In most classrooms, the student is presented with a carefully curated narrative: a theory is stated, an experiment is performed, and the outcome is said to “confirm” what was already dictated. This is not science. It is ritual. It is a scripted performance designed not to uncover reality but to validate the authority of those who dictate the theory. The inversion is striking: the tools of empirical investigation — beakers, electrodes, thermometers, balances — are repurposed from instruments of discovery into instruments of compliance. The student is no longer a discoverer; the student becomes an actor, executing a preordained choreography in which success is measured not by insight but by obedience. Consider the common example of electrolysis in a high school laboratory. Students are given a theoretical description of water splitting into hydrogen and oxygen, then instructed to construct a simple apparatus: two electrodes in water with an applied current. Bubbles rise, gas is collected, and occasionally a flame confirms that “hydrogen burns, oxygen supports combustion.” The ritual is complete: the experiment validates the teacher’s authority. The reality of what occurs — the tactile sensation of bubbles, the behavior of gases, the heat, the ignition — is secondary. Observation is subordinated to a narrative. This is not harmless pedagogy. It is a systemic reinforcement of epistemic authority. By dictating theory first, schools train students to prioritize confirmation over discovery, to value the written word above sensory evidence, to see experimentation as a ceremonial act rather than a means of interrogation. Knowledge becomes hierarchical: the authority of theory is unquestionable, while first-hand observation is merely supplementary. A truly descriptive approach would invert this ritual. It would start with the phenomena: bubbles forming at electrodes, the sound and heat of ignition, the rising gas, the displacement of water. Only after careful, repeated observation would labels or tentative explanations emerge — and these labels would be provisional, descriptive, and accountable to evidence. This is the method of trial-and-error empiricism, the method that predates formalized chemistry and physics: observe first, name second.

However difficult it may me to define a good life, I think this insight is a key piece to the puzzle: “People are all decent underneath. All that is necessary to prove this is to find out what the motives are for their superficial behavior—nasty, mean, or vicious though that behavior may be. Once these motives are understood, it is impossible to resent the behavior that follows. “The insecurity cycle—from this flows everything. . . . The person who behaves badly behaves so because of hurt, actual and expected, and lashes out in self-defense, as a cornered animal might. The fact is that people are good, if only their fundamental wishes are satisfied, their wishes for affection and security. Give people affection and security, and they will give affection and be secure in their feelings and behavior.” ~Abraham Maslow That’s why, “Love your enemies.”

It doesn't move the same for everyone. To speed it up, to live a month in 24 hours, simply put more cause into effect. If someone on your team does 100 messages a day, and you do 200, you've lived 48 hours in his 24. This is how the exponential gap that separates men is created. You have to CONSTANTLY be doing, moving, creating. Even moving at a steady pace isn't good enough. Because there are people out there who aren't, so you're falling behind. You're either spiraling up or spiraling down.

This is the Skool community for Practical Philosophy -- Let me know if you have been to a meetup in person and if not, where you're located!

May was an interesting month in the history of Practical Philosophy… On May 30th, 2024, we started the Practical Philosophy Vancouver chapter. For the first 2.5 years we just had the three groups. Minding our business. Then we opened CDMX in early 2024 and Vancouver was the 5th group. That was a turning point. After that, within a few months we had opened up another 5 or 10. One year later and we have 5x’d that number with over 25 chapters. It seems that Practical Philosophy has become an actual movement. During this month of May, 2025, we added new chapters in Montreal, Doha Qatar, Cagliari Italy and Saltillo Mexico. As well as the revival of our San Francisco chapter. For June, we have similar growth happening. What we must keep in mind, while all this exciting growth is happening, is that although growth in numbers is good, we MUST make sure that we are optimizing for the best discussions that we can have. That we are building something beautiful is evident, yes. That it’s quite massive, also yes. But that our main focus must be on the quality. When the initial exponential growth happened, it got into our head a little bit. We lost our humility for a brief period. We’ve made adjustments and remain conscious that we must maintain that humility. It’s been a balance because you also want to maintain your frame and yeah … that’s a whole other topic. Too humble is as bad as too arrogant. But we just try to keep in mind that our indicator for impact is not so much based on bodies through the door, but how well we are facilitating discussions that involve critical thinking and communication. That’s our goal. How is it that we can build a community built on honest and transparency? That’s the question we must ask. Things will continue to change, but with our focus on open discussion and connection through community, we believe that Practical Philosophy will continue to grow and change the lives of people all around the world. It started as a hangout, it has since become a movement. We are riding that wave together, and as long as we keep our focus on quality discussions, we will continue to be a space where people can connect with other deep thinkers.