Robert Anton Wilson

[JiayoJames]

Hi.

I thought it'd be interesting to see what you guys think of Robert Anton Wilson.

Here is a video...

...if you want to spend a lot of time: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RVAfT7D5-w

...if you don't want to spend a lot of time: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEZtw1yt8Kc

I like this guy! I tend to agree with many of the things he says. I used to agree with Objectivism quite closely, so I'd be interested in hearing how you interpret his words.

[Ninth Doctor]

I like this guy! I tend to agree with many of the things he says. I used to agree with Objectivism quite closely, so I'd be interested in hearing how you interpret his words.

I read one of the Illuminatus! novels, started another a few years later, got bored and didn’t finish it. In my opinion, Foucault’s Pendulum (Umberto Eco) and Gravity’s Rainbow (Thomas Pynchon) are far superior novels dealing with conspiracy theories. I’ve also dipped into some Alan Watts and have read most of Joseph Campbell’s stuff (I’m thinking here of the Eastern mysticism connection).

I watched the quantum physics video you posted and it strikes me as just the sort of thing that has certain Objectivists saying quantum physics is a fraud. Which it isn’t, it’s just that when you analogize (or generalize) aspects of it to epistemology you end up with skepticism, relativism, and the hurling of epithets like “naïve realism”, like he used in the video.

RAW was a libertarian, so you will find some good overlap between his political positions and Rand’s, but generally I don’t think you’ll find he has much appeal hereabouts.

[Ninth Doctor]

I read one of the Illuminatus! novels, started another a few years later, got bored and didn’t finish it.

This thread led me to dig out and restart the second Illuminatus! novel. It has quite a few snide references to Ayn Rand, and a hilarious parody of Atlas Shrugged called Telemachus Sneezed. I got through it and I'd say I enjoyed it, but I can’t recommend it with much enthusiasm.

[Q.E.D.]

I'm a graduate student in theoretical physics, and his extremely subjectivist view of quantum theory is neither canonical, necessary, nor reasonable. In fact, modern quantum physics, equipped with protected and weak quantum measurements has been able to uncover much more of the previously "hidden" (or as Mr. Wilson would say non-existent) quantum world. For example, using weak measurements experimenters at the University of Toronto were able to map the average trajectories of photons in the double slit experiment, while determining which slit each photon went through, WITHOUT destroying the interference pattern. Also, more importantly, even during a strong quantum measurement (one which appreciably disturbs the system in question), it is not necessary for a human observer to actually OBSERVE the measurement or its results to have the same physical effect - which further discredits the subjectivist view of knowledge in quantum mechanics.

Aside from his erroneous physical understanding, Mr. Wilson commits a larger philosophical error by taking quantum physics out of its proper observed context and applying it in an over generalized manner. Unless you're a nano-technology engineer or a particle physicist then quantum mechanics is almost certainly completely unrelated to your life in any way whatsoever.