Hey Vsauce, Does Anything Exist?

Get all sides of every story and be better informed at https://ground.news/AlexOC – subscribe for 40% off unlimited access. For early, ad-free access to videos, and to support the channel, subscribe to my Substack: https://www.alexoconnor.com.

Rien ne repose, tout se tient !

Not sure what these guys were smoking before the interview, but I'd like some! 😄

GET TO THE FUCKING POINT!!!!!

I have never seen an example of free will in the humans around me or in my own life.

Cells do the same thing they have their own consciousness just as society does 1:30:02

google.com

I now understand why Peter Hitchens walked out. He smelt it.

Jesus, this is boring. Sophistry.

5:20 ❤️
man I have admired the most in my life. 😊

Alex please have a conversation with Prof Jeff Kripal

“the mystical is not the ethical”

Better title: "Nothing" Matters

In theory, does the website for the Ship of Thesius even still exist? I mean, if the website changed servers, does it still exist or is this a new thing we now have? Is it a new wiki page each time someone visits it? Each new instance, none the original, all simply copies of a copy of a copy? Does this video exist at all? Am I watching the same video when I watch it again or is it a whole new thing? Is it the same video if I watch it on my phone vs my computer?

Good try nothing is still something!.

10:10 LOOK, I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHERE THE BOAT IS, OKAY?!

Michael repeatedly denies intrinsic unity:

“There is no table there. There’s a bunch of stuff and it’s table-ing right now.”

Aristotle would call this category confusion.
Aquinas would call it denial of substantial form.
Reid would call it absurdity, because it contradicts the way human cognition actually works.

Michael says:

“Every moment is a new me… I choose whichever answer makes me feel better.”

This is continental subjectivism (Sartre, Derrida, Deleuze), not classical metaphysics.

Aristotle:
Identity persists because the form persists.

Aquinas:
The human person is a rational soul, not a bundle of momentary psychological states.

Reid:
Personal identity is a first principle of reason; denying it is self-refuting.

Michael’s “choose whichever feels right” is precisely the kind of anti-realist voluntarism the classical tradition rejects.

Michael says:

“There is no such thing as the ship of Theseus… it’s whichever one you want.”

Aristotle and Aquinas would say:

The ship has a substantial unity grounded in its form (its function as a ship).

Replacement of parts does not destroy identity because form, not matter, is primary.

Reid would add: ordinary language already solves this; philosophers create confusion by ignoring common sense.

Michael’s “whichever you want” is continental constructivism (Heidegger, Foucault), not metaphysics.

Michael critiques van Inwagen:

“People exist, but they don’t wear clothes.”

But classical metaphysics already solved this:

Living beings have substantial forms.

Artifacts have accidental forms.

Clothes are accidental unities, not substances.

Michael’s confusion arises because he rejects form entirely.

Continental Philosophy in the Document (Identified and Destroyed)
A. Phenomenological anti-realism
Michael treats objects as “whatever we label them.”
This echoes Husserl, Heidegger, and Derrida.

Classical destruction:
Labels do not create ontology.
Form grounds being.
Reality is not constituted by language.

B. Existential voluntarism
Michael says identity is “whatever makes me feel better.”
This is Sartrean existentialism.

Classical destruction:
Identity is objective, grounded in form and substance, not feelings.

C. Reductionist materialism
Michael reduces everything to “stuff.”
This echoes Deleuze’s “plane of immanence.”

Classical destruction:
Matter without form is unintelligible.
Matter alone cannot explain unity, function, or identity.

D. Anti-essentialism
Michael denies essences (“no nouns except stuff”).
This echoes Foucault and Derrida.

Classical destruction:
Essences are necessary for knowledge, classification, and rational discourse.

From an Aristotle–Aquinas–Reid perspective:

Michael’s metaphysics is false, incoherent, and self-refuting.

It collapses into continental anti-realism, nominalism, and material reductionism.

It cannot explain unity, identity, persistence, or cognition.

It contradicts both common sense (Reid) and classical metaphysics (Aristotle, Aquinas).

The classical tradition would say:

Objects exist. Persons exist. Identity persists.
Form is real. Finality is real.
Continental metaphysics is a confusion of language with reality.

Would you love me if i was a worm – reminds of the book written by Kafka "metamorphosis"

With the moustache on the one hand, and the beard of the other, YouTube is whole again.

that idea about conciseness having possibly developed into what we know it as now being completely different in ancient times is such a fascinating concept

Solipsism,. Really?

I dont know about anything. Something exist though.

Gen X.