Untimely Reflections #45: Nick Nielsen - Philosophy of History

I spoke with Nick Nielsen (Geopolicraticus), who publishes a regular newsletter, and the series, Today in the Philosophy of History. We discussed Augustine's theory of history; the differing views of history of Hegel and Schopenhauer; the Renaissance and the Reformation; textual gaps in the Middle Ages; Nietzsche's "On the Use and Abuse of History for Life"; Nietzsche & Machiavelli as the monumental role models of our time; ideographic versus nomothetic knowledge; Peter Turchin's Cliodynamics. This was my first conversation with Nick, but it was lovely to meet him and I had a nice time talking to him. I very much enjoy his Youtube channel and would recommend it to those among the Patrons who enjoy history, and speculations about history.

Chris joined me for a conversation on Friedrich Schelling & German Idealism! In spite of his prominence, Schelling tends to be underdiscussed in popular philosophy circles when it comes to the German Idealist tradition. In this episode, we talk about his essay Philosophical Inquiries into the Essence of Human Freedom, the dialectic of potencies that develops out of nature-philosophy, and the relation of Schelling's ideas to those of his school friends at Tubingen - two gentlemen you may or may not have heard of, named Hegel and Holderlin. The three of them were enthusiastic about the French Revolution, and planted a "freedom tree", around which they danced and sang "Hen Kai Pain" - "One and All" - the watchword of Hellenistic pantheists. Schelling's late lectures were attended by everyone from Kierkegaard to Burckhardt to Engels to Bakunin; his views on myth (centering on Apollo and Dionysus) likely influenced Nietzsche, and his notion of the dark ground as a ceaseless impulsive striving echoes in the work of Schopenhauer. At the end of the episode, we have a brief discussion about Chris' thoughts on Deleuze, a philosopher he has drifted away from, and some of the pitfalls of post-structuralist thinking.Christopher, on how to read Schelling's Freedom Essay: https://epochemagazine.org/77/freedom-god-and-ground-an-introduction-to-schellings-1809-freedom-essay/Papers Referenced: Exceeding Reason: Freedom and Religion in Schelling and Nietzsche by Dennis Vanden AuweeleNietzsche, German Idealism and Its Critics (DeGruyter)

In our continuation of Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations, we'll discuss Wittgenstein's arguments against the possibility of a private language, which culminates in the position that all subjective experiences of sensations are not communicable. Thus, language must be doing something else, other than communicating inner experiences, with its words that seem to refer to these experiences. Of particular interest to Wittgenstein is the communication of pain, and sense perceptions. Finally, we'll consider Wittgenstein's arguments as concern meaning: presumably there is an inner experience of "meaning something" by one's words, which is different from how the words may be perceived - or the individual may even intend to deceive. Is it therefore sensible to speak about an "inner meaning" separate from common use? Join me as we explore my favorite ideas from Wittgenstein!

In this episode, we're finally talking about a book near and dear to my heart, Wittgenstein's "Philosophical Investigations" (this book took second place in a Patreon poll, and I decided it was time). What is language? How is the meaning of words determined? Wittgenstein initially proposed a pictorial theory of the meaning of sentences, but after his return to philosophy, Wittgenstein II put forward a new theory of language, as the "language-game". We will discuss Wittgenstein's life and career, and then focus on Philosophical Investigations, a work assembled from notes written over the span of 16 years, covering a wide variety of topics and approaching philosophy through thought-experiments, and reflections on the varied uses of words. Wittgenstein's method is to describe rather than explain, and to take our understanding of words from the metaphysical down to the everyday. "Don't think, but look!"

Joe Folley joins me for a conversation on Albert Camus and the absurdist response to the death of God. We begin by comparing and contrasting Camus and Nietzsche, and their differing approaches to the devaluation of values. Taking inspiration from Nietzsche, Camus searches for an attitude to life akin to amor fati, but defined by a defiance against dogmatic certainties and nihilistic abandonment of life's struggles. We also consider the influence from Descartes, the Stoics, and Schopenhauer on Camus' thought. In the latter half of the conversation, we explore the meaning behind philosophy's attempts at consolation; the question of the suspension of judgment versus the affirmation of certainties; the arguments between analytic and continental philosophers; the philosophers who have bridged the divide; the classical versus romantic worldviews; and the value of truths of a vague or emotional nature that can only be conveyed through art.

The longest Q&A so far! The beginning has a number of Patreon updates, most of which involve things that have already transpired on the podcast. If you want to be involved with asking Q&A questions, or voting in polls to decide future material for the podcast, join the Patreon!

In Marcus Tullius Cicero's Tusculan Disputations, he cites a story of Pythagoras, the man who created the term, "philosopher". His description of the philosopher is as one who comes into life not as a competitor, not in the pursuit of money or fame - but merely as a spectator, who observes and inquires into the nature of things. According to Pythagoras, this way of life is the best, by far; Cicero wholeheartedly embraces this way of understanding philosophy, as part of his consolatory project in which philosophy is seen as part and parcel with virtue. For Cicero, the worth of philosophy is that it delivers us from life's suffering. We will explore the background of Cicero's Tusculan Disputations, the Pythagorean doctrine of metempsychosis, and the Homeric convention of presenting the gods themselves as spectators. This analysis will bring us back to Nietzsche's Birth of Tragedy, as well as some of the comments he makes in his later career about the theatric element of Greek culture, and the philosopher as a spectator, who "stands aside" from the world rather than acting within it. By the end of the episode, we will pose the question of whether or not Cicero's Stoic philosophy actually constitutes a life as spectating, or whether Cicero is just another actor on the philosophical stage.

There is nothing new under the sun: it was here, already, long ago. It was here before our time. This much must be said of the ancient skeptics, who put forward perspectival, relativistic, and moral anti-realist arguments during the Hellenistic age. The central figure is Pyrrho of Elis, who is only known through secondary sources, and whose life is surrounded by a number of fascinating anecdotes which speak to an of image life guided by indifference and the pursuit of ataraxia. In this episode, we'll discuss that concepts, as well as ephektos, adiaphoria, and the possibility of viewing skepticism as a power or a practice rather than a doctrine or ideology. We will also discuss the ten skeptical tropes of Pyrrho and the five tropes of Agrippa. Primarily, we will follow the chapter on Pyrrho found in Diogenes Laertius, but I've also included some insights from A.W. Benn's "The Greek Philosophers" and Mary Mills Patrick's book on Sextus Empiricus, as well Sextus Empiricus himself (particularly the chapter on Gorgias).

Devin (Left Nietzschean) joined me to discuss the underlying philosophical themes of Star Trek, including a potential affinity with Nietzsche as regards the need for self-overcoming as opposed to utopia; the idea of moral "perfectionism", interpreted through "Schopenhauer as Educator"; interpreting the political positions and critiques of the show in their cultural context, as regards the significance of the Federation, Borg, and Dominion; the distinctive traits of each captain in classic Trek, including an interpretation of Kirk as an Odysseus figure; the depressing inability of "New Trek" to articulate a positive vision of the future, instead choosing to wallow in dystopia.

In this episode, we'll compare Nietzsche's view of causality, habit, and free will to Hume. Although, in substance, they make very similar arguments, we'll explore important differences. Nietzsche arrives at his critique of causality through his attack on free will, and the subsequent understanding of metaphysical beliefs as necessitated by moral beliefs - whereas for Hume, the issue of liberty versus necessity is secondary to the critique of reason's ability to derive necessary connexions. For Hume, habit cannot be further explained, because this would be to ignore our practical affirmation of habit and the insufficiency of reason; Nietzsche wishes to investigate the genealogy of habit as part of his critique of morals. Perhaps most importantly, Hume places his philosophy in "subserviency" to the easy and obvious philosophy of commonsense, whereas Nietzsche sets his philosophy against common sense - and everything "common".