So he may start with a scientific study or a shorter summary of one. His intuition kicks in and delivers an idea. He then leaps immediately to the idea assuming it to be a correct and valid one and continues from there. Your alternative is to take a step back once the idea arrives to check it out more thoroughly before proceeding to the next step if at all since the idea may not be valuable and may better be discarded.zenmaster wrote:The material offered, itself, has no legitimate standing other than to serve as gut-feeling interpretations of what may have been scientifically demonstrated elsewhere. Normally, the intuition is initially used to guide one to an idea. The idea is then tested, a rationale developed to support the test methods, and the method's rationale is communicated. This important stage is skipped in the spirit of whimsy and flights of fancy. Basically, if everything can be conveniently made into a relativist's dream, or hyper-intuitivist's playground, then there are a few benefits: much less actual thought involved (free-association is an automatic function of the mind) and therefore less real work to do, plus no accountability because, after all, one can effectively disown that which is a "dream".
Because he has a relatively high degree of fame at this point (for sure in the area he is in), there are a large number of people who accept the things he relates. This adds to his responsibility since he is aware of this. When he does not do due diligence with his ideas, he is potentially leading at least some people down a fruitless path or worse. He doesn't really know whether he is or isn't and this doesn't seem important for him to know. He doesn't truly care and this is what disturbs you about David? Does this represent your viewpoint?