I dont see how that video backs up the claim of charlatan. I see someone saying that our science is limited and that survivorship (evolution) has an intelligence to it.
I think to really make this claim you would need to focus on a falsifiable statement(s) that he has made.
How about his claims that the enlightenment screwed everything up and we were better off with a religious approach? Contradicts all evidence. Post-enlightenment reasoning and culture advanced civilization dramatically.
In the video he says we are unwiser. That we are arrogant in our application of our limited scientific understanding. This type of statement by him is so vague that it cant really be a claim that is provable one way or another.
Saying that we are unwiser post-enlightenment than in the dark ages is pure charlatanism in my opinion, however vague than statement is. The arrogance argument is more arguable but in the context it makes it look like the only thing we got out of the scientific revolution is arrogance, which is like saying that the only thing we got from discovering penicilin is antibiotic overuse.
Charlatans don’t really do clear. Look at Deepak Chopra, it’s also going to be difficult to do demonstrably false stuff. It’s mostly vague mumbo jumbo that’s intuitively nonsense. Still, saying that we are unwiser now than before the enlightenment is demonstrably false by a number of metrics, from medical results to number of books published, literacy and many more.
Running a Marathon every day for a week isn’t really much of an achievement for Extreme runners... but people are still allowed to be proud of running even a single Marathon. He wasn’t claiming to be an olympic weightlifter just sharing his PRs with pride.
13 comments
[ 1.5 ms ] story [ 67.6 ms ] threadI think to really make this claim you would need to focus on a falsifiable statement(s) that he has made.