Thanks for the videos about Fichte, he isn't covered enough today

@PaulJosephKrause

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks. I agree, Fichte is under covered (especially in the English speaking world). If you don't know, I cover Fichte's "Science of Knowledge" in this lecture on German Idealism; description table of contents has the time moments for him: kzread.info/dash/bejne/gn6cj6Zpg9LJgbA.html

I can't wait to listen to all your videos, this was great!

You are doing great work. I hope people get to know more about your channel.

Very helpful! Hope more on Fichte or relation with romanticism.

Interesting and very clear lectures, thanks! (Checking the rest of your videos)

Wow, this just connected a ton of dots.

AMAZING!

FICHTE, JOHANN GOTTLIEB (1762 - 1814), was a German Idealist philosopher and religious thinker. Usually remembered mainly for his part in the development of German Idealism from Kant to Hegel and for his contribution to the rise of German national consciousness Wikipedia

Could you please tell me where did you found that or how did you come to that conclusion, that the source of inspiration for Fichte's I = I is the Biblical I am who I am? I do not doubt you, it is just the case that the issue seems interesting. Books written in German are fine for me.

thank you for this!

Dear Paul, Great video! Would like to see more done with the editing, however. Maybe screen recorded slides or something that summarizes what you are discussing. Thank you for the very informative info, though!

Very interesting!

Much appreciated

I was constantly coming across Fichte references when studying Novalis.

good stuff

Good job. I think this is excessively theological for this subject

Can't believe Monty Python didn't mention Fichte in their Philosopher's Song, some great rhymes there surely!

Can you explain in what way Freud is an Augustinian? Is this view developed in detail somewhere by you or someone else? This is an intriguing reading, but I believe it clashes with a standard reading of Freud as a materialist / empiricist.

@PaulJosephKrause

Жыл бұрын

This is very common knowledge; Augustine begins the “introspective” tradition of erotic psychoanalysis of which Freud is the preeminent modern example of - it has nothing to do with the materialist/idealist divide which is a rather shallow distinction to begin with. William Parsons has written an excellent book showing just how much Freud is indebted to Augustine, among many other scholars: www.upress.virginia.edu/title/4694

Need a good grounding to start the study of Existentialism? Start with this vid

this is nectar

This is wonderful content but the number of commercials ruin the experience.

@gabescrazy5504

4 ай бұрын

Knowledge in this world is not happiness inducing, in a way, by taking a few brain cells the ads make the world a little less (bad? Sad? Sadistic?). Crazy place, but without conflict there is no growth, so it has to be the way it is

Thanks for this video. I might be wrong, but I'm not sure your "Hegelian" reading of God as collective self-reflection was viewed that way by early practicioners of religion. Imo, even if it was recognised this way, the idolatry of our self-consciousness towards a certain Geist "muddies" our own view of our rationality.

Very good

Kant's philosophy stands on its own. Fichte arguably went too far in his metaphysical speculations about absolute ego. Kant initiated a new ideas and trends in various Fields of philosophy, including epistemology and ethics. Fichte offered a different and in some ways intriguing perspective, but he is the bridge between Kant and Hegel. As such, Fichte is now a footnote in the history of philosophy.

@PaulJosephKrause

Жыл бұрын

Absolutely true! Fichte turns Kant on his head, goes far beyond what Kant intended, and ends up with the idea of the collective ego of assertion which is so radically different from Kant's defense of the sanctity of the subjective individual that it's not hard to see how Fichte proceeds to his philosophy of collective consciousness that is integral to his development of German nationalism. But nevertheless, Fichte is very much the forgotten man between Kant and Hegel.

@sterlingweston

10 ай бұрын

A footnote? You, sir, are a footnote

Pay attention to people named Johann. In America, people named Mike.

This first premise is just blatantly wrong. Fichte was not the first interpreter of Kant. You are forgetting the massive important scholarship of Reinhold's Letter's on the Kantian Philosophy which not only popularized Kant's ideas in Germany/Prussia but put Kant on the map. Reinhold also became the chair of philosophy at Jena and stayed there until Fichte was appointed chair only after Reinhold left. You are also forgetting Maimon's work in 1790 ...that Kant thought next to Reinhold was the only thinker to bring important necessary objections to Kant CPR. There is also Jacobi, who was critical of Kant’s project along with Beck.

I don't like the way you explain the justification for the existence of laws: you say it's so that people can be (ultimately) consumers, I would say, it's so that you can live a good life without all that you've worked for being destroyed. I think the word "living" is better and therefore building a life or a "living" is a far better way of explaining it than merely to say you become consumers. Consumption is what you do in order to live another day - it's so mundane and ordinary, it devalues the purpose of law instead of stratifying it with higher meaning. It's just that within today's context of language, being a consumer has so many negative overtones and doesn't really sit very well next to "the purpose of law".

Objective democracy is dual to subjective democracy -- democracy is dual for all observers. Absolute is dual to relative Absolute time (Galileo) is dual to relative time (Einstein) -- time is dual. Space is dual to time -- Einstein Space is dual, left is dual to right, up is dual to down, in is dual to out. Positive is dual to negative --> synthesis.

Kant would have strongly objected to Fichte's focus on the ontology of the ego. I can Imagine Kant saying "I warned you philosophers to stay out of the Metaphysical Forest, because you easily get lost in reifications of obscure abstractions" . Kant's categorical imperative has its problems but at least he moved us in the direction of a practical ethics.

Deduction (reason, analytical) is dual to induction (empirical, synthetic) Positive is dual to negative Action is dual to reaction -- Sir Isaac Newton Gravitation is equivalent or dual to acceleration -- Einstein's happiest thought Rational (a priori) is dual to empirical (a posteriori)

At least you didn't use the fake term "Judeo-Christian".

Fichte was a pioneer of German nationalism , so not very positive connotation in context of 20th C

@AdolfStalin

3 жыл бұрын

Oh well

@forbesfoofighters

3 жыл бұрын

Germany nationalism is a great thing

@AdolfStalin

3 жыл бұрын

@@forbesfoofighters of course

@jojomccarthy8345

3 жыл бұрын

@@forbesfoofighters Nationalism might be the key to survival of humanity. Interesting times, we are living in.

@JB-kn2zh

2 жыл бұрын

At the time Germany didn’t even exist yet. It was a bunch of small states. So his desire for a German nation was understandable. That said, I see it debated in some scholarly articles on Jstor whether or not he was an ethnonationalist and to what extent he is to blame for the later developments of German nationalism. Anyways my point is I think to lump all forms of nationalism from the 1800s in with fascism is a mistake. Nationalism is also what motivated Polish, Irish, Finnish, Greeks, Indians, etc. to assert independence.