Podcasts about pure reason

So what, exactly, was “The Enlightenment”? According to the Princeton historian David A. Bell, it was an intellectual movement roughly spanning the early 18th century through to the French Revolution. In his Spring 2025 Liberties Quarterly piece “The Enlightenment, Then and Now”, Bell charts the Enlightenment as a complex intellectual movement centered in Paris but with hubs across Europe and America. He highlights key figures like Montesquieu, Voltaire, Kant, and Franklin, discussing their contributions to concepts of religious tolerance, free speech, and rationality. In our conversation, Bell addresses criticisms of the Enlightenment, including its complicated relationship with colonialism and slavery, while arguing that its principles of freedom and reason remain relevant today. 5 Key Takeaways* The Enlightenment emerged in the early 18th century (around 1720s) and was characterized by intellectual inquiry, skepticism toward religion, and a growing sense among thinkers that they were living in an "enlightened century."* While Paris was the central hub, the Enlightenment had multiple centers including Scotland, Germany, and America, with thinkers like Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant, Hume, and Franklin contributing to its development.* The Enlightenment introduced the concept of "society" as a sphere of human existence separate from religion and politics, forming the basis of modern social sciences.* The movement had a complex relationship with colonialism and slavery - many Enlightenment thinkers criticized slavery, but some of their ideas about human progress were later used to justify imperialism.* According to Bell, rather than trying to "return to the Enlightenment," modern society should selectively adopt and adapt its valuable principles of free speech, religious tolerance, and education to create our "own Enlightenment."David Avrom Bell is a historian of early modern and modern Europe at Princeton University. His most recent book, published in 2020 by Farrar, Straus and Giroux, is Men on Horseback: The Power of Charisma in the Age of Revolution. Described in the Journal of Modern History as an "instant classic," it is available in paperback from Picador, in French translation from Fayard, and in Italian translation from Viella. A study of how new forms of political charisma arose in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the book shows that charismatic authoritarianism is as modern a political form as liberal democracy, and shares many of the same origins. Based on exhaustive research in original sources, the book includes case studies of the careers of George Washington, Napoleon Bonaparte, Toussaint Louverture and Simon Bolivar. The book's Introduction can be read here. An online conversation about the book with Annette Gordon-Reed, hosted by the Cullman Center of the New York Public Library, can be viewed here. Links to material about the book, including reviews in The New York Review of Books, The Guardian, Harper's, The New Republic, The Nation, Le Monde, The Los Angeles Review of Books and other venues can be found here. Bell is also the author of six previous books. He has published academic articles in both English and French and contributes regularly to general interest publications on a variety of subjects, ranging from modern warfare, to contemporary French politics, to the impact of digital technology on learning and scholarship, and of course French history. A list of his publications from 2023 and 2024 can be found here. His Substack newsletter can be found here. His writings have been translated into French, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Hebrew, Swedish, Polish, Russian, German, Croatian, Italian, Turkish and Japanese. At the History Department at Princeton University, he holds the Sidney and Ruth Lapidus Chair in the Era of North Atlantic Revolutions, and offers courses on early modern Europe, on military history, and on the early modern French empire. Previously, he spent fourteen years at Johns Hopkins University, including three as Dean of Faculty in its School of Arts and Sciences. From 2020 to 2024 he served as Director of the Shelby Cullom Davis Center for Historical Studies at Princeton. He is a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a corresponding fellow of the British Academy. Bell's new project is a history of the Enlightenment. A preliminary article from the project was published in early 2022 by Modern Intellectual History. Another is now out in French History.Named as one of the "100 most connected men" by GQ magazine, Andrew Keen is amongst the world's best known broadcasters and commentators. In addition to presenting the daily KEEN ON show, he is the host of the long-running How To Fix Democracy interview series. He is also the author of four prescient books about digital technology: CULT OF THE AMATEUR, DIGITAL VERTIGO, THE INTERNET IS NOT THE ANSWER and HOW TO FIX THE FUTURE. Andrew lives in San Francisco, is married to Cassandra Knight, Google's VP of Litigation & Discovery, and has two grown children. FULL TRANSCRIPTAndrew Keen: Hello everybody, in these supposedly dark times, the E word comes up a lot, the Enlightenment. Are we at the end of the Enlightenment or the beginning? Was there even an Enlightenment? My guest today, David Bell, a professor of history, very distinguished professor of history at Princeton University, has an interesting piece in the spring issue of It is One of our, our favorite quarterlies here on Keen on America, Bell's piece is The Enlightenment Then and Now, and David is joining us from the home of the Enlightenment, perhaps Paris in France, where he's on sabbatical hard life. David being an academic these days, isn't it?David Bell: Very difficult. I'm having to suffer the Parisian bread and croissant. It's terrible.Andrew Keen: Yeah. Well, I won't keep you too long. Is Paris then, or France? Is it the home of the Enlightenment? I know there are many Enlightenments, the French, the Scottish, maybe even the English, perhaps even the American.David Bell: It's certainly one of the homes of the Enlightenment, and it's probably the closest that the Enlightened had to a center, absolutely. But as you say, there were Edinburgh, Glasgow, plenty of places in Germany, Philadelphia, all those places have good claims to being centers of the enlightenment as well.Andrew Keen: All the same David, is it like one of those sports games in California where everyone gets a medal?David Bell: Well, they're different metals, right, but I think certainly Paris is where everybody went. I mean, if you look at the figures from the German Enlightenment, from the Scottish Enlightenment from the American Enlightenment they all tended to congregate in Paris and the Parisians didn't tend to go anywhere else unless they were forced to. So that gives you a pretty good sense of where the most important center was.Andrew Keen: So David, before we get to specifics, map out for us, because everyone is perhaps as familiar or comfortable with the history of the Enlightenment, and certainly as you are. When did it happen? What years? And who are the leaders of this thing called the Enlightenment?David Bell: Well, that's a big question. And I'm afraid, of course, that if you ask 10 historians, you'll get 10 different answers.Andrew Keen: Well, I'm only asking you, so I only want one answer.David Bell: So I would say that the Enlightenment really gets going around the first couple of decades of the 18th century. And that's when people really start to think that they are actually living in what they start to call an Enlightenment century. There are a lot of reasons for this. They are seeing what we now call the scientific revolution. They're looking at the progress that has been made with that. They are experiencing the changes in the religious sphere, including the end of religious wars, coming with a great deal of skepticism about religion. They are living in a relative period of peace where they're able to speculate much more broadly and daringly than before. But it's really in those first couple of decades that they start thinking of themselves as living in an enlightened century. They start defining themselves as something that would later be called the enlightenment. So I would say that it's, really, really there between maybe the end of the 17th century and 1720s that it really gets started.Andrew Keen: So let's have some names, David, of philosophers, I guess. I mean, if those are the right words. I know that there was a term in French. There is a term called philosoph. Were they the founders, the leaders of the Enlightenment?David Bell: Well, there is a... Again, I don't want to descend into academic quibbling here, but there were lots of leaders. Let me give an example, though. So the year 1721 is a remarkable year. So in the year, 1721, two amazing events happened within a couple of months of each other. So in May, Montesquieu, one of the great philosophers by any definition, publishes his novel called Persian Letters. And this is an incredible novel. Still, I think one of greatest novels ever written, and it's very daring. It is the account, it is supposedly a an account written by two Persian travelers to Europe who are writing back to people in Isfahan about what they're seeing. And it is very critical of French society. It is very of religion. It is, as I said, very daring philosophically. It is a product in part of the increasing contact between Europe and the rest of the world that is also very central to the Enlightenment. So that novel comes out. So it's immediately, you know, the police try to suppress it. But they don't have much success because it's incredibly popular and Montesquieu doesn't suffer any particular problems because...Andrew Keen: And the French police have never been the most efficient police force in the world, have they?David Bell: Oh, they could be, but not in this case. And then two months later, after Montesquieu published this novel, there's a German philosopher much less well-known than Montesqiu, than Christian Bolz, who is a professor at the Universität Haller in Prussia, and he gives an oration in Latin, a very typical university oration for the time, about Chinese philosophy, in which he says that the Chinese have sort of proved to the world, particularly through the writings of Confucius and others, that you can have a virtuous society without religion. Obviously very controversial. Statement for the time it actually gets him fired from his job, he has to leave the Kingdom of Prussia within 48 hours on penalty of death, starts an enormous controversy. But here are two events, both of which involving non-European people, involving the way in which Europeans are starting to look out at the rest of the world and starting to imagine Europe as just one part of a larger humanity, and at the same time they are starting to speculate very daringly about whether you can have. You know, what it means to have a society, do you need to have religion in order to have morality in society? Do you need the proper, what kind of government do you need to to have virtuous conduct and a proper society? So all of these things get, you know, really crystallize, I think, around these two incidents as much as anything. So if I had to pick a single date for when the enlightenment starts, I'd probably pick that 1721.Andrew Keen: And when was, David, I thought you were going to tell me about the earthquake in Lisbon, when was that earthquake?David Bell: That earthquake comes quite a bit later. That comes, and now historians should be better with dates than I am. It's in the 1750s, I think it's the late 1750's. Again, this historian is proving he's getting a very bad grade for forgetting the exact date, but it's in 1750. So that's a different kind of event, which sparks off a great deal of commentary, because it's a terrible earthquake. It destroys most of the city of Lisbon, it destroys other cities throughout Portugal, and it leads a lot of the philosophy to philosophers at the time to be speculating very daringly again on whether there is any kind of real purpose to the universe and whether there's any kind divine purpose. Why would such a terrible thing happen? Why would God do such a thing to his followers? And certainly VoltaireAndrew Keen: Yeah, Votav, of course, comes to mind of questioning.David Bell: And Condit, Voltaire's novel Condit gives a very good description of the earthquake in Lisbon and uses that as a centerpiece. Voltair also read other things about the earthquake, a poem about Lisbon earthquake. But in Condit he gives a lasting, very scathing portrait of the Catholic Church in general and then of what happens in Portugal. And so the Lisbon Earthquake is certainly another one of the events, but it happens considerably later. Really in the middle of the end of life.Andrew Keen: So, David, you believe in this idea of the Enlightenment. I take your point that there are more than one Enlightenment in more than one center, but in broad historical terms, the 18th century could be defined at least in Western and Northern Europe as the period of the Enlightenment, would that be a fair generalization?David Bell: I think it's perfectly fair generalization. Of course, there are historians who say that it never happened. There's a conservative British historian, J.C.D. Clark, who published a book last summer, saying that the Enlightenment is a kind of myth, that there was a lot of intellectual activity in Europe, obviously, but that the idea that it formed a coherent Enlightenment was really invented in the 20th century by a bunch of progressive reformers who wanted to claim a kind of venerable and august pedigree for their own reform, liberal reform plans. I think that's an exaggeration. People in the 18th century defined very clearly what was going on, both people who were in favor of it and people who are against it. And while you can, if you look very closely at it, of course it gets a bit fuzzy. Of course it's gets, there's no single, you can't define a single enlightenment project or a single enlightened ideology. But then, I think people would be hard pressed to define any intellectual movement. You know, in perfect, incoherent terms. So the enlightenment is, you know by compared with almost any other intellectual movement certainly existed.Andrew Keen: In terms of a philosophy of the Enlightenment, the German thinker, Immanuel Kant, seems to be often, and when you describe him as the conscience or the brain or a mixture of the conscience and brain of the enlightenment, why is Kant and Kantian thinking so important in the development of the Enlightenment.David Bell: Well, that's a really interesting question. And one reason is because most of the Enlightenment was not very rigorously philosophical. A lot of the major figures of the enlightenment before Kant tended to be writing for a general public. And they often were writing with a very specific agenda. We look at Voltaire, Diderot, Rousseau. Now you look at Adam Smith in Scotland. We look David Hume or Adam Ferguson. You look at Benjamin Franklin in the United States. These people wrote in all sorts of different genres. They wrote in, they wrote all sorts of different kinds of books. They have many different purposes and very few of them did a lot of what we would call rigorous academic philosophy. And Kant was different. Kant was very much an academic philosopher. Kant was nothing if not rigorous. He came at the end of the enlightenment by most people's measure. He wrote these very, very difficult, very rigorous, very brilliant works, such as The Creek of Pure Reason. And so, it's certainly been the case that people who wanted to describe the Enlightenment as a philosophy have tended to look to Kant. So for example, there's a great German philosopher and intellectual historian of the early 20th century named Ernst Kassirer, who had to leave Germany because of the Nazis. And he wrote a great book called The Philosophy of the Enlightened. And that leads directly to Immanuel Kant. And of course, Casir himself was a Kantian, identified with Kant. And so he wanted to make Kant, in a sense, the telos, the end point, the culmination, the fulfillment of the Enlightenment. But so I think that's why Kant has such a particularly important position. You're defining it both ways.Andrew Keen: I've always struggled to understand what Kant was trying to say. I'm certainly not alone there. Might it be fair to say that he was trying to transform the universe and certainly traditional Christian notions into the Enlightenment, so the entire universe, the world, God, whatever that means, that they were all somehow according to Kant enlightened.David Bell: Well, I think that I'm certainly no expert on Immanuel Kant. And I would say that he is trying to, I mean, his major philosophical works are trying to put together a system of philosophical thinking which will justify why people have to act morally, why people act rationally, without the need for Christian revelation to bolster them. That's a very, very crude and reductionist way of putting it, but that's essentially at the heart of it. At the same time, Kant was very much aware of his own place in history. So Kant didn't simply write these very difficult, thick, dense philosophical works. He also wrote things that were more like journalism or like tablets. He wrote a famous essay called What is Enlightenment? And in that, he said that the 18th century was the period in which humankind was simply beginning to. Reach a period of enlightenment. And he said, he starts the essay by saying, this is the period when humankind is being released from its self-imposed tutelage. And we are still, and he said we do not yet live in the midst of a completely enlightened century, but we are getting there. We are living in a century that is enlightening.Andrew Keen: So the seeds, the seeds of Hegel and maybe even Marx are incant in that German thinking, that historical thinking.David Bell: In some ways, in some ways of course Hegel very much reacts against Kant and so and then Marx reacts against Hegel. So it's not exactly.Andrew Keen: Well, that's the dialectic, isn't it, David?David Bell: A simple easy path from one to the other, no, but Hegel is unimaginable without Kant of course and Marx is unimagineable without Hegel.Andrew Keen: You note that Kant represents a shift in some ways into the university and the walls of the universities were going up, and that some of the other figures associated with the the Enlightenment and Scottish Enlightenment, human and Smith and the French Enlightenment Voltaire and the others, they were more generalist writers. Should we be nostalgic for the pre-university period in the Enlightenment, or? Did things start getting serious once the heavyweights, the academic heavyweighs like Emmanuel Kant got into this thing?David Bell: I think it depends on where we're talking about. I mean, Adam Smith was a professor at Glasgow in Edinburgh, so Smith, the Scottish Enlightenment was definitely at least partly in the universities. The German Enlightenment took place very heavily in universities. Christian Vodafoy I just mentioned was the most important German philosopher of the 18th century before Kant, and he had positions in university. Even the French university system, for a while, what's interesting about the French University system, particularly the Sorbonne, which was the theology faculty, It was that. Throughout the first half of the 18th century, there were very vigorous, very interesting philosophical debates going on there, in which the people there, particularly even Jesuits there, were very open to a lot of the ideas we now call enlightenment. They were reading John Locke, they were reading Mel Pench, they were read Dekalb. What happened though in the French universities was that as more daring stuff was getting published elsewhere. Church, the Catholic Church, started to say, all right, these philosophers, these philosophies, these are our enemies, these are people we have to get at. And so at that point, anybody who was in the university, who was still in dialog with these people was basically purged. And the universities became much less interesting after that. But to come back to your question, I do think that I am very nostalgic for that period. I think that the Enlightenment was an extraordinary period, because if you look between. In the 17th century, not all, but a great deal of the most interesting intellectual work is happening in the so-called Republic of Letters. It's happening in Latin language. It is happening on a very small circle of RUD, of scholars. By the 19th century following Kant and Hegel and then the birth of the research university in Germany, which is copied everywhere, philosophy and the most advanced thinking goes back into the university. And the 18th century, particularly in France, I will say, is a time when the most advanced thought is being written for a general public. It is being in the form of novels, of dialogs, of stories, of reference works, and it is very, very accessible. The most profound thought of the West has never been as accessible overall as in the 18 century.Andrew Keen: Again, excuse this question, it might seem a bit naive, but there's a lot of pre-Enlightenment work, books, thinking that we read now that's very accessible from Erasmus and Thomas More to Machiavelli. Why weren't characters like, or are characters like Erasmuus, More's Utopia, Machiavell's prints and discourses, why aren't they considered part of the Enlightenment? What's the difference between? Enlightened thinkers or the supposedly enlightened thinkers of the 18th century and thinkers and writers of the 16th and 17th centuries.David Bell: That's a good question, you know, I think you have to, you, you know, again, one has to draw a line somewhere. That's not a very good answer, of course. All these people that you just mentioned are, in one way or another, predecessors to the Enlightenment. And of course, there were lots of people. I don't mean to say that nobody wrote in an accessible way before 1700. Obviously, lots of the people you mentioned did. Although a lot of them originally wrote in Latin, Erasmus, also Thomas More. But I think what makes the Enlightened different is that you have, again, you have a sense. These people have have a sense that they are themselves engaged in a collective project, that it is a collective project of enlightenment, of enlightening the world. They believe that they live in a century of progress. And there are certain principles. They don't agree on everything by any means. The philosophy of enlightenment is like nothing more than ripping each other to shreds, like any decent group of intellectuals. But that said, they generally did believe That people needed to have freedom of speech. They believed that you needed to have toleration of different religions. They believed in education and the need for a broadly educated public that could be as broad as possible. They generally believed in keeping religion out of the public sphere as much as possible, so all those principles came together into a program that we can consider at least a kind of... You know, not that everybody read it at every moment by any means, but there is an identifiable enlightenment program there, and in this case an identifiable enlightenment mindset. One other thing, I think, which is crucial to the Enlightenment, is that it was the attention they started to pay to something that we now take almost entirely for granted, which is the idea of society. The word society is so entirely ubiquitous, we assume it's always been there, and in one sense it has, because the word societas is a Latin word. But until... The 18th century, the word society generally had a much narrower meaning. It referred to, you know, particular institution most often, like when we talk about the society of, you know, the American philosophical society or something like that. And the idea that there exists something called society, which is the general sphere of human existence that is separate from religion and is separate from the political sphere, that's actually something which only really emerged at the end of the 1600s. And it became really the focus of you know, much, if not most, of enlightenment thinking. When you look at someone like Montesquieu and you look something, somebody like Rousseau or Voltaire or Adam Smith, probably above all, they were concerned with understanding how society works, not how government works only, but how society, what social interactions are like beginning of what we would now call social science. So that's yet another thing that distinguishes the enlightened from people like Machiavelli, often people like Thomas More, and people like bonuses.Andrew Keen: You noted earlier that the idea of progress is somehow baked in, in part, and certainly when it comes to Kant, certainly the French Enlightenment, although, of course, Rousseau challenged that. I'm not sure whether Rousseaut, as always, is both in and out of the Enlightenment and he seems to be in and out of everything. How did the Enlightement, though, make sense of itself in the context of antiquity, as it was, of Terms, it was the Renaissance that supposedly discovered or rediscovered antiquity. How did many of the leading Enlightenment thinkers, writers, how did they think of their own society in the context of not just antiquity, but even the idea of a European or Western society?David Bell: Well, there was a great book, one of the great histories of the Enlightenment was written about more than 50 years ago by the Yale professor named Peter Gay, and the first part of that book was called The Modern Paganism. So it was about the, you know, it was very much about the relationship between the Enlightenment and the ancient Greek synonyms. And certainly the writers of the enlightenment felt a great deal of kinship with the ancient Greek synonymous. They felt a common bond, particularly in the posing. Christianity and opposing what they believed the Christian Church had wrought on Europe in suppressing freedom and suppressing free thought and suppassing free inquiry. And so they felt that they were both recovering but also going beyond antiquity at the same time. And of course they were all, I mean everybody at the time, every single major figure of the Enlightenment, their education consisted in large part of what we would now call classics, right? I mean, there was an educational reformer in France in the 1760s who said, you know, our educational system is great if the purpose is to train Roman centurions, if it's to train modern people who are not doing both so well. And it's true. I mean they would spend, certainly, you know in Germany, in much of Europe, in the Netherlands, even in France, I mean people were trained not simply to read Latin, but to write in Latin. In Germany, university courses took part in the Latin language. So there's an enormous, you know, so they're certainly very, very conversant with the Greek and Roman classics, and they identify with them to a very great extent. Someone like Rousseau, I mean, and many others, and what's his first reading? How did he learn to read by reading Plutarch? In translation, but he learns to read reading Plutach. He sees from the beginning by this enormous admiration for the ancients that we get from Bhutan.Andrew Keen: Was Socrates relevant here? Was the Enlightenment somehow replacing Aristotle with Socrates and making him and his spirit of Enlightenment, of asking questions rather than answering questions, the symbol of a new way of thinking?David Bell: I would say to a certain extent, so I mean, much of the Enlightenment criticizes scholasticism, medieval scholastic, very, very sharply, and medieval scholasticism is founded philosophically very heavily upon Aristotle, so to that extent. And the spirit of skepticism that Socrates embodied, the idea of taking nothing for granted and asking questions about everything, including questions of oneself, yes, absolutely. That said, while the great figures of the Red Plato, you know, Socrates was generally I mean, it was not all that present as they come. But certainly have people with people with red play-doh in the entire virus.Andrew Keen: You mentioned Benjamin Franklin earlier, David. Most of the Enlightenment, of course, seems to be centered in France and Scotland, Germany, England. But America, many Europeans went to America then as a, what some people would call a settler colonial society, or certainly an offshoot of the European world. Was the settling of America and the American Revolution Was it the quintessential Enlightenment project?David Bell: Another very good question, and again, it depends a bit on who you talk to. I just mentioned this book by Peter Gay, and the last part of his book is called The Science of Freedom, and it's all about the American Revolution. So certainly a lot of interpreters of the Enlightenment have said that, yes, the American revolution represents in a sense the best possible outcome of the American Revolution, it was the best, possible outcome of the enlightened. Certainly there you look at the founding fathers of the United States and there's a great deal that they took from me like Certainly, they took a great great number of political ideas from Obviously Madison was very much inspired and drafting the edifice of the Constitution by Montesquieu to see himself Was happy to admit in addition most of the founding Fathers of the united states were you know had kind of you know We still had we were still definitely Christians, but we're also but we were also very much influenced by deism were very much against the idea of making the United States a kind of confessional country where Christianity was dominant. They wanted to believe in the enlightenment principles of free speech, religious toleration and so on and so forth. So in all those senses and very much the gun was probably more inspired than Franklin was somebody who was very conversant with the European Enlightenment. He spent a large part of his life in London. Where he was in contact with figures of the Enlightenment. He also, during the American Revolution, of course, he was mostly in France, where he is vetted by some of the surviving fellows and were very much in contact for them as well. So yes, I would say the American revolution is certainly... And then the American revolutionary scene, of course by the Europeans, very much as a kind of offshoot of the enlightenment. So one of the great books of the late Enlightenment is by Condor Say, which he wrote while he was hiding actually in the future evolution of the chariot. It's called a historical sketch of the progress of the human spirit, or the human mind, and you know he writes about the American Revolution as being, basically owing its existence to being like...Andrew Keen: Franklin is of course an example of your pre-academic enlightenment, a generalist, inventor, scientist, entrepreneur, political thinker. What about the role of science and indeed economics in the Enlightenment? David, we're going to talk of course about the Marxist interpretation, perhaps the Marxist interpretation which sees The Enlightenment is just a euphemism, perhaps, for exploitative capitalism. How central was the growth and development of the market, of economics, and innovation, and capitalism in your reading of The Enlightened?David Bell: Well, in my reading, it was very important, but not in the way that the Marxists used to say. So Friedrich Engels once said that the Enlightenment was basically the idealized kingdom of the bourgeoisie, and there was whole strain of Marxist thinking that followed the assumption that, and then Karl Marx himself argued that the documents like the Declaration of the Rights of Man and Citizen, which obviously were inspired by the Enlightment, were simply kind of the near, or kind of. Way that the bourgeoisie was able to advance itself ideologically, and I don't think that holds much water, which is very little indication that any particular economic class motivated the Enlightenment or was using the Enlightment in any way. That said, I think it's very difficult to imagine the Enlightement without the social and economic changes that come in with the 18th century. To begin with globalization. If you read the great works of the Enlightenment, it's remarkable just how open they are to talking about humanity in general. So one of Voltaire's largest works, one of his most important works, is something called Essay on Customs and the Spirit of Nations, which is actually History of the World, where he talks learnedly not simply about Europe, but about the Americas, about China, about Africa, about India. Montesquieu writes Persian letters. Christian Volpe writes about Chinese philosophy. You know, Rousseau writes about... You know, the earliest days of humankind talks about Africa. All the great figures of the Enlightenment are writing about the rest of the world, and this is a period in which contacts between Europe and the rest the world are exploding along with international trade. So by the end of the 18th century, there are 4,000 to 5,000 ships a year crossing the Atlantic. It's an enormous number. And that's one context in which the enlightenment takes place. Another is what we call the consumer revolution. So in the 18th century, certainly in the major cities of Western Europe, people of a wide range of social classes, including even artisans, sort of somewhat wealthy artisians, shopkeepers, are suddenly able to buy a much larger range of products than they were before. They're able to choose how to basically furnish their own lives, if you will, how they're gonna dress, what they're going to eat, what they gonna put on the walls of their apartments and so on and so forth. And so they become accustomed to exercising a great deal more personal choice than their ancestors have done. And the Enlightenment really develops in tandem with this. Most of the great works of the Enlightment, they're not really written to, they're treatises, they're like Kant, they're written to persuade you to think in a single way. Really written to make you ask questions yourself, to force you to ponder things. They're written in the form of puzzles and riddles. Voltaire had a great line there, he wrote that the best kind of books are the books that readers write half of themselves as they read, and that's sort of the quintessence of the Enlightenment as far as I'm concerned.Andrew Keen: Yeah, Voltaire might have been comfortable on YouTube or Facebook. David, you mentioned all those ships going from Europe across the Atlantic. Of course, many of those ships were filled with African slaves. You mentioned this in your piece. I mean, this is no secret, of course. You also mentioned a couple of times Montesquieu's Persian letters. To what extent is... The enlightenment then perhaps the birth of Western power, of Western colonialism, of going to Africa, seizing people, selling them in North America, the French, the English, Dutch colonization of the rest of the world. Of course, later more sophisticated Marxist thinkers from the Frankfurt School, you mentioned these in your essay, Odorno and Horkheimer in particular, See the Enlightenment as... A project, if you like, of Western domination. I remember reading many years ago when I was in graduate school, Edward Said, his analysis of books like The Persian Letters, which is a form of cultural Western power. How much of this is simply bound up in the profound, perhaps, injustice of the Western achievement? And of course, some of the justice as well. We haven't talked about Jefferson, but perhaps in Jefferson's life and his thinking and his enlightened principles and his... Life as a slave owner, these contradictions are most self-evident.David Bell: Well, there are certainly contradictions, and there's certainly... I think what's remarkable, if you think about it, is that if you read through works of the Enlightenment, you would be hard-pressed to find a justification for slavery. You do find a lot of critiques of slavery, and I think that's something very important to keep in mind. Obviously, the chattel slavery of Africans in the Americas began well before the Enlightment, it began in 1500. The Enlightenment doesn't have the credit for being the first movement to oppose slavery. That really goes back to various religious groups, especially the Fakers. But that said, you have in France, you had in Britain, in America even, you'd have a lot of figures associated with the Enlightenment who were pretty sure of becoming very forceful opponents of slavery very early. Now, when it comes to imperialism, that's a tricky issue. What I think you'd find in these light bulbs, you'd different sorts of tendencies and different sorts of writings. So there are certainly a lot of writers of the Enlightenment who are deeply opposed to European authorities. One of the most popular works of the late Enlightenment was a collective work edited by the man named the Abbe Rinal, which is called The History of the Two Indies. And that is a book which is deeply, deeply critical of European imperialism. At the same time, at the same of the enlightenment, a lot the works of history written during the Enlightment. Tended, such as Voltaire's essay on customs, which I just mentioned, tend to give a kind of very linear version of history. They suggest that all societies follow the same path, from sort of primitive savagery, hunter-gatherers, through early agriculture, feudal stages, and on into sort of modern commercial society and civilization. And so they're basically saying, okay, we, the Europeans, are the most advanced. People like the Africans and the Native Americans are the least advanced, and so perhaps we're justified in going and quote, bringing our civilization to them, what later generations would call the civilizing missions, or possibly just, you know, going over and exploiting them because we are stronger and we are more, and again, we are the best. And then there's another thing that the Enlightenment did. The Enlightenment tended to destroy an older Christian view of humankind, which in some ways militated against modern racism. Christians believed, of course, that everyone was the same from Adam and Eve, which meant that there was an essential similarity in the world. And the Enlightenment challenged this by challenging the biblical kind of creation. The Enlightenment challenges this. Voltaire, for instance, believed that there had actually been several different human species that had different origins, and that can very easily become a justification for racism. Buffon, one of the most Figures of the French Enlightenment, one of the early naturalists, was crucial for trying to show that in fact nature is not static, that nature is always changing, that species are changing, including human beings. And so again, that allowed people to think in terms of human beings at different stages of evolution, and perhaps this would be a justification for privileging the more advanced humans over the less advanced. In the 18th century itself, most of these things remain potential, rather than really being acted upon. But in the 19th century, figures of writers who would draw upon these things certainly went much further, and these became justifications for slavery, imperialism, and other things. So again, the Enlightenment is the source of a great deal of stuff here, and you can't simply put it into one box or more.Andrew Keen: You mentioned earlier, David, that Concorda wrote one of the later classics of the... Condorcet? Sorry, Condorcets, excuse my French. Condorcès wrote one the later Classics of the Enlightenment when he was hiding from the French Revolution. In your mind, was the revolution itself the natural conclusion, climax? Perhaps anti-climax of the Enlightenment. Certainly, it seems as if a lot of the critiques of the French Revolution, particularly the more conservative ones, Burke comes to mind, suggested that perhaps the principles of in the Enlightment inevitably led to the guillotine, or is that an unfair way of thinking of it?David Bell: Well, there are a lot of people who have thought like that. Edmund Burke already, writing in 1790, in his reflections on the revolution in France, he said that everything which was great in the old regime is being dissolved and, quoting, dissolved by this new conquering empire of light and reason. And then he said about the French that in the groves of their academy at the end of every vista, you see nothing but the gallows. Nothing but the Gallows. So there, in 1780, he already seemed to be predicting the reign of terror and blaming it. A certain extent from the Enlightenment. That said, I think, you know, again, the French Revolution is incredibly complicated event. I mean, you certainly have, you know, an explosion of what we could call Enlightenment thinking all over the place. In France, it happened in France. What happened there was that you had a, you know, the collapse of an extraordinarily inefficient government and a very, you know, in a very antiquated, paralyzed system of government kind of collapsed, created a kind of political vacuum. Into that vacuum stepped a lot of figures who were definitely readers of the Enlightenment. Oh so um but again the Enlightment had I said I don't think you can call the Enlightement a single thing so to say that the Enlightiment inspired the French Revolution rather than the There you go.Andrew Keen: Although your essay on liberties is the Enlightenment then and now you probably didn't write is always these lazy editors who come up with inaccurate and inaccurate titles. So for you, there is no such thing as the Enlighten.David Bell: No, there is. There is. But still, it's a complex thing. It contains multitudes.Andrew Keen: So it's the Enlightenment rather than the United States.David Bell: Conflicting tendencies, it has contradictions within it. There's enough unity to refer to it as a singular noun, but it doesn't mean that it all went in one single direction.Andrew Keen: But in historical terms, did the failure of the French Revolution, its descent into Robespierre and then Bonaparte, did it mark the end in historical terms a kind of bookend of history? You began in 1720 by 1820. Was the age of the Enlightenment pretty much over?David Bell: I would say yes. I think that, again, one of the things about the French Revolution is that people who are reading these books and they're reading these ideas and they are discussing things really start to act on them in a very different way from what it did before the French revolution. You have a lot of absolute monarchs who are trying to bring certain enlightenment principles to bear in their form of government, but they're not. But it's difficult to talk about a full-fledged attempt to enact a kind of enlightenment program. Certainly a lot of the people in the French Revolution saw themselves as doing that. But as they did it, they ran into reality, I would say. I mean, now Tocqueville, when he writes his old regime in the revolution, talks about how the French philosophes were full of these abstract ideas that were divorced from reality. And while that's an exaggeration, there was a certain truth to them. And as soon as you start having the age of revolutions, as soon you start people having to devise systems of government that will actually last, and as you have people, democratic representative systems that will last, and as they start revising these systems under the pressure of actual events, then you're not simply talking about an intellectual movement anymore, you're talking about something very different. And so I would say that, well, obviously the ideas of the Enlightenment continue to inspire people, the books continue to be read, debated. They lead on to figures like Kant, and as we talked about earlier, Kant leads to Hegel, Hegel leads to Marx in a certain sense. Nonetheless, by the time you're getting into the 19th century, what you have, you know, has connections to the Enlightenment, but can we really still call it the Enlightment? I would sayAndrew Keen: And Tocqueville, of course, found democracy in America. Is democracy itself? I know it's a big question. But is it? Bound up in the Enlightenment. You've written extensively, David, both for liberties and elsewhere on liberalism. Is the promise of democracy, democratic systems, the one born in the American Revolution, promised in the French Revolution, not realized? Are they products of the Enlightment, or is the 19th century and the democratic systems that in the 19th century, is that just a separate historical track?David Bell: Again, I would say there are certain things in the Enlightenment that do lead in that direction. Certainly, I think most figures in the enlightenment in one general sense or another accepted the idea of a kind of general notion of popular sovereignty. It didn't mean that they always felt that this was going to be something that could necessarily be acted upon or implemented in their own day. And they didn't necessarily associate generalized popular sovereignty with what we would now call democracy with people being able to actually govern themselves. Would be certain figures, certainly Diderot and some of his essays, what we saw very much in the social contract, you know, were sketching out, you knows, models for possible democratic system. Condorcet, who actually lived into the French Revolution, wrote one of the most draft constitutions for France, that's one of most democratic documents ever proposed. But of course there were lots of figures in the Enlightenment, Voltaire, and others who actually believed much more in absolute monarchy, who believed that you just, you know, you should have. Freedom of speech and freedom of discussion, out of which the best ideas would emerge, but then you had to give those ideas to the prince who imposed them by poor sicknesses.Andrew Keen: And of course, Rousseau himself, his social contract, some historians have seen that as the foundations of totalitarian, modern totalitarianism. Finally, David, your wonderful essay in Liberties in the spring quarterly 2025 is The Enlightenment, Then and Now. What about now? You work at Princeton, your president has very bravely stood up to the new presidential regime in the United States, in defense of academic intellectual freedom. Does the word and the movement, does it have any relevance in the 2020s, particularly in an age of neo-authoritarianism around the world?David Bell: I think it does. I think we have to be careful about it. I always get a little nervous when people say, well, we should simply go back to the Enlightenment, because the Enlightenments is history. We don't go back the 18th century. I think what we need to do is to recover certain principles, certain ideals from the 18 century, the ones that matter to us, the ones we think are right, and make our own Enlightenment better. I don't think we need be governed by the 18 century. Thomas Paine once said that no generation should necessarily rule over every generation to come, and I think that's probably right. Unfortunately in the United States, we have a constitution which is now essentially unamendable, so we're doomed to live by a constitution largely from the 18th century. But are there many things in the Enlightenment that we should look back to, absolutely?Andrew Keen: Well, David, I am going to free you for your own French Enlightenment. You can go and have some croissant now in your local cafe in Paris. Thank you so much for a very, I excuse the pun, enlightening conversation on the Enlightenment then and now, Essential Essay in Liberties. I'd love to get you back on the show. Talk more history. Thank you. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit keenon.substack.com/subscribe

As AI continues to advance and integrate into our daily lives, can it truly be designed to align with our deepest human values and moral principles? If so, how can we ensure that AI not only understands but also respects and promotes our ethical frameworks, without compromising our privacy or hindering our personal growth and autonomy?  John Vervaeke, Christopher Mastropietro, and Jordan Hall embark on a nuanced exploration of the intricate relationship between AI and human flourishing. They explore the concept of "intimate AI," a personalized guardian that attunes to individual biometrics and psychometrics, offering a protective and challenging presence. The discussion underscores the critical importance of privacy, the perils of idolatry, and the urgent need for a new philosophical framework that addresses the meaning crisis. Jordan Hall is a technology entrepreneur with several years of experience building disruptive companies. He is interested in philosophy, artificial intelligence, and complex systems and has a background in law. Hall has worked for several technology companies and was the founder and CEO of DivX. He is currently involved in various think tanks and institutes and is focused on upgrading humanity's capacity for thought and action. Christopher Mastropietro is a philosophical writer who is fascinated by dialogue, symbols, and the concept of self. He actively contributes to the Vervaeke Foundation. Notes:  (0:00) Introduction to the Lectern (0:30) Overview of Today's Discussion: Can AI be in Alignment with Human Values? (1:00) The Three-Point Proposal - Individual Attunement, Decentralized and Distributed AI, Guardian AI (6:30) Individual AI Attunement  (8:30) Distributed AI and Collective Intelligence (8:45) Empowerment of Agency through AI (12:30) The Role of Intimacy in AI Alignment - Why Relationality Matters (22:00) Can AI Help Develop Human Integrity? - The Challenge of Self-Alignment (28:00) Cultural and Enculturation Challenges (31:30) AI, Culture, and the Reintegration of Human Rhythms (38:00) Addressing Cocooning and Cultural Integration (47:00) Domains of Enculturation - Psychological, Economic, and Intersubjective  (48:30)  ”We're not looking necessarily for a teacher as much as we were looking for the teacherly opportunity in the encounters we're having.” (51:00) The Sanctity of Privacy and Vulnerability (1:07:00) The Role of Intimacy in Privacy (1:13:00) Final Reflections    ---  Connect with a community dedicated to self-discovery and purpose, and gain deeper insights by joining our Patreon. The Vervaeke Foundation is committed to advancing the scientific pursuit of wisdom and creating a significant impact on the world. Become a part of our mission.   Join Awaken to Meaning to explore practices that enhance your virtues and foster deeper connections with reality and relationships.   John Vervaeke: Website | X | YouTube | Patreon   Jordan Hall: YouTube | Medium | X   Christopher Mastropietro: Vervaeke Foundation   Ideas, People, and Works Mentioned in this Episode Christopher Mastropietro Jordan Hall Jordan Peterson James Filler Spinoza Marshall McLuhan Plato Immanuel Kant The AI Alignment Problem Decentralized & Personal AI as a Solution The Role of Intimacy in AI Alignment Enculturation & AI's Role in Human Integrity Privacy as More Than Just Protection The Republic – by Plato Critique of Pure Reason – by Immanuel Kant The Idea of the Holy – by Rudolf Otto Interpretation of Cultures – by Clifford Geertz  

Send us a textJoin us for an in-depth discussion with Dr. Robert Hanna on Immanuel Kant's philosophy, covering transcendental idealism, the transcendental deduction, and free will. We explore key concepts from Critique of Pure Reason, including synthetic a priori knowledge, causality, and the limits of human understanding, as well as the distinction between noumenal and phenomenal reality. Dr. Hanna explains how Kant's ideas revolutionized metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics, shaping modern philosophy. Faith That Challenges. Conversations that Matter. Laughs included. Subscribe Now!Breaking down faith, culture & big questions - a mix of humor with real spiritual growth. Listen on: Apple Podcasts SpotifySupport the show--------------------------If you would want to support the channel and what I am doing, please follow me on Patreon: www.patreon.com/christianityforall Where else to find Josh Yen: Philosophy YT: https://bit.ly/philforallEducation: https://bit.ly/joshyenBuisness: https://bit.ly/logoseduMy Website: https://joshuajwyen.com/

You read the title! Next month, Gil is teaching a class on Kant's Critique of Pure Reason at the Goethe Institute in downtown Chicago through the Brooklyn Institute for Social Research.Enrollments are now open for anyone interested. Check out the course description and sign up here:https://thebrooklyninstitute.com/items/courses/new-york/kants-critique-of-pure-reason-chicago/Hope to see some of you there!leftofphilosophy.comMusic: Titanium by AlisiaBeats

As a listener of TOE you can get a special 20% off discount to The Economist and all it has to offer! Visit https://www.economist.com/toe In today's episode of Theories of Everything, Curt Jaimungal speaks with Matthew Segall, a professor at the California Institute of Integral Studies, on the evolution of philosophical thought, linking ancient teachings on consciousness to modern scientific perspectives. We delve into the limitations of contemporary views of reality, paralleling them with the Ptolemaic model, and explore how an awareness of mortality can enrich our understanding of existence. Matthew argues for a shift toward introspection and self-inquiry in a society grappling with existential challenges, emphasizing that confronting mortality can foster a deeper sense of meaning in our lives. New Substack! Follow my personal writings and EARLY ACCESS episodes here: https://curtjaimungal.substack.com LINKED MENTIONED: •⁠ ⁠Matthew's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Footnotes2Plato •⁠ ⁠Matthew's Diagram of Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Z1zY39EKbs •⁠ ⁠Matthew's talk with John Vervaeke: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=15akhXGHwzo •⁠ ⁠Critique of Pure Reason (book): https://www.amazon.com/Critique-Pure-Reason-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140447474 •⁠ ⁠Critique of Judgement (book): https://www.amazon.com/Critique-Judgement-Immanuel-Kant/dp/1545245673/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr= •⁠ ⁠The Phenomenology of Spirit (book): https://www.amazon.com/Georg-Wilhelm-Friedrich-Hegel-Phenomenology/dp/1108730086 •⁠ ⁠1919 Eclipse (paper): https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/epdf/10.1098/rsnr.2020.0040 •⁠ ⁠Einstein/Bergson debate (article): https://www.faena.com/aleph/einstein-vs-bergson-the-struggle-for-time •⁠ ⁠The Principle of Relativity (book): https://www.amazon.com/Principle-Relativity-Alfred-North-Whitehead/dp/1602062188 •⁠ ⁠John Vervaeke's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@johnvervaeke •⁠ ⁠John Vervaeke on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVj1KYGyesI •⁠ ⁠Philip Goff on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmaIBxkqcT4 •⁠ ⁠Sabine Hossenfelder on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3y-Z0pgupg •⁠ ⁠Donald Hoffman on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmieNQH7Q4w •⁠ ⁠Karl Friston on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk4NZorRjCo •⁠ ⁠Iain McGilchrist on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9sBKCd2HD0 •⁠ ⁠Thomas Campbell on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kko-hVA-8IU •⁠ ⁠Noam Chomsky on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch? •⁠ ⁠v=3lcDT_-3v2k&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlORiRfcaQe8ZdxKxF-e2BCY&index=3 •⁠ ⁠Michael Levin on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c8iFtaltX-s&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlN6E8KrxcYCWQIHg2tfkqvR&index=39 •⁠ ⁠Roger Penrose on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGm505TFMbU&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlN6E8KrxcYCWQIHg2tfkqvR&index=16 •⁠ ⁠Neil Turok's lecture on TOE: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gwhqmPqRl4&list=PLZ7ikzmc6zlN6E8KrxcYCWQIHg2tfkqvR&index=35 •⁠ ⁠TOE's Consciousness Iceberg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TR4cpn8m9i0&ab_channel=TheoriesofEverythingwithCurtJaimungal •⁠ ⁠TOE's String Theory Iceberg: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4PdPnQuwjY Timestamps: 00:00 Introduction 1:35 The Roots of Process Philosophy 4:47 The Rise of Nominalism 8:26 The Evolution of Substance 11:02 Descartes and the Dualist Divide 21:34 Kant's Copernican Revolution 33:08 The Nature of Knowledge 37:42 Hegel's Dialectic Unfolds 46:18 Schelling's Panpsychism 56:50 Whitehead's Organic Realism 1:22:17 The Bifurcation of Nature 1:31:38 The Emergence of Consciousness 1:38:37 The Nature of Self-Organization 1:53:40 Perspectives on Actuality and Potentiality 2:11:35 The Role of God in Process Philosophy 2:23:55 The Human Experience and Self-Inquiry 2:40:34 Reflections on Mortality and Meaning 2:47:44 The Shift from Substance to Process 2:58:02 Embracing Interconnectedness and Consciousness 3:00:49 The Call for Inner Exploration #science #philosophy Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Jon Courtney of Pure Reason Revolution delves into the band's latest album, Coming Up to Consciousness. We discuss the intricate layers of sound, the conceptual underpinnings, and how the band continues to evolve its unique blend of prog rock, electronic, and ethereal soundscapes. Jon also shares personal insights on the creative process and what fans can expect from this stunning new chapter in PRR's musical journey. Now Spinning Magazine Podcast with Phil Aston

In this episode we explore the correct context for understanding Kant's relation to the historical period known as “the Enlightenment” or “the Age of Reason.” On the one hand, Kant's Critique of Pure Reason may be understood as “critiquing reason to make room for faith.” On the other hand, the Method of Kant's Transcendental Philosophy reveals Spirit as the condition for the possibility of the unity of Mind and Body. We'll understand these insights by discussing what has been called “the Homeric Contest” to complete Kant's “System of Transcendental Philosophy.” The contest refers to the competition that may be witnessed in the writings of Fichte, Novalis, Hölderlin, Schelling, Schopenhauer, and Hegel. Understanding this historical contextualization of Kant's philosophy makes it much easier to see that contemporary Postmodern criticisms of Kant's philosophy are not actually criticisms of Kant's philosophy. Rather, they are criticisms of Descartes' philosophy. Thus, Kant's philosophy is not the problem; Kant's philosophy is the solution to the problem(s) with Descartes' philosophy. . Please post your questions or comments on The Philosophemes YouTube Channel. Accessible through this Linktree link: https://linktr.ee/philosophemes . Amazon Author Page: https://amzn.to/4cM6nzf . The Existentialism Book: http://shepherd.com/book/what-is-existentialism-vol-i . Online Courses (Gumroad) Coming Soon! . Podcast Page: https://evergreenpodcasts.com/the-philosophemes-podcast #philosophy, #existentialism, #FrankScalambrino, #phenomenology, #psychology, #historyofphilosophy, #historyofpsychology, #Plato, #Heidegger, #philosophypodcast . Some links may be “affiliate links,” which means I may I receive a small commission from your purchase through these links. This helps to support the channel. Thank you. Editorial, educational, and fair use of images. © 2024, Frank Scalambrino, Ph.D. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

[power press]

[power press]

[power press]

This is the first in a series of episodes discussing Kant, specifically his relation to Descartes, Aquinas, and the philosophically-correct historical context of his Critique of Pure Reason. The most common mistake - by far - we encounter when listening to Postmodern Academics discuss Kant is that they are not discussing Kant, they are discussing Descartes. Dr. Jordan Peterson, Bishop Barron, Dr. Stephen Hicks, and (now even) Ben Shapiro all make the mistake discussed in this episode. I hope you enjoy it, and I hope you find it thought provoking! . Please post your questions or comments on The Philosophemes YouTube Channel. Accessible through this Linktree link: https://linktr.ee/philosophemes . Amazon Author Page: https://amzn.to/4cM6nzf . The Existentialism Book: http://shepherd.com/book/what-is-existentialism-vol-i . Online Courses (Gumroad) Coming Soon! . Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Frank_Scalambrino_PhD . Podcast Page: https://evergreenpodcasts.com/the-philosophemes-podcast #philosophy, #existentialism, #FrankScalambrino, #phenomenology, #psychology, #historyofphilosophy, #historyofpsychology, #Nietzsche, #Heidegger, #philosophypodcast . Some links may be “affiliate links,” which means I may I receive a small commission from your purchase through these links. This helps to support the channel. Thank you. Editorial, educational, and fair use of images. © 2024, Frank Scalambrino, Ph.D. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Time Artist Title Duration Album Year 0:00:00 ProgPhonic 166 Intro 0:44 0:00:41 Anekdoten The War is Over 4:34 Gravity 2003 0:06:32 Frost* Moral and Consequence 8:09 Life In The Wires 2024 0:14:41 NoSound This Night 4:16 Allow Yourself 2019 0:18:57 Sylvan The Sound Of Her World 9:20 Home 2014 0:35:29 Pure Reason Revolution Interlude 4 […]

Jon Courtney from Pure Reason Revolution is on the show! He is on several years after becoming a lost episode. We're talking about animals, session bassists (theirs worked with David Gilmour and Pink Floyd), lineup shifts within PRR, the band's new record Coming Up To Consciousness, and more. Then Sam Vallen from Caligula's Horse discusses his first band. Far Beyond Metal Pure Reason Revolution  Order the new record - Instagram - Facebook Caligula's Horse  Website - Instagram - Facebook

Jon Courtney is the founder, vocalist, and multi-instrumentalist who drives modern prog rock outfit Pure Reason Revolution. The band is set to release its sixth album on Sept. 6, Coming Up to Consciousness. The themes on the record are lyrically personal ones to Jon, who was kind enough to discuss the album, getting the legendary Guy Pratt to play on it, his influences, and the band's career with me. Find out more about the band at https://www.purereasonrevolutionofficial.com/. Please hit the like button and/or leave a rating/review wherever you consume this podcast. You can read my Michael's Record Collection newsletter for free by signing up at michaelsrecordcollection.substack.com. Follow MRC on Twitter (@MikesRecords), like it on Facebook, and follow on Instagram and/or TikTok. Have questions or comments or want to suggest a topic? Hit me up at michaelsrecordcollection@gmail.com. I'd love to have your support for this independent podcast. You can become a patron of this show by becoming a Michael's Record Collection Patreon subscriber starting at only $2 per month at the MRC Patreon page. Supporter benefits escalate at each level, providing more value the more you support the show. For example, you will know about interviews in advance and at some levels you can submit questions for the artists, come on the show to co-host, enter prize drawings, and more. 

Talking with Jon Courtney, multi-instrumentalist and founding member of Pure Reason Revolution about the personal struggles and loss that fueled his inspiration for the band's latest album, Coming Up To Consciousness. Pure Reason Revolution (purereasonrevolutionofficial.com)Facebook: BleedingEdgeShowInstagram/Threads: @bleeding_edge_showX/Twitter/Whatever: @Bleeding___Edge Live365:The Expanse - https://live365.com/station/The-Expanse-a09675

Kant, I. 1791 "Critique of Pure Reason" Augustinus, A. 397. "Confessiones" Book 11. Plotinus 253. "Ennead III" Beethoven,L. 1799. Septet Es-Dur op. 20 https://youtu.be/pXsj43qCcUA?si=lWoBhVSC4WhT8uUP Winwood-Capaldo. 1970. "Empty Pages " [Traffic: John Barleycorn Must Die,lp] https://youtu.be/5ycyIkcX7zU?si=jUJ6U2u31_SL1vNR --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/message Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/support

Ryan and Todd continue their exploration of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason with the Introduction. They discuss the importance of his critique of dogmatic metaphysics and the incredible discovery of the synthetic a priori judgment. Ryan's sports article: https://link.springer.com/journal/41282/online-first

This lecture discusses key ideas from the 18th century philosopher Immanuel Kant's work, The Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. Specifically it focuses on his discussion in the Preface that outlines the relationship between the Prolegomena and his earlier published Critique of Pure Reason. The Prolegomena as a work addresses some of the obscurity that Kant admits is present in the Critique, and is structured in an analytic rather than synthetic style of presentation To support my ongoing work, go to my Patreon site - www.patreon.com/sadler If you'd like to make a direct contribution, you can do so here - www.paypal.me/ReasonIO - or at BuyMeACoffee - www.buymeacoffee.com/A4quYdWoM You can find over 3,000 philosophy videos in my main YouTube channel - www.youtube.com/user/gbisadler Purchase Kant's Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics - https://amzn.to/49pc1Xm

Ryan and Todd begin their analysis of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason by working through the prefaces to the first and second edition of the work. They focus on the radicality of Kant's breakthrough and the role that the limit plays in his philosophy.

Welcome to Street Stoics! In this thought-provoking episode, we delve deep into the heart of Stoicism as we explore the concept of the Stoic God, otherwise known as "Logos." Join us on a journey of intellectual discovery as we unravel the layers of this ancient philosophy, seeking to understand how Stoics find pure logic and reason in the divine concept of Logos.Discover the profound wisdom behind Stoic teachings as we discuss the role of Logos in cultivating a life guided by reason and clarity. Gain insights into how embracing the Stoic God can provide a framework for navigating the complexities of existence, fostering resilience and tranquility in the face of life's challenges.Tune in to uncover the essence of Logos in Stoic philosophy and learn practical ways to incorporate its principles into your daily life. Whether you're a seasoned Stoic practitioner or new to the philosophy, this episode promises to enrich your understanding of the Stoic God and its transformative power in fostering a life grounded in pure logic and reason.Don't miss out on this enlightening exploration of Stoicism and the profound connection between the Stoic God and the pursuit of a virtuous, meaningful existence. Subscribe now and join us on a journey toward greater wisdom and inner peace!Support the showwww.streetstoics.comhttps://twitter.com/StreetStoicsReach us: streetstoics@gmail.com

Every once in a while, JF and Phil like to do a “song swap.” Each picks a song, and the ensuing conversation locates linkages and correspondences where none was previously thought to exist. In this episode, they are joined by the music scholar Meredith Michael – Weird Studies assistant, and co-host of Cosmophonia, a podcast about music and outer space – to discuss songs by Lili Boulanger, Vienna Teng, and Iron & Wine. Before long, this disparate assortment personal favourites occasions a weirdly focused dialogue on time, impermanence, control, (mis)recognition, and the affinity of art and synchronicity. Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/weirdstudies). Buy the Weird Studies sountrack, volumes 1 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-1) and 2 (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-2), on Pierre-Yves Martel's Bandcamp (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com) page. Listen to Meredith Michael and Gabriel Lubell's podcast, Cosmophonia (https://cosmophonia.podbean.com/). Visit the Weird Studies Bookshop (https://bookshop.org/shop/weirdstudies) Find us on Discord (https://discord.com/invite/Jw22CHfGwp) Get the T-shirt design from Cotton Bureau (https://cottonbureau.com/products/can-o-content#/13435958/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s)! REFERENCES Iron and Wine, “Passing Afternoon” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0dP7iZv9K0&ab_channel=PsyPars) Vienna Teng, “The Hymn of Acxiom” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QF-7WiLykGM&ab_channel=ViennaTeng-Topic), (and here is the live version (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJyheSPtjoU&ab_channel=ViennaTeng)) Lili Boulanger, [Vieille Priére Bouddhique](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evn3bkK2W3o&abchannel=CHORWERKRUHR)_ Star Trek: Deep Space Nine (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106145/) Karol Berger, Bach's Cycle Mozart's Arrow (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780520257979) William Shakespeare, Hamlet (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780743477123) Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780451529060) Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780140447477) Vladimir Jankelevitch, Music and the Ineffable (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780691090474) Hector Berlioz, Fugue on “amen” from La Damnation du Faust (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChgJsOdNYSo&ab_channel=JulesBastin-Topic) Slavoj Zizek, A Pervert's Guide to Idiology (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2152198/) Federico Campagna, Technic and Magic (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9781350044029) Shepard Tone (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BzNzgsAE4F0&ab_channel=J_II) Rudolf Steiner, The Influces of Lucifer and Ahriman (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780880103756) Special Guest: Meredith Michael.

The Bulgakov Booth is a four-part series of interviews on the Russian priest and theologian, Sergius Bulgakov (1871–1944). The interviews here will explore the many intellectual twists and turns in Bulgakov's biography as well as some key themes in his writings. Jordan Daniel Wood earned his PhD in theology from Boston College in 2019 and published a book with University of Notre Dame Press entitled The Whole Mystery of Christ: Creation as Incarnation in Maximus Confessor (2022). He is also a stay-at-home father of four girls. PODCAST LINKS: Jordan's academia.edu page: https://bc.academia.edu/JordanWood Jordan's Twitter: https://twitter.com/JordanW41069857 CONNECT: Website: https://wipfandstock.com/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/wipfandstock Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/wipfandstock Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/wipfandstock/ SOURCES MENTIONED: Bulgakov, Sergius. The Bride of the Lamb. ———. The Lamb of God. ———. Sergii Bulgakov: Towards a Russian Political Theology. ———. The Sophiology of Death: Essays on Eschatology: Personal, Political, Universal. ———. The Tragedy of Philosophy (Philosophy and Dogma). Daley, Brian E., SJ. God Visible: Patristic Christology Reconsidered. Dei Verbum: Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation. de Lubac, Henri. The Religion of Teilhard de Chardin. John Paul II, Pope. Fides et ratio. Kant, Immanuel. Critique of Judgment. ———. Critique of Practical Reason. ———. Critique of Pure Reason. Kaplan, Grant. Faith and Reason through Christian History: A Theological Essay. Marcel, Gabriel. Creative Fidelity. Plato. Parmenides. Rahner, Karl. Faith in a Wintry Season: Conversations and Interviews with Karl Rahner in the Last Years of His Life.  ———. The Trinity. Slesinski, Robert F. The Theology of Sergius Bulgakov. Unitatis Redintegratio: Decree on Ecumenism. von Balthasar, Hans Urs. Dare We Hope That All Men Be Saved?: with “A Short Discourse on Hell.” ———. The Theology of Karl Barth. Wood, Jordan Daniel. “The Lively God of Sergius Bulgakov: Reflections on The Sophiology of Death.” OUTLINE: NEED TO ADJUST TIME STAMPS AFTER INTRO IS RECORDED (00:00) – Maximus Confessor, Friedrich Schelling, Sergius Bulgakov (06:31) – Roundtable: Bulgakov, Augustine, Aquinas, Hegel (10:56) – Incarnation as repair vs. Incarnation as disclosure (21:24) – Bulgakov: alive to God, alive to the world (30:00) – Key themes: antinomy and synthesis (37:50) – What the Western traditions can learn from Bulgakov (44:00) – The particularization of the universal (49:15) – Creative distance (from Europe) and creative fidelity (to the church) (57:30) – Bulgakov's ecumenism (01:00:13) – The Sophiology of Death (01:06:42) – Two approaches to Sophia (01:20:36) – The One and the Many (01:31:09) – The influence of German Idealism (01:33:48) – Bulgakov and universalism

Hello Interactors,Who would've thought that R.E.M.'s hit tune "Stand" held the secrets to Western spatial thinking? This week I break it down for you. From Aristotle's "Stand in the place where you live" to Newton's "Carry a compass to help you along," it's like they were dropping knowledge bombs all along! So next time you get this '80s hit stuck in your head, remember, you're getting a crash course in geographic philosophy. Rock on!As interactors, you're special individuals self-selected to be a part of an evolutionary journey. You're also members of an attentive community so I welcome your participation.Please leave your comments below or email me directly.Now let's go…IT'S FIXEDR.E.M.'s 1988 hit single, Stand, starts with this chorus:Stand in the place where you liveNow face northThink about directionWonder why you haven't beforeNow stand in the place where you wereNow face westThink about the place where you liveWonder why you haven't beforeFollowed by this verse:If you are confused, check with the sunCarry a compass to help you alongYour feet are going to be on the groundYour head is there to move you aroundWithout knowing it, they outlined what one researcher regards as the complete set of Western thought on space and place. In 1996, history and philosophy of geography professor Michael Curry identified just four distinct, but relational, notions of space that emerged two thousand years ago but continue to shape Western thought today.Curry's four main categories of space provide a framework for understanding different conceptualizations of space. These notions have influenced philosophical and scientific perspectives on space throughout history. Here they are:1. Static, Hierarchical, and Concrete Space (Aristotle 384-322 BC):This notion of space was influenced by Aristotle. It suggests objects and events have their natural places within the world. Aristotle associated the elements of earth, air, fire, and water with their respective natural places – a rock falls back to earth, water finds its way back to water, air flows to air, and fire moves upwards.This perspective views space as fixed and objects, and their elements, as being in specific positions within it. Curry reminds us that despite what modern science may say about the atomic structures and behavior of the world, we can see – as Aristotle did – that a bubble rises through water to find air like a frightened toddler running to their mother. And even with the best throw, there's no separating a rock from its mother earth. Aristotle embraced a qualitative notion of science, informed by what he perceived to be true. Even when we may know we're deceived. For example, we have to remind ourselves that the earth is not fixed and the sun does not set, even though it appears to be true.Aristotle's notion of space remained in Europe throughout the Middle Ages and guided all thought and action. But even though this Aristotelian common-sense view of the world can be seen even today, Curry notes that in 1277 the Church did its part to stamp it out. The Catholic church's passing of Condemnation of 1277 aimed at eradicating Aristotelian teachings. The Church also embraced mathematics in the Middle Ages, though later challenged advances in math that conflicted with religious doctrine, recognizing its truth, contribution to education, and sensing the economic and intellectual power it wielded.As the Enlightenment awoke, and with it the rise of Church-backed European geopolitical power, a more exacting view of space emerged. Surveying was ripped from the Roman ages and with it the gridding of land for political, economical, and military organizing and domination.Then, in the mid to late 1600s, Descartes further quantified space by marrying elements of algebra to geometry imbued with Christian religiosity. He, and the Church, preached – like Plato did – that this model of mathematical certainty is the bases of all knowledge. So, while the common sense, observational, and qualitative views of Aristotle are still with us today, they don't have nearly the influence over science Cartesian approaches do. Which leads us to Curry's second big influence on our notion of space.2. Absolute Grid Space (Newton 1642-1727):The second notion of space is most often associated with Isaac Newton. This conceptualization of space is influenced by Descartes and views space as an absolute grid. In this view, space is considered an infinite and independent entity within which objects exist and events occur. It is a framework where positions, distances, and directions can be precisely defined, a fixed reference frame allows for the measurement and calculation of an object's position and movement. Curry reminds us that Newton is largely regarded as a secular contributor to science, but like Descartes his work is riddled with religious overtones.His Christian view of space as infinite and eternal, where objects and motion are the work of an omnipresent God, are found in his 1686 Fundamental Principles of Natural Philosophy. He says God“is eternal and infinite, omnipotent and omniscient…He endures forever and is everywhere present. He is omnipresent not virtually only but also substantially…In him are all things contained and moved, yet neither affects the other; God suffers nothing from the motion of bodies, bodies find no resistance from the omnipresence of God.”But Newton's voice and influence was not alone. Which gets us to number three.IT'S ALL RELATIVE3. Relational Space (Leibniz 1646-1716):The third notion of space was influenced by Newton's contemporary Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. He argued for a relational understanding of space. While adopting the scientific outlook of Newton, Leibniz attacked Newton's absolutist approach tinged with Christian orthodoxy. Whereas Newton rejected the senses, as they may deceive God's power and will, Leibniz emphasized the importance of considering how we sense relationships among objects and events. Because our eyes (with the help of our brain) can sense objects moving relative to one another, Leibniz argued space is fundamentally defined by these relationships. The positions and properties of objects are interdependent. This relational view highlights the dynamic and interconnected nature of spatial relationships that comes from motion of one object relative to another.This notion of spatial relationships, that some objects appear to move in absolute space while others remain stationary has echoes of both Descartes and Newton but without metaphysical religiosity. It also embraces elements of a human-centeredness that culminates in unique and individual spatial perceptions. This opened the door to number four.4. Imposed Form Space (Kant 1724-1804):The last notion of space, associated with the philosopher Immanuel Kant, challenges the previous perspectives by positing that space is something imposed on the world by humans. Kant argued that space is not an inherent quality of the external world but rather a framework through which humans perceive and organize their experiences. In this view, space is a subjective construct that shapes our understanding of the world.Kant very much believed in Descartes and Newton's mathematical truths in how to describe the world and how objects behave, but in his 1781 Critique of Pure Reason he questioned what we can really know about the world given it's all skewed by our perceptions. Curry recalls that Kant himself regard this shift in thinking as a ‘Copernican Revolution'. Just as Copernicus reoriented the universe by centering planets around the sun, Kant believed his critique of reason shifts the center of knowledge from what was thought to be known to the perception of the knower. He observed that even though something can be shown to be mathematically true, like gravity, we can't see gravity. We can calculate wind speed, but we can't see what caused the air to move. Kant's revolution opened the door for radical alternatives to describing the world, including the discovery of non-Euclidean geometry just thirty years after Kant's publication.Curry's four notions of Western spatial thought just may have culminated in a pop hit single in the 1980s. Aristotle would have liked that R.E.M. suggest we “check with the sun” given his version of space is all about the fixed positions of natural elements. Newton would commend them on advising to “carry a compass to help you along” an absolute grid space. Leibniz would remind the confident compass holder that while “your feet are going to be [at a point] on the ground, your head is there to move you around” relative to that point. And Kant would have told everyone to just stop and “think about the place where you live, wonder why you haven't before.” This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit interplace.io

References J Biol Chem 2017 292: 20481. Critique if Pure Reason.1781. Kant,I. Guerra,2023. manuscripts in preparation --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/dr-daniel-j-guerra/message

Paul Williams of Blogging Theology talks to Muhammad Jalal about his ten most influential books, why he recommends them and the importance of reading. Titles mentioned in order of rank: 1. The Meaning of the Holy Qur'an by Abdullah Yusuf Ali 2. Islam and the Destiny of Man by Charles Le Gai Eaton 3. The Book of Hadith: Sayings of the Prophet Muhammad from the Mishkat Al Masabih selected by Charles Le Gai Eaton 4. Encountering Mystery: Religious Experience in a Secular Age by Dale C. Allison Jr. 5. Ibn Taymiyya on Reason and Revelation by Carl Sharif El-Tobgui 6. Muhammad: His Life Based on the Earliest Teachings by Martin Lings 7. Misquoting Muhammad by Jonathan A.C. Brown 8. The Oxford Book of English Verse edited by Christopher Ricks 9. Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant 10. The Making of a Salafi Muslim Woman by Anabel Inge This Ramadan please consider making a donation, however small, to The Thinking Muslim, to receive a share in the reward and to help us make a greater impact. ⁠⁠⁠https://www.thinkingmuslim.com/Donate⁠ Join our Telegram group here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://t.me/thinkingmuslim ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Follow us on Twitter here: ⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://twitter.com/jalalayn⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ and⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://twitter.com/thinking_muslim⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ Website Archive: ⁠thinkingmuslim.com

Welcome back for another episode of Nick's Non-fiction with your host Nick Muniz The Critique of Pure Reason is a book by the German philosopher Immanuel Kant, in which the author seeks to determine the limits and scope of metaphysics. Kant builds on the work of empiricist philosophers such as John Locke and David Hume. Prior to Kant, it was thought that all a priori knowledge must be analytic. Kant, however, argues that our knowledge of mathematics, of the first principles of natural science, and of metaphysics, is both a priori and synthetic. Subscribe, Share, Mobile links & Time-stamps below! 0:00 Introduction 6:00 About the Author 7:50 Ch1: Critique of Pure Reason 12:45 Ch2: Empiricism 18:00 Ch3: The Method 23:30 Ch4: Religion 30:00 Ch5: Organize 36:25 Next Time & Goodbye! YouTube: https://youtu.be/25BFkTxsnGo Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/TheNiche

Exploring the Leadership Paradox with Emotional Intelligence. Using Antimony Strategies to Unlock The Leadership Paradox and gain Emotional Intelligence. Leadership paradox. Emotional intelligence. Reason vs Intuition. Kant's antinomies of Pure Reason. Structure of Beliefs. Logical thinking. Critical thinking. Existential understanding. Understanding the confusion.  Check out our website www.LikeItMatters.Net.  Be sure to Like and Follow us on our facebook page.  Get daily inspiration from our blog www.wayofwarrior.blog. Follow our Podcasts and build the pattern for; Living Life Like It Matters.  Be sure to Like and Follow us on our facebook page. Learn about our non profit work at www.likeitmatters.net/nonprofit.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In this episode, I explain Immanuel Kant's notion of the Transcendental Aesthetic from the Critique of Pure Reason. If you want to support me, you can do that with these links: Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/theoryandphilosophy paypal.me/theoryphilosophy Twitter: @DavidGuignion IG: @theory_and_philosophy

Start Artist Song Time Album Year Procosmian Fannyfiddlers Smelly Tune 4:33 Return Of The Sweaty Owl 2003 0:06:45 Professor Tip Top Procrastination Song 4:39 Exobiology 2016 0:11:23 Professor Tip Top Turning Machines 5:16 Hybrid Hymns 2019 0:16:39 Profuna Ocean Black Train 4:21 Continuation 2020 0:21:00 Profusion Infinite 3:52 Phersu 2015 0:26:08 ProgNoise Shedding tear 5:53 […]

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the insight into our relationship with the world that Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) shared in his book The Critique of Pure Reason in 1781. It was as revolutionary, in his view, as when the Polish astronomer Copernicus realised that Earth revolves around the Sun rather than the Sun around Earth. Kant's was an insight into how we understand the world around us, arguing that we can never know the world as it is, but only through the structures of our minds which shape that understanding. This idea, that the world depends on us even though we do not create it, has been one of Kant's greatest contributions to philosophy and influences debates to this day. The image above is a portrait of Immanuel Kant by Friedrich Wilhelm Springer With Fiona Hughes Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at the University of Essex Anil Gomes Associate Professor and Fellow and Tutor in Philosophy at Trinity College, Oxford And John Callanan Senior Lecturer in Philosophy at King's College London Producer: Simon Tillotson

Scottish philosopher David Hume thought that rationalism didn't work at all. German philosopher Immanuel Kant thought rationalism didn't work by itself. Critique of Pure Reason, the first in a three-part project, is Kant's attempt to join the beliefs of Hume with the beliefs of the rationalists. In his system, thoughts, experience, physics, morality, political and religious questions all exist in relation to one another. It wasn't a takedown of reason; it was an investigation. Professor Michael Rosen is a professor of Ethics in Politics and Government at Harvard University. His work includes philosophy, social theory, and the history of ideas. He is well known for his work on 19th and 20th century European philosophy. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/new-books-network

Scottish philosopher David Hume thought that rationalism didn't work at all. German philosopher Immanuel Kant thought rationalism didn't work by itself. Critique of Pure Reason, the first in a three-part project, is Kant's attempt to join the beliefs of Hume with the beliefs of the rationalists. In his system, thoughts, experience, physics, morality, political and religious questions all exist in relation to one another. It wasn't a takedown of reason; it was an investigation. Professor Michael Rosen is a professor of Ethics in Politics and Government at Harvard University. His work includes philosophy, social theory, and the history of ideas. He is well known for his work on 19th and 20th century European philosophy. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/german-studies

Scottish philosopher David Hume thought that rationalism didn't work at all. German philosopher Immanuel Kant thought rationalism didn't work by itself. Critique of Pure Reason, the first in a three-part project, is Kant's attempt to join the beliefs of Hume with the beliefs of the rationalists. In his system, thoughts, experience, physics, morality, political and religious questions all exist in relation to one another. It wasn't a takedown of reason; it was an investigation. Professor Michael Rosen is a professor of Ethics in Politics and Government at Harvard University. His work includes philosophy, social theory, and the history of ideas. He is well known for his work on 19th and 20th century European philosophy. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/intellectual-history

Scottish philosopher David Hume thought that rationalism didn't work at all. German philosopher Immanuel Kant thought rationalism didn't work by itself. Critique of Pure Reason, the first in a three-part project, is Kant's attempt to join the beliefs of Hume with the beliefs of the rationalists. In his system, thoughts, experience, physics, morality, political and religious questions all exist in relation to one another. It wasn't a takedown of reason; it was an investigation. Professor Michael Rosen is a professor of Ethics in Politics and Government at Harvard University. His work includes philosophy, social theory, and the history of ideas. He is well known for his work on 19th and 20th century European philosophy. See more information on our website, WritLarge.fm. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week we're reairing episodes featuring some of our favorite audiobooks we've covered on Behind the Mic. AudioFile's Michele Cobb tells host Jo Reed about the National Book Award finalist performed by one of her favorite narrators. Marin Ireland narrates Rumaan Alam's stunning audiobook that explores race, class, family, and global catastrophe. A married couple and their children head to Long Island for a family vacation. However, the owners of their rental house arrive unexpectedly after fleeing a blackout, and the two families—one white and middle class, the other Black and wealthy—cohabitate and try to figure out what's happened. Whether Ireland is focused on the character dynamics or omnisciently describing the terrifying events of the world at large, she delivers an unforgettable powerhouse of a performance. Read the full review of the audiobook on AudioFile's website. Published by Harper Audio. Find more audiobook recommendations at audiofilemagazine.com Support for AudioFile's Behind the Mic comes from Naxos AudioBooks. Peter Wickham reads Critique of Pure Reason, Immanuel Kant's hugely influential treatise on the nature of human reason. In this engaging recording, the ideas and arguments in the Critique are put forward with great clarity. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When talking about posthumanism and its intellectual dependencies the philosophical groundwork that made it possible often tends to be neglected. In this series we'll provide an incentive to reflect upon these presuppositions by outlining the implications present in the work of premiere philosopher of modernity, Immanuel Kant, that opened up the intellectual horizon for posthumanism. In the first part we focus on Kant's groundbreaking intuitions about the nature of consciousness and its constitutive role at the heart of reality itself as both irrevocable departure from pre-modern intellectuality and necessary condition for assumptions of contemporary posthumanism. We do this by giving a broad outline of Kant's arguments from the central part of his Critique of Pure Reason - "the transcendental deduction of the categories of pure reason". In the second part we'll sketch how posthumanists rely on Kantian understanding of subject/object split for building their utopian quasi metaphysics.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: A short conceptual explainer of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, published by jessicata on June 3, 2022 on LessWrong. Introduction While writing another document, I noticed I kept referring to Kantian concepts. Since most people haven't read Kant, that would lead to interpretation problems by default. I'm not satisfied with any summary out there for the purpose of explaining Kantian concepts as I understand them. This isn't summarizing the work as a whole given I'm focusing on the parts that I actually understood and continue to find useful. I will refer to computer science and statistical concepts, such as Bayesianism, Solomonoff induction, and AI algorithms. Different explainers are, of course, appropriate to different audiences. Last year I had planned on writing a longer explainer (perhaps chapter-by-chapter), however that became exhausting due to the length of the text. So I'll instead focus on what still stuck after a year, that I keep wanting to refer to. This is mostly concepts from the first third of the work. This document is structured similar to a glossary, explaining concepts and how they fit together. Kant himself notes that the Critique of Pure Reason is written in a dry and scholastic style, with few concrete examples, and therefore "could never be made suitable for popular use". Perhaps this explainer will help. Metaphysics We are compelled to reason about questions we cannot answer, like whether the universe is finite or infinite, or whether god(s) exist. There is an "arena of endless contests" between different unprovable assumptions, called Metaphysics. Metaphysics, once the "queen of all the sciences", has become unfashionable due to lack of substantial progress. Metaphysics may be categorized as dogmatic, skeptical, or critical: Dogmatic metaphysics makes and uses unprovable assumptions about the nature of reality. Skeptical metaphysics rejects all unprovable assumptions, in the process ceasing to know much at all. Critical metaphysics is what Kant seeks to do: find the boundaries of what reason can and cannot know. Kant is trying to be comprehensive, so that "there cannot be a single metaphysical problem that has not been solved here, or at least to the solution of which the key has not been provided." A bold claim. But, this project doesn't require extending knowledge past the limits of possible experience, just taking an "inventory of all we possess through pure reason, ordered systematically". The Copernican revolution in philosophy Kant compares himself to Copernicus; the Critique of Pure Reason is commonly referred to as a Copernican revolution in philosophy. Instead of conforming our intuition to objects, we note that objects as we experience them must conform to our intuition (e.g. objects appear in the intuition of space). This is sort of a reverse Copernican revolution; Copernicus zooms out even further from "the world (Earth)" to "the sun", while Kant zooms in from "the world" to "our perspective(s)". Phenomena and noumena Phenomena are things as they appear to us, noumena are things as they are in themselves (or "things in themselves"); rational cognition can only know things about phenomena, not noumena. "Noumenon" is essentially a limiting negative concept, constituting any remaining reality other than what could potentially appear to us. Kant writes: "this conception [of the noumenon] is necessary to restrain sensuous intuition within the bounds of phenomena, and thus to limit the objective validity of sensuous cognition; for things in themselves, which lie beyond its province, are called noumena for the very purpose of indicating that this cognition does not extend its application to all that the understanding thinks. But, after all, the possibility of such noumena is quite incomprehensible, and beyond the sphere of pheno...

Time Artist Title Duration Album Year 0:00:00 ProgPhonic 89 Intro 0:44 0:00:41 Stuckfish Calling 5:58 Calling 2017 0:08:08 Kaipa The Bitter Setting Sun 15:11 Urskog 2022 0:23:18 Hasse Froberg & Musical Companion To Those Who Rule The World 7:18 We Are The Truth 2021 0:31:57 OSI Indian Curse 4:35 Fire Make Thunder 2012 0:36:33 Oceansize […]

[powerpress]

[powerpress]

[powerpress]

Hey Happy Monday y'all it's New Music Week. We're shaking down March 2022 and Steven Routledge, Roger Grace and Gerald Chyzenski have the inside info. Hit play and find a favorite song. Subscribe to Rockin' the Suburbs on Apple Podcasts/iTunes or other podcast platforms, including audioBoom, Spotify, Google Podcasts, Amazon, iHeart, Stitcher and TuneIn. Or listen at SuburbsPod.com. Please rate/review the show on Apple Podcasts and share it with your friends. Visit our website at SuburbsPod.com Email Jim & Patrick at rock@suburbspod.com Follow us on the Twitter, Facebook or Instagram @suburbspod If you're glad or sad or high, call the Suburban Party Line — 612-440-1984. Theme music: "Ascension," originally by Quartjar, covered by Frank Muffin. Visit quartjar.bandcamp.com and frankmuffin.bandcamp.com

Though it is seldom acknowledged in the weirdosphere, there is a difference between weirdness and mystery. Most the time, the Weird confronts us with a problem, an impersonal epistemic obstacle which we can always hope would go away if we just closed our eyes and whistled past it with our hands in our pockets. Mystery, however, is always personal. It envelops us; it addresses us as persons. Mystery is as present within us as it is out there. It is there when you open your eyes, and even more so when you shut them tight. Maybe it had us in its grip before we were even born. In this episode, JF and Phil make radical mystery the focus of a discussion ranging over everything from unique kinds of tea and spelunking mishaps to antisonic demon pipes and malevolent radiators. Support us on Patreon (https://www.patreon.com/weirdstudies) Find us on Discord (https://discord.com/invite/Jw22CHfGwp) Get the new T-shirt design from Cotton Bureau (https://cottonbureau.com/products/can-o-content#/13435958/tee-men-standard-tee-vintage-black-tri-blend-s)! Get your Weird Studies merchandise (https://www.redbubble.com/people/Weird-Studies/shop?asc=u) (t-shirts, coffee mugs, etc.) Visit the Weird Studies Bookshop (https://bookshop.org/shop/weirdstudies) Buy the Weird Studies soundtrack (https://pierre-yvesmartel.bandcamp.com/album/weird-studies-music-from-the-podcast-vol-1) REFERENCES For information on JF's new course, Groundwork for a Philosophy of Magic, go to Nura Learning (www.nuralearning.com). Phil Ford, “Radical Mystery: A Preliminary Account” (https://www.patreon.com/posts/radical-mystery-64180412) J.F. Martel, “Reality is analog” (http://www.reclaimingart.com/reality-is-analog.html) John Keel, The Mothman Prophecies (https://bookshop.org/books/the-mothman-prophecies-a-true-story/9780765334985) Gabriel Marcel, [Being and Having](https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/1242857.BeingandHaving) Immanuel Kant, Critique of Pure Reason (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780140447477) Eugene Paul Wigner, “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics” (https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/17448036-the-unreasonable-effectiveness-of-mathematics-in-the-natural-sciences) Louis Sass, Madness and Modernism (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780198779292) Peter Kingsley, Catafalque (https://bookshop.org/books/catafalque-carl-jung-and-the-end-of-humanity/9781999638412) Rudolf Otto, The Idea of the Holy (https://bookshop.org/a/18799/9780195002102) Steven Spielberg (dir.), Raiders of the Lost Ark (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082971/) Dogen, “Instructions for the Cook” (http://www.thezensite.com/ZenTeachings/Dogen_Teachings/Instructions_for_the_cook.html) Alan Watts, The Way of Zen (https://bookshop.org/books/the-way-of-zen-zendao/9780375705106) Weird Studies, Episode 56 with Jeremy Johnson (https://www.weirdstudies.com/56)

00:00 PhD student Matthew Ghobrial, https://twitter.com/GhobrialMatthew 01:00 Matt's Youtube channel, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9z6CwgycPjUbOLElkLuHjQ 02:00 What are Russia's legitimate interests in Ukraine? 04:00 Why did Putin invade Ukraine? 06:00 What would a peace agreement look like? 08:00 Hyperbolic rhetoric about Putin 09:00 When Russia was pro-Western (1990s) 11:20 Why is Biden uninterested in peace in Ukraine? 12:00 The case against sanctions against Russia 13:30 Stephen Colbert's anti-Russian attitude 15:00 Turkey, Russia, Ukraine 18:00 Will Turkey join the EU? 19:40 The death of Madeline Albright and Bill Clinton's foreign policy 26:30 Why are chemical weapons worse than regular weapons? 28:00 Per capita (nominal) GDP, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita 36:00 Why does the Alt Right like Putin? 42:00 Surprises from the war 48:30 Charles Bausman - U.S. White Nationalist Group Linked to Pro-Kremlin Propagandist, https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2020/10/06/us-white-nationalist-group-linked-pro-kremlin-propagandist 45:00 Russia Today 1:02:00 History was political history until the 1920s, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_von_Ranke 1:04:30 When did history cease to be a tool to promote ethno-nationalism? 1:06:10 Epistemology and history 1:07:30 In Defense of History by Richard Evans, https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=143040 1:13:00 Does history have general laws? 1:15:30 Historians rarely make predictions 1:19:00 Paul Kennedy's 1987 best seller, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers: Economic Change and Military Conflict from 1500 to 2000, https://www.amazon.com/Rise-Fall-Great-Powers/dp/0679720197 1:28:00 The Hitler Diaries, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hitler_Diaries 1:35:00 Kant's Critique of Pure Reason, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critique_of_Pure_Reason Join this channel to get access to perks: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCSFVD7Xfhn7sJY8LAIQmH8Q/join https://odysee.com/@LukeFordLive, https://lbry.tv/@LukeFord, https://rumble.com/lukeford https://dlive.tv/lukefordlivestreams Listener Call In #: 1-310-997-4596 Superchat: https://entropystream.live/app/lukefordlive Bitchute: https://www.bitchute.com/channel/lukeford/ Soundcloud MP3s: https://soundcloud.com/luke-ford-666431593 Code of Conduct: https://lukeford.net/blog/?p=125692 https://www.patreon.com/lukeford http://lukeford.net Email me: lukeisback@gmail.com or DM me on Twitter.com/lukeford Support the show | https://www.streamlabs.com/lukeford, https://patreon.com/lukeford, https://PayPal.Me/lukeisback Facebook: http://facebook.com/lukecford Feel free to clip my videos. It's nice when you link back to the original.

More great books at LoyalBooks.com

More great books at LoyalBooks.com

This is the third in a series where I'm joined by Eric Taxier to discuss Kant's First Critique, the Critique of Pure Reason. In this episode we discuss the Introduction to the Critique. The first segment discusses Kant's conception of the collaboration between the object and our faculties for comprehending that object as well as the distinction between the a priori and the a posteriori. The second segment turn to the Kantian distinction between the analytic and the synthetic and examines the notion of the analytic as involving containment. The third segment zeroes in on the synthetic and the manner in which we are a necessary component of the act of synthesis. We also examine the troubling (for many) notion that math exemplifies the synthetic rather than the analytic. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

Eric Taxier and Chad Jenkins discuss the two prefaces of Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. We address the different goals and strategies of the two quite different prefaces: the 1781 original and the new preface for the 1787 revision. We discuss the way in which Kant describes Reason as insisting on going beyond what it can directly experience (and the trouble it causes itself in so doing), the notion of a critique, the things metaphysics can learn from other sciences, the importance of being in some way "rule-bound," and the question of one's grasp of the noumenal (or lack thereof). --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

This is the first in a series of episodes in which Chad Jenkins and Eric Taxier discuss the Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant. This episode covers some background information including the conflict between Rationalism and Empiricism, Kant's pre-critical writings, and the authors that led him to the critical impasse: Leibniz, Hume, and Rousseau. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app

This lecture concern's Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. I examine some of the core features of Kant's famous text - noumenal and phenomenal, conditions of possibility, time and space, intuition and concepts. Most importantly, I try to explain just why understanding Kant is indispensable for any understanding the debates which go on to form Continental Philosophy in the 20th Century.This lecture series are from one of our modules called 'Transcendence and the Body' which is a core module of our MA in Continental Philosophy. On this course we study the history and emergence of Continental Philosophy. Much of 19th Century thought can be understood as a productive debate between philosophers working in an idealist tradition - where the key questions are to do with the conditions of possibility of thought or presentation, whether these conditions are understood transcendentally or historically - and those working in a broadly materialist tradition - where the key questions concern the material basis of both mind and appearance. This thematic will be used to investigate key figures and positions within this period, whilst allowing also for the possibility that staging the debate in this way might obscure certain other problems, themes or methods. Philosophers studied will be selected from a list that includes Kant, Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Lange, Marx, Nietzsche, Bergson, Merleau-Ponty among others.Come study on our MA in Continental Philosophy via this link. Or, join our MA in Philosophy of Nature, Information and Technology via this link. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.