Philomena does a really good job of presenting every single logical fallacy in a form easily understandable by those who are not philosophically trained. It's hilarious and educational.

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

Totally

I just want to point out that "How many Three Wisemen were there?" is actually a fair question, and "Who knows?" is the correct answer. At no point in the story does it actually say that there were three. Only that there were three gifts - gold, frankincense, and myrrh, and that they are referred to in the plural. So all we can get is that there were more than one.

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

Oh right. I never thought of it that way. Taking to completely out of context probably doesn't help. I was just thinking it's 3 by definition, but yeah, there could be multiple sets of 3. Thanks

@kimbirch1202

Жыл бұрын

And were they really wise ? Perhaps they got the wrong stable. Who knows ?

"He was a Catherinoholic....or Catholic for short" is brilliant word-play

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

🤣

@mrorinocobottle9371

Ай бұрын

Milton Jones said something like the pope was a catholic which meant he was obsessed with cats.

It all went over thier heads.

Very good chaps! I think cunk is a bit of a genius, she makes you think in different ways..

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

For sure. It's well executed comedy. It was fun making this video. I laugh every time I see these clips.

@NyikoDoris

Жыл бұрын

so you are thinking she's a genius, therefore you am?

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

@@NyikoDoris 🤣

This did suck the joy out of it to a very large extent

@veenachandrasekaran5650

9 ай бұрын

Sadly, yeah. When comedy is explained in excruciating detail, all joy is lost. I prefer the history channels where historians enjoy the comedy, and provide more context to the joke, enhancing the viewing experience. This video was a bit tedious and academic, which made the original video and the reaction feel boring. How I wish there was more playfulness and fun in this video.

@JohnHollands

8 ай бұрын

They found no joy, just an excuse for mental onanism.

This dude Joe is adorable.

Just stumbled on this, super interesting and entertaining (Cunk is hilarious) But I have to ask if you’d ever be willing to do a similar vid about Karl Pilkington because oh my god. Even just the most iconic quotes on the surface of the Pilkington iceberg lend themselves to discussion: “do you control your brain or does your brain control you?” Or on the discussion of doppelgängers “how would I know which one I was?” That would be cool.

@TheologyUnleashed

2 ай бұрын

I'll check it out. That could be fun. How shcmid is great for this sort of thing.

Oh, it's parody. Almost sounds real!😂

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

Yeah, on social media you can find comments from people who think it's real talking about how the host keeps getting things wrong.

Respect to the philosophy guy , come on gooners xD

She didn't write that series it was Charlie Brooker, the guy that did Black Mirror as well as many others

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

Good to know. It's top level comedy.

@mirelairinapetre6503

Жыл бұрын

Still,Diane was brilliant in all series! 😂😂❤❤

@SimosFunk

Жыл бұрын

@@mirelairinapetre6503 yup perfect for the part

@iantellam9970

10 ай бұрын

The interviews are a mixture of written questions and her improvising though.

Oh my. So serious. So believing in invisible friends. Such am earnest boy.

You guys are hilarious!

Is a building a building, or is a " building " just a name for an appearance ? Does the building know its a building? Does the building just exist in our minds, as an idea or does it have an objective existence, irrespective of our minds ??

I really enjoyed this video, thank you! The commentary alongside the video was great, I adore Cunk 😂 I also believe gender to not really be a thing for the most part. Animals don’t bother with such things. Whilst I do feel entirely like a girl myself, my brother is transgender, and he would prefer to see himself as anything but! It’s 100% a social thing forced upon us imo, probably because of religion, ultimately, but not going there 👀

Sorry, I thought that this was 2 guys reacting to Philomena cunk. My mistake. These guys must be the ones who empty a room in 5 minutes.

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

Philosophy isn't for everyone but that's forgivable.

@tonypate9174

Жыл бұрын

Fingers crossed this pair of Joe the boy and it's Wicked uncle Ernie side kick never ever ever dive into the world of .....DILKINGTON....they may never be as Hip n Kool with a "K" think they are ever again ....No back to "close far away".

@cjstato

8 ай бұрын

​@@TheologyUnleashedsuch a condescending reply. I personally love philosophy, just not you guys.

Haribol Arjuna. The point about the 1914 soccer truce, was really great. Reminded me of how the Kurukshetra war was fought during the day and at night, apposing armies with mix with each other as if they were good friends. The difference with modern warfare compared to Vedic wars fought on the grounds of Dharma, is that the leaders who declare war are far removed from the battlefield, ready to skip their countries if things go pear shaped and seek refuge somewhere else. Vedic kings were warriors through and through, and fought in the battle, in the front line, leading their armies. We don't see the presidents of countries today fighting to defend their country if invaded. They just hide in some bunker somewhere, and given all protection. They probably can't last even half a round in a boxing match with any of their citizens. Many woman would defeat them easily in single face to face combat. Such is the state of the leaders of Kali-Yuga.

14:00 Bravo Arjuna 👏👏👏Luv ur insight and wit:D

@SpiritualPsychotherapyServices

Жыл бұрын

Kindly repeat that in ENGLISH, Miss.☝️ Incidentally, Slave, are you VEGAN? 🌱

Pick up a well polished spoon and look at your reflection on the concave side and you'll be upside-down. 🤷‍♂

Sorry gentlemen but you don’t get it

HA HA HA❤

I'm gonna start repeating *"I'm smarter than most people."* Eventually it'll be true

Wow boys you nearly laughed

One of the reasons philosophy is often not respected is that those engaged in rigorous study of philosophy become so esoteric and existential in their musing that they become utterly foolish. For example the idea that you can't provide a definition for a chair is ridiculous. A chair is a four legged construction with a back specifically designed to sit a single person. That definition is sufficiently adequate for any rational person. Maybe you can find some abstract way to poke holes in that definition, but you are just being a smart-ass, you aren't adding any value to the conversation. And a building cannot be something that hasn't been built. I believe I was Gallagher who famously said, "Why do they call it a building? It should be called a built." And money is very easily defined, as the economist mentioned as a token of value widely accepted as representative and exchangeable. And the idea of "I think therefor I am" is just a restatement of the biblical phrase "As a man thinks, therefor he is" which far predates your philosophers.

@TheologyUnleashed

9 ай бұрын

I tend to agree with you. I have a category I call things so obvious only a philosopher fails to appreciate them. The most silly one is when they pretend not to know what we mean by conciousness. I think when it comes to chairs, in a way, they have a point. I get around that by saying language is something we use to gesture but the concept is beyond the language. We all know whay concepts these words indicate, even if we can't give exhaustive definitions of them.

@tomblackburnmusic

7 ай бұрын

I think you're trying to pretend philosophy is something that it is not. No philosopher would disagree that, in most everyday contexts, logic-chopping about what a 'chair' is or what 'money' is doesn't matter. The point is that there is value in playing the 'philosophy game', and WHEN you're doing that, then these questions become important. And it's sometimes important to play that game. To say that your analysis of the philosophical concepts above somehow proves that philosophy is unimportant or unnecessary for rational people is just glossing over the philosophical problems. A million philosophical questions could be asked about your claims above, and several substantial criticisms could be given.

@TheJohmac

7 ай бұрын

@@tomblackburnmusic I wasn't making a criticism of philosophy in general, it is certainly a valuable endeavor. And as with any endeavor can be taken to extremes that become absurd. Is it useful? Is it solving a problem? Is it advancing some noble goal? Or are you just stroking your own intellectual ego? It isn't the vehicle that is important,it is the destination. Philosophy is a vehicle for intellectual pursuit of understanding. This video is doing brodies in the parking lot.

@jackspeer2127

7 ай бұрын

Every philosopher's battle cry......DO YOU WANT FRIES WITH THAT?

Just out of curiosity, who says you can't do that with English? Is there some authority who can dictate how people can use THEIR language?

@jackspeer2127

7 ай бұрын

Worlding. Did you learn that from Voldemort

How do we know that you can do that with words in Sanskrit? I thought we only knew PARTS of the language as it was mostly lost?

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

No, sanskrit is not lost at all. There is even one place in India which a while back adopted it as the local language. There are many sanskrit scholars around the world and there is a massive body of Sanskrit texts.

@markalexander3659

Жыл бұрын

@@TheologyUnleashed Oh, my mistake, I didn't know that. A teacher told me (back in maybe 2001) that it was a "lost language". I guess she was mistaken. It is an ancient language, though, right?

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

@@markalexander3659 yes, it's extremely ancient. There are different dialects of sanskrit, and some of them are harder to interpret than others. Maybe the teacher was saying that baout a different language, or maybe they were mistaken.

I came here for Philomena but became an instant fan and subscribed to your channel. Really interesting watch.

@TheologyUnleashed

8 ай бұрын

Check out Joe's channel too. He's awesome.

@troyaaron

8 ай бұрын

@@TheologyUnleashed done!

It sounds like you are partaking in Schrodinger style philosophy....."It could be this or it could be that" The cat is alive or the cat is dead, but for sure one of those states, but we cant know for sure which.

13:16 define "progressive" without making reference to how someone self-identifies. define being a man in universal impersonal terms, an be prepared to be told that your defining qualifications fall short of someone else's standard of what makes a "man." What makes Arjuna's name Arjuna? If self-identification isn't the core of that, you'll force me to question either your intellectual capacity or intellectual honesty. Is it possible that some categories are so convoluted an amorphous that what really defines them is self-identification, as all other standards for qualification are arbitrary?

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

A name could be said to be just convention. We can call that ontologically subjective. What we mean when we say something is my name is that it's what people call me. For political views they can in some cases be defined by a few features, but these days I think a lot of political labels have become meaningless and we need a better structure for categorizing ideas.

@MrKreinen

Жыл бұрын

@@TheologyUnleashed but I only call you Arjuna because you'd told me that the name you identify with. I have no other reason to call you that name. I agree that language needs agreed upon structure and semantics to have utility:) I also am aware that a name that one invents for ones self that is not known to others does not fulfill much of the function of a name. Of course, if you refer to yourself by that name, even if no one else does, though of vary little utility, it still is your name (what you call yourself). On the flip side, people can call you whatever they decide to; but if you don't identify by a name, it's not really your name is it. Even a community of many whom you are not in communion with is not your community, and names reside in the domain social contract with the community you commune with.While an individual is a community of one, and one communes with oneself at lest. I wish everyone were as interested in etymology, linguistics, and paleo-linguistics as I am, and I think the functionality of communications would improve if they were, I try my best to never forget that languages aren't a conscious system, but are instead a natural phenomena that arise from our nature to make up and use languages. I remember the lesson illustrated by the French Academy's sad stupid attempt to classify the French language, only for the spoken language of French to diverge from that freeze-frame photo of the language so dramatically within just a few decades as to make classical French a dead language. Languages are sloppy, and organically evolving things, so the most important part of a word that I am analyzing in my mind is the intended usage of the speaker at hand. Yet Im sure you can recall conversations in which I started calling for Sanskrit terms to avoid the confusion of using/making a translation-by-analogy-to-western-concept"X". I don't mean to be talking in circles; I suppose I'm of "two minds" on the subject :D

@MrKreinen

Жыл бұрын

@@TheologyUnleashed Political labels these days seem to be more Slogan, CatchPhrase, or Meme than rational description. I mean wtf is Woke? I tend to think we are all being served political theater for the sake of donations, memberships, and ratings; more bread and circuses.

I sub to a number of philosophy channels but this is the first time I've seen you. Just re the accent, I watched yours because I heard a Kiwi speaking in the preview. Im a bit tired of listening to north American and British accents tbf but just thought that while it may not be more listenable your Kiwi accent is a point of difference that could be a draw.

@TheologyUnleashed

7 ай бұрын

There's some bad kiwi accents too. Internet historian does well with a kiwi accent.

You American guys are too serious for this kind of dry, very British humour. 😅😊

@TheologyUnleashed

6 ай бұрын

Lol

Nowt wrong a bit philosophy -

You guys are clueless!

@TheologyUnleashed

Жыл бұрын

Please explain

@jim7831

9 ай бұрын

This is clearly satirical comedy and not written to be analysed

@JohnHollands

8 ай бұрын

Haha man called clueless asks for clues.

These guys think they are some kind of modern day folosifers or somethings. I didn't come here to think about stuff.

@TheologyUnleashed

8 ай бұрын

Joe is a post graduate philosophy student with multiple publications. Maybe I should call it philosopher reacts.

@ballconei

8 ай бұрын

@@TheologyUnleashed yeah that's exactly what a couple of ordinary guys would say... if I could give you any advice just look at the camera and nod your heads next time.

@ballconei

8 ай бұрын

@@TheologyUnleashed I hope you understand how intelligent I am... and how much I appreciate the why in which you reacted. Sorry I meant to say way. I would also like to apologise not only for my sarcasm but also my lack of intelligence and spelling capabilities. I would also like to apologise for my lack of all of these things, ➡️ ,`' .

@formerCEO

8 ай бұрын

​@@TheologyUnleashedit doesn't matter what you call the channel. Balcony will always exist.

These two are clueless, don't they realise this is comedy, sarcasm it's all a joke. Wake up

When she says planes fly because of belief, and you laughed at her, compare and contrast with your knowledge of god.

This video should be titled "How to destroy comedy by being an over-analytical, supercillious, self-important bore."

Biscuit time...what role does religion play in the care of cancer patients when assuming God gave them cancer in the first place to punish their sins? I would argue religion is nonsense. A tiresome belief system in place to placate a growing enlightenment that wasn't just for the educated of the time. Everyone questioned the church. Interestingly today almost no-one questions the validity of the bible, it is universally frowned upon. Science (or the pretence of knowing what is going on) fills that gap for most...

@TheologyUnleashed

Ай бұрын

You should ask that question to a hospital chaplain. People find immense benefit form theology when they're suffering I'll health.

@whofriggincares!

What? Being built IS a necessary condition because things that require being built dont just spontaneously create themselves......things that are built aren't buildings was the fucking joke......then in the next breath talks about making an unnecessary case.....seriously wtf? No wonder folks dont take philosophy seriously.