Nigel Warburton - Why studying Philosophy is so important?

okay so this is billed as a talk for freshers so some of the things I'm going to say are going to be directed at people just beginning studying philosophy at University but I think in order to read philosophy at all you have to study it so anybody who picks up a philosophy book is in a sense a student of philosophy so this is much broader than just directed at freshers but I'll get the easy bit out of the way first the real value of studying philosophy comes in the second half of this roughly 20 minute talk and there'll be a chance for you to ask me questions as well and that's very important because I think philosophy is essentially subject to dialogue Rawdon monologue so the easy bit is philosophies for a fantastic sub subject to study because of the side effects if you look at the data on this it's quite remarkable that students who study philosophy at University under it and graduate level perform brilliantly in graduate studies tests in in the States when they're looking at going into graduate school in verbal reasoning and in analytic reasoning particularly but also oddly they perform quite well in mathematical analysis so this they're all kinds of spin-offs of studying philosophy and that's the instrumental value but I want to Park that because I don't think that's the reason why philosophy is such a wonderful subject that's just a very useful thing you can tell your parents if you need to persuade them the value of studying philosophy at university for me the great value of philosophy is that it transforms the people who study it inevitably almost if you study it for a few hours it will transform you if you do it properly and for me what study it properly means is engaging with it not simply letting it become noticeably absorbing it passively so from so philosophy isn't a spectator sport it's different from some of the subjects because when you study it you actually have to do it in the way that if you kick a football around on a field you're actually playing football you may not be as pehle or Ronaldo or whoever it is but you're still doing you're still playing from football when you're studying philosophy you're actually doing philosophy because you're engaging with arguments thinking about what follows from the various ideas have been expressed but also your if you're doing it sincerely you're thinking about how you should live what's the nature of reality just as a philosopher world and it's if you simply learn it as a dogmatic subject that's not really studying philosophy that's letting it wash over you and I believe this facts about philosophy explains in some ways why it's so transformative I'm going to come back at the end of the talk as well to another way in which is transformative but John Stuart Mill who is one of my heroes crystallized this in his book on Liberty which was published in 1859 which is a fantastic little book when he's talking about the value of free speech so free speech essentially for him has value because it allows people to flourish in various ways and the freedom to express your views even if they're dissenting views has an immense value because it's a catalyst for other people to think philosophies often following on from Socrates at the beginning a subject which is attracts gadflies people who tell other people because they are asked or questions and that's actually at the heart of philosophy asking difficult questions or awkward questions that other people may not want to ask fundamental questions about what follows from what do you really believe what you're saying and so on now when when a dissenter asked of us something even if that person expresses that view in quite a forceful way for meal that person's value isn't simply that they might be saying something that could be true although he allows that many of the most important thinkers of history have been dissenting voices like Galileo or you might think Jesus there have been people who stand out socrates who go against the flow ask difficult questions and turn to have said some things which were very profound but familiar the value comes in the fact that they force people to think in a non dogmatic way so philosophy is a subject which encourages you to think non dogmatically by that I mean you don't I don't know how a television works I don't know how my iPhone works really but I can use it quite effectively both of those things I'm going to watch a football match tonight I'm going to make some phone calls that's not difficult but you can't just absorb the conclusions of philosophy in that way you can't say look oh now I know what freakin Stein's thought so I don't need to understand how he got to those conclusions or now I understand having expressed it what John Stuart Mill thought about free speech the point about philosophy is you have to understand the reasoning that led to the conclusion and understanding it involves thinking critically about it and that process is very enlivening process it it's impossible to do it in a in a quiet absorb what's what is a passive way as I said before it's it's it's an active subject so it's much more like a kind of physical fitness than it is like watching the sport I'll be watching the football match so I'd be the couch potato but philosophies not the subject for intellectual couch potatoes and virtual Russell crystalized this quite nicely when he said that some people would sooner die than think in fact they do and this is the the big problem that as Daniel Kahneman has pointed out thinking critically thinking analytically involves a lot of energy it's not an easy thing for us to do and we often rely on intuitive judgments and that's blood works pretty well but there are times when you can't do that and philosophy as a subject which encourages you to think in that critical way for me it starts with Socrates that rather strange portly bearded Greek philosophy wandered around the marketplace challenging people asking them to defend their own positions things that they were supposed to know a lot about he does a soldier about courage and the soldier couldn't define courage and gradually Socrates would tease away at him and actually revealed to anybody standing by that the person who thought they knew what they were talking about didn't really know what they were talking about and Socrates friend went to visit an Oracle not a method of finding out the truth that I'd recommend but the Oracle the Delphic Oracle said in response to the question who is the wisest person in Athens other wisest man in Athens Socrates Socrates heard this didn't believe it but gradually as he wandered around the marketplace talking to people he got to realize that there was some truth in what the Oracle had said that his wisdom lay in knowing how little he knew everybody else thought they knew things but he realized how little he knew and that's the humble side of philosopher as it were that if you study philosophy you very quickly realize how little you know not just because reading philosophy can be quite a difficult thing to do but also because a lot of fundamental questions haven't been answered it take the basic questions about right and wrong you don't need to go very far into it to discover that it isn't an easy thing to do to establish a system of ethics of they're very polarized views on how we should live and there's no simple way of reading off the truth there so there's this humility of recognizing how little that we do actually know which is quite shocking to many people and how little we can prove but there's also a kind of arrogance or forcefulness that you need for philosophy as well which is the willingness to question received opinions this is the challenging of dogma that I was saying this part of what John Stuart Mill emphasized so that those two qualities of I think of the virtues within philosophy some of the virtues there others to the humility to recognize that you might be wrong how you know and also to recognize other people probably don't know what they're talking about most of the time and but also the arrogant sort or full hardness in certain cases of challenging people and asking why they believe things or actually pointing out contradictions or inconsistencies and what people say so those those two quality is very useful in life in a whole range of areas because it allows you to to make a certain sort of jump of thinking it's very easy we are heard like animals you know we historically we've grown up as social animals and it's very easy to fall into the trap of going along with what other people believe one of the things that interests me is how people in Nazi Germany for instance some people actually resisted what was going on around them intensive Nance's very difficult when most of your colleagues would have been indoctrinated in certain sorts of ways to do what one individual did there's a there's a great photograph of a guy refusing to Heil Hitler when everybody else around him is doing it he got thrown into a concentration camp for doing it but it's requite remarkable that he would dare to do them and to be able to stand out and be different and I think philosophy is the kind of subject that forces people to reflect in a way that can have those side effects it's um it's also a great subject as a preparation for doing other things if you look in the list of what graduates have lost we've gone on to do you'll find novelists there you there was some obvious ones like jean-paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir who are philosophical novelists the hanif khureshi studied philosophy the guy who wrote consider the lobster what's his name was David Foster Wallace studied philosophy to a high level Angela Carter studied philosophy in English there are many people who are in the arts who's who studied philosophy there are people have barristers who said Michael manse studied philosophy there there are people in the city who studied philosophy there are even politicians who studied philosophy believe it or not Oliver latwon has a PhD in philosophy there's a there's a crossroad who's in the Labour Party Barry Gardner did have started PhD in philosophy and studied with John Rawls through there are people in all walks of life excelling and I believe they've been transformed by philosophy these are everybody who studies is is transformed this is partly because we're doing what Socrates challenges to do he's Socrates famously said the unexamined life isn't worth living for a human being it's okay for cattle cattle can't reflect on their existence but philosophies the subjects which forces you to reflect on what you're doing while you're doing it and whether you're consistent whether you're irrational you might put it on one side but the certain point in life most of us need to reflect on questions like is there a god that's a fundamental question that philosophers have through the ages addressed there are other people addressed it as well but philosophers particularly pay attention to the arguments that are used to support the idea that there might be a God or arguments like the problem of evil which suggests that there isn't a God so we all have to ask questions like is there a god what's the nature of reality that sounds like a an airy-fairy question but it comes up over and over and over again in movies it seems to be an obsession with people Descartes asked could I be dreaming is there any way I could tell whether I'm dreaming and now with virtual reality through Google glass becoming something that will be affecting us all in the next decade I think we we will start to reflect on what is reality if you can have an enhanced reality is that just an illusion in the same way that cinema might be an illusion or is it something which is actually part of reality and we will seems to draw this distinction between the inner and the outer world as it were there's a just the stuff around us those sort of philosophical quest arise quite naturally out of the changing technological environment so I think we're all going to need philosophy in that way and what I have to say is it can be a really dry subject as well it's unfortunate I was I've been presented here as an academic talking to you about philosophy but I'm not an academic anymore I've actually quit my job as a an academic philosopher because I've been frustrated in some ways by some of the directions that philosophy is gone with in academia there are people who ask in my view the wrong questions and one of the things that philosophy hopefully should teach you is not just to work out the answers to questions but to work out which of the right questions to ask and that is a really difficult thing you can give a very dry answer to a question that nobody really cares about or maybe you can analyze a question and attack a question that is really important to people and my view is that the best philosophy if you go through the history of philosophy their best philosophers have always in part of their work at least found fundamental questions fascinating with typically questions about ethics and politics but also metaphysical questions the nature of time the nature of space those sorts of questions and they've worked away at those they don't tend to be the people who've written a paper that's a reply to a paper that's a reply to a paper and just got obsessed with this sort of ping-pong game of footnotes that goes on within academia sometimes so if you do get frustrated as a student of philosophy which is possible because there are some very obscure and apparently unnecessary bits of philosophy what I recommend you do is go back to the great philosophers people like people like Socrates I've mentioned several times people like John Stuart Mill people like David Hume people like Nietzsche Sartre Kierkegaard Vick and Stein John rules people established as great philosophers in fact the people who I picked out for a little history of philosophy wouldn't do badly if you want to get back in touch with the mainstream philosophy so I have been a very privileged position of having met literally hundreds of the top philosophers in the last five years top living philosophers there several have died since not as a result of me meeting them through making this podcast with David Edmonds philosophy bites frosty bites is an idea was David's idea that we go around and we interview a philosopher on a particular topic for about 15 minutes and crucial to that is the idea that it's a dialogue it's a dialogue on a particular topic and the dialogue forum has a long history in philosophy it's got it through through Socrates but almost all philosophy is discovered through dialogue it may not be face-to-face dialogue there's a history of people writing letters to each other publishing books at each other and so on but principally it is the subject which twice on Kant conversation and debate it's very difficult to go off into a hut somewhere which we can Stein did and come up with a meaningful philosophy without challenge from other people so something I would also say is you have to recognize that it's a social subject that other people who disagree with you are the best kind of people to have around you because they're the ones that will make you think so that if you're in a little group a cluster of people who all think the same way the best thing to do as a philosopher is to come up talk to somebody with polarized views someone who really objects to what you're saying and then see if you can meet the arguments because that's when you start to do philosophy so a lot of the dialogues in the in the podcaster audio podcast so it's just the spoken word a lot of those aren't antagonistic dialogues and that's something else I want to get in here there is a a vision of philosophy that's prevalent in many philosophy departments which is it's not expressed in this way but this is the critical view of it this is that philosophies are kind of martial art and it's quite a macho martial art what you have to do is to learn all these techniques of arguments so you can fend off sloppy thinking and get your opponent into the kind of jujitsu hold and push the pressure points until they submit now it's very useful to have those skills of self-defense in argument available to you but philosophy is more than just exercising critical thinking skills I think it involves a kind of sincerity and I think it involves the kind of willingness to pursue questions that really matter and I think it's unfortunate that philosophy has appeared as a very male subject in recently it's been picked out quite a lot this is pervert there's no reason why the philosophy philosophy has always to be done in that manner and I think the the way that I bring this out is through product placement of the duck rabbit this icon which could either be a duck facing that way or rabbit facing this way it's a famous not optical illusion the famous figure that's used in psychology sometimes and Vick and Stein picked this out as a an interesting thing to discuss and he spoke about it in terms of aspects saying you can't see it as both the duck and a rabbit simultaneously it flips from one to the other but when it flips it's not that your retinal images change your in terms of what's on the back of your eye board the light is reflecting in the same way but you organize it differently there's a kind of dished out shift as it's sometimes called and for me that's a really interesting metaphor for what philosophy can do this is what I was talking about in terms of it transforming people's lives it doesn't necessarily give you any new facts and I would say that if you're studying philosophy and you're just interested in dates of philosophers and learning facts about what philosophers said that won't be particularly valuable but the real value for me in philosophy is that it has a capacity and a whole range of topics of making people have a kind of get out shift like that you can move from seeing things one way to seeing them in a completely different way so I'll give you a couple of examples of this a recent one for me that worked quite well is Peter Singer the Australian philosopher has got a great thought experiments about charity giving money to charity he says if you imagine you're walking past a pond and there's a young child drowning in the pond say a two-year-old child is drowning in the pond there's no one else around and you're wearing expensive trainers maybe your trainers cost 75 quid but let's probably cheap hundred quid I don't know what they cost now but they're expensive not many people would walk past that child they would ruin their trainers weighed in saved a child if they did walk past you think they're completely canvas brutes so most people feel that they're prepared to sacrifice a 75 pound or 100 pound bear of trainers for the life of a child that it's not a big sacrifice it wouldn't they if their trains cost a thousand pounds they still do it so why when we know that there are people starving in sub-saharan Africa or dying from malaria that could have been avoided if they had malaria Nets mosquito nets or dying from basic diseases that are easily curable why we're not giving all of us that kind of money to save those lives and some people say well of course when you walk past that the pond there's nobody else around so it has to be me whereas lots of people can say those children in sub-saharan Africa but there are so many of them that that's not true and so few people are actually making those sorts of donations that you can know with some certainty that if you don't sacrifice the money that you would have spent on trainers and give it to gives money to Oxfam for instance almost inevitably some children will die he wouldn't otherwise have died so why don't we do it you don't have to agree with the conclusion there but for me that's an example of somebody doing the same kind of thing that Socrates did challenging through a clever use of example a common way of thinking I'm thinking well you know my shoes I don't need to worry about this I can have several pairs of shoes but of course I would save a child in front of me if they were drowning but we know so much about what's going around in the rest in the rest of the world at the moment there surely we ought to be consistent there all know why we're not consistent about giving money to help other people if I'm prepared to sacrifice that kind of money when somebody just happens to be right in front of me so that for me is one of those moments that it's it's a challenge to come up with good counter arguments and the classic way of meeting that is simply denial the psychological strategy that many of us use most of the time always Sartre put it to be in bad faith about our freedom so we deny that we are free to detract otherwise of course we couldn't really be giving money and we would anyway we don't know with any certainty what the effect of the money will be well Peter Singh is absolutely brilliant on this because it's got all the counter-arguments to the standard of rejections so there's one example of a philosopher that I think does a brilliant job of challenging people's thought and making you see the world differently another one that struck me that was Dickon Stein he's got this notion of family resemblance a family resemblance term you know you look probably look a bit like your siblings like your parents biological parents there resemblances between families but you probably don't look exactly like them that would be strange unless you're an identical twin and even then that'd be differences so we have this pattern of overlapping resemblances in a family vic and stein said if you take a word like game the word game what makes a game a game is it that there's a winner and a loser well solitaire doesn't have a winner and a loser exactly throwing a ball against the wall could be a game there are things which don't quite meet with the obvious definition so this is frustrating when you move into other areas that you're trying to fine arts which is what people quite often try to do and Vic and Stein suggested that if you actually look and see how words are use you'll find that there are a number of concepts which are like this there are they're just these patterns of overlapping resemblances that the assumption that there must be some essence something which makes everything that thing that's called that thing is perhaps misguided so the whole history of aesthetics where people are trying to define art where they say all art is significant form where art is the expression of emotion or art is representation all that history made the assumption all the philosophers made the assumption there must be some single unique common denominator to the things that we call art or if we use a word like game there must be some definition which which picks out every single thing called game and what vacant stone suggests is that maybe there's just these patterns of overlapping resemblances are nothing more so there's there's no single defining feature that makes everything a game and for me that was a moment of realization because I've been struggling to think about what now you could possibly define art and how mysterious it is that nobody's come up with a good definition and for me this unlocked another way of thinking about the topic completely then what you have to look at is what are actually is and the number of different things the cluster of things that we call art and not to make the assumption that there must be a single common denominator so if we those are just two examples of that cashed out shift that is represented in this duck rabbit which is for me the transformative elements of philosophy it can just make you think complete in completely different ways about material that you already understood and thought unique all you thought you understood and about the world that you thought you knew it can take you to cook to a completely different place so forget this stuff about the martial arts that's just a one upmanship in philosophy treat it seriously and it can change your life thank you that's releasing our genifique could hear that this gentleman was saying that I was seemed to be suggesting that there isn't a great deal of critical thought around and if that doesn't match with his experience his colleagues his peers are critical and think for themselves my view is that we all are philosophers to some extent and we have a huge history of philosophy which you can draw on or not people may children are naturally drawn to asking for the softball questions and debating philosophically whether it's naturally or not whether they do this from an early age sometimes they lose that the thing is philosophy all around us so I'm not the kind of person who thinks that philosophies set off in a little academic world that's the first thing I'd say secondly perhaps in as much as they are critical thinkers in the way you described they are doing philosophy and you may be in a privileged position of electrical engineers highly educated people you have to think in at least in an analytical way about what they're doing and it may transfer to other areas of their life but there are huge numbers of people who are and all of us who are dramatically influenced by what happens to be around them it's quite difficult to be an eccentric dissenting voice in a group of people that is psychologically demonstrated there be many studies about this sorry an emotional aspect yes certainly there's an emotional psychological effect of being in a group which makes it difficult to disagree in many cases it's not just this actually it's more than that it's more than that what other people think there are lots of unconscious influences on our behavior there's some great studies about the way that people act in relation to charity giving money to charity as soon as that was the topic I mentioned people are more generous if they just found a dime like a very low value coin in a telephone kiosk they were more generous if they just found a dime there's somebody and experiments are left there than if they hadn't people who stood outside a a baker's with a smell of fresh dirt freshly baked bread were better disposed to give to charity than people standing outside a dry goods store at a hardware store they weren't aware necessary they could even smell bread but these these environmental factors affect us a lot and we like to think of ourselves as critical rational beings but certainly the Consensus who moment which again might get us into trouble but the consensus among psychologists seems to be with people like Daniel Kahneman Jonathan Hyde the a better model is of the the irrational part of us dominating the non conscious elements domination so that we should see ourselves as a as a rational tail trying to wag an irrational dog as Jonathan Heights has put it so I think we can be over proud of our critical abilities I think a lot of us have swept up by other things and it's difficult once we're in the situation to know the degree to which what you're doing is affected by other people and by environment right so so why would it not be instinctive when you know about a child that you could help somewhere else I mean I'm assuming you don't give huge amounts of your money to charge because most of us probably do you might give some yeah so but it but it's that a rational way to behave when you know that this is there are people in agony in Syria at the moment then we could probably do something about that but we're sitting here rather than shaking at in outside well that's another argument this check out Peter singers book to life is insane there's an assumption that I'm not in philosophy I'm in philosophy in a in a heavy way believe me I spend everyday I believe doing some philosophy whether it's writing or discussing philosophy or thinking about it as so institutionally I really finally face-to-face education actually it's a really interesting point we're at wisdom the development of MOOCs massive open online courses I think philosophy science on face to face interactions and a lot of learning takes place through discussions and real-life situations I think there are things you can do effectively through distance learning and through online education in a sense we're in the business of online education they would enter state nurseries straight for the education delivering as it were a potential eavesdropper into a conversation about philosophy so what can what we do within philosophy education I think within within universities I think what we need to do is get it have a greater well okay the first thing teach people better teach writing philosophy as well as discussing philosophy teach writing as a skill but a greater emphasis on clarity we as philosophers people haven't talked about the need for clarity in the great clarity of Descartes or whoever it is but many professional philosophers do not exemplify that clarity in their publish writing and they do not teach students how to write clearly some of them would do that very fewer than devote times their imagination is not often cultivated within philosophy so there's there are sort of although philosophy is essentially a series of open questions within universities at undergraduate level it's taught as if it were a set of close questions so there are anticipated right answers to the questions that are asked and so narrow questions are asked and people aren't stimulated in to get beyond the conventional ways of thinking so often then it's a huge jump from an undergraduate degree to do postgraduate studies where there's a demand to be original in some sense so that those things are important I think the self-centered focus on my research that many academics have can be misguided I think if more philosophers saw themselves as principally teachers who do research that would be wonderful for philosophy already there is any easy solution I think if it's called caught up in a kind of strange scholasticism at the moment it's not the whole of philosophy I've been my wife used to describe me as a I was like a vicar who'd lost his faith in relation to philosophy and but carried on their job I've left it now but I think through through philosophy bites we should make the David Evan say I've met some of the most amazing philosophers alive who talk lucidly about quite difficult subjects are completely committed to understanding philosophically and their enthusiasm and ideas are infectious you can't be in the room with these people not be excited about philosophy because they are they're thinking on their feet there you can see they really care about it and they've got interesting things to say that for me is a lot that life in philosophy is fantastic so that if that could be what goes on generally in philosophy departments that would be fantastic they'll be superb what actually goes on quite often is people read papers at each other which is the kind of torment they've read verbatim at ER when they're in the room with each other for three quarters of an hour an hour and a half they just weed badly from their paper that they're about to publish and then take a few questions which they've already know the answers to and and then go home or go to the bar which is terrible big waste of time and public money I would say one of the things I do is that quite frequently give talks in schools and what's been striking in the last five years is the way that philosophy is grown as an a-level subject within schools and AAS level but also within religious studies which is getting to be larger than English literature in many schools the number of students in SiC forms who's studying religious studies they're not many of them are not religious themselves but there's a large amount of philosophy within the religious studies a level syllabus and that that's resulting thousands of students across the country getting really interested in philosophy I think I don't think going back to the previous question most philosophy departments have an eye on that I think they they they see it as something that shouldn't really be of interest to them when in fact there could be a great deal of flow of expertise or teaching going from the universities into the SiC forms but I don't see that happening so much I think often that people who go around and speak in schools are off or independent philosophy writers and so on rather than the academics in in the Universities it's very difficult to talk about the British school system having extra time for making connections when as we all know everything is being shifted towards passing exams learning facts that Grove wants us to learn that will good for him on University Challenge and so on so I don't for me that's that's the antithesis of philosophical education because it's treating education is something that has to be banked something that has you know you build up a stock of cultural knowledge for me that's not what philosophy is at all so the odds with that the direction that seems to be being imposed from above in British education context I think philosophy is great because it can work alongside other subjects and tribes in asking questions about those other subject questions that arise from science or from from literature or from practical such as to like art as well so I think it works very well alongside of the subjects there's no reason why intrinsically why shouldn't be integrated I just don't hold out much hope that in with the current direction of Education is moving in I'm just trying to find a career for myself in that position what a fire I'll be creative I guess they don't don't see look obviously you can beat you can teach the some of the most inspiring teaching philosophies going on in primary schools I've seen there's a guy called Peter Worley who teaches teachers how to teach philosophy two young children I've been I've seen some of his methods in action and he said absolutely fantastic a very dramatic conversations take place as a result of this things you wouldn't imagine that a ten-year-old would be able to discuss that discussed at a level that could be almost in a seminar and it first-year undergraduate course so so you might think about going into teaching if you transform people's lives very dramatically they're also you get long holidays we can do more for us vivre rightly if that's what you want to do I don't know it's like being a poet isn't it it's that it's not easy to make money from poetry you know to make enough to live as a poet maybe get a job in the city but I see myself as writers I think amongst other things and podcast maker but there are all kinds of opportunities opening up online and a lot of people assume that you can't actually write philosophy online and get paid for it but that's false there are lots of new places that are emerging which will pay you to write philosophy to make audio philosophy whether you can make a living at that it depends on whether you get you get the large enough public attention and and money flowing from from whatever source that way but there are paid opportunities but I'd say it's for each this is the society announcer you have to choose and make your own decisions for yourself I can't tell you how to do it you're free going to find a way to do it if you really want to do it I'm sure you can find a way to survive but most people survive if you don't we don't need that much money to study philosophy their main amazing resources you can get access to for nothing online in philosophy in terms of the great works of the past so if you want to study David Hume all his works are online just about Daisy team.org that Peter Milliken runs it's got fantastic resources you don't have to own copies of the book I'm sorry to say this but there's but at the same time I should say that there is a moral imperative to buy books by living authors especially philosophy books when the philosophers are in the room

Channel: Blackwell's Bookshops

Views: 9,274

Rating: 4.9727893 out of 5

Keywords: Nigel, Warburton, Philosophy, Blackwell, Oxford, Bookshop, University Of Oxford (College/University), Education, Open Uniersity, Teaching, Transformative, John Stuart Mill (Author), Ludwig Wittgenstein (Author), Philosophy Bytes, Popular, Perception, Event, Talk, Public, Plato, Aristotle, Critical, Thinking, Important, Studying, Philosophy Department, David Hume, Peter Singer, Charity, Syria, Drowning, Child

Id: 7kYKF3IAwyw

Length: 42min 16sec (2536 seconds)

Published: Fri Dec 13 2013