@stephenpetro411: Thomas Hobbes was forty when he wandered into a library and found a geometry book left open on a desk. He read the conclusion — the square on the hypotenuse equals the sum of the squares on the other two sides — and thought: "By God, this is impossible." So he read the proof. It cited earlier propositions. So he read those. Which cited earlier ones still. He followed the chain all the way back to the opening definitions — and couldn't find a single gap. Every step justified. Every conclusion earned. Nothing merely asserted. That book was Euclid's Elements. It changed how one of history's great political philosophers understood what an argument even is. He built his masterwork, Leviathan, the same way: definitions, then assumptions, then conclusions. Most people argue by assertion — "clearly," "obviously," "it follows that." Spend time with reasoning this rigorous, and you start hearing the gaps in every argument. Including your own. #ThomasHobbes #Euclid #Logic #CriticalThinking #BookTok

Victor :

in a previous video, your reference to the Elements of Euclid was a little abstract for me. I wasn't able to link the significance of geometry to a thought process. This video is so much better. Thanks for the clarification.

itsmisssam :

This is the type of reasoning that law school teaches. Start with the legal issue presented. Then the rule statement for the applicable legal principle, then rule explanation including definitions, circumstances under which the rule applies, what exceptions there are or what required elements or factors must be present for this rule to apply. Then analysis, where you take your current factual situation and apply it to the rule, explaining the factors/elements met or not met, how this rule applied to the facts does not does not work and why. Using the same language and definitions that were defined in the rule and rule explanation. Then you reach your legal conclusion.

user063495081 :

One of the many reasons why all modern political systems are falling apart.

okjoel :

My high school history teacher, Mr. Harris said “always question assumptions”.

Vladimir Bjelobrk :

werent spinosas ethix same and Wittgenstein tractatus?

Valkymarie :

are people really walking around not able to see gaps in their own thinking when they look

Bopcat :

Mathematical ideas are innate, political ones are not, there could be similarities if you’d like to stretch and collude the concepts

Steve :

Hobbs tried to prove materialism but there are gaps in his arguments one being the subjective experience of consciousness. Dead atoms can’t and have not ever been proven as to how they can create the qualities we experience such as a colorful sunset. But he tried and helped define the gaps.

Markus99 :

Great opening line too 🤔

ACMVisuals 🔴♣️ :

newyorkbadboy :

Well put

Stavinchi :

What about the hypopetous of love?

Carlos Camacho :

Same as Spinoza

Homosapienish :

Thanks for sharing this anecdote of Hobbs

Ajit Rai :

Could you please give me the details of the source of what you said?

Cato :

Hobbies would never be declarative.

silly_lady_888 :

I mean, but his "rational" argument led to totalitarian conclusions 😂

Sacré Djob. :

🥰🥰🥰

Franglais69 :

😁😁😁

Immanuel Kant :

@luke.k'ly cái chuyện nó vòng vòng

gregmartin62 :

😳😳😳