It wasn’t purely left-hemisphere. It was necessarily both. The process would not have worked if it had just been the AIs and my left hemisphere. The magic ingredient, all through the process, was the full engagement of my own right hemisphere. The Master was always in control.
When this movement emphasizes a perspectivist approach, it isn’t trying to say ‘all maps are arbitrary’ or ‘let’s negotiate a comfortable fiction.’ It’s trying to do what you did with the AI: assemble different perspectives to stress-test our collective assumptions, catch blind spots, and ensure our maps actually align with reality.
That only works if science is included as a legitimate perspective in its own right, and (crucially) a privileged perspective. Postmodernism explicitly denies the epistemological privilege of science. 2PC restores it, but with strict rules regarding the limitations of science – rules that physicalism doesn’t respect.
The disconnect here isn’t that the forum rejects objective truth or fears your model. The disconnect is that you have spent six months in an intensive, high-level dialectic with advanced systems, resulting in a highly condensed, polished framework - but the people on this forum are encountering the final output without having been part of that process.
Yes, that is a major contributory factor. And not just here.
Here is a quote from Part 1 of the book, from the section I have repeatedly posted a link to ( A new kind of paradigm shift | Two-Phase Cosmology)
There is a new story available, and it does satisfy the description of the whole elephant given above, but it does so in a way that almost nobody is expecting. And if you think about it, then I hope you’ll agree that it always had to be that way.
When you share your conclusions, people don’t have the context of those six months of stress-testing. If they ask questions or offer alternative viewpoints, they aren’t trying to ‘debunk’ you with pseudoscientific garbage; they are trying to run their own manual check on the map. Shouldn’t this be evidence of rigor rather than PM hogwash?
I have not objected to people asking questions or offering alternative viewpoints. I actively welcome any relevant discussion.
Since you’ve already done the heavy lifting of ironing out the internal contradictions, you are in a unique position to help lead the search for truth here. Instead of treating the forum’s perspectives as a postmodern threat, why not treat this space as the human sandbox for the model you built? What is the best way for us to actually engage with the core data of 2PC without getting bogged down in the culture wars?
(1) Read the first two chapters of my book. Preferably read the whole thing.
(2) Stop ignoring posts like this: Why the crisis in cosmology is so serious, and so relevant to the goals of 2R - General - Second Renaissance Forum