| |||||||
| Skeptiko Podcast The Official discussions forum of skeptiko.com podcast |
 |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools |
12-01-2009, 09:23 AM
| |||
| |||
 88. Scientific Community Unfair to Dr. Rupert Sheldrake, Imperial College London Diss Faced with choosing a prominent figure for his Science and Society Masters dissertation, Phillip Stevens avoided the obvious.nbsp; Instead of Kepler, Newton, or ... Click here to read more ...  |
| Sponsored Links - register to remove ads |
| |
|
12-02-2009, 12:51 AM
| |||
| |||
| 1543 - Copernicus - Heliocentric Theory . 1687 – Isaac Newton - Laws of Motion . 1859 - Charles Darwin/Alfred Wallace - Theory of Natural Selection . 1873 - James Clerk Maxwell: Theory of Electromagnetism 1900 - Max Planck - Quantum Theory . 1905 Albert Einstein - Theory of Special and General Relativity . 1980 Rupert Sheldrake! - Morphic Resonance Theory! 1981/1994 John Maddox (member of CSIcop) - Book burning and heresy theory..... YouTube - John Maddox (Book For Burning)  Opps ... I forgot Pele in 1970 |
|
12-02-2009, 02:00 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Last edited by OC68; 12-02-2009 at 03:16 AM. |
|
12-02-2009, 04:47 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
I think it stands to reason, really. Psychologists and even biologists and neurophysiologists just take standard physics for granted. Never in their training (at least I imagine!) were they asked to consider the possibility that the bedrock of science might not be complete. I did chemistry, and the same was true - you took the basic physics for granted - much like maths. On the other hand, theoretical physicists must think that way a lot. Erwin Schroedinger speculated about the nature of life (and not just in relation to his cat scenario), and the physicist Roger Penrose is interested in the ultimate nature of consciousness. David |
|
12-02-2009, 08:01 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
~~ Paul |
|
12-02-2009, 08:10 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
...only about 3% of National Academy of Sciences members believe in psychic phenomena. However, 55% of our natural scientists believe ESP is either an established fact or a likely possibility. Comparable figures for other disciplines are higher: 66% of our social scientists [excluding psychologists] and 77% of our academics in the arts, humanities, and education accept ESP at least as a likely possibility. Of the psychologists surveyed, 34% actually believe psi is an impossibility, while only 2% of the other respondents maintained this position. Only 34% of psychologists believe that ESP is a fact or a likely possibility (Wagner and Monnet 1979). The survey is old but while I suspect that numbers overall might be lower (with the high time of Geller & co being long past) I don't think they should be qualitatively different. We can see that physics does not make people susceptible to psi-belief. Artsy people are more believing, sciency people less so. Just like the cliche would have it. The odd group out is the psychologists who are markedly disbelieving. My personal explanation is that this is due to the fact that they encounter psi beliefs usually in the context of mental illness. There it is easy to see them as obviously untrue and also there is motivation to demarcate themselves from their patients. |
|
12-02-2009, 09:52 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
An over condensed list, full of countless holes .... it doesn't show the gradual unravelling of material realism with Heisenberg uncertainty principle ... wave/particle duality ....or perhaps the biggest wrecker of local material realism John Bell's (Inequality) Theorem ... With regard to modest Alfred Wallace seldom getting equal credit for co-discovering natural selection .... he committed an establishment taboo!  ... he supported experimental evidence of telepathy and believed in discarnate spirits (and God, whatever that means) .... materialists have ever since imagined natural selection hammers non-materialists viewpoint but the co-discoveror was a non-materialist who didn't think these were incompatible at all Last edited by Open Mind; 12-02-2009 at 10:24 AM. |
|
12-02-2009, 10:23 AM
| |||
| |||
| Quote:
Even Max Planck once said “We have no right to assume that any physical laws exist, or if they have existed up to now, that they will continue to exist in a similar manner in the future.” Sheldrake deserves the credit for also challenging the classical notion of fixed enterally true laws ... Sheldrake concept of laws forming like habits makes a lot of sense! . ....I think future generations will probably laugh more at the reaction of his opponents. Last edited by Open Mind; 12-02-2009 at 10:27 AM. |
| Sponsored Links - register to remove ads |
| |
|
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
