Rationalism: a paper tiger?

Had you ever been to New Orleans? I had. That was certainly a different culture than the one I'm from. Radically different from anything I had ever lived in.It's not a strawman, Holmes, when I apply your exact reasoning to situations that highlight how absurd it is. Obviously, you have never said that I couldn't help the victims of Katrina. It's just that, to be intellectually honest, you would have to conclude that I could not! I think we can.Let me say that I grasp the merit of your point; it's just that, like most things, you take an obvious principle and extend it to ridiculous extremes.Obviously, it would be folly in the extreme to think that the solutions of my culture, my neighborhood, my community could be transplanted verbatim halfway across the world and have positive results. I think we've seen the results of that kind of thinking writ large across the Middle East lo the past several years.It's a serious mistake to disregard completely local customs, local outlooks, local solutions to problems. It would be a disaster. And to come in as an outsider to a culture and attempt to solve problems in a way that people are going to respect and help with is a difficult problem indeed.But to say that it is difficult is not to say that it is impossible, or to say that there's no reason to think of problems as problems, or to simply abandon all hope of rendering aid to people not like ourselves, as you would seemingly have us do. It's simply hard.Think of it like a neighborhood, Holmes. When neighbors can't get over their differences, when they're afraid to engage with each other for fear of misunderstanding or out of distrust, neighborhoods suffer for it. We see communities like these in our own country, in the roughest conditions. And, of course, declining conditions drive residents into even more insular and disconnected attitudes.But when neighbors act like neighbors, explore each other's viewpoints, share what works for them, and yes - enforce community standards when it becomes necessary - the neighborhood is vibrant. People feel safe and problems come to have solutions. And, hey, what works at one house doesn't work at another, without taking into account how the people of one home differ from another. Obviously. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't share. And, yes, when a neighbor threatens the community by violating its standards, our differences can't mean that we don't take action.It's ultimately selfish to withhold from others the benefits we enjoy. It's ultimately racist to assert that those who are not like us can gain nothing from what we have to offer them, or they from us. I'm sorry you object to that, but it's true. Language, culture, and race are not excuses for us to close our hearts to one another, regardless of what precious multi-culturalism might tell you.

Good luck with that.No, really, seriously. Everybody should investigate these claims with an open mind, at least once. Ask probative questions. Investigate mundane alternatives. Understand that people often convince themselves first, and that therefore sincerity isn't an indicator of veracity.Remember that if PP is right, we'll need to rewrite everything we know about neuroscience. But understand that we'd love nothing more than to do just that (that's what it means to be science-minded), and so our incredulity is not personal, it's professional. We'd love to overturn everything we know about the brain. Don't you think we deserve a little more than his say-so before we start?

Because those models say what PP claims he can do is completely impossible. The brain simply doesn't work like that.If we see observations that contradict the models on a fundamental level, we need new models. Simple as that. You can't simply do the impossible and expect there not to be interest in that. Is that suspicion based on your realization that Petro's claims are unlikely and untenable? If so that seems inconsistent with your pledge to approach them with an open mind.If not, then what is the source of your suspicion? I'm a student of why people believe things that are obviously false. I'm not saying you believe Petro, but Petro believes Petro, and maybe he's more amenable to inquiry from you. Clearly he views the rest of us skeptics as incorrigible ideologues wedded to the idea of a completely mundane universe.I just think it'll be interesting if you can get him to answer some probative questions. It's up to you, best of luck.