Not sure why this video needs to be 3 and a quarter hours, because it is mostly repetition and rehashing the same perspective that is summed up in a few minutes, which is basically the title, and that is how shallow this is.
The perspective is neither interesting nor rigorous, and I saw no attempt to define first principles, but just throwing around terms like "truth" and "objective reality" without any attempt to define these, when long before the field of neurology existed philosophers already determined there can be no truth and that objective reality does not exist.
Not sure why this video needs to be 3 and a quarter hours
That's the nature of podcasts, long form, with plenty of give and take, and time to ramble around until getting to the point. It's how people talk naturally.
Could it be edited down? Of course it could. I'm not sure you could do that without bias, nor would it be worth the effort.
Comments
Not sure why this video needs to be 3 and a quarter hours, because it is mostly repetition and rehashing the same perspective that is summed up in a few minutes, which is basically the title, and that is how shallow this is.
The perspective is neither interesting nor rigorous, and I saw no attempt to define first principles, but just throwing around terms like "truth" and "objective reality" without any attempt to define these, when long before the field of neurology existed philosophers already determined there can be no truth and that objective reality does not exist.
Shocking... not. Sedative, yes.
That's the nature of podcasts, long form, with plenty of give and take, and time to ramble around until getting to the point. It's how people talk naturally.
Could it be edited down? Of course it could. I'm not sure you could do that without bias, nor would it be worth the effort.