• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Science Delusion

Angel

Angel

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2017
Messages
18,001
Reaction score
2,909
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
THE SCIENCE DELUSION​

"The science delusion is the belief that science already understands the nature of reality in principle, leaving only the details to be filled in. This is a very widespread belief in our society. It’s the kind of belief system of people who say “I don’t believe in God, I believe in science.” It’s a belief system which has now been spread to the entire world."

"But there’s a conflict in the heart of science between science as a method of inquiry based on reason, evidence, hypothesis and collective investigation, and science as a belief system or a world view. And unfortunately the world view aspect of science has come to inhibit and constrict the free inquiry which is the very lifeblood of the scientific endeavor."

(Full Text)
https://singjupost.com/rupert-sheldrake-on-the-science-delusion-at-ted-talk-full-transcript/





The 10 Dogmas of Science

1. Nature is mechanical or machine-like.

2. Matter is unconscious.

3. Nature is purposeless.

4. The laws of nature are fixed, as are the fundamental constants.

5. Total amount of matter and energy is fixed.

6. Biological heredity is material.

7. Memories are stored inside your brain.

8. Your mind is nothing but the brain.

9. Psychic phenomena are impossible.

10. Mechanistic medicine is the only kind that works.



"We're entering a post-materialist world."
— Rupert Sheldrake​

The first video, the banned TED talk, is 18 minutes in duration.
The second video is 45 minutes long.
Enjoy!

Sheldrake is a World Treasure. I think his criticism of science as a world view is right on! Time to move beyond dogmatic materialism.

What do you think of his criticism?
What do you think of his prescription for science?


Namaste.
 
Last edited:
Angel said:
THE SCIENCE DELUSION​





The 10 Dogmas of Science

1. Nature is mechanical or machine-like.

2. Matter is unconscious.

3. Nature is purposeless.

4. The laws of nature are fixed, as are the fundamental constants.

5. Total amount of matter and energy is fixed.

6. Biological heredity is material.

7. Memories are stored inside your brain.

8. Your mind is nothing but the brain.

9. Psychic phenomena are impossible.

10. Mechanistic medicine is the only kind that works.
Click to expand...

I dont know where you got that list for science 'dogma' but most of it's wrong.

If you accept that list you dont know anyone working in the medical field, science, or research.
 
Lursa said:
I dont know where you got that list for science 'dogma' but most of it's wrong.

If you accept that list you dont know anyone working in the medical field, science, or research.
Click to expand...

Assumptions of rational thinking.

1. Reality exists.
2. We can learn about reality.
3. Models that make reliable predictions about reality are useful.

These ARE assumptions made tentatively but heck, every time I go back and check that they still apply they always seem to.
 
Lursa said:
I dont know where you got that list for science 'dogma' but most of it's wrong.

If you accept that list you dont know anyone working in the medical field, science, or research.
Click to expand...
The list is by Sheldrake, taken verbatim from the videos -- have you not watched at least one of the videos, at least one of Sheldrake's presentations, before commenting on his list?
This sort of dismissiveness is exactly what Sheldrake is talking about.

Namaste.
 
Last edited:
devildavid said:
Here is an interesting article on this "World Treasure"

https://newrepublic rupert-sheldrake-fools-bbc
Click to expand...
Many of you might know of Sheldrake. He enjoys a certain popularity in the US and UK among those who think that there must be “something more out there”—with “more” meaning psychic phenomena. I don’t really understand a penchant for things that aren’t supported by evidence, but that’s probably a failure of empathy on my part—as well as a product of my scientific training to doubt. I am sure, though, that some of the same psychological tendencies that promote sympathy for woo also promote sympathy for religion.
Click to expand...

Yep that about sums it up.

But there’s a conflict in the heart of science between science as a method of inquiry based on reason, evidence, hypothesis and collective investigation, and science as a belief system or a world view. And unfortunately the world view aspect of science has come to inhibit and constrict the free inquiry which is the very lifeblood of the scientific endeavor.
Click to expand...

Yes, those who think the universe is know to a high dergee are wrong. Those who apply skeptical thinking to all claims are using the scientific method. Those who cannot see the difference are thick.
 
Tim the plumber said:
Yep that about sums it up.



Yes, those who think the universe is know to a high dergee are wrong. Those who apply skeptical thinking to all claims are using the scientific method. Those who cannot see the difference are thick.
Click to expand...
And those who haven't viewed or read what they comment on -- what are they?
 
William Rea said:
Assumptions of rational thinking.

1. Reality exists.
2. We can learn about reality.
3. Models that make reliable predictions about reality are useful.

These ARE assumptions made tentatively but heck, every time I go back and check that they still apply they always seem to.
Click to expand...
Sheldrake, it seems to me, is wholly in accord with your view of the scientific method of inquiry.
 
devildavid said:
Here is an interesting article on this "World Treasure"

https://newrepublic rupert-sheldrake-fools-bbc
Click to expand...
Many of you might know of Sheldrake. He enjoys a certain popularity in the US and UK among those who think that there must be “something more out there”—with “more” meaning psychic phenomena. I don’t really understand a penchant for things that aren’t supported by evidence, but that’s probably a failure of empathy on my part—as well as a product of my scientific training to doubt. I am sure, though, that some of the same psychological tendencies that promote sympathy for woo also promote sympathy for religion.
Click to expand...
Strawman.
GAYtVbOt.jpg


Have you watched Sheldrake's presentations, or even read the full text of his banned TED talk (offered in the OP)?
Or did you just look immediately to discredit the man before you hear him out?
 
Angel said:
THE SCIENCE DELUSION​

"The science delusion is the belief that science already understands the nature of reality in principle, leaving only the details to be filled in. This is a very widespread belief in our society. It’s the kind of belief system of people who say “I don’t believe in God, I believe in science.” It’s a belief system which has now been spread to the entire world."

"But there’s a conflict in the heart of science between science as a method of inquiry based on reason, evidence, hypothesis and collective investigation, and science as a belief system or a world view. And unfortunately the world view aspect of science has come to inhibit and constrict the free inquiry which is the very lifeblood of the scientific endeavor."

(Full Text)
https://singjupost.com/rupert-sheldrake-on-the-science-delusion-at-ted-talk-full-transcript/





The 10 Dogmas of Science

1. Nature is mechanical or machine-like.

2. Matter is unconscious.

3. Nature is purposeless.

4. The laws of nature are fixed, as are the fundamental constants.

5. Total amount of matter and energy is fixed.

6. Biological heredity is material.

7. Memories are stored inside your brain.

8. Your mind is nothing but the brain.

9. Psychic phenomena are impossible.

10. Mechanistic medicine is the only kind that works.



"We're entering a post-materialist world."
— Rupert Sheldrake​

The first video, the banned TED talk, is 18 minutes in duration.
The second video is 45 minutes long.
Enjoy!

Sheldrake is a World Treasure. I think his criticism of science as a world view is right on! Time to move beyond dogmatic materialism.

What do you think of his criticism?
What do you think of his prescription for science?


Namaste.
Click to expand...



And believing in an all powerful invisible sky daddy makes more sense than the scientific method?...
 
Angel said:
The list is by Sheldrake, taken verbatim from the videos -- have you not watched at least one of the videos, at least one of Sheldrake's presentations, before commenting on his list?
This sort of dismissiveness is exactly what Sheldrake is talking about.

Namaste.
Click to expand...

He has earned dismissiveness by promulgating pure nonsense. Poor wittle Rupert! Give me a break! He dismisses himself every time he opens his mouth. His ideas are insubstantial and not worth a rational persons time.
 
Angel said:
Have you watched Sheldrake's presentations, or even read the full text of his banned TED talk (offered in the OP)?
Or did you just look immediately to discredit the man before you hear him out?
Click to expand...

Psychic dogs everywhere are laughing at him. Can't he pick that up?
 
devildavid said:
He has earned dismissiveness by promulgating pure nonsense. Poor wittle Rupert! Give me a break! He dismisses himself every time he opens his mouth. His ideas are insubstantial and not worth a rational persons time.
Click to expand...

devildavid said:
Psychic dogs everywhere are laughing at him. Can't he pick that up?
Click to expand...
The dogmatic viewpoint in mock speed mode. Exactly what Sheldrake alerts us to.
 
Angel said:
The dogmatic viewpoint in mock speed mode. Exactly what Sheldrake alerts us to.
Click to expand...

Sure, it's his strategy to keep the suckers lapping up his drivel. Classic.

Look how they mock, scorn, and persecute me! It must mean I am right!

The bloodhounds are howling in derision. Poor Rupie!
 
Science observes, records and hypothesizes. It doesn't pretend to know what it cannot prove; religion does that.
 
calamity said:
Science observes, records and hypothesizes. It doesn't pretend to know what it cannot prove; religion does that.
Click to expand...
Have you looked at any of the OP material? Did you note the distinction drawn by Sheldrake between science as a method of inquiry and science as a world view? Did you notice that the subject of religion is nowhere mentioned in any of the material presented for your consideration in the OP?
 
Angel said:
Have you looked at any of the OP material? Did you note the distinction drawn by Sheldrake between science as a method of inquiry and science as a world view? Did you notice that the subject of religion is nowhere mentioned in any of the material presented for your consideration in the OP?
Click to expand...

A world view based on observation and repeatedly substantiating ideas with evidence is not exactly a bad thing.
 
calamity said:
A world view based on observation and repeatedly substantiating ideas with evidence is not exactly a bad thing.
Click to expand...
Sheldrake might agree with you, up to the point where the world view gets in the way of the method -- which is what he's all about in the OP.
 
devildavid said:
He has earned dismissiveness by promulgating pure nonsense. Poor wittle Rupert! Give me a break! He dismisses himself every time he opens his mouth. His ideas are insubstantial and not worth a rational persons time.
Click to expand...

The Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science

1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media.

2. The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work.

3. The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of detection.

4. Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal.

5. The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for centuries.

6. The discoverer has worked in isolation.

7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation.
 
RAMOSS said:
The Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science

1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media.

2. The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work.

3. The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of detection.

4. Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal.

5. The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for centuries.

6. The discoverer has worked in isolation.

7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation.
Click to expand...
Another fallacy offered by our chief fallacy-hunter, who in this case has not even bothered to consider the OP presentations he presumes to comment on.
Try responding instead of attacking ad hominem out of the gate; you might earn some credibility.
 
Good example of why we need better public education.

Something I learned by accident, knowing a bit of the history and philosophy of science, is that scientists are usually pragmatists (using the ordinary meaning, not the philosophical school of Pragmatism).

As a rule, they don't like philosophy or other speculative pursuits (that they aren't working on). Doing science well takes an exceptional mind. But you have to be off the charts brilliant to be able to have that in your head and take up philosophy. (Most learn religion young, it's a settled issue in their minds, so it doesn't consume any brain power.)

I sure as hell can't.

Let's go with the history now. Back when science was just starting, they occasionally got killed for it, in quite gruesome ways. The simple truth here is that there has always been tension between academia and the outside world. It's not always visible, but it's never far from the surface.

Please notice I switched from science to academia, because the OP was more about academia, than it was about science. He just didn't know it. Science is about the work, when all is said and done. Academia handles the cultural angle, science doesn't go there.

Time for another switch.. our brains are screwed up. You can get a feeling for what that means in the Undoing Project. At the very least it will get you thinking about flaws we have in perception and cognition. It's the reason science is the way it is. It has to be, to keep our stupidity from killing it.

Which brings us back to the Inquisition. Scientists don't care what you think, as long as you let them be to do their work.

Academia has to protect themselves from the eternal onslaught from people that don't like the cognitive dissonance that causes in them.

https://www.amazon.com/Undoing-Project-Friendship-Changed-Minds/dp/0393354776/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
 
Tim the plumber said:
I wouldn't know. I have viewed some of it before. It was drivel.
Click to expand...
Be specific if you can. What is "drivel" in Sheldrake thesis? Assuming that "drivel" isn't your catch-all term for what you don't understand, help us understand what you designate "drivel" in the Sheldrake views represented in the OP.

Namaste.
 
late said:
Good example of why we need better public education.

Something I learned by accident, knowing a bit of the history and philosophy of science, is that scientists are usually pragmatists (using the ordinary meaning, not the philosophical school of Pragmatism).

As a rule, they don't like philosophy or other speculative pursuits (that they aren't working on). Doing science well takes an exceptional mind. But you have to be off the charts brilliant to be able to have that in your head and take up philosophy. (Most learn religion young, it's a settled issue in their minds, so it doesn't consume any brain power.)

I sure as hell can't.

Let's go with the history now. Back when science was just starting, they occasionally got killed for it, in quite gruesome ways. The simple truth here is that there has always been tension between academia and the outside world. It's not always visible, but it's never far from the surface.

Please notice I switched from science to academia, because the OP was more about academia, than it was about science. He just didn't know it. Science is about the work, when all is said and done. Academia handles the cultural angle, science doesn't go there.

Time for another switch.. our brains are screwed up. You can get a feeling for what that means in the Undoing Project. At the very least it will get you thinking about flaws we have in perception and cognition. It's the reason science is the way it is. It has to be, to keep our stupidity from killing it.

Which brings us back to the Inquisition. Scientists don't care what you think, as long as you let them be to do their work.

Academia has to protect themselves from the eternal onslaught from people that don't like the cognitive dissonance that causes in them.

https://www.amazon.com/Undoing-Project-Friendship-Changed-Minds/dp/0393354776/ref=asap_bc?ie=UTF8
Click to expand...
Interesting post, late. I'm not sure how either Lewis's book or the work in rational decision-making done by the subjects of his book applies to Sheldrake's thesis about the limitations placed on science as inquiry by materialist philosophy. Perhaps you'll be expand on this theme.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom