Professor Dave and Grayson Hawk discuss excerpts from the marathon interview with Chris Langan made three years ago by Curt Jainmungal on his YouTube channel. Langan, rumored to have the highest IQ in the world, is a somewhat controversial figure who developed a "theory of everything" known as the CTMU. It´s really a philosophical or metaphysical system. While I don´t get half of it, there does seem to be a broad family likeness with Whitehead´s process philosophy and Ken Wilber´s Integral Theory. Perhaps CTMU could be described as an evolutionary form of panentheism?
Grayson believes that it´s idealism pure and simple, but expressed in a more convoluted language. Think Berkeley. Both Dave and Grayson consider materialism and "scientific realism" to be proven once and for all long ago, so Langan´s model (in which consciousnes is primary) strikes them as downright kookish. It´s worthless as a scientific theory, despite using scientific-sounding language. And while claiming to explain everything in physics, the CTMU contains no math. It also postulates the existence of God (or as Langan prefers to call it: G.O.D.) The two skeptical debate bros further believe that Langan deliberately uses an obscure and self-invented Newspeak when describing his theory, making it needlessly difficult to understand.
True to form, Dave also cracks ad hominems! Speaking of which: note that the first section of the video deals with another drama: the "debate" between Dave and the Christian creationist Tour in Texas about a year ago.
Langan went super-viral a couple of months ago, when he was featured in an interview on the Daily Wire, an interview which apparantly has 11 million views to date?! Perhaps because the Daily Wire gave people the impression that "the smartest man in the world" is some kind of Christian. Personally, I suspect super-intellectual Hindus and Buddhists may find the CTMU more to their liking. OK, good luck with this material...
Erratum: Daily Wire actually pulled the interview for some reason, but Langan published it on his own channel.
ReplyDeleteÄn en gång. Det är ju intressant med någon som ändrar sig så snabbt, så ofta och så mycket. Jag har ändrat mina åsikter genom åren, men du tar definitivt priset.... Här är ännu ett exempel. https://www.blogger.com/comment/fullpage/post/5978248756669811485/8901609340675303644
ReplyDeleteJag har ändrat mig i detaljer, mycket, men grunderna i mina åsikter har varit ganska så stabila.
ReplyDeleteMin politiska grundinställning är en syntes av de "allmänsocialistiska" åsikter jag utvecklade i slutet av 1969 och de "trotskistiska" tilläggen från våren 1971. (Innan dess hade jag en spontan vänsterinställning i allt utom ekonomi, som jag inte visste ett skvatt om). Mitt ställningstagande för en religiös mot en materialistisk inställning fick jag våren 1973 (innan dess hade jag under flera år varit en ovanligt fyrkantig materialist). Att det har varit viktigt att försvara barn mot vuxet tyranni har tyckt redan som barn. Att det ursprungligen fanns nån form av matriarkat, som hade positiva drag som sedan gått förlorade började jag ana våren 1970.
Att jag sedan har svängt mellan politiska organisationer och religioner som en jojo, är en annan sak. Men min grundinställning var i stort sett klar redan i våren 1973.
Erik R