What Philosophers Mean by Mental and Physical Jeffrey Kaplan 2024-10-19 | What Philosophers Mean by Mental and Physical
Saul Kripkes Causal Theory of Names Jeffrey Kaplan 2024-06-18 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Part 1: youtu.be/MncEzRAw3tUThis is a video lecture in a course on the philosophy of language. It summarizes Saul Kripke's brief and suggestive theory of proper names that he offers as part of his famous 1970 lectures, delivered in January of 1970 at Princeton University, and then published as a book, Naming and Necessity. Kripke presents a causal theory of proper names in lecture 2, after attacking John Searle's Descriptivist theory of proper names. Kripke's basic idea is that a speaker's use of a proper name refers to whomever was dubbed with that name at the earlier end of a causal chain, every link of which consists of a person intending to use a name to refer to whomever other language users in their community were referring to with that name.
Naming and Necessity by Saul Kripke - Part 1 Jeffrey Kaplan 2024-05-09 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Background lecture on Possible Worlds and Rigid Designators: youtu.be/ry84r_gw8HA Part 2 of this lecture: youtu.be/eSS8-i28oho This is a video lecture in a course on the philosophy of language. It summarizes Saul Kripke's famous 1970 attack on the Descriptivist Cluster Theory of Proper Names of John Searle. This is just the first part of Lecture 2, which was delivered in January of 1970 at Princeton University, and then published as a book, Naming and Necessity. It includes the famous Godel Schmidt Case. I will make Part 2 of this video, which will cover Kripke's own causal theory of proper names, and once that video is ready I will post a link to it here: youtu.be/eSS8-i28oho
What are Possible Worlds? Jeffrey Kaplan 2024-02-29 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is a video lecture in a course on the philosophy of language. It explains possible worlds, rigid designators, and non-rigid designators using some basketball examples involving LeBron James and Mt Everest and some other stuff. Even though the idea of possible worlds goes back to Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, this short video is specifically designed to provide the background necessary to understand Lecture 2 of Saul Kripke's famous work, Naming and Necessity.
Proper Names by John Searle Jeffrey Kaplan 2023-11-30 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is a video lecture in a course on the philosophy of language. It explains John R Searle's seminal and groundbreaking 1958 paper "Proper Names". Searle discusses and ultimately rejects both Frege's and Mill's theories of proper names. But Searle does think that associated with every name there is something like Frege's sense, except Searle thinks that it is a purposefully vague cluster of descriptions. Therefore, Searle's theory is often called the Cluster Theory of Proper Names. This video explain's Searle's theory and it uses a lot of examples involving Beyonce, Jay-Z, and Aristotle.
Gottlob Frege - On Sense and Reference Jeffrey Kaplan 2023-08-30 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.The compositionality of language: youtu.be/ZWP6Sv2_8c8This is a video lecture about Frege's groundbreaking 1892 paper 'On Sense and Reference', which is sometimes translated from the original German as 'On Meaning and Nominatum' though those are silly and obscure terms, so I don't use them. This is the second lecture in a philosophy of language course. This lecture covers the sense (mode of presentation) and reference (object referred to) of names, but also definite descriptions, and the fact that the sense of a full sentence is the proposition or thought expressed and the reference of a full sentence is the truth value of that sentence.
The Compositionality of Language explained Jeffrey Kaplan 2023-06-29 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is a short lecture providing one of the foundational and essential concepts needed for a semester-long Philosophy of Language college/university course. The compositionality of language is that feature of language by which the meanings of whole sentences or phrases are composed out of the meanings of parts of those sentences (i.e., words). This might seem obvious, but it is the thing that allows human beings to generate and understand wholly new or novel sentences, and understand them the very first time they hear them.
John Stuart Mill - one minor mistake Jeffrey Kaplan 2023-06-04 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is the first in a series of video lectures built for my college course in the philosophy of language.John Stuart Mill lived in England from 1806 to 1873. He was a philosopher and also a Member of Parliament. Much of his philosophical work is in moral and political philosophy. He was the student of Jeremy Bentham and, like Bentham, an advocate of Utilitarianism. He was the second Member of Parliament to argue that women should be granted the right to vote. Mill also wrote one of the early and central works in the philosophy of language, 'Of Names,' which is what we are reading for this course.This video lecture discusses several distinctions among types of names that Mill introduces:General Names vs. Singular NamesCollective Names vs. Non-Collective NamesConnotative Names vs. Non-Connotative NamesBut it important to note that Mill's term "names" doesn't just include proper names, like “Susan” or “Frederick” or “Dartmouth” or “North Carolina.” The term also encompasses, for example, definite descriptions, like “the tallest human on Earth,” “the cat,” and “the teacher of Plato.”
Legal Positivism - the dominant theory in jurisprudence Jeffrey Kaplan 2023-05-04 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Austin's theory of law: youtu.be/0F62gA1LGfwHart's theory of law: youtu.be/Xg_9F2h89TE and youtu.be/4qtSYUccppcThis is a video lecture that explains the central theory, for the last two centuries, in the philosophy of law: legal positivism. I created this additional lecture because I found that the standard readings on the positivism v natural law theory debate (often as exemplified by figures like HLA Hart, Ronald Dworkin, John Finnis, and Joseph Raz) were not enough to get my students to latch on to exactly what legal positivism is.
The Liar Paradox - an explanation of the paradox from 400 BCE Jeffrey Kaplan 2023-03-15 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.The liar paradox goes back at least to Eubulides, the Ancient Greek philosopher and student of Euclid in the 4th century BCE. That’s the year negative 400. In this lecture video I explain what the liar paradox is and why it just won't go away. I also try to make some jokes about Captain Kirk of Star Trek.
The first 7 philosophy texts you should read Jeffrey Kaplan 2022-12-14 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Descartes’ Proof of God’s Existence in Meditation #3: youtu.be/w4Kj6SuGYLoWhat is a Counterexample?: youtu.be/jPdZ42UX41AI am Assistant Professor of Philosophy at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, and here is a list of the seven philosophical pieces of writing that I think someone first getting into philosophy should read, and why:Plato’s Euthyphro (~399 BCE)Rene Descartes’ MeditationsPrincess Elizabeth's letter to DescartesDavid Hume's Dialogues Concerning Natural ReligionHP Grice's Logic and ConversationHLA Hart's The Concept of Law (just chapters 2, 3, and 4)Peter Singer's Famine Affluence and Morality
This philosophers work explains Twitter Addiction Jeffrey Kaplan 2022-10-07 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is a video about Twitter and the philosophy of jokes or humor. It deals with the work of Thi Nguyen from the University of Utah, Ted Cohen from the University of Chicago, and the 3rd Earl Lord of Shaftesbury. It makes the point that jokes and tweets both centrally involve high-context speech and run the risk of context shedding or context collapse.Read Nguyen's excellent short article on all of this, "Twitter, the Intimacy Machine" published by The Raven ravenmagazine.org/magazine/twitter-the-intimacy-machine
Russells Paradox - a simple explanation of a profound problem Jeffrey Kaplan 2022-09-08 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is a video lecture explaining Russell's Paradox. At the very heart of logic and mathematics, there is a paradox that has yet to be resolved. It was discovered by the mathematician and philosopher, Bertrand Russell, in 1901. In this talk, Professor Jeffrey Kaplan teaches you the basics of set theory (a foundational branch of mathematics dating back to the 1870s) in 20 minutes. Then he explains Russell’s Paradox, which is quite a thrilling thing if you are learning it for the first time. Finally, Kaplan argues that the paradox goes even deeper than Russell himself realized.Also, I should mention Georg Cantor, Gotlob Frege, Logicism, and Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory in this description for keyword search reasons.
Semester Ethics Course condensed (Part 2 of 2) Jeffrey Kaplan 2022-07-14 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Extended lecture of Plato's dialogue, Euthyphro: youtu.be/oltsfcVWe3AThis is the second half of an attempt to compresses an ethics course that normally takes 15 weeks into just two videos.What is the morally right thing to do? Is there some moral law that applies to everyone, or is morality relative in some way? And what’s so good about morality anyway? To answer these questions, we read Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Hume, Bentham, Locke, Kant, Nietzsche, Nozick, Singer, O’Neill and others. This is an introductory level philosophy course. Students do not need any prior experience with philosophy.For more of my videos: jeffreykaplan.org/youtube
Semester Ethics Course condensed into 22mins (Part 1 of 2) Jeffrey Kaplan 2022-06-09 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Video explaining counterexamples: youtu.be/LQaNMxNVCJQThis is a philosophy video lecture that compresses a course that normally takes 15 weeks into just one video. Or really, it only manages to condense half of that course into 22 minutes. What is the morally right thing to do? Is there some moral law that applies to everyone, or is morality relative in some way? And what’s so good about morality anyway? To answer these questions, we read Plato, Aristotle, Hobbes, Hume, Bentham, Locke, Kant, Nietzsche, Nozick, Singer, O’Neill and others. This is an introductory level philosophy course. Students do not need any prior experience with philosophy.For more of my videos: jeffreykaplan.org/youtube
Why do philosophers use *imaginary* examples? Jeffrey Kaplan 2022-03-28 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This video explains the philosophical concept or tool known as a "counterexample." The central question answered in this video is why it is legitimate, when attempting to disprove a philosophical theory, to sometimes use a fictional or made-up example.
Rules for Interacting with College Professors - Office Hours, Email, Letters of Recommendation Jeffrey Kaplan 2022-03-09 | This is part of a series of lectures, intended for first-year college students, on 'How To Do Well in College" or university! This video covers Rules and Norms for Interacting with college professors. Topics include:Office HoursEmail EtiquetteLetters of RecommendationHow to DressWhat Questions to Ask
Lecture #11: Taking Notes Effectively - which words should you write down? Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-10-15 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is part of a series of lectures, intended for first-year college students, on 'How To Do Well in College" or university! This one is about how to effectively take notes.1. Do not write down everything down world-for-word2. Do not even grab exact phrases3. Add felsh to the text within 24 hours4. Write the notes with a pen or pencil, by hand, not by typing on an electronic device.
Lecture #10: How to Memorize Anything - EFFICIENTLY Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-09-09 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is the tenth lecture in a series of lectures, intended for first-year college and university students, loosely around the topic of "How to Do Well in College". But the information in this video may be more widely useful. There are two methods that allow people to efficiently memorize things: mnemonic cues and spaced repetition. In this video I explain how to use each of these.
Lecture #9: How to Read so that you *Retain* Information Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-08-17 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is the ninth in a series of lectures, intended for first-year college students, tentatively titled "How to Do Well in College." This lecture, however, applies to anyone who reads anything. In it, I recommend a specific version of marginalia, whereby one summarizes information in the margins of texts. This forces the reader to engage with the meaning or content of what they are reading and therefore absorb the material. I also tell a story about an economics course that I took in college, and there is a bonus rant about how speed reading is a scam.
How much of the reading do you have to do in college courses? Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-08-06 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is another lecture that is part of a series on 'How to Do Well in College.' This series is intended for first-year college students. In this lecture, I go through four types of courses (Philosophy, History, Science and Social Science with textbooks, and Science and Social Science with articles) just as an illustration of how different types of courses have different understandings of what it means to "read" an assigned text. Often, they just mean 'skim.' But nonetheless, doing the reading before class is one of the most powerful things that students can do to improve their grades and make their courses easier.
Lecture #7 - My Method for Defeating Procrastination Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-07-26 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This video lecture is the 7th in a series of lectures for first-year college students, tentatively titled "How to Do Well in College." This lecture is about how to overcome procrastination. The first point is that procrastination is not a time management problem. Rather, it is a problem with regulating ones emotions. As a result of this, I use three techniques to combat my own lack of motivation:1) Rewards2) Serious Temptation Removal3) Motivation HarvestingThe third of these is is a term of my own invention, and it is the most effective method, at least for me.
Keeping a Calendar in College Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-07-15 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is the seventh in a series of 17 video lectures, tentatively titled "How to do Well in College." The videos are intended for first-year college students. This one is just making the case that one must keep a calendar, and really it is a matter of stress reduction. Of course, there is also the fact that without a calendar you will miss tons of assignments and not only get worse grades, but also not learn as much.
How to Read a College Syllabus - And Strategize for How to Best Approach the Course Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-07-06 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is the 6th video in a series of 17 videos on How to Do Well in College. This video walks through one of my own syllabi, and explains how to tailor one's strategy for taking a college course to the various policies in the video. It is also important to understand which parts of the syllabus can be skipped, and how to build one's personal calendar based on the course schedule. This is for first-year college students. The parts of the syllabus covered include: Office Hours, Course Description, Student Learning Outcomes, Course Policies (attendance policy, late policy, grade breakdown, etc.), and Course Schedule. I also talk about the faculty meme: "It's on the syllabus" or "It's in the syllabus".
Secret to College Success #4: Actually Learn Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-06-25 | This is the fourth in a series of lectures that I am tentatively calling "How to Do Well in College." In this lecture video I explain the purpose of intermediate assignments (which were not graded for me at Oxford and Cambridge), such as homework, problem sets, quizzes, and essays. Their purpose, as crazy as this sounds, is to try to get students to actually learn the material. Once you realize this, and once you study in ways that aim toward actually learning, comprehending, and understanding the material, it makes your college courses much easier. Also, I point out that when you actually learn, your college courses become...interesting. Yes, that's right, and everyone seems to forget that.
How to Make College Courses Easy and How *Not* to Practice Self-Care Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-06-22 | This is the fourth in a series of videos intended for first-year college students, tentatively titled "How to Do Well in College." This video explains that the common question "Is this course easy or hard?" is misplaced. Really, what determines whether a college course is hard or easy is not so much the course itself, but rather *how* one goes about taking that course. I talk through several examples to illustrate this. And then I go on a little rant about the phrase "Self-Care" and how it can mislead students. Giving oneself a break from the reading or note-taking required for a course makes the course harder than it needs to be, and really amounts not to self-care, but to self-sabotage. Alternatively, if by "self-care" you merely mean treating yourself to guacamole on your burrito, then go for it.
To Do Well In College: Dont Work Hard, Work Efficiently Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-06-15 | This is the third in a series of lectures that I am tentatively calling "How to Do Well in College." This video introduces the central thesis of all of the upcoming videos that present tactics for college success--for getting good grades in undergraduate college courses. That central theme is: do not work hard, work efficiently. I give several examples of the kind of efficiency that I am talking about. And I tell a story about a bodybuilder.
Student Loans are Great, But Only if Used Correctly Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-06-04 | This is the first lecture in a series of lectures that I am tentatively calling "How to Do Well in College." This first lecture focuses on how student loans work and how they constitute a smart risk, wherein students are betting on themselves. The result is that it is incredibly important to study and graduate from college. In order to explain this, I have to explain some things about my own family and my great-grandfather, and also the nature of the home mortgage loan. Here are three good articles about the income boost that comes from a college degree:insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/14/differences-college-roi-vary-institution-type-and-time-frame-measured-report-saysinvestopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/062515/college-tuition-vs-investing-it-worth-it.aspeconomist.com/united-states/2014/04/05/is-college-worth-it
The Details of Brown v Board of Ed - - US Supreme Court Jeffrey Kaplan 2021-01-05 | This is a lecture video about Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, 347 U.S. 483 (1954). This famous court case outlawed segregation in public schools, on the grounds that it violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment. It was a unanimous 9-0 ruling, authored by Chief Justice Warren. In the lecture I discuss the relevant of 1860s public schooling to the 1954 decision, among other things. This is part of a Philosophy of Law course.For an explanation of Plessy v Ferguson, the infamous court case the enshrined the doctrine of 'separate but equal' and which Brown v Board of Ed overturned: youtu.be/RizbRg2zllc
What is Philosophy? - First Lecture of the Semester Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-12-09 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.For more philosophy videos: youtube.com/channel/UC_hukbByJP7OZ3Xm2tszacQThis is a video intended for college students considering taking a class in philosophy, but who are not sure exactly what philosophy is. This is also a video for parents or other relatives or friends of college students who have decided to major in philosophy, but who are not sure exactly what philosophy is.In this lecture, I argue that philosophy is the attempt to rigorously answer questions that cannot be answered either (a) by observation or experimentation or (b) by calculation from stipulated definitions and axioms.
Guide for Writing a Philosophy Paper Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-11-17 | I am writing a book! If you to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Other videos you might want to watch:What is a Counterexample?: youtu.be/jPdZ42UX41AHow to Read Philosophy: youtu.be/XlcrKfaJBRMWhat is Philosophy?: youtu.be/wwT4N_v0-WQArguments vs Conclusions: youtu.be/GAYn5v5E20sIf you are taking a college-level philosophy course, and you have to write a paper or an essay, then this video is designed for you. In it, I explain how academic philosophical writing is different from the other kinds of writing that you may have had to do in the past. And I offer several specific tips for how to write better undergraduate philosophy papers. I also give some anecdotes or examples to illustrate the various points that I make. The main point is that the goal of philosophical writing is clarity. You want your paper to be as clear as possible. This is a tutorial on writing a college or university academic philosophy paper.
How to Read Philosophy Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-11-13 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.How to Write Philosophy: youtu.be/nKdl_VmKNmkWhat is Philosophy?: youtu.be/wwT4N_v0-WQThis is a quick video lecture that provides six tips or pieces of advice for how to understand the papers or books or texts assigned in a college philosophy course. Some illustrations involve Rene Descartes, Barbara MacKinnon, Princess Elisabeth of Bohemia, and Tommie Shelby. I want to get the keyword 'signposts' in here somewhere, so I am adding this sentence.
The Zombie Argument (from David Chalmers) Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-09-10 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Physicalism & Dualism: youtu.be/P3pmVf3Gs70Nagel's 'What is it like to be a bat?': youtu.be/aaZbCctlll4This is a lecture video about a short article by Amy Kind, wherein she explains David Chalmers' famous Zombie argument against physicalism. A "zombie" is a philosophical term for a creature that is micro-physically identical to a normal human being, but who doesn't have any consciousness. The argument, briefly and roughly, is that such a creature seems conceivable, which means that such a creature is metaphysically possible. If zombies are possible, then consciousness cannot be identical with any physical state of affairs, meaning that physicalism is false. This video lecture is part of an introductory philosophy course.
The Hard Problem of Consciousness Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-09-09 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Nagel 'What is it Like to be a Bat?': youtu.be/aaZbCctlll4Jackson's Mary's Room & Epiphenomenalism: youtu.be/QhTRbXpfKw8This is a lecture video about "The Puzzle of Conscious Experience" by David Chalmers. In this 2002 article from Scientific American, Chalmers distinguishes the easy problems of consciousness from what he calls the hard problem of consciousness. He explains how there are three broad responses to the hard problem (optimistic reductionism, mysterianism, and dualism, though he does not use the term "dualism"), and how all current neuropsychological research only attempts to solve the easy problems. There is also discussion of potential psychophysical laws. This is part of an introductory philosophy course.
Frank Jacksons famous Marys Room Thought Experiment Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-09-04 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Nagel's 'What is the like to be a bat?': youtu.be/aaZbCctlll4Princess Elisabeth's attack on Descartes: youtu.be/kJIZzmUpfmkThis is a video lecture about Frank Jackson's Mary's Room thought experiment, which is designed as an argument against physicalism. Mary is a vision scientist who spends her whole life in a back-and-white room. It is stipulated that she knows all the correct physical information. But when she emerges from the room and sees a red object for the first time, it very much seems like she learns something new: what red looks like. So, if she learns something new, then she must not have known everything. So there must be non-physical information. So physicalism is false. That's the argument. Also, this video goes in to a discussion and explanation of Epiphenomenalism, the view that conscious mental events are byproducts of physical events that do not themselves causally act on the physical world. This is part of an introductory level philosophy course.
What is it Like to be a Bat? - the hard problem of consciousness Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-09-04 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Dualism & Physicalism: youtu.be/P3pmVf3Gs70This is a video about Thomas Nagel's famous 1974 Philosophical Review paper, "What is the like to be a bat?" The paper introduces a novel argument against physicalism. The basic idea is that consciousness embodies (or can only be understood) from a subjective point of view. But physical science, by definition, gets away from subjective perspectives and goes toward objective understanding. So when one tries to give a scientific account of conscious experience, one ends up getting farther away from the very phenomenon that one set out to understand. It is also mentioned that dualism may be no better off at explaining consciousness. This video also includes a list of approximate synonyms for consciousness, including qualia, the phenomenal character of experience, phenomenonolgy, qualia, etc. This is part of an introductory-level philosophy course.
Does your RED look the same as my RED? Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-09-03 | Functionalism: youtu.be/rd8sITBnijgThis is a lecture video about the inverted experience thought experiment, as well as about the scientific evidence that some percentage of men are, in reality, red-green color inverted. This is part of an introductory level philosophy course.
The famous Chinese Room thought experiment - John Searle (1980) Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-09-01 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Dualism: youtu.be/P3pmVf3Gs70Behaviorism: youtu.be/k715B-2t-YUIdentity Theory: youtu.be/zO0slzSuxpIFunctionalism: youtu.be/rd8sITBnijgThis is a video lecture about "Can Computers Think?" by John Searle. In this paper, Searle argues again a form of functionalism, which he calls "Strong AI". The argument rests on a thought experiment having to do with a non-Chinese speaker who is locked in a room with a lookup table, receiving inputs and providing outputs all in Chinese. Searle claims that syntax is never sufficient for semantics, and that digital computer only ever deal with syntax, so they therefore can never understand the meaning of a language. This is part of an introductory philosophy course.
Functionalism Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-28 | Background lecture on Identity Theory: youtu.be/zO0slzSuxpIThis is a video lecture about Hilary Putnam's Multiple Realizability argument against the mind-brain identity theory and his argument for the functionalist theory of mind. Functionalism is the theory that being in a mental state just is being a functional state, with certain inputs and outputs, or causes and effects. This is part of an introductory level philosophy course, focusing on the philosophy of mind.
The Mind-Brain Identity Theory Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-21 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Here is some background material.Dualism & Physicalism: youtu.be/P3pmVf3Gs70Princess Elisabeth's attack on Dualism: youtu.be/kJIZzmUpfmkBehaviorism: youtu.be/k715B-2t-YUPutnam's attack on Behaviorism: youtu.be/lRI95Vdc5CUThis is a video lecture about a the 1956 paper "Is Consciousness a Brain Process?" by U.T. Place. This lecture distinguishes the "is"s of identity, prediction, definition, and composition. And I explain how Place uses these distinctions to defend the identity theory from a common line of attack. The central idea is that the mind-brain identity theory is a scientific hypothesis, which cannot be rejected or disproven on logical grounds alone. This is part of an introductory philosophy course.
Hilary Putnams Super-Spartans attack on Behaviorism Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-20 | Video about Behaviorism: youtu.be/k715B-2t-YUVideo about Counterexamples: youtu.be/jPdZ42UX41AThis is a video lecture about Hilary Putnam's seminal paper "Brains and Behavior". The Super Spartans example and the x-world (or x-worlders) example are both discussed, as are how those examples are meant to present a problem for the logical behaviorist theory of mind. This is part of an introductory level philosophy course, Introduction to Philosophy.
The Behaviorist Theory of Mind Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-18 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.Link to video on counterexamples: youtu.be/jPdZ42UX41AThis is a video lecture about the theory in the philosophy of mind known as 'Behaviorism.' The reading that this lecture is based on was written by David Armstrong, who was not himself a behaviorist, but he gives an excellent summary of the view. Behaviorism is the theory that being in a mental state just is being disposed to exhibit a certain type of characteristic behavior. This lecture of part of an Introduction to Philosophy course.
What is a Counterexample? (and why philosophers use fictional examples) Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-17 | This is a short lecture video explaining one of the most common and most powerful philosophical tools: the counterexample. Counterexamples are examples that are given to disprove a general claim. This video also explains how general claims centrally involving a concept--i.e., those claims about conceptual truths--can be proven false with the use of a fictional or even impossible counterexample.
Riggs v Palmer - famous court case about a grandson murdering his grandfather Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-06 | This is a video lecture about the famous NY State court case, Riggs v. Palmer, 115 N.Y. 506 (1889). This case is important, in part, because Ronald Dworkin discusses the case as an example of legal principles being used in adjudication. This lecture mostly discusses the majority opinion of Justice Earl, who held that Elmer Palmer could not inherit the estate of his grandfather, Frances Palmer, even though the senior palmer's will clearly stated that Elmer was to inherit, because Elmer had murdered his grandfather and because no one should profit from their own wrong. This is part of a Philosophy of Law course.
Ronald Dworkins attack on HLA Harts Theory of Law Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-05 | I am writing a book! If you want to know when it is ready (and maybe win a free copy), submit your email on my website: jeffreykaplan.org I won’t spam you or share your email address with anyone.This is a video lecture about the criticism or objection (mostly from "Model of Rules I," which appears in Dworkin's book "Taking Rights Seriously") that Ronald Dworkin makes of HLA Hart's version of legal positivism. The video explains Hart's theory of adjudication, his concept of the open texture of law, and Dworkin's distinction between rules and principles, and how that distinction is used in his objection to Hart. This is part of a Philosophy of Law Course.
Marbury v Madison - the most important case in US Supreme Court history Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-04 | This is a video lecture about the 1803 United States Supreme Court case, Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137. In this case, the Supreme Court gives itself the immense power of judicial review, allowing it to strike down laws that it deems unconstitutional. To understand what is going on, you need some explanation of the history surrounding the case, which is what I try to provide here. This is part of a Philosophy of Law course.
The Rule of Recognition Jeffrey Kaplan 2020-08-03 | Essential background info from The Concept of Law: youtu.be/Xg_9F2h89TE and youtu.be/4qtSYUccppcThis is a lecture video about a selection of Scott Shapiro's essay "What is the Rule of Recognition (and Does it Exist)?" The essay concerns HLA Hart's fundamental, secondary rule, the rule of recognition. Shapiro argues that although it is natural to think of the rule of recognition as power-conferring, it is instead duty-imposing. Specifically, it imposes a duty on legal officials, i.e. courts, to apply rules that meat certain criteria of legal validity, and those criteria constitute the test of validity for that legal system. Justicability is also discussed. This lecture is part of a Philosophy of Law course.
