True vs False Skepticism

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


  • Nikki Shue says:

    I’ve been saying this since I was a teenager and felt shamed by religious people everytime i voiced my feelings on this topic. I really enjoyed this video 👍🏻

  • Dance Electric says:

    Modern self-proclaimed "skeptics" = followers of scientism

  • PETZZZ says:

    Truth vs falsehood by
    David r Hawkins

  • The Library of Humanity says:

    Maybe yes…maybe no…maybe maybe… who knows

  • Sean McMahon says:

    Sophist does not mean philosopher. I don’t understand opposition to heavy handed rationalism with appeals to absurdity that I remember you exhibiting though I inferred or drew implications with possible inaccuracy as to you rejecting appeals to absurdity in serious argument. Thanks for speaking as I learn more of ignorance and delusion within someone who I am…

  • Mohamed Nadjmo - محمد نجمو says:

    Mind blowing , thank you sir 🙏

  • Pirapat qwe says:

    Leo, does this mean that you are not dogmatic about non-duality? To me, you seem pretty convinced that you’re right about non-duality and consciousness.

  • Stylish Banana says:

    I will start to question this consiousness stuff now 😂

  • Eva - says:

    What you say is so true, Leo. I have been struggling with doing inquiry because of my strong believe in scientific paradigm and rationalism.. I study philosophy too, and rationalism has influenced me quite a lot.

  • Rami Zentgraf says:

    What a bunch of facile nonsense. This guy doesn’t even know the difference between philosophical naturalism and methodological skepticism…or maybe he does, and is simply equivocating.

  • The Anarcho–Nazbol Inquisition says:

    This kind of skepticism i can stand, this dogmatic YouTube skepticism of "consensus is right, you are wrong" is utterly insufferable.

  • MakeItBetter says:

    Leо, what is the difference between peronism and agnosticism? Does it exist?

  • Collin Chi says:

    Leo. I'm sorry that probably only 1% of the people who watched this video can fully understand and appreciate its entirety. Know that I do and I appreciate it. Know that I was looking for it because I had all the same thoughts and research in my mind. Know that this video represents, in my opinion, the most important subject of modern times, the modern paradigm, the Aquarian age. If this type of subject never reaches the mainstream and mass consciousness, then I believe the scientists, materialists, capitalists, rationalists, secularists, etc. will contribute more than any other group to destroying much of mankind and the other species on earth. If not, you can bet nature eventually will. That's not nihilistic, that's the way of nature. If you ever make enough money and gather enough like-minded individuals to make a documentary on this subject that we can market the hell out of to reach the mainstream, let me know. I will gladly be interviewed in the documentary and offer my unique perspective alongside yours, as well as do work on it in other capacities provided I could get cut into the profits from it, or even if I didn't get cut in, I would still interview for free of course. I myself am in the midst of much work on the topics you spoke of, not in documentary form, but other capacities. Of course, the mainstream would never fully understand the subject here probably, even if we could reach the mainstream, but it nevertheless would plant more seeds for future generations. Let me know in 10 years when you get fed up with youtube and want to pursue other projects. I know, I know, you're probably a youtuber for life, like me. It's hard to get away once you've put so much into it already. Anyway, just figured I would tell you that you are one of the only conscious people making real content about real subjects on youtube. That means a hell of a lot coming from me. I've only ever met one other person in my life who knows more breadth and depth of a variety of subjects as I do. You rank right up there with em buddy. Cheers.

  • cicciogrecia says:

    ΕΥΔΑΙΜΟΝΊΑ bitches!

  • → to the knee says:

    58:05 – Where are the millions of innocent deaths caused by scientists and philosophers? Without theocratic religion there would be far less practical problems with dogma. A dogmatic Jain poses no threat, and a dogmatic physicist poses almost no threat. Dogmatic nationalism and religion are the problem, and I think you should be explicit about this.

  • → to the knee says:

    The first half was enlightening, but then you degrade into dogmatism by claiming spirituality exists and is related to the human mind. That's the oldest delusion in the book.

  • → to the knee says:

    I think your entire critique of modern skepticism is a straw man, unfortunately. Religion is a major problem for modern humans, and so the skeptics try to remove it from its pedestal as a purely practical matter. The modern skeptic will always question their own assumptions and admit them, while the religious person would never do so.

  • → to the knee says:

    I think most skeptics, scientists, and philosophers would readily admit that we don't really know anything with absolute certainty. But there's a practical aspect to life that supersedes philosophy, and so we deal with it and do the best we can with our flawed senses and reason. We usually require sports, politics, or religion to become dogmatic.

  • Doi Bing says:

    Can you give some examples of famous people who practice the right and wrong versions of skepticism? My real question being do you think Lawrence Kraus's mindset is true skepticism?

  • Mark Fredrick Graves, Jr. says:

    Thank you for t his video. I think it's a bit long to hold my interest, but I have watched 22 minutes so far and I can relate with this philosophy. This is how I relate: In the last year, I had the thought that having any opinion is illogical for two reasons; one: opinions are unverifiable, and two: committing yourself to an unverifiable belief is a promise that you'll be, at some point in the future, perturbed (either from trying to defend it, or facing an unsettling experience which contradicts it). This is a hindrance in the pursuit of perpetual contentment. It may seem strange how I don't just say happiness instead of "perpetual contentment" (like everyone else). I do not use the word happiness because perpetual joy is impossible, and a positive emotion is a response to the relief – real or imagined – of a negative emotion. So happiness implies having some underlying negative emotions. Happiness is thus a sign that one is not living a life unperturbed.

  • Rin Wesley says:

    Pyrrhonism: the ultimate fence sitting.

  • Hiroyuki Hasegawa says:

    are you looking 4 perfectionist to be like god?

  • Braga777 says:

    But isn't saying that whe cant truly perceive reality through our senses or rational minds some form of dogmatism? what if we CAN? I bet the skepticals didnt think that one through

  • bhavanaga srinivas dharanikota says:

    this video means live like a YOGI

  • Sarah Khoury says:

    Holly, I loved this video and everything it's about!🙌🏼🤔

  • DJDDM says:

    Purinism can be beaten by showing that there has to be stuff that is proofen by itself

  • Paul Awad says:

    im a Christian but i gotta say this dude is actually one of the more respectful atheists. Cheers mate.

  • Jim Southgste says:

    Great talk Leo I got a lot from it. have you done a talk on ego identification? If not, that would help with most as a pre cursor to this. As I'm sure you know ego is such a big barrrier to self realisation so should be helpful for peritisum.

  • Dorothy Huisman says:

    damn your good! give us more…

  • Alexander Winter says:

    Small mistake in description "my" should be "by"

  • TalkswithMyself says:

    my ego is watching this and trying to be a skeptic. But I'm observing my ego and that person, she's comfortable with all this life stuff. Just trying to be the best I can be!

  • Chaitanya says:

    At 34.00 I just started to applaud. Accept our humble regards Master Leo 🙂

  • Cornelius Müller says:

    thank you

  • jidar says:

    The end result of cognitive dissonance.
    He wants to believe himself a rational person something he sees as a virtue, but he doesn't like that skepticism exposes his own mystic ideals, so he creates a skepticism that is open to his belief in the supernatural and calls the other "false skepticism".
    I hope it doesn't influence too many people.

  • Emily H says:

    I can definitely class myself as a true skeptic. I approach all theories of all kinds equally and find myself saying "it's possible…" and "i can't disprove it."
    I find it humbling to be totally honest with myself and the world by stating that nothing can really be 100% proven and I'm comfortable in that awareness.
    I wouldn't say I rigorously QUESTION everything, just acknowledge it as a possibility and respect it as a theory.

    Couldn't say I'm the calmest of people, but that's mainly because of my mental illness.
    Calmness and peace of mind are pretty much my goal in life!
    Good to have it confirmed I'm on the right track… 🙂

  • phillydoughboy says:

    It's definitely a very subtle thing to carry out this work without feeling like your chasing after something.

  • Hot Sauce says:

    You are an incredible human being!

  • Charis Andreou says:

    Wow I bought into false skepticism so much and im greek :p
    Btw for the nerds, here is the etymology of the word of Eudaimonia, ευδαιμονία in greek: "ευ" means good, and "δαίμων" means spirit.
    and i may repeat
    Gimnosofist, in greek γυμνοσοφιστής: "γυμνος" meaning naked (prounounced yumnos(stressing the O) and "σοφιστής" meaning wise.

  • Haley Cote says:

    Your teachings are really helping to change my life for the better! Thank you <3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *