Thanks

Some critique: 2:40 Science is not a domain of faith. Science and religion operate on completely different epistemological premises. As Tim Minchin (provocatively but essentially correctly) has put it: "Science adjusts its views based on what's observed, faith is the denial of observation so that beliefs can be preserved". Klemm is right that scientific theories can't ever be "proven right" given the impossibility of complete evidence (induction problem) - however the scientific method can and does falsify theories. In fact the criteria of a theory to be scientific is that it can be falsified. Beliefs rooted in faith however are resistant to falsification which is what makes them from a scientific perspective dogmatic (not a theory). This is the difference - religion doesn't aim for falsification of its own views, yet science does. It also explains why there is historic progress in the worldviews that science has offered (e.g. from Newton Laws to the Theory of Relativity), while religion isn't progressing in its ways of explaining the world. Science also has enabled technological advancements in ways that religion never has. 14:40 I think he fails on his own criteria of "no proselytization" here 15:05 Spooky physics. The fact that things are yet unexplainable doesn't mean that it won't ever be explainable in the future. Nor does the fact that something is not explainable proof the existence of something else (e.g. god). From a historic angle literally every phenomenon on earth once was "spooky physics". E.g. weather - now that we understand weather, we don't anymore think it's spooky physics. Even though we still know very little, we still know a lot more than before - there is progress. 17:50 While he mentioned before there are / have been roughly 4200 religions in human history, he closes with a quote from Jesus, which seems again kind of biased What religion offers that science doesn't is that it tells you "how to live a good life". Science doesn't help there because it doesn't deduct any normative statements, it just tries to explain the world.

you only need to watch up to 2:09 to know where this is going.

neuroscience is also a term used for extreme depression and anxiety, perhaps through trauma, shock and behavioural science, meaning the individual must become aware what causes their habits, their addictions, lifestyle choices, mood swings and spiritual values.

Being taught about and writing essays on topics like that would be an incredible class to take! No wonder his students gave such high ratings for his class.

2:50 Sic!

A hypothesis is not the same thing as faith. It is not BELIEVED in. It is TESTED.

@anonymouse4793

6 жыл бұрын

Yes, and a scientific theory is the explanation of the facts. No faith required.

@josesantos2084

5 жыл бұрын

Wrong and I'll prove it to you: Do you act like the theory of gravity describes a real phenomena and that gravity exists? So you BELIEVE in the theory of gravity. Simple. (Of course you may test, and should, but in the end you believe or not, and I think is better for you to believe in gravity, the same about the believe in God.) Cheers!

@ApozVideoz

5 жыл бұрын

You Believe the results of the test, therefore there're certain things you take for granted as acceptable without explanation (Foundationalism).

The hard problem is that even science doesn’t understand what is going on. For instance, what is matter? Is it real? A solid substance or simply a wave pattern of probability. Our perceptions have led us to all kinds of assumptions that predominate in the laws of physics, but these perceptions are just that. We do not really know what is going on in the deepest sense. But the academics are usually caught up in the assumptions which only apply on the explicate reality, not in the implicate underlying reality that is the basis for it.

@bradsmith9189

3 жыл бұрын

Well stated

@BlacksmithTWD

3 жыл бұрын

Indeed, in order to create any model for reality that goes beyond "cogito ergo sum" one needs to make certain assumptions(axioms). Since we have no way to check whether these assumptions are correct or not, all we can do is check for internal consistency of the model after acceptence of those assumptions. In other words, if we cannot check wether the premises for an argument/model are correct or not, meaning we cannot check for the soundness of an argument/model, all that is left is to check whether the conclusion necessarily follows from the premises, meaning that we can only check for the validity of the argument/model. This disctinction is hard to make for those who are not properly trained in making this distinction. One can easily check this with the following example: premise 1 : everything that is blue is a cat premise 2 : my car is blue conclusion : my car is a cat This is a valid argument, it's just not a sound argument since one of the premises is incorrect. Yet if you provide this example while claiming this argument to be valid, most who haven't learned to make the distinction between a sound argument and a valid argument may claim this argument to be not valid. One could formulate the argument differently, for instance "if everything that is blue is a cat and if my car is blue then my car must necessarily be a cat". Present the statement in this formulation and you will notice many people will be incapable of understanding the meaning of the word 'if' which appears twice in this sentence.

That was a good talk. Though, the concept of "God" must also be defined in its usage, so to avoid any confusion about the convictions of the speaker. As he began stating that all religion was and is born out of human minds, so the same applies for all religious concepts of a "God" and "Gods".

@ApozVideoz

5 жыл бұрын

And any concept that considers everything is born out of the human mind.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

Indeed, most religions started with ancestor worship, and traces of that can still be found in scriptures of most religions. 'god' is a rather ambiguous and abstract concept, which makes it hard to define as a general concept in a way it still applies to all statements ever made using the word without loosing any of the meaning of any of those statements.

@nola3058

Жыл бұрын

EXACTLY, duh! 👍 (religions and "God(s)" are man-made!)

@nola3058

Жыл бұрын

"losing"! 😉

Atoms, schmatoms - where does *thinking* come from; how and why did it come about? When did the first *thought* occur?

As to God vs. science: The debate is moot. It's been established that their are high spin mono-atomic elements with the body producing photons, room temperature super conductivity. These produce the well known effect of super-conductivity of resistanceless transmission of energy. This also works for conscious energy. Hence: psychic phenomenon and spirituality have a basis in physics/science. Hence: the dichotomy is resolved in that both are true. Some have more natural capability than others. Hence: all the excuse making for both sides is a moot point to the realities of actual physics. The universe is what it is whether we comprehend or not.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

The dichotomy had been solved already in the 13 century by Thomas of Aquino.

@AmericanBrain

2 жыл бұрын

You are incorrectly fraudulently fictitiously equating two different subjects: science with religion. There is no God, it's mysticism and myth. There is no evidence whatsoever. There IS full evidence on how man generates myth - it can be done in a lab very easily to test for this. HENCE man needs science and/or "reason and logic" because the natural mind left to itself is myth making. It 'evolved' for practical survival not truth; but 2,400 years back man found a way to glean truth: reason and logic.

@georgeroberts613

2 жыл бұрын

@@AmericanBrain Oh my. Your world and your box of understanding is a little small. Psychic phenomenon happens, no if's, ands or buts. Science is about explaining the cosmos to ourselves. To relegate yourself to believing in only what you can see and touch renders you no genius, regardless of academic prowess. Still, science is the art of being methodical in investigation. But not all is subject to the limits of our dimension and three dimensional logic parameters. It's like playing Solitaire with a deck of 50 cards. You can't win so you make stuff up to pretend that's what is supposed to happen. Higher perceptions have always been noted by a percentage of the population. Like gays, they exist whether you want them to or not just as a matter of percentages. Astral projection (out of body experience) is pure conscious energy free of our physical form. My ex-girlfriend has a Ph'd in child counseling, she is also a spiritual healer dealing with cosmic energy. It's true we're shooting from the hip for the most part, but there's no doubt there's more to the conscious universe than meets the eye. Your fear blinds you. Telepathy of one sort or another is part of our makeup, our potential. And mono-atomic elements is the bridge as they are just higher energy versions of some of the periodic table. The nucleus goes high spin for whatever reason inducing the electrons to pair up into Cooper Pairs, fostering or becoming photons and room temperature super-conductivity within the body at times. They are just another aspect of the physical universe but operate both in and out of space/time. Hence, the occasional ability of some to see the ribbon of time from the outside, as Nostradamus, Edger Casey, the profits of Christianity. The Double Slit experiment around for a hundred years is a key along with super conductivity on which energy can travel without resistance or end. The light doesn't commit until it's 'observed''. Consciousness required of one sort or another. It was useful for the best hunters in more basic times to see a silver thread of the path a game animal took. Nay-sayers always claim it's all swamp gas. But it was also useful to know when you were being intently stared at lest you go from predator to prey. I occasionally 'know things' ahead of time. But I've known many who have had significant experiences. Most families have members they laugh at on occasion as if they're not playing with a full deck. But there are numerous dimensions involved, and organized pure conscious energy is basic to it all. Spirituality is part of that conscious energy. Relax, it's not a bad thing. We have cosmic interaction on a nearly minute by minute basis. Though you are right in your concerns with organized religion. It's the human condition, humans can screw up anything...as demonstrated by the blind Frump lovers manufactured by propaganda and shenanigans. Science is an attempt to understand the universe. But that requires a couple more cards. The fact that our pure conscious energy can exist outside our physical bodies is not an illusion. We are conscious beings having a human experience. Argue for your limitations, and they shall be yours. If you want the truth, you'll have to look deeper.

@AmericanBrain

2 жыл бұрын

@@georgeroberts613 IF YOU can prove ONE psychic phenomenon, you will NOT only win the NOBEL but EVERY NOBEL forever and TRANSFORM the ENTIRE world of science (into NON-SCIENCE, i.e. NONSENSE!!!!!!!!) LOOK back at your error and delusion. Please just admit it below.

At their best, organized religion encourages love and community; at their worst, they revert back to tribal animosities, leaning toward my God is better than your God. There is a dark side to organized religion; a very dark side.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

there is a dark side to any form of organization.

not convinced...

Nice talk

Science and religion go hand in hand But not if you are blind

@kepspark3362

Жыл бұрын

But only if you're blind. Is this what you meant?

Great talk

Ciencia y religión no tiene porque ser opuestos.Saludos

@ThePassiveObserver

4 жыл бұрын

Sorry, you are wrong. Science = logic (and corrects itself and updates data). religion = myth and stupidity which condemns facts until it is no longer able to . Thankfully, religion is dying......finally. ( Lo siento pero eres incorrecto).

Science and religion both try to explain our reality from different perspectives. When science has fallen short, religion fills the gap. Refreshing to see a scientist speak about spirituality. Seek the truth you will surely find it. You might not like the answer.

@ryanodonnell6748

4 жыл бұрын

LMAO.... Religion fills the GAPS, That was so funny.... Religion is a mental health issue

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

Indeed, one doesn't invalidate the other, they both substantiate each other.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

@@ryanodonnell6748 Lucky for you ignorance isn't a mental health issue.

@snapjitzy

3 жыл бұрын

@@BlacksmithTWD but religion is. Gotcha.

@BlacksmithTWD

3 жыл бұрын

@@snapjitzy No it's not, the fact that you seem to think it is, is rather indicative of your religion.

Mulder said it best, "I want to believe."

@ericephemetherson3964

Жыл бұрын

Believe is all you can do. This is no proof of anything.

@DCronk-qc6sn

Жыл бұрын

@@ericephemetherson3964 False - pudding, for example.

@ericephemetherson3964

Жыл бұрын

@@DCronk-qc6sn Everything is false.

@DCronk-qc6sn

Жыл бұрын

@@ericephemetherson3964 Eric - I don't understand - please advise!

@ericephemetherson3964

Жыл бұрын

@@DCronk-qc6sn Neuroscience is not the explanation for existence of any god or gods and some supernatural entities before or after death. You mind can imagine everything. All is in our mental machine.

Dear Mr. Klemm. Kindly read the comments below. Here you will find that your "illogical" lecture has been met with some very logical, knowledgeable and intelligent retorts. If anything, your particular way of thinking shows that religious indoctrination at an early age, is sometimes impossible to erase, even when the "myths" are exposed, and the facts are clear.... i will leave you with the famous words of Pope Leo X ; "All ages can testifie enough howe profitable that fable of Christe hath ben to us and our companie". In other words " What a profit the myth of christ has been for us in the faith".

hypothesis and theory and faith are all good. But the problem I see with religion, when it comes to "faith" is that "those" people think their way is the only way and everyone else is wrong and some may go to great means, as to kill or control to prove their point!

@kasimanakatarina6687

7 жыл бұрын

Jim Juarez what about it?

@rerpxd

5 жыл бұрын

Well communism had the same problem that religion. Religion and communism are a problem to both Christians and atheists, Jesus not only is not religious, or any religion, but He actually thought and preached against religion, and you can see that in Matthew 23, and He was also killed by religious people.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

Yea, but those people are trespassing on the first commandment by doing so. The first commandment informs human beings that no single human being is god, and only god is all knowing. Hence to pretend/think oneself to be all knowing, is to think of oneself as the all knowing god rather than to adhere to the first commandment that only god is all knowing and I as a human individual am not God, hence I can't be all knowing.

A theory is faith based, based on incomplete evidence?? A scientific theory is based on proven facts. Religion is based on faith. Unproven assertions some of which have been proven to be false. Sorry but he lost me after this. Another religious person trying to force a square peg through a round hole to justify what he wants to believe.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

No, a scientific theory only has to account for all known facts, not all possible facts including the ones we don't know about yet. It's been demonstrated often in science that a theory was incorrect when a new fact was discovered, forcing scientists to adjust their scientific theory obviously demonstrating the older scientific theory was based on incomplete evidence. So even a scientific theory is believed to be true without having conclusive evidence for it. The problem is that in science we can't prove something to be correct, we can just attempt to prove something to be incorrect. If in science we exhausted all possible tests attempting to prove something to be incorrect, we assume it to be correct by lack of evidence of it being incorrect. So you don't properly understand either religion or science. no wonder he lost you.

Oh my gosh! He has no idea what hypothesis is in science and uses the colloquial term. He probably thinks it's just a theory. Sad

@annalee_the_bananalee3226

Жыл бұрын

I think he was more so referring to science's ability to change their rules. Like how in science we call thinks theory's and hypothesis's not because there's isn't good cause of evidence to believe it is fact but because as we learn more we can adjust and further develop those theory's and hypothesis's. In science we don't throw out thinks persay as much as we grow with new information and take what we can from the old theories.

please help me all ted on tech, business, pro, camp, store, web go to eu-us about ( cc ted, inc 2019 ) know

Dude, there are seriously flaws in this guys logic. And it's worrying to see a scientist state that scientific theories are comparable to religion and faith on the same level.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

Can you substantiate your claim by providing an example of such a serious flaw?

Wow, it's hard to take TED talks seriously after this.

When we search for gods we do not discover but invent.

@rerpxd

5 жыл бұрын

Prove it.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

Is there a significant difference?

@linguaphile9415

3 жыл бұрын

@@BlacksmithTWD yes, I would say so. A discovery is made when observations/facts lead to conclusions, an invention is a story made up without any supporting facts. Usually, people already believe something and try to make the facts fit their imaginations. Thereby they tend to distort reality.

@BlacksmithTWD

3 жыл бұрын

@@linguaphile9415 So the machine you use to type this response is just a story made up without any supporting facts?

4200 religions so far created by human minds

Belief in god is a choice, because there is no proof. If you need to believe because it fills some void in your life, then do it. But once you use your belief to harm others, to push on others, or as an excuse to divide yourself from others then it's harmful.

And you lost me when you equated science and faith.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

Then I suggest you study how science works more thoroughly before watching this again.

2 minutes in - he is wrong because mind and brain are not the ontologically same -- by definition the brain is part of material reality, whereas the mind is immaterial....

@anonymouse4793

6 жыл бұрын

Without a brain there is no mind. This is scientifically proven.

Only fools believe you can describe reality with words!

Wow this man has twisted himself into a pretzel. Sad.

If there is an intelligence that underlies the totality of all things it sure is going to great pains to hide itself and this talk goes no distance to help...in his example of near death experiences, some have put a random number generator up high in the operating room and not one, last I checked, has been able to recall that number; not one. In science that is called a failed hypothesis...not one of his students mentioned that? And if one did, how disingenuous not to mention it.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

It doesn't hide itself, you are just not seeing it while it's right in front of you. It's like looking for your glasses while wearing them. The fact that you may not see them doesn't mean they are hiding, you are just thinking in the wrong mode to be able to see them since you are expecting them to be much further away than they actually are.

What bs. This is the quality of scientists ?

Religion is one thing and the existence of a creator is a completely different thing. Religions all full of myths and scientific and historical inaccuracies. God in the Abrahamic religion is NOT the creator of this universe.

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

The universe doesn't even get mentioned in any of the sacred scriptures of the Abrahamic religions. Now for the real question: Who or what created all concepts/ideas you consider to be true?

@elma6550

4 жыл бұрын

BlacksmithTWD Universe is definitely mentioned in the Quran. In 1916, Albert Einstein formulated his General Theory of Relativity that indicated that the universe must be either expanding or contracting. Confirmation of the expanding-universe theory finally came in 1929 in the hands of the well known American astronomer Edwin Hubble. Yet, astonishingly well before telescopes were even invented and well before Hubble published his Law, Prophet Muhammad (s.a.v.s)used to recite a verse of the Quran to his companions that ultimately stated that the universe is expanding. “And the heaven We created with might, and indeed We are (its) expander.” (Quran 51:47) At the time of the revelation of the Quran, the word “space” was not known, and people used the word “heaven” to refer to what lies above the Earth. In the above verse, the word “heaven” is referring to space and the known universe. The verse points out that space, and thus the universe, happens to be expanding, just as Hubble’s Law states.

@bradsmith9189

3 жыл бұрын

You offer zero proof for your claim of fact. Nothing.

2 minutes wasted. The argument from complexity..... Moving on....

"W. R. (Billl) Klemm is a neuroscientist with a large number of research publications and substantial international recognition of his research." To bad his mind has been twisted by a religious upbringing.

@bradsmith9189

3 жыл бұрын

Before you casually insult people, you might consider learning to spell...

Not a good ted. The guy trying to reconcile religion and science by altering both. Not science

@BlacksmithTWD

4 жыл бұрын

How did he alter either ? How can you be sure you didn't come in here with misconceptions about either that made it just seem he altered them, while it could have been you instead who may have come in here with an altered conception?

Still struggling to revive the god of the gaps?

Just a good-old Texas boy. Talk to him about guns, church or football. I guess in his case you can throw in neuroscience. There's a big difference between (neuro)science and theology. I think that, someday, we will understand the universe, quantum and all, where theology is just imagination, near death experiences or not. His last few words show his true colors regardless of how he instructed his students in writing their essays. 100 years from now, give or take, this guy and Dennis Prager will be thought of as a couple of foolish old farts. I'd bet.

Too much touchy feely padding to be considered science. That said I felt embarrassed for him. Conflating religion with neuroscience reeks of a slow death.

I am a great fan of Klemm in the field of neuroscience, but his childhood belief in God and aspects of religions are lodged in his brain and he cannot get past them. So, what he does is rationalize his religious belief by falsely characterizing science as the same "faith" as religion... and he knows better. The laws of nature were not created by a deity; they exist naturally as a fundamental aspect of nature.

@bradsmith9189

3 жыл бұрын

Explain “exactly how they exist as a fundamental aspect of nature” Please enlighten us because you’ve essentially explained nothing.

@georgegrubbs2966

3 жыл бұрын

@@bradsmith9189 All evidence points to that fact and truth. There is no evidence for a deity.

@TheGoat2367

3 жыл бұрын

There are

@georgegrubbs2966

3 жыл бұрын

@@TheGoat2367 Share the evidence

religion is not science religion is psychology religion has value but that doesnt mean its true santa clause has value easter bunny has value aesops fables has value that doenst make them true

@davidbolen8982

3 жыл бұрын

Nice.

@junkjunk2493

3 жыл бұрын

@@davidbolen8982 thx

Complete rubbish.

more nonsense

He lost me when he said that science is faith

@eensio

2 жыл бұрын

Richard Dawkins makes clear the difference: science tries to search the things and mecanisms. Religion is fairy tale for adults. The faith is unclear word, which means everything or nothing. Like Hamlet: to believe or not.

A desgrace for ted