46. Dr. Rupert Sheldrake and the Skeptics (Podcast)

[LeoM]

Excellent Podcast as always Alex!

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by LeoM

Excellent Podcast as always Alex!

Thx... Rupert Sheldrake is really fun to chat with... so bright.

[David Bailey]

Originally Posted by scomsjw

Yes and I think that part of the work is great. But there were references to ruddy-faced Swiss farmers and rooms full of "unsophisticated" people who couldn't see the point in controlled experiments to test something that they already know to be true. I thought there was a suggestion that this also counted as evidence. I'm not sure it does.

I think it is important to realise that outside of scientific circles, these things are seen somewhat differently. I got something similar when our neighbour told us about how our cat knew when we were returning - to her it was just a commonplace, to me (as the skeptic that I then was) it was a scientific impossibility!

Normal people react even more strongly to some of the issues related to consciousness that get debated. For example, there was a time when Nicholas Humphrey would argue that most if not all animals had no consciousness and merely operated as robots! Most people (especially pet owners) would be just amazed by such a suggestion. Likewise concepts like epiphenomenalism would draw blank stares!

David

[alextsakiris]

Originally Posted by David Bailey

I think it is important to realise that outside of scientific circles, these things are seen somewhat differently. I got something similar when our neighbour told us about how our cat knew when we were returning - to her it was just a commonplace, to me (as the skeptic that I then was) it was a scientific impossibility!

Normal people react even more strongly to some of the issues related to consciousness that get debated. For example, there was a time when Nicholas Humphrey would argue that most if not all animals had no consciousness and merely operated as robots! Most people (especially pet owners) would be just amazed by such a suggestion. Likewise concepts like epiphenomenalism would draw blank stares!

David

also, some people are just more tuned-in to animals. I've never been, but after looking into this research I've found this to be true. So, it's not surprising that some folks are more likely to notice and report behaviors like this... dog people look at the world a little differently.

[Venom]

At the beginning of the podcast, Sheldrake says that for skeptics the "dogs that knows phenomenom" is just impossible.

I think this is a gross misrepresentation of the skeptic position. The dog waiting behavior exist. Nobody says otherwise. Skeptics thinks that a lot (if not everything of it) can be explain by he "anxiety hypothesis" and the "sensory clues hypothesis".

When we say that, how can you hear "the phenomenom doesn't exist" is beyond me. Once again, it's clear that the waiting behavior is real; the real question is how to explains it.

It's true that skeptics don't thing that Sheldrake's pet hypothesis, aka morphic field hypothesis, is a valid answer to this question, because of the many problems of that hypothesis.

But instead of tackling that issue, it was easier to use of straw man (for skeptics the phenomenom is just impossible because they are all hard-core atheists blablablablablabla ad nauseam).

I hate those straw man, but hey, it's almost "Skeptiko"'s trademark now. As soon as they are "bashing the skeptics", they're just talking about the skeptics inside their head and not the real ones. Disappointing.

[Venom]

1. A little bit further in this episode (I know, I know, I'm slow), Tsakiris talks about his story of a soldier coming back home and the dog is especially agitated and excited.

But in the Skeptiko videos, the dog looks more sleepy than anything else.

So if the dog is sleepy, it's a hit, if the dog is excited, it's a hit, if the owner come back home it's a hit, if the son of the owner come back home, it's a hit, if the postman come to the door, it's a hit...

I really wonder what's not a hit for Tsakiris & co. By the way, you should rename the phenomena: "The dogs that knows when anyone related in anyway to the house is coming to it".

2. In the second video on YouTube, Tsakiris states that "the dogs are less likely to wait when someone is in the house". But here Sheldrake states:

And we did a similar number with the dog alone in her own apartment. And, although the dog showed the behavior when it was alone, it was much weaker and, you know, it waited less long. It did it less frequently and, instead of statistic, there’s significant fact. But it wasn’t as much.

So Sheldrake says the exact opposite of what says Tsakiris in his video, but hey, no problem, Alex doesn't react to this at all. He just agree:

Right.

Come on Alex. He stating the opposit of what you're claiming and the only thing you can say is "right"... You must be joking...