1 00:00:04,530 --> 00:00:18,160 So here we are as a week, and we come now to ask Congress to pass the much needed discipline of reason remember promised in the first article. 2 00:00:18,540 --> 00:00:21,100 Is that reasonable becomes optional. 3 00:00:23,990 --> 00:00:36,740 And it is by way of the parallel adjustments and base that constitute this tend to overstep its grounds and on the contrary, 4 00:00:36,740 --> 00:00:40,970 first reason overstepping its legitimate grounds. 5 00:00:41,820 --> 00:00:50,420 You want to take the political. It's overstepping on the grounds that a juridical proceeding. 6 00:00:51,850 --> 00:00:57,820 Would find impermissible the overreaching or standard. 7 00:00:58,990 --> 00:01:10,110 It is, as it were, unlawful. The parallelism to mention of these are developed late to the critique, but the groundwork is done and quite early. 8 00:01:10,110 --> 00:01:15,840 In fact the groundwork for these instead of just a to prosthetic. 9 00:01:17,930 --> 00:01:23,570 Recall that under the transcendental doctrine of the elements, part one is devoted to the translator. 10 00:01:24,620 --> 00:01:39,320 This is followed immediately with what contents the transcendental logic of which is able to distinguish transcendental from general logic. 11 00:01:42,620 --> 00:01:47,720 Remember the letter to mark a church where he says, I have a mania for system intercession? 12 00:01:48,260 --> 00:01:49,850 I'm sorry, but can you these? 13 00:01:50,240 --> 00:01:58,490 The subheadings of the substantive headings of common ground are very important to keep the books orderly on these subjects. 14 00:01:58,550 --> 00:02:05,450 So he wants to make no distinction between transcendental logic and general logic. 15 00:02:05,450 --> 00:02:10,400 And general logic is further divided into what he refers to as analytic. 16 00:02:11,820 --> 00:02:18,870 And dialectic. And it's that second one that is the cause of logic. 17 00:02:18,870 --> 00:02:22,770 Logic. It's just the formal logic bequeathed by Aristotle. 18 00:02:23,340 --> 00:02:27,860 And it stands as what the country refers to as the cannon of judgement. 19 00:02:29,840 --> 00:02:41,610 Dialectic is another matter entirely. The formal logic that is a canon of judgement is not used in canons but concerns as a more common. 20 00:02:43,380 --> 00:02:49,740 It's a method. It's treated as if it were a method of discovery, which in the end becomes law, says Carter. 21 00:02:50,550 --> 00:02:54,600 The sophisticated art of giving to ignorance. 22 00:02:55,110 --> 00:03:05,960 The appearance of truth. So it's a dialectical logic that's going to be the culprit, as illustrated in the paroxysms, the generous. 23 00:03:08,880 --> 00:03:20,130 Those who are guilty here fail to realise the utter dependence that college claims have of a proper assimilation of appearances to conflicts. 24 00:03:21,240 --> 00:03:27,200 Thus, both the empiricists and the rationalists have wandered in darkness and confusion. 25 00:03:27,210 --> 00:03:37,200 He says he's going to turn in something of a pathologist's report that there's a point where he refers to the euthanasia recently. 26 00:03:37,530 --> 00:03:41,730 It is quite you know, you think of him as the front door. 27 00:03:42,800 --> 00:03:47,650 Prussian scientist family background. He does a lot of research. 28 00:03:48,190 --> 00:03:52,480 He's got these turns of phrase skeletons, characterisations of people. 29 00:03:54,270 --> 00:04:02,770 And as I've told you, that supper, it was really a parallel case to some of the stories you'd have to. 30 00:04:06,340 --> 00:04:10,040 Well, it is a paroxysm come competition. 31 00:04:10,540 --> 00:04:18,250 Thus it is a syllogism which is fallacious in form b its content. 32 00:04:18,300 --> 00:04:23,420 What it may. His specific target. 33 00:04:23,420 --> 00:04:29,080 Here is the transcendental biologist. Here we have a transcendental grounding. 34 00:04:29,090 --> 00:04:37,790 That is, we we're going to have a proposition that is grounded in what is recognised to be a necessary condition or enabling condition. 35 00:04:40,070 --> 00:04:44,660 But it's a transcendental ground with them leads to a formerly invalid conclusion. 36 00:04:46,470 --> 00:04:55,330 It's precisely because such syllogism are transcendental grounds that he says it is in the nature of 37 00:04:55,330 --> 00:05:02,340 the human reason and gives rise to an illusion which cannot be avoided but may be rendered harmless. 38 00:05:02,700 --> 00:05:11,879 Do you see, once you establish the ground as transcendental, it becomes a necessary part of our cognitive apparatus. 39 00:05:11,880 --> 00:05:21,090 So it's not something that you good about. It isn't even something that that you would be aware of in a conscious way. 40 00:05:21,570 --> 00:05:27,120 So it's by way of critical analysis that he will at least draw attention to this. 41 00:05:27,400 --> 00:05:40,350 And although we can stop doing this sort of thing, we can at least aim and know when you say he's establishing the sense of reason. 42 00:05:40,720 --> 00:05:48,420 And so once you know what the boundary conditions are, it doesn't mean you are not going to cross over into territory. 43 00:05:48,420 --> 00:05:55,470 That's not really reasons to claim. But at least when you do it, you'll know you're doing it and you'll be ready for a score. 44 00:05:57,970 --> 00:06:02,230 What's common to such a syllogism is a lack of empirical premises. 45 00:06:03,250 --> 00:06:10,120 So although they are lacking in necessary and careful content, we nonetheless use them, says Khan, 46 00:06:10,780 --> 00:06:17,380 to conclude from something which we know to something else of which we have no concept, 47 00:06:18,340 --> 00:06:26,320 and to which, owing to an inevitable illusion, we ascribe objective reality. 48 00:06:28,430 --> 00:06:36,530 What the Terrell Owens isms have in common is an attempt to derive rationality from the transcendental unity of consciousness. 49 00:06:37,250 --> 00:06:42,770 Some actual synthetic propositions about the soul or the self. 50 00:06:44,700 --> 00:06:51,150 The basic mistake is confusing the transcendental necessity of how we must regard. 51 00:06:51,690 --> 00:06:58,530 That's the translator part. How we must regard themselves with what we are as new to them. 52 00:07:00,070 --> 00:07:09,760 So rational psychology strongly argues from a transcendental necessity to an empirical discovery of the thing in itself, 53 00:07:10,090 --> 00:07:14,980 which in this case is the real self, as in itself, it really is. 54 00:07:15,340 --> 00:07:25,120 That's the value of psychology and also the lifelong mission of rationalists to establish the true essence of the soul. 55 00:07:25,270 --> 00:07:30,060 The source Spiritual says at a 340. 56 00:07:31,370 --> 00:07:42,440 I conclude from the transcendental concept of the subject which contains nothing manifold, e.g. the absolute unity of this subject in itself. 57 00:07:42,530 --> 00:07:50,099 That's the parallel to this. So the first images of the decor, arts, 58 00:07:50,100 --> 00:07:58,500 culture and what come close to a rational doctrine of the soul is defeated by the very transcendental logic of the case. 59 00:07:59,430 --> 00:08:10,080 Now rationalist, long sought to establish that the soul can be no, and we know to be at once a substance symbol and constructs. 60 00:08:11,240 --> 00:08:15,710 But as rationalists have good arguments for the immortality. 61 00:08:18,880 --> 00:08:25,450 Such good arguments as to claim that the immortality of the soul would be settled as a matter of knowledge itself. 62 00:08:28,050 --> 00:08:34,170 But of course, all such knowledge actually were reached through reason alone. 63 00:08:35,070 --> 00:08:43,650 CONSTANTIA Objects will be defeated. It will mount the claim that no mother directly given an experience. 64 00:08:46,750 --> 00:08:50,100 The arguments for this contain no empirical premises. 65 00:08:50,110 --> 00:08:57,160 Moreover, the pure categories are empty of the very objects that would be accessible to experience alone. 66 00:08:57,760 --> 00:09:07,780 You will recall that famous maxim concepts without intuition are empty at age 52 b 76. 67 00:09:08,770 --> 00:09:14,770 Concepts can be applied solely to appearances, as these are grounded in pure intuitions. 68 00:09:16,090 --> 00:09:24,310 Well, knowledge, as you know, depends on the full cooperation of sensibility and understanding, not of them either alone. 69 00:09:24,640 --> 00:09:28,210 Thus, what is beyond sensibility is beyond knowledge. 70 00:09:29,620 --> 00:09:40,090 He made all this clear as early as being 147 where she writes, quote, For death, no intuition could be given corresponding to the concept. 71 00:09:40,810 --> 00:09:46,420 The concept could still be solved so far as its form is concerned, 72 00:09:47,260 --> 00:09:53,770 but would be without any logic and no knowledge of anything, would be possible by means of it. 73 00:09:54,430 --> 00:10:04,630 So far as I could know, they would be nothing and could be nothing to which my thought could be applied based on thinking about nothing. 74 00:10:06,400 --> 00:10:16,630 You know, in the first edition of the Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, the old Macmillan dish, you might amuse yourselves by looking out of the article. 75 00:10:17,470 --> 00:10:29,660 Nothing. Where? Political philosopher says part of the difficulty is analysing the concept of loss because there's no settled position. 76 00:10:30,770 --> 00:10:45,750 On how to cultivate the verb to love. Thus, such transcendental views of the understanding, independent of sensibility, is simply a mistake. 77 00:10:46,890 --> 00:10:56,640 Generally, one of the illusions of regional singing knowledge is things that are independent of experience is seeking over them, 78 00:10:57,180 --> 00:11:00,690 and it's doomed to fail. You want to consult a. 79 00:11:00,810 --> 00:11:13,950 246 3303 And this concludes the search for the new middle self includes the search that was conducted by Descartes and by Lawrence. 80 00:11:16,310 --> 00:11:25,940 Rather than uncovering the dominant self. Descartes requirements confused a logic itself of propositions with an ontological discovery. 81 00:11:27,810 --> 00:11:32,280 They say they can choose the transcendental necessity. 82 00:11:33,200 --> 00:11:43,820 If there is to be a unification of the centuries manifold, the necessary condition for the thing itself. 83 00:11:47,680 --> 00:11:56,530 Alas, this is capped at the 41 is where he's actually part of the discussion of O.J. Simpson. 84 00:11:57,550 --> 00:12:04,870 Quote, From all this, it is inevitable that rational psychology owes its origin simply to misunderstand. 85 00:12:06,030 --> 00:12:12,780 The unity of consciousness is only unity and sought by which alone no object is given, 86 00:12:12,780 --> 00:12:20,650 unto which we have all the category of substance, which always presupposes that given intuition cannot be applied. 87 00:12:20,670 --> 00:12:30,700 So arguments to the effect which have directed the sole substance as a rational proof of a sole substance is just again based on best state. 88 00:12:32,880 --> 00:12:40,200 The second power, which turns to the putative simplicity of the soul so that we've seen that the argument 89 00:12:40,410 --> 00:12:47,220 to the effect that rationality by itself can establish that there is a self substance. 90 00:12:47,700 --> 00:12:54,080 That's just one of the misunderstandings of Russian psychology, I thought. 91 00:12:54,300 --> 00:13:03,629 So it's a simple substance that's a second which refers to as the Achilles of all dialectical influences. 92 00:13:03,630 --> 00:13:11,400 He says that it a361 the main argument for the so simplicity goes something like this. 93 00:13:12,640 --> 00:13:20,260 Well, the total thought for one's total thought, the confirmation of the thoughts held by more than one soul. 94 00:13:20,650 --> 00:13:24,460 There would be no unity and absolute unity. 95 00:13:24,760 --> 00:13:31,570 No proposition could be expressed. That was Chinese nation. 96 00:13:32,110 --> 00:13:35,720 So that everybody wants a separate piece of paper. 97 00:13:36,070 --> 00:13:43,150 I don't know. There's no place to put all this together in one unified symbol. 98 00:13:43,900 --> 00:13:54,010 Substance. A day 352 contemplation this as it's therefore possible only in a single substance, 99 00:13:54,280 --> 00:14:00,280 which not being an aggregate of many, is absolutely so much the conclusion of the argument. 100 00:14:00,970 --> 00:14:05,320 But the required conclusion says can't. It doesn't fall first. 101 00:14:05,890 --> 00:14:14,290 The proposition that requires the unity of the thinking subject if multiple representations are to yield a single representation, 102 00:14:14,860 --> 00:14:18,309 is certainly not a monolithic proposition. In other words, 103 00:14:18,310 --> 00:14:23,860 the concept of the unity of a thinking subject is not synonymous with or included 104 00:14:23,860 --> 00:14:29,710 in the concept of multiple representations condensed into a single representation. 105 00:14:30,790 --> 00:14:34,930 Therefore, the proposition is not established by way of the principle of identity. 106 00:14:35,680 --> 00:14:40,180 In other words, it's not a claim capable of vindication by reason alone. 107 00:14:41,140 --> 00:14:52,330 Well, nor can it, as a synthetic proposition, be no priority for a single representation could be derived by the concerted action of a collective. 108 00:14:54,030 --> 00:15:03,060 Nor is it empirically confirmed for nothing. And experience is generally a biological necessity that attaches to the proposition itself. 109 00:15:04,860 --> 00:15:10,079 We see both the alleged sin and substance is not the content of an experience, 110 00:15:10,080 --> 00:15:17,280 but merely a subjective condition of knowledge that such n350 for so challenged. 111 00:15:17,280 --> 00:15:22,290 Here is the alleged reality of the show's simplicity. 112 00:15:23,130 --> 00:15:27,630 You see, it is just knocking these bottles. Other. 113 00:15:29,940 --> 00:15:33,360 He concludes his father's quote, It's all of us. 114 00:15:34,050 --> 00:15:45,870 But in attaching to ourselves, we designate the subject of interference only once and without knowing it, inequality. 115 00:15:46,740 --> 00:15:54,660 In fact, without knowing anything of it, either by direct acquaintance or otherwise simplicity of the representation 116 00:15:54,660 --> 00:15:59,790 of the subject is not the knowledge of the simplicity of the subject itself. 117 00:16:00,360 --> 00:16:06,950 And so the whole of rational psychology is involved in the collapse of its main supports. 118 00:16:09,970 --> 00:16:15,610 What about the server power outages on. That's called enduring. 119 00:16:16,300 --> 00:16:26,120 So. Of course, at your age, you are so much more concerned about sort of the power lunches of others. 120 00:16:28,250 --> 00:16:32,060 Yesterday was president of the 74.7 K. 121 00:16:33,740 --> 00:16:44,120 So you understand that I have very focussed attention on certain approaches which promises to give us nothing less than an enduring continuum. 122 00:16:44,480 --> 00:16:48,920 So. Here's the paradigmatic argument. 123 00:16:50,330 --> 00:16:59,180 That which is conscious of the numerical identity itself at different times is in so for a person. 124 00:17:00,330 --> 00:17:05,060 Now the soul is conscious of it, some changing, etc. over time. 125 00:17:05,540 --> 00:17:14,240 Therefore it is a person. Which is to say there something there that survives alteration makes a distinction between change. 126 00:17:14,570 --> 00:17:18,760 Alteration, substance undergoes alteration on top. 127 00:17:18,920 --> 00:17:22,940 Just change within the box of gold. It stays gold. 128 00:17:23,660 --> 00:17:30,110 And lots of things happen to the self. But the essentials, substantial, etc., etc. 129 00:17:30,200 --> 00:17:35,000 That's what endures or near alteration. 130 00:17:37,730 --> 00:17:47,420 Well, is there an enduring, persistent, persisting self or soul that could be knowable by way of the loss of reason? 131 00:17:48,710 --> 00:17:51,460 There is indeed a case for a self person, 132 00:17:51,590 --> 00:18:01,900 transcendental self as a necessary concept to account for the unity of search through all of that, not as an object of knowledge. 133 00:18:03,690 --> 00:18:13,709 As Councillors of 8366. We could never parade it as an extension of our self-knowledge through curiosity and as exhibiting 134 00:18:13,710 --> 00:18:21,690 to us from a mere concept of the identity itself of a broken continuation of the subject. 135 00:18:23,580 --> 00:18:34,650 Granting the unity and simplicity of a sole substance, there is still no guarantee of its continued existence, he says later at the four one floor. 136 00:18:35,280 --> 00:18:46,050 Thus, the permanent so regarded merely as an object of innocence remains demonstrated and indeed in demonstrable close. 137 00:18:48,240 --> 00:18:59,930 To which I replied. So what big challenges must make clear is that reason liberated from necessary or just 138 00:19:01,100 --> 00:19:08,900 seeks to go beyond its transcendent on the ground to what is finally the transcendent. 139 00:19:09,890 --> 00:19:19,970 And therein lies the evolution. If you want to get you will not do so by way of reason. 140 00:19:21,290 --> 00:19:28,370 You will not do so by way of the understanding will that you do so by correctly subsuming 141 00:19:28,820 --> 00:19:35,170 somatic sensuous manifold correctly under the pure concepts of the understanding. 142 00:19:35,270 --> 00:19:38,360 So much up to you. This. 143 00:19:38,370 --> 00:19:46,060 This. Let me move now to the end to this race. 144 00:19:47,700 --> 00:19:53,490 It's a transcendental dialectic at 80, 39, 33, 97. 145 00:19:54,450 --> 00:20:03,870 But count lists the three pseudo rational dialectical syllogism as productive of illusory knowledge. 146 00:20:04,530 --> 00:20:07,970 The first of these, the first three being apologists. 147 00:20:09,110 --> 00:20:18,389 Now, as we see these kind well-trod entrances from transcendental concepts to particular inferences, 148 00:20:18,390 --> 00:20:26,760 that is from concepts lacking empirical context to some claimed known fact about the real world. 149 00:20:29,050 --> 00:20:31,060 The second form of of. 150 00:20:32,360 --> 00:20:44,540 Pseudo rational syllogism is fun to draw inferences from a series of appearances to the transcendental concept of the absolute totality of conditions. 151 00:20:44,780 --> 00:20:54,620 And this is where activities set. The third, for which I do hope to have time to get to the third floor. 152 00:20:54,630 --> 00:20:59,070 So the Russian entrance moves from this community of old. 153 00:20:59,070 --> 00:21:03,850 One does so by way of the understanding to what one could not know. 154 00:21:03,950 --> 00:21:10,620 I have the same concerns and influence to the ends and to an entrance to God. 155 00:21:11,310 --> 00:21:15,180 And here we have come to close the ideal of tourism. 156 00:21:16,080 --> 00:21:20,630 Whereas I have a logistics speech, conjectures without empirical conjecture. 157 00:21:21,600 --> 00:21:33,420 The Antilles are rich in empirical content in which nonetheless yet another set of fallacies tends to cause the euthanasia of pure reason. 158 00:21:34,880 --> 00:21:41,180 The parallel adjustments generate illusions regarding the subject of thought that is regarding the self. 159 00:21:41,420 --> 00:21:54,110 So but now a different class should say no to a class of illusions that arises by reason as applied to the objective synthesis of appearances. 160 00:21:55,430 --> 00:22:00,350 The parallel doesn't pretend to be a large and rich reason to our nominal self. 161 00:22:00,620 --> 00:22:10,550 So the other challenges are exemplified by unwarranted, rational inferences toward the object to avoid counter calls. 162 00:22:11,030 --> 00:22:20,690 The world, this being says at a war, to quote the absolute totality of all existing things. 163 00:22:23,630 --> 00:22:25,250 Well, what about the world? 164 00:22:25,910 --> 00:22:36,470 The world is to be understood as the ultimate source of all appearances, all options, all events, so understood in these terms. 165 00:22:36,620 --> 00:22:41,929 The burning question is whether we can know the world through sure reason. 166 00:22:41,930 --> 00:22:48,740 Greece and the Antilles are attempting to illustrate a country for to as a necessary 167 00:22:48,980 --> 00:22:53,570 sceptical method when it comes to addressing the question of the protocol. 168 00:22:53,840 --> 00:22:59,660 And he makes a very sharp distinction between scepticism and the sceptical method. 169 00:23:00,290 --> 00:23:02,540 So let me read this passage very quickly. 170 00:23:02,540 --> 00:23:12,320 I'm sorry it's so long, but it's particularly informing when it comes to this method of watching or rather provoking a conflict of assertions, 171 00:23:12,680 --> 00:23:16,490 not for the purpose of deciding in favour of one or the other side, 172 00:23:17,150 --> 00:23:25,460 but of investigating whether the object of controversy is not perhaps a deceptive appearance which each vainly strives to grasp, 173 00:23:25,970 --> 00:23:32,600 and in regard to which, even if there were no opposition to be overcome, these are trying to arrive at any result. 174 00:23:32,870 --> 00:23:36,500 This procedure I am making entitled The Sceptical Method. 175 00:23:37,040 --> 00:23:46,100 It's altogether different from scepticism a principle of technical and scientific ignorance which undermines the foundations of all knowledge. 176 00:23:46,490 --> 00:23:54,380 So sceptical method is the one that puts to the test competing claims. 177 00:23:54,390 --> 00:23:59,840 It's not doubtful about our capacity for objective knowledge, 178 00:24:00,890 --> 00:24:08,150 but it applies the sceptical method as a test of what is available to us by way of knowledge. 179 00:24:09,140 --> 00:24:14,110 So the process of euthanasia begins with reason appropriating from the 180 00:24:14,120 --> 00:24:21,200 understanding concepts whose valid function potentially just sensuous intuitions. 181 00:24:22,900 --> 00:24:25,990 The proper deployment of the pure concept, to be honest, 182 00:24:26,800 --> 00:24:37,000 is to social intuitions of them and thereby make the objective world thinkable to make possible nothing less than experience itself. 183 00:24:38,320 --> 00:24:41,890 But although it is sensible, it's not for that reason thinkable? 184 00:24:42,580 --> 00:24:48,280 No. To that, the pure, the transcendental concepts issue from the understanding, 185 00:24:48,730 --> 00:24:54,910 not for the reason that such and this creates the possibility of metaphysical mischief. 186 00:24:55,420 --> 00:25:01,090 Look reason contrived all sorts of makes the imagination spontaneity. 187 00:25:01,090 --> 00:25:06,820 You can put together worlds that no one has ever experienced or ever will experience. 188 00:25:07,090 --> 00:25:13,510 You can contrive possibilities that constitute, namely, the art and measure of science fiction. 189 00:25:16,700 --> 00:25:24,589 These and other things. You know, these are not things that fall under the heading of understanding reason can produce a wide range of 190 00:25:24,590 --> 00:25:32,210 possibilities that go beyond the reach of understanding the properly understood understanding that now. 191 00:25:33,700 --> 00:25:37,360 Over the centuries. Intuitions or concepts? 192 00:25:37,900 --> 00:25:41,160 Probably. Experience other concepts. Probably. 193 00:25:44,700 --> 00:25:51,600 Reason is able to liberate concepts that we understanding from the limitations of all possible experience. 194 00:25:51,840 --> 00:25:57,720 That's one reason we can do it phrase the understanding of the otherwise unnecessary 195 00:25:58,110 --> 00:26:06,520 bondage that it should have to experience by way of this liberation reason. 196 00:26:06,690 --> 00:26:14,490 Now, extend the concept beyond the indirect, the accessible and narrow we find but illusory. 197 00:26:16,350 --> 00:26:20,490 But now reason would go beyond all this reaching for absolute totality. 198 00:26:20,520 --> 00:26:30,170 It's not enough to subsume representations up to general concepts and thus possess a genuine experience of reason. 199 00:26:30,180 --> 00:26:35,490 Now over extends itself to reach nothing less than the totality of the world. 200 00:26:36,180 --> 00:26:44,760 And in so doing, reason converts the cost of otherwise empirically supplied into some sort of transcendental idea, 201 00:26:45,300 --> 00:26:51,150 but is so liberated from what is given an intuition as to be beyond just. 202 00:26:53,790 --> 00:26:56,940 Having established how the process works consciously, 203 00:26:57,280 --> 00:27:04,770 the decision to examine is for journalism to reason and illustrate the illusions arising from each. 204 00:27:05,580 --> 00:27:16,110 If you, as we all know, you do spend long hours engaged in what I sometimes call café metaphysics. 205 00:27:17,790 --> 00:27:23,850 Ideally suited to a 3/6 cup of coffee. 206 00:27:26,930 --> 00:27:32,420 Shame. Chairman looking at you sort of trooping I. 207 00:27:33,810 --> 00:27:39,700 As you ask whether the world had a beginning, whether it has existed for all eternity. 208 00:27:40,990 --> 00:27:44,100 Whether there really is freedom, etc., etc. 209 00:27:44,830 --> 00:27:55,260 Well, you know, in the game of tournaments and if you actually believe I have one more cup of coffee, you know, to settle this part of the geography. 210 00:27:59,870 --> 00:28:03,260 Three four Enter the bazaar divided into two categories. 211 00:28:03,740 --> 00:28:12,790 Two of them come closest mathematically to this and to what he calls dynamic or dynamic terms. 212 00:28:13,490 --> 00:28:17,180 What makes the first two mathematical things change? 213 00:28:17,510 --> 00:28:26,200 Two, that the world of objects that exist in space and time so they have a scalar magnitude dimension. 214 00:28:27,410 --> 00:28:34,070 Is the world finite? Limitless is everything divisible on their indivisible holds. 215 00:28:35,300 --> 00:28:38,840 The dynamical and telomeres arise from very different questions. 216 00:28:39,410 --> 00:28:44,090 Is the world to be understood as the outcome of strict and mechanical causation? 217 00:28:45,560 --> 00:28:50,020 Must there be behind everything some one causal power itself? 218 00:28:50,030 --> 00:28:52,220 Three constraints. 219 00:28:53,420 --> 00:29:05,450 If there is such freedom, then that cost source must stand outside the order of spatial temporal causation is and absolutely necessary of beings. 220 00:29:06,290 --> 00:29:13,040 I told you what is even time to spare is an absolutely necessary being standing. 221 00:29:13,040 --> 00:29:19,130 Those things often caused originate. Intelligent design. 222 00:29:22,570 --> 00:29:26,530 Barbara Starr on the physics of the art of shipbuilding. 223 00:29:26,530 --> 00:29:29,530 We're in the water. We have ships by nature. 224 00:29:30,860 --> 00:29:34,160 So this is a sensible question. 225 00:29:35,150 --> 00:29:41,400 It's a sensible question. We get in trouble, but we think that's the level of knowledge we have to ask. 226 00:29:45,600 --> 00:29:50,400 The first engineer made this country for us. To us the cosmological and. 227 00:29:51,660 --> 00:29:55,700 And these are set up to follow the thesis and antithesis. 228 00:29:57,530 --> 00:30:11,210 Here's the thesis. The world has a beginning in time and a limited space, and this world is infinite and temporal duration and spatial extent. 229 00:30:12,140 --> 00:30:29,350 We're at a 26 B. The second part is the artillery pieces, substance and substances of the world are ultimately composed of simple parts. 230 00:30:30,950 --> 00:30:35,600 Antithesis. Nothing is ever to be found in the world. 231 00:30:36,140 --> 00:30:39,170 Thus, everything is infinitely divisible. 232 00:30:43,160 --> 00:30:51,750 Trying to manage the agenda of causality. Here's the basis causality in accordance with the laws of nature. 233 00:30:52,140 --> 00:30:54,360 It's not the only kind of causality. 234 00:30:54,840 --> 00:31:06,010 There must be a causality of freedom, and the antithesis of everything in nature takes place in accord with deterministic loss. 235 00:31:06,270 --> 00:31:14,510 Although. The fourth mentioned ambiguously theological thesis. 236 00:31:15,650 --> 00:31:27,170 There must be a necessary thing as the cause of the whole sequence of contingent beings, either as its first member or underlying. 237 00:31:28,400 --> 00:31:35,030 And the antithesis. No such thing exists inside or outside the world. 238 00:31:38,690 --> 00:31:43,850 And the parallel presence of pure reason can't put rational psychology on notice, 239 00:31:44,810 --> 00:31:50,690 offering a refutation of any proposition by which the soul self could be known. 240 00:31:52,770 --> 00:32:01,830 Now by way of the itineraries, he will set the same limits on cosmology and theology and causality ratio must 241 00:32:01,920 --> 00:32:08,340 learn to discipline itself and spare itself self-delusional conclusions. 242 00:32:09,580 --> 00:32:18,610 Neither experience nor as now properly assessed by comfort by a sound method is can establish 243 00:32:18,610 --> 00:32:25,240 any of this as knowledge and this that parole is to note the other limits of sense and reason. 244 00:32:27,260 --> 00:32:39,010 Now on the question of is there any place for God here, I want to say this is a good place to be brief, 245 00:32:39,110 --> 00:32:43,580 because the alternative to being brief is eight weeks of lectures. 246 00:32:45,670 --> 00:32:51,850 It's at the end of the first 34 cards for setting the stage for the for critique of project. 247 00:32:53,310 --> 00:32:54,380 For the small. 248 00:32:57,780 --> 00:33:05,760 And they are totally regarding causality can't does take up the question the freedom of a new charge makes my wait a very interesting observation, 249 00:33:06,570 --> 00:33:12,300 but from a moral point of view, it's not necessary to prove the freedom sufficient but would be of. 250 00:33:13,820 --> 00:33:25,610 But as from the point of view, it is sufficient for the character to act on the supposition that the chosen course of action is authentically itself. 251 00:33:26,240 --> 00:33:29,850 But that's. But these topics. 252 00:33:30,680 --> 00:33:33,680 Melanie a lectures on psychology. 253 00:33:35,470 --> 00:33:42,550 But conscious of it and referring to lost freedom sounds paradoxical, doesn't it? 254 00:33:43,510 --> 00:33:47,470 A loss of freedom. This is all important. What do we mean by that? 255 00:33:50,220 --> 00:34:00,540 On the assumption that at a choice point there really is a chance, which is to say it is within your power agency to go left or right. 256 00:34:02,000 --> 00:34:10,270 At any point. The decision you make if it is a decision which is different from. 257 00:34:10,730 --> 00:34:18,020 Living in poverty. There is a decision. There must be some reason for choosing left or right. 258 00:34:19,460 --> 00:34:24,410 Which is to say there must be some principle that guides choice. 259 00:34:26,210 --> 00:34:31,490 And the more consequential the choices, the more fundamental the principle faith. 260 00:34:33,540 --> 00:34:40,620 You might think that when it comes to the most consequential choices, there would be a ruling principle that would cover all. 261 00:34:42,300 --> 00:34:50,580 Also. Conscious of being more educated. 262 00:34:52,510 --> 00:34:58,450 Of such nature that any and every consequential choice point. 263 00:34:59,730 --> 00:35:06,270 The principle that governs the choice is an ideal principle, a flawless principle. 264 00:35:07,260 --> 00:35:12,480 A principle applicable over all such places and always. 265 00:35:16,030 --> 00:35:23,010 Calls that got. Though, what Carter's offering. 266 00:35:23,910 --> 00:35:34,190 Remember, he had already been instructed by by the monarchy to write off religious subjects to 18. 267 00:35:36,040 --> 00:35:44,900 [INAUDIBLE] be. This was not a good time to be drawn to rhinos of this nature. 268 00:35:45,750 --> 00:35:48,800 Those are the decades of the 18th century witch hunts. 269 00:35:52,220 --> 00:35:57,980 But come on, stop offering some sort of fig leaf for some sort of failed theology. 270 00:36:00,050 --> 00:36:03,440 Can't reach the console to the golf. 271 00:36:05,030 --> 00:36:12,370 By way of gravity. That is he. The steps will be primarily anthropological, a theologian. 272 00:36:13,240 --> 00:36:22,250 It'll be something in human nature that triggers God's thoughts of a certain kind recognised towards the way. 273 00:36:23,120 --> 00:36:28,040 But as far as people get that kind of. Will leverage knowledge and itself. 274 00:36:29,970 --> 00:36:32,820 So yes, even in the first place, 275 00:36:32,820 --> 00:36:42,480 ample room for the sorts of theological issues engaged by the issue of free will and determinism engaged by morality itself. 276 00:36:44,200 --> 00:36:54,310 But neither experience nor pure reason how properly assessed by a sound metaphysical method will establish any of this knowledge. 277 00:36:55,810 --> 00:37:01,640 And this, after all this to note yet again, just what the limits of science and race. 278 00:37:03,100 --> 00:37:09,310 Our powers are knowing that real limits, even as they make nature itself possible. 279 00:37:10,010 --> 00:37:13,520 And this, after all, was the very point of the first.