1 00:00:09,230 --> 00:00:20,260 I say very early in the first marriage and several times there are others who remind me that the it is to raise most possibilities, 2 00:00:20,260 --> 00:00:23,590 to raise metaphysics to the level of science. 3 00:00:24,010 --> 00:00:29,049 As one would understand, science at the close of the 18th century, 4 00:00:29,050 --> 00:00:39,160 namely a systematic body of principles on which you can ground truths that are once universal and necessary. 5 00:00:39,460 --> 00:00:47,290 So the question is whether. But this campaign. Oh, I did so while assumptions made. 6 00:00:49,120 --> 00:00:54,970 But he wants to make clear what gets us to being better positioned in the first instance. 7 00:00:55,660 --> 00:01:03,130 And I think in the back of his mind, this is just another reminder of how people like you get them selves and the rest of us in trouble. 8 00:01:03,970 --> 00:01:10,240 What gets us to be better physicians in the first instance is that as ordinary recipients 9 00:01:10,240 --> 00:01:16,540 going through the lives of ordinary folks and having the most ordinary sorts of experiences, 10 00:01:16,870 --> 00:01:20,439 we begin to ask questions about the source of the experience, 11 00:01:20,440 --> 00:01:27,940 but they truly experience what it is about our experience that matches up or fails to match up with what others have. 12 00:01:28,300 --> 00:01:34,630 Can we trust our senses, what we're supposed to do about these illusory phenomena, etc., etc.? 13 00:01:34,810 --> 00:01:39,910 And so reason begins to raise questions about the nature of experience itself. 14 00:01:40,720 --> 00:01:50,980 Before long, you are steeped in conjectures and wild theories and unsupportable, untestable suppositions. 15 00:01:51,880 --> 00:01:59,510 You've now introduces the arena of metaphysics to say This is where these conflicts are played out. 16 00:01:59,530 --> 00:02:05,980 They have played out on the individual person, and they're played out of schools of philosophy. 17 00:02:08,140 --> 00:02:16,690 Now, since you are to Oxford Scholars, you know where the very term metaphysics comes from. 18 00:02:17,850 --> 00:02:21,060 It comes from our Aristotle, 19 00:02:21,540 --> 00:02:27,210 but it doesn't come from Aristotle having an idea of metaphysics as of course he had an idea 20 00:02:27,480 --> 00:02:35,250 that it was such a wonderful part of it's a little work we call Aristotle's Metaphysics, 21 00:02:35,760 --> 00:02:38,880 but in both one, he informs his students. 22 00:02:39,450 --> 00:02:51,890 Now, having addressed the major issues in the natural sciences, as we will take up fundamental questions regarding the nature of the subjects. 23 00:02:52,470 --> 00:02:57,540 So what is what he's going to be lecturing on now is something that comes 24 00:02:57,960 --> 00:03:03,570 after the treatise on physics and when the first century scholars started of. 25 00:03:04,350 --> 00:03:08,999 He started lining up all Aristotle's work and also going from ology. 26 00:03:09,000 --> 00:03:18,510 All of this work which came after the physics was simply designated natural time fisica after physics. 27 00:03:19,420 --> 00:03:24,990 That was the good old days when we were all very serious about keeping things neat and tidy. 28 00:03:25,470 --> 00:03:31,560 We used to tell students that metaphysics had two interdependent branches. 29 00:03:32,730 --> 00:03:42,140 What the constituted metaphysics. One had to do with the question of real being, real existence. 30 00:03:42,200 --> 00:03:47,870 So that one ground of metaphysical inquiry was ontology. 31 00:03:49,110 --> 00:03:59,730 And there are fundamental questions. And in fact, Aristotle's metaphysics addresses questions of sort all the substances to later, you know, change. 32 00:04:00,060 --> 00:04:03,690 If they undergo change, they remain in substance. They work in such and such. 33 00:04:04,290 --> 00:04:08,520 But of course, to address a question like that, you have to have some mode of inquiry. 34 00:04:09,180 --> 00:04:12,629 And every mode of inquiry is subject to criticism every quarter. 35 00:04:12,630 --> 00:04:22,500 Therefore, it has its limitations. And so in the process of addressing ontological questions, you also have to ask how adequate, 36 00:04:22,500 --> 00:04:27,660 how apt the mode of inquiry is that you are using to address the question. 37 00:04:28,110 --> 00:04:31,590 And that comes down to us as epistemology. 38 00:04:32,280 --> 00:04:43,829 And so metaphysics in the traditional sense was a combination of the logical and the gist of a logical inquiry designed to answer 39 00:04:43,830 --> 00:04:53,100 fundamental questions about real existence of the nature of the relationships that it obtained among greatly existing things. 40 00:04:53,430 --> 00:04:56,940 Sometimes Aristotle's metaphysics has lapsed into. 41 00:04:57,630 --> 00:05:04,650 You can summarise his position by saying that the number of things we can know is determined 42 00:05:04,650 --> 00:05:15,180 by the number of questions we can ask of which minimally and way before does a thing exist? 43 00:05:16,320 --> 00:05:19,770 If it exists, in what degree do success? 44 00:05:20,820 --> 00:05:25,500 In what relation does it stand to other things and what is it for? 45 00:05:26,850 --> 00:05:31,770 What is it for? The to a logical explanation. 46 00:05:33,510 --> 00:05:38,159 So is coming along centuries later is respectful of Aristotle. 47 00:05:38,160 --> 00:05:45,000 But he wants to notice that although mathematics and science have come a long way since Aristotle's time, 48 00:05:45,810 --> 00:05:49,240 this business of metaphysics doesn't seem to explore it. 49 00:05:49,620 --> 00:05:56,310 And the question is why and what might be done to move the ball further down the field? 50 00:05:57,030 --> 00:06:04,800 Will we ever get out of the arena of contests in which one set of projections and speculations does balance another? 51 00:06:07,680 --> 00:06:18,420 Meanwhile, close calls the world of high school and science to say about all of this and lens the fact that because metaphysics has gone nowhere, 52 00:06:19,290 --> 00:06:25,500 the persons most interested in objective science have a job that will calm calls in different ways. 53 00:06:26,610 --> 00:06:30,360 It's sort of a pox on all these metaphysical houses. 54 00:06:30,630 --> 00:06:34,260 Why all this? We've got Newton, we've got Galileo. 55 00:06:34,260 --> 00:06:37,440 We've got a jelly. We're doing just fine. 56 00:06:37,680 --> 00:06:43,860 Let the philosophers drive themselves crazy and can't understand and correctly understand. 57 00:06:44,100 --> 00:06:51,420 But that is not permissible. Science cannot be indifferent as to its most fundamental problem. 58 00:06:51,990 --> 00:06:58,620 It cannot be indifferent to the question of what presuppositions make it possible in the first instance. 59 00:06:59,490 --> 00:07:05,490 So the metaphysician task is to restore metaphysics to a state of respectability, 60 00:07:05,790 --> 00:07:13,830 lest scientists and mathematicians become complacent and thus, of course, error. 61 00:07:17,480 --> 00:07:27,320 So what is it? Well, what is not all of it is the evidence of sense as a way of settling these questions. 62 00:07:27,740 --> 00:07:35,860 If you take the systematic science to be something that is parasitic on core universal principles, 63 00:07:35,890 --> 00:07:40,610 necessarily true that is foundational for anything one corrects on. 64 00:07:41,180 --> 00:07:45,050 The evidence of sense is uniquely inapt. 65 00:07:45,740 --> 00:07:56,270 It's shifting subject to error. The most you can claim for this kind of contingent factual truthfulness, but certainly nothing universal. 66 00:07:56,870 --> 00:08:08,720 So what come to make clear is that the nature of this metaphysical inquiry is into those pure aspects of the understanding of what counts as pure. 67 00:08:09,050 --> 00:08:14,270 He always means non empirical line instead of pure reason. 68 00:08:14,690 --> 00:08:20,480 It's reason stripped of all empirical supports, attributes and conjecture. 69 00:08:22,640 --> 00:08:38,190 Pure. Now in the preface to the second edition, we find him scolding anthropologists of today. 70 00:08:38,190 --> 00:08:46,980 We called sociologists and psychologists who both think that you can settle some of these disputes 71 00:08:47,520 --> 00:08:54,120 by looking at the peculiarities of the human condition or certain cultural forms of thought, 72 00:08:54,120 --> 00:08:57,329 etc. But this is quite a lot of the world today. 73 00:08:57,330 --> 00:09:01,350 Of course, a concept of physics doesn't have anything to do with that at all. 74 00:09:02,360 --> 00:09:05,370 So in a word, you talk like this in your notes. 75 00:09:05,870 --> 00:09:09,740 Culture. Metaphysics is not psychology. 76 00:09:11,470 --> 00:09:16,210 It's not psychiatry and therefore it's not neuropsychology. 77 00:09:16,420 --> 00:09:20,590 It's not neurophysiology, it's not brain mechanisms. 78 00:09:20,980 --> 00:09:30,700 Just put all that away. Nothing about brain function is universal and necessary and therefore get on to the job that you're looking for. 79 00:09:30,700 --> 00:09:36,030 The Centre for the Categorical Imperative. You're working alongside? 80 00:09:37,220 --> 00:09:40,480 No, necessarily universal, as you might guess. 81 00:09:40,510 --> 00:09:45,280 Aristotle was the one who put the ball in play and he put the ball in play with formal logic. 82 00:09:47,140 --> 00:09:50,980 Formal logic, Aristotelian logic, logistic reasoning, etc., 83 00:09:50,980 --> 00:09:58,360 constitute a very rules of thought that apply to all sorts of operations, whether pure or empirical. 84 00:09:59,620 --> 00:10:04,800 These are truth saving or truth preserving logical devices. 85 00:10:04,810 --> 00:10:11,440 They are not modes of discovery. So although they constitute the formal versions of itself, 86 00:10:12,010 --> 00:10:19,210 they are like if they are not intended and cannot reveal the factual nature of the external world. 87 00:10:19,600 --> 00:10:23,350 So something in addition to that is going to be required. 88 00:10:27,510 --> 00:10:35,820 So what Aristotle offers then by way of the syllogism card is going to give a is going to establish a noble pledge. 89 00:10:36,240 --> 00:10:44,850 This is where he makes the country of distinction between propositions that are analytic and propositions that are sympathetic. 90 00:10:46,680 --> 00:10:50,880 Analytic propositions are universally necessarily true, 91 00:10:51,480 --> 00:10:58,350 but they're true because total tolerance and an analytic proposition says the 92 00:10:58,350 --> 00:11:03,060 meaning of the subject term is contained in the meaning of the predicate, 93 00:11:03,810 --> 00:11:07,190 as if all bachelors are married men. 94 00:11:08,010 --> 00:11:13,860 Of course it's true that all bachelors are unmarried men, but it's a definitional truth. 95 00:11:14,190 --> 00:11:24,080 It's not the truth. Well, that's something new either about bachelors or about unmarried women by learning that all bachelors are unmarried men. 96 00:11:25,470 --> 00:11:31,870 So it's in the nature of the analytic proposition that the truth that preserves can be known a priori. 97 00:11:31,890 --> 00:11:36,930 You don't have to run around asking persons, you know, to be bachelors. 98 00:11:37,200 --> 00:11:41,760 Are you married? Would you say that if you're doing that, you don't understand the language? 99 00:11:42,360 --> 00:11:46,440 So it's not something that's gained by way of empirical industry. 100 00:11:47,100 --> 00:11:50,310 It's something established by the very terms of the proposition. 101 00:11:50,940 --> 00:11:56,610 So analytic propositions are universal and thus universally unnecessarily true. 102 00:11:56,880 --> 00:12:03,510 And the truth is no operating order before experience, independently of experience. 103 00:12:06,110 --> 00:12:14,510 What about the facts of the world? The facts in the world are contained in what country refers to as synthetic propositions. 104 00:12:15,210 --> 00:12:19,250 So one of those terms you wish had been translated in some other way, 105 00:12:20,240 --> 00:12:30,680 but synthetic in the sense of pulling together the attributes and properties, is such that you no longer be so synthetic proposition. 106 00:12:32,000 --> 00:12:39,740 This contains both metal and glass. This is capable of holding a fluid. 107 00:12:40,970 --> 00:12:45,110 This is at least synthetic propositions involved. 108 00:12:45,110 --> 00:12:51,450 They pull them together of sensory data in such a way as to identify something. 109 00:12:53,480 --> 00:13:00,830 The typical claim is that the truth of synthetic propositions can only go so old established by experience. 110 00:13:01,280 --> 00:13:06,080 So the truth of any synthetic proposition is established a posteriori. 111 00:13:08,090 --> 00:13:16,350 In a nutshell. Huge clay sand shield that's always going to be in the background when he's not in the foreground. 112 00:13:16,980 --> 00:13:20,070 SHIELDS Clay, is that the truth? 113 00:13:20,100 --> 00:13:23,190 OHNO Since that proposition can be established. 114 00:13:23,560 --> 00:13:34,190 Reorg Which is just another way of saying reason cannot unearth the facts of the world by way of its own resources. 115 00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:38,690 Just a rationalist project simply fails. 116 00:13:39,480 --> 00:13:45,990 If you want to establish the truth of a synthetic proposition, that's going to be based on experience. 117 00:13:46,500 --> 00:13:52,590 And here's the bad news as it is based on experience, what you come up with will be contingent. 118 00:13:53,070 --> 00:13:58,800 Probabilistic to some extent, subject to the errors to which the senses are thrown. 119 00:13:59,370 --> 00:14:02,819 It's going to be specific to a particular species. 120 00:14:02,820 --> 00:14:09,690 Perhaps special circumstances may be dependent on the age of the observer, etc., etc., 121 00:14:09,690 --> 00:14:15,840 etc., so that we return to the scandal which refers to the control of dominance. 122 00:14:16,200 --> 00:14:20,249 You cannot establish the reality of an external world, do you? 123 00:14:20,250 --> 00:14:28,080 You can't have a slam dunk once and for all the proof of anything that comes under the heading of a synthetic proposition. 124 00:14:28,550 --> 00:14:38,790 And they think life D because of that. So is that a something short term but plenty of length of sentence? 125 00:14:40,050 --> 00:14:47,220 You wanted to point out the contrast between can't articulate conscious clothing and 126 00:14:47,220 --> 00:14:53,520 the truth of no synthetic proposition can be established a priori and conscious, 127 00:14:53,520 --> 00:15:00,020 claiming that we can establish a truth of any sort, even one synthetic proposition of where you are. 128 00:15:01,000 --> 00:15:05,850 That's insights to children. That's going to be the central. 129 00:15:07,910 --> 00:15:23,430 A few of the. First party. Now there are already concerns and a number of synthetic truths. 130 00:15:23,640 --> 00:15:25,470 But no, in fact, 131 00:15:25,770 --> 00:15:36,180 mathematics and the physical sciences are riddled with try to give you a synthetic proposition known to be true a priori in mathematics. 132 00:15:37,770 --> 00:15:40,890 There's no number so large that one cannot be added to it. 133 00:15:43,110 --> 00:15:47,580 That's that's that's true. If you're doing this. 134 00:15:49,880 --> 00:15:59,360 Sean Patrick describes the radical empiricist as one who believes the series of positive integers was discovered at one at a time. 135 00:16:01,570 --> 00:16:05,980 So if I tell you that there's no number so large that one cannot be added to it, 136 00:16:06,310 --> 00:16:13,000 and you find yourself running out of the fingers and toes, you're very, very much younger than you are. 137 00:16:13,420 --> 00:16:17,920 That's a synthetic proposition. What about in the sciences? 138 00:16:19,000 --> 00:16:24,670 Can anyone think of a synthetic thing? I can't think how to fix the first. 139 00:16:25,720 --> 00:16:31,570 Can you think of a synthetic proposition known to be true in the developed sciences? 140 00:16:32,710 --> 00:16:38,010 That will be true across all the sciences. Yes. 141 00:16:38,210 --> 00:16:43,760 Something like Nixon's second war. Yes. Over and over, more generally, every effect has a cause. 142 00:16:45,130 --> 00:16:53,310 Every election is now to see. If you want to put it in the form of something granny might have said, nothing will come of it. 143 00:16:53,610 --> 00:16:57,750 Well, that was incredibly stupid. 144 00:17:01,730 --> 00:17:06,140 So there's no line so long as you catch the Christmas line, etc. 145 00:17:08,920 --> 00:17:18,480 Another question is going to be the metaphysics itself can be can be shown to be based on similar synthetic propositions, 146 00:17:18,500 --> 00:17:24,790 the truth of which is necessary and universal and known to be the case. 147 00:17:25,150 --> 00:17:28,480 That's one other way of putting it. So. 148 00:17:31,340 --> 00:17:37,280 Carter was not the only one who was impatient with the state of the art of physics at the time. 149 00:17:37,850 --> 00:17:44,750 In fact, the Prussian Academy of Sciences had a prize competition in 1762. 150 00:17:46,560 --> 00:17:52,110 And if he wanted to enter, this was the question you had to address to win the prize. 151 00:17:53,190 --> 00:17:56,550 Listen carefully. This is still quite a question. 152 00:17:59,270 --> 00:18:03,170 Quote. Was a metaphysical truce in general, 153 00:18:04,040 --> 00:18:10,189 and especially the first principles of natural theology that morals are capable of the 154 00:18:10,190 --> 00:18:17,060 same degree of proof as geometrical truths and just they are not capable of such proof. 155 00:18:17,630 --> 00:18:27,230 What is the nature of this certainty and to what degree can they achieve it and has such certainty sufficient for conviction? 156 00:18:31,310 --> 00:18:39,370 Metaphysics give us a totally credible account of the creation of religion. 157 00:18:41,410 --> 00:18:45,430 How about the insistent demands of morality? 158 00:18:46,240 --> 00:18:50,140 Is it really a matter of taste? Merely cultural. 159 00:18:51,700 --> 00:19:00,680 So we find some places that, you know, non-vegetarian like like to eat very young and that happens to be their preference. 160 00:19:01,700 --> 00:19:13,340 Or is there some way of establishing metaphysically? But there are core moral precepts, the truth of which is necessary and universal if. 161 00:19:13,970 --> 00:19:19,820 And then you have to fill it with a certain kind of life as possible, etc., etc., etc. 162 00:19:20,270 --> 00:19:32,240 So there's the price, competition and entry, the manual card entries, the prize competition of 1762 and finishes second. 163 00:19:35,150 --> 00:19:44,230 Who? What? And those Moses famines won, in part because he didn't actually answer the question at all. 164 00:19:44,620 --> 00:19:46,800 Carter was doing similar things. 165 00:19:47,320 --> 00:19:58,660 Much of what's recorded by the competition itself is the Prussian academies, and that is to say, indeed, the the Prussian aristocracy. 166 00:19:59,850 --> 00:20:10,980 The Prussian Kings. Already worried about the relative rising trends now taking place in the Anglo European world. 167 00:20:12,610 --> 00:20:12,969 Remember. 168 00:20:12,970 --> 00:20:26,470 Now, this is the 1760s speaking French philosopher, so having his heyday against all traditional forms of authority and this is 1762 and 1765. 169 00:20:27,190 --> 00:20:35,660 Voltaire publishes. Kind of ridicule play on the claims of likeness. 170 00:20:35,990 --> 00:20:47,530 What's the name of the place? What's. And these days afterwards, they learn that love lets you change doctor as well. 171 00:20:48,740 --> 00:20:57,559 And Paton-Walsh has established about how he's established to moral certainty in 172 00:20:57,560 --> 00:21:05,810 virtual with his rational calculus that this is the best of all possible worlds. 173 00:21:07,270 --> 00:21:12,820 Now it's part of life that's rational philosophy. 174 00:21:14,200 --> 00:21:19,630 But yes, there is a distinction to be made between matters of fact and the truth of reason. 175 00:21:21,060 --> 00:21:26,280 But this argues that in the end, if we really had a fully developed knowledge, 176 00:21:26,280 --> 00:21:33,680 we would understand that all propositions, including all factual propositions, are analytic. 177 00:21:34,680 --> 00:21:38,760 That is everything is what it is. Because necessarily. 178 00:21:40,810 --> 00:21:47,379 And if you follow that throughout the order of the argument that of course, 179 00:21:47,380 --> 00:21:55,660 one of the conclusions almost trivially true is that this indeed is the best of all possible worlds. 180 00:21:59,020 --> 00:22:02,290 And in questions. So. 181 00:22:06,760 --> 00:22:13,050 A musical education can teach. Music was written by Leonard Bernstein's. 182 00:22:14,110 --> 00:22:17,830 And the book was written by Richard. Little Richard. 183 00:22:18,820 --> 00:22:25,580 I'm Dorothy Parker. Whose moral instruction we all should follow. 184 00:22:26,420 --> 00:22:30,260 Quote, Do whatever you like, but don't ride horses. 185 00:22:32,250 --> 00:22:39,760 And kindness has wonderful lines given to the line by Dorothy Parker. 186 00:22:40,160 --> 00:22:44,320 Richard. At the very end of. 187 00:22:45,730 --> 00:22:50,330 Part of the character, which just looks at the audience and says. Any questions? 188 00:22:55,290 --> 00:22:58,680 Khalil was very much influenced by Christian verse. 189 00:22:59,960 --> 00:23:12,320 In fact confidence so far as to say that this is can't unchristian was quote he was peculiarly well fitted to raise metaphysics to the 190 00:23:12,320 --> 00:23:22,910 dignity of a science if only it had a credible to prepare the ground beforehand by a critique of the organ that is of pure reason itself. 191 00:23:23,270 --> 00:23:35,790 He finds in verse this important inside the insight is that we are the passive observers of the external world. 192 00:23:36,200 --> 00:23:47,510 We bring a certain assortment of cognitive and perceptual powers themselves, governed by principles to bear on every factual claim of the matter. 193 00:23:48,020 --> 00:23:53,690 And thus it's only by developing our understanding of our elemental apparatus. 194 00:23:54,440 --> 00:23:59,620 Though he didn't go so far as to say a thorough, uncritical appraisal of reason itself, 195 00:23:59,870 --> 00:24:10,460 but a development of our own mental apparatus so that we can see what it is we're adding to what we take to be the choice of the external world. 196 00:24:10,820 --> 00:24:23,870 I say what was most important? He agitated for a scientific comprehension of the human mind and of a systematic study of cognition. 197 00:24:26,890 --> 00:24:31,840 He's also critical of empiricist alternatives. 198 00:24:33,100 --> 00:24:41,180 Every time I say empiricist, alternatives always look awfully like Berkeley Jones. 199 00:24:43,590 --> 00:24:47,980 But these are the thinkers with whom Carter's going to wrestle most vigorously. 200 00:24:53,770 --> 00:24:57,610 Wolf watched a lot of news and found that, in fact, 201 00:24:58,660 --> 00:25:07,800 much of its fans passions and much of the attention paid to violence as teaching came as a result of the influence Christian movement. 202 00:25:08,830 --> 00:25:19,000 And the recognition involves providing distillations and supporting essays on identity, philosophy and identity theology. 203 00:25:24,430 --> 00:25:32,799 And one of his most celebrated works, the German metaphysics, says because of that, which, 204 00:25:32,800 --> 00:25:41,020 although only by experience, one knows only that it is, but doesn't see how it's connected to other truths. 205 00:25:41,290 --> 00:25:48,340 This will be a persistent complaint of the rationalist watching world of what they call when you think on the insides, 206 00:25:48,700 --> 00:25:55,570 you end up with a thick and thickening book of observations, but there's nothing there to pull it together. 207 00:25:56,530 --> 00:26:04,930 Remember, how is that possible? How come out of all of these facts, these disparate facts, these merely contingent facts, 208 00:26:05,350 --> 00:26:10,960 finally become subsumed under something that is systematic, universal and principled. 209 00:26:11,350 --> 00:26:18,720 And the argument against empiricism is that it has no means of doing that and those kind of mechanical associations. 210 00:26:19,960 --> 00:26:24,970 My goodness. What sort of systematic world do you get with that? 211 00:26:25,840 --> 00:26:29,140 Even in a sense with that, anything would be the cause of anything. 212 00:26:29,680 --> 00:26:37,000 So on the rational side and rationalist side on what is trying to do is render experience intelligible. 213 00:26:38,380 --> 00:26:46,240 And on the empiricist side, there is the complaint that every attempt to render the experience intelligible is going to be 214 00:26:46,240 --> 00:26:53,320 based on precepts and principles that cannot be rationally ground cannot be rationally validated. 215 00:27:00,670 --> 00:27:07,749 So both. It's clear that empiricism has no means beyond dissociation or something by which the elementary 216 00:27:07,750 --> 00:27:15,280 sensations or elementary ideas could possibly comprehend the natural world as still. 217 00:27:18,080 --> 00:27:27,260 Now of. Looks as a concern concerning human understanding was was read by its and likens 218 00:27:27,260 --> 00:27:34,990 prepared a book like reply to it because it wanted to engage across directly. 219 00:27:35,850 --> 00:27:42,960 Productive philosophical controversy and then locked into something entirely unfair. 220 00:27:43,440 --> 00:27:46,600 You know what we did? So he died. 221 00:27:48,070 --> 00:27:59,650 So his life was [INAUDIBLE] bent on having a good, robust sort of cafe metaphysics argument with the great British empiricism. 222 00:28:00,100 --> 00:28:08,220 And lo and behold, what goes ahead does so long as itself for quite some time. 223 00:28:08,230 --> 00:28:14,020 And it finally was published, and it was published under the title New Estates Only Up to standard. 224 00:28:16,670 --> 00:28:24,150 In that work. He attributes to lack of a max, which you will find nowhere in the law. 225 00:28:24,170 --> 00:28:37,130 And it's probably a fair attribution, but it's a scholastic maxim, which I say is not anywhere to be found in the books as. 226 00:28:38,770 --> 00:28:45,190 Ne il est intellectual quote, known for their courage and sense. 227 00:28:46,710 --> 00:28:51,030 Nothing is in the which was not first in the sense. 228 00:28:52,030 --> 00:28:56,139 Nothing is in the mind except by way of the sentence. 229 00:28:56,140 --> 00:29:00,580 Remember it. It looks as a concern of human understanding, he says. 230 00:29:00,900 --> 00:29:04,990 Now comes the mind to be furnished by answering In a world. 231 00:29:05,660 --> 00:29:10,700 From experience. So, Neal, this intellectual nothingness. 232 00:29:12,290 --> 00:29:21,199 Quote Prius with the first stop was in the senseless violence is replied to this 233 00:29:21,200 --> 00:29:28,230 could actually boil down to two words three words these three intellectuals. 234 00:29:28,250 --> 00:29:32,250 It's. Nothing but the intellect itself. 235 00:29:33,400 --> 00:29:43,870 So here are the terms of the dispute. Online and inside, there must be an active organising mind. 236 00:29:44,170 --> 00:29:53,080 There must be some set of organising principles and precepts such that experiences don't simply become a fad happens. 237 00:29:53,500 --> 00:30:03,490 Rather, they become a coherent whole. They hope here they render the world intelligible, not merely sensible, but intelligible. 238 00:30:08,300 --> 00:30:11,150 Well, how much of this prefigures a critique? 239 00:30:11,390 --> 00:30:20,540 Here is a good deal of it prefigures what Carter is going to be arguing for, namely precisely what is here, so to speak. 240 00:30:20,780 --> 00:30:31,820 The intellect that is responsible for the integration, the synthesis and the rendering intelligible of the this sense. 241 00:30:36,560 --> 00:30:47,100 Now of. There can be no synthetic proposition whose truth can be established a priori. 242 00:30:50,020 --> 00:30:54,590 And context. Look at what Kim is claiming in the inquiry. 243 00:30:54,640 --> 00:30:59,080 Remember comes another huge treatise, 1739. 244 00:30:59,530 --> 00:31:04,030 He had the injury of 1751, which was translated into German. 245 00:31:04,900 --> 00:31:08,380 The trade is also translated, but not in terms of common. 246 00:31:10,450 --> 00:31:21,190 So here's the shield tells us that he sees on the videotape before him a bullet striking another wall, which then moves forward. 247 00:31:21,670 --> 00:31:25,720 And I must of I cannot see some sort of term betwixt. 248 00:31:27,320 --> 00:31:36,290 So what you can see, what you has no empirical evidence of is causality. 249 00:31:37,010 --> 00:31:41,180 It's not on the vineyard. So where is it? 250 00:31:41,840 --> 00:31:46,820 Well, it must be in shoe. It must be some habit of the mind. 251 00:31:47,690 --> 00:31:55,010 Similarly, in the domain of morals, she has us examining this poor thinking. 252 00:31:55,700 --> 00:32:01,700 You say the victim of maybe highway robbery sprawled out on the ground. 253 00:32:01,700 --> 00:32:06,530 Pocket's energy in a pool of blood. Perhaps I could place this score in your mind. 254 00:32:08,590 --> 00:32:22,900 Such a huge challenge for us to find anything in that empirical fact, anything in the picture that is morally wrong. 255 00:32:25,800 --> 00:32:30,030 So where is the moral focus? It's not out there. 256 00:32:31,200 --> 00:32:35,880 It's not here. Or perhaps. Or at least in. 257 00:32:37,620 --> 00:32:46,250 Here. It has to be something that excites in us, a feeling of revulsion to what is still emotion. 258 00:32:46,640 --> 00:32:50,960 I generally feel revulsion right about here. 259 00:32:52,220 --> 00:32:56,300 Sometimes, like clockwork, it comes off. I watch the news. 260 00:32:56,870 --> 00:33:00,530 Feelings of revulsion or feelings of happiness. 261 00:33:02,560 --> 00:33:13,090 That is to say, the moral of scriptures that we make are reflections of how events in the external world affect us affectively. 262 00:33:13,690 --> 00:33:21,730 Emotional, sentimental. He's one of the great thinkers and the British sentimentalist tradition of moral thought. 263 00:33:23,520 --> 00:33:28,570 So again, causality is a habit of the mind based on past conjunctions. 264 00:33:29,500 --> 00:33:35,160 Morality is a set of sympathetic responses to events. 265 00:33:38,740 --> 00:33:43,600 Where does this put the physical sciences? Where does it put all the sciences? 266 00:33:44,620 --> 00:33:52,659 What does it do to the very notion of objectivity and and our comprehension of the objective facts of the external world, 267 00:33:52,660 --> 00:33:57,219 which, after all, is the part of the world of knowledge that comes for us. 268 00:33:57,220 --> 00:34:00,730 Fatigue is seeking to save from scepticism. 269 00:34:06,070 --> 00:34:11,050 Now, I don't want to be guilty of a libel. I don't want to say it's not true. 270 00:34:11,470 --> 00:34:21,950 Truth is a defence. I suspect that more than half of this throng has quite a child with human morals. 271 00:34:23,200 --> 00:34:27,220 I mean, I'd be very surprised. Do surprised? 272 00:34:28,590 --> 00:34:34,980 If he were prepared to take the position that moral precepts of absolute and universal, 273 00:34:35,730 --> 00:34:42,120 that the adequacy of a moral theory is entirely independent of the psychological, 274 00:34:42,360 --> 00:34:50,989 social and cultural dimensions of the lives of those who subscribe to the theory that there are truths that are true. 275 00:34:50,990 --> 00:34:57,720 Of course, all time such and such, that's pretty old fashioned way of dealing student human rights. 276 00:34:58,410 --> 00:35:00,950 After all, they embody morals. 277 00:35:00,960 --> 00:35:13,330 It's just so much the sentimental dispositions that do a kind of rational loss of feelings that we might come out with some place a utilitarian of. 278 00:35:13,590 --> 00:35:20,410 Not only does it make me sick to my stomach, but it's, you know, that that's the stock market. 279 00:35:20,440 --> 00:35:31,319 But you do realise that if you tell yourself that you are prey to a quite interesting criticism that 280 00:35:31,320 --> 00:35:38,670 was advanced but can be found in college and was advanced actually by Judy more people a century ago. 281 00:35:39,990 --> 00:35:43,500 Here's the problem. If you try to. 282 00:35:45,740 --> 00:35:49,399 So I know what gives. 283 00:35:49,400 --> 00:35:53,330 Rise in me to feelings of revulsion. 284 00:35:55,640 --> 00:36:00,810 Split infinitives, for example. The improper use of the joke. 285 00:36:00,820 --> 00:36:06,390 But that also means the older I get, the more things come out of that that most of. 286 00:36:10,450 --> 00:36:15,510 But I don't quite know what makes like in youth culture. 287 00:36:16,000 --> 00:36:25,780 So let's say we go to the highways and byways of the world and we both see that body stretched out and full of pockets empty. 288 00:36:26,530 --> 00:36:39,540 And I go something like, Ooh! And you go something like, you know, I know I did it for lunch, but I have no way of knowing your. 289 00:36:40,780 --> 00:36:46,090 Now we walk a little further and there's another body and it's even in worse shape. 290 00:36:46,420 --> 00:36:51,850 And then I go, oh, you go, oh, oh. 291 00:36:53,020 --> 00:36:58,060 And you look at me and say, That's more important to me than the first ones. 292 00:36:58,900 --> 00:37:01,960 And I say, Well, it's more important to me too. 293 00:37:02,500 --> 00:37:08,840 But it's, I don't know the magnitude of the oral culture and you don't know the magnitude of my revulsion. 294 00:37:09,190 --> 00:37:21,140 We can't get a moral argument. So there's something counterintuitive about a theory of morals that precludes serious moral disputes. 295 00:37:23,430 --> 00:37:26,760 How do you argue with people regarding the two things? 296 00:37:28,120 --> 00:37:31,390 We sent a terrible. Stand down very much. 297 00:37:32,920 --> 00:37:39,400 That's not project. You said a good journalist. I've got to translate this as, oh, you change you. 298 00:37:40,540 --> 00:37:44,350 So there is a counterintuitive consequence. 299 00:37:44,590 --> 00:37:48,760 There are answers to all these things. What philosophers show is an answer to everything. 300 00:37:50,320 --> 00:37:57,309 The problem is that there's a natural reaction. If it goes on as we engage in life, counterinsurgent, 301 00:37:57,310 --> 00:38:05,470 that's how we'll stop this kind of blood flow that seems to be getting somewhere because our arguments get louder. 302 00:38:09,280 --> 00:38:16,660 Well, Sheila, she's been your boss on a table before him. 303 00:38:18,990 --> 00:38:24,780 But you understand that space is also not given as a stimulus. 304 00:38:25,880 --> 00:38:31,540 When he sees one bold move. And then another four. 305 00:38:33,000 --> 00:38:39,420 And you understand The Times is also not given in the stimulus. 306 00:38:39,490 --> 00:38:43,530 All right. There are no sense walk ins for time. 307 00:38:44,130 --> 00:38:52,200 There are no sense organs for stress. We've already seen that the dispute regarding space violence has a reasonably 308 00:38:52,200 --> 00:38:57,060 good argument that concludes with there's no such thing as absolute space. 309 00:38:57,660 --> 00:39:02,910 There's no such thing as action. Because there is no call it a cause. 310 00:39:02,910 --> 00:39:07,020 Call it a sufficient reason. There's no calls, nothing. 311 00:39:07,380 --> 00:39:17,220 And if by absence base, you mean something entirely empty, something entirely emptiness and nothingness, and you add cause nothing else. 312 00:39:17,640 --> 00:39:21,360 So I suppose I will encounter space. That sounds problematic. 313 00:39:23,070 --> 00:39:30,470 But on any given night, I'll just say if you have a live television space, you certainly can say that there's a sensible response. 314 00:39:32,160 --> 00:39:42,150 So where is you going to get a better table out there with one thing moving and then another thing moving. 315 00:39:43,320 --> 00:39:46,380 So we already begin to see what counts. 316 00:39:46,950 --> 00:39:55,320 Flow is going to be couch ploy his his way again, which goes something like this. 317 00:39:56,250 --> 00:40:05,760 You accept Hill's conclusions, but you show that there are presuppositions necessary for those conclusions to be defensible, 318 00:40:06,060 --> 00:40:11,850 and the presuppositions turn out to be at variance with the union position in the first instance. 319 00:40:12,450 --> 00:40:18,930 What is it? That must be the case for there to be temporarily success in the past? 320 00:40:19,980 --> 00:40:23,940 What must be the case for anything to happen in space? 321 00:40:26,180 --> 00:40:33,440 And so one might want to argue, as I show the next week, that Hong Kong's account. 322 00:40:34,830 --> 00:40:47,520 The success of Iran's program presupposes the adequacy of concepts, metaphysics, and particularly the adequacy of account of pure time space. 323 00:40:49,080 --> 00:40:54,600 So I did say something about photography, about a sister. 324 00:40:55,380 --> 00:41:01,830 And I was just joking before class. 325 00:41:02,580 --> 00:41:07,920 Thank you. Thanks to. But I do want to say something about current interpretation, 326 00:41:07,920 --> 00:41:12,180 because we're now getting to the point in these lectures where interpretation is required. 327 00:41:14,640 --> 00:41:23,070 The interpretation that I shall be offering the ballots in these elections is, shall we say, sympathetic but not fully. 328 00:41:25,690 --> 00:41:33,030 And sympathetic in this sense. Carlos, one of the great philosophical minds in the history of philosophical reflections. 329 00:41:35,070 --> 00:41:41,149 It gets tires. To see the volume of books and articles so, 330 00:41:41,150 --> 00:41:56,030 so contented in establishing how silicon was to claim X or y and how y compulsive of particular argument, how absolutely self-contradictory is. 331 00:41:56,030 --> 00:42:07,819 From page this to that you get a picture of content very much like the picture philosophers of mind giving Descartes that he was some nifty hope, 332 00:42:07,820 --> 00:42:13,010 attached himself to some theory or thesis, 333 00:42:13,010 --> 00:42:17,479 some theatre of mind, some homunculus theory, 334 00:42:17,480 --> 00:42:23,980 according to which we've got to have someone inside looking at what we're looking at in order for us to see it, that, that. 335 00:42:23,990 --> 00:42:34,460 But any first year philosophy student can do much better on silly Descartes, for goodness sake, he makes mistakes that 15 year olds for fun. 336 00:42:34,520 --> 00:42:40,310 Michael, I want you to disabuse yourself of that convenience. 337 00:42:42,600 --> 00:42:53,640 De Craft was not the class clown and Count did not go through two editions of perhaps the greatest metaphysical treatise ever composed. 338 00:42:55,220 --> 00:43:00,260 While proving how wonderful he was at missing the point and contradicting himself. 339 00:43:01,490 --> 00:43:07,160 So what I'm going to presuppose in the elections as well and where the text is problematical. 340 00:43:08,240 --> 00:43:12,140 There's a stylistic problem, a translation problem. 341 00:43:12,650 --> 00:43:15,470 And to some extent, perhaps the problem of comprehension. 342 00:43:17,250 --> 00:43:22,650 You want to begin with the assumption that if you don't get the quote, can't say it could be that you are not getting it. 343 00:43:23,130 --> 00:43:26,850 Not necessarily that he isn't saying so. 344 00:43:26,850 --> 00:43:31,490 That's what I mean when I say that the lectures will be sympathetic. 345 00:43:31,500 --> 00:43:37,470 I will always try to think the articles thinking the first critique, 346 00:43:38,250 --> 00:43:42,600 and there's a secondary literature out there that you could build a house with a very large 347 00:43:42,600 --> 00:43:47,739 post clip that will make it clear to you how routinely cut gets almost everything wrong. 348 00:43:47,740 --> 00:43:53,580 And I began these lectures with Jonathan Bennett declaring the body of conscious thought to be dead and gone. 349 00:43:54,030 --> 00:44:01,200 And the only remaining task is to see if you can find some semblance of life amidst the litter. 350 00:44:02,920 --> 00:44:05,500 Yeah, sure. So we.