Academics are Bad Communicators

[Extreme Z7]

Just because @Leo Gura teased a future episode on "Clarity", I thought I'd share this recent vid that seems very relevant.

 

Edited November 4, 2022 by Extreme Z7

[Osaid]

Great video. I think Leo said in his college episode or something that he had to unlearn how they taught him to write in school to communicate better.

[DocWatts]

[avatarse]

I think one problem with this is that academics aren't concerned with communicating to laymen.  Every avenue of academics almost has it's own language and it's basically focused on communicating within their own dept.

 

As a result, it definately makes it hard to communicate what you're doing, but it may also make it less efficient to communicate to other people in your discipline.

 

Ultimately I think we need to focus more in educational communicators as a hugely important part of all disciplines.  Physics and STEM in general has started to do a better job of this for sure.

[Vibroverse]

7 hours ago, DocWatts said:

Instead of saying "it seems like we cannot find a solid ground to say something is beautiful, because proofs and the direct experience of beauty don't seem to be supporting one another, meaning, you cannot never prove to me, objectively, why you experience something to be beautiful. and yes, we can trust the ideas of the experts more on this, but still, no matter how much expertise you have in the field of reasoning, there will still be a gap of explaining 'but why does x necessarily lead to y". there will always be an explanatory gap there, for x and y are two different phenomena of consciousness, and, it seems like, you need to have some sort of 'faith' to say that x and y are objectively connected to one another. so, it looks like the aesthetic experience, and aesthetic judgment cannot be grounded on an objective basis, but instead, it seems to be about the subjective experience and reflection of the individual". 

 

Edited November 5, 2022 by Vibroverse

[Ulax]

Lmao I found that vid partially reassuring actually.

I thought analytic philosophers were difficult until I started trying to read some continental philosophers. I found the latter absolutely nuts to try and understand in the most part - a lot of jargon.

[Clabber Girl]

When people speak this way to me... it communicates they dont know what they are talking about so they need to make it sound good. I have never been a fan of people who cannot have a humble convo 

There is a quote that Einstein said something like... if you cannot explain it SIMPLY you dont understand it.

[Carl-Richard]

@DocWatts I get anxiety halfway through that text ?

[Carl-Richard]

It's one thing to use jargon. It's another thing to write like you're trying to birth a new language out of your left nostril.

[Leo Gura]

It's a game designed to hide the vacuousness and lack of originality of their ideas.

Academia is a very serious circle jerk.

Edited November 7, 2022 by Leo Gura

[ZenSwift]

@Leo Gura that's so sneaky! Omg! 

 

Super excited for an episode on clarity as in the future when I teach self-actualization, my brand is centred on Clarity. My Gene Keys tell me that the highest expression of my heart is Clarity. 

 

"Clarity" will be to me as the word "Actualized" is for Leo Gura. 

Edited November 8, 2022 by ZenSwift

[Tyler Robinson]

I think academicians lack EQ. 

 

[Vibroverse]

Academic philosophy seems to be, almost, nothing but concept fetishism. It is like they don't know what they are talking about anymore, but talking about talking about talking about talking. 

 

[ValiantSalvatore]

46 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

Academic philosophy seems to be, almost, nothing but concept fetishism. It is like they don't know what they are talking about anymore, but talking about talking about talking about talking. 

 

Sounds almost like me . It's not holistic enough, there are a few professors who give you a sense of holism after watching Leo's video about holism, and they interconnect stuff, although this was at a polytechnic... now it's way to open and most of them don't make an effort like Lex Fridman and/or Huberman to share their research for consumers and create a plattform to be more integrative and functional at Yellow, so to speak and value discussions and sharing information highly as lean and functional as possible even with long videos. A lecture has so much technical depth.

Also the pressure to not develop yourself and just offer stuff, it's a huge circle jerk of development. For example we have great offers, yet it's not easy to support yourself financially and then take part in that offer, for example Yoga/Meditation/Research programm etc. Then billions of distractions, most are to nihilistic and a nihilistic sort of postmodern thinking is pervasive in academia it has advantages of not taking stuff and failure so seriously and move on with life, yet it lacks meaning. I miss a Prof. like Leo that I had similar, as he was more practically concerned... and a perv... with the fundamental integration of knowledge into ones life.

Most yearn for comfort/security and emotional support and higher earnings, so philosophy itself is quiet exotic imo. Although I feel there is space. There is a misunderstanding of the individual functioning as a paradigm. I'd stll like to know even now besides Leo's pure philosophy, which is way to advanced to beginn with. What is practical philosophy and how can it help me for example make practical steps in my life that produce comfort/security/financial freedom. It's fine having partial truths and making mistakes, this is what I dislike partially about academia most are so hyper-focused on their personal absolute truths. I dunno it's tricky I don't know a solution besides chopping philosohpy down to an applied version of it and to share and life by itself. Usually the critiques imo are good for example reading about anarchy gave me insights into how stage purple societies work. 

I also find it odd, that usually only 90% of philosohpy is attributed to the west and not the east and there barely is anyone integrating both like Daosim etc. similar to Alan Watts and or even Shinzen Young in their own works. For example I prefer Alan Watts as an applied philosopher even if his personal life was quiet odd, he gives a lot of pointers. Most westernes are stuck in their heads and the east is adopting that attittude of survival imo. There is no spirit in philosophy which sort of sucks. I am not an expert this is my opinion.

For example we have a toasmasters programm for 13€ which is cheap... most don't see the value of personal development imo and only care about survival. So everything goes and communication flies out of the window as it's often my way or the highway at one point even though there is more community etc. Anyway this is my opinion...

[Vibroverse]

35 minutes ago, ValiantSalvatore said:

Sounds almost like me . It's not holistic enough, there are a few professors who give you a sense of holism after watching Leo's video about holism, and they interconnect stuff, although this was at a polytechnic... now it's way to open and most of them don't make an effort like Lex Fridman and/or Huberman to share their research for consumers and create a plattform to be more integrative and functional at Yellow, so to speak and value discussions and sharing information highly as lean and functional as possible even with long videos. A lecture has so much technical depth.

Also the pressure to not develop yourself and just offer stuff, it's a huge circle jerk of development. For example we have great offers, yet it's not easy to support yourself financially and then take part in that offer, for example Yoga/Meditation/Research programm etc. Then billions of distractions, most are to nihilistic and a nihilistic sort of postmodern thinking is pervasive in academia it has advantages of not taking stuff and failure so seriously and move on with life, yet it lacks meaning. I miss a Prof. like Leo that I had similar, as he was more practically concerned... and a perv... with the fundamental integration of knowledge into ones life.

Most yearn for comfort/security and emotional support and higher earnings, so philosophy itself is quiet exotic imo. Although I feel there is space. There is a misunderstanding of the individual functioning as a paradigm. I'd stll like to know even now besides Leo's pure philosophy, which is way to advanced to beginn with. What is practical philosophy and how can it help me for example make practical steps in my life that produce comfort/security/financial freedom. It's fine having partial truths and making mistakes, this is what I dislike partially about academia most are so hyper-focused on their personal absolute truths. I dunno it's tricky I don't know a solution besides chopping philosohpy down to an applied version of it and to share and life by itself. Usually the critiques imo are good for example reading about anarchy gave me insights into how stage purple societies work. 

I also find it odd, that usually only 90% of philosohpy is attributed to the west and not the east and there barely is anyone integrating both like Daosim etc. similar to Alan Watts and or even Shinzen Young in their own works. For example I prefer Alan Watts as an applied philosopher even if his personal life was quiet odd, he gives a lot of pointers. Most westernes are stuck in their heads and the east is adopting that attittude of survival imo. There is no spirit in philosophy which sort of sucks. I am not an expert this is my opinion.

For example we have a toasmasters programm for 13€ which is cheap... most don't see the value of personal development imo and only care about survival. So everything goes and communication flies out of the window as it's often my way or the highway at one point even though there is more community etc. Anyway this is my opinion...

I mostly don't find anything useful in western philosophy. I've studied it to some extent, although I'm not an expert at all, but I'm feeling like, meh. I mean, to be honest, I've not heard anything original from any of them, and maybe the reason for that is their ideas have already imbued themselves in the world, so that, whether we're aware of it or not, we've been influenced by their thoughts, I don't know. 

And, however, I'm feeling like there is, almost, nothing in it that truly touches me, except some schools like Neoplatonism, German Idealism, Transcendentalism, etc, to some extent. And these are the schools that were inspired by Eastern Philosophy, to a great extent. I mean, there is always a tone in the Western Philosophy that, in my opinion, makes simple ideas complicated. 

Maybe it is because their minds also have been confused, or maybe it is because they wanted to look sexy etc, I don't know, but I feel like it is very dry and does not tell me anything about the nature of reality at all. And, yeah, you can receive some value from them, of course, but my opinion about it is pretty much the same with what Leo thinks. 

Truly, when Leo made his video about philosophy, even before watching it, I said "okay, this shit is for me, he's created this video for me", and I mostly agreed with everything he said, and of course, I have some differences in my thoughts also. I think about reality much more in a "woowoo" way, like through the concepts of vibration, emotion, idealism, consciousness, etc, and it makes much much more sense to me. 

When I think about the works of Western Philosophers through that lens also, then I say "aha, it now makes sense why you're saying that", it is like I'm feeling what they're actually talking about and why they're actually talking about it. I mean, I, in a sense, have a more mystical perspective on life, but I don't think mysticism and philosophy are actually two different things also. 

I'm thinking of mystical and philosophical teachings as two sides of the same coin, just different degrees of giving importance to different concepts, but yeah, of course, we can say that mysticism is more emotion and state of being etc based, and yeah, in that sense, I believe that intuition and emotion are much deeper and fundamental than reason, if what I'm saying is understood correctly. 

I mean, the concepts of intuition and reason etc are also viewed differently by different people, so I don't even wanna talk about that, but I believe that our natural state of being is peace and silence, in a sense, that only when we are caring about being in those states first, then our mind and thinking is clear, and so that's why I'm seeing reason and intuition, in that sense, as the two sides of the same coin. 

 

[Carl-Richard]

54 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

I mostly don't find anything useful in western philosophy. I've studied it to some extent, although I'm not an expert at all, but I'm feeling like, meh. I mean, to be honest, I've not heard anything original from any of them, and maybe the reason for that is their ideas have already imbued themselves in the world, so that, whether we're aware of it or not, we've been influenced by their thoughts, I don't know. 

Thomas Kuhn.

[Vibroverse]

43 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Thomas Kuhn.

In the sense that we are all children of a historical momentum, a paradigm? 

 

[Carl-Richard]

6 minutes ago, Vibroverse said:

In the sense that we are all children of a historical momentum, a paradigm? 

He's pretty original and useful.

[Vibroverse]

6 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

He's pretty original and useful.

Of course there have been many great ideas created by those philosophers, I'm not trying to say that everything they say is bullshit. I appreciate their contributions to our thinking, and in helping us how to think in a good and effective way. 

I respect and appreciate them, and Kuhn's studies in epistemology, and more specifically in philosophy of science, have been very helpful to me also, in helping me understand that science, like all other human endeavors, also is a human endeavor. 

And it also helped me understand the importance of our minds, and how our minds, in a sense, shape reality with their interpretations of reality. So, in many ways, I'm really very thankful to those guys, and gals. 

[ValiantSalvatore]

2 hours ago, Vibroverse said:

I mostly don't find anything useful in western philosophy. I've studied it to some extent, although I'm not an expert at all, but I'm feeling like, meh. I mean, to be honest, I've not heard anything original from any of them, and maybe the reason for that is their ideas have already imbued themselves in the world, so that, whether we're aware of it or not, we've been influenced by their thoughts, I don't know. 

100% agree just skimming and listening to audiobooks etc. About western philosophy and hearing it in a nutshel, it's close to dead almost if there is not an integration of topics like matter and energy, that are excluded 99.9% of the time in academic topics. As it basically is a hot topic imo. I go to Wikipedia some philosophers and mathematicians even though I am not fluent in them. Like IIRC Euclid and Heracleitus are just insane sources of life philosophy imo. I like Marc Aurel also for example and Lao Tzu in terms of contemplating when I find the time to do it currently...
 

2 hours ago, Vibroverse said:

Truly, when Leo made his video about philosophy, even before watching it, I said "okay, this shit is for me, he's created this video for me", and I mostly agreed with everything he said, and of course, I have some differences in my thoughts also. I think about reality much more in a "woowoo" way, like through the concepts of vibration, emotion, idealism, consciousness, etc, and it makes much much more sense to me. 

Yeah, I feel this is missing and to be honest as a black/white person a lot of humans project this sort of hope towards me in Europe and even when I have psychdelic experiences, I'd be seen as a loon as most cohere to a fear moral instead of looking at this stuff from a couragous viewpoint with more positivity and practical implementation. Most dismiss and ridcule stuff like this, yet it also takes serious work. So I see the seemingly paradoxical nature...

2 hours ago, Vibroverse said:

When I think about the works of Western Philosophers through that lens also, then I say "aha, it now makes sense why you're saying that", it is like I'm feeling what they're actually talking about and why they're actually talking about it. I mean, I, in a sense, have a more mystical perspective on life, but I don't think mysticism and philosophy are actually two different things also. 

Same mystecism should be called philosohpy applied as for example an integrative practical approach imo!

2 hours ago, Vibroverse said:

I mean, the concepts of intuition and reason etc are also viewed differently by different people, so I don't even wanna talk about that, but I believe that our natural state of being is peace and silence, in a sense, that only when we are caring about being in those states first, then our mind and thinking is clear, and so that's why I'm seeing reason and intuition, in that sense, as the two sides of the same coin. 

Yeah that sounds to me very holistic as I lack the conceptual framework of philosophies I tried for example on Wikipedia to remember all of the technical terms, and it was simply to much without serious study and then you can easily get lost. 

What would be cool is to have an array of concepts explained to contemplate about as many other majors are fundamentally lost in the chaos of survival. Then Leo says for example 1h of meditation or psychdelics/yoga/kriya yoga is way better than philosophy and I can see why, it takes thousands of hours to understand this even tiny bits and pieces. This is why I like for example Ralston and Alan Watts as they give you a living version of most of these philosohpies even when you never read them.