I just finished a topic about skepticism from my psychology class. Science can be viewed as a game. The theorist that proposes X to be true or works in the way he or she describes, has to be disproved in order to be not true or not to be a standard. Einstein's relativity theory for example. He had observations about this topic, had a theory and then hypothesis followed by experiments afterwards. When he shared the results and no other scholar or scientist could disprove him validly, Einstein continued with his theory by making, or writing down, more observations, theories and hypothesises followed by experiments that to him approved the theory to be correct or the case. The game here is that as a scientist; bring out theories and make them un-disprovable for as long as possible. Something Einstein succeeded in. But also be skeptical and try to validly disprove the theory. Even if it's the scientists own, or best friend's, family or celebrity crush's, theory. If the scientists fail to be skeptic, we might've actually believed telepathy or water-divining were true.
2 місяці тому+10
However, the one with a claim has the burden of proof
There is this form of mathematics called Analysis. It’s used for proving your equation. Let’s just say for some it’s a burden , for Einstein it was Tuesday.
Nicely put, healthy skepticism is essential in science! As far as telepathy... you might want to look into Dean Radin (scientist/researcher). He seems legit, and says that, with the current state of research done so far, telepathy is actually one of the psi phenomena that have been proven to exist (yep, I was surprised too!). He has done plenty of interviews on YT
I think "trust but verify" has been a good policy from trusted sources and outright skepticism from others. Always let the data guide you to the best or most-correct answer/solution.
My critical inquiry skills led me to believe that the furniture in this video wasn't real and that this wasn't even filmed at a real location. I can confirm that I feel all the healthier for my skepticism.
that's actually what you should do. in an age where misinformation is rampant, you should be skeptical even if it's from trusted sources. there are "scientific research" found to be fraudulent to gain whatever they desire.
Keep in mind this is not the same thing as "never believe anything scientific authorities say ever". This is a lot different. There is a lot of toxic contrarianism out there. So much so that, frankly, I'm not sure if this video helps anything. Generally, trust an academic paper. But if you want to invest the time to become more information and scientifically literate to digest what it says in more detail, do that!
@@3ntr0py777 This is actually terrible advice masquerading as wisdom. Engage in critical thinking, and yes, you should give a study published in Nature more weight than something published in an alternative medicine journal. Authorities are not perfect and there can be fraud, but saying "some of it might not be true, so I'll look at the sources and data" is a lot different than "some of it might not be true, therefore none of it is."
@NATESOR I agree... perhaps the problem also comes from intermediate interpreters of studies, like journalists or bloggers who may take parts of study results and ignore study limitations... and because their content is more accessible to the average person than many published papers, their interpretation becomes the takeaway message for most people.
The Atkins diet promotes weight loss by drastically reducing carbohydrates, causing the body to enter ketosis and burn fat for energy instead of glucose. You must reduce carbohydrates to enter ketosis, as the diet changes your metabolism to prioritize fat-burning instead of relying on calorie counting. Atkins was not being extreme, just using the natural mechanics of metabolism to achieve this shift.
As said in the video, the atkins diet only became popular because its simple and easy to understand. That doesn't make it correct, just makes it simple. The Atkins diet is deadly for a large percentage of the population, especially if you're lazy with it.
If this was taught at schools, perhaps they’d be less people who fall for all the misinformation that’s out there. We’d elect better leaders and have less wars. Misinformation threatens everything and everyone. Please think about what I’ve just said critically 😊
My critical inquiry skills led me to believe that there's a possibility this guy got paid by a food company to create even more confusion to what we consume. I mean there're so many things to talk about, why food? even worse formula in one particular perspective? This could be a video made to secretly promote formula and bread/grain.
This is a great example of how 2 ideas can be true. Yes, calories in/calories out is true on paper, but the body stores fat AND glucogen. When you start eating low carb, you don't seamlessly start burning fat. You use up all available glucose/glucogen. Your body freaks out because it thinks it's running out of energy. It creates hunger hormones to make you want to eat as many calories as possible to replenish the glucogen stores. Once you get adapted to burning fat, the panic-mode hunger hormones die down. Eating protein and fiber from non-starchy vegetables and lowering the fat intake is then easier, as long as you don't have a sugar-starch cheat meal. Feel free to prove me wrong.
"Information is not truth." Yuval Noah Harari in his latest book, Nexus. The world is awash with information. Only a very small amount is fact/truth. People promulgate information to connect with like minded others, NOT to spread truth/facts. That's really useful to know. We seek a tribe to belong to.
So basically everything concerning information and misinformation is true depending on your world View,am working on a book a i used to think i have to research every information when i have the natural ability to decend my own thought process and intelligence.
I was bottle fed because it was 1954, and my Mom was 19. Two years later, when my brother came along, she decided to nurse him. Good thing, too. I guess he'd be a complete imbecile orherwise. On the other hand, any further intelligence I could have developed with that turbo charge would have probably made me unbearable and arrogant! JUST KIDDING! I will share the info as widely as possible. I only just realized the urgent necessity! 😮
I've been a carnivore for 2 years. No carbs. Best medical lab work results ever, lost all excess weight and feel better at 72 than I did in my 30s. Energy level is phenomenal and I can out perform people less than half my age. 😊
I believe we do because of the micro biome diversity is much greater and robust in carb eaters. And a few other factors. But I’m happy to be proven wrong
@@Fab666. I used to think that also. Why do we need that though? People living on just meat seem to do okay. Like, every species eats what it’s eaten for the longest. We can’t decide we want cats or dogs for example to have a more diverse microbiome. It wouldn’t help them. They would do the best if they ate what they’ve eaten for a million years. Is there any evidence that having a more diverse microbiome is beneficial.
I think we would first need to figure out what consciousness is, before we jump into what people call a "soul" really is. Otherwise, the existence is more belief-based, which can't be proven or disproven. That is not the scientific method.
Especially now we need more information like this, more ways we can ferret out what is playing on our biases and what is more likely the truth. Emotion is especially being used to coerce us into believing certain things and if I find a story or some news that uses inflammatory speech, presents on small bits of a talk or something else that supposedly supports their arguments, I will take a step back from it. I can see the manipulation which I can easily step away from.
TRUMPISM Good or Bad? Trump is exciting voters to get involved. But what about WHAT TRUMP is pushing? ================================================================= TNX
Great topics, poor examples. Re: breastfeeding - there is a real, non-zero chance that the ingredients used in infant formula are subpar relative to the constituents of breast milk to the degree that they might impact IQ. It might not be the case - I'm not arguing that it is - but it is possible. We are currently discovering a range of negative effects from previously-thought-to-be-safe processed and otherwise unnatural foods. So yes, lower IQs of babies fed formula does not necessarily mean that the formula caused the lowered IQ. However, it could. So, poor example. Re: carbohydrates - the Atkins diet did not achieve popularity because it's simple. It achieved popularity because it works. There is an abundance of evidence showing the efficacy of a low- to no-carb diet for losing weight, among numerous other health benefits. Carbs are often related to with black-or-white thinking, and going low- to no-carb for too long does have negative effects. So it does illustrate the tendency towards black-or-white thinking. And, again, the way it's presented makes it a poor example.
Yes, the basic idea is right, but the examples he gives are a bit on the edge. I can't possibly believe that BREASTMILK is NOT beneficial as opposed to formula. I mean, I hope Nestle's giving him some money at least... This is stupid and he is discreetly misinforming, after he warned about misinformation. Find a less harmful example, please. I don't think anyone in the world would suggest formula is as good as breastmilk. It's not just about the IQ. What does he actually believe, if we were to ignore the hypothetical? Also, how do you choose the neutral? Why does he suppose that "formula" is just as good, if the studies show otherwise, even if the studies might be biased? Why does he say that formula is ok, if the studies are done by the formula manufacturing companies? Are those not biased? A better idea would be to integrate knowledge of science, economics and psychology to understand that big companies are in it for the money and would say anything to make you buy their product and that humans evolved eating "natural" food so it would make sense that breastmilk would be more healthy. I think....
@@foamheart Yes, I am sorry for getting triggered but it feels like it is very easy to misinterpret what he is saying. That was my point, everything is right, but better examples could've been found, as to not risk misinforming about healthiness of breastmilk. P.S. - how was the correlation debunked? I have no knowledge of the idea or the debunking of it, but it feels pretty hard to measure something like this anyway.
I can't...make it past my bias of a male professor of finance starting the video with an example of whether breastfeeding is good or not...make it make sense.🤦♀️Done. I keep giving this channel a chance but...
Horrible examples. The author falls in the cognitive bias trap he described by diving into the calorie myth. And yes, Atkinson was right and there is plenty of science that proves that. A funny way to try to prove a pont by swapping true and false facts as well as science and pseudoscience.
@@3ntr0py777 Based on the title, it tells you that being skeptic or having critical thinking should be discouraged while having no critical thinking, being an NPC (non playable character) is encouraged
@@melvinrosoaario.a1532 There are two definitions for this word (both relatively the same). First there’s npc’s in video games, those are “non-player characters” or N.P.Cs. The second definition is a person with such little originality and brain power that they are the most bland human on the planet, sorta like how most Doja Cat fans always say “Does she forget she’s famous???” Or how all Andrew Tate fan says “Common Tate w.”
Here is a fact. 50-13. We all know what fact that is. Now, here is the problem : why do people who cite this ONLY cite this? There is a crime statistic they don’t like to talk about. Sexual abuse is done by Yt men more than any other group. What’s that? “Per capita”? That’s a bad interpretation. Because here is the thing : the criminal population and the law abiding population have nothing to do with one another. The fact that normal people don’t want to hire or associate felons is proof of that. When you remove that racist interpretation, you are left with the reality that white criminals out number black criminals and that is a fact. Why isn’t that brought up? Because, facts can be manipulated by hateful people to subcommunicate “I’m in this group, so I’m better than you.” And it is, ruthlessly.
The irony. Following the advice from this video means you should be skeptical about following the advice from this video.
Video: You should be more skeptical.
Viewer: I'm too skeptical to listen to you!
That is good though, it means you are taking the advice.
I'm skeptical about your skepticism.
Let's just call ourselves 'Meta' with a capital m.
If that’s what you gathered from the video then it worked!
Being aware of logical fallacies is an important part of critical thinking.
There is a book called ,how to think clearly, it has 100 such fallacies 😍
I just finished a topic about skepticism from my psychology class.
Science can be viewed as a game. The theorist that proposes X to be true or works in the way he or she describes, has to be disproved in order to be not true or not to be a standard.
Einstein's relativity theory for example. He had observations about this topic, had a theory and then hypothesis followed by experiments afterwards.
When he shared the results and no other scholar or scientist could disprove him validly, Einstein continued with his theory by making, or writing down, more observations, theories and hypothesises followed by experiments that to him approved the theory to be correct or the case.
The game here is that as a scientist; bring out theories and make them un-disprovable for as long as possible. Something Einstein succeeded in.
But also be skeptical and try to validly disprove the theory. Even if it's the scientists own, or best friend's, family or celebrity crush's, theory.
If the scientists fail to be skeptic, we might've actually believed telepathy or water-divining were true.
However, the one with a claim has the burden of proof
There is this form of mathematics called Analysis.
It’s used for proving your equation.
Let’s just say for some it’s a burden , for Einstein it was Tuesday.
"I just finished a topic about skepticism from my psychology class."
- I don't believe you.
@@lewis72 haha, you got it!
Nicely put, healthy skepticism is essential in science! As far as telepathy... you might want to look into Dean Radin (scientist/researcher). He seems legit, and says that, with the current state of research done so far, telepathy is actually one of the psi phenomena that have been proven to exist (yep, I was surprised too!). He has done plenty of interviews on YT
I think "trust but verify" has been a good policy from trusted sources and outright skepticism from others. Always let the data guide you to the best or most-correct answer/solution.
My critical inquiry skills led me to believe that the furniture in this video wasn't real and that this wasn't even filmed at a real location. I can confirm that I feel all the healthier for my skepticism.
So what you're telling me is to question everything, all the time, even when it's from "trusted" sources. Got it.
that's actually what you should do. in an age where misinformation is rampant, you should be skeptical even if it's from trusted sources. there are "scientific research" found to be fraudulent to gain whatever they desire.
Keep in mind this is not the same thing as "never believe anything scientific authorities say ever". This is a lot different. There is a lot of toxic contrarianism out there. So much so that, frankly, I'm not sure if this video helps anything. Generally, trust an academic paper. But if you want to invest the time to become more information and scientifically literate to digest what it says in more detail, do that!
@@3ntr0py777 This is actually terrible advice masquerading as wisdom. Engage in critical thinking, and yes, you should give a study published in Nature more weight than something published in an alternative medicine journal. Authorities are not perfect and there can be fraud, but saying "some of it might not be true, so I'll look at the sources and data" is a lot different than "some of it might not be true, therefore none of it is."
YES! So many people need to do this!
@NATESOR I agree... perhaps the problem also comes from intermediate interpreters of studies, like journalists or bloggers who may take parts of study results and ignore study limitations... and because their content is more accessible to the average person than many published papers, their interpretation becomes the takeaway message for most people.
The Atkins diet promotes weight loss by drastically reducing carbohydrates, causing the body to enter ketosis and burn fat for energy instead of glucose. You must reduce carbohydrates to enter ketosis, as the diet changes your metabolism to prioritize fat-burning instead of relying on calorie counting. Atkins was not being extreme, just using the natural mechanics of metabolism to achieve this shift.
So it's a load of BS
As said in the video, the atkins diet only became popular because its simple and easy to understand. That doesn't make it correct, just makes it simple. The Atkins diet is deadly for a large percentage of the population, especially if you're lazy with it.
"Anyone can write a book." - an insight I offer this channel before having some "experts" as guest.
Check the description.
Excellent video and subject.
Loved this, cant wait to read your book!
If this was taught at schools, perhaps they’d be less people who fall for all the misinformation that’s out there. We’d elect better leaders and have less wars. Misinformation threatens everything and everyone. Please think about what I’ve just said critically 😊
If that's the case, then government is keeping the population dumb through the education system, so the misinformation continues to be successful
Skepticism is going to be key factor to get the better of it all
My critical inquiry skills led me to believe that there's a possibility this guy got paid by a food company to create even more confusion to what we consume. I mean there're so many things to talk about, why food? even worse formula in one particular perspective? This could be a video made to secretly promote formula and bread/grain.
Everyone has cognitive bias..the trick is to be aware and not be paralysed by it.Always have an open mind and keep to the middle ground..
"The first principle is you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool."
- Richard Feynman
Aspiring book writers: “Anyone can write a book?”
This is a great example of how 2 ideas can be true. Yes, calories in/calories out is true on paper, but the body stores fat AND glucogen. When you start eating low carb, you don't seamlessly start burning fat. You use up all available glucose/glucogen. Your body freaks out because it thinks it's running out of energy. It creates hunger hormones to make you want to eat as many calories as possible to replenish the glucogen stores. Once you get adapted to burning fat, the panic-mode hunger hormones die down. Eating protein and fiber from non-starchy vegetables and lowering the fat intake is then easier, as long as you don't have a sugar-starch cheat meal. Feel free to prove me wrong.
"Information is not truth." Yuval Noah Harari in his latest book, Nexus. The world is awash with information. Only a very small amount is fact/truth. People promulgate information to connect with like minded others, NOT to spread truth/facts. That's really useful to know. We seek a tribe to belong to.
ok i'll do anything you tell me sir
Carnivore diet ppl are choking on lamb chops over this video! 🤣
This was fantastic, thank you!
Great Video!
ty!
WE OFTEN HAVE THE DISCERNING SKILLS ALREADY WITHIN OURSELVES. WE JUST NEED TO OVERCOME OUR BIASES AND DEPLOY THEM.
Fantastic!
So basically everything concerning information and misinformation is true depending on your world View,am working on a book a i used to think i have to research every information when i have the natural ability to decend my own thought process and intelligence.
Skepticism =/= Cynicism.
preach brother preach
I can't understand, why this world is not random, why there must be a creator??
This guy is cool.
criticise to understand
So do I have to be confused about everything I see? Not accept anything as the truth?
Truth
Question "fact checkers." Do they have a bias?
Watch Skeptalk On The Line
great
Sponsored by Nestle
This is so simple. Not learning much here.
Yes! I’ve been promoting “Independent, Critical Thinking” since Trumps Presidential Run back in 2015
Hey everyone.. check out how calories are determined. There is really no corelation to how our bodies would use them.
Karl Popper’s Theory of Falsification
Rozumiem :). Dobrze, ciesze sie, ze chcesz to poznac.
A rodzine chcialbys miec?
I was bottle fed because it was 1954, and my Mom was 19.
Two years later, when my brother came along, she decided to nurse him. Good thing, too. I guess he'd be a complete imbecile orherwise.
On the other hand, any further intelligence I could have developed with that turbo charge would have probably made me unbearable and arrogant! JUST KIDDING!
I will share the info as widely as possible. I only just realized the urgent necessity! 😮
In the first part the schemas were quite close to reality, and in the end we've just built an AI model :)
I would loathe taking a class from that guy.
I’m skeptical that we need carbs. There are essential fatty acids and essential amino acids but no essential carb equivalent.
I've been a carnivore for 2 years. No carbs. Best medical lab work results ever, lost all excess weight and feel better at 72 than I did in my 30s. Energy level is phenomenal and I can out perform people less than half my age. 😊
I believe we do because of the micro biome diversity is much greater and robust in carb eaters. And a few other factors. But I’m happy to be proven wrong
@@Fab666. I used to think that also. Why do we need that though? People living on just meat seem to do okay.
Like, every species eats what it’s eaten for the longest. We can’t decide we want cats or dogs for example to have a more diverse microbiome. It wouldn’t help them. They would do the best if they ate what they’ve eaten for a million years. Is there any evidence that having a more diverse microbiome is beneficial.
@@robertavanselow9172Well, I've been vegan for 30 years and also am very healthy. But I also don't contribute to mass animal cruelty which is lovely.
@@d_e_a_nyes there is evidence actually
tl;dr: trust, but verify. Thank you. Your KGB.
Just because it's right doesn't mean it's right! Lmfao
Is "soul" a misinformation?
I think we would first need to figure out what consciousness is, before we jump into what people call a "soul" really is. Otherwise, the existence is more belief-based, which can't be proven or disproven. That is not the scientific method.
You don't learn much from this 6 minute video.
How could you possibly know this about me?
Especially now we need more information like this, more ways we can ferret out what is playing on our biases and what is more likely the truth. Emotion is especially being used to coerce us into believing certain things and if I find a story or some news that uses inflammatory speech, presents on small bits of a talk or something else that supposedly supports their arguments, I will take a step back from it. I can see the manipulation which I can easily step away from.
Dear Alex
Please, when you are a product of Finance fantasies, refrain from talking about "thinking."
Let the adults in the Sciences do that.
Christianity and Islam
Yes, he´s totally right.
YT stop deleting my comments, for gods sake. I an expressing my opinion in a civilized manner. WHY are you acting like a secret police ?
TRUMPISM Good or Bad?
Trump is exciting voters to get involved. But what about WHAT TRUMP is pushing?
================================================================= TNX
TNX
Not everybody can write a book , get your facts right Alex.
Great topics, poor examples.
Re: breastfeeding - there is a real, non-zero chance that the ingredients used in infant formula are subpar relative to the constituents of breast milk to the degree that they might impact IQ. It might not be the case - I'm not arguing that it is - but it is possible. We are currently discovering a range of negative effects from previously-thought-to-be-safe processed and otherwise unnatural foods. So yes, lower IQs of babies fed formula does not necessarily mean that the formula caused the lowered IQ. However, it could. So, poor example.
Re: carbohydrates - the Atkins diet did not achieve popularity because it's simple. It achieved popularity because it works. There is an abundance of evidence showing the efficacy of a low- to no-carb diet for losing weight, among numerous other health benefits. Carbs are often related to with black-or-white thinking, and going low- to no-carb for too long does have negative effects. So it does illustrate the tendency towards black-or-white thinking. And, again, the way it's presented makes it a poor example.
Are there any other channels like Big Think. Introduce me, guys.
The Well @the-well
Academy of Ideas may be similar enough
Bro what? @@ilv1
Pretty much the same... Ty
as soon as you use iq for a metric of quality you lose the argument
He’s just taking about pure speculation no means to it
Yes, the basic idea is right, but the examples he gives are a bit on the edge.
I can't possibly believe that BREASTMILK is NOT beneficial as opposed to formula. I mean, I hope Nestle's giving him some money at least...
This is stupid and he is discreetly misinforming, after he warned about misinformation. Find a less harmful example, please. I don't think anyone in the world would suggest formula is as good as breastmilk. It's not just about the IQ. What does he actually believe, if we were to ignore the hypothetical?
Also, how do you choose the neutral? Why does he suppose that "formula" is just as good, if the studies show otherwise, even if the studies might be biased? Why does he say that formula is ok, if the studies are done by the formula manufacturing companies? Are those not biased? A better idea would be to integrate knowledge of science, economics and psychology to understand that big companies are in it for the money and would say anything to make you buy their product and that humans evolved eating "natural" food so it would make sense that breastmilk would be more healthy. I think....
The example was, that breastfeeding causes a higher IQ. This assumption has been debunked. Breast milk can still be beneficial in other ways.
He was talking about correlation and conditioning
@@foamheart Yes, I am sorry for getting triggered but it feels like it is very easy to misinterpret what he is saying. That was my point, everything is right, but better examples could've been found, as to not risk misinforming about healthiness of breastmilk.
P.S. - how was the correlation debunked? I have no knowledge of the idea or the debunking of it, but it feels pretty hard to measure something like this anyway.
@@ilv1 he was only talking about higher IQ's when it comes to breastmilk, not all it benefits
In his context, Either way, it’s either association or causation. Both conclude that Endpoint: breastmilk good
I can't...make it past my bias of a male professor of finance starting the video with an example of whether breastfeeding is good or not...make it make sense.🤦♀️Done. I keep giving this channel a chance but...
E
This man's speech pattern is absolutely insane.
Horrible examples. The author falls in the cognitive bias trap he described by diving into the calorie myth. And yes, Atkinson was right and there is plenty of science that proves that. A funny way to try to prove a pont by swapping true and false facts as well as science and pseudoscience.
Skepticism or critical thinking is bad.
NPC is good
How is both bad? please elaborate
whats npc?
@@3ntr0py777 Based on the title, it tells you that being skeptic or having critical thinking should be discouraged while having no critical thinking, being an NPC (non playable character) is encouraged
@@melvinrosoaario.a1532 There are two definitions for this word (both relatively the same). First there’s npc’s in video games, those are “non-player characters” or N.P.Cs. The second definition is a person with such little originality and brain power that they are the most bland human on the planet, sorta like how most Doja Cat fans always say “Does she forget she’s famous???” Or how all Andrew Tate fan says “Common Tate w.”
@@serenityssolace how is it discouraging? it literally says "improve".
Here is a fact. 50-13.
We all know what fact that is.
Now, here is the problem : why do people who cite this ONLY cite this?
There is a crime statistic they don’t like to talk about.
Sexual abuse is done by Yt men more than any other group.
What’s that? “Per capita”?
That’s a bad interpretation.
Because here is the thing : the criminal population and the law abiding population have nothing to do with one another.
The fact that normal people don’t want to hire or associate felons is proof of that.
When you remove that racist interpretation, you are left with the reality that white criminals out number black criminals and that is a fact.
Why isn’t that brought up?
Because, facts can be manipulated by hateful people to subcommunicate “I’m in this group, so I’m better than you.”
And it is, ruthlessly.
Sponsored by the ministry of truth
😢I couldn't understand some words. Annoying accent
This feels patronizing. As if we don’t posses the ability to use logic and research on a channel called “big think”.
Annoying accent. Obvious, well-known ideas.
Blah, blah, blah.
Think whatever you want to think. Who cares?