Good evening, and welcome to episode 399 of the Private Property Podcast. I'm your host, Usamantama Kamalo. Just one episode away from 400, and we know that you couldn't have done it without you at home. Well, if you join us for the first time, you may start on some incredible shows. Do make sure that you go to our Facebook, YouTube, Spotify, Apple podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts to certainly catch up on all the awesome episodes that you have missed out on. And all our regular viewers on Facebook, on Instagram, and on YouTube, welcome to it. You know how we do. Every single weekday, you and I have an appointment at 7 p.m. We're always in conversation with a property expert who helps us make big property decisions.  And talking about helping you along in your property needs, whether you're, of course, in the market, or just looking to get a good sense of what some of the properties are out there, you can tune into the Home Shoppers show that comes to your screens every single Monday and Friday at 8 p.m., which takes you through exquisite properties that you can find on www.privatepotty.co.za. And on Tuesdays and Thursdays, Malinogov brings you the farming podcast tackling all things agriculture. I'm already using some of the tips that she's had on some of the shows for your home garden, and also doing my own gardening at home. Spinach is coming along nicely. My onions, I've given up on onions. Garlic is coming on nicely. The basil is coming on nicely. The beads are also coming on nicely. And I saw a cabbage that's slowly coming up. So I'm quite excited to see and, of course, monitor those developments in the coming weeks. And to get some of those tips and insights, and to also get you started on your farming journey, or simply your gardening journey, make sure that you tune into the farming podcast. And on Wednesdays, Estee Cranston brings you the first time home buyer show. She's always in conversation with people who bought that first time home buyer journey and have gone on to grow their property portfolios from strength to strength. Well, those are the great shows that every single weekday at 8 p.m., that you can look forward to right here across private parties, social media pages. Do make sure that you follow us across the various social media pages where we're on. We're on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube. You can find us on LinkedIn, as well as on TikTok. You can follow myself as I'm doing an underscore K on Twitter, as well as on Instagram. Well, to kick start our Monday edition of the private property podcast, I hope you stayed safe this weekend. We are seeing the rise in the COVID numbers, especially in Jovic. And I think the one big thing is that some people are trying to rebrand it as a new flu or beard flu. Just make sure that you're staying safe. I think rather air on the side of the portion as much as possible, as much as many of us are vaccinated. We also want to make sure that we don't catch it, right? I think that's the thing that we want to make sure we do not do. That's exactly why we're always here to keep you company along on your journey. And when it comes to keeping you company this evening, we're going to be looking at how landlords can attract occupiers in a post-pandemic world. And I don't even know if we're getting to talk about a post-pandemic world at this stage. I think what we can talk about is how we are creating hybrid work environments and, of course, want to make sure that we are catering to that. And to help us better understand and unpack this topic, I'm joined by Maggie Weber, who's the Head of Digital Design at Tetris in South Africa. Maggie, good evening and thank you so much for joining us. Hi, Summer. Thanks for having me. It's such a pleasure to have you with us on the show, I think before we even look at how landlords can do this, because I know people at home are thinking, oh, gosh, how are we talking post-pandemic when we are literally walking into a fourth wave? We're in the fourth wave right now, especially if we're in Khau Deng, as much as the alert level hasn't changed. We know very well that we are well in a fourth wave. And a lot of us are already anxious because we already know that Christmas and New Year's Eve are probably going to be on a stricter level, living in stricter levels in Khau Deng and probably going to end up having another indoor New Year's Eve, which I know nobody wants. But before we even explore that, I think first, perhaps share with the views of home, some of the trends that you've certainly picked up in this COVID era and how they've been fundamentally different from the pre-COVID era that we were, that I know many of us absolutely missed. So I think two things really come to mind when speaking about, obviously, within the pandemic and then looking forward to trends as we're lifted from the pandemic in some ways. And I think the first one is sustainability where that's become hugely important. It always was important, but in terms of bringing people back to the office and designing in a way that's comfortable for everyone. Sustainability is not just about hanging a plant for well-being in the office. It's really about creating a space which is inclusive and which allows you to do your tasks well. And then obviously with a major impact on the planet and well-being. So that's pretty huge in terms of what we've seen. And then the other thing would be the return to the office and the desire to be in the office, where the office spaces are home away from home in a way that they maybe have never needed to be, where they've become actually a sanctuary and a space where you can really work effectively and then go home and actually have that distinct switch-off time. So in terms of trends, I would say that those are the main ones. The sustainability overarching from within the pandemic now coming out of it. And then the return to the office being the one that we're seeing more prevalently and hoping to see much more even 2022. And you know, Maggie, when we talk about the return to the office, I know one of the key things that we're going to have to be mindful now more than in sort of a pre-COVID era is design of the office, how an office is actually designed. And I think beyond COVID we already know that a lot of scientists have said that we're going to live through another pandemic. And so if anything COVID in many ways is kind of a dress rehearsal for what may potentially come. So when we look at the importance of design, especially of course in the office context and knowing that not every kind of business would land itself to remote working. And others as you say, there are people who are mindful of working from home and want the flexibility of having a hybrid type model. How does design then come into place when we're looking at designing for a world where we're now very mindful of sitting too close to colleagues? I mean, we've just come out of the era of open plans and even have cubicles. We absolutely hated that. And now we kind of have to rethink because we can't be sitting, we're not that close to our colleagues at work. So how does design then come in in sort of helping us transition back into the office given our new fears more than anything? I hear you. And I think, yeah, I mean, it seems counterintuitive because we're distancing ourselves, but actually it's all about people. And so for us, I think to make the transition smoother as well as being safe, that's absolutely fundamental to the design and the expertise that we bring along to the space, not only to make it comfortable and look a certain way, but also to make it a safe space to be. And so for us, it's about engaging with and having the know-how to give our clients what they need to live, to work, to play effectively. It allows us to adopt a holistic approach by really listening to our clients and then creating an environment which provides this. So I suppose for us transitioning by looking into a workplace strategy, which is a massive part of what we do, alongside sustainability requirements and then regulations, we have the opportunity to design spaces which promote a safe working environment as well as one that's inviting. Like I said before, it's transitioning to a space you actually want to be in, you feel safe in, and it's kind of bringing you back together, regardless of hybrid and whether you're working in rotation to keep yourselves at a comfortable capacity of people. But design is definitely the vehicle to get you back into the office in a safe way. And I can see some of the love that we're getting on our Facebook page for our NSDK watching, Happiness Manila watching, Fatima Sadyen also watching, and taking our questions and comments this evening as we're looking at how landlords can attract occupiers in a post-pandemic world. And of course we are looking specifically at the office context and looking really at what commercial landlords or office landlords, what they can do to better attract tenants for their respective units. Because I think we sometimes understand, we probably underestimate how much work it requires to get a commercial tenant, even if you've for instance got a relatively small office and have a few units, you have to be able to offer different kinds of packages. And I think now more than ever, you actually have to be able to adapt to the needs of the respective businesses that are going to be in your office park. And taking some of those comments and questions, I see Matashiman is saying here, are employers willing or can afford to redesign their office spaces? I think that's such an important one. I mean people are already so financially strained, are there financial means for them to be able to redesign to some degree the offices in such a way that it doesn't obviously create an unsafe working environment given the COVID context that we now have to work under? So I'll answer the question first. Absolutely and that's why I would say that design is so multifaceted and it's really not about the curtains and the scatter cushions. It's really delving into the requirements as I was speaking about and for us, it's the full engagement of workplace strategy. So that would be working with your current assets, your current headcount with our space planners and workplace strategists to specialise their expertise in doing exactly that and making this new way of working possible. It doesn't matter whether you're in a small office or a bigger office and it's about education of different ways of working. So if you've got a financial constraint then maybe looking to a rotation-based model where I would sit at a desk some days of the week, then you would sit on that desk on the other days of the week so that we both have the opportunity to be in the office at certain points but then you're not having to buy two desks for one person or you can reconfigure in a safe way so that you're spaced apart enough that you don't have the same amount of people within the office. So that's a lot of what we deal with as much as we do with what looks beautiful and all the acoustics and everything else that goes into fit out, definitely the user experience is the most important thing and how you're going to function. And that's just a crucial one that because now you know longer looking at perhaps if you have a staff complement of 50 ensuring that all 50 have to have a desk indicator into having them all at work at the same time because I mean the fact that we'd all come in at work around about 839 and leave relatively the same time and don't have a staggered approach to how you know how we get to the office and not just for purposes of you know the office environment itself but even for the purposes of traffic I think the fact that we're not doing this at scale as a country is partly why some people end up getting stuck in traffic for such an extended period of time and we're now back to getting stuck in traffic unfortunately with so many people being back at home. Well what are the things that we're going to do we're going to go for a quick break see who the lucky winner of the competition that we are running is of course that's the competition where we want to find out from you some of the expensive advice that you have learned while watching the show we need 400 episodes in so there's quite a lot of advice that I'm sure you've already picked up on do share with us what that advice has been and you certainly do stand a chance of walking away with 500 rand in cash every single evening. My colleague I think I'm waiting for him to let me know how much we've got in the money bag I know we had a rollover on Friday so I'm not sure whether we've got a thousand rands or the thousand five hundred rands in the money bag and of course that is the amount that the lucky winner is going to walk away with. Well let's have a look at who this evening's a lucky winner is and that lucky winner this evening is no name or term congratulations to you you walk away I've been told we're actually back at five hundred rand so the winner on Friday did in fact claim the prize so five hundred rand is yours this evening learning good and all you have to do to get that money is of course drop us a message down here below I did see a post from learning her checking in early I hope she's still watching us live and if she is do drop us a message and of course you will walk away with that cash prize. Continuing with our conversation this evening with Maggie Whitster who's a head of digital design at Tetris South Africa looking at how landlords can attract occupiers in a close pandemic world taking your questions and comments and we've got a great one here coming through from Prince Jones my mother was asking what can I do to attract clients to small holding to small holding with office space and storage space of factory space a lot of people want to be visible next to highways and busy complexes and I think this is a this is such a great question because the reality of office space Maggie is it's in different kinds of environments so it isn't just one environment that is you know essentially close to the freeway but of course there are office parks that we've seen that are you know slightly more suburban slightly more inland so they're not as you know close to the major freeways or some of the major roads so how do you attract clientele in those kinds of you know office environments or certainly those industrial parks where there's also an industrial park and I see there's also a storage facility in that particular complex so my colleagues at JLL actually have a bit expertise in that part of you know the brokerage deals and in that part of this game so I suppose what I can answer in terms of design would be that the amenities or the surrounding the surrounding environment so I suppose on the small holding maybe it's slightly more remote and that could be a pro if that means that the you know you're not in the hustle and bustle so maybe you're not getting the advertising or the you know as people drive by they're not seeing you but in terms of people who want to work in a space that's not so good I suppose they could be pros and cons to both then it would be about the tenants experience as they work would be my answer to how you would get people to engage with that space and I think one of the things that we'll definitely do Maggie is you know invite one of your colleagues at JLL I mean a really great firm international and they really are the best people to be able to answer those kinds of questions when it comes to increasing visibility I think to to to a point that we're making earlier important thing of also pointing out different amenities because you also understand that from a budget perspective not everybody can afford some of the offices that are closer to you know the freeways and so what are you offering at that particular price point and given of course you know the various amenities that you can certainly have in your respective office park and and I think when we then you look at this particular one you know Maggie how what are some of sort of the best practices or how can landlords office landlords use inclusive design to expand you know their business value because I think this speaks to what is the business value how can you incorporate then design to you know almost add to what your value proposition is as a landlord so there's two ways to answer this so obviously from a landlord perspective and then from a tenant perspective so as a landlord the amenities and the you would offer as part of your building is not important so whether you have amenities within the building or if you have restaurants and gyms in surrounding areas that becomes really important you know initiatives where you're close to public transport so it gives people the ability to live work and play in one location so it shows a more it gives you more flexibility as the end user in terms of an occupier inclusive design speaks directly to talent retention so attracting a diverse work for gain engagement for staff who in turn would provide then broader insights into the clients of our clients and their business so I suppose that really speaks to driving productivity by designing inclusively it's really as important as we begin particularly to understand your diversity more and more and designing spaces so whether you're hypersensitive or hypersensitive there's a space for you to work effectively so that's how we we design as an exclusively extremely important for the business's productivity you know Maggie we reflected a bit about some of the trends in in the year that was nearly two years and past 18 months I think are there any design elements or certain design trends that you should be aware of in the built environment going into the new year so I know I've spoken about sustainability and I thought it was just important to share that you know you've touched on what draws people what draws investors what draws tenants and part of the research that we've done it shows that up to 73 percent of investors say that green strategies lead to higher occupancy higher range higher tenant retention and overall higher value so although I've touched on it for us absolutely it's definitely the biggest trend that's going forward and it's multifaceted in terms of sustainability of how you build how you design the choices you make the community initiatives circular economy in the local artisans that the local providers so it trains to for us it's a trend to local is lack of community and connection above all so how do we become both human in a distant world I am this evening this evening in conversation with Maggie Weber who is the head of digital design at Tetris South Africa and looking at how landlords can attract occupies in a post-pandemic world and we're taking your questions and comments this evening Menzi Bhutilesi saying I think some of the commercial property tenants should have a booking system for people that want to come into the office limited to the seats available but limited to covert compliance and landlords can enable this system and I think you know this is this is probably then the moment when I hear when I read a comment like this we're already just thinking of the we works of this world and and I think that that service is already there for the most part and it's it's got its own I think ups and downs any comment on that particular one maybe so we have moved from you know typically only be able to book out meeting rooms and definitely to book to desk booking systems so if you're looking at a much larger client who are multiple floors it's extremely important to have a desk booking system so you can see okay there's availability for me to work in these certain areas and you don't have to walk around the building a hundred times and go into different zones and touch things where you don't necessarily have to so desk booking is a real thing both within co-working environments as well as established clients who are taking up buildings with multiple floors and I think that if anything that that isn't an option available for you know people in some of these suburban areas where we already see that we work the workshop 27th you reaches and the likes you know very big players who are really doing that perhaps in areas where we don't see those kinds of services I think there's certainly an untapped opportunity there I haven't seen those kinds of opportunities for instance in townships and the reality is people want to be able to access those office amenities in those you know spaces and if you look at a township as a way to you would want to be able to to have an office type setup and not and not have to go all the way to Sainton or Rosebank in order to be able to access them and Prince Mazmuga are saying you know office sharing is there any design trends one should follow or consider to attract small SMMEs I mean any any and I know that this isn't quite your area of expertise but certainly from a design perspective what are some of the pressure points from you know SMMEs where if you had to you know tweak certain design components when you have an office space they certainly be attracted to your particular party so that's a that's a great question and I think flexibility here is key so to move away from what we see as a works workspace just being a desk maybe it's a work cafe maybe it's a local barista who then has a corner of his coffee shop which is for for working so maybe it's a quiet area in a coffee shop maybe it's a standing a standing environment where you don't have a chair um perhaps you're sitting with two people in a meeting room and as opposed to being desk based for the whole day and that's how you do your work day so I think it's about challenging ourselves to be flexible in sitting maybe we're not sitting maybe we're standing maybe we're as I said at a coffee shop so and to kind of forgo the traditional working desk rather for a space where you can do your task effectively and Maggie final question from my side I mean if you're looking to buy or perhaps you're an investor you're looking for you know off to add office as part of your property portfolio what are some of the key things that you should be aware of and certainly look out for so I suppose if you are looking to invest in a property and you for a space which would get tenants um the you would be looking for also a building which has potential for multifunctional spaces so there's definitely a trend towards um even if there are various tenants in a building to have a common um a common space that can be shared so you don't have four canteens and four waiting areas for clients where you share maybe a main reception and a work cafe so I think the potential for that and also again to look at spaces in a different way so maybe it's a space where you could there's a residential aspect a retail aspect as well as a corporate um as a corporate office um offering so kind of having those multifunctions in one building or the potential to have that would definitely attract people Maggie we are going to leave it there this evening it's been such an insightful conversation I think we're really good perspective for those who are looking to go into office we do a lot of conversations around frezzy and a bit on commercial but certainly from an office perspective we need to start thinking about that especially for the investors who may want to add this to their property portfolio Maggie thank you so much for joining us this evening it's been such a pleasure to have you with us thank you for the opportunity I love speaking to you Zama it's been such a pleasure and that is Maggie Weber who is the head of digital design at Tetris to South Africa uh wrapping up the Monday edition of the private property podcast with myself was a man don't walk a malo and unfortunately we're going to have a roll over to tomorrow evening one link will tell was not watching us and I know that she was watching earlier because she actually dropped a message to say hello but she didn't watch uh when her name came up and of course when we needed her to claim that prize and this is why you need to watch throughout the whole show because if we call your name then you need to so text us while the show is on for myself as a man don't walk around there is so the team has been a pleasure to be with you this evening tomorrow is celebrating episode 400 we're going to have a great episode and certainly also just reflect a little bit that we already we've planned something special later on I'm not going to give away too much so tomorrow show is going to be relatively normal but of course you know 400 is a bit of a milestone that many podcasts in the country that get to that figure so thank you very much of hope for ensuring that to be gotten there and of course we're going to get to higher and higher heights as we move along well that's it from us of course do stay tuned for the home shopper show with Chad at 8 p.m. until then stay cooking you're staying cool and staying safe


What's going on guys welcome back to the channel critical overload here, so we'll be talking about maxine in this video here today I'll mostly be going over what we know Teasing some stuff that you don't know That I've had I've been tipped off about and kind of recapping other things that have not officially been stated by the studios Or anyone involved with the project, but it is online for you to see courtesy of an audition tape So just to begin maxine We know is the upcoming presumed final chapter in ty west's x trilogy Ty West said this about the project when speaking to bloody disgusting last year He said to round the whole thing out maxine as a sequel to x is fine maxine as part of a trilogy is infinitely more interesting So that was part of the overall concept. I think what'll be fun in maxine I'm not going to tell you what it's about But what what fun is it's an evan evolution of the character in the way that you met pearl and x But then you get to know a different side of her in pearl. Yes, you have met maxine It is a continuation of maxine, but she's at a very different point in her life It's going to be an interesting thing to catch up to catch up with her when we do and see Mia goth in yet another way Well, we already know what the film is out film is about at this point because the film is going to be following maxine It's set years after the events of x six years to be exact As the sole survivor who continues her journey towards fame setting out to make it as an actress in 1980s Los Angeles the film itself is set in again 1985 according to the teaser 824 dropped nearly a year ago and Some other plot details that are out there again that have not been announced by 824 But they were on online for you for you to see I've actually touched on in the past Some other plot details help us understand what year this is in We don't have an official release date quite yet for Maxine But I'm leaning on early 20 24 because dropping it this year seems unlikely although I wanted it this year Mia goth has also chimed in of course early this year talking about Maxine and Other times of course throughout the year and past months just hyping up the project She had this to say about Maxine early this year when speaking with Collider. She said it's just such a fun film Ty really I don't know how he does it. He's just able to come up with these worlds It's just the biggest of the three movies the stakes are the highest and Maxine has been through so much at this point at Another point with variety Mac or Mia also said that this is the best script of all the three And I will say this before I even keep going. I do tend to think From what I know this is the best of the three I just have to see how it is executed now We know the cast of Maxine includes Mia goth herself Of course returning as the titular character Kevin Bacon Halsey Lily Collins young Carla Esposito Moses Sumney Elizabeth Debecchi Bobby kind of Ali and others Moses has actually called the film decadent intense and fun Just to dive into another aspect of the plot that has not yet again been announced by 824 or any crew members But it's online for people to see so we're entering possible spoiler territory here for anyone that wants to dip out Halsey is starring in the film as a character named Tabby This is known due to an audition tape over on Vimeo that shows us that Maxine is still doing adult content It has made a friend named Tabby who was dying to go to this party But she doesn't want to go alone and she's afraid of the night stalker now The audition tape does not confirm that it's Halsey in the role But again, I've done a video speculating on this could be Halsey in the past But the steals that have been released showing Halsey being close to Max was enough to convince me and then I was tipped off That is exactly who Halsey is playing. She's playing a character named Tabby Who is a close friend to Maxine in the film now? This audition tape also sheds light on the film incorporating the night stalker craze who was active during 1984 Before he was stopped in 1985. I believe and it's also incorporating since Satanic paranoia It's also revealing to us that Maxine has landed the role of a horror film now Here's a bit that's not in this audition tape, but apparently Maxine isn't just starring in a horror film She's starring in a sequel to a horror film that has already come out before The film is revolving around the murders in Hollywood while production While production is occurring on this horror sequel So we still have a slasher on our hands for anyone that was maybe having doubts about that We still have a slasher on our hands. The killer is not the night stalker But I presume they are capitalizing on the media's obsession with the stalker to use him as a scapegoat While they target Max now a few of you who follow my Twitter are Aware that I've been giving nuggets about Maxine Those know those nuggets are basically the meat and potatoes of what's going on who lives who dies Who the killer is the motive etc So to piggyback on Mia's excitement for Maxine Out of all the plots and nuggets for upcoming horror films I had sent to me Maxine is the only one I'm excited to see play out on screen and I hope the execution isn't atrocious because I love everything I've heard about this film so far. It does seem like the biggest It does seem like it'll have Honestly the the most set designs out of the three films given the locations I've been told about and where certain things are occurring and how they play out in Comparison to what we know is happening in Pearl and in X this definitely seems like the biggest Um, I love the killer. I love the motive It makes sense and it has the potential to be shocking if you don't overanalyze everything the kill sequences again They sound intense to me and they're in line with the gore We've seen in the last two for anyone that has seen those cemetery images of Halsey I'll say this the context of why and how her character ends up here is something I'm eager to see play out on screen if you can't help yourself when it comes to overanalyzing the trailer whenever that eventually drops Because I have no time table on when that drops I've also not seen the trailer for Maxine, but if you cannot help yourself. I will say this You have more than enough clues to figure out who the killer is you have more than enough clues I am not going to tell you who it is. That's not what I'm here to do I'm just telling you that I know a lot of people are going to be floored When the killer is revealed. I think a lot of people are going to examine this cast They are going to overlook the small details and that's why they'll be floored and that's probably going to make this The best reveal of the year for a slasher movie Not of the year but at the time when it releases next year depending on who is watching it because some of you guys are very smart You'll probably catch on but I think that at a small glance from people viewing the cast They're going to overlook the small details. That is your hint Do not overlook those small details and pay attention to what has already come out if you want to do some analyzing Let me know what you guys think about this down in the comment section below if you haven't already Of course make sure you subscribe turn on post notification at the numbers of video in the description I'll have links to all my social media accounts I'm on Facebook Twitter and Instagram you can message me there Of course, let me see any movies news or views let me to cover in the future and with all that in my guys I will see you in the next video


How much does a man mean or a player mean to a fan base? He is their modern day Sandy Kofaks. But the thing that would concern me, and maybe he wouldn't have opted out, is he doesn't throw nearly as hard as he used to. He thinks he can throw harder if he works out his back problems. But he's been on the DL two years in a row because of back issues. That's scary to me. When you get older, other than Verlander, you don't throw harder. And I thought this was unusual. I thought they were going to say, either you take the 32 and a half, adding up to 65 for the last two years, or you can go somewhere else. And I don't think there's any place else that would pay him $31 million a year, although I look at it this way. Maybe to the Dodgers, he's worth that. Even at a distressed level. That's got to be it because he's not the same pitcher he used to be, and he's never been a good pitcher in the postseason. But isn't that dangerous to do something because it would be a gift to the fans?  Now, I think they can be competitive to do that because the National League is wide open. They can go right back to the World Series again for a third consecutive year. But does this make a lot of sense over the next three years to spend that kind of money? Now, there's no cap. I guess they don't really care from that standpoint. But does this make a lot of sense? Does this preclude them from going out and improving a pitching staff that maybe needs to be improved? I'm not sure. But if you did this solely because he's an iconic Dodger and he deserves to finish his career there, that's tough to do at the expense of winning a championship. Now, they've gone 30 years between championships. And that's a long time for this organization. For any organization. You're going back a long time. They've had a lot of winning in LA since they got there in 1958. And this is the longest they've gone by far without winning a championship. And you know that the Mets are two years longer? No, you don't think I know that? I know you know that. I know it. Now, when I say how it affects the free age of market, if Clayton Kershaw in a diminished state gets $31 million a year, what's Patrick Corbin going to get? Did he just lock him into a $30 million a year contract? Just because of what they gave Kershaw? Now, you could say Kershaw got Dodger money because he's an iconic Dodger. But Patrick Corbin's younger, had a great year. So what's he going to command? Is that going to be the price now for a big-time free age and pitcher over $30 million a year? The Diamondbacks do not have the Dodger's money when it comes to the television revenue that they raked in. Then they sign like a billion-dollar television contract with Fox. I don't know if Arizona's got that kind of money to throw around. As much as they probably want to keep Corbin, I don't know if they have that. They've said they want to rebuild. They would love to trade. Is that cranky? If cranky makes over $30 million a year, but cranky has no trade clause. So it's going to be interesting. Deals like this, they reverberate throughout the free agent market because now Corbin could probably make more money than we thought he was going to make.


We're going to do philosophy in 45 minutes, believe it or not. I'm Mary Ann Talbott, as you probably guessed, and I've been asked to say something quickly about lifelong learning. I'm very happy to do that because I was thrown out of school at 15, some of you possibly know that, but others don't. I was thrown out of school at 15 for truancy and disruption. I didn't come back into full-time education until I was 26. I wnaeth am 26 ydym wedi bod yn y meddwl y university gyda'u defnyddio, fel hynny'r cyflwynt yma, sy'n cymorth o'r ffordd o'r pethau ym Ynwu Cymru, ac yn ddiddorol i'r ffordd. Byddwyd wedi gweld i'r ddisgu'r gwaith, ac yn ddiddorol er mwyn i'r gwaith, yn fawr o'r lelaf, ac yn ymwneud, ac mae'n ganddo i'r ffordd yma. It was the hardest thing I had ever done although I sat up all night trying to do this assignment, whatever it was. Ener Occultwn I thought, Wow, Wow, I really really enjoyed that. I just fell in love with philosophy. I went on, I did a year at the open University. I went on to Bedford College at the University of London. I was just walking on air. I absolutely adored it, and that's what lifelong learning is. It's never too late, and to illustrate that, my mum, in the year of her 50th wedding anniversary, the year she was 70, she got herself a 2-1 from the University of Manchester. Less in philosophy, she tried philosophy and she hated it. Probably the desires on the phone to her saying, are you sure you've done this, are you sure you've done that, that she really was not into that. But she absolutely loved studying later in life and she got herself a 2-1, as I say, in the year of her 70th birthday. I'm so proud of her. In English, which she continued to love. I mean, she should always love that. So that's something about lifelong learning. So if any of you are thinking of coming back to lifelong learning, I can only say, do please, you'll love it. If you choose the right subject, and of course we all know what the right subject is, don't we? I've also been asked to say something about the department, and to do that, I'm going to tell you about Eileen. Eileen, who won't thank me, I didn't tell her I was going to talk about her and she'll see us on the podcast and she'll be horrified. But she started coming here, actually I didn't know how long ago, it must have been about 15 years ago, maybe not quite as long as that, to start weekly classes in philosophy and she got hooked on philosophy rather than I did. And she did weekly classes, then she did the philosophy certificate course, which sadly is now defunct, but I'm hoping to get going again. Then she went on to Reading to do a master's degree and she's just submitted her PhD in philosophy at Reading University, so to Eileen, and I'm sure she'll get it because she's a very, very good philosopher. And that's coming to classes here, but many years later, it doesn't take, it takes longer than five minutes to get a PhD. OK, but we're really here to talk about philosophy. So, the word means love of wisdom, and what's more important is the first philosophers were the first people to search for natural as opposed to supernatural explanations. So, most people were happy to just think that God did something, is a perfectly good explanation, but the first philosophers, the Presocratics, were not happy with that sort of explanation. They would appeal to God in the final analysis if they really couldn't find any other explanation that would do, but first they would look for a natural explanation. Which is why the first philosophers were also the first scientists, and many sciences started off being philosophy, and then as they became empirical, as you could actually test things, they hithered off into their own discipline. Didn't mean that philosophy became irrelevant, as we'll see. So the subject matter of philosophy is everything. That's why it's so brilliant. OK, it's everything, because if a human being can think about it, there is a philosophy of it. So there's a philosophy of minds, there's a philosophy of language, philosophy of science, philosophy of politics, philosophy of religion, and I could have carried on forever, but I ran out of PowerPoint slide. So I've just got those on there. So let's have a look at some of these. Just in mind, for example, well, it's a mental epiphenomenal. So the mental to be epiphenomenal would be for it to have no causal power at all. You might think, well, nonsense. It's what I believe that causes me to do what I do. So it's because I believe that this person has very luminous grubs at the bottom of her feet that I'm going to say, would you pass me one? So she's covered in books and things. So she's passed me one, and I'm now showing you this is indeed very luminous. So it was my desire to show you that and my belief that I could do that by asking this person to give me a laugh that caused me to do that. My actions are the result of my beliefs, and that's why we attribute, thank you, beliefs to each other all the time. What we're trying to do is understand each other's behaviors, understand what we're trying to do, why we're trying to do it, what our reasons are for doing what we do. So our mental states are implicated in our behaviors. But if I wave at you now, you can explain that by, I want to perform an action that I then say, well, how do you explain it? Okay, there's a desire and a belief there. But we all know that another explanation of my waving my hand is you'll. If somebody knew enough about my brain, they'd be able to say, well, there's that neural state there that's causing that behavioral behavior there. Well, this is why I needed the flipchart. So you've got one action, a hand waving, and two possible explanations, a neural explanation, and a mental explanation. Well, that's problematic, isn't it? Why should we need two causes for something? Surely one of those must be, and there are two possibilities you might think, either the neural state is the mental state, okay, so that in fact there are not two explanations here, there's just one explanation of the same thing. Or one of these explanations just isn't the right one, and surely it's going to be the mental one. And some people think that because we will eventually find a neural explanation for all our behavior, what that shows is that mental states are, either they don't exist at all, and that's metaphysics which we're going to do next slide, or if they exist, they're epithenominal, so it's rather like the shadow. So my shadow has no causes or effects, sorry, it has causes, it doesn't have effects. I have effects, but my shadow doesn't. And so the mental states would shadow neural states, but they don't themselves have effects. Now, philosophers won't say, well, okay, is that true, or is this true? Could it be that the mind is the very same thing as the brain? In that case, you've solved that problem. But there are big problems with that, and if anyone wants to see any more about those problems, they might look at my podcasts and there will be a reference to the podcast, a romp through the nature of mind at the end of this unit. And in that I look at whether the mind is the same thing as the body, and I look at all the problems for that because there are big problems for that. And it's not obviously a question that science will be able to answer. And I wish I could say something more about that now, but we haven't time, because we're going on to language. Okay, so that's just a feeling for what philosophy of mind is. If you ask me of language, now what's that? Okay, well, what is meaning? His, let's say, his word, mental. Okay, now you all know what that means, or if I write on here, James is tall. Okay, you all understand that, don't you? Okay, that has meaning. Well, how can that squiggle on the board? How can I just using a pen to squiggle those things? How does that have meaning for you? And what about my saying, James is tall? All that is is sounds crossing to your ear from my mouth, I suppose. How can that have meaning for you? And what is it to have meaning in the first place? What's the meaning of the word meaning? Here's why we might think that it's a bit difficult. If I say James is tall, you all understand that, don't you? Yep, okay. So it has meaning, doesn't it? Can you tell me whether it's true or not? Well done, exactly so. Not without knowing who James is. So you know what is tall is. You don't need to know any more about that, you can tell. But you need to know what the word James refers to, or the sounds James refers to. Okay, that's right. So there are two sorts of meaning, aren't there? One is weak meaning, which is what you had there. You had something that looked like meaning. But actually, if you can't tell the truth value of a sentence, do you really understand the sentence? Until you know who James is, do you really understand the sentence? If not, then there's another sort of meaning. There's also strong meaning. So weak meaning is meaning without a context, if you like. Strong meaning is meaning with a context. And there's another reason for thinking that that is important. So what's your name? Yes? Rupert. Rupert asks me, is he a good philosopher? And I say his handwriting is excellent. Okay, what is the meaning of what I've said there? Is it he's a good philosopher? Is it he's a bad philosopher? Isn't it? I'm implying that he's not a good philosopher, aren't I? And how do you know that? Because the meaning of the words that I used were completely irrelevant to the question I was asked, wasn't I? If I'm asked, is he a good philosopher and I say his handwriting is excellent, then it's the very fact that I used something with that weak meaning in a completely irrelevant context that alerts you to the fact that this has a different meaning from the meaning you're expecting, from the meaning it would normally have. Another one, I mean there are all sorts of things we can do with language. So, for example, if we think of this as the strict and literal truth conditions of a sentence, and then there's the force, whether it's used to ask a question or to make a command or to make a statement or something, and then there's the tone we use. So, how about, I'm not angry! I mean, what I've said, the strict and literal truth conditions of what I've said are contradicted by the tone in which I've said this, aren't they? And then there's the context. So, what would happen if, what's your name? Gordon. Gordon. Say we'd been having a class every six weeks for a while and he turns up every time Gordon's been late. OK, so 10 minutes into this class the door crashes, Gordon comes in and I say, hello Gordon, early again. What have I said? You're late. Haven't I? So the context has reversed what I've said. So many things that we can do with language. So many things we can do with meaning. So, I mean these are just, in each case I put just a few of the questions that philosophers want to know. How can we do this? How can we get this meaning? So, it's the job of a linguist to study how language works empirically. But of course as a linguist must work with the idea of meaning that must be assumed by a linguist and again with the idea of reference. But it's the job of a philosopher to say, well what is meaning? What's the meaning of the word meaning? What is reference? How does a name, what's your name? George. George, how does the name George get attached to him? And probably is there anyone else called George in this room? No, so it's George. And this is where I say, is anyone called John thinking everybody around my age who's male is called John, is there? No, look at that, there isn't. Oh yes, there's one person. Okay, but let's move to science. Okay, one question that a philosopher might ask. Okay, the question of how science and philosophy differ is a very important one because you have heard Stephen Hawking's, for example, said recently that philosophy is dead, he said, philosophers haven't kept up, philosophy is dead. Now logic is something that philosophers study and of course logic, one type of argument in logic is arguments that come from authority. So Stephen Hawking says P, therefore P. Is that a good argument? No, why not? Just sometimes isn't it? I mean if Stephen Hawking tells me that time travel is possible, I'm going to think well maybe time travel is possible, but if Stephen Hawking says philosophy is dead, am I going to believe him? Answer not necessarily because of course he is an authority on physics but not an authority on philosophy. Let's have a look at, okay, the paradoxes of confirmation. This is going to be good.  We think okay, we'll extrapolate here, all ravens are black. Now I see a black raven. Does that confirm or a little bit confirm all ravens are black? You say no, why not? Okay, yes but that's why I said a little bit. I mean it's not a falsification is it? A right raven would be a falsification but another black raven is just a tiny bit of confirmation because once you've got to the point that all ravens are black, every black raven you see is further confirmation of that theory, which is uninteresting frankly. Who would think, well it is isn't it? I mean if you've got to a stage where you make this generalisation in the first place you've seen so many black ravens that seeing another is uninteresting. So confirming a generalisation is nice but not interesting. Actually it's not nice because we're a much rather false fan. But what about a white gymshw? Once seeing a white gymshw confirm all ravens are black, who thinks yes? You're all wrong. Cos a white gymshw does confirm all ravens are black and this is why. I'll tell you what, let me get the arguments out then it disagrees with me.  Is that right? What logical equivalence means is there's no situation where that's true, where that's not true and there's no situation where that's true, where that's not true. OK? So who thinks that this isn't a logical equivalence?  I'm dying to know why you think that's not a logical equivalence. Now you've all gone quiet. The only situation I can think that it wouldn't be is if you're using all ravens are black as a definition of what a raven is. Well even then it would still be true wouldn't it that all non black things are non ravens. Yeah, I mean even that wouldn't. Yes, do you see what it means? You could say that by definition if it's not black it's not a raven. We usually think of discovering that ravens are black as something extra we learn about ravens rather than something that's part of the definition of ravens mainly because of albino ravens which of course... We're ignoring the odd white ravens. Yes, we're ignoring the odd white ravens. Okay, does anyone want to disagree with me that this is a logical equivalence? Yes, that's true, my boots are black. But are they a non black, non raven? No, because they're black. They are a non raven. But we're not saying all black things are ravens. We're saying all ravens are black. Got to get your van diagrams the right way around. The fact that our gym shoe happens... We haven't got onto the gym shoe yet. Well this is a non black thing. Yeah, you're right. And it's a non raven. You're absolutely right. It does not prove that all ravens are black. Now let me continue because Gordon's got there first. Okay, if all ravens are black is logically equivalent to all non black things are non ravens then the sighting of a white gym shoe which is, as Gordon says, a non black non raven if it confirms that and this is logically equivalent to that it ought to confirm that as well. So logic tells us that a white gym shoe does confirm all ravens are black. Now this is nonsense, isn't it? Well we all know that the sighting of a white gym shoe does not confirm all ravens are black. So what's gone wrong here? Can anyone tell me what's gone wrong? You're trying to reverse the argument. No, the logic, believe me, really does work. If you believe that that is logically equivalent to that and you should because it is. No, we're in charge. There are certain things you ought to take on a farce here and if we had longer I would have convinced you but I can, yeah. But actually you don't need my authority to tell you that that and that are logically equivalent. You can see they are. Hang on, I've got to draw it. Okay, I need somebody with arms. George, come up on stage. That's what you get for sitting in the front. Okay, all ravens are black. Here are all black things and here are ravens. Right, what was your objection? So Marianne's boots are here. No, and here are... Do you know nobody else's wearing boots? Yes, you are. What's your name? Oh, they're black. Okay, what's your name? Emily's boots are brown. They're not black. So have I convinced you yet or not? Why not? I mean, what's the problem? Actually you're going to have to move a bit over that way because you've got the... That's it. There are other things, all of which are black. Cole, okay? Cole is here. Okay, this is the class of non-black things. Okay, so it's separate from the class of black things. Emily's boots are in here. Sorry, I've run out of room to do my circles as I should, but you can see Emily's boots belong here. Okay, and white gymshoos belong here, don't they? But all ravens are black. So in the class of all black things, you get all ravens. Are you convinced? Yes, okay. Right, now I've got what I was saying. Thank you. Ah, yes, I remember. Okay, so now this... Now do that. Okay, so this is the logical equivalence of that. For logic tells us that the sighting of a white gymshoo confirms all ravens are black. We all won't say nonsense. No chances, no way of sighting of a gymshoo. So what I asked you was why not, what went wrong. And I'll tell you what went wrong. Well, actually, you tell me. Was that a hands going up? Is it because one white gymshoo is not all non-black things? So it's just a point toward... No, no, because that's... No, because if it was a white raven, it would be just one white thing and it would completely go to smithereens, wouldn't it? If it was a white raven. Is it the logic... Can you cash that out a little more? Well, I'm thinking of such a vast number of things in the world. The implication of one of those things being a particular colour, that we just know isn't going to imply that all... That's... OK, I can see you're getting tied up in your words, but you're absolutely on the right track. I can't argue from the individual to the... an assumption from one to all the general... No, because you're not making an assumption from one. You're seeing a white gymshoo, so you're seeing a non-black, non-raven. This is the sighting of one black raven would confirm this, so the sighting of one white gymshoo would confirm this, and therefore logically confirm that. But there's one more and then we'll move on. Is it because there are more things in the world than just ravens and gymshoos? So, you know, if something is a gymshoo, it doesn't mean it's like the inverse of a raven. It could be... OK, you're also going in the right direction. What it shows us... So, you're all shouting out now. Good. What it shows us is that in order to decide what would confirm all ravens are black, you are bringing to bear background knowledge of the world in which we live. OK, if you were using only logic, you would agree that a white gymshoo would confirm all ravens are black. But you're not using only logic. You're also bringing to bear your background knowledge of the world. And what your background knowledge tells you is that there are too many non-black, non-ravens... I don't know why I'm writing this. You can't read it. I can't either. There are too many non-black, non-ravens in the world for it to be interesting. There are ten things in the world, apart from me, that is. And nine of them are black and nine of them are ravens. If I was in that world, the sighting of a white gymshoo would make it quite conclusive that all ravens are black, wouldn't it? You're saying no. No, not if nine of them are ravens and nine of them are black. If you see one white... Nine of the things that exist are ravens and nine of the things that exist are black. Nine of them are black and nine of them are ravens. So the sighting of a white gymshoo in this world would make it absolutely conclusive that all ravens are black. But the reason this is important, and I do this often with scientists, so they get just as irritated with me as you did, because what knows is this, what is white gymshoo you've got to do with it. What it's got to do with this is it draws our attention to the fact that actually we're always beginning to bear assumptions that we don't even notice when we decide what we'll confirm, what theory to... postulate, what theory to test, how to test it, et cetera. And so what this does is it brings out the fact that we rely on all sorts of assumptions that we don't even notice. And it's perfectly reasonable to rely on that assumption here, but isn't it interesting we don't even notice it? And of course sometimes the assumptions on which we rely are very important and they turn out to be false. Okay, that's thought of in science. I knew that would take ages. Politics, okay. Which principles should ground society? I mean, John Rawls, who's a very important philosopher of politics, asks us to imagine what he calls the original position. And the original position is a position where none of us know who we are. Our task is to choose the principles by which society should be run, whether it should be equality, whether it should be utilitarianism, whether it should be deontology, et cetera, et cetera. Okay, you may not know what these things are, but just bear with me for the moment. But in the original position, what we don't know is who we are or indeed anything about ourselves. So we don't know whether we're male or female. We don't know whether we're old or young. We don't know whether we're rich or poor. We don't know whether we're tall or short. You get the idea. So we're behind what he calls the veil of ignorance. And what we do have, we do have some knowledge. We have the thin theory of good. And the thin theory of good tells us some physiological, psychological, political facts about human beings. So, for example, we know that it's human females who have babies, not human males. We know that the gestation period is nine months. We know things like that, but we don't know whether we ourselves are female or male. Now, why would that be a good position from which to decide on the principles of justice? Can anyone tell me? You can't load the dice in your favour. That's so nicely put. You can't load the dice in your favour. You can't say, well, I'm a man. All women should be at home by nine o'clock at night cooking a meal. Six o'clock at night. What do I mean nine o'clock at night? Because I'm male, I think that. Actually, I might be female. Would I want that? No, I wouldn't want that, therefore. So we can't load the dice in our favour. That's exactly what the veil of ignorance and the thin theory of good and the original position of four. All sorts of problems with that, and it would be lovely to tell you about them, but we haven't got time. So what about the conflict between justice and equality? This was a thought experiment done by a chap called Robert Nozick, who's another very important political philosopher. He asked us to think about a chap called Waltz... Or was it Waltz? Chamberlain. Waltz Chamberlain. Partly it was a basketball player. Is that right? You're Canadian, you ought to know. Okay, so Waltz Chamberlain is a brilliant basketball player. We all love to see... I mean, we may hate sport the rest of the time, but we really want to see Waltz Chamberlain play, and we're prepared to each of us give him 25 cents to play. As a result, for him to play rather, as a result, Waltz gets extremely rich. We're all quite poor, but Waltz gets extremely rich. Now, the only way we can make us equal again is by restricting freedom in some way. So we can either restrict your freedom to give Waltz 25 cents of your money to see him play, but you might think, well, hang on, that's a bit annoying. I want to see him play. I think he's worth 25 cents. Or we can say to Waltz, okay, you can take all this money, but you've got to give quite a lot of it back. So redistributing wealth. But that's to restrict Waltz freedom to spend the money he has earned as he chooses. And the only way we can get equality is by restricting freedom. And the only way we can get freedom is by allowing inequality. That's what the Waltz Chamberlain argument is supposed to do. So those of us who want both freedom and equality within a society have immediately got a problem. And what are we going to do with that problem? Sadly, we don't have time to think about it right now, but this is what you would do if you were thinking about philosophy. Okay, religion, the big one. Okay, this is... If God exists, why is there so much evil in the world? You have heard of this, the problem of free will. Problem free will is God is omnipotent. He can do everything. If he's omniscient, he knows everything. And if he's omnibenevolent, he wants everything to be good for us all, then how come there is so much evil in the world? I mean, God could stop it. He's omnipotent. He knows about it. It's not that it's gone past his radar. He knows about it. He's omniscient for goodness sake. And it's not that he doesn't want to do anything about it because he's omnipotent. So how come there is evil in the world? The traditional answer is that's why we've got free will. Because it's better that we have free will and evil because we choose to do evil than it is to not have free will, in which case there wouldn't be any bad in the world, nor would there be any good in the world. And one of the things I like to do as students here is ask them to engage in a thought experiment. If you were God, you couldn't create a world in which there's only good or only evil. If you create good, you have to create the possibility of evil. Because you have to create free will, you have to create choice. Would you choose not to create a world at all just perhaps to create a world with no good or evil? Or would you choose to create a world in which there's both good and evil? I'm going to leave you with that one. You can stay awake tonight worrying about that one. There's a what? There's a course about it. There's a course about all the things I'm talking about, often by me. Okay, so just going back to that, what I've said is that the subject matter of philosophy is everything. There's nothing a human being can think about that a philosopher isn't interested in thinking about the thinking about it. That's what we do. I've given you some examples there. But if there's any subject matter that can be said to be peculiarly the province of philosophy, it's these four. Logic, ethics, metaphysics and epistemology. When I say logic is peculiarly the province of philosophy, of course it's not. It's also the province of maths. But maths and philosophers are now computer scientists who I suppose I'm counting as mathematicians in a way. Possibly unfairly. Actually study logic. It's only in philosophy and maths in universities and computer science that logic is studied. What we study is what is an argument. Which arguments are good? Which arguments are bad? Are there different types of argument? Or laws of logic? I can ask you a question about that. One thing that's assumed for many, many years has been assumed to be a law of logic is the law of excluded middle, which says either P is true or not P is true. So P or not P is always and everywhere true. Quantum mechanics has called that into question over the last century. Which of course is interesting. Could there be an empirical objection to a law of logic? That's a very interesting one. But here's a rather easier example. Your jacket there, let me take it, is a fame at last says, actually it's not quite going to work for me. It's not, not red is it? Unfortunately it is not red, you're quite right. Do you see if it will have a different colour? I could say it's not, not red. And isn't that already, thank you, a counter example to the law of excluded middle? If something's not, not red, then it's neither P nor not P, isn't it? Do you see? So we didn't need to wait for quantum mechanics. Surely we could just say. And here's another example. That little kitten on the floor there, is it black? Mouse? You can't answer that, but what I've said, the little kitten on the floor is black, is neither true nor false, is it? Do you think it's straight forwardly false that the little kitten is black? Not really, because if you say it's false, you're sort of implying there is a kitten there, but it's ginger. So the laws, what the laws of logic are, is still a live issue. There are lots of different types of logic, and classical logic, which is the one that says the law of excluded middle is a law of logic, is only one type of logic. Ethics, of course, is a very big one. Is moral truth absolute or relative? Well, lots of people think it's relative. Anyone here think that moral truth is relative? Anyone tell me why? Okay, different generations have different moral beliefs. Okay, and different cultures have different moral beliefs. Okay, so moral truth is relative to a culture at the back, and moral truth is relative to a generation, or time perhaps at the front here. Okay, or you could say moral truth is relative to an individual. You believe that abortion is right, and I think it's wrong or something like that. Surely the fact that different people have different beliefs is reason to believe that moral truth is relative. Who is it? If I have two genetically identical seeds, and I put one of them in John Innes' number three compost, water it nicely, talk to it, give it a pat every now and again, put it somewhere where it's going to get the sun, and the other one I put in nasty garden soil and I stick it in the airing cupboard and forget about it. I give it enough water to keep it alive, but that's all. Are they going to look similar after six weeks? They're not, are they? They're going to look very different. Okay, is the fact that the phenotype is different evidence for they're not having the same genotype? No, it isn't, is it? Because the environment counts as well. And might we not think that the same thing is true with morality in some cases? So, for example, we keep our elderly alive as long as possible. The inuit at least used to put them gently to death. Might that not be explained by the fact that we both respect the elderly, but in their environment respecting the elderly is to let them die, whereas in our environment it isn't. Alternatively, one of us could be wrong, and I wouldn't like to say who it is in this case, but one of us could be wrong. And so the fact that there are differences in moral beliefs amongst cultures or generations or even individuals is actually not in itself sufficient to say that morality is relative. Okay, metaphysics is to do with... This is the most general. Metaphysics means before physics. What exists? So all of you in this room have an ontology. Some of you believe in ghosts, some of you believe in fairies, and others don't. Those who believe in fairies have an ontology, a list of what exists, on which fairies feature. Some people say that moral values exist. Other people will say, well, what are they? They're the queer sort of things if they do exist. Perhaps they don't exist. But if we model everything on physical objects, things you can touch or kick or put into your pocket or something, then moral values do look very old, don't they? So metaphysics asks, well, what does exist? Do mental states exist? Does truth exist? And the second question that metaphysics asks is what is the nature of what exists? So if physical objects exist, what is their nature? Are they, as Barkley said, constituted of nothing more than actual or counterfactual perceptions? Or are they, as Locke thought, real mind independent three-dimensional solid things, which is what we all think until we read Barkley, then we don't know what to think. I haven't got time to ask you what truth is, which is a shame. So I'll send you home thinking, asking yourself what truth is. And epistemology is what can we know? What is knowledge? How can we justify claims to know something? Did you know that if you know something, there's something you know can't be false? We can't know something false. Does anyone disagree with that? Wait till someone disagrees with it, and I'll tell you. Can we not know that something is false? Oh, we can know something is false? Yes, that's right, because then it's true that it's false, isn't it? But we can't know something false. Okay, they tell you that they're 50, so you believe they're 50. But do you know that they're 50? You don't. We can believe that we know something false. We can't know something false. If it's false, we can't know it. Because knowledge is factive, which means nothing more than you can't know something false. Perceptions also factive. I can't perceive something that doesn't exist. When Beth thought that he could perceive the dagger in front of him, he was wrong. He was hallucinating the dagger in front of him. He believed he could see it. He couldn't see it because there wasn't a dagger. Perception is factive, knowledge is factive. Okay, so that's a romp through philosophy in 45 minutes. I hope I've convinced you this is the best subject in the world, because it is. That's just true. Where to go from here? OEDC, you know where we are now. I hope you come again. There are weekly classes in philosophy. There's this newspaper which will tell you all about it. We've got things on thought experiments in philosophy and introduction in philosophy of science, philosophy of maths for beginners, applied ethics, aesthetics, creativity, imagination and fiction. Just a few of the weekly classes we've got. We've also got weekend schools. I've been doing an introduction to critical reasoning, but that's finished sadly, but there will be a podcast. Anti-realism, what is it and should we believe it?  Philosophy in the weekend, I'm doing that with a chap called Nigel Warburton. Philosophy of the family. Told you we can think about everything. Language in its pragmatics, philosophy in literature and an introduction to the mind-body problem which I'm doing in Newbury in June. There are also summer schools and I forgot to bring a prospectus to have no idea what we're doing there. There are lots of online courses. We do our ethics, philosophy, introductions to philosophy, mind, bioethics, religion, theory of knowledge, introduction to metaphysics, philosophy of science. There are ten-week short courses and they're really good, I really recommend them. That's the philosophical society. We've got 284 members and you'd be most welcome to come. Oxford University philosophy podcasts including my podcasts and that's my website, that's my Twitter feed. Hope you're all going to follow me. That's my Facebook page. You can like it, which will be very kind of you. And that's it. Thank you very much.