Richard A. Nichols III
Omg, I just had this moment of clarity while watching this that hit me like a brick, and made this entire video seem cringe.

First, all animals, including humans, obviously exist within and as a part of Nature, physical reality, or whatever you want to call it, and because of this, there's no Kantian 'absolute divide' between noumena and phenomena--we're an actual part of the causal pool. And yes, there are some misleading things about perceiving reality as a biological being with biological senses, but even those aren't that important because the important thing is sharing in life and Nature.

Anyway, following the acquisition of language, and then furthered by the advent of civilization, then even more by the scientific and industrial revolutions, humans became 'lost' and can't really see or relate with the things we actually look at (after a certain age), except to a very limited degree--when we look at a tree, we don't really see the tree, we see 'any instantiation of the category of object we call "tree"'. This is what causes us to objectify, exploit, control, enslave, manipulate, subjugate, harm, kill, deceive, etc. each other and all of Nature, but that's beside the point.

Now this guy is talking about whether we can have any knowledge of or connection with what's "out there" as he's clearly sitting in a chair, breathing air--appropriately enough, among plants, and it's downright "cute," or even more honestly, "cringe," as it's really just a metaphoric reflection of our being lost in language...the problem isn't not having the proper language with which to describe reality, nor not having some "view from nowhere" with which to be objectively sure about what we see; the problem is two-fold: one, that we're *more or less* disconnected from reality by language, and two, that, like Wittgenstein said, all [analytic] philosophy is language games, so our theorizing about whether we can know reality at all, or whether it's purely a social construct, etc., and trying to create some model for how we can answer that question like he did, is just another on one of those games.

Larry Williams
Rousseau would have like this.

Penelope Tabualevu
and Goethe