It's silly that people get so bloody haughty about 'systems of intuition' versus standard science. People like Turi are so vulnerable to attack on all fronts versus dogmatic scientists who's job seems to be, lately, ensuring that everyone is 'safe' and every shred of evidence is proven by decree of the university pontiffs.
If the posts were really from Dr. Turi, I'm sorry he's been treated so badly by 'those in the know' here. You can argue the evidence and theories but you don't have to impugn someone's character in the process. Just sayin' mind you, I'm no Pollyanna myself and I know a helluva lot less than many here about anything, LOL but I hope I don't spit acidic words on people themselves, ever, or play 'idea' judge and jury (that could be a good basis for a new board game to teach tolerance- :D I don't feel so tolerant about a lot of things myself, lately).
I liked what David Talbott said about Wallace Thornhill's 'Inquisition' when his alliance with Talbott's 'electric universe' ideas and the marriage with his own study of plasmatic physics at Los Alamos became known. David said that, in his experience, it's always the juniors, who are 'earning their stripes' who are the least open-minded in accepting new ideas while the professional data gatherers and scientists studying the many patterns that turn up around a theorum they are working on proving, are the MOST open minded. He said it's the 'juniors' who become the literal inquisitors of the mavericks and their new ideas. Poor Thornhill ended up leaving Los Alamos, touring the world to study the symbols of plasma shapes and take GPS coordinates at prehistoric petraglyph sites, and then had a 4-bypass heart surgery which left him pretty debilitated.
New ideas often have followers, enemies, and evangelists but it isn't worth giving someone a heart attack over. I wish Dr. Turi well (and luck) in pursuit of his data gathering, with his chosen system of astrology. I don't buy into it currently because I can't 'buy' into it to understand all his secret information he's teaching but that doesn't mean he isn't smack on with some of his predictions - he is, some other areas, not so much or not yet in others. I give him the benefit of the doubt, not knowing enough about his system of prediction.
|
|