@Moribus_Artibus
"Everything popular is wrong" -Oscar Wilde I can understand that pop is something that drives people together and that these people share a 'collective euphoria' but let us remember that the element that it uses to bring people together is something ridiculously base, vulgar and, at its core, commercial. Marcel Proust, Charles Dickens, and Lincoln were not followers of pop at all. What they were espousing wasn't commercial and mediocre, but rather glorious, almost divine! The worship of Britney Spears, Taylor Swift and all of these other American plastic dolls is nothing to be seen as worthy. Pop is a business that is all it is. Rather than make philosophy more public Why not make the public more philosophical?
@film8655
Such a dense video. Apocalyptic. Well done. By the way, I feel Michael and Gaga have been the ultimate quality pop idols, resetting the game of pop art and using their power to mentally inspire and educate the mass.
@crp5860
Thank you for this video. While going to school for philosophy it was impossible to ignore the overarching condescending attitude towards all things pop culture; I thought this was a huge mistake for Philosophy© so to speak--pop culture is a deeper well than it seems from which we ought to be pulling endless ideas, concepts, implications. I'm not saying it's all Dostoyevsky Pop culture draws from philosophy itself, many times without even knowing it. And you know what the masses LOVE more than pop fluff? Believing that their pop fluff is rich with some depth and meaning beyond an artist's PR team. People want to feel deep. If philosophy would just embrace the opportunity it has to capitalize on pop culture it could become a more useful and employable field of study again beyond, "hey, you know who loooves philosophy students?! Law schools! The government sometimes! Sometimes medical ethics..." At this point, pop culture essentially IS the culture of the West; hiding behind the stuffy walls of academia, pretending that this information should be made available and useful to only the "best and brightest," (or those who can afford it) is not only elitist but alienating and damaging to the field. Of course no one cares about philosophy anymore--those who practice and study it often believe themselves superior to popular culture, yet, they're no longer well-respected within their own university walls as STEM continues to dominate academic, cultural, and economic playing fields. Those interested in media, marketing, and pop culture are dismissed as fluff by philosophers who are often dismissed in a similar fashion by those who study and practice hard science, despite the historical courtship and blending of philosophical concepts and science/math. Let's take a show like Buffy, for example. The show provides more than one episode which pays homage to Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein," which relates to Prometheus, of course, and both of these parables relate to the depths of human nature and the question of free will and mortality and meaningful existence and societal norms. But beyond concepts that can be traced back and back and back to philosophical musings which might excite and satisfy an academic searching for meaning in pop culture, the more salient, and in my opinion, interesting point worth pursuing is why in the late 1990s, on the cusp of a new millennium which has proven dominated by technology, information, pragmatism, and shallow uses of such technology (social media, media hosting sites, smartphones, needlessly flashy laptops, tablets, and similar devices)--why are we still so haunted and touched by these concepts of the "id" and the self and free will? Why, when we have so many effectual Frankenstein's monsters of our own in the form of AI computers and humans who have been restored by machinery to keep them alive, should we still find these concepts relatably scary, no matter how diluted in presentation, despite it being familiar? What should be so scary or penetrating about piecing together a human life when that's exactly what we do all day through snapchat and instagram--configuring the representation of a human life which purports to exist only through idealized snippets of an existence? In my opinion, it's because, despite its own pretenses, philosophy is only an academic field of study by accident; it is a matter of fact that expression of deep or abstract thought or concepts was kept somewhat exclusive until the last century or so. In other words, it is a facet of us all--of any conscious, self-aware member of humanity, and I'd argue conscious, self-aware existence, period, (I believe certain non-human animals are capable of "philosophy" to an extent) to philosophize to some extent and the exclusivity of philosophy as a school of thought all on its own has more to do with its historical ties to the wealthy and privileged than it does to some very specific, intelligent mind. Do you wonder? Then you're a philosopher. If it weren't for its own pretentious attitude, philosophy would pair with pop culture like pb&j.
@mayflower2370
But instead of communicating things we need to know, like actually think for ourselves, the music industry is using this to appeal to a mainstream audience to make more money. The pop song with the strongest message that a lot of people respect used on this video is Imagine by John Lennon. That song is about imagining something that will never happen because we have been dumbed down to a point where we can longer make it happen. Basically, you cannot communicate philosophical and reasonable thinking through pop music methods because they only apply to simple minded people who will reject philosophy in exchange for happiness and ignorance.
@lisaseeman8196
Bon jovi's, "it's my life" is one of the best summaries of hedonism
@dipankarsemiphilosophicus
What about longevity? We definitely need to learn about Pop culture. But, not philosophically as it aims at the ways knowledge and higher truths are revealed and nurtured. One way they remain separate is that Pop culture does not have any application.
@UlfMTG
Great vid, as always. I was wondering if you guys had any plans on doing a video for Dostoyevsky? I belive he's a brilliant writer and thinker who deserves as much attention as other, more famous thinkers.
@GIJOERO
another great video
@general9064
"wrong side of heaven" - another philosophical song :3
@Kaiman477
Have you thought of establishing an awards for philosophical influence? It might give artists of all medians something to aim for and would certainly highlight which artists could aid them in different areas of their life... Just a thought. Great work all around, keep it up! 😊
@sirnatharius79
You should do a video on Noam Chomsky.
@9551744537
Great idea but few reflected in their music like Michael Jackson(earth song....).sure artist can entertain and they can also spread philosophical views like "peace"
@SheyMirza
Yeah for example only if Tylor swift, Katy perry, etc had a picture with a book in their hands in their social media posts... they could have a good impact on teens and thus future but they only show physical beauty.
@tommyebbs9399
While I found this video to be just as engaging and enticing as many of your others, I have to say that I do feel you may have been a bit overzealous with your claim at the end. Obviously, you have to make these videos in six minutes, so it's hard to compress all information and make it tangible but I do feel pop musicians have tackled philosophy rather masterfully in the past; I'm talking about songwriters such as Leonard Cohen, Bob Dylan, Patti Smith, David Bowie, Lou Reed, Nick Cave, The Smiths, and many more independent artists currently working in the field. To me it just seems this focused on the current pop and mainstream artists who are intentionally diluted and focus on more trivial matters, instead of ones who think outside the box and are more likely to have picked up a work of Kiekegaard and Adorno.
@Gabriel7839
Can someone do a summary of what this video reports to me please, i'm brazilian and i don't understand anything, i'm writing this here on google translator lol
@c.a.4349
Most pop singers aren't even talented singers... That's why a lot of them use vocal tracks during live performances and don't even sing. A majority of pop singers' voices are so indistinct, it's hard for me to even differentiate. I think pop has the ability to be powerful but instead it is just a formula used to make money.
@MEXgraff94
but if pop is successful, because of its disregard for subtly and complex ideas. Wouldn't trying to change the message it brings, to one of a "deeper truth", essentially remove one of the main reasons pop is pop? Look at the difference in mainstream rap vs underground rap as an example.
@nataliarodriguez3740
This is too much. Philosofy is love for knowelge and sharing it with others; pop's about transporting your money from your pocket to theirs, by exploiting your deepest emotions. It's like eating spoons of sugar and trying to feed on it.
@GrumpyStormtrooper
Can someone make a short recap? I don't get this
@abbeymaeliam1