Socrates

@zurew Outsourcing is inevitable and not inherently problematic. The goal isn't independence from all external input—it's retaining ownership of the conclusions. You outsource the technical and mechanical parts of validation: the experiments, the data collection, and the methodology execution. What you never outsource is the evaluative layer—scrutinizing sample size, methodology quality, experimenter incentives, and whether the conclusions actually follow from the data. That part stays yours. The smarter move is a reduction to fundamentals. Most topics have a small number of high-yield structural questions that determine the shape of everything else. Getting those right produces more epistemic value than mastering the technical periphery, and it's more time-efficient. The technical experiments become inputs you filter, not authorities you defer to. The one honest complication: identifying which experiments are high-yield versus low-yield requires some prior competence in the domain. That distinction isn't always visible from the outside.

The office and friends are cringemaxxing

https://zeteo.com/p/mehdi-goes-head-to-head-with-professor-jiang ***( i suggest watching the full interview) Watch how triggered and combative Medhi gets in this one (noted that I usually like this guy). Anything below yellow has emotional reactions to other stages. If any perspective actually triggers you, you aren't yellow yet. Also, notice how still clinging to arbitrary facts like the meaning is baked-in, an orange/green person is, as if a fact has any inherent meaning in a vacuum, or as if it produces any actual understanding without context/interpretation.

@Leo Gura The only part I can be more charitable on is "extremely unlikely, not impossible." Noted. But notice what you just did. You had an opportunity to defend the substance of your position, and instead spent your entire response policing how I read your quote. You have no argument to defend the original claim, and correcting my reading doesn't produce one. On the substance: extremely unlikely compared to what? If serious university graduates also largely fail to develop transferable rationality—which domain-dependence strongly suggests—your position becomes "rationality is rare everywhere, but marginally less rare in universities." That's not the strong claim you're making. And you're confusing correlation with causation. The selection problem goes completely unaddressed. Intellectually serious people are funneled toward university by default. Of course, most visibly rational people have degrees. That's a pipeline effect, not institutional causation. When you have an actual argument, I'm here for it.

@Leo Gura You're conflating the source of rationality with the institution that claims to teach it. Rationality as a capacity predates universities by millennia. Aristotle, Socrates, and a long line of thinkers developed rigorous epistemic frameworks with no formal institution behind them. The idea that rationality is essentially a university product is a very modern and very provincial assumption. On your second point, "poor students don't reflect on the classes," you're dodging the actual criticism. The argument isn't that the curriculum lacks rational content. It's that the system's incentives, structure, and culture don't produce internalized rationality in most graduates. If the output is consistently poor, at some point that's the system's problem, not a coincidence of bad students. And your own position undermines itself. You say rationality "is taught at university," but teaching and learning are different things. If the majority of serious university students still outsource their validation to academic consensus rather than developing independent judgment, then whatever is being taught isn't landing. That's not a defense of the institution, it's an indictment of it dressed up as one. The stronger point is simpler: a person who independently develops the ability to construct models, test claims, and update beliefs without deferring to authority is rational by any meaningful definition—regardless of whether they ever set foot in a lecture hall. Gatekeeping rationality behind institutional credentials is exactly the kind of authority-dependent thinking the argument is criticizing.

Actualized Quotes #481 This is probably the worst take I've seen from Leo. Public education is 95% pre rational in itself; repeating and parroting "correct" scientific ideas isn't rational nor does it introduce you to rationality, it is blind indoctrination, hence it is pre-rational. Every uni student and academia-influenced person I know has no method for validating facts, nor does he care to develop one; he just takes an opinion, filters it through the academic who already verifies his preexisting beliefs, and basically outsources the whole process. This isn't rationality, this is fancy pre-rationality portrayed as rigor, and only naive conformist idiots fall for it. Someone mastering rationality DESPITE university indoctrination is even more rare. So if you want to make a statement like that i'd be more willing to argue that you should treat people who went to college like pre-rational baboons than the other way around.

Piers has shown his colors multiple times; he is just another cheap whore for the zionist terrorists.

Why are so many mods so underdeveloped in here? Admiring Vitaly is like admiring Trump. The other clown is a nazi zio. Why is the bar so low? @Leo Gura

It's really interesting to see how you approach this, since the conversation can literally go anywhere depending on where you steer it. What happened to the destiny talk? You could've tried for a dr K talk before he went out of your league in subs

I've personally quit protein long ago, just eat high protein foods, even if you're bodybuilding, 2g protein per lb of bodyweight is excessive. Not to mention they have increased the prices so much on these proteins that a good iso is 100bucks for 2kg. Not worth it. I'm seriously concerned that this level of contamination will creep into every food, and I'm not ready for it.

Apart from the slopiness in here, the pod showcases to me how much underdeveloped orange/low green really is, mostly living in fantasy, projections, and ego identification of what you think you know, who you are, and basically mind bullshit. Imagine someone telling you, if you don't control the mind, you are "mentally ill", and you get triggered instead of reflecting: "Maybe he is into something". You're unredeemable with that attitude. Fools don't want to grow; they want to appear smart. Appearances>substance, and drK's channel is so mainstream at this point that these guys are the vast majority. Smart enough to understand some technical scientific study, but way too dumb to observe life and make conclusions of their own without parroting another fool. Unfortunately, this is the content of info-tainment consumption, and that is the result. Too many people think information is the same as wisdom. They are all underestimating the depth of this work.

@Natasha Tori Maru Slopiness and mental gymnastics from newbies are expected, but from Leo, the bar is higher, so you'd better expect me to press him on his BS.

@Leo Gura Did you try any other yoga programs that are hardcore enough for you? Are you doing virtue signaling spirituality? The fuck do you expect to happen, 5meo trip during the yoga? Sounds like a you issue if you don't have the patience to jump through 2 fucking hoops, to at least have a taste of what a great guru has to offer. When you start new things, have an open mind and 0 opinions, a monk with a stick would do you wonders with the audacity to judge a system you don't even know the outline of. You can bulshit yourself, but this is all ego, not wanting actual growth. Cling to the trips, bro, you are enlightened!!!! Monks eat 10x your dose and don't bat an eye, but their method is definitely flawed. Even on a logical basis, this attitude of yours is laughably unserious.

Stop labeling things weak or strong, YOU DON'T KNOW YOGA !!! WAKE UP!!! No discernment of yours in this topic matters, you are DELUDING YOURSELF!!!!

@Leo Gura You can't do a 21-minute meditation? Where is the hardcore attitude of spirituality? Does that only come up with drugs? Where is the scientific rigor to find out if it works or not? Did you lose that? you are demonstrating deep unseriousness here, Leo