[yovav (OP)]

Just Food for thought...
Could the next paradigm be the one that will create within us a suitable tool for perceiving a new reality?
And if so can some of the philosophical become a scientific part?
An attempt  to express it in the clip:

[alancalverd]

When reality changes perceptibly, our perception of it will change.

We are each certainly unique and no study of one person can fully predict the response of another.

So what?

[Bored chemist]

Could the next paradigm be the one that will create within us a suitable tool for perceiving ...

I would expect to carry on using my brain to perceive things.
What other plausible options are there?

The next time someone asks me what "style over substance" means, I will show them your video.

[yovav (OP)]

When reality changes perceptibly, our perception of it will change.

We are each certainly unique and no study of one person can fully predict the response of another.

So what?

What does it mean when reality changes?.
It will not change if we do not change.
And this is what I mean - about the inner change within us.

[yovav (OP)]

Could the next paradigm be the one that will create within us a suitable tool for perceiving ...

I would expect to carry on using my brain to perceive things.
What other plausible options are there?

The next time someone asks me what "style over substance" means, I will show them your video.

Dear friend, I am not talking about the mind, I am talking about the will.

[Bored chemist]

I am talking about the will.

Well, in the past, when you were asked to define it, you used "will" for something totally different from what the dictionary thinks it means.

What are you using it for today?

[yovav (OP)]

Well, in the past, when you were asked to define it, you used "will" for something totally different from what the dictionary thinks it means.

What are you using it for today?

The problem is that there is no more appropriate word to describe the essence of what I am talking about more than the will.
It is true that this is not the conventional definition.
It is true that this is not the definition:  a cognitive process in which an individual decides to perform an action.
But there is no more appropriate word.
I will try to explain.
There are exteriors and interiors.
Our five senses allow us to recognize the external. I go out of my house, I see people, I experience them through my eyes. But everything I see, actions, faces, etc., are clothed in an inner essence that is the reason for what I see outwardly.
Why does one think about money, for the other it is important to gain respect and the third is not interested in anything other than understanding the meaning of life?
Where does this difference come from?
you tell me....

[yovav (OP)]

When reality changes perceptibly, our perception of it will change.

We are each certainly unique and no study of one person can fully predict the response of another.

So what?

What do you mean so what?
It is clear that each of us has our own uniqueness.
The question is who of us can use the same uniqueness, change it and perceive reality differently.

[yovav (OP)]

Could the next paradigm be the one that will create within us a suitable tool for perceiving ...

I would expect to carry on using my brain to perceive things.
What other plausible options are there?

The next time someone asks me what "style over substance" means, I will show them your video.

You missed the point.
Your mind is not responsible for perception but the perceiver. It does not rotate what will go into it but a machine. He is not the essence but the servant of the essence.

[yovav (OP)]

It will not change if we do not change.

Obviously nothing will change if we do not change. But that's exactly the point.
That the same change is not a change in thinking, is not a change in our ability to be smarter or more talented. The change is unique to our same essence into which it draws every parameter of filling. And if we reverse this specific feature, then we can really say that we have changed.

[Bored chemist]

There is only one reality.
We can't perceive a new one.

[yovav (OP)]

There is only one reality.
We can't perceive a new one.

is that so?
I think this place that belongs to changing perceptions of reality will gain more weight in the future.
why?
Because the accuracy of our research results depends on it.

[alancalverd]

Perception and interpretation have changed over the years, but there is no evidence to suggest that reality is any different since the old perceptions remain as valid as they were. One of the tests of a new hypothesis is that it should at least approximate to the old one in the same circumstances: hence relativity passes the test as it tends towards classical mechanics when v << c. 

[yovav (OP)]

Perception and interpretation have changed over the years, but there is no evidence to suggest that reality is any different since the old perceptions remain as valid as they were. One of the tests of a new hypothesis is that it should at least approximate to the old one in the same circumstances: hence relativity passes the test as it tends towards classical mechanics when v << c.

The perception of reality is a consequence of the way in which my will experiences reality. So if my wills get changed, so will my perception of reality change.