Well, here’s the thing: I’m skeptical of “Here’s all the answers” theories simply because there’s always conflicting ones. I’m also easily inspired in general.
So I’ve learned to accept carefully. I find myself in agreement, then I remember that I’m easily enthusiastic, so I start looking for *what might be wrong with this?*
I don’t discard anything completely – there’s a reason why I liked it. But often with any theories, there’s something stinky in the middle of all this good stuff – a fatal flaw that’s glossed over that is required to tie it together. The good parts stay good, but if the bad parts are ones I can’t work with and accept as ok, then I have to move on.
In this case for example, it was pointed out elsewhere that Fine wasn’t really speaking about truth but rather was saying, “shush, accept the awkwardness and move on”, which is very pragmatic if one is stuck on an issue, but otherwise wasn’t very helpful in the discussion.
So with that pointed out to me, I knew I could move on and not spend excessive time studying it.
It’s hard and it might be overkill… but for myself I’m trying to find what I can stand behind without having to worry about someone easily pulling the rug out from under me.
I’d rather say, “I don’t know” than “I support this completely!”, even though it’s tempting.
Some examples of things I’ve nearly endorsed are Holographic nature of mind, The universe is mathematics, and a dozen other things that SEEMED _so good_.. until I really thought about it. It’s a frustration I enjoy though.