Leo's Blog: Infinite Insights

What scientists don’t understand is that they have no more right to define what counts as science as non-scientists. Why would scientists have any more right to define science than anyone else? That seems smart on the surface but it’s actually stupid. That is egotism masquerading as science. I don’t care how many PhDs or Nobel prizes you have, you have no more right to define science than I do. If this doesn’t make sense to you, think it through deeper. Nobody owns what science ought to be. Just because you got a PhD or Nobel prize does not mean your version of science is how it ought to be! Just because you joined a country club doesn't mean you know what is best for the future of that country club. The question isn’t how science is, the question is how it ought to be? But who gets to decide how it ought to be? Today’s scientists? NO! Obviously no, because that is straight up question-begging. If today’s science is deeply flawed — which it is — then you can’t use that as a rationale for why they get to decide the future. The fox has convinced himself that only he has the right to guard the hen-house. But I say the fox is high on his own supply.

The notion that only scientists get to define science is unscientific, unquestioned dogma masquerading as science.

The scientific ego thinks it owns science. No. You don't own science any more than me. I will tell scientists how science should be, precisely because I'm not corrupted by science.

It will take a long time for scientists to understand this one because it so contradicts everything they've been taught.

The beauty of true science is that anyone can define it, not just a credentialed class. Science is not owned by anyone, not even scientists. That is because no scientist ever knew what science was. No one gets to be the Pope of Science because no one ever knew what science was. Don't you scientists see that true science is so open-ended that it cannot even define itself!

The over-definition of science is unscientific and corrupts science by artificially limiting its purview. Do I have to be a scientist to understand or say this? Nope. Does it matter if every scientist in the world disagrees with me? Nope. It is still true.

It order to have an exceptionally developed society, we must have hundreds of millions of exceptionally developed citizens, which is basically impossible. Being exceptional does not scale. Being amazing does no scale. Being Good does not scale. Being Conscious does not scale. The only reason society is not amazing is because the majority of its members are not amazing. How can society be amazing when most people are sloppy, lazy, irresponsible, uneducated, unconscious, selfish, corrupt, survival zombies? An amazing society cannot be magically created through gimmickry or shortcut. An amazing society requires deeply educating and training hundreds of millions of amazing people. But not as conformist zombies and government loyalists, but as fully autonomous minds. That is why we don’t have a great government. There is no free lunch. You cannot have a great government when most of its citizenry is not great individually.

The true function of government is to help create and foster great individuals at massive scale. That's the actual problem every government is struggling and failing to solve. Great individuals cannot be created through a mechanical, unconscious, factory-farm process. The more mechanical that process gets, the more it scales, but the less greatness it produces. Greatness is not mechanical, it is sentient, it is Spirit. There is no greatness without Spirit. Spirit cannot be cultivated in a factory. A factory is a spiritual slaughterhouse. That's why you don't find much Spirit in school, universities, corporations, the military, and bureaucracy. The highest collective challenge for mankind is inventing ways of scaling Spirit. That's the real developmental challenge.

How do we scale Spirit without crushing it? That's what our greatest minds should be working on. That's where our resources should be invested, not in datacenters. But instead the greatest minds are trapped in inventing a mechanical hell because science told them that Spirit is "unscientific".

My claim is that science is bigoted. What is this bigotry? Science is bigoted against the supernatural, mystical, and infinite. My challenge to every scientist is this: How do you know that science is not simply bigoted? Who did you ask? Science? Can you see that this must be a meta-scientific issue? Because if what I say it true, if science is bigoted, then you cannot ask science to answer this question due to conflict of interest. Of course if you ask any bigot whether he’s a bigot, he will deny it. “But Leo! Prove to me scientifically that science is bigoted.” No! That means you aren’t seeing the depth of the problem. Whether or not science is bigoted cannot be answered by science, it must be answered from beyond science. Which demonstrates why you can’t have proper science without considering factors beyond science. When science says, “Science is all you need to understand reality. Nothing else is needed beyond science.” That is bigotry! But science refuses to recognize its own bigotry because it is bigoted. All I am trying to do is help science see its own bigotry. But of course, this means I will be gaslit by the bigots.

The challenge is this: How do we get every scientist in the world to recognize that science is spiritual bigotry? Do you see that recognizing this requires something more than science?

This is what I mean when I say meta-science is more important than science. First we must get our meta-science right, then we can go on to do proper science. But that is not how today's scientists operate. Today's scientists are too busy and too arrogant to care about meta-science. All I'm trying to do is show you the importance of meta-science. But when I do that scientists perceive me as their enemy. Because meta-science genuinely threatens the authority of science. The one thing science cannot stand is having its authority undermined. But that's exactly what is needed to advance science to the next developmental stage. Ironically, the one trying to make science better the most is the one who will be attacked and gaslit the hardest. This is why scientific progress takes centuries. Science can only advance as fast as bigots die. Sadly, it is easier to wait for bigots to die than to cure them of their bigotry.

Do you see the problem that bigotry cannot be cured with facts and logic? If science is truly bigoted as I claim, then you can't cure that by presenting a scientific argument. No amount of research papers cure bigotry. How do you cure a bigot? How do you prove to a bigot that he's a bigot? Realizing you're a bigot requires an awakening, which requires deep philosophical self-reflection, which science denies is needed in science.

The problem with arguing with scientists about God is that you are not arguing against a position which was rationality or scientifically adopted. You are arguing with bigotry, which is why you can never win no matter how good your argument is. When you argue with a scientist, you are arguing against an unfalsifiable position. Science is unfalsifiable. Not because it is true, but because it is bigotry.

By the way, look up the definition of bigotry.

Scientific bigotry is not an oxymoron. Scientists were bigots throughout history and they are still bigots today. Yes, it is bigotry to a priori deny all mystical experience. That is as bigoted as denying the data produced by microscopes and telescopes. I can't believe I have to explain this. I would hope all this is obvious to a scientist.

If science stops being bigoted, I will stop criticizing science. Isn't that fair? What I've been criticizing this whole time is not science but bigotry. But scientific people have confused bigotry with science. We must clear up this confusion to advance as a species. That is why I talk about science so much.

Philosophy is really just science of your own mindspace. That is why it works. It works because you are observing real ways the mind works. Philosophy turns your own mind into a laboratory. That is why philosophy cannot be distinguished from science. You can’t separate philosophy from science because science requires understanding your own mind. You cannot do valid science without understanding your own mind. The deeper you understand your own mind, the deeper science you can do. But scientists don’t understand this. They think science is so objective that it doesn’t require awareness of the mind at all. That is insanely naive. That means science will not develop sufficient construct-awareness to understand itself. The biggest problem with science is lack of construct-awareness, which comes from separating science from philosophy, psychology, introspection, and spirituality. Rationalist scientists have foolishly convinced each other that removing the mysticism from science makes science better, more rigorous, more true, but in fact it makes science dumb by cutting science off from its own source: MIND.

The core problem for science is this: MIND is inherently supernatural and mystical, but science a priori denies that anything can be supernatural or mystical. In order to make that a priori dogma seem to hold, science has to reject deep introspection and self-reflection as part of science, since if it was embraced by science it would reveal that science is MIND and MIND is supernatural and mystical. Science has painted itself into a corner by closing its mind to the possibility that MIND could be supernatural and mystical. It is in fact unscientific to believe that MIND cannot be supernatural and mystical. That is nothing more than a dogma and a prejudice. If the mind is used properly, then it will have no bias against the supernatural and mystical. If the mind is used improperly, it will have a bias against the supernatural and mystical, while calling itself objective and rational.

Rationality is fully compatible with the supernatural and mystical. Of course it is. Because rationality is a function of MIND, and MIND is supernatural/mystical because MIND is Infinite. Science is in denial about its own Source. Science has severed itself from its Source. Science is the spiritual disease of an overly unholistic, analytical mind. But culture and group-think has normalized this disease and even placed it on a pedestal as the highest form of intelligence. This is embarrassingly wrong. The highest form of intelligence would never cut itself off from its Source.

From now on, every time you hear a rationalist scientist talking, just remind yourself that this is a mind so prejudiced and arrogant that it has cut itself off from its Source, and is proud of it.

I don't like making predictions, but I predict that the AI bubble is going to pop. So watch out. Don't lose your pants. Many people are going to get hurt. This AI bubble is collective madness. People are drunk on AI fantasies.

At this point all the tech companies are in so deep, nothing they say or do can be trusted. At this point they have a loaded gun to their head. They will say and do anything. They will lie, cheat, steal, bribe, break laws, buy politicians, fudge numbers, distort, and manipulate just to stay alive. Do not trust anything that is said about AI by people making AI. They are all compromised and drunk on Silicon Valley group-think.

This AI crash will go down in history as the perfect example of why developing autonomy of mind is so important. When your mind works autonomously you become immune to collective madness.

Note: My predictions are not guarantees. My predictions can be wrong. So take that into account. I am making educated guesses.