Andrés

And so for everybody that's tuning in, this conversation is going to be all the shallow topics that we like to typically explore here in life. And Philip is going to be our joint maestro in helping us explore these topics and points of exploration. Where I would love to start is actually around the topic of your first book, which was Galileo's Error.

I think about how societally we're always building on the knowledge we have from our predecessors and how we often really inherit the axiomatic worldview of previous brilliant thinkers, which is amazing. And yet we are always in many ways limited working in a line of questioning that we started working on.

I think about how societally we're always building on the knowledge we have from our predecessors and how we often really inherit the axiomatic worldview of previous brilliant thinkers, which is amazing. And yet we are always in many ways limited working in a line of questioning that we started working on.

I think about how societally we're always building on the knowledge we have from our predecessors and how we often really inherit the axiomatic worldview of previous brilliant thinkers, which is amazing. And yet we are always in many ways limited working in a line of questioning that we started working on.

When you think about great thinkers of the past from Descartes to Newton to Galileo and how a lot of the fundamental positioning of understanding reality was reducing it to a set of mechanisms, where do you think we fundamentally went wrong?

When you think about great thinkers of the past from Descartes to Newton to Galileo and how a lot of the fundamental positioning of understanding reality was reducing it to a set of mechanisms, where do you think we fundamentally went wrong?

When you think about great thinkers of the past from Descartes to Newton to Galileo and how a lot of the fundamental positioning of understanding reality was reducing it to a set of mechanisms, where do you think we fundamentally went wrong?

I think in that exploration, it's fascinating to just see how fundamentally limited we are as human beings using our sense perceptions to understand reality, yet they are, in a sense, our only direct access to reality. Aldous Huxley and his book, Doors of Perception, and many philosophers and thinkers throughout time have viewed the brain as a reduction valve for consciousness.

I think in that exploration, it's fascinating to just see how fundamentally limited we are as human beings using our sense perceptions to understand reality, yet they are, in a sense, our only direct access to reality. Aldous Huxley and his book, Doors of Perception, and many philosophers and thinkers throughout time have viewed the brain as a reduction valve for consciousness.

I think in that exploration, it's fascinating to just see how fundamentally limited we are as human beings using our sense perceptions to understand reality, yet they are, in a sense, our only direct access to reality. Aldous Huxley and his book, Doors of Perception, and many philosophers and thinkers throughout time have viewed the brain as a reduction valve for consciousness.

And we know through studies through neuroscience and perception mechanisms, how we have millions of bits of information accessible to us in any given moment. And yet what we are consciously aware of is a small, small fraction of that. And so in a sense, we really are getting a reduction of the possible inputs of stimulus around us.

And we know through studies through neuroscience and perception mechanisms, how we have millions of bits of information accessible to us in any given moment. And yet what we are consciously aware of is a small, small fraction of that. And so in a sense, we really are getting a reduction of the possible inputs of stimulus around us.

And we know through studies through neuroscience and perception mechanisms, how we have millions of bits of information accessible to us in any given moment. And yet what we are consciously aware of is a small, small fraction of that. And so in a sense, we really are getting a reduction of the possible inputs of stimulus around us.

And so we're kind of like looking through this, peeping through this little straw at reality, trying to understand it. What do you think about the limits of our sense perception when viewing reality from that kind of worldview of a mechanistic worldview, which, you know, not to put any shame on, has bared many fruits. But again, it's gone wrong in our understanding of consciousness and who we are.

And so we're kind of like looking through this, peeping through this little straw at reality, trying to understand it. What do you think about the limits of our sense perception when viewing reality from that kind of worldview of a mechanistic worldview, which, you know, not to put any shame on, has bared many fruits. But again, it's gone wrong in our understanding of consciousness and who we are.

And so we're kind of like looking through this, peeping through this little straw at reality, trying to understand it. What do you think about the limits of our sense perception when viewing reality from that kind of worldview of a mechanistic worldview, which, you know, not to put any shame on, has bared many fruits. But again, it's gone wrong in our understanding of consciousness and who we are.

yeah there is this actually this great quote from moritz schlick from he's the founder of the vienna circle in the early 90s he said that physics has ascended to summits hitherto visible only to philosophers whose gaze has however not always been free from metaphysical haziness very interesting quote in the way that it's phrased. I love it.

yeah there is this actually this great quote from moritz schlick from he's the founder of the vienna circle in the early 90s he said that physics has ascended to summits hitherto visible only to philosophers whose gaze has however not always been free from metaphysical haziness very interesting quote in the way that it's phrased. I love it.

yeah there is this actually this great quote from moritz schlick from he's the founder of the vienna circle in the early 90s he said that physics has ascended to summits hitherto visible only to philosophers whose gaze has however not always been free from metaphysical haziness very interesting quote in the way that it's phrased. I love it.

It talks in points to how our capacity for exploring physics has gone to realms that only used to be accessible to philosophers, right? And so, yeah, I just look at all the different ways in which we have our ability to probe reality, to understand it deeper. Before we fully move on from that last point,