Thanks, but why is he “a disaster for rationalist kind”? Does he have significant influence among rationalists (I’d find that surprising), or has he made the general public more tolerant of untruthfulness and, therefore, harder for rationalists to appeal to? (True, but too weak to justify “disaster”.)
Thanks, but why is he “a disaster for rationalist kind”? Does he have significant influence among rationalists (I’d find that surprising), or has he made the general public more tolerant of untruthfulness and, therefore, harder for rationalists to appeal to? (True, but too weak to justify “disaster”.)