Chris Langan Against Bernardo Kastrup (New Metaphysics ‘CTMU’ vs. Old Academy Metaphysics) — And Our Intellectual Dark Web Mission

And for this Langan has had an answer for three decades. I will not keep you in suspense. It is: ‘Telesis’ maximizing ‘General Utility’ in the process of ‘Self-Selection.’ Not that hard to grasp;

Watching the first half of Curt Jaimungal’s ‘Theories of Everything’ (TOE) episode with Langan and Kastrup, we get to the meat of the fundamental distinction of Chris Langan’s CTMU over and against metaphysics of the past.

I quickly read a reddit thread afterward (which if you’re searching for idiocy and lack of imagination in spades, I’d recommend reading just a few comments to get your fill). They argued that, from the standpoint of conducting discourse, that all philosophers (Chris including in this) should adopt common language to discuss and debate the issues of our Metaphysical Collective Thought. What these people don’t understand is that this language is at least two hundred years old, dating from the German Idealists, and back even further yet under the Ancient Greeks.

Langan’s CTMU seeks to deposit a Metaphysic, a Metalanguage, and a Model which supplants this old, outdated and outmoded language of past metaphysics. And here with me he has found a supporter. As, even though I thoroughly enjoy reading and conducting traditional metaphysics of Hegel and the like; it is too old…

Just ask yourself, what language did the Greeks or Germans employ? They sought after the natural sciences, mathematics, physics, geometry, for use value in their philosophies. Wouldn’t it make sense for us to update our metaphysics to at least the natural sciences of the 20th century in the paradigms of Relativity and Quantum Mechanics? I am not even well versed in these as such nor am I an apologist of Physics in Philosophy. Yet I see the eminently graceful application of a new language to support anew metaphysic. And further Langan has scoured Reality Theory and Information Theory. Surely there is the dire necessity of incorporation of these languages into philosophy and especially metaphysics. ‘Physics needs Metaphysics,’ but how can metaphysics be of any use when its using 18th century semiotics, signs, symbols, and the language of people who do not live in our Ontological Horizon; indeed who could not conceive of the Communications Revolution that has taken place.

For this Kastrup unfortunately represents the Old Guard of Academics in Metaphysics - lying interred in the mausoleum of the works of Schopenhauer - wedded to the Archetypes of Carl Jung.

The fundamental distinction of Christopher Langan came (a distinction which points our way to the signal in the noise of the future) when Kastrup claimed: “the properties of the Universe [Universal Mind] are given, they simply exist,” [I’m paraphrasing for simplicity but this was the gist.] This is the stance of and present state of Old Academic Philosophy. The explanatory-power buck just ran out: “It is because it just is.”

Now Langan stated explicitly that he is trying to determine, not that there are properties [this is a given,] but How those properties came about. And if you read into the CTMU with anything more approximating effort than the countless thousands of lazy Professors who seek nothing in the New, then you will find that Langan has the intuition to answer this question: “How did the properties of the universe come about?” In line with Wheeler’s question: “How Come Existence?”

And for this Langan has had an answer for three decades. I will not keep you in suspense. It is: ‘Telesis’ maximizing ‘General Utility’ in the process of ‘Self-Selection.’ Simple, not that hard to grasp. And entirely self-evident if you contemplate it as explaining your own Life and your own Being. It will take WE in the intellectual Dark Web to be the coherent militant core expounding Langan’s discovery - we have this against Old Academy [the Universities] but it is ample enough in itself to perpetuate with our work and effort.

Best Regards and Keep up the Good Fight. - Greg W.