Excellent presenation professor Gijsbers! The series on Kant's critique of pure reason was impeccable, i hope this one would be of the same value.. go on!!

I am a layman, your presentation I stunned no words to add.

Your presentation is fascinating

take a cue from the venerable Graham Oppy - he appears online with an empty bookshelf behind him ,... or populated only with children's board games.

You and I have a very different understanding of Popper.

Thanks a lot for a clear and knowledgeable explanation.

Brilliant!

“All models are wrong… but some are useful…”

They say "space-time" bends and assume everybody knows what space-time is. It's not my field either (I studied engineering) but I can try to shed some light - haha - on the light bending thing. An implication of General Relativity is that time passes differently in different places because mass affects time therefore time if a function of space and that makes what is called time-space. The speed of light is constant therefore when it gets near the Sun the path it has to follow is the one that keeps the speed constant. Speed is the distance traveled in some time and a straight line used to be the quickest path but now if I take some path, time might be faster and the amount of time would be greater. Well ... it's something like that but I have a feeling it's easier to understand like this than saying that a four-dimensional space get curved by mass. (btw, it doesn't need to be a large amount of mass - grains of dust in space also do that otherwise there would be not stars since that is gravity).

God you have a great professor voice ❤️

Thank you ❤️

Hi, Professor Gijsbers. I have questions not so relevant to this video: Is current paradigm of quantum physics overall (e.g., the Standard Model) incommensurable to the paradigm of classical physics (e.g., general relativity)? I am not familiar with modern physics but heard that many physicists now disagree Kuhn’s philosophy of science. Does the overall progress in physical science from 1970s to now seem to fit with Kuhn’s claim?

Well done!! Carry on :)

Hi Victor. I hope you receive this well.

Thank you, Jesus!

“Scientific theories are modelled approximately by propositional statements, but they are exactly explanations.”

The criticism you have of the first point should have more context and background.

Super Ego is Serotonin driven, while Id thrives on Dopamine. Perhaps someone more knowledgeable in Neurobiology could shed some light on it?

Insofar as the examples in this video reguarding both Marx ans freoud, i dont really see how that was even a glimmer of a representation of what Marxism even is, let alone for it to disprove some element of marx.

I think wikipedia's page for this book has a better summary than this guy's. The whole premise of the book is to differentiate between a proper scientific method and a non or quasi science. Given this: