Just found your channel a few days ago. I like you very much. You have one of the only philosophy channels that doesn't degrade quality of content for entertainment value.

@TheoryPhilosophy

3 жыл бұрын

There is value to the entertainment approach, but it comes at the coat of more content. I do it this way so that I can amass a significant compendium of ideas and books. Thanks for the kind words :)

I was searching for one of my favorite Black Metal/blue grass bands and I found this and learned a lot actually.. thank you for this :)

@imonshrooms6866

2 жыл бұрын

There is a black metal blue grass fusion?

What a fascinating idea. 7:02 Mhm, this makes me think of: "In a city, we're always looking into other people's lives," a quote by George Georgiou, a British photographer. Panopticon also seems to allude to George Orwell's 1984 and the idea of an all-watching entity. Oddly enough, as scary a thought as that is, our modern society now thrives on the masses who decide to publish their lives online, for all to see. Someone flipped the switch, and now we're caught in the balance between privacy and publicity. We only want so much to be shown online, that's where VPNs enter the narrative. 10:30 In addition, this whole idea of an "unseen" authority, an eye-in-the-sky, if you will, is dangerously similar to how most religions work. If a God above is judging our actions, then wouldn't we then want to comply to his wishes? He's the head honcho, el jefe, the boss. Knowing that we're being watched alters our view of morality, and it's tough to discern authentic behaviour. Your kid in the sandbox is a perfect example of this; he behaves according to the tools he's given. Religious scriptures are to society what sand is to the child. What is society without power? Democracy? Or is democracy a society with average power, spread to all? I'd love it if you could cover the idea of sophistry. It's abundant in the news nowadays! Would be neat to hear your thoughts. Thanks David, you're a godsend. Cheers! Edit: Spelling mistakes.

@TheoryPhilosophy

3 жыл бұрын

Well thunk! And oh gosh sophistry is a tricky one. Maybe one day I'll have the courage haha

@thomasrivet5494

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheoryPhilosophy Fair enough! I'll be happy with whatever else you delve into. Keep up the awesome effort, dude!

Excellent video, I am writing a paper about Foucault right now in school, and this video helped me a lot. Thanks!

I'm a fan and now a subscriber. No coincidence that I came across your video, grateful that I did as your content is as unique as is your presentation and we thank you for that! Keep winning keep shining.

I really like the way you are not agreeing with Foucault, unlike most of the other explanatory videos on KZread. I felt my viewpoint validated. And the way you twisted the philosophy around at the end of the video by explaining that visibility trap is actually democratic and about self-rule was commendable. Great job, Sir.

I'm glad that I'm his one of the very early subscribers. Nice explanation.

Excellent video once again , thank you!

Love this, sound is very quiet

I’m very impressed. I knew it, but needed those concrete examples to make it sing for me. I’m thinking on independence -v- interdependance using a panopticon frame. Thanks you added to my points I am building around a framework of functional-external expectations, resulting in poor internal and external locus of control. What do you think of Denzian membership?

Just discovered your podcast, fantastic work you are doing! Any chance you cover Bataille or Blanchot?

@TheoryPhilosophy

3 жыл бұрын

I'm sure I will!

Thank you :)

The most ironic development in the social sciences is the appeal to Foucault for the notion that normative control, as institutionalized and internalized, is both negatively *and* positively productive of "order".

Sounds pretty much with political regimes and its regulations on society.

@TheoryPhilosophy

3 жыл бұрын

They absolutely play a part!

😎

Nice, 😘

ultrakill reference??????

@HaydenLH31

Ай бұрын

lmao

A bit late to the party, but someone might still answer. What about religion? You do not talk about it and it seems to me like the elephant in the room. I understand the theoretical opposition about king power vs contemporary power that you lay down, but it was never like that, there was always the priest with the king and removing it is just talking about a past that never existed. It seems important to me, because the religion was the real control, the panopticon clearly sounds like god who is always watching us. Is that idea sometimes presented like that, how does Foucault addresses it ? The contemporary system of control being just secularised religious power? It seems to work with the exact same core ideas, just a different way of putting it in place. Sorry if I am either saying the obvious or complete non sense..

I think I like this guy or not lol

#PostOfficeStructuralists.