Leo's DemystifySci Podcast Appearance

[AerisVahnEphelia]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

I think it depends on how much pushback their audience gives them.

The issue is, even though them two are openminded, their audience will whine in their ear to not talk to non-scientists. There is always pressure on them to create an echochamber and not seriously challenge their audience. I don't know how well they will withstand that pressure.

We shall see.

The more they talk to me the more threatening it will get for them. Until their entire world collapses.

I once sent you a death threat during an existential crisis caused by the work. It was about 8 years ago. I was doing all of this very seriously and way too quickly, because I had nothing going on in my life, no work, no girlfriend, no sense of survival. I approached chasing truth like a cocaine addict.

-
Since then, there's also a sense that you've found words that hurt the ego less and might reduce the backlash. The only thing I felt could have come across as jarring was the "psychopath for the truth" framing. People won't see the factual use of the word and I think they reacted to it tensely.

I wish I could tell you how much I love you sometimes. You're still my favorite channel for a decade now, and nothing has matched my sense for what you've done. But it doesn't feel entirely fair to say that, because I know, and I think you know too, that this isn't serious love.
I'm projecting the survival power & entertainment you gave me by facilitating my awakening. The best I can do is keep standing for what you did by bettering the game character, even if I still disagree with a few of your relative takes, especially on love and attraction.

I'm still wondering about your video game. I'm working myself on a lot of stuff, 3D related at the moment. Is it still a thing?

Edited 19 hours ago by AerisVahnEphelia

[Nemra]

22 hours ago, Nemra said:

I am amazed how you survived the insanity of your awakenings, especially with your health situation.

Have you ever felt that you might go mad, become clinically insane, or lose/break your mind?

@Leo Gura, sorry if that came off as rude or maybe its personal.

When I don't try to focus on survival stuff, such thoughts start to creep into my mind after my recent illness, which put me in a delirious state for a few days; a terrifying experience.

[Tristan12]

14 hours ago, LambdaDelta said:

@Tristan12 For what it's worth I read it. Watched a couple videos too. Your journey is fascinating, further documentation would be lovely.

Thanks! I wrote an update here:

[AerisVahnEphelia]

 

4 hours ago, Miguel1 said:

Lovely. I want my clothing pieces to have as much soul and meaning as possible. If I can have a beautiful piece from a fellw serious actualizer and from the aus, that would hold quite a lot of meaning and soul!

White & Black, only.
 Color entertain and distract from the Truth.

[Sincerity]

These guys and their objections were often painful to listen to. I was dying inside when hearing the „hmm this is basically my experience already” and „maybe I’m awake after all” points from the lady. And not even understanding that evil doesn’t exist, like come on.

Well, it is what it is. Good conversation still. What matters is you guys had fun.

Edited 18 hours ago by Sincerity

[Dazgwny]

They are clearly very intelligent people, academically clever. But what intrigued me most about all of this is that there was barely a reaction to whenever Leo said infinity. Reality is infinity etc. It’s almost as though this was not registering at all. I began to wonder why this was. I’m thinking because maybe coming from their scientific mindset, even though they try to find things to deconstruct science to a degree, but they still have the materialistic scientific mindset at the foundation of everything, that they actually think they know what infinity is, or understand enough about it that when Leo says reality itself is infinity, that it just goes over their heads. The same when consciousness was mentioned. The point was even made at the end that they didn’t even touch on consciousness. It was almost like throughout the conversation, they didn’t need to really go into it, because it’s not what reality is, nor could it be, but that consciousness probably just is what biology claims it is. Although they do remain reasonably open to things, I just get the sense that is the case. It’s not near open enough. What gets me though, is that those 2 words, infinity and consciousness, are the 2 most important words you can find in reality, along with God, all synonymous. So for these to be brushed over so easily, and have the conversation veer off to things like good and evil, really enlightened me to just how difficult it is to communicate all this to even extremely intelligent people. Infact im quite shocked I even get it to the degree that I do. Because in terms of what people see as intelligent and clever, as a human, I am not a patch on those pair. Yet when it comes to this, I understood clearly 100% what Leo was saying.

I must add that they do come across as good genuine interesting people and I’ve enjoyed a taking in a few of their conversations since Leo brought the channel to attention

Edited 18 hours ago by Dazgwny

[AerisVahnEphelia]

7 minutes ago, Sincerity said:

These guys and their objections were often painful to listen to. I was dying inside when hearing the „hmm this is basically my experience already” and „maybe I’m awake after all” points from the lady. And not even understanding that evil doesn’t exist, like come on.

Well, it is what it is. Good conversation still. What matters is you guys had fun.

The lack of consciousness is painful if you don't like the game of it.
You shall learn to be able to enjoy more 

 

[AerisVahnEphelia]

9 minutes ago, Dazgwny said:

They are clearly very intelligent people, academically clever. But what intrigued me most about all of this is that there was barely a reaction to whenever Leo said infinity. Reality is infinity etc. It’s almost as though this was not registering at all. I began to wonder why this was. I’m thinking because maybe coming from their scientific mindset, even though they try to find things to deconstruct science to a degree, but they still have the materialistic scientific mindset at the foundation of everything, that they actually think they know what infinity is, or understand enough about it that when Leo says reality itself is infinity, that it just goes over their heads. The same when consciousness was mentioned. The point was even made at the end that they didn’t even touch on consciousness. It was almost like throughout the conversation, they didn’t need to really go into it, because it’s not what reality is, nor could it be, but that consciousness probably just is what biology claims it is. Although they do remain reasonably open to things, I just get the sense that is the case. It’s not near open enough. What gets me though, is that those 2 words, infinity and consciousness, are the 2 most important words you can find in reality, along with God, all synonymous. So for these to be brushed over so easily, and have the conversation veer off to things like good and evil, really enlightened me to just how difficult it is to communicate all this to even extremely intelligent people. Infact im quite shocked I even get it to the degree that I do. Because in terms of what people see as intelligent and clever, as a human, I am not a patch on those pair. Yet when it comes to this, I understood clearly 100% what Leo was saying

You have no clue what is intelligence, being able to weave a pattern of aesthetical well sounding words that sounds intricate isn't intelligence, it's what your culture told you was intelligence.

Intelligence is being able to tolerate and integrate Truth.

They are intelligent sure, in some sense, a beaver is intelligent too.

Edited 18 hours ago by AerisVahnEphelia

[Elliott]

37 minutes ago, Dazgwny said:

They are clearly very intelligent people, academically clever. But what intrigued me most about all of this is that there was barely a reaction to whenever Leo said infinity. Reality is infinity etc. It’s almost as though this was not registering at all. I began to wonder why this was. I’m thinking because maybe coming from their scientific mindset, even though they try to find things to deconstruct science to a degree, but they still have the materialistic scientific mindset at the foundation of everything, that they actually think they know what infinity is, or understand enough about it that when Leo says reality itself is infinity, that it just goes over their heads. The same when consciousness was mentioned. The point was even made at the end that they didn’t even touch on consciousness. It was almost like throughout the conversation, they didn’t need to really go into it, because it’s not what reality is, nor could it be, but that consciousness probably just is what biology claims it is. Although they do remain reasonably open to things, I just get the sense that is the case. It’s not near open enough. What gets me though, is that those 2 words, infinity and consciousness, are the 2 most important words you can find in reality, along with God, all synonymous. So for these to be brushed over so easily, and have the conversation veer off to things like good and evil, really enlightened me to just how difficult it is to communicate all this to even extremely intelligent people. Infact im quite shocked I even get it to the degree that I do. Because in terms of what people see as intelligent and clever, as a human, I am not a patch on those pair. Yet when it comes to this, I understood clearly 100% what Leo was saying.

I must add that they do come across as good genuine interesting people and I’ve enjoyed a taking in a few of their conversations since Leo brought the channel to attention

They don't just interview science people, they interview spiritual people too.

[Carl-Richard]

1 hour ago, Dazgwny said:

They are clearly very intelligent people, academically clever. But what intrigued me most about all of this is that there was barely a reaction to whenever Leo said infinity. Reality is infinity etc. It’s almost as though this was not registering at all. I began to wonder why this was. I’m thinking because maybe coming from their scientific mindset, even though they try to find things to deconstruct science to a degree, but they still have the materialistic scientific mindset at the foundation of everything, that they actually think they know what infinity is, or understand enough about it that when Leo says reality itself is infinity, that it just goes over their heads. The same when consciousness was mentioned. The point was even made at the end that they didn’t even touch on consciousness. It was almost like throughout the conversation, they didn’t need to really go into it, because it’s not what reality is, nor could it be, but that consciousness probably just is what biology claims it is. Although they do remain reasonably open to things, I just get the sense that is the case. It’s not near open enough. What gets me though, is that those 2 words, infinity and consciousness, are the 2 most important words you can find in reality, along with God, all synonymous. So for these to be brushed over so easily, and have the conversation veer off to things like good and evil, really enlightened me to just how difficult it is to communicate all this to even extremely intelligent people. Infact im quite shocked I even get it to the degree that I do. Because in terms of what people see as intelligent and clever, as a human, I am not a patch on those pair. Yet when it comes to this, I understood clearly 100% what Leo was saying.

Leo is not the first "consciousness-first" idealist they have interviewed. Consider that their knowledge actually mirrors their intelligence. Idealism is actually not a new thing, believe it or not.

The issue is that Leo's communication is sort of whimsical compared to the concise scientific delivery. The way he mixes morality, love, goodness, evil, into the Absolute, it makes the scientist-minded thrown off track. A view like Bernardo Kastrup's analytic idealism is much more effective for that kind of audience, clearly delineating a metaphysical position without dragging in too many connections or too much conceptual baggage.

Edited 17 hours ago by Carl-Richard

[Carl-Richard]

16 hours ago, Sincerity said:

I miss your most direct and advanced teachings. Especially for those who have had looks into God-realization, solipsism, Infinity of Gods.

Infinity of Gods is a load of bullshit, I'm sorry.

[Rafael Thundercat]

On 22/02/2026 at 8:00 PM, Leo Gura said:

It certainly wasn't my doing. Those are just the questions they asked.

I would not have talked about morality at all if it was up to me. I was there to talk about science, metaphsysics, epistemology, and consciousness. But they don't know what questions to ask me.

Is like in my life. My talks with people would be deeper only of they would enjoy deep questions, but as people are swallow they only get the level of talk they can tolerate, only deepness can meet deepness. 

[UnbornTao]

21 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Infinity of Gods is a load of bullshit, I'm sorry.

Spitting facts!  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, Sincerity said:

These guys and their objections were often painful to listen to. I was dying inside when hearing the „hmm this is basically my experience already” and „maybe I’m awake after all” points from the lady. And not even understanding that evil doesn’t exist, like come on.

Well, it is what it is. Good conversation still. What matters is you guys had fun.

I perceived she thought she understood. But it seemed she was not truly listening, so labouring under a missapprehension.

I think she smuggled in her own idea of what awakening was. Who knows though, I could be wrong !

[Leo Gura]

39 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Infinity of Gods is a load of bullshit, I'm sorry.

You understand that there are infinite Infinities?

No?

[Sincerity]

40 minutes ago, Carl-Richard said:

Infinity of Gods is a load of bullshit, I'm sorry.

That’s what you think.  

[YIDIRYIDIR]

Leo: explains deeply and passionately what love is. 

The girl interviewing him: is that why people end up looking like their pets?....i think you are on to something.

[Leo Gura]

Be nice, guys. Don't belittle our hosts, so we can continue the conversation in the future.

They did a good job overall talking to me.

[AerisVahnEphelia]

I finished second part, they showed more open mindedness here overall.

it wasn't bad, the guy was a bit more open to think about it seriously.

Overall maybe even higher than curt in some sense.

by the way, I love beavers and I think they are genius ( and cute )

 

Edited 16 hours ago by AerisVahnEphelia

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Carl-Richard said:

A view like Bernardo Kastrup's analytic idealism is much more effective for that kind of audience, clearly delineating a metaphysical position without dragging in too many connections or too much conceptual baggage.

Kastrup is not going to lead them to God. It will just be academic philosophy.