Rationally Speaking Live from NECSS 2014

Featuring Massimo Pigliucci, Julia Galef, & Lawrence Krauss. Does the modern scientific enterprise provide us with our only reliable source of knowledge? Or does science itself require philosophical foundations? What do philosophers have to tell us about the limits and utility of science? Physicist Lawrence Krauss and biologist-philosopher Massimo Pigliucci will discuss the relationship between science and philosophy, moderated by Rationally Speaking co-host Julia Galef.

[flashpeter]

Great talk. I laughed really hard in 58:54, and Julia's reaction to it is absolutely priceless.

[Alachia]

Lawrence Krauss is such a pleasure to listen to.

[Mrnumberontop]

Really great minds, really great people!! Thanks for the video!!

[plantagenet]

Lawrence Krauss would be one of my heroes, if I had heroes .

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more to speak as narrow path seeker...
Vs
Think more although widening paths encircled through every sides of life

[aysikl]

What movie is Krauss talking about in the start? (first 4 mins)
Supposed to have Krauss in it with the earth as center of universe or some crap..

[annov]

Thanx for posting! Very very interesting:-))

[Alejandro-Te]

around 39:00 he says quantum mechanics is absolutely deterministic but the measurement is probabilistic. I still don't get to grasp what that means. Does anyone know more about it?

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more the hardest way as how I developed to bind the new things that I just learnt on the same page that I intended to grow up...
Vs
Think more the hardest way with the hardest I was put into test, the hardest way of how I can't be defeated by lies

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more the hardest way of how I continually developed the habit of writing
Vs
Think more even when I am 100% blank

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more as how I handle my everyday's situation just to remain truthful to you...
Vs
Think more as how I read the same book all over again and again

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more as wise as possible as how a mind out of nothing works in a day's hours naturally...
Vs
Think more as wise as how the flow of conversation went smoothly if I focussingly focuss on what I specifically aimed at no matter what I am doing, or how others will say to me

[stevesobot]

Random, yet poetic & beautiful...

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more as a person who don't want to agree with what's not rightous...
Vs
Think more as a person who was happy to live with what's rightous

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more to claim not what's belong to others
Vs
Think more but to proof what's belong to mine particularly

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think 🧂💎
Vs
Think Hindi (Antonym)Paryavachan Antonym(Vilom) for Class VIII and Windows Explorer for Class VI till 11:30 AM

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more as wise with knowledge that makes me feel jealousless
Vs
Think more with knowledge that makes me Emotionless

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more yet not to be fool by those whose believed that 3 hours effort of studying is too much..
Vs
Think more but to rationalise my effort to you for nearly 24/7 as a study timing

[zadeh]

The problem is there is too much focus on rationality and not enough on intuition. One level below g (IQ), is senses and perceptions, where a lot of intelligence is missed on IQ tests. Factors like associative memory, and computational fluency, that are component to intuition. Rationality, is essentially IQ minus any intuitive component. Intuition is important as it allows us to recognize repetition and apply relevant strategies or integrate relevant information when working on subproblems, so that when they are thinking in complex fields, we are minimizing the cognitive load, which can be conserved for more critical periods of thinking (with IQ) about elements of a larger problem. And in certain problem classes, intuition is a very powerful empirical tool, that allows to sift through, select, and arrange bits of distant information, based on underlying structural repetition - this allows for the 'generation' (as in intelli-gence), of a novel set ( a novel set is a free selection of associations, for example: 3, tree, tee). These sets can later be analyzed (with IQ), and new information extracted. That's why intuition deserves just as much attention as rationality. The system is getting more biased in favor of IQ, not less biased. And these rationalists, like Maggie Toplak, just use the exceptional cases, where intuition happens to fail. In most instances in life, and when thinking subconsiously about highly complex topics, intuition is a prerequisite, for the generation of new and useful ideas.

[jimnesstarlyngdohnonglait]

Think more the hardest way with the content stuff I hold in my hand...
Vs
Think more the hardest way although my ears or my eyes are being framed as a person who have to pay the moment I listen to what noise they make, neither as a person who have to pay the moment I look to what the shown me