The forum suggestions pointed to this old one, so I watched it again. That thread got off the original reason for me posting it, so, fresh start.
Trying to make a short review here. Before I start, note that at 32 minutes, he says the true quietude of mind is the absolute truth, but he’s not sure anyone ever got there, and I don’t see how he knows that, or WTF. Also, I googled the guy, and he has a dark side. I do not endorse any of his other work and based on reviews, I’m not even going to look at them.
Maybe check out this critique, posted on their forum. Gotta give them credit for leaving it up there A Critique Of Actualized.org And Leo Gura - Personal Development – [Main] - Actualized.org Forum
Right off, 2:30, he says he’s doing this video because he sees that people don’t understand what skepticism is, and it’s something that was discussed in ancient Greece. So, this is an examination of ancient philosophy with applications to today. I find these valuable, some don’t see it that way.
He talks a lot about infinite regress, that was new then, obviously not new now, but are we examining it correctly? The crux is the debate of the dogmatists vs the skeptics. It’s informative because dogma was the main form of philosophy at the time, and we are still suffering from it. The pyrrhonists changed that by saying, all this philosophy stuff is just a game, and if you are playing to win, you lose. Instead, play it by being skeptical of everything.
As John Locke much later pointed out, doubting everything lacks common sense, you couldn’t make any decisions. Pyrrhonists allowed for “appearances”, the more modern scientific word would be evident, or demonstrable. And, scientific methods include the pyrrhonist idea that we are never 100% certain. He gives a nod to “eudaimonia”, that being skeptical is about asking questions for the pleasure of gaining knowledge.
At 24:00 he suggests searching for anything you believe through the infinite regress and you will see it has an end, either you accept it’s unprovable, or you realize you are taking something on faith. Unfortunately, some people see this, and then conclude that this is depressing, and that life is meaningless. They miss applying the skepticism to this conclusion. They miss all the evidence that happiness exists and is obtainable.
Important point at 29:57 – It can seem like this philosophy points to relativism, but relativism becomes a form of absolutism. It really points to non-duality, that all things are connected, whether it’s chemical reactions or the vastness of space or the laws of physics. He throws out some idea of “direct consciousness” at this point, which bugs me, and says we need to “experience absolutism” or something. Then goes on to discuss modern skepticism.
He rips on people who are militantly hyper rational. These modern skeptics takes a position while calling themselves a skeptic, but they really aren’t. Pyrrhonism points inward, always questioning itself, keeping the mind open. It tries to recognize how the ego gets trapped by concepts and paradigms. Pyrrhonism includes not getting caught in their inward reflection to the point of identifying with it and separating themselves from reality. “A true skeptic is not a debater”. The goal is happiness, not ego gratification. True skepticism is a humanist philosophy, it’s open to the full spectrum of positions in the world held by the variety of people in the world. It’s a spiritual practice that doesn’t believe in gods, it’s freedom from all ideologies.
I’m over 500 words, so, I’m calling it good.