He’s not immature or a bad debater like some have said, he just has latin passion, a property sorely lacking in philosophers these days. When it comes out, it surprises people who expect the discipline to be dry and impersonal.
>>24120545Kastrup is brilliant when he does show spirit. I liked his tidbit about brain extraction, even the network which performs the function still requires training which is indicative of a process that is more than input/output function at a mere data level. I imagine he will probably continue that vein of thought.
Idk who this man is but dear lord is he ugly
>>24120633no u
>>24120545I've watched and read most of his stuff, and cerebrally engaged with his content. What do you want to talk about?As to his hot-headedness: To his defence, it mostly only happens when the other is full of shit, so no loss. Langan, Hossenfelder, Maudlin, etc. I don't like that he doesn't call out Spira for doing seances and talking to the dead sessions. Or his new acceptance/interpretation of UAPs.
>>24120545He wrote an essay in this anthology, how good is it? I bought it years ago but haven't opened it yet
>>24120545His argument against panpsychism, especially the process variety, sucks. The correlationism of idealism is a far bigger issue than the combination problem in panpsychism.If the One Mind, its external appearance being the Unified Quantum Field, ripples and yields the dissociation that is my individual mind, then it is only natural and most parsimonious to assume all processes have a degree of experiential or inner mental life. All ripples are fundamentally dissociative from the Mind-at-Large.He's right to criticize the particle-based panpsychism, sure, but I have not seen him argue against the process based view.
>>24120633He’s a 9/10 in Brazil
