5:45, you studied.mostly in the anglosphere, in France they do study and treasure their scholastics.
@TheModernHermeticist
Жыл бұрын
Were hitting quantum levels of esotericism right here. Way spookier than the clerical necromantic underworld.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
I'd rather read Scotus any day over boring medieval necromancy. This is the real stuff.
@DHTC888
Жыл бұрын
Can y'all point out something in the video's timeline that's intense and profound for me, because the whole thing is going right over my black metal head
@tedhand6237
Жыл бұрын
Can't wait until he gets to Pico's little treatise on Being. LMAO at hipster esotericism BTW.
@Bildgesmythe
Жыл бұрын
@@DHTC888 agreed, I've hurt myself in my confusion
@brookechang4942
Жыл бұрын
@@DHTC888 26:14 and talking about "to be anything, you must first be in a general sense" is where it started to get a little more concrete for me, but this is definitely one of those "I'm gonna have to listen to this three or four more times and take notes to be able to wrap my head around it" videos. I THINK what Scotus is getting at is that logically speaking, something has to exist in order to have attributes-the whole "you have to be in order to be in a suit" thing.
@radioactivegorgon2307
Жыл бұрын
It's kind of amazing to me how much argumentation occurred around trying to maintain God as an ideal human and yet one involved with non-ideal human life that we can attempt to reach-yet never with complete success. I find it to be a sort of underlying current to what creates a sense of the divine.
@didack1419
Жыл бұрын
It's interesting to see how people struggle with making sense of the metaphysical divine exceptionalism while trying to be humble about how much they can pretend to know and understand about it.
@rachelvargas8446
Жыл бұрын
There’s is no such thing as a being as god.
@darinanelson
Жыл бұрын
Funniest philosophical presentation since Diogenes did that thing with the chicken.
@jtzoltan
Жыл бұрын
@@rachelvargas8446 shocking! I've never heard such an opinion as this before. Tell me more...
@davidchess1985
Жыл бұрын
I do wonder what people like Scotus, fresh from a day struggling with the nature of the transcendent Being of the Divine, really thought of say church officials announcing that God totally wants you to give 10% of your income to Bishop Fred here. They seem entirely disjoint.
@wyattwatson9848
Жыл бұрын
I knew of Wahdat Al Wajud, but never realized there were other Unity of Being philosophies appearing from different traditions. It’s a killer for sure
@thebyzantinescotist7081
10 ай бұрын
This came up in my recommendeds and I was super worried based on the title. A lot of people really misrepresent Scotus’s theory of univocity to make it seem more radical than it actually was. As a Scotist, I will say that I think you did an excellent job correctly explaining Scotus’s positions. I very much agree as well on the Copleston recommendation. He heavily follows early 20th century Scotists who are usually much better than contemporary literature on Scotus. Thank you for this video. Glad to see more discussion of Scotus around the internet. And glad to see you actually read Scotus.
@TheEsotericaChannel
10 ай бұрын
I think it's both more radical than appreciated and then oversold in some philosophy circles than necessary - but yes, I enjoy scotus. I even have a book of his for sale on my website.
@wcropp1
Жыл бұрын
Dr. Sledge--as a student of philosophy and the "history of ideas," I particularly enjoyed this episode. Not many channels are willing to get into the weeds with Scholasticism, despite how influential some of these ideas and thinkers have been. Thanks for digging into this one, it is a fantastic introduction to the topic. As an off-topic aside, one of these days it would be awesome to see an episode on the history of esoteric herbalism, sacred plants, incense, entheogens, etc. Psychoactive or otherwise, the history of these plants and the associations they came to have is a fascinating topic. The other tools, equipment, etc., used in ceremonial magic probably all have an interesting history as well. I'm not sure how much scholarly research there is into this subject, I know everyone has a theory as to what exactly "soma" was, or what was given to initiates in the Mystery Shools in Greece and the like. Even so, some speculative hypotheses would be interesting to discuss. This is also a rather broad topic, it may need to be broken down into multiple episodes. Something like you did with absinthe would be awesome to see with historically significant plants used in witchcraft and magic, or at least I think so. Keep up the good work, and I'll keep watching!
@siobhanomalley1968
Жыл бұрын
I agree, it would be excellent to see Dr Sledge do a few videos specifically on entheogens and mystery cults, I'm sure there has been at least one piece that delved into it a little but it's such a broad and varied topic. I'd love to see his take on the various references to altered states and the various trance-inducting practices throughout both western and eastern esotericism.
@protagtom
Жыл бұрын
I would love to see a video on entheogens and ritual trance practices
@a.cesquire7856
Жыл бұрын
Univocity of Being seems to share some ideas with Wahdat al Wujud put forward by Ibn Arabi in the Sufi metaphysics tradition which I find interesting! Thanks for the video Dr Sledge!
@DukensteinA1
Жыл бұрын
I bought a shirt to support you, Justin. I’m 6’6” and 350. The 4xlt didn’t cut it 😅. I need an Esoteric diet plan.
@max_the_mantis5173
Жыл бұрын
Pretty sure if we bring up this KZitemr at our local mages meeting at least a few people will also be fans. We suspect that many wizards who take their craft seriously, are fellow fans of this man's work.
@crancourt1789
Жыл бұрын
We really need a Kimmy Gibbler joke counter, alongside a "wonder what happened to that Josh guy" joke counter.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
I only pull the Gibbler material when it's a special episode. Scotus deserves it.
@jeffreyherda9684
Жыл бұрын
@@TheEsotericaChannel that joke had me nearly losing my lunch. Good job good sir.
@dushmanmardom
Жыл бұрын
In my years of Philosophy studies, Medieval Philosophy was rather encouraged, but then again it's Poland, and most professors are involved with Catholic University. That being said, I had a privilege of being taught Medieval Philosophy by a great professor who did her doctorate on Duns Scotus - so this episode hits close to home :)
@nataliet4293
Жыл бұрын
I suddenly understand why your videos were getting recommended to me when i started watching elden ring videos. Man.
@2012jordie
Жыл бұрын
Fascinating! By far the most difficult video of yours I've watched so far. But I'll keep working on it. It seems to me that the laws against heresy were for Scotus (and many others) a frustrating constraint, and this is what makes it so hard to get to the core of his argument. When one has to avoid being burned at the stake, one must talk in circles. I might go further and say that the real difficulty of talking about the divine in the Middle Ages has nothing to do with any logical or philosophical problem. It's simply that the powerful elite of society have a particular point of view about the divine and will punish people for disputing that point of view. Naturally, since that point of view is what the social order is built on. I suspect this is the source of all class bondage and wealth inequality: the reduction of God to what is socially convenient, or what enables certain people to maintain power and control over others. If the king is the person everyone listens to and obeys, then the king may as well be God. And while that may be good enough for government, it utterly defeats the purpose of philosophy. Philosophy can't exist within a contained environment. It must be free to expand beyond the constraints of law and principles of social organisation, or it is useless. "Christian philosophy" is an oxymoron. Sorry if I'm just restating Philosophical History 101. I'm still working on my undergrad degree in ancient history and inhaling philosophy and esotericism in my free time. Some brilliant thinkers have come out of theology, and no doubt the wish to better understand God is what compelled them. But I can't help but feel that, on the whole, monotheistic religion has tremendously slowed the intellectual progress of humanity. The thinkers could've done so much more if they hadn't been forced to compromise with the ideas and agendas of the rich. We might've had atomic science in antiquity.
@williamhesterjohnson
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for another wonderful episode. I like to imagine a plane of existence where Scotus and Tillich discuss the univocity of being and God as the ground of being/God above God... but out of Christian humility I'd have to admit only grasping a small amount of the discussion.
@anayrre2062
Жыл бұрын
This incredible video can go hard in hand with foolish fish's, "science vs religion, wrong question" video. Such good stuff! We are positively blessed to have such creators talking about these concepts in such an approachable way. I finally feel that I have arrived at a point in my life when my years of study and trying to find my true call, have paid off.
@cheri238
Жыл бұрын
Bravo, Justin Sledge, with that PHD Of yours. I have written and listened all day long just with your understanding of plunges of great depths of wide open wisdom with knowledge. BRAVO, SIR!!!!! I can't get enough of your lectures, and I thank you.❤
@ChrisLively
Жыл бұрын
Greetings from Chattanooga, TN. Dry? Boring? Not to me, this is where I choose to spend my free time, right now. What's that quote "Those who say, do not know.....". Have a good day and thanks for sharing and for your time and wisdom.
@TheMarkRich
Жыл бұрын
I think, therefore my mind is melting.
@beepboop204
Жыл бұрын
we need to learn how to drive, learn how to speak, but people act like we dont have to lean how to think
@davidstrickland1127
Жыл бұрын
I think therefor i think...he he
@nomaanhaque1704
Жыл бұрын
I love your work! Honestly the parables of history, religion and society are so awe inspiring to the creative artist. I had a request for you to maybe consider making a video on the Avesta: Yasna and the effect of that on the middle east and subcontinental oceania. It's the only known collection of Zorostranic text and I can understand the genuine skepticism at looking at a Sanskrit text. But please could you consider giving it a try incase you can help showcase some of its relevance in the history of alchemy or the Magi. Stay blessed wise one! Truly you have a microcosmic gift! ❤
@klyanadkmorr
Жыл бұрын
I had to rewatch this listen concentrate 2-3 times just to get what you were saying Scotus was talking about
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
Yeah this is a good example of how this channel is not an introductory level channel - this is seriously difficult material
@klyanadkmorr
Жыл бұрын
@@TheEsotericaChannel Well I consider myself abit of a Pantheist considering my science mixed into philosophy and so had to arrange my brain thoughts to understand the needle thread Scotus was doing of that time to avoid complete Unity Oness of everything=a god but that is supposed to be outside all?, like a new logic Ven diagram design. Still I'm probably not getting his idea.
@carsonianthegreat4672
3 ай бұрын
28:52 Thank you Bl. Scotus for preserving analogy. Dominicans everywhere are grateful.
@geraldmeehan8942
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for yet another mind bendingly wonderful episode of Esoterica. Keep up the good work
@beghards
Жыл бұрын
I woke up in a foul mood today, but the intricacy of his thought made me chuckle so much that now I'm light-hearted. Thank you Doctor for this gem.
@SirCoughsalot
Жыл бұрын
Such a great episode. Thanks for going up to bat for medieval philosophy in general and scholasticism in particular.
@ДаниилФролов-м3л
Жыл бұрын
(Rarely did I rewind KZitem to understand that often.) This video is a great work you know why? Because it makes it like a thriller. You may read of all notable philosophers in Wikipedia or some student's book, and you know some statements or even systems they made. If you like philosophy and stuff like that, you probably like these statements/systems already, they are fun toys for you, you collect them in your mind as you did collect Bionicles as a kid (and you probably like Greek and Descartes-Locke generations more than Medieval one, just as you like original Toas and Toa Metru more than Toa Nuwa). But dr. Justin Sledge make it pulsating, you feel what all these people lived for, what thrilled them, why they felt it important, why it was the drama of their lives. That's wonderful. ...But I guess you have to be nerdy enough from start to see it as a thriller (and to make that philosophers-bionicles comparison).
@ieatlolz
Жыл бұрын
This is so awesome, so much more interesting than bossing around more demons! Ive been wanting to delve deeper into Scotus for a few years but there are so few resources thay succinctly describe his doctrine - this video is an absolute godsend ;). I would kill for you to do a course on medieval philosophy or something, maybe once the Merkhava series is finished someday. Much love!
@crustymcgee6580
Жыл бұрын
I've listened to this three times and I still have trouble understanding these concepts.
@JadeSune
Жыл бұрын
4:38-4:48 In high school I pored through the Catholic Encyclopedia. I remember a common, relevant lament in its pages. Wish I remembered a citation. This reputation arises from the direct failing of the Scholastics in grappling properly with rising Humanism, renaissance philosophy, Protestantism, and eventually Positivism. There, a lack of innovation, a decadent laziness, meant the same stultified, aged arguments were repeated ad nauseum, inviting easy ridicule. No new counterarguments or polemics were effectively developed or spread, not in time, and at any rate many Catholics were taken with new ideas of rationalism and kept their faith, so the threat of these other schools of philosophy weren't seen for what they were.
@JadeSune
Жыл бұрын
Hah, Dr. Sledge beat me to it. Perhaps I should've listened to the next 30 seconds before writing.
@estebanmondragon6726
Жыл бұрын
Yes, reading medieval scholasticism is awesome. All the problem of universals, the problem of translation between greek-syriac-arab-latin, and the problem of the first faculty of the soul are so interesting and incredibly relevant. To continue with this series you must do a video about Ockham. PS. I really don't get your problem with Deleuze, it's not if he ever conceives the univocity of being of Scotus as ontological. He just points out that Scotus was the first to create a logical concept of univocity, as Spinoza did in the ontological plane.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
My problem is that he attributes that position to Scotus despite the fact that Scotus clearly rejected it - something Deleuze is known to do to other philosophers (for instance forcing the A of the deduction onto Kant which clearly he rejected...hence him writing the B version and sticking to it). Scotus was by no means the first to come to the concept - it was widely known and rejected by Thomas, etc.
@vaporchild1821
Жыл бұрын
yaay!!! what a great way to end the week with this fresh upload on medieval theological beef
@scriptea
Жыл бұрын
Oh damn! Parmenides and Duns Scotus in such a short window! Two of my favorites. Nice.
@markcharron
Жыл бұрын
Duns Scotus elevated primitive Franciscanism to new intellectual heights. It's so beautiful to me how Islamic Sufism and Christian Scholastic Franciscanism arrive at such similar and beautiful insights rather independently merely through a reading of Aristotle. Very much appreciated your glowing appraisal of medieval philosophy.
@teachnola10
Жыл бұрын
“I pity the fool” who didn’t like this episode
@williamrees6662
Жыл бұрын
As a Catholic priest, I had a similar hat, though not the beard. On the subject of being, have you ever read the Catholic philosopher of the early 19th century, Antonio Rosmini and his idea of the order of Being?
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
I've not but sounds interesting
@williamrees6662
Жыл бұрын
@@TheEsotericaChannel His On the Origin of Ideas would be the starting point.
@thebyzantinescotist7081
10 ай бұрын
I should mention since Rosmini came up here that there is a book in Italian on Scotus’s influence on Rosmini
@williamrees6662
10 ай бұрын
@@thebyzantinescotist7081 Fantastic!
@Fr.O.G.
Жыл бұрын
As someone who majored in a philosophy around the same time as you, I remember anything from before the 17th century was ignored. You got a little Plato in 101, and then that was it. Maybe something between Plato and Descartes would come up in a Special Problems class, but other than that, not a peep. No Stoics, no Neoplatonism, no Confucianism, nada.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
Were you in a hardcore analytic department?
@Fr.O.G.
Жыл бұрын
@@TheEsotericaChannel Yes, but my school was also a med school, so my professors were mostly interested in medical ethics. I did have one professor who was a classicist, but even she was more interested in Kierkegaard than Aristotle. Dr. Sadler, one of your fellow KZitem philosophy teachers, told me this wasn't an unusual experience in the late 90s.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
That makes sense. I was really lucky and undergrad to get a wide range of offerings. But graduate school with shockingly limited. Though I will say that Memphis is fantastic in that you're required to do both analytic and continental work. That's super rare in this country and I really appreciated that dimension of my graduate school training. I think it also informs how I do philosophy now where I really want to have the rigor of analytics and especially logic but also the adventuresome spirit of continental philosophy.
@Midgard458
Жыл бұрын
You’re an outstanding professor. I like your lectures on all subjects, especially Kaballah, which is part of my Jewish faith. You are fair and balanced and that I like. I also like your manner of presentation. It is logical and without emotion, like a Vulcan.
@markdpricemusic1574
Жыл бұрын
Wonderfully lucid presentation of some notoriously spaghettified abstractions. As a philosopher and recovering Catholic I can confirm your opinion that most of ''Church philosophy'' is far weirder than most people CAN think. Many thanks for this - and all your work. M.
@jmarz2600
Жыл бұрын
I've been working my way through Marco Sgarbi's "Kant and Aristotle." This episode merits multiple replays.
@rouslanrouslan2677
Ай бұрын
Probably the clearest summary of Aristotle's problem of the categories and the development of the science of metaphysics.
@greenfire4115
Жыл бұрын
I’ve been trying to get into Scotus (via, I admit, Deleuze) and wasn’t expecting this when I clicked. Thanks so much!
@erickoraganie8705
Жыл бұрын
This was an eyes-glaze-over episode for me. Would need to go back and listen to each line to really get what was being said. Utterly lost. Fascinating as usual thank you
@Dank-gb6jn
Жыл бұрын
I’m not sure how deep your content library goes, but if you haven’t done so already, I’d love to see a video on the gods and goddesses of ancient Canaan like Moloch and Asherah; since I find the religion of ancient Canaan to be vastly interesting. Would also love to see a video on how psychedelics may have influenced the rise of religion (McKenna’s interpretations about Çatalhöyük for example).
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
There are solid arguments now that moloch was actually never a god at all. And I think this psychedelic stuff is mostly nonsense.
@Dank-gb6jn
Жыл бұрын
@@TheEsotericaChannel that’s interesting. I’ll have to research those arguments and glean new info. Personally, I find the psychedelic influence on the archaic world to be one that, while possibly far fetched, to be one of the more understudied and undervalued influences on the advancement of our species.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
It'd be more interesting if there were any evidence for it
@1001011011010
Жыл бұрын
"Do I look Catholic?" Totally could pass for an Eastern Catholic 100% In the Catholic Church the bishops etc still wear what looks like a kippa too, though for different reasons of course
@carsonianthegreat4672
3 ай бұрын
Even priests can wear a black zucchetto, which looks very similar to a kippa, and comes from a shared tradition.
@KENNETHedwardMitchell
Жыл бұрын
Pierce carried this through to contemporary thought. He’s esoteric also. I did my grad work at saint louis u so i devoured Scotus.
@mdlahey3874
Жыл бұрын
I think there were prerequisites to this video... And I plan to have a migraine on the day of the quiz...
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
Yeah this video isn't exactly introductory level
@Bildgesmythe
Жыл бұрын
😂
@steben3318
Жыл бұрын
Such language!!! a reminder how good humans can get and reminded me to go listen to some Heilung (medieval German lyrics) I don't know medieval either. Thank you Dr Sledge and all the others out there seeking clarity.
@VernoMusic
10 ай бұрын
The emphasizing of “500-year prejudice” has me so tickled rn idk why LMAO
@ratboy_
Жыл бұрын
This is one of your videos where I’m just like “I like your funny words, magic man.” But enjoyable nonetheless.
@b-r-a-i-n-r-o-t
Жыл бұрын
Deleuze as "interesting but wrong" made me cackle
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
The guy's a genius there's no doubt about that and when he's right he's right and when he's wrong...well he's wrong
@TheJudgeandtheJury
Жыл бұрын
Thank you for the overview of this philosopher I will read him in the future.
@aminrodriguez4707
Жыл бұрын
Awesome week end food for thought, thanks Doc
@brookechang4942
Жыл бұрын
I want to say Scotus did the philosophical equivalent of saying, "Okay guys, so matter isn't made up of atoms... but it's okay, I figured out what it IS made out of and it actually explains matter better." I can't help but think he'd hate being described analogically, though. At the risk of getting too political, it's highly amusing to me that the terms "dunce" and "Scotus" are associated with each other. Some of them aren't doing much to help that perception, either.
@carsonianthegreat4672
3 ай бұрын
Technically “Scotus” at the time referred to the Irish
@PanSzawu
Жыл бұрын
Can you do an episode on Jakob Böhme please? His story is wonderful considering that he was a shoemaker and is impact on the rest of philosophy to come is enormous despite being not very well known. Thanks, Justin
@Mazza-Geen
Жыл бұрын
Really enjoying the recent ontological turn around here.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
Yeah I've kind of been on a bender
@Mazza-Geen
Жыл бұрын
Tbf, it's all you CAN talk about thanks to Plotinus.
@comeandsee9643
Жыл бұрын
So…. how does one salvage the pieces of a blown mind! Fantastic presentation!
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
Jb weld is what I use
@comeandsee9643
Жыл бұрын
🤘🤘
@marshalldarcy7423
Жыл бұрын
I am not much of an intellectual but I wish to say Thank you for this presentation for I have long seen the problem of an Infinite God and a finite being.
@RKGrizz
Жыл бұрын
This channel is amazing. Thank you for the excellent content and presentation. I still am unsure why divinity needs to be outside the genus of being but I am sure if I rewatch that portion I will make some more sense of it all.
@jbaquinones
Жыл бұрын
One more thing, this whole thing sounds so Gnostic to me. Scotus seems to be talking about G-d as the Monad. The primal Genus being, G-d, with archons and aeons in between, and the us. Holding the precepts of BS categorization proved to be such a powerful tool for the powers that be. Who said philosophy was not of much monetary worth?
@andythedishwasher1117
Жыл бұрын
Philosophy (or at least logic) is, in my opinion, a precursor to money itself. How does one define value using numbers without engaging in logic?
@jbaquinones
Жыл бұрын
@@andythedishwasher1117 that’s a difficult question to answer. I believe economics is not necessarily within the realm of logic, or at least as it is demonstrated by our institutions. Haha.
@carsonianthegreat4672
3 ай бұрын
Scotus would strongly disagree that his ideas were Gnostic-ish. Instead, they borrow a ton from the ideas of Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, and Pseudo-Dionysius.
@phillipbernhardt-house6907
Жыл бұрын
Magister T is one of my favorite philosophers of the MCMLXXXs! ;)
@drewduncan5774
Жыл бұрын
29:25 When are we getting an episode on Godel's Ontological Proof?
@anthonygeorge3689
Жыл бұрын
Tale as old as time, no one like a Rules Lawyer
@erichoffmann8515
Жыл бұрын
Glad to see a video on Duns Scotus
@aranialawakiro7246
Жыл бұрын
This is interesting. But my brain is packing and wants a vacation,
@jakeaurod
Жыл бұрын
Going back to what I last understood and then repeating over and over until I think I understand is how I listen to this channel. It can take me twice as long to finish a video as its original length. Plus the cats always beg for food or water at some point. I'm not sure I understand everything you say about Scotus, but it makes sense to me, meaning it seems to match my own understanding. I never formally studied philosophy, but I have thoughts and observations based on my experiences that sometimes feel divine, like my near-death experience. But my observations and the process behind don't feel revelatory... they feel logical. Anyway, I think the answer is fairly simple and straightforward. God is in a category of being without any other. There is no subcategory. There is no other being, equal, superior, or inferior. All entities are God, not in part, but completely. Think of it like playing a video game with a first person point of view. You know more than the character you're playing, but the character your playing has limits on their abilities and knowledge and inventory, etc. It's basically like that. Why would it be like playing a video game? Because it's entertainment. God is bored and came up with reality to pass the time. BTW, this isn't an idea that a part of the divine is in everyone or everything. I don't think it's massively parallel. I think it's massively serial. That way, experience and time in game is extended - multiplied instead of divided, because God doesn't want experience to end. God may be omniscient and omnipotent and omnipresent everywhere in creation, but only within the perceptions of God. Does that mean there's something outside the perception of God? Even God doesn't know what God doesn't know, and God knows that. God doesn't know where God came from or where God is or how long this pocket of perception will exist. So, God divided perceived reality of unknown and unknowable duration into infinitesimally smaller parts of time and space and matter, to create a sandbox to play in. I say unknowable duration because that would require knowing something outside of the perception of God, and God doesn't know if God or creation will persist after God's perception stops. IDK, maybe I'm projecting. Does that sounds more logical or more revelatory? (In case it helps anyone reading this to decide, I have amnesia about my cardiac arrest, meaning I don't remember anything about my near-death experience - so no conscious revelations there.)
@virioguidostipa5681
Жыл бұрын
Such an excellent video! Thank you so much Dr. Sledge. If I may, the most compelling and clear philosophical work on the Greek concept of being that I ever read has been Emanuele Severino work. A real beauty that could inspire anyone on this subject.
@leeshiflett1863
Жыл бұрын
Another "I get it! Nope....oh wait this feels weirdly familiar. " episode. 🤘
@flantos23
Жыл бұрын
people really like equivocating being and existence, even when they do so much work trying to separate the two in other areas
@honeyfaewoman
Жыл бұрын
I really enjoyed the video! You are the reason I spend so much time on Google. Lol. I had a question though. I don't know if you already have a video that covers this, or maybe it's just obvious to most, but I wanted to know why Jewish people don't "believe" in Jesus? They never really explained this in school. In fact, my middle school put Judaism under a form of Christianity. That textbook that had that got recalled for a lot of reasons but I'm sure that was one of them.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
Simply put, Jesus failed to accomplish any of the generally conceived things a Messiah is supposed to do within their lifetime.
@honeyfaewoman
Жыл бұрын
@@TheEsotericaChannel Thank you for your response. I hope it wasn't a rude question.
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
Nope, not at all - thanks for asking!
@Cat_Woods
Жыл бұрын
I watch your video the same way you read him -- watch it, then go back to the last place I think I understood and re-watch. 😊
@HeadlessGiant
Жыл бұрын
Thank you Scotus, very cool.
@ewinternetvideos
Жыл бұрын
Oh i was fighting for my life trying to understand this one
@erichoffmann8515
Жыл бұрын
Great video 🎈
@jamesnomos8472
Жыл бұрын
Quick Q about equivocity vs univocity. Etymologically, they seem very similar - the equation of voices vs the unity of voices. Assuming I haven't completely misunderstood them, this seems to imply that these are closely related concepts. In what sense are these similar or related? And what distinction is this twin terminology outlining?
@garrettsmith1505
Жыл бұрын
terms come from Aristotle, equivocity is when there is a common name for two things but they have different definitions, univocity is when two things have the same name and same definition.
@jamesnomos8472
Жыл бұрын
@@garrettsmith1505 I'd figured that out from googling. My question is etymological - univocity and equivocity (to get a bit meta) seem like they're two words that ought to mean the same thing, and that's why I'm confused
@veramitchell3134
Жыл бұрын
How do you think Aristotle would have approached quantum causality, particularly in the ways that, potentially, the causal order of events isn't necessarily fixed?
@TheEsotericaChannel
Жыл бұрын
I don't think Aristotle could have wrapped his head around Newtonian mechanics, honestly.
@carsonianthegreat4672
3 ай бұрын
I’d recommend everyone check out Dr. Edward Feser’s book entitled “Aristotle’s Revenge.” It is an academic-level work that dedicates several chapters to discussing Thomistic-Aristotelianism’s surprising suitability in interpreting quantum mechanics over and against Continental Philosophy.
@zacharycurrie3708
Жыл бұрын
Brilliant. Eventually the logical and the metaphysical collapse back into each other. It's the history of philosophy.
@peterchristiansen9695
Жыл бұрын
Thanks Doc, for another interesting video! 👨🏻🎓☺️ Also "thanks Doc"; you’ve indirectly got me hooked on ‘Blackbraid’ - that’s yet another "money drain" right there… (!) 😉🤘🏻Finally; a prolific Native American Metal Artist! Good to get started collecting, whilst his back catalog is still modest… ☺️ I’d assume that you’ve heard of Melechesh (ethnically Assyrian band, but nevertheless…)?🤘🏻
@Bildgesmythe
Жыл бұрын
Medieval life has been so misunderstood they had to label it the Dark Ages. I wish more academics would delve into the art, literature, philosophy. It's more than the Church and dungeons and dragons. Though D&D is awesome.
@The_Broddha
Жыл бұрын
"The Ascended Master, Kimmy Gibbler" 😂
@cargo_vroom9729
11 ай бұрын
A lot of this goes over my head. But around 23:00 I got confused in a specific way I can articulate. What's wrong with God being a being among beings. I mean, is God a being? Yes (if he exists in reality). Are there other beings? Yes. Ok then. I'm an Ex-Christian and don't understand the problem it presents to Christianity.
@zephyrdaz
Жыл бұрын
Thank you
@catoelder4696
Жыл бұрын
Another awesome video!
@EricVanWinkle
Жыл бұрын
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? It depends on the tune.
@josdelijster4505
Жыл бұрын
thank you Scotus😀
@JM-hr4xp
Жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@mackdmara
Жыл бұрын
If one was to say the divine is the ultimate in power, it is reasonable to believe he should use such a power. The idea that authority is derived from the governed flies in the face of this, but even in practice such a believe doesn't work. Thus we can say the, "authority of the governed" is idealic at best, but never achieved. It is a lie we tell ourselves about ourselves to avoid the reality that the most powerful around you basically control your existence. *You have no rights you cannot defend.* Thus, in the face of unbounded power, a man is forced to realize the lack of ability to govern his own life and that even given someone was to obtain great influence, they still lack self governance. God humbles the mighty by his very existence. We can but acknowledge our weakness, or live a lie of our own supremacy. In short, philosophy is built on finding understanding, not defining reality. You are conveying what is, not forming it. Thus, you might have many working understandings of one truth.
@jamesnomos8472
Жыл бұрын
What does that have to do with the videos content?
@mackdmara
Жыл бұрын
@@jamesnomos8472 What didn'tit touch on? By definition, if not by true state, God has this level of impact. That alone is from all his videos. You cannot talk about esoteric things without mentioning the divine. Also, he brought this concept up. There are often more than one view point that holds a piece of wisdom in philosophy. So we have to hear every good idea in hopes of achieving a whole understanding. Third, and maybe of upmost importance comments are where I express what the video spurred in me. Maybe that is on topic, but in philosophy I find it is tangential at best. If you read the Greeks, as he suggested, you will find things aren't as linear as you are used to. They go from concept to concept in an attempt to bring a greater things into focus. So at first, what I said might seem odd, but in fact they are intermingled. There are human philosophies that lack the concrete nature of reality. They are idealic things that we try to assimilate into our known world as if they are real, and not a description of how we perceive things. The actual vs my subjective viewpoint. In truth, it is a thing that doesn't exist, and we have brought it forward to examine the concept. Especially enlightenment and latter thinking embraces this notion and Eastern philosophies that gave this as the ultimate; These were popular at that time. Unfortunately, they end you up in a more sophist kind of thinking. So you have made the full curcle when accepting that this latter thinking is better because it imagines the concept is the reality, thus was formed by man. You are your own end and everything else can be assumed a tool to your ends. It is self-centered really. Many will not think it through, though they parrot the concepts. God is the utimate, and as such is your referent to any way to find truth. If not, you are forced to admit that truth is ellusive, if not irrelevant. As such, you are without bounds or bering on an endless sea of thought. It has no point, nor does it have a depth that you can sound. Just as absurd as a bottomless pit, and as valid. It is an illusion you pulled over your own eyes to escape the truth. Justin pointed this out & I expanded on that.
@jamesnomos8472
Жыл бұрын
@@mackdmara I'm going to be honest, I cannot figure out how your comment or explanation relates to the video at all. I'm not saying you're wrong, nor right, but that you seem to be talking about an extremely broad cluster of concepts related to divinity, philosophy, the relativity of perspective and its impact on understanding truth, and a dozen other topics in theology/philosophy. Dr. Sledge's video was very specific in its topic - the metaphysical gaps in scholasticism that seemed to make talking about the divine impossible (possibly even totally meaningless, all claims equally true and false), and the way Duns Scotus solved this problem by turning metaphysical distinctions into merely logical ones. Your comment doesn't seem to be responding to any of those in specific, but is written as though it were. I am not saying that the content of your comment was wrong, or right, but that it was practically unrelated to the video content.
@mackdmara
Жыл бұрын
@@jamesnomos8472 So what are you saying? You don't understand my comment, but think I am disgreeing? Ideas are relative to the user and don't allow for direct examination. Yes? Also, are we not looking to an idealic state, either in a Platonic or Aristotlian mind set?; Keeping in mind the other thinkers mentioned would vary greatly & any of their names could be placed there as well. It seemed obvious to me that I was at how obtuse and obscure these things are. Of course, I know what I am thinking, even if I fail to convey it in a potable form. Maybe I should ask you what your understanding is. Are you under the impression we form reality by will or discover it?
@jesperandersson889
Жыл бұрын
well displaced, what a movement, what flair and with such a large displacement its almost quick or shall I say like turning an oil tanker with sensuousity... (oh great beauty) The Great All!
@TheSpyder49
Жыл бұрын
new hollywood blockbuster biography piece focused scotus imploding philosophy
@dianabriggs1032
Жыл бұрын
I want "Stultum Misereo - Magister T" on a t-shirt
@comradeghostboi7989
Жыл бұрын
what does the Supreme Court Of The United State have to do with metaphysics 🤔
@HoTrEtArDeDcHiXx
Жыл бұрын
Never forget anything 😎
@Holistic-Healthcare
8 ай бұрын
3:00 what does that hand gesture represent? Anyone know?
@aminrodriguez4707
Жыл бұрын
Sorry Dr Sledge, I tried, hard, but O could not understand after about half the videp, cpmpletely lost.
@codexintegrum
Жыл бұрын
This is excellent as usual.
@etnaicholas
Жыл бұрын
Sorry, but was that some kind of Exalted reference with the Solar Aquinas / Lunar Scotus etching, or is that how they were referred to?
@sahhaf1234
10 ай бұрын
more scholastics please
@nightmajic
Жыл бұрын
Hey God, say nothing if you're totally cool with me using your descriptors of Being to describe myself, since, you know, we tight.
@alabamapilot244
Жыл бұрын
Smells like Spinoza!
@darrylviljoen6227
Жыл бұрын
Christian humility. I don't see that very often.
@mahdedarmo
Жыл бұрын
“anything you can do, I can do meta” mhmm
@gregoiremasset488
Жыл бұрын
Daamn. That is so much schooling per the minute. I have an urge to spout out so much dumb stuff right now, I can't contain myself. I'm only at the haha, twelth minute. Plus, the topic make me think it was custom-made for me, but that's my usual thwarted dispositions problem. it's a mental ailment. Pre-first off, that intro about scholastics feels like you're pulling the hierophant blade from the dreaded and shwouldn't be mentioned book of trumps. First off, hey. If it's post-structuralist, that can only be about a rough half of 20th century french philosophy, no? But everything that comes before, I bet it's quite kosher, if you pardon my french. De saussure, bachelard... Second, mainly and lastly, and I think I perceived some echoes of that impression in some of the other comments, it instantly makes me want to say, "tao". But also, "Thathata" (exported by Alan watts and translated from memory as "that which is all that is, there, and maybe now for all one can say)". I'm waaaay over my league here, but still, you specify AND emphasize the "grammatical" nature of the whole predicament here. that's it. The whole stuff feels like a precursor to advanced semiotics and linguistics, the western way. By the way, I'm as aristotle deficient as your common 11th century townfolk, so that analytical matrix and genii theory is fresh news to me. That joke about analogical predicate and veridic syllogism goes way over my head, no surprises there, it looks like a russian doll set to unpack. I'll BOLO for more about that when I'm done littering. See I'm stuck for life, it appears at the "is it a metaphor or a metonymy" stage. I've seen that symptom in other pre-doctorate philosophy students or free-time adepts. Yet, I have been spotted recently fancying the "comparison isn't reason" parable, which I find as endlessly entertaining as the best koan from a zen master. Anyone has his limits, you know. Anyhoo. Tao, hinduism, not the same time frame. Conversations between greek philosophers since aristotle and before, and indian masters, and taoism emerging somewhere along this Scotus contemporaneity, give or take three or four centuries, that's the gap that's never bridged, and yet. In the end, I mean at this stage of your video, The sentiment is that discussions of divinity converge unavoidingly into linguistics and logics problems. Do i hear a "the medium is the message"? See I just finished a book on Nietzsche's "volonte de puissance" (I really should have chosen german as second foreign language) analysis and epistomolgy through the lens of the advances in biological sciences of his time and age. It's almost a life's work for such an in-depth historicist and epistemological analysis. and still, not a damn single line on the major fascination for the vedic corpus the guy had along his deep-rooted greek philosophy and philology upbringing. Pokemons man. You can't catch them all. Well, maybe you can. Not infering anything there. Speaking of pokemons. How many angels can fit on the thread of a needle... Well. Depends on their character sheet and DEX score I'd say, but I have been re-acquainted with the kardashian scale yesterday. Or, Was the karamazov scale? Kardashev. had to look it up. And then someone tried to explain to me a further extrapolation of this scale. Because DMT little people. So on a leap of faith, I'd say all of them.
@gregoiremasset488
Жыл бұрын
Aaah. And now i'll watch the rest. Much thanks.
@gregoiremasset488
Жыл бұрын
Oh by the way. Your cleverly baiting title had me betting for teilhard de chardin.
@gregoiremasset488
Жыл бұрын
(It's okay if you don't pardon my french. French is quite unforgivable right now)
@gregoiremasset488
Жыл бұрын
There. almost finished. So, essentially, you demonstrated how scotus gave slack to the later generations of thinkers.
@gregoiremasset488
Жыл бұрын
Huuuh. I wish this universe would give me back the slack i had. I was doing fine with it. better than now, with horrible people asking slack of me to be horrible people in direct and utterly depressing and morbid proximity of my livelyhood.
Пікірлер: 344