Scientific Dogmans?

(1/1)

Superman (April 06, 2012, 16:30:53 PM):
Ice fills my veins as I pick up the book and look at its unimaginative title. I want to put the book down and forget that I have ever seen it but now there is no denying its existence. I have to confront it, I have to see what it is about.
I read some at the back and I feel a little better somehow, very intrigued but still not entirely convinced. Not at all really. I manage to rummage thought the book but I am to unsettled to consentrate and decide I will look it up on the internet for later.

I am sure that for most of you this is not news Dr Rupert Sheldrake's The Science Delusion. I did find the following article on it:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/dr-rupert-sheldrake/the-science-delusion_b_1198721.html

Perhaps if I knew the author, I would not have been shocked. It looks interesting but I am still a bit weary, he seems to be attacking materialism more than anything else. He seems to attack 10 dogmas of science materialism.
Here is an interesting quote from the article:

Quote
Contemporary science is based on the philosophy of materialism, which claims that all reality is material or physical. There is no reality but material reality. Consciousness is a by-product of the physical activity of the brain. Matter is unconscious. Evolution is purposeless. God exists only as an idea in human minds, and hence in human heads.

These beliefs are powerful not because most scientists think about them critically, but because they don't. The facts of science are real enough, and so are the techniques that scientists use, and so are the technologies based on them. But the belief system that governs conventional scientific thinking is an act of faith.


I don't know if I would even buy the book, it looks like a lot of what is covered in the book is stuff that I have indirectly been exposed to already.






brianvds (April 06, 2012, 20:56:21 PM):
Sheldrake's a loon. He's been at it for decades now. No need to pay him any attention.
Hermes (April 07, 2012, 14:51:59 PM):
In brief, Sheldrake formulated a hypothesis involving "morphic units" which are supposed to have "morphic fields" in and around them which interact by means of "morphic resonance". This would enable telepathy, Lamarckian evolution and various other wonderful phenomena. Unfortunately Sheldrake's hypothesis is superfluous in explaining any natural observations and not potentially refutable, therefore disqualified as scientific. Hence, science is deluded and needs to become more creative.
BoogieMonster (April 09, 2012, 22:19:42 PM):
The facts of science are real enough, and so are the techniques that scientists use, and so are the technologies based on them. But the belief system that governs conventional scientific thinking is an act of faith.

Same old same old, "Science is right about everything, except this one thing I happen to care about".

Navigation

[0] Message Index

Skeptic Forum Board Index

Non-mobile version of page