
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or


There are dramatic and less dramatic arguments of anti vaxxers. The dramatic ones are the ones dealing with the 5G chip implanted in the vaccine or the conspiracy theories of virologists and politicians to make the people obey and stay home …
But some arguments are less dramatic than those (but still false though).
An example of this kinds of arguments: The vaccines are not tested for the long term effects
What “hard” coaches really do, has nothing to do with coaching:
(to be asked continuously)
About interpretations of QM and why those "can" allow us to understand QM.
"Why did that happen?" is a common question.
You can, rationally, answer this question in 3 (very) different ways:
1) Giving evidence for the phenomenon happening
2) Giving "a" cause for the phenomenon
3) Explaining why your cause is a better explanations than some other cause (comparing explanations and retaining the one that survives the comparison, so the one that explains "best")
A short treatment about what is wrong, pessismistic and dangerous about this statement ;-)
Discussion about why personality tests "must be" wrong and why that is actually a good thing (that they are wrong)
I am referencing 2 specific tests (there are many more)
My arguments for saying that they are wrong are based on Karl Popper's epistemology (critical rationalism)
Bruce Nielson (@bnielson01) explains the 4 strands of the Fabric of Reality by David Deutsch (@DavidDeutschOxf)
The 4 strands contain our 4 deepest theories about reality:
Should we centralise or de-centralise activities in organisations ? And why ?
I argue that both of these statemnts are incorrect/ incomplete:
From the publisher's feed