Oh alright, then I may have misunderstood how they were intending to use the mythological stuff that some of them like to mention fairly regularly. In all fairness though, Talbott (and of course, he isnt a physicist , at least as far as I recall) is about the only one that that I think often seems to *clearly* think that the mythology is an argument for the physics. But I think one can probably dismiss him is a bit of a crackpot ( the less redeemable sort possibly) , or at least safely ignore the more wild speculations he is guilty of.
Apparently this subject has come up on the forums before.
You mean the claim that since Kant said that “the world we observe is all in the mind” ( or whatever exactly Wal claimed that Kant said) that physics has suffered a [massive] decline? Cause I am not sure that *is* incorrect actually. :
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reg_ls_physics
Indeed, you link the Harriman talk that I was referring to here:
he only quoted Harriman and an absurd misrepresentation of Kant that no doubt came from the same source.
Do you take your understanding of Kant from Harriman (and/or Peikoff), or have you arrived at the same view firsthand?
Oh yeah turns out it has come up before. I dont recall taking part in it back then, guess I must have missed it or else I probably would have posted there ( seems I didnt though).
Note that I dont necceasirly agree with everything Thornhill says about Kant in the original interview, I just wondered if the thing I highlighted is what you meant.
I have read enough Kant to be able to come to my own conclusion that Harriman (Peikoff/whoever) is *essentially* right.
Wal has published a paper of great interest here.
http://www.benthamscience.com/open/toaaj/articles/V004/SI0162TOAAJ/191TOAAJ.pdf