Tuesday, 7 July 2020

What's the point of Bebeflapula?

Not sure. I was always interested in questions about reality, I mean, what is reality? What is the world? Is that world mediated through our senses? Does our cognition actively process sensory data into a completely different whole? Is my world, the human world, the modern-millenial-world, the stupid-philosopher-jerking-off-to-arguments-world, is it completely detached from the world as it is?

Then I gradually realized that those questions are too big for me. For anyone, maybe. - But together we stand a chance! - We need to communicate. Develop ideas together. Poke into each other's arguments. Get rid of bad ones. Heap up good ones, and build up a cathedral of knowledge.

Would be cool if we could just hook up to a cloud and directly transmit those ideas from one brain to another. But we can't, I think. So, we have to mediate those ideas. Through language. Sigh.

Philosophy of language! My passion. My curse. My excuse, so I can pretend like I'm doing something useful with life.
That's what I'm doing, I guess. In life. And I try to be useful, so I transmit those ideas via Youtube. But certainly, I could be more effective at transmiting those ideas? I guess I try to have fun with the channel. Do a bunch of stupid shit. Can't help myself, really.

Anyways, that's my long-term goal. Get some neat ideas out there, minimize the spread of fallacies that relate to language and stuff. Maybe provide some useful tools for viewers, who'll know to use them better.

For now, I just want to finish processing Wittgenstein's ideas (still reading Philosophical investigations) and find some sort of synthesis with another author that completely gripped me, Merleau-Ponty. They have a lot in common and their ideas do provide a different, a more dynamic, a more fruitful world-view than the rigid, static ontologies of modern science.

Language as a organic system of localized rules of useage? Consciousness as an embodied self, whose dynamics are shifting in relation to situational context? Dynamic semantics? A dynamic world?

After I finish that study, I'll familiarize myself with recent scientific developments and start presenting them through the lens of the acquired philosophical perspective on things. Oh, and meanwhile, I'll be posting a bunch of stupid shit, because that makes me happy:

Saturday, 20 June 2020

Time to revive this blog!

I goofed around with some recent videos, but now it's time to get down to business and cover some real philosophical topics. Before shooting I'll be sharing my thoughts and findings here, so that I'll give myself some time ot process and get some feedback from you, guys.

The philosophy of language lectures opened up the path to philosophy of mind, I'll start with an inspection of behaviorism, gestalt psychology and phenomenology.

An easy way to approach those topics, I think, is through certain case-studies of mental phenomena, such as aphantasia, the blindness of the mind's eye.

Wednesday, 18 March 2020

Ludwig Wittgenstein's Tractatus

He's sharp. He's cute. He's Ludwig Wittgenstein, one of the most important philosophers of modern philosophy!

In this video we look at his Tractatus, his first major work and only one to be published in his lifetime. Basically we could say that he wanted - just like Bertrand Russell - to find out how our thoughts relate to reality. In an attempt to answer this question he put forth the "Picture Theory of Language".

I try to give an easily approachable lecture that serves as an introduction to Tractatus. In the second part of the video I examine the task of his logical analysis and portray how exactly he imagined science to construct true sentences of the world by deriving at the so-called "simple objects", the elementary particles of reality. A true sentence, in this view, would be the stated relation between signs for those particles, that would reflect their relation in reality.

The logical empiricists, also known as the "Vienna circle", took the ideas of Tractatus and constructed a very interesting variation of Wittgenstein's ideas, that I will present in the next lecture - on the dispute between Rudolf Carnap and Martin Heidegger.


Friday, 27 September 2019

What do words mean? - Semantic change and definitions

Phenomenal, Chair, Bebeflapula.

What do these words mean – and – who gets to decide?

This posts serves as an introduction to semantics, the linguistic and philosophical study of meaning in language. It also serves as an introduction to the fresher and more interesting problems in modern philosophy of language.

It’s common for people to sometimes just assume that meanings are these fixed things that never change and hence words are always to be understood in just a certain fixed sense that is dictated by definitions or the origin of a word. We’ll see how that holds up.

Saturday, 14 September 2019

Introduction to the Scientific Realism Debate

This post is a short introduction to two influential arguments in the scientific realism debate (basically this is a transcription of the attached video):

When you think about the world, at some point you have to ask yourself – what to make of science and the supposed body of knowledge it has acquired?

Is science merely a very successful tool for controlling nature, but says nothing about the underlying structure of the world? Or do certain scientific theories at least to some degree capture the actual truth?

The answer to this question determines how you are going to view the mind, think about language and talk about the metaphysics of space and time. Where you’re going to position scientific beliefs in your philosophical system, will have a significant effect on it.

The most commonly held view (at least by people in general) is that yes, scientific theories do tell us the truth, even if it’s just an approximation of what the world is actually like. We call this view scientific realism, which normally consists of the claim that:

  1. “Our best scientific theories about the world are approximately true – an approximation of what the world is actually like."

Monday, 9 September 2019

Inductive reasoning and Cross-induction

This post is an introduction to the method of inductive reasoning and the problem of induction. It also introduces an interesting answer to the problem, called cross-induction (this post is more or less a transcription of a video that I made a couple of months ago, feel free to check it out:)

Why do you think there's going to be a tomorrow? The future is uncertain. You don’t know what it brings. But still you make claims about it. Claims like:

  1. The sun will rise tomorrow.

We don’t know that. But still, we all believe that. Why? What’s our rational justification for believing anything about the future?

Sunday, 8 September 2019

Occam's razor (and why we use it)

This post provides an explanation of Occam's razor and why we use it - again, it's basically a transcription of a video that I made a couple of months ago (feel free to check it out):

Suppose you hear a vase break.

You go to the living room and there's little Jimmy, next to the broken vase. He says that a cat did it.

But you don't even have a cat in this household.

So, Jimmy says, some cat must have sneaked in from the outside.

You remember closing all the windows and doors.

So, he says, it must have entered the house before you closed them.