I'm sure he was credible enough in the field of psychology, but that does not automatically make him an expert in classical literature or religion, which is where he finds the purported evidence for the theory. Therefore the theory have to be judged on its own merit, not just the academic title of the originator.
Both Jaynes and Pauling are extremely intelligent and not gullible people. Why are we so quick to dismiss their "Crackpot" theories, simply because they don't fit with the dominant paradigm?
goto11|7 years ago
coldtea|7 years ago
Well, Pauling got two Nobel prizes, but still had crackpot theories about Vitamin C
rjplatte|7 years ago