Dogma and double standard applied to Parasychology by Atheist/Materialists/Naturalist

[Open Minded Atheist]

Here is the link, i am glad Chris French sees the double standard used by the so called skeptics : Subversive Thinking: Moderate Skeptic Chris French concedes that professional skeptics apply a worldview-induced double standard towards parapsychology

[Arouet]

I'll look at the link, but do all your thread titles have to be so sensationalistic and inflamatory? Really started to get annoying.

[Open Minded Atheist]

Originally Posted by Arouet

I'll look at the link, but do all your thread titles have to be so sensationalistic and inflamatory? Really started to get annoying.

Why do you consider them inflamatory, i am not like Steve Novella that calls parasychology research nonsense, i am not like PZ Meyers that calls non Atheists kooks and idiots. I am not like Richard Dawkins that considers people studying the paranormal charlatans. I am not like Ebon Musings or Greta Christina that calls Scientists involved in paranormal research woo believers.
It seems to me that you are highly protective of the Atheistic/Materialistic worldview. I have never seen you give even the slightest support to people with a different world view. Have you ever considered that maybe Materialism is wrong? Have you ever asked yourself, what if i am wrong?

[Arouet]

Give me a break, you know very well that your thread titles are meant to be provocative. It's worse when you mischaracterize what was said, as in this case. French did not say there is a double standard. He was simply saying that for an average psychological study, the import of replication is much less important than, say, in a study about telepathy!

We would say the same thing about finding the Higgs Boson particle, dark energy, relativity, organisms on asteroids, newly discovered forms of life that subsist on acid (forgetting the particular one at this moment) or any other important scientific discovery.

What kind of support would you like to see me give to people with a different worldview? I look at arguments and respond to them. If I agree with something, I'll say so, if I disagree I'll say so. Most of the time I ask questions. I haven't called parapsychologists charlatans and I've recognized parapsychology as a serious science, and am supportive of parapsychology and further study.

As for being protective. Not really. Only when the inflamatory comments come out and the straw men arguments. I have no vested interest in "materialism". While my views are likely in common with materialism, I don't think of myself as a materialist since I don't really think about this stuff in philosophical terms. I have no problem with psi if its reliably demonstrated.

Also, you can't have these conversations without appreciating that you may be wrong. In fact, I'm certain I'm wrong on a lot of stuff. Forget about whether science has all the answers (it doesn't), but I'm a dabbler in this stuff. My science understanding is relatively basic, though expanding all the time. I'll admit when I'm wrong and do so often. I also don't pretend to be certain in my writing, and almost always leave open the possibility of being wrong and invite people to correct me. So I ask myself if I am wrong all the time.

[Open Minded Atheist]

Originally Posted by Arouet

Give me a break, you know very well that your thread titles are meant to be provocative. It's worse when you mischaracterize what was said, as in this case. French did not say there is a double standard. He was simply saying that for an average psychological study, the import of replication is much less important than, say, in a study about telepathy!

We would say the same thing about finding the Higgs Boson particle, dark energy, relativity, organisms on asteroids, newly discovered forms of life that subsist on acid (forgetting the particular one at this moment) or any other important scientific discovery.

What kind of support would you like to see me give to people with a different worldview? I look at arguments and respond to them. If I agree with something, I'll say so, if I disagree I'll say so. Most of the time I ask questions. I haven't called parapsychologists charlatans and I've recognized parapsychology as a serious science, and am supportive of parapsychology and further study.

As for being protective. Not really. Only when the inflamatory comments come out and the straw men arguments. I have no vested interest in "materialism". While my views are likely in common with materialism, I don't think of myself as a materialist since I don't really think about this stuff in philosophical terms. I have no problem with psi if its reliably demonstrated.

Also, you can't have these conversations without appreciating that you may be wrong. In fact, I'm certain I'm wrong on a lot of stuff. Forget about whether science has all the answers (it doesn't), but I'm a dabbler in this stuff. My science understanding is relatively basic, though expanding all the time. I'll admit when I'm wrong and do so often. I also don't pretend to be certain in my writing, and almost always leave open the possibility of being wrong and invite people to correct me. So I ask myself if I am wrong all the time.

And you didn't read the article properly, . Do us all a favour and read that article, for once just once consider that maybe your most cherished beliefs are wrong. Please read that article completely.

[Sandy B]

Originally Posted by Arouet

Really started to get annoying.

But I thought you liked Really? I have to admit that sometimes I find him annoying too.

[Arouet]

Originally Posted by Open Minded Atheist

And you didn't read the article properly, . Do us all a favour and read that article, for once just once consider that maybe your most cherished beliefs are wrong. Please read that article completely.

I didn't read the article. I read the quote from French, which was the topic.

Oh, I have absolutely no cherished beliefs. I don't think you read my post at all.

Originally Posted by Sandy B

But I thought you liked Really? I have to admit that sometimes I find him annoying too.

haha

[Open Minded Atheist]

The problem with Arouet is knwon as CONFIRMATION BIAS,
Arouet practices selective thinking, he tends to notice and looks and supports what confirms his beliefs and he ignores, criticizes and finds fault and undervalues anything that contradicts his beliefs.

[Open Minded Atheist]

Originally Posted by Arouet

I didn't read the article. I read the quote from French, which was the topic.

Oh, I have absolutely no cherished beliefs. I don't think you read my post at all.



haha

Exactly, like I said CONFIRMATION BIAS AND SELECTIVE THINKING. He refuses to read the whole article, how sad

[Arouet]

Originally Posted by Open Minded Atheist

The problem with Arouet is knwon as CONFIRMATION BIAS,
Arouet practices selective thinking, he tends to notice and looks and supports what confirms his beliefs and he ignores, criticizes and finds fault and undervalues anything that contradicts his beliefs.

lol. While we all suffer from confirmation bias, I take efforts to reduce the effect of the bias. Why don't you tackle my arguments specifically rather than making broad generalizations.