Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 1
By Leo Gura - October 26, 2020 | 10 Comments
A 4-part series exploring the metaphysical and epistemic limitations of science.
Megan Renk says: Are you kidding? Are we ready? I get so excited about looonnnggg videos! Watched this 3 times already and on my 4th tonight. Thanks Leo for your perspective. 3 years watching now…cant get enough.
Max Gron says: Just be careful of intellectuals like Leo that you don’t fall in the trap of misinterpreting his “science” and making an arse of yourself!
Megan Renk says: I appreciate your concern. I’ve been following Leo for almost four years and have watched more than 50% of his videos multiple times. I feel like Leo gives his amazing perspective on certain topics and then also educates his viewers on not pigeonholing their research and giving them other options to go and make their own opinions of what he has to say. I feel like over the last 4 years following his work has changed my entire life and the way that I view things. I suffer from bipolar disorder and the only way that I have actually been able to view the world in a way that works for me is to study psychology and a lot of what he studies including the study of science, his view of looking at things helps me and my worldview. I feel like if you’re only watching one of his videos you’re not going to get his point of view whereas if you follow him from the beginning you sort of get to know him and his mindset and you understand that he just gives you the tools you need to start opening up your mind to think about things for yourself. In a lot of his videos he warns people that the things he speaks about are not for the faint of heart and you have to be able to decipher for yourself what you want his information to mean in your life and he’s really smart about the way that he puts it I feel. Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion but I hope that Leo continues to do exactly what he wants for his life and continues to put the education out there for free for people like me because it actually does benefit my entire life and my entire personality and worldview.
Max Gron says: Yes you’re right, Leo can do whatever he wants, but it’s not a concern with what Leo wants, it’s a concern with misinterpreting what he says and using it as an excuse to be religious-minded and not sciency-minded.
Roese Eisele says: Witchcraft is real. Demons exist. First-hand experience.
Why aren’t your lemons pink Leo or green or brown?
Max Gron says: His lemons are yellow as a symbol for stage yellow, which he thinks he should be at. And as for witchcraft and demons, even if they were real they would be undesirable, god hates you very much and there’s only one truth: antitheist, philosophical, rational truth, as with Christopher Hitchens. And as for science it brought man to the moon, it’s displayed in museums so away with your old wive’s tales, it’s people beliefs, it’s not true.
Max Gron says: Science is necessary as an educational tool, even though it’s in error sometimes, they check their data and fix it, rendering truth to science, it’s all about testing. Leo’s spot on with his frustrations, to defend his religion because he’s wrong. Religious people won’t admit they’re wrong. And yes I did figure reality out: Darwinism if you know about it says that only the strongest and the least vulnerable will survive, it’s so not intellectual teaching anti-dogma of science, the solution is simple and it’s not that complicated: you should eliminate all dogma and injustice, it’s not enough deconstructing science, you should be an academic, which in the field of philosophy, I’m an academic, or one thing, ancient philosophy is taught by Plato, Aristotle etc and the ancient sceptics were ancient philosophers, for another existentialism is modern philosophy and Hegel contemporary philosophy, the diference being modern from 18th century and contemporary from 19th century, and if you’re not wise in accumulated knowledge of philosophy, you can’t deconstruct science.
Max Gron says: Leo speaks with his genius non-academia of science, but he seems to have missed that science is undogmatic, scientists don’t claim to have a belief, I tested my science, this particular one, namely methodological solipsism, is true.
Max Gron says: Leo makes dangerous claims to science, of course if they refused to hire him as a scientist he would make dangerous assertions to science because he’s ignorant of science, I tested my science, “investigated” it, yet the shopkeeper is denying my evidence for belief that an item costs as much as I said, it’s scientific conjecture yet people aren’t ready for it, my science only proves that through my senses I’m telling the truth, not the other way around, if you studied methodological solipsism you’ll know that although the sciences are wrong in many aspects, methodological solipsism is a true science.
Max Gron says: It’s relativistic because it’s relative to traditional science, that’s maths, chemistry, biology, botany, cetology, arthropology, butterfly science, science of amphibians, history, anthropology, primatology, do you see these are “physical” sciences and not science as the whole field? Expertly mixing drinks isn’t itself nuclear science, it’s drink science, the sciences of cooking is measurements, mixing, timing, temperatures, presentation, garnishing, and serving. The science of music is notes, music theory, song writing, tempos, beats, harmony, etc, yes, music’s a science. Weirdness is also a science, it’s a method of not being popular, being extraordinary, contempt for ordinary things and people, even contempt for the ordinary computer, that is itself a science and as simple as this is compared to normalcy, it’s very difficult.