One next thing you know, your back goes out, right? You're stuck in the bed going, I can't believe I didn't get a check sooner.  Get it checked. If the neck hurts, go to the chiropractor, do whatever you want. And I know a lot of people who are anti going to a regular doctor, they don't trust them, right? Cutting up, fine.  Do acupuncture. Do Reiki, whatever you want to do, but don't ignore the body this year. As a matter of fact, it's funny. I don't know if you have felt this to me, but the eight wants you to look good. So you'll literally look at the mirror, go, okay, I need to work out some more. Maybe I'll do my hair different, get some new makeup.  It wants you to look good.


Last year, MacGuffin County managed just two wins and the Hornets gave up over 400 points. This year, MacGuffin looks for a turnaround with a focus on defense. Tonight, we take you to Sawyersville in the huddle with the Hornets. Justin Combs is getting his second season started as the MacGuffin County Hornets head football coach. Last year, Combs was hired just four days prior to the start of the season and faced many obstacles throughout his first year, finishing at just two and eight on the season. Coach Combs has had a full offseason to get his team prepared for year two and the 2017 season. It's great to have a full summer. You know, we had a full offseason. We started lifting in November. You know, our season was over. We started lifting weights and we didn't stop till, you know, the end of June. So just having that, it's amazing. And now you get them in July. You can actually start working in that defense, offense. And I think we'll be pretty good. We got a lot of young players. We got we got a lot of them last year. And we're going to be in shape this year. So I think we'll play longer and play good. Coach Combs is pushing us real hard this season. This offseason, we've worked out a lot. Big year for us, I think. Been doing a lot of coverage drills, a lot of new pass options. We got a lot of people working at quarterback. Everybody working on new positions. Really just trying to get ready where most of my goals win that district championship this year. This offseason, Coach Combs has taken the time to address last year's issues. He believes defense will be the key to success and has put extra time in on the defensive side of the ball this offseason. Defensively last year, I didn't do a whole lot defensively with them. You come in four days before the first game. It's hard to put a lot of stuff in. Once we got to about the middle of the season, that's when things started working out. But we've been working defense really, really hard. Hopefully our defense is a lot better. They're excited for this year to get started. They have that competitive mindset that they want to go to the regional championship. They want Corbin. That's their goal. They want to get that foot forward and they want to keep going in the playoffs. Go Hornets. Bring it home for Goffin. We're bringing it home this year, guys. Come out and support us. Reporting for EKB Sports, I'm Logan Sales.


I'm sorry how often? every evening? at this time? at this time, just on sunset and where are they going? sorry, they're night-seaters, they're going and eating whatever they can find at night and then they sleep during the day down near the river but they don't seem to be doing much sleeping, they walk by and they're stalking they argue with each other a bit and so they fly in the evening and then and then and then fly back in the at dawn these are the stragglers, like 10,000 have come through so they do this every evening? every evening so they get what are their favorite food? mango, fruit? fruit and made in flowers so they eat flowers out of eucalyptus and melaleucas eucalyptus and melaleucas and melaleucas have you seen them? do you ever see them? yeah, yeah, someone's been on motion all right, I've been on the air, I've been on the air and you can't kill them, they're protective yeah and do they benefit the environment? yeah, they pollinate some planes oh right in the wild, they're pollinators so the sky was basically black with them yeah, yeah


Hey everyone, good afternoon. This is Gabrielle with Oxma Rotagrew. We're here at Oxma Toyota today And I have Chuck Schumann here with us. Now Chuck's going to be going over some interior features on the 2018 Toyota 4Runner, and this is the limited. So Chuck if you want to start us off that would be awesome. Absolutely Yes, so first thing I want to point out so there's a difference. There's different trims of the 4Runner This is 2018 no change from the 17s other than they made the headlights a little bit more aggressive But also when you get the limited you actually get this chrome strip right here on the SR5 and on any of the TRD off-roads It's more of an open-mouth look So this one's just a little bit more elegant a little bit You know nicer looking I think with that big silver smile right there in the center And then this one even has parking sensors on here So if you get too close to something that'll beep to alert you just a little stuff You know safety feature added bonus to having a limited But the reason you go to a limited is because of all the great features that you get So leather seats, these are ventilated heated leather seats power adjusted seats and you even have a memory here You can program the car seat for you and another driver And then here's your park assist button that you turn on there This has an outlet in the back for tailgating or camping You can turn that on there as well and then hands-free control You can voice to talk for your radio and get it to set your directions because if you see there on the screen You actually have navigation in this one integrated so it's a map It's uses a map card and satellites and all that as a sunroof and these seats like I said They're ventilated so they can blow cold air and they're also heated So wintertime summertime doesn't matter when you're driving this you're gonna be comfortable It's very nice and your guests are gonna be comfortable, too It's got a huge backseat this actually folds down if you need a more storage space because a lot of people take These cars off-road they use them for camping You know going this car was meant to be off-road, right? But when these aren't you've got nice big back seats back here the recline You've got outlets there for your cuss your your customers Charge their phones and tablets and all that right there as well and then back here is really cool You got a lot of space and You've got this great all-weather trace. So if you have dirty camping gear bags You could throw it in here. You've got a JBL speaker here So really good quality sound quality and here's those outlets I was talking about before for tailgating camping any cool stuff like that and then here's the special bonus on this one Pull this out. Look, you got back seats back here. These actually fold up. You got a third row back here Keep them under this tray keep them clean and then when you need them you got it right there So I mean these things are great. They're iconic love the forerunner Yeah, well, thank you so much for going over some of those features very nice Absolutely. All right if you guys are interested in this vehicle would like to take one for a test drive Take a closer look at one. Please. Let us know you can give us a call Phone number you can reach us on is<PHONE_NUMBER> You can also visit our website oxymertoyota.com and I'll have a link to this specific one in the comments below So, thanks you guys for watching. Bye guys


The National Education Martyrs, the academic and other activities have been paralyzed that the Amadobello University Zarya in Kanduna State as a seven-day warning strike by the senior staff Association of Nigerian Universities Sanu and the non-academic staff union Nassu enters its second day. Now the Sanu members at the university attributed their strike actions to the federal government's failure to pay their formants with health salaries and other earned allowances. The chairman of the Joint Action Committee, ABU Zarya Chapter, Mohamed Yunusar urged the government to reconsider their plight. The situation guarantee will help salaries. Actually, you know, it is not an easy situation with the inflation in the country, things are rising off in the market every day on daily basis. So the situation wasn't easy for us and especially now with the increase of the the deal of the 12th society on daily basis prices of commodities are increasing and now without the formance salary it is not easy for us to pay our school fees, our children's school fees and also do the other unedified within the houses. So it's not an easy thing for us all of us. There is no way any function in the university can hold without members or non-teaching staff. On this ground we decided to put down our tools and embark on this strike, demanding forward our request for the payment of our own with health salaries. The aggrieved worker has also lamented the high cost of living which has made life difficult for them and their families. Light is sift, water is sift, the several of the universities also sift, there is no internet facilities, libraries, all the gates are closed, our lecture theaters are also closed. We will not allow because these areas are all areas of concern, the university health services, the book matron unit, therefore we are asking the prayer government to meet advance by paying also the non-teaching staff, their formance would help salary as well. The prayer government also in 2023, promised paying us 50 million as a raise of an allowance. This one was also budgeted in the 2023 budget.


Design the ultimate tree house Start with a tree. Maybe you'll have a wide oak tree or a tall maple tree or a towering pine Just don't choose a cactus. That would hurt Next think about the design What will it look like? What shapes will you use? What features will you have? Will you have a bridge or a staircase? What kinds of windows will you have? Will the doors swing open or will they slide up? Or maybe you'll have a trap door What furniture will you choose? Maybe a recliner or a beanbag chair? And what will you do for fun? Will you have a television? Video games, a ping-pong table, a library, and maybe a makerspace with robotics or a water balloon launcher Your decision It's your idea So plan it out and describe step by step how you would make The ultimate tree house


Hello everybody. Welcome to the next session of DevConf 2022. My name is Andrey Veselov, and me and Richard Philo are moderating this session. This session goes live, and feel free to use chat and Q&A section for your questions. I think the speakers will be able to answer them in the end of the session or during the session. And next up, we have Maria Nubala, Maria Lordin, and Sumatra Mukherjee, speaking about federal community outreach revamped. And from this moment, I'm giving one to our speakers, and see you soon. Awesome. Thank you, Andrey. Appreciate it. So very quickly, we'll do an introduction for the folks who don't know us. I'm Maria Nordin. I am Fedora's Community Action and Impact Coordinator. I've been a part of Fedora since 2013, doing Fedora badges and graphic design on the design team. And I've stepped into the F-cake role at, like I was saying, the very end of 2019. And I've been doing this for about two years. Mariana, do you want to go next? Sure. Hi, everybody. My name is Mariana. I am a Fedora contributor since 2016. I have been mostly helping with community and outreach matters. I am not a redheader. So, yeah. Sumatra. So, I am Shumanthra. I work for the Q&A team, specifically the Fedora Q&A team. And my work is to organize test days. And other than that stuff, I help Maria and Mariana, you know, write the docs, push things to, you know, this awesome thing that we call revamp of the community, which will be talking more about it. So, Mariana, what's your day job? Sorry, I am a product owner. Yes. Yeah. And I'm sure you kick butt at that. Okay, cool. Thank you. So, let's get into this. A lot of people who are here, who might have kind of seen our story all along, we've presented at plenty of conferences, but there's some who haven't. So, we're going to try to give the background part kind of quickly. Feel free to drop questions into the chat, into the Q&A. The Q&A would be preferred. And we'll try to leave some time for questions. And we have something cool and new to show off today. So, we want to make sure there's plenty of time for that. So, I'm going to get into it first with how did we get to the community outreach revamp? So, you've heard us talking about this for almost a year and a half now. So, how did we get here? The Ambassador program in Fedora is a long-term program. It's been around for 15-plus years. And it's had a lot of ups and downs over the years. It just steadily grew at the beginning and was this really amazing thing. But as it continued to grow, it didn't necessarily scale. And it was not sustainable in the structure and format that it was. With that, tied with some changes with how money was distributed and how those decisions were being made, caused kind of a rift. And people ended up kind of leaving the Ambassador program, not being as excited about it. There was some unclear communication about changes. People were burnt out and we didn't have new folks to step into their shoes. People were feeling a bit unrecognized. There was a shortage of mentors, as I mentioned. So, I came in end of 2019, as I mentioned. And one of the first things that happened was somebody started the Ambassador conversation again. And I had had some inspiration about how to make some change happen from a book club that I'm a part of. And so, I came up with a proposal to the community. So, this was going to be an objective that would revamp several of the outreach teams. So, we have kind of a cluster of them that have merged and grown out of these different changes in our community. So, we wanted to bring together ambassadors, join-sig, advocates, commops, all these teams that were kind of half-functioning and bring them together in a streamlined way. So, the desired outcome is for all of these teams to function successfully. I would say we're three quarters of the way there. And at the end, the team should be feeling reinvigorated. And the title of the book was Switch, How to Change When Change is Hard. That was a really, really good read. I would suggest it. And another desired outcome is to rebuild contributor fulfillment. We want people to be happy about it and feel a sense of pride in Fedora and not feel negatively about their ambassadorship experience. So, that's kind of how we got here and these outcomes that we were trying to shape. Over to you, Mariana. Thanks, Marie. So, when our team of three was formed in the beginning, we gathered together all the resources that we had and we came up with a plan on what we wanted to do in the upcoming months. I will briefly mention what we have done so far. We have conducted some mind-share team interviews from different mind-share representatives. We have conducted the community outreach survey, which is my favorite thing that we have worked on because... So, this is a survey. But the results reveal something very interesting. We realized that people do a lot of Fedora stuff and they do not let the community or mind-share know, which means that there is quite some Fedora activity out there and we're not aware of. Because we also had the experience from this survey, we helped with the community engagement survey that the council published. We have worked on the old handbooks, which I will explain a little later. We had an outreach design intern over the summer. We had Daria that helped us create some amazing graphics and logos for the different mind-share teams. We have been tracking our progress so far with public meeting notes. We have a public hack and D file. You're more than welcome to check what we've been working on. We meet every week and we keep notes. And we have been trying, not achieved, to publish monthly posts on the community blog. I cannot remember when was our last update on the community blog, but I hope our next one will be with some pretty big updates. I think it might have been December. I think we've done... We have a better track record than you remember. Okay. I'm happy I'm wrong. All right, this one's for Samantha. So, yeah, like Mariana said and like Marie exactly mentioned, we just don't write a lot of blogs or rather try to communicate back. We actually go reach out to contributors, run polls and stuff like that over a lot of events. And we have been doing that primarily for the calendar events for Fedora, which are the release parties and the Nest. But other than that, we have also been trying to reach out to other open source conferences such as DevConCZ, open source account community central, which is a web show that my friend had specifically from projects and initiatives. Other than that, we have been actually doing a doc stream or what we call as kind of hackfest. We bring in a lot of contributors from across open source projects that help us, you know, write out some of those docs and look at some of these docs and give us some suggestions how they're going, so on and so forth. So, we have been pretty much establishing our presence of this revamp in every other way we can. Next slide, Marie. And as a result of which we have some of the stuff which are completed exactly like Marie mentioned, we are almost there and the whole idea of this being this thing being in progress is some of the stuff requires updating every month, every more frequently as we get more feedback from the community as more people join. So, we can never call it complete, but the fundamentals of the structure and the docs is complete. We're going to have something to show off by the end of this presentation. Stuff that are complete right now includes the documented process of how, you know, our mind share reps perform or rather what are their job roles as a matter of mind share, how they perform, what they do, how you can reach out to them, how they can help you inside for our community, so on and so forth. We have been trying to go out there and write these role handbooks which describe how, if you're a part of a specific team, how you would do or participate in community outreach as a part of that team and we have tried to run that down as a part of role handbook which is going to be shown off again. We have tried to go out there and done two health surveys by which we kind of gather the sentiment around how the community is thinking about ambassadors, programs, so on and so forth. We have, we are trying to repeat this process of informal polls which is basically like we would go out there, go certain amount of questions and try to garden responses around how the community is doing what we can do to meet, you know, if there are some feedbacks around this is not going in the right direction, how can we do something in that area. Moving on, something that's in progress is we do look at all the pages of role handbooks as not yet so much complete but we look at it in progress. It always needs to be translated into multiple, you know, languages and we propose five to eight key languages. So yeah, we are trying to go there. We are going to have, you know, a monthly ambassador call from here onwards in some days which would be again talking to, releasing with ambassadors and trying to figure out how we can make a better marketing plan or a much better way to make sure this can be executed and sustained in the coming days. Back to you. Cool. I think this one's actually Marianne. Yes. So our latest thing that we worked on was to update documentation. So our goal was to bring together all the pieces of documentation in one place. The Fedora project is a huge project which means that there are resources and documentation and information about the project in so many different places. So we wanted to create a place where we will be able to bring everything together. We have been working in two-hour, three-hour sprints to complete our documentation. What we did was basically to go through old, wiki pages that had not been updated. We took some pieces that still apply to the way the Fedora community is to this day and we also created new documentation for new processes because we also realized that now with COVID, even community meetups and conferences and everything will not be the same as it was before it was very local and people had local communities but now we see people gathering together online from all over the world. So this is something we didn't have or it was not that common before the COVID era. So we have collected in one place text documentation. We have brought together all these amazing graphics and logos and different media types that we had and also created new. We have the new slide deck that we're also using for this presentation. This is I would say 90 plus percent done.  I mean it is published. It is there. Just we need to check one last time that everything is as we want it to be. At this moment we would love to hear your thoughts on it and if you would like to help and or suggest something, we'll be more than happy to hear your feedback about this. You can check the QR code. It leads you to the page that Marie is browsing. Yeah Marie. So Vickal is asking where do we request that? So a great place to bring that up would be the MindShare IRC channel or chat channel wherever you access that because we're all in there and MindShare kind of oversees this. So we'll make sure that it gets incorporated. MindShare is a great place to bring any suggestions. If you have a more detailed thought or idea you want to bring you could open a ticket on MindShare or you could open a thread on discussion under ambassadors slash MindCo. I think MindCo is the tag there. So that was the really cool thing we wanted to show off which was our updated documentation. Super excited about that. Love seeing all of the work, the different pieces of work that we've done over the last year and a half finally coming together into one place that's very cohesive and ultimately like as Marianne was saying and Asimantra was saying when we start this call we're going to need feedback from ambassadors on these documentation. Like is it useful? Is it working? What can we add here? How can we do this better? Because we're just three people. We've gotten as much community input as we possibly can but once again we're just three people and we only have our own perspectives. So we're looking forward to that moment when we get to talk to ambassadors more in a monthly way so we can kind of all get on the same page. So what are the next steps? We're wrapping up that documentation that we were showing off and we want to work with translations team to get that into more languages. I think we want to refine it a little bit before we get that work done so that we're not overworking translators for no reason but we will continue to develop a rollout plan. So that's kind of that marketing plan. We want the ambassadors and the thorough community to be able to embrace this and start feeling like we're ambassadors again. So we have done all of this work and hopefully set up a great foundation for success. How can we bring people back and get people excited about it? As I mentioned, we want to start to test the process in the docs and make refinements. Work on scheduling some of the informal polls that we have developed. Wrap up loose ends document our process and of course we're going to continue focusing on the things we've kind of been looking at all along which is sustainability, empowering individuals to do this stuff with as little much little oversight as possible and providing those resources for those people who prefer to work independently, building in more recognition and listening to feedback, letting the community know that we're hearing them, trying to make changes based on that. So that concludes the newest updates that we have to share with you. Okay so there's some Q and A here so let's go with the first one. Okay congrats on your work. It's amazing what you've done but it looks to me that Comops is covering part of MindShare responsibilities. Are there common ground between both? So my understanding is that MindShare is gathering representatives from all across Fedora to help make the best plan and make choices for these outreach teams, right? So they're looking at budget, they're looking at all these different things but they see the entire picture of what we're trying to do with our outreach, right? So ambassadors can go to MindShare for help, right? MindShare is there to help ambassadors get done what they want to get done. So if you look at the documentation, we're looking at resources for ambassadors to go out and do the stuff that they're already doing but do it better. You have like slide templates, you have cheek cubes, you have pronouns to bring to wherever you want to go, you have logos to stick on posters and all these things, right? But MindShare is still going to be the entity that's making decisions about things like funding and about sponsoring events, etc, etc. So there is that division between what they do but they are both looking at outreach, right? But MindShare is looking at it from here and ambassadors are looking at it in their local regions. So does that help answer the question? And, okay, and also Sumantro, Mariana, do you have anything you might add to that? Um, I don't have something. Yeah, okay. Pretty much. Cool. So then let's look to the next question. Does this effort end at some point and leverage the work on the actual teams? Yes. So absolutely. And the three of us have been really pushing to get this done, right? So we had a timeline in mind. We've gone longer than that but we're three people in a pandemic. So we're just giving ourselves the grace and knowledge that we're also volunteering in other places and spaces and just being persistent with it, patient with it. But in the last three months, we have ramped up and we have done probably two sprint sessions a month looking at trying to complete this, right? So the next step is establishing that ambassador monthly call. Me as Fcake will probably be involved in that indefinitely. But for Sumantro and Mariana, I envisioned something more like three to six months. Staying at those meetings, answering questions, helping to do like changes with the documentation and provide like the historical work context that we've done with this. And then hopefully that means that Sumantro and Mariana can pull back from the revamp and myself too when we could just start participating and making things happen, right? And hopefully, hopefully, ambassadors will begin to be able to do in-person events again, right? And have some of the, some of our old standbys and what people are comfortable with and missing back again. Yeah. So if I can add something here, the whole revamp. So our job in the beginning was to analyze what was the problem, why ambassadors were feeling the way that they were feeling, why we stopped seeing events, et cetera, et cetera. So basically we saw what was happening. I'm happy that the revamp happened or started with the pandemic because we basically see now new practices that if we had done this two years ago, probably the pandemic would have wiped everything because some of this process applied only for online events, et cetera. So our job was to create documentation and processes and structure and call it however you would like to. So the different teams would continue their work later on. I am sure that in a few years from now, maybe things will change again, but the project is so big and there are so many people and every time somebody comes, they bring new ideas. So I am very happy to see that the ambassadors program will also change in a few years from now because it makes sense, right? Yeah. That's awesome. So one last thing I want to add to both Marie and Marianna's answer and to this question is when we started this thing, the only thing that concerned us the most was can we make a process which is very sustainable, is very lightweight and each of these teams, maybe the outreach teams would be able to take that along with them every time. The idea was not to create a bunch of processes and make it tougher and tougher for people to get in. It was easier, it was made in such a fashion that every single team can take to the minimum bit of work and still sustain all the contributors across releases. And that has been kind of put to the test with a lot of polls, a lot of matrices, a lot of data. And we can kind of right now say that we have somewhat of a sustainable mechanism or figured out a way that if every team follows set of practices, they would be able to actually sustain some of these contributors or at least know where they'll be going forward. Awesome.  Honestly, it's perfect timing and we're going to love having you at the Ambassador call, I hope. Yeah. We're almost out of time. Are there any more questions, comments, feedback for us? Yeah. Hi, Andrei. Hello. Thank you. I'm just checking if there are any more questions and Awesome. Discussions. Thank you very much. Thank you to all the speakers and thank you to the thanks to the audience. It was really interesting presentation. Thank you. Thanks for having us. So we, yeah, and we will announce the next speech during the break. See you in a few minutes. Bye.


I'm going to be talking about funding positive some goods. I'm Divya, I'm a political economist at Microsoft Research, the Radical Exchange Foundation, in the process of starting the Collective Intelligence Project. And this is really a concept I've been working out. I think it's a concept a lot of people here have been working out and thinking about. So this is sort of me inviting you into my process, so to speak. So it's not totally fleshed out yet, I would say. And I think as an intro, we're all here to enable positive some features. To align individual incentives with the common good. And this talk is really about how we can think about what constitutes that collective good and how we can better achieve it through hybrid goods funding and hybrid governance mechanisms. And I'm going to start out with something that we've all seen maybe a million times, which is this traditional two by two of how we think about economic goods. And these come with sort of implicit modes of provisioning, right? We imagine the state will fund public goods and communities will govern commons and the markets will sort of basically take care of the rest I think is the typical imaginary. But real life, as we know, does not separate super cleanly into these buckets. So we can imagine perhaps adding some granularity. We can imagine adding semi rival goods, which are only partially depleted by other people's using them, something like a museum where maybe it's a public good but really becomes depleted quite quickly if it gets crowded. And that's why these goods are often called congestible. We can add something like semi-excludable goods. So they're only partially excludable but not directly provided for cost. For example, something that is a PDF that has DRM on it so that it's difficult to share and to pirate. And we can even imagine possibly extending this into something that's more of a continuum. We can go from sort of rivalry to non-rivalry as a continuous sphere and same with excludability. And maybe that gives us a little bit more granularity. We get a little bit closer to the truth in terms of really determining where different goods fall. But I think the difficulty with thinking kind of in this flat space at all is sort of recognizing that these goods are not fixed into categories, right? I mean, I think that's a big part of the problem with these kinds of mechanisms, which is that where these goods end up is a matter of choice, not of pre-existing characteristics. And so it reminds us that goods aren't forever in one category or another. I mean, famously, the reason we have private property as all is because a lot of land was moved from that commons bucket into the private bucket, right? And in a lot of different ways, we can still do that for various types of goods that we might associate with one bucket or another. So the PDF we were talking about earlier, I mean, for that, excludability is a cost that we can choose to pay or not to pay. It's not that something is excludable by design, it's the fact that we are choosing to pay the money to make it excludable or not. So something like a children's playground, for example, we could easily make it excludable. You can build a wall around it and you can have someone outside and they can be collecting money for every kid that comes in, right? And we often don't choose to do that because socially, that's not the kind of world we want to create. And so there are certain things that we choose to pay the price for excludability on and certain things that we don't. And I think a general principle that kind of emerges from looking at this for a while is we often want to be closed or exclude as little as possible to maintain maximum increasing returns. So we recognize that there's some amount of excludability that enables innovation, that enables more provision and things like that. We want to do as little as possible of that for the maximum amount of return to the network. And so I think that's kind of the balance we're often striking and it's important to remember therefore that we can move goods around into this sort of more broad space of rivalry and excludability to sort of enable that outcome. And so we've seen that excludability is about cost, not about attributes. So are you willing to pay to make something excludable? Rivalry may kind of feel like less of a choice, right? Maybe you buy me on the excludability argument but you're not totally convinced that rivalry is also something you can move around which makes sense.  That's something that if I consume it you can't consume it. That's just a fact about that good. And that is true in some cases but I will argue that it's often not true. And I think that's because this two by two misses a crucial element which is anti-rival goods. And Evan and I have talked about this and I think he mentioned it earlier in the talk that I unfortunately missed. But anti-rival goods are goods that one adds positive value by using the good that can be experienced by others. Term was coined by Professor Stephen Weber at Berkeley to describe open source software but it can be extended to categories far beyond it. Discoveries and inventions like solar cells, that's an anti-rival good. The more people use it, the more that ecosystem grows and it's positive for everyone. Ideas are in this category. Systems of law and institutions are in this category. I mean, liberal democracy for example, one adds positive value if you participate in that system to others in that system. Protocols, blockchain protocols, standards like TCPIP. There are so many types of goods that underpin our systems that are really in many cases anti-rivalry. Sorry, anti-rival risk. And so what do we do with that, right? And I think there are a couple of specific things that we can keep in mind about anti-rivalry that help us sort of structure the types of goods that we might want to fund in this space. So one is that anti-rivalry tends to be systemic. So take something like language which is sort of a broadly anti-rival risk concept. Individual instantiations of this can be rival or not. A book can be very rival, a printed book, right? And it is a way that people get brought into this anti-rival risk network of language, but the overall system is better the more that people use it. If I'm speaking a language that no one else speaks, that's useless for me, right? I can own, the more people speak English as an English speaker, the better it is for me to speak that language, but very much certain parts of English are very much rival risk. So we have to think about this balance. And I think this is where we think about, it can apply differently to different aspects of the same goods. So think of something like a traffic light. The physical object is clearly rival, can't be replicated at zero marginal cost. Usage is non-rival, so unlike some of the book categories, if I look at a traffic light and stop, you hopefully are also doing that at zero cost to me. But at the systemic level, it's anti-rival. Following the rules of a traffic light, following broad traffic systems that we all mostly agree with, at least, it's much better for you if other people do it too. It's very difficult if people don't, right? So in fact, we realize that there are probably optimal trade-offs between rivalry and non-rivalry in particular instantiations that can create this anti-rival system. So that's one piece. And then the third point is with anti-rivalry, people don't just benefit from sharing. It's often the case that they benefit in a rough proportion to the amount of sharing. So this can change the way we manage goods. Instead of aiming for excludability, which we talked about earlier, sometimes you need to aim for excludability to enable innovation and things like this, we actually want to enable not only permissiveness, but to sometimes actively inclusion, because the shared benefit to the network is proportional to the amount of inclusion that you have. So these are different ways that anti-rivalry, if we don't think about goods in this way, we may forget that these are all kind of functions of anti-rivalrous goods that are different from the traditional categories. And I would say the conclusion from what we've gone through so far from the two by two, recognizing goods can be moved around and thinking about this concept of anti-rivalry is goods can be made anti-rival and more important systems can be made anti-rival. And I would argue this is a core part of what we should be aiming for at a systemic level and trying to fund the commons or fund public goods and all of these kinds of things that we talk about. And on top of that, making a system anti-rival means quite strategically figuring out how to apportion exclusion within that system. So an anti-rival ecosystem definitionally requires funding some rival goods, some excludable goods, with things like communication networks and scientific research and institutions, you need to fund some of those things to make the network possible. And if we do the right balance, we may get something like positive sum networks built off of these anti-rival goods. And yet, getting that balance wrong, which I would argue we often do, means sacrificing huge amounts of benefit from people. And it's on that side that I think a lot of our systems are airing. So we can learn from things like the cooperative ecosystem, as Sarah talked about earlier, that have created these positive sum networks and are quite careful about not over-extracting such that they kind of don't create this balance of exclusion and rivalry and anti-rivalry that we might want to see. And I think to make this a little bit more concrete, I'll walk through some examples that I work on, but I think this is the kind of concept that people can definitely apply right to their own ecosystem. So for me, I work a lot on data governance as an input to AI and different types of governance, as an input to tech governance. And this is an ecosystem where I think we can all agree we're not really hitting the optimal trade-off between exclusion and rivalry and anti-rivalry, right? There are some inherent anti-rivalrous qualities to what data is for. There are some inherent concerns to sharing too much. There are privacy concerns, there are extraction concerns. And there are a lot of types of positive sum externalities that you can imagine from sharing data. There's a huge amount of input into scientific research. There's a lot of input into solving public problems. We saw this with COVID, we saw this with climate change. There's a lot you can get from more sharing. And yet we've set up a system where there are certain entities that end up hovering up huge amounts of this data to the detriment of others, right? So we've taken a good that could be non-excludable and could be non-rival. We've made it excludable, which sometimes is good for privacy reasons. We've made it excludable only by a few people and we've created an entire marketplace around preserving that excludability. So a bunch of what I work on is, and this is a picture from when I made less pretty slides for another presentation, but creating this kind of network ecosystem of data cooperatives and coalitions to mediate basically some of these problems, to make sure that we have more of a hand in when we're excluding people from certain types of data, when we're creating networks and when we're regulating that system as a whole, whether that is by platforms or by government, all of that comes into play in trying to create an anti-rival system. And another example that I spend a fair bit of time on is on internet protocols. So similarly, we created an ecosystem that's incredibly positive sum. Existing internet protocols, HTTP, TCPIP, et cetera, they are some of the most directly positive sum networks that we currently have used to transfer information in this incredible global way. And then there are varying levels of the stack that have gotten captured, right? We talked about identity earlier, just talked about data, payments, communication. These are things that weren't a part of that positive sum network to begin with and now have been captured by entities that provide them at high exclusion. And so we can imagine if instead we were able to build new protocols and standards that allowed for these types of things to be provided in a more anti-rival risk way, then the positive sum externalities we could enable would far outpace what is currently possible, even though what is currently possible is still positive sum. And so a lot of this is about balance. It's about figuring out who should fund these ecosystems and where they should be built. And in the case of the internet, right, there's a great prior because it is, was initially a product of public funding and private funding and academic research and civil society. And as that balance has moved away from being as polycentric as we might want it to be, we see more capture. And so I think this is almost a warning to both say, yes, things that are not purely public goods can be positive sum. So we don't wanna focus on things that are purely public goods. However, if we get the balance wrong, if we do too much excludability and too much rivalry, if we build too much private capture into the system, we're no longer enabling all the externalities that we can.  Time is going faster than I anticipated, so I'll run through them really quickly. Local journalism, I think is a great one, right?  Clearly the market isn't providing what we needed to provide. How do we hit that balance? Data I already talked about. Social media platforms have anti-rival risk characteristics, but they could be enabling more positive sum externalities than they currently are, possibly through more open protocols. Scientific research, I know lots of folks are covering, so I won't get into it. Transportation networks, I think are like this. They're sort of the communication networks that we have physically, right? But I think the concluding point is, we can have these anti-rival positive sum networks, but we need to be hitting this right balance. And the last piece I'll say is one of the ways that we can do this is by implementing collective intelligence mechanisms. And this to me is really about aligning who has voice over a decision versus who faces the consequences. And a lot of the spaces in which we see this balance going wrong is when these two things aren't aligned. When it's not the case that the people who are making decisions over the system face consequences over that system. And so we can build these kinds of collective intelligence mechanisms that allow us to align these things better and to make sure that there's a check on what people who are designing a system can imagine is the right balance to strike, to make sure that there's a check to say, are the people who are being affected by this also think that the right balance is being struck? Do institutions think that that's the right balance? Do private companies think that that's the right balance? Do stakeholders think that that's the right balance? Do citizens of a nation state think that that's the right balance? It's the only way we can figure out whether we're doing a good job in cutting off those feedback mechanisms at the root, which I think we're doing in a lot of these networks currently really prevents that from being possible. And so I think these are all sort of mechanisms, technologies and systems we've talked about and we'll talk about in this ecosystem a lot, but these are ways that we can create hybrid collective intelligence mechanisms that enable funding positive some goods. If we're gonna break the binary between public and private, which I think we should, I think we should think about these things as networks instead of certain goods that are public and good and certain things that are private or not, then we need these checks and for public goods that check often comes in the form of the state. The democratically accountable state ideally does this for us, right? Maybe it's not perfect, but it should do it. We no longer have those checks if it's just the people in this room kind of thinking about what would be positive externalities and what wouldn't be the appropriate rate of capture and what wouldn't be. So I would urge us to sort of consistently go back to stakeholders and get a sense of if we're striking that right balance. And that's that. This is my exhortation to you. Thank you. I think we may have two minutes and 48 seconds for questions. Cool. I mean, I had a question. So do you think, are there any heuristics while trying to build towards anti-riverly? Sorry, I'm not mispronouncing it, but you know what I mean. Yeah, it's funny. I kept getting my autocorrect to like anti-viralty. Yeah. Which I think is, yeah, Polish pronunciation, sorry. Appropriate in the age of the pandemic, which we need to capture with anti-rival risk codes. But anyway, yeah, I think there are definitely ways to measure network effects, right? There are ways to measure externalities that we've already talked about. If we think about something like carbon markets, for example, I mean, the idea there is you try to measure a type of externality that we haven't previously measured. I think that type of accounting can be taken in other spaces. One thing that I've advocated before is labor market externality capture. Can we figure out if a technology is having positive effects on the labor market or not? And is that something that you can price in and create these collective intelligence mechanisms around? So I think in that way, we have some of the underlying mechanisms that can do that, but we need to be using them to capture different types of externalities than we currently do, because a lot of what we want to capture is not priced in. Cool, one more question. Thank you, that was really great. So yeah, we talk a lot about DAOs, we talk a lot about crypto-economic systems, and I really love the point that you made about kind of blurring the line or introducing a continuum from public versus private. And we've seen this in traditional business entity structures from for-profit, non-profit, now in the middle you have public benefit, right? And there's only what, like 3,000 public benefit corporations right now, I think, last time I checked. So what I would really be interested in are, do you have any kind of thoughts or maybe suggestions or directions as to how we could from the ground up from a governance using Web Zero technology to embed maybe certain governance mechanisms or business entity structures to be anti-rivalers from the beginning, right? Yeah, definitely. I mean, I think there's a lot of interesting work happening here. I work with the Exit to Community Network that kind of tries to do this, right? How do we have some community ownership built into companies from the beginning so that they can start including these collective intelligence mechanisms? Gitco and I know is speaking next, I don't see Scott here, but I think that their model is a great example of what this could possibly look like. And I think this is where mechanisms come into play because if you can set up, and mechanisms don't just have to be technology, I mean legal trust, purpose trust, there's an organization called Purpose that works on this. If you can set in different types of outcomes that you're optimizing for into a charter early, right? Then that is the same as having some sort of technological mechanism that holds you to capturing externalities, for example. So I think both on the tech side and on the legal side, there are lots of different kind of adjustments in corporate governance structure that can get to this point. And some of that means public pressure as well. Like some of that means now we care about whether a company is carbon neutral or not, that's the kind of thing that we could expand a lot into the different types of positive, some things that we can imagine companies could do. Cool, awesome. I think that's kind of the, pretty much. Is there one more question? One more quick question? If not, that's the time we'll have. Thank you so much. Yeah, this was awesome. Thank you.


Welcome to this 21st lecture of this course on Aspects of Western Philosophy module 21st. In continuation with the previous lecture, this is again trying to give an understanding about Immanuel Kant's philosophy. In the previous lecture I have mentioned Kant's philosophy is known as the critical philosophy because it is basically engaged in a kind of critiquing of human faculties. And for Kant there are fundamentally three faculties of the mind which is related to knowing, willing and feeling roughly can be divided into pure reason, practical reason and aesthetic judgments. And the previous lecture and this lecture would are focusing on the first critic, the critic of pure reason which is also the name of Kant's major publication for the first critic. And the previous lecture we have trying to introduce this whole process of critical philosophy and how Kant has started his examination of pure reason. And this lecture would be actually trying to understand what is this critic of pure reason all about, what is it trying to achieve. So there are three basic aspects of the critic which are known as transcendental aesthetic, transcendental analytic and transcendental dialectic. The transcendental dialectic part we will probably discuss in the next lecture. We will just mention about it, but we will discuss it in the next lecture. This lecture we will concentrate on the first two transcendental aesthetic and transcendental analytic, that is what we do when we discuss these two issues, the forms of sensibility and categories of understanding. And by elaborating these two the transcendental aesthetic and transcendental analytic we would attempt to explain the process of knowledge acquisition in the sense in which Kant was trying to elaborate it. And then finally we will see the concepts of phenomena and phenomena or rather to put it the other way, the reality which is known to us, the reality which is understood by us and the reality those capital R, if at all there is a reality, that reality which is unknowable and for Kant there is no doubt there is, there is a domain, there is a realm of things in themselves for Kant, though Kant again was categorical in saying that this is unknowable. So this is the famous Kantian agnosticism. So these are the issues which we are going to discuss in this lecture. So we will start with what where we have stopped in the previous lecture, the possibility of synthetic a priori prepositions. This is the central problem in Kant's critic of pure reason. So that is why it keeps on repeating these issues. So what we have seen yesterday was that synthetic a priori prepositions are on the one hand they talk about the world, on the other hand they also talk about us. So these two aspects of internal and external space, the outer and inner space is brought together to explain the process of knowledge acquisition by Kant. The synthetic aspect presupposes experience or percepts from an external source. So this is a very important step when we try to understand Kant's critic of pure reason, particularly the critic transcendental aesthetic part of it. Because the transcendental aesthetic part deals with this percepts or the experience or the sensations that we receive from an external source. Then also our experience of the world must be perceivable and it is about the world. So that is what the synthetic part of it deals with. And the a priori part deals with presupposes certain elements that are not derived from experience that are given a priori not which is the result of experience. The mental counterpart something which is innate what the mind contributes I mean real knowledge the scientific knowledge when he talks about the scientific knowledge. This knowledge is constitutive of synthetic a priori prepositions not synthetic a posteriori. They are not scientific they are just commonsensical like when I say it is very hot outside or it is very cold inside. These are all not very scientifically tested statements this is my feeling. Another person might contradict me by saying that no no no it is very hot inside this room. So these are all subjective feelings but scientific knowledge cannot be subjective feeling. For example when I say the temperature in this room is 25 degree centigrade which is this cannot be your feeling this is based on certain data which come from outside and also something which we contribute to understand to conceptualize this data in a particular way. So there are certain things crude data which comes from outside and this crude data is ordered by the mind. This ordering business by the mind is done by the a priori structures which the mind possesses this is Kant's theory. So synthetic a priori prepositions would explain this synthetic a priori preposition would if you analyze such prepositions you will get the structure of the mind you will also get to know how knowledge is possible. You can develop an epistemology for natural sciences. You can overcome the humance skepticism. You can overcome the kind of dogmatism which was involved among the rationalist philosophers and come up with a more comprehensive well balanced theory of knowledge which Kant was aiming to attain. Now our experience of the world must be thinkable as well. So on the one hand our knowledge should be about the world but it is not that we are just a photographer whatever is there just copying no we contribute to that that is the Kantian point it is about ourselves. The way in which we think about it the way in which we conceptualize about it in order to think about it in order to conceptualize about the world we should process the instruments by means of which we conceptualize and think.  This is why in the previous lecture I mentioned Kant has introduced something called a Copernican Revolution philosophy. This is how Kant has introduced it. Kant made the human mind at the center of the knowledge acquisition process like Copernicus made son at the center of the universe. Now preconditions of knowledge what are these preconditions of knowledge knowledge is possible only about the world that we can experience there you know it is empiricism it is nothing that you know something which we come with but there should be a world and experiential knowledge is thinkable only if there is some regularity in what is not apparently it looks that Kant is referring to or subscribing to a kind of fundamental empiricist principle which asserts that all knowledge is a result of experience that is true all knowledge is a result of sense experience sensations and perceptions are important. But this sensations apparently the crude data which we encounter these sensations in its first encountered by the mind itself comes to the mind enters the mind in an ordered fashion. So, before it reaches the mind or rather the process of encounter itself they are ordered in a certain fashion. So, there is a regularity in which it is known it is possible only if there is some knower in whom that regularity can be represented. So, what Kant says is that this regularity cannot be seen there in the world out there in the world we never know this regularity needs to be located within ourselves within our mind concepts without percepts are empty and percepts without concepts are blind this statement is again another very important statement by Kant concepts without percepts. So, just by having an innate structure of the mind without having this percepts which come from an outside world then it is going to be empty. Similarly something which comes from the external world, but there are no conceptual background from which we can order them and regulate them and understand them then it would become blind. So, clear understanding knowledge is possible only when concepts and percepts come together when there is a cooperative endeavor activity of both concepts and percepts. Now, let us see the beginning of knowledge what happens the process step by step the only way in which our knowledge can be relate can relate immediately to objects is by means of an intuition. So, here he talks about an intuition intuition is some sort of a sensible sensation in the sense in which Kant uses it and an intuition can take place only in so far as an object is given to us.  So, what is it there should be something in the outside world that actual water bottle should be there in the world. Now, human subject must be affected by the object in some way. In some way you know it should affect me it should have an impact on me the capacity, but again it is very interesting the capacity for receiving representations of objects by being affected by them is named sensibility. So, to get a sensation when I see this bottle water bottle I get certain sensation some shape some color which the empiricists were talking about. So, this is called sensibility and here he agrees with empiricism, but there is a very important aspect of human thinking which is called the synthetic function of thought I mentioned in the previous lecture that you know typical synoptical mind of Kant who is trying to synthesize reconcile the different tradition. So, here he says that it is true that something should affect me there should be an impact from an outside world, but there is a synthetic function of thought which needs to be recognized that it refers to the constructive power of the understanding. What is that constructive power mind is active even when the sensations are received from outside it is not that mind is a passive receiver or a passive spectator of sensations. The mind does not work like a camera which just takes what is out there, but it is an active counterpart in the process. The sensations are not received passively by the mind opposes the photographic theory of sense perception which was actually very common among philosophers and perceptions are produced by the active working of thought upon the sensory material. So, the human thinking process is already in under operation. The mind is already active the moment sensations are received they are received in an ordered regulated fashion they are not just dumb to the mind. So, that the mind would encounter a kind of chaotic bundle of things and in this sense we can say that every seeing is thinking every seeing is a process of thinking. So, here this figure will give you an understanding about what happens when the synthetic function of thought and this will also give you a kind of summary of Kant's philosophical program. So, you have the synthetic function on the left hand side of the mind there are three phases of our thought activity in the first phase you have sense perception. The second one is relating various perceptions with each other and the third one is making inferences from that. So, these are the three phases of our thought activities and which will lead to three corresponding faculties. Sense perception would lead to sensibility which we have already explained relating various perceptions lead to understanding and the third one inference is leads to the faculty of reason. And again Kant's whole program is concerned about these three things the first one is transcendental aesthetic second one is transcendental analytic and the third one is transcendental dilating. So, when it deals with sense perception and sensibility it is called transcendental aesthetic and when it deals with the process of understanding it deals with transcendental analytic. We are going to discuss these two things in detail in this lecture. So, what is transcendental aesthetic? The transcendental approach as I already mentioned in the previous lecture it is different from empirical and other sorts of approaches because a transcendental approach would focus on preconditions what are the a priori preconditions? It is not something which is derivative of or derived from experience it is something which even think about the preconditions that make experience itself possible. So, here when it deals with transcendental aesthetic sensibility what makes sensibility possible that is the question factors that are indispensable and necessary in the perception of all objects those preconditions without which perception of objects would never take place not the perception of one object a bottle or a chair or any of these particular things, but all the objects entire range of objects what are those factors that are indispensable for their perception elements present in the sensory process, but are not qualities of any particular object of perception. As I mentioned not dealing with one particular thing the part of the sensory process as such have an a priori and not an empirical origin these factors which enables us to have sensibilities to perceive. They have an a priori origin and not an empirical origins and they are transcendental. So, what are these two conditions? So, Kant's introduces two such conditions space and time and can cause them the forms of sensibility. So, these two are essential conditions for all sensibility they are called the forms of sensibility space and time every object the moment we perceive an object we perceive it in a particular space and a particular time it is situated in a particular place when I talk about this bottle of water it is there in my hand the place at this moment now. So, my understanding is this whole sense of time and place cannot be separated from my understanding my process of understanding my sensations or my sensibility cannot be detached from this spatial temporal organization which is so inherently present in it you cannot abstract it away and conceive of this bottle existing outside space and time all my understanding all my conceptualization all my imagination about everything is necessarily and essentially situated in space and time all sensibilities all perceptions. So, they are so fundamental there and this figure will give you an understanding about what happens in this process of sensibility. So, knowledge through senses there are basically two elements he talks about there is a variable element and there is a constant element whenever you encounter an object there are these two elements the variable elements and the constant element the variable elements are the qualities of the object which determine it and differentiate it from all other objects see I take once again the example of this water bottle it has got certain qualities which is variable which determine it the shape of it the color of it and certain other qualities which determine which definitely tells us what it is at the same time and again this is variable because this can change there are certain constant elements what are they space and time and space according to Kant is observed by the outer sense and time is observed by the inner sense. I am not going to the details of this because that is not in the scope of this lecture it basically deals with the common forms in which all objects of sense perception show themselves in experience. So, that is what the space and time means. So, they are not variable they are constant elements of any sensation about this world they are there the spatial form of sensibilities observed by the outer sense and the temporal form is observed by the inner sense this is what Kant says and again space and time when you talk about them they are not the result of inductive generalization of experience from where do I get this idea I mean it is part of it is not something which I derived from my experience again constant elements in the objects of perception things appear in space and are connected with some point or period of time. So, space and time are indispensable all experience is conditioned by space and time all my experiences and this is quite obvious in the case of day to day conversations as well without the very process called grammar in language is based on space and time to very great extent on time because we would not make sense if you do not use space and time categories and assume that the other person or other people would also understand it we would not make sense at all we would not be able to communicate with each other if you do not employ it when I say I came to this room 10 minutes back or 20 minutes back to give a lecture in continuation with the lecture I had given in the last week or whatever whenever I make such a statement I involve the space show temporal categories a lot this room space yesterday today 10 minutes back all these are temporal categories when I came. So, when I say I came it presupposes a place 2 places from somewhere I came from somewhere and I came reached this place. So, all these are so integral to our understanding and we cannot separate them from our conceptual processing they are common forms in which all objects of sense perception appear and show themselves in experience have their origin in the very nature of thought itself this is the point which can is trying to drive us to they are not the result of experience they are not being inferred from the process of thinking, but they are the very preconditions of thinking and their sources have to be they have to be found in the mind itself the structure of the mind itself or in the nature of thought itself quite interestingly that is where he calls them forms of sensibility the sensibility the sensations are possible in an orderly manner because of them. Now, they are a priori forms of the mind according to which it arranges the mind arranges sensations it is not that we are at first aware of unordered sensations and that we then subject them to a priori forms of space and time no that is not the case it is not that you know the first encounter with the world is with all these unordered chaotic data we never know that we never we are not aware of the fact that whether the data is order or chaotic we can always assume that it was chaotic and the mind imposes, but it is true that you know we cannot conceive this data as already spatially and temporarily organized ordered. We are never faced with unordered sensations all that sensations we encounter are already ordered and regulated in a particular fashion. So, that is very interesting aspect of can you know he introduces the active cooperation of the mental component the a priori structures of understanding are under operations at the level of sensibility itself it is not that at the level of sensibility you do not encounter any a priori structures, but just receive the data and then only when you it goes to the mind then the mind does all these business which the rash the empiricist were claiming it was not that kind of a picture which Kant is trying to advocate for him we never faced we never encounter unordered sensations the ordering is a condition of awareness or consciousness not a consequence of it. So, it is already there it is a precondition and all representations are determinations of the mind and when you talk about the forms of sensibility they are universal and necessary the space and time they are universal and necessary and all experience must conform to the constraints imposed by space and time that is the reason why they are called a priori they are called transcendental they are called preconditions. These forms are imposed by the nature of the mind which conceives them and they are the subjective conditions imposed upon experience by the mind and applied only to things as appearing to us. So, this is again from here we can see that Kant is trying to implicate that there are certain limitations to the application of these forms of sensibility as well we cannot just apply this forms of sensibility to anything on the one hand these forms of sensibility are necessary preconditions no doubt about it without that there is no knowledge without that there is no experience. On the other hand these forms of sensibility do not find an application on certain things like wherever you do not have objects that appear to us the sensibilities you cannot apply them say for example, God the very concept of God is by definition or by all human imagination God is conceived as an infinite entity philosophically as well as religiously God is conceived as an infinite entity who cannot be seen who cannot be sensed in the sense in which objects can be sensed. So, can we ever talk about having knowledge about such a God that is the question and if you follow this logic you cannot you cannot talk about God you cannot talk about any object which is not given to you through sensations if there is no sensibility there cannot be any application of these categories possible and without the application of these categories you cannot have knowledge. So, it says that these subjective conditions are applicable only to things as they appear to us and not applicable to things in themselves like God like Saul or any such metaphysical object which is metaphysics which is beyond the physical world. They are essentially conditions for the possibility of appearances. So, that is why they are called forms of sensibility it is transcendental aesthetic it deals with sensible object it deals with the world which we perceive and their reality according to Kant they are they are real one can really raise an issue whether if that is a case if they are subjective conditions of knowledge can you conceive them as real it is a very tricky question because it needs to first clarify what you mean by real if you mean by real something which is totally independent of the mind then there are certain reservations in accepting these forms of sensibility as real, but for Kant they are real Kant would say that space and time are empirically real, but transcendentally ideal they are empirically real means what is given in experience is in space and time in that sense they are real and they are transcendentally ideal because the sphere of phenomena is the only sphere of their validity and that they do not apply to things in themselves considered apart from their appearance to us. So, in that sense they are ideal transcendentally ideal space and time are not illusions for Kant they are real it is something very similar to the kind of I am not saying same, but very similar to the kind of distinction which the Advaitins make between the Paramartika and the Viharika levels of reality. And they talk about Maya the concept of Maya which is not an illusion, but something which when we talk about the categories the space and time the subjective categories finding an application on the data on reality that where the question is whether that can be conceived as ultimately real and Kant's answer would be something like they are not unreal they are not illusions, but there is a reality which lies behind or which lies beyond them the phenomena the things in themselves which can never be understood which can never be approached or exist with the help of these space and time categories and another aspect of is that we human beings cannot approach or understand anything without the application of these two categories. So, for Kant reality would always remain unknowable, agnosticism. Now, transcendental analytic the second part of his theory is transcendental analytic here it talks about the cooperation of sense and understanding in human knowledge as I mentioned percepts and concepts are essential without the cooperation of percepts which are senses and concepts which stand for understanding no knowledge is possible. So, percepts without concepts are blind and concepts without percepts are empty. So, now what is it human knowledge here there is sensibility where the faculty of receiving impressions are highlighted and on the bottom you can see the power of thinking the data by means of concepts which is called understanding and human knowledge is possible with the cooperation of sensibility understanding where the faculty of receiving impressions cooperates with the power of thinking the data by means of concepts percepts and concepts. Now, what do you mean by concepts? Because you basically what Kant means by concepts are with the term concepts he refers to a set of laws by means of which human understanding is possible a set of laws on the basis of which the mind organizes the data it receives from sensations. And what is this how can you legitimately say that there is a set of laws which deal with human understanding from where do you discover what methodology did you adopt to discover it. So, Kant adopts a kind of logical method he says that there is a transcendental logic involved because it is concerned about the a priori concepts and principles of the understanding and their application to objects again you can see the transcendental approach which deals with preconditions. So, Kant's approach is this the following that examine what are the preconditions of our understanding by examining our understanding of this world when I understand the world in a particular way say for example, when I am given an apple I understand it is an apple as a red object round with a taste with a smell and several other qualities how is this understanding possible. And here he says that it is possible on the one hand because as the previous slide indicates there is a faculty of receiving impressions present in me. So, that I would receive these qualities of redness taste smell etcetera in an ordered fashion and then further the power of the thinking this data would be taught about by the concepts by understanding. So, the understanding will put it in relation with each other and it forms a concrete shape it attributes a concrete shape to the data received from sensations and understand it as an apple. So, this cooperative activity is possible because there is something which is a priori concepts present in the mind. And studies the a priori concepts and principles of the understanding as necessary conditions for objects being taught just sensations would not give you knowledge you have to think about it you have to conceptualize it just sensing red color round shape would not give you any knowledge at all you have to conceptualize this red color and related with round shape and make finally, a kind of a picture of an apple and understand it is an apple only then there is knowledge. And this is possible when only there are certain a priori concepts and principles of understanding necessarily present it studies the a priori concepts of understanding by which the manifold of phenomena is synthesized. So, there is a synthesizing process that the mind performs by relating these ideas putting them together and relating them and finally, forming a concrete shape to discover the ways in which human understanding necessarily synthesizes phenomena. So, these are the processes which Kant is Kant tries to explain with transcendental analytic and the task of transcendental analytic is the following one to ascertain the a priori concepts of the understanding with an examination of the faculty of judgment or the power of thought. Second one reduce all operations of understanding to judgment. So, there is the fundamental question is what you mean by understanding when you understand something what essentially happens and here it is a logical examination of the process of understanding what logically what is the process that takes place in the mind when you understand something. Say for example, when I understand that this is a camera in front of me this is a laptop computer or anything this is a chair all these understanding which I have in my day to day life. They are necessarily involved in judging something as something when I understand this as a chair I am making a judgment this is a chair or when I understand that there are 20 chairs in this class I basically make a statement a judgment there are 20 chairs in this class or when I say the temperature is 26 degree centigrade again it is a judgment it is 26 degree centigrade or when I say that the clapping produces sound again there is a judgment about a causal relationship the clapping is the cause of sound. So, all these are examples which we can cite where we reduce all operations of the understanding to judgment and examine what are the possible kinds of judgments. So, this is a logical inquiry which can't conducts to judge is same as to think to judge is to think to unify different representations to form one cognition by means of concepts. So, these are all the things which we do when we essentially make a judgment we are thinking we are synthesizing we are uniting judgments synthesize representations by means of concepts. So, we are basically involving concepts to synthesize it to unify it. So, when I say there are 20 chairs in this class I am using concepts like 20 for example, 20 is a concept it deals with quantity then chairs when I say chair again it deals with an object with a particular shape. So, these are all qualities and quantities and relationships in this room these chairs are present in this room. So, I am relating the presence of 20 chairs with this room. So, a relationship has been established. So, all these processes involve what I would say making judgments synthesizing and uniting and here he talks about categories of understanding these are the categories by means of which we unite with synthesize we form concepts. Understanding involves a process of judging a process of synthesizing can seeks to examine the different ways of judging the number of possible ways of judging the number of logical types of judgments. So, logicians have done it traditionally logicians have already made a list of possible kinds of judgments and can just has to take them from the tradition the logical traditions only thing is that can takes it a little further and tries to identify the a priori structures that are operational behind the very possibility of making such judgments. So, is making an advancement from the possibility of this judgment to the kind of what you call the kind of structures that enable any one of us to make such a judgment. So, it is from a statement to the logical structure of that statement because any statement any judgment would be exhibiting a kind of logical property from that logical property can't infuse the logical structure of that judgment the logical structure is essentially an a priori structure for him it is not derived from experience, but it is the very precondition of all experience. Now, this is examine the reason why these and only these forms of judgments are possible each form of judgment is determined by an a priori concept. So, when I say 20 chairs 20 is an a priori it is a category of quantity deals with quantity 20 and it is a priori present in me the quantity is a priori that is the reason why I could learn mathematics. If the category of quantity is not there in me then I would not be able to communicate anything about numbers discover the fundamental synthesizing functions of the understanding in these a priori concepts of understanding and they are known as categories or categories of understanding. Now, categories of understanding so anyone who had heard about Kant's transcendental analytic would have heard about these famous expression categories of understanding which is so central in Kantian philosophy. The understanding is the unifying synthesizing or judging power which I have already mentioned and discussed it possesses an a priori categorical structure it necessarily synthesizes representations in certain fundamental ways according to certain basic categories and the categories of understanding are a priori conditions for knowledge their a priori conditions for the possibility of objects being thought the very possibility that we can think about object without the thinking component of part there is no knowledge possible. So, you have to basically think about it and when you think you are synthesizing it you are relating that different perceptions and synthesizing it and forming a concept. So, here Kant talks about different categories of understanding according to him there are four broad groups of categories categories of quantity categories of quality categories of modality and categories of relations out of in under each category there are three types of judgments corresponding to three types of judgments there are three types of categories. So, there are three judgments of quantity corresponding to them there are three categories of quantity they are the judgments of quantity are universal particular and singular and corresponding to that you have unity, plurality and totality. So, the category of quantity we employ these categories when we understand anything when you talk about unity of an object or plurality or totality, generality basically these categories we employ in our day to day conversation and in our scientific explorations and they are actually there in the mind, they are part of the logical structure of the mind according to can. And now when we come to categories of quality they are affirmative, negative and infinite judgments corresponding to that there is a quality of reality, negation and limitation. And this is category of modality where you have the judgments like problematic, esoteric and apodictic, the categories are possibility or impossibility that is why it is problematic, existence or non-existent corresponding to esoteric and corresponding to apodictic there is necessity or contingency. And the categories of relation is again a very interesting aspect because it is interesting because this is something an aspect which Hume has observations in accepting. So, there are judgments of categorical, hypothetical and disjunctive judgments and corresponding to them you have the categories of endurance and subsistence, substance and accident. Then causality and dependence you have cause effect relationship and you have disjunctive where community reciprocity between agent and patient. So, these are the essential 12 categories of understanding can never thought that this 12 is an arbitrary number. Of course, you can always I did there are criticism about against cans transcendental analytic by saying that why cannot we have more than 12. If there are 12 then why not 13, why not 14, why not more you can keep on adding to that, but what can would say is that this number 12 is not something which is arrived at in an arbitrary fashion. It has been arrived at as a result of a very detailed kind of logical analysis and examination. And basically he believed that all other so called categories can be ultimately reduced to these 12 fundamental categories. There could be more than 12, but ultimately all the other categories could be reduced to these 12 categories which are fundamental. So, let us see the process involved in this. The sensations cost by the world is primarily ordered by space and time or forms of intuition which we have already examined the forms of intuition come to play. And these ordered sensations are further categorized by the 12 categories of understanding as a result we get knowledge about the phenomenal world. So, this figure is an attempt to picture eyes what happens when we know the process of knowledge. So, you have on the left hand side reality which is unknowable according to Kant which is what he calls things in themselves. And we encounter this reality through senses. So, you have pure reason understanding the 12 categories and sensibilities of form and space and then you get knowledge or more clearly we will see this picture will give you a better understanding of it. Here you have reality which is called technically called nomina and this reality is being known through sensation. So, I have just mentioned sensation 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 because corresponding to our 5 sense organs. And these sensations are actually given to space and time which are forms of sensibility. So, they are already ordered before they enter the mind and the moment it enters the mind the 12 categories will be operating upon them. So, the mind in structurally constitutive of these 12 categories which would operate on these sensations received through the sense organs and are already received in an ordered fashion because they are ordered through the forms of sensibility of space and time. And the 12 categories will work on it and you will get knowledge which is nothing but phenomena. So, there is a definite gap between nomina and phenomena reality and knowledge about the world. What is the real world we can never know it there is a gap between nomina and phenomena because in between the nomina and phenomena in between reality with a capital R things in themselves and our knowledge about the world you have all these things the sensations and the forms of sensibility and the 12 categories. So, these are all subjective conditions which the mind imposes and there is no knowledge possible devoid of these mental subjective conditions of understanding. So, that is why Kant is an idealist that is why there is a Copernican revolution initiated by Kant because he places the human mind at the center. But one aspect of Kantian philosophy I need not say that explicitly because that is quite obvious that Kant would not say that this is a subjective mind mind of one person, but rather this structure of mind according to Kant is something which is universal. So, that is why it is transcendental a perception it is called. So, as I raise the question how can you talk about these categories of understanding. So, Kant says that there is a transcendental deduction is possible about these categories which would ultimately contain or consist of a justification of categories. You can justify this categories through this transcendental deduction where they are a priori condition of all experience they make all experience possible. They are conditions of the possibility of experience and. So, when we talk about these conditions as I already mentioned there are two types of them two categories of them. The first one is space and time the forms of sensibility, but there is a difference between them they are necessarily required in order that object should be given to us. So, the forms of sensibility are also preconditions they are also a priori conditions of understanding, but they are necessarily required in order that object should be given to us. Now, the categories are conditions which are necessarily required for objects to be thought. So, the first one is objects to be given to us the second one is objects to be thought and they have to come together with the objects given. Objects cannot be thought except through the synthesizing categories of understanding and it is in this context you have the distinction between phenomena and phenomena which I have already mentioned and this distinction is going to play a very important role in Kant's philosophy further which we would discuss in our next lecture. The entire analysis presented by Kant in critic of pure reason aims at drawing the limit of human understanding it is trying to understand the limitations of human understanding and Kant would remind us that scientific knowledge is possible no doubt. So, he is trying to overcome the human skepticism, but at the same time on the one hand he says that human understanding has the ability to gain knowledge, human understanding has the capacity to know there is objective scientific knowledge possible. So, in that sense skepticism is not entertained, but at the same time this knowledge has got certain limitations. This knowledge does not the capacity to know does not mean that human mind can know anything or human beings can know anything know there are certain limitations the limitations are imposed by virtue of preconditions. The preconditions are forms of sensibility and categories of understanding. So, without there are three things involved the first one is sensibility the forms of sensibility the sensations which are spatially temporarily ordered and the categories of understanding. So, only when these two things come together we can have knowledge, but in order to come together there should be two things one is a mind with 12 categories another one is a world with objects or sensations should come from outside. So, you need a cooperative activity of both with the cooperation of sense and understanding in human knowledge we get to know about the phenomena it is the world as we see it with our preconditions and limitations things in themselves or phenomena are always unknown and impossibility of metaphysics. So, Kant is trying to underline the impossibility of metaphysics impossibility of applying the scope of human understanding to know reality in itself or ultimate realities or metaphysical realities. So, in one sense Kant's work underlines the fact that metaphysics as a science is impossible human knowledge is always confined to the phenomenal world. The phenomenal world is a spatiotemporal world in which we leave and we can converse about each other with each other. So, that is humane Kantian philosophy in nutshell. So, in the next lectures we will concentrate on some of the implications of this and also his ethical theory. And so Kant's critic of pure reason is to understand the process of knowledge acquisition in natural sciences. How sensibility and understanding cooperate it is trying to explain the role of human mind is also explained with this notion of idealism. And the idea of independent reality would suggest the Kantian agnosticism and then it will also talk about Kant and metaphysics and also raises a question about morality which we will discuss in the next lecture. So, we will wind up this lecture here this lecture on Kant's critic of pure reason and his notion of human understanding and knowledge. Thank you.