Відео

I don´t mention chinese philosophy in this video. But chinese philosophy is part of a common distinction called eastern philosophy from the eastern hemisphere. Just as European philosophy is part of a western hemisphere and western philosophies.

Thank you. Your feedback is always appreciated @projectmalus

I´ll try this next time. I´m new to these shorts! I normally shoot long videos with a "real camera".

Hi Timothy. I think there is a great wealth of ideas in the fragments from the presocratic philosophers. I really recommend reading the fragtments of their works that has been collected. Sometimes we have references of their works from other later philosophers like particular Aristotle and Plato. But if you read fragments. I highly recommend Heraclitus, Anaximander and Anaxagoras. Some have thought that the pre-Socratics were closer to philosopher-scientists than the peripatetic school, and the Big 3 (Socrates, Plato and Aristotle). But their philosophies/theories are shrouded in mystery and will make thonk with them. I believe that the dark ages sent us alot of years. More stuff happened in ancient times ;-)

@@Thedanishphilosopher I wholeheartedly agree with regards to the Presocratics thinkers. All too often, they have been kinda dismissed/overlooked or at least quickly passed by as some sort of immature/prenascent/embryonic precursors of modern scientific thought - and so are left by the wayside as being no longer relevant now that we have the so-called "the real thing" (also, when people refers to "science" - it is often the case that what they're really propagating is "scientism", or so it seems to me). However, I'm quite convinced that their approaches to reality and life in general have value in and of themselves, expecially, or not least, with regards to illustrating our existential life-world in the ways that it is actually unfolding, i.e. phenomenologically/experientally. A great (yet somewhat expensive) work that looks deeply into this question is Raymond Prier's "Archaic Logic - Symbol and Structure in Heraclitus, Parmenides, and Empedocles" (1976).

@@madshojmark Thank you Mads :-) For your insights and your book recommendation! Your feedback is always appreciated.

@@Thedanishphilosopher You're welcome, Kasper. Always a pleasure watching your videos :) Btw, I must say that I quite admire your persistence in producing them + the fact that you have been in this game for so long now. If I'm doing the math correctly, you must have started shooting and publishing videos when UA-cam was less than 10 years old - so that's some fearless pioneering right there!

@@madshojmark Your right! I was almost there from the beginning. I´ve been producing videos since 2012.

No, guns are not legal anywhere in Denmark. The gun used here is a prop gun. A model weapon. An attrap.

Thank you Timothy :-)

Good question. I have to say it is the philosophical questions it raises and the philosophers mentioned throughout the book. - Socrates is reffered to alot. The book raises philosophical questions like what is free will and what makes an authentic person. It raises qustions of personhood and authenticallly conscious agency. All and all the internal dialog of the protagonist and his "spectator" is in a way philosophical. The book can be read as a sort of version of a platonic dialogue.

I’m pleased you liked it. It would help alot if you would subscribe to my Channel.

Thank you Timothy for your respons and insights. I always value them high. I’m so glad you found it interesting. -The reason why Socrates is not on this list is because I could only pick 5. This a thing I have with these kind of videos. That I can only choose 5 and Socrates is so well knowed and wanted philosophers who were maybe not as know as him. But in a longer list, Socrates should be on such a list for the exact reason you write. I been thinking about what you wrote; "but your choice here favours thinkers who appear to have killed themselves because of their thinking, rather than those who take their own lives despite it, wouldn't you say?". I don´t know if any of these philosophers philosophies would lead them to suicide. Could you give an example of this in say Deleuze´s case? I was not thinking about a bridge between their philosophies and their suicide when contemplating the video. Or was that not what you meant? I suppose its possible to find a link if you look. But I would rather think, that most philosophers on my list committed suicide despite their philosophy. But your question got me thinking and forced to think about my choices for this list. Let´s discuss this further?

Hello again, Kasper. Actually, Deleuze is the only 'case' here where you do not actually imply, or leave open, that they killed themselves as a result of their thinking! Deleuze was, you say, tired of being sick - much like one of my most loved authors, Hemingway, who also killed himself. There's a point at which physical suffering is intolerable and meaningless. But the others? Empedocles - you seem to be saying that he jumped down Etna to prove something about his earth, fire, water and stuff. You imply, also, that Seneca chose to kill himself stoically rather than fight Nero. Who other than because he's a philosopher, and thus his thinking, could choose death by cow dung asphyxiation/suffocation, like Heraclitus, though I'm not sure what he was trying to prove? You are even more explicit, intentionally or not, in proposing that Dalgas killed himself because of his philosophical ideas - even including a kind of suicide note within his actual work. So, a man gets to thinking, after listening to your video, that in the cases you have chosen, they do indeed kill themselves because of their philosophy rather than despite it. No?

@@timothybalding249 Typically, I wrote an extensive reply for you here and somehow erased it. Hate it when that happens. So now I must write it again or do it differently? Your right. I see your points now. I did imply a connection in this video about the philosophies and their suicide. But as you say Deleuze properly killed himself because of suffering from his illness. They say he lost his speech and ability to write. So not much for a philosopher to do? However, Heraclitus and Empedocles probably just lost their minds at the end. Maybe because of old age? Ernesto Dalgas killed himself because of sickness in his mind. Maybe he suffered from manic depression. But found comfort in his works/philosophy but killed himself after finished writing to avoid further hospitalization. Seneca as you say was a stoic and killed himself in a stoic manner, so yes this I do imply. The whole video was a artistic and humorous attempt at showing that philosophers no matter how smart and no matter how great their philosophies are. They were also humans and they to have committed suicide. So I wanted people to think about suicide and why some people do it? An old existential philosophical question. Actually the first philosophical question you should ask yourself is; Do I wan’t to live? The next question if you answer yes is; How should I live? But if you answer no to the first. Then suicide is an option.

​@@Thedanishphilosopher It's true, Kasper. I misunderstood the title of your video! Whereas you meant it in the same way as if you had examined, for example, 'Philosophers Who Played Football', or 'Philosophers Who Loved Hot Dogs', i.e. as an unrelated facet of their lives, I charged into it believing that you were judging their deaths in the light of their philosophical thinking. (Notwithstanding that Camus actually claimed that everything he knew about morality he learnt on the football pitch playing goalkeeper for Racing Algiers! And not even to mention his claim - repeated in my novel, as you might have seen - that suicide is the central question of philosophy itself). Anyhow, here we are; sorry to have gone astray. Thanks for all the interesting additional information about these poor guys. Now, you have led me back on to the right path - I only regret you had to formulate your answer twice!

@@timothybalding249 ​​⁠ Thank you Timothy for your honesty. I also have something I would like to admit. Something I been thinking about reading the spectator = That perhaps I was not that self-aware through all the process of making this video. If so, I would have been more aware of my implication and how it could be interpreted. One Can be so in your own head when making these projects.

Thank you :-)

Thank you Ellen.

Sorry I meant the sixteen hundreds. Aka 1632 -1677

Thanks 🙂

I might be remembering the quote wrong. I might be. "The dream dreams the dreamer" Which can take a hole other meaning. Unfortunately I can´t recall where I read it, but it has stuck with me ever since I read it first. -What it means? To me it says something about the nature reality and a so call awaken state or even conscious state. That all such things are illusive of sorts. - There is an aspect of life that seems like it could be a dream. Somehow unreal in a sense. Also yourself seems contructed from the stuff of dreams sometimes. Anyways thats somewhat what I make of it. Either way I think it worth pondering over. Many times. I still do!

Have you heard the Philosophy of Fearism? It is an advanced stage ot it.

@@bahadurdesh9150 I did watch the previous video but haven't read the book. Just for fun because I'm an amateur philosopher, I'll copy and paste this from my reply elsewhere. For the planet, one gradient level and different facets of access that creates levels. All humans as one facet that is able to acquire more of that one gradient, or so we think. But if Hegel and Ernst Cassirer are right in that mind creates objects (mind as that facet of availability from qualia and GI tract) then perhaps symbiosis is successful in aligning gradient "levels" and this works by releasing that energy by allowing a "larger" while still complex expression. Why do humans objectify the world? I think it's because of ingesting the grass "object" within the human "object", that this went from emergency food, ceremonial sharing to a staple. I don't expect this to be a popular idea. But I'm not saying give it up, just dial it back on an industrial scale, also sugar is a problem when production is ramped up...see an amazing video entitles 'sugar production in the Americas". A self objectification thru manipulation of the environment of the gut which influences the bacteria (more anaerobic for instance) and neurotransmitters. The muffling of qualia gathering tools like the nose especially. Does that affect one's self? Non-object self of person, between object of skin bounded and objects of organs...objects as an easier way to look at gradient access. Self between object of person and object of group, called individual. Same for world citizen, human object with others sharing the one gradient. By entering this gradient level of that symbiosis more fully, we take on those characteristic I think, without that balance. The all powerful grass isn't checked, the cow isn't kept intelligent by chasing the grass and being chased, the wolf can be lazy and clever, the dark triad. But only because they were objectified by allowing the sociopath of big business to introduce that as a staple. Feel free to respond or ignore. Thanks for reading.

@@projectmalus Great you have lots of philosophical knowledge. you can share Trans Philosophism knowledge with readers. It is a new philosophy in the world. As Kasper said, It can look at previous philosophies from this innovative lens.

Thank you Lawrence

Hi Gary. Thank you. I´ll be very pleased if you will subscribe to my channel.

Hej Mads. Jeg håber du abonnere eller vil abonnere på min kanal. Det vil jeg blive rigtig glad for. Håber også vi en dag kunne mødes til en kop kaffe og filosofisk snak.

@@Thedanishphilosopher Done :)

Thank you. Please share the video, so more people may know about them. It will also support my work. I hope you will subscribe 🙂

This made me happy :-) thank for your comment on this vid. This for me is what doing philosophy is all about. “Philosophia aka love of wisdow. It is about finding joy in wisdom and a true insight. If my videos can inspire someones else thoughts. This is all that I wish for. I hope you will subscribe to my Channel and Watch some more of my videos.

Who is an important thinker? And who decides who is an important thinker? I think it is a matter of interpretation. Diotima would´nt have been a leftist, in ancient Greece. Their was no such thing. I don´t think Hannah Arendt would call herself a leftist.

@@Thedanishphilosopher Plato = socialist

Thank you Peter.