1 We have experiences whose interpretation does not guarantee that they are true, and «still» they have to be true «to some extent» because we have them. To me, this seems like a quantum superposition in actum.
Dismissing superposition as a human experience, for instance as the basis of much of thought (and of when we think best), on the grounds of how little self-awareness most people have (including physicists), seems foolish to me.
Anyone who has developed, to some degree, the ability «to catch oneself having an experience» (if I’m not mistaken, this is very rare, unlikely) has no doubt that thought is quantum.
You have to have very little self-awareness (be used to very little depth) to come to think that we think in words. In fact, from there springs, in part, the difficulty of coming to know oneself better, and also the contraindications and problems that appear from managing to do so.
2 One example of how little physicists understand the observer can be seen in «how much» they repeat that contiguity does not guarantee causality, and how rarely one hears them say that there are «brilliant mistakes» we need because of contiguity.
3 After a discovery, like the theory of relativity, the cooks who prepare that hunted piece in different ways are valuable (most physicists cook much better than they hunt). In this way they extract the value that lay in that plot another hunted down so that they could extract the gold from it.
But then a stage arrives (ours) in which the cooks begin to obscure new discoveries if they keep insisting on preparing mines that are already empty and keep knocking down doors that are already open.
As Nietzsche saw clearly, institutions, like the theory of relativity, are valuable while they are still being fought for. But once their value has already been extracted and distributed, the cooks who remain inside them become levelers. What once empowered was fighting for the value of that institution, but once it is empty, those same cooks turn into oppressors of freedom, since now they are not in the service of something liberating, but in the service of something liberated.
4 Whoever is free is a hunter, not a cook. The two have to complement each other, but it is the hunter who marks out the plot in search of gold, not the cook.