:01:03
I try to make them think
about thought itself...
:01:06
...the act of thinking.
:01:07
I use the term transcendental
in a general sense.
:01:10
Does that include Husserl's interpretation?
:01:12
Of course.
:01:14
And for you?
:01:16
-What?
-What does "transcendental" mean?
:01:21
What she said,
a philosophy placed on the highest peak...
:01:25
...which surpasses all points of view,
transcends them.
:01:29
That's not it.
:01:32
You're confusing "transcendental"
and "transcendent," like 99% of people.
:01:36
Then there's nothing shameful about it.
That didn't stop me--
:01:39
From getting an "A", I know.
:01:41
I only got a "B", myself.
:01:44
Don't be mad,
I just wanted to show Jeanne...
:01:46
...that that's not what we learn
in philosophy class.
:01:50
I'm not mad, I'm going to get the dish.
:01:56
Excuse me for having used such jargon.
:01:59
I could have said it another way.
:02:01
Words don't matter.
:02:03
Your students can follow you
in that kind of thinking?
:02:05
They follow and even lead.
:02:07
Dad, can you help me?
:02:10
Lead?
:02:11
For example...
:02:14
...with five or six students, I started...
:02:16
...a maieutic dialogue,
like in Plato's Theaetus.
:02:20
Is science perception?
Do we see through our eyes or with them?
:02:24
While I didn't want to get too involved...
:02:27
...we found ourselves questioning...
:02:29
...the possibility
of synthetic a priori judgments...
:02:32
...Iike in the Critique of Pure Reason.
:02:37
You were saying, your students....
:02:39
Question the possibility
of synthetic a priori judgments!
:02:42
Yes, anyway....
:02:44
Do you know what a synthetic
a priori judgment is?
:02:47
If I knew, I forgot. And you?
:02:49
Yes. A synthetic a priori judgment...
:02:51
...is one that, while a priori,
is not analytical.
:02:57
To be more precise, excuse the jargon...