Leo's Blog: Infinite Insights
Miscellaneous bits of wisdom and resources on personal development, life purpose, philosophy, epistemology, nonduality, psychedelics, etc. Published randomly throughout the week.
- penetrating mental vision or discernment.
- the sudden act of grasping the inner nature or truth of a situation.
- a deep understanding of a person or thing.
Insights here are meant to be quick and half-baked. Consider these food for thought.
I've deliberately disabled comments to keep the blog streamlined. If you want to discuss any of the blog posts, you can do so here: Actualized.org Forum
What nobody teaches the laymen outside of science is just how much scientists fudge their numbers, play curve-fitting games with the data, and downright twist their experiments to give the answers they want to get. This happens lot more than laymen would believe. I am not talking about instances of scientific fraud. I am talking about something far more subtle, devious, and intelligent. I am talking about how the scientific ego-mind distorts science and cherry-picks data to fit the models it favors. As an earnest scientist, your own mind is still fooling you because you haven't studied yourself deeply enough to understand how fundamentally dishonest you are.
Why don't scientists admit they fudge their data, calculations, and models? Because that would destroy their authority, and we can't have that. Scientists lie to themselves about why they do it. When you believe that science is the end-all-be-all, the ends justify the means. But again, this begs the question.
Bonus: Research "renormalization". It's a genius bit of scientific witchcraft to eliminate Infinity from science.
Note: Renormalization is a complex topic which I don't have my own analysis of. Contemplate it on your own. It is just fascinating to me that scientists are so allergic to infinities. What, cat got your tongue? Perhaps its a feature, not a bug ;)
Watch this:
https://www.instagram.com/reel/DYMqkuXGLk0
My only advice for Mr Tyson is to take his own advice more seriously.
If you were truly humble, if you truly did not know, you would realize you don't know whether science is true.
Science fools itself by telling itself that it is already humble.
Not humble enough.
Contemplate this: How does science know that its own opinion of its humbleness is true? What if every scientist is actually not humble but arrogant, and in his arrogance thinks himself humble, because science trusts its own opinion of itself too much?
See, this is real skepticism. This is why science is not skepticism.
"Science is humble" is NOT a scientific statement! It is pseudo-science! Where is the research paper that proves science is humble? Oh, right, there isn't one. Then why are you making unscientific claims about science?
When I claim that science is a hallucination, my position is not contradictory, because I am not using science to make it. But when you claim that science is humble, your position is contradictory, because you are making unscientific claims about science and you believe that science is the end-all-be-all. If science is the end-all-be-all, why are you making unscientific claims about it? Why don't you only stick to scientific statements? Oh, right, because your mind cannot function on scientific statements alone. Why not? Because science is not fundamental.
As a serious scientist, don't you feel it's important that science not make unscientific claims about itself? Then why do you keep doing it? Why are scientists so unscientific?
Why do I — someone who doesn't even believe in science — have to educate scientists on their own lack of scientificalness? Because I'm more honest then them.
Don't forget that honesty trumps science. Science ain't worth shit if it isn't honest. And you cannot use science to check science's honesty! Do you see that? "Is science honest?" is a meta-scientific question.
Who does a scientist ask if science is honest? Another scientist?! Get the fuck outta here, you clowns. You don't even understand what honesty is, yet you crown yourselves with PhDs. The king has crowned himself and sees no problem here.
Don't you see? Science has crowned itself. I am taking away the crown. You weasels have played with it long enough. Your crown is a self-serving fantasy and you lack the self-reflection necessary to see that. You don't deserve the crown because you are too epistemically sloppy. The crown belongs to God. Y'all just got together and convinced yourselves that it belongs to you.
Consciousness mesmerizes you. Because it is literally a hallucination. A hallucination sucks you into its reality. Hallucination is not just a random figment of imagination, hallucination hypnotizes you into its own world. Science literally hypnotizes humans into itself for 50 years! When you are hallucinating you can’t resist it. It just sucks you in by overwhelming you, flooding you with a world. That’s what academia is. Once you get sucked into the world of academia, it is no different than being under a hypnotic spell. The spell is so powerful that most academics will only awaken with physical death.
The epistemic problem is so much deeper than facts, logic, research, or arguments. The epistemic problem is, How do you break someone out of a 50-year-long hypnotic spell? Facts and logic rarely break a hypnotic spell. The person in a hypnotic spell does not believe you when you tell him he’s in a hypnotic spell. In fact, he attacks and demonizes you for it.
Science is a hypnotic spell.
Abra-kadabra motherfuckers!
