@@GregoryBSadler Your videos are great! Your channel is the main one I use for commentary on texts. Would you be so kind as to comment on my planned route of study? I've read Plato, some Stoics, a little Aristotle. I recently read the Meditations and am now working through the Enquiry of Human Understanding (maybe the Principles of Morals also). With the intention to get a good grasp of which arguments Kant was attempting to reconcile. I'm then planning to read the Prolegomena followed by the Critique, and move on to Hegel afterward. Then I feel like I should have Schopenhauer in there too. In the end I would like to have a solid grasp of the things Nietzsche was reacting to. I realize this is a lot of work, but I am not in a hurry. Would you please let me know if I'm missing something? Thank you!!!
I find the implicit ad absurdum argument weak, if you are already a theist, you would not have any problems by not thinking about God's personal life or experience, so how God controls everything and every moment is inconceivable to man but doesn't mean it is for God. Hume's critiques were weak aswell, just mere "weirdness", as if anyone claimed God's life is like man.
@africandawahrevival180 Wittgenstein would have said that the weirdness Hume experienced is a sense derived from the limitations of logic. You're right in that the Gregory isn't very rigorous. First and last time I'll listen to his weak philosophizing.
