thanks. I mean, it's a great read - I'm just always on the
lookout for either a BS factor or at least a glossed-over
factor.
If the person represents the uncontrolled subconscious, and his
theory is the explanation for the uncontrolled subconscious,
then that means his theory is the replacement for the
subconscious, at least in a 'meta" way. This is something that's
true for any theories of the mind, but this one even more so
because, in the process, he is attempting to eliminate control
of consciousness altogether.
This.. puts his theory in control of all humanity's conscious
thoughts, in a sense, making him the final person (or team) with
a controlled consciousness - to have been able to come up with
this theory in the first place.
[that is, if this theory became defacto standard, rather than a
nice speculative read with some interesting ideas and some
interesting evidence behind it]
It's a dramatic THEREFORE THUS. [Thus, conscience control is
REALLY [x]). - so that engages my analyzer. If someone's going
to take away my sense of freedom of choice - whatever its
reality/unreality is, I'm going to give it my best to see if
it's valid/invalid/solid/has holes/etc.
