WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.520 --> 00:00:02.399
<v Speaker 1>Mahn and he brings up all these obscure texts that

2
00:00:02.439 --> 00:00:03.680
<v Speaker 1>I'm like, I haven't read this. I don't know what

3
00:00:03.680 --> 00:00:05.320
<v Speaker 1>you're talking about. What is reference?

4
00:00:05.719 --> 00:00:07.639
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, as much as I love the guy, this is

5
00:00:07.679 --> 00:00:12.199
<v Speaker 2>why we haven't covered him. He's actually terrible for podcast forum.

6
00:00:12.679 --> 00:00:15.960
<v Speaker 3>He's the worst name dropper fucking ever. Man, He's always

7
00:00:16.079 --> 00:00:18.839
<v Speaker 3>name drop and who the hell's kangy Am? I'm sure

8
00:00:18.879 --> 00:00:21.879
<v Speaker 3>that name is bouncing around in the Ecole Superior are

9
00:00:21.920 --> 00:00:24.320
<v Speaker 3>in the mid century, But come on, dry up. People

10
00:00:24.359 --> 00:00:26.359
<v Speaker 3>are gonna read you for more than ten fucking years

11
00:00:26.359 --> 00:00:29.679
<v Speaker 3>in different languages, so maybe you should. No, I'm just kidding.

12
00:00:29.719 --> 00:00:30.760
<v Speaker 3>I can't say that shit.

13
00:00:31.239 --> 00:00:33.759
<v Speaker 2>That's why I know that's I mean, I agree with you.

14
00:00:33.840 --> 00:00:37.560
<v Speaker 2>He has read fucking everything he was. Half of the

15
00:00:37.640 --> 00:00:39.759
<v Speaker 2>names are not even people I've heard of.

16
00:00:39.840 --> 00:00:43.200
<v Speaker 3>But then again, it's always those fundamental moves that are

17
00:00:43.240 --> 00:00:47.560
<v Speaker 3>being put into question in Dary does texts, so you

18
00:00:47.640 --> 00:00:51.000
<v Speaker 3>can't what is contextuality? Like, is there a difference between

19
00:00:51.039 --> 00:00:54.600
<v Speaker 3>text and context? Is the context somehow outside of the

20
00:00:54.640 --> 00:00:57.520
<v Speaker 3>text and determines the meaning of the text, Like we

21
00:00:57.719 --> 00:00:59.840
<v Speaker 3>just say about language, you know, like, how do I

22
00:00:59.880 --> 00:01:01.079
<v Speaker 3>know what that word means?

23
00:01:01.200 --> 00:01:01.439
<v Speaker 4>Oh?

24
00:01:01.479 --> 00:01:04.200
<v Speaker 3>By the context, the words around it. Okay, fine, what

25
00:01:04.280 --> 00:01:05.280
<v Speaker 3>about those words?

26
00:01:05.319 --> 00:01:05.439
<v Speaker 2>Then?

27
00:01:05.480 --> 00:01:07.680
<v Speaker 3>How do I know what they mean? Further context? Like

28
00:01:07.719 --> 00:01:10.319
<v Speaker 3>he puts those sorts of things into question, that leads

29
00:01:10.359 --> 00:01:15.480
<v Speaker 3>you down those sometimes frustrating thought loops. And then you

30
00:01:15.599 --> 00:01:18.000
<v Speaker 3>get pissed off and throw the text away. And then

31
00:01:18.120 --> 00:01:21.280
<v Speaker 3>you have a dream and realize you read something beautiful

32
00:01:21.319 --> 00:01:23.159
<v Speaker 3>and go back and then remember that it was in

33
00:01:23.280 --> 00:01:25.359
<v Speaker 3>daridawn and you go fuck, And then you got to

34
00:01:25.359 --> 00:01:31.000
<v Speaker 3>read Darida again. An example of my frustration and the

35
00:01:31.480 --> 00:01:34.920
<v Speaker 3>beauty of his work. Right, Yeah, it's poetic, is what

36
00:01:35.079 --> 00:01:37.680
<v Speaker 3>is it? That is to say? It is very poetic,

37
00:01:37.719 --> 00:01:41.959
<v Speaker 3>and this text is in a way all about poetry.

38
00:01:42.000 --> 00:01:47.319
<v Speaker 3>He involves a lot of Aristotle's poetics. It involves talking

39
00:01:47.359 --> 00:01:51.640
<v Speaker 3>about metaphor. It involves talking about the difference between what

40
00:01:51.760 --> 00:01:55.239
<v Speaker 3>is a metaphor and what is a concept. Concepts are

41
00:01:55.239 --> 00:01:58.480
<v Speaker 3>supposed to be truthful things that science uses. Metaphors are

42
00:01:58.480 --> 00:02:02.760
<v Speaker 3>supposed to be flower figurative things that poets use. How

43
00:02:02.799 --> 00:02:07.480
<v Speaker 3>could they possibly not be super distinct? All the philosophers

44
00:02:07.480 --> 00:02:11.400
<v Speaker 3>he brings up, I have these very precise distinctions between

45
00:02:11.479 --> 00:02:16.479
<v Speaker 3>metaphors and other modes of expression. But Darida is gonna

46
00:02:16.960 --> 00:02:21.639
<v Speaker 3>do his thing and question that question the possibility of

47
00:02:21.680 --> 00:02:25.599
<v Speaker 3>making those clean distinctions between metaphors and concepts.

48
00:02:25.560 --> 00:02:28.280
<v Speaker 1>Right, because language is metaphorical, like everywhere they.

49
00:02:28.319 --> 00:02:31.199
<v Speaker 3>Went through top to bottom, front to back. Baby.

50
00:02:32.000 --> 00:02:35.039
<v Speaker 2>But I'll just read the first paragraph just we have

51
00:02:35.520 --> 00:02:37.479
<v Speaker 2>a little bit of flavor, because I know that even

52
00:02:37.520 --> 00:02:41.719
<v Speaker 2>though I demanded that the listeners do their homework, I don't.

53
00:02:41.520 --> 00:02:42.840
<v Speaker 4>Expect them to. They have lives.

54
00:02:43.319 --> 00:02:47.439
<v Speaker 2>So uh, first on the obverse is what the opening

55
00:02:47.520 --> 00:02:52.080
<v Speaker 2>is called philosophy dot dot dot and from philosophy read

56
00:02:52.120 --> 00:02:55.439
<v Speaker 2>it from a book roughly and more or less a

57
00:02:55.439 --> 00:02:58.319
<v Speaker 2>book to create a flower, and to create it here,

58
00:02:58.680 --> 00:03:01.960
<v Speaker 2>to bring it forth to mount it, rather to let

59
00:03:02.000 --> 00:03:05.840
<v Speaker 2>it mount and find its dawning and turns aside as

60
00:03:05.879 --> 00:03:11.120
<v Speaker 2>though of itself revoluted some grave flower following the reckoning

61
00:03:11.240 --> 00:03:15.599
<v Speaker 2>of a lapidary. We learn to cultivate patients. So in that,

62
00:03:15.800 --> 00:03:17.599
<v Speaker 2>in the spirit of this, we are going to be

63
00:03:18.599 --> 00:03:22.120
<v Speaker 2>cultivating some patients, we can get to overall themes. I

64
00:03:22.120 --> 00:03:26.319
<v Speaker 2>think Eric opened it up there. My my summary of.

65
00:03:26.280 --> 00:03:28.199
<v Speaker 1>This, what did that even just mean? What you just said?

66
00:03:28.360 --> 00:03:29.319
<v Speaker 1>That first thing, like the f.

67
00:03:29.879 --> 00:03:31.360
<v Speaker 4>Good question, good place to start.

68
00:03:31.919 --> 00:03:34.439
<v Speaker 2>It's kind of a joke because he's talking about the flower,

69
00:03:34.879 --> 00:03:37.159
<v Speaker 2>and he brings up later in the essay the florid

70
00:03:37.240 --> 00:03:40.639
<v Speaker 2>piece of language, because philosophers say, we're not going to

71
00:03:40.759 --> 00:03:43.960
<v Speaker 2>use florid language, We're going to use true language.

72
00:03:44.199 --> 00:03:46.240
<v Speaker 4>So he's a he's bringing he's.

73
00:03:46.120 --> 00:03:49.599
<v Speaker 2>Talking about this flower, and then we see him go

74
00:03:49.759 --> 00:03:52.680
<v Speaker 2>in on two ways because you can't ever be sure

75
00:03:52.680 --> 00:03:54.919
<v Speaker 2>of what he's saying, because sometimes he says something or

76
00:03:54.960 --> 00:03:58.919
<v Speaker 2>brings up an author like Anatole France, only to shut

77
00:03:59.000 --> 00:04:01.280
<v Speaker 2>it down and say, but that's not what I mean

78
00:04:01.319 --> 00:04:04.960
<v Speaker 2>at all. So if you're looking at this reader, listener,

79
00:04:05.039 --> 00:04:09.879
<v Speaker 2>I mean, uh, there's these giant, basically page long quotations

80
00:04:10.120 --> 00:04:14.520
<v Speaker 2>taken from novels, taken from so sur a bunch of sources,

81
00:04:14.960 --> 00:04:17.480
<v Speaker 2>and they're the font size this is kind of frustrating.

82
00:04:17.519 --> 00:04:20.560
<v Speaker 2>The font size on the giant block quotations is eleven

83
00:04:21.079 --> 00:04:22.959
<v Speaker 2>and the rest of the font size is twelve.

84
00:04:23.000 --> 00:04:25.399
<v Speaker 3>It's twelve. Yeah, they're hearts to tell apart.

85
00:04:25.480 --> 00:04:27.000
<v Speaker 4>So they're very hard to tell apart.

86
00:04:27.040 --> 00:04:30.079
<v Speaker 2>And if you are like citing this, make sure that

87
00:04:30.199 --> 00:04:32.839
<v Speaker 2>you are finding out who's actually speaking on the page,

88
00:04:32.839 --> 00:04:36.480
<v Speaker 2>because these these these quotations last for entire pages.

89
00:04:36.680 --> 00:04:39.040
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, and yeah, and I noticed that. And they're like

90
00:04:39.120 --> 00:04:41.000
<v Speaker 1>you just said they're like barely different fonts.

91
00:04:41.040 --> 00:04:43.319
<v Speaker 4>They're like yeah, they're like it's like a half a

92
00:04:43.439 --> 00:04:44.279
<v Speaker 4>size different.

93
00:04:44.399 --> 00:04:47.639
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, exactly. It's like what it's like the regular texts

94
00:04:47.680 --> 00:04:49.680
<v Speaker 1>twelve point font and the quotes are like eleven and

95
00:04:49.720 --> 00:04:51.160
<v Speaker 1>you're just like, oh wait shit.

96
00:04:51.600 --> 00:04:54.720
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, kind of a kind of ableists. They're looking at

97
00:04:54.759 --> 00:04:59.360
<v Speaker 3>looking ahead a bit. That that flower thing you mentioned. Uh,

98
00:05:00.439 --> 00:05:03.360
<v Speaker 3>you know, I might be wrong about this, but eventually

99
00:05:03.439 --> 00:05:07.439
<v Speaker 3>he's gonna talk about the sun, right, the sun as

100
00:05:07.480 --> 00:05:12.160
<v Speaker 3>one of those in scare quotes foundational metaphors in Western

101
00:05:12.160 --> 00:05:17.720
<v Speaker 3>philosophy and the sun, you know, so you get these

102
00:05:17.759 --> 00:05:20.800
<v Speaker 3>playful connections, right, A metaphor is a trope? What is

103
00:05:20.839 --> 00:05:23.079
<v Speaker 3>a flower it looks towards the sun? What do we

104
00:05:23.120 --> 00:05:27.120
<v Speaker 3>call that heliotropic? What is the original metaphor in the

105
00:05:27.160 --> 00:05:30.360
<v Speaker 3>Western tradition? The sun? You know, the light of reason,

106
00:05:30.639 --> 00:05:33.680
<v Speaker 3>the obscure and the clear, the dark and the than

107
00:05:33.720 --> 00:05:36.279
<v Speaker 3>the bright, you know, all those things like those are

108
00:05:36.319 --> 00:05:42.360
<v Speaker 3>all very very deep metaphors in philosophy that have supposedly,

109
00:05:42.680 --> 00:05:45.639
<v Speaker 3>as we'll learn in this section, you know, metaphors are

110
00:05:46.360 --> 00:05:48.920
<v Speaker 3>at least we're gonna think with the idea that for

111
00:05:49.000 --> 00:05:52.920
<v Speaker 3>a bit that metaphors are coins that have had like this,

112
00:05:53.079 --> 00:05:55.519
<v Speaker 3>one of the sides rubbed off of them, the side

113
00:05:55.519 --> 00:05:58.079
<v Speaker 3>that has like a figure on it, the sensible part.

114
00:05:58.639 --> 00:06:02.959
<v Speaker 3>It's been rubbed off by use, by usage, right, these metaphysicians,

115
00:06:03.000 --> 00:06:05.759
<v Speaker 3>and they take their coins and they rub them down

116
00:06:05.839 --> 00:06:09.079
<v Speaker 3>so that they're super you know, at they look abstract

117
00:06:09.120 --> 00:06:13.839
<v Speaker 3>and like they don't have any original sense reference to them.

118
00:06:13.839 --> 00:06:16.519
<v Speaker 3>But yeah, he comes and points out the sun later

119
00:06:16.720 --> 00:06:19.240
<v Speaker 3>is like that too, and that's like at the heart

120
00:06:19.319 --> 00:06:23.759
<v Speaker 3>of Aristotle's texts is like the sun, and Plato obviously

121
00:06:23.800 --> 00:06:26.120
<v Speaker 3>too with the cave thing. Right, the sun is like

122
00:06:26.160 --> 00:06:30.920
<v Speaker 3>the er fucking metaphor in philosophy. And he shows that

123
00:06:31.000 --> 00:06:34.120
<v Speaker 3>it's just that it's a it's a metaphor. It has

124
00:06:34.160 --> 00:06:37.399
<v Speaker 3>this like unsensible sensibleness because you can't look straight at

125
00:06:37.439 --> 00:06:39.240
<v Speaker 3>the sun but you see it's light all the time.

126
00:06:39.480 --> 00:06:42.839
<v Speaker 3>Like it has the same problems as any other metaphor does.

127
00:06:43.519 --> 00:06:47.560
<v Speaker 3>And uh, well, that's just that's jumping the gun. Sometimes

128
00:06:47.600 --> 00:06:49.759
<v Speaker 3>with Daridell, you got to bury the lead. Sometimes you

129
00:06:49.800 --> 00:06:51.439
<v Speaker 3>got to jump the gun. That's the only way to

130
00:06:51.439 --> 00:06:52.920
<v Speaker 3>do it. But yeah, that's coming.

131
00:06:53.279 --> 00:06:57.399
<v Speaker 4>All right, all right, all right, slow down there. Yeah.

132
00:06:57.480 --> 00:07:03.000
<v Speaker 2>So the sun is the truth obviously in Western philosophy,

133
00:07:03.079 --> 00:07:06.879
<v Speaker 2>and the way we understand truth is by analogy with

134
00:07:06.959 --> 00:07:08.879
<v Speaker 2>the son. You don't you can't look straight at it,

135
00:07:09.079 --> 00:07:11.759
<v Speaker 2>you can never see it directly, but only because of

136
00:07:11.800 --> 00:07:15.160
<v Speaker 2>it can you see other things. So it's the analogy

137
00:07:15.279 --> 00:07:19.639
<v Speaker 2>is because the truth is, then we can have all

138
00:07:19.639 --> 00:07:22.560
<v Speaker 2>these other pieces of truth. We can use perception and

139
00:07:22.600 --> 00:07:24.319
<v Speaker 2>get a part of the truth. We can use math

140
00:07:24.439 --> 00:07:26.759
<v Speaker 2>and science and get other parts of the truth that's

141
00:07:26.800 --> 00:07:32.800
<v Speaker 2>not Deredi's position. That is what the Western metaphysics generally is.

142
00:07:33.480 --> 00:07:35.319
<v Speaker 2>I don't know if you guys noticed, but this thing

143
00:07:35.639 --> 00:07:40.279
<v Speaker 2>is I believe this isn't just a sneak diss at Heidegger.

144
00:07:40.600 --> 00:07:43.720
<v Speaker 4>Everything in here is against Heidegger, is it?

145
00:07:44.120 --> 00:07:46.920
<v Speaker 3>I thought he I thought he got so much out

146
00:07:46.920 --> 00:07:49.720
<v Speaker 3>of Hideger, like like when I he did. But when

147
00:07:49.759 --> 00:07:52.680
<v Speaker 3>you watches that documentary on Darida, he kind of he

148
00:07:52.720 --> 00:07:55.399
<v Speaker 3>points to his library. Its like, Heidigger's the only thing

149
00:07:55.399 --> 00:07:59.600
<v Speaker 3>I've read carefully here. I think he says something like that. Anyway,

150
00:07:59.639 --> 00:08:02.519
<v Speaker 3>he's not. He's like, obviously he's very very well read,

151
00:08:02.600 --> 00:08:05.720
<v Speaker 3>but like Heidegger seemed to be the thing he reads

152
00:08:05.759 --> 00:08:09.000
<v Speaker 3>with the most care. And husserl, I guess too.

153
00:08:09.319 --> 00:08:10.519
<v Speaker 4>That's absolutely true.

154
00:08:10.519 --> 00:08:13.480
<v Speaker 2>But if you remember, there's a essay he wrote something

155
00:08:13.560 --> 00:08:18.120
<v Speaker 2>like history and Heidiger something to that point, and he

156
00:08:18.240 --> 00:08:21.959
<v Speaker 2>says like Heidiger tried to not be an onto theologian,

157
00:08:22.480 --> 00:08:25.560
<v Speaker 2>but he ended up just falling right back into ato theology.

158
00:08:26.079 --> 00:08:30.000
<v Speaker 2>So when he's talking about these etymology the etymology games

159
00:08:30.319 --> 00:08:32.519
<v Speaker 2>finding out where words came from and then pointing it

160
00:08:32.559 --> 00:08:35.120
<v Speaker 2>and say like this is the true meaning, we've lost

161
00:08:35.159 --> 00:08:35.799
<v Speaker 2>the true meaning.

162
00:08:36.320 --> 00:08:37.840
<v Speaker 4>You know, you can hear the echoes of Hiderger.

163
00:08:37.840 --> 00:08:38.159
<v Speaker 1>That's true.

164
00:08:38.159 --> 00:08:40.360
<v Speaker 2>We've lost the true meaning of beaning because we have

165
00:08:40.480 --> 00:08:44.360
<v Speaker 2>lost the true meanings of these terms. Originally, Darida just

166
00:08:44.440 --> 00:08:47.240
<v Speaker 2>picks that up and shits all over it. But we're

167
00:08:47.240 --> 00:08:49.399
<v Speaker 2>getting ahead of ourselves. I'd like to start with the

168
00:08:49.440 --> 00:08:50.960
<v Speaker 2>opening gambit, and that's this.

169
00:08:50.960 --> 00:08:52.879
<v Speaker 4>Thing with coins.

170
00:08:53.600 --> 00:08:59.440
<v Speaker 2>The first three vignettes are so Sir Nietzsche and a

171
00:08:59.559 --> 00:09:03.799
<v Speaker 2>character from a novel by Anatole France whose name is Polyphilos,

172
00:09:04.720 --> 00:09:08.240
<v Speaker 2>and they all make the same metaphor, so I'll try

173
00:09:08.279 --> 00:09:11.440
<v Speaker 2>to I'm not gonna do the deconstruction first. I'll present

174
00:09:11.480 --> 00:09:15.879
<v Speaker 2>to you what they present First, we have original language

175
00:09:16.000 --> 00:09:18.799
<v Speaker 2>language in its home language that has to do with

176
00:09:19.360 --> 00:09:23.720
<v Speaker 2>phenomenology to drop that in there, physical stuff, you know,

177
00:09:23.879 --> 00:09:27.679
<v Speaker 2>like our word for our word for truth in English,

178
00:09:27.679 --> 00:09:32.080
<v Speaker 2>the Latins veritas. But in English truth comes from the

179
00:09:32.080 --> 00:09:36.200
<v Speaker 2>word for oak tree. So what's the what's the metaphorphorization

180
00:09:36.399 --> 00:09:39.240
<v Speaker 2>there is? We need to compare it to something solid,

181
00:09:39.320 --> 00:09:41.720
<v Speaker 2>So we find the most solid thing around or whatever

182
00:09:41.799 --> 00:09:45.600
<v Speaker 2>our angle Anglo Saxon ancestors did and say, all.

183
00:09:45.559 --> 00:09:47.200
<v Speaker 4>Right, we got we got oak.

184
00:09:47.720 --> 00:09:50.960
<v Speaker 2>We're gonna call truth and compare it to oak, because

185
00:09:51.000 --> 00:09:52.559
<v Speaker 2>truth is solid, that kind of thing.

186
00:09:52.639 --> 00:09:55.360
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, not as much sun up there as there was

187
00:09:55.440 --> 00:09:56.360
<v Speaker 3>in ancient Greece.

188
00:09:56.399 --> 00:09:59.960
<v Speaker 2>I guess the Greeks did the sign and our answer

189
00:10:00.080 --> 00:10:02.360
<v Speaker 2>us there did the trees and the mountains.

190
00:10:02.440 --> 00:10:06.440
<v Speaker 3>We yet igdrasil the world tree instead of the sun.

191
00:10:07.039 --> 00:10:07.159
<v Speaker 1>Well.

192
00:10:07.159 --> 00:10:08.919
<v Speaker 4>I actually don't know if the word.

193
00:10:10.159 --> 00:10:13.720
<v Speaker 2>Drew like drewid is that might be Celtic instead of

194
00:10:13.759 --> 00:10:16.720
<v Speaker 2>Anglo Saxon. But anyway, I think so getting caught up

195
00:10:16.720 --> 00:10:20.279
<v Speaker 2>on it all, the all three of these guys Anatole France,

196
00:10:21.159 --> 00:10:27.240
<v Speaker 2>so Sir and Nietzsche make the metaphor of metaphor, which

197
00:10:27.320 --> 00:10:29.399
<v Speaker 2>is a coin and the coin.

198
00:10:30.000 --> 00:10:31.039
<v Speaker 4>First of all, it has.

199
00:10:30.919 --> 00:10:34.360
<v Speaker 2>Its location in time and space, you know, because a

200
00:10:34.440 --> 00:10:36.360
<v Speaker 2>coin has the name of the country or the name

201
00:10:36.360 --> 00:10:38.720
<v Speaker 2>of the king or whoever I'm on it, which gives

202
00:10:38.759 --> 00:10:42.200
<v Speaker 2>it a physical location in space and time over time.

203
00:10:42.960 --> 00:10:49.039
<v Speaker 2>This is anatole France's character's description of what happens over time.

204
00:10:49.200 --> 00:10:53.519
<v Speaker 2>With a word like drew, which means oak, it gets

205
00:10:53.720 --> 00:10:56.919
<v Speaker 2>the surface gets sanded off, the location at a specific

206
00:10:57.000 --> 00:10:59.679
<v Speaker 2>time and place in a language, in a country. This

207
00:10:59.720 --> 00:11:01.799
<v Speaker 2>gets stand it off, and we're ended that we end

208
00:11:01.879 --> 00:11:06.000
<v Speaker 2>up with something extremely abstract like truth.

209
00:11:06.279 --> 00:11:06.799
<v Speaker 4>Truth is.

210
00:11:07.200 --> 00:11:11.519
<v Speaker 2>Truth originates in the physical, real, sensible, normal world, and eventually,

211
00:11:11.559 --> 00:11:14.120
<v Speaker 2>by the time it gets to us, it's this you know,

212
00:11:14.360 --> 00:11:19.519
<v Speaker 2>cosmic religious, fleeting entity that has all of being in

213
00:11:19.559 --> 00:11:21.559
<v Speaker 2>it and yet is nowhere kind of thing.

214
00:11:22.000 --> 00:11:26.120
<v Speaker 4>So we start from a coin. The coin gets effaced

215
00:11:26.440 --> 00:11:31.120
<v Speaker 4>by knife grinders over time. And this is why Nietzsche,

216
00:11:31.879 --> 00:11:33.919
<v Speaker 4>so sir, and this character.

217
00:11:33.600 --> 00:11:39.039
<v Speaker 2>In the novel, they're all against metaphysics, and Hegel gets

218
00:11:39.080 --> 00:11:44.080
<v Speaker 2>called out here. For example, specifically, Hegel uses terms like

219
00:11:44.240 --> 00:11:47.399
<v Speaker 2>absolute and infinite. These are not even positive terms. They're

220
00:11:47.440 --> 00:11:49.039
<v Speaker 2>just negative.

221
00:11:48.840 --> 00:11:51.240
<v Speaker 3>Terms, negative concepts.

222
00:11:50.840 --> 00:11:51.879
<v Speaker 4>Nothing that exists.

223
00:11:52.080 --> 00:11:55.960
<v Speaker 2>So that's the opening argument is that metaphysics are just

224
00:11:56.120 --> 00:12:00.240
<v Speaker 2>coins that have the inscriptions sand it off, which which

225
00:12:00.240 --> 00:12:03.480
<v Speaker 2>is you know, very cool, very good, and there's truth

226
00:12:03.519 --> 00:12:03.840
<v Speaker 2>to it.

227
00:12:05.120 --> 00:12:08.840
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, that the coin, the coin metaphor is very dominant.

228
00:12:09.159 --> 00:12:09.759
<v Speaker 4>And here.

229
00:12:09.840 --> 00:12:12.480
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, then then when you're not just using like you know,

230
00:12:12.559 --> 00:12:15.519
<v Speaker 3>words or like coins or symbols or like coins, you

231
00:12:15.519 --> 00:12:18.559
<v Speaker 3>can exchange them for whatever you want kind of thing here,

232
00:12:18.799 --> 00:12:22.320
<v Speaker 3>then they become like the metaphor of metaphors.

233
00:12:23.039 --> 00:12:26.960
<v Speaker 2>But the idea is right again, we have an original meaning,

234
00:12:27.080 --> 00:12:32.279
<v Speaker 2>original meaning with a functional value of functional utility, and

235
00:12:32.360 --> 00:12:36.559
<v Speaker 2>over time it becomes abstracted. Now this is something that

236
00:12:36.600 --> 00:12:39.120
<v Speaker 2>we can observe. But Darida is not going to use

237
00:12:39.159 --> 00:12:41.960
<v Speaker 2>this as his explanation. So if you if you cite

238
00:12:42.000 --> 00:12:45.240
<v Speaker 2>anything from the first fourteen pages, then he pulls a

239
00:12:45.279 --> 00:12:47.919
<v Speaker 2>one eighty and goes, but we're not gonna We're not.

240
00:12:48.120 --> 00:12:49.000
<v Speaker 4>That doesn't make sense.

241
00:12:49.519 --> 00:12:54.720
<v Speaker 3>He problematizes, Okay, metaphor in the text of philosophy. He

242
00:12:54.919 --> 00:12:58.559
<v Speaker 3>like basically just says the title right away, and it's

243
00:12:58.639 --> 00:13:01.159
<v Speaker 3>kind of like this, this is the topic metaphor in

244
00:13:01.200 --> 00:13:04.600
<v Speaker 3>the text of philosophy. But then Daridad does his thing,

245
00:13:04.720 --> 00:13:09.480
<v Speaker 3>you know it as do we really understand what this means, like,

246
00:13:09.519 --> 00:13:12.639
<v Speaker 3>I feel like I'm getting this point of Yeah, philosophical

247
00:13:12.720 --> 00:13:18.320
<v Speaker 3>language depends on metaphor. It's metaphorical top to bottom. But

248
00:13:18.360 --> 00:13:22.799
<v Speaker 3>the point about ordinary language, Okay, maybe that's what he

249
00:13:22.879 --> 00:13:26.519
<v Speaker 3>means here is that you know, this poliphialos guy is

250
00:13:26.559 --> 00:13:29.600
<v Speaker 3>going to start thinking about these words that have this

251
00:13:29.840 --> 00:13:30.759
<v Speaker 3>ordinary meaning.

252
00:13:31.240 --> 00:13:31.480
<v Speaker 4>Right.

253
00:13:31.600 --> 00:13:36.120
<v Speaker 3>It was very closely connected to the original sense experience. Right,

254
00:13:36.279 --> 00:13:39.879
<v Speaker 3>you see something with four legs, and it's furry, and

255
00:13:39.919 --> 00:13:42.200
<v Speaker 3>it barks and it licks you when you try to

256
00:13:42.200 --> 00:13:44.799
<v Speaker 3>pet it. Whatever. You call that thing a dog? You

257
00:13:44.879 --> 00:13:47.799
<v Speaker 3>have this, you call that thing a dog. Right, it's

258
00:13:47.799 --> 00:13:52.120
<v Speaker 3>a sensible there's a sensible image the figure. Right, But

259
00:13:52.240 --> 00:13:57.519
<v Speaker 3>over time that figurative sensible meaning is what gets rubbed off. Right,

260
00:13:57.720 --> 00:14:01.440
<v Speaker 3>so suddenly I can say, like, you know, you're a dog,

261
00:14:01.639 --> 00:14:04.440
<v Speaker 3>or like someone you say this this that man is

262
00:14:04.480 --> 00:14:08.960
<v Speaker 3>a pig, right to mean he's lecherous. Rights has nothing

263
00:14:08.960 --> 00:14:11.320
<v Speaker 3>to do with the original meaning.

264
00:14:11.480 --> 00:14:11.600
<v Speaker 1>Right.

265
00:14:11.679 --> 00:14:13.720
<v Speaker 3>We think we know, you know, oh, pigs kind of

266
00:14:13.799 --> 00:14:16.279
<v Speaker 3>roll around in dirt, But then science tells us they're

267
00:14:16.279 --> 00:14:19.639
<v Speaker 3>actually very clean animals and actually genetically very close to us,

268
00:14:19.679 --> 00:14:22.480
<v Speaker 3>and we can use their organs for transplants sometimes. Okay,

269
00:14:22.519 --> 00:14:25.159
<v Speaker 3>all that, but we can still call someone a pig

270
00:14:25.519 --> 00:14:29.440
<v Speaker 3>and mean they're lecherous, right that that original sensible image

271
00:14:30.080 --> 00:14:33.240
<v Speaker 3>we encounter. This is almost like, very close to Nietzsche's

272
00:14:33.279 --> 00:14:38.200
<v Speaker 3>argument in in the beginning of on Truth and Lives

273
00:14:38.200 --> 00:14:41.679
<v Speaker 3>in a non moral sense, he says, you know, the

274
00:14:41.720 --> 00:14:46.639
<v Speaker 3>first metaphor this, the nervous sensation is transformed into an image,

275
00:14:47.120 --> 00:14:51.200
<v Speaker 3>and then the image is transformed into a concept. Second metaphor, right,

276
00:14:51.240 --> 00:14:54.000
<v Speaker 3>and the and the and the concepts. Originally then they

277
00:14:54.039 --> 00:14:58.720
<v Speaker 3>just they lose their connection with original sensible experience, and

278
00:14:58.799 --> 00:15:01.799
<v Speaker 3>we perceive that as being generalized. Right, Oh, they have

279
00:15:01.879 --> 00:15:04.759
<v Speaker 3>this general value. Now we can use things like the

280
00:15:04.799 --> 00:15:08.000
<v Speaker 3>word truth to mean so many different things because it

281
00:15:08.039 --> 00:15:13.480
<v Speaker 3>has no sensible figurative ground anymore. It's been rubbed off.

282
00:15:14.480 --> 00:15:18.279
<v Speaker 2>Well, A good example is the term infinite, because especially

283
00:15:18.360 --> 00:15:23.360
<v Speaker 2>in Christian theology, we have this term infinite applied to God,

284
00:15:23.759 --> 00:15:28.159
<v Speaker 2>eternal applied to God. These are negatives, right, There's nothing

285
00:15:28.200 --> 00:15:30.200
<v Speaker 2>that you can point to that's infinite. There's nothing you

286
00:15:30.240 --> 00:15:32.759
<v Speaker 2>can point to eternal. You just look at something in

287
00:15:32.879 --> 00:15:36.240
<v Speaker 2>time and go, well, God's the opposite of that, or

288
00:15:36.279 --> 00:15:39.919
<v Speaker 2>infinite like a not just used by Christianity but by Hagel,

289
00:15:40.720 --> 00:15:44.240
<v Speaker 2>not finite. We only know finite things. But I'm talking

290
00:15:44.279 --> 00:15:45.159
<v Speaker 2>about this other thing.