintentionally mistaken, I find that it is somewhat off-base and misses the point.

@George-xu9jd

9 жыл бұрын

When you're attempting to describe Nietzsche's views on any one thing in three minutes, you're sure to miss out on several key points. That's a given.

@AlexBermann

9 жыл бұрын

I like the objection that making meaning is a more worthwile endeavor then searching for it. Even if the universe is in itself meaningless, our actions and our perception of the world are meaningful. With that said, you can either argue that some meanings are more legitimate than others or embrace the idea of everyone wanting to take control of the world for their own reasons (the will for power). Evangelizing science is a problem. While some things are relatively uncontroversial in the scientific community, there are opposing theories on many fields. People who argue that they know the truth often reduce that complexity in favor of being right. Furthermore, they use bad science to prove their points or misinterpret scientific results so it fits their prejudices. You could argue that some religious people do the exact same thing: they reduce the incredible complexity of their religion to get definite "truth" they can defend their prejudices with. About your third objection: That actually is Nietzsches point. Blind believe in scientific facts is very problematic. It's mostly a criticism of positivism. After all, Nietzsche lived in the 19th century. Considering what was considered "scientific fact" (not just) in Germany during parts of the 20th century, the criticism seems justified.

@zeal2177

9 жыл бұрын

Covered in other videos. Argument invalid.

@BionicDance

9 жыл бұрын

Uniscious Didn't see these other videos; still stand by these arguments with regard to the contents of _this_ video. If you have _specific_ objections, by all means, lay them out for discussion. Otherwise, I see no point continuing to communicate with you.

@BionicDance

9 жыл бұрын

***** *how many regular everyday people do you know who actually evaluate the processes by which people come up with their conclusions?* I don't have cameras in peoples' heads, nor psychic powers enough to know what they're thinking, so I'm not sure how you expect me to answer this question. *That's what this philosopher is talking about.* That is not the impression I got from this video. *When ideas like " humans only use 10 percent of their brains" become regarded as scientific fact because the general populous is too lazy to scrutinize it because "SCIENCE" it becomes a problem* Yes, it does...and something ought to be done about it. But so what? That doesn't change the fact that, however science may be regarded by those with insufficient head-meats to follow, it does not mean that science is being preached, nor is it being _taught_ without valid logical and empirical bases which can be independently verified...unlike certain other worldviews I might just point to.

The more I learn about philosophy, the more I realize how meaningless philosophy itself is. Who gives a fuck what the meaning of fire is? All we really care about is how to harness it to make our lives better, and science gives us that. These are still great videos though, keep up the good work.

@Kevtbynumi

10 жыл бұрын

There in lies the contradiction within your own argument. what does it mean to make life better? how can u harness something to do something else if you do not examine what that something is? Science cannot explain why something ought to be done. Doing so is the is/ought fallacy. The question is not literally surrounding the meaning of fire, but fire's telo's or reason for being. And what the ultimate purpose of fire is. And on a larger scale what is the purpose of reality.

@LividImp

10 жыл бұрын

Kevin Donaldson Look, don't get me started, because my arguments will start to get insultive by nature, and I am really not trying to insult. I am not a philosophy hater, it was going to be my major in college, but I was (rightfully) convinced that if I wanted a job after college, philosophy was not the way to go. I was very enthusiastic for the subject back then. And yes, I understand that the "meaning of fire" isn't the point, I was being dismissive. Ultimately the "meaning of life" is itself meaningless.

@LividImp

10 жыл бұрын

alice x. How do you know I haven't already gone there and circled back around? If you think I'm a kid or uneducated, you are very wrong on both.

@LividImp

10 жыл бұрын

alice x. There is nothing to "give up". Just a lot of mental masturbation by people so insecure with their own lives that need it to mean something.

@LividImp

10 жыл бұрын

alice x. That's a pretty simplistic way to look at it. Looks you're the one that has a long way to go.

Keep em coming, these are the best

Great vid! Thank you very much! I think I'll be reading some Nietzche soon. I often delve into debates with religious an atheist youtubers and have found exactly the points your addressing to be accurate.

How are you going to talk about Nietzsche and not talk about nihilism

Whats a good program to do animation of this type? been wanting to do sprite animations

@YayPeptobismal

10 жыл бұрын

Why not create it in flash, so therefore you've got the smoothness and record it with a recording software?

@YayPeptobismal

10 жыл бұрын

Noxus Axios nice mustache

@FlipTheAngryAsian

10 жыл бұрын

flash cost money and i would rather not pirate it

@x3naurus

10 жыл бұрын

FlipTheAngryAsian why don't you pir-- oh. Why are you even on the internet? (Jk jk.)

@FlipTheAngryAsian

10 жыл бұрын

information and entertainment

great video, puts the meaning of truth into perspective. a couple of friends and I were having this argument not too long ago

thank you, this is one of my biggest pet peeves and why I've always preferred philosophy and other "soft sciences" to "hard sciences". I find that answering why is a far bigger deal to me than answering how.

@jodicompton5561

8 жыл бұрын

+ Que Tip, I'd say that why and how are closely related questions. A similar channel, The School of Life, tries to cast insomnia as strictly about psychological issues and unfaced 'life questions,' but electric light and caffeine use are also big contributors. We ignore that at the peril of continued sleepless nights even though we've worked hard on our issues. That's just one example, but I do think that we lead happier lives when we consider biological, chemical, and other factors as to why things happen.

There's no why.

Is it just me, or does that sound a tad similar to postmodernism?

@noticias6111

10 жыл бұрын

***** If I may add on (but not to negate the "emotional appeal of existentialism) so does (post)structuralism which I'd go as far as to say is more influential to current Western philosophy as the linguistic based stuff in (post)structuralism is taken into account by *both* the Continental school (big on experience,consciousness and cultural issues) and Analytic school (big on reason,logic and language) that have been the mainstay after the turn of the century vacuum in philosophy Nietzche left.

@Joepopa12

10 жыл бұрын

The werdz i am redn dont flow into tha 8 bit word en wich aye live.

@stuiesmb

10 жыл бұрын

Actually, the idea that "God is dead" was a trademark of modernism not postmodernism.

@Manuelomar2001

10 жыл бұрын

Stuie Borenovich it's a trademark of both, since postmodernism was a reaction to modernism. You don't have one without the other. But really, it's just something that Nietchze said, and he wasn't really talking about God, but instead about the popular belief in God being dead.

@tsuich00i

10 жыл бұрын

Xavier Diaz Sanchez I would agree, Jean-Francois Lyotard in his critique of overarching, "grand" narratives makes use of many of the points illustrated in this video, to argue for a dialectic which is not contingent upon scientific suppositions and consensual concessions (of truth claims) but rather, favors dialogue to make sense of and clarify topical issues.

David Deutsch approaches this question (in the first chapter of his book, "The Fabric of Reality") from the point of view of a physicist. Worth the reading. Great vid btw

Excellent idea! Love it!

Science observes and describes. According to religious scriptures, God is truth and the source of creation, which would make Him the author of the laws of physics and the universe. That would also explain why He is "mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality nor takes a bribe." (Deu 10:17). We may not fully understand God, but it is not for a lack of trying, an attempt which can be called science. Then the question remains; what are we supposed to do with all this knowledge? What should our priorities be? According to Christ it is "Love God, Love Each Other". Religious and atheists alike may have trouble taking his word for it, but I believe it is the simple conclusion that mankind will have to make in the end. End of sermon, lol. ;)