正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

People fall into 4 categories when it comes to wealth - the one with wealth & knowledge - the one with no wealth, but knowledge - the one with wealth, but no knowledge - the one with neither wealth nor knowledge In my opinion, we should aim to be... show more

Xavier

63,411 subscribers

45,566 次观看 • 10 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

健康养生教育财经

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Karl Popper on How We Gain Knowledge: ––Karl Popper: "People think, usually, that we acquire knowledge by opening our eyes and our ears and let the sensations stream into us, and they believe then that we record this like a camera. In my opinion, if we wish to get knowledge, we have to have a problem. It has to be knowledge of something. We have to find out something. We don't have to wait for information to stream into us, but we have to be inquisitive if we want to get knowledge. If we were passive, we would gain a confused mass of sensations or something like that, which we would hardly be able to understand and to convert into what one may call knowledge. Quite apart from that, perception is not really, in my opinion, the main source of our knowledge. The role of perception is to inform us about a momentary situation in our environment. But we couldn't really interpret our perceptions without knowing much more about our environment, namely, we know whether we are in a house or whether we are in a glacier. So we have two kinds of knowledge: this wider knowledge of a frame in which we orientate ourselves, and the momentary perception which gives us information about the situation at that particular moment. And it is only this situation in which we can use our perception. So we have theoretical knowledge and, if you like, the momentary practical challenge to our theoretical knowledge. And here comes perception in."

Karl Popper on How We Gain Knowledge: ––Karl Popper: "People think, usually, that we acquire knowledge by opening our eyes and our ears and let the sensations stream into us, and they believe then that we record this like a camera. In my opinion, if we wish to get knowledge, we have to have a problem. It has to be knowledge of something. We have to find out something. We don't have to wait for information to stream into us, but we have to be inquisitive if we want to get knowledge. If we were passive, we would gain a confused mass of sensations or something like that, which we would hardly be able to understand and to convert into what one may call knowledge. Quite apart from that, perception is not really, in my opinion, the main source of our knowledge. The role of perception is to inform us about a momentary situation in our environment. But we couldn't really interpret our perceptions without knowing much more about our environment, namely, we know whether we are in a house or whether we are in a glacier. So we have two kinds of knowledge: this wider knowledge of a frame in which we orientate ourselves, and the momentary perception which gives us information about the situation at that particular moment. And it is only this situation in which we can use our perception. So we have theoretical knowledge and, if you like, the momentary practical challenge to our theoretical knowledge. And here comes perception in."

Karl Popper Quotes

115,160 次观看 • 3 个月前

We can't fall into right-wing populism’s lie that the most vulnerable in society are to blame for wealth inequality in our countries. We need to build movements that tell the truth: the story of wealth inequality is not a cultural one, but a class one.

We can't fall into right-wing populism’s lie that the most vulnerable in society are to blame for wealth inequality in our countries. We need to build movements that tell the truth: the story of wealth inequality is not a cultural one, but a class one.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

467,250 次观看 • 5 个月前

"POLYGAMY IS NOT OUR CULTURE" MASOYINBO EAYoruba It was a great pleasure to have you on the show sir. Thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge with us.

"POLYGAMY IS NOT OUR CULTURE" MASOYINBO EAYoruba It was a great pleasure to have you on the show sir. Thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge with us.

Abiola Adebayo

77,064 次观看 • 7 个月前

.Naval: You define wealth in a beautiful way. You talk about wealth as a set of physical transformations that we can affect. So as a society it becomes very clear that knowledge leads directly to wealth creation for everybody. A given individual can obviously affect physical transformations proportional to the resources available to them—but much more proportional to the knowledge available to them. Knowledge is a huge force multiplier. You then define resources as the thing that you combine with knowledge to create wealth. New knowledge allows you to use new things as resources and discard old things that maybe we’re running out of. There are lots of examples of how we’ve done that in the past. For example, in energy we’ve gone from wood to coal to oil to nuclear. But then people say, “Now we’re out of ideas. Now we’re caught up. Now we’re done. There aren’t going to be new ideas, and now we have to freeze the frame and conserve what we have.” The counter to that is, “No, we’ll create new knowledge and have new resources. Don’t worry about the old ones.” Well they say, “If you’re going to have new resources, if you can’t think of them now, it’s not real.” This now gets into the realm of people demanding that if you’re going to claim that new knowledge will be created, you have to name that knowledge now. Otherwise it’s not real. But that seems like a Catch-22. David Deutsch: It does, and it’s a bad argument. I don’t want to claim that the knowledge will be created. We’re fallible; we may not create it. We may destroy ourselves. We may miss the solution that’s right under our nose, so that when the snailiens come from another galaxy and look at us, they’ll say, “How can it possibly be that they failed to do so-and-so when it was right in front of them?” That could happen. I can’t prove or argue that it won’t happen. What I always argue, though, is that we have what it takes. We have everything that it takes to achieve that. If we don’t, it’ll be because of bad choices we have made, not because of constraints imposed on us by the planet or the solar system. Naval: It will be by anti-rational memes that restrict the creation of knowledge and the growth of knowledge. David Deutsch: Maybe. Or maybe it’ll be by well-intentioned errors, which nobody could see why they were errors. Again, it doesn’t take malevolence to make mistakes. Mistakes are the normal condition of humans. All we can do is try to find them. Maybe not destroying the means of correcting errors is the heart of morality; because if there is no way of correcting errors, then sooner or later one of those will get us. Naval: Don’t destroy the means of error correction is the base of morality. I love that. I think about places like North Korea where you can’t have elections and a revolution is very difficult because the gang in charge is armed to the teeth and they’ve destroyed the means of political error correction for a long time. That is a case where humanity is trapped in a local minimum, and it’s very hard to climb out of that hole. If too much of the world falls into that mindset, then we as a species may just stagnate because we’ve lost our biggest advantage. We’ve lost our biggest discovery, which was the ability to make new discoveries.

.Naval: You define wealth in a beautiful way. You talk about wealth as a set of physical transformations that we can affect. So as a society it becomes very clear that knowledge leads directly to wealth creation for everybody. A given individual can obviously affect physical transformations proportional to the resources available to them—but much more proportional to the knowledge available to them. Knowledge is a huge force multiplier. You then define resources as the thing that you combine with knowledge to create wealth. New knowledge allows you to use new things as resources and discard old things that maybe we’re running out of. There are lots of examples of how we’ve done that in the past. For example, in energy we’ve gone from wood to coal to oil to nuclear. But then people say, “Now we’re out of ideas. Now we’re caught up. Now we’re done. There aren’t going to be new ideas, and now we have to freeze the frame and conserve what we have.” The counter to that is, “No, we’ll create new knowledge and have new resources. Don’t worry about the old ones.” Well they say, “If you’re going to have new resources, if you can’t think of them now, it’s not real.” This now gets into the realm of people demanding that if you’re going to claim that new knowledge will be created, you have to name that knowledge now. Otherwise it’s not real. But that seems like a Catch-22. David Deutsch: It does, and it’s a bad argument. I don’t want to claim that the knowledge will be created. We’re fallible; we may not create it. We may destroy ourselves. We may miss the solution that’s right under our nose, so that when the snailiens come from another galaxy and look at us, they’ll say, “How can it possibly be that they failed to do so-and-so when it was right in front of them?” That could happen. I can’t prove or argue that it won’t happen. What I always argue, though, is that we have what it takes. We have everything that it takes to achieve that. If we don’t, it’ll be because of bad choices we have made, not because of constraints imposed on us by the planet or the solar system. Naval: It will be by anti-rational memes that restrict the creation of knowledge and the growth of knowledge. David Deutsch: Maybe. Or maybe it’ll be by well-intentioned errors, which nobody could see why they were errors. Again, it doesn’t take malevolence to make mistakes. Mistakes are the normal condition of humans. All we can do is try to find them. Maybe not destroying the means of correcting errors is the heart of morality; because if there is no way of correcting errors, then sooner or later one of those will get us. Naval: Don’t destroy the means of error correction is the base of morality. I love that. I think about places like North Korea where you can’t have elections and a revolution is very difficult because the gang in charge is armed to the teeth and they’ve destroyed the means of political error correction for a long time. That is a case where humanity is trapped in a local minimum, and it’s very hard to climb out of that hole. If too much of the world falls into that mindset, then we as a species may just stagnate because we’ve lost our biggest advantage. We’ve lost our biggest discovery, which was the ability to make new discoveries.

Deutsch Explains

143,949 次观看 • 2 年前

Embark on a cosmic odyssey of knowledge and wonder. We'll soar through the galaxies unraveling the mysteries of the universe one discovery at a time. 🌌📚 Passion, curiosity and wealth of knowledge for everyone. Dare to wonder like never before. ✨🚀

Embark on a cosmic odyssey of knowledge and wonder. We'll soar through the galaxies unraveling the mysteries of the universe one discovery at a time. 🌌📚 Passion, curiosity and wealth of knowledge for everyone. Dare to wonder like never before. ✨🚀

The Wandering Earth NFT

17,371 次观看 • 3 年前

Elon Musk: Creating wealth should be applauded. “If one creates wealth or creates great products and services, that is something that should be applauded. It's effectively increasing the standard of living of the country and perhaps of the world. And sometimes, people think of consumption and wealth as the same thing, but they're obviously not the same thing.” Interview with Everyday Astronaut, May 26, 2022

Elon Musk: Creating wealth should be applauded. “If one creates wealth or creates great products and services, that is something that should be applauded. It's effectively increasing the standard of living of the country and perhaps of the world. And sometimes, people think of consumption and wealth as the same thing, but they're obviously not the same thing.” Interview with Everyday Astronaut, May 26, 2022

ELON CLIPS

1,098,941 次观看 • 1 年前

this kind of people deserve to be the one with richness & wealth

this kind of people deserve to be the one with richness & wealth

Posts Of Cats

1,542,010 次观看 • 1 年前

The Bible is a wealth of knowledge, but sometimes confusing to read. How can we possibly understand the whole story? 🤔 NEW from Ascension and fathermikeschmitz comes a beautiful, clear, shareable summary of the story of salvation: "The Bible in 10 Minutes."

The Bible is a wealth of knowledge, but sometimes confusing to read. How can we possibly understand the whole story? 🤔 NEW from Ascension and fathermikeschmitz comes a beautiful, clear, shareable summary of the story of salvation: "The Bible in 10 Minutes."

Ascension

25,507 次观看 • 2 年前

Opposing mistake on one side but one should fear Allah with regards to insulting and making takfir on scholars likes of Nawwawi , Ibn Hajr , ibn Iyad , al Qurtubi , Ibn al jawzi and Abu Hanifa. Only people of knowledge recognize the virtue of people of knowledge.

Opposing mistake on one side but one should fear Allah with regards to insulting and making takfir on scholars likes of Nawwawi , Ibn Hajr , ibn Iyad , al Qurtubi , Ibn al jawzi and Abu Hanifa. Only people of knowledge recognize the virtue of people of knowledge.

Salafi

12,278 次观看 • 2 年前

Living in a surveillance state is not good, but there are good things you can do with the knowledge that you are living in one.

Living in a surveillance state is not good, but there are good things you can do with the knowledge that you are living in one.

Emily Galvin-Almanza

13,543 次观看 • 1 年前

My good friend Peter McMahon joined me to share his wealth of knowledge about soccer and his thoughts on whether the U.S. can win...

My good friend Peter McMahon joined me to share his wealth of knowledge about soccer and his thoughts on whether the U.S. can win...

Paul Mauro

18,194 次观看 • 1 个月前

Esther McVey(ex minister for common sense) says Rachel Reeves "didn't have the knowledge that she needed" to be Chancellor, but Rishi Sunak "had a wealth of experience." 🤦 #PoliticsLive

Esther McVey(ex minister for common sense) says Rachel Reeves "didn't have the knowledge that she needed" to be Chancellor, but Rishi Sunak "had a wealth of experience." 🤦 #PoliticsLive

Haggis_UK 🇬🇧 🇪🇺

35,948 次观看 • 1 年前

My husband always said it best. COVID taught us that knowledge and wisdom are not the same thing. Our institutions are filled with people like Fauci who have credentials, degrees, and knowledge, but lack wisdom. And knowledge without wisdom, especially when combined with power, is incredibly dangerous. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” — Proverbs 9:10

My husband always said it best. COVID taught us that knowledge and wisdom are not the same thing. Our institutions are filled with people like Fauci who have credentials, degrees, and knowledge, but lack wisdom. And knowledge without wisdom, especially when combined with power, is incredibly dangerous. “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,” — Proverbs 9:10

Erika Kirk

599,870 次观看 • 22 小时前

.Naval: Marxism, besides denying human incentives, also has a problem where it just assumes that everything is finite and we're all just dividing up the same small set of things. Well, the cavemen didn't have color TVs, computers, cars, antibiotics, or medicine. They were not sitting around dividing up the same few things. The knowledge grows, and we create more. It also tends to assume that we can freeze frame at some point in society and say, 'Well, we have enough different kinds of sneakers, enough different kinds of housing, we just need to allocate it better.' And that is not how anything works. David Deutsch has a great definition of wealth, which he says is the set of physical transformations that we can affect. So, when you think about it that way, you realize that knowledge is not just stored capital in the classic Marxist sense (capital vs. labor), but it's also knowledge on what to do with that capital. The cavemen or Palaeolithic ancestors had access to all the same resources we did. They were living on the same Earth, and by the modern environmentalist arguments, they had a better Earth—they had more to do things with. But yet, they couldn't do anything. They were not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination. Why? Because of knowledge. Life is not a zero-sum game, it's a positive-sum game. But we are hardwired to think it's a zero-sum game because, for millions or billions of years, there was no such thing as wealth. There was no such thing as persistent knowledge creation in the environment. What you had was a small amount of resources being divided up, and most of the games were status games—'Which monkey outranks which other monkey?' And that decides which monkey gets to eat first. We played that game for a billion years. Now, we come onto a recent game where, actually, we can all eat, and the big problem is obesity. It's no longer starvation. The big problem is boredom. It's not actually work. There's enough work. So, in this environment, switching your evolved mindset from a zero-sum game to a positive-sum game where we can all win, if we create knowledge together and use the resources that we have to create more resources and more wealth, that's the game we all need to be playing now.

.Naval: Marxism, besides denying human incentives, also has a problem where it just assumes that everything is finite and we're all just dividing up the same small set of things. Well, the cavemen didn't have color TVs, computers, cars, antibiotics, or medicine. They were not sitting around dividing up the same few things. The knowledge grows, and we create more. It also tends to assume that we can freeze frame at some point in society and say, 'Well, we have enough different kinds of sneakers, enough different kinds of housing, we just need to allocate it better.' And that is not how anything works. David Deutsch has a great definition of wealth, which he says is the set of physical transformations that we can affect. So, when you think about it that way, you realize that knowledge is not just stored capital in the classic Marxist sense (capital vs. labor), but it's also knowledge on what to do with that capital. The cavemen or Palaeolithic ancestors had access to all the same resources we did. They were living on the same Earth, and by the modern environmentalist arguments, they had a better Earth—they had more to do things with. But yet, they couldn't do anything. They were not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination. Why? Because of knowledge. Life is not a zero-sum game, it's a positive-sum game. But we are hardwired to think it's a zero-sum game because, for millions or billions of years, there was no such thing as wealth. There was no such thing as persistent knowledge creation in the environment. What you had was a small amount of resources being divided up, and most of the games were status games—'Which monkey outranks which other monkey?' And that decides which monkey gets to eat first. We played that game for a billion years. Now, we come onto a recent game where, actually, we can all eat, and the big problem is obesity. It's no longer starvation. The big problem is boredom. It's not actually work. There's enough work. So, in this environment, switching your evolved mindset from a zero-sum game to a positive-sum game where we can all win, if we create knowledge together and use the resources that we have to create more resources and more wealth, that's the game we all need to be playing now.

Arjun Khemani

163,525 次观看 • 1 年前

Love Forrest Maready. If you want to learn the true history of Polio, he's a wealth of knowledge along with Dr. Suzanne Humphries- Dissolving illusions.

Love Forrest Maready. If you want to learn the true history of Polio, he's a wealth of knowledge along with Dr. Suzanne Humphries- Dissolving illusions.

Jessica Rojas 🇺🇸💪

169,713 次观看 • 2 年前

"There is only one real scandal in this country today: the massive corruption and redistribution of wealth, power, and influence into the hands of a tiny number of people... At this point, no matter what Donald Trump does with his pardons, we should challenge their legitimacy. We should seize the assets he gained through corruption and return that wealth to the American people, because he is stealing from you."

"There is only one real scandal in this country today: the massive corruption and redistribution of wealth, power, and influence into the hands of a tiny number of people... At this point, no matter what Donald Trump does with his pardons, we should challenge their legitimacy. We should seize the assets he gained through corruption and return that wealth to the American people, because he is stealing from you."

Mike Nellis

14,435 次观看 • 25 天前