1
00:00:09,040 --> 00:00:18,940
Conte took up the task of developing a systematic kind of business at a time when the smart money was that it was a waste of money,

2
00:00:18,960 --> 00:00:25,340
that science had progressed and applied mathematics and address to the point where the world of thought,

3
00:00:25,660 --> 00:00:32,740
the Enlightenment world knew what it was doing and the metaphysician was actually just troubled themselves.

4
00:00:33,550 --> 00:00:44,050
So the state of metaphysics was something of a wreckage and many of wiser heads thought that it could be safely regarded entirely.

5
00:00:44,440 --> 00:00:51,069
That's how I usually like to begin these lectures with counsel insistence that even as you set out to ignore metaphysics,

6
00:00:51,070 --> 00:00:56,260
you're probably engaged in some form of metaphysical, physical speculation yourself.

7
00:00:56,620 --> 00:01:01,450
He says that the human mind will never give up metaphysical research.

8
00:01:02,080 --> 00:01:10,180
This has little to be expected is that we should prefer to give up breathing altogether to avoid inhaling impure air.

9
00:01:11,500 --> 00:01:14,470
There will therefore always be metaphysics in the world.

10
00:01:14,620 --> 00:01:25,420
Nay, everyone, especially every man of reflection, will have it, and for one, a recognised standard will shape it for himself after his own power.

11
00:01:25,870 --> 00:01:29,350
So you're going to do this whether you like it or not.

12
00:01:29,380 --> 00:01:34,420
And one of the objectives of the committee in the Senate was do it the right way.

13
00:01:34,510 --> 00:01:37,510
Results issued by the Commonwealth are mixed.

14
00:01:38,980 --> 00:01:43,330
Not only mixed, but many regard the project as a dead letter.

15
00:01:43,360 --> 00:01:46,620
Jonathan Bennett in The Philosophical Review.

16
00:01:46,630 --> 00:01:57,940
Some years ago I wrote this Most of the particular reason is prima facie dead because prima facie independent of wholly indefensible theories.

17
00:01:58,720 --> 00:02:04,450
So the commentators dominant problem is to display of life below the surface.

18
00:02:07,270 --> 00:02:16,270
Now, I think that this autopsy report will surely be premature because of the 40 years since Bennett reached that conclusion.

19
00:02:16,840 --> 00:02:23,710
Don't ask how many hundreds and even thousands of dissertations, journal articles,

20
00:02:23,860 --> 00:02:30,780
treatises, presentations from lectures have been addressed to this alleged corpse.

21
00:02:32,430 --> 00:02:35,190
It's a case of mistaken identity, I think.

22
00:02:35,220 --> 00:02:45,629
I think the dead body that it found was a body that he had misidentified but conservationists in his own time.

23
00:02:45,630 --> 00:02:48,840
After the first edition, which came out in 1781,

24
00:02:49,140 --> 00:02:57,030
it was obvious in no time that both friends and critics systematically misunderstood what he was trying to convey.

25
00:03:01,920 --> 00:03:06,150
You are just trying to talk. This is the five minute beginning now.

26
00:03:06,720 --> 00:03:20,080
I have no discipline at all. I can't react to criticism with his characteristic intemperate, frustrated impatience.

27
00:03:20,710 --> 00:03:22,000
He refers to, quote,

28
00:03:22,840 --> 00:03:33,309
incompetent judges who wildly have an old name for every deviation from their perverse though common opinions and never judge of the spirit

29
00:03:33,310 --> 00:03:42,340
of philosophical nobility lecture but cling to the letter only already to put their own conceits in the place of well-defined notions,

30
00:03:42,520 --> 00:03:51,809
and therefore deform and distort them. But his critics didn't have a leg to stand on.

31
00:03:51,810 --> 00:03:54,300
And if you've been waiting for the first picture,

32
00:03:54,350 --> 00:04:01,680
you'll be sympathetic with the frustration of critics who are often not clear as to just what not only what concrete means,

33
00:04:02,070 --> 00:04:07,600
but what the purpose of the entire project is. What is the project of the first chamber?

34
00:04:07,920 --> 00:04:11,700
What's he trying to do? It's not enough about the Arabic to say,

35
00:04:12,060 --> 00:04:21,210
put metaphysics on a scientific foundation because we've yet to define metaphysics or come to some agreement as to what it would mean by scientific,

36
00:04:22,020 --> 00:04:27,180
let alone putting something on a foundation. Ashton Gardiner says this.

37
00:04:28,830 --> 00:04:36,300
This is all by way of encouraging you to approach the book with great optimism, sheer dispersion, Gardiner says.

38
00:04:36,960 --> 00:04:41,040
Virtually every sentence of the critique presents difficulties.

39
00:04:41,850 --> 00:04:52,050
Attempts have been made to provide commentaries comprehensively illuminating, comprehensively illuminating each individual section of the work.

40
00:04:52,320 --> 00:04:57,450
And some of these run to several volumes without getting near its end.

41
00:05:00,220 --> 00:05:11,120
And Schilling. And then one commentator noted what it's like to read the critique of Pure Race and says it is, quote,

42
00:05:11,900 --> 00:05:21,710
a disagreeable task because the words dry, obscure, opposed to all ordinary notions and long winded as well.

43
00:05:22,220 --> 00:05:27,780
Who said that can't emanate from the communists?

44
00:05:28,850 --> 00:05:39,860
This is his reflection on the critique of purism disagreeable task, dry, obscure, post-war, very notions and long winded as well.

45
00:05:40,190 --> 00:05:46,790
So you should be very enthusiastic about taking notes the first from cheap based on his judgements.

46
00:05:49,280 --> 00:05:59,269
Can't go to this. During his credibility, as he was a highly accomplished scholar, his interests were wide ranging.

47
00:05:59,270 --> 00:06:04,790
They included issues in law and in science, and particularly in astronomy.

48
00:06:07,510 --> 00:06:15,170
He is a scholar of consequence and he would have been a notable scholar had he never taken up this project at all.

49
00:06:17,090 --> 00:06:22,580
He gets to it through a rather winding path. A lot of it is hit and miss.

50
00:06:22,880 --> 00:06:29,720
You can tell from the correspondence he has with friends and admirers that he's heading toward the critique of pure reason.

51
00:06:29,720 --> 00:06:33,110
But he's not quite sure what the model should be.

52
00:06:34,280 --> 00:06:38,440
And the best way to get there is he's living in a divided world.

53
00:06:38,450 --> 00:06:42,220
He's living in a world of notes and blog.

54
00:06:42,230 --> 00:06:47,480
That's a world of British empiricism, focussed on observation and measurement,

55
00:06:48,110 --> 00:06:55,910
and a world of traditional rationalist approaches to difficult problems where if you have the right person sitting in the right chair,

56
00:06:56,210 --> 00:07:05,230
you should be able to deduce the facts. And Conte is trying to make that claim and even reconcile those two words.

57
00:07:09,440 --> 00:07:16,100
The first sign of of real progress comes ten years before the first edition of the first ever.

58
00:07:16,760 --> 00:07:23,270
He's writing a letter to Marcus Hurt's former student doctor, an interesting fellow in its own right.

59
00:07:24,110 --> 00:07:25,729
Marcus Hurts, I think,

60
00:07:25,730 --> 00:07:39,770
was the first medical school faculty member to admit and teach Jewish students at a crushing university and hurts himself to a fair amount of writing.

61
00:07:39,770 --> 00:07:44,600
And he was a very loyal, faithful correspondent of accounts,

62
00:07:45,260 --> 00:07:53,900
of deeply interested in contact as a person and in this work and of course was rather self disclosing in his letters to her,

63
00:07:54,800 --> 00:07:57,830
he says to her that he's well, he's he's on to it now.

64
00:07:57,830 --> 00:08:05,420
In 1771, he's working on something he's tentatively titled on the Limits of Sensibility and Reason.

65
00:08:06,690 --> 00:08:13,140
So we can see that this is the forecast of the major workplace.

66
00:08:13,500 --> 00:08:21,690
He describes himself and his approach to these subjects suffering from a mania for Systematising.

67
00:08:22,500 --> 00:08:27,220
You may have noticed those clinical signs that give us some interpretation.

68
00:08:27,600 --> 00:08:39,540
It's a veritable mania for system that if the thing were outlined to any more molecular level, it would be a book about what you see.

69
00:08:40,050 --> 00:08:50,430
And in the German, it's much more outlined. He expresses an urgency in his letters to parents.

70
00:08:51,180 --> 00:08:56,670
He sees time running out. He's still not quite sure how to get this.

71
00:09:00,540 --> 00:09:01,820
Well, what is the question?

72
00:09:01,830 --> 00:09:11,880
The question is how far our knowledge can reach the extent to which we can rely on a census, on the extent to which we can rely on reason.

73
00:09:12,750 --> 00:09:19,110
He recognises that the ultimate arbiter in matters of this kind has always been human rationality,

74
00:09:19,440 --> 00:09:23,160
but no one has taken the time to test the measuring instrument.

75
00:09:23,460 --> 00:09:29,520
That is, the gold standard for whether an argument succeeds or not is rationality itself.

76
00:09:30,420 --> 00:09:33,990
One has to assess the instrument. How good a thermometer is it?

77
00:09:34,860 --> 00:09:43,229
What does its nature bring to the table as it sets about to make judgements about its own productions and conduct?

78
00:09:43,230 --> 00:09:46,470
It is quite original in that regard.

79
00:09:46,830 --> 00:09:51,720
He understands that the census and reason are both limited, but limited to how?

80
00:09:56,960 --> 00:10:00,680
Now what was the project?

81
00:10:01,880 --> 00:10:07,640
If someone were to ask you as one day you will be asked if you're doing philosophy here, it's.

82
00:10:09,780 --> 00:10:16,770
It's one of those easy questions. What was the concept project of the first 40 years?

83
00:10:17,010 --> 00:10:22,560
You have three ideas. What? What what would you say about the project is?

84
00:10:26,590 --> 00:10:30,310
Karl Marx, who is a distinguished scholar,

85
00:10:31,480 --> 00:10:39,910
sees contemporary scholarship as giving us three alternatives and works as a force

86
00:10:42,040 --> 00:10:48,190
for us to develop a systematic metaphysics serving as a reputation of scepticism.

87
00:10:48,700 --> 00:10:54,759
So the great evidence here, of course, is Hill, who awakened Khan from his dogmatic slumber.

88
00:10:54,760 --> 00:11:05,470
And one certainly can read the first four as a sustained defence of our epistemic resources against human type scepticism,

89
00:11:05,770 --> 00:11:11,740
which is the most developed form of what might be called the empiricist path to scepticism now.

90
00:11:12,010 --> 00:11:23,800
What is it about empiricism that that culminates in scepticism and some form of scepticism on the traditional empiricist account?

91
00:11:23,860 --> 00:11:34,560
We do not have direct access to the facts of the external world, and that is we do not experience externality directly, but only immediately.

92
00:11:34,570 --> 00:11:41,960
Not immediately, but immediately. Because between us and the external world are those what do you call them?

93
00:11:41,980 --> 00:11:49,590
Oh, yes, censorious. And so the question is how faithfully they report, what is going on up there?

94
00:11:49,920 --> 00:11:59,040
Well, to raise the question, how faithful is the sensory report of the external world is to assume that you have some reliable,

95
00:11:59,190 --> 00:12:04,500
nonsense, free way of answering that question. That's the box you can't get out of.

96
00:12:04,740 --> 00:12:12,810
And so there is always this gap between reality as it might possibly be known by some nonhuman creature,

97
00:12:13,050 --> 00:12:21,270
and the reality that's empirically sampled by the senses whose limitations and distortions are very well known,

98
00:12:21,630 --> 00:12:26,040
but not perfectly classified or categorised or measured.

99
00:12:26,880 --> 00:12:31,860
So there is that problem. You do the best you can. How good are the senses?

100
00:12:32,640 --> 00:12:38,970
Well, we go to the lunatic back, so they're obviously reporting something reasonably well.

101
00:12:39,450 --> 00:12:46,770
But if you're serious about epistemology, then you have reservations about full knowledge grounded in science experience.

102
00:12:46,790 --> 00:12:59,430
So there's that problem. Call it a lot of problems, but call it a problem like it's it's one of the consequences, certainly, of a radical crisis.

103
00:13:01,630 --> 00:13:09,640
And there are gambits that can be invoked apart from counting information, from adopting a form of realism.

104
00:13:10,360 --> 00:13:16,810
Thomas Reid type of religion, according to which the alleged gap is not a gap at all.

105
00:13:17,020 --> 00:13:24,190
In fact, you see what is there full knowledge of the external world is immediate, not mediated.

106
00:13:24,190 --> 00:13:28,180
And I shall have a few things to say about that. Maybe today.

107
00:13:29,230 --> 00:13:33,990
For some of these lectures? Well,

108
00:13:34,000 --> 00:13:38,229
you might also say that the project of the first critique is to develop a

109
00:13:38,230 --> 00:13:43,630
metaphysical system that will provide the right kind of foundation for science.

110
00:13:44,680 --> 00:13:54,400
And I lean in the direction of kind of attempting to develop an argument that will ground the objectivity of science,

111
00:13:54,520 --> 00:14:03,129
that is to say can't is not trying to redeem the wisdom of the plane that he

112
00:14:03,130 --> 00:14:08,560
recognises the error of is that ordinary thought this problem would be brought.

113
00:14:09,400 --> 00:14:19,960
But he also recognises the profound success of the Newtonian project, the 17th century project, the age of Newfoundland, Galileo coming.

114
00:14:20,620 --> 00:14:32,650
And this surely cannot be based on it. And at the stunningly chancy human tide of the vulnerabilities.

115
00:14:33,610 --> 00:14:40,839
So what Metaphysical Foundation at once respects the achievements of science and provides a

116
00:14:40,840 --> 00:14:47,290
grounding so that science itself understands the basis upon which its claims ultimately depends?

117
00:14:47,560 --> 00:14:52,540
One might argue that that is the project of the first critique.

118
00:14:55,350 --> 00:15:04,170
America gives us a third option, which is the enduring problem philosophy, enduring problem of ontology.

119
00:15:06,460 --> 00:15:09,920
So what is ontology? Well, you all know about elections.

120
00:15:09,930 --> 00:15:14,249
The philosophy students will read on the fine says.

121
00:15:14,250 --> 00:15:21,960
The nice thing about ontology is that it can be defined exhaustively by three monosyllabic English words.

122
00:15:23,010 --> 00:15:29,040
What is there? Well, what is there now?

123
00:15:29,170 --> 00:15:33,370
LOCKE Surely, one of the fathers of modern,

124
00:15:33,760 --> 00:15:43,450
modern day British empiricism was at pains to argue that the endless metaphysical disputes about the real

125
00:15:43,450 --> 00:15:51,850
essence of things were either to begin because we lack the capacity to know the real essence of any.

126
00:15:53,470 --> 00:15:58,630
All we have is what Locke referred to as the nominal essence of things.

127
00:15:58,960 --> 00:16:05,350
It's the way we live in virtual, the way we perceive and cogitate.

128
00:16:05,740 --> 00:16:11,770
It's the way we come to label things. People and carpets and bulbs and computers.

129
00:16:12,790 --> 00:16:16,540
We give things names based on general characteristics.

130
00:16:16,540 --> 00:16:23,770
And it's largely the the shared experiences of a community that settles on the meaning of a term.

131
00:16:24,220 --> 00:16:31,210
As for the realists of things, that's beyond the reach, beyond the reach of our very senses.

132
00:16:32,230 --> 00:16:43,030
How does Locke come to a conclusion like that? Well, he has an older friend of that very clever young fellow, Isaac Watson, that.

133
00:16:44,380 --> 00:16:49,120
And according to Newt, ultimate reality is corpuscular.

134
00:16:50,230 --> 00:16:58,540
That is to say, the ultimate material basis of everything is beyond our visual capabilities.

135
00:16:59,260 --> 00:17:00,969
So the real essence of, you know,

136
00:17:00,970 --> 00:17:13,090
this stuff like spins out of a particular theory of mind that he advances in an essay concerning human understanding of what our ideas.

137
00:17:13,180 --> 00:17:17,110
Ideas are something fabricated out of elementary sensations.

138
00:17:17,530 --> 00:17:26,740
Well, how does that work? Well, elementary sensations are very much like the corpuscular elements of our mind.

139
00:17:26,890 --> 00:17:36,220
Do you see? Now, by a process of association, these elementary sensations are pulled together to form elementary ideas.

140
00:17:36,670 --> 00:17:45,850
And what is that process of association like? It's like gravitational forces that fall together cause for more complex bodies.

141
00:17:46,180 --> 00:17:51,220
So Bloch has already given us something of an Italian theory of mind.

142
00:17:51,580 --> 00:17:54,910
And on that account, of course, we can know the real essence.

143
00:17:56,050 --> 00:18:00,190
No, no. Even above can of the real essence of things.

144
00:18:00,460 --> 00:18:03,880
The real essence of things is something very small.

145
00:18:05,410 --> 00:18:08,740
But that's another level at which we examine things.

146
00:18:08,750 --> 00:18:15,640
We examine this. And at this level, we give things names based on what?

147
00:18:15,970 --> 00:18:20,900
Based on the use we make and the traffic that we have with them in actual.

148
00:18:20,930 --> 00:18:24,860
But. Well, this then does create something of a pathological problem.

149
00:18:24,880 --> 00:18:30,370
The problem is. All right, we've got these phenomenal essences, these things we've given names to.

150
00:18:30,580 --> 00:18:41,320
But what really is there and in case you're hearing something about that squeak of candy and nobody's speaking at this point,

151
00:18:41,590 --> 00:18:46,060
your your hearing, you're hearing, actually.

152
00:18:46,940 --> 00:18:52,010
But there is an aspect of reality which is inferred but not know.

153
00:18:53,600 --> 00:19:00,390
And the condition of numenor are not entirely removed from the loftiest real essences.

154
00:19:02,520 --> 00:19:09,020
I can almost hear Costco screaming, just like they usually take something from that.

155
00:19:13,800 --> 00:19:22,080
Now, Karl Emmerich's argues that Congress aware of all three of these issues,

156
00:19:22,410 --> 00:19:29,700
but he finally settled on a modest fourth option, which once referred to as the transcendental option,

157
00:19:30,300 --> 00:19:40,690
but would unearth and delineate the conditions necessary for both the scientific and the manifest images of the world of the transcendental option.

158
00:19:40,710 --> 00:19:47,640
I will get your content and his neo logistic use of transcendental.

159
00:19:49,040 --> 00:19:54,609
Place. Well,

160
00:19:54,610 --> 00:20:01,929
Kurt says this is a beachhead when one's region has learned completely to understand

161
00:20:01,930 --> 00:20:07,780
its own power in respect of objects which can be presented to it in experience,

162
00:20:08,350 --> 00:20:13,360
it should easily be able to determine what completeness and certainty the extent

163
00:20:13,360 --> 00:20:17,530
and the limits of its intended employment beyond the bounds of experience.

164
00:20:17,800 --> 00:20:21,400
Once reason sees what it is doing would be inferred.

165
00:20:21,400 --> 00:20:31,290
If I could use that horror like it's because it was so difficult to turn off today and to start talking about it, which I'm sure it is.

166
00:20:31,360 --> 00:20:35,500
And he stopped me before I said again, yes, for once.

167
00:20:36,040 --> 00:20:41,530
What's reason has a way of reckoning. What it does with the contents of experience.

168
00:20:41,800 --> 00:20:48,320
How it works on the contents of experience. Half the model is taken care of already.

169
00:20:48,320 --> 00:20:56,660
And this is why we need a lot of critical assessment of how the reason operates, what its limits, what its limits are.

170
00:21:01,080 --> 00:21:06,330
Contra raises a very interesting question, which I think is probably the best way to the first chief.

171
00:21:06,330 --> 00:21:15,120
He raises the question and they throw the gun. The question is, how is nature possible?

172
00:21:17,010 --> 00:21:21,820
How is nature possible? Think about this.

173
00:21:24,070 --> 00:21:31,180
He defines nature as the existence of things so far as it is determined according to universal laws.

174
00:21:33,010 --> 00:21:36,430
So what is he getting out of this book?

175
00:21:37,750 --> 00:21:43,620
here.We said, Well, you set a standard. Here we stand and sit.

176
00:21:44,930 --> 00:21:50,020
In a veritable hurricane. Of stimulation.

177
00:21:52,490 --> 00:22:04,960
Showers of quantum. Sounds, which if you were very attentive, you would begin to hear, listen, say things you touch.

178
00:22:06,930 --> 00:22:11,220
Surfaces that you think are hard. So they're not.

179
00:22:11,520 --> 00:22:22,380
Well, they're hard. They're not what you think. You've got this tremendous balance of stimulation disconnected.

180
00:22:24,190 --> 00:22:37,560
How bad is it? Well, the olfactory epithelial cells of the canines will respond to the dissipation of one molecule of fatty acid.

181
00:22:38,150 --> 00:22:46,270
You see? This is why Marcus detects Odysseus the minute he gets within smelling rage.

182
00:22:48,050 --> 00:22:55,000
There's Odysseus pretending to be me and I just go to spots.

183
00:22:55,000 --> 00:23:03,990
And after all these years of dogs, I mean, there's the very fact of Odysseus, the survival shots.

184
00:23:04,000 --> 00:23:10,410
And I'm so. So August picks up the smell, your dogs pick you up.

185
00:23:11,670 --> 00:23:16,230
Maybe it's sort of a mile away without you say.

186
00:23:18,730 --> 00:23:29,020
The best studies of energy at the threshold of human vision indicates that if we can successfully get two or three quanta to a retinal cone,

187
00:23:29,290 --> 00:23:31,750
it will excite the visual response.

188
00:23:33,370 --> 00:23:41,410
You generally have to bang the cornea with about 150 of them because half of what arrives in the cornea is reflected back.

189
00:23:41,860 --> 00:23:45,760
And then this more reflection of the anterior surface of the lens, etc., etc.

190
00:23:46,030 --> 00:23:50,920
But if you can get a few to the retina, you'll excite a visual response.

191
00:23:51,850 --> 00:23:55,660
Audition is sensitive at the level of Brownian motion.

192
00:23:57,980 --> 00:24:03,140
If you haven't done them in physics, may I say to you that is a very low bar,

193
00:24:03,620 --> 00:24:09,410
since most of you are blowing out your own internal mechanism with what you refer to as music.

194
00:24:09,770 --> 00:24:14,240
You don't have to worry about hearing anything above the level of Brownian motion.

195
00:24:14,450 --> 00:24:17,960
You'll be lucky if you hear a streetcar come down on it.

196
00:24:18,290 --> 00:24:23,450
But the auditory system is that when you see the problem, don't you?

197
00:24:24,080 --> 00:24:30,320
You've got all that going on and hitting the system that's responsive to just about everything.

198
00:24:30,710 --> 00:24:38,540
How out of that morass do you get tables and chairs and people and symphonies

199
00:24:38,540 --> 00:24:44,540
and rules and law and trees and agricultural principles and shipping vessels,

200
00:24:44,540 --> 00:24:48,980
etc. How do you get the law governed world of science?

201
00:24:49,760 --> 00:25:01,340
Given that that rash, that epidemic of sensory experience is what makes that possible and can't

202
00:25:01,430 --> 00:25:06,350
satisfied that empiricism doesn't even have a way of addressing the question,

203
00:25:06,350 --> 00:25:16,940
let alone selling the human being as a passive recipient to these tidal waves of stimulation.

204
00:25:18,230 --> 00:25:21,800
What, in the words of Sir Thomas Brown in religion?

205
00:25:21,980 --> 00:25:30,740
It's a wonderful passage in religio literature where Thomas Brown refers to one as Stella, the boat with a gross thrust just sitting.

206
00:25:32,030 --> 00:25:35,990
Well, we'd go through life staring about to the grocery store stage.

207
00:25:37,370 --> 00:25:44,030
What was that? What was that? Oh, what was that as opposed to.

208
00:25:45,580 --> 00:25:49,560
The Lunar Excursion model. And coming back to Earth.

209
00:25:51,300 --> 00:25:53,820
Orbiting the moon, etc.

210
00:25:54,690 --> 00:26:07,960
How is all that possible charges going to argue that all that is possible because of what we bring to this otherwise tidal wave of stimulations.

211
00:26:08,400 --> 00:26:14,010
The order that we impose on is that the knowledge we have, in fact,

212
00:26:14,010 --> 00:26:22,500
is a reflection of the very rational and perceptual principles that operate as we confront the world.

213
00:26:22,920 --> 00:26:25,920
Now you say to yourself, Well, for goodness sake, what's new with that?

214
00:26:26,310 --> 00:26:27,690
Here's what's wrong with that.

215
00:26:29,370 --> 00:26:36,120
Anyone taking the that part of the empiricist story, according to which our knowledge of the external world is never immediate,

216
00:26:36,120 --> 00:26:42,930
but immediate, recognises that we are imposing some kind of effect on whatever it is that gets to us.

217
00:26:42,960 --> 00:26:50,890
That old act. Memo to scan submission all agents over now.

218
00:26:50,980 --> 00:26:57,060
No one ever steps into the same river twice. Everything's in flux to see.

219
00:26:59,300 --> 00:27:03,460
The trick that Comcast pull off is how to save.

220
00:27:03,710 --> 00:27:12,950
In light of all that. How to say what I prefer to think of as the scientific image from Reich's objectivity.

221
00:27:14,240 --> 00:27:24,030
That's the burdensome part of the task to acknowledge what we are doing by way of constructing a lawful reality.

222
00:27:24,050 --> 00:27:32,090
And at the same time saving the resulting image from, as I say, rank, subjectivity.

223
00:27:41,400 --> 00:27:45,540
So he wants to save philosophy from something else.

224
00:27:46,500 --> 00:27:58,050
Next week I shall go into a little more detail and a number of scholars have wondered why can't is so harsh

225
00:27:58,890 --> 00:28:09,060
and the propaganda and his treatment of the Scottish gun since the school of read Oswald Beijing and others.

226
00:28:11,490 --> 00:28:15,410
And I think Manfred Kean has has the right answer to that.

227
00:28:17,310 --> 00:28:22,110
Count as part of a war within German philosophy.

228
00:28:22,740 --> 00:28:32,100
It has to ask of us. It was there before Thomas was even a student, and the war was between those who would make philosophy in a systematic,

229
00:28:32,730 --> 00:28:36,330
scientific and that sense of systematic subject,

230
00:28:37,410 --> 00:28:46,140
and those who would attempt to reconcile philosophy to the ordinary understandings of the ordinary person.

231
00:28:46,410 --> 00:28:55,550
Indeed, reconcile philosophy to the claims of religion in such a way as to appeal to persons full of narrow perception judgement.

232
00:28:57,340 --> 00:29:04,570
This gives rise really to two rather than distinct schools of philosophy within the German intellectual world.

233
00:29:05,260 --> 00:29:15,430
The sure philosophy, which is the academic philosophy that confirms all of this life and the popular philosophy which is,

234
00:29:15,850 --> 00:29:22,870
as the term suggests, something much more accessible to ordinary sensibilities.

235
00:29:24,100 --> 00:29:33,160
Can't, I think, have the Scottish Common sense as so close to the popular philosophy as to put some distance between it?

236
00:29:33,750 --> 00:29:44,650
So this is the only explanation for the rather trivial reference to read Passport and

237
00:29:44,890 --> 00:29:53,110
Beat because of this much encouraged that is redolent of reading commonsense philosophy.

238
00:29:55,420 --> 00:30:09,370
So a few words about Reid. If Thomas Reid were alive and thriving, well, he would be stronger today because he was 54 years old before his first book.

239
00:30:09,670 --> 00:30:15,520
Which means he will have been let go about 25 years before he had any occasion to write it.

240
00:30:17,740 --> 00:30:27,760
He wasn't a prophet. He was carefully thought out, probably the scientifically most prepared mind of the period.

241
00:30:27,790 --> 00:30:34,350
He knew the math intuitively. He was an expert in geometry and was an expert in going about it.

242
00:30:36,230 --> 00:30:50,530
We discovered long ago. I think the first paper that I published I read was 1978, and good scholars would look you in the eye and say, Thomas School.

243
00:30:51,730 --> 00:31:00,100
Well, that's no longer the case and creates inquiry into the human mind as a book you can take to the beach.

244
00:31:00,420 --> 00:31:05,050
You will enjoy it. It's well-written. It's humorous places.

245
00:31:06,490 --> 00:31:14,319
Reid's concern is that philosophical scepticism will create a refuge out of philosophy.

246
00:31:14,320 --> 00:31:21,820
And so he's particularly concerned with the influence that children's philosophy is likely to have.

247
00:31:24,400 --> 00:31:34,290
Not because it startles, but because it makes virtually no contact with the successful dimensions of life.

248
00:31:34,300 --> 00:31:35,110
That is to say,

249
00:31:35,380 --> 00:31:44,380
everything about which HUME raises a sceptical challenge is something that must be taken for granted in all of the ordinary experience of life.

250
00:31:46,030 --> 00:31:50,500
And Reid works HUME against himself in this regard.

251
00:31:51,010 --> 00:31:59,739
If you read human causality in the Trees and mind you, if HUME awakened because it wasn't a treatise,

252
00:31:59,740 --> 00:32:07,120
because all the treatise comes before the end of the treatise was not available in which an object can't read Hume's inquiry,

253
00:32:07,130 --> 00:32:12,880
but not the treatise, which I think is one of the reasons why he never got caught up in the personal identity issue,

254
00:32:12,880 --> 00:32:15,970
which is so fully explored in the treatise.

255
00:32:15,970 --> 00:32:20,600
Not so much at all really important, but what is it?

256
00:32:20,650 --> 00:32:23,860
What is he talking for regarding causality?

257
00:32:25,000 --> 00:32:31,060
HUME gives us the the simplest stuff that I see before me on a venue table.

258
00:32:31,510 --> 00:32:35,050
Two balls, one moves, it hits the other, the other moves.

259
00:32:35,140 --> 00:32:40,030
What? I must own myself. I cannot see some third term way to explain.

260
00:32:41,760 --> 00:32:45,450
Ball one. Holmes It's ball to all two.

261
00:32:46,320 --> 00:32:50,730
What is it that you can see between those events?

262
00:32:51,300 --> 00:32:57,740
He can see, of course. He had.

263
00:32:57,760 --> 00:33:04,070
See, of course. So where is causality? Causality isn't on the billiard table.

264
00:33:04,790 --> 00:33:11,360
Causality is a habit of the mind fabricated out of repeated experiences.

265
00:33:12,290 --> 00:33:24,560
Thus, whenever two events are constantly conjoined in experience, it becomes habitual for us to assume that one causally brings about the other.

266
00:33:24,980 --> 00:33:33,770
And since this is an habitual feature of our own mental machinery, which after all, could be other than what it is.

267
00:33:34,190 --> 00:33:40,250
Hillary chose the rather startling conclusion, quote, that anything may be the cause of anything.

268
00:33:42,320 --> 00:33:50,540
That is, you could reconstitute sentient life in such a way that the causal connections would be understood in radically different ways.

269
00:33:51,020 --> 00:33:52,760
This just happens to be the way we do it.

270
00:33:53,000 --> 00:34:01,730
And then the field assures us that, of course, when he leaves the privacy of his study and goes out into the light of day,

271
00:34:02,480 --> 00:34:08,360
he thinks the way ordinary people think that this is a philosophical insight on his part.

272
00:34:11,510 --> 00:34:15,260
Reid has a bit of fun with that, he says.

273
00:34:15,260 --> 00:34:26,810
So you see that Mr. Hill's philosophy is very much like a hobbyhorse which Amanda is ill, can keep home with him and ride to this contentment.

274
00:34:27,890 --> 00:34:30,920
But just in case he should bring it into the marketplace,

275
00:34:31,700 --> 00:34:40,460
his friends will quickly come a the jury and confiscate his estates and have the solicitude solicitor never and the law.

276
00:34:42,340 --> 00:34:49,090
Now what Reid wants to make clear is that there are certain first principles.

277
00:34:50,420 --> 00:34:52,420
On which all four ends.

278
00:34:53,780 --> 00:35:02,960
These are principles of common sense, he says, which we are under an obligation to take for granted in all of the ordinary affairs of life.

279
00:35:03,230 --> 00:35:12,200
Quote Even the lowly caterpillar will crawl across a thousand leaves until it finds the one that's right for its dying.

280
00:35:14,190 --> 00:35:17,640
It does not do this by way of metaphysical speculation.

281
00:35:18,750 --> 00:35:27,840
In fact, 99 times in 100, the most decisive moves we make, the initiatives we take are known deliberately.

282
00:35:28,800 --> 00:35:39,780
You will not be deliberating the movements associated with riding a bike, getting a forkful of something into your mouth, picking up the phone.

283
00:35:40,870 --> 00:35:44,220
But it's not just the picking up of the phone.

284
00:35:44,460 --> 00:35:52,320
It's understanding that whatever laws were operating that gave the telephone weight yesterday are still operating.

285
00:35:53,400 --> 00:35:54,450
Do you see that? The laws?

286
00:35:54,690 --> 00:36:02,010
Well, we didn't know about internal combustion engines, but but if you go out in the morning and the car doesn't start your first all this stuff.

287
00:36:02,160 --> 00:36:06,830
My goodness. They've suspended the laws of the internal combustion.

288
00:36:06,930 --> 00:36:12,450
No, you're you're forced to stop because there's something wrong with the car and that assumption.

289
00:36:12,660 --> 00:36:16,530
It's not something that you sort of grudgingly reach on the basis of.

290
00:36:16,920 --> 00:36:26,639
It is a necessary part of functioning. You might see this as almost a kind of pre Darwinian insight into what it is.

291
00:36:26,640 --> 00:36:35,040
Creatures of a given time and a given nature must take for granted to get across the street.

292
00:36:35,460 --> 00:36:43,800
Now, what Reed wants to argue is that a philosophy that officially opposes this, that holds up before a rational thing,

293
00:36:44,160 --> 00:36:54,870
the spectacle of its most basic conceptions being fatally philosophically flawed is a philosophy that's going to have a very, very brief shelf life.

294
00:36:55,110 --> 00:37:02,340
People will look at it and they'll smile at the clever person who advanced it, and then they will get on with the business of life.

295
00:37:03,300 --> 00:37:12,060
But reading the principles of common sense have a kind of cousin ship with some of the apparatus that you will see

296
00:37:12,390 --> 00:37:21,430
culture developing under the pure categories of the understanding and under the core principles of perception.

297
00:37:21,450 --> 00:37:28,440
So that's sort of a rather long winded way of saying that there are some reading and anticipations of the cards.

298
00:37:28,680 --> 00:37:36,749
And then the question is, since can't an English dictionary read and I do want to say the account, by the way,

299
00:37:36,750 --> 00:37:46,200
took some pride in the fact that his ancestry was Scottish, that the name itself is a corruption Scottish name.

300
00:37:47,010 --> 00:37:53,669
And we know how avidly he pursued the productions of the Scottish school because

301
00:37:53,670 --> 00:37:58,170
these in redacted form were being made available on German translations very,

302
00:37:58,170 --> 00:38:09,850
very quickly. Scottish philosophical thought was not remote from the German speaking world of a number of years, many years ago.

303
00:38:09,870 --> 00:38:18,790
Oh my gosh. One of my students was going to do a PhD in Berlin.

304
00:38:20,470 --> 00:38:23,920
And as we always have, our students will say.

305
00:38:25,080 --> 00:38:28,860
Professor, is there anything I can do for you while I'm in Germany?

306
00:38:28,890 --> 00:38:34,860
You've done so much for me. You should write that down.

307
00:38:36,660 --> 00:38:40,580
I said I read it. Yes.

308
00:38:42,430 --> 00:38:54,580
See if you can find a German translation of rates inquiry that might have been available before Conte wrote the first edition of the first party.

309
00:38:55,090 --> 00:39:00,050
And damned if it wasn't for. It's the worst thing.

310
00:39:00,230 --> 00:39:04,160
It was anonymously published wisely by the church.

311
00:39:04,940 --> 00:39:08,899
It's a horrible translation. And although the timing of that.

312
00:39:08,900 --> 00:39:15,710
All right, I have no reason to believe can't ever go forward with this common sense and surrender as.

313
00:39:16,950 --> 00:39:18,990
Galina mentioned that she found, you know,

314
00:39:19,520 --> 00:39:30,690
a all of that and may be comfortable with this because he intends to get in read Oswald Beatty as if as if what they came up with would serve.

315
00:39:31,650 --> 00:39:35,100
As a criticism of Hume's sophisticated philosophy.

316
00:39:35,940 --> 00:39:42,780
He says. What does the common sense school do other than consult for the wisdom of a herd?

317
00:39:44,740 --> 00:39:49,480
But you see the common sense school is not concerned. It's not insulting the wisdom of the herd.

318
00:39:49,810 --> 00:39:54,070
It's not what everyone stands up and applauds. It's not what everyone claims.

319
00:39:54,070 --> 00:39:59,350
Classroom. So it's what every one of us is under an obligation to take for granted.

320
00:40:02,170 --> 00:40:10,300
You can't prove the law of contradiction, for example, because all proof presupposes the validity of the law.

321
00:40:10,330 --> 00:40:16,270
You get that right? Well, this is exactly what Richard is going to do with the principles of common sense.

322
00:40:16,570 --> 00:40:24,220
Every moment of verification that you would seem to employ is an attempt to vindicate these principles presupposes their validity.

323
00:40:24,530 --> 00:40:34,540
And this guy's very close to a common, transcendental argument, a necessary condition for something else to be etched.

324
00:40:37,350 --> 00:40:43,740
There's one more feature of the project that I want to bring to your attention.

325
00:40:45,330 --> 00:40:50,250
Before going into the details of what he means by a transcendental argument.

326
00:40:51,360 --> 00:40:55,170
Com very often takes recourse to legal force.

327
00:40:57,360 --> 00:41:01,680
He speaks of a fair minded judge.

328
00:41:03,210 --> 00:41:08,400
He speaks of the kind of evidence that would prevail upon the judgement of the grand jury.

329
00:41:10,320 --> 00:41:15,450
He wants his arguments to be understood not as arguments in formal logic,

330
00:41:16,020 --> 00:41:22,710
but arguments in a transcendental logic by which he means an evidentiary form of argument.

331
00:41:22,980 --> 00:41:32,340
Given the fact what get given this is the case, what are the necessary conditions absent which this couldn't possibly make the case?

332
00:41:33,810 --> 00:41:40,480
Now, we do know that the Court early on, I mentioned to you at the beginning of the lecture that his interests reached law and politics.

333
00:41:40,500 --> 00:41:49,170
Total Contra was quite interested in in legal cases involving boundary disputes and law.

334
00:41:49,200 --> 00:41:54,870
These are often referred to in the papers that will be filed on behalf of the boundary dispute,

335
00:41:55,560 --> 00:42:00,860
would be referred to as the double seal of certain deductions.

336
00:42:00,900 --> 00:42:13,350
Correct. And to some extent, course of argument as a species of deduction system where you show the the pedigree of property claims,

337
00:42:14,040 --> 00:42:16,890
the pedigree of cognitive claims,

338
00:42:17,700 --> 00:42:26,160
how far back you can take them, what what conditions they satisfy, what is made possible by the fact that they are in place.

339
00:42:27,030 --> 00:42:34,349
And I think it would be well-served reading the first 20 as if it was something of a brief of something

340
00:42:34,350 --> 00:42:41,880
of a legal brief and in place of something of a brief proposal of an oral and oral argument.

341
00:42:44,040 --> 00:42:57,390
Well, is he just another dead Prussian philosophy of this is what we find?

342
00:42:58,320 --> 00:43:05,630
In a contemporary journal, a leading journal in physics wrote.

343
00:43:07,720 --> 00:43:14,830
In physics, it became quite clear in the last 30 years how the cognition of objects can be carried through.

344
00:43:15,820 --> 00:43:16,719
Surprisingly,

345
00:43:16,720 --> 00:43:24,730
the strategy which was applied in physics for the cognition of objects follows essentially in the conceptual program formulated by count,

346
00:43:25,420 --> 00:43:29,380
even if the majority of physicists is not aware of this point.

347
00:43:30,370 --> 00:43:36,820
So I say this is not not only in my judgement, Jonathan Bennett, this identified the body.

348
00:43:37,090 --> 00:43:45,370
Not only is the body not dead, but in some fields the body is is very much, very much a lot of.

349
00:43:48,860 --> 00:43:52,550
What shall we say about the overall and.

350
00:43:52,910 --> 00:44:00,739
Well, I'm going to get a little tough now. I mean, this is over, Mr. Clarke controversy split the royalties with me.

351
00:44:00,740 --> 00:44:08,860
But I do want to say this. But first, contrary to a rumour that got started here four or five years ago, I am not a content.

352
00:44:10,760 --> 00:44:16,850
Of. I died in 322 B.C. with my friend Aristotle.

353
00:44:16,850 --> 00:44:21,210
We think the whole town like to move down here a sense of.

354
00:44:22,110 --> 00:44:28,950
But could that possibly be a more consequential philosophical project?

355
00:44:30,770 --> 00:44:40,880
A project that respects the perceptual and cognitive resources that we bring to bear on every knowledge claim we make.

356
00:44:41,830 --> 00:44:47,320
And at the same time does not lapse into a kind of psychology.

357
00:44:49,330 --> 00:45:01,950
It's a metaphysical analysis that I say respects the stamp of human cognition on all of its works but does not collapse into subjectivity.

358
00:45:03,300 --> 00:45:12,000
A metaphysical project that would inform all the sciences of just what it is that makes some of their

359
00:45:12,000 --> 00:45:18,990
undertakings necessarily successful in virtue of the manner in which we do carbonised reality.

360
00:45:22,200 --> 00:45:28,920
Oh, I'm going to leave you with a B in the garden so that you understand that it is possible

361
00:45:29,310 --> 00:45:36,630
to maintain objectivity while respecting the perceptual uniqueness of the recipient.

362
00:45:39,670 --> 00:45:43,420
Well, I got to go. That's all right, Cesar.

363
00:45:44,020 --> 00:45:47,349
I like the yellow roses.

364
00:45:47,350 --> 00:45:51,220
We have yellow roses, and they both beautiful.

365
00:45:53,170 --> 00:45:59,170
I don't do this alone because there's invariably a honey and my arrival doing something with this thing.

366
00:45:59,350 --> 00:46:10,170
Rose. As it happens, the peak spectral sensitivity of the normal human visual system.

367
00:46:11,450 --> 00:46:16,700
Is 5500 angstroms 550 billion microns.

368
00:46:17,850 --> 00:46:26,910
You will call that? Yeah. The peak sensitivity in the visual system of the honeybee is in the ultraviolet.

369
00:46:27,870 --> 00:46:33,840
So the honeybee doesn't see anything else. And I don't see anything ultraviolet.

370
00:46:36,010 --> 00:46:40,320
All the girls are victims of some sort of hallucination, though.

371
00:46:41,770 --> 00:46:51,999
And once we start wading through council documents, we will see the manner in which the unique perceptual and cognitive principles we bring to bear

372
00:46:52,000 --> 00:46:59,830
on the situation can preserve the objectivity of the knowledge we claim about that situation,

373
00:47:00,220 --> 00:47:05,920
even while granting that what we are bringing to bear is distinctly human.

374
00:47:07,710 --> 00:47:11,870
Coming to. Well, then I shall see.