Deconstructing The Myth Of Science - Part 3
By Leo Gura - November 9, 2020 | 13 Comments
A 4-part series exploring the metaphysical and epistemic limitations of science.
Brent says: I was watching this video Deconstructing the myth of science 3, and Leo, you said “you may actually think you were born”, or something to the affect. This really struck me as odd as I was telling myself, “yes I really believe that I was born”. How can I innerstand this statement? Do you have an answer for me or must I watch 1000 hours of video’s to qualify. btw I have watched many hours of your material. I have experienced the affects of LSD and mushrooms though many years in my past. I can comprehend your language to a certain extent. I believe that there is no way to communicate the whole of reality but I do get it. Riddle me this…
Leo Gura says: Your birth is imaginary.
Ah yes, I remember questions from Alan Watts that ring true to this statement:
Where were you before you were born?
Where will you be after you die?
Were you born at the time of conception, or when your father had that gleam in his eye, was that you?
It’s simply a matter of measurement, symbolism, and of course social conditioning.
Joel says: To sum up: Science is not an exact science.
Christine Kunert says: Is there a Deconstructing the Myth of Science – Part 4 yet? I can’t find it.
Patience. Let this be a time to question and contemplate for part 4 rather than just consume it.
DON’T JUST TEACH YOUR CHILDREN TO READ
TEACH THEM TO QUESTION WHAT THEY READ
TEACH THEM TO QUESTION EVERYTHING!!!
George Carlin
THE TWO ENEMIES OF THE PEOPLE ARE CRIMINALS AND GOVERNMENT
SO LET US TIE THE SECOND DOWN WITH THE CHAINS OF THE CONSTITUTION
SO THE SECOND WILL NOT BECOME THE LEGALIZED VERSION OF THE FIRST!
Thomas Jefferson
I love this Leo. I love it because it brings me right back to nothingness, literally right back to where I have been. I’ve heard and read your point in the works of Alan Watts quite often, that thought and symbol are entangling us so much so that we believe we are ‘we’ and that there are ‘things’ at all. BUT THERE ISN’T ANY-THING! Something is just ‘THIS’ as Alan Watts describes it. There is only direct experience and it can change completely, subtlety or immensely, as it has for me on LSD and shrooms.
So I do have a question then, and I’ll give my conclusion afterwards;
A science of consciousness, centered on experiencing and training consciousness using practices such as visualization, contemplation, psychedelics, coherent thought sequencing, astral projection, lucid dreaming, and so on IS indeed a science, correct? And if so, is it possible to become ‘gods’ or at a state such as the supposedly supernatural ‘ETs’?
I THINK it is and believe so too, but it is my Life Purpose to test it, to master the science of consciousness, and to inspire people to become masters of consciousness and creativity.
Max the know better says: To deconstruct what all humans believe, don’t question what you read, believe everything you read if it’s true, how are you going to know what’s true? This might be a break with my cherished beliefs but realise that life’s a disaster, and be with the facts, a true religion needs no holy book. or maybe it’s not the case, maybe the whole time I’m wrong, consider that belief in Schopenhauer’s pessimism needs no holy book, that doesn’t make what I say true, to show how intelligent I am I realise I’m God and the universe is God, and that reality’s all in your consciousness and imagination. If it was the same for everyone they’re not going to agree upon it, I’m already “jailbreaking” my mind, deconstructing Christianity, piece by piece a foundation not on a rock, if Christianity was solid then why does it split into schisms? and why were there holy wars all throughout history/ I think Leo’s engaging in the same war, by questioning science he’s defending spirituality that’s not based on fact, first things first, get with the facts, but Leo doesn’t face facts, facts are these cold unfragmented truths that almost no institution wants, a pessimist doesn’t want the facts, they want acknowledgement that evil and downfall is the only truth, if i demonstrated facts to my housemate and rightly so, he would drag me back down to the brutal reality, it can’t just be the facts and it’s not just proof. Pessimism hasn’t got any proof, the things I say are extremely threatening to your ideal model of reality, I’m about to say I question my disbelief in religion, I regain strength in the belief, pushed aside as a cult, Mormonism is extremely threatening to another Christian’s worldview, it’s radically different, if it’s a change to what Christianity should be, it becomes heresy, that stuff which is very different to other beliefs is scary, what Leo’s scared of isn’t his falsehood but that his teachings may be wrong, I’m not calling him out on his bullshit, I’m saying Leo’s not immune to the survival mechanism, he’s also preserving the survival of his brand, and if there’s one nudge, one question begging him to teach truth, he switches off immediately. It’s not just the truth he’s concerned with, but the survival of his views, he’s not going to present what I’m searching for, the facts, the truth, as this shit, that is God, magic, elven people and all that fantasy, is addictive, eventually a man gives in to belief in these things, it doesn’t feel or sound true at first but you try it on for size and delude yourself into falsehood, I’m simply saying that if you’re not careful into these cults you’ll be fooled into a scam, you’ll spend your life reading the Bible finding out you follow the wrong Christian sect or that you’re blind to some stories written by somebody who wrote them in chocolate, can you believe this? No, of course not, then why do you disbelieve all these truths handed out to you but not one narrow facet of truth? That’s why as Leo is saying I’m deconstructing religion.
Max the shithead says: Leo is himself scary to scientists, he can do anything he wants but I still think meta”science” is a disgrace, I still think purists including my little brother don’t want novelty, I tried novelty on him before, it turns out it’s scary, as weirdos are scary; yes, I can do what I want, but not without a cost, I can deviate from the norms if I want to, when they push their norms on other people. I still think these crackpots are belligerent, engaged in war, by trying to improve science you’re trouble to the scientists, most people are orthodox what they take seriously, mostly traditionalists and purists (it doesn’t seem to fit a label but my little brother’s a purist and doesn’t want to hear anything new).
Max the shithead says: I’m not doing any of that anti-intellectual shit, lacking understanding when contemplating, I’m out, what kind of God deprives you of the intellectual? Religion, mysticism, metaphysical monism? Islam?, crazy things like that, followed by idiots with psychiatric disorders, I’m out, I’m a Kierkegaardian, intellectual stuff, Leo looks like a dickhead when he mentions it’s not intellectual, well I’m not giving him the satisfaction.
Max the shithead says: from now on I’m entertaining this disgrace’s to science notions, whether I like it or not, I’m biting “the bullet”, I have an open mind, to study as a technician myself (as a dipterist, lepidopterist and anthologist) and to maybe extend the sciences to include araneology, studying spiders, I discovered no truth, I can’t know it for certain when I could debunk unscientific thoughts and say that spiders have compound eyes, yes, cousin Susan Dunk was a little araneologist in her school-learning days (she now goes to school to teach), how else does she know?
Max Gron says: if there are no chromosomes, still, the fact remains male chromosomes are shaped like penises, it’s so, how do you know what’s in accordance with fact or reality, what’s true? why these objective claims when history was always wrong? it’s all subjectively biased, in my sciences I made hardly any theoretical models, all I created was an analysis of flowers and certain insects, it’s so, lepidopterology already debunked the belief that moths were the devil, you can’t believe in this debunking and believe in God, I’m spiritual now, no longer theist, I wonder how long this’ll last? Perhaps it’s arthropodology I should study, or maybe entomology and araneology, to expand my sciences, and perhaps also a botanist and not an anthologist or maybe both, adding up to 5 sciences if I include ornithology, since all I would have to buy is binoculars, but if that’s not a fact to me, then it’s owl research, problem solved, I very much bumped into my lepidopterological-truth problem, if I conduct this science more I’ll know more about it, the truth never makes itself known. as all the people here are closed-minded in the comments section when they’re not supposed to be, nobody even bothers to know that I have the truth, and not self-deceptions, furthermore nobody cares about this but if I told them my method they’ll reject it. To be honest, an unlikely science might be correct, orthopterology, the science of the orthoptera (grasshoppers, crickets etc), even when difficult to grasp might be a true science, a true scientist’s up for a challenge, so I should, within my budget, be a dipterologist, lepidopterologist, orthopterologist, and anthologist, to avoid a fake behaviour, I’ll only regularly follow these 4 sciences, expanding my science to include the orthoptera (see above), without changing anything, if moths and butterflies can get me to understand the universe more, even risking what’s evasive to grab hold of a grasshopper for the research and studying that, then perhaps I’ll have the full picture.