It's hard to win an argument with a smart person, but it's damn near impossible to win an argument with a stupid person. ―KoreTen

@jayjung5234

7 жыл бұрын

Arguments aren't about winning.

@tisajokt7676

7 жыл бұрын

I think in a sense arguments do have a "win" state, where all parties are convinced in the truth. You can concede and still "win" if your concession means you've forfeited a falsity. So KoreTen's statement remains applicable: A smart person is generally more open to new information and more likely to seek the truth, and is also more likely to possess the truth in their argument, making the win state more easily accessible.

@lm601

7 жыл бұрын

Albert Shaw I'm smart and you will not convince me of the contrary! That was a pretty smart comment, wasn't it?

@mirthrow4655

7 жыл бұрын

recess?

@laffy7204

6 жыл бұрын

It's actually very easy, it's called the Socratic method

What do you call a group of philosophers? A "disagreement".

@Theraot

8 жыл бұрын

+Daniel Băț ba dum tis

@TheAzet89

8 жыл бұрын

+Daniel Băț What do you call a group of people that can't disagree on anything? Fascists.

@gabrielrangel956

8 жыл бұрын

+TheAzet89 Pretty sure they did though

@shilohlindemulder1235

8 жыл бұрын

+Jacques Hanekom No, didn't you watch the video?

@shilohlindemulder1235

8 жыл бұрын

+Jacques Hanekom mine was a joke about a joke about the joke. jk

you can never lose an argument if you say 'shut up nerd' at the end

@sassywells3783

7 жыл бұрын

Iyyappan Sivaraman it's a joke don't take it too seriously

@abazhou4044

5 жыл бұрын

Hahaaa lol

@c.l.6523

5 жыл бұрын

Ok Anti-intellectual whose watching Crash Course for some unknown reason.

@adonismoy721

5 жыл бұрын

I would just say thank you because I’m watching Crash Course

@xblackcatx1312

5 жыл бұрын

Sassy Wells just call them a racist, or laugh at them...Leftists are masters at this. If either of those arguments wont work, calling someone a fascist is also very effective at proving you are correct and your foe is false.

Something that I've seen in internet arguments quite a lot is: "Person's opinion" + "True (enough) premise" = Conclusion. Then the person refuses to back down because they know their reasoning is right, but they won't acknowledge that one of their premises was just something they believe to be true, and not something that is widely accepted to be true.

@seangannon6005

7 жыл бұрын

Isla Drummond ah yes, the old feelsies over realsies argument

@LolLol-wi3zy

5 жыл бұрын

Doesn't need to be widely accepted to truly believe that what ur doing or thinking is right

@edrian.cristobal

5 жыл бұрын

Is it also the philosopher's saying that "if you think you're right, then you're wrong"?

@gabrielkage8991

5 жыл бұрын

Very astute observation

@jashnchahal7544

5 жыл бұрын

Lol Lol yeah that would be another fallacy... something like just because 5 million people believe it to be true it does not have to be true

Just to be precise. The original Aristotle quote is: Φύσει μέν ἐστιν ἄνθρωπος ζῷον πολιτικόν. Which translates: to The Human is a political animal...It was just translated in the past by many scholars as "Man is a rational animal". So he was not that sexist...His translators were.

@bram9333

5 жыл бұрын

Good to know

@Boyd2342

4 жыл бұрын

@@seferraziel9534 Thank god for moral progression 9

@jordanpeterson8414

4 жыл бұрын

@@seferraziel9534 Was he? Or did he wrote in a more acceptable style? You just can say, that you think he was a sexist.

@aplus1080

4 жыл бұрын

Political animal is so much better. 😮

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Here are a couple nice quotes from Aristotle .•••• "We suppose ourselves to posses unqualified scientific knowledge of a thing, as opposed to knowing it in the accidental way in which the sophist knows, when we think that we know the cause on which the fact depends, as the cause of that fact and of no other, and further, that the fact could not be other than it is". -Aristotle, Posterior Analytics •••••••••• "We ought in fairness to fight our case with no help beyond the bare facts: nothing, therefore, should matter except the proof of those facts." -Aristotle, Rhetoric ••••••••••

Premise 1: Cheese has holes Premise 2: More cheese = more holes Premise 3: More holes = less cheese Conclusion: More cheese = less cheese

@Fearofthemonster

7 жыл бұрын

fallacy: I forgot its name but this is the fallacy about using homophones. "more holes" in p2 and "more holes" in p3 do not mean the same thing.

@ncaged6753

7 жыл бұрын

Fallacy of Equivocation is the one you're looking for.

@florramirez2789

7 жыл бұрын

Observation 1) It is necessary for there to be more holes than cheese ex in "More holes = less cheese?" to equal "More cheese = less cheese", but in "More cheese = more holes" is there the same amount of holes and cheese? "only guidance is the word "more" for "More cheese = more holes". Both descriptions include the word more, if 1 included more, there would be more, but if both included more, they would be equal...? Question 1??) Are the holes the same sizes and take up the same space as the cheese or less?

@tomhudson6413

7 жыл бұрын

On the basis that all cheese contains the same amount of holes, surely more cheese = more holes? Is that a valid conclusion that can be drawn out from the stated premises?

@georgeeconomou7026

6 жыл бұрын

I can't believe people took this seriously.

i hold so much adoration for whoever composed the intro music for this series. it's ethereal

The sad part is that many people can't be persuaded by arguments - especially in comment sections such as this one. Generally, people are surprised when I concede that my opponent in aa discussion was right and that I was wrong. This should not be that surprising. Schopenhauer was on point when he wrote a book about Sophisms and called it "the art of being right" This is because people are naturally inclined towards Sophism. Plato knew that and was very frustrated about the success demagogues and lawyers had because of that. I believe tht this is part of the reason of the politeia - Plato desired that the leaders would be in a different mode - a mode which actually was interested in truth except in winning arguments. This is the most important virtue for Plato. I still see philosophical approaches when people actually don't fully try to oppose a statement but agree inn general but just want to inquire on some points or add something to it. Aristotles Logic is a very powerful tool to deal with conflicts without resorting to Sophism since it can actually disprove something. This is the true power of logic: true contradictory statements can't both be true. Unfortunatelly, in a court of law, in a parliament or in other places where decisions have to be made, logic is not nearly enough to resolve the conflicts. What I strife for is not becoming more convincing. I want to become wiser, I want to avoid convincing people to do mistakes or believe in my mistakes. I believe Logic helped me on that endeavor, but I'm not there yet.

@Ryan-kh9xn

7 жыл бұрын

Alex Bermann it's very odd that someone would advocated Plato and Aristotle, Plato being anti reason and Aristotle the father of reason

@AlexBermann

7 жыл бұрын

How was Plato anti reason?

@blovlh6258

7 жыл бұрын

Alex Bermann Platonism is the foundation of america if I'm correct.

@AlexBermann

7 жыл бұрын

Plato was a few thousand years too old for that

@marcosgutierrez9100

7 жыл бұрын

Alex Bermann I don't argue to prove something I argue to learn something

Most relaxing intro theme ever.

@bryanwan6169

8 жыл бұрын

Also, great 'entertainer' music in the thought bubble.

@natcamargo5344

8 жыл бұрын

+Cryp Tic yes!

@afroceltduck

8 жыл бұрын

+Cryp Tic Kudos to Michael Aranda!

@ahmadnawazwattoo5407

8 жыл бұрын

Dude even soothing things arent as soothing as that

@rawrcakes7

8 жыл бұрын

I want it on repeat

I think you explaining deduction really well. Bonus points for being the first explanation of it I've seen that didn't use that Sherlock Holmes trivia

@crashcourse

8 жыл бұрын

+Intu Well, I can't promise we're going to get through philosophical reasoning without a little Sherlock Holmes. Apologies in advance. -Nicole

@Intu3

8 жыл бұрын

+CrashCourse fair enough, I hope his little thought bubble-cartoon is cool

@Jake-kn3xg

8 жыл бұрын

+Intu Sherlock uses abduction though.

@Intu3

8 жыл бұрын

+Caffa Jake You're quite right

@Jake-kn3xg

8 жыл бұрын

Allofusien Abduction it is.

There used to be a subject called "logic" in school. They don't teach it anymore.

@KMissPerfect

7 жыл бұрын

In Serbia they teach us logic. It's an awesome subject.

@Fearofthemonster

7 жыл бұрын

Here, politicians shout at the microphone. They appeal to emotions instead of logic. Many people vote based on their emotional connection with the party as if they are football fans cheering for their team.

@petarjovovic308

7 жыл бұрын

Fearofthemonster just bcs here in serbia logic is taught in school does not mean its applied one quick look at our leaders is more than enough to confirm that

@athenaskid

5 жыл бұрын

I took it as a dual enrolled class at a university when I was a high school junior. Awesome awesome class

@jeezwitz3325

5 жыл бұрын

Most schools don't teach students logic because those who control schools wants students to be a robot in which, they can program something whatever they input and told over and over again.

Can I just say how grateful I am to be in this time and age where this knowledge is right at my finger tips. Thank you so much for these videos i’m so grateful for you!

Most people who take part in the KZread comments cannot be persuaded, no matter how good your argument. So, your argument is in salad.

@LittleLion93

8 жыл бұрын

+Rizerr96 It's also true that pretty much no one makes good arguments, mostly I see insults :P

@senorsushi6625

8 жыл бұрын

+LittleLion93 because kids come here.

@ClimbaRock5

8 жыл бұрын

While I agree that most on the internet can't (won't) be persuaded, I think there is still value in at least trying to have good conversations and arguments.

@ClimbaRock5

8 жыл бұрын

Also, in salad XD

@TheOtherNeutrino

8 жыл бұрын

+LittleLion93 NO IT'S NOT. FUCK YOU. /s

Hank, this is exactly what I wanted out of this course. People need more philosophy in their lives, especially since education doesn't really value it as much as it should anymore. Having a meme-guy such as yourself present it in such a smart way will definitely do the world good.

"All cats are mammals. I'm a mammal, therefore, I'm a cat." - Facebook Commenters

This was really great

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

LEARN FRENCH WITH VINCENT •••• Hey, maybe he'll teach you the first law of the science of Logic next time ? But don't bet on it .

Personally I am a big fan of Socrates' method of arguing, getting someone to argue with themselves and then walk off laughing to yourself.

Is anyone else really confused by the barber paradox? Video: "No matter what the barber does, he'll wind up breaking the rules." Me: "Yeah, ok, I'm with you so far." Video: "Therefor all groups must be members of themselves, otherwise the logic that supports the group's existence doesn't hold up." Me: "what the fuck are you even talking about"

@RossPeterson06

8 жыл бұрын

+Xidnaf I really enjoy your videos, by the way. Looking forward to see what comes next. (no rush)

@andyman1111996

8 жыл бұрын

+Xidnaf yea, you're not alone in that...

@Pfhorrest

8 жыл бұрын

+Xidnaf The barber is a proxy for talking about the set of all sets that don't contain themselves. Does that set contain itself? If it doesn't, then it's a set that doesn't contain itself... so it does contain itself. If it does, then it's a set that contains itself... so it doesn't contain itself. Russell used it to illustrate the problems with naive set theory, and justify the need for a more rigorously axiomatic set theory.

@ronpaulrevered

8 жыл бұрын

+Xidnaf There is a law in logic called the law of identity. I think the paradox illustrates this, but the paradox seem like a false one. The paradox only exists as a result of the silly dictates imposed on the barber by the rulers of beard land.

@Rottenation

8 жыл бұрын

+Xidnaf I'm pretty sure it's the opposite, a group (set, formally) must not be a member of itself. If it is, paradoxes may happen.

I LOVE CRASH COURSE! I teach with it, almost always learn with it (1000000000000000 times better than school!) and even enjoy learning with it! I EVEN BINGE-WATCH crash course, sometimes even re-watching episodes. Ever heard of an education platform having a fandom? Surprise! Thanks, Greens & co.

I have a philosophy final in a few hours, this man is a life saver

@blovlh6258

7 жыл бұрын

Faithfully Restored It depends on how that person learns.

Will John become a Philosoraptor during this CC series?

@mikekuppen6256

8 жыл бұрын

+gnhtd1 Yes! Please Thoughtcafé, make this happen!

@AnaseSkyrider

8 жыл бұрын

+gnhtd1 Maybe it's because I have a lame sense of humor and a low standard of entertainment... But I want to see that as a visual gag too.

@jdrock5265

8 жыл бұрын

+Anase Skyrider I second everything you just said.

@AnaseSkyrider

8 жыл бұрын

Piotr Woźniak No, not "Philosophers". "Philosoraptor". As in, the meme with the velociraptor with captions that ask philosophical-sounding questions. The joke is because of John's reptilian tail in the thoughtcafe graphics earlier in the episode.

@bestpseudonym1693

8 жыл бұрын

+gnhtd1 No, because John Green is a member of the scientific community, all members of the scientific hate most members of philosophy and most of philosophy. therefore John Green hates most members of philosophy and most of philosophy.

I can't hear squarespace without a part of my brain saying _Build it beautiful._

@flynn9500

8 жыл бұрын

+LazerLord10 Same here actually; LTT ftw.

@50ShadesOfEndo

8 жыл бұрын

You should

@DtWolfwood

8 жыл бұрын

+LazerLord10 the branding is strong with square space.

@UnashamedlyHentai

8 жыл бұрын

+EZ E Nope. Squarespace is legit awesome. I helped my dad get his small business website setup a couple years back. It was great. The business died, but the website looked fantastic, and even he could maintain it.

1. I have a pen 2. I have an apple -Ugh (?), applepen

@ayushsharma9270

5 жыл бұрын

+

@stevenbustamante9626

4 жыл бұрын

Pen pineapple apple pen

@classiccarfanatic

4 жыл бұрын

You, are, not, Bob, Dylan!

@manh385

4 жыл бұрын

It really works ...

@Hamburger-vg7vt

4 жыл бұрын

Pen Pineapple Apple Pen.

I'm a long time nerdfighter, so I have huge faith in both Hank and John, but I must say--hooking up with PBS has lent you guys a lot of... what do I want to say... legitimacy? Like, I was talking to my mom about how I was going to start this crash course with Hank Green, and she was like "oh", like, "so just some random thing on the Internet", but when I told her it was in conjunction with PBS she was totally into it, like, "oh, yeah, that'd be great for you to do." And as vlogbrothers and PBS are the only two media outlets I have total faith in, this like, perfect.

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

hippogriffgrrl10 •••• Hey, maybe Hank will actually teach you the first law of the science of Logic in the next video. But I doubt it .

@hippogriffgrrl10

4 жыл бұрын

@@williamspringer9447 I'm really glad you took time out of your day to reply to a 3-year-old comment. Well done.

I'm getting smarter by "wasting time" on KZread ! Love it!

To all of the Crash Course staff and to Hank and John, thanks for all of your creativity! As one of your older, and I do mean ooooolder followers, the material you guys put out helps me to understand the younger generation considerably more than I would without your library of great material. I learn a great deal and have material reinforced that I thought I once knew. Or as Don Hendley put more eloquently, "All the things I thought I'd figured out, I have to learn again." The Nerdfighter Network has given me a great insight into what the likes, dislikes, and challenges are of my college-age grandchildren as well as my younger grandchildren. Enjoying the new "Philosophy" series and looking forward to more videos about the subject. Thanks again for all of the great material and your dedication to educating the world!

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Jim Sluder •••• Don't worry , neither generation was taught the science of Logic in school , both nice and stupid . The science of logic hasn't been taught in our State controlled public schools for more than a century. The Underground History of American Education by John Gatto

Plato's Tripartite Soul: 1. Rational | Logical - seeks truth and is swayed by facts and arguments 2. Spirited | Emotional - how feelings fuel your actions 3. Appetite | Physical Desires - drives you to eat, and protect yourself. Bertrand Russel Barber - 4:04 Argument, Logic, Premise, Predicate - similar to that of learned in Rosen's Discrete Mathematics chapter 1.

I normally speed up every video a watch on KZread. This is the first one I've slowed down!

Jesus can walk on water. I can walk on pickles. Pickles are 96% water therefore I am 96% Jesus.

@unixone7558

8 жыл бұрын

+Top Dog Unsound argument and religious bait.

@sejrefraincisa4276

8 жыл бұрын

+Top Dog That is a valid argument based on those facts. Well done.

@sejrefraincisa4276

8 жыл бұрын

DJR Awww, stop ruining jokes....

@toahordika6

8 жыл бұрын

+Top Dog Well my gardener is 100% Jesus

@bingbung

8 жыл бұрын

Only logical

some arguments are not hard to win but for the other person to give up their pride for a moment is apparently the hardest thing ever

Hey its the sci show guy! This guy is great, I love the emphasis and hand gestures he uses when articulating the finer points of the lesson. I'm always glad to see a video with him in it. Thus I have now subscribed.

I love this...it help me a lot. The course is simplified and I can understand it easily. Thank you!

this video is about philosophy i watched this video i'm now a philosopher :D

@lcmiracle

8 жыл бұрын

+flat moe  Your first premise should be: Watching a video about philosophy makes the watcher a Philosopher. Your second premise should be: you watched a video about philosophy Thus your conclusion can be that you are now a philosopher Then it'd be a valid argument.

@Grayhome

8 жыл бұрын

+lcmiracle But not necessarily a sound one! Watching a video about philosophy can make the watcher a philosopher. You watched a video about philosophy. You can be a philosopher.

@almohsen12

8 жыл бұрын

lcmiracle lol im irrational , so your argument about my argument being fault isn't right to me either -Trump (i guess that's what he tells himself every morning in the mirror )

@TheOtherNeutrino

8 жыл бұрын

+Tyler Graham Look at that. The series is already paying off.

@RunxDevil

8 жыл бұрын

+flat moe You have always been a philosopher. You are the chosen one.

I'm already in love with this show! Thank you John and Hank for bringing us Crash Course, it's awesome to see folk so intent on educating people.

I stumbled on to your videos and now i'm hooked! Great stuff!

I'm loving this course, thank you!

I like this series, it finally shows esoteric crazies that philosophy is not bla bla but its opposite.

@SomethingSeemsOff

8 жыл бұрын

+AktionJackson i just dont like meta physics. give me some scientific reasoning

@teckyify

8 жыл бұрын

+Something Seems Off Do you know what metaphysics exactly is? It's not astrology, it's logical reasoning about the most general foundations about "everything", see: plato.stanford.edu/entries/metaphysics/ If you like reasoning it's one of the most technical and hard fields of philosophy.

@shakilrafi7964

8 жыл бұрын

+AktionJackson More of an epistemology person myself, I feel like epistemology is the most "out there" branch of philosophy

Guys, he said 'Man is a rational animal' is sexist because when Plato said that he was actually explicitly excluding women.

@DimetriKhan

8 жыл бұрын

+WrathOfMega Don't bother. These people are strangely adverse to anything of this nature.

@Atypical-Abbie

8 жыл бұрын

+WrathOfMega I was gonna comment stating how he may not have meant it that way, but I'm glad someone actually did their research on this. Also, it was a different time anyway.

@Shangori

8 жыл бұрын

Plato.. mgtow-ing since 424 BC Did he really? Interesting. I was wondering why hank would say something like that, knowing that this is the internet. Have a feeling he did it on purpose. If so, kuddos. And that says an egalitarian.

@TheMrWreckz

8 жыл бұрын

+WrathOfMega Thank you, Hank made this pretty clear, dont see how people messed it up.

@Atypical-Abbie

8 жыл бұрын

Mr Barwick He did? I don't see how, care to enlighten me?

I think I am pretty gifted at philosophy and arguing. I just now a sophomore in high school, and when I was a freshman, I went to State for Youth and Government, and I was one of the top nine and the only freshman in the state to go to State. I was a lone speaker, and my proposal got passed with an overwhelming majority, even though there was help, I did a bunch of it myself. Philosophy and arguing and debate are strong skills and extreme interests of mine. Thanks CC!

hank green is white john green is white therefore hank green is john green

@samuelsmith2707

6 жыл бұрын

Not all white people are john or hank. Your logic is flawed.

@banditbykko8798

5 жыл бұрын

Jaden :3 validity is not the truth

@ugurmumcu9845

5 жыл бұрын

there is a lot of white people you can't say they all hg or jg

@LeahsLover

5 жыл бұрын

Nope.

@harryjebb7235

4 жыл бұрын

Bandit ByKKo but his argument isn’t valid, cause: the middle term ( white people) is not distributed in the premises. Therefore you can not have a valid argument with the fallacy of undistributed middle term

My eyes and mind were fighting so hard to glaze over during the barber explanation.

Every crash course series has been a wonderful journey, I am happy and thankful for this new one :) thank you Hank and the cc crew, for all your hard work.

I do state level congressional debate in California, and this is such a helpful video that I think will help the kids that are new to debate.

I think I just found the best channel on KZread..? Mate, your videos are amazing. It's so reassuring (and faith restoring) to see folk like yourself sharing philosophy and inspiring others to embrace it more actively in daily life. Probably one of the single most vital tools for the development of both self and society. Namaste 😊🙏

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Mr McBeardy •••• The science of logic is a mystery to the masses . How can that be in a free society ? Why did this guy not explain the first law of logical reasoning ?

@mrmcbeardy9268

4 жыл бұрын

@@williamspringer9447 if you are referring to Aristotle's first law of "Identity", I can see how that could be a good point to make in today's world where many people will believe a conspiracy before doing any research to find the truth. Sure, i can see your point, and i agree to a point, it may have been a point worth touching on, even if briefly. (Perhaps he did, as it was 11 months ago that i watched this, so i can't say i recall whether or not this was touched on, even if briefly). With the point of the "law of truth" in mind, I present these two following observations. 1, Just because one may not broach the subject of "identitifying the difference between truth or non-truth", it doesnt mean all the other information is moot or discounted, because in truth, all the other information is still apt and applicable to the teachings of logical reasoning. And 2, that is a question you should be asking the content creator. As I am not them, i cannot claim to know their throughts or reasons in order to answer your query (although i am certain it was rhetorical). Perhaps they thought that in a world where people vote, drive mutli-tonne weapons around, raise children, and work jobs to pay bills, that a concept like discerning "what is truth" should be a rather self-explanatory process to even the more cerebrally challenged, and therefore determined the time was better spent on highlighting other principles that may be less conspicuous to those just discovering deductive reasoning? But I digress, this is but a reasoned speculation, as i cannot claim to know the authors mind. 🤔🤷‍♂️😊

@mrmcbeardy9268

4 жыл бұрын

@@williamspringer9447 but indeed, i do sympathize with your statement/observation... it can 'seem' like logic is often missing in the many in this day and age. Be careful with blanket statements though, as to throw the rest of humanity in with the illogical folk, is to throw the baby out with the bathwater. To begin a process of automatically discounting the entire population of their potential and ability, only serves longterm to negatively impact on your own personal opinion and view of the world... Which, in turn, would be an illogical way to think yourself, as blanket statements cannot accurately portray the truth of humanity. For your point to be proven true (about the masses not having logic), we would have to question and explore the answers of every individual on earth, and then count the difference between those of logical vs illogical thought processes. So even your original statement wouldnt pass Aristotles first law of Truth, rendering your statement to the level of congecture and anecdote. However, with this in mind, I would agree to an extent, that in todays world, it can SEEM that when humans are in larger groups, they tend to follow hive-mind mentality, and at such point logic and reasoning can seemingly be rather absent or hard to find. But many of those people on their own, may think more logically. Hive mind mentality is a real problem with humans, and can potentially cause more problems than it ever solves... (depending on who the hive is subconsciously following). A solution to this, would be to teach children about logic and reasoning (and conscious thought in general) at an early age in school. Of course, one major symptom of todays world is a higher prevalence of narcissism, and kids being raised in narcissitic environments will rarely be shown reasoning by their narsiccistic family members... which may or may not help reinforce whatever the kids learn about reason, as that itself will come down to the individual kids innate intelligence and who they look too for guidance and role-modelling.

@mrmcbeardy9268

4 жыл бұрын

@@williamspringer9447 also, if you're into healthy reasoning and logic,,you would love some of Jordan Petersons talks ;) arguably one of the best psychologists of todays world. But you may have already gotten there :) Be well and happy. Namaste 😊

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Mr McBeardy ••••• What an excellent response ! Thank you. Now, for the two points I wish to make : (1) There is overwhelming evidence that the science of Logic is not taught in our State controlled public schools. The near universal ignorance of the subject by U.S. high school graduates makes this perfectly obvious. Historian John Gatto argues in his book "The Underground History of American Education" that the suppression of the teaching of the science of Logic in our schools has been going on for over a century . • ••• (2) I think it is easy defend the proposition that the first law of logic is that logical arguments must be properly supported by solid evidence . This becomes apparent when you realize that the human mind does not readily accept invalid arguments as properly reasoned , but they continuously accept false or questionable premises as true . •••• Here s little information about Logic that I have found useful . ••••• "Logic, therefore, as the science of thought, or the science of the process of pure reason, should be capable of being constructed a priori." -Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Controversy ("A priori" is defined as deduced from self-evident premises.) •••••••••• 'Logic: The science that investigates the principles governing correct or reliable inference.' -Webster's Unabridged Encyclopedic Dictionary •••••••••• 'infer ... v. ,1. To derive by reasoning; conclude or judge from premises or evidence ...' -Webster's Unabridged Encyclopedic Dictionary •••••••••• 'For logic is the science of those principles, laws, and methods which the mind of man in its thinking must follow for the accurate and secure attainment of truth." -Celestine N. Bittle, "The Science of Correct Thinking: Logic" •••••••••• "We suppose ourselves to posses unqualified scientific knowledge of a thing, as opposed to knowing it in the accidental way in which the sophist knows, when we think that we know the cause on which the fact depends, as the cause of that fact and of no other, and further, that the fact could not be other than it is". -Aristotle, Posterior Analytics •••••••••• "We ought in fairness to fight our case with no help beyond the bare facts: nothing, therefore, should matter except the proof of those facts." -Aristotle, Rhetoric •••••••••• "Without the presentation of solid evidence no argument can be a good one" -Patrick Hurley, A Concise Introduction to Logic, 1985 •••••••••• 'Fallacious reasoning is just the opposite of what can be called cogent reasoning. We reason cogently when we reason (1) validly; (2) from premises well supported by evidence; and (3) using all relevant evidence we know of. The purpose of avoiding fallacious reasoning is, of course, to increase our chances of reasoning cogently.' -Howard Kahane, Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric, 1976, second edition •••••••••• 'The province of Logic must be restricted to that portion of our knowledge which consists of inferences from truths previously known; whether those antecedent data be general propositions, or particular observations and perceptions. Logic is not the science of Belief, but the science of Proof, or Evidence. In so far as belief professes to be founded on proof, the office of Logic is to supply a test for ascertaining whether or not the belief is well grounded.' -John Stuart Mill, A System of Logic ••••••••• "And if we have a right to know any Truth whatsoever, we have a right to think freely, or (according to my Definition) to use our Understandings, in endeavouring to find out the Meaning of any Proposition whatsoever, in considering the nature of the Evidence for or against it, and In judging of it according to the seeming Force or weakness of the evidence: because there is no other way to discover the Truth." -Anthony Collins, 'A Discourse of Free Thinking', 1713, taken from the first page of 'Thinking to Some Purpose ' by L. Susan Stebbing •••••••••• 'Aristotle devides all conclusions into logical and dialectical, in the manner described, and then into eristical. (3) Eristic is the method by which the form of the conclusion is correct, but the premises, the material from which it is drawn, are not true, but only appear to be true. Finally (4) sophistic is the method in which the form of the conclusion is false, although it seems correct. These three last properly belong to the art of Controversial Dialectic, as they have no objective truth in view, but only the appearance of it, and pay no regard to truth itself; that is to say, they aim at victory.' -Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Controversy •••••••••• 'The fallacy of suppressed evidence is committed when an arguer ignores evidence that would tend to undermine the premises of an otherwise good argument, causing it to be unsound or uncogent. Suppressed evidence is a fallacy of presumption and is closely related to begging the question. As such, it's occurrence does not affect the relationship between premises and conclusion but rather the alleged truth of premises. The fallacy consists in passing off what are at best half-truths as if they were whole truths, thus making what is actually a defective argument appear to be good. The fallacy is especially common among arguers who have a vested interest in the situation to which the argument pertains.' -Patrick Hurley, A Concise Introduction to Logic, 1985 •••••••••• 'A high degree of probability is often called 'practical certainty.' A reasonable man should not refrain upon acting upon a practical certainty as though it were known to be true. In England, for instance, it is customary for a judge, at the trial of a person accused of murder, to instruct the jury that an adverse verdict need not be based upon the belief that the guilt of the prisoner has been ' proved ', but upon the belief that the guilt has been established ' beyond a reasonable doubt .' To be ' beyond reasonable doubt ' is to have sufficient evidence to make the proposition in question so much more likely to be true than to be false that we should be prepared to act upon the supposition of its truth. Many of our most important actions have to be performed in accordance with belief of such a kind.' -L. Susan Stebbing, 'Logic in Practice', (1934) pages 98 and 99 ••••••••••

Called it, two episodes in and we already have a controversy, even if it is a small one.

@LittleLion93

8 жыл бұрын

+Alpaca Man Tha't a good thing, it means that we are albe to think! Well... kinda of....

@coolbadboy786

8 жыл бұрын

+LittleLion93 its all about rationally thinking... just thinking is so last year

@unixone7558

8 жыл бұрын

+Alpaca Man If one cannot handle conflict and controversy, one should not be on the Internet.

@sejrefraincisa4276

8 жыл бұрын

+Alpaca Man What controversy? I didn't see anything that could offend anyone.

@AnstonMusic

8 жыл бұрын

+Sejref Raincisa I think he refers to the barber, which I and many others here think that because the rules are contradictory, they cannot be followed either way. Edit: I'm wrong, it was about Hank saying Plato was sexist because he said that man is a rational animal.

This episode alone was surprisingly enlightening! I always used to consider a bipartite soul system, lumping spirited and appetitive into an emotional bundle. I never considered having that bundle be separated until now, but it makes sense to me to have them separate.

Thank you for all the effort and the hard work you put into making all of your videos!

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Angela Guasti•••• I wonder when he's going to tell us that logical arguments must be properly supported by solid evidence?

Thank you for the courses

I have always loved how professionally Crash Course videos are made.

I'm loving this series, Hank! I'm so excited to learn more about philosophy.

I appreciate so much that crash course brings us these brilliant videos. I also think that it's going to be a benefit for the world if we make philosophy as a required study.

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Kun Yu Tsai ••••• He left out some pretty important ingredients from the recipe . He never explains that logical arguments must be properly supported by solid evidence. He never mentioned that the science of Logic hasn't been taught in our State controlled public schools for more than a century. The Underground History of American Education by John Gatto

Great vid as always

I think this episode was awesome. And I also think you're going into the right places. I retract my previous (rather unfair) criticism of episode 1. I'm still interested to see where this heads.

Thank you for all the videos. You're exceptionally intelligent.

Just discovered "Crash Course", (thanks Luke), and find it fascinating.

Hank is an amazing teacher.

I'm a youtuber. Pewdiepie is a youtuber. therefore, I'm Pewdiepie

@AASAP447

7 жыл бұрын

I don't think it works that way. You're using a singular noun.

@szlanty

7 жыл бұрын

Henree Garcia ylecsactly

@aliyuh

7 жыл бұрын

Random Mapper/Scratcher/Robloxian I think that's called the substitution property

@szlanty

7 жыл бұрын

Cookie Monster girl :)

@leowang5867

7 жыл бұрын

Random Mapper/Scratcher/Robloxian I am a human, Dr Richard Feynman is a human, therefore I am Richard Feynman? I don't think so.....

Great video, thank you for sharing.

Once again Great content! Thanks a lot!

In my experience, persuasiveness is often more to do with social skills than rational argument. Humans often act irrationally, especialy when challenged.

Tripartite soul split in 3 Rational logical - seek truth and swayed by facts and arguments Spirited/ emotional - how feelings fuel your actions Appetitive/ physical desires - drives you to eat have sex and protect yourself An argument Your beliefs should always be backed up by reasons which are called premises Premises - support the structure Premises form the structure of your argument. They offer evidence for your belief, and you can have as many premises as you like, as long as they support your conclusion, which is the thing that you actually believe. Deductive - if your premises are true then your conclusion must be true Premise 1 all humans are mortal Premise 2 Socrates is a human Conclusion : Socrates is mortal Entailment - one fact leads to another. Begins with the general then reasons down to the specific. The truth of the premise must lead to the truth of the conclusion when this happens then the argument is valid no way the conclusion can be false when the premise are true . Validity is not the same as the truth. Validity= if the premises are true then your conclusion can't be false If your premises don't guarantee the truth of your conclusion then you can end up in a stupid argument Deductive soundness Validity + all true premises

So far I'm enjoying this, and I'm excited to watch more. But I also just wanted to say I like the little Wall-E on the corner of your desk. He's really cute.

Thank you for the video. I found this very useful!

Boy makes a logical argument; gets grounded for arguing with siblings

I'm really looking forward to this course. My fiance is a Philosophy major, so I'm hoping this will help turn our conversations about Philosophy into a little less him taking while I scratch my head.

I seriously love you, Hank!! I've decided I need to meet you both. (You ad John) You both are amazing!!!

This will channel with be the only reason i will pass my philosophy course. Thank you.

"Tripartite soul" sounds like a term for a 3-part-horcrux.

@TaunellE

4 жыл бұрын

Lmao! 😂❤

@lolhi7652

4 жыл бұрын

Lol😄

This was great! I started this "open-minded" talk show and knowing how to persuade better is always helpful! Thanks CC!!

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

JimmyJam ••• It would have been better if he had explained that logical arguments must be properly supported by solid evidence. And better still if he explained why the science of Logic hasn't been taught in our State controlled public schools for more than a century. The Underground History of American Education by John Gatto

Love this series!

These gentlemen do an amazing job of making these ideas digestible. Gratitude, to the Greens and their staff. Bravo!

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Matthew Flynn ••• And they still manage to suppress the most important element of logical reasoning . Brilliant .

This should be one of the videos in the KZread creator academy

I really like how Hank presents this from neutral perspective. Thanks, I wish more people would use this method.

47 videos in this playlist - wow! This is an awesome resource.

man this is awesome, my phylosophy exam tomorrow is going to go way better. this does help a lot. thanks!

WHAT DO YOU MEAN HANK GREEN ISN'T A CAT?!!! I feel like I've been lied to...

"Philosophers continue to agree with Plato: that reason should be in the driver seat" Q: This mostly applies to Western Philosophy, which, as opposed to many Asian teachings, distinguishes between affairs of the heart and affairs of the (rational) mind. So, will we be getting some Eastern philosophy in this series? Because the way of thinking is very different, making a lot of it extremely interesting

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Jon •••• I'd be more impressed if this guy explained the first law of the science of Logic to his audience.

Thanks for the video. I really appreciate it.

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

kaerblover ••• This guy didn't even teach you the first law of the science of Logic.

I loved the little Cameo mention!

''An argument in philosophy isn't a shouting match'' My parents are shouting at each other lol

that little compass thingy keeps shaking when Hank talks and it is incredibly distracting

@luxtenax9175

8 жыл бұрын

+Max Fux Now I can't unsee it

Great content! Thanks

The music is great, I'm rewatching this series for like the 3rd time.

you can never lose an argument if you say "ok boomer"

@saocxdc210

4 жыл бұрын

You must have forgot the most effective countermeasure to ok boomer: " This meme is already nothing but a memory" - Patrick Harlan

@tty8526

4 жыл бұрын

ok boomer

when it comes to logic, emotion, and fallcy within arguments my perspective is there are 4 types of arguments. 1)logical and persuasive 2)logical but not persuasive 3) illogical and not persuasive 4)illogical but persuasive It is a bit of a trap that smart/philosophical people get into, to consider a logical argument as necessarily good and an illogical one to be bad. If an argument full of fallacies is more persuasive than one with flawless logic, then the the fallacious argument is better.

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

RespectYourViews ••• To a person properly educated in the science of logic , an illogical argument should not be persuasive . To a average person , uneducated in the science of logic, authority and popular opinion are everything . That's why the science of Logic hasn't been taught in our State controlled public schools for more than a century. The Underground History of American Education by John Gatto

Even though this is 2019 I love you guys, everything is beautifully said and presented. LOGIC! 😎👐👌🏼

I am so grateful of this thank you

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Jay Was •••• This video suppressed the first law of the science of Logic .

The first time hank said "plato" I understood "play-doh" 😂

@affordablecareactof

4 жыл бұрын

Mk

3:08 I feel like being fully rational would lead to being cynical Acting on emotionan would be irrational

Thanks, very nice and informative.

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Willie Van Straaten •••• Hey, maybe next time he'll actually teach you the first law of the science of logic. But I doubt it .

The little turtles all the way down (or up 😂) joke in the title animation was really lovely & a nice little detail!

Saiyans have a tail Goku is a saiyan Goku has a tail

@ShiveringIsles

7 жыл бұрын

Most of the Saiyans in the anime get their tails removed, but on some occasions, they grow back

@dkatomski

7 жыл бұрын

Kevin He had one.

@freeman8508

7 жыл бұрын

You got this straight from a google search lol

@justinlacek1481

6 жыл бұрын

Premise one requires an existential quantifier. Some saiyans have tails. Or, you could state that All saiyans are born with tails, Goku is a saiyan, thefore goku was born with a tail.

@niceguy9061

6 жыл бұрын

Transitive property, we all learn it one way or another.

0:10 isn't it normal to think that "man" in that context means the human race? I'm no linguist but I've always thought that it was just an old fashion way of speaking, rather than implying anything about the sexes?

@mytparty

8 жыл бұрын

+Simon Als Nielsen It is now, but at that time it was used to refer to male humans. As in, that quote was likely meant to exclude anyone who wasn't a guy.

@adamkhan9899

8 жыл бұрын

on the contrary, I've always thought that 'man' being considered a synonym for 'human' is emblematic of the depths of patriarchy.

@SALSN

8 жыл бұрын

Adam Khan Holy crap, if that is enough to keep someone down, then it is probably better to shield them from the real world, man is literally just the last part of the word human.

@DreamxWonderland

8 жыл бұрын

this is only in english,that's why he specified it,it doesn't have the same meaning as in greek,where men=members of the male gender

@SALSN

8 жыл бұрын

Silvia Elena Oh, didn't think of that aspect, good point.

That huge Plato Biography looks amazing!

Thank you Crash Course ☺️

So using the word man when referring to humanity is sexiest now?!

@tiedeman39

8 жыл бұрын

I'm pretty sure it was a joke m8

@jonathanwilkinson4299

8 жыл бұрын

+Fred Skiddles Are you sure? These guys are pretty PC.

@principetnomusic

8 жыл бұрын

+Jonathan Wilkinson They are PC but they like to mock themselves about that, so... go figure.

@justadude4938

8 жыл бұрын

+Jonathan Wilkinson Yes, it leaves out women. It's not a huge issue, but it's insulting to at least some women.

@elijah9822

8 жыл бұрын

+Jonathan Wilkinson Let's check his privilege!

All nice and dandy until you have to argue with your wife.

I love these videos!

I love crash course thank you so much!!

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

Timothy Ahrendsen •••• Hey, maybe next time he'll actually teach you the first law of the science of Logic .

"How to argue properly" -Ben Shapiro has left the chat

@LaLaBlahBlahh

4 жыл бұрын

William Woodward i don’t agree with everything he says but i honestly think he’s one of the few people who are capable of formulating a logical argument and delivering it well, without emotional reactivity (with the exception of that BBC interview). same as jordan peterson... but hey! it’s cool to have different views

@truthhurts1936

4 жыл бұрын

@@LaLaBlahBlahh he uses flawed reasoning all the time and his fast speech doesnt help others either. same as jordan peterson.I used to like him a lot until that debate with zizek.He was shown he doesnt know much outside his main field(psychology)

@williamspringer9447

4 жыл бұрын

reallymagnolia To argue properly is to use the art of rhetoric to persuade your audience . This is only done logically if all of the reliable evidence is on your side and your audience will not positively respond to the judicial use of logical fallacies .