Mod+ New presentation/panel discussion with Bernardo Kastrup

#4
At 16 .11 Shermer does his stuff.
Yeah... and the level of the discussion sinks :D

Shermer is always a fun clown to watch. His intellectual strength is so abysmal that he doesn't even feel the need to know what he's talking about.
It doesn't take 20 seconds that his obtuse argument about the limited variations of dreams collapses because he's completely oblivious to what Neil Theise was talking about.
This makes the perfect pair with the popular UFO debate on Larry King's show with Stanton Friedman & C. Again he made himself look like a right prat :D... same thing, obtuse generalizations, no idea of the topic in discussion.

I suspect Chopra loves to have Shermer in his debates because he's such a low weight.
 
#5
Finished watching the last 10 minutes. Bernardo really helps to keep a high level in the discussion, but none of the other participants seem to have the intellectual tools to debate him. Even Mlodinov doesn't seem to get Bernardo's logical argument against solipsism, and evades the point.

It's a pity most panelists seem pretty uncomfortable arguing with Kastrup's ideas.
 
#6
Finished watching the last 10 minutes. Bernardo really helps to keep a high level in the discussion, but none of the other participants seem to have the intellectual tools to debate him. Even Mlodinov doesn't seem to get Bernardo's logical argument against solipsism, and evades the point.

It's a pity most panelists seem pretty uncomfortable arguing with Kastrup's ideas.
Very true. I think Bernardo's ideas are wonderfully sharp and focused, but sadly go way over the heads of many of the panellists here. I think they would have needed to familiarise themselves with his idea's before coming on stage for a philosophical fencing match, as Bernardo's points sink their old school materialist dogma without much effort, however none of them are equipped to see this. Not one is able even to begin to address any of the points he makes, let alone challenge them.

Sad to say that I think that Bernardo's thinking is so far ahead and beyond most of all the other panellists here, and it shows by the lack of engagement he receives from other panellists. I think even old Deepak may really struggle with the gravity and ramifications of Bernardo's rational idealism, even though ideologically, they were hitting for the same team.
 
#7
Very true. I think Bernardo's ideas are wonderfully sharp and focused, but sadly go way over the heads of many of the panellists here. I think they would have needed to familiarise themselves with his idea's before coming on stage for a philosophical fencing match, as Bernardo's points sink their old school materialist dogma without much effort, however none of them are equipped to see this. Not one is able even to begin to address any of the points he makes, let alone challenge them.

Sad to say that I think that Bernardo's thinking is so far ahead and beyond most of all the other panelists here, and it shows by the lack of engagement he receives from other panellists. I think even old Deepak may really struggle with the gravity and ramifications of Bernardo's rational idealism, even though ideologically, they were hitting for the same team.

Yeh I noticed the same thing. They are so entrenched in a particular worldview that they couldn't even see the weakness in their own position. Mlodinov didn't even realize that his counter points to Bernardo completely undercut his own position. I think is so funny that materialism is so dominant in academia even though when you look at it closer is makes alot of large and wild assumptions.
 
Top