This should have way more views. With all those "alternative facts" floating around, being aware of how yourself are processing inputs could stimulate critical thinking. Nobody likes being lied to, no matter what political views someone has. But I fear that this video doesn't have enough explosions and barely covered women in it to get lots of attention...
These videos are awesome with how succint and well-put they are, but I get sort of worked-up and upset feeling whenever I watch them, because they describe in such abundantly clear terms the litany of obvious faults in the average person's customary thinking, all the way up through the graduate and professional level. I just can't understand it, and it drives me nuts. For me, being a purely or even primarily analytic thinker is not excusable or at all relatable for a functioning adult. Taken to the extents it is typically taken to by default, it is a quite ridiculous and entirely unrealistic way of reasoning. I had internalized it myself too, by cultural osmosis, but my high school education and the general ed classes in my undergraduate education soundly and thoroughly annihilated that whole paradigm and mindset in detail for me, ad naseum even. From this education, it has always seemed that analytic reasoning as a default, universally applicable and deeply efficacious form of reasoning was discredited roundly, starting with the fall of modernism in the early 20th century, and in contemporary society is nothing more than a childish illusion you're supposed to be disabused of and grow out of when you mature in your cognitive capacity. Not a path to an advanced form of thinking for some kind of upper echelon of intellectuals - just a level of thinking appropriate for a functioning adult in a post-enlightenment era context. Or so I thought. This has made graduate education an extreme culture shock and incredibly frustration on this count, as I shockingly - and inexplicably find an endless and dominating deluge of graduate and professorial level SOCIAL SCIENTISTS of all things, unquestioningly and unironically committed to linear, reductionistic thinking. I didn't expect that even lay people should be like this past a certain age, and am stunned to find that even the last people on earth who ever should be - the people whose job it is to not be this way, who are certified as experts at that job by our society, at the highest level - are by and large like this. And nothing I say gets through. Each person just filters anything I have to say through a analytic reasoning purist, vulgar mechanistic "empiricist" frame, and spits out responses of that same nature, no matter how much I spin my wheels trying to be as explicit as possible about what the problem is. The closest really anyone seems to seeming to getting what I'm trying to say are the minority of people who take it as some piecmeal "good point;" people who think that my problematization of the entire epistemology they're using and my direction toward what I think are alternatives is a small, overlooked, confounding variable that can have overlooked effects on their analytically produced models now and then, meaning said variable should be bracketed, put aside, and briefly considered as a form of due diligence when going through the checklist of sound thought processes in the specific realm of academic theorizing. That is the closest people get. Can you imagine how maddening this is? Do you experience this too?
Sound reasoning. I would assume they are quite literally lacking open-mindedness, referring to the people who simply filter what you say. The environment seems to be part of the problem for you. Maybe you're just preaching to the wrong audience. When you asked, "Do you experience this too?" the answer is yes, but could you go into more detail about how this affects the change you're trying to create in the world? Now, obviously, what you said is a huge systemic problem that needs to be addressed. But I feel you may be addressing it the wrong way. You also posted this 2 years ago, so I probably won't get a response, and you probably have an entirely different outlook on this now.
This is infinitely more interesting than what they teach at my uni
5:01 lol anyone else noticed the jigsaw piece doesn't fit in the gap?
great video! Thanks a lot!
loving your channel. its brain candy and soul food at once.
This aligns to so much I have heard from tibetan Buddhists
This should have way more views. With all those "alternative facts" floating around, being aware of how yourself are processing inputs could stimulate critical thinking. Nobody likes being lied to, no matter what political views someone has.
But I fear that this video doesn't have enough explosions and barely covered women in it to get lots of attention...
The video sound is pretty good, beyond my imagination
What is this channel? Why has god given it to me now? Who are you, why do you make this? You're blowing my weak empiricist mind.
These videos are awesome with how succint and well-put they are, but I get sort of worked-up and upset feeling whenever I watch them, because they describe in such abundantly clear terms the litany of obvious faults in the average person's customary thinking, all the way up through the graduate and professional level. I just can't understand it, and it drives me nuts. For me, being a purely or even primarily analytic thinker is not excusable or at all relatable for a functioning adult. Taken to the extents it is typically taken to by default, it is a quite ridiculous and entirely unrealistic way of reasoning. I had internalized it myself too, by cultural osmosis, but my high school education and the general ed classes in my undergraduate education soundly and thoroughly annihilated that whole paradigm and mindset in detail for me, ad naseum even. From this education, it has always seemed that analytic reasoning as a default, universally applicable and deeply efficacious form of reasoning was discredited roundly, starting with the fall of modernism in the early 20th century, and in contemporary society is nothing more than a childish illusion you're supposed to be disabused of and grow out of when you mature in your cognitive capacity. Not a path to an advanced form of thinking for some kind of upper echelon of intellectuals - just a level of thinking appropriate for a functioning adult in a post-enlightenment era context. Or so I thought. This has made graduate education an extreme culture shock and incredibly frustration on this count, as I shockingly - and inexplicably find an endless and dominating deluge of graduate and professorial level SOCIAL SCIENTISTS of all things, unquestioningly and unironically committed to linear, reductionistic thinking. I didn't expect that even lay people should be like this past a certain age, and am stunned to find that even the last people on earth who ever should be - the people whose job it is to not be this way, who are certified as experts at that job by our society, at the highest level - are by and large like this. And nothing I say gets through. Each person just filters anything I have to say through a analytic reasoning purist, vulgar mechanistic "empiricist" frame, and spits out responses of that same nature, no matter how much I spin my wheels trying to be as explicit as possible about what the problem is. The closest really anyone seems to seeming to getting what I'm trying to say are the minority of people who take it as some piecmeal "good point;" people who think that my problematization of the entire epistemology they're using and my direction toward what I think are alternatives is a small, overlooked, confounding variable that can have overlooked effects on their analytically produced models now and then, meaning said variable should be bracketed, put aside, and briefly considered as a form of due diligence when going through the checklist of sound thought processes in the specific realm of academic theorizing. That is the closest people get. Can you imagine how maddening this is? Do you experience this too?
Sound reasoning. I would assume they are quite literally lacking open-mindedness, referring to the people who simply filter what you say. The environment seems to be part of the problem for you. Maybe you're just preaching to the wrong audience. When you asked, "Do you experience this too?" the answer is yes, but could you go into more detail about how this affects the change you're trying to create in the world? Now, obviously, what you said is a huge systemic problem that needs to be addressed. But I feel you may be addressing it the wrong way. You also posted this 2 years ago, so I probably won't get a response, and you probably have an entirely different outlook on this now.