Fundamentally, the system for testing subjective ideas (hypothesis) against objective physics is called empirical evidence ( e.g., the idea [hypothesis], the experiment, etc). The philosopher Karl Popper contributed significantly to the philosophy of science. For example, " a scientific theory must be falsifiable" ( if ya can't prove an idea wrong [e.g., ghosts], ya can't prove what idea is more probably right [e.g., biology]). It sounds like Andy is combing the empirical evidence from cognitive neurosceince with his more personal philosophical epistemology, and coming up with some hypotheses. However, can he test them? The evolutionary psychologists David buss tests his hypotheses using well-designed experiments (.i.e., the empirical scientific methods. e..g, volunteer research participants from many different cultures so as to compare more species-typical human behaviours) https://labs.la.utexas.edu/buss/ FYI, whilst a person could be semi-nurtured towards learning the empirical-based method, fundamentally understanding is not "indoctrination" (indoctrination is generally believing in narratives. Not understanding quantitative systems. e.g., population statistics). For example, (population statistics), one hundred slightly different sized rocks, if a method accurately weighs each rock, and then the sum is divided by how many rocks there are, that's the statistical average weight of the rocks. Fundamentally, that mathematics is understood. A better example would be comparing a neurological feature such as depth perception. Whilst a more accurate (calibrated) depth perception can be nurtured (learnt), depth perception isn't an adaptation that is indoctrinated, any more than having two eyes.
The speaker is a foolish, narcissistic, lower-earth energy arrogant fool! And you can hear in Rogan's voice and body language that he too find him to be so!
Typical rational and nihilistic mindset
Joe rogan please pull some gear heads on and talk about the RPMact
He basically said wishful thinkers are more open minded. Which is bad…I disagree
Fundamentally, the system for testing subjective ideas (hypothesis) against objective physics is called empirical evidence ( e.g., the idea [hypothesis], the experiment, etc). The philosopher Karl Popper contributed significantly to the philosophy of science. For example, " a scientific theory must be falsifiable" ( if ya can't prove an idea wrong [e.g., ghosts], ya can't prove what idea is more probably right [e.g., biology]). It sounds like Andy is combing the empirical evidence from cognitive neurosceince with his more personal philosophical epistemology, and coming up with some hypotheses. However, can he test them? The evolutionary psychologists David buss tests his hypotheses using well-designed experiments (.i.e., the empirical scientific methods. e..g, volunteer research participants from many different cultures so as to compare more species-typical human behaviours) https://labs.la.utexas.edu/buss/ FYI, whilst a person could be semi-nurtured towards learning the empirical-based method, fundamentally understanding is not "indoctrination" (indoctrination is generally believing in narratives. Not understanding quantitative systems. e.g., population statistics). For example, (population statistics), one hundred slightly different sized rocks, if a method accurately weighs each rock, and then the sum is divided by how many rocks there are, that's the statistical average weight of the rocks. Fundamentally, that mathematics is understood. A better example would be comparing a neurological feature such as depth perception. Whilst a more accurate (calibrated) depth perception can be nurtured (learnt), depth perception isn't an adaptation that is indoctrinated, any more than having two eyes.
The speaker is a foolish, narcissistic, lower-earth energy arrogant fool! And you can hear in Rogan's voice and body language that he too find him to be so!