In possible telepathic conversations, I have heard academics and my own brother saying: "He's the mastermind of so much madness..."
I think they were referring to the students writing papers on perpetual motion and objectivist philosophy, who hardly breathed a word of Newton or Ayn Rand.
Students whose sole aim---beyond education, beyond happiness, beyond all sanity----is to convince the professor of the greatness of Nathan Coppedge, the worthiness of absolute knowledge, and especially the legitimacy of certain kinky ideas.
So, is 'Nathan' a good philosopher, but a bad mathematician?
Or just a kook with ideas about impossible machines?
Or was he a mathematician after all?
Or was he a bad philosopher with a few good ideas?
Or did his ideas for perpetual motion in fact, WORK in the END?
They mysterious life of Nathan Coppedge is full of intrigue.
Why did he have such a low I.Q.?
What is his religious affiliation?
And why did he write so MANY books?
Many of these factors are clarified by realizing that Mr. Coppedge comes from a very smart family.
He did not just depart for these STRANGE ISLES on a whim!
He has a prophetic name, and he lives in a very intelligent city.
He has had ideas not just about perpetual motion machines, but about computer games and virtual reality!
Nathan is a prodigy at finding relevance for himself!
But, here are the facts:
Coppedge published 44 books in 2014.
His I.Q. has gone up by 10 - 30 points in the last 20 years.
His closest religious affiliation is Unitarian Universalism or Urban Zen (a test said Mahayana Buddhism). He has been proselytizing Asceticureanism.
He is still in undergraduate at SCSU as of September 2015.
More and more often, he is being recognized for his profound ideas, although he has almost zero conventional media exposure. For example, he is 67th most quotable at http://www.poemhunter.com/quotations
He is, as he says, in some capacity a philosopher, artist, inventor, and poet.
He is in his early 30s.
He may have invented absolute knowledge.
He may have invented perpetual motion.
He may have invented numerous brand-name concepts.
And he has sold at least one painting in Great Britain, for $400.
By today's standards, he has potential.
But he is unusual.
He is not easily accepted.
He is a little peculiar.
Give him a chance! He's the next thing since sliced bread!
International Society for the Philosophy of Architecture » Ethics and Aesthetics of Architecture and the Environment