Idealism Part 2: Fichte, Schiller, Hegel, and Schelling

preview_player
Показать описание
We introduced the movement of idealism and discussed its most important early proponents, such as George Berkeley and Immanuel Kant. Now let's examine the key figures that were to follow, including Johann Fichte, Friedrich Schiller, Georg Hegel, and Friedrich Schelling. Where did they take these ideas? Let's find out!

Script by Luca Igansi

Check out "Is This Wi-Fi Organic?", my book on disarming pseudoscience!
Рекомендации по теме
Комментарии
Автор

as a German, your pronunciation of Fichte is spot on! Thanks for taking the effort to learn the German pronunciation 😊

anniestumpy
Автор

Appreciate the way professor Dave can explain complexed philosophical ideas in lay mans terms in a way most of us can understand, well done Dave!

zacharylehocki
Автор

Nice! One way to extend this mini-series would be to discuss the Young Hegelians, their eventual inversion of Hegel’s idealism into materialism, and their influence on Marx.

ianmathwiz
Автор

Hey Wael, sending positive vibes to your section of the big ball

donchristie
Автор

If I remember well both Hegel's and Marx dialectics did not describe three moments: thesis, antithesis, synthesis but one moment: thesis-antithesis since every thesis contains it's opposition their dialectic resolution, its synthesis ( new thesis ) contains its antithesis.

pocojoyo
Автор

Had no idea Schiller was in the mix like that, always thought he was just the poet who wrote An Die Freude back in the 1790s.

quexalcoatl
Автор

Hey, professor Dave have you done any videos on the evolution of the immune system if not, could you please make one, thanks

RyanGhezawi
Автор

Thanks Dave, appreciate the philosophy videos. You’ve really helped them make sense to me.

jamiegallier
Автор

Im just here for the german name pronounciations

bactrosaurus
Автор

Lol, as a German student of philosophy it's quite funny to hear an English guy confusing "Weltgeist" with "Zeitgeist".

Spielkalb-von-Sparta
Автор

How you gonna nail the pronunciation of Fichte but keep messing up Berkeley?

mikmalot
Автор

Berkeley isn't pronounced like U.C. Berkeley. It's pronounced "BAR-klee" or "barkley".

NicholasOfAutrecourt
Автор

Wait what, Germans.
Next thing the visigoths from the west, unlike Eastern goths.
Asterix and the herculean tasks

drunkentriloquist
Автор

If heat inherently has physical meaning when in transit, constituting its existential definition as a form of energy in motion, what does it truly mean to say that heat 'flows'? When we assert that heat is a form of energy in transit, it implies movement; however, using the term 'flow' seems to redundantly invoke the concept of movement. How can the movement of energy itself be described as 'flow' without introducing redundancy?" I created this analogy to understand what the definition is trying to say:"When we say 'heat always flows from higher to lower temperature until thermal equilibrium is reached, ' it conjures an image in my mind of an invisible 'glitter glow' dispersed in the atmosphere(massless being in motion). This 'glitter glow' represents the thermal energy, and with a temperature change, it becomes unevenly distributed. In this mental model, a chunk of the glitter glow with a relatively higher distribution moves towards a lower distribution in a flow, seeking to maintain symmetry as per the Thumb Rule of the universe. The glitter glow represents thermal energy, and when it flows, we call it heat?

nirmalmishra
Автор

Professor Dave is the type of guy to compete against you in a trivia contest about your entire life and win

Pacdad
Автор

Prof is teaching social sciences like he completed maths

generaljenith