I believe western science refers too this as "dark matter", which might be termed a spirital realm.

@@Gaiandreamer Dark matter has to do with gravitation effect it has on regular matter.

It's really not on par, Ryan

@@richardhead9818oh look another small WYTE “man” who can’t handle his own biases being called out. Grow up settler man. You’re in our world now! 😎

point well taken. but if science is the pursuit of understanding what we don't yet understand, i.e. expanding knowledge ... there are more than one way of doing that ... the Western scientific method is very effective, not desparaging it, but it's just one way and many things that it can't yet understand.

If only that were true

To be human is to have predicates and biases. Science is created by humans, therefore……

In an ideal world - the institutions of science are abject to social constructs not too unlike the church

Read: Bruno Latour - We Have Never Been Modern. You'll find that the practice of science is heavily influenced by a network of "social" factors (Latour avoids the use of abstractions like 'culture' and 'social', which you might like). There are a myriad of ontological assumptions in science, the most evident being the subject-object divide which is absent in indigenous knowledge. The subject-object relation is deterministic of the functions and interests of so-called "objective" science. I hope you will read into this because it's crucial to separate ourselves from the assumptions of Cartesian-influenced enlightenment, rather than to separate mind and body; self and other.

Oh boy youre naive arent you

Why? WTF?🤦‍♂️🤷‍♂️ The way I see it, what Dr Little Bear is talking about is relevant to what we need to consider in order to better adhere to our constitution, and bring us back from the brink of collapse.

The United States of America is not a democracy; The United States of America is a constitutional republic founded on natural law nomocracy. "For the American The Law is King." - Thomas Paine From: "Common Sense" January 10th 1776 The Declaration of Independence specifies this law to be natural law philosophy, as it quote John Locke almost verbatim, from the point where it reads "we hold these truths to be self-evident..." After the Articles of Confederation failed miserably, United States of America adopted a system of government based upon the Iroquois Constitution. This was confirmed unanimously by an act of Congress, during the Reagan Administration" under HR 331 100th Congress second session 1988 It was conservative radio commentator Paul Harvey, himself, who brought this fact to the attention of the American people, and our government. "Roll back the darkness we've been blind for far too long in this socialist Communist democracy Well it can't be right when it's all wrong." - Robbie Romero From the song Heartbeat kzbin.info/www/bejne/b4PbpZR6r6-Cnrs

😂

@MYOB the Haudenosaunee before European conntact

@MYOB Your the one who brought up the myth, I'm talking about the confederacy of 5 very different nations that spans from Nova Scotia to Vermont. It was also where Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson admit the saw true participatory democracy in action in 1774.

Oh, if reality were so simple, we'd have it all figured out. Science is useful, but not authoritative on all life and knowledge. The scientific method is very good at getting us focused, empirical evidence, but very limited at getting a broad view on reality and how the world works. Perhaps try reading Nietzsche, Khun, and McPherson (Native American philosophy) to get what I mean. KZbin argumentation can be trite. Littlebear's argument is that there are different ways to get to truths, and that western science is currently tunnel visioning (and look at the state of our natural ecosystems... we are fucking things up even with all this great technological science).

@@ACofOntario , you are mixing philosophy and science. Just FYI they are separate things.

ACofOntario There are different ways to get to the “truth”, only one of them rely on facts and verifiable evidence-only one of them is consistent and always reliable. Only one of them is not based on authority or tradition, but based on follow experimentation and evidence.

@@kenelliott6897 Science emerged from philosophy. Where do you think the idea of verifiable facts comes from? Einstein studied philosophy too, and used it to expand his idea of science.

@@DarthAlphaTheGreat Indigenous knowledge functions in a similar way but built on thousands of years of trial and error in isolated situations and geographic regions. Your idea of truth is resting on an assumption of stagnant unchanging 'being', while missing the idea that things change ie. 'becoming'. Truth for being doesn't entail truth for becoming. @ACofOntario's suggestion to read more, I have to agree with, especially Nietzsche who addresses 'becoming' and how truth relates when you factor in change, as opposed to frozen, isolated concepts. The Eskimo and Inuit people don't have 50 words for snow because its fun. The Sto:lo's knowledge on floods along the Fraser River does't exist by accident. The examples are endless, and there is no way western science could come to the same knowledge or comprehensive understanding without the input of indigenous people. Try a different perspective bud, yours is only one.

No one is forcing you to align with his way of viewing the world and I think it is awfully dogmatic of you to dismiss all other scientific frameworks for "the one and true" scientific method. The more ways of thinking we have the better, for instance considering the Blackfoot Tribe's and other Indigenous knowledge systems overlap with mechanics operating at the quantum level, it connects sciences and offers a broader understanding of what is closer to the truth. Wouldn't we be better as a global human society if we, for instance, let the people who have been stewarding the land for 10,000 continue to do so while others develop life-supporting technology? Considering vaccines maybe you should do some research on how many of our 'modern medicines' come out of Indigenous sciences. You'll be surprised at what was, and continues to be, stolen.

@@jadechanges1379 absolute bullshit, there is no 'other scientific framework' that can be called science, that doesn't include the scientific method. You're romantic fantasies about indigenous 'scientific' superiority is hilarious - quantum level connections, what a joke. Name one vaccine indigenous people came up with? I'll give you a hint, ZERO

you obviously don't know your way around a physics textbook, take your negativity elsewhere

@@richardhead9818 I'm not a physicist, but I am a scientist and I do not agree with your message. There is nothing problematic about questioning how we look at the world. That is exactly how science advances. This presenter is not saying we need to change the scientific method... They're saying that we should question what we think we know about the world if we want to progress into the unknown. You come off as more of a gatekeeper than an actual scientist despite trying to dismiss this persons worldview in favor of what you think "science" should be.

@@Yahsbsuq I wasn't addressing the video specifically, but the comment above. Though I think the video is filled with reductionism and simplicities about what science is actually doing. For example, the notion that science is all about isolating things to be studied, which precludes a holistic worldview is neither informative nor accurate, in reality its part of a larger process that tries to understand how systems work (holistic? I think so). The presenter chalks this up to 'dichotomous thinking', which is ironic given that's the framework he is obviously applying. This speech is full of all sorts of mystical non-sense.

I mean, honestly, I "get" her point of view....but I don't get the way she is presenting it--she is definitely rabble-rousing even if she claims she isn't. She is correct in that universities should be open places for freedom of speech. With this in mind, let's talk about the place where she did her PhD and I graduated years ago too....York. Should they allow Zionists to hold lectures? What about Palestinian freedom groups? These are two examples of groups that would both claim a right to free speech and academic freedom on that campus, and over the years this has created ongoing challenges. It is easy to stand up and say "hey, let's just sit down and chat...I'm on the same page as you" but we are all human and university or not, it does not always work that way. At some point in academia, too, there is a *choice* regarding use of words and phrasing: if her claim is that the indigenization of universities is problematic, why also speak down about the atrocities (because they were) that happened with Residential Schools? Heck, Hitler and South Africa drew reference from Canada's practices; does she believe that he and they were also not engaging in genocidal practices--i.e. why do we get a "pass" just because it was schools vs camps/segregation? I am also a socialist but I'd be having a serious argument with her, not because I want to shut her down but because I just plain disagree regarding a lot of her points. I don't agree with everything this video is saying either....heck, I also don't think "Western science" (his term) has it all figured out (there are huge gaps, and as a woman I can say that with confidence). What I also don't get is this: if she truly is a Socialist, why target indigenization of all things vs the right of all to that higher level of education--make universities free to attend (as they are elsewhere)...or does she like her tenure that is pretty much a set-guarantee a bit too much? Lawyers make butt tons of money defending all kinds of ridiculousness too; maybe take up issue with their general lack of ethics? Interesting link nonetheless and I did give it a spin.

I think this does not have more views because we are a socially primitive Society who do not understand our own system of government. Instead of building on our constitutional republic, which is founded upon natural law nomocracy, we degenerated rather quickly to that which we escaped from by the formation of the two party system and functioning as a democracy as opposed to natural law consensus. When examined, natural law is the core of American values, the Cowpens flag, predecessor to Betsy Ross, is our medicine wheel and functional as a schematic to understand the meaning of our government and Society. Sadly, when we adopted the Iroquois system of government, through the adoption of our constitution after the miserable founder of the Articles of Confederation, we took the car but left the motor needed to make it run. Suggested reading Remarks concerning the Savages of North America 1784 by Benjamin Franklin: Regrettably left out of the Federalist Papers HR 331 100th Congress 2nd session 1988 I am a firm believer that it is time we revisit the influence of Far Western Civilization upon these United States of America in order to correct our government system and Society. Of course I've been doing this for 40 years. Hopeful to publish my work within the next few years.

Because this is bullshit lol

Underrated comment. Thank you, I say, as one who may wish to engage what is said in this video for further research. Search terms are known to have variants in many if not all fields (it seems ubiquitous). It's certainly helpful to be as well-equipped as possible.

randolph langstieh Metaphysics must follow Physics, not the other way around. Metaphysics Change because Physics changed. Physics shouldn’t change based on what Metaphysics find convenience. Quantum Physics is not metaphysics. What does quantum physics imply about the nature of our existence is metaphysics. The latter is significantly more subjective.

@@DarthAlphaTheGreat Metaphysics preceded physics but ok.

@@tylerbranston6383 initially metaphysics was all we had, that's a bit like saying religion came before science therefore religion should take precedence in it's claims about how the world is. Non-sense really.

​@@DarthAlphaTheGreat or, instead of atomizing this dilemma and compartmentalizing metaphysics and physics, we could approach this from Dr. Little Bear's perspective and find a symbiotic, cyclical relationship between metaphysics and physics. Does metaphysics not provide deep, philosophical questions that guide physics, and does physics not use these questions to explore the nature of our reality, thus presenting metaphysical philosophers with more questions? You're right in saying "Physics shouldn't change based on what Metaphysics find [convenient]" but it will change based on the questions posed by metaphysics about scientific discoveries.

More likely, you have a defensive, negative mindset towards western culture that animates your ideas and understandings of what science even is. After all, you've made a point of declaring your identity, so obviously you have a lot invested in the ideas and fantasies that surround the "tribal thought" you have declared your fidelity too. This kind of bias distorts your thinking.

@@richardhead9818 ....how do you know that your thinking isn’t distorted by your own world view?...

I agree!

see my comment to Bob above.

Religion is not a construct of Far Western Civilization. The Western concept of religion, like art, is alien to Native Americans. It can be said that Western Civilization is linguistically built upon the noun ( objects/ materialism) whereas Far Western Civilization is linguistically built upon the verb ( action/ relationship). Sir, if you were listening rather than convincing yourself that you automatically do not agree, in ethnocentric arrogance, you would have learned this from the lecture itself. Additionally it was stated that native science is a metaphorical term in and of itself. I would sincerely hate to see your GPA, I would surmise that it is rather embarrassing

, what does this mean? The point is that religion is a belief system, whereas science is a system of inquiry.

That is entirely a whiteEuropean perspective that always is dismissive, disdainful and primitizing of anything not European, but especially Indigenous knowledge. They label and define what they don't know just to fit into their structures of value and worth. They wrongly categorize and mislabel other peoples, cultures and belief systems because they are so rigid in thinking. They try to force fit others into their shape of the universe and living, which is linear and limited. Its a sad way to be, and its no wonder many are envious of Indigenous freedoms and beauty, and try to emulate or appropriate it.

@@RedhairedCrow ​ @Prodigal Son Found the critical theorists. This is not a normative judgement of whether ethnic knowledge is good or bad. It's just not a science like math, physics, chemistry etc. which are falsifiable.

I encourage you to put more research into this opinion of yours. Maybe spend some time out on the land with indigenous peoples and I guarantee you that you will indeed change your mind.

Precession of the Equinoxes. Recognized by ancient cultures around the world. How do you account for that? Bob?

Read the book. Educate yourself. Seek humility.

Paul Brett oh really Paul? Clearly you are not well versed in different disciplines. Gregory cajeta is clearly expressing an intj approach to science as opposed to an istj approach to science. Now look at the camera and say duh and I would ot suggest you not attempt to join Mensa.

Nothing you have said goes against anything that I have stated. However, I fear that your combative tone suggests that you have not really understood my comment or your comment in relation to it. I wish you good luck my friend.

@@prodigalson6166 your comments on this video have proven to be consistent in that they say almost nothing of use or value

@@richardhead9818 all you are doing is ethnocentricly superimposing a noun based worldview on a verb based paradigm. If you don't understand something be man enough to admit that you are dumbstruck

@@richardhead9818 I really am tired of left-wing people like yourself running around trying to conquer the world. That's okay we've got Trump in office. We're sweeping you left-wing people aside; don't think you are going to stop academic freedom