> Understood metaphorically, the "thetan hypothesis" might be partly true. It belongs with other psychoanalytic theories which, while out of vogue today, probably contain some truth.
Abstracted into a sufficiently broad metaphor, almost anything can be partly true. But in this case, abstracted to the extent where it starts to make sense, there's none of the original thetan hypothesis left in the mix. You'd just toss out the thetan part and go with the metaphor part at that point.
> I'm not sure where this leaves us. Maybe every "great thinker" is a mountebank?
Maybe! To me, it seems like the problem usually starts with the followers. The great thinker makes a case, it's persuasive enough, then other people take the idea and turn it into a worldview, or an industry. Sometimes you find a philosopher with enough charisma or force of will to start their own cult, but more often than not it's someone at the margins of the original movement who latches on and makes it their thing. A student, a lover, a family member, a random billionaire, whatever.
Abstracted into a sufficiently broad metaphor, almost anything can be partly true. But in this case, abstracted to the extent where it starts to make sense, there's none of the original thetan hypothesis left in the mix. You'd just toss out the thetan part and go with the metaphor part at that point.
> I'm not sure where this leaves us. Maybe every "great thinker" is a mountebank?
Maybe! To me, it seems like the problem usually starts with the followers. The great thinker makes a case, it's persuasive enough, then other people take the idea and turn it into a worldview, or an industry. Sometimes you find a philosopher with enough charisma or force of will to start their own cult, but more often than not it's someone at the margins of the original movement who latches on and makes it their thing. A student, a lover, a family member, a random billionaire, whatever.