Simple, clear, concise and accurate explanation of the scientific approach and rational thinking. We need more and more of such videos on various topics from ecopreservation to secularism, rationalism to scientific temperament, cultural democracy to human rights... Simple introduction like this one... Thank you so much...
The scientific collection of methodologies are the best epistemic approaches we can use to discover the nature of nature. However, we don't know everything, many theories are incomplete, mistakes can be made by scientists - which are human and can be subject to psychological biases. Having said all that - it is still the best epistemological approach. If you can get a pseudo-science, woo-woo advocate, or religionist on board with the above, they may point out those same flaws, but the point is: No one can legitimately insist on perfect knowledge and certainty. Accepting this reality is humbling and will do a lot to set expectations. Compare different epistemologies and science will come out on top. As Stephen says, it has the best track record.
Love your site,adore Stephen Fry and thought it would be good to add that there is also the Pessimistic Meta Induction from the history of science - today's theories will someday prove as wrong as those of the past.
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and Not realize a return on investment exceeding current Treasury Bill Rates. So sayeth the high priests of holy capitalism.
That is one good way though it approaches a specific range of reality, while being often useless in others, some of which are the most important questions of Philosophy, morality, purpose, history... Stay humble and carefully apply the best method for each knowledge category.
*How do we know what's true?* Oh! That's easy! Listen carefully to the information being disseminated on the news, and Assume that its opposite is probably closer to the actual state of affairs.
religious people not blessed with revelation or prophesy (the vast majority) must determine what is true through faith - a thing is true simply by virtue of being proclaimed by a particular person
One does not have to be religious to experience revelation. The religious are usually paying homage to someone else's. They would be better served if they had sought their own, but That kind of precocious self actualization is discourage when detected.
I can appreciate and are inspired by the world without digging into it with telescope or microscope. I can understand why one would want to examine and scrutinize it, because it is a phenomenal creation. I can also understand and especially admire the works Mr Ingersoll without being an atheist. What I cannot embrace is the “Big Bang Theory,” and from my own, like everyone else’s, mind, it reasons ludicrous! Like everything in life (there is evil) there is OPPOSITION! There is Right, there is Wrong. This, at least, we CAN agree on?
Right and wrong? Well, it depends on the question I suppose but why would you want to know the answer to that if you are so lacking in curiosity when it comes to all the basic, fundamental questions? You say you cannot embrace the Big Bang theory but don't state why? It always makes me laugh when people come on a forum like this, criticising science _while using a computer connected to the internet!_
@@mrswinkyuk …You don’t understand me and probably, because you were educated by the system, you think you are somehow more superior…a bit like the Tory Party who are callous toward the vulnerable citizens they so inadequately govern. You are not very considerate or understanding to your fellow human and you most likely operate solely from the gray matter. Hopefully with the right experiences you will improve for the better!
@@blakebronte1544 That's quite a critique of my character considering you don't know me either, how very nice of you. Your condecending attitude is very much in keeping with other "holier-than-thou", religious people I've met. A bit like the Tory party, you think yourself superior. I wonder what System you were educated in?
I don't know about the other "Holy books" but I know that the vast majority of people at one time believed that the earth 🌎 was the centre of the Universe and the Church believed in the Bible holding that view. Galileo was punished by confinement at home for holding the scientific view that the Sun, not the Earth, was the centre of the Universe! Bruno was burnt at stake!
Keep in mind that the first step in science is inspiration(in spirit) or an idea from the beyond, which we then must test by the scientific method to determine how much our ego has distorted what the soul tried to pass on in a pure and correct form. In other words what we find lacking in our inspiration is a measure of how out of a line or not enlightened we are.
An "idea from the beyond"? Beyond what? What is a "soul," and how does it pass on ideas in "a pure and correct form"? What is "spirit"? So many questions.... ;-)
Simple, clear, concise and accurate explanation of the scientific approach and rational thinking. We need more and more of such videos on various topics from ecopreservation to secularism, rationalism to scientific temperament, cultural democracy to human rights... Simple introduction like this one... Thank you so much...
The scientific method is human’s best creation. And our only way to long term survival.
Poppycock! 😎
The scientific method is a powerful process, but just like any other tool,
It can lead to disastrous outcomes when wielded without wisdom.
You can't test religious beliefs. Great film.
The Flying Spaghetti Monster approves of this message.
🤣🤣 Ramen 🍜
Reason, evidence, experience.
Love these narrations by Stephen Fry👌
Great content, thank you humanists!
The scientific collection of methodologies are the best epistemic approaches we can use to discover the nature of nature. However, we don't know everything, many theories are incomplete, mistakes can be made by scientists - which are human and can be subject to psychological biases.
Having said all that - it is still the best epistemological approach.
If you can get a pseudo-science, woo-woo advocate, or religionist on board with the above, they may point out those same flaws, but the point is: No one can legitimately insist on perfect knowledge and certainty. Accepting this reality is humbling and will do a lot to set expectations.
Compare different epistemologies and science will come out on top. As Stephen says, it has the best track record.
Wonderfully clear, accurate explanation. More please.
What a super series of short, easy to understand videos . Thank you !
The truth must not change or it wasn't true.
Truth is that which is self evident
Love your site,adore Stephen Fry and thought it would be good to add that there is also the Pessimistic Meta Induction from the history of science - today's theories will someday prove as wrong as those of the past.
Nicely explained 👍🏼
Thank you!
Very true! How can we counter postmodernist view about truth?
Really well done! And excellent leg-warmer wearing from the caveman.
I am sharimg this...thank you!
1:23 Unfortunately, we’re currently required to choose medicines based on market values.
For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and
Not realize a return on investment exceeding current Treasury Bill Rates.
So sayeth the high priests of holy capitalism.
What about things that cannot be tested now we’re going to be or experimenter time, but still have evidence?
That is one good way though it approaches a specific range of reality, while being often useless in others, some of which are the most important questions of Philosophy, morality, purpose, history... Stay humble and carefully apply the best method for each knowledge category.
*How do we know what's true?*
Oh! That's easy!
Listen carefully to the information being disseminated on the news, and
Assume that its opposite is probably closer to the actual state of affairs.
Wow
if it feels good, its true.. The World as will encompasses our irrational,( irascible), appetites and drives.
religious people not blessed with revelation or prophesy (the vast majority) must determine what is true through faith - a thing is true simply by virtue of being proclaimed by a particular person
One does not have to be religious to experience revelation.
The religious are usually paying homage to someone else's.
They would be better served if they had sought their own, but
That kind of precocious self actualization is discourage when detected.
Ok. I got that. But...what about fake news?
Listen carefully to the information being disseminated on the news, and
Assume that its opposite is probably closer to the actual state of affairs.
@@joecaner yep. I'd say that is about right.
I can appreciate and are inspired by the world without digging into it with telescope or microscope. I can understand why one would want to examine and scrutinize it, because it is a phenomenal creation.
I can also understand and especially admire the works Mr Ingersoll without being an atheist.
What I cannot embrace is the “Big Bang Theory,” and from my own, like everyone else’s, mind, it reasons ludicrous!
Like everything in life (there is evil) there is OPPOSITION!
There is Right, there is Wrong.
This, at least, we CAN agree on?
Right and wrong? Well, it depends on the question I suppose but why would you want to know the answer to that if you are so lacking in curiosity when it comes to all the basic, fundamental questions? You say you cannot embrace the Big Bang theory but don't state why?
It always makes me laugh when people come on a forum like this, criticising science _while using a computer connected to the internet!_
@@mrswinkyuk …You don’t understand me and probably, because you were educated by the system, you think you are somehow more superior…a bit like the Tory Party who are callous toward the vulnerable citizens they so inadequately govern.
You are not very considerate or understanding to your fellow human and you most likely operate solely from the gray matter.
Hopefully with the right experiences you will improve
for the better!
@@blakebronte1544 That's quite a critique of my character considering you don't know me either, how very nice of you. Your condecending attitude is very much in keeping with other "holier-than-thou", religious people I've met. A bit like the Tory party, you think yourself superior. I wonder what System you were educated in?
I prefer old animations
what holy book said the earth was the centre of the universe?..
I don't know about the other "Holy books" but I know that the vast majority of people at one time believed that the earth 🌎 was the centre of the Universe and the Church believed in the Bible holding that view.
Galileo was punished by confinement at home for holding the scientific view that the Sun, not the Earth, was the centre of the Universe! Bruno was burnt at stake!
All Abrahamic texts.
@@kenlee5509 a Brahman.
Keep in mind that the first step in science is inspiration(in spirit) or an idea from the beyond, which we then must test by the scientific method to determine how much our ego has distorted what the soul tried to pass on in a pure and correct form. In other words what we find lacking in our inspiration is a measure of how out of a line or not enlightened we are.
An "idea from the beyond"? Beyond what?
What is a "soul," and how does it pass on ideas in "a pure and correct form"?
What is "spirit"?
So many questions.... ;-)
What you've just said has no basis in reality
The soul and spirits were simply a poor explanation of breathing and the wind.
Good job explaining absolutely nothing.
Wonderful!