Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

I’m preparing a new course that will build on and expand the recent videos on Wittgenstein and Quine.
But I’d like to hear from you: which theme is drawing your attention the most?

1 month ago | [YT] | 0

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

One of Wittgenstein’s most cited passage — §201 of Philosophical Investigations — is often reduced to a neat paradox: “no course of action could be determined by a rule, because every course of action can be made to accord with the rule.”

In this new video essay, I reframe it as a journey through myths we’ve built into our thinking — private language, consensus, mental essences, and the illusion of transparency in meaning.

You’ll see it staged in a 1920s Al Capone–style repair shop, rendered in cinematic black-and-white with Wittgenstein in vivid color, surrounded by mechanics and mythical creatures in the clouds. The visuals aren’t there just to illustrate — they co-create the meaning, in sync with Wim Mertens’ The Bird Song.

Watch it if you’ve ever wondered how the “same” rule can lead to entirely different worlds:

https://youtu.be/zi1bFlQTgxg




No file chosen

1 month ago | [YT] | 0

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

Smuggling operation: a few words about this channel

Much is said about the vocation to teach — as if it were a quiet fire anyone might stumble upon. And perhaps that is true. The impulse to instruct, to pass on, to draw another mind into light, can be found in all disciplines. But philosophy is not simply one such field among others. It is not merely a bearer of content. It is a re-maker of form.

That is why philosophy, properly taught, does not “add” knowledge. It mutates cognition. It alters the architecture. Where once there was repetition — competent, perhaps even brilliant — there emerges a fracture. A light enters where once there was only smooth, mirrored operation. And in that fracture, something uncountable begins.

This channel, this modest flickering presence inside a digital system built for distraction, is not an accident.
It is the crooked shape through which a teaching vocation has found air. And perhaps, yes, it doesn’t always look like one.

There are days when I wonder whether this is still “teaching” at all — this act of speaking into the void, editing, layering, releasing fragments of thought into an endless scroll. There are days when I sense the gaze of the academy, cool, amused, politely distant. As if to say: "I don't know if he is clever. But I know this is not serious."

And yet.

And yet, the vocation remains, not in spite of this medium, but through it. The task was never about the room. It was about the transformation of sense. And here, too, if we dare to treat it with dignity, thought can still change the air.

There have always been those who could not quite inhabit the classroom. Those for whom the rituals of institutional pedagogy — the syllabus, the grade, the conference panel, felt like borrowed clothes. And yet these same figures published, labored, read by candlelight, wrestled with texts until dawn. They were not frauds. They simply belonged to another syntax of transmission.

I am one of them.

I write articles, yes. They live in journals that few ever read. And I cherish that form; the private letter to an imagined interlocutor, the quiet seminar among the initiated. It, too, is a kind of teaching. A kind of classroom. But it is not the only one.

This — here — is something else. A broken amphitheater in the digital wasteland. A screen, a voice, a trace. And someone, somewhere, listening. Not to be entertained. But to remember that thought, too, can be smuggled. That even inside the machinery of noise, a few signals may still carry the weight of truth.

2 months ago (edited) | [YT] | 0

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

This video-essay argue that truth-conditional models are best understood as post hoc evaluative frameworks: tools for verifying the coherence of utterances once the semantic parameters have already been fixed through prior interpretive or pragmatic alignment.


As such, these models exhibit a certain epistemic limitation: they do not account for the conditions under which meaning is generated, negotiated, or revised. Instead, they presuppose semantic stability and function as mechanisms of formal calibration.


This reliance on extensional criteria, while useful for logical analysis, tends to obscure the inferential, normative, and context-sensitive dimensions of meaning. In doing so, it risks reducing language to mere functional output — an operation whose validity is judged solely by systemic compatibility, rather than by its role in cognitive and communicative life.


Accordingly, we propose a shift in orientation: from post-semantic formalism to a theory attentive to the pre-formal conditions of semantic commitment. Language, we suggest, should be viewed not merely as a system of mappings, but as a structure of conceptual responsibility — one that precedes, and in part determines, the very possibility of truth-conditional evaluation.


https://youtu.be/JdqzAcZv7PU

2 months ago | [YT] | 0

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

To see evolution as an explanation is not to receive a fact — it’s to inherit a long history of conceptual labor. Phenomenology doesn’t dismiss this — it reveals it as the very condition for meaning. Sense is not given; it is achieved.

Watch the essay.

This short video-essay is part of a modest channel I created this year, initially with the quiet hope of one day making a living from the craft I love. But reality proved otherwise. Rather than revenue, the project drew a kind of hostility that, frankly, borders on the pathological — a social media phenomenon I can only describe as a black hole of psychic derangement.


Let me be precise. The visual dimension and rhetorical pacing of my videos — many of which are shaped with the aid of generative AI — seem to trigger, in certain viewers, not curiosity but panic. Not critique, but collapse. The rhetorical cadence of this very message — its modulation, texture, and pacing — also owes something to AI. As a non-native speaker navigating a linguistic economy where fluency too often serves as a gatekeeping mechanism, I have found in these tools not a shortcut, but an amplifier. This is not gimmickry. It is simply the new terrain. Musicians, rhetoricians — like mathematicians before them — have had to witness the partial automation of their craft. The response need not be despair, but adaptation.


Yet what these tools reveal — the loosening of form from credentialed authorship — seems to unmoor some. The reactions they provoke are not grounded in philosophical reflection on AI’s role in our cultural landscape, nor in historical analogies to sampling, montage, or symbolic recursion. They are, rather, spasms: affective seizures in the presence of form untethered from familiar authority. And in that, one suspects, lies the true scandal.


One begins to suspect that the algorithm has not created a crisis of originality — it has merely revealed how little of it was ever there to begin with.


The truth is this: the small, bitter minds that prowl the gutters of online commentary are not just annoying. They are dangerous. They function, psychically, as vectors of poison — desperate figures from the valley of despair, anxious to drag others into the abyss they now call home. Their rage is not philosophical; it is pre-rational. Like figures from a spiritualist parable, they carry decay as a vocation.


And so, before I risk renewing any naïve dream of making money from thought, I have chosen — for now — to retreat into a style more resonant with what we might still call academic. Not in the bureaucratic sense, but in that older meaning: a space of interior labor, of disciplined wonder. The following video is part of that effort. It is a morning essay, of the kind that might accompany a professor’s first coffee — not to instruct, but to spark: a conceptual prod, a turn of phrasing, a philosophical ember around which thought can gather again.

@TheSchoolofLife, @PhilosophyTube, @WirelessPhilosophy, @Contrapoints, @MajestyOfReason, @PhilosophizeThis, @BrainInAVat, @LetsTalkPhilosophy,
@Psicolosofia, @PensoLogoAssisto, @ImplicacoesFilosoficas, @FilosofiaAcademica, @FilosofiaNosTrilhos, @MateusSalvadori, @IluminismoPosModerno, @MeteoroBrasil, @IstoNaoEFilosofia, @Horazul, @CafeFilosofico, @Transe, @CGPGrey

#filosofia #philosophy #reflexão #conhecimento #existencialismo #ai #pensamento #sabedoria #inteligênciaartificial


If you are weary of content and long, instead, for reflection — this was made for you:

2 months ago (edited) | [YT] | 0

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

We thought we buried Plato. We thought we evolved past the Forms. But what if the scaffolding of modern thought—reason, science, language—still echoes his shadow?

This video is not about the past.
It’s about the ghost still shaping the present.

📺 Watch here:
👉 https://youtu.be/wnuP-zjbwhY

#Plato #ModernPhilosophy #IdeasThatEcho #PhilosophyTube #LegacyOfThought #Platonism #TheForms #AIAndPhilosophy #HistoryOfIdeas #PhilosophicalEssay #EchoesOfPlato

3 months ago | [YT] | 1

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

I should clarify something — and I say this with some reluctance, because I don’t enjoy self-promotion, and in fact it feels a bit uncomfortable to bring it up. But given the intensity of some reactions I’ve received on this small channel, especially when people encounter my work done in collaboration with AI tools, I think it’s necessary.



...while I don’t place myself among the ultra-elite of the academic world — I’m not a chaired professor at Oxford or a media figure with institutional backing — I’m included in the average. Maybe more than that. Most academics, frankly, never publish in some of the top venues I have the fortune to publish. Many build entire careers in local or lower-tier institutions without ever having a single piece go through that level of peer review.

But I never had the social skills to network properly in my field. My Brazilian accent and my difficulty expressing myself in English with the fluency of a native speaker put me at a serious disadvantage. I couldn’t pass through the gates — not because I lacked thought, but because I lacked the polish expected by the gatekeepers.

Now, with these new tools — video editing, voiceovers, ChatGPT to polish my grammar and fluency — I’ve found a way to express ideas in my own way. My work is like that of a director: you may not like the vision, but there is one. It's present in the structure, the pacing, the montage, the visual metaphors I choose, the songs I employ. And the incredible thing is: I can do it alone. Something that decades ago would’ve required a studio and a staff.

But instead of curiosity or dialogue, many people respond with hostility. As if I’m stealing something that belongs to them — people who, with their specific skill sets and, sometimes, the mere privilege of being born in an English-speaking country, have never had to fight for a voice. They still have the jobs. They still occupy the seats of prestige. And yet they feel attacked — just because someone like me found a backdoor into the room.

So yes, there’s fear. But there’s also cruelty. And what never ceases to amaze me is how deeply cruel humans can be when the structures that once served them begin to serve others.

3 months ago (edited) | [YT] | 0

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

100 Days Free – For the Few Who Got Here First

If you're reading this, you're among the early ones.
This channel is still small, still growing — but maybe you saw something here that felt real.

So here’s something in return:

🔗 Get full access to my course Before the Algorithm: Philosophy & Semantics of AI — free for 100 days
👉 Click here to enroll with the free coupon

🎟️ Coupon Code: 09BAB18BC2925D0B8D7C

This course explores the deep questions behind artificial intelligence:
What makes a thought thinkable?
Can a machine really mean something?
What happens when logic breaks down — and philosophy takes over?

We go from Kant to Wittgenstein, from Turing to teleosemantics, in search of the boundary between simulation and real understanding.

If that sounds like the kind of thing you want to think about — you're exactly who this was made for.

See you inside.

4 months ago | [YT] | 2

Fields of Mind: Philosophy Audio Essays

Let’s be honest: if I wanted to succeed on YouTube, maybe I should’ve stuck to “5 Ways to Stay Productive Like Aristotle” or “Nietzsche Was Right (Again?)” thumbnails. But no — I had to go and talk about semantic inflation, social trust, and the erosion of meaning in late-stage cognition.


Classic me.


Here’s the pattern (ironic!): whenever I really go deep — not “deep” like fake-enlightenment Instagram captions, but dense, uncomfortable, socially-anchored ideas — people stay. The retention grows. Slowly. Like a fungus. Or maybe like respect.


I’ve published papers in real journals, talked Kant with people who actually read him in German. And for a long time, I tried to play by the rules: clean thumbnails, simpler titles, less jargon. But the truth? The “accessible” stuff flopped. It wasn’t just less dense — it was less mine.


Then I dropped a video on semantic inflation — no compromise, no trimming, just raw thought — and it twitched. Not exploded. Twitched. And somehow that meant more to me than all the “maybe try simplifying your script?” feedback ever did.


So yes, I know this looks like one of those “I’m misunderstood, therefore I must be a genius” rants. But it’s not. It’s worse: it might actually be working.


And that’s the scary part.

4 months ago | [YT] | 4