Hey Ed, thank you for sharing your thoughts. That thin line was exactly what I was getting at. What I also find interesting is what happens when we examine what “truth” actually means and arrive at the conclusion that it is just a collective agreement. While it is somewhat easy to dismiss ideas that make factual claims that can be proven wrong, it becomes very tricky when someone’s delusions make claims that evade current scientific methods of examination. Like claims about the nature of our reality or claims that involve the cutting edge of science. How do we know which theories we should believe in and which ones are just BS ? The whole grayzone in between science and pseudoscience feeds on these dynamics. What are we supposed to think about neuromarketing and is neurofeedback really a way to treat psychopaths ?
Who knows… : )