Тёмный

Husserl Logical Investigations 

Mark Thorsby
Подписаться 46 тыс.
Просмотров 21 тыс.
50% 1

In this video, Professor Thorsby walks through the first arguments of the "Logical Investigations" by Edmund Husserl.
Summary:
In this reading, Husserl offers a critique of the position of logical psychologism. The problem concerns the theoretical foundations upon which the validity of the sciences depend. All science - psychology, physics, biology, etc. depend upon the validity of their reasoning. Taken in this way, logic can be understood as a normative discipline - or technology - that gets used by other sciences. Logic as its own science is an investigation into the principles that govern validity. Logic is dependent upon certain core methodological features. Or, as Husserl puts it, the normative technology of logic depends upon a theoretical foundation. Logicians of the 19th century had largely held that these theoretical foundations were empirically given as inductive forms of reasoning governed by psychological laws. (see Mill and Lipps). Husserl's work represents a sustained attack against the logical psychologist of this period in favor of an a priori theoretical foundation. Put in historical context, Husserl's own philosophical position is much closer to the position of Immanuel Kant. Historically, this text nicely illustrates the continued tension between the tradition of English empiricism and German idealism.
For a great resource take a look at:
plato.stanford.edu/entries/hu...
books.google.com/books?id=nat...

Опубликовано:

 

12 фев 2018

Поделиться:

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист
Посмотреть позже
Комментарии : 36   
@Havre_Chithra
@Havre_Chithra 6 лет назад
This content is fantastic. Like, better than the content I encountered at my university. It's free, I can pause and take notes. Wonderful. If I were a professor, I'd tell my students to do the readings and listen to most of the lectures online in this sort of format and then use most of the class time for actually helping students with writing and developing ideas for their assignments.
@whereisawesomeness
@whereisawesomeness 2 года назад
Agreed! One of the silver linings to lockdown is that most universities have started recording lectures now. It’s so much more accessible, in so many different ways :)
@ShannonIsSpiffy
@ShannonIsSpiffy 5 лет назад
This video has saved my life!! I was struggling so much with Husserl but now I finally feel like I know what's going on. I would love to see more videos like this covering the rest of Volume One
@ZishanWazedBegg
@ZishanWazedBegg 4 года назад
this was beautiful and so informative. I have no formal training in philosophy and I'm only genuinely interested in this. I must say, I actually understood something. thank you so much for being so lucid :)
@fizywig
@fizywig 3 года назад
Shame we didn’t get a 6 hour guide to this text like you did with ideas1.
@ghungas
@ghungas 6 лет назад
Thanks a lot for all the wonderful videos!
@rezamahan7109
@rezamahan7109 2 года назад
Thank you, Mark, I love and admire your excellent presentations😇
@changuanzhou7676
@changuanzhou7676 2 года назад
The greatest one i have ever seen.Support!
@deprogramr
@deprogramr 6 лет назад
Thanks so much for all your vids!
@jabilani
@jabilani 4 года назад
Great exposition! I am very curious whether there is some discussion about psychologism as a "driving force" of the constitution of our modern society. Indeed, the dynamics of our modern world is based upon empirical truths which feeds back on how we behave towards one another and think about each other. From this perspective, psychologism is not a mere concept so as to understand two different views of logic which, in turn, would limit itself to the domain of philosophical analysis; it is perhaps the utmost philosophical notion so as to rationally understand how the modern world is wired together on the social-political-economical level and, more importantly, how one can understand and stipulate the mechanisms through which configurations and conformations of the world are set up on the aforementioned levels so as to stabilize or destabilize certain properties thereof. A dynamical-systems view of the world having psychologism as one of its fundamental concepts. That would be very interesting! Of course, I hope that those, who are inclined to conspiracy theories, do not feel addressed by this call. In fact, I have invoked a perspective from which rationality prevails unconditionally.
@billdennehy570
@billdennehy570 6 лет назад
thank you for your work!
@jakecarlo9950
@jakecarlo9950 3 года назад
Great post! Quick note: I understand “Crisis of European Sciences” is actually H’s last life’s work per Britannica.
@henrybogle8437
@henrybogle8437 5 лет назад
Excellent synopsis
@lukepipa2570
@lukepipa2570 2 года назад
32:00 Seems like Husserl was foreshadowing Kuhn and the idea of paradigms. Theories need facts to fill them out, but facts are influenced by the scientific theory under which they are perceived. The theories are not some independent truths that are simply applied to physical reality as we were taught in 5th grade when we learned "the Scientific method". Much more complicated
@zauberkeit1234
@zauberkeit1234 Год назад
Can I ask, what programme do you use to create your beautiful presentations?
@mgm6076
@mgm6076 6 месяцев назад
what is the name of the presentation program?
@Zeno2Day
@Zeno2Day 4 года назад
“Patterns of quantities”.... got it. :-)
@molocious
@molocious 5 лет назад
Stanley Goldberg in his _Understanding Relativity: Origin and Impact of a Scientific Revolution_ made an interesting assertion early in the book when discussing the nature of science, that science commits the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent. Anyone care to comment on Goldberg's assertion while I refresh my memory on what the fallacy of affirming the consequent is and how science commits that fallacy? I may think further about this and make a comment myself.
@molocious
@molocious 5 лет назад
It seems that there are a number of people who reject the assertion. Since I don't possess Goldberg's book, I can't give his reasons for making his claim because it has been a few years since I read his book. However, my gut sense is that he is speaking metaphorically in order to say that an empirical observation may be accounted for by more than one hypothesis, taking the empirical observation (O) as the consequent and a hypothesis (H) as its antecedent, hence, if H, then O. O, therefore H. I recall that this bothered Phaedrus, the alter-ego character who shadows the narrator in Pirsig's _Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance_, and who, as a student of science, was dissatisfied with the wiggle-room of infinite possible hypotheses to explain empirical phenomena. However, it doesn't seem to bother practicing scientists and this can be illustrative of Husserl's point that science needs a discipline like philosophy to examine the theoretical justification of science. I think it is in this sense that philosophy was called "first philosophy" by philosophers in the Middle Ages when they considered that philosophy would occupy this foundational position with respect to science.
@common-rock
@common-rock 4 года назад
@@molocious You posted this a long time ago, but yes, this is the issue that many people have with some scientific studies. The idea is that if you have established a conditional relationship "The presence of A will indicate B", and you can see that B is present, it does not then mean that the presence of B indicates A. There may be other variables that impact the result, such that A is not the necessary cause of B. So, when some studies are published, sometimes people take issue with the idea that there may be other variables impacting the result. Modern science tries to eliminate those inconsistencies as much as possible, but it's not always perfect.
@molocious
@molocious 4 года назад
@@common-rock Thank you for your thoughtful reply, But you should explain how modern science "eliminates those inconsitencies as much as possible." I never asked for perfection. Of course, what philosophers of science do and what practicing scientist do are no doubt worlds apart!
@molocious
@molocious 4 года назад
One should also consider a little-read nowadays English philosopher, J. M. E. McTaggart who made the interesting observation that one could never found a religion on science because religion, if it is to last, must have foundational dogmas. Science, on the other hand, is constantly changing, hence the once fashionable thinking of Thomas Kuhn and the changing paradigms of science. One reason for this is the logical fallacy that I described. Newton's hypothesis, or Law until the arrival of Einstein, yielded to Special and General Relativity. (One must remember that Einstein's special relativity paper of 1905, "On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies" made no mention of the earlier Michaelson-Morley experiment whose null result was infamous.) What this means is that empirical considerations were absent in the founding of special relativity. But it's a complex history.) Likewise with quantum mechanics, on the other side of which one of its founders, Einstein himself (the photoelectric paper of 1905) found himself contra Niels Bohr and the Copenhagen Interpretation. With modern science one must concede that's there's never a dull moment. But I wonder if humans find such eternal restlessness comforting,
@dubbelkastrull
@dubbelkastrull Год назад
47:06 bookmark
@ApteraEV2024
@ApteraEV2024 Год назад
❤∀❤
@artlessons1
@artlessons1 7 месяцев назад
On Art ... If you asked Michelangelo about his technique of sculpting David, he would give you a good explanation, much after Aristotle's and Plato's works on Philosophy. When one gets into the art created through Kant's concept of genius as an artist, the artist cannot answer the question. They are creating works out of mind, not logically. As a retired art teacher and philosopher, I see where Kant has undercut the art world ( not for the better). Kant should stick with Aristotle's rules, not weaken the links by bending the rules to fit a modern concept. Much bad art resulted from Kant, as did psychology and philosophy. A slippery slope over the edge. The artist is no longer creating the work they identify with Philosophical concepts. A short-lived bubble that bursts.in midair. If you months later ask an athlete how he did a sure thing, he will walk you through it step by step. Penrose ( quantum physics) also believes intuition is compared with known required skills, not as coming out of nowhere as the Kantian intuitive concept of genius. (ps) Picasso was trained in the classic school of art. This later allowed him to create his cubism.
@arnaldocosta3
@arnaldocosta3 Год назад
+1USD
@saimbhat6243
@saimbhat6243 Год назад
"Mathematics is a science" ?????
@ahmadzulfahmimuwafiq3839
@ahmadzulfahmimuwafiq3839 6 лет назад
First comment
@JohnVKaravitis
@JohnVKaravitis 6 лет назад
"Comment with least value" award winner! Congratulations!
@molocious
@molocious 5 лет назад
@@JohnVKaravitis Yours, necessarily, is a "second comment" in relation to Ahmad's "first comment." So, that establishes its necessary cause in relation to succession. But what is its sufficient cause in relation to succession? There is no sufficient cause because succession is infinite, i.e., one can always make further comments ad infinitum. My comment, is, of course, a "third comment." Anyone care to comment?
@clintonlunn4357
@clintonlunn4357 3 года назад
@@molocious comment
@molocious
@molocious 3 года назад
@@clintonlunn4357 From your lack of punctuation, it's hard to determine if you mean the word "comment," or an imperative command meaning, "Comment!" If it's a command, then it's a comment to which I've replied by way of commenting, in particular, this comment (although I don't like to be self-referential). If it's the word "comment," then it fails to be a comment because it isn't a sentence, that is, if your agree that comments are subsets of sentences. If you were a politician, then to the question, "Would you care to comment?," you'd reply, "No comment," which is an abbreviation of the sentence, "No, I don't care to comment." So, would you care to comment by elucidating your reply? Or are you a politician?
@lancecoleman7440
@lancecoleman7440 3 года назад
NOTHING EXISTS
@JohnVKaravitis
@JohnVKaravitis 6 лет назад
Who's the little head bobbing up and down in the lower right-hand corner? Quite annoying! Also, 1:16:40 Spelling error. Also 1:24:00 It's "judgment", only one "e." Tsk tsk tsk.
@Cathrac
@Cathrac 5 лет назад
I suggest to do better, rather than complaining. The effort taken into this video must enormous, even though it has some typos in it.
@molocious
@molocious 5 лет назад
Edmund Husserl mastered shorthand so that he could be a more efficient writer and this partly explains his vast legacy of writing known as Husserliana which might make a good name for a rock group. In all of the Husserliana written in shorthand there is not a single spelling mistake, a proposition, by the way, that can only, necessarily, be established with one's posterior--I suppose by sitting on the work--a posteriori.
Далее
Wittgenstein.  The Philosophical Investigations I
1:14:11
Husserl: Phenomenology and the Life World
45:00
Просмотров 182 тыс.
It seems Sonya's choice was obvious! 😅 #cat #cats
00:20
Husserl on First Philosophy
59:46
Просмотров 10 тыс.
1.  Frege:  "Thought, Sense, & Reference"
1:22:46
Просмотров 53 тыс.
Being & Time  Introduction II
56:32
Просмотров 17 тыс.
Gottlob Frege - On Sense and Reference
34:06
Просмотров 307 тыс.
A Brief History of Epistemology
42:56
Просмотров 86 тыс.
Understanding Existentialism: Søren Kierkegaard
1:41:53
A History of Philosophy | 70 Husserl and Heidegger
1:01:42
Phenomenology: WTF? Time and Phenomenology explained!
9:44